Managing an Aggressive, Disrespectful Employee

Question from Quora.com about a situation every manager eventually faces:

How can I be a strong leader of a company?

I’m the managing director of a company in a national competition. I appointed ‘Billy’, as we’ll call him, as deputy managing director. However he’s trying to take charge and criticising me as a public speaker, which I am actually very good at. How can I be strong and prove that I’m in charge?

Manage or Lead?

Mr. Asker is right to focus on leadership. A good manager guides the business whereas a good leader guides people. Success comes when you do both. 

One responder correctly stated that firing "Billy" is an option. However, since Mr. Asker saw value and ability in Billy, it’s probably better to help him grow, so firing him would be the last option. A manager would fire Billy first; a leader would fire him last. 

That having been said, let's consider some options. Everybody has a unique personality, motivations, and needs, so we no single response fits everybody. However, we can identify some common, general methods. 

Rise above the challenge

Mr. Asker should not focus on proving anything, although, after settling the problem, he may need to take steps to restore his stakeholders’ confidence in him. The following excellent advice is offered by Kim Bunting:

Prove that you’re in charge by taking charge.  The first thing about being in charge is to not get caught up in the emotion of the situation.

Criticism is only as impactful as you let it become.  Make sure you hear what he’s saying and look (without emotion) at it to make sure it isn’t feedback that might help you improve your already good presentation skills.  If it’s not, say “thanks for the feedback” and keep going.  If it is, work on changing.  A leader takes feedback and isn’t injured by people offering it.

If he’s trying to take charge of things you are doing, say “thanks for the help, I’ve got this” and move on.  Assign him something else to focus on, such as saying “rather than both of us spending time on this task I’m doing, we can get more done if you get the spreadsheet finished. Let me know when you’re done.” (or whatever)

The most powerful thing you can do to someone who is trying to upstage you or discredit your authority is to NOT react to them as if your authority could be taken away.

Confront the challenge

Containing the situation limits the damage to your reputation, to company morale, to business, and to Billy’s reputation, too. Jesus stated a rule about escalating an issue (Matthew 18:15-17). You start one-on-one, then bring in witnesses if you must, and then bring in the broadest authority; sanctions are the last resort. Some companies have Human Resources professionals who specialize in managing interpersonal conflicts, so involving them may be one of the routes for escalation.  Needless to say, the best option benefits everybody.

I recommend a two-pronged approach. One step is urgent while the other is important.

Feedback is urgent.

Billy needs immediate, private feedback. I suggest using the feedback model taught at Manager-Tools.com. (You can join to access their content or you can search their website or the iTunes store for their free podcasts on the feedback model.) The script goes something like this, and it should only take a minute or two:

1. Describe what Billy did. Focus strictly on one event, not on personalities or general behaviors.
2. Explain the result of what Billy did. Remember, this is about what’s good for the business. It’s not about judging Billy or defending yourself. However, you can describe the perceptions that his behavior causes and the feelings it triggers as they impact business. 
3. Explain your standards for profitable business behavior.
4. Ask Billy whether he can support those standards, and ask him what he will do to meet those standards. 
5. Thank Billy for his time and for the improvements you expect to see.
6. Move on. Don’t mention it again unless another feedback session is needed. 

Notice two things about the model: First, the model identifies the problem and its costs and then conveys a vision, a to condition, before seeking change. 

Second, if Billy agrees to take steps to correct his behavior, Mr. Asker now has a standard against which to hold him accountable. If Mr. Asker keeps thorough records, he now has a basis for future actions such as rewards for improvement, withholding rewards for failing to improve, or sanctions such as demotion or termination.

Treating the cause is vital.

Feedback is urgent, but identifying the root cause is important. Knowing root causes enables making a plan for how to will deal with the problem, just like a manager would make a plan for dealing with any other business problem. 

Toward that end, Mr. Asker should work on his relationship with Billy. He could take him to lunch. He could establish weekly one-on-ones (learn about those in the Manager-Tools podcasts, too). Determining what drives Billy him and his goals will help determine how to direct his energies and help him grow as a human being.

Manager-Tools’ also has a coaching model. Mr. Asker can also help Billy by assigning research or reading that would help correct his behaviors. Sometimes a bad behavior expresses some other frustration. Dealing with the root cause may mean helping Billy learn some technical skill rather than teaching him the social skill.

Leaders are learners. They prepare by collecting tools for dealing with issues and problems and by investigating to learn the root causes. Their plans for how to deal with issues may include a variety of approaches, and they may change approaches. Finally, the leader works for the benefit of everyone, including the offende

Copyright 2016, Richard Wheeler

Trusting the Project Team

Vikas Gupta asks on Google Plus, pretty well answering his own question:

How much can/should a Project Manager interfere in the technical details of a project? For e.g. If a developer thinks that xyz is the most efficient way of implementing a functionality, is it unproductive for the Project team to have PM challenge that beyond a limit? I personally think that challenging the team members is ok, but a PM must trust the technical skills of team members and too much interference may demotivate the team.. Thanks in advance for your expert opinion!

 Discussion Link April 30, 2014

Project-Aria replied,

It is rare that a PM is just a PM.
Usually the PM also adds value by bringing technical expertise. Now the question here is: does the PM have the expertise in technical area in question. If yes, then yes. If no, then interference may be a dangerous path.
I would also note that communicate is a 2-way challenge. It is also important to all team members, including experts, to be able to explain their ideas and convince others. It is important for the expert to be able to communication without hiding behind a expert-cryptic language.

Apr 30, 2014

I think Vikas stated it well and correctly. Early in each design phase, the PM can ask the team to consider his personal favorite solution. The design team should then compare the various options for each architectural element and weigh them against each other. The result is a trade study that weighs the trade-offs and makes an objective recommendation of the best solution.

Unless the decision is very close, the PM should leave the decision to the results of the trade study. If he does not, it can reflect badly on him.

• It indicates that he did a poor job of selecting his team.
• It insults the design team and, as Vikas said, demotivates them.
• It may indicate that he failed to have the design team include his favorite option in the trade study.
• It may indicate that he failed to properly define the design parameters.
• It indicates subjectivity, a failure to rely on objective evidence produced by the trade study.
• It turns the time and cost of trade studies into waste.
• Failure to trust often results from projection; that is, expecting others to do what you would do. Therefore, it raises issues about the PM's ethics.
• Overriding the results of a trade study can create an appearance of impropriety (for example, the PM appears to take a bribe from the selected vendor or subcontractor).

As Project-Aria stated, the PM may bring enough technical expertise to deserve the right to override the design team; but he had better have convincing technical reasons for his actions and had better own up to his mistakes that made his action necessary.

If your experience has shown you more reasons why a PM should or should not override the decisions of his design team, I'd like to hear from you in the comments.

Should I ask for introductions to expand my network?

Reference: Giammatteo, Giacomo. Should You Ask For Introductions on Linked in? 2 December 2013. http://nomistakes.org/ask-introductions-linked/?goback=%2Egde_1800872_member_5813661638988947460#%21

The author of the referenced article correctly state the rules, and his reasoning is solid. I recommend reading the article. It will help you understand the most common view about asking for favors when networking.

If you have 15 gazillion connections like he does, and you receive dozens of requests each day, you have to be selective. That is not selfishness; it is survival. 

I have a little over 300 connections, and I have received one request for introduction in the last four years. If I imposed the same rules, it would be terribly selfish.

 

Providing an introduction is a small favor to do. I look at the profiles, decide whether the fit is appropriate, and then (if appropriate) provide the introduction. I might even give the requester some unsolicited advice about networking etiquette.  The author does not distinguish between asking for introductions and asking for recommendations. I think that one can make an introduction without recommending the requester.
 

In the introduction, I will state to what degree I know the requester. If I do not know him, I will say so; but I will leave the receiver of the request with the freedom to look at the requester's profile and make his own decision.

Others' non-responsiveness has taught me not to ask for favors until I have developed our relationship. When I started building my LinkedIn network, I requested several introductions. I never heard back, not even a "no."

That means you have to impress your connection enough that he offers help; or you have to do him enough favors that he owes you a favor in return.

That seems manipulative. It is quite frustrating when you are just beginning to network and your need is now and desperate.

But those are "the rules."

I abide by them, but I do not impose them.

My advice to those who wish to ask for introductions follows: 

• If they have a few dozen connections, they might be unsociable. Don't expect results. On the other hand, they might not know "the rules" yet, so it might work. Give it a try.
• If they have a few hundred connections, wait to ask for favors until you've established a relationship (not just a connection) or done them some favors.
• If they have thousands of connections, make sure you've established a relationship AND done them some favors.

A good network takes years to assemble. Start building yours now. Make it a hobby. Do not wait until you need it.

Project Management and Open Communications

Project Managers need to guard against setting up an environment where bad news never reaches them. They need to praise and encourage those who communicate risks before they become issues, issues before they become problems, and problems before they become project failures.

Some managers remind me of the Clinton trial in the Senate, following his impeachment in the House.

The Senate set up a rule requiring Ken Starr to keep all the records and evidence in another building. Bringing it to their offices without an invitation would have violated protocol.

Then the majority of senators refused to go view the evidence. A few who did view it said they came away weeping, and the rest (having refused to view the evidence) said that they lacked evidence sufficient to convict.

Does your comfort zone tempt you to maintain willful ignorance? Does your character allow reliance on plausible deniability? The PM has accountability for project success, which any lack of awareness may bring about; but that accountability extends to achieving success ethically.

