Printed Page 402

Communicating with Subordinates

The movie Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle tells the story of Harold Lee and Kumar Patel, two friends who encounter bizarre obstacles in their nightlong quest for White Castle hamburgers (Leiner, Hurwitz, Schlossberg, Kahane, & Shapiro, 2004). The film opens with a confrontation between Harold and his supervisor, Billy Carver. It’s Friday afternoon, and Billy has been invited by J.D., a fellow supervisor, to a party that night. But Billy has a research report due the following morning for a Saturday meeting with German investors. J.D. encourages Billy to “just get somebody else to do your work for you,” so Billy dumps the project on Harold. First, Billy attempts to get Harold to agree by suggesting that it is Harold’s responsibility. When that doesn’t seem to work, J.D. steps in and threatens to tell the head boss that Harold is slacking off if he doesn’t do the work. Harold reluctantly agrees.

When you communicate upward, you’re typically trying to influence your supervisors. But when you’re the supervisor, you have the influence. When you present a request or demand to your subordinates—like Billy passing his report on to Harold—you don’t have to worry about using advocacy. You can simply tell them what to do and use whatever language you want. Or can you?

Having formal authority in an organization gives you freedom in the messages you use when interacting with subordinates, known as downward communication.But with this freedom comes responsibility. Although many people in power positions exploit their freedom by bullying or harassing employees (as we’ll discuss shortly), what distinguishes competent downward communication is the willingness of empowered people to communicate without relying on their power in order to appeal to subordinates in positive, empathic, respectful, and open ways.

Competent downward communication can be achieved by observing five principles (Eisenberg & Goodall, 2004). First, routinely and openly emphasize the importance of communication in workplace relationships with subordinates. For example, some supervisors engage in both informal and formal interactions with subordinates—hallway chats, impromptu office visits, weekly status updates, or team meetings. They also clearly and concisely explain instructions, performance expectations, and policies.

Second, listen empathically. Respond positively to your employees’ attempts at upward communication rather than perceiving such attempts as a threat to power. Listen to subordinates’ suggestions and complaints, and demonstrate a reasonable willingness to take fair and appropriate action in response to what they are saying.

Third, when communicating wants and needs to subordinates, frame these messages as polite requests (“Do you think you could . . .”) or persuasive explanations (“Here’s why we need to get this done in the next week . . .”). By contrast, incompetent downward communication involves using power to make threats (“Do this now or else”) and demands (“Take care of that customer now!”).

Fourth, be sensitive to your subordinates’ feelings. For instance, if a reprimand is in order, try to make it in private rather than in front of other workers. Keep such exchanges focused on behaviors that need to change rather than making judgments about the subordinate’s character or worth: “John, I noticed that you arrived late to the last three staff meetings. I’m worried that late arrivals disrupt the meetings and cause us to lose time. What ideas do you have for ensuring that you get to meetings on time?”

Last, share relevant information with employees whenever possible. This includes notice of impending organizational changes and explanations about why the changes are coming. For example: “Our company hasn’t been meeting its forecasted revenues, so several units, including ours, are being sold to another company. We’ll have an opportunity to accept jobs here or to move to the company that’s acquiring us. As soon as I know more about what this change means for all of us, I’ll share that information.”

Complimenting your subordinates is most effectively done when the compliments are focused on a subordinate’s work—his or her achievements, expertise, attitude, cooperativeness, and so forth. Avoid compliments about personal matters—like a subordinate’s appearance. Regardless of your intention, something as innocuous as complimenting the stylishness of a subordinate’s hairstyle or the beauty of his or her skin may make the person feel uncomfortable. In some organizations, such compliments can trigger charges of sexual harassment or discrimination.

Also, praise is best presented privately rather than publicly, except in formal contexts such as recognition dinners and award ceremonies. Many supervisors enjoy spontaneously singling out particular employees for praise in front of their coworkers (“Everyone, let’s give Samantha a round of applause—she was our unit sales leader again this past month!”). These supervisors incorrectly believe that such praise improves morale, but it can do the opposite. When someone is publicly singled out in a context where such recognition is unexpected, that person’s status is elevated. This might be merited, but it could foster resentment and envy among the person’s peers and ultimately undermine the organization’s climate.

Of course, criticizing subordinates is no easier. Especially challenging is providing constructive criticism to high-achieving employees, who often have little experience receiving criticism, and expect only praise (Field, 2005). But offering constructive criticism isn’t as difficult as you might think. Instead, it requires you to draw upon the many skills you have mastered in previous chapters.

Begin by using your knowledge of emotion management from Chapter 4, remaining calm, kind, and understanding throughout the exchange. Open your interaction with positive remarks, and end your comments with similar commendations: “It was obvious you worked really hard on designing that presentation” or “This isn’t the end of the world—just something I’d like you to work on for future presentations.”

Second, follow the guidelines for competent interpersonal communication described in Chapter 1, and cooperative language detailed in Chapter 6. Informatively, honestly, and clearly identify the issue or behavior that concerns you, describing it neutrally rather than personalizing it or leveling accusations. For example, instead of saying, “You clearly don’t realize how you came across,” say, “I think the way you defended our team’s work yesterday may not have been the most effective approach.” Rather than “You shouldn’t have gone in unprepared like that,” say, “There seemed to be an expectation in the room of more precise data on projected sales.”

Strive to experience and express empathy toward your subordinate through perspective-taking and empathic concern (Chapter 3), showing that you understand how he or she may feel: “The same thing has happened to me before” rather than “I would never let something like that happen.” Keep in mind how you have felt when receiving criticism from your superiors, and adapt your communication accordingly.

Finally, avoid belaboring the error that has been made, and instead, focus most of your talk time on ideas for avoiding such missteps in the future. Although you have the authority to dictate corrections, subordinates respond more favorably when supervisors negotiate solutions with them. Offer your subordinate specific ideas, but frame them as suggestions, asking for their opinion. The goal of constructive criticism is not only to correct the errant behavior but to create a mutual consensus with your subordinate.