By Anthony Tedla
Supervising employees in today's environment can be both stressful and aggravating followed by downright frustration. When an employee makes a mistake or commits an infraction which requires discipline, a supervisor feels like it may require a criminal court setting when attempting to administer this discipline. Another situation is if the employee is doing just enough to pass off as 8 hours and nothing mor, he/she expects a party and a 21 gun salute. Yet another problem exists when an employee excels(from their point of view), and the supervisor is not exhibiting enough accolades or handling out rewards to meet the employee's satisfaction. The employee may exhibit a type of "hero" complex where they deem themselves invincible or untouchable. Other areas of conflict include promoting through the ranks and having to supervise those who were once peers. The top employee conflict maybe the sexual/workplace harassment complaint. finally there is the insurgent who continuously looks for errors in the supervisor's decision making process. Now not all workplaces have all of these types of chaotic circumstances, but chances are one or two of these scenarios have happened at one time or another. Many of these situations tend to be more prevalent in occupations that are highly structured or have a uniform chain of command.
Depending on the severity of the infraction an employee makes and the discipline to be executed can make for an interesting outcome. Like many television crime shows, it can be riddled with plots and twists. Many times the employee can manifest the punishment into management's lack of proper training or insufficient resources to complete the task. They may also choose to become a "Whistleblower" in order to avoid punishment. If the infraction involves monetary loss then there is usually a union or workplace advocate group to fight for the employee with a multitude of counter options. This may include a background history on the supervisor/manager involved or the company's policy and procedure being challenged. This way the employee's mistake is deflected by the supervisor's personal life or professional skills. The employee's disciplinary record is another factor. One situation has to do with the employee's nonchalance to the issue. Since they may have made the mistake on previous occasions they know how far the supervisor can go with discipline or what the supervisor's threshold is on non-punitive action. In this case they tend not to care about any action taken and even brag to their peers. They now deem the supervisor useless and incapable of performing their job.
An old saying is supervisors spend 90% of their time on 10% of their employees. I have it broken down a little differently. A supervisor spends 70% of their time on difficult employees, 10% on the average employee and 20% on the "Overachievers". Overachievers is a metaphor for the employee who does just barely enough to get by. The "8 and skate" and collect paychecks can be a supervisor's worst nightmare. This type of employee feels that because they are going above and beyond by simply "treading water" and not causing problems, then they are special. I also call this type of employee a PPP(or Triple P) or Praised, Preferred and Promoted. They feel a need to be consistently praised for doing the expected work, any special duties or bonus should go to them because they are preferred and when it's time to promote they should be the one promoted. This employee will consistently find fault in supervision and management, when mistakes are made or the system falls apart. Then employees weren't adequately prepared or supported, it's someone else's fault or they have documented evidence or supervisor mismanagement.
These Triple P's are also the employee "Watchdogs" for the workplace. If someone makes a mistake that the P's have previous made, then it's their job to ensure that the supervisor takes the exact same action. Now there is nothing wrong with this type of action, but some employers have a system in which prior work history is taken into account. The Triple P's also have what some call a "blind perception". The Triple P's have their own perception of what happened and nothing else matters. They don't have all the facts and since it's none of their business, they are not privy to all the facts. They only see what they want to see; and the supervisor who is bound by employee privacy rights, cannot disclose all the facts. The P's may often enlist the help of the 10% to back their position in these types of issues. Since the 10% consistently have problems, their support helps solidify the Watchdog's position by showing multiple complaints on the issue. They already know which ones to pick based on certain employees tendency to follow the crowd.
A well known hypothesis is that people dislike change. The Watchdogs love this type of situation. When there is a system that they don't agree with, added work or responsibility with no compensation or when a group of employees are found at fault, the Watchdogs show up in full force. They rely primarily on the discontent of the 70% to support their opinions or attempt to block the issue at hand. This is also where they fall back on their Union or workplace advocacy. The individual supervisor or management also fall under the scrutiny of these groups. Personal Life and Professional History are the favorite places for them to look at and use for leverage. These types of situations also lead to lack of production, lost man hours and non-participants being affected. Supervisor also tend to grow gray hair if they are involved in the type of scenario.
The final section to discuss is what I call the "Emotion Factor". this occurs when an employee is promoted withing the workplace, is in a relationship with an employee or the supervisor or employee believes every issue is a workplace/sexual harassment issue. If a supervisor promotes within, this can cause problems if they cannot separate work from any personal attachment they might have with the employee. Even more difficult is if the employee cannot differentiate the supervisor from the friend or ex-coworker. In many places it is wise to promote outside the workplace. If a supervisor is having an intimate relationship with an employee, it can end in disaster for both sides. This is especially prevalent during times of promotion, pay raise or discipline. Favoritism or preferential treatment allegations may also surface. The "Policy Parrot", as I call them, is the employee who finds fault in almost every decision a supervisor makes or action taken. They threaten action based on their perception of certain decisions or policies and then claim harassment. This makes it especially difficult in the case of sexual harassment. Supervisor must keep abreast of all departmental policy and procedures on a daily basis. They must also ensure that the employees are consistently aware and provide training on a regular basis. Again, countless man hours are wasted by these "Policy Parrots" on unjustified claims. Because every claim must be investigated at some level, this type of employee attempts to make the matter a popular "water cooler" topic.
After listing many of the downsides of being a supervisor, one would concede that promotion or assignment is not worth the benefits that come with the position. Then again; with the economy the way it is, most will jump at the opportunity. Bearing that in mind the examples listed are just Supervisor's Nightmares. Many of these issues may not occur in some workplaces. It is just important that an individual be made aware of them and be prepared to handle the situation if it arises. An individual may want to consider that when being placed in a supervisory position, they may have to adopt a different type of personality(within the workplace) than they are accustomed to. This is not to say a person must change completely. They must also be ready to execute direction, policy and procedure from management that conflicts with the workforce. They may disagree with what they are expected to enforce, but it is critical to not voice these opinions to their subordinates. If this happens they lose trust from above and give a perception of weakness from subordinates when he/she is manipulated by them. The supervisor must constantly be vigilant for signs that any of these issues are starting to manifest. It is imperative that management ensure supervisors are properly trained on how to deal with these situations and that periodic training is in place to refresh all employees. This world in which everybody has to be "politically correct", supervisors (especially first level or mid level supervisors) can be the first on the unemployed line when situations arise. It's unfortunate that the 10/90 or 10/20/70 exists, but we can take comfort in the fact that "Big Brother" hasn't totally automated everything.
Depending on the severity of the infraction an employee makes and the discipline to be executed can make for an interesting outcome. Like many television crime shows, it can be riddled with plots and twists. Many times the employee can manifest the punishment into management's lack of proper training or insufficient resources to complete the task. They may also choose to become a "Whistleblower" in order to avoid punishment. If the infraction involves monetary loss then there is usually a union or workplace advocate group to fight for the employee with a multitude of counter options. This may include a background history on the supervisor/manager involved or the company's policy and procedure being challenged. This way the employee's mistake is deflected by the supervisor's personal life or professional skills. The employee's disciplinary record is another factor. One situation has to do with the employee's nonchalance to the issue. Since they may have made the mistake on previous occasions they know how far the supervisor can go with discipline or what the supervisor's threshold is on non-punitive action. In this case they tend not to care about any action taken and even brag to their peers. They now deem the supervisor useless and incapable of performing their job.
An old saying is supervisors spend 90% of their time on 10% of their employees. I have it broken down a little differently. A supervisor spends 70% of their time on difficult employees, 10% on the average employee and 20% on the "Overachievers". Overachievers is a metaphor for the employee who does just barely enough to get by. The "8 and skate" and collect paychecks can be a supervisor's worst nightmare. This type of employee feels that because they are going above and beyond by simply "treading water" and not causing problems, then they are special. I also call this type of employee a PPP(or Triple P) or Praised, Preferred and Promoted. They feel a need to be consistently praised for doing the expected work, any special duties or bonus should go to them because they are preferred and when it's time to promote they should be the one promoted. This employee will consistently find fault in supervision and management, when mistakes are made or the system falls apart. Then employees weren't adequately prepared or supported, it's someone else's fault or they have documented evidence or supervisor mismanagement.
