![]() But not doing what he said he was going to do is his problem. Remember, he doesn't have a problem getting along with them, they have the problem. It makes me think about firing you." But see how much more powerful that is if you have step 4 in from before? If you just tell him "If you don't get along with everyone, I'm going to fire you" that's so much less. "When you don't do the things you say you're going to do it makes me think you're not interested in keeping this job. You get the idea.įinally, if you're giving feedback and he's not adjusting, that's feedback too. Tell him it makes other people not want to work with him. Tell him that it makes other people not listen to him. Other people's feelings are their problems. Don't tell him it hurts other people's feelings when he does that. You should give them another listen, the information will be more complete.)Īgain from the casts, don't forget to adjust the impact message (step 3) based on his personality type. (I'm really just summarizing the great material M&M have in the feedback casts. It's just one piece of feedback among many. You might not get this with a "shot across the bow," but you can get it the next time. That way if the behavior is repeated you can give him feedback on not doing what he said he was going to do. You have to wait for him to come up with something that addresses the issue to your satisfaction, and he has to say it. ![]() When you use the feedback model step 4 asks the recipient what he can do differently next time. If the behavior is repeated, you have a historical standard to fall back upon. Whether he admits he did that or not doesn't matter, you're setting a standard. ![]() The first time, your goal is simply to let him know what behavior is unacceptable. Have you given him feedback before? I was making the assumption that this was the first "shot across the bow." If this isn't the first time you are giving him feedback on this topic, then it's no longer a shot across the bow. Since his behavior was noticed by many people and was demonstrated in public, is there still any point to allowing him to deny it happened and "believing" him? Why wouldn't I just move forward with next level of feedback - essentially that not taking action on feedback is not acceptable? Turning this into a bit more of a hypotetical case now to make sure I fully understand. Cursing, raising your voice, or flatlt refusing to take action on feedback from your management team are behaviors that can be addressed. But his delivery technique was so alienating that rather than making any progress on fixing them, he just further dug himself into a hole.īut I get your point. The sad thing was, in many cases, his end points were often valid. And then when asked to be part of the solution, he's say "not my problem - that's your problem". Mind you, these were all people with much more experience and perspective than he had. ![]() He was alienating his peers and his management chain on a daily basis by telling them bluntly and in public forums their plans were stupid, they had no sense of what they were doing, they weren't inspiring to him in the least, he didn't value their opinions or feedback, etc. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |