In a recent workshop, I asked all the leaders to spend some time getting to know people during their work week. When they came back to the follow-up session, they all reported that their staff looked suspicious and confused when they simply asked how they were and tried to have a normal conversation.

If you are a manager, here’s one of the most nerve-racking things you can do to your staff. Just walk up to them and say ‘How are you going?’

It seems innocuous enough. You might even be genuinely interested in their weekend or their wellbeing. But the reality is that the vast majority of employees think that if you are talking to them, then there’s a problem.

I have dealt with so many organisations, whose staff believe that the only reason management talks to them is when something is wrong. Is this the truth? I am sure it isn’t – I am sure the truth lies somewhere in the middle of what management thinks and what the staff think. Whether this is actually true or not, though, is inconsequential. Their perception is their reality.

The vast majority of staff think: ‘no news is good news’. If no-one’s talking to you, then things must be ok.

Why does this happen?

There are two reasons:

Firstly, leaders in general, don’t talk to their staff enough. And the staff are actually right – they hear more about the bad than the good. If they do a good job, they are doing their job, right? No need for praise when someone just ‘does their job’. But, if they do a bad job, there is a flurry of activity. Now, even if you don’t actually get angry at the team member, there is a still a flurry of activity trying to rectify the situation. Therefore the bad gets more attention than the good.

Secondly, humans are hard-wired to be more sensitive to negatives than positives. This is a throwback to our evolution. As a survival machine, I couldn’t afford to miss a threat – like a predator – but I didn’t see an apple tree, it wasn’t going to kill me. So we learnt to become hypersensitive to negatives.

So, here’s what you need to do:

1) Just talk

This seems like a waste of time to a lot of people, but you would be surprised at how much you find out by just having a normal conversation with someone. They might bring up work or problems they are facing, and that’s ok, but that shouldn’t be your agenda. Your agenda should be learning about your people, and in particular what they like and what motivates them. It’s a chance to build rapport – and we tend to trust people with whom we have a good rappport.

2) Praise the good – a lot

To combat our natural tendency to remember negatives and not positives, we need to make sure that positive feedback outweighs negative. Make a set time each week to go through the team’s accomplishments and give them a verbal pat on the back. Do this without any negatives at all. Save them for another time.

3) Analyse the negatives

When there is some negative feedback to deliver, force your staff to analyse. When we wwitch on the analytical brain, it dulls the noise from our emotional centre. Ask ‘how’ questions – these make us analyse. Avoid ‘why’ questions, because this analysis actually switches the emotional brain on and makes us ruminate.

These are three simple things that you can do to help your people see that management isn’t all about dealing out punishment and bad news. Next time you ask ‘How are you going?’ you might be greeted with a smile rather than fear.

Every manager has at least one person who isn’t hitting their targets. You really want them to do better, but do you sometimes sabotage that by managing them like underachievers?Here are some tips for helping those who are languishing.

We want our people to perform at their best. No doubt about that. Regardless of your personal intentions – whether you want to look good as a manager or you want to make sure your business stays healthy, we all want our people to do their best work.

When people start to underperform, when they start to let us down, our initial impulse is to take back some control. We might decrease some responsibilities, take back some of the project, or micro manage them just a little in order to make ourselves feel more comfortable. This is human nature. We have a goal that is being threatened, so we take back some responsibility.

But how does this impact the person doing the work?

If we look at the way we manage our top performers, versus the way we manage our underperformers, we’d see two completely different management approaches. And while this seems logical on the surface, it seems ludicrous when you dig a little further. I’ll break down the logic:

You do ABC – and someone performs really well.

You have someone that isn’t performing well – and you really want them to do well – so you do XYZ, instead of ABC.

In other words, we manage high performers like high performers. And we manage underachievers like underachievers – even though we want them to be high performers.

That doesn’t sound so logical.

And a big component of this is a feeling of control. When we take control away from people, their ability to think critically, to problem solve and to control emotions and behaviours is compromised. As leaders, we tend to give our high performers a lot of control, and our underachievers less. This might end up being a self-fulfilling cycle.

In a study last year, a group of people were given a problem solving test and their scores were recorded. Each of the participants were then asked to describe a person in their lives that they thought was controlling. For 15 minutes, they were asked to describe the person, their actions and specific situations. After this interview, they were given another (equivalent) problem-solving test and each and every one of them performed about 30% worse.

Just the thought of someone controlling us decreases our ability to problem-solve by 30%!

But it turns out actual control isn’t completely necessary. In many research experiments using computer tasks, just the feeling of control can reignite someone’s performance. As with most things, perception is more important than reality.

So here are some key considerations for giving people the feeling of more control.

1)    Be more organized to delegate

To delegate well and give people control, you have to be more organized than when you simply do it yourself. Give yourself and your direct reports longer lead times, that allow them to get their work done, get some feedback and then redo it it if necessary. When your direct report gets it wrong too close to the deadline, you have very little choice but to take it back and do it yourself

2) Delegate pieces of projects, rather than the whole thing

In doing this, you’re bound to find things that people are proficient at. Remember, the sweet spot for development is at the juncture of challenge and support – too much of either is a poor recipe for learning. Give people pieces of the project that you are happy for them to control, rather than setting them up to fail by asking them to do the entire thing.

