Around 12 months ago, our data told us we had higher staff turnover than previous years. At the same time, surveys and exit interviews were identifying extremely high engagement scores in most areas, but low scores in relation to career development and professional development. We dug deeper and found several issues relating to the lack of opportunities around career development.

Having recently implemented a new HR information system (HRIS), we knew there was a module for performance management that we hadn’t yet developed. That went hand in hand with a review of our performance management process. The new process could incorporate a strong connection with professional development and career development, and be enabled by the HRIS.

A democratic approach

After an employee survey, and utilising data from exit interviews, we presented the problem   we’d identified and the solution we’d devised to the executive. It was important that we had their support and they were keen to remain across what was happening.

We also had a working group made up of employees and managers to help design and guide the process.

Our focus was not just to ensure a clear professional development process and framework, but to support it with an HRIS element that reduced the amount of time a process like this might take up. In the not-for-profit space, time is a luxury most people don’t have. We needed to improve efficiencies and add value, rather than add administrative effort.

Another deep focus was ensuring every element of the system was fit for purpose. One excellent piece of advice I received when we spoke with other organisations that used the same HRIS was, “Don’t get caught up in what the system can do. Instead, focus on what you need it to do.” 

“[AHRI Certification] recognises job-based learning and expertise, and offers me greater confidence in my own decision-making.” – Megan Werner CPHR, People and Culture Business Partner, Stroke Foundation

Our previous performance management process involved meetings in November and December, with notes typed into Word files. It simply wasn’t conducive to structured, ongoing development. There was a great opportunity to change things.

We looked at our HRIS, at the key functionalities that were available. Then we created our processes to align with the pieces of functionality that matched our needs.

A new approach to career development

As we planned and executed the additions in functionality to the HRIS, we realised the result of those changes was far greater than the sum of their parts.

For example, there are now more areas that can be developed and customised for each individual in terms of performance management and professional development. There are employee goals, career goals, competencies for each role, performance reviews and more.

Other changes included:

• Check-ins are now happening at least once a month and people are going into the system with their managers and assessing their role competencies. Importantly, that’s not from a performance perspective, but instead from the angle of where they need to develop to do their job well.
• The mindset has changed from assessing how a person is performing in their role to assessing areas for development.
• Goals are set and regularly assessed – it’s a living platform, as opposed to a Word file that’s rarely opened because it’s hidden in a folder somewhere.
• Salary reviews aren’t connected to these performance check-ins or to performance reviews. Instead, it’s up to the manager and employee to work out how the process works best for them.
• Feedback and data from the system has already led to new offerings within the business, such as internal training programs and a mentor and emerging leaders program. 

It also brought a simple but powerful change to the timing of the major annual performance review, from the very busy November/December period to the much more manageable January/February one.

Overcoming challenges

The major challenge of the Team Stroke Performance and Development Project was a personal one – the fact that I am not an IT developer.

There was a lot of back-end work to be done on the system. While the vendor was exceptionally helpful and supportive, I had to develop a strong understanding of what our HRIS can and can’t do.

I did not anticipate the amount of time that was going to take, so I spent a lot of time learning about that space. Having said that, it was a positive experience and I now feel I have a new level of knowledge. It was excellent personal development.

I have been with Stroke Foundation for 19 years. I started out as the executive assistant to the CEO. So, for someone like me who doesn’t have a breadth of experience across organisations and sectors, doing this project to achieve my AHRI Certification shows how I’ve been growing and progressing.

You learn so much as you work in a role. This Certification recognises job-based learning and expertise, and offers me greater confidence in my own decision-making. 

This article first appeared in the April-May 2024 edition of HRM Magazine. Megan Werner CPHR is the People and Culture Business Partner, Stroke Foundation

The post Designing a fit-for-purpose career development system appeared first on HRM online.

Managing an employee who is underperforming can be an uncomfortable task. Having to deliver negative feedback, however necessary, can turn into a difficult conversation, and managers are often tasked with striking a balance between driving improvement and maintaining morale.

By comparison, managing star performers can feel like a dream. Their ability to get things done effectively allows for a low-touch managerial style, and the high quality of their work gives the impression that they are thriving in their roles. 

However, according to Charles Brass FAHRI, Senior HR Business Partner at Moonee Valley City Council and Chair of the Futures Foundation, this impression might not be reflective of the whole truth.

“By and large, we respond to the issues that our line managers raise, and, by and large, the issues they raise are of underperformance,” he says. “The tendency is that the squeaky wheel gets the grease.

“It’s true that overperformers don’t need the same attention that underperformers might need. But they do need [support] for a variety of other reasons – not the least of which is that, if they don’t feel their needs are being met, they’re going to get up and leave.”

Issues that can arise with an overperforming employee

Since managers are aware that an overperforming employee will “get the job done”, they can make the assumption that things will be easy for them. 

Managers also tend to pile more work onto their best performers without considering how the extra load is impacting them. What’s more, the high performer, who may also exhibit perfectionist behaviour, might be hesitant to flag if they’re not coping for fear of having their ‘star’ badge revoked.

“They are also dragged into things they don’t necessarily need to be dragged into,” says Brass.

“Often, when managers are facing performance issues with a team, they tend to call the entire team in to have the conversation. While that is sometimes a necessary thing to do – because we’ve got to be treating everybody equally – there’s also an [opportunity] to say to those people, ‘We recognise that your circumstances are different. And we want to acknowledge and respect that.’”

When an employee is consistently exceeding expectations, it could be a sign that they are ready to move up the ladder in their organisation. However, that should be a gradual process. Research shows that the pressure placed on newly promoted employees can cause them to quit, so don’t just pile more responsibilities and power on a high performer without coaching them on how to manage a new role.

Read HRM’s articles on supporting your future leaders effectively.

If there is no immediate opportunity for a promotion, communicate with the employee about a performance management process that works for them and will allow them to thrive in their existing role until a chance to progress arises. This might look like the chance to lead team meetings or work on a project where they have full autonomy.

With that said, if an employee is overperforming to an extreme extent, it becomes much harder for managers to give them the support they need, says Brass.

“It’s true that overperformers don’t need the same attention that underperformers might need. But they do need [support] for a variety of other reasons.” – Charles Brass FAHRI

“Ninety per cent of those serious overperformers are in the wrong job. There’s about 10 per cent I’ve met who are just delighted to be doing the job and doing it exceptionally well, and they don’t want to do anything else. But for most of those people, the fact that they are seriously overperforming is an indication that there is capacity there that the organisation needs to recognise, or it’ll lose them. 

“Anyone who is seriously overperforming is not sustained unless they are continually challenged. This is true in almost every field of life. We’ve seen this with sports stars [when they] go to a second class team – they don’t last long, because they’re not being challenged by the rest of their teammates. They end up leaving, even though there are huge amounts of money involved, and they go to an environment where they are being challenged.”

Tailoring performance management to your strongest players

Particularly in larger organisations, performance management can sometimes feel like a box-ticking exercise for both employees and their managers. 

This can be exacerbated in the case of overperformers, since many elements of a formulaic feedback process will not be applicable to them.

While it is difficult to manage an underperformer without following a formal process, managing your star players might be suited to a more informal management style. The key, says Brass, is to communicate with them about how the process could be tailored to their preferences.

“These conversations around performance tend to be forced upon people. [Instead], you should try to find more organic ways for the conversations managers have with their staff to fit into this picture of performance.

“Rather than having a separate conversation around managing performance, you should do what is good practice anyway, which is to check how things are going, then talk about what’s going on and then have a bit of feedback at the end,” he says. 

During these conversations, managers should consider personalised ways to support high-performing workers to ensure that they are not bored, unchallenged or saddled with stacks of work that they don’t enjoy. 

Read HRM’s article on the three different types of burnout.

“When having that conversation with an overperformer, [you could say], for example, ‘I can clearly see that what we expect of you is being done. So could we give you a day where you spend some time choosing what work you’d like to do?’ Or, ‘There’s this project coming up in the organisation some time in the future. It’s a little outside your normal sphere of activity at the moment, but do you want to get involved in it?’”

This is a subtle version of job crafting and can be a great way to keep an overperforming employee challenged without pushing them too far, as the plan is led by their preferences.

Ensuring equitable feedback and support

When employers adopt different management approaches to employees based on their performance, one concern is that they could open themselves up to accusations of unfair treatment. 

Overperforming employees might feel that they are receiving less attention and development than their colleagues, while underperforming employees might resent any extra flexibility or opportunities offered to high achievers. 

“Ninety per cent of those serious overperformers are in the wrong job.”  – Charles Brass FAHRI

To address these concerns, Brass recommends ensuring that the amount of attention given to each employee is consistent, even if the type of attention might be different.

“That’s the way to deal with the perception that you’re dealing with people differently. [We could say], ‘Yes, it’s true that the conversation I’m having with you, the underperformer is different from the conversation I’m having with them, the overperformer. But the fact that I’m meeting with both of you means I’m treating you the same.”

Reward and recognition may also look different for these two groups, he says – for managers, this requires a careful balance between giving employees the recognition they need to remain motivated without showing favouritism.

“We’ve moved a long way from thinking that reward and recognition is all about money,” he says. “But I think organisations, particularly large organisations, have a way to go in managing these reward and recognition programs for people who are clearly performing at or above a level that is required.”

By providing ample consultation, tailored support and opportunities for growth, leaders can ensure that their star players don’t become victims of their own success.

Develop the necessary skills to build and sustain a high performing work team and tap into the full potential of team members with this short course from AHRI.

The post How to manage an overperforming employee appeared first on HRM online.

When Jeremiah Arigu Emmanuel CPHR began working at the Department of Housing in Nigeria in 2006 as a Training Officer, he immediately knew something was amiss.

The Department of Housing is responsible for building and constructing housing and roads in Nigeria’s 36 states in collaboration with several stakeholders.

Good roads and affordable housing are integral to the growth of Nigeria’s economy and its expansion into non-oil sectors such as agriculture, solid minerals and tourism.

But Emmanuel witnessed a workforce whose morale had slumped, impacting performance and wellbeing, and manifesting in behavioural and cultural issues. 

Many employees didn’t bother turning up to work, and if they did, it would often be late in the day before they arrived. Customer service relationships suffered, with unethical practices becoming a regular occurrence.

“People were collecting kickbacks to do tasks they were supposed to do already without any strings attached,” says Emmanuel, who is know a Teaching Associate at Monash University.

Ethics wise, there was also a common issue of favouritism and bias. Employees were singled out for praise and training based on their connections within and outside the organisation.

The impact of these issues radiated outwards, with many projects suffering service delivery setback

“The organisation handles a lot of enormous projects and we had contractors and organisations working with us to carry out these projects.

“The turnaround times in processing documents and files was impacted, and contractors were often coming to the office to follow up.”

Reinvigorating the training process

As a training officer, Emmanuel worked closely with the Deputy Director of Learning and Development and the Director of HR, and was responsible for developing training plans and proposals and overseeing short courses.

He discovered that in an organisation made up of over 9000 employees, the training budget only took a quarter of this number into account.

“Training had stagnated over two to five years,” he says. “When there was training, there was no deliberate attempt to train people based on needs and merit.”

On a daily basis, both formally and informally, Emmanuel received complaints and queries from employees about the lack of training, which led him to link this back to the issue of low morale and the resulting behaviours.

“Based on that, I drew up argumentative evidence [to demonstrate that] something had to be done if we want to reinvigorate a workforce that could deliver the organisation’s expectations.”

The proposal, which was the focus of Emmanuel’s case study to achieve AHRI’s HR Certification via the Senior Leaders Pathway, was a two-pronged approach comprising a mass training exercise and specific department-centred training.

The project was designed to uplift the capabilities of mid-to-junior level staff, who made up a third (3026) of the organisation.

“These staff were critical resources who I would describe as foot soldiers,” says Emmanuel. “They carried out the nitty-gritty detailed work that required approval by top-level management.”

The first aspect consisted of a one-time holistic training course to bring back employees’ confidence and let them know that the organisation recognised their importance.

Next, he changed the focus of the training to a needs and merit basis.

“I came up with a training needs analysis (TNA) [tool], and formed a Ministerial Training Committee which comprised line managers across all the departments in the organisation, including finance, architecture, engineering, electrical and highways.”

This committee helped to facilitate their respective departments’ TNA to identify the gaps, those who needed to upskill and the training required. They were also tasked with sourcing reputable training organisations that worked in collaboration with the HR team to deliver the required training.

“Employees who came late to work were coming in early and there was an enthusiasm in the air that you could read in their faces.” Jeremiah Arigu Emmanuel CPHR

However, there were some issues agreeing on the format of a TNA survey, but Emmanuel came up with a template that captured data in the context of performance in the following areas: What are the skills required to perform these roles? Do the employees have those skills? If not, what skills do they need to perform at the level expected of them based on the job description?

To strengthen his business case, the TNA was carried out before Emmanuel submitted his proposal to the higher ups. But it still took him a whole financial year to get the plan across the line after some delay due to lack of funds as advised by the finance and accounts department.

Emmanuel persisted, however, and was able to get the department on board by convincing them that training was critical to driving the organisation forward.

Moving the needle on mindset and performance

Once the new approach was implemented, almost all (2384) junior-to-mid level employees received training in a single financial year. The shift in their morale was palpable.

“Employees who came late to work were coming in early and there was an enthusiasm in the air that you could read in their faces,” says Emmanuel.

The turnaround time for processing customer requests improved dramatically, with 90 per cent of files processed within 24 hours of receipt. Positive customer relationship behaviour displayed by front-desk staff also jumped from 30 per cent to 70 per cent.

