TriPolar has already mentioned the solution in supervisors. Just pick a few of the NPs from the “good” pile.
I think you’re always going to have issues with motivation and resentment when you try to split people into us and them, though. One team, one firm, and all that. Make people feel included and valued whatever their role.
Presumably you’ve asked the NPs who are not co-operating with new Pros if there is a problem?
Cite?
I mean really, what is your case here? You are mismanaging a business and you want to blame the employees at the bottom of the ladder. **Rand Rover **is right, I have a chip on my shoulder. That has no bearing on your situation. You are letting your ego get in the way of rational thought. Superiors are not intimidated by inferiors. Paper tigers are intimidated by almost everything.
Institutionalized insubordination/laziness/sense of entitlement is almost impossible to fix organically. You’re going to need to swap out the bad apples, end of story. You can’t (and probably don’t want to) do it all at once, but you do need to do it, slowly but persistantly.
Had a very similar situation at my current job. Took me about two years, and yes it’s a PITA because it’s never fun firing someone (even the really lousy workers), and hiring is a major time-suck (although I love the whole hiring process itself).
Two years later things are downright boring on the people issues front. It starts by getting rid of the bad apples and replacing them with good apples, and then making sure everyone stays good apples. It’s not quantum physics; it really isn’t all that hard. Just don’t expect a magic word that will suddenly fix everything with the people and situation you have.
EDIT: Mispost.
OK, so your NPs think they are valuable for their institutional knowledge, rather than for their performance and efficiency. You need to institute rewards and recognition for performance excellence within the NP ranks.
You also need a better on-boarding process which teaches the Ps their jobs before they hit the floor, so that they don’t all start out as a burden to their direct reports. Training should be run by a team of excellent P and NP. NPs who lead these trainings should be rewarded.
You also need to make crystal clear to the Ps that documentation for poor performance is part of their job. Those who are intimidated into doing NP work are shirking their true responsibility. You have to punish/deincentivize that. Make it clear that they are not authorized to charge P rates for doing NP work, and this is incorrect use of corporate funds.
Begin formal warnings/HR processing of P non-performance.
Within about nine months you should be in a position to begin formal warnings for NP non-performance. Having first rewarded NP excellence and addressed P shirking/ignorance, the perception of unfairness will be minimized as much as possible.
Counseling of NPs should always be in the form of fairness of burden within their ranks. If you have successfully stopped the Ps from shouldering lower-level burdens, then any non-performing NPs will be putting pressure on their performing peers, and overall perception should be that you are making the workplace more fair by putting them under the gun.
I’ll second this - some folks get a bad attitude and they just can’t abandon it. They have to be called on it, given the opportunity to fix it, and given the consequences for not fixing it. It needs to be made clear that it is their choice how it turns out, they own the outcome.
I agree entirely with your first sentence.
As for your second sentence, in this particular environment, firing someone may be just a hair below proving string theory in level of difficulty. There are many, many increasing levels of disciplinary actions which must be traversed in order to terminate someone. Even then, meticulous record-keeping must be maintained to wage the inevitable and lengthy post-canning legal battle that will ensue.
A couple of the bad apples are, in fact, nearing the ultimate disciplinary step. Interestingly enough, it is neither their work habits nor their attitudes which landed them there. It is their attendance.
Sorta like nailing Al Capone for tax evasion.
Incidentally, I am neither a hirer nor a firer. I am merely a low level semi-supervisor who has become fed up with the bullcrap that has been going on.
I like what TrueCelt has said. Is there a clearly defined organizational structure at this place? It sounds like 25% of the non-pros don’t quite understand their role. With this type of confusion, it would probably be beneficial to actually print out a matrix or a flow chart or whatever kind of structure exists and post it somewhere so that everyone is on the same page. You might even want to suggest a meeting with all hundred employees to review and explain the organizational structure. When roles have been clearly defined beyond doubt, you can then dish out rewards/punishment to employees who perform/underperform at the expected levels.
I know you say you don’t want to be terminating people, but frankly it sounds like you’ve got a good quarter of your np’s who are simply causing trouble.