3) Create the perception of control

People always need to feel like they control something. There are always things that we have no control over – such as deadlines. But there are also things that we can make sure people do have control over – that might be the way in which the work gets done, the timeline for milestones or even the color of the binding for the final report. These small things can actually make a big difference to the way people perform.

People do their best work when they feel like we trust them and when they have a sense of control. Not when they are operating on fear or worried about making mistakes.

These simple things might just help your underachievers turn their game around.

A study recently showed that people who were allowed to use Facebook at work were actually more productive than those who weren�t. As astonishing as this sounds there might be some underlying reasons for this that sit at the heart of productivity. So let’s take a look at why his might happen and then what we can learn from it.

There are a number of conditions under which people are more productive and seem to work better. When I say work, I mean the sort of work that characterizes the information age. That is, creative thinking, problem solving and working smarter, not harder.

Being able to access Facebook during work hours helps to satisfy two of these conditions – autonomy and belonging.

Autonomy � having control over our own resources

It has been shown countless times that when people feel a sense of control or autonomy, they are better able to control stress, problem solve and think critically. Control over resources is important. When budgets are micromanaged and heavily prescribed, there isn’t a team in the world that doesn’t say “Heck! Why don’t they just give us the money and let us spend it the way we need to? We know better than anyone how to use the budget to its best effect!”

This holds true for most resources, including time. When we allow people to use their time how they want – without micromanaging or telling them what they can do and when – we might actually see them make better use of their time.

Most employees feel that they are experts at what they do – they do it every day – so they know how to best use their time. But is Facebook-ing the best use of time? If they’re using it to disconnect and recharge for a moment before working at high intensity again, then it could well be.

Belonging � Facebook feeds social connectedness

Social support and feeling connected to people is a major contributor to productivity. When people have a feeling of social support and connectedness, they are better able to handle stress and a decrease in stress leads to an increase in productivity. Take for example people who are about to undergo surgery. When people are merely able to hold the hand of someone they care about, the stress reaction (characterized by heart rate, blood pressure and the level of stress hormones) decreases dramatically.

Connecting with people with whom we feel safe also has a positive effect on problem solving and creativity. Simply conversing with other people helps provide a different perspective on a problem and can often be the seed that creates a new solution. This happens even when we’re not talking about the specific problem in question – in fact sometimes that works even more effectively.

But won’t people abuse the privilege?

Sure some people will. But most people are pretty reasonable. In many situations where people are given control of a precious resource, they tend to treat it fairly responsibly. In one particular study, they compared patients with chronic pain and divided them into two groups. One group had to call a nurse to administer their painkillers, while the other group was able to self-administer their drugs. Contrary to expectations, the patients who were allowed to self-medicate used less of the drug. Amazingly, they also reported feeling less pain. Might this be another by-product of a feeling of autonomy?

So, what can we learn from this?

Well, the real lesson is that if we can create a feeling of autonomy and belonging then we get more productive people. Facebook might be just one example of this.

But the other lesson is this: we often make rules for the sake of those people who might offend. We make blanket rules because we think that one or two people might do the wrong thing if we give them a chance. Start making rules that satisfy the people who will do the right thing – and then manage the people that don’t.

Why do we cooperate?

The simple explanation is that cooperation is evolutionarily rewarding. The story goes like this:

�We were only able to defeat much larger, more dangerous species because of our ability to work together � to cooperate, work in teams and help each other out. That�s how we became the earth�s dominant animal�.

But this only makes sense at a species level. If we look at our own individual survival, it would be far more beneficial sometimes not to cooperate. We could hoard more resources for ourselves, benefit from other people�s misfortune and generally get ahead.

And this sometimes happens. People forgo cooperation in favour of their own individual benefit.

So how do we enforce cooperation and fairness? There are some simple rules, spawned from evolution and game theory, that tend to work for all species. And, whether inadvertently or be design, eBay has implemented these principles to create one of the true self-regulating markets of the information age. So let�s take a look at the principles

Principle #1 � Open-Book Play forces cooperation

Open-Book Play simply means that all people participating in the �game� are able to see how everyone else has played in past games. If everyone knows what sort of strategy you adopt (do you cheat regularly or do you usually do the right thing?) then you are more likely to cooperate. eBay publishes your feedback right alongside your username. If people can see what you�ve done in the past, you�re more likely to do the right thing.

Principle #2 � Repeated Interactions

We are most likely to cheat if there is a one-off interaction with no future consequence. eBay can�t stop people having only one interaction, but this is obviously rare. And even though you might have only one interaction with a particular buyer or seller, you will have repeated interactions with the eBay community. This works in conjunction with Principle #1 to ensure cooperation.

