ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Sunday, May 26, 1996 TAG: 9605240011
SECTION: BUSINESS PAGE: 6 EDITION: METRO
COLUMN: WORKING IT OUT
SOURCE: CAMILLE WRIGHT MILLER
Q. Last year I joined a fast-growing, new accounting firm. At the end of this tax season the partners called a meeting of all employees and said we'd lost nearly $100,000. Several were fired; the rest were given 90-day probation to "clean up our act." We were given no explanation of what went wrong and I have yet to figure it out.
A. The partners have demonstrated an absence of insight, control and problem-solving skills. It appears that lack of business and management experience are contributing to a pending massacre. Use the remaining time to gain insight and find more experienced employers.
Meet with the supervising partner and ask for specific examples of your mistakes and performance problems. Use the information to improve your performance.
Ask what he thinks led to the loss. Use the information to evaluate how the loss happened and who was responsible. This information may prove valuable in the way you handle later accounts.
Express appreciation for the opportunity to demonstrate your capabilities over the next 90 days. Your demeanor is important. You want to have the full probationary period to secure a new job.
Begin your job search immediately. When interviewers ask why you're leaving, talk about the desirability of the experience offered by the interviewing firm - there's enough difference among organizations to highlight distinctive features.
When faced with a no-win situation, learn what you can about yourself and the business while you are making efforts to secure a position with a stable, experienced firm.
Q. I've never liked formal performance evaluations. I give on-going evaluations with praise for excellence and suggestions for improvement. A newer employee is asking for a formal evaluation, suggesting that my failure to provide one both violates company policy and puts him at risk. How do I convince him otherwise?
A. Performance evaluations provide many things, among them a history of an employee's work. Should you transfer, earn a promotion, change jobs, retire, or become unable to work, the recorded evaluations provide a written base of knowledge.
The record also provides a measure of security for employees. If a new supervisor finds a worker's performance lacking, an employee could have evidence that the particular area was previously viewed as a strength, if that's the case.
If the organization institutes new policies, the records can also stand to protect employees. For example, if a merit review for raises should be introduced, your staff stands at a disadvantage with no written records of their efforts. You've no way of knowing what's in the future; your well-intentioned actions could eventually undermine your staff.
Finally, if you're ever involved in a legal dispute with the company, your lack of documentation could undermine you completely.
On-going, daily evaluation is an excellent supervisory skill when coupled with written records to provide a history. Employees are best served by having access to both.
Q. I just completed leadership training best described as two days in hell. So we would "better" understand our employees, we were subjected to confrontations, verbal abuse and displays of physical violence by our trainer's accomplices. The last part of the session explored our reactions and reviewed how we handled the situations. I'm angry and feel my trust was abused. Is this the training of the future?
A. Like every other industry, there are those who shouldn't be in the business. Fortunately, many trainers engaged in humiliating participants have been subjected to lawsuits for that abuse. Abusive training isn't a fad, it's abuse.
No training should ever humiliate a participant, no matter what subject the group is trying to more fully comprehend or behavior is to be changed.
Difficult scenarios are handled through role-playing, video tapes and vivid descriptions. These "hit home," but ensure participants are left emotionally intact so they can improve behavior. Confrontational therapy should be handled only by trained therapists, not trainers.
Training which crosses the line of respect should be abandoned. Feel free to leave the room and wait for a break. Talk with the trainer at the break and express your concerns. If an acceptable explanation is offered, rejoin the group. However, if the explanation demeans you or provides no clear rationale, leave. Request a refund and warn co-workers against the experience.
In the future, if a trainer's reputation is unknown to you, call and ask about the goals, content and methods of delivering training.
Camille Wright Miller, an organizational behavior sociologist who works in Lexington, answers questions from our readers about workplace issues. Please send them to her in care of The Roanoke Times, Business News Department, P.O. Box 2491, Roanoke 24010.
LENGTH: Medium: 94 linesby CNB