{"id":1132,"date":"2016-12-30T23:20:01","date_gmt":"2016-12-31T07:20:01","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/b-spoke.net\/?p=1132"},"modified":"2026-06-29T22:00:30","modified_gmt":"2026-06-29T22:00:30","slug":"balanced-environment","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thirdactmedia.com\/b-spoke\/2016\/12\/30\/balanced-environment\/","title":{"rendered":"Seeking Balance with ‘People Problems’"},"content":{"rendered":"

Part Three of Three<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

A Six Minute Read<\/h6>\n

It is easy to treat “people problems” as disciplinary issues, chalking up the cause of the problem to the employees \"problems\"<\/a> themselves, and their motivations. Sometimes there are indeed bad actors, but strong leaders make sure they set their team up for success.<\/p>\n

Taking an honest look at what expectations have been set, and communicated, can bring clarity to such concerns. If there are gray areas \u2013 or even full gaps \u2013 in expectations, employees will likely run into trouble. Previously, I outlined some ways to create that clarity<\/a> to avoid problems in the future.<\/p>\n

Years ago, in bureaucratic, command-and-control environments, simply telling staff what to do would be enough to get results; indeed, when performance lagged, the root cause could often be tied directly to an employee’s discipline. Those days are gone, so it becomes more important to understand what other forces, besides \u00a0internal “motivation”,\u00a0 lead to success or failure in the workplace.<\/p>\n

Diagnosing the Environment \u2013 And How It Reacts<\/h4>\n

An adaptation of Newton’s Third Law applies here \u2013 for every action an employee takes, there will be a reaction. What that reaction is \u2013 how those forces impact employees – drives their behavior.<\/p>\n

Rick was a desk clerk at a mammoth convention center hotel. On the first day of a big show \u2013 which was usually weekly \u2013 there could easily be over 50 people in line to check in. It was really stressful! By the time they got to the front of the line, guests would be angry.<\/h3>\n

John, the desk manager, knew he had a problem with Rick. The new guy, Peter, would greet guests at his station, get them smiling and walking to the elevators with their key in less than a minute; Rick could take four or five minutes and the guests usually didn\u2019t look happy when they walked away.<\/h3>\n

The problems would start when Rick tried to assign guests\u2019 rooms (it seemed they all wanted nonsmoking rooms with king beds and nice views!) If he couldn\u2019t find the right one, either he would call John over to help him calm the guest down, or the guest would get angry and ask to see the manager. Either way, Rick felt a cloud of incompetence hovering.<\/h3>\n

John tried to solve the \u201cRick Problem\u201d with additional training \u2013 in both customer service and computer skills. Rick felt he was technically capable, he just couldn\u2019t churn through guests the way Peter did. His discipline file was getting thick. He loved hospitality but wondered if maybe he wasn\u2019t cut out for it.<\/h3>\n

Even though it was embarrassing, he sat down with Peter to ask for advice. How did he move the lines so quickly?<\/h3>\n

\u00a0\u201cI joke with them a little about the line, tell them I have a lovely room for them, and put them in the very first room the computer assigns,\u201d Peter said.<\/h3>\n

\u201cBut the computer assigns the worst rooms first!\u201d Rick reminded him. Meaning, lower floors, smaller rooms, twin beds, and ashtrays would be assigned before nonsmoking kings overlooking downtown. It was a remnant of how the inventory was coded in pre-computer guest registers. \u201cYou\u2019re almost certainly putting them in a room they don\u2019t want!\u201d<\/h3>\n

\u201cYes, but I\u2019m getting them out of the line,\u201d Peter replied. \u201cIf they don\u2019t like the room, \"logiclonglines\"they can either come back down and get at the end of the line \u2013 which they won\u2019t do \u2013 or they\u2019ll call the manager and complain. Then it\u2019s John\u2019s problem. And I can\u2019t get in trouble, because I actually didn\u2019t do anything wrong.\u201d<\/h3>\n

\u201cIs that good service? Putting a customer in a room they won\u2019t want?\u201d<\/h3>\n

\u201cHow is it better service to make them wait, and still put them in a room they don\u2019t want? Besides, I<\/u> never get called on the carpet for being too slow\u2026\u201d<\/h3>\n

Although he was uncomfortable with it, Rick decided to adopt Peter\u2019s \u201crack \u2018em, stack \u2018em, and pack \u2018em\u201d approach. He was able to move the line more quickly, and spent less time in the manager\u2019s office. He knew when the monthly guest satisfaction reports arrived that overall complaints were skyrocketing, but he also knew that ugly words on the occasional fax paled in comparison to being shouted at daily.<\/h3>\n

There were, in fact, several behind-the-scenes factors that contribute to this problem, but the manager feels he\u2019s hit on the right cause: Slow employees, who don\u2019t understand \u201cthe system\u201d. After all, Peter seems to get it. John has set the same expectations for Peter and for Rick, and he has confirmed that Rick understands them. Clearly, Rick is the problem.<\/p>\n

Only he\u2019s not.<\/p>\n

When discussing human error, John Lauber of the US National Transportation Safety Board reminds us that \u201cperformance takes place in a context.\u201d To understand why people behave the way they do, it is important to understand that context.<\/p>\n

Reviewing a performance environment forces us to examine how that environment responds to individuals. Does it encourage them or discourage them from repeating themselves?<\/p>\n

In the above example, Rick is actually discouraged<\/em> from doing the right thing. If he tries to satisfy his guest:<\/p>\n