In a well-established, internationally known company, there is a supervisor who is caught in a problem that a little Force Field analysis could help. Debbie, as we shall call her, is required to complete reports on a timeline set by her administrative head. However, the timelines are set so close to the end of projects that the data is not accurate.
Force Field analysis, as you may recall, involves an examination of the positive and negative factors of an endeavor. It can assist us as we review the positives and negatives of our policies, procedures, and decisions. In Debbie’s case, that is not happening.
Debbie believes that handing in inaccurate reports, regardless of the timeline, is a waste of time and a misrepresentation of information.
However, some colleagues–other supervisors–make sure their reports are provided as requested–accurate or not. This tends to make them look better, receive better evaluations, and more bonuses than Debbie.
Debbie believes the practice should change, and at the very least, ought to be examined, and the positive and negative sides be addressed.
She has talked with her administrative head regarding this concern. Nothing changed. What can she do? She has three choices: (1) turn in the reports, although inaccurate, on the timeline given; (2) continue providing accurate data, but late, receive poorer evaluations, less chance for bonasus; or (3) quit. None of these choices are good. About the only positive force in this situation, is that she has a job. She has a tough dilemma.
However, the company also has at least two problems: (1) they are frustrating and potentially losing effective employees–a problem that will become more critical as the workforce better aligns itself with the jobs available; and (2) using inaccurate data.
Traditions are great. Routines can be very helpful. Policies eliminate confusions. At least, that is one side of the story–don’t forget the other.
Force Field analysis, as you may recall, involves an examination of the positive and negative factors of an endeavor. It can assist us as we review the positives and negatives of our policies, procedures, and decisions. In Debbie’s case, that is not happening.
Debbie believes that handing in inaccurate reports, regardless of the timeline, is a waste of time and a misrepresentation of information.
However, some colleagues–other supervisors–make sure their reports are provided as requested–accurate or not. This tends to make them look better, receive better evaluations, and more bonuses than Debbie.
Debbie believes the practice should change, and at the very least, ought to be examined, and the positive and negative sides be addressed.
She has talked with her administrative head regarding this concern. Nothing changed. What can she do? She has three choices: (1) turn in the reports, although inaccurate, on the timeline given; (2) continue providing accurate data, but late, receive poorer evaluations, less chance for bonasus; or (3) quit. None of these choices are good. About the only positive force in this situation, is that she has a job. She has a tough dilemma.
However, the company also has at least two problems: (1) they are frustrating and potentially losing effective employees–a problem that will become more critical as the workforce better aligns itself with the jobs available; and (2) using inaccurate data.
Traditions are great. Routines can be very helpful. Policies eliminate confusions. At least, that is one side of the story–don’t forget the other.
No comments:
Post a Comment