Forums

In my weekly staff meeting this week, I gave my team a debrief of the conference and explained to them a few of the changes to expect, namely O3s and feedback. I received mixed reaction which was not unexpected but still a bit disappointing. Most of the negative reaction came from my top performers which are also the ones I tend to spend more of my time with. Some comments were: “great another meeting, guess we’ll have to figure out how to work that into our schedule” and “do we have to attend?” The positive reaction seemed to come from the managers newer to my staff or those I spend less time with. I will officially start them next week. Just have to stay positive. Was wondering how others are doing for those that are just introducing the official O3 structure?

-Steve

kklogic's picture

rook,
Awesome job! Any chance those top performers are High Ds?

jeffh's picture

Steve,

I've had roughly the same response. Of 5 team members, 2 completely love them, 2 are on board as long as it seems useful to them, and 1 thinks it is a complete waste of time. The ironic thing is that I am getting the most potent ideas the one who thinks it is a waste of time. I am sure it is an expectation issue, somehow I've set the expectation that her opinion is not heard. Hopefully I can change that soon.

Jeff

Mark's picture

Wow. Those folks won't get very far in most orgs unless they are BEYOND exceptionally good...

DO NOT REACT to their negativity. Just start, and stick with them. They'll get it.

Mark

trandell's picture

I have a similar mixture of directs. One of my top performers is the same as one of yours. Doesn't see the value in O3s. Often doesn't show up at all. Never prepared for them. My *BIG* mistake was not giving feedback on all the negative behaviors (late, no-show, unprepared, etc.).

Keep to the schedule and give feedback. It may not get any easier with them but you will get some value and they will get more than they realize.

To Mark's comment on those people not getting far, I think he is dead on. I've seen some of these types promoted, but it is out of recognition for their talent and technical contributions. They may make a little more money for their smarts, but they rarely get any more responsibility or say in how the org runs.