Performance Coaching for Business Results: Common Traps ... · without effective coaching, they...

www.impactachievement.com

888-248-5553

Introduction ................................................................................................1

1. Performance Coaching for Business Results........................................3

2. The Dependency Cycle:

How Managers Create It and How to Avoid It .....................................11

3. Performance Coaching:

The One-Size-Fits-All Dilemma...........................................................18

4. Performance Coaching Flexibility:

Every Great Manager Has It................................................................23

5. Coaching and Influence.......................................................................25

6. How to Handle Performance Problems:

Tips and Guidance for New Managers................................................28

About Impact Achievement Group

Impact Achievement Group is a training and performance management consulting company that provides assessments, coaching, story-based interactive workshops, and simulations for managers at all levels of organizations worldwide. Impact Achievement Group helps companies dramatically improve management and leadership competency for bottom-line results. Company experts Rick Tate and Julie White Ph.D. are internationally recognized authorities in leadership development, human performance, customer-focused business strategies and workplace communications.

To learn more about how Impact Achievement Group can transform your organization’s performance results, visit www.impactachievement.com.

Contents


888-248-5553

he challenge is clear. The need for managers and supervisors who

can coach employees effectively is greater today than ever before.

Why? Recent surveys have shown that companies list “finding and

keeping quality workers” as their biggest problem. The severe concern of

being hit by a multi-million dollar law suit as a result of poor managerial

behavior – behavior that would have been considered merely annoying

a few years ago – has led to permissive and passive management of

employees. And while it is obvious that doing nothing is not a recipe for

success, managers and supervisors have succumbed to the ineffective

approach of “keep employees happy.”

Managers and supervisors are searching for solutions, and coaching is

one of the critical solutions. The single purpose of coaching is to influence

employee performance results that directly impact the organization’s

business strategy. Coaching is not a skill set that is intended to make

people happy, build morale, or make the boss well-liked – although those

are predictable by-products of effective coaching. The skilled coach

routinely clarifies expectations and standards of performance, teaches

new skills as needed, shows others how to improve, redirects when

necessary to get performance back on track, and uses delegation,

inclusion and autonomy appropriately. There may be no other skill set

as paramount to manager or supervisor success as coaching skills.

Behavior – not intentions

It’s not enough to have good intentions as a coach; managers at all levels

of the organization must execute a coaching process that allows them

to replicate what works, and continually refine what doesn’t. Rick Tate,

Senior Managing Partner of Impact Achievement Group, coined a phrase

years ago made popular in the One Minute Manager book series by Ken

Blanchard: “Feedback is the breakfast of champions.” Ideally, managers

and/or supervisors – as a necessary element of their job – should not only

get trained on how to be effective performance coaches, but should also

have a process where they receive feedback from employees on the

impact of their coaching behavior. Managers and supervisors are never

on the receiving end of their own coaching behavior, so they can never

accurately evaluate their own impact. Only with a feedback system can

the loop be closed – so the manager/supervisor can gain a clear insight

into whether their good intentions are being turned into effective

coaching behavior.

T

Introduction

There may be no other skill set as paramount to manager or supervisor success as coaching skills.

Introduction • 2


888-248-5553

Too important to leave to chance

The purpose of this e-book on performance coaching is to provide insight

into the critical elements that make up an effective coaching process:

Coaching skill training

Assessment of the impact of manager/supervisor coaching

Follow-up reinforcement

Organizations that establish an effective integrated coaching process will

gain a competitive edge in employee performance, leading to sustained

successful business results.

Coaching is a skill that is too important to be left to chance!


888-248-5553

Organizations with excellent cultural support for coaching enjoy

13 percent stronger business results and 39 percent stronger employee

results. —Bersin & Associates ® Research Results November, 2011

Coaching: The Ultimate Skill Set

Coaching is the process that transforms good intentions into

performance—that helps employees reach their potential and turns

capabilities into business results. In many ways, coaching is the most

significant skill set for performance management. In a very real sense,

business results are the sum of a thousand everyday coaching situations

conducted throughout the company.

In business, as with athletics, planning and strategy are necessary; but

without effective coaching, they often remain just that: well-intentioned

plans, not results. Leaving a manager’s or supervisor’s coaching skills

to chance means that business results are put at risk.

We define coaching as “Any interpersonal attempt to influence the

performance of an employee.” Coaching is the process where:

Objectives and expectations are set.

Feedback and recognition is provided.

Problems are dealt with and solved.

Support and encouragement is provided.

Trust and commitment are established.

Work gets done.

Coaching is a purposeful interpersonal communication process designed

to continually improve employee performance. Through the coaching

process, managers/supervisors build a working relationship with their

direct reports. Depending on the coaching skills of managers and

supervisors, relationships with employees will be strengthened (creating

more commitment and discretionary effort on the part of the employee)

or lessened (creating compliance and disengaged employee behavior).

When employees need help but are afraid to ask for it, when they receive

ineffective coaching, or when they get help but feel belittled or demeaned

in the process, the results are always negative. Because coaching affects

people’s self-esteem, it is always for better or worse – there is no neutral

coaching experience.

1. Performance Coaching for Business Results

Leaving a manager’s or supervisor’s coaching skills to chance means that business results are put at risk.

1. Performance Coaching for Business Results • 4


888-248-5553

Effective coaching provides direction, challenge, guidance, support,

encouragement, and even autonomy. At its best, coaching builds both a

rational connection (the understanding of how to do things well) and an

emotional connection (the belief that you care about development and

success) with the employee. In this way effective coaching creates a dual

function – taking care of results and people.

Discretionary Effort Hangs in the Balance

So, what is discretionary effort? It is the effort and commitment to one’s

job that goes above and beyond what is necessary for that person to

continue to hold his or her job.

What level of effort does it take to keep a job? Both anecdotal interviews

and a number of studies have attempted to determine the minimal effort

the “average employee” believes they need to give to keep their job.

It seems that the “average” American employee feels that the effort

a person has to give in order to keep his or her paycheck is about

70 percent of what they feel they could be giving. These “70 percenters” –

as we like to call the disengaged – are costly to a business. Many of them

have simply quit, but neglected to tell anyone. They just stay and draw

pay – giving the bare minimum in return.

Given that employee indifference is the major enemy of customer loyalty,

product knowledge, and overall company productivity, this type of

performance is a major obstacle to achieving business results. The

danger lies in the fact that a 70% effort describes an employee who does

what he or she is told – nothing more, nothing less – and does so without

a bad attitude. This type of performance lies just below the day-in and

day-out notice of everyone but customers and eventual end users of

products. It isn’t bad performance – it’s just not great or even very good

performance. It’s average.

The problem is that the customer loyalty and product quality needle

doesn’t move when employee performance is average. Companies that

suffer average performance are seen as “no worse than anyone else.”

This isn’t an attractive moniker for any brand. Imagine a company logo

that reads, “We’re no worse than anyone else!”

Some people are naturally wired to give their best and help their company

grow. But many people are not totally independent self-starters – they

react or respond to the way that they are managed and coached. The

majority of employees require skilled leaders who challenge, direct, guide,

support, and encourage them day in and day out. To get engaged, high-

performing employees, we must first have engaged leaders. Engaged

leadership is the quality that helps employees see and realize their

The customer loyalty and product quality needle doesn’t move when employee performance is average.



888-248-5553

potential, which increases the odds that they will give their best effort

instead of a “70%” effort that will allow them to just get by.

As a leader, your role is to increase the collective mass of those

employees who give their discretionary effort to the job – give 100%, not

70% – in any work group or business unit. The most significant variable

affecting an employee’s discretionary effort and level of engagement is

their working relationship with their immediate supervisor/manager.

Discretionary effort can’t be bought. A leader or organization must earn

it with effective performance management practices that employees

experience as the norm in the organizational culture.

The Performance Landscape: The Business Case for Employee Engagement

Key Business Results

In the now-famous meta analysis study conducted by the Gallup®

Organization, each of their 12 “engagement” elements were linked to at

least one of four business outcomes – profitability, productivity, retention,

and customer satisfaction1.

10 of the 12 were linked to productivity.

8 of the 12 were linked to profitability.

5 of the 12 were linked to employee retention; however, the

employee’s immediate manager influenced those 5 more than

the rest.

Engaged employees (those answering, “Yes I strongly agree” to

the Gallup 12 engagement questions) worked in businesses where

customer satisfaction was strongest and had 27% less absenteeism

than disengaged employees.

Specific Business Metrics2

Business units with a surplus of disengaged employees suffer 31%

more turnover than those with a critical mass of engaged employees.

Workgroups with an inordinately high number of disengaged workers

lose 51% more of their inventory to “shrink” than do those on the other

end of the spectrum.

1 Gallup Meta Analysis Study on Engagement. (2006)

2 Harter, J.K., Schmidt, F.L., Killham, E.A., and Asplund, J.W. (2006). Q12 meta-

analysis. Omaha, NE: The Gallup Organization

Discretionary effort can’t be bought. A leader or organization must earn it...



888-248-5553

The workgroups whose engagement scores puts them in the bottom

25% of the Gallup database average 62% more accidents than the

workgroups in the top 25%.

When the nearly 1 million teams in the database are split down the

middle, the teams in the more engaged half are more than twice as

likely to succeed than those in the lower half. When the teams are

split into four equally sized groups, teams in the top 25% are three

times as likely to succeed as those in the bottom 25%, averaging 18%

higher productivity and 12% higher profitability.

Employee Issues

74% of employees are either indifferent to their work or actively

disengaged3.

Disengaged workers tend to be significantly less productive, less loyal

to their companies, less satisfied with their personal lives, and more

stressed and insecure about their work than engaged employees4.

Compared to 2007, disengaged employees are 24% more likely to

remain with their current employers. That is, they “quit and stay.” In

addition, over the past four years, the discretionary effort put forth by

these employees has markedly decreased – by 53%5.

Discretionary Effort6

77% of leaders believe their employees are not giving their best effort.

72% of employees admit they aren’t giving their best effort.

The most significant variable that affects an employee’s discretionary

effort and level of engagement is the immediate supervisor/manager7.

Pay, benefits, and other extrinsic elements are important, but when

performance is less than satisfactory, absenteeism and safety issues are

above the norm, customer satisfaction is average, and retention numbers

hurt the business – it is a people management issue.

Performance Based Coaching™

The Performance Based Coaching™ approach is based on three tenets

that have been thoroughly researched as having the most positive impact

on coaching effectiveness:

3 http://govleaders.org/gallup_article_getting_personal.htm.

4 http://gmj.gallup.com/content/28876/Many-Employees-Would-Fire-Their-

Boss.aspx. 5 Corporate Executive Board (CEB) study. (2009)

6 Leadership IQ research (500,000 employees and leaders). (2010)

7 Gallup Meta Analysis Study on Engagement. (2006)

The most significant variable that affects an employee’s discretionary effort and level of engagement is the immediate supervisor/ manager.



888-248-5553

Based on contingency theory.

An emphasis on performance diagnosis skills.

Coaching behaviors based on challenge and support.

Contingency Theory

Researchers have studied coaching and coaching theory for a number

of years now, and a large body of research has been dedicated to

developing theories about effective coaching. One of these theories,

perhaps the most effective and most pragmatic is known as “contingency

theory.” In simple terms, contingency theory suggests that despite what

the “bestsellers” may tell you, there is not one universal “best way” to

coach people – there is no one best coaching style.

Contingency theory asserts that the most effective coaches use a

coaching style that is “contingent” on the situation. In coaching, the

situation is made up of two variables:

Performance results.

The skills of the employee.

Thus, accurately determining these two variables dictates how the

employee should be coached to gain the best outcome. With this type

of approach, the coaching process properly balances the two critical

challenges of effective performance management – concern for results

and concern for people.

Emphasis on Diagnosis Skills

Consider going to the doctor. No treatment is given without an attempt

to accurately determine or diagnose the present health situation. “Vital

signs” are taken prior to prescription. With athletic coaches, observation

and viewing game films provides the accurate diagnosis for coaching

players effectively. This process should apply to performance coaching

in business also – no coaching behaviors until the present performance

“vital signs” are taken.

Over the years, contingency theory research has shown the one variable

that most determines whether coaching will be effective or not is the

accurate diagnosis of specific performance issues and situations. This is

more important than any specific coaching skill or technique used. After

all, if a doctor has a wrong diagnosis, then it doesn’t much matter how

skillfully he or she prescribes the wrong treatment. Thus, in any coaching

approach, the emphasis should be on how to apply skills that are reliable

and can be used to effectively diagnose performance on an ongoing basis

to acquire reliable and replicable diagnostic skills. Performance Based

Coaching™ teaches a quick and practical way of taking employee

The most effective coaches use a coaching style that is “contingent” on the situation.



