ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Sunday, October 20, 1996 TAG: 9610180028
SECTION: BUSINESS PAGE: 4 EDITION: METRO
COLUMN: Working It Out
SOURCE: CAMILLE WRIGHT MILLER
Q: Members of my staff will sometimes tell me something another employee has said or done. Without fail, the information is followed with "you can't use this because they'll know I told you." I'm left in a bind - I have information related to performance or attitude yet can't do anything about it.
A: Your dilemma is shared by many supervisors and co-workers. Rather than feel frustrated by an inability to act on confidences shared with you, develop a system for dealing with such information.
Ask yourself what the "teller" has to gain by giving information and then asking that it not be used. The answer may give more valuable insight into your informer than any possible use of the information.
Ask the informant what he or she would like for you to do with the information. Again, the response may be revealing.
Once you've evaluated interpersonal dynamics, evaluate the information and the evidence.
If the information reveals a situation that could cause harm to an employee or the business - for example, if the informant tells you someone was seen operating equipment in an unsafe manner - you'll want to act even if your actions violate a confidence.
If the information suggests no physical harm, but is disturbing because of performance or attitude implications, use the information only as a signal to become more alert. If there's a significant problem, alertness to the potential allows you to uncover evidence on your own. If nothing is amiss, dismiss the original complaint as a mistake.
Take care that your alertness doesn't cause you to misinterpret future events. Being sensitized to possibilities sometimes causes us to define everything as supporting evidence. The process for dealing with informant knowledge calls for evaluating both motive and evidence. The initial confidence is a strong signal you need to be alert to a number of possibilities. Rarely will you have to violate the request for confidence.
Q: I'm a northern transplant who is happy to be here. One thing that does bother me is the misuse of language. One example, among dozens, is the directional misuse of "up" and "down." My staff says they are going "down" to Richmond when, in fact, Richmond is north and one should be going "up to Richmond." I'd like to permanently correct the misuse; however, I don't want to risk alienating my entire staff.
A: When one individual misuses or mispronounces a word or phrase, you can "model" correct usage by immediately repeating the sentence or a variation of it employing the correct use.
However, when you find yourself in a setting where words or phrases are used "incorrectly" by everyone, you've stumbled into cultural differences. The use you're finding incorrect isn't. It's part of a culture which has evolved over a long period of time.
Note the differences, then learn to appreciate them as part of what makes an organization or region unique. You needn't adopt a particular language pattern, but you should accept that it's normal and correct in its context.
Q: We're supposed to conduct a needs assessment to identify training needs. How does a needs assessment differ from a pretraining assessment?
A: Rather than engaging in hit-or-miss training, a needs assessment provides data needed to put together a comprehensive long-term training program.
You can use several methods or a combination of them to assess needs. Focus groups, closed and open-ended surveys, and evaluation of training records are good starting points.
Identify training which has been given so far. To whom? How long ago? How did employees respond to that training? What needs will be met with new training? Is there any resistance to training? What specific skills are needed according to employees and according to their supervisors? What skills are desirable according to employees and to their supervisors? How will the training be used? Pretraining assessment is part of a broad needs assessment. It evaluates the current skill level of every employee. Pretraining assessments also identify skill gaps which need to be addressed in training plans.
The assessment also provides starting-point data, a baseline against which to measure the success of future training.
Pretraining assessments are more likely than needs assessments to cause anxiety among employees concerned about job security. That alone suggests that great care must be used to ensure the results are not misused against any employee.
Camille Wright Miller, an organizational behavior sociologist who works in Lexington, answers questions from our readers about workplace issues. Please send them to her in care of The Roanoke Times, Business News Department, P.O. Box 2491, Roanoke 24010.
LENGTH: Medium: 89 linesby CNB