Category: Leadership

Survivor’s Guilt: The Unexpected Experience of Those Left Behind

Posted on by Myron Beard, PhD

As a leader during this pandemic, you may notice surprising behaviors from your team members. We are talking about employees who have not been directly impacted by the virus: they have not been infected, no one close to them has been affected, and they continue to work. In fact, their positions may have been identified as essential and thus they are not at risk for losing their jobs. However, despite not having been directly impacted, they may be irritable or unmotivated, and may report difficulty sleeping. There is a tendency as a leader in such situations to emphasize how fortunate they are. You may think to yourself that they have nothing to complain about. But this seemingly logical approach to their complaints will likely only make things worse. Why?

A regularly occurring, but unexpected, consequence of surviving a traumatic event is known as survivor’s guilt. This is defined as “having feelings of guilt for having survived a traumatic event when others did not.” It is a common reaction to traumatic events and, indeed, a symptom of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Survivor’s guilt was originally coined to describe feelings that survivors of the Holocaust experienced, but it can also apply to anyone who survives a traumatic event that others did not. This occurs not only in life or death situations. Employees holding onto a job when those around them have been laid off or fired can also experience a sense of guilt. At this point in the pandemic, we are seeing the highest rates of unemployment since the Great Depression! It is likely that the dwindling number of those who are still employed will feel some level of survivor’s guilt.

Feelings of guilt are most common following traumatic or life-threatening situations. Behaviors that can indicate survivor’s guilt include: 

  • Obsessive thoughts
  • Irritability and anger
  • Feelings of helplessness
  • Fear and confusion
  • Lack of motivation
  • Physical complaints (e.g., headaches, nausea or stomach problems, racing heart, trouble sleeping)
  • Social isolation and heightened absenteeism
  • Increased alcohol usage
  • Suicidal thoughts 

Survivors may harbor a set of false beliefs regarding their role in such an event, such as obsessing about how they might have prevented a negative outcome. Links have been found between survivor’s guilt and submissiveness and introversion. Survivors who have had family members or very close friends harmed or terminated are more likely to experience guilt than those who did not have any close connection. In virtually all cases, managers are likely to see a decrease in productivity.

When leaders notice employees experiencing behaviors that are associated with survivor’s guilt, especially if that is unusual for the employee, it is important for the leader to respond in a way that will help (rather than hinder) the employee returning to full productivity. In no case will shaming or diminishing the feelings of the employee be beneficial, especially in the long term.

Here are some leadership behaviors found to be most helpful in assisting such employees:

  1. Empathy: Let those on your team know that the loss of others, through no fault of their own, has also saddened you. Publicly recognize that their loss is also your loss.
  2. Grieving: Accept and allow others to have and express feelings of sadness related to the loss of those friends and coworkers. Undoubtedly, there will be a cloud cast over the organization until such a time that a new normal is reached. Trying to rush through the grief is akin to pushing a rope uphill—it will only frustrate the leader and lead to a loss of confidence on the part of the employees.
  3. Connecting: Getting through a sustained traumatic event is facilitated when people are able to freely and openly connect with others. Encourage team members to stay in touch with each other and discuss their feelings, as needed. This can include establishing a structured time during the day or encouraging ad hoc social connections at lunch, breaks, and on projects.
  4. Communicating: Discuss what really led up to the situation. This is usually external factors—for example, coronavirus—unconnected to the individual. Providing context through rationality (external factors) to accompany the guilt (internal factors) can promote a healthy perspective to grieving and guilt-ridden survivors. 
  5. Structuring: In times of great transition and high emotion, having a structure to the day can help. It is up to leaders to provide a clear sense of direction in the short term and plenty of structure going forward. This helps those experiencing survivor’s guilt get through the day and gives them a sense of accomplishment in the midst of their grieving.

If employees continue to experience heightened behaviors associated with survivor’s guilt after a reasonable time period (4 to 6 weeks), their leader may want to consider referring the employee for additional outside help in the form of counseling. 

In all cases, leaders need to actively demonstrate their deep connection and understanding of what their employees are experiencing. In times like these, leaders would be wise to consider the wisdom of the great writer, Leo Tolstoy. He said: “Patience is waiting. Not passively waiting – that is laziness. But to keep going when the going is hard and slow – that is patience. The two most powerful warriors are patience and time.”

