Untitled

How do you know if you are selecting the right motivational strategies to convince your employees, peers, and even yourself to work smarter and harder?

Behavioral scientists have been researching the different ways people motivate themselves and others for decades. Their experiments have shown, for instance, that people work harder when they get feedback, set ambitious goals, and are given incentivizes.

But after recently conducting a review of more than 150 scientific articles on motivation, we found that each of these motivational tools can also unexpectedly backfire. For example, positive feedback can lead recipients to relax their effort, overly ambitious goals can cause employees to give up, and incentives can undermine intrinsic interest.

Chances are that you (at least sometimes) are using the wrong tools under the wrong circumstances. We propose a set of guidelines for when and how to use different types of motivational tactics, so that you can better understand how to effectively motivate yourself and others.

Feedback

There are two primary forms of feedback: positive and negative. Neither one is better than the other. In some circumstances, positive feedback can be more effective for motivation because it increases people’s commitment and confidence. In others, negative feedback can be more effective because it signals that more effort is needed.

Because positive feedback enhances personal commitment, it works best when recipients are questioning their commitment to a task. That’s why novices or people who are disengaged are best served by positive feedback. A new employee is likely to thrive under positive feedback, but wilt under negative feedback.

In contrast, negative feedback is ideal for people who are already committed to achieving their goals, but just need a push to reach them. Feedback that emphasizes their lack of progress increases their motivation. So people with expertise in a particular domain, such as professional speakers, not only respond better to negative feedback, they also seek more negative feedback.

Goal Setting

To increase performance, it is often useful to set challenging and proximal deadlines (e.g., “finish reading a professional magazine in the next 30 minutes”). People — even animals — tend to work harder and faster when approaching a finish line.

Typically, a shorter distance between you and your goal is more motivating than a longer one. It feels within reach, and it’s easier to feel that you’re making progress. This means people should set closer targets or sub-goals. So instead of telling yourself or your employees to finish a project in the next month, focus on achieving certain milestones by the end of each week.

Research also shows that when beginning to pursue a goal, people should focus on the progress they’ve made rather than on the progress they still have to make. Only when they’re closer to the finish line should people focus on the remaining distance between them and their goal. Focusing on the least amount of distance — either from the start or from the end of your project — is more motivating.

For example, consider loyalty programs that use “buy 10, get one free” cards. These can focus consumers on either accumulated progress (by stamping the card for each purchase) or remaining progress (by punching a hole in the card). A study showed that those who are farther from the reward are more motivated when they receive stamps, because the card highlights how much progress they have already made. Conversely, those who are close to the reward are more likely to keep buying when holes are punched in the card, because that method highlights what is still between them and their reward.

People are also particularly conscientious of their work when they are just beginning to pursue a goal and when they’ve nearly reached it. Research has found that people are more likely to slack off or behave unethically around the middle of a project. Since people will produce their highest quality work as they’re getting started or about to wrap up, it might be useful to re-frame their goal pursuit — by setting smaller goals, for example — so that people don’t feel stuck in the middle.

Another common mistake with goal setting is choosing the wrong means or approach for achieving your objectives. Research has shown that it’s more effective to tailor your approach based on one specific goal you’re trying to reach than to apply a one-size-fits-all approach that could work for any goal. For example, if you want to have more productive staff meetings, it may help to choose an office space that is only used for important group meetings, rather than one that people also associate with one-on-ones or lunch breaks.

Incentives

Incentives can be categorized into three types: immediate (vs. delayed), certain (vs. uncertain), and extrinsic (vs. intrinsic).

Immediate incentives are psychologically more appealing than delayed incentives. People will work harder for incentives they can get sooner — even if they are smaller than those they would get after waiting longer. The lesson here is simple: To motivate people, use immediate incentives.

People similarly prefer incentives of a certain value over those of an uncertain value. For example, compared to a promotion that offers shoppers an uncertain reward (e.g., “$30 or $50 off if you spend over $200”), one with a certain reward (e.g., “$40 off if you spend over $200”) would more likely fare better.

However, there are times when uncertain incentives can be more motivating. If they offer a higher potential value, for instance, people may be optimistic and more motivated to pursue them. They can also be exciting, leading some to work harder. In one experiment participants evaluated a series of print advertisements in return for a prize of either a certain amount or an uncertain amount. In the certain conditions, participants expected a bonus of 50% of their base pay. In the uncertain condition, the bonus could either be 20% or 50% of their base pay (to be determined by a lottery). People who expected a bonus of 50% of their base pay worked less hard than those who weren’t sure what their bonus would ultimately be, which suggests that “mystery” rewards (i.e., of uncertain value) can be exciting and push some to work harder.

Incentives can also be extrinsic (e.g., money, perks, etc.) or intrinsic (e.g., satisfying work). Some activities offer both: a paying job can also be satisfying. However, adding extrinsic incentives often leads people to see less intrinsic benefit. In one study, children were less willing to consume food when it was framed as healthy (extrinsic benefit), because they then perceived the food as being less tasty (lower intrinsic benefit).

People also seem to value intrinsic incentives more when they are in the middle of pursuing a goal than when they have not yet started. This is why when people are selecting a job, they often put relatively less emphasis on things such as interest in the task and employee morale, compared with extrinsic benefits like salary. But when going to the job each day, people care relatively more about these intrinsic incentives. Thus, tangible incentives should be emphasized in advance, while more intrinsic ones should be used to motivate employees already working toward something.

Just as people fail to recognize the value of intrinsic incentives for themselves, they also underestimate its importance for others. People tend to believe interesting work tasks and morale are more important to them than to their colleagues. As a result, when motivating others, people may choose to use fewer intrinsic incentives than they would for themselves.

All of this behavioral research can provide guidance on how to better motivate yourself and others. There are three key conclusions to keep in mind. First, apply positive feedback to enhance commitment and negative feedback to highlight slow progress. Second, set near-term goal targets; people work faster and better at the beginning and end than in the middle. Finally, do not underestimate the value of immediate, certain, and intrinsic incentives — but also recognize when they might fail. Selecting the best motivational tool is not just an art — it’s a science.

“I cannot forget the follies and vices of others so soon as I ought, nor their offences against myself,” Mr. Darcy tells Elizabeth Bennet in a pivotal moment in Pride and Prejudice, before famously admitting: “My good opinion once lost is lost for ever.”

Plenty of people would agree with Mr. Darcy on matters of trust: that trust is difficult to gain, easy to break, and tough to repair once broken. Or they’d say that a major violation of trust is more likely to lead to a broken relationship than a minor infraction.

But our research shows that although trust violations can rupture relationships, the impact of a violation depends less on the type of transgression and more on the mindset of the trusting party.

Some people believe personal attributes, such as negotiation ability and moral character, are stable. Others believe that these attributes are malleable.

Here’s how these beliefs work. Imagine two job candidates negotiating their respective signing bonuses. The first candidate spends a great deal of time preparing for the negotiation, doing her homework and practicing with her friends. The second exerts little effort preparing, instead deciding to “wing it.” The two candidates negotiate, and the first achieves a $10,000 signing bonus, whereas the second attains a bonus of $8,000. Consider the effort they invested and their outcomes. Who is the better negotiator?

Some might think that the first candidate is superior — she not only attained a great outcome, but she also worked hard to develop skills that will help her in the future. People who think the first negotiator is better are likely to perceive that negotiation ability is a skill that can be learned over time. Others, however might think that the second candidate is the better negotiator. After all, he was able to attain a reasonable outcome while putting forth little effort — he must have an innate ability to negotiate. Individuals who give this response tend to believe that key attributes are fixed, and that people either do or do not have the ability in a given area to succeed.

We’ve found that these mindsets play an important role in how people react to being deceived in a negotiation. Individuals with a fixed mindset “lock in” to an initial view of others. If they believe that someone is trustworthy, they fixate on that view and believe that they know what this person is like. Even in the face of disconfirming evidence, their initial beliefs are slow to change. As a result, someone with a fixed mindset is more inclined to maintain trust in a negotiation counterpart who disappoints them. (The converse is also true. Someone with a fixed mindset who forms the initial impression that someone is untrustworthy will be slow to update that belief as well.)

