which employee should be let go?

A reader writes:

I supervise a staff of 5 people as part of a team that was just created within the organization since the beginning of the year. Two of them are constantly bickering between themselves and each runs to me with complaints about the other. I have tried coaching and mediating with the two of them. But this has been going on for six months now. I do not have the time to do a weekly “intervention” with these two and it is draining on the whole team.

I have decided that one of them has to go (not fired; just to another team within the organization). The dilemma is...which one? One of them is disorganized, has made some mistakes and cannot seem to stay on task. The other one performs efficiently but has a track record of not getting along with people, gossiping and just generally keeping things stirred up. I have addressed the specific issues with each of them independently to no avail. Any suggestions?

Yes. Expect them each to meet appropriate standards and fire them if they don't. With their current level of performance, I don't see why you'd want either of them staying on your team, or why you'd inflict them on someone else in your organization.

You're not holding them accountable, and you need to.

Meet with each one individually and explain that you have serious concerns about her performance. With the one who's disorganized, makes mistakes, and has trouble staying on track, address each of those issues. With the one who causes problems among the staff, address that. And with each of them, tell them the bickering is going to stop, effective right now, and that you're not willing to deal with it anymore. They are expected to deal with it between themselves like adults, without it affecting their work or taking up your time, period. These are fundamental requirements of the job. If they don't or can't meet those requirements, they can't stay on staff. It's not negotiable.

And then stick to it.

Do you know how many competent people are on the job market right now, who wouldn't cause you these kinds of issues? These two aren't entitled to hold onto their jobs at all costs. Plus, the opportunity cost of having the wrong people on your staff is enormous. Think about if you had stars in those positions -- the impact can be dramatic.

As a manager, getting results is your fundamental job, and since having the right people makes a huge impact on your ability to do that, you should be putting significant energy into getting and keeping the right people on board and moving out the ones who don’t meet a high bar.

Be clear about your expectations, warn them that if they don't meet them you will let them go, and then back up your words with action.

when an employee gives you info in confidence

A reader writes:

An employee tells you they observed another employee talking on a cell phone while supervising children (which is against company policy). How can you effectively address the situation when an employee asks you to to keep it confidential that it came from them, yet no one else saw it happen? It's not likely that it would happen in front of a supervisor, and waiting for it to happen again puts the children at risk. What's the best approach to address this with the employee who was on the telephone?

You have a couple of options when an employee tells you something in confidence in a situation like this.

In general, I believe that your bias should be toward respecting requests for confidentiality if at all possible. Otherwise, your employees will be less likely to come to you with information that you want to hear about, and that's not good. You want your employees to feel confident that they can speak to you without having their name attached to it, because otherwise you'll never hear about some pretty important things.

Almost always, there's a way to act on information without attaching the person's name to it.

But not every time.

Here are your options in this situation:

First, I would start by explaining to the employee that what she observed is serious and puts children at risk. Ask her to reconsider and to allow you to relay what she told you. Sometimes, just pointing this out to people will get them to agree to it. (And people appreciate being asked, rather than having you plunge ahead without their permission.)

If the employee doesn't agree, however, then your options are:

1. Try to witness the behavior yourself -- by coming by when you're not expected and so forth. If you can spot it yourself, you can address it without violating the other employee's confidence. I've had employees tip me off to a problem before, and once I know, I can easily look around and find evidence of it myself. This can be a good option in some situations.

2. Address the issue on a more widescale basis, such as reminding all the employees that talking on a cell phone while supervising children is unsafe and a fireable offense. Hope the perpetrator gets the message.

3. Tell the employee that you're sorry but the situation is so important that you need to be able to use the information. Say you'll keep her name out of it, but since she's the only one who observed it, you can't guarantee the other employee won't draw conclusions. (I'd also point out that the cell-using employee has probably done this before, and so for all she knows, there have been multiple witnesses to it.) You can also tell her that if the other employee gives her any crap about it, you'll intervene and make it known that that's unacceptable.

I would only use this option if you consider the situation so dire that you have no other choice, because you may pay a price in how open employees are with you in the future. In other words, this option is only for really serious stuff.

Anyone have a fourth option?

cautionary tale: leaving Track Changes on your resume

Today I got a resume where the candidate had left Word's Track Changes feature on. As a result, I could see all the edits someone had made on his resume, and I know that they weren't his own, because they also included suggestions like "you have to beef up the first paragraph."

I don't have a problem with him having editing help; I have a problem with the carelessness. It made him an instant rejection, even though he was otherwise was qualified.

There are so many silly ways of shooting yourself in the foot that are easily avoided if you pay attention.

am I a back-up candidate?

A reader writes:

I am curious to know what the message is to back-up candidates while a the company is waiting for someone to respond to a job offer. I was told that a decision would be made late last week, and I recently received an update that it will be another week and a half.

