velohead66

I sent the following e-mail to my accounting team of about 6 people, and had some comments back.
It was sent in good faith, but I would like to know how people on this forum interprept the following e-mail.

I'm looking for between 2-3 adjectives that IMMEDIATELY come to mind.

Don't want to put words in anyone's 'mouth' so to speak, so no examples.

Here Goes......



To: Accounts
> Subject: Business Plan Meeting - The Way Forward For Accounts.
>
> Dear All,
>
> I have just had a meeting with XXXXX and YYYYY, to clarify our departmental
> business plan objectives for the next 12 months.
> The overall feeling was that we had performed well in certain areas, but had failed
> to meet KPI's or objectives in other areas.
>
> We have today set the new revised KPI's and objectives which are numerous and far reaching.
> With this in mind, I will have a one-to-one chat with each of you during the next week or two,
> so we know exactly where we are going as a dept, and also what our personal objectives will be.
>
> The main department objectives will include the following;
> 1) Improve Debtor Stat
> 2) Formalise and enhance credit control procedures
> 3) Bring forward to the 19th all financial/management reporting
> 4) Re-introduce Ticket Stock audits - with the help of reps
> 5) Replace Intech before April 2004
>
> I hope you look upon these changes in a positive light, as they are meant to improve our output
> as a team. The better our procedures, the less problems we create for ourselves.
>
> I look forward to the changes, and the improvements that will result.
> At the end of the day, we will work smarter, not harder !!
>
> ZZZZZZZZZZZ.

TelBoy

Sanctimonious, self-righteous, pious.

Although well-meaning, all the same, i'm sure..!

red_dog104

Sounds like one that would be sent by our office!


Not offensive. Wouldn't wind me up. Then again, i've seen much more condecending (sp) arrogantly written ones by our management!!!


[Edited by red_dog104 - 7/24/2003 10:19:32 AM]

pthomlinson@hotmail.com

1. jibberish
2. "it's all your fault" (not strictly a word I know)
3. formal (as in not "good natured" as it was intended)

might have been good to have an informal meeting with everyone together before having the one-to-one chats - people might have some good ideas come out of the informal meeting but feel too pressurized to voice them in front of everyone else.

[Edited by pthomlinson@hotmail.com - 7/24/2003 10:21:29 AM]

brickboy

[Gus Hedges mode]

"I don't like the word 'problem', I prefer the word 'opportunity' "

"Come and have a scuba in my mental think-tank."

"Let's pop it in the mental cappuccino machine and see if it comes out frothy."

[ / Gus Hedges mode]

Sounds like you have a few "hands-on executive facilitators" there.

Puff The Magic Wagon!

iTrader: (2)

"Mushrooms" is the word that springs to mind, but thats not an adjective...

Loads of "what we're going to do" but no "how we're going to do it". There's no discussion or rationale behind the email, so its a bit of a dictat - hence the mushroom comment, 'cos they're being kept in the dark & fed poo

Not motivational & inspiring by any means.

Out of interest, what were the comments & feedback you had?

speedking

non-motivational
condescending
overfamiliar


A KPI is a measure. You can't fail to reach a KPI, but you can fail to meet a target measured against a KPI.

You cannot have numerous KPI's. K = key, i.e. important, do not dilute. If you have numerous then they are just PI's and only a few can be key. You list 5, hardly numerous.

3 and 5, and possibly 4 have a binary outcome. You cannot do better than the target, either achieve it or not. It is difficult to incentivise this type of target. People will not aim for the target until they think they can just make it, then they will miss, it's human nature.

1 is better, it's SMART, Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Timebound.

Setting numerous objectives tends to be counterproductive, a few achievable ones is better.

As stated previously, the management needs to look at why the performance failed to measure up, and why objectives were not met. Perhaps the targets are just too high?

It is no good bumbling along for 12 months and then informing everyone that you have missed targets. Review them monthly and let everyone know where extra effort is required. This is more likely to get everyone on board than an annual ticking off. Publish the progress and seek suggestions as to why targets are not achieved.

HTH

TopBanana

Alright apart from 'hope you look on these changes in a positive light'... unnecessary really.

beemerboy

too late, by all accounts (nopunintended)

mattstant

this springs to mind http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/theoffic...bb/index.shtml

Dont know why

velohead66

Well, the e-mail was meant to be a statement of fact that,
OK we (collective word that includes me) have missed certain KPI's. Lets have a look at ourselves, and find ways in which we can easily improve, without too much slog.

