c. 2026 Cheryl Kelly, Rod ice
All rights reserved
(5-26)
Her Take:
It is often said that the more money one makes and the higher up the proverbial corporate ladder one rises, the less one does. It is one of those “they say” statements, where “they” are not quite formally introduced or identified. As with most generalized assertions, there is some truth to be found but also exceptions as well. During my career, I have run across both types of coworkers and bosses; those that do and those that either pass the buck or delegate depending on where they are on the organizational chart. As a manager myself, I try to limit my delegation, however, proper and strategic delegation is not only good for the delegator, but the delegatee as well. It is a great growth and coaching tool that can help an employee get prepared for upward movement when the opportunities arise.
Every company has its share of diverse personalities and work ethic amongst its employees. I liken it to students in a way. You have your “D” students who are your paycheck collectors; they do the bare minimum without any desire to move in any direction but out the door when the day is done. These employees work the system in every way possible to get the maximum benefit with minimal effort, making sure it is just enough not to get fired. Then you have the “B-C” students who are your steady work performers; they show up on time, ready to work and meet the expectations of the job. These employees have a bit more care and pride in their work. They truly want to do a good job, care about the quality of their performance, but are content where they are; there is no desire to move beyond their current job description. Lastly, you have your “A” students who are your over-achievers; they consistently go above and beyond expectations and continually strive for improvement. These employees are the first in and the last out; the ones who always volunteer for those extra projects; they excel in leadership and have aspirations of advancement.
For this mermaid, who has been in the workforce for quite some time, I have seen a trend that shows the truth part of what “they say” above. Too many times I have seen “A” student employees taken advantage of to a point where they become overwhelmed. They end up being the go-to employees for everything because their supervisors and managers know that the job will get done accurately and on time; with minimal to no oversight. The positive attributes and qualities those over-achievers possess start to become a negative…for them. Their plates become fuller and fuller, and at times those extra responsibilities come without proper consideration or compensation. The company has now taken this wonderful asset and through their own fault created a liability; or worse, they have managed to push this asset with high potential right out the door to a competitor.
So much time and effort, and increasingly so given the recent focus on work/life balance, is put into human resources and projects to create awareness for corporations with regards to employee relations and well-being. How then, do we continue to see companies fail when it comes to recognizing and promoting those employees who are exceptional performers; those candidates who show the most promise for advancement? Are they so greedy that they do not want to allocate funds for proper compensation? In other words, why pay when they can get it for free, at least for a limited time. Or perhaps it is easier to climb an “A” student hurdle than a “D” student hurdle. Typical “D” student employee behavior has shown more aptness for argument, complaint, and at times litigiousness. On the other hand, typical “A” student employee behavior has shown an eagerness to learn and excel; a need to please and not cause waves or draw negative attention. Could this simply be a case of the squeaky wheel getting the grease?
There is nothing more frustrating for an employee than to watch a coworker less qualified and less committed get away with underperforming. Or worse, a coworker who holds a higher position doing less work or putting in less effort while they themselves are continually pushed for more. Everyone has their breaking point. The point at which they finally see the situation for what it is. Unfortunately for some “A” student employees, this threshold doesn’t come until they have invested so many years that the commitment of time outweighs the desire to start all over with another employer. Adding insult to injury is watching the years spent working to the higher standard they put on themselves become the normal expectation for their position from their boss.
So, what’s an over achiever, “A” student employee to do? I believe your work ethic is your work ethic, and try as you might, it is hard to decide one day that you will no longer perform to the standard that is typical for yourself. If the guilt doesn’t get you, the stress will. The best you can do is to find ways to satisfy your inner self by doing your job to the best ability that you can for the day, and search for ways to push back respectfully when your boss goes to add that second or third helping to your plate without asking.
His Take:
My friend the Mermaid has a superior amount of experience in this area, and it shows in what she has written here, about employers and their human assets. While my own experience as a salaried manager was somewhat fractured, coming with five different retail chains and surviving numerous company closures and revisions, I can distill my own philosophy into a few, basic platitudes.
First – When joining the workforce, one should keep in mind that career goals and company targets may or may not always occupy the same points on a dartboard. Ownership groups generally have some master plan in place regarding their evolution and development, but that may not offer a proper amount of room for growth regarding their employees. As an example, I remember that a most talented manager I encountered while beginning my journey, at a local department store, was frustrated by the structure of their hierarchy. She found herself eschewing accepted routines of supplication to district supervisors when they visited, in favor of accomplishing necessary tasks. This prioritization of actual duties, over embracing ‘office politics’ to further her own advancement caused friction. She was tagged as a contrarian, not adequately a willing and cohesive part of the team. Eventually, she went to a competitor in a different market, and rose quickly to a position of general manager over an entire unit. Her talent was, I thought, quite obvious. But it seemed to matter less than following her superiors around at their heels, with the affection of a puppy. Another member of the same team was a shy, slender woman who took an opposite approach to doing her job. She deferred to the boss on every occasion, and helped to cover when there were issues with his own performance. Their bond remained unbreakable for many years.
Second – When working for a Cleveland chain in the 1990s, I saw several fellow associates getting moved from store to store, and having their duties reassigned, in an upward or downward direction. These shifts usually were a product of dependably achieving excellent results, or poor performance being delivered, without improvement. The only people who were able to stay on their spot did so by being anonymous contributors. They showed up as scheduled, did the basic minimum for their classification, and went home accordingly. There were no ripples in the water, having departed. One could rightly observe that their service gave little to the company, except for marking time and holding their position. Yet because they typically avoided controversy or questions, their place in the continuum was safe. Once again, many who were the best and brightest among us moved on to other work. Those veritable slugs who stayed on course, steady and slow, were around forever. With an obvious effect on our operation, a lack of zeal for seizing the day.
Third – In personal terms, I benefitted from a wealth of informal training, provided by fellow employees who had previously been veterans of corporate retailers such as A & P, Kroger, Valu King, and many regional operators. Sometimes, I learned more about the industry in this setting than through official manuals and handbooks that were provided. But most important of all was the concept of a work ethic. I sometimes heard members of the team complain that it made no sense to push their limits on the sales floor, when the amount of compensation gotten in return was minimal. That gripe fell upon deaf ears, because I remembered that those who handled simple tasks with dignity and determination did the same when climbing a company ladder. As an example, a Sunday School teacher from my childhood was a top-level executive with his firm in Virginia, but had started out sweeping floors in their stockroom. The character he possessed mattered, at every level of advancement. Sadly, it is something that can rarely be acquired through training at the store level. Instead, a downward spiral of thought and action usually takes precedence, when hiring people who do not fit the paradigm.
Fourth – One of the company owners I served, who had a franchise under the banner of a regional chain, urged me to ‘look down the road to see what lies ahead.’ So that I would be prepared when changes came my way, not surprised at the last minute. His advice still resonates with importance. But it also pointed out how we retain our individuality, while participating in a greater association of commercial interest. For a time, I wrote proposals that were submitted to our corporate offices, in another state. A chore I took upon myself for the purpose of seeking advancement while with my local employer. I literally wanted to have a forward outlook on career goals, as my mentor had advised. What transpired thereafter was puzzling and unexpected, however. About half of the ten structured ideas were implemented, some with great benefit for the entire company. But I received no credit for what had been done, and also saw no doors open for new opportunities. In a sense, I had failed completely to derive a personal benefit from this experiment. Yet as an exercise in developing comprehensive skills that would serve me well, later in life, the yield was valuable. I did not see the worth reflected immediately in my paycheck, but felt its confident glow when pondering my own image, in the mirror.
Bottom Line – Perhaps the question posed by our Mermaid can best be answered with another query, in response to the first. Is it better to be a paycheck collector or over-achiever? That ultimately comes down to what you expect of an employer, and of yourself.
No comments:
Post a Comment