One of the common experiences I enjoy about working in the HR
sector is that, in casual moments when people find out what I do, I often
become privy to their workplace “dirty laundry”. Some HR professionals may not
enjoy this aspect, but I find it’s almost a trade secret. For it is often in
those moments that you may find you are being offered valuable insight into the
mindset of employee / manager relations.
The knowledge gained from this type of conversation is one
of my favourite examples of diversity education, stemming from the simplicity
of sincerely listening to the human experience. It also represents the primal
need to be heedfully heard. When we don’t feel heard, it appears disrespectful
to our dignity. When we feel disrespected, we do not function at our most
effective levels.
While catching up with a friend, I was made privy to the
struggles their office and parent organization are currently facing. With my
friend’s permission, I was left with some great take-away examples that I felt
eager to share. To be clear, I won’t be sharing the “who”, “what” and “where”.
To spare the innocent, the details may be vague, but the examples are not.
This story stems from a managerial promotion that the
majority of their staff found questionable.
The specific office is comprised of approximately 100
employees, who are split between several managers. Within the office, there is
an in-house team that was formed to address staff needs. It’s a “before we call
the union in, let’s see if we can work this out ourselves” type of situation: a
smart, cost effective idea.
This team scheduled a meeting with the executive who was
directly tied to the decision of the questionable promotion and notified the
rest of staff as such. When the meeting began, the executive, who had been
confirmed to attend, never arrived or notified anyone that they would not be present.
The organization has grievance policies in place to handle
matters like these. The employees were notified that a grievance had been filed
due to this situation, and that the executive is allotted a certain amount of
time to respond.
How convoluted is this?
The lack of executive attendance – and now the extension of
time offered to the executive to respond to why they weren’t in attendance –
gave an already ailing office morale (due
to the initial questionable promotion situation) a deep kick in the gut.
Still with me?
The employees felt intentionally avoided by management, and
left in a situation where they believed their employment equality was being disregarded.
My friend began to then describe how the general tone of the
office became “gray”. Those known to frequently laugh were rather silent. Many
people began keeping to themselves, and leaving the building for lunch to
harness more alone time. They made mention that tensions between management and
staff were consistently escalating. Any instance of slight discomfort in the
office was being brought to management, because staff felt it was a way to
“push back”.
Even my friend, who is one of the most rational people I
know, found their mental health was shaken by this instance. At the end of a
day, it’s only natural for our brains to Rolodex through the events that
occurred over our last twenty-four hours. If the experiences in that time-frame regularly
include off-putting work situations, it leads to lack of sleep. Lack of sleep,
as we all know, leads to both physical and mental deterioration: something I
firmly believe no one must endure as part of their work-life.
So now we fast
forward to about a week after the allotted response time is up. Staff are
called into a meeting and told that the executive in question would be there to
deliver a presentation. However they are not informed as to what the
presentation will regard.
The executive proceeds to offer a presentation about office
attendance, and how over the past weeks, the employee attendance levels from
this specific office have dropped dramatically. Without engaging any discussion
as to why this absenteeism is occurring, the executive opts to remind the
employees that they have co-workers and when a staff member does not show up
for work, their co-worker suffers, and in-turn the entire organization suffers.
Upon the completion of the presentation, a staff member
presented the idea to the executive that their lack of attendance was a direct response
to the executive’s lack of attendance to the initial questionable promotion
grievance meeting. The executive with an apology then claimed they were never
informed of the meeting leaving staff disoriented as to what the truth of the
situation really was.
Even if I were a staff member of this office, I may not be
in ‘the know’ as to the ins and outs of the organization and the full extent of
its decision-making process. I’ll acknowledge that not all players in the game
need to see the complete playbook. Business is business. Decisions must be
made, and one of the first lessons we learn as entrepreneurs is that you can’t
please everyone. But I firmly advocate approaching business with a “You can’t
please everyone, but you can sincerely try” attitude.
It all boils down to dignity.
Break down of the Situation:
- Executive makes an unpopular decision.
- Employees contest decision.
- Executive, without warning, does not attend meeting designated to discuss issue.
- Employees evoke their policy-written right to contest the executive’s actions.
- Management notifies the employees that they have been heard and will be responded to appropriately.
- A large portion of time passes with no response.
- This has a negative effect on employee morale and productivity.
- Employees are reprimanded for that poor productivity by executive.
In this situation, the employees felt lied to by management,
as well as the executive involved. Giving management and the executive the
benefit of the doubt, even if they weren’t being misled, employees should never
be placed in a situation where they feel it’s a possibility.
If you as a leader provide the lowest common denominator of respectful
acknowledgment, you will receive the lowest common denominator of effort from
your employee in return. If you do not address a negative situation with swift
action and by seeking to understand the emotional well-being of your employees
involved, your employees will not seek longevity with your organization.
It’s very simple: Show you sincerely care, and those that
sincerely care about your vision will present themselves to you.
“Communal
well-being is central to human life.” - Cat
Stevens