I know that there are only 2 other candidates up for the job, and I'm pretty sure the decision will be made by 3 people who are in the same department and work together daily. This makes me think that they have already made a decision and made the offer, and I'm in a back-up candidate in case their first choice declines. Are my instincts right or am I overanalyzing? How do hiring managers typically communicate with "alternates" in this stage of the game?

Heh. Well, that was exactly what I used to do when someone was a back-up candidate, until it occurred to me to build a buffer into the timelines I was giving people.

But let me tell you, there is no shame in being a back-up candidate. In this economy, it's not unusual for me to end up with three back-up candidates of stellar quality, any one of whom I'd be excited to hire.

On the other hand, it's also possible that it doesn't indicate that you are a back-up candidate at all. It could indicate that their process is dragging out for some other reason -- it's taking a long time to check someone's references, or the company moves really slowly on putting together offer paperwork, or their interview with one of the other candidates got delayed, or the person who has to sign off on the final decision is on vacation, or whatever. So you definitely can't take it as anything certain -- more just as fodder for speculation.

7 mistakes managers make when giving criticism

Giving critical feedback to employees can be difficult, and it’s one of the areas that managers most often handle badly -- and there are myriad ways to mess it up.

Over at U.S. News & World Report today, I talk about the seven most common mistakes managers make when delivering less-than-positive feedback. Please check it out and leave your own thoughts in the comments over there.

bad interviewer behavior: a forcible, sweaty hike

I always enjoy nightmare interview stories, so here's one for you.

A friend of mine recently went for a job interview that consisted of two parts -- first an interview with an HR rep, followed immediately by an interview with the hiring manager. At the end of the HR portion, the HR rep told her that the next meeting was in a different building, but that "it will be faster for you to walk there than to drive."

My friend believed her because ... why wouldn't you?

Her walk to the second building ended up being close to three quarters of a mile. She was in heels and a suit. It was a horrible east coast summer afternoon, meaning hot and humid. When she arrived at the second building for part two of her interview, she was, by her own description, covered in sweat and reeking quite foully.

She was then immediately sent into a small, hot, and apparently not air conditioned office to finish the interview ... which she did, drenched in sweat and smelling what can only be described as terribly offensive.

She is quite understandably baffled and annoyed.

She also notes that it would have been faster to drive, parking wasn't an issue, etc., so why the HR rep inflicted this on her is rather inscrutable. This was not a job that requires the ability to withstand unpleasant physical conditions, nor does it involve any sort of boot camp, so WTF?

So, a public service announcement: When you are interviewing someone, in general it's both useful and nice to try to put them at ease, so that they have a decent experience and so you can get a better sense of what they're like day-to-day. It's also to everyone's benefit not to direct candidates to do things that will cause a normal person to reek. And if you do somehow inadvertently push them into a forced march or a sweat lodge, you should apologize profusely and offer extended bathroom time for repairs.

What is wrong with people?

creative resumes, and how long employers take to respond

A reader writes:

I would like to inquire on how long an employer will usually take to reply to an expression of interest in a job.

I am a 16 year old student that has emailed several different employers with my resume and cover letter and have only received an instant reply from one. A few were advertised positions and the rest were general inquiries on my part. I admit it has been less than a week since I have sent them but considering I received a reply from one within a few hours, I am rather anxious and frustrated to hear from the rest too (I have refreshed my email around 20 times today, I kid you not).

I understand that the job market at the moment isn't particularly keen on employing less experienced teenagers but surely the lower pay rate attracts them?

I'm also unsure whether my resume is a turn-off because I made a much more creative one that still clearly delivers the facts and figures, but is presented with color and more flair. Also the jobs I am applying for are cafes, juice bars and fashion stores. And no doubt my lack of real retail experience (I only have volunteer work) disadvantages me. Any words of wisdom you may offer?

Okay, clearly I have to drop my preconceived notions about teenagers not reading career blogs, because you are the second 16-year-old in three weeks to write to me. It still surprises and impresses me though.

It can take some employers quite a long time to respond to applications. A week is definitely nothing -- some take a month or even more. I tend to be pretty fast and often respond within a few days, but even I wouldn't feel ashamed of myself if it took me, say, two weeks. And lots of employers really do take a lot longer. In some cases, this may be because they're disorganized, but generally it's just because they have lots of other stuff going on that they have to deal with first. So stop obsessively checking your email.

As for creative resumes, in certain fields if they're well-done, they can be a plus. I'm sure there are some HR people or hiring managers out there who consider them a deal-breaker because they want you to do things the traditional way, but in general I suspect most people feel like I do, which is this: The most important thing about your resume design is that I need to be able to read it clearly, without straining, and I want to be able to quickly scan it and get the highlights. Creativity, while a nice trait, doesn't trump those requirements, so make sure whatever format you use works in those ways.

As for more general teenager job-searching advice, I'm going to refer you to the comments section of the last post from a teenager -- people offered up really helpful advice, so read through that and see if it's useful.