The majority of behavioural issues do not originate from having bad employees; they stem from having unclear policies. When a team functions based on assumptions such as what defines “professional” behavior, a health infraction, or how feedback should be delivered, conflicts are bound to happen. The answer is not to add more rules, but to eliminate the ambiguity before things go wrong.
Define behaviour in concrete terms, not character traits
Simply saying “be respectful” won’t cut it. The phrase is too vague, but more importantly, we don’t say it just to feel good about our principles. We say it as a shortcut, because we’re either too busy or nervous to call out disrespectful behaviour explicitly. More often than not, in those situations, it’s that we haven’t taken the time to lay out what being disrespectful actually looks like. Written down, though, we’d give a list that looks a lot like my cues above.
Build a tiered response, not just a punishment scale
One of the reasons behavioral problems get out of control is that there’s a big leap from “nothing happens” to “HR is involved.” A tiered feedback loop helps to bridge that gap.
Minor infractions – a couple of late arrivals, an in-meeting interruption – get resolved through low-key coaching. Quick conversation, no paper trail, no performance management bells triggered. “We picked up on this. Can you do X instead? Thanks.”
Repeated or more severe offenses escalate to formal feedback. But only infractions of the sort that raise red flags on safety or severe employee exploitation automatically trigger the use of discipline.
This obviously protects the org legally. More importantly, it treats employees like mature humans who, it turns out, often can and do correct their behavior if the situation is clearly and respectfully flagged for them rather than getting punished in some apparent slap-out-of-nowhere scenario.
Address physical environment standards directly
E-cigarette smoke used indoors is a problem in many shared office spaces, and one that a lot of existing conduct policies fail to clearly outline. It impacts the air quality of the people around you. It causes health issues for coworkers who may be particularly sensitive or allergic to airborne particles. And, depending on the nature of your lease, local building codes, or local laws, it’s a liability issue.
Yet it remains difficult to enforce because vaping simply doesn’t have the same visible cues that someone is breaking the rules like smoking or excessive cologne does. You can’t have an office manager on every floor and in every conference room at all times, and your employees really shouldn’t have to police each other over something like air quality.
An automated monitoring system is the most practical solution to maintain an environment that everyone can work in peace in. Easy installation with wireless vape detectors means a facilities team can keep air quality standards in check without constant supervision, freeing up your janitorial or maintenance teams to focus their efforts elsewhere.
Tie conduct to performance, not just compliance
Many organizations have values written in their handbook, but these values are not repeated in performance evaluations. You can hit all your numbers for the quarter, but if you run roughshod over your coworkers, that will never count against you. The ends don’t justify the means, because the how question matters. And it matters at least as much as the what.
Values do not automatically come up as part of the review process if they are not embedded in actual criteria for feedback. This ushers in a very concrete answer for employees: We’re not just about the rules; this is how we get work done together. By placing values alongside results in the rating process, the company signals aspiration for improvement as a default setting – this isn’t a checklist, this is your path to mastery.
This in turn encourages employees to act in a way that is responsible and appropriate around others, which reduces interpersonal issues and things for HR to tackle. It also encourages employees to keep their colleagues in check in order to build a work environment that is conducive for productive work in order to raise their standings when it comes to a review. Both these things work in tandem to create a more efficient operation for all involved.
Make psychological safety part of the infrastructure
The above strategies are all meaningless if employees are hesitant to report issues. If the person who raises a concern in the misconduct system is punished, then it isn’t a misconduct system, it’s a cover-up system.
Psychological safety isn’t achieved through a leadership proclamation. It’s achieved when the same boss who demands high standards also reliably responds with gratitude to the messenger, admits and discusses their mistakes, and thanks the employee who gives feedback. When employees feel safe to speak up, and when the response to the first error is discussion, not exclusion, people spend less time, energy, and attention trying to cover up errors, and more time trying to identify them.
For more, visit Pure Magazine