These Triple P's are also the employee "Watchdogs" for the workplace. If someone makes a mistake that the P's have previous made, then it's their job to ensure that the supervisor takes the exact same action. Now there is nothing wrong with this type of action, but some employers have a system in which prior work history is taken into account. The Triple P's also have what some call a "blind perception". The Triple P's have their own perception of what happened and nothing else matters. They don't have all the facts and since it's none of their business, they are not privy to all the facts. They only see what they want to see; and the supervisor who is bound by employee privacy rights, cannot disclose all the facts. The P's may often enlist the help of the 10% to back their position in these types of issues. Since the 10% consistently have problems, their support helps solidify the Watchdog's position by showing multiple complaints on the issue. They already know which ones to pick based on certain employees tendency to follow the crowd.
A well known hypothesis is that people dislike change. The Watchdogs love this type of situation. When there is a system that they don't agree with, added work or responsibility with no compensation or when a group of employees are found at fault, the Watchdogs show up in full force. They rely primarily on the discontent of the 70% to support their opinions or attempt to block the issue at hand. This is also where they fall back on their Union or workplace advocacy. The individual supervisor or management also fall under the scrutiny of these groups. Personal Life and Professional History are the favorite places for them to look at and use for leverage. These types of situations also lead to lack of production, lost man hours and non-participants being affected. Supervisor also tend to grow gray hair if they are involved in the type of scenario.
The final section to discuss is what I call the "Emotion Factor". this occurs when an employee is promoted withing the workplace, is in a relationship with an employee or the supervisor or employee believes every issue is a workplace/sexual harassment issue. If a supervisor promotes within, this can cause problems if they cannot separate work from any personal attachment they might have with the employee. Even more difficult is if the employee cannot differentiate the supervisor from the friend or ex-coworker. In many places it is wise to promote outside the workplace. If a supervisor is having an intimate relationship with an employee, it can end in disaster for both sides. This is especially prevalent during times of promotion, pay raise or discipline. Favoritism or preferential treatment allegations may also surface. The "Policy Parrot", as I call them, is the employee who finds fault in almost every decision a supervisor makes or action taken. They threaten action based on their perception of certain decisions or policies and then claim harassment. This makes it especially difficult in the case of sexual harassment. Supervisor must keep abreast of all departmental policy and procedures on a daily basis. They must also ensure that the employees are consistently aware and provide training on a regular basis. Again, countless man hours are wasted by these "Policy Parrots" on unjustified claims. Because every claim must be investigated at some level, this type of employee attempts to make the matter a popular "water cooler" topic.
After listing many of the downsides of being a supervisor, one would concede that promotion or assignment is not worth the benefits that come with the position. Then again; with the economy the way it is, most will jump at the opportunity. Bearing that in mind the examples listed are just Supervisor's Nightmares. Many of these issues may not occur in some workplaces. It is just important that an individual be made aware of them and be prepared to handle the situation if it arises. An individual may want to consider that when being placed in a supervisory position, they may have to adopt a different type of personality(within the workplace) than they are accustomed to. This is not to say a person must change completely. They must also be ready to execute direction, policy and procedure from management that conflicts with the workforce. They may disagree with what they are expected to enforce, but it is critical to not voice these opinions to their subordinates. If this happens they lose trust from above and give a perception of weakness from subordinates when he/she is manipulated by them. The supervisor must constantly be vigilant for signs that any of these issues are starting to manifest. It is imperative that management ensure supervisors are properly trained on how to deal with these situations and that periodic training is in place to refresh all employees. This world in which everybody has to be "politically correct", supervisors (especially first level or mid level supervisors) can be the first on the unemployed line when situations arise. It's unfortunate that the 10/90 or 10/20/70 exists, but we can take comfort in the fact that "Big Brother" hasn't totally automated everything.
