CaseStudy.co.in» Employee Relations

IMPORTANCE OF RECEPTIVENESS

vicky113 — Thu, 01 Jul 2010 05:49:41 +0000

The Receptiveness Hypothesis is applicable at a number of levels. For example, it applies to organizations in general, and the ability of the organization to respond to the needs of customers, staff and other stakeholders (e.g. politicians, etc). It applies to non-supervisory staff, and their ability to respond to the needs of their managers, customers and co-workers. Here we are going to look at Receptiveness as it applied to managers, leaders and/or supervisors.
Influence Of The Receptive Manager
The Receptive manager tends to succeed by building bonds of respect and trust with those around him/her. Staff respond positively to Receptive managers; they work more diligently, work to help the manager and the organization succeed, and will go the extra mile when necessary. That is because Receptive managers act consistent with the principle that their jobs are to help their staff do their jobs. So, a basic inter-dependence emerges based on behaviours that show concern, respect and trust.
Receptive managers also influence those above them in the hierarchy. Because Receptive managers have the ability to read and act upon the needs of their “bosses”, they are perceived as helpful and reliable, or in a simple way, very useful. This allows them to get the “ear” of people above them in the system, and further helps get things done when needed.
Contrast this with the limited influence of the UNReceptive manager. The unReceptive manager is restricted in influence because those around him/her do not respect or trust them to look out for their welfare. Influence is more limited to the use of power coming from the formal position, and fear, a motivational component that is hard to sustain over time. UnReceptive managers tend to be perceived as self-interested, or at best uninterested in the needs of those around them. They also tend to be perceived by those above them as less reliable and less useful due to their focus on empire building, organization protection, and self-interest, rather than getting done what needs to be done.
How Do They Do It?
Receptive managers apply a number of specific skills and abilities to the task. Above all, they appear to be “withit”. Withitness has a number of components. First withit managers are able to put aside their concerns to listen to (and appear to listen to) those around them. As a result, they know what is going on, and know what is both said, and said between the lines. They have the knack of appearing to know what people need even if those needs are not expressed directly.
However, knowing what is going on, and identifying the needs of those around them is not sufficient. The Receptive manager also acts upon that knowledge, attempting to help fulfil the needs of employees, superiors, etc. Receptive managers wield influence to solve problems for those around them, often before even being asked.
Here’s an example:
John was responsible for automating an office system in a government department. As happens sometimes, the Management Information Systems people were not keen on their going their own way on the project, despite the fact that they had indicated they could not do it for them in the near future. As a result their cooperation (needed for the project) was patchy. As team leader, John faced a number of roadblocks, despite the fact that their Assistant Deputy Minister wanted to see this project come to fruition. He regularly reported back to his Director, outlining progress and roadblocks. Every time he communicated roadblocks to the Director, they were removed within a short time, despite the fact that he did not request direct action. In addition, the Director advised and counselled him on how to deal with the “systems people” so he could have maximum impact. Despite the roadblocks, the project was completed on time and was very successful, much to the chagrin of some of the systems people, who he thinks were hoping it would fail.
This is a simple story, but one full of meaning. In this situation the Director was able to identify the project leader’s needs with respect to the project, listening carefully, and identifying actions he could take to “smooth the path”. Not only was the Director able to remove obstacles and fulfil the need of the project leader, but the Director responded on a deeper level, helping to teach the Project Leader methods of becoming more effective, fulfilling yet another need. All of this was assumed to be the proper role of the Director, and was done without expressing all of the needs specifically or explicitly.
We can contrast this with the unReceptiveness of the MIS people. They lectured, they fussed, they predicted dire consequences, rather than offering consistent, Receptive help. They focused not on responding to the needs of their clients, but on some other factors having to do with control, and their own needs. Eventually, their lack of Receptiveness resulted in the very thing they did not want; loss of control of the project. As a result of this project their overall status in the organization suffered, simply because at both an organization and individual level they were seen as barriers, rather than useful.
Let’s look at one more example.
An employee had been working for a government branch for about a year, having moved to the city as a new resident. In a casual conversation, the supervisor noted that the employee wasn’t looking at his best, and asked how he was feeling. The employee explained that he hadn’t been feeling well lately, and sounded very tired and overwhelmed. The supervisor determined that the staff member didn’t have a local family doctor, asked if he would like the supervisor to arrange an appointment, and proceeded to do so immediately. The problem turned out to be a minor one.
In this example we see again the ideas of “withitness” and Receptiveness. The supervisor was able to identify that the staff member was in need of some help, despite the fact that the staff member did not state this explicitly. Note that the supervisor didn’t pressure the staff member to go to the doctor, but identified needs, checked them out, and then acted upon them. In this case, help consisted of direct, helpful action.
Conclusion
These two examples are the stuff of loyalty and commitment. They are remembered years and years after the fact, and continue to extend the influence of managers. In this sense Receptiveness is a critical component of management success, because it allows managers and supervisors to get things done, for the benefit of all players.
In the limited space we have, we have attempted to give you a feel of what Receptiveness means. You might want to extend your own understanding by considering some of the following questions.
1. If you are a manager or supervisor, how can you modify your own behaviours so that you become and are perceived as more Receptive by a) your staff, b) your boss and c) your customers?
2. Again, if you are a manager or supervisor what is your definition of the “Receptive employee”? Can you identify your “favourite employees”, and consider how they are Receptive to you? Our bet is you will find that your most valued employees are Receptive.
3. If you are non-management, what would you need to do to be perceived as more Receptive by the people around you?
To download click here….

