ManagingEmployeePerformance

A colleague is struggling. She's been coaching an employee off and on for a year, with no change in results. She's distraught -- she's going to have to fire this employee.

I'm more of a "tough love" kind of manager (her words :-). If I can't help an employee straighten out and perform the necessary work within a few weeks, I fire that person. If I have an "indispensable" employee, I fire that person, especially if he or she behaves like the person in Schrage's story:

So, what am I missing that this colleague has? Why is she taking so long to fire this person who can't do the job? -- JohannaRothman 2005.02.17

There could be many reasons, but I'll suggest the one that I find most frequently underlying this behavior. Your colleague thinks she's a parent, not a manager. She thinks the employee is a child, not an adult. You don't fire your children, no matter what they do, because they can't take care of themselves. Where did she get the idea that it was a parent/child relationship? That's another question, but if you're her manager, you'd better disabuse her of this idea or else fire her (at least from her management responsibility).- JerryWeinberg 2005.02.17

I have known many people who felt they could change people. I guess they were like Johanna's colleague. Some were not nice about their attitude. They beat people until the people changed.

I work in the government. We cannot fire government employees for lack of performance (it is possible, but practically impossible). Hence, I don't have Johanna's experience in quickly firing someone.

We do, however, fire companies for poor performance. This comes in the way of not renewing a contract or selecting another company in a competitive contract situation. I suffer when I have to do that. I guess it is like Jerry's comment about confusing manager and parent. Nevertheless, I still do it and with the years I suffer less with each "firing."

DwaynePhillips 18 February 2005

''Where did she get the idea that it was a parent/child relationship?''

The parent/child and employer/employee relationship share some common characteristics, which might account for the confusion. They are both regulated by a "relational contract" - long term, emotionally invested, and going beyond purely performance-related aspects, by contrast with "transactional contracts". Both feature an imbalance of power and need.

It might help a manager to distinguish between the relational and the transactional aspects of the contract she has with her employee.

LaurentBossavit 2005.02.18

I'd agree that power imbalance and need imbalance are feature of corporate hierarchies.

Hierarchies can be paternalistic -- treating employees as less-than-adults, as people who require the care and protection of their managers. But they don't have to be that way.

Even in hierarchies, though, it's possible to relate adult-to-adult. When we approach the people we work with as adults, we know they can handle the emotional effects of firing (both the firer and the firee.)

An article on firing here:

EstherDerby 02.20.05

Updated: Monday, February 21, 2005