“I personally received messages from consultants and contractors, saying, ‘The customer relationship has improved.’

Employees also showed their appreciation, telling Emmanuel that greater access to training enhanced their technical, managerial, and attitudinal skills, and improved their ability to perform tasks.

“You could see that employees were beginning to implement things they learned during training.

“It showed in their behaviour and the way they approached colleagues and customers outside the organisation, with a considerable decline in employees taking kickbacks or engaging in corruption.”

The perception of HR in the organisation also shifted after the success of the project. HR used to be locked out of high-level discussions and there was no strategic alignment of HR and business functions. But afterwards, there was an integrated, deliberate approach in discussing key people-related issues at the top level.

“HR became a strong strategic partner in that all the departments saw HR as helping them achieve business objectives.”

Advice for HR professionals

For HR professionals looking to take on a similar challenge, Emmanuel says collaboration, openness and transparency are the keys to success. 

“You need to collaborate with other stakeholders in the industry, whether regulatory bodies or others in the organisation, such as the finance department.

“Training is not a one department affair – it’s an organisational affair. Get the right team and then work together.”

Resilience was also essential for Emmanuel to achieve his goal in the face of resistance.

“Even though some felt this may be a futile effort, I was determined. Top executives might ask you, ‘Why do you want to train people? Everyone is delivering.’

“You need to be persuasive and convince them that in order to gain a competitive advantage in the workforce, you need to upskill, train and develop them.”

A version of this article first appeared in the October 2022 edition of HRM Magazine.

Want to take your career to the next level and be recognised as a Certified HR Practitioner? Achieve the industry standard for the HR profession with the AHRI Practising Certification Program (APC).

The post How this HR professional turned low performance around with targeted training appeared first on HRM online.

It’s time for a performance management revolution.

That’s what Dr Anna Tavis, Clinical Associate Professor and Academic Director of Human Capital Management Department at New York University, and Peter Cappelli, HRM academic, proposed in a 2016 article for the Harvard Business Review.

In the following years, Emma Grogan, Partner at PwC, recalls many organisations announcing they would throw out performance ratings altogether.

This didn’t happen to the full extent that many headlines predicted, says Grogan, but there was movement towards alternative forms of performance management that broke away from the more traditional approach – that is, an annual appraisal that reviewed past performance and outcomes.

History of performance management

Movement away from traditional forms of performance management in recent years hasn’t happened in a vacuum; there were major shifts for decades before, harking all the way back to World War I when performance management first began.

The emergence of newer forms of performance management can be attributed to two main factors, says Grogan:

In 2015, Grogan co-authored research which found that 42 per cent of employees in ASX-150 companies anticipated there would be no impact if performance management was ditched, and 35 per cent said it had no impact on their engagement or motivation.

“There was a feeling that performance management had been quite ineffective and wasn’t a process that supported employees’ development,” she says.

Employees have now shifted their expectations and are seeking learning and development opportunities.

“I think performance management systems need to change because they are going to be a differentiator for employers.

“Part of the value proposition that employers are looking to win on is saying, ‘If you come and work with us, we will grow your career.’” 

An impetus for change

As remote working has become more widespread, many employers have had to rely upon different metrics.

“Leaders are now focusing more on outputs because that’s what they have to measure employees’ contributions by,” says Grogan.

COVID-19 has also created a need for more frequent touchpoints.

“Leaders are checking in more often, providing feedback through video-conferencing, or through digital feedback apps. We’re seeing a change of focus of those conversations to always include that check-in around mental health and wellbeing.”

Seeking to explore how performance management has shifted, AHRI teamed up with the University of Sydney Business School to survey 163 HR professionals in May last year (you can view the report here).

While the results were mixed, and many employers remained wedded to traditional approaches by default, COVID-19 ignited huge changes for some organisations.

John Shields, lead researcher and Professor of HRM and Organisational Studies at the University of Sydney Business School, along with co-researchers Associate Professor Sughoon Kim and Dr Anjali Chhetri, found not-for-profits (NFPs) are often a driving force in the uptake of newer performance management methods.

One NFP in particular is revolutionising its approach to performance management.

“Animals Australia is aggressively experimental, despite being a relatively small organisation. It is pushing the envelope in terms of practice change, and using COVID as fuel for that,” says Shields.

New ground for performance management

Before the pandemic, Animals Australia adopted a relatively conventional approach to performance management.

Kaylene Idda, its People and Culture Manager, describes it as “task-focused”, which included a standard personal development plan for each employee and operated on an annual cycle with a mid-year review. 

When COVID-19 hit, they underwent a cultural transformation that placed flexibility as a central pillar.

Two themes sit at the centre of its performance management revolution, says Idda:

With a focus on flexibility, employees craft their personal and professional goals.

“Instead of being a tick-box exercise, it has turned into something that’s meaningful. It has challenged our people because [the performance management approach includes] questions that prompt self-reflection,” says Idda.

The approach pushes individuals to consider their purpose beyond Animals Australia. 

“It’s about finding their meaning and purpose in life so we can identify how to help them get that within their current role.”

Blended approach 

While Animals Australia is just one example, AHRI and USYD’s study suggests the willingness of a NFP to take up newer performance management approaches isn’t an anomaly.

“Big organisations, particularly for-profits, tend to predominate in the use of traditional practices,” says Shields. “They certainly aren’t ahead of the pack when it comes to newer practices, such as ratingless reviews, crowd-sourced feedback and ongoing feedback.

“In those newer practices, not-for-profits are every bit as proactive, and in some cases more.” 

While there is movement towards the adoption of newer forms of performance management, many organisations are hesitant to shift from older methods.

In AHRI and USYD’s study, more than 70 per cent of HR professionals said their organisations were continuing to use traditional practices such as performance planning discussions and self-assessments.

However, it’s possible to have the best of both worlds by tweaking elements of a conventional approach and introducing newer methods where appropriate.

Even if an organisation isn’t seeking to revolutionise its performance management system, Grogan advises starting with a blank slate so you aren’t bringing any preconceived ideas to the table.

“At the end of the day, a lot of the features of traditional performance systems are still key decision points. Almost every organisation is focused around annual reporting periods, and so ultimately, targets and expectations will be set over the course of a year.” 

An adherence to traditional methods, but with a newer take, has also been observed in the area of ratings.

“There is still going to be a need and desire by employees for direct and transparent feedback about how they’re performing,” says Grogan.

Doing away with rating reviews in a bid to create greater democratisation is a tempting prospect, but it can make it harder for a company to justify certain decisions.

“When there is an annual bonus, which there commonly is for listed companies, they want an explanation about why the company has made that outcome.

“That’s very difficult to explain when you don’t have some kind of rating or anchor point to attach people to.”

Where change occurs, however, is in the range of inputs the employer considers before arriving at a number. 

When reviewing an employee’s performance, a manager might take feedback from clients, customers and an employee’s team members into account.

The success of implementing any new performance management method will depend on the organisational context and willingness to embrace change.

“Companies are facing a lot of choices right now,” says Tavis. “It’s not just the decisions they make about performance management, but also how they introduce it to the organisation and how much leadership support there is.”

Creating a change, however great or small, requires all moving parts to come together.

“The successful implementation of new performance management systems are usually about, not just what’s being introduced, but how they were developed, and what kind of leadership support they received.”

Strengthen your performance management approach and help your teams to excel with AHRI’s short course on Performance Management. Book in for the next course on 19 September.

The post Has COVID-19 changed performance management for good? appeared first on HRM online.

Last October, a motor services company dismissed a technician for failing to meet his key performance indicators (KPIs). The company said he fell short of selling batteries to customers at a minimum of 24 per cent of the jobs he attended and that this low sales rate differed from his colleagues.

The employer also said he failed to reduce the time he was taking at each callout (he spent longer than the 17 minutes target set for each job) and had an “exceptionally high” rate of replacing batteries under warranty. For example, the company said in August 2021 he replaced 20.6 per cent of batteries under warranty, whereas his peers replaced only 3.9 per cent.

The employer maintained that its performance expectations were in line with industry standards, and that the technician consistently failed to meet KPIs for almost 22 months.

In May 2020, the technician was placed on a performance improvement plan, but once the plan ended in October of that year, he received a formal written letter noting that due to his “continued failure to meet expectations… his ongoing employment was at risk”.

The following August, the technician was issued a show cause letter noting that while there had been some improvement in the three identified areas, his performance remained below KPI standards.

The technician was dismissed a few months later and then took the matter to the Fair Work Commission.

While Deputy President Boyce noted that KPIs “might be an acceptable tool to measure general performance comparatively amongst [technicians]”, he said the technician’s underperformance did not justify his dismissal. Among other reasons, this was in large part because the KPIs set were deemed unfair measures of his performance and there was minimal guidance provided to help him achieve those KPIs.

The FWC ordered the employer to reinstate the employee to his previous role, stating that there is a “sufficient level of trust and confidence [that] can be restored between the parties to make their relationship viable and productive going forward”.

James True, Practice Group Leader at LegalVision, highlights the order for reinstatement as being “notable by its rareness”.

“It’s quite uncommon to see an order for reinstatement,” says True.

“But the employee in this case just wanted his job back to do the best he could for his customers. Although the employer said there’d been a breakdown in the relationship and it wouldn’t be appropriate that the employee comes back to the workplace, the FWC sided with the employee on that point and said it was possible to ultimately repair the relationship.”

The KPIs in question

A major factor weighing into the FWC’s decision was the absence of a document clearly outlining the technician’s KPIs, with specific information to support the employee in achieving those targets.

This could have included details about “how each KPI has been derived, what definitions are associated with the KPIs, how the KPIs are assessed, what variables are accepted as impacting upon KPIs, or how such variables are dealt with in terms [of] ultimate KPI outcomes”, said Boyce.

He also noted the performance improvement process was “neither a well-structured, nor assistive one” and that “no training or direction was given” to the technician.

True says the FWC’s finding is particularly interesting because an employer could typically be fairly confident in dismissing an employee where they have been set consistent KPIs, failed to meet those KPIs, been warned their employment is at risk, and been given an opportunity to improve.

“That would ordinarily be the building blocks for a very strong case for an employer, but I think this decision demonstrates how the detail in those KPIs and in the employer’s approach was lacking. That was the determining factor for unfair dismissal.” 

The FWC also found that many of the KPIs set by the employer were not reasonable or fair measures by which to assess the employee’s performance.

For example, Boyce noted how “average working time and time on job measures were a perverse incentive to not complete work properly or professionally”.

“If those jobs were complex or difficult, they should necessarily spend more time on them,” said Boyce.

Being able to achieve many of the KPIs set was also highly contingent upon factors outside the employee’s control.

“The KPIs rely on things like whether the battery is or isn’t under warranty and if the employee has to change it over. This isn’t necessarily something they can improve upon,” says True.

The technician argued that a fairer and more accurate KPI that he could’ve been judged against was ‘jobs per hour’, and True says it appeared as though “the employee was actually doing fairly well on that… There were other KPIs that could have been looked at instead of the ones used”.

Denied opportunity to respond

The show cause letter covered an asserted failure to meet KPIs in relation to the three improvement areas identified. But the employer failed to include allegations about the employee’s “assertedly poor attitude” and assertions that he was replacing allegedly sound batteries under warranty, the FWC found. The employer said these issues weighed into its decision to dismiss the technician.

This factored into the FWC’s decision because the employee could not have had the opportunity to respond to issues that were only raised after termination.

“The employer relied on the employee’s poor attitude as a basis to justify the termination. The fact that there were points omitted from the correspondence with the employee, including the final formal letter, the show cause letter and the termination letter, made it difficult for the employer to suggest that these were considerations they were relying on when they made the termination,” says True.

On the latter point, Boyce noted that “knowingly replacing batteries under warranty when they were not under warranty is plainly misconduct and was a matter that was never raised with [the technician] which he could have responded to”.

“That’s quite a serious issue, and one that should have been brought up with the employee at a much earlier point,” says True.

Setting KPIs

The issues in this case raise questions around how employers should set KPIs, and how best to communicate these to employees while giving them the opportunity to improve.

True highlights four key points for HR to keep in mind:

1. Communicate KPIs in writing: “Being short on detail hurts the employer because it makes it harder for the employee to know what’s required of them to achieve a reasonable level of performance.”
2. Make sure the KPIs are reasonable: “They need to genuinely reflect the performance that you’re trying to achieve from the employee.”
3. Cover all your bases: “There’s a lesson here to be thorough in your correspondence and make sure that you are comprehensively dealing with all the issues. There was some criticism from the Commission that major allegations about the employee’s attitude and behaviour were not flagged until after termination.”
4. Provide the opportunity to improve: “When you’re going to tell someone that their performance is not up to scratch, you need to identify what is required in order for them to approve.”
5. Be specific to help them improve: “You need to be really clear in what you’re asking of someone. If you’re vague and say something like, ‘You need to make the required improvements,’ then the employee can turn around and say, ‘I didn’t really know what you wanted from me.’ It’s hard for the performance issues to then be on the employee because it was never made clear what they needed to do to improve.”

Employers have a responsibility to not only set performance standards, but to provide guidance and support to help employees achieve them. This case shows the fall-out that can result if clear and detailed processes aren’t followed when setting performance improvement plans.

Managing an underperforming employee isn’t as simple as just putting them on a performance improvement plan. Get across your legal obligations through AHRI’s short course on Performance Management. Book in for the next course on 19 September.

