ERUPTION Vs DEFUSION
The teams are split between very able and willing employees and demotivated colleagues
THE PROBLEM:
I was hired by a small company because of internal staff problems.
There was a generally negative atmosphere but the owners did not understand why. It was
clear that staff was unwilling to talk so I came in.
After the introductory talks I asked the owners what approach they wished for me to use.
They asked me what I meant.
I replied: “there are commonly two ways to solve these types of issues. Imagine there’s a
volcano waiting to erupt. You can either put more pressure so it explodes (faster approach
but more devastating) or you create small openings at the foot of the mountain for a
defusing and more gentle effect which avoids the big eruption and solves the issue. The
second approach is obviously better for everybody but takes more time. If you’re out of time
or simply prefer to get things done faster then option 1 is best”.
They told me they believed there were both management and staff issues. For management
they wanted to get things done fast, for staff they preferred a slower approach.
I thus began a series of sessions.
The sessions were 1 to 1 with managers and group + single session with staff.
Staff was grouped according to their teams (so marketing staff was 1 group, production staff
was another group). They’d meet with me once a week as a group and then one more time
per week on a single session.
Managers:
I began “uncovering sessions” where I delved deep on every single task they were
performing.
All managers were thus put under some pressure because they had to give a reason for
everything they did or were doing.
Obviously those who were not working properly got annoyed with the sessions and began
complaining. Instead the managers who were good at their job found the sessions inspiring.
Within 2 months one of the managers left spontaneously (and rather abruptly, it wasn’t
pretty).
I later (the year after) found out that the manager who’d left was going under a lot of trouble
with her relationship, but after leaving the job she also divorced, and within a year she’d
gotten a job she’d always wanted and found a new partner. Sometimes an apparently
negative change is the catalyst for a better life just around the corner.
Staff:
The staff members were expecting a similar treatment of the managers (word had spread
fast) but I used a different approach.
We embarked on a personal growth journey, where we discussed the basics of human behaviour and got the team to learn how to recognise personal beliefs. We hardly mentioned their actual work in the company.
It took more than a month just to get everyone comfortable enough to engage in conversations, but by end of month 3 I was able to report the following to the owners:
We embarked on a personal growth journey, where we discussed the basics of human behaviour and got the team to learn how to recognise personal beliefs. We hardly mentioned their actual work in the company.
It took more than a month just to get everyone comfortable enough to engage in conversations, but by end of month 3 I was able to report the following to the owners:
The teams are split between very able and willing employees and demotivated colleagues
who are not particularly dedicated to the cause, sometimes even under-skilled for what they
do. This is creating tension between the 2 types of employees as the “good ones” are having
to do the work of the “less performant ones”. On top of this 70% of the highest performant
employees are in the younger age range. This creates tension with the older members who
don’t like to be told what to do by people below their age.
I gave management 2 options:
“If you leave things as they are, it’s likely that you’ll lose some good employees who will seek
a better job, and you’ll be left with those who’d rather stick around and keep things going as they are.
If you allow me to start pushing buttons, it’s likely that some employees will leave, but those who stay will probably benefit in the long run, and you’ll have a void which can be re-filled with the right staff”.
If you allow me to start pushing buttons, it’s likely that some employees will leave, but those who stay will probably benefit in the long run, and you’ll have a void which can be re-filled with the right staff”.
The owners chose on the second approach.
I thus intensified the sessions and also got the company to do an evaluation on job skills.
The staff that was under-skilled was proposed to go on some courses.
By now another 2 months had gone by and 1 member of staff gave the resignation.
He said the workplace had changed and he no longer felt comfortable there.
What happened?
By what I could see he was too insecure of himself, and when he was proposed to go on a
course to up his skills he got scared – believing he wouldn’t be capable of performing well
enough – and went for a new job which was right within his comfort zone (we later found out
about her new job which confirmed the above). Initially the owners saw this as my failure, but
I explained that it was in fact a good result. Of course managing to help staff to remain was
the ultimate goal, but it is equally positive to help someone realise what their comfort zone
is, or what they really want out of their life.
Within 2 more months, 3 more people left spontaneously, while those who stayed benefited
from the skill courses and the company employed 2 new people.
When we discussed the strategy for the re-employment with HR, we agreed that with a bit of
work they should have been able to get 2 highly skilled employees who could easily do the
work of the 4 who had left, there was just some extra organisational work to be done
internally to improve the quality of the systems in place.
So before employing anyone we had some focus sessions with the employees of the 2 areas
where the 4 had left and got those teams to help us shape up the new job descriptions. We
3.
also got them to propose ways to improve processes and it worked magnificently. Because of
the previous months’ work together we had created a strong sense of team building, so
everybody joined into this new project and saw it as an opportunity for everyday to benefit. It
also gave some employees the chance to voice parts of their own jobs which they wanted to
change/improve and this got done too.
In less than a year the company managed to improve the quality of their internal systems,
employ 2 new members of staff and save money on the whole.
I checked in after another year, and things were going so well that the owners had granted a
reduced working week to all staff for the same salary. Basically things were running so
smoothly that most people could take Friday afternoons off!