In this fourth video in my series on communicating concerns about performance, I talk about the importance of documentation. If you are serious about improving employee performance, documentation of the conversations you have about behavior are critical.
The documentation process helps communicate to employees that you really do care, and because you do, you are serious about helping them change and improve. You don’t do yourself or your employee any favor by not keeping a record of these critical conversations about performance.
The documentation process also gives you the opportunity to reinforce that you intend to be transparent and fair in your treatment of the employee. At the end of your conversation about performance, tell the employee that you are going to go away and document the conversation, and that you will share that documentation with them. Invite them to make sure the documentation accurately reflects what you talked about and agreed to. If your intention is truly to help the employee, and they know it, then this process should be facilitating and not threatening.
I was thinking this might be my last video in this series, but I can think of at least one other topic that I need to cover – follow-up. Is there anything else you would like to know that I have not covered? Do you have any other suggestions for improvement?
Related Posts:
Communicating Concerns About Performance: Focus on Behaviors
Communicating Concerns About Performance: Watch Your Motives
How Do You Communicate Concerns About Performance or Behavior to Your Employees?
You should follow me on twitter here.
Bret,
I like the videos and the backdrop. I think you’ve covered the key aspects in this difficult subject. Once we raise a performance issue with our staff, it’s important to draw up a schedule where we’ll come back together to review and measure progress. It shows we’re serious about changing behaviors and also sets the expectations.
M
[Reply]
Bret L. Simmons Reply:
October 25th, 2009 at 9:24 am
Michael, thanks for the comments. It seems simple, but it is often neglected. It’s good news to be straight up with people. Thanks! Bret
[Reply]
Bret,
I think you touched on a very important aspect in this process that from an employee perspective gives leadership credibility and respect and from a leadership perspective has got to be one of the more difficult qualities to maintain. Transparency.
Thanks for another great video,
Alex
[Reply]
Bret L. Simmons Reply:
October 25th, 2009 at 2:54 pm
I think transparency is very important. We just don’t trust people we think are hiding something, not telling the whole truth, or getting ready to ambush us. In my experience real transparency is very rare. I find it very refreshing when I encounter it in a leader or colleague. Thanks, Alex! Bret
[Reply]
I have a slightly different take on this one, Bret. For me, documentation takes an issue out of the informal and negotiating realm and moves it into the formal, may-be-part-of-your-evaluation realm. I find that most effective negotiation happens in the cracks in the system.
I suggest to supervisors that most of their conversations with team members be informal. If there is a need to move to more formal discussion, complete with documentation, that, itself needs to be an explicit act.
[Reply]
Bret L. Simmons Reply:
October 27th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
I’m not sure we are that far off. I totally agree that most of these conversations should start informal if you want to put the employee at ease and hear what you need to hear to help. But I think EVERY conversation about behavior should be documented. I can think of so many times I thought things were taken care of with the informal only to learn later they were not, then I had to start all over. Thanks!! Bret
[Reply]
We’re not far off, but I think we disagree on this one. My take is that if you document every conversation about behavior you ratchet up both the importance of the initial conversations and the workload of the supervisor.
My experience is that if you talk to someone about behavior informally, that’s usually enough to get the change. If it doesn’t, then you give notice that from now on you’ll be documenting. That almost always works. When it doesn’t you’re facing the kind of situation that takes a lot of attention and documentation.
[Reply]
Bret L. Simmons Reply:
October 27th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
I hear what you are saying, and your approach is of course completely valid and I am sure very effective. I’ve always believed that if there is something about performance or behavior that needs to be corrected and it merits a conversation, then it merits documentation. I would treat conversations about suggestions for improvement differently than I would treat a conversation about a necessary course correction. If it’s just a suggestion, then it’s just a suggestion and I would agree documentation is not needed. But if the behavioral change is or will be a necessity, then I want to start my documentation trail the first conversation I have that identifies the change as necessary. Thanks, Wally!! Bret
[Reply]
You say “if it merits a conversation, then it merits documentation.” I disagree. That wasn’t always the case. When I started training supervisors, I advocated using “working notes” as a way of (as you suggested) honoring the seriousness of the issue and discussions, and functioning as a memory aid.
It worked then. Team members knew what working notes were. And they helped everyone have productive discussions. But the workplace changed.
A small number of those who were either malcontents or had a legitimate complaint about their supervisor began requesting to see those working notes in mediation, arbitration and administrative hearings. That meant that their representatives had something to attack and to use as the basis for interrogation. Because they too no notes, they had complete deniability for anything they chose.
I thought that supervisors had two choices in that situation. They could do things. They could escalate the recordkeeping, doing things like having the team member write out their own version to file with the supervisors notes, having the team member sign off on the supervisor’s notes, etc.
The other option was to keep things informal (in the sense of undocumented) unless it was necessary to escalate. I thought, and still think, that’s more effective. The benefit that I didn’t anticipate was that a lot of team members reacted negatively to the supervisor taking notes and a system of clear notice before documentation was actually more comfortable for them.
I also confess to a bias for as little paperwork as possible, but having what’s necessary done thoroughly. Doing this with formal notice followed by documentation allows a supervisor to put more time on the hard cases.
I don’t claim perfection on this and I know there are lots of supervisors doing things that work for them but are different from what we’ve discussed. But to borrow the line that Art Petty uses in his blog, “it’s the bottom line for now.”
[Reply]
Bret L. Simmons Reply:
October 27th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
I have TREMENDOUS respect for your professional opinion and advice Wally. I too have a bias for little paperwork. The principle that I am strongly advocating here is transparency. the key is going to be knowing when to start the documentation process. I would error on the side of too soon rather than too late, understanding the potential drawbacks you point out. There is NO perfect system. the key is for employees to understand and accept the system that is used, and then the system must be used consistently with all employees, all the time. Great conversation, Wally!! Thanks. Bret
[Reply]