--- Benjamin Franklin

Here's a question for you to ponder as you enter a New Year:  What one wish would you make to change something about your job so you would be happier and engaged in what you do - love what you do? Think of your answer for a minute before you read on.

That's the exact question I asked recently when I spoke at a retail sales conference.  I asked participants to write down their answers confidentially - no need for signatures.  You may be surprised that the majority of responses centered around one fact - getting rid of their co-workers who were "negative," had "bad attitudes," lied about their "accomplishments," hated their boss, and could care less about the company and others.  In other words, they would get rid of the people who are disengaged.

Is it Possible?

Wouldn't it be wonderful to work in a place where everyone gets along, cares about each other's success as well as the success of the company, and focuses on results rather than people problems? Sound like Nirvana? Not necessarily.  I work with many companies where happy and engaged people are the norm - not an anomaly; companies that have learned the hard way, the value of quickly identifying poor performers and doing something about it.

If you in any way, shape or form are a "boss" - and I believe that's an OK word to use in today's politically correct world - whether you manage one or fifty individuals, here's my wish for you for this New Year:  Identify and deal with your poor performers. Promise yourself to determine the value of every employee.  Ask yourself: "Would it make a difference if this person was not here?"  Keep in mind, this is not an exercise in cost cutting, performance management, or productivity, but it does impact those areas.  Yet foremost, this is an exercise in emotions, relationships, happiness, and love - love as in "loving what you do."  It's also an exercise in recognizing the importance of weeding out those who do not love what they do. 

The Cost of Indecision

The damage that an unproductive and disengaged worker can cause is impossible to tally. In my research on organizational behavior patterns, I have found that co-workers recognize disengagement much sooner than management. As a result, the impact on employee morale, customers retention and overall productivity, is often devastating. Dissatisfaction, frustration and constant complaining create a vortex that sucks the enthusiasm out of even the most productive and engaged workers.

Our research has discovered that it takes the typical manager nine months before recognizing unacceptable work patterns. Then, this typical manager lingers another three months before addressing the issue. This allows the employee to remain actively disengaged for twelve whole months - one full year!  Even worse, once the performance problems are addressed with the disengaged individual, it takes the average manager an additional six to nine months before he's willing to fire the employee. This is especially damaging considering that many company policies state that before an employee is "separated" he must be put on a three-month "PIP" (Performance Improvement Plan). If the disengaged employee agrees to be placed in PIP - and most employees do, simply to buy time - the employee must show improvement by meeting set goals and demonstrating a renewed commitment to the job and the company. If he does not meet the requirements after the three-month period, he can then be fired.

While this may sound reasonable, consider that at this point, if the employee continues to be disengaged, his disengagement period now totals 18 to 21 months - a period during which he has continued to negatively affect co-workers, customers and overall performance.

This divisive pattern exists at all levels - from frontline employees to executives. Regardless of the position, nip it in the bud.  If you make the wrong decision in hiring, recognize it early and deal with it. Either change the position or change the person. "Fixing" people can actually yield negative returns in productivity. You need to know when not to retain an employee and why.  So, follow the lead of Bob Lapidus, my husband's best friend and the best man at our wedding. 

Bob, the founder and former CEO of Bob's Stores, was a retail genius. His approach to people was simple, yet powerful: "Recognize them when they do well, and let them go quickly when they don't."

So, when is the right time to fire a non-productive employee? When you first think about it! Don't ponder it.  Don't postpone it.  Simply recognize that you've made a hiring mistake and immediately correct it. In the long run, you'll do as much a favor for the wrong-fit employee as you do for you and your company.

Your Help Needed

In my personal dream and quest to get everyone who works to love what they do, I need your help. You can begin that help by making a New Year promise to recognize problems early and take decisive actions quickly.  When you do you will: 

Many organizations fail to track and measure the costs involved when they hire the wrong people; if they do track and measure, they often measure the wrong items.  When an individual is hired who is not a "fit," - someone who doesn't match the organization's culture and who fails to match all the specific requirements for the job, the loss to a company becomes incredible. 

