Here's a question. Let's say you manage a dispersed team, and it becomes necessary to terminate someone at a remote site. It's not a RIF — perhaps the issue is performance, or something even more difficult. And let's say that traveling there probably would be a two-night stay, because of the flight schedules and time required "on the ground." You're tempted to do it by phone, or videoconference, or something not involving travel. Is that OK?
It's probably not OK. Actually making the trip is better for the employee, better for the company, and probably better for you.
The temptation to find an "easier" way comes about because we don't usually have budget to cover such travel. But the root of the problem isn't a shortage of money. If you suddenly found an error in projected materials prices, you'd find the money somewhere, right?
Rather, the root of the problem is a mistake in setting priorities. When the budget was first approved, someone failed to allocate for the cost of distant terminations. Now, facing unplanned expenditure, that error isn't seen as important enough to put right.
Choosing to find a more "cost effective" method of termination only makes it possible for the company to continue to act irresponsibly. By taking responsibility for this problem now, and by refusing to export the penalties for the error onto the person terminated, we help the company to mend its ways.
Even if The root of the problem
is a mistake in
setting prioritieswe do decide to travel to carry out the termination, we might be tempted to do it on the cheap. For tricky and possibly hostile terminations, it's common to have an HR representative "sit in," but for remote terminations, we sometimes don't take HR with us, to save money. Foolishness. If anything, it's more important to have HR present for a remote termination.
The most important reason to travel is respect. How would you feel if you were terminated by phone, fax, or carrier pigeon? Not good, I suspect. The effect on other staff is also important. Everyone is watching. If you do it remotely, some bystanders might feel disrespected, too. Some might start looking for alternative positions, while others might become demotivated. It's a lot cheaper to buy the airplane ticket than to replace people you didn't want to lose.
Often, the person terminated wants to vent. Usually, through the anger, there are at least a few nuggets of truth, and as the supervisor, you're the person best able to convert those nuggets to real value for the company. By listening — in person — you'll do much to calm the waters, and perhaps emerge from the meeting having done some good — for the person terminated, for the company, and maybe even for yourself. Top Next Issue
Are your projects always (or almost always) late and over budget? Are your project teams plagued by turnover, burnout, and high defect rates? Turn your culture around. Read 52 Tips for Leaders of Project-Oriented Organizations, filled with tips and techniques for organizational leaders. Order Now!
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrensUcIRHaLPFLtKFdvner@ChacQQfuCPOBEacqqQNtoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.
About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
More articles on Ethics at Work:
- Workplace Politics vs. Integrity
- A reader wrote recently of wanting to learn "to effectively participate in office politics without
compromising my integrity." It sometimes seems that those who succeed in workplace politics must
know how to descend to the blackest depths, and still sleep at night. Must we abandon our integrity
to participate in workplace politics?
- Your Wisdom Box
- When we make a difficult decision, we sometimes know we've made the wrong choice, even before the consequences
become obvious. At other times, we can be absolutely certain that we've done right, even in the face
of inadequate information. When we have these feelings, we're in touch with our inner wisdom. It's a
- Personnel-Sensitive Risks: II
- Personnel-sensitive risks are risks that are difficult to discuss openly. Open discussion could infringe
on someone's privacy, or lead to hurt feelings, or to toxic politics or toxic conflict. If we can't
discuss them openly, how can we deal with them?
- Some Truths About Lies: III
- Detecting lies by someone intent on misrepresentation is an important skill for executives, managers,
project managers, and just about anyone involved in knowledge-oriented organizations. Here's Part III
of our little collection of lie detection techniques.
- Influence and Belief Perseverance
- Belief perseverance is the pattern that causes us to cling more tightly to our beliefs when contradictory
information arrives. Those who understand belief perseverance can use it to manipulate others.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming January 24: Understanding Delegation
- It's widely believed that managers delegate some of their own authority and responsibility to their subordinates, who then use that authority and responsibility to get their work done. That view is unfortunate. It breeds micromanagers. Available here and by RSS on January 24.
- And on January 31: Nine Brainstorming Demotivators: I
- The quality of the output of brainstorming sessions is notoriously variable. One source of variation is the enthusiasm of contributors. Here's Part I of a set of nine phenomena that can limit contributions to brainstorm sessions. Available here and by RSS on January 31.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenoVICvjqKAUWgLstDner@ChaczbeEsRCUSEuCRJnZoCanyon.com or (617) 491-6289, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
- The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power
- Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program. Here's a date for this program: