Within a one a
week period of time I spoke to two different people who had worked as a store
manager for Starbucks. Interestingly, one said it was one of the best jobs he
had ever had, and the other said it was the worst. What do you think was the
difference?
Many of the
people who work for Starbucks love it. One wrote a book about it: How Starbucks Saved My Life. Wow, that’s
an endorsement for a great place to work, isn’t it?! In his book, Michael Gates
Gill talks about how it was the perfect job for where he was in his life. But
there was something else that made his time as a barista so rewarding. His
manager.
The person I
spoke to lately who loved his time at Starbucks talked about how he interacted
with his regional manager at least twice a week, with a weekly in-person visit
to talk through the details of the business, and a monthly visit from the
regional manager’s boss.
And while the
regular interaction was important, what really made this a great place for this
person was the feedback he got. He knew what he was doing right, and what he
needed to better. It wasn’t a case of “No news is good news” – the
NNIGN problem. In so many organizations, the only feedback a person gets is
when he or she does something wrong; if they don’t hear anything from their
manager they can assume things are okay.
Of course, the
problem with the NNIGN management approach is that humans often assume the
worst. If they don’t hear anything, they begin to think something is wrong, or
they are doing things wrong. So, unless they go out of their way to ask for
some feedback, they stumble around, hoping they’re doing a good job. That’s not
the ideal state for a person to perform well in.
Actually, what
often happens is this: “Dianne” does a great job on a project, but gets no
feedback from her manager. Her boss has the attitude that she should do her
job, and if something needs fixing, he’ll let her know. Since Dianne doesn’t
know whether she did a good job or not, the next time she is faced with a
similar project, she tries something different. After all, the first approach
didn’t get a response, so she might was well try something different. Dianne
approaches the project differently, and if she gets lucky, she hears nothing;
if she does it wrong, she’ll hear about it, and likely become frustrated by not
knowing how to do things right.
In their book, How Did That Happen?, Roger Connors and
Tom Smith writes about a job satisfaction survey conducted by the U.S.
military, where jet fighter pilots were at the bottom of the list and cooks at
the top. Why? Apparently, the fighter pilots rarely received any positive
reinforcement; it was only when they got a chance to do what they were trained
to do that they received any. Cooks, on the other hand, received immediate
positive feedback three times a day. People are more engaged in their work –
and more satisfied - when they fully understand what they’re doing right, and
receive positive reinforcement.
The person who
said that Starbucks was one of the worst working experiences he’d ever had complained
about this very situation – a manager that would only communicate with him when
he had done something the manager felt was wrong. The only feedback he got was
to point out all the things he’d done wrong.
One company, two
completely different experiences. The only difference was the manager, and
specifically the amount of positive reinforcement or confirming feedback the
person got. Makes you think, doesn’t it?
Comments