Crisis Leadership: Leading in Times of Great Uncertainty

Posted on by Myron Beard, PhD


It has almost become a cliché to say that we are living in unprecedented times because of COVID-19. The global fear that we are all experiencing can be immobilizing. Indeed, this fear is well-founded, with cases worldwide rapidly increasing. To make matters even worse, the number of cases has been widely underreported because of a lack of accurate testing capacity. Entire nations are shut down with stay-at-home orders, in addition to the millions of people who are self-quarantined. The impact on the world economy is devastating: business after business is closing and unemployment is nearing all-time highs. 

Those who are employed are often heard to say how thankful they are to have a job. This is particularly true with those in essential industries like healthcare, construction, law enforcement, infrastructure, and energy. Yet even in these industries, many employees have been laid off or forced to take leave without pay, in hopes that they will have their jobs in the future. Furthermore, even for those employees who still have jobs, many have extreme anxiety, and wonder if they are exposing themselves to the virus by going to work or if they will be the next to get laid off. 

While there were initially reports of individuals, teams, and communities pulling together, the cumulative toll that the virus is taking—combined with so much economic uncertainty—has impacted virtually all workers. As this crisis wears on, leaders are finding that employee productivity is being replaced by less desirable behaviors, such as malaise, anxiety, absenteeism, negativism, shortness of temper, and distraction. Leaders are struggling with how to keep their employees engaged and return to productivity. What can leaders do to re-engage their employees more fully?

We will provide below several suggestions, but mainly, leaders need to understand that the techniques, behaviors, and management tools they have previously used to motivate employees will not work in this unfamiliar state of affairs. In other words, doing more of the same at a higher intensity can actually have the opposite effect: further diminishing productivity. During this pandemic, leaders need to adopt a different set of behaviors to re-engage their staffs, whether working face-to-face or remotely. In most cases, leaders will need to slow down…in order to eventually speed up!

Leaders must think from the perspective of the employees that they serve. What do employees who are anxious, fearful, depressed, distracted, exhausted, emotional, irritated, or uncommunicative need?

First and foremost, all of these employees need understanding and empathy. It is important for them to know that their leader can relate to their feelings and is fully supportive and appreciative of what they are going through. Leaders should ask employees what they need in order to feel more secure and, when possible, fulfill those requests. Simply put, empathy can go a long way toward restoring an employee’s equilibrium and re-engagement.

Second, these employees need their feelings to be recognized as normal and appropriate for the situation, rather than shameful. This is not a time for leaders to use any kind of “carrot or stick” approach to motivation. Leaders need to demonstrate this patience by being vulnerable themselves and by acknowledging the fears and anxieties that they may also have.

Third, these employees need the opportunity to express their feelings in a safe and nonjudgmental venue. Being able to talk openly with other employees to further normalize their feelings can help reduce levels of anxiety and depression. Having daily times for teams to talk in small groups can go a long way to reducing employee apprehension. Encouraging employees to take breaks together, eat lunch together, and meet informally, all while maintaining social distance as appropriate to prevent contagion (or connecting remotely to maintain human contact), demonstrates understanding and support on the part of leadership. 

Fourth, these employees need structure and consistency. Having clarity as to what is expected and providing small, achievable goals will help employees stay engaged. The more specific and achievable the tasks, the better. Accomplishing several small tasks can be more rewarding at times like this than working on issues that are long-term and more conceptual. Creating consistency in the workplace with regard to schedules, expectations, and agendas can reduce anxiety and provides employees with a greater sense of security.

Fifth, these employees need communication—possibly, even over-communication. In a crisis, the leader becomes coach, inspirational communicator, counselor, and hand-holder. Leaders may need to hold even more meetings than usual, whether in person or online. However, such meetings should be brief, focused, outcome-specific, and tactical. At a minimum, leaders must be cognizant of being in touch more regularly with employees and taking time to listen to concerns, no matter how small.

Finally, leaders need to reassure employees that they are important and that the jobs they are performing are valuable to the organization. We all need to know that we are needed and important to the enterprise; this is even more critical in times of uncertainty. 