Incoming search terms

example of unreceptive response in management

How Do I Convince My Boss?

maddy — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 04:32:36 +0000

Companies often make the mistake of thinking the best programmer will be the best manager of programmers. This is rarely the case, as programming and managing are different skills.
The problem is, as you know, that it’s super obvious that the best programmer is the best. Your “soft” skills are less quantifiable. You do need to toot your own horn. Let’s figure out a way to do that.
Read more….

KBR: Roles and responsibilities within an organisational structure

admin — Sun, 20 Jun 2010 08:51:42 +0000

KBR (Kellogg, Brown and Root) is a Texas-based global corporation. It employs over 57,000 people worldwide and is a leading engineering, construction and services company. It supports the energy, hydrocarbon, government services and civil infrastructure sectors. KBR’s business is based on project management activities.
The core values of the business are a central part of the culture throughout KBR. These include an uncompromising commitment to health & safety and open and honest relationships between employees that are based on mutual respect. The company’s values focus on transparency, accountability, financial responsibility and discipline. Conducting business with the utmost integrity and ethics is the foundation of KBR’s day-to-day business.
Read more….

Incoming search terms

Forestry Commission: Developing people through training

admin — Sun, 20 Jun 2010 08:34:40 +0000

The Forestry Commission is a government department, making it a public sector organisation. Its mission is ‘to protect and expand Britain’s forests and woodlands and increase their value to society and the environment’. It is Britain’s largest land manager and is responsible for some of the UK’s most spectacular landscapes. Over the last 20 years it has expanded Britain’s woods by an area more than three times the size of Greater London.
The case study will show how training and development is central to the work of the Forestry Commission and how it benefits the career development of its people. It will particularly highlight the work of Julie McMorran, a civil engineer with the Forestry Commission, for whom training and development has provided the springboard to promotion.
Read more….

Incoming search terms

Sustaining Top Talent : 5 Biggest Mistakes

newuser — Fri, 18 Jun 2010 06:04:24 +0000

Executives have a unique opportunity to boost the motivation and productivity of their top talent without spending lots of money, with today’s stale job market limiting employees’ mobility. But the fact is that when it comes to managing their emerging leaders or high potentials, many companies are missing the mark, reports Roland Smith of The Wall Street Journal.
Here are the five biggest mistakes companies are making with high-potential talent:

Ignoring the view from the pipeline
This is the first big mistake and it fuels the others.
… click here to read ahead

Run the Extra Mile: Sales force reward system

admin — Tue, 15 Jun 2010 14:10:43 +0000

Few areas within management control have gained as much attention as incentives and reward systems. However, in the current media discourse, the focus has been on bonuses for management. In the competitive business environment of today, companies need to enter new markets, win new customers, and continuously improve their retention of current customers, in order to in-crease profitability and shareholder value. The sales force is a vital link between a company and its customers and is therefore the key to business growth and profitability.
Read more…

Designing A Compensation for executives

maddy — Tue, 15 Jun 2010 06:01:38 +0000

There is evidence that compensation levels are linked to firm performance as well as monitoring, in other words, the composition of the board influence compensation.
The Industry firms might pay the CEO for performance. Also, stock ownership influence compensation levels; when the five largest shareholders increase their holdings, CEO compensation levels decrease. We interpret this finding as that monitoring is important and the agency costs can be reduced by higher holdings by institutional investors.
Read more…

Incoming search terms

New Belgium Brewing : An ESOP Case Study

newuser — Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:48:32 +0000

Jeff Lebesch and Kim Jordan founded New Belgium Brewing in 1991. The company, which brews and distributes Fat Tire Amber Ale and five other beers in the western United States, now has over 280 employees. Early on, the company created a broad-based phantom stock program with a twist: all employees are eligible for phantom stock, provided that they are voted into the program by current participants.
In 1999 the company established an ESOP, which now owns 32% of the company. New Belgium uses many ownership culture best practices, including open-book management and short-term incentives based on company performance, but a major piece of the company’s culture comes from something a bit harder to define or duplicate: a story… read ahead

Incoming search terms

IMPORTANCE OF LEADERSHIP IN DOWNSIZING

deeptodip — Sat, 12 Jun 2010 15:56:56 +0000

Downsizing…Right-sizing, lay-offs or workforce adjustment, whatever the current “correct” terminology, the fact remains that it is the most difficult thing that managers will deal with in their careers.
There are two (only two?!) issues regarding downsizing. First, the period of downsizing brings with it incredible anxiety for everyone. Both managers and employees have to “get through” this period where downsizing is announced and individuals are notified. While this is the period of greatest short term stress, it is an acute situation.
The second problem and one of much more long term significance is the issue of those that remain. Somehow managers have to deal with the fall-out from the downsizing process, and move their organizations beyond the grief, the anger and the loss of morale that characterizes these major organizational events. It is those that remain that will determine what happens to the organization. We are going to talk about the long term issues here.

