Delivering Bad News Tactfully and Effectively

 Published assignment for COM480 – Communication Studies Capstone - Instructor Larry Sexton

September 24, 2012 - Ashford University

Forbes.com

DELIVERING BAD NEWS TACTFULLY AND EFFECTIVELY

Almost every manager will admit that the least favorite part of their job is disciplining employees.  Not only for the simple fact that it is not easy, but, most managers have not had sufficient training in this area in order to handle difficult discussions appropriately and effectively.  Managers may simply hope that the Human Resources department will handle those situations for them when they arise.  Unfortunately, that luxury is not often afforded to managers whose responsibilities include having a team of employees.  It is the expectation of most organizations that department heads tackle adverse situations that occur among their designated staff.  In the case study presented for this assignment, I will discuss how I would approach a difficult conversation with tact and effectiveness.

Although preparation involved in strategic positioning for an organization is reserved for anticipating conflict in high profile and public situations, I would approach a potentially uncomfortable conversation with an employee in much the same way because it still reduces risks for the organization (Cameron, 2008).   To accomplish this, the first step I would take upon learning about complaints about an employee’s performance and confrontational behavior would be to gather as much information available documenting or supporting the claims of misconduct.  I would review past performance evaluations to see if there is a pattern that has been noted or if it is in stark contrast to how the employee has conducted themselves in the past.  Once I felt I had gathered enough information, I would set a meeting with the employee in an environment that is neutral, like a conference room, in order to minimize interruptions during our discussion.  If I were to conduct the meeting in my office, other employees might walk in or a ringing phone could disrupt the conversation at a critical moment.  The employee may also appreciate the undivided attention especially considering the topic is so personal.

I would start by asking the employee casually how he or she feels the job is going.  It could be just the question an employee has been hoping to be asked by their manager and the floodgates of conversation could be wide open at that point.  If not and the employee responds with a quick and closed response, like, ‘fine’ then that might reveal to me that this employee is aware of the purpose of the meeting and wants to ‘get on with it’.  If that’s the case, I would continue to ask what his or her perception is of the rapport and camaraderie around the office with other colleagues.  If after asking the employee if all is going well with the job and with other employees there is still no substantial response, I would give the employee one last opportunity to provide their own impressions of the workplace before beginning to explain the purpose of the meeting.  I would encourage the employee to speak openly.  I would explain that the meeting would be the best opportunity to explain his or her perceptions, positively or negatively, and that I would listen for as long as I needed to for understanding of potential issues within the department or organization.  At this point, I would expect the employee to have the floor and speak freely about his or her impressions of the work environment.

If the employee is unfamiliar with the reason for the complaints, I would begin asking about the situations that are the basis for the complaints and still allow the employee to elaborate or tell his or her side of the story.  The first reaction I would expect from the employee would be defensiveness and confusion if it is unwarranted.  If this employee has a reputation for creating conflict, I would imagine that he or she may begin attacking the integrity and work of the other employees doing the same work.  Instead of allowing the employee to criticize others, I would ask him or her to provide examples of how his or her work compares on a level of productivity to others in the office.  I would want the discussion to remain professional and focused on output instead of reactive criticism.

After giving the employee ample opportunity to talk about each situation, I would reinforce the importance of cooperation and collaboration in a professional environment.  I would remind the employee of any ethical practice standards that apply to as well as protect him or her from others who might behave in a manner that is substandard at the office.  With a professional pool that exists in this scenario, it isn’t difficult to refer that employee to standards applying to principles, competence, confidentiality, integrity, credibility and resolutions of ethical conflict similar to what can be found with the IMA (www.imanet.org).  If there are any past concerns documented in the evaluations, I would also take this opportunity to discuss that an immediate improvement will need to begin and that there will be status meetings in one month, 3 months and 6 months to gauge the employee’s progress.  If the employee’s situation hinged on the effects of something personal, I believe the same time frame would be appropriate to ensure that the employee is making personal as well as professional improvements.

 “Actual conflicts do not follow a linear path” so one cannot rely on one single and perfect technique to resolve them (Brahm, 2003).  However, there are five basic conflict episodes that scholar Louis Pondy says helps us visualize conflict as a process and analyze specific conflicts can provide useful understanding when assessing the stages of conflict: latent conflict, perceived conflict, felt conflict, manifest conflict and conflict aftermath (Shockley-Zalabak, 2009).  Latent or underlying conditions this employee might be experiencing from the organization or individual relationships could be personal or professional.  The perceived conflict could prove to be completely baseless and just be misunderstood actions or comments.  This alone could improve the employee’s awareness of misconstrued comments and how their comments have been the perceived or felt conflict which impacted his or her colleagues.  The manifest conflict, or actual conflict, that was detrimental to productivity and interactions with others is what is preventing further productive and collaborative efforts in the department.  Finally, the conflict aftermath and how to recover from all of these conditions would have to be addressed with the employee but would the expectation to resolve the conflict would rest heavily on the future actions of the employee.  These stages are seen as influencing one another, and the total interaction determines whether the conflict is productive or counterproductive (Shockley-Zalabak, 2009).

References

Brahm, E., 2003.  Conflict stages.  Beyond Intractability.  Eds. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess.

Conflict Information Consortium.  University of Colorado, Boulder.  http://www.beyondintractability.org/bi-essay/conflict-stages

Cameron, Wilcox, Reber and Shin, 2008. Public Relations Today: Managing Competition and

            Conflict. Pearson Learning Solutions.

IMA Statement of Ethical Professional Practice, N.D.  The Association for Accountants and

Financial Professional in Business. http://vizedhtmlcontent.next.ecollege.com/pub/content/e00df6ce-0c14-4e71-88e8-bdb52240eca6/Statement_of_Ethics_web.pdf

Shockley-Zalabak, 2009.  Fundamentals of Organizational Communication: Knowledge,

            Sensitivity, Skills, Values, 7th Edition. Pearson Learning Solutions.