Principle #3 � Third Party Punishment

One of the most compelling �rules� of cooperation is the idea of third party punishment. Cooperation flourishes when A does something bad to B, and C, an observing bystander, punishes A for doing so. eBay makes this happen again through the publishing of past performance. If you do the wrong thing, you can essentially be �punished� by way of others excluding you from the game. At eBay, that means that no one will want to sell to you or buy from you.

So how can we apply this in an every day business setting? Here are four things you can start doing straight away.

Make the rules transparent

Rules are the first thing that we need to focus on. Before we are able to hold people accountable for any behaviours, we need to make the rules of engagement clear. Work through these with your team. How do you want to treat each other? How do you want to treat clients?

Enforce the rules in public

There is an age old management saying: praise in public, punish in private. This is a great thing to remember, but there also needs to be a delicate balance. If someone breaks the team rules, people within the team need to know that something is being done about it. If they think that you are not paying attention to these behavioural discrepancies, they won�t understand that the rules are genuine.� Also, as the above principles of cooperation demonstrate, if your team members don�t understand that their reputation is on the line � they can break the rules without fear of damaging their reputation.

Make working together a part of every day

Make sure there are repeated, mutually beneficial interactions amongst your staff in some way, shape or form every single day. You�d be surprised how little cooperation is necessary in most teams � because we don�t create common goals that people genuinely need to work together to achieve.

Create mutual accountability

Mutual accountability is the holy grail of teamwork. Set an expectation that you want your staff to hold each other accountable � that it shouldn�t be up to the leader to do it all the time. After all, what happens when the leader isn�t there to see something happen? This is something you can do only once you have a high level of trust and support in the team and a commitment to open and honest communication.

If you can somehow implement the cooperation principles, then your level of collaboration is going to go up enormously. It�s a tough thing to do, but it�s worth the investment.

See www.tony-wilson.com.au for more

�Your job as a manager is to make yourself redundant.�

It�s an old line that has helped inspire many leaders to manage their teams in such a way that they, as a leader, are not really needed anymore. The team can run itself and the leader can happily go on holidays without a care that the team will be in great shape when they return.

However, I recently spoke with a manager who does not believe in empowering his staff at all. And I was quite surprised to find out that he had come back from a holiday and found that the team had functioned terrifically.� That�s when I learned of the shortcut he had taken.

There are two ways to make sure that your team can run by itself. You can help them achieve Autonomy or you can force them to be Automatic. There is an enormous difference.

The Automatic team is so well drilled that they don�t put a foot wrong. They are like a well-oiled machine and will do the same thing over and over again without so much as a mistake. These teams can work well without a leader � all they need is for someone to wind them up and go. But what is the expense?

The Automatic team is great for tasks that require auto-pilots. However, if they have to solve an out-of-the-ordinary problem or give a client special attention, or if something out of left field goes wrong, they are toast. These teams don�t really have the ability to do anything outside of the norm. They wince at the need for abstract thinking and cannot make decisions by themselves. In short, they have been so well drilled that they become fearful of doing something different. �Correct� is so well defined that they are paralysed at the thought of doing something �incorrect�.

On the other hand the Autonomous team will thrive in this kind of environment. They are empowered to make decisions that will greatly benefit the team and have no hesitation in problem solving and choosing the correct path, even when thrown a curve-ball. Even if they are in an auto-pilot task, they will look for ways to improve and try new approaches to get things done.

Autonomy and Automatic are mutually exclusive. If you have shown your team that there is only one right way, then you miss out on the potential benefits that your team members can bring. However, there are probably also times to be Automatic � especially when under enormous pressure or following a strict protocol. Be sure to understand which one your team will benefit from the most and then strive to make it happen.

More than merely annoying, rude behaviour is a catalyst for aggression and decreased productivity. When an employee is getting on everyone�s nerves, too many managers are too quick to say �oh, that�s just him�…. especially when it�s a star performer.

Addressing behaviour is one of the hardest things that leaders have to do. We don�t like calling out behaviours – generally because it can be pretty subjective and the �rules� are a little ambiguous. But some new research might make you think again about accepting a team member�s rudeness.

Professor Ido Erev, a specialist in behaviour explored the effect of rudeness. Simply, he asked students to turn up to an office to take a test. Outside the door of the office, obscured by a million post it notes, was a small sign that said �test moved to another location�. Most students, unable to locate or read the sign, walked into the office anyway, interrupting a lecturer. The lecturer did one of two things: they either turned on the student saying things like �are you stupid? Can�t you read?� or else they pleasantly told the student of their mistake, and pointed them in the right direction.

Down the hall, in the new location, the students took a problem solving test (this is what they thought the experiment was about). The results were astonishing: the students who were treated rudely scored significantly worse in the test than those who were treated pleasantly.

But here�s another impact. The students also did a classic creativity test – in two minutes, they had to think of as many uses as possible for a brick. Those who were treated rudely concocted far more aggressive uses for the brick than those who weren�t, including smashing windows, using it as a weapon, and weighing down a dead body in a river!!

So next time you hear complaints about rude or unfair behaviour amongst your team, think twice about looking the other way. You just never know how big the impact is to those around you. You might even find yourself on the wrong end of a brick.