888-248-5553

performance “vital signs” to ensure the appropriate coaching intervention

will be made. This increases the odds for success and decreases the

odds of failure.

This foundational approach to Performance Based Coaching™ –

accurate performance diagnostic skills – gives managers and supervisors

an effective and efficient process for coaching employees and driving

critical business results. First, identifying the task-specific issue that

requires coaching provides the framework for diagnosing:

The level of Results the employee is currently delivering.

The Ability (skill set) of the employee to perform the task at an

expected level.

The Confidence the employee has to learn and/or to work

independently.

The Commitment – the level of desire – the employee has to do a

good job.

In the Performance Based Coaching approach, the “TRACC” method

helps determine the performance “vital signs” before choosing how

to coach. This is a prerequisite for delivering results and ensuring

employees receive the most effective coaching.

Coaching Behaviors Based on Challenge and Support

The findings of extensive research on leadership behavior and the

relationship of leaders’ behavior and business results provide revealing

data8. Two factors stand out that separate exceptional leaders from

average leaders. Exceptional leaders almost universally use a pattern of

Challenge and Connection.

Challenge is the extent to which a leader pushes his or her people: the

difficulty of assignments, the amount of stretch they ask for, and the skill

development their people acquire in areas where they are struggling or

still developing.

Connection – which we refer to as support and encouragement – is the

depth of the emotional connection a leader builds with his or her people:

openness, sharing, desire for leader feedback (positive or constructive),

belief the leader cares about their success, and the level of trust they

have in the leader.

The implications are clear. Challenge without Connection can be seen as

intimidation. No Challenge and no Connection can be seen as leadership

abdication. And Connection without Challenge can be seen as “soft” and

8 Leadership IQ research (100% leaders) (2010)



888-248-5553

create the belief that the leader doesn’t care enough about others to insist

that they reach their potential.

The results of the research linking these behaviors to business results

were striking. Leaders were assessed in three categories: budget results,

employee turnover, and innovation. The leaders who relied on both

Challenge and Connection were the best performers in all three of these

areas. The top 10% of budget performers demonstrated both of these

leader behaviors, with a slight emphasis on Challenge. The top 10% of

employee turnover performers overwhelming relied on these two leader

behaviors more than the rest, with a slight inclination toward Connection.

And the top 10% of the performers on innovativeness relied heavily on

both of these behaviors.

The results are clear. If a leader pushes people but doesn’t care about

them, they risk failure. However, it is also true that if a leader cares about

people but doesn’t push them to reach their potential, success is at risk.

As difficult as it sometimes is, effective coaches must be able to both

Challenge and Connect.

Effective coaches must rely on coaching styles based on both of these

critical leader behaviors. Employees themselves validate this. When

3,000 random responders were asked what kind of boss they wanted to

work for, 70% chose to work for the leader who demonstrated these two

behavior patterns9. The bottom line is, people don’t want to work for jerks,

and they also don’t want to be coddled all day. Balance is the key –

again, concern for results and concern for people.

In the Performance Based Coaching™ approach, once leaders have

diagnosed the performance “vital signs,” they choose a coaching

style that is representative of appropriate amounts of Directive

Behavior (Challenge) and Collaborative Behavior (Connection) for that

performance situation. Since these are the two patterns of behaviors

that garner the best results and the best working relationship between

employee and manager/supervisor, any coaching attempt should have

these two leader behaviors as the foundation.

Building Trust

Trust is a byproduct of the confidence we have in others. Effective

coaching requires trust. To really trust someone, we have to be confident

that when push comes to shove, we can count on them to:

Do their part.

Have our back.

9 Murphy, Mark. Hundred Percenters. McGraw-Hill, New York. 2010

The bottom line is, people don’t want to work for jerks, and they also don’t want to be coddled all day.



888-248-5553

Do what is right.

Be competent.

Distrust, on the other hand, evolves from suspicion. When we are

suspicious of another’s agenda, motives, competence or track record,

we don’t trust10. When managers and supervisors use the Performance

Based Coaching approach to coaching, employees become confident in

the manager or supervisor’s motives and performance management

competence, significantly reducing the cost of distrust. And by relying on

a process that requires Challenge and Connection, managers and

supervisors continually build trust by:

Developing others’ potential so they may share in success.

Supporting and encouraging others to learn and improve.

Holding others accountable. People thrive in an environment where

they know everyone is expected to be responsible.

As Steven M.R. Covey so aptly stresses, “People don’t trust you because

you don’t get things done. And there’s no place to hide here – either you

produce or you don’t. You may have excuses. You may even have good

reasons. But at the end of the day, if the results aren’t there, neither is the

credibility and neither is the trust. It’s just that simple; it’s just that harsh.”

As we previously stated, coaching is the process that translates potential,

intentions, strategy, and plans into performance and results. Done well,

things get done. Done well, trust is built.

Summary

The art of coaching defines the successful manager. So much time with

employees is spent coaching their development—their ups and downs,

coaching problem performance, coaching confidence issues, and even

coaching high-performance employees— that leaving the acquisition of

effective coaching skills to chance is not an option.

10

Covey, Stephen M.R. The Speed of Trust. Free Press, New York. 2006


888-248-5553

o one consciously attempts to delay productivity, to stifle talent

development, to increase response time for solving problems, or

to thwart the morale and motivation of employees. But we have

all seen organizations where these things happen, and they are a result

of a dependent performance culture. Instead of demonstrating their

own initiative, taking personal responsibility, and maximizing their own

talent potential, employees “delegate up” situations and problems to

the managers above them. Dependency in organizations, with all its

problems, may not be intended, but it is the result of flawed management

behavior and practices.

While most dependent relationships don’t end in tragedy, they do keep

people from living the full, rewarding lives they have the potential to enjoy.

The person in a dependent relationship easily acquires low expectations

of himself, and his performance often begins to reflect this negative,

inner voice. Appropriate management behaviors can develop initiative,

trust, and personal responsibility and play a large part in ensuring

that performance-hindering “dependency DNA” doesn’t take hold in

an organization.

While a dependent performance culture is a major concern for

organizations, so is the art of performance management. While managing

the performance of others can be complex, we can offer some focus

when we look at the process through an economic filter.

The process of people management is an investment in others and, like

any other investment, we hope for good returns. Practically speaking,

supervisors or managers only have two resources they can invest in their

direct reports: the time they spend with them and the influence potential

they have on them. Since time is finite, a manager’s influence can be

enhanced or eroded by the effective use of time.

Delegation can be used to cross train, develop competencies, gain

bench strength, and effectively use the precious work time available.

When supervisors or managers fail to encourage the personal initiative

and responsibility of their direct reports and avoid using delegation, they

lose control over their time, and therefore, lose much of their ability to

influence superior business results.

N

2. The Dependency Cycle: How Managers Create It and How to Avoid It

Practically speaking, supervisors or managers only have two resources they can invest in their direct reports: the time they spend with them and the influence potential they have on them.

2. The Dependency Cycle: How Managers Create It and How to Avoid It • 12


888-248-5553

Developing Personal Initiative and Responsibility

To foster quick and responsive performance within an organization,

along with personal ownership of assignments, the onus of initiative and

responsibility must remain with the appropriate person. But all too often,

the initiative and responsibility for action has escalated one, two, or even

three levels higher in the organizational hierarchy than it needs to be or,

for that matter, should be. The result is a slow-paced performance culture

where employee initiative is rare, responsibility is avoided, and time and

money are wasted as people are quite literally “on hold” – waiting to be

told what next action they should produce.

To combat the phenomenon of initiative and responsibility escalation in

organizations, leaders must do two things: (1) adopt a different mindset

about managing their direct reports; and (2) routinely apply specific skills

as they manage their direct reports.

Let’s take a closer look at how misplaced initiative can hurt organizational

performance. Managers and supervisors must cope with competing

responses from three different demands for their time:

• Boss requirements—those tasks and assignments delegated down

by the boss.

• Organizational requirements—those assignments required by the

organization, such as training or mandatory meetings.

• Personal requirements—the tasks and assignments inherent to an

individual’s job description.

Leveraged time is using these three time requirements effectively to

deliver expected outcomes and results. But here’s the caveat. Often

supervisors and managers take action on tasks that are not part of their

three time requirements and thus compete for the limited resource of

managerial time. This is called non-leveraged time – the time spent

working on tasks, problems, or activities that their employees bring to

them – work that the employees should be taking action on themselves.

Non-leveraged time, which in the long run delivers very little benefit to

the organization, the manager, or the employee, begins the moment a

manager takes the initiative for action away from the employee.

Perhaps the clearest and most vivid understanding of non-leveraged time

comes from the work of William Oncken Jr., who coined the “monkey”

metaphor in his still heavily requested Harvard Business Review article in

1974. His legacy lives on in this time-tested approach to creating initiative

and preventing – in his words – ”upward delegation.”

Often supervisors and managers become prone to taking action on tasks others should be doing—this is called non-leveraged time.



888-248-5553

Paraphrasing Mr. Oncken’s words, here is a typical “leaping monkey”

scenario:

You are on your way to a meeting when you are approached by one of

your employees. You are targeted with the line, “Hey boss, we’ve got a

problem.” As managers are programmed to be the ultimate problem

solvers for their employees (after all, what are bosses for?), you ask for a

quick explanation. After receiving the brief overview, you realize that you

don’t have the time to deal with it at the moment. You dutifully respond by

saying, “Thanks for bringing that to my attention. I can’t deal with it right

now – I will get back to you.” You then go your way and the employee

goes his or her way. The employee no longer has the “monkey” that

arrived on his or her back and you now leave with the “monkey” you

erroneously accepted with your response, “I’ll get back to you!”

Mr. Oncken says, “At the end of a dialogue between two parties, the

person who takes the next action has the monkey.” We can see that

these monkeys cause you to lose control over your time while

simultaneously losing your influence potential – not a good recipe for

effective performance management or talent development.

There are a wide variety of reasons for this transfer of initiative from

employee to manager. Here’s a short list:

Not enough time to coach or teach: The manager, (1) believing he

or she can do it faster or (2) feeling time constrained, steps in and

takes ownership of the action to be done. The result – a guarantee

that they must do so again next time – breeds managerial

dependency down the road.

Done it before/can do it better: The manager most likely has the

skill and experience to do the task well. Additionally, often the task

is enjoyable and can act as a form of “catnip” for the manager. The

result: a guarantee that employees won’t develop the acumen or skill

to perform, again creating dependency on the manager.

Lack of trust: Not trusting the employee to take the right action, or to

solve the problem. The result: not allowing the requisite learning and

development that is fundamental to developing talent and fostering

discretionary effort in the workplace.

Keeping Initiative in its Proper Place

We acknowledge that there are critical times when a manager must step

in and take action or solve a problem in order to avoid a crisis. But, more

often than not, managers and supervisors jump in and take action when,

with a little coaching, the employee could actually handle the problem.

Losing control over your time means losing your influence potential—not an effective recipe for performance management or talent development.



888-248-5553

We offer the following tips for keeping initiative with employees and

cultivating personal responsibility for performance.

Make sure employees:

Bring performance difficulties or problems to you before you find out

about them from another source.

Take the initiative to set up times to “get back to you.”

Collect all relevant information or data for any issue or problem and

use their best efforts to tackle tasks or assignments before bringing

them to you.

Offer possible solutions for any problem they bring to you.

Manage others without usurping their initiative and leave the personal

responsibility to achieve results with them. Let others learn, develop,

grow, and reach their full potential.

The Art of Delegation

Delegation is a managerial practice that, when well done, can allow

employees to learn and grow and also keep initiative for action in the

appropriate place. However, far too many managers either fail to delegate

or do so ineffectively. We encounter many managers who have been

“burned” in the past. They’ve delegated some key task or project, gotten

poor results, and had to step in at the eleventh hour with Herculean

efforts to clean up the mess. As a result, they’ve now essentially stopped

delegating, or only delegate routine tasks.

But the solution is not to stop delegating; it is to become more strategic in

what you delegate. There is considerable research that poor delegation

is the number one reason that managers fail to routinely exceed

expectations. Effective delegation requires the confidence to make

decisions and the skill to manage the process. While not easy, it is a

necessity when you look at all the positive benefits to the organization,

the manager, and the employee.

Effective delegation allows for increased cross-training – developing

multiple skills for the employee and creating more flexibility for the

manager. Delegating challenging work that will prepare employees

for upward mobility is an excellent way to reward good performance.

Delegation can offer deviations from routine work responsibilities, giving

employees both a change and a challenge. And delegating routine tasks

by spreading them around to direct reports can give a manager significant

leverage for carrying out more critical responsibilities and also frees up

managerial time for tasks and functions that only the manager can (or is

required) to do.

The solution is not to stop delegating; it is to become more strategic in what you delegate.



