It's the Little Things You Say

Some employers wonder why they just achieve full diversity in their workplace and then it suddenly collapses when an exodus of five to ten people occurs. The pay is good. The benefits are excellent. The working hours aren't excessive. Work-life balance issues are addressed. There's everything going for the environment. So why are these five to ten people leaving after a year or two? The scenario is repeated year after year, department after department.

Maybe that's the problem. The things that are being held constant but not examined. Undoubtedly, the interviewers are people who have been in the organization for a good amount of time. They've become acculturated. They speak and reflect the culture. That's one of the reasons they were selected to be interviewers. They represent the corporate culture in addition to knowing all of the details about the position and the best fit for it. As interviewers, they don't grill the candidates; they have conversations. They tell anecdotes that are actually open invitations to share information and personality. They relax and begin to spontaneously react to things said by the candidate and then reveal a little more of who they are and why they've been with the company for as long as they have.

There were faux pas during the interviews that the candidate chose not to address or acknowledge. But as time passed, the new employee realized these were not aberrant. These instances are part of the corporate culture and they keep getting repeated in various ways.

Coupled with watching the practices is the listening. The listening started from the moment the phone call reached them for the phone interview and the invitation to come in for a personal interview. The listening was happening as they sat in the reception area and as they made their way through the halls from one office to the next. The listening was happening as they walked into the front doors into the elevator from the commute to the office.

It was the little comments that were made in response to something that was willingly volunteered in order to show how motivated the candidate was. It was an observation that over-reached the situation but simultaneously came crashing down on a particular class of individuals. It was an observation that was basically pandering to some part of the candidate's identity and the observation was completely wrong. They were asked where they expect to see themselves in five years. The honest response was met with a muttered, "Yeah, right." During their tenure with the company, some executive asked them to reserve some time because they wanted to meet with the employee. The employee had been doing the right type of networking and politicking to move into that department and commented to their supervisor that the meeting would hold a lot of opportunity for them. The supervisor's comment was something on the order of, "I doubt it."

One of the things these corporate emigrants realize is that there is no place for them in the higher rungs of the company. They've been there long enough to have watched the various types of personnel who are pushed along and who has been diverted or discouraged from following a particular path. The pattern repeats itself without benefit of gossip nor sniping remarks.

Perhaps there was good follow-up and the candidate was contacted by phone or letter or email. The message was essentially that although the candidate's qualifications and background are exceptional, they simply were not the right fit for the position. Good luck in [your] future endeavors. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Or perhaps there was no follow-up. A person who looks just like everyone else in the company was hired and life just went on. If either of these situations occurred, the candidate who was passed over had little to say aloud. In fact, they may have even forgotten they interviewed at your company. Why? Because of how under-whelmed they were. They were relieved to be out of the way of the sniper shots.

In the alternative, they were hired for some reason. Maybe it was because they are of the ethnicity or gender that was required at that time. But they've reached that exodus threshold and just tendered their resignation. That's when a disappointed at the resignation notice is made and thoughts about losing a worker of that quality are mulled. Where to find more of that type of worker to do exactly the same thing but more of it. After all, that's why they were hired. More importantly, how do you keep them?

"Sam[antha], you're such a great [insert job title]. You're conscientious and hard working. You get things done and don't need a lot of supervision. You're not like the others of your kind. You're an exception. We'd like to keep your kind with us in the family. Is there anything we could do to convince you to stay, to keep doing your exceptional work for us?"

It's about this time the key to the door has been turned and locked. Sam[antha] doesn't need to say anything but will probably respond with, "I don't think so. But thanks."

Case Study: The Nebulous Barista

One of the greatest challenges any person can experience is what to do when presented with a potential conflict of interest situation. It first has to be identified as a potential conflict of interest. If it can go either way, the consultant (or any other business person) must have a thorough and honest assessment of their own self in order to determine whether they are capable of putting aside their personal feelings in order to deliver a fair and balanced assessment of the situation and then make reliable recommendations.

I've never faced this sort of challenge in any of my business or consulting career until in the last six months or so. I was in a relationship with "Martin" and it had pretty much become public. Knowing my business identity as a management and career consultant, all three of his shift supervisors, during conversations on different days about various and sundry topics, broached the subject of Martin and what a great worker he is. The only perplexing issue for all three of them is what to do about him. He's max'd out on what he's qualified to do for the company yet he has talents that are not being tapped. Everyone is losing. They (all three) wanted to know what they can do to help Martin.

In the first two conversations, I promised I would think about the situation and get back to them. With the third, I began to question myself on the conflict of interest matter. "Can I put aside my personal feelings in order to deliver a reliable, independent recommendation about this?" I asked myself. It was a legitimate concern and one on which my reputation as a person capable of doing an accurate assessment and analysis rode.

One of my strong suits is taking a clinical look at a situation in order to see the various issues impacting it. A colleague recently commented on how careful and detailed my analyses of situations are and how well they make plain the issues that are buried in the tangle of each situation. Even when it's something about my own personality, I'm very strict with my assessment, analysis, and corrective measures. I finally responded to the third supervisor that I could do the assessment (that is, I could maintain an independent perspective of the subject) but it would need to be on a consultative basis, not as one-on-one training. She was satisfied with that response but we did not explore any other details.

