Helping a partner regain their performance edge.

An under-performing partner or coworker can bring down the performance of a division or the whole company – this may in turn, affect our end-of-year bonus, profit share or work environment. So, rather than saying that it is her or his problem and letting them be, sometimes it is in our best interest to help the under-achiever.

Recently I was working in a venture with a person that was under-performing and it was bringing the whole partnership productivity down. We were both responsible for parts of the venture that were complementary but mutually exclusive. My problem was how to help her achieve the desired performance without destroying the partnership by being invasive and controlling. The reasons for my decision to help were:

• It seemed fixable (no drug use, alcohol or any of the sorts). 
• Her past performance indicated that she was capable of much more than she was delivering. 
• Dissolving the partnership would have been a complicated and messy affair – and not good for both our reputations. 

My plan was to approach this person and state the problem and my intentions in a clear and respectful manner. I set up an appointment to discuss the situation in a non threatening environment and out of the office. During the conversation I setup myself as a supporter and ally and not a fixer – this is important! You are there to help not do their job (unless it is a problem in your area). At the end of the meeting we established an agreement that we would work on the problems and setup a general plan. Keep it simple.
Over the next few days, we clearly identified the problems, their causes and devised plans to fix and correct each one of them, as well as establishing indicators and goals for each one of them (you have to know when you are done). We identified everything that may be affecting her performance, from rebellious employees to over-dependent clients, and put a plan in place to correct them.
Over time, we tracked our plans and made corrections, while keeping our eyes in our indicators and goals. As problems started to disappear her productivity went back to what was expected and we developed a better working relationship.

Triggering a full reorganization

How often do you stir things up in your company? I was turn to this topic by a conversation I had about operational efficiency. I was thinking about how often you should look at what you are doing and look for ways to improve it. If you go by the Kaizen methodology, then you are doing this constantly... this works great for small changes but not for big ones. Full-on reorganizations can be triggered by traumatic events but the price you pay in organizational stress is great.
I recommend you are always on Kaizen mode; it is a great way to do business and life in general. But, how do you decide is the right time to do a full-on reorganization? The conditions I think could trigger a full reorganization are:

• Financial results are not there for 3 quarters or more. You are underperforming and it is not the result of a disaster, and the recovery trend is not there.
• You tried incremental enhancements and they are not having enough impact.
• Your key decision processes are convoluted or ineffective.
• Key players leave or arrive into your organization (for example, after a merger or acquisition).
• Your market conditions have changed dramatically (new and strong competitors; new business models)

These are a few of the conditions; your individual reasons may vary and add to this list. If you decide that a reorganization is in order, just be careful to fix the issues with a holistic approach.

Negotiation - the lost art

I've been reminded of a lecture I attended at the Author's Globe because of a negotiation that I am currently involved with .  At the lecture, one of the exercises was to try to divide 7 marbles between two people. As expected most people tried to get 3 or 4 of the marbles, but there were a few participants that wanted all 7 of the marbles - and were being very vocal and proud about it.

The persons I am negotiating with is like that. They are pricing themselves out of the market, they want every benefit and they do not want to negotiate on anything. I have tried to create a win-win situation, but that means that we need to agree to divide the marbles. I understand that it may be a tactic on their part, but the offer is so out of the market and their attitude so final that I have started to wonder if what they want is for me to leave the negotiating table.

If we do not resolve the issues we will loose the 7 marbles and we will pay extra penalties, both parties will have to put extra marbles out of our pockets. Resolving the issue will create the most economic benefit to both parties, so I don't understand the hold out.

This also creates a bully-type situation, where if you concede too much (say less than 3 marbles) you are never going to be able to negotiate anything with them again - you would become a pushover. In this case unless somebody talks some sense to the other side we may have to end up leaving the negotiation table.