Learning how to manage others

[BluBell]

Within the past year I was able to expand the program I started and have hired two staff, and am about to hire a third person. Management is new territory for me, and I'd always had an idea about what type of boss I'd like to be (the opposite of every horrible boss) but I've quickly learned that I have so much to learn about managing others.

 

One of my staff is completely underperforming and cannot seem to learn his role at all. I've tried everything I know how to do to communicate expectations and help him...I wrote a job manual detailing procedures and processes, I've tried lengthy emails and even lengthier in person meetings. Often I need to ask him multiple times- 4-5- to complete assignments or turn in reports. He can't multitask, has terrible communication skills and never follows up with anyone, ever. He's dropped so many balls and made some serious mistakes- ones that could cost my whole team our jobs and end our entire program. I keep wondering what I can do to help him be more successful but am running out of ideas. It's hard to help someone when they don't ask for help and just continue to make the same mistakes over and over.

 

My other staff is doing really well- she learned her role so quickly and always asks for clarification when she's confused about something. My only challenge with her is keeping her challenged and finding the balance between pushing her to do more and overwhelming her. The other day she said that she feels like she's "Racing to keep up" with me. It's true I'm multitasking and always taking on more projects and responsibilities. I wanted to say "Well just run faster; keep up!"

 

Any advice or resources about managing others- especially someone who needs to be micro-managed are really welcomed!

[knitwit]

Are you working for a company with an HR department? Or are you starting up your own small business? What kind of company you work for plays a big role in how you want to manage underperformers.

 

 

One thing I've learned in management: underperformers can wreak havoc and be extremely expensive. I don't give a lot of opportunity at this point in my career: I do training, get the person mentoring, and start a Performance Improvement Plan at the earliest opportunity. It sounds mean but the PIP has been a major tool- it helps the person realize and identify areas where they need improvement. A well-written PIP will also give definitive steps on how they need to improve.

 

In my field, someone who needs to be micro-managed would be on a PIP quickly and will very likely be managed out quickly. You lose too much time on micromanaging and when you try to let them on their own, they screw up. It might take you a while to find all the screw ups and there can be a lot of downstream problems.

 

Being older, I also appreciate now that we humans can spend way too much time trying to squeeze ourselves into the wrong role. This is true for jobs, relationships, friendships, etc. It's better to just work with your strengths then endlessly try to fix all your weaknesses. If you're mostly focusing on fixing your weaknesses, you lose your chance then to really do something great with your strengths!

 

Also, someone who needs to be micromanaged in one career sphere might be happy and motivated and independent doing something else that she loves. "This isn't a good fit" can be a true statement. The guy who isn't picking up the job you're trying to help him do now might be much better at another job (maybe even in your company, if you do see some areas of strengths.)

 

Best of luck!

[BluBell]

Thanks for the input! We don't really have an HR, this is a small nonprofit operation that I started. I did already make the move to downsize his contract and feel pretty confident that is more than generous at this point. And I agree there's no point in trying to force a fit that will never be a good fit, that's likely the case here. Just looking for different perspectives and advice for getting someone to follow through and do their job, basically. I feel like this is the point when bad managers just resort to fear tactics, insults, anger, etc.

[Fugu]

Within the past year I was able to expand the program I started and have hired two staff, and am about to hire a third person. Management is new territory for me, and I'd always had an idea about what type of boss I'd like to be (the opposite of every horrible boss) but I've quickly learned that I have so much to learn about managing others.

 

One of my staff is completely underperforming and cannot seem to learn his role at all. I've tried everything I know how to do to communicate expectations and help him...I wrote a job manual detailing procedures and processes, I've tried lengthy emails and even lengthier in person meetings. Often I need to ask him multiple times- 4-5- to complete assignments or turn in reports. He can't multitask, has terrible communication skills and never follows up with anyone, ever. He's dropped so many balls and made some serious mistakes- ones that could cost my whole team our jobs and end our entire program. I keep wondering what I can do to help him be more successful but am running out of ideas. It's hard to help someone when they don't ask for help and just continue to make the same mistakes over and over.

 

My other staff is doing really well- she learned her role so quickly and always asks for clarification when she's confused about something. My only challenge with her is keeping her challenged and finding the balance between pushing her to do more and overwhelming her. The other day she said that she feels like she's "Racing to keep up" with me. It's true I'm multitasking and always taking on more projects and responsibilities. I wanted to say "Well just run faster; keep up!"

 

Any advice or resources about managing others- especially someone who needs to be micro-managed are really welcomed!

 

Don't tell him what you want; show him what you want and how you want it done.

 

This is tough because real training requires a ton of time which is a precious commodity in a small business.

[BluBell]

Right. He's just a very, very slow learner. The upside is that he really cares about the position and I do believe is genuinely trying...it's just been surprising/disappointing that he's not able to manage the workload or keep himself organized and on task. Unfortunately I don't have the time in my own schedule to constantly keep him on track, remind him, etc. When I ask for something to get done by a deadline, that just needs to happen! I'm finding myself even creating arbitrary deadlines just so he knows there is a deadline...otherwise it will literally fall off his radar.

 

Is it possible to teach someone who is a slow learner, and not a multi-tasker, how to get organized and become efficient?

[Mr. Lucky]

One of my staff is completely underperforming and cannot seem to learn his role at all. I've tried everything I know how to do to communicate expectations and help him...I wrote a job manual detailing procedures and processes, I've tried lengthy emails and even lengthier in person meetings. Often I need to ask him multiple times- 4-5- to complete assignments or turn in reports. He can't multitask, has terrible communication skills and never follows up with anyone, ever. He's dropped so many balls and made some serious mistakes- ones that could cost my whole team our jobs and end our entire program. I keep wondering what I can do to help him be more successful but am running out of ideas. It's hard to help someone when they don't ask for help and just continue to make the same mistakes over and over.

 

I've leaned a couple of things the hard way over the years:

 

1). Chronic under-performers fall into one of two groups - "can't do it" or "won't do it".

 

2). It doesn't matter which of the two groups they're in.

 

This person sets the performance bar for your entire group, you can only move as quickly as he'll allow. By continuing to tolerate his inadequate performance, you're prioritizing his needs over the success of the group - not a good decision from either a human or financial perspective.

 

So I agree with knitwit, I'd use progressive discipline to move him out. Life's too short, and there's generally too much to get done. Time to stop thinking "micro" and look big picture...

 

Mr. Lucky

[Fugu]

Right. He's just a very, very slow learner. The upside is that he really cares about the position and I do believe is genuinely trying...it's just been surprising/disappointing that he's not able to manage the workload or keep himself organized and on task. Unfortunately I don't have the time in my own schedule to constantly keep him on track, remind him, etc. When I ask for something to get done by a deadline, that just needs to happen! I'm finding myself even creating arbitrary deadlines just so he knows there is a deadline...otherwise it will literally fall off his radar.

 

Is it possible to teach someone who is a slow learner, and not a multi-tasker, how to get organized and become efficient?

 

It's possible to teach them, but it depends on a variety of factors. You may have hired someone who simply doesn't have the kinds of skill levels that his position requires. He might know how to use MS Word to write basic memorandums, but can't do mail merges. Might know what Excel does but doesn't know basic spreadsheets and formulas. Might know a little about using access but can't build a database. Can't do multiple things at the same time because maybe that's never really been expected of him. It takes time and practice to learn these skills too.

 

I agree with Mr. Lucky that personal motivation's another factor potentially. If someone knows that they have a skills gap, they have to take responsibility for trying to fix it as well.

[OatsAndHall]

 

Is it possible to teach someone who is a slow learner, and not a multi-tasker, how to get organized and become efficient?

 

 

If you don't have the time to keep babysitting him, then I doubt you have the time to teach him much. Honestly, he's an adult and this is the real-world. It sounds like you've given him all of the tools he needs to get the job done; he needs to DO IT.

 

 

 

If I were in your shoes, I send him ONE more email and sit down with him ONE more time. Go back through what he needs to get done, how he needs to do it and then firmly and politely explain to him that his job is on the line. His lack of organization almost cost other people their jobs and that is not acceptable.

 

 

 

This is the harsh reality of management; people have a job to do, you do what you can to get them on the right track, and then be ready to let them go if things don't get done.

[Eternal Sunshine]

Just to put this in perspective: in one of my previous teams, there was a bunch of under performers. There was only 3 of of us doing something while the others just drank coffee and gossiped. After a couple of years of this, when management did absolutely nothing to fix the issue, 3 of us scaled back our work. I ended up doing maybe 2 hours of work a day for a full time salary. And I was still more productive than the "under performers". Eventually, it got too depressing for me so I found another job.

 

 

 

When management tolerates too much, employees lose respect and motivation to do anything.

[No_Go]

Yup I had very similar experience in my last job. Too many coworkers abusing 'flexible hours' policy to show up when they feel like it, basically I doubt anyone was working over 2-3 real hours a day besides tracking 8-12 hours working days which was sad and hilarious in the same time.

 

This lax management style appealed to some, but most people that really got into the job because they wanted something done got fed up, demotivated, and left.

