Good Intentions

So, the Government is seeking to rein in the number of employment tribunals with the introduction of ‘protected conversations’ and compulsory pre-tribunal conciliation. Not surprisingly, this has caused a backlash from the unions and other industry groups, complaining that these ‘frank and honest’ conversations – protected from being used against an employer as part of legal action – make it easier to fire people and don’t support the promised ‘back to work culture’.

In my opinion, much of the comment on these proposals puts the spotlight in the wrong place. Rather than obsessing over the new measures, the focus should be on what is going wrong within organisations. No matter what the legislation dictates or what policies an organisation has in place, avoiding ‘bad blood’ with employees isn’t down to following a set of procedures, it’s largely down to two things - the quality of recruitment and the quality of management. 

People before process
Recruitment obviously plays a crucial part in getting the right people into your organisation and clients that I work with on developmental issues often identify a particular appointment as a poor fit from the outset.  All too often employers cite the rush to fill a position or the lack of proper criteria to interview against – such as a competency framework – as the reason why candidates have been recruited who simply aren’t a good fit for their organisation.  Recruitment can also be distorted by bureaucratic approaches to equality of opportunity.

Of course, not every individual who has performance issues is in the wrong job.  They may fail to achieve their potential for reasons that often include how they are being managed.

Management relationships matter
Within many organisations, management has been reduced to a set of systems with comprehensive policies outlining everything from personal development plans to disciplinary procedures that managers must follow when interacting with employees. Some structure to ensure legal compliance and fair and equal treatment is of course essential but these internal processes have often become tortuous and seriously over-engineered for fear of tribunals.  And tribunal decisions are often based on procedure rather than fairness.

Fluency in managerial relationships is undermined by long drawn out HR processes, which affect public and private sectors alike but which seem to be more prolonged and harder to resolve in the public sector – sometimes lasting months or years.  The waste of time, energy and management resource is enormous with a serious impact on morale.  The outcome is rarely satisfactory for anyone except those (and they do exist) who make a career out of taking employers through the process with the aim of securing a pay-off.  

Being held to account
Bureaucracy frustrates proper management when managers are frightened to have ‘real’ conversations with employees.  The natural dynamics of relationships are distorted and when employees should be held to account they are not for fear of process.  This often places an unfair burden on other colleagues who bear the brunt of underperforming individuals.

Open or ‘real’ dialogue with employees on a continuing basis is the only way to form true relationships. For me, what information should and shouldn’t be fair game for inclusion in workplace conversations isn’t what managers or their employers should be worrying about. In getting it right, the critical factor is the intention.

Authentic engagement
Where the intention of a so called ‘frank and honest’ conversation is to take an employee through a performance related development programme, designed to highlight their shortcomings and ultimately provide ‘proof’ that they don’t measure up, most employees will be able to see straight through this even if it is positioned to them as a helping hand. In reality, most people would much rather someone be honest with them than be played for a fool.

Authentic intention is everything and it becomes known in an organisation whether the culture is genuine or not.  Organisations and managers have reputations. If there is a genuine desire to resolve issues and help an employee to improve and remain part of the organisation, then the likelihood is that a satisfactory resolution will be found. Even if the desired improvement is not achieved, nine times out of ten, if the employee and employer are working from a mutual point of understanding, the outcome will still be amicable.

Living in the real world
In the current climate, we need all the new jobs we can get and there is evidence from countries such as Spain that high levels of employment protection, which make it virtually impossible to fire someone, also make employers unwilling to hire – resulting in a two-tier market where most new employment is temporary or on short-term contracts.

This brings us back to the Government’s intentions. If the introduction of protected conversations and conciliation services do become reality and are truly designed to provide swift and fair processes that will help both employers and employees, then the criticism will subside. However, if it does prove to be legislation for legislation’s sake that will cause further compliance headaches for employers, I fear there will be even less time available for organisations to spend looking at how to improve their management practices and build the relationships that are critical to good employee relations.

Jo Ouston
December 2011