Incidentally, this is the very reason I only patronize doctors who are also Hell’s Angels.
Is this the federal government? It sounds like my wife’s agency. Often times the professionals just work around the NPs.
How many levels - 70, 80 or maybe 3 or 4. Perhaps an organization with so many professionals could manage some meticulous record-keeping unless, of course, their normal standard of work is slipshod do-whatever-you-like type stuff.
You can only take one step at a time but complaining about how hard it is to do makes you guilty of the same thing you are complaining about. Something needs to be done, someone should be doing it, just not you.
My management mantra is: we didn’t get in this mess overnight and we’re not going to get out of it overnight. What you need is a top to bottom culture change. There are immediate steps: getting rid of dead wood and holding people accountable, then there are long term steps: addressing the issues that created the disfuntionality in the first place and making sure it doesn’t take hold again.
It is not easy, but there is a clear series of steps that need to be taken and one of them is making it easier to fire poor perfromers, it’s not easy, but until this step is taken this thread can go on for 30 more pages.
I think there are 5 or 6 levels before you arrive at termination.
With regard to the last half of your post, I read it 5 times and I still do not understand what you are trying to convey.
Who actually supervises the non-professionals and what sort of tasks are the professionals “delegating” ? For that matter, are they really delegating - if I give a typist a report to type , I’m not delegating. Typing the report is her job, not mine.
If the non-professionals are not assigned to and supervised by a particular professional, then probably the best idea is to set up a separate chain of command for the support staff, which doesn’t intersect with that of the professionals until they get to the office or department head. For example, in the state agency I work for , depending on the size of the office the typists and clerks are supervised by senior typists and clerks, who are in turn supervised by the secretary or administrative assistant . Entry-level professional staff are supervised by those one level up in their title series. The office head directly supervises the clerical supervisor, the professional supervisors and a paraprofessional if there is one. Entry level professional staff do not assign work to the support staff. The clerical supervisor does, either by assigning specific tasks to staff members (Mary handles the incoming mail, and John handles outgoing mail), by assigning a specific task member to perform all clerical tasks for a specific unit, or by receiving tasks from the professional staff and then assigning work.
On the other hand, if the professionals are supposed to be supervising the non-professionals but are actually doing the work for them, the professionals aren’t doing their own jobs.
BTW, I know all about “increasing levels of difficulty” and “meticulous record keeping”. I manage offices full of union-represented employees in a government agency. It’s not that hard to document behavior, and it’s not that hard to go down the progressive discipline road. It becomes difficult, if not impossible, when supervisors/managers ignore behavior for months or years and then want to fire the person for the most recent incident. In which case the supervisors/managers are not doing their jobs.
I agree you have to look at what it is in the structure and organization that makes the NPs feel they’re not accountable for performing their job (those that don’t) and the Ps feel they’re not accountable for reporting non performance.
It seems like the carrots and sticks are set up so the easiest thing is to ignore the situation or make it someone else’s problem.
I worked in accounting (years ago when it was still the “big six”) and we had similar issues. What worked was to have an office manager who all the NPs reported to. That person was able to set up incentives (positive and negative). They also had the authority to insist that the Ps completed their evaluations meaningfully. The OM needed the respect and authority to do this.
Frankly, the hardest part was with the Ps. A great audit associate who shirked the NP evaluations didn’t get much more than a talking to. And a lot of times those evaluations were viewed as TPS cover sheets. So, it took time and a very persistent OM to get them to finally acquiesce.
It’s not as easy as this, IMHO. I am over 50, and I went in as a manager at one job. I let everybody know I respected them and we were all in this together. Talk about being treated as if I were a pimp at a CEO meeting! I was the SOB. They didn’t want me to be their bud. They needed the whip hand. When they did get it, by the manager they sent in over me, they loved their manager, they loved their jobs, and they treated me like a person.