 

I wonder:  Do PMs ever include ethical lapses as project risks?

ROI on Subsidizing Professional Memberships

What Return On Investment (ROI) does a company receive by paying the professional membership dues or educational expenses of employees? For example, if a company pays the annual PMI or INCOSE membership dues, what dollarized benefit or ROI does it receive?

[Sarcasm="On"]

I only have one data point. When the company invests zero dollars in its employees' growth, the investment:

• Creates zero expansion of its pool of outside SMEs
• Creates zero growth of workers' skills
• Encourages zero engagement in the work
• Subsidizes zero creativity
• Suppresses crazy ideas from professional cross pollination

On the positive side, such an investment strategy:

• Discourages annoying attributes such as pride and overconfidence
• Prevents exposure of its products, services, expertise, and industry leadership to the public
• Encourages turnover of unengaged and obsolete employees
• Ensures that personal connections will not interrupt hiring managers' time reading resumes.

[Sarcasm="off"] Employee Focus

If the company pays for schooling, it might be possible to argue that the ROI of membership fees is even greater. You will not only learn from presentations during meetings, but the meeting time per membership dollar will be a multiple of classroom time per tuition dollar, you will spend countless hours studying toward PMP, CSEP, or other certifications, and you will bring all the other intangible benefits, too.

If the company pays for books for classes or for reference, you can also list the values or prices of the numerous downloadable materials such as the PMBOK Guide (hard copy was $66 for the fourth edition). 

If the company reimburses you for certification exams, then you can list the discounts on exam fees. For example, if you join PMI before registering for the PMP exam, the discount on the exam pays for the first year's membership.

As an alternative to paying for dues directly, a company can reward employees through raises or bonuses when they see positive results. The flaw in a reactive strategy is that it fails to model the trust and loyalty that management expects from employees and only rewards tangible, directly measurable, short-term results.

Wider Perspective: It's Your Loss, Boss

Businesses lose a lot of money by failing to align their talent management with their business strategies.  A study by the Project Management Institute found that managing the talent pool cuts risks by 50% (1). Cutting project risks cuts costs, improves quality, shortens schedules, and boosts morale.

PMI estimates that active talent management results in 14% more project success -- meaning that projects reach all success criteria. If you focused on individual success critera, the numbers would be much higher. Would it be worth, say, a hundred dollars per employee to improve your success rate by 14% on a million-dollar or billion-dollar contract?

Turn the question around and ask, what does the company lose if it does not subsidize professional memberships? Just go through the issues above and you will see issues of obsolescence, disengagement, turnover and the resulting loss of braintrust, as well as disengagement of the company itself from its industry.

According to the PMI, industry will annually create 1.57 million new project management roles, globally, each year until 2020 (2) and 80% of organizations already report struggling to find qualified managers (3). Employers that fail to encourage employee growth will lose to proactive competitors.

Sample Calculation

Remember that you obligate yourself to whatever you list.

Some people will get the membership, add it to their resumes, and then never think about it again until the renewal notice arrives. Others would will join regardless of whether the company reimburses them.

On the other hand, if young employees find mentoring and take an early interest in expanding their networks, social skills, and professional skills, how would you calculate the exponential growth in their value to the company?

But... we have to try.

One source measured the increased productivity multiplied it by the hours saved and the labor rate.

They looked at the cost incurred by a project manager in previous projects under the charging categories for estimation, planning, resource, scope, schedule, and customer management. They then compared the numbers with the same charges in a current project.

The manager spent 27 hours less per year. This did not include the higher level of tasks or the higher quality of performance. Using a very conservative $100/hour, the savings appeared to be $2,700. A $130 membership spent corellated to an ROI of 20 times.

Factors such as the employee's learning curve could have contributed to the ROI. However, even with such factors accounting for 90% of the gain, the ROI was still 2:1.

If you consider that an employee creates value greater than the rate of pay (otherwise, why employee him?), then that 2:1 ROI leverages back into a higher ratio again; and the higher the level of the employee, the greater the leverage.

Even ignoring the many difficult-to-measure benefits, subsidizing membership fees yields a far higher return than most company dollars return.

References

1. Pulse of the Profession (TM) In-Depth Report: Talent Management. Project Management Institute. 2013.

2.  Ibid.

3.  Project Management Talent Gap Report. Project Management Institute. 2012.

Politics and the Project

Question:

Cultural norms include a common knowledge regarding how to approach getting things done. It also takes into account formal and informal leaders who exist in almost every organization. Most organizations have developed unique cultures that manifest themselves in many ways. Which attributes of a company culture is NOT consistent with the discussion of cultural "norms"?