Look at the "real" expenses, that when added together, can total up to a huge price tag when the wrong person is hired: 

1.  The HR time to complete these tasks: 

• Developing position specifications
• Posting the position internally and externally
• Sourcing, screening and reviewing resumes
• Conducting preliminary telephone interviews
• Scheduling, preparing for and conducting face-to-face interviews
• Testing or assessing final candidates
• Checking references for candidates
• Offering the job
• Assisting with on-boarding and training
• Teaching managers how to assimilate new hires

An HR manager or recruiter might invest at least 40 hours to complete the above tasks.  Using an average $30 per hour salary, HR has already invested one week of time - or, $1200. 

2.  Other recruitment/interview costs would include the cost of posting the position ($500), and manager's time interviewing candidates ($1500).

3.  If the person is hired, at the end of the 90-day assimilation period, the company would have invested three months salary, plus benefits (30% of base salary), plus administrative expenses (20% of base salary). 

A new hire's first three months at $36,000 base salary costs a company $13,500, plus hiring costs of $3,200.  Now, add training costs (materials, hours and travel), trainer's time and manager's time and you could easily add another $2,500 to the expenses.  That's a total of more than $20,000 in costs for a wrong hire who has been operating at a max of 75 percent productivity during the first three months. 

Fast forward another 30 days.  Let's say the new hire's productivity isn't improving - or performance is mediocre at best and the manager is having doubts about whether the new hire is a fit.  He decides that the person was a "bad hire."  Now, what's going to happen?  The costs just keep adding up: 

• Additional time for coaching and counseling.  Eventual termination and exit interview time for HR and management - all the result of making a wrong hire.
• Then advertising costs, additional recruitment and interview time, more paperwork, files and documentation - all as a result of having to replace a wrong hire. 

There's no question about it.  It's simply best to hire right to begin with.  When you do a better job of matching people with jobs that fit their natural behaviors, beliefs and values, you will be more likely to retain the people who will best help you to retain your customers.

In Terri's response to our reader's question about hiring right, she stressed the importance of recognizing the differences between skill and will and the importance of there being a match with the values required in the job and the values important to the individual.  Here's a great example of the importance and impact of this understanding: 

A major company recently decided to pilot an experiment when they hired sales people for one of their high end retail departments.  Going beyond traditional hiring practices, they focused on assessing the applicant's values in addition to their behaviors.  By hiring people with a high value for money and time (a Utilitarian value) as well as a high value for beauty and style of the product (an Aesthetic value) they not only surpassed their sales goals by more than 40 percent, they also reduced initial turnover by 70 percent.  They reduced this turnover during the critical time period (the first three months) when traditionally, many new employees decide that the job they took, doesn't fit them.

Problem:  Solutions to your problem are usually provided in this column.  But rather than respond to a problem this time, Terri instead poses some questions to you in the hopes that they may move you to find your own solutions for being more effective in your work and improving your relationships.  Questions, that when thought about and answered by you, will provide more overall satisfaction and happiness in what you do.  Keep in mind, Terri's mission is to help everyone LOVE what they do. 

The following questions are specific to the key attributes that The Kabachnick Group has discovered in successful, engaged and ingaged leaders - leaders who are not just engaged and love what they do, but are ingaged in the company, their customers and everyone around them. 

Do you listen to learn?

What have you heard someone say during these past few weeks that may have caused you to search deeper - possibly re-think something upon which you thought you were 100 percent decided?  What would have happened if you hadn't been truly focused on what that person was saying?  How often do you listen not because you intentionally want to, but because you should or have to? 

Do you repeat to reinforce?

What positive or helpful message do you continually repeat to others?  Are you tired of repeating the same message to people who seem not to hear or take action?  Is it a chore to keep repeating this message?  What might happen if you rephrased, repackaged, restated your message? 

Do you surprise to support?  

Have you done something for someone recently where the response was:  "Thanks!  I never expected that."  (In other words, the responder is thinking - I never expected you to go out of your way to do this for me.)  What might happen if delivering little positive surprises became a habit rather than merely giving random, occasional surprises? 

Do you seek strangers?   

Can you name five people you have spoken to in the past month whom you didn't know, but ended up learning something from, or whose ideas or comments laid the foundation for a mutually beneficial relationship?  Do you avoid strangers simply because it's an easier path?  Do you tend to mingle mostly with people you know at meetings, informal gatherings or company functions?

Terri's traversing the country over the next two months with speaking and consulting engagements in:

• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• San Jose, CA
• New York City, NY
• Orlando, FL