888-248-5553

Managers who effectively delegate make significant contributions to their

organizations by building bench strength, developing better talent, and

providing more flexible and competent responses through cross-training.

Delegation, used properly, also reduces the need for managers to step in

and take initiative away from employees as confidence and trust are built.

While there are many excellent books on delegation practices that can

benefit managers and supervisors, we offer two important tips for

effective delegation:

The Delegation Triangle: A significant obstacle to effective delegation

is the failure to include all three elements of the Delegation Triangle.

Managers often delegate just the responsibility for tasks (1) without

considering the level of authority needed to make things happen; and

(2) without the control over the work process necessary to reach the

desired result.

Without the authority and control to handle the responsibility, employees

can feel “set up” in a no-win situation as they experience difficulties

carrying out the assignment. Trust and confidence can suffer downstream

between both parties.

Delegation is positioned for success when managers assign responsibility

for a job, task, or project with the commensurate authority, and assign

the amount of control over resources to achieve the desired performance

results.

Levels of Delegation Authority: Few managers and supervisors have the luxury of having direct reports who have the necessary skills and confidence to handle every assignment and task. So, we often shy away from delegating for fear of poor outcomes. By thinking about two attributes – ability and confidence – as performance vital signs, managers

Without the authority and control to handle the responsibility, employees can feel “set up” in a no-win situation as they experience difficulties carrying out the assignment.



888-248-5553

and supervisors can still use delegation with a wide variety of employees with good results. Depending on the degree of ability and confidence the employee brings to the delegated responsibility, there needs to be an appropriate level of authority to act.

Level Description Level of Authority

1 Employee has little ability at present

and lacks the confidence to take on

the responsibility.

Advise me before

you act.

2 Employee has moderate ability

and confidence to take on the

responsibility.

Act, but advise me

right away.

3 Employee has excellent ability and

high confidence to take on the

responsibility.

Act on your own—

keeping me in the

loop as needed.

Expectations and the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy

Both research and life experiences have illustrated how managerial

expectations influence the quality of performance and the motivation

others bring to the workplace. Better known as the Pygmalion Effect

in management – or the self-fulfilling prophecy – this means that a

manager’s expectations (positive or negative) strongly influence

the outcome.

When a manager has high expectations of his or her own talent,

combined with high expectations of the employee’s potential, it usually

results in performance that is over and above what the employee herself

thought she could achieve. The research in this area indicates that

these high expectations are not communicated merely with goals and

motivational speeches. They are communicated by how the manager or

supervisor actually treats and manages employees. The most effective

managers use a combination of challenge and support – challenging

employees to reach their potential while simultaneously supporting them

in the process.

Taking the initiative away from employees and failing to use delegation

to develop their skills and talent sends a message that the manager or

supervisor has “low” expectations of those he or she manages. This lack

of trust and confidence creates a self-fulfilling prophecy for the employee,

reinforcing the belief that they can’t and shouldn’t be doing things for

themselves. This process builds a cycle of dependency in the

organization that is not congruent with a high-performance DNA.

Low expectations of others – manifested by failure to delegate and taking initiative away from employees – creates a cycle of dependence in an organization.



888-248-5553

The human capacity is poorly served by managers who have low

expectations about the potential and capability of others, because they

tend to never give anyone else the opportunity to grow and excel – to be

challenged, to try and err and then learn and succeed. The manager who

feels a misguided compulsion to “help” employees by doing their work for

them and solving their problems without letting them work through issues

themselves, unintentionally denies others the opportunities available in

the organization.

Managers and supervisors provide real help when they coach others

instead of doing for them, when they ask questions and teach judgment

rather than simply answering questions, and when they leave initiative

and action to the employee. As the old adage goes, teaching them how to

fish, not giving them a fish, creates self-reliance, interdependency, and

personal fulfillment.

Summary

When we see managers and supervisors routinely caught up in this self-

induced time trap, frantically overworked with poor work/life balance, we

are reminded of the story we heard a few years back. This is the tale

about the manager who continually brings work home. Always pressed

for time, continually juggling priorities, and possessing a high level of

commitment to the organization, this manager uses weekends and

evenings to “catch up.” One evening his young son asks his mother,

“How come Dad is always working late or bringing his work home?”

Mother responds in the traditional supportive manner, “Well, Daddy’s

job is very important and he has to work hard to get everything done.”

Undaunted and still confused the son then asks, “Well then, why don’t

they just put Dad into a slower group?”

The ultimate effect on managers and supervisors is negative when they

(1) take on tasks and solve problems that employees should be handling

themselves – effectively, taking their initiative away; and (2) don’t build

bench strength through routine delegation. These managers experience

an overwhelming erosion of their time and influence that hurts their

personal productivity by creating a “dependency culture.” Organizations

don’t meet their goals when employees don’t learn, grow, and develop

bench strength and competency building.

As the old adage goes, teaching them how to fish, not giving them a fish, creates self- reliance, interdependency, and personal fulfillment.


888-248-5553

n any organization, managers and supervisors are expected to coach

their employees. While this is a critical component of managing

performance, we all know there are successful and unsuccessful

coaches. In the absence of specific training, many people assume that

good coaching equates to good communication skills. However, good

coaching begins with accurately diagnosing the employee’s specific

performance levels and then choosing an appropriate coaching style for

that situation. Only then do good communication skills come into play.

Few managers are inherently excellent, adaptable coaches; coaching is

a learned, and teachable, set of skills.

The absence of effective coaching – whether it stems from lack of

training or a reliance on personal coaching preferences – results in

under-management. Thus, a large body of research has been dedicated

to developing theories of effective coaching. One of these theories –

perhaps the one that has the most efficacy and is most pragmatic –

is known as “contingency theory.”

Contingency theory, as it relates to performance coaching, best

addresses the age-old management paradox of balancing a manager’s

concern for task – getting results – and people – leading people

respectfully and effectively. Contingency theory advocates that there is

no universal “should” – that is, there is no one best coaching style. Fritz

Perls, the father of Gestalt Therapy, articulated contingency theory best

when he stated that there is only one “should” that matters: context.

He writes,

“There is only one thing that should control: the situation. If you

understand the situation you are in and let the situation you are in control

your actions, then you learn to cope with life.”

Contingency theory is the basis of Performance Based Coaching™ –

a contingency coaching model created by Rick Tate and Dr. Julie

White, senior managing partners at Impact Achievement Group, Inc.

