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

‘…more than half of American employees “feel over worked at least some of the time,” and “70 percent say they often dream of having a different job,”’ according to a survey by non-profit Families and Work Institute (2016): as reported in NY Times article “Preoccupations,” January, 2017.

   Our quote was drawn from an eye-opening article about a Google client services manager who was feeling miserable in her job. After negotiations with her own executive she was given a 3 month, unpaid pause or leave of absence from her job. Such a break gave her time to reflect and realign her thoughts and approach to work life. She ultimately returned to Google feeling refreshed and rejuvenated to take on a different assignment.

Episodes like this one reminded your writer of the many instances where clients have discussed their concerns about different people’s performance. In some instances it was

clear that a parting of the ways was inevitable, but in others it became obvious that a formerly good performer was going through a bad patch. Bad patch people exist in every organization and how those individuals are handled determines whether they come back on-side, with continued positive productivity, or whether they become your organization’s loss and another’s gain. Stories about bad patch people come along way too often.

With this latter group an appropriate half-day or day out with their leader, or an objective outsider, can allow for reflection. Buttress this reflection with some essential follow-through and then watch the person to put themselves back on track, and more. Regrettably too many people-leaders are not trained in handling such situations or don’t possess the personal confidence or interest to do it. Knowing that someone cares about bad-patch people can work wonders. It’s a much more positive approach than pressuring people through highly managed performance meetings.

Similar to the Google client services manager story, this writer also recalls a client meeting from not such a long time ago where a client executive was experiencing conflicts and performance difficulties with a previously well-regarded, high potential, mid-level leader. After spending some time with the individual concerned, it was clear he was experiencing some real challenges with his boss’s leadership-managerial style. He expressed some valid points about his conflict situation and also seemed to be a reflective and willing-to-make-some-personal-changes person, where necessary.

His executive listened carefully to this writer’s feedback, which included a recommendation to allow the individual to take a two-week vacation backpacking in the mountains: as was his passion. Armed with the extra advice received before he left, this mid-level leader returned from his hike to have a sensible and mature discussion with his executive. They came to a mutual understanding on how to proceed together. This same individual is now operating in a senior position within his parent organization.

Accounts like this are pretty regular in more progressive organizations, although such organizations are still in the minority. Too often executives point their fingers at their people, rather than at themselves. It can be quite rewarding for more enlightened organizations to give their momentary, challenged people time to reflect and then turn things around. Giving people a time-out is a considerably more optimal solution; rather than fire them and hope for the best that someone better will come along.

The above Google example portrays the benefits of someone taking a 3 month unpaid leave or pause: such as:

» Minimize the inconvenience of allowing someone to work out their issues over a period of time or      permanently losing a person with potential.

» Unpaid leaves are a good way to retain and attract talented people.

» Increases company loyalty and good will for those who get the pause opportunity.

    » Provides the pause-person with a renewed sense of purpose and alignment.

» Rejuvenates and refreshes team members, so when they return, they have an obvious ripple effect on other team members.

 » Enables newer or less experience staff to fill interim roles and learn new skills, while people take a pause.

 » Encourages time-out team leaders or executives to reflect upon and enhance their leadership approach.   

Better still, on occasions this writer has encouraged clients has allowed their executives to attend a leadership appreciation session immediately prior to a key vacation. A session like this brings the added advantage of giving them pause for reflection immediately afterward, through their oncoming vacation, instead of plunging right back into their normal work environment. While on vacation, they consciously or subconsciously reflect upon their “appreciation” experience and return with a refreshed and likely objective approach to move their team’s ball forward.

Such an approach fits in nicely with the stronger, intrinsic motivational approach called PEACAM – where P= renewed purpose; E= treated in a respectful and equalizing way to review their situation; A= refreshed feeling of pending achievement; C= likely continued camaraderie; A= given a degree of autonomy to work out the next way forward; M= provide them with greater mastery through a better understanding of their talents.

So, the next time you’re thinking about firing someone because they appear frustrated and/or somewhat difficult: start by asking yourself questions like – How much of their situation is due to my inadequate leadership? Is there a better alternative option with an individual who may still be able to contribute a lot? Remember, you have already invested quite a bit in this person. Consider instead, a pause, an unpaid sabbatical, a paid vacation, a trek in the wilderness, and so on. There are many ways to get people back on track and then benefit from their continued expertise and efforts.

To learn more about different types of pause, talk with: