4 ms·
> If an employee engages in behavior that frustrates, annoys, or confuses others, performance suffers, particularly in any role above entry level, where leaders
by dunpeal 8y ago
> If an employee engages in behavior that frustrates, annoys, or confuses others, performance suffers, particularly in any role above entry level, where leadership, communication, and mentoring ability are part of the job description."
I don't see arguments in the thread that being generally insufferable at work is not a performance problem.
Most of the comments are about the fact that you can easily lose your job for being disliked arbitrarily by exactly one person: your direct superior.
This can happen to people who are good performers and team players.
One obvious example: professional differences, where an employees generally disagrees with his superior's approach. None of them is necessarily wrong, they just have different professional styles.
One less benign example: the manager is incompetent, the employee is a top performer, so the manager is intimidated and tries to push the employee out.
- smueller1234 8y agoThere's a moderately good cure for the subject-to-managers-whim problem. Have a policy that in any case of performance issues, the person with the bad ratings gets to move to a different area in the company with as clean a slate as possible without being naive. Ideally away from the management chain up to and including the director. Then have HR reevaluate after 3-6 months. It's only moderately good because it's never (and shouldn't quite be depending on the cause of poor performance) a completely clean slate and because it is very expensive to execute. I've seen a number of folks who has relationship problems due to their environment be salvaged as perfectly good employees this way. I've seen others who left with the realization that maybe it wasn't JUST the manager after all and hopefully growing from that experience. And of course, I've seen people think it's all a giant conspiracy against them as well.