In one study, we tested this effect with 94 MBA students. The students completed a negotiation, and immediately afterward, they reported how much they trusted their counterpart. Then, we informed negotiators about the full facts of the case. As it turns out, many of those negotiators had been deceived. How did their perceptions of trust change? It turns out that people with growth mindsets did what we might expect — they paid attention to the new information. After learning that they had been deceived, they revised their beliefs and trusted their counterparts less. People with fixed mindsets, however, discounted the new information and maintained their trust in their counterparts.

In a follow-up study with 258 participants, we explored this result in more detail. When we presented people with information suggesting that someone they had trusted had deceived them, we found that people with fixed mindsets tended to give the transgressor the benefit of the doubt, explaining away or excusing the deceptive behavior. People with growth mindsets integrated the new information and revised their perceptions (and trusted that person much less).

In much of our research, we focus on how people react to a single violation, but we have also found that mindsets influence trust following multiple violations. As you might expect, after many violations, people with both fixed and growth mindsets update their beliefs — and stop trusting the transgressor. It just takes people with fixed mindsets longer to get there.

Of course, there are often good reasons to forgive others and give people a second chance. And our research suggests that although people with growth mindsets are quick to lose trust in those who’ve deceived them, they’re also more accepting of apologies and promises to change. Individuals with fixed mindsets, though slower to lose trust in others, are much less likely to believe an apology and less inclined to think that a deceiver will change.

But if you’ve broken the trust of someone stuck in a fixed mindset, you do have hope. First, recognize that they may be locked into their beliefs about you. If you have changed or your organization has changed, you will have a hard time convincing people with fixed mindsets. When you communicate with these people, you will be more effective if you first convince them that people can change. (Sharing past examples of how other people have changed will help.) You may also have to bombard them with persistent and overwhelming evidence that you’ve changed — subtle changes may not be noticed.

So is one approach better than the other? The data suggest that a growth mindset is preferable — unfortunately, deception is common, and if you are deceived it is wise to update your perceptions quickly. You can always change your opinion of someone again, if they prove themselves more reliable in the future.

Moreover, a large body of research has found that believing that change is possible has a number of benefits. People with a growth mindset are more likely to overcome negative stereotypes, are more creative, and ultimately tend to be more successful.

So if you tend to believe people’s characters are stable and fixed, try to notice those times they surprise you. Everyone can change — including you.

We’ve all hit a wall at some point. You may run up against a competitor you cannot beat. You might lose your job despite your best efforts. You could be doing everything you can — but still not getting that promotion. But whatever the cause, what feels like a roadblock could be your first step on a new growth journey — as long as that step is backwards.

When you can’t go forward, the only way to keep moving at all is to take a step back. As entrepreneur Barbara Corcoran shared on the TV show Shark Tank when talking about starting Corcoran Real Estate, the tony residential brokerage firm in Manhattan, “By anyone’s standard I was a success. But I knew I was going bankrupt. And you know what I did — I went out and took a full-time job while I worked my business. There is nothing wrong with stepping back before you go forward.” As we see from Corcoran’s experience, sideways or backwards sometimes turns into a slingshot.

We see this all the time in the corporate strategy world — companies that have hit a wall take a step back, reassess, and then move forward. Consider Tractor Supply, founded in 1938 to sell tractor parts to the six million farms in the United States. Growing steadily, the company went public in the 1950s. But by the late 1960s, due to more reliable tractors needing fewer replacement parts and the decline in farms from 6 million to 3 million, Tractor Supply was struggling. Over the next twelve years, Tractor Supply was acquired twice, and had five different presidents. After seeing a significant number of store closings and a revenue decline to $100 million, several key executives participated in a leveraged buyout in the early ’80s.

