Ubu 2 / Give Me A Kiss/ No Lick
Unfortunately, the black labs of the world are much better at learning things and pleasing their master than people are at learning things and pleasing their employers. Yeah, it’s a trade-off. For example, black labs can’t code. People can. Black labs don’t have inter-office affairs (generally). People sometimes do. Black labs might steal your slipper. People don’t but they can steal other stuff like money. These are the realities of having a non-canine work force.
So, what do you do when people screw up?
Let’s start with this. There is a big difference between a mistake and negligence. The former is an accident. The latter is either intentional or total disregard. And each requires a different management approach.
My labradoodle, Buddy, is a very affectionate dog. And how do dogs show their affection? Other than leaning into you, which is their version of a hug, they lick you. One lick, a kiss, is almost universally acceptable. But non-stop slobber is almost universally not. (Me and my niece being the possible exceptions.) So, I had to teach Buddy to give me a kiss versus teaching him “no lick.” That is a very subtle difference and Buddy was taught the difference by tone of voice.
That same subtlety holds for the difference between a mistake and negligence. And like the difference between a kiss and slobber, needs to be taught with language and tone.
An owner or manager who expects no mistakes is a fool or worse and he/she needs to learn how to address mistakes properly for the benefit of both the employee and the company. A mistake, is answered with, “Hey, it happens, man. I’m glad you told me. Now, let’s see what led to that mistake and how we can prevent it from happening again.” That does about 1,000 things but let’s just talk about a few.
One, it shows respect for the employee because you are assuming it was an accident. A good place to start. Second, it reinforces the basic principle of taking ownership and bringing it to management’s attention. Third, offerring to “train” the employee shows you care about them, want them to do better and that you want them around as a colleague.
Mistakes can be addressed in public, generally, because they teach other employees the same three plus other lessons described above. They then become less fearful which, funny as it seems, reduces pressure and lessons the likelihood of an error. It also shows that you, the manager, aren’t an @#$.
Negligence? Another matter altogether. For one thing, negligence needs to be addressed privately. This represents a serious and risky behavior on the part of the employee and warrants a serious, and maybe even harsh, response. Depending on the nature of the negligence, it may even warrant dismissal. Not the case with a mistake. And while “root cause” analysis is needed in the case of negligence, by definition a negligent act on the part of the employee is almost always on them.
Here are two examples, a salesman, who does not have pricing authority, tells the customer they can get the product at fifty percent less than it should be sold for, which creates a large loss. That is negligent. You are stuck with a large loss or a ticked off client who wonders what the heck is going on at your company.
Another example is a bank employee that releases an unauthorized, $3.5 million wire transfer. It may be a mistake but, if you know anything about wire transfers and the irretrievability of the funds once released, you know this a colossal mistake.
In both of the above examples, very clear language, written communication and impacts on compensation are in order. Maybe even termination.
Back to the kiss/no lick analogy, though, there are many shades of grey between mistakes and negligence. For instance, in the above example, what if the wire transfer was for $1,000 rather than $3.5 million? Still a big issue but more from a looking forward perspective. In the “mistake” case, of someone making an input error, say, is one input error a big deal? Generally, not. But if that happens three-four times a week for six months? That begins to cross the boundary from mistake to negligence.
How you, the owner/manager, define mistakes versus negligence and how you react and treat your employees in response to those situations, can make or break a small firm, both financially or culturally. From a faith-based perspective, you want to be compassionate and forgiving. You also want to help the employee reach their full potential. On the other hand, the owner/manager cannot permit the negligence of one person affect the outcomes of the whole group. As a result, the decisions and actions you make when mistakes or negligence occur greatly impact how you are perceived, how the company is perceived, affect morale and whether or not good employees want to hire on or stay there.
Now, back to doodles. With kiss versus lick, there are a few shades of grey, not many. Two licks (max) is a kiss. And Buddy can be trained for that. But I am consistent with him in terms of that definition. And while there is a wider variety of greys between mistakes and negligence, you, the owner/manager have to establish guidelines over time, developed by experience, and try and be as consistent as possible in your approach to the different degrees of “bad.” To not be so, creates all sorts of other fairness and cultural issues at your company that can be very destructive.
A company full of Australian labradoodles might be desirable but it is not practical. Not if you want to make any money. But we can learn from how we train the Buddys the importance of teaching our employees the nuances of performance, what “give me a kiss” means” versus what “no lick” means. And do so in a consistent and kind manner.
And, yes, sometimes what “you’re in the dog house” means.
Show A Little Faith