In Scott’s latest article, published on July 7 in the VC Star, he points out that old clichés can come in handy in certain workplace situations.
—
Clichés have some value in the business world, providing an easy, quick shorthand; something that is readily understood, even if the origins of the cliché are unknown.
But because they are labeled as cliché, the meaning — and value — behind such statements are sometimes passed over. Clichéd phrases became cliché for a reason — they were such effective descriptors/phrases that they became overused, not because they were inaccurate or useless.
And while clichés are generally considered writing crutches that should be avoided, this column isn’t about how to write a great article or book, but rather how to run a good business. And part of running a good business is being succinct and clear — two areas in which clichés receive high marks.
So please forgive my dependency on them in this article.
The first cliché I remember hearing was from a Boy Scout leader. We were on a 10-mile hike and a couple of the Scouts (I may have been one of them) were dragging behind.
The leader said (removing the salty portion of the quote) that we should “Hurry up. We can’t go any faster than the slowest Scout.” This is a variation of another well-used cliché, “No stronger than the weakest link.”
This is a cliché I not only believe in, but would like to modify for the purposes of running a business: “A manager is no better than his or her weakest employee.”
In today’s business environment, it is critical to maximize efficiency and return on investment. If you have an underperforming employee, you are limiting the chances of overall success, reducing profits, weakening your team and — since the employee is your responsibility — setting yourself up to take the blame for the failing employee.
And, honestly, you should be held accountable.
As a manager, the performance of your employees is ultimately your responsibility. If you have brought in strong, dedicated talent and have earned their respect and there is mutual trust, you’ve laid the foundation for making your job easier because those employees will do the work you need them to do.
But sometimes there are employees with great potential, and it is up to you to help them reach that potential — it’s better for your business, and better for you.
If a struggling employee is identified, you must motivate, train or replace that person. If the employee is able, but unwilling, to produce at acceptable levels, he or she needs to be motivated. If he is willing, but unable, he needs to be trained to do the job.
If it turns out that after attempts at training or motivating you still have an unproductive employee, then you need to let him go. It doesn’t really matter if he is incapable or unwilling; you simply need to make a change.
It is better for the team (someone who doesn’t pull his weight always has a negative impact on those who are working hard and successfully), better for the individual (allows him the opportunity to find a place where he might be successful) and better for you.
So if you find yourself with someone who is not a “team player” or who isn’t “cutting the mustard,” you need to “man up” because a weak employee puts you “between a rock and a hard place” and as a manager “the ball is in your court.”
There is “no time like the present” to put “best practices” into effect, get rid of the “deadwood” and “raise the bar” for your entire team, allowing you to “get back in the black.”
Read more: http://www.vcstar.com/news/2013/jul/06/scott-harris-putting-clich233s-to-work-in-the/#ixzz2YZ9G4O76
– vcstar.com