Poison people — who’s obstructing safety in your workplace? Part 3

Part 3 — How do we manage poison people?

Also: Part 1 — Who are 'poison people'?
          Part 2 — Identifying poison people and keeping a culture of safety?

In short, we manage them ‘proactively’. Proactive management is where managers monitor for difficulties, and anticipate the need for intervention. It’s usually contrasted with ‘reactive management’, where managers wait for a problem to arise.

The benefit of proactive management is the potential to control the future in a positive direction. Proactive management of problem employees is crucial, as management should aim to neutralise the problem behaviour as soon as possible.

Counselling

The first step of proactive management is performance appraisal and counselling. Counselling is the process of reviewing an employee’s performance and/or conduct with a view to clarifying expectations, and assisting the employee to meet specified objectives. The goal of counselling is to help the employee recognise a performance problem and develop effective solutions to it.

Effective counselling requires a clear understanding of what conduct is acceptable and how the employee’s conduct falls short of acceptable standards. The examination of the employee’s behaviour must be against reasonable and objective measurements which are known and understood by the employee. The counselling must precisely and accurately identify the offending conduct and specify what is required to address the problem.

Be sure of the facts before putting allegations of problem behaviour to the employee. Investigate reports of difficult behaviour and don’t confront an employee with allegations unless you’re in a position to provide specific details.

Focus on the behaviour, not the person, even where the problem appears to stem from an inherently difficult personality type. Few people can overhaul their personality, but most people can address behaviour. Indeed, this advice applies to most situations where conflict resolution is needed – use ‘I’ statements (rather than ‘you’ statements) and deal specifically with the behaviour in question.

Be specific about the behaviour which is regarded as acceptable. Some employees are not certain how to respond in certain situations. Give examples of acceptable responses to a problem. Remember that most people make the best choice that they know how to make in the circumstances.

We also recommend that managers explain how the behaviour negatively impacts on the business and how it is inconsistent with the values or purposes of the business. By relating the problem back to those core values, the exercise of authority by the employer is given legitimacy and coherence.

Never be emotional or argumentative in a counselling session with a difficult employee. You don’t want to add fuel to Mr Resentful’s fire. Keep the message simple and don’t over-talk. The difficult employee will almost always become resentful and argumentative when confronted. Don’t be drawn into it.

Listen actively, demonstrate some empathy with the perspective of the person and be prepared to acknowledge their concerns. Don’t assume that the behaviour stems from a desire to be uncooperative. Mr Munchausen has undoubtedly adopted an internal narrative which justifies his behaviour. While not expected to be their ‘shrink’, you will be more able to address the problem behaviour if you can adopt (and then tackle) the narrative yourself.

If the problem has arisen due to a lack of skills, address the source of the problem. For example, Mr Bully may have developed an aggressive communication style over time and may be unsure how to communicate effectively without intimidating others. See if the employee can help identify the assistance which they need. If the source of the difficulty is personal problems, never be drawn into giving personal advice, but focus on what the employee can do to ensure the problems are not impacting at work. If necessary, refer them to an appropriate professional for assistance.

If the problem employee blames other employees (a common response), take the time to look into the substance of allegations. Again, be armed with the correct facts, particularly if you decide to move down a disciplinary path.

Don’t underestimate the role of positive feedback and rewards as motivating forces. Unless you are moving towards termination, counselling should be solution focused.

The aim of performance management of difficult employees is to arrive at a mutually agreed upon solution. The end point of counselling should be a plan for improvement (including a relevant timeframe) and plan for follow-up. The goal is to obviate the need for a disciplinary response, although this won’t always be possible. Where it becomes clear that sufficient improvement will not occur, consider termination. This should always be done in accordance with the company’s disciplinary and termination policies.

Termination

Where a decision is made to terminate the problem employee, the business must ensure that the dismissal is effected according to the principles of procedural and substantive fairness.

Substantive unfairness addresses the fairness of the outcome by asking whether there was a proper reason for dismissal and whether dismissal was appropriate under the circumstances. Procedural unfairness examines the steps taken by the employer before coming to the final decision; in particular, whether the employer has put the allegations to the employee and considered the employee’s response. In particular, the employee must have been given a detailed account of the problem behaviour and be given an opportunity to address that behaviour.

For most behaviour, one or more warnings before termination are appropriate. In addition, the conduct must be serious enough to justify termination, so ensure that dismissal is not a disproportionate response.

A collateral benefit: minimising the entry points for trade unions

As most OHS managers know, problems in OHS provide a platform that enables trade union representatives to get leverage in the business. Wherever dissatisfaction, disharmony and perceived risk are present, an opportunity arises for penetration of the business by unions. Ensuring that OHS issues are addressed at an operational level, and that OHS solutions are embedded in a workplace culture of shared values and purposes, minimises the opportunities for trade unions to wield influence.

Conclusion

Never let a culture of dissatisfaction, gossip, intimidation and disharmony flourish in the workplace. Monitor, counsel and excise, if necessary, the toxic employees who contribute to it. By developing a positive, safety-focused environment, those employees (and trade union officials) who thrive on undermining the constructive efforts of others will not get a foothold. In such a workplace, the misters Munchausen, Resentful and Bully will see for themselves that their destructive behaviour has no place.

And then, like Jake Blues and Joan of Arc, you will have cultivated the workplace culture needed to achieve the truly exceptional.

*Andrew Douglas is principal of Douglas Workplace and Litigation Lawyers.