The new owners plowed into the data and discovered that, while the number of commercial farmers was decreasing, hobby farming was on the rise. This suggested a strategic pivot away from supplying tractor parts, and toward general farm and ranch supplies. Says former CEO Joe Scarlett, “One of our key goals was to become the pet supply store for people who own horses.” Today, Tractor Supply has grown to 1,400 stores, three times more than its next five competitors combined, with revenue north of $5 billion, and is a successful chain of stores for home improvement, agriculture, lawn, and garden care.

Of course, Tractor Supply is not alone — they were doing what so many startups do. According to Tufts’ University professor Amar Bhide, 70% of all successful new businesses end up with a strategy different than the one they originally pursued. The sequence of events for these companies is almost always the same: step back, reassess, and then pivot or jump to a new strategy.

So when you feel like you’ve gotten stuck in your own personal growth journey, take a page from their playbook. Ask yourself: why have I stopped growing? What does the data tell me? And what adjacent areas might let me grow again? Then take a deep breath — and a step back.

When we’ve gotten too close to a wall, it completely fills our line of sight, preventing us from getting an accurate view of our surroundings. It’s like the mobile game Close Up. First you see an extreme close-up of an object, but then the frame slowly pans out, revealing what the object really is. Until the camera pulls back, it is nearly impossible to identify what you’re looking at.

Many people struggle with stepping back because of the psychological ramifications. For some, stepping back is tantamount to admitting they’ve failed. Others may believe they are tougher than the wall and can simply smash their way through. Still others just want to ignore the reality of their situation, continuing to spin their wheels until they run out of gas. How many of us have said to a recruiter, “I can’t take a lower salary” or “Any move has to be a step up”?

This type of rigidity can be disastrous, while flexibility and a willingness to pivot can greatly enhance your chances for success.

Are you raring to change careers? Break into a whole new line of work that makes you leap out of bed, happy to go to work every day? Parlay personal passions into professional endeavors? Or focus on a different clientele, type of product, or service?

We all know the power of LinkedIn for job hunting and networking. But how do we use it to help change careers — to make sure we’re found by the right recruiters, hiring managers, colleagues — not ones from our past, but from our future careers?

It’s tempting to create an “everything under the sink” profile that makes you look qualified for both the job you have and the one you want or for a variety of new functions, industries, or roles. But that’ll just confuse your readers and send them running — to others’ LinkedIn pages.

Instead, focus your profile on your new career direction, just as you’ve tailored your resume to specific jobs. In both cases, you highlight your most relevant experiences and minimize or omit the rest. Here’s how to do that on LinkedIn:

Headline. Focus first on your headline. LinkedIn auto-populates this field with your current position, but don’t let it. Instead, use the 120 characters to write your own eye-catching headline.

Why is this so important? If I’m searching for someone like you on LinkedIn, my search results will reveal only your name and headline — and I could easily overlook you. But if you write an irresistible headline, I’ll take the time to click to your entire profile.

Let’s look at how one mid-careerist uses her distinctive headline to attract the right people and opportunities.

Kristi Sullivan’s been a successful marketing executive for over 15 years. While still very committed to her current Marketing VP role, she also wants to add a new direction to her career path: marketing small businesses in the health and wellness industry. And she’s a devoted yoga practitioner and instructor. So this is her two-part headline:

Holistic health/yoga instructor, consultant, connecter * Marketing executive for small businesses & nonprofits

She immediately distinguishes herself from other marketers by putting health and yoga first. And she attracts people needing help with their holistic health and yoga businesses.

Check to see how distinctive your headline is by searching LinkedIn for people like you. Kristi found lots of “marketing executives” but no one else with holistic health and yoga in their headlines — a very good sign.

Summary. Now that your headline has attracted the right people, keep them reading. Tell a compelling story and write it in the first person. Unlike resumes, your LinkedIn summary gives you much more space (up to 2000 characters) to highlight past accomplishments and connect them to what you want to do next.

This is especially important if you’ve changed careers before. Craft a cohesive narrative that pulls together what might otherwise appear to be fragmented pieces of your professional past. This will avoid leaving your profile reader wondering what the heck you’re trying to do now — or why you appear scattered and unfocused.

Here’s how Kristi accomplishes this. She stitches together three areas of her professional and personal endeavors: marketing small businesses/nonprofits; women’s business success; and holistic health/yoga instruction and business consultation.