Example, We have do report X by the 20th.
Rather then start report X on the 20th, and submit on the 21st (late), why not start on the 19th and submit on the 20th.
Extra Work; None
Improvement; Yes

Again, we all know what our deadline is, we know how long the job will take, we all know what data is needed, we all know that the data is available. Why miss the deadline then ?

The 'one to one' chats would have involved a self appraisal rating system, whereby the incumbant rates themselves in various catagories, such as "ability to meet deadlines" amonst others.



OK, with hindsight the e-mail is a bit cheesy & condasending. Not OTT though.

However, one member of staff has said in no uncertain terms that "I have it in for the staff" and "that they had better watch out, or else".


Or Else What ???
The whole thing was meant to point out our failings, and on a one to one basis, recognise that there was a failing, and that improvements could be made.

Surely staff development is a good thing.
Why spend 8 hours doing a job that should take 6.

speedking

Because if you do it in 6 someone will find you another job to fill the other 2 hours </tongue in cheek>

Regacy

Delete
Delete
register sender as junk mail, therefore never have to deal with patronising tosh again.

You highlight everything that's wrong with most accounts departments; you're great at counting but terrible at communication.
If there are only 6 people why didn't you just talk to them instead of hiding behind an email?
That might even engineer a modicum of respect.

TelBoy

Well said Regacy. Harsh but true.

Alas

Does come across as their fault and may have been a shock to them if they did'nt realise targets not being met.
Put the targets and ongoing performance on the wall and they may have come to you first when they saw it was'nt happening. I would'nt have taken offence but would be concerned as to who will be singled out
alas

camk

I'd have spoken to them all first on the issues then sent out the email as a summary of the position, which would have included issues brought up by the employees.
Its not a bad email, you'll of course get lots of tosh from people who do not manage people on how its not right. Its likely many of them don't manage, even though they have people working for them. Your heart is in the right place, make things better so the mundane stuff no one likes goes away. Just keep in mind that if its a team then team input to strategy and issue resolution proves its a team. As a manager you DON'T need to be seen to BE THE MANAGER round the office but you do need to organise and push and ask questions like WHY/WHEN and HOW to provoke thought to get the best out of your group. People are more productive when they know what they are doing will be questioned, its no issue if the questioning is felt to be done in the right manner.
I also wouldn't have went into the meeting with XXX & YYY withou having been round the team asking them for their improvement idea's as its likely XXX & YYY will need to OK any expenditure e.g. new fax or PC or whatever. If you are talking to your management about the department performance in a negotiating sense then be prepared to have some wants as well. Also talking to the guys will give you a better insight into why these things happen.


All the Best
CK
[Edited by camk - 7/28/2003 10:45:33 AM]

[Edited by camk - 7/28/2003 10:52:00 AM]

Mungo

Speaking to people first may not really help either. Do you do it individually or as a group? Individually, you run the risk that the first person in talks to the 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th whilst you're with the 2nd. As a group, they're all speculating and rumour-mongering in the time between setting the meeting and actually having it. You can't win.
The email wasn't bad - I thought he did say what's being done about the failings - discussions on a one-to-one basis so that everybody understands their role, personal objectives and contribution.
The worst bit about the message is the "hope you understand bit" which implies the neutral-stance stuff above it is unpleasant and provokes a bad reaction from the staff. It's a bad selling job.

TurboKitty

I disagree with this to some extent. I'm good at my job and, as such, I expect to be left to get on with it. I make sure I know what's required of me and if I don't know, or if there's something I don't understand, I ask. I expect to be questioned if I fail to deliver, although I would almost always make my manager aware if I was not going to be able to meet a deadline, and why, at the earliest opportunity. I do not expect to have to waste time detailing and justifying what I am doing when I am successfully managing my own workload. I hate to be micro-managed and if anything it makes me resentful and less productive.

[Edited by TurboKitty - 7/28/2003 11:46:54 AM]

camk

Mungo,
If its at the position where a 1:1 provokes rumour and speculation then there are other issues. Communication is 2 way and should be regular and constant, if you only do when there are issues then people get edgy I agree.

