One of the direct reports, N, has a strained relationship with colleagues. He has been working in the position for more than two years, and his attitude towards new employees has changed in the last few months. His duties include mentoring several new hires during their introduction to the profession, and he is supposed to answer their questions and provide feedback on their performance. While he was open and positive when he was first promoted to this position, there have been reports of him being rude to new workers. Several new hires did not finish their first month, and some of them said that their mentor did not want to answer questions. After the first reported instance, an informal conversation was held with N to collect more information and remind him that answering questions was one of his duties. Nevertheless, several incidents were documented recently, where N was rude to the new staff, arguing with them and ignoring their attempts at communication.
Corrective Action
In the scenario, the employee (N) has already gone through an informal conversation with his superior. This attempt led to an insignificant change in his attitude, which did not last long. Thus, corrective action in the form of a verbal warning is necessary as the first formal step in the process. According to the plan outlined by Manning and Curtis (2019), first, it is vital to understand the core values and use them as the basis for reasonable and just rules. A rule of performing one’s duty and a standard of polite, professional conversation can be used as the basis for the discussion. It is reasonable for the new hires to ask questions of their mentor as it is a part of his official responsibilities.
Moreover, they are correct to expect a polite and informative answer due to the norms of any conversation. One has to ensure that these rules are transparently presented to all workers.
Prior to talking with N, all facts have to be collected and documented for presentation. The corrective action should take place in an office, and only N and the supervisor should be present during the discussion. Here, it is vital to obtain the agreement of the problem to move forward. First, N has to be reminded about his duties; his view of these activities has to be heard to see potential misunderstandings or personal grievances. Then, one has to explain what exactly N has done incorrectly and how it affected the staff and the performance of the organization as a whole. The previous conversation can be brought up; discussing his personal opinion could help to understand what could be affecting his attitude towards new hires (Nugroho & Afif, 2016). One has to present alternative solutions and discuss them with N – these may include a transfer to another position, communication training, or counseling.
It is essential to agree on a plan with clear goals for N to achieve, including time frames, actions, and outcomes. For example, if N wishes to remain a mentor to new hires, he should undergo a communication skills workshop. At the same time, the feedback from the staff will be collected anonymously through secure channels. N should be encouraged to improve his relationship with the rest of the team – his excellent performance is what inspired the management to entrust him with the mentorship position (Brower, Lester, & Korsgaard, 2017). Finally, the outcomes of the plan should be evaluated, showing the results of the verbal warning and possible future steps.
References
Brower, H. H., Lester, S. W., & Korsgaard, M. A. (2017). Want your employees to trust you? Show you trust them. Harvard Business Review, 11, 1-3.
Manning, G., & Curtis, K. (2019). The art of leadership (6th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
Nugroho, S., & Afif, A. N. M. (2016). Factors affecting employee performance: A case study in marketing and trading directorate, Pertamina Ltd. International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 8(8), 2801-2804.