Because we have never been in a worldwide pandemic before, leaders need to become more versatile and willing to try new behaviors better suited to the crisis. This is a time for leaders to show their own humanity and vulnerability. During a prolonged crisis, increased productivity will happen only when employees feel as safe, as secure, and as understood as possible. This is the leader’s charge.

We wish health and happiness to you during this historic time. Please stay tuned for the next blog post on Survivor’s Guilt.

Toxic Employees—Does Your Team Need a Cleanse?

Posted on by Myron Beard, PhD

The president of a company engaged me to help him understand what appeared to be an ongoing conflict between two of his key employees. A year earlier, the president had hired his “dream team”—a group of individuals whom he believed could change the face of the company in the marketplace. Each of these hires had been very successful previously and, on paper, had all the credentials needed to make the company a standout and move it ahead of the competition. But that didn’t happen. What happened instead was that two members of the “dream team” became embroiled in bitter disputes that involved manipulation, back-biting, self-righteousness, over-confidence, intimidation, unrealistic certainty of their position, and more. Neither of the employees in question had behaviors that rose to the level of termination, and both had levels of productivity and quality of work that were exemplary. Their contentious relationship was only a distraction at first, but it began to involve others in choosing sides and creating divisiveness on the team. The president recognized that something had to be done.

Toxic Workers

The conflict the president was witnessing is associated with behaviors of “toxic” employees. Toxic employees are ultimately quite harmful to an organization because their undermining, unethical, or questionable behaviors can spread to other employees. However, the complexity in dealing with toxic employees is that they are often high performers. In fact, according to recent research, compared with the average employee, the toxic employee is often more productive as well as more likely to better follow processes, rules, and procedures, often with rigid adherence. Although these employees’ behaviors may be incredibly disruptive, their ability to be productive—and appear (to management) to be acting in the best interest of the company—keeps them employed. It is only when enough damage has been done and the complaints from other employees reach a fevered pitch that management is forced to take action.

Characteristics of Toxicity

According to the research, the toxic employee is characterized by three major traits:

  1. Over-confidence: Toxic employees appear to have supreme confidence and the sense that there is nothing they can’t accomplish. Over time, not having a sense of limits or boundaries can cause them to engage in behaviors that may verge on misconduct.
  2. Self-regarding: Toxic employees consistently put their interests or functions above those of their colleagues. They demonstrate arrogant behaviors that suggest their approach is the only right one, and that they will prevail at all costs. They will not demonstrate any collaborative or supportive behaviors with their colleagues. In this sense, they exhibit a low level of emotional sensitivity, similar to both narcissists and psychopaths.
  3. Rule-follower: Toxic employees will regularly insist that their adherence to the rules of the organization is the foundation for their differences with others. They may claim that rules should not be broken and will steadfastly follow them whenever it suits their purposes. Interestingly, these same ostensible rule-followers are more likely to be terminated for actually breaking the rules.

Toxic Effects

Because toxic employees are usually productive, many of their behaviors are likely to be overlooked or accepted as the price of having a “diva” on the team. This rationale can also be used to discount the early warning signs reported by their disgruntled coworkers. The clever toxic employee can even make others feel responsible for conflicts that the toxic worker has initiated. They are the kind of people who blame others for having a white carpet if they spill red wine on it!

As if having toxic employees were not bad enough, the situation is often exacerbated by their ability to “recruit” others to follow in their footsteps. Their intimidation, persuasiveness, and convincing sense of being right have the effect of causing others to fall in line. This becomes a vicious cycle, whereby toxic individuals and their followers reinforce detrimental behaviors and compete increasingly with others in the organization! Another downside is that those having close, regular contact with toxic employees have a higher chance of being compromised and terminated themselves, compared with those who work with non-toxic employees.

Antidotes

What is the best solution for managing and dealing with a toxic employee? If you identify a toxic employee in your workplace, your best strategy is to take the high road. The odds of turning a toxic employee into a good employee are low, at best. In fact, a company is better off replacing a toxic employee with an average employee than spending time and energy trying to transform the toxic one. Of course, prevention is the best solution. Note the predictors and traits of toxicity discussed above and do not hire candidates who display these traits. If your team needs a cleanse, as with the president and his two problem employees discussed earlier, a manager should bring the team together to remind them of their shared goals. By re-establishing the vision for the team, managers can bolster the productivity and morale of employees, while also maintaining the effectiveness and credibility of management, thereby decisively counteracting any harmful behaviors.

