One way you might be killing morale

One way you might be killing morale

It’s a common complaint from schoolchildren – one child misbehaves and the entire class is punished. My children, who happen to be very big on what is fair and right, can get really riled up when this happens. “I didn’t do anything wrong, so why do I have to miss recess/sit without talking/lose free time privileges/or whatever other punishment the teacher comes up with because Joey kept talking when he wasn’t supposed to?”

Teachers often rely on this method of peer pressure to get kids in line and teach lessons about the broader consequences of your individual actions. That’s all well and good for the classroom, but when you see the same approach taken in the workplace, it’s usually a sign of poor leadership.

I’m sure most of us can recall the boss who would take sweeping actions or declare broad edicts, all to address the behavior or mistake of one or a few individuals. I worked for someone who announced at a team meeting that going forward everyone would have to get a two-level approval for office supplies. How ridiculous is that? And what a waste of time and energy? We all knew that he was doing this because there was someone in the office who was purchasing unnecessary and costly items. But instead of having a conversation with that person, he instituted a policy to stop the behavior.

Why do some leaders put rules into place for an entire team or department in order to “fix” issues generated by a few? It’s probably either cowardice or mistrust, neither of which is good.

It’s uncomfortable to have a difficult conversation about someone’s behavior. The cowardly leader would much rather announce an edict to all in the hopes that the true culprit will change. If you do this, unfortunately what actually happens is that you anger the whole team and put another dent in morale. People see you as a leader who avoids conflict and hides behind rules and policies rather than dealing with behavior or performance issues. And that can filter down and become an unwanted part of your team culture – problems are not directly dealt with and everyone suffers.

Some leaders assume that individual problems are just the “tip of the iceberg” and they decide to nip a problem in the bud by communicating a tough message to everyone or again, declaring a new policy or procedure before the problem happens again. Case in point is one leader who pulled all of the department heads into a conference room, read them the riot act, and made not-so-veiled threats that they would lose their jobs if another lapse in safety occurred. A safety breech had just happened and it was an isolated incident. Almost everyone in the room had stellar safety records, but the harsh tone and heavy-handed message left many with a bitter taste in their mouths and a feeling that their hard work and great results were not appreciated.

Before you decide to take broad action following an individual issue, consider the consequences of that action on the larger team, and ask yourself:

  • What will be the impact of my action? What message will I be sending?
  • Have I had the necessary conversations with the people who are most responsible?
  • Am I jumping to action before understanding what is really going on?
  • Am I punishing the many for the actions of a few?

There’s a good chance that your answers to those questions will make it clear that a targeted approach, addressing the source of the issue, will be a much better response than a broad-brush one.

Where are you taking a broad action to address a specific problem? What should you do instead?
Please leave a comment.

To become a more effective leader, contact Robyn at rmcleod@chatsworthconsulting.com.

Click here to receive The Thoughtful Leaders™ Blog posts via e-mail and receive a copy of “Ending Leadership Frenzy: 5 Steps to Becoming a More Thoughtful and Effective Leader.”

Click here to purchase The Power of Thoughtful Leadership: 101 Minutes To Being the Leader You Want To Be.

Join The Conversation

What People Are Saying

Cari   |   11 February 2014

This is a common issue within my department. I find you sometimes have to do both; address it with the group and the individual. I find the most effective way to manage an issue is directly with the individual. To keep the group up to date with the expectations, it is important to clearly communicate them.

Robyn McLeod   |   12 February 2014

Thank you for your comment, Cari. It is very true that addressing both the individual and the group is sometimes necessary. In that way, you address the source of the issue and you also have an opportunity to clarify expectations and reiterate performance standards with the whole team.

John Hunter   |   14 November 2014

I have suffered through poor management but I can’t recall experiencing this, so I am happy about that. The similar thing I have experience is refusing to address performance problems but not the part of punishing everyone else.

I worked for the federal government for years and the results of what you talk about was present everywhere – lots of stupid rules that were obviously created for exceptional cases (and/or not trusting managers to properly use discretion). But that is a bit different as the people around me were not choosing to impose stupid rules because they didn’t want to manage the stupid rules had been imposed long ago.

Refusing to directly address problems is very annoying and imposes bother that could be avoided on all those that must put up with the consequences of continuing failures.

Robyn McLeod   |   17 November 2014

Thanks for your comment, John. I couldn’t agree more that the failure to address performance problems, no matter what form that takes, can negatively affect everyone’s day-to-day experience at work. I appreciate your sharing how that played out at your job.