The post Failing to reach KPIs did not justify dismissal, finds FWC  appeared first on HRM online.

You could technically use nothing but a knife to eat your food, cutting the meal down to size, then painstakingly scooping pieces up or piercing them individually. But since forks exist, why would you do that? Similarly, organisations can use human resources information systems (HRIS) to handle all their performance management, but why would they do that when a more effective system exists: a dedicated employee experience platform?

Research shows that organisations with employees who are more satisfied with their company’s approach to performance management are:

• 1.3x more likely to meet their financial targets;
• And three times more likely to manage change effectively.

A performance management system that employees are satisfied with is one that is perceived to be fair, transparent, and valuable for the employee – not just the employer. Creating such a system is a big challenge and most HRIS are just not up to the challenge.

The typical reasons companies stick with HRIS for performance management are cost, convenience or both. The HRIS is already embedded and it has some performance management functionality, so some organisations don’t see the need for an employee experience platform when integrating it with their HRIS seems difficult. 

But those who rely on their HRIS might not be aware of its many performance management limitations.

A ‘nice to have’ vs dedicated functionality

On the surface, the standard HRIS platform offers the essentials an HR team requires. It tracks employee data like salary, leave entitlements and so on, while allowing you to enter and view performance-related data. 

The back-end of the technology tells a different story. Rather than an integrated system, HRIS platforms are often a collection of discrete databases. This tends to mean HR will spend more time and encounter more errors than they would with a dedicated technology.

This issue extends to the interface. According to a US-based survey of 48,000 people by Leadership iQ, only six per cent of CEOs and only 13 per cent of employees and managers find their company’s performance appraisal system useful. This could be because many HRIS platforms’ feedback features are tacked-on.

The worst outcome of this is that feedback becomes less common and less embedded in the culture. A meta-analysis of 71 research articles found that frequent feedback had one of the largest positive effects on job performance.

Compare the overly simple feedback of some HRIS’ platforms with Culture Amp, an employee experience platform that makes feedback engaging and accessible to all relevant stakeholders, and measurable to HR. Not only does it encourage more frequent and useful feedback, it allows employees to set meaningful, realistic goals and track progress over time.

The core distinction to keep in mind is that while HRIS companies are focused on delivering generalist technology, employee experience platforms are supported by engineers and IT specialists solely focused on people management. The best ones are also designed by behavioural scientists to maximise the usage and impact of the technology.

For example, creating a performance review template on a lot of HRIS platforms requires HR to liaise with their provider or in-house IT team, and then wait their turn in what’s likely a long list of other competing priorities. However, Culture Amp’s platform offers functionality for HR professionals to do this quickly and easily. Rather than a team having to support the technology, the technology supports the team.

This dynamic also affects innovation. Because performance management is a ‘nice to have’ in an HRIS and not a make-or-break feature, its evolution is slow and updates from the provider can be sporadic. Like Uber Eats’ pickup option, HRIS companies are not too concerned if the feature is seldom used.

Deep, accurate analysis

Perhaps the most important reason to have performance management technology is to unearth insights you would not otherwise be able to see. The underlying technology of Culture Amp is built from the ground up to track, analyse and present performance data. Just as importantly, they’re designed to simplify data collection.

Performance management workflows have to be streamlined, because most line managers’ jobs are difficult enough as it is. If entering information about an employee’s goals, one-on-ones and performance reviews is cumbersome – if it requires opening up several windows and fumbling for the correct section – they will likely either avoid doing it, or do a half-hearted job.

If this happens, the data can’t be analysed properly and will often not be there when leadership needs to review it. Worse, what’s there to review might be misleading, if a frustrated manager has entered inaccurate information. All of this can exacerbate the impact of bias on the performance review process – which can hugely undermine the perceived fairness of the process.

Dedicated employee experience platforms such as Culture Amp are designed with managers, HR and leadership in mind, so workflows can be tailored to optimise completion rates.

It doesn’t have to be either/or

HRIS platforms make functional HR simpler and are exceptional at doing that. They can be the single source of truth for your core employment data, keep track of leave and other entitlements, and be a linchpin of other employee-related processes.

Employee experience platforms are more focused on that next stage of organisational maturity. They are designed to maximise employee engagement and unearth what makes your people productive – they make strategic HR simpler. As the profession tries to fulfil that more strategic role, they should look for the technology that can support them.

Of course, the two things can co-exist. For HR teams that rely on their current HRIS, it can be synced to supply data to Culture Amp. That way you get the benefits of dedicated performance management technology with minimal disruptions to your current processes.

It turns out that eating with both a knife and fork is not only possible, it’s really effective.

Embrace a more human approach to performance management today and download Culture Amp’s free Performance Management Toolkit or book a demo of Culture Amp for your business.

The post HRIS platforms fall behind on performance management. Try this instead. appeared first on HRM online.

In July 2020, Shannon Wilson CPHR had been working as HR Advisor at Shearwater Steiner School in Mullumbimby for eight months when James Goodlet, the new Head of School, arrived. Before long, Goodlet had devised a strategic focus aimed at boosting employee initiative and improving the school environment while still delivering high-quality education. 

An employee survey in late 2019 had revealed that employees, while hungry for change, felt unacknowledged, under-appreciated and overworked. They reported that their roles and responsibilities lacked definition, and that professional development lacked structure. By 2020, voluntary staff turnover had reached 20 per cent – up from 10 per cent in 2016.

Wilson recognised that if Goodlet’s strategic plan didn’t address these issues, it would struggle to get the support of staff. So she set about working on the cultural issues at play to ensure he had a strong foundation to build on.

A four-pillar approach

Even though the school recognised the need for change, leadership was wary of introducing a performance management system. 

“Teaching is a unique job,” says Wilson. “Efficiency and productivity can’t be determined simply by looking at students’ scores, so it’s difficult to devise an objective process for performance management.”

Also, the school’s leadership felt that a performance management system would be perceived as a function to address underperformance when it was so much more than that.

“So we had to change the language,” says Wilson.

She adopted a holistic, four-pillar approach she called the Staff Potential Program, which doubled as her capstone project to achieve AHRI’s HR certification. The program comprises a “whole person” review, a goal-setting framework for a staff potential plan, probationary reviews for new staff and procedures for under performers.

Creating a tailored framework

The whole person review precedes the goal-setting framework, and unlike traditional performance reviews, it’s personal, spiritual and professional in scope. It takes the form of an unstructured conversation between employees and their manager. 

Wilson drew on the research of American neuroeconomist Paul Zak when putting the plan together. (Neuroeconomics is an interdisciplinary field that seeks to explain human decision-making.)

“The personal aspect provides a safe space to open up and reduces stigma around sensitive issues such as mental health,” says Wilson. “This conversation also assists us in fulfilling our duty-of-care obligations under the Work Health and Safety Act.”

The spiritual aspect is two-fold.

