Maximizing the Potential of the Team

From the desk of Val Schoenherr

January 2009

While watching my daughter's softball team I was struck by how she and others played up or down depending on the performance of their coaches, teammates and opponents. This is no new observation to anyone who regularly watches athletic competitions. But, have you noticed that organizations experience the same phenomenon with their employees?

Studies have shown that poor performers produce up to 98% less than superior performers in managerial and executive positions. The impact, however, goes beyond the performance of the individual manager - trickling down through the ranks. A survey by McKinsey and Co., a global management consulting firm, found that "80% of respondents said that working for a low performer prevented them from learning, making greater contributions to the organization and made them want to leave the company.". Thus, subordinate employees who might be top performers are hindered in playing up to their full potential, making it vital for a company to weed out under performing managers.

IDENTIFYING POOR PERFORMANCE

The greatest difficulty most organizations face in developing managers is identifying the low end performers. Most management positions involve goals and duties that are vague and dynamic in addition to more measurable, static benchmarks. To be fair a performance evaluation must include a variety of perspectives. The process should include a top down evaluation of the manager's ability to meet established objectives as well as a 360 degree review that evaluates the person's leadership qualities as experienced by peers and subordinates alike. This multifaceted approach for gathering information on performance leads to a variety of methods leaders can then use to coach managers. The manager may lack good supervisory skills or simply need guidance on new methods to reach and set goals.

OVERCOMING POOR PERFORMANCE

The Checkpoint 360 with the SkillBuilder, an online tool that incorporates coaching tools can help managers overcome weaknesses in staff development, team building and communication, etc.. A manager's difficulty in meeting specific performance goals might be better addressed by retooling processes.

The manager whose performance evaluation shows failure on both fronts is almost certainly dissatisfied with his own work situation and would likely benefit from different employment either within the company or somewhere else entirely. By evaluating Job Fit with the Profile XT an employee may be more appropriately placed within the company. Subordinates required to work under a manager who is a poor performer should not be unfairly put in the position of playing down from their own potential! Starting at the top is key to not only eliminating poor performance and lost dollars at the management level but also serves to develop the best in every team member.

"I was a gardener providing water and other nourishment to out top 750 people...of course I had to pull some weeds too." - Jack Welch

10 Ways to Coach by Example

1. Envision good performance and communicate your vision.

2. Don't just nod your head; listen to your direct reports.

3. Don’t ask employees to do something you are not willing to do yourself.

4. Treat everyone with fairness.

5. Recognize and reward exceptional performance.

6. Never assume; always ask.

7. Say please and thank you.

8. Under-promise and over-deliver.

9. Leave the frown behind when you enter the office door.

10. Keep your sense of humor in good repair.

I don't like that man. I must get to know him better.
-- Abraham Lincoln, 16th president of the United States

Case Study

Increasing Sales, Reducing Turnover with the ProfileXT®

Two case studies in a travel agency reveal how the agency or similar employers can save money in training budgets while enhancing sales performance, and reduce turnover as well.

The first study showed how the agency could increase sales by 349 percent per week. The second resulted in a reported savings of $330,000 in hiring costs. Both results came from choosing candidates that best matched a job fit pattern using the ProfileXT®.

Study 1: Performance Issues
The travel agency's first study covered a period of nine months. Its intent was to identify trends based on performance data and the relationship of the trends to the overall job match percentage on the ProfileXT®. The study included 153 sales agents who had finished a trial employment period.

Using a job match pattern developed with the ProfileXT®, the travel agency decided that 76 percent represented a good overall job match score. To arrive at the score, the agency chose top performers based on their weekly sales average. Ten of these top-ranked employees averaged 76 percent on overall job match, or competencies that travel agency managers wanted to see. Ten bottom performers averaged 69 percent. Sales for top performers averaged five times greater than for bottom performers.

