I was trying to hide but you found me!

I’ve always liked the saying “if it’s not broke, then don’t fix it”.  It reflects the prudence more people should take when considering an amount of change.  Change is, of course, natural, but there are some instances wherein an affected change should really be looked at in a very critical manner before it is instigated, such as instances regarding employment.

In many cases wherein a specific department isn’t meeting a set of designated metrics, or in incidences wherein the company is viewed with less-than-spectacular performance, the near automatic response would either be to remove certain key people or hire new and fresh talent to the firm.  There are instances wherein this move could solve the problem, but this is not always the case.  If anything else, this practice is quite disruptive, particularly in cases where people are removed from the organization, and the intended goal for the move will still not be met, since removing people, or even hiring new ones, may not really be the proper solution.

This situation is actually quite similar to a toothache.  Many people suffering from a toothache have the knee-jerk reaction to simply have it removed.  I had a particularly nasty bout with a bothersome pain a while back, but when I visited the dentists, I asked if there were other available options to outright extraction, since the thought of not being able to chew (it was a molar) well as much as I did wasn’t very appealing to me.  Thankfully, the dentist suggested a root canal instead, and it worked out rather splendidly.  Another incident was with a friend of mine who had a rather prominent overbite problem.  He had been long considering having the bothersome teeth removed or even replaced with dentures, since he could not afford to be without teeth as his profession involved a lot of speaking engagements and smiling.  A simple corrective procedure was able to solve his problem without the removal or replacement of any of his teeth, and it worked out very well for him.

While dental concerns may indeed be painful and quite bothersome at times, concerns and issues arising from personnel matters, whether hiring or removing people, could prove to be far worse should it done haphazardly and without careful thought and planning.

New hires mean new adjustments for ALL

It’s a given that a new job means a major adjustment to the new hire.  There are new policies to study, new skills to learn, and new people to get better acquainted with.  This, however, is the easy part.  The real burden is the adjustment of the part of the people already in the company.  Not too many take kindly to adjusting to someone new.  They know absolutely nothing about the person they are supposed to be working with now, and in cases where the new hire is of mid-level management or higher, this is a definite problem.  I have actually been in rather awkward situations wherein the staff was reluctant or even outright resistant to following the directives I gave when I was hired as a new manager.  There completely unfamiliar with my methods, although many did pick up rather well when I finally got to explaining it to them.  Regardless of whether you are rank and file or even of management level, being new means you are smack dab in the middle of the proving ground where you need to show everyone you deserve the position.  On the part of the people already in the company, they are put in a position where they have to learn to trust and work with a person they know nothing of.

Removing people is disruptive for ALL

It goes without saying that the first person to be affected by termination or removal is the one who was let go.  What many do not know is that the people left in the company are also adversely affected as well, in that they have to pick up whatever slack was left by the person who was removed.  Having someone fill in for the one removed doesn’t immediately solve the problem either, since the person filling in will necessarily have to learn the processes and tasks done by the person who left.  In many cases, there is a period of demoralization in some employees who knew the one removed, and this could affect how they do their everyday tasks.  In some cases, the confidence of the people left become so eroded that they also inclined to leave as well, as they may generate the baseless belief that they could be the next one to be removed.  The disruption of someone leaving or being removed even affects those not directly involved with the person who left, such as HR and Finance, who need to make certain arrangements to close accounts, discontinue certain medical, dental, or pre-need benefits the company may have offered to the one who left, and so on.

The point I am trying to drive here is that being hasty in decisions regarding hiring and removing people at work is not always such a great thing.  More importantly, it may not even be the solution to whatever issues and concerns the company may be having right now.  Sometimes what is needed is long, hard look at what the company is doing, or what direction it is taking, to see where the problem could really be, and what best course should be taken to correct it.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>