“It provides staff an opportunity to reflect on how one’s professional practice is supported and influenced by the Steiner philosophy, and, beyond that, to explore one’s passions outside of work to support and nurture their personal wellbeing and identity.

“The professional aspect is concerned with how the staff member is going with their career and where they see themselves in the future, and this can be used to inform our succession and workforce plans.”

Following the review, each staff member creates goals utilising the SOAR analysis framework, which stands for strengths, opportunities, aspirations, results. (See template here). This means focusing on strengths and opportunities, in line with aspirations, to achieve specific results.  

“We tailored the framework for our staff. For example, we encourage them to look at opportunities which exist in the organisation and support the school’s strategic plan, such as undertaking strategies to better integrate school curriculum.

“The intent is to guide managers, so they feel empowered to act when it’s needed, with an understanding of both legal and ethical obligations.” – Shannon Wilson CPHR, HR Advisor, Shearwater Steiner School

“Additionally, staff are required to devise goals in line with their professional standards. Teachers, for example, would develop at least one goal which reflects the NSW teaching standards, such as devising a goal to support student participation in the classroom.”

Wilson’s program includes probationary reviews to ensure that realising staff potential is a priority from the beginning. They take place when staff members are three and six months into their positions and begin by mirroring the whole-person review process. 

“The probationary review begins as a discussion about how the new staff member has found their time in the school so far. It provides an opportunity for us to find out what support is needed from their perspective in terms of development or resources while providing their managers with the opportunity to address any issues early on.”

Meanwhile, the risk of underperformance is addressed through policy and guidelines, which explain what is expected of employees and how leadership will manage underperformance. 

Wilson emphasises that this is a flexible approach. 

“The intent is to guide managers, so they feel empowered to act when it’s needed, with an understanding of both legal and ethical obligations. For example, when to take notes and how to draw up an improvement plan while identifying appropriate reporting lines.”

Feeling supported

The Staff Potential Program was launched in late 2020 and had achieved some pleasing results by April 2021. There was a 10.8 per cent increase in the number of staff who felt the school vision was clearly articulated; a 24 per cent increase in the number who felt supported by their supervisors; and a 23 per cent increase in the number who said they now received more regular feedback. 

“I was particularly happy that so many staff felt better-supported,” says Wilson. “In formalising the need for conversations between staff members and managers, we’ve created a space which is really positive.”

She acknowledges there’s still work to do. Not least because the pandemic and vaccination mandate for NSW teachers have negatively impacted job satisfaction and increased turnover rates.

“Designing and implementing an HR program for a whole organisation can be overwhelming and intimidating, but completing it as part of AHRI certification really helped. 

“In bringing together research and evidence-based strategies, I had more confidence in my recommendations and in the design of the program. It also helped me build clout with the leadership team.”

Join a growing cohort of HR professionals who are taking the next step in their careers by undergoing HR certification with AHRI.

This article first appeared in the March 2022 edition of HRM magazine.

The post Fixing staff turnover issues by rebranding performance management appeared first on HRM online.

Is your workplace haunted?

You might think, “Of course not!”, but I have some worrying news for you: it might be.

While spirits and ghouls are probably not possessing your photocopier (I hope), there are some workplace ghosts that crop up from time to time. And if you don’t know how to bust them, they can harm your people and your bottom line. 

So who are these ghosts, and how do you get rid of them once and for all? As Halloween draws near, HRM goes on a ghost busting hunt.

1. Ghosts in the payroll

Ghosts lurking in your payroll system usually indicate that there could be occupational fraud at play, says Tracy Angwin, CEO of the Australian Payroll Association.

This occurs when an employer continues to pay someone who is no longer working for the organisation, or possibly never existed to begin with.

Worryingly, they are more common than we think, says Angwin.

“Ghost employees are relatively common in payrolls, especially those [organisations] with high turnover and high usage of casual or part time staff members,” she says. 

“They are more likely to occur when there is poor governance and controls in a payroll operation.”

This kind of fraud is more likely to happen if payroll is managed centrally, or if it’s only managed by one person. To create a ghost employee, the fraudster needs to be able to add people to the payroll system without much oversight.

Ghost employees can appear by accident. Maybe two employees have very similar names, for example. But in Angwin’s experience, more often than not, ghost employees are maliciously placed on the payroll to defraud the organisation.

“If you have good governance and controls, it would be difficult to justify a ghost employee as an accident,” says Angwin.

“All the ghost employees we have discovered are deliberate acts, and therefore fraudulent payroll activity.”

Some red flags that could indicate ghost employees are present include: employee files with very little identifying information, a mailing address that matches another employee or multiple employees using the same postal box, or an employee without a job description or recognisable job title.

“The red flags for payroll fraudsters include living beyond their means, [sometimes a] drug or gambling addiction and often people who are going through major life changes,” says Angwin.

Busting this type of workplace ghost:

Be sure to regularly check your payroll lists, or conduct a payroll audit at least once a year, and implement procedures to act on suspicious additions. If possible, try to meet employees whose file looks odd in person to confirm that their details are accurate. 

“Prevention is much better than cure. The best thing you can do to solve this issue is to ensure you have good governance, controls and processes in your payroll system,” says Angwin.

If you’re ever suspicious of your payroll team, it means your processes and controls aren’t strong enough, she says.

“We also recommend that employers do police checks as part of recruiting a payroll team,” says Angwin.  “[A woman] stole almost $20 million from [retailer] Clive Peeters, got a payroll job while on bail.”

“It’s like they’re leaving their ghost in their old team. It’s a kind of job robbing because you’re not letting the new manager do the job they’ve rightfully gained.” – Karen Gately, Founder of HR consultancy Corporate Dojo.

2. Ghosts of employees past

These are employees who have a lasting impact on your organisation long after they leave. 

They aren’t necessarily employees who’ve been fired and are returning to try to ruin your reputation, but more so someone whose personality was so radiant, or their work so phenomenal, that they are remembered and revered well after they’ve jumped ship. 

Sometimes this kind of workplace ghost can be someone who had a nice presence, and reminiscing about them might be a bonding experience for staff, or they might be remembered for being an amazing worker – “Remember Janet? She could sell ice to the Inuit!”

This long-lasting praise and affection can put the person replacing them in a difficult position. Whether they’re a new recruit or a current employee, there can be an expectation that they will be Janet 2.0. 

“This can make people closed-minded or limit their beliefs of what’s possible. In that instance it needs to be tackled,” says Karen Gately, Founder of HR consultancy Corporate Dojo. 

An example of this is when Tim Cook took over as Apple CEO from Steve Jobs in 2011. Jobs introduced the world to the iPhone, turning Apple into a technology powerhouse. How could Cook possibly replace him?

He couldn’t. Rather than become a Steve Jobs clone, Cook made the role his own while still respecting Jobs’ legacy.

Demonstrating respect is important for any incumbent filling a workplace ghosts’ role, says Gately. 