Background

Martin started with the company in the lowest entry position possible. He is smart. He knows the way to keep a job is to do one's work well, thoroughly and in a timely fashion, without being told to do so two or three times.

He is a willing worker. No matter what the task, he is available to carry out the steps to bring it to fruition. He does not grouse or grumble. But he is bored. Thus, when I met him two years ago, nearly anything could distract him -- mostly the women. He began to find my table on a frequent basis. He began providing little extra services. Eventually, he was given a timer so that he could remember when it was time to recommence his cycle of duties. The timer worked.

All three of his shift supervisors agreed on one aspect of Martin. He's reliable. "I know that if I assign something to Martin, I don't have to think about it again. I can rely on him to get it done and done the right way." It was as though the three had read these words from a script because each one said exactly the same thing about him.

But the company had determined that in fairness to all employees, it was no longer going to have a custodial position. Instead, everyone would pitch in on maintenance; everyone would have their day at the bar. Therefore, Martin's world broadened because he needed to learn names and preparation of drinks. He became more engaged in his work, happier and more productive. His ceiling was raised.

Previous Work Experience

About a year ago, Martin shared with me information about his education and work he did in his native country. He talked about some of his personal responsibilities and his interests; he shared several of his interests with me. Unfortunately, what he spoke of as his previous occupation and education did not match the capabilities he exhibited. I have reservations about his representations in this regard. It seems to me he was attempting to impress me in order to gain more favorable attention and reception.

His lack of facility in English was plainly why he had not followed his previous alleged profession here in the United States. If he was telling the truth, he is drastically under employed and doing himself a mortal disservice by staying in his present position without seeking some type of promotion. However, this is by personal choice and necessity. During private conversations (before the meetings with the supervisors), I suggested to him that he consider taking one or two evening classes, even an ESL class. He declined the suggestions by saying he did not have enough time to attend the classes.

Martin enjoys reading. He is a wealth of information that he yearns to share with others but is constrained from doing so because of his position and his language deficiency. He would do well in training others. In fact, he is usually the one who trains the new employees about the various housekeeping duties of the store. He is conscientious and thorough. Unfortunately, he gets a little confused about co-worker congeniality compared with romantic overtures and requires constant reminders that "it's called training."

Another thing that didn't match his purported past with his current environment was the ability to deal with people. True enough, he serves people with courtesy. And in accordance with the theme of the company, he makes you feel as though you're at home.

However, Martin's previous occupation involved explaining concepts to others, making plain those concepts that are difficult to grasp, and getting people to talk to one another. He would have been responsible for negotiating deals and bargaining with others. He would have been deeply immersed in long and complicated conversations about complex subjects. These conversations would have droned on until there was resolution, the parties saw eye to eye, and all was plain.

Martin is good at talking to people but not in confrontational situations and not when negotiations are required. When hostility rears its ugly head, Martin backs down and looks for an ally to come to his defense. In the past, Martin has shared stories with me about the hostile customer who did not receive their drink as quickly as they desired or the drink did not meet with their approval. Although we attempted to rehearse some of the scenarios, he declined on the basis that rehearsal was unnecessary. Likewise, we attempted to come up with negotiated resolutions. These failed because he was seeking someone to step on his behalf rather than seeking a way to amicably resolve the situation on his own.

This reticence to discuss and resolve carries over into other situations. In the long run, it is ultimately discovered that the reason for the conflict (lack of seeing eye to eye) is because of a misinterpretation from one language to the other. Clarifying questions and answers would have resolved the tension.

Assessment and Recommendations

Even though Martin's representations about his background and work experience do not match his current behavior, he is a dedicated, diligent, and reliable worker. He will continue in his present position (or some form of it) for as long as he desires to work for the company.

If Martin wants to advance in the company, there are requirements for reaching each new position in order to qualify for it. It is mandatory that he fulfill those prerequisites and stop avoiding them. He constrains his own opportunities with his reticence to face new and greater challenges. He also retards his growth with his refusal to accept responsibility for his acts.

Martin needs to realize that flirting is not a synonym for customer cordiality. He would do well to continue to offer a pleasant smile and attentive service. But outright flirting with the female customers is not necessary.

Although AB 1855 only requires training supervisorial staff on the issues of sexual harassment, it would be well for all personnel to receive some training so that they have some concept of where the line is and when they may be crossing it or inviting someone to do so. Again, a person with the previous work experience that Martin represents he has would appreciate the differences and be capable of accurately identifying the behavior, no matter where the source that gives rise to it.

He would do well to learn more about the names and attributes of products, correct spellings, prices, and proper display. He should be trained on all aspects of front counter service and become involved in delivering service in that area so that he becomes a completely well-rounded employee.

It would be wise to train Martin on how to handle hostility in the workplace whether it occurs between employees, employees and customers, between customers. It would also be helpful to train him on how to handle the scene when it appears there will be an attempted robbery and how to recognize a developing dangerous condition.

Martin's greatest shortcoming is communication skills. He needs training in how to have a conversation about misunderstandings rather than blame others for mistakes or allow problems to fester because of lack of communication. Still, communication skills is a broad term and only scratches at the surface of the root issue. Martin's skill in spoken English is poor and retards his progress in everything he endeavors to do. He should be supported in taking an English as a Second Language course so that he may master his vocabulary recall and fluidity of speech.