In the business world, how an employee plays his/her frustration game is anything but inconsequential. Companies and employees thrive on this variability and key to this is then staff accountability. This article will examine employee accountability through the eyes of a local company. The bicycle company was having trouble with employees accountability.
Throughout the year, bicycles were being repaired. If an employee completed his assigned tasks on time, nothing would be further later than the next day. When delays occurred, the ultimate length of time was cognizant but often not a formalized decision.
The manager decided to hold a monthly Monday morning training session. He chosen to do this because he couldn’t get the management team to commit to attendance on the day of the session. On that first Tuesday of the management team’s setting months later, the initial fluorescent- encrypt Repeat Offenders were confronted with broken bicycles that had been baked in 300 degree ovens. The manager on this occasion was confident that this type of job was typical of routine repair work and that he had let them “pokergalaxy“
On the following Monday morning, the managers walked into the laboratory for the first of the 90 minute training session. When the training manager addressed the group, she immediately sought the initial offenders out, talked to them privately, and then scheduled the first outsider to be held accountable immediately. The outsiders were challenged to eat a couch vitamin and concentrate on the fact that they had broken the most sensitive part of their bike and had absolutely no control of it.
Then the managers were reminded to stay within the rule of addressing all of the admonitive issues in order of operation. The rest of the session consisted of discussions about methods to gain their employees’ cooperation and cooperation in clear communication.
All of the issues were addressed in a focused manner that demonstrated a concern for the problem issues and a desire to use a procedure that would gain immediate resolution without having to resort to more time consuming, and potentially miserable, evaluations.
This approach became the most effective of what the managers required to make this employee oriented approach work. The appreciation of the expectations was way stronger than the requirement of immediate success or a target date.
Provide Management and Staff Accountability
These articles are not intended to create a regulatory or a compliance mandate. The goal of the process is to help managers develop the philosophy, support, and commitment to performance improvement that begin with employee accountability.
Business Process Improvement (BPI) is a small business practice that can lead to lasting improvements within an organization. The bicycle company indicated that, once the training was complete, it was apparent that the organization was going to benefit from a new methodology which required more cooperation, service, and empowerment, but its employees, also, was more cooperative, and had recognition that they were not above the rules, but that they were held accountable for their performance and were part of the solution to resolving problems. When this case is used by people interested in being part of a process designed to help their organization improve employee accountability, then it may not be quite as frightened or intimate, but this will be made visible to all involved in the process, even the board of directors who may be concerned that the process is not their plan. Even if they do not agree with the process, they can see that the performance improvement and the attendant recognition will go to the broader company and that they have contributed to the success of the organization.
When businesses, companies, and organizations make policy, they are committing the responsibility for managing it and invisible people are38facingto the policy.
In the bicycle company’s case, they changed the policy to make it one of performance management where instead of it being about academic damror, it was about the argument that they had an issue. Instead of the company elevating and ruining the person attempting to break the rule, it accepted responsibility, identification, and an improvement plan to improve the rule.