“You’re only going to get people digging their heels in and retaining loyalty for people of the past if they don’t feel like there is a fair and reasonable acknowledgement of what came before,” she says.

Busting this type of workplace ghost:

Mehtap Ozdemirci CPHR, Founder of Lock HR, has dealt with this issue personally when she moved into a State Manager role and was routinely compared to her predecessor. 

Sometimes change paralysis can overcome teams, says Ozdemirci, which makes them look back to the ‘good old days’.

“I would focus the messaging on moving people forward to the future just one step at a time,” she says.

“We don’t know what the future will look like, but if we focus on two-week or two-month sprints, then change feels less scary.”

Also, make sure an observation and learning period are part of any role transition, so employees don’t feel like the contributions of the former employee are ignored, says Ozdemiric. 

“There has to be a balancing act of recognising the past and bringing in your own contributions.” 

3. The lingering ghost

This is a workplace ghost that hasn’t left your organisation, but they are having difficulty relinquishing control of an old role.

The lingering ghost appears when employees move up the hierarchy. 

For example, Rahja has just moved up from a District manager position into the Head of the Branch. Their subordinate, Jason, is promoted to the District Manager role. The problem occurs if Rahja tries to control how Jason does his job, or continuously offers unsolicited advice.

“It’s like they’re leaving their ghost in their old team,” says Gately, “It’s a kind of job robbing because you’re not letting the new manager do the job they’ve rightfully gained.”

Spotting this ghost can be tricky because the new manager might not feel comfortable making a complaint about their former manager.

One sign could be if the new manager’s performance is slipping. Another might be if the employee reports feeling unempowered in organisational surveys. When following up with them, you might find they feel restricted by the ghost haunting their role.

“Having a deeper dive, beyond a regular organisation assessment, once or twice a year, around factors like decision-making and employee empowerment can [reveal] this kind of behaviour.”

Busting this workplace ghost:

It can be handy having the former manager around as a knowledge source to tap into, but there should be strict boundaries around when the transition period is over, so the former manager can focus on their new role.

Implement clear lines of responsibility, says Ozdemiric. These should outline what is and isn’t part of their role.

If the new manager still reports to the ghost, then it might be helpful to manage up, says Gately.

To manage up, make sure you understand the old manager’s personality and motives. 

“For example, the old manager might be worried because they can’t get a sense of what’s going on,” says Gately. 

“Show them [what you’re working on] and the outcomes to put their mind at ease that things are on track.”

With all this information, hopefully you’re able to do some ghost busting of your own this Halloween. Who you gonna call? The HR department.

Becoming a workplace ghost buster is only one skill HR needs to thrive. If there is an area you’d like to improve in, check out AHRI’s selection of short courses.

The post Are these three workplace ghosts haunting your employees? appeared first on HRM online.

Despite seeing the light at the end of the tunnel in terms of the various state lockdowns lifting at some point in the near future, many employees will continue to work from home for the foreseeable future. 

This means employers need to remain vigilant about their continuing obligations to remote workers. They also need to consider the new and unique challenges that have arisen as a consequence of employees spending months away from the physical office.

One common remote work challenge is managing performance issues. Here are some important tips to keep in mind.

Virtual performance management is a new playing field

Where an employee isn’t performing to the required standard, employers are entitled to implement a performance management process, notwithstanding that employees have been working remotely and may continue to do so for some time. 

However, it’s important to have regard for any barriers to performance that have arisen due to this required mode of work. For example, has their performance been affected because of:

• An employee’s reliance on their home internet and computer devices, which may not be as fast or up-to-date as the office equivalents, for example.
• Difficulty contacting relevant people to get their work done.
• An employee having to manage concurrent caring responsibilities or homeschooling.
• Mental health or social challenges that have been exacerbated by the pandemic (e.g. being isolated from peers and colleagues for months at a time).

Failure to have regard for such matters may result in issues for employers down the track if they seek to rely on performance issues to justify dismissal.

How to implement a fair process

Where it may be necessary to terminate employees who are working remotely, employers should proceed with caution and ensure that procedural fairness continues to be adhered to – to an extent that’s reasonably practicable – to avoid the Fair Work Commission (FWC) finding that any dismissal was harsh, unjust or unreasonable due to procedural failures. 

This includes providing adequate warnings and notice, and giving reasonable opportunities to improve and to respond to claims of underperformance, as would be the case if an employee was not working remotely. 

While it may be a challenge to meet with the underperforming employee in person, as part of the performance management or termination process, you should still opt for a face-to-face option, such as a video call, to mitigate the risk of the employee feeling aggrieved at receiving such news via a phone call, email or text.

The FWC decision Petersen v Allpet Products illustrates the importance of the above matters. 

In this instance, an employee was let go due to underperformance during the pandemic.

In finding that the employee’s dismissal was unfair, the FWC said the employer should have considered the impact of the pandemic on the employee’s ability to perform her duties, and performance issues could not be assessed against pre-pandemic work hours and standard performance criteria. 

The FWC was also critical of procedural defects around the termination, including a failure to provide an opportunity to address or correct the issues, and terminating the employment without notice by email without a call or meeting. 

This demonstrates the importance of employers being mindful of the new challenges arising from the pandemic and longer-term remote work.  

Employers should also continue to adhere to their statutory and common law obligations in relation to implementing performance management and termination processes, to the extent reasonably practicable in the context of the pandemic. 

When it’s not reasonably practicable to do so, employers should attempt to replicate existing processes as much as possible while maintaining an overarching focus on ensuring procedural fairness. 

Understanding the important legal considerations is just part of the virtual performance management process. Equally important is knowing how to tweak your approach to cater to a changing environment. Stay tuned for an article from HRM in the following weeks unpacking the practical side of virtual performance management.

Amy Zhang is the Executive Counsel & Team Leader at Harmers Workplace Lawyers.

Understanding the legal side of emerging workplace practices, such as virtual performance management, can be challenging. Ensure you’re up to speed by taking AHRI’s Introduction to HR Law short course. Sign up for the next course on 22 November 2021. 

The post Things to keep in mind during virtual performance management appeared first on HRM online.

You look away from your laptop screen and your colleague is at it again: mindlessly scrolling through Facebook for the fifth time today before their mouse lands upon a clickable link titled: ‘Here’s how my dog knows when my alarm is about to go off’. Unless your colleague is undertaking a project in animal behaviourism, there’s a very slim chance the endearing dog footage is a genuine work task.

We all spend a few minutes here and there checking Facebook, chatting to a colleague about a gripping Netflix series we just finished binge-watching, or taking a quick personal call during work hours. But there’s a point at which a short and well-deserved break enters into ‘slacking off’ territory.

Sean Wilson, CEO of Better HR, says although even the best workers have times when they slack off, this point arrives when the problematic behaviour starts to follow a similar and predictable pattern.