The foundation of this coaching approach is an effective method for

diagnosing the performance “vital signs” of employees. This model

suggests “diagnosis” – assessing the “task-specific” current performance

of an employee – prior to “prescription” – the choice of a coaching style

by the manager or supervisor. Based on the diagnosis of the task-specific

performance level of the employee, the manager then chooses a

coaching style that provides the amounts of structure, direction, teaching,

I

3. Performance Coaching: The One-Size-Fits-All Dilemma

Contingency Theory: Suggests that there is no universal “should” – no one best coaching style.

3. Performance Coaching: The One-Size-Fits-All Dilemma • 19


888-248-5553

involvement, joint problem solving, or autonomy that the diagnosed

performance level requires.

A recent study conducted by Impact Achievement Group Inc. in

partnership with HRmarketer shows evidence that many managers and

supervisors:

Lack effective diagnostic skills for determining the coaching needs

of employees;

Lack flexibility in their choice of coaching style with employees; and

Fail to provide the appropriate amount of direction, clarity, and

structure for employees.

For the purposes of this survey, a score of 1 to 5.9 or “No impact” means

there is no evidence that managers and supervisors are being effective. A

score of 6.0 to 7.9 represents “Inconsistent impact” – that the predictable

effectiveness is moderate at best. And a score of 8 to 10 represents

“Consistent impact” – it is highly predictable that the managers or

supervisors are consistently effective in their coaching practices.

These scores will correlate in the pie charts to follow with “Rarely,”

“Sometimes” and “Consistently,” respectively.

The ultimate purpose of coaching in an organization is to engage

employees and capture their engagement as it relates to their job – that

is, to gain their discretionary performance. Engaged, talented employees

are prime drivers of overall productivity.

Where under-management exists, these drivers suffer – and so do

desired retention rates. Consistently effective coaching is vital to an

organization’s bottom line. As this study’s results will demonstrate, that

means many companies are in real trouble.

When asked how well managers and supervisors accurately assess

employee performance issues to determine the right type of corrective

action and/or coaching that is necessary, we find that 61% of managers

and supervisors fail to receive a passing grade and that only 8% are

considered excellent.

When asked how effective managers and supervisors are at adapting

their coaching style to meet the variety of performance situations they

must deal with, we find that 78% of managers and supervisors fail to

receive a passing grade and that only 8% are excellent at adapting their

coaching style.

Over 60% of managers and supervisors receive failing grades for effective performance diagnosis and coaching style adaptability.



888-248-5553

When asked how effective managers and supervisors are at providing the necessary direction, guidance, teaching, and structure for their direct reports who are new to the job or who take on new responsibilities, we find that 57% of managers and supervisors fail to receive a passing grade and that only 9% are excellent at ensuring necessary direction.

When asked whether managers and supervisors, when providing

autonomy and delegating decision-making authority to employees, ensure

this is done with clear expectations, clear parameters of authority, and

necessary guidance, we find that 63% of managers and supervisors fail

to receive a passing grade and that only 5% are excellent at managing

delegation and autonomy effectively.

When asked how well managers and supervisors intervene in a timely

and effective manner when a direct report’s performance is not meeting

acceptable standards or an individual’s performance has dropped below

past levels, we find that 63% of managers and supervisors fail to receive

a passing grade and that only 12% are excellent at effectively correcting

performance in a timely manner.

These numbers should cause great concern. The evidence is clear that

to a large degree, under-management is present in the workplace. This

leads to less than desirable employee performance, wasted time using

inappropriate coaching styles, “Groundhog Day” coaching (the same

discussions conducted over and over again), tolerance for poor and

marginal performance, ineffective use of the best employees, and poor

manager/employee relationships. These all contribute to less-than-

optimal business results – results that could be much better with effective

coaching on the part of managers and supervisors.

More often than not, managers and supervisors rely on their comfort

zone – their individually preferred style – when coaching and addressing

employee performance. This reliance results in the data we found in our

survey – which to a large degree matches the anecdotal evidence we

have gathered over the last several years. To counteract this trend toward

under-management, managers and supervisors need to develop effective

performance diagnostic skills, choose a wider variety of possible coaching

interventions, and ensure there is appropriate structure, direction, and

clarity provided in an effective cadence of performance management.

One-size-fits-all solutions – like one-size-fits-all hats and t-shirts – fit no

one well, and most people poorly. This axiom applies to coaching as well.

The manager or supervisor’s preferred (comfort zone) coaching style will

not meet the needs of the wide variety of performance situations he or

she will face. Performance situational adaptability, which depends on the

context of the situation, is a key factor for driving excellent business

results.

Consistently Sometimes Rarely



888-248-5553

Selected Comments

In order to provide greater context and insight into the current state of

management, we have selected representative prose comments from

each of the survey questions.

Question 1

Our managers and supervisors accurately assess employee performance

issues to determine the right type of corrective action and/or coaching

that is necessary.

Comments:

Our managers avoid performance issues.

Some better than others. Frequently misdiagnose root cause of

performance issues.

They can identify the problems but are not good at following through

with the employee.

Not sure that all of the managers have the skills or tools to adequately

assess these issues.

My organization is still on the management buddy system.

Question 2

Our managers and supervisors are effective at adapting their coaching

style to meet the variety of performance situations they must deal with.

Comments:

Our managers try the “one size fits all” coaching style.

Rarely does a manager adapt their style to meet the situation or the

employee’s personality.

I have not seen any adaptation of management styles in the nearly

nine years I have been here.

Nobody has been taught how to adapt their coaching style.

There is plenty of room for improvement here. Most adhere to their

preferred style and are not flexible.

Question 3

Our managers and supervisors are effective at providing the necessary

direction, guidance, teaching, and structure for their direct reports who

are new to the job or who take on new responsibilities.

Comments:

Too often they leave this to orientation or delegate the training to a

subordinate manager or employee, and then fail to follow up.



888-248-5553

Most direction and guidance appears to resemble something between

mind-reading and tribal knowledge.

Standardized orientations help but there is a lot to communicate and

often the managers forget.

I think due to significant time constraints and budget challenges, our

supervisors are often over-taxed, and accordingly don’t often have the

requisite time to bring on employees with the best training/guidance

possible.

Question 4

When providing autonomy and delegating decision-making authority to

employees, our managers and supervisors ensure this is done with clear

expectations, clear parameters of authority, and necessary guidance.

Comments:

Too often they micromanage or fail to follow up properly on

delegation. Need delegation training!

I think supervisors are good at giving autonomy and delegating... until

an employee messes up. To me this speaks to unclear

expectations.... but leads to the need for increased guidance.