A. shared vision, values, beliefs, expectations
B. policies, methods and procedures
C. consistent political views
D. view of authority relationships

I was given answer as "C".

Shared vision, values, beliefs, expectations; political views; and views of authority relationships are all cultural factors. Each is a valid topic of discussion to the degree that it affects the project and the organization.

Political views include both those related to national government and those related to the company goals, culture, and hierarchy.

Western employees are taught that religious and political views are inappropriate topics. However, Political Correctness (PC) is alive and well. For example, some countries suppress "subversive" or "counter revolutionary" political views. This can affect project success.

Even in the USA, many employers will fire you if you oppose certain movements such as homosexual marriage or affirmative action (discrimination in favor of disadvantaged minorities). The reasoning goes like this:

• Diversity has value.
• People who oppose a PC (politically correct) view create a workplace that is hostile to favored minorities and an atmosphere where conflict may arise.
• This hurts members of those minorities, limits diversity, subjects the company to legal liability, and disrupts teamwork.
• Thus, inconsistent political views concerning some topics can hurt the project.

You don't have to like PC, but it exists. PMs have to deal with it and sometimes even enforce it.

Consider a different meaning of "political views:" Every organizational hierarchy has "office politics." Competition, conflicting opinions, and popularity can affect whom you can rely on. A stakeholder or resource may oppose you, or others may not support your resource. Such factors affect how one succeeds in getting things done.

We may say (C) is an inappropriate topic, but political views are certainly a part of cultural norms, and some version of PC is enforced anywhere you go. Moreover, the question is not, "what is appropriate," but "which attributes of a company culture is [sic] not consistent with the discussion of cultural 'norms'?"  (C) cannot be correct.

While culture may affect policies, methods, and procedures, they are classified not as part of the enterprise environment (that is, external factors that affect the project), but rather as organizational process assets. (B) is correct.

Copyright (C) 2013, Richard Wheeler. Permission granted for use not involving publication.

In Business, Take Time to Do the Calculations

In Business, Take Time to Do the Calculations


Reference:  Weiser, Matt . California Parks Director Resigns Amid Scandal. Sacramento Bee. Friday, 20 July 2012.

As California balances between eternal debt and bankruptcy, the Democrats in Sacramento look for excuses to raise taxes and spending. One such excuse, the shortfall of funds to keep California State Parks open, has forced many volunteers into fundraising and forced local governments into shifting their own funds into keeping state parks open to draw tourist dollars.

The Sacramento Bee found that a deputy director at State Parks "carried out a secret vacation buyout program for employees at department headquarters last year. That buyout cost the state more than $271,000." This led to a much larger find: The State Parks department his hiding $54 million in unspent funds.

State Parks Director Ruth Coleman resigned after the Bee published news of the stash. The employee who bought back vacation time had already been demoted and later resigned. His crime, in my opinion, discriminated between his friends at the headquarters and those who work equally hard in the field.

I believe the withholding of funds could only happen in concert with Democrat attempts to extort more taxes from the public. That's how Democrats do things in California government.

The gem in the original story follows: For the sake of argument, let's assume we have two employees:

1. Mr. Buyout sells his vacation time back to the state.
   Mr. Vacation enjoys taking time off to go protest with OWS.
2. Vacation is earned over the course of the year.
   Both employees make $50/hour.
3. Both have 160 hours/month x 12 months/year (rounding) and 40 hours vacation

This means

• Mr. Buyout works 1920 hours for 1960 hours' pay.
  Mr. Vacation works 1880 hours for 1920 hours' pay. 
• Mr. Buyout makes $98,000.
  Mr. Vacation makes $96,000. 
• Mr. Buyout has an effective pay rate of $51.042 per hour.
  Mr. Vacation has an effective pay rate of $51.064 per hour.

Mr. Buyout actually makes 2 cents per hour less.

Two cents/hour is not much, but consider a couple more factors.

First, when you add in the effects of benefits and overhead, the difference multiplies to 3 to 4 cents per hour. Employers love forcing employees to work overtime because the benefits are paid for by the first 1920 hours' labor. With benefits costing 50% to 100% of the base pay, that means employee overtime effectively costs 33%-50% less (assuming pay at straight time rates, if any).

On a tangent, managers often put their directs in a position where overtime is forced and vacation is denied. Both practices hinder productivity and morale. When employees forced to work lose unused vacation, it amounts to stealing. Therefore, vacation buyouts often form an ethically necessary action.

Second, if you multiply 2 cents/hour over a year and thousands of employees, the added productivity and lowered effective cost create a good deal for the taxpayers.

Conclusion: The state punished the fellow who conducted the buyouts for doing a good thing. THAT, dear friend, is California government, just as much as hiding funds to force increased taxes. The business-related point is, "do the math." The worker who violates procedure may have done so because it was right for the company and simply, ethically right.