Overcoming the Fear of Feedback

Improve employee engagement by soliciting employee input

Engaging employees can be a difficult but ultimately rewarding task. When performed correctly, it can transform a company’s production style, reduce workplace stress, and even have a positive impact on the bottom line.

According to the Association for Talent Development, 44 percent of employees feel that their workplace’s policies, practices, and procedures are ineffective and may actually reduce employee productivity and workplace morale. Yet, studies also show that more than two-thirds of all employees are unlikely to speak up and offer suggestions that could result in improvements because they believe their input is either unwelcome or not valued by management.

This means companies are routinely missing out on valuable opportunities to reduce input costs, improve product quality, increase output, and establish the critical competitive advantages that they need in today’s global economy.

Instead of wondering if employees are willing or unwilling to provide input, management teams should ask if they are prepared to accept, acknowledge, and act upon input provided by employees.

As with most challenges in a company, efforts to change a corporate behavior or culture must first begin with management demonstrating the change. Only then will all employees buy in and become sufficiently engaged to embrace the change, to the benefit of the company as a whole.

A Firsthand Look at Employee (Dis)Engagement

The Problem:

A few years ago I found myself walking around the production floor of a manufacturer with the operations manager to get the lay of the land. The company was experiencing decreasing levels of engagement from its production line workers, which was resulting in an increase in production errors and downtime.

While touring the plant, I asked the operations manager what he thought his main problem was. He pointed to a number of areas that needed improvement, but said the workers did little to comply with the company’s improvement plans. He was frustrated because none of the employees were willing to step up and offer to help make what he felt were important changes.

I then spoke with a number of front-line workers to get their side of the story. What I learned from them was very different from what their manager told me. They too believed there were a number of areas within the production process where improvements were necessary, but management never listened to their ideas. This, it seemed, was the reason that the workers had not become engaged in previous management-driven improvement initiatives.

Their perception was that line employees had the best knowledge of each step of production. Yet every effort the company had made to improve had been devised by managers who rarely walked the production floor, rather than by the workers who were expected to actually make the changes.

When workers approached management with an idea for an improvement, they were rebuffed, becoming increasingly frustrated as their attempts to provide input were ignored, unwelcome, and even thwarted by managers not willing to listen.

When I met with management again, I asked point blank if they had involved the workers in the development of the improvement plans. Answers ranged from “Absolutely not” to “Are you nuts?”

Here are the problems as I saw them:

  • Managers were afraid that if they asked workers for ideas they would relinquish some of their power and be forced to act on those ideas or be accused of not listening. Therefore, they simply didn’t ask.
  • The management believed they always knew more than the workers and were afraid that asking their workers for ideas was the equivalent to suggesting that they didn’t know what to do.
  • Senior managers were afraid that including workers, who were unionized, would give too much operational information to the union and hurt the company’s negotiating position in future contract negotiations.
  • Management, many of whom had MBAs, presumed that workers, who on average had lower levels of education, had little to offer in terms of valuable input.
  • Some managers were afraid of (and even threatened by) how they would be perceived by their peers if one of their workers, and not them, came up with an effective idea for improvement.

It had become overwhelmingly clear that management was afraid to solicit workers’ input. This fear of feedback resulted in managers engaging in behaviors that were causing their employees to become disengaged, less productive, and increasingly frustrated with their jobs. This needed to be remedied before it was too late.

Working closely with the management team, and inviting a few key front-line workers to the table, we put a plan in place designed to help managers overcome their fears while at the same time helping workers overcome their preconceptions that there was little point in approaching management with ideas. Here is a summary of that plan.

Breaking Down False Expectations Appearing Real (FEAR)

The Solution:

Change the culture of the management team. Managers’ feelings that they needed to appear all-knowing and infallible needed to end. This required a commitment to change from senior management, who were the only ones who could initiate such a change.

Second, managers needed to learn to feel comfortable with -- rather than threatened by -- input and feedback from front-line employees. They needed to look past their own egos and acknowledge that they didn’t have all the best answers and that a great idea could come from anyone.

Third, workers and managers both needed to understand that worker input did not automatically mean that ideas presented would be put into action. Workers needed to trust management to give their input due consideration and make a decision regarding to what extent the input would be acted upon accordingly. Where input was offered but no action taken, it was recommended that managers “close the loop” by updating the worker who offered the input on what had been decided and why. Transparency and communications skills needed to be developed to do this effectively.

Last, to build a sense of teamwork between managers and production workers, it was recommended that the company form a Cooperative Action Committee, which consists of a group of employees representing various departments of the company.

Its purpose is to create a non-confrontational environment where multiple perspectives, interests, ideas, and concerns can be shared without a feeling of “it is us versus them.” Tasked with the mandate to create a better workplace for all, members come to the table as equals, regardless of position or title within the company. The committee spends its time looking at all of the systemic issues that can contribute to conflict in the workplace, whether the issue is operational, administrative, or cultural in nature.

While the first steps in the plan were recommended to help managers and employees move past their limiting fears and notions, the last recommendation was the most important.

The creation of the committee provided a structure in which all stakeholders could discuss problems and provide input. It also created a forum to allow everyone to openly discuss what was needed to move forward and to execute each recommended solution. The proposed solutions would then be presented to management to ultimately decide upon the most desirable one.

Managers must never forget that front-line employees have just as much at stake as they do if the company fails. These employees typically value any opportunity to participate in efforts to keep the company strong and healthy. It is when management shows they have little value or appreciation for the contribution and ideas of front-line workers that these workers become disengaged. Management, as a whole, must invite worker input and then use this input to strengthen the company and its critical relationships, both within and without.

www.the2percentfactor.com