 

Just to put this in perspective: in one of my previous teams, there was a bunch of under performers. There was only 3 of of us doing something while the others just drank coffee and gossiped. After a couple of years of this, when management did absolutely nothing to fix the issue, 3 of us scaled back our work. I ended up doing maybe 2 hours of work a day for a full time salary. And I was still more productive than the "under performers". Eventually, it got too depressing for me so I found another job.

 

 

 

When management tolerates too much, employees lose respect and motivation to do anything.

[OatsAndHall]

When management tolerates too much, employees lose respect and motivation to do anything.

 

 

 

 

Yes, it does. My previous superintendent is a great guy but he let many staff members get away with murder. They showed up late, left early, called in continually, and couldn't be bothered to help out with anything, even during contract hours. I planned on leaving if he opted not to go into retirement.

 

 

 

I, personally, hate management positions and avoid them at all costs. I've been an athletic director where I had to manage coaches, bus drivers, concessions (etc..) and that part of the job drove me insane. But, folks learned quickly that I set the bar high and didn't tolerate much. People will either raise to meet your expectations or they'll fail to do so and you'll need to take action.

 

 

I fired a young volleyball coach who is an alumni from the school and a favorite around town (i.e. I took a lot of sh-t for the situation). But, she was disorganized, unprofessional and immature. I warned her in three separate emails and two meetings about her behavior during the season and was specific about what my expectations were of her. Nothing changed so she's gone.

[Rockdad]

You almost have to become Dr Phil to understand and communicate in a way they can understand. I don't care how small or large a crew there is always at least one your continually dealing with.

[GemmaUK]

With the under performer I have a couple of questions.

Are his tasks start to end tasks?

As in does he own various things as 'his baby' so to speak and does he know the impacts they have on other processes too?

 

Some people are happy to blindly perform role X alone having absolutely no idea what it is used for, what value it has and what it leads up to.

Many people perform better when they know the impact of a task they're doing and how it fits into the flow of things.

Also, start to end tasks can be important too. If you are asked to for instance reconcile the bank account - so you identify credits and debits and do all required but then someone else takes over the final part to balance it so it agrees (which is always to a deadline). It can happen that the person doing the identifying and allocating isn't terribly aware of the deadline or impact of not allocating everything so will 'potter around' with it, not identify everything, not allocate everything. Therefore leaving a total mess for the person who needs to balance it to unpick.

I would, at this stage make sure he has complete (start to end) tasks, with deadlines (arbitrary) and knows how it flows through and then have mini catch ups with him to make sure he is on track prior to the deadline.

Maybe you are so busy that he doesn't ask questions when he should so that catch up prior to a deadline would give him that opportunity to ask.

If you are already doing all of that with him then it's time to tell him he is under performing and in what ways specifically.

If after a month there has been no improvement then he isn't the right guy that you need for the role.

But having said all that, have a conversation rather than keep sending emails to get the point across. Communication 'style' is crucial. Speaking can usually solve a lot more than any email. Emails are good for clarification yes, but repeated emails saying virtually the same thing become like junk mail.

 

With the racing to catch up colleague you need to prioritise her whilst also listening to what she is saying about how long things take to do and what issues she is experiencing which could or are causing delays.

If you find that deadlines and priorities are running into each other then yes, you're over whelming her. She would be best given real deadlines

[BluBell]

With the under performer I have a couple of questions.

Are his tasks start to end tasks?

As in does he own various things as 'his baby' so to speak and does he know the impacts they have on other processes too?

 

Some people are happy to blindly perform role X alone having absolutely no idea what it is used for, what value it has and what it leads up to.

Many people perform better when they know the impact of a task they're doing and how it fits into the flow of things.

Also, start to end tasks can be important too. If you are asked to for instance reconcile the bank account - so you identify credits and debits and do all required but then someone else takes over the final part to balance it so it agrees (which is always to a deadline). It can happen that the person doing the identifying and allocating isn't terribly aware of the deadline or impact of not allocating everything so will 'potter around' with it, not identify everything, not allocate everything. Therefore leaving a total mess for the person who needs to balance it to unpick.

I would, at this stage make sure he has complete (start to end) tasks, with deadlines (arbitrary) and knows how it flows through and then have mini catch ups with him to make sure he is on track prior to the deadline.

Maybe you are so busy that he doesn't ask questions when he should so that catch up prior to a deadline would give him that opportunity to ask.

If you are already doing all of that with him then it's time to tell him he is under performing and in what ways specifically.

If after a month there has been no improvement then he isn't the right guy that you need for the role.

But having said all that, have a conversation rather than keep sending emails to get the point across. Communication 'style' is crucial. Speaking can usually solve a lot more than any email. Emails are good for clarification yes, but repeated emails saying virtually the same thing become like junk mail.

 

With the racing to catch up colleague you need to prioritise her whilst also listening to what she is saying about how long things take to do and what issues she is experiencing which could or are causing delays.

If you find that deadlines and priorities are running into each other then yes, you're over whelming her. She would be best given real deadlines

 

He's a person who is used to working very independently and so learning how a big organization functions is all very overwhelming for him. At first I gave him all the information I thought would be useful- to connect his role and his projects to the bigger picture, so that he'd understand why it was necessary for him to do the things we're asking for (complete progress reports). My program is grant funded and I'm creating reports for all the work we're doing; which means I'm quantifying services provided as well as the value of the services provided. He seems to think that when I ask for documentation, it's just me being difficult. It doesn't matter how many times I explain that we all need to produce documentation of our work- we're being paid by a grant. I have to be accountable to the funds I'm spending.

 

Mostly he just has this horrible attitude lately. He shows no appreciation for the fact that I will drop what I'm working on to help him get his own work done. His attitude is frustrated and annoyed, because he refuses to listen and understand to my explanations of how he's made mistakes or isn't getting his work done properly. Trust me, the last thing I want to do is call someone out every single day on the mistakes they keep making- I'd love to rather be celebrating successes and expressing gratitude for a job well done.

 

The long conversations and meetings don't work, because he simply doesn't comprehend 75% of what's being said to him. What's worse, is that he will "yes" you and act like he DOES understand, and then later whatever was discussed doesn't happen and he'll just say "I didn't know I was supposed to do that". I've then started to document conversations so that I can reference- "well we talked about xyz in the meeting and then you didn't do it". But he really doesn't read his emails either. Pretty much he's shown that he wants to do his job the way he wants to do it, on his terms, and thinks everyone else should accept that.

 

And if it were just a difference of opinion between him and I that's one thing, but I have good reasons for needing documentation and reports, or needing someone to comply with safety policies, etc.

 

He also is opening a side business that he wasn't up front about during the interview process. And whenever he is working with us, it's clear his mind and focus is elsewhere. He's basically trying to figure out how to get through the tasks we've hired him for as quickly as possible so he can go handle the issues he has with his other business. And knowing what I know about his inability to organize or multitask, I'm not too sure his other business will last long anyway.

 

It's pretty clear we need to let him go. But I very much appreciate everyone's advice. This is the first time I've been in this position and it's not easy.

[Mr. Lucky]

It's pretty clear we need to let him go. But I very much appreciate everyone's advice. This is the first time I've been in this position and it's not easy.

 

Don't know if you'd be the one doing the dirty work, but one of the best pieces of advice I ever received was to make sure the end result - "We're letting you go..." or "You're being terminated because..." - was the first thing you said.

 

My initial time firing someone as a new manager, I couldn't make myself say "you're fired". The situation was complicated by my knowledge of the person's desperate financial situation and wife and young kids at home. So I had this bizarrely vague and uncomfortable conversation with him until, finally after 15 minutes, he asked me "are you letting me go?". When I responded affirmatively, he said "I've been fired before, you're not very good at this".

 

Unfortunately over the years, I've had the chance to get better with practice...

 

Mr. Lucky

[BluBell]

Well my Director feels sorry for him for some reason. The last time she and I discussed this (for hours and hours over several days) we were on the same page, and now he's played up his winning personality and won her over.

 

As if I had nothing else better to do today, I'll be spending the day printing out all the emails I've sent him and documenting in detail how he hasn't met the expectations in his current contract.

 

She doesn't think it's right that I decrease his pay although it's okay for me to decrease his responsibilities...and this makes absolutely no sense to me.

I've never had a supervisor be so forgiving, so many times, and give so many 2nd and 3rd and 4th chances.

 

To be honest, I wasn't upfront with her about his shortcomings until about a month ago. I had tried to resolve all the problems on my own. I thought she'd fire him immediately and I wanted to give him more time to change.

 

Wish me luck tomorrow!

[BluBell]

So my Director and I spent two hours with him today going through a new limited contract and changing roles. He's defensive, frustrated, is the biggest king of excuses:

 

example- I wasn't able to send that report to that group of coworkers because I don't have their email....when the reality is I'm sure he has their contact information somewhere, it's readily accessible literally on our website, or he could have asked me for it.

 

Thankfully she had my back and told me afterward that I did a good job of handling a difficult meeting. That means a lot coming from her, she has tons of management experience and usually she handles tough situations pretty well, too.