She immediately hooks her profile readers with this opening statement:

I am devoted to and excel in three areas — each area strengthening the others: marketing small businesses and nonprofits; women’s business success; and holistic health and yoga. Let me expand a bit on each:

She makes it easy for readers to quickly skim her summary by including headers that call out each of the three areas. And she introduces each area with a sentence that ties it to the others. For example, in the Women’s Business Success section, she connects to her 15 years of marketing at the economic development resource center where she’s been working:

Because I’m passionate about enabling women to make positive differences in the workplace and the economy at large, I launched the Farmington Valley chapter of B.I.G. (Believe, Inspire, Grow).

And then in the Holistic Health/Yoga Instructor and Consultant section, she makes connections to her work in economic development and women’s business by noting:

I see holistic health as a critical component of individuals’, organizations’, and communities’ wellbeing.

Finally, she ends her summary with an invitation to specific types of people:

I’m always interested in hearing from holistic health business owners and women entrepreneurs, as well as economic development professionals. Please contact me via InMail.

Experience. Once you’ve nailed your headline and summary, tailor each of the positions in your experience section. Here’s how:

Continue to write in the first person — to provide continuity with your first-person summary.

Here’s an example of how Kristi focuses on some of her most relevant accomplishments — fund raising, client acquisition, and social media:

I’ve brought in $.75M in new funding and over 20 new clients… I established this Connecticut nonprofit’s presence on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and YouTube, growing its followers by 150% in the first year. I also conceived an e-newsletter, blog and vlog to enhance our social media presence and website…

Recommendations. As with any LinkedIn profile, sparingly add recommendations to selected positions — the ones most relevant to the new type of work you’re seeking. Invite one or two people to recommend you. And don’t hesitate to direct their testimonials; you’ll make it easier and faster for them, and more effective for you. Tell them exactly the type of positions you’re now targeting and the skills you’d like them to highlight.

Images and Media Samples. Again, as with any LinkedIn profile, use images and media samples to draw attention to your most impressive accomplishments. Add them only to the positions you want your new profile readers to focus on. For example, Kristi added her colorful business card to her summary section, a video screen shot and link to her presentation about internal social media strategies, and a photo of her teaching yoga on a stand-up paddleboard.

When you’re trying to get into a new line of work you have to prove that you have skills in a new area when you’ve always focused your career elsewhere. With a targeted profile that catches readers’ attention you’ll position yourself well to make that change.

You’ve decided it’s time to let the low performer on your team go. You’ve covered your bases in terms of documentation, and you’ve coordinated with HR. But now you have to have the dreaded conversation. What’s the best way to deliver the news? Who should be in the room with you? What do you say and not say? And how do you tell the rest of the team?

What the Experts Say “Firing is the single most difficult thing we ask leaders to do,” according to Dick Grote, a management consultant in Dallas, Texas, and author of How to Be Good at Performance Appraisals. “Even when the business justification is clear, you’re sitting down and telling someone that he’s no longer getting a paycheck and that when he wakes up in the morning, he has no place to go. That’s tough.” But firing is a necessary evil, says Jodi Glickman, author and founder of communication consulting firm Great on the Job. “As the manager, you have to bear in mind what’s right for the company.” You have to focus on the fact that “the firing makes good business sense and hopefully is in the best interest of the person and your team going forward.” While it will never be easy to deliver bad news, here are some tips on how to manage the process.

Don’t drag your feet The prospect of firing someone you’ve worked with for years — particularly someone you know well and respect — is daunting, but you mustn’t let your personal agony delay the conversation, says Glickman. “When the bad outweighs the good and when the employee is causing more problems than he or she is solving, it’s time for that employee to go,” she says. Of course, firing should be the final step in a fair and transparent process that began long before the actual termination talk — and there should be a trail of paperwork to prove it. Even if the documentation process is cumbersome, stay focused. “Managers rarely regret acting too quickly on a termination, but they have regretted waiting too long,” says Grote. If you’re still having trouble mustering the courage to act, think about your team. After all, they’re “the ones who are picking up the slack and maybe working longer hours because the person [you need to fire] is not doing his job correctly.”