Another telltale sign might be if a colleague is falling behind on tasks, or the quality of their work is being compromised.

Unsurprisingly, your colleague who is watching dog videos all day is probably the same one who’s not pulling their weight on the team project, or constantly missing deadlines.

So how can you approach a coworker who is slacking off, and tell them their work ethic isn’t up to scratch without jeopardising your relationship or causing conflict in the workplace?

Wilson and Dr Allan Cohen, distinguished emeritus professor in global leadership at Babson College, share their insights and top tips.

1. Identify slacking off behaviour

First things first. Before you jump the gun and assume your coworker’s underperformance is indicative of a poor work ethic, consider other underlying causes for their behaviour.

Wilson says maintaining effective communication will enable you to delineate between an employee who is slacking off versus someone who is unsure of what’s expected of them, struggling to stay on top of their workload or not equipped with the necessary skillset.

“If you have strong relationships, you’ll find that your employees will tell you what obstacles are preventing them from performing effectively,” says Wilson. “It’s easy to say that someone is slacking off, but it could be that they’re underperforming and not aware of what you want them to do.”

As many employees are currently juggling work responsibilities and homeschooling, it’s possible they’re preoccupied with other demands right now. In the current climate of uncertainty around COVID-19, various lockdowns, and burnout rates at a worryingly high level, many employees might not have the physical or mental space to give their all to work right now and that needs to be okay.

“Maybe they have three children to juggle at the moment, so it’s difficult for them to focus on their work,” says Wilson.

He gives the example of an employee who needs to set their children up at home for school at 9am, so they might not log onto their work computer at that time.

“But in reality, what you’re not aware of is that at six o’clock in the morning when their children are still asleep, that employee might be putting in the hours then to deliver the same result.”

They might also be underperforming because their home environment isn’t conducive to productivity.

“There could be an equipment issue. Maybe they don’t have a desk at home and they’re sharing the desk with their kids, so that’s causing a lot of noise which is creating productivity problems.

“If you have conversations with people, often you can uncover these kinds of problems and identify solutions to fix them before they become a formal performance management issue.”

2. Open a dialogue

If you’ve explored the possibilities above and still come to the conclusion that your coworker’s tendency to slack off is likely due to a poor work ethic, it might be time to tackle that issue head-on.

Wilson advises doing this before making a call about whether to escalate the problem to someone more senior.

“It’s possible that an employee is dealing with personal issues at home that have nothing to do with the workplace. Going to their manager escalates it from being a genuine issue of concern about trying to fix the problem to calling out somebody else’s behaviour.

“They might have other issues on their mind that are impacting their performance, but if you tell their manager straight away, they might become very conscious that everybody else in the workplace is now looking at them, and that they’re being singled out.

“It’s about making sure those conversations are handled appropriately, and people are given opportunities to respond privately.” 

3. Work together

When approaching an employee who is slacking off, Wilson advises taking a calm and steady approach and  avoiding confrontational language.

Instead, he proposes finding a solution together by asking questions such as: ‘Is there anything I can do to help? Is there something that’s preventing you from doing your job? Is there a problem in the team that is having an impact on you?’

A productive outcome will more likely ensue with a positive and forward-looking approach, says Wilson.

“It’s not about being critical and saying, ‘You’re not carrying your weight’. Help that person to save face by being positive in your communication. The minute you criticise people, they become immediately defensive, whereas if you come from a place of genuinely trying to help people, they’re more likely to be responsive.”

Cohen concurs with this sentiment and encourages employees to “get into a posture of inquiry and exploration, rather than attack and blame” before approaching a colleague.

“Remember to treat the first conversation or two as exploration and problem-solving. Point out one or more examples, or a pattern of the difficulty and its consequences, making sure that the person understands what the ramifications have been and are. Work to get into joint problem-solving: “let’s see what we might do to prevent future problems.”

Come to an agreement about a method for keeping track of progress, says Cohen, who advises considering questions such as: Does the person prefer close monitoring or only periodic checks? How would the person prefer to be managed if deadlines or timelines are not being met? Can you express discomfort with what is desired and look for other alternatives that are mutually satisfying? 

Further strategies to create a positive and non-confrontational environment that encourages collaboration could include:

• Approach the conversation on neutral ground, such as in a small break-out area or at a coffee shop, and avoid a more confrontational set-up such as a formal board room that could lead the employee to feel worried or act defensively.
• Avoid using accusatory statements. “Talking about the impact on you and the work, the inconvenience or other negative consequences for you, and your concern about whether it is possible to help, is much more likely to reduce defensiveness than overt attacks, accusations, sarcasm, threats, and so on,” says Cohen.
• Avoid using ‘we’ statements, which could imply that you’ve been discussing the colleague’s behaviour with other people. For example, “We’ve all noticed that you spend a great deal of the morning doing non-work related tasks” might be interpreted as a group uniting against them, whereas, “I’ve observed that it takes you a number of hours to start on your work for the day” keeps the conversation strictly between you and the other person.

Take responsibility

If the employee slacking off is in your immediate team, you likely won’t have to think very deeply about how their lack of commitment is impacting your workload.

Most probably, their idleness is going to mean there’s more work piling onto your plate. Or, if you’re working on a project together and they aren’t meeting deadlines, that will probably have a negative flow-on effect to the rest of the team.

In this situation, it’s advisable to speak up sooner rather than later, in order to keep your own workload at a manageable level and stave off burnout.

But what if they’re not in your team? Then it’s not so clear cut. For instance, what if you have minimal day-to-day interaction with the underperforming employee? The fact that they check Facebook an unreasonable number of times per day might grate on you, but if you work in separate teams, have different bosses, and produce separate work, what does their slacking off have to do with you?

Probably not a whole lot.

As a general rule, Cohen advises against approaching a colleague slacking off who isn’t in your team.

The reason to avoid doing so, he says, is because organisational norms often frown on people who butt into the dynamics of teams outside their own.

“If you are skilled at raising issues and can talk with the person privately in circumstances that are not too rushed, a direct approach can be helpful,” he says. “But it has to be made in terms of explaining the impact of the work not done, a spirit of inquiry about what problems are getting in the way rather than blame, and a willingness to acknowledge that you or your team may be causing some of the problem.”

But even if an employee slacking off doesn’t directly impact your ability to do your job tasks, Wilson says it’s in everyone’s best interests to hold an employee slacking off to account.

“Putting your head in the sand and not saying when you see a problem happening feeds into the business’ potential to fail, and your job may ultimately fail.

“We all have a responsibility to help a business succeed. That’s what helps them employ people, get pay rises, and achieve success.”

Do you need to approach a colleague who isn’t pulling their weight? Tips in AHRI’s short course on having difficult conversations can help you to raise issues of underperformance with an employee. Sign up to the next session on September 6.

The post Employee slacking off? Here’s how to respond appeared first on HRM online.