Hard Conversations? Just Do It!

Posted on by Myron Beard, PhD

Recently, a client called me to ask for my counsel regarding an upcoming performance discussion with one of his subordinates. He told me about the individual’s declining performance, including several instances of the employee failing to deliver on agreed-upon projects. The employee was contrite and apologetic, but his performance had not improved. In addition, the employee had experienced some personal problems over the past year, for which my client had made several allowances. It was clear that my client had delayed the discussion for some time and could delay no more. The time had come for a direct and unambiguous performance discussion.

My client expressed significant apprehension about having the discussion and asked my advice on how to handle the meeting.  Violations of company policy or ethical standards are easier to address because they are cut and dried. However, discussions about performance issues are not always as clear-cut. Such issues tend to be more about the behaviors of employees, which are more difficult to discuss because they may cause employees to feel defensive, embarrassed, or nervous.

My experience is that when leaders have faced difficult personnel decisions, they never say, “I wish I would have waited longer before taking action.” Quite the contrary! They always say, “I wish I would have taken action sooner.” The effects of waiting to take some kind of corrective action include loss of time and productivity. More important, leaders who are slow to address performance issues risk demonstrating a lack of credibility and confidence to subordinates and colleagues.

Why do managers consistently delay the timing and directness of difficult performance conversations? The major reason they procrastinate is a lack of self-confidence. They are uncomfortable having potentially tense and contentious discussions in which they do not feel in control of the outcome. In addition, I see leaders delay having these discussions because they want so much to be liked and admired that they would rather be taken advantage of than risk hurting someone’s feelings. The greatest error leaders can make is to lose sight that such conversations need to be unemotional reviews of the facts of the individual’s performance, not emotional displays of feelings.

There are three things managers need to keep in mind before having difficult performance discussions with their employees:

1: Data. Come to the meeting prepared with clear data about the individual’s performance. To have a productive performance discussion, it is critical for managers to have provided clear expectations for work behavior and responsibilities (including quality, quantity, and timeliness of efforts), as well as to have documented instances when expected behaviors or deliverables were not met.

2: Focus. Have a clear agenda about what you are going to discuss, and stick to it. Because the meeting will be based on facts and not opinions, the tone of the meeting should be professional and any degree of emotion should be minimal. The manager can always respond to difficult retorts by the subordinate by staying calm and guiding the discussion back to the facts at hand.

3: Plan. Prior to the meeting, decide with clarity what changes are required, what the expected outcomes should be, and by when you expect to see improvements. In meetings of such importance, it is unfair and unprofessional to make it up as you go. If the manager does not have a plan, including the consequences for failing to meet expectations, the outcome of the meeting will be sub-optimal. A less-than-good outcome is not beneficial for either the individual or the organization.

The key to having difficult performance discussions is preparation, along with a commitment to keeping the conversations factual, focused, and outcome-oriented. My client took this advice to heart and went into the meeting prepared with the facts, an agenda that he followed, and an outcome in mind. He kept the meeting factual and non-emotional; and though the discussion was not an easy one, the client and his subordinate left the meeting with a clear and unambiguous plan. Furthermore, it was agreed that if the subordinate followed the plan, he would be successful, but that if he wasn’t able to follow the plan, he would be either reassigned or terminated. As is often the case, my client’s post-meeting evaluation was, “I should have had this meeting a long time ago!”

The next time you are faced with having a difficult conversation, make sure to plan ahead, have data to support your positions, keep the discussion focused, and go into the meeting with an idea of the desired outcome. Being prepared will make these interactions more productive, and you will waste less time and energy worrying beforehand.

Managing the Passive-Aggressive Employee

Posted on by Myron Beard, PhD

We all know passive-aggressive employees. They are consistently late—for meetings, with assignments, even for social engagements—and tend to procrastinate and “forget” to complete a task or deadline. They may even be so bold as to ask their manager to send them reminders to get something done. Now that is audacity! No matter what “tricks” are put in place to manage their passive-aggressive behavior (e.g., scheduling them to arrive 30 minutes early, telling them a deadline is due two weeks before the actual due date, etc.), any possible gains they make quickly erode and they revert to their former ways. In addition, passive-aggressive employees can be characterized as being closed to new ideas and stubbornly holding onto their own point of view, even in the presence of data to the contrary. They may play clueless instead of defending their point of view, but the closed-mindedness remains. These manipulative patterns of behavior can also pervade their personal lives. It is only when these individuals offer benefits that far outweigh their liabilities that managers, employees, and friends tolerate—and adjust to or excuse—the disrespectful or manipulative behavior.

Passive-aggressive employees always have a reasonable excuse for being tardy (when they offer one at all)—the traffic was heavy, they had a physical problem, the dog ate their assignment, their computer went down, and so on. When decisions are made in their absence because the decision could not wait, they often show emotions ranging from disappointment to sullenness or rage that their input was not solicited. Managers joke that these folks will be “late to their own funeral.” Although these laggards may be the target of our light-hearted joking, over time, their consistent and ongoing tardiness, stubbornness, and sense of entitlement can result in lost productivity, loss of team unity, lower team morale, frustration, and resentment from managers and coworkers. These employees may be agreeable, apologetic, and possibly remorseful when challenged about their behavior; however, when confronted, they can also become defensive and even seem to be insulted!

The only reason passive-aggressive employees advance in companies, and in life, is because they are smart, talented, or effectively manipulative. To succeed in the face of often fierce opposition is itself a talent! A hair stylist I know is routinely 30 to 60 minutes late for her clients, but they tolerate her tardiness because she does a good job. Her clients have adjusted their behavior as a means of dealing with her tardiness—but this only serves to reinforce the hair stylist’s passive-aggressive behavior!

Passive-aggressive employees often are unable to change their behavior because it is rooted in anger, deep hostility, and wariness. Their passive aggression represents an inability to express frustration or anger in constructive or direct ways, and a lack of maturity, disrespect, and concern for other people’s feelings. These employees have somehow missed a crucial part of socialization that has to do with the development of empathy, intimacy, and collaboration. Instead, they have successfully been able to get others to conform to their way of conducting themselves, and therefore have little incentive to change. Psychologically, these individuals have never learned to express their hostility in a direct and constructive manner. In fact, they may assert that nothing is wrong and that they are simply disorganized or absent-minded. They will rarely take serious responsibility for their shortcomings or the discomfort and frustration it causes others.

So what is a manager to do? Dealing with passive-aggressive employees is especially difficult because it is unlikely these employees will truly change their behavior. In larger companies, these are the employees who may have gotten “passed around” because of the frustration previous managers have had with them. But there are effective ways to manage passive-aggressive employees.

  1. Establish Individual Contributor Roles: Passive-aggressive employees are not good team players. In fact, they can negatively impact the function and morale of a team. To the extent possible, put passive-aggressive employees into an individual contributor role, in which the work they do is independent of others relying on them.
  2. Set Clear Boundaries: It is critical to set clear boundaries with passive-aggressive employees in terms of expectations, quantity, quality, and timeliness of work. Equally critical is for you to be consistent with your expectations and not waver in the face of seemingly good excuses. The less consistent you are with your expectations and the subsequent consequences, the more likely the negative behavior will continue.
  3. Schedule Regular Performance Meetings: With passive-aggressive employees, reviewing clear and documented assignments in regularly scheduled meetings (at least weekly) is critical to determining whether these employees are completing their assignments. During these meetings you can demonstrate both positive regard for work done as expected and specific feedback where modifications are necessary. Be vigilant against manipulation and in your resolve and expectations.
  4. Manage Emotions: Because passive-aggressive employees have not learned how to express anger or frustration appropriately, encourage them to discuss their feelings when things are not going well. You are not their therapist, of course, but giving them the opportunity to talk about what is really behind their behavior can help create a new paradigm for relating to issues that affect their performance.
  5. Manage Decisively: When old patterns of passive aggression emerge, act quickly and decisively to deal with them. Putting passive-aggressive employees on a performance improvement plan or redeploying them in the face of opposition are wise and sometimes necessary options. Similarly, when new and positive behaviors emerge, being quick to recognize them and reward individuals for their success will reinforce new patterns and ways to move forward.