The Psychology of Work
There is a lot an employer can do to maximize employee engagement.
Imagine this: A small-town retail store owner
struggling to find responsible, dedicated employees
is approached by a key employee who
generally is engaged in her job and has tenure.
She asks for four weeks off for what in the employer’s
mind is minor surgery. The employer, faced with losing
a key employee for four weeks and having no one
to replace her, tells the employee an absence of four
weeks would result in a significant disruption to the
business. He turns down her request.
The employee decides to proceed with the surgery.
The employee returns to work following successful
surgery and resumes full duties and hours. Needless to
say, the rapport that once existed between the employee
and employer is no longer present.
During the next six months, the employee/employer
relationship deteriorates further. Arguments
ensue over work assignments and hours of work. The
employee becomes disenfranchised and bad mouths
her employer. She tells friends and co-workers the
owner is trying to fire her. Over time, the employee
loses confidence in her ability to do her job and becomes
increasingly anxious around her boss. She is
written up for poor performance and no longer receives
positive performance reviews.
Believing she is on the verge of being fired, she has
a nervous breakdown. The employer is told by her attending
physician she will be off work indefinitely. As
details emerge, the employer learns the primary return-
to-work obstacle is the employee’s fear of her
boss. The short-term disability claim becomes a long-term
disability claim. The employee’s anxiety has
grown to the point where she no longer feels capable
of entering the store to shop.
Realizing her job options are limited in a small
town, she is faced with returning to her pre-disability
employer or moving into a new industry, which would
result in loss of seniority. She opts for a new career. The
employee and the employer lose.
Lessons Learned
What could have been done to avoid this negative outcome?
Clearly, the employer’s limited success in hiring
employees left him vulnerable. What contingency
strategies do you have in place when a key employee
requires extended time off work? What lessons could
the employer learn from this scenario?
This case study demonstrates that having a proactive
disability management program is just part of the
puzzle. Employee morale, employee engagement,
communication, and synergy between management
and staff all contribute to the effectiveness of your disability
management program, employee health, absenteeism,
and productivity.
For example, if the retail owner had better understood
the needs of the employee prior to the lost-time
claim, steps could have been taken to ensure the employee’s
issues could have been addressed. Ironically,
the employer’s limited investment in the employees resulted
in limited recruiting success. Proactive management
of employee issues will positively affect all aspects
of the business, including customer service,
attendance management, and business growth.
Consider this: By making human resources management
a primary focus, management has more time
to think about growing and planning for the future instead
of dealing primarily with day-to-day issues, such
as shift shortages, hiring issues, or lost-time claims.
Planning for the Future
Here are some issues to consider:
1. Are you a “big picture” thinker? Are you operating
in a silo, or do you see how corporate decisions affect
all stakeholders? Here are some examples of silo
thinking:
Autocratic decision making, where the individual
does not take into consideration other departments or
employees.
Limited or no communication with other departments
to discuss strategies to improve synergy among
departments to improve customer experience. Customer
service is critical. By developing strategies that
will empower your employees to address customer service
issues, everyone wins.
2. Do you think in terms of Win/Win or Win/Lose
outcomes? In the above scenario, the employer did not support the employee’s request for time off
work. He perceived the situation as harmful
to himself and his business. In reality, this
decision resulted in a significant disruption
not only for a month, but indefinitely. The
limited communication between the employee
and employer resulted in a no-compromise
situation. If the employer had discussed
the situation with the employee,
perhaps she may have returned to work
prior to the original request of four weeks.
Perhaps some modified work could have
been offered to facilitate her recovery.
This article originally appeared in the September 2008 issue of Occupational Health & Safety.