There’s no reason to assume that the Pros are slinking little jackals, or treacherous POS’s. They may blamed well be 10 times more competent at doing the job, and lacking leadership skills. They could be overdoing the ‘respect’ thing, and not enough of the ‘me boss, you employee’ thng.
Best wishes,
hh
If you want fast and effective change I recommend this approach. It seems you have a couple of people teetering on the edge of being justifiably fired, for attendance issues.
Which ever one next calls in sick, when they come in the next day, and in front of as many people as possible, just lose your shit. Just flat out go off on them in an uncharacteristic fashion.
Raise your voice, and be sure to throw out all the issues you’re fed right up with, especially the inability of them to work like a team, and the lateness and attendance issues. Be sure to mention, that you’ve tried to be patient and understanding but you have had your fill of it, anyone who cannot get along, work together without conflict as a team, will also find themselves without a job. Storm into your office and slam the door. Stay in there a long time, then leave the office in a huff and let them stew for the rest of the day.
You won’t recognize them the next day. They will get your message, loud and clear. Your behaving out of character, will reinforce that you’ve had your fill of it, I promise.
Yeah, I know, it sounds harsh, but it’s fast and effective. One loud, public outburst/firing and, voila, problem solved.
And I don’t care about the professional opinion of someone who does not have the credentials required to perform the job. No matter how good a job the support staff does (or doesn’t do), they are not qualifed to perform the job of the professionals. That’s why they are support staff.
The janitorial staff at your office will be happy you think so.
These typically aren’t new managers. They are 22 year old 1st year Associates and Analysts. Entry level in the professional organization. The Support staff are not even in the same career track. IOW, the best damn Support staff person ever will not get promoted to Associate. That doesn’t mean they should be treated as some sort of untouchable underclass.
True enough. However since I assume the entire company isn’t investment bankers, hedge fund managers and attorneys, there must be other factors besides persuing whatever job pays the highest compensation. Indeed the fact that some people are Service jobs and not Professionals indicates that compensation is not necessarily the biggest motivator.
IOW, yes, no one is going to turn down a $150,000 a year salary. But are you willing to work weekends and 100 hour weeks for it?
No, that is delagating. Delegating doesn’t mean “push off bullshit work I don’t feel like doing myself”. It is simply assigning tasks to other people based on their rolls and responsibilities.
Mean Mr. Mustard - I think you’ll find that many of the people here will identify with your support staff and not the professionals or managers. It may help you understand the issue from the non-professionals point of view. Specifically, in spite of their lack of required education or certification they are “just as good” as those “stuck up college jerks”. It is a fantasy of course and typically leads to the sort of insubordination you are experiencing. If they really were “just as good”, they should quit their crappy job that doesn’t appreciate them and invest the time and money to get the education necessary to earn twice the pay.
Instead, what they will do is use their knowledge of the procedural beurocracy of the company to try to intimidate new hires as they learn the ropes of their jobs. Of course in a few years, those new hires will be managers further along in their career while those support staff are still performing the same tasks they have been mastering for the past 20 years.
I worked in a company that had software that each P used to add to a task list for each NP, detailing the task and the importance level or due date. A 1 could be need it as soon as humanly possible, while a 5 could be do it sometime this month.
The NP had to list the task as completed, or detail the status, i.e. waiting for approval of 2nd draft, and had to turn their list in every week to the office manager. Untouched tasks were left blank. The manager would then evaluate the workload, make adjustments as in reassign tasks as necessary, and none of the NP’s had a chance to shirk their workload. It also made it clear which NP’s had too much to do as well as those who had too little to do. It also had the originally unintended effect of showing which P’s were not doing work that was intended for them.
Overall, it was pretty effective.
No, you really do have to fire them - you can’t make an example of them if you don’t terminate with extreme prejudice. You’re getting rid of bad apples, but you’re also letting people know where the line is.
This is all good advice. Someone told me once that management sets the tone in a business, and I have yet to see that proven false. You have to respect the workers on both sides, but you also have to let them know in no uncertain terms that there are consequences for not behaving right at work (and that includes the professionals - they need to do what they were hired to do, not shirk it because they’re intimidated).