Make HR your ally Before you schedule the conversation, Grote suggests double-checking your plans with HR. “You’re not asking for permission — you’re the boss; you make the decisions — but you’re asking if there’s any reason you shouldn’t go ahead with your plan to fire Louie on Tuesday morning,” he says. First, you want to ensure that an HR rep is able to attend the meeting, since it’s legally practical and more comfortable to have someone else in the room. Second, the HR department can offer “a fuller picture” of the employee’s extenuating circumstances. “In this litigious society, HR is your ally in filling in any blanks.” HR might tell you, for instance, that Louie’s pension vests on Wednesday, so firing him Tuesday might be viewed as suspect in court. Or HR might tell you that Louie’s wife starts cancer treatment on Monday afternoon, in which case firing him Tuesday could be seen as inhumane.

Keep it short The words you use to terminate an employee should be simple and to-the-point. Don’t waffle. “Go somewhere private and then lead with the punch line,” says Glickman. She suggests you begin by saying, “I have some bad news for you. Today is your last day here.” Then state the reason for termination in one simple sentence. “Be transparent,” she says. “We’ve let you go because you didn’t meet your sales targets” or “You’ve not been a good cultural fit here.” It’s important to use the past tense because it “precludes arguments about second chances,” says Grote. “The plug has been pulled.” If the employee tries to argue or lashes out at you, try not to get caught up in responding. “It’s a natural human thing to want to say ‘I’m sorry,’” says Grote. But when it comes to firing a poor performer, he recommends couching your regret in terms where “personal responsibility lies squarely on the individual.” He suggests saying something like, “‘I’m sorry that the situation has gotten to this point.’”

Stay in the room HR may be your ally, but you shouldn’t expect it to do your dirty work. While some experts contend that you needn’t say anything more or even remain in the room after the initial pronouncement, Grote vehemently disagrees. “Leadership demands compassion,” he says. “You were the agent of a terrible thing that has just happened in this person’s life. Don’t run away, and don’t force HR to pick up the pieces.” You should be prepared to “speak as needed and answer questions as they come up.” Before the meeting, you need to be well versed on practical matters — the details of the former employee’s severance agreement, for instance, and what happens to his benefits and unused vacation time. Of course, there will always be issues you hadn’t considered. If something comes up, Grote recommends saying, “Let me apologize, I hadn’t thought of that,” and then turn it over to HR. But make no mistake: “This is your baby.”

Show compassion Firing may be a difficult chore for you, the manager, but for the person who’s being fired, it’s downright traumatic. So empathize. “Offer to be helpful,” says Glickman. “If you genuinely believe someone is a good person who has talents and abilities that could be useful elsewhere, tell her that you’re very happy to provide a reference, or offer to make introductions.” Grote suggests scheduling a termination at the end of the workday, bearing in mind office optics. After the conversation, he recommends saying, “Let me walk you back to your desk, where you can pick up your belongings, and then we’ll both walk out of the office together like it’s a normal day.” He adds, “It’s showing your humanity.”

Talk to your team After the person you’ve fired has left, Glickman suggests gathering the colleagues affected by the termination to address the matter. “The message should be direct and straightforward,” she says. Do not reveal reasons behind the decision — that’s confidential, and besides, “It sets a bad precedent to badmouth a former employee.” Recognize that the office rumor mill is likely churning. Grote suggests this script: “As some of you may already know, Diane is no longer part of the organization. I can’t go into details because that’s confidential information and I want to ensure Diane’s privacy. If you have suggestions about how to minimize the impact of Diane’s absence, let me know.”

If you think people will start to worry about their own jobs, you might assure them that the person was fired for cause, that the organization is not eliminating roles. You can also divulge a few details if you want to send a strong message to your team about the fired employee’s poor behavior. In this case, Grote recommends saying, “Diane’s employment has been terminated. I’m not going to go into all the details, but I will say that Diane acted in violation of our sexual harassment policy. We do not tolerate that.”

