I recently conducted a survey on “The
Consequences of Bad Attitude” in preparation for a
presentation. The results gleaned from the more than 100
respondents uncovered three interesting bits of information.
1) According to the respondents, a solid 10% of our employees
are deemed to possess this thing called “Bad Attitude”.
2) Of that 10% we fire, terminate, let go and constructively
dismiss more than 66% of them for reasons ultimately stemming
from their bad attitude. That’s close to 7% of all
our employees terminated because of Bad Attitude.
3) The general consensus of the respondents, based on their
commentary and the termination percentage listed above, is
that managers have little, if any, control over an employee’s
attitude… the turnover cost of that belief is significant.
Many, if not most managers agree with the related statement, “You
cannot motivate someone to change. Their motivation must
come from within!” This resonates with the belief that
the attitude of our employees is beyond management control.
Yet, those same managers accept without question the existence
of great leaders. What is a leader, if not someone with the
proven ability to motivate people through difficult times
and towards great achievements?
The existence of leaders, and their ability to motivate,
contradicts our belief that motivation (attitude) is internal
to the individual. This contradiction means that somewhere
we’re making an invalid assumption. Contradictions
don’t exist.
We know for certain that leaders exist; Churchill, Gandhi
and King led people through war, to peaceful freedom and
to equality. They succeeded where others failed, and motivated
their sometimes reluctant followers to great sacrifices,
perseverance, heroic acts and ultimately victory.
If leaders make their mark on the world because they motivated
people to action, then the notion that motivation is entirely
an individual choice must be wrong. This observation or deduction,
if accurate, immediately places all managers into a peculiar
bind. Contrary to our practice of firing 7% of our employees
for bad attitudes, we’re forced to accept that we have
another, underutilized option.
It is possible to lead (motivate) those employees to a better
attitude. We might not know how to do this, but we know,
based on the achievements of the leaders we look up to, that
it’s possible.
Now… almost every manager reading this is going to
raise an objection. There are people who just have a sour
outlook on life, they don’t want to work, and their
bad attitude is invulnerable to all attempts of transformation.
Even Gandhi’s peaceful nature would be sorely pressed
if faced with some of these individuals. Etc. etc.
Having met at least one such individual during my career,
I have to allow some leeway. I must allow for the possibility
that some bad attitude employees are beyond all redemption,
but they’re rare and make up less than 1% of our employees
and not the full 7% that we give up on and terminate.
Here are some of descriptions of folks with bad attitude
and extremely terse descriptions of what we might do to resolve
the source of the problem.
1) Those who just don’t like working for a living.
These might be that 1% beyond redemption.
2) Those unwilling to accept unavoidable change.
Extremely rare, if the change is truly inevitable, most adapt.
3) Those with psychological problems of some type.
Often solvable by counselling or transfer to less stressful position.
4) Those with stress/life challenges unrelated to the organization.
Temporary and addressable via acceptable concessions.
5) Those who don’t like their current job.
Often solvable through internal transfers.
6) Those who disagree with a management practice.
Two cases here:
If the management is at fault (e.g. favouritism) then change the practice.
If it’s merely a lack of understanding of why the practices are
the way they are, then communication is the solution.
7) Those incorrectly labelled as having a BA.
Not all BA are really BA. Asking “why?” is not necessarily an act
of insubordination, it’s often nothing more than a plea to understand.
Bad attitude cannot be tolerated, mostly because it spreads like an infection;
degrading productivity everywhere it’s found. In the end, if management
is incapable of motivating an employee towards a more productive attitude,
then management has no choice but to jettison both the employee and their attitude.
Harsh actions perhaps, but as managers we’re responsible for departmental
morale. Bad attitudes are infectious.
The key phrase in the paragraph above, and the one which
will cause the most controversy is, “if management
is incapable of motivating an employee... then...” It
suggests at least three things;
1) Managers differ in their ability to manage people problems.
(obviously)
2) The need to terminate employees with bad attitude is a
direct consequence of management’s inadequate people
skills. (Also obvious, but more difficult to accept.)
3) We can reduce turnover significantly (Remember, 7% of
terminations are due to bad attitude. 7% is significant)
by training managers to overcome and change bad attitudes.
All of this hinges on our personal belief in the existence
of leaders. If they exist, then they exist because we recognize
their ability to motivate us. Since magic doesn’t exist,
their ability isn’t magical. They are doing something
other humans, that even includes managers, can emulate. Discovering
how to become a leader, in other words, how to motivate others,
is the goal of every manager.
<For more attitude survey details, visit: http://www.technobility.com/docs/article081.htm>
Do you have a comment or feedback on
this article? Email
us and let us know what you think.
| 