If autonomy is provided it is because the manager has no clue about

the goals for a project. Delegation is a technique for deflecting blame

– not getting the job done.

Question 5

Our managers and supervisors intervene in a timely and effective manner

when a direct report’s performance is not meeting acceptable standards

or an individual’s performance has dropped below past levels.

Comments:

I think supervisors intervene eventually when pushed up against the

wall....and it doesn’t always appear to be from a coaching perspective,

but from a more punitive one, unfortunately.

“Timely” yes, “effective” – maybe.

If they do intervene, it is because a problem has reached

Armageddon proportions. If the world isn’t coming to an end,

managers will ignore problems.

They often delay intervening or aren’t direct enough when they do

intervene. They don’t often address underlying causes and tend to

intervene on unvalidated inferences.


888-248-5553

ffective performance coaching is a critical managerial skill. A

leader needs to clearly understand what his or her direct reports

are asked to do, and help give their team the confidence that they

can accomplish those tasks and responsibilities. In order to do this, the

manager must accurately diagnose the employee's performance needs

and then adopt a complimentary coaching style that meets those needs.

Managers who can’t be flexible and adaptable in their coaching style can't

hope to meet the variety of performance situations that come their way.

Identifying Performance Needs

First, the manager needs to break the employee’s performance down

into specific tasks – effective coaching requires this step. Once the

performance issue is identified in task-specific terms, the second critical

step in effective coaching is diagnosing the employee’s performance

level. An employee’s performance level can be broken down into:

Results: Performance results as they relate to acceptable standards

for anyone in that specific job function. Are the employee’s

performance results well below standard, below standard, at or

slightly above standard, or consistently well above standard?

Ability: Does the employee have the skill to accomplish the task at

the acceptable standard? Could he or she do it if they had to? Often

managers will confuse enthusiasm, potential or capability with ability.

Ability refers to current performance – not the ability to learn to

perform. If the performance issue is a true ability problem, then

anything other than training will not suffice – and even cause more

difficulties.

Attitude: The combination of the employee’s confidence (to learn

and/or work independently) that they can accomplish the required

performance and the employee’s commitment (desire) to accomplish

the required performance. For a manager, an employee suffering from

a lack of confidence and one who is just not committed to the job

can look the same: they can both lack initiative, seem hesitant and

wait to be told what to do. Yet, determining the difference between

confidence and commitment issues is critical in determining the right

coaching style.

E

4. Performance Coaching Flexibility: Every Great Manager Has It

"It does very little good to try to “motivate” an employee in an effort to influence good performance when they don't have the ability."

—Dr. Julie White, People Leave Managers – Not Organizations

4. Performance Coaching Flexibility: Every Great Manager Has It • 24


888-248-5553

“I’m only one boss away from another job.”

—Management training participant

Coaching Styles

Once a manager has diagnosed the results, ability, and attitude of their

direct report, four performance levels are possible. Each level has an

appropriate corresponding coaching style.

Performance Level 1: Performance results are below acceptable

standard – employee might or might not have the ability and lacks

commitment and/or confidence for the task. Coaching Style: Structure.

This style provides high amounts of structure, teaching and direction

and little collaboration and autonomy.

Performance Level 2: Performance results that are below acceptable

standard – employee might or might not have the ability – but has

commitment for the task and the confidence to learn and perform.

Coaching Style: Structured Involvement. This style provides a high

amount of structure and direction and high amounts of involvement

and participation – but not autonomy.

Performance Level 3: Performance results at or above the

acceptable standard – employee has the ability to perform the task

but lacks either commitment for the task or confidence to do the task

independently – or both. Coaching Style: Involved Autonomy. This

style provides low amounts of structure and direction and high

amounts of involvement, and some autonomy.

Performance Level 4: Sustained superior performance for the task –

possesses the ability to perform – and has both commitment for the

task and a high level of self-confidence. Coaching Style: Autonomy.

This style provides very low structure and direction, moderate

involvement, and high autonomy.

Conclusion

Over the past several years, there has been a common trend of

minimizing or avoiding management or supervisor behavior that is

directive in nature. However, for some tasks, employees may need

teaching, training and structure, and the correct use of directive types of

behavior is not only helpful but necessary. That is why it is important for

managers to be able to accurately diagnose performance needs and then

use the appropriate coaching style, rather than coach from their own

“comfort zone” or preference.


888-248-5553

he two key resources supervisors and managers have for

managing the performance of others is their time and their

influence. This article will discuss influence – the ability to

effectively motivate employees through the appropriate use of

social power.

Social power is a person’s influence potential. It is the resource that

enables a person to induce compliance or gain commitment from others.

Appropriate use of social power by managers and supervisors establishes

their character, integrity, and credibility. Without using social power

appropriately, managers and supervisors can’t manage performance

effectively.

The skill set of coaching is dependent on the effective use of influence –

that is, social power. The degree of influence potential a manager

or supervisor has defines the probability that one’s coaching will be

successful. The two sources of social power available to any manager

or supervisor are position power and personal power.

Position Power

Position power is inherent in the title or position a manager or supervisor

holds in the organization. It is power that is given to the leader by the

organization. This power comes from the use of performance appraisals,

formal rewards, discipline, accountability processes, job assignment,

promotions or recommendations for promotions, and merit increases. The

three elements of position power are: reward power, discipline power, and

legitimate power.

Reward power is the ability to deliver positive consequences and remove

negative consequences in response to another’s behavior. Reward power

includes the ability to promote, provide formal recognition, influence

financial rewards, and assign duties.

Discipline power is the ability to mete out negative consequences

and discipline. Discipline power includes invoking financial sanctions,

demotions, making assignments, holding people accountable for

performance, and recommending disciplinary procedures.

Legitimate power is given to the manager or supervisor by the nature of

his/her position in the organization. It confers the authority on the leader

T

5. Coaching and Influence

Appropriate use of social power by managers and supervisors establishes their character, integrity, and credibility.

5. Coaching and Influence • 26


888-248-5553

to do things such as set standards, establish goals and objectives, and

provide performance feedback.

Position power is a necessary influence when managing performance.

However, over-reliance on position power at the expense of personal

power gains only compliance. That said, without having or using position

power wisely, accountability for performance is lost – creating an

environment where poor performers work the system and high performers

become frustrated and look for other opportunities. Coaching without

position power truly handicaps managers and supervisors.