Turbokitty,
Ohh how I laugh, are you a DBA by any coincidence . I'm not talking about every detail of everything you do. However managers need to know what's being worked on(since in your position you don't get all your work handed to you to complete from a single source and that you get to take a personal view of priorities).
You also probably don't have the bigger view on priority and its easy for technical people to get tied into a problem because its pissing them off rather than it being the #1 business problem.
If I'm asking I'm not usually asking because I don't think the person can do it but usually to enable me when I'm asked or when I am communicating on progress to have a grip on whats being done. Its just not an option for a manager to say don't worry my people are on it..... The alternative is that you not only fix the problem but spend half your time on the phone explaining to customer/users or other management what your doing to fix it....



[Edited by camk - 7/28/2003 12:59:11 PM]

TurboKitty

No, I'm not a DBA. And I think you'd find I am quite capable of prioritising the problems on which I am working. I'm also capable of asking for a judgement call from my manager when it's needed. I have a one-to-one meeting with him once a fortnight where he gets a brief run down of what I am working on, and I update him on progress by e-mail whenever it's appropriate, but that's about it. Other than that I expect to be left to get on with things, unless I have a specific problem and have requested input.

Sounds like you have a classic case of "I'm a manager and I'm important and I am going to bug my staff just so they realise they can't do their jobs without me"-itis.

If you need to actively manage your staff, you need new staff. All IMO, of course.

edited for spolling.

[Edited by TurboKitty - 7/28/2003 1:35:02 PM]

Apparition

If it was delivered "On Paper " and personally signed, then it surely would have had much, much more impact. Emails within offices are cowardly, impersonal and lazy.

[Edited by Apparition - 7/28/2003 1:40:44 PM]

Mungo

Apparition - maybe you're just old-fashioned.


Turbokitty - you obviously have a bit of a chip on your shoulder. Some people need to be closely managed, some don't. You seem to be experienced and competent, and able to be left largely to your own devices. Imagine if you were new to a job or a company, or if you were a slow learner - you'd need guidance on a far more regular basis - hourly or maybe even constant. I'm glad your manager has recognised that you can be left to get on with things. If you view management as "bugging", you obviously wouldn't make a good one yourself.

camk

turbokitty,
Maybe its the aggressive attitude he avoids , my goodness. Anyway you prove my point, you talk fortnightly on whats happening, therefore in the example given you'd already know there were issues, would you not ? I can see you'd also take criticism well Very Defensive..., its the management equivalent of talking to Arsenal Not sure where you worked out that I have some managementitis...nothing I said was out of sync with you answer.....

Apparition

Mungo, Maybe I AM just old -fashioned...... BUT the personal touch cannot be beaten.

Then again,,,,, if I were THAT old-fashioned....... I wouldn't be using this weird contraption now would I ?

[Edited by Apparition - 7/28/2003 4:19:16 PM]

Apparition

And lets face it..... you're just aggrieved because I got the corner ... he he he .......

TurboKitty

Mungo, it depends on the manager whether management 'bugs' me or not. The comment that people are more productive if they know they'll be questioned about what they're doing is a gross generalisation and sums up what I hate most about the attitudes of some so-called 'managers'.

That statement did not take into account that new or less confident staff would need more support, and it had the overtone of, "if I don't know what my staff are doing every second of the day, I can't possibly be in control and how can I know my staff are working properly". It sounds to me like the attitude of a manager lacking in confidence in himself, and with little faith in his staff.

If you need to take the approach of nit picking and micro managing in order to try and harass your staff into doing good work, you need to start looking at replacing people.

camk

especially those who post so much on Scoobynet, obviously well able to take on more work

TurboKitty

Yeah, it's been a non-stop post-a-thon for me in the past month.

As if happens though, I'll be more than able to take on a lot more work, when we finally get stuff handed over to us. I'm part of a new team intended to take on support of a part of the server infrastructure. However, as we don't actually own any servers yet, things are a bit quiet.

I use SN, and other sites, because I'd die of boredom otherwise, and my manager is well aware of this.

TurboKitty

For some reason, this thread is reminding me of...



Another manager who'd tell you he's essential and completely in touch with his team. 'nuff said.

Peanuts

iTrader: (15)

uh huh...

Somebody posts on a subject to which they ask for a response, you post a response and people disagree with you so you welch out and try to act all cooool about it in your *hutch*..
yeah real