In prior articles on coaching, we have discussed how to conduct one-on-one sessions, how to identify whether a performance challenge is a matter of skill or a lack of will, and discussed how to coach for a skill deficiency. Today we are going to go over how to coach a team member for a “will” issue.
What is a Will Issue?
Let us start by revisiting what we mean by a will issue compared to a skill issue. In a skill issue, the team member is lacking in general knowledge and capability to meet the requirements. This could come from a lack of training, little exposure to practice the skill, personal strengths or weakness, or the implementation of something new. A will issue, on the other hand, tends to be more subtle. Team members with will-related issues have typically proven that they possess the required skills. Despite showing technical mastery, they continue to not meet the expectations. A lack of “will” is therefore most commonly a choice – someone is choosing not to perform in a prescribed manner.
When an employee is facing a “will” issue towards improving performance, the coaching tactics become more nuanced, and opportunities to turn things around may be more limited. This does not imply that these team members cannot be coached and then become strong performers. However, the time and effort to reverse poor performance for these employees will be greater. After all, a skill issue is frequently a teaching opportunity. To resolve a will issue, the leader must identify and attempt to fix “why” something is occurring.
Identifying “Why”
The first thing that one must evaluate is why the “will” challenge exists.
- Does your team member not agree with the thing being requested of them? Is there a new process, system, other change that is the source of this disagreement?
- Are they having issues with others inside the organization? Is there team strife? Unhappiness with their leadership? Arguments with peers?
- Is the employee becoming disengaged from the organization? Are there other business changes that are causing negative morale, and it is manifesting in a tangential area?
- Has the team member become disgruntled with their position? Have they become burnt out?
- Is the employee going through personal stress or issues that are causing distractions at work?
- Or finally, is the employee just willfully choosing not to perform? Sometimes this is a byproduct of one of the items above. At other times, this is done as a mechanism to force conflict or force the organization into more direct action?
When you look at the possible reasons behind the lack of desire to change through observation and direct communication with the employee, you have the opportunity to determine the course of action that may correct the behavior. By helping to address parallel issues, the team may feel invigorated to tackle something challenging that they have let slide. By displaying empathy and illustrating your willingness to get to the heart of their concerns, you may be able to re-engage employees who have been simply drifting along.
A Case Study in Turning Things Around
The Scenario
A new manager to a team noticed that one of his employees is very capable and technically adept. However, the team member is disengaged and is seen as a “problem child” with many small issues. Initially the team member was noted as resistant to change and had adopted a “why bother” attitude if things were not going well, rather than trying to make something better. This employee was content to look at only one single assigned function of his role throughout his shift instead of thinking independently towards what actions and priorities would be beneficial for the team that day.
Figuring Out Why
So the new manager spent time during his one-on-ones to start digging into why this employee was labeled as a problem child despite technical proficiency and a high skill level. Several things were uncovered:
- There were a lot of manual reports requested by prior leadership that simply replicated information found elsewhere. This “busy work” had little intrinsic value, but it was something easy to mark off the to-do list. “Easy” won over “value.”
- There was no expectation of independent thought. The team was given a set of tasks to complete during the day, with the primary job responsibilities approached as afterthoughts. Employees stayed within their comfort zones and made little to no effort to bridge gaps.
- Changes were not explained well, and employees were not given the opportunity to question direction. This lack of buy-in led to several instances of things not being done because the employee considered it unimportant.
- Employees had minimal facetime with prior management. The interactions were primarily focused on “what went wrong,” and the employee motivation centered on “not getting yelled at.”
Taking Action
By uncovering these reasons underlying the will issue, the leader was able to begin a series of actions aimed at turning the employee around.
- “Busy work” reports were eliminated or automated.
- All team members had regularly scheduled 1on1s where changes were discussed, ideas were solicited, and open dialog was had on challenges and successes.
- Team members were given additional education beyond instruction on how to perform the task. They were taught why it mattered, the impact the task had, and given more context.
- Team members were given broader autonomy in their decision making with clearly defined accountability for ensuring the high priority / required tasks were completed in a timely fashion. If a poor decision was made, or there was a failure within the team, it was used as an opportunity to look at “what can we do better next time” instead of being viewed as just a failure.
As a result, the team member had a complete reversal in attitude. He became a leader within the team, even though he was not a people manager. And he demonstrated his technical capabilities beyond the expectations of his leadership team. This set him up for a promotion and move to another group within the company. For the remainder of his tenure, he was generally regarded as a valued employee.
An Instance Where Will Could Not Be Coached
A manager was faced with a highly tenured employee who had historically been viewed as a go-to person but had recently been having an ever-increasing number of performance issues. These issues were readily identified as “will” challenges. The failures were on items that had previously been done successfully many, many times over the prior months and years. The manager attempted to correct the individual behaviors, only to have new issues arise, requiring the coaching and corrective cycles to begin again.
Upon review by the employee’s leadership, it was apparent that the will issue stemmed from disgruntlement. The employee had not been moved into a desired position, and their perceived influence and value was waning. While the team member remained technically adept, they were choosing not to perform. As time progressed, the challenges caused by this employee led to additional time and effort from his peers, and feelings of resentment began to grow.
You may find that your employee is willfully choosing not to perform at the level you are requiring of them. There comes a point in time where the healthiest thing you can do for the company and the other members of your team is to let the poor performer go. Employees can see when someone is just “getting away with” poor performance, and this creates poor morale and general displeasure (or even distrust) within the team that management is not willing to address the problem while other team members “pick up the slack.” While it may mean a shift in workload temporarily, removing and replacing these poor performers from the team generally has an overall positive impact in the long run.
Addressing Will
There is no one single path to correcting a performance issue driven by a lack of desire. As a leader, you must evaluate what is driving the issue and determine if the situation is correctable within a reasonable amount of time and effort. When these scenarios play out well, you may find that employee is a key member of your organization that was lost under a series of little issues. Many newer managers struggle to make the determination on when the situation is not resolvable. At the end of the day, it becomes a matter of doing what is right and beneficial for the person, the team, and yourself. While we aim to help people improve, sometimes the uncomfortable decisions are the right ones.