Personal Power

Personal power resides in the leader – his/her personal qualities. It is

power given to the leader by others as a result of confidence in and

respect for the leader. This power comes from establishing integrity,

truthfulness, a sense of fair play, character, likeability, competence,

expertise, and the use of information. Effective use of personal power

results in gaining commitment from employees. If a manager or

supervisor lacks personal power, his/her credibility and integrity are

hindered – as is the ability to teach and coach. The three elements of

personal power are: expert power, character power, and information

power.

Expert power is based on the degree to which a person displays special

or superior knowledge or skill as it relates to specific areas of expertise

and to specific goals or objectives.

Character power comes from the respect, integrity, and personality

characteristics that others find admirable in a person. Character power is

based on characteristics of honesty, fairness, rapport, acknowledgement

and character.

Information power relates to having information or access to information

that others deem valuable. This power base is leveraged on two

variables: the degree to which the valued information is not available

anywhere else and the means by which a person doles out information.

Summary

Power is not a dirty word when it comes to management. It is a necessary

skill that must be developed and sustained. If a manager or supervisor

is able to use his/her position and personal power effectively, the new

manager will increase his/her influence potential over the performance

of others, thereby gaining more respect, credibility and power within the

organization.

Effective use of personal power results in gaining commitment from employees.

5. Coaching and Influence • 27


888-248-5553

The use of all six sources of influence is an important element in

effectively coaching employees. At its basic practice, coaching is the

ability to influence the performance of others. Knowing which influence

source to call upon when coaching various situations enables the

manager or supervisor to be more successful.


888-248-5553

olding employees accountable creates consistent clarity for

performance expectations – and is an important element of a

motivating work environment. For managers, the decision to either

address or ignore performance problems is a career-defining moment. If

poor performance is tolerated, employees learn that:

It’s okay for people to do less than their best.

It’s okay for people to fall short of expectations if they have an excuse.

It’s okay for people not to do what they said they would do.

Under-management of consequences is a fatal trap in which a supervisor

or manager finds him or herself in a cycle of limitations, decreasing the

quality of work life. However, performance problems that are handled

properly can lead to tremendous management success.

Confronting Poor Performance

The DESC Intervention Model can help managers balance the

paradoxical nature of holding individuals accountable for performance

while simultaneously maintaining positive relationships – balancing task

issues and people issues.

When a manager needs to address a performance problem or situation

by asking an employee to change behavior in some way, the employee

is usually not happy to hear the negative information and can easily

become defensive. Using the DESC Intervention Model (describe the

specific situation (D), clarify the effect of the situation (E), state specific

future expectations (S) and communicate consequences (C)) focuses

performance problem discussions on the behavior and performance

standards and avoids judgments about the person.

Step 1: Describe

Knowing that people often react to uncomfortable situations by becoming

defensive or angry, the manager needs to first get the other party to

agree to the performance facts.

Specifically state the performance facts – the gap between what is

expected and the employee’s behavior and performance results.

Keep it manageable in scope – stick to the current performance issue

and don’t bring past issues into the conversation.

Avoid commenting on their motive, intent, or personal characteristics.

H

“Productive people are happy people: learning, development, achievement, and success pave the path to high morale.”

—Rick Tate, Senior Managing Partner

Impact Achievement Group

6. How to Handle Performance Problems: Tips and Guidance for New Managers

6. How to Handle Performance Problems: Tips and Guidance for New Managers • 29


888-248-5553

Gain agreement from the employee on the performance facts – the

gap between actual and desired performance – before moving on with

the discussion.

It is natural to want to explain or justify poor performance, but if

the employee attempts to talk about other issues or reasons for the

performance gap, avoid that discussion until there is agreement that the

performance in question is unacceptable.

Step 2: Effect

It is important to do some homework before having a discussion

regarding the impact of present performance. Identifying how the

performance problem affects customers, team members, cost, quality

and/or other departments is critical to addressing the “So what?”

question that gives performance problem discussions legitimacy. It gives

performance feedback the credibility and importance that doesn’t get

delivered when the “impact” of poor performance is absent. Again,

keep it:

Specific – the measureable impact

Legitimate – show the clear connection between performance

and impact

Succinct – as concise as possible

Step 3: State

In the “State” stage of the DESC model, the manager needs to deliver

clear future performance expectations using “I” statements. Avoid

disguised “I” statements that ascribe motive, intent, or personal

characteristics. For example, a good “I” statement is: “The production

group is behind their schedule because they are not receiving the quality

data they need every day. I need you to ensure that you get the quality

data in before 3 p.m. every day.” A bad “I” statement is: “I feel that you

lack the initiative necessary for this job – you need to do the job the right

way so others can rely on you.”

An effective method for delivering “I” statements is:

State the impact of the present problem.

Clearly communicate feelings – when appropriate.

State expectations.

Make it crystal clear what is expected in the future and, if necessary,

provide a timeline for performance improvement.

It is always helpful if the action steps for correcting the situation come out

of the employee’s mouth – not the manager’s or supervisor’s. This last

It is important to do some homework before having a discussion regarding the impact of present performance.

6. How to Handle Performance Problems: Tips and Guidance for New Managers • 30


888-248-5553

step makes it more likely that the employee is committed to changing

their behavior.

Step 4: Consequences

Clearly spelled-out consequences are a necessary part of the process.

Ensure that the employee understands his or her responsibility for

improvement efforts and clearly explain the consequences for failure

to improve or change performance and what the consequences will be

for positive improvement or change. One of three things will result from

performance problem conversations: The performance will either improve,

remain the same, or deteriorate.

Your job as a manager is to increase the odds that the performance

will improve. If it doesn’t, following up on the consequences is a critical

management responsibility. Using idle threats or not following through

with consequences will define the supervisor and manager in the rest of

the team’s eyes.

Through appropriate consequences, managers can either build or erode

their power – their ability to influence their group.

Key Takeaways

Choosing to either ignore or address a performance problem is a

watershed moment in a manager’s career. Ignoring the performance

problem creates a poorly performing culture. However, managers

who successfully navigate the challenges of dealing with unacceptable

performance create a culture where good performance is honored while

at the same time increasing their respect, credibility and influence.

Managers can use the DESC Intervention Model to balance task issues

and people issues:

DESCRIBE the specific situation (D)

Clarify the EFFECT of the situation (E)

STATE specific future expectations (S)

COMMUNICATE consequences (C)

Your job as a manager is to increase the odds that the performance will improve.

Date post:	04-Aug-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Performance Coaching for Business Results: Common Traps ... · without effective coaching, they...

Documents