 

I can handle needing to train a person more, use a different communication style, etc., but I'm having an extremely hard time handling his attitude. He's totally ungrateful at all the backbending and twisting I'm doing to try to help him be successful. He could care less that I've spent the majority of the past month dealing with all these issues he's created. Which is slowing down our progress and we only have a year 1/2 left to accomplish some pretty big goals. He's got us way behind track and he just wants to argue about it.

 

I'm bringing someone new on to the team in a few weeks and this person's role will be to pick up and manage all the things he can't manage. From my perspective he should be happy to even still have a job with us, but he's so angry that we are paying him less.

 

The upside is that this conversation drew out a lot of the negative things that he's been able to hide from my Director, so she's agreed to completely let him go if things don't change entirely within the next month. And I will do my best to run interference between him and the new unsuspecting team member...who he will likely be highly critical of.

 

To think a few months ago he was still calling this his "dream job" ....

[Fugu]

I get the feeling that this is a job where he either sinks or swims from the start. I don't mean that you or your organization did anything wrong - with some companies having fewer training resources, the reality is that some jobs are just like that and new hires have to understand that going in. They either meet expectations or they don't.

 

Your employee is frustrated because it's probably increasingly clear to him that this job isn't whatever he envisioned it to be, and he knows he's failing to meet expectations. No employee is going to be happy in that situation. Again, that's not necessarily your fault or the company's. It kinda is what it is.

 

I found myself in a similar situation when I was in my 20s. I had been successful in one nonprofit management job in one state and then an industry colleague (nonprofit management) heard I wanted to move to his state and hired me with great fanfare and expectations.

 

It wasn't but a few weeks after getting hired that I realized I had no idea what I was expected to do in order to be viewed as 'successful'. The company just expected that I would take certain projects and run with them, without ever really finding out what my actual specific skill set was in advance.

 

Long story short, I remember one Thursday afternoon my boss (colleague who hired me) and I were on the phone for a good two hours. It wasn't good. Lots of arguing, with him saying "You're not producing enough given what we're paying you," on his end, and lots of "What the heck do you want me to do that I'm not doing?" on mine. The next day, I had completed a lot of projects that were near completion and he praised me and said he hadn't realized all the work I was doing. Unfortunately, it was too late, because in that same conversation he told me that the Board was having doubts about my new position and concluded it wasn't working out. I was out by Monday morning.

 

I could tell it was tough for him, almost even felt a little empathetic that he was in that position. He'd never had to let someone go before. I was obviously disappointed (and pissed) but here's where I'm going with this: getting fired was one of the best things that ever happened to me. It brought me into reality. It even taught me things I hadn't really considered, like how important it is as a prospective employee to do your own homework on a company and what the job entails. It's not just the company's responsibility to judge whether a position is a good fit -- prospective employees also have to figure that out. It's their responsibility, too. A lot of people who get fired don't understand that, and don't want to. Obviously, this should be a teachable moment for the hiring management as well - they didn't do their homework either. IMO, when an employee doesn't work out, more often than not, it's a mutual failure by both the hiring company, who didn't properly evaluate a new hire's skill set, and also a failure by the individual employee, who didn't do enough to compare the demands of the job with his own skills. Just a thought.

 

Maybe he can turn things around with whatever time he has left, but assuming he can't, I agree that you just need to get to it and let him find another place where he can be more successful.

Edited August 29, 2018 by Fugu

[BluBell]

Well, in this case, I've given him more than a few weeks. It's been six months.

I realized we had problems within the first month. I addressed every issue immediately and let it be known that XYZ was a problem. I'd follow up with instructions how to fix the problem, how not to repeat the problem, etc. He'd say- great, got it. Then he'd make the same exact mistake.

 

He's not just making one mistake, he's making dozens of mistakes over and over again. I meet with him, talk it over, talk through what went wrong, he says he understands, and then two days later...its like the conversation never happened and he repeats the same mistake.

 

I've also given him fair warning that I was going to hire a new team member and adjust his contract to reduce all of the responsibilities and leave him with a pretty low-skill basic low-wage position. I've met with him 4 times and asked- "are you sure you're okay with me making these changes to your contract?" and he said he'd be completely happy to take the role with less responsibility.

 

Also it's become clear over time that he greatly exaggerated his qualifications and skills from the get-go. He also never disclosed that he was trying to open a second business. So he hasn't really been very honest from the start.

This has been a lesson for me in hiring someone- although he really had me fooled! It feels like the person I met in the interview process is a completely different person than the one I'm working with now.