Details included these:

The top 10 sales agents' weekly sales average was $2,648
The bottom 10 sales agents' weekly average was $482
The difference between the two averages is $2,166 weekly.
For every dollar a bottom performer earned, a top performer earned $5.50.
Using the overall match on the assessment, replacing a poor sales performer with a top sales performer would result in a sales increase of $2,166 per week, or 349 percent.

Study 2: Turnover Issues
The travel agency's turnover study covered a period of 12 months and included 181 sales agents. Managers gathered turnover rates throughout the study period. Before the study began, turnover was 28 percent.

Managers developed a job match pattern using the ProfileXT® and found 60 top performers with a job match percentage of 75 or greater. They matched the results of the entire group of 181 workers against the pattern, and then used the same pattern in the employee selection process. At the end of the study period, turnover had dropped from 28 percent to 16 percent.

Details included these:

Reduction in turnover: 43 percent
Average cost of hiring: $15,000
Cost of 28 percent turnover (51 people times $15,000): $765,000
Cost of 16 percent turnover (29 people times $15,000): $435,000
Savings: $330,000 in reduced hiring costs.

During the study period, the agency hired 181 new employees. Twenty-nine left, reducing the turnover rate from 28 percent to 16 percent and giving the agency the $330,000 in savings.

Summary
In both areas of study, the job match pattern proved to be a valid and reliable means of selection and retention.

Product Focus

ProfileXT® Coaching Report: First, Envision What You Want

Great coaches have a way of envisioning what they want to see and then communicating the information in a way their players understand. Great leaders in business can be great coaches, too. One tool that many have found effective is the coaching report offered as part of the ProfileXT® system.

To see how the coaching report works, we will use the assessment given to Mary Sample. First, a little background. Managers gave Ms. Sample the ProfileXT® to assess, among other things, her thinking style, behavioral traits, and interests. Managers also gave top performers already in the position Ms. Sample is interested in the same assessment to determine how they scored in these areas. Leaders then used their scores as a benchmark for other candidates.

What happens if Ms. Sample scores below the job pattern rank of top performers in the position she wants? If her score is low in only one or two areas, the coach must recognize that Ms. Sample needs help developing in certain areas. The ProfileXT® coaching report helps by giving him detailed information on how to coach her to get the performance he wants.

For example:
In one area, verbal reasoning, Ms. Sample scores below the designated numerical profile that top performers reached. The appropriate range on a 10-point scale is between 5 and 7, and Ms. Sample scored a 4. This means that her ability to solve verbal problems is below what the position typically requires. Perhaps her score indicates that she will have a problem efficiently processing communications. These are the steps a coach could take to help her develop in this area:

Keep instructions simple and direct.
Watch her as she solves problems and offer help when necessary.
Make sure she understands verbal information by asking her to repeat the information in her own words.
Review the information she writes and ask questions to ensure understanding. If clarity is lacking, show/tell her where.

Second example: Ms. Sample scored a 5 in manageability, when top performers for the position scored in the 6-9 range. Does that mean her manager is not capable of managing her? Not necessarily, especially if the manager has a coaching report. The lower score suggests that her willingness to follow standard procedures is less than the position normally requires. The coach should have a discussion with her to find out her potential frustration points.

Other steps to take:

Clarify the options available for her behavior and the specific consequences of her choices.
Spend one-on-one time with her, especially if she appears confrontational about authority. Stress the importance of her compliance with authority and a willingness to facilitate as a group leader.
Reward compliance with opportunities to express her freedom in other areas.

These are only two examples in which coaching can help develop an employee, reduce turnover, and increase productivity. That's because the technologically advanced ProfileXT® allows managers to see the total person, including reasoning styles, occupational interests and behavioral traits.

The most valuable feature of the ProfileXT® may be its job match function, which allows managers to analyze a person’s job-related attributes and compare them to the qualities required to perform successfully in a particular job. In this way, the ProfileXT® fine-tunes the process of putting the right people in the right jobs.

Coaches who can envision what they want but need a little help putting that vision into action will find the ProfileXT® to be a reliable aid.

No man ever listened himself out of a job. -- Calvin Coolidge, 30th president of the United States