The First Few Weeks
In the first few weeks after downsizing even those who still have jobs will feel a lot of difficult things. Grief, anger, sense of betrayal, and depression are common “normal” reactions. Typically productivity drops as people work through their feelings by talking with each other.
This applies to the leader of the organization. However, the leader has an important role to play in helping employees get past the initial reactions.
During this time, it is important he/she does not pressure employees unduly, either in the areas of increasing productivity, or in expressing feelings about the change. Some people want to talk, others not. Some will work harder and some will not. The leader’s job is to help by gently talking to them, both in group settings and individually about their reactions, and how he/she can help.
Listening is the key here. Asking questions and keeping his/her own comments to a minimum, and not exhorting or pressure people. By showing concern and interest, the leader will be working towards repairing the sense of broken trust that accompanies downsizing.
During this period, the leader needs to take stock of his/her own emotional situation. His/her ability to lead people through the tough times will depend on his/her own physical and emotional health. Talking to colleagues outside the organization is a good idea, or at least, venting the feelings with someone unconnected with the organization. If the leader finds him/herself plagued by sleeplessness, mood swings and depression and guilt, he/she shouldn’t hesitate to take advantage of support services that are available.

Normalizing
The initial shock of downsizing is likely to linger for some time, certainly for more than the two weeks mentioned. Unfortunately, the leader and his/her staff have goals to accomplish, people to serve. At some point there is a need to get on with it, to normalize the situation.
It is difficult for leaders to determine when it is time to start sending the message that “business as usual” must prevail. Too early and one alienates and anger staff…too late and one ends up wallowing. It is best to start normalizing slowly and gently.

The situation in the organization can be helped if the leader starts to address any operational problems that might have been caused by the downsizing. Any shifting in staff will result in new challenges in terms of doing business, and there can be some confusion and chaos regarding how everybody is going to go about doing “business” with a smaller staff complement.
It is important that the chaos be reduced. Normally this will mean clarifying with staff any concerns they have about getting the business done, and problem-solving around the issues. The longer that there is confusion, the more likely there will be permanent effects on organizational health and morale.
During this period, both group problem solving meetings and individual discussions are appropriate and recommended. We should bring ALL staff into the discussion, and making sure everyone is clear what they should be doing.
While the feelings of employees are important during this phase, staffs need to be slowly moved back to getting the job done. By getting clear understandings of the changes, we will create a climate of stability, which is necessary for the “recovery” of people in the organization.

Futuring
The first part of adjusting to downsizing is to address the feelings of those that remain. The second is to focus on dealing with the operational problems stemming from the changes, and the third step deals with the future.
People need a vision of the future, a sense of what they are trying to achieve, and they also need to know that they are part of a goal-oriented team pulling in the same direction. While we have talked above about “getting through”, futuring involves people in trying to create (or confirm) a vision of the organization, and its goals, values, purpose, etc. It is the creation and commitment to these things that will work to revitalize an organization that has been downsized.
The futuring process is usually a group process, and can extend to undertaking strategic planning, re-examination of priorities, operational planning, and review of role and mission. By doing these kinds of things we can promote a sense that the future will bring positive, exciting things. Organizations that have lost staff need to have that sense if they are to rebuild.

Conclusion
Leading staff through downsizing requires the leader to exercise superior judgement and decision-making. It’s a complicated task that involves the leader in recognizing the natural reactions of those that remain in the organization, and determining the right timing for moving the organization from the emotional reactions to a focus on the present and future. While it is difficult, the consequences of mismanaging or under-managing the situation are severe. Both management and staff will suffer if the timing is wrong, or managers deny or avoid dealing with the fall-out from downsizing.
click here to download article.

Incoming search terms

Managing The Maverick Employee

newuser — Sat, 05 Jun 2010 21:15:47 +0000

Workplace is often said to full of professional challenges but it the situation becomes even tougher when we encounter an independent minded person. These personalities seem to march to his own drum, always slightly out of step with the rest of the group. They tend to be independent, and never quite fits in with any one group. The maverick is usually challenging the way things are done, always looking for different ways to get things done, though sometimes these different ways aren’t an improvement … click here to know how to deal with this professional challenge