Focus on the future Terminating an employee is an emotionally draining task, but for the sake of your team, you mustn’t wallow. “At this point, it’s about forward momentum,” says Glickman. “Focus on the now.” The firing likely presents short-term challenges for your team — namely more work. “So it’s up to you to come up with a strategy for how to manage the workload while you look for a replacement.” Acknowledge that there’s more work to do in the short term, but talk about a goal. “Say, ‘It’s going to hurt for three months, but here’s the plan,’” she adds. “You want to ruthlessly move forward on the future.”

Principles to Remember

Do:

Enlist HR to help you manage the process and answer questions as they arise

Show compassion for your fired employee — if you genuinely believe he has talents that could be useful elsewhere, offer to serve as a reference or provide other help

Communicate the news to your team in person but do not divulge the details behind the decision

Don’t:

Delay in terminating a poorly performing worker when the cost of keeping that worker is greater than the disruption of letting him go

Waffle or be long-winded — the words you use to fire someone should be simple and to-the-point

Expect HR to do your dirty work — after you’ve told the person he’s fired, stay put and be prepared to answer questions as they arise

Case Study #1: Demonstrate compassion and respect John Stieger, the chief marketing officer of Wilke Global, an Ohio-based company that provides customer service software to clients, says he hates firing people. “Anyone with empathy can at least understand how losing a job will impact a spouse, children, and others who are blameless,” he says.

But over the course of his 20-year career, he has had to preside over multiple employee terminations at Fortune 500 companies. One situation in particular stands out.

John made a decision to redesign his team, and after matching people to new roles, it became clear that several employees weren’t right for their jobs and needed to go. Preparing for the conversations was “simply awful,” he recalls. “When you need to give someone difficult news, your instinct is to try to soften the blow.”

But this “workplace version of ‘it’s not you, it’s me,’” is a dangerous game, he says. “You can easily muddy the waters, confusing people and opening potential legal liability in an attempt to make someone feel better and maybe even shift blame away from yourself.”

With the help of HR, John prepared a simple, brief statement for every conversation that explained the reorganization and the termination. He also said, “I do not have another job for you. Unless you identify another role in the company, your last date will be X. HR is here to tell you a little about what that means and your options. I know this is difficult to take, so we need to set up another meeting for a day or two from now once you have thought this through.”

Some of the employees reacted angrily. Others cried. John offered tissues and did his best to remain calm. “My instinct is to try and make someone feel better, [but] people don’t usually want to be comforted by someone who just fired them,” he says.

In this case, the terminated workers were given a monthlong leave period where they were still technically employed. “I made a point of setting up recurring meetings with each of them to offer my advice on internal or external searches,” he says.

Demonstrating respect and compassion are also important for morale, he says. “How you treat people on their way out the door does not go unnoticed by the rest of the organization.”

Case Study #2: Act decisively and focus on your team’s well-being and productivity Moe Glenner, management consultant and author based in South Bend, Indiana, vividly remembers the first time he ever had to fire an employee. At the time, Moe worked for a medium-sized transportation company supervising a small team. One of his direct reports (we’ll call him Anthony) had been with the organization for two years and had serious “performance deficiencies.”

Moe tried to remedy the situation in a variety of ways. He consulted HR, which advised him to “document Anthony’s [poor] performance.” He met Anthony privately in hopes that they could come up with a “collaborative, mutually agreed” upon performance improvement plan, but it didn’t work. Moe “made discreet inquiries to find out if there were external influences that might be driving Anthony’s poor performance,” but he came up empty-handed. He even called a team meeting to discuss ways members could help “improve everyone’s performance.”

Moe was discouraged. “The team was suffering from Anthony’s continued poor performance. They felt pressure to make up for his deficiencies, and they expressed frustration that nothing was being done to correct the issue.”

Finally, after six months, Moe decided that the situation was not going to improve. He advised HR of his decision to let Anthony go. “HR offered to conduct the meeting so I wouldn’t be involved, but I declined,” he says. “I feel that as a manager I need to deliver both the good and the bad news.”

The termination meeting