Post by Ayia Gospodinova on Feb 25, 2016 21:15:57 GMT
• What assumptions are present in this scenario?
The two primary assumptions are that the employee understands the job expectations and his expectations of what is appropriate on the job are the same as the manager’s. Both during the interview and the meeting addressing the performance review, the manager seems to be talking “at” him and acknowledging his response but not gaging the level of his understanding of his job or how his actions were not appropriate.
Viewing the video, there were several red flags during his interview that showed the employee had limited understanding of the job. He seemed to cut off the manager a few times and misunderstand what she stated and she seemed to miss these interactions and continue speaking. The manager also never asked any active questions which tested his understanding of the job expectations and during the “firing” conversation delved in deeper to why he didn’t understand how his actions were inappropriate and tried to address his point of view in response. This shows that again the manager assumed that employee understood the job expectations and had the same expectations of what was appropriate as the employer.
• How would you respond?
I would respond by having a dialogue with the employee. I would first outline all the issues by priority and discuss each one by explaining it and then allowing the employee to explain his perspective and then responding by addressing the issues with his thought process.
• What would you do?
Since the employee is relatively new and it seems like this is the first time his wrongdoings have been addressed, I would have a detailed discussion clearly laying out the expectations on each items and discussing how his actions were not correct and if the employee was receptive to discussion I would give him another chance to test how he handles these issues based on our discussion
When having the discussion, I would also ask questions and try to understand the thinking which led him to make the mistakes and have a dialogue about how these situations could have been handled better and what was flawed in his thought process.
Having had very similar staff issues and seeing that many issues arise because both sides (manager and employee) assume they have the same “assumptions” which is most often not the case, I am a big believer that you should evaluate someone’s actions after repeated issues and their actions are evaluated after laying out expectations clearly and making sure that the employee is using the correct thought process if receptive to improving.
• What questions did you ask yourself in coming to your conclusion?
Were the job expectations clearly explained? Did the employee fully understand them and agree to do them? Were the employer’s assumptions the same as the employee’s assumptions? Did the employee have a flawed thought process? How new was the employee and were these the first set of offenses? Was the employee interested and receptive to correcting his/her behavior?
The two primary assumptions are that the employee understands the job expectations and his expectations of what is appropriate on the job are the same as the manager’s. Both during the interview and the meeting addressing the performance review, the manager seems to be talking “at” him and acknowledging his response but not gaging the level of his understanding of his job or how his actions were not appropriate.
Viewing the video, there were several red flags during his interview that showed the employee had limited understanding of the job. He seemed to cut off the manager a few times and misunderstand what she stated and she seemed to miss these interactions and continue speaking. The manager also never asked any active questions which tested his understanding of the job expectations and during the “firing” conversation delved in deeper to why he didn’t understand how his actions were inappropriate and tried to address his point of view in response. This shows that again the manager assumed that employee understood the job expectations and had the same expectations of what was appropriate as the employer.
• How would you respond?
I would respond by having a dialogue with the employee. I would first outline all the issues by priority and discuss each one by explaining it and then allowing the employee to explain his perspective and then responding by addressing the issues with his thought process.
• What would you do?
Since the employee is relatively new and it seems like this is the first time his wrongdoings have been addressed, I would have a detailed discussion clearly laying out the expectations on each items and discussing how his actions were not correct and if the employee was receptive to discussion I would give him another chance to test how he handles these issues based on our discussion
When having the discussion, I would also ask questions and try to understand the thinking which led him to make the mistakes and have a dialogue about how these situations could have been handled better and what was flawed in his thought process.
Having had very similar staff issues and seeing that many issues arise because both sides (manager and employee) assume they have the same “assumptions” which is most often not the case, I am a big believer that you should evaluate someone’s actions after repeated issues and their actions are evaluated after laying out expectations clearly and making sure that the employee is using the correct thought process if receptive to improving.
• What questions did you ask yourself in coming to your conclusion?
Were the job expectations clearly explained? Did the employee fully understand them and agree to do them? Were the employer’s assumptions the same as the employee’s assumptions? Did the employee have a flawed thought process? How new was the employee and were these the first set of offenses? Was the employee interested and receptive to correcting his/her behavior?