Dear Bob ...
Publicly flogging the clock-watcher (see "Rights, privileges, fairness and equality," Keep the Joint Running, 5/5/2008) by denying him a Crackberry is unlikely to get the improved performance you seek. Likewise, explaining to them your rationale as "work to your potential." The clock watcher will likely respond with an enumeration of the assignments they have completed or your performance review indicating they were worth keeping. If the clock watcher is a member of an EEOC protected group, you're going to have problems with HR as well.
If you want better performance out of the clock watcher, ask for it with more challenging assignments and by requiring better quality work products. That way if the clock watcher doesn’t perform, you will have an objective basis for performance feedback.
- Motivator
Dear Motivator ...
I don't think we'll reach agreement on this, starting with this: There's a difference between denying someone a Blackberry and deciding a Blackberry is not part of their required provisioning. Denying them one identifies it as a perk, which they don't get. The second identifies it as a tool, and you also aren't provisioning the employee with a pliers or compound mitre saw.
Certainly, a decision to not provision an employee with a particular tool doesn't constitute a public flogging. Public floggings are active actions. Withholding something is the absence of action. Entirely different, just as deciding not to promote someone doesn't constitute a public flogging either.
A good manager should know how to handle an employee who enumerates completed assignments: "Yes, you have done your job adequately. We appear to agree completely. Now, can you give me examples of situations where you've gone above and beyond? It's entirely possible that you have and I'm not aware of them."
If the employee then explains that there aren't any because the manager hasn't provided assignments with sufficient challenge … well, then, everyone is on the right track.
- Bob
Publicly flogging the clock-watcher (see "Rights, privileges, fairness and equality," Keep the Joint Running, 5/5/2008) by denying him a Crackberry is unlikely to get the improved performance you seek. Likewise, explaining to them your rationale as "work to your potential." The clock watcher will likely respond with an enumeration of the assignments they have completed or your performance review indicating they were worth keeping. If the clock watcher is a member of an EEOC protected group, you're going to have problems with HR as well.
If you want better performance out of the clock watcher, ask for it with more challenging assignments and by requiring better quality work products. That way if the clock watcher doesn’t perform, you will have an objective basis for performance feedback.
- Motivator
Dear Motivator ...
I don't think we'll reach agreement on this, starting with this: There's a difference between denying someone a Blackberry and deciding a Blackberry is not part of their required provisioning. Denying them one identifies it as a perk, which they don't get. The second identifies it as a tool, and you also aren't provisioning the employee with a pliers or compound mitre saw.
Certainly, a decision to not provision an employee with a particular tool doesn't constitute a public flogging. Public floggings are active actions. Withholding something is the absence of action. Entirely different, just as deciding not to promote someone doesn't constitute a public flogging either.
A good manager should know how to handle an employee who enumerates completed assignments: "Yes, you have done your job adequately. We appear to agree completely. Now, can you give me examples of situations where you've gone above and beyond? It's entirely possible that you have and I'm not aware of them."
If the employee then explains that there aren't any because the manager hasn't provided assignments with sufficient challenge … well, then, everyone is on the right track.
- Bob
Posted by Bob Lewis on May 19, 2008 03:21 AM
