Comments on: Managing Latecomers

By: Anton Clark

Anton Clark — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 00:37:03 +0000

Dear Joseph, thanks for an informative and useful article.

By: Mike Koselek

Mike Koselek — Mon, 26 Aug 2013 18:56:47 +0000

The above response to Managing Latecomers is likely the best response to any question I have read from anyone at VitalSmarts. Bravo. Probably the hardest thing for new leaders to accept is they were not chosen because they were the smartest of the group…including me! The very first lesson I try to teach a new leader is to understand where his/her frustration is coming from before implementing new rules or becoming an enforcer. I ask them, when they feel frustrated with an employee, to stop and ask themselves 3 questions: is what the employee doing unsafe, is what the employee doing adding unnecessary costs/delays or is what the employee doing just plain wrong? If the answer to all three is no, then their issue is with preference so no intervention is required. Negatively reacting to a preference issue (being a boss) is about trying to control people in a manner that suggests a lack of the big-picture-perspective I need from the leader. It limits creativity and more importantly employee ownership in the deliverable. All I require of the leader is to ensure they meet safety, schedule and costs on their deliverables thus making me successful at my job. In the words of Star Trek’s Jean Luc Picard, “Make it so!”

By: Managing Latecomers | Motivation and inspiratio...

Managing Latecomers | Motivation and inspiratio... — Fri, 16 Aug 2013 08:44:39 +0000

[…] I manage a group of more than thirty employees at six different locations, and my office is at yet another location. Needless to say, I do not see or speak to each person every day. I have set the … […]

By: Del

Del — Thu, 15 Aug 2013 17:49:42 +0000

Results focused, wow an outstanding answer. I believe when you have someone “punching the clock” they do what they have to and not very much more. I personally REFUSE to punch the clock. I am on salary; I produce an above par product in a better then reasonable amount of time. My focus is my own output results, my livelihood, my reputation and my happiness depend on it. I know me; and I know if I am tired, frustrated, have a sick kid/personal issue or are otherwise distracted I am not productive. I deal with the distraction (e.g. leave, go home take or even take a nap) then get back to the project. My hours are flexible I work late, come in early. I even have a home office and answer calls and emails on vacation in other words, I do the needful and I meet my targets. I want my people to be professionals also, therefore I know my setting of sensible production goals and allowing them the flexibility to manage their own time to meet those objectives develops them as a professional, and those who can’t seem to “get it”, get the chance to work for someone else…and by the way it’s more fun to work with people, then to have them work for you.

By: Yvonne

Yvonne — Wed, 14 Aug 2013 20:47:05 +0000

I understand the point of the response and I agree, but I would like to offer a counterpoint. I work on a similar team. We work in various time zones across the US. We do not punch time clocks. Our efforts are largely project based, not customer-service related. And yet our manager has established core working hours of 9-4 in our local time zone. If for some reason we will not be available by the start of the core hours, we must let him know. Management is very clear about the reason for core hours: In order to schedule meetings he needs to know when people will be around. If he finds out at 10pm that a team meeting is needed the next day, he can schedule a meeting at 9:30am and expect everyone to attend. If an urgent request is received he knows who can be asked to handle it and not worry it will sit in someone’s inbox for hours. By observing core hours, this is possible. Some folks work 7-4, others 9-6. My hours vary from day to day. Occasionally I cannot arrive within the core hours, but in those cases I send an email or make a phone call. Management knows who is available. Employees have flexibility.

By: Annette Lawler

Annette Lawler — Wed, 14 Aug 2013 20:05:15 +0000

This is very well written.

By: josephgrenny

josephgrenny — Wed, 14 Aug 2013 19:02:41 +0000

In reply to Lin. How honest of you to say so, Lin. I have "control" issues myself and have to check my motives often!

By: josephgrenny

josephgrenny — Wed, 14 Aug 2013 19:01:32 +0000

In reply to Kit. This is a great scenario to add to the consideration, Kit. Thanks for adding it.

By: Kit

Kit — Wed, 14 Aug 2013 16:50:45 +0000

If there are also hourly people working at these locations, then I will respectfully disagree. True enough that salaried folks are paid to do a job and get results, not directly for the time spent doing it. However, if there are hourly people there too, I think there would be considerable resentment in the ranks when they perceive “the suits” coming and going as they please. I saw that in the military when enlisted often resented officers, and I see the parallel in civilian life. If for no other reason than setting a good example and positive morale, I think that salaried employees should show up on time. (And I realize full well that the wage earners probably don’t notice when the salaried folks have to put in some evening or weekend time. That’s why salaries are higher – we have to do whatever it takes.)
All that said, if everyone there is salaried, then I agree with Joseph’s answer. Results are the bottom line. I just want people to remember that resentment by the hourly folks detracts from those results.

By: Ammon Nelson

Ammon Nelson — Wed, 14 Aug 2013 16:45:42 +0000

In reply to Deb. I think you may have missed the point of the article. Why is this sign of respect so important? If it truly is about respect, address the issue of disrespect, not punctuality. Disrespect is often a symptom, rather than a problem. Of what is the disrespect an indication? How do you address that problem?