Schellenberg shook his finger at him:
— A small lie gives rise to a big mistrust, Stirlitz.
«Seventeen Moments of Spring», Y. Semenov
— The count ordered to appoint an official of the office, Sergeyev, to this place …
— What kind of Sergeyev is this? exclaimed the countess. “Is it not the one who was involved in this dirty business last year?” He stole some fur coat or something like that…
“You are mistaken, Countess; Sergeev did not steal anything, but on the contrary: they stole his fur coat.
“Well, it doesn’t matter at all whether he stole or someone stole from him … The main thing is that he was involved in a nasty business, une affaire de vol, and therefore it is very strange to appoint him to such a prominent position … However, I forgot that in In our ministry, people like Sergeev are now more successful than people in our society.
«The Unfinished Tale» (1888), A. Apukhtin
In this article, we have analyzed complex negotiations with a subordinate, and I briefly touched on a special case when there is no direct evidence of opposition from the subordinate.
At trainings, participants often ask me: “But what to do when I know for sure, damn it, I feel that a subordinate is harming, but there is no evidence?”
Have you ever had this?
There is such a thing as image person. Say, the image of a scoundrel. We personally did not experience meanness on the part of a person, but “this is how they talk about him.”
The image may be «Empty» (if a less authoritative one speaks of a more authoritative one), the image can be «solid» (if more authoritative — well, you understand, right?).
To resolve the above situation, I propose the following algorithm. Once again I will indicate that we are talking about situations where you are clearly sure that there is opposition, but there is no evidence.
So, you call the slave, and the following monologue occurs:
- “Ivan, for the last month I have had questions about interacting with you. I have one gets the impressionthat you oppose my instructions.
- — Ivan, I will say this, I have no direct evidence. Wherein in my eyes you form an image a subordinate I can’t trust. Once again, I draw your attention to the fact that I do not claim that this is so. However, I think that an adult is responsible for his image, which he develops in the eyes of others, especially the higher management, do you agree?
- – Ivan, in the current state of affairs I feel uncomfortable and my costs of managing you exceed, unfortunately, the efficiency of your work. We do it like this: I give you a month to fix your image, the criteria for my assessment will be so-and-so. Commit changes in a month, if yes, then I congratulate you, we continue cooperation. If not, unfortunately, I and our team will not be able to burden you with our tasks in the future, do you understand what I mean?
- “Ivan, I really count on you, I have serious plans for you as an employee.”
I draw your attention to 4 important points:
- Image reliance is dissociation, which allows you to say things unpleasant for the employee without prejudice to his personality. I’m not saying he’s a scoundrel. Just such an image.
- Important to complete positive and motivate.
- Needed clear criteria, by which you evaluate the employee in the same month.
- Be prepared to keep your word in a month if the image has not changed.
The algorithm, of course, from the point of view of specific formulations, is very conditional, but the general course of the negotiations, I think, is obvious.
I am often asked the question: “But how is it possible to part with an employee because of his “image” — is this subjective?”
Colleagues, yes, subjectively. You, as the Leader, have the right. If you and your subordinate are uncomfortable, this is his problem-task, not yours. Again: not the Manager adjusts to the subtle mental organization of the employee, but vice versa. And such a right gives the Leader the responsibility that he bears.