職場(chǎng)報(bào)憂4步走
?
|
????親愛的安妮：這幾年我一直在看你寫的關(guān)于升職的專欄，現(xiàn)在終于有了想請(qǐng)教你的問(wèn)題。這個(gè)問(wèn)題使得局面非常糟糕。我這個(gè)職位上的前任使部門業(yè)績(jī)下滑到了不可接受的程度，原因主要在于他不愿解雇任何人——即使有的人幾年里都沒(méi)有真正做過(guò)什么事。這些人還影響到了其它團(tuán)隊(duì)成員，最終使得其他人的工作效率也降低了。 ????因此我的老板告訴我，我現(xiàn)在需要“扭轉(zhuǎn)局面”，解雇一些人，同時(shí)評(píng)估其他人的表現(xiàn)，告訴他們，“要么好好干，要么滾蛋”。我沒(méi)有傳達(dá)這類壞消息的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，也非?？謶诌@類談話。請(qǐng)問(wèn)您或您的讀者能不能給我一些建議，告訴我應(yīng)該怎樣做？或者說(shuō)怎么才能不干這個(gè)苦差事呢？——“管理層信使” ????親愛的“管理層信使”：“如果你想找到某種方法來(lái)避免傳達(dá)壞消息時(shí)的不愉快情緒，我恐怕要讓你失望了，因?yàn)檫@種方法并不存在”，杰弗里?圖姆林說(shuō)。圖姆林是總部位于奧斯丁的溝通管理公司Mouthpeace Communications的CEO。圖姆林還寫了一本新書，書名為《停止說(shuō)話、開始溝通：職業(yè)與人生成功的反直覺秘訣》（Stop Talking, Start Communicating: Counterintuitive Secrets to Success in Business and in Life）。 ????圖姆林非常理解你的處境。每當(dāng)公司管理者一再推遲告訴員工壞消息，以至于整個(gè)團(tuán)隊(duì)或部門都被拖垮后，人們就會(huì)找圖姆林來(lái)扭轉(zhuǎn)局面。圖姆林說(shuō)：“很神奇的是，一點(diǎn)小問(wèn)題就能把公司拖到要垮的程度，而原因僅僅是沒(méi)人愿意開除問(wèn)題員工?！比欢瑫r(shí)，他也理解管理者們（比如你的前任）一再拖延傳達(dá)壞消息的原因：“解雇別人是一件艱難的事情”。 ????沒(méi)有什么方法能使這件事變得更容易。但圖姆林還是給出了四條建議： ????1．直奔主題?！爸黝}很好識(shí)別，它總是你說(shuō)不出的那句話——有可能是‘我們要換供應(yīng)商了’，也可能是‘我們得開除你’，或者‘我們不要再見面了’，”圖姆林說(shuō)。因此還是直奔主題吧。他說(shuō)：“想說(shuō)得好聽一點(diǎn)沒(méi)有用，反而可能使聽者感到困惑，以至于接受事實(shí)對(duì)他們來(lái)說(shuō)更加艱難?！?/p> ????2．堅(jiān)持到底。如果你有被說(shuō)服放棄一個(gè)決定的經(jīng)歷，你就知道堅(jiān)持到底有多么艱難了?！八麄儠?huì)說(shuō)，‘可是我們一起工作15年了！你不是真的要我走人吧？’”，圖姆林說(shuō)?！盎蛘咚麄儠?huì)問(wèn)你這么做的原因。但是一定要抵抗住誘惑，不要因?yàn)楸槐破取⒑逭T或被別人的魅力所折服而敗下陣來(lái)?！?/p> ????3．解釋原因，但不要解釋太多。圖姆林建議用一句簡(jiǎn)單的話來(lái)概括你的決定和這么做的原因——比如，“我們解雇你是因?yàn)橐淖冋麄€(gè)部門的發(fā)展方向”。你想多說(shuō)一些也可以，“但是要反復(fù)陳述一個(gè)原因。不要增加其它信息，否則談話會(huì)偏離正軌?！?/p> ????4．結(jié)束談話。沒(méi)完沒(méi)了地討論通常是失策的行為，圖姆林說(shuō)?！澳憧梢宰匀坏鼗卮鹨恍┦聦?shí)性的問(wèn)題，比如‘我哪天離開？’，或者‘我的401K保險(xiǎn)怎么辦？’如果你不知道某個(gè)事實(shí)性的答案，也可以主動(dòng)提出幫忙詢問(wèn)，”圖姆林說(shuō)?！暗枳⒁?，不要回答任何推測(cè)性或試探性的問(wèn)題，原因還是一樣：你的回答會(huì)混淆問(wèn)題，導(dǎo)致談話偏離正軌?！?/p> ????圖姆林補(bǔ)充說(shuō)，在這種情況下，“有一個(gè)簡(jiǎn)單的公式，那就是：清晰、簡(jiǎn)要、結(jié)束?！比欢瑐鬟_(dá)不那么敏感的評(píng)估結(jié)果，就是另一回事了?！皞鬟_(dá)評(píng)估結(jié)果，即使是負(fù)面的，也與解雇完全不同，”圖姆林指出?！斑@是因?yàn)椋瑐鬟_(dá)評(píng)估結(jié)果不是單一的事件，而是持續(xù)的交流。你的愿望是對(duì)方能夠留下來(lái)，前提是他們能改進(jìn)工作?！?/p> ????考慮到這一點(diǎn)，圖姆林建議你先解雇需要開除的員工，一段時(shí)間之后，再對(duì)其余員工進(jìn)行批評(píng)。原因有二。首先，圖姆林指出，對(duì)于整個(gè)團(tuán)隊(duì)來(lái)說(shuō)，解雇某人——比如某個(gè)眾所周知的懶怠員工——已經(jīng)是某種形式的反饋?！八腥死硭?dāng)然都會(huì)看到這件事，因此可以等上幾個(gè)星期，看看這事會(huì)起到什么效果，”圖姆林說(shuō)。“你可能會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)，某些員工表現(xiàn)變好了?！比绻_實(shí)如此，你需要處理的棘手問(wèn)題就又少了一個(gè)。 ????其次，圖姆林說(shuō)，想要批評(píng)發(fā)揮作用，你必須指明想要?jiǎng)e人改變的具體行為。“太籠統(tǒng)的反饋通常是最無(wú)效的，比如‘你不擅長(zhǎng)和客戶打交道’。這句話沒(méi)有給員工任何有用的信息，也很容易被忽視，”圖姆林說(shuō)。相反，一個(gè)具體的例子——“你在上周二的會(huì)議上打斷了客戶甲的發(fā)言”——確切地指出了員工需要在哪方面做出更多努力。 ????“你剛開始做這份工作，因此可能還沒(méi)碰到過(guò)類似的例子。但想要對(duì)員工的批評(píng)發(fā)揮作用，你最好等遇到類似的例子再提，”圖姆林說(shuō)。“應(yīng)該不用太久，你就會(huì)碰到?！?/p> ????反饋：你有沒(méi)有被解雇過(guò)，或者有沒(méi)有解雇過(guò)別人？哪一點(diǎn)使這個(gè)壞消息更加（或不那么）令人難以接受？你得到過(guò)的最有用的批評(píng)是什么？請(qǐng)?jiān)谙旅姘l(fā)表你的評(píng)論。 ????譯者：朱毓芬/汪皓 |
????Dear Annie: I've been following your columns about promotions over the past year or so, and I finally got one. The trouble is, it comes with some nasty conditions. The person who had this job before me let my department's performance slide to an unacceptable low, mainly because he didn't want to fire anybody -- even though there are a few people here who haven't done any real work in years. These same people have also influenced other team members, so their productivity has fallen too. ????So now what I have to do is "turn things around," my boss said, by letting a few people go and giving shape-up-or-ship-out evaluations to some others. I have no experience with giving this kind of bad news, and I really dread these conversations. Do you or your readers have any advice on how to do this, or how not to? -- Management's Messenger ????Dear M.M.: "If you were hoping for a way around the unpleasant emotions that accompany the delivery of bad news, I'll have to disappoint you, because there isn't one," says Geoffrey Tumlin, who heads Austin-based communications firm Mouthpeace Communications and wrote a new book called Stop Talking, Start Communicating: Counterintuitive Secrets to Success in Business and in Life. ????Tumlin gets where you're coming from. He is often called in when managers have put off doing the inevitable for so long that whole teams and departments have crashed. "It's amazing to see how problems can cascade through an organization because no one wants to get rid of a problem employee," he says. At the same time, he understands why bosses like your predecessor procrastinate: "Firing people is hard." ????Nothing can make it easier, but Tumlin offers four tips for getting it done: ????1. Get straight to your core message. "Your core message is easy to identify, because it's always the thing you don't want to say -- whether it's 'We're switching vendors' or 'We have to let you go' or 'We should stop seeing each other,'" Tumlin says. So get straight to the point. "Trying to sugarcoat it won't help, and may even confuse the other person, which just makes it harder for them," he notes. ????2. Stick to your guns. If you've ever been talked out of a decision, you already know how tough this one can be. "People will say things like, 'But we've worked together for 15 years! You're not really letting me go, are you?'" notes Tumlin. "Or they will try to talk about the reasons. But resist the temptation to get pushed, cajoled, or charmed off your message." ????3. Explain yourself, but not too much. Tumlin recommends fitting the message and the reason for it into a single sentence -- for instance, "We're letting you go because we're taking this whole department in a different direction." If you want to say more, that's okay, "but do it by repeating the point. Don't add any new information, or you'll encourage the discussion to drift away from what you need to say." ????4. Get out of the conversation. Letting the discussion drag on is usually a mistake, Tumlin says. "Naturally you can answer factual questions like, 'When's my last day?' or 'What happens to my 401(k)?' or offer to get any practical answers you don't have," Tumlin says. "But beware of trying to answer any speculative or probing questions, again because they can confuse the issue and drag you away from your point." ????In this situation, Tumlin adds, "It's a simple formula: Be clear, be concise, and be gone." The not-so-hot evaluations you'll have to deliver are, however, a different story. "An evaluation, even a negative one, is really the opposite of firing someone," he notes. "That's because it should be an ongoing discussion, not a one-time event, and because you're hoping to keep the people you'll be speaking with, assuming they can get better at their jobs." ????With that in mind, Tumlin advises you get the firings over with first, and then wait a bit before giving feedback, for two reasons. First, firing someone -- say, an employee who's a known slacker -- is a form of feedback to the whole team, he points out. "Everyone will be watching, of course, so give it a couple of weeks and see how that percolates through," he says. "You may find that some people's behavior changes for the better." If so, you'll have one less tough topic to tackle. ????Second, Tumlin says, evaluations that make a difference require specific examples of the behavior you want to change. "The least effective feedback is always too general, like 'You're not good with clients.' That doesn't tell the other person anything useful, and it's too easy to dismiss," Tumlin says. Instead, a particular example -- "You talked over Client A in that meeting last Tuesday" -- tells exactly where an employee needs to focus her efforts. ????"You're new in this job, so maybe you don't have an example yet. But if you want these evaluations to matter, wait until you do," says Tumlin. "It shouldn't take long." ????Talkback: If you've ever been fired or had to fire someone, what made the bad news more (or less) bearable? What was the most useful evaluation you ever got? Leave a comment below. |
最新文章