by Peter A. Arthur-Smith, Leadership Solutions, Inc.®

“A quarter (25%) of those I surveyed in 1998 reported they were treated rudely at work at least once per week. That figure rose by nearly half (to 36%) in 2005 and then to just over half (to 39%) in 2011,” by author Christine Porath, front page article NY Times Sunday Review, June 2015. She is an Associate Professor at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business.

Productivity is on every executive’s mind during these tougher times as they pursue maximum performance. But that flies in the face of the above finding. Consider a workplace example unearthed by Porath: ‘According to a survey of 4,500 doctors, nurses and other hospital personnel, 71% tied medical errors to disruptive-uncivil behavior…another 27% tied such behavior to patient deaths.’ Pretty numbing, don’t you think?

Let us consider some of the article’s rude behaviors as surveyed about bosses, in order of prevalence:

» Interrupting people – by the boss who knows best

» Being judgmental of those with different views -dismissing people who don’t buy into their boss’s views.

» Pay little attention to other people’s opinions – virtually ignoring those who don’t share the same ideas.

» Fail to pass along vital information – bosses who aim to maintain control by keeping people in the dark.

Just think with these behaviors: if the boss does it, many others within his-her organization will follow suit. Hence a dysfunctional and uncivil culture is established. When that occurs, optimal productivity will inevitably slide.

Another reality is that, in the article author’s words, “Individuals feel valued and powerful when respected. Civility lifts people. Incivility holds people down. It makes people feel small.” There’s no doubt about it, there are those executives who choose to put people down, and those who choose to lift people up. Have you seen them?

Many managers unwittingly put people down because they only see them as part of a “system:” where the system carries more weight than their people do. Such systems are designed for their people to be just cogs within a system of wheels. Once those wheels are mentally established, their people either behave like cogs or leave.

Unfortunately Porath offered few remedies. The one she did offer was to “smile and give simple thanks -as compared with not doing anything at all.” Just doing this apparently resulted with those “in charge” being perceived as 20% warmer, 33% more competent and 23% more civil. Since leaders are more likely to be the ones who smile and say “thank you,” owing to their natural stronger people-orientation; it goes to show why leaders create more goodwill and generate stronger performance.

One of the most alarming areas of growing incivility is where executives, their team members and meeting sponsors bring along their laptops or iPads…supposedly for note-taking. But you often see those same executives or participants, and even meeting sponsors, scrolling through their emails when others are addressing issues. They can also be seen compulsively texting, ‘twittering’ and/or reviewing news flashes instead of fully participating with everyone else

This is where leadership shows itself: firstly, to make any meeting more engaging and purposeful and, secondly, to lead their meeting by asking people to close down their laptops and shut off cellphones … just as if their audience were in a movie theater. But then participants have to feel they’re in a “two-way” meeting rather than a one-way monologue: that is, they are fully involved. People are inclined toward their “toys,” if they don’t feel fully part of the show.

Meeting leaders arrive with a mindset to listen and learn. When meeting leaders do this, there’s a much increased chance participants will do the same. Setting the meeting tone by offering an outline agenda and then asking, “What would you like to see as our meeting outcome?” Suggestions can either come from individual members or from small groups. From these suggestions, meeting topics and ideas should then be phrased as questions for discussion in small (up to six) breakout groups…with the meeting leader listening-in and rotating from group to group. When breakout groups offer proposals, the meeting leader should either embrace them or invite them to deliberate further.

Working with people on an individual basis. To reduce the possibility of incivility or disrespect in one-on-one meetings, executives should be of good mindset and well prepared. Try not to hold meetings when angry or frustrated with events. Such behaviors increase the chances of provocative behavior and dramatically reduce the likelihood of listening, which could take weeks or months to repair. Either take time to cool-out or postpone meetings to another day.

Dealing with inadequate performance. Where an executive needs to address below par performance, lifting the person up rather than belittling them is far more likely to produce the desired results. This can be done through a three step question approach:

» Where are you right now? (A)

» Where do you want to move things forward? (B)

» Where can we best spend our time discussing how you can move things from A to B?

This suggests a truly collaborative and respectful approach, especially where the individual is encouraged to take the lead and the meeting leader shows real intent to listen.

 Greater people involvement.  Traditional enterprise models have tended to keep their people in the dark. Where this may have worked in the past with less educated workforces, it is less likely to work with people from up-and-coming generations: especially as they have access to so much more information. Such generations are going to need much higher degrees of purpose and involvement to get them away from their screens and more virtual world. Once they feel fully included and consulted, then their talents will be revealed and utilized. If you leave them in the dark, they will remain in the dark and either go through the motions or leave.

So, if you are really interested in enhancing productivity; incivility or sarcastic behavior is unlikely to get you there. It’s the difference between being a boss and a leader. Depending on a boss’s immediate know-how advantage, he or she might win some short term gains by uncivil behavior. But leaders will always win out in the longer term by continually wanting to lift their people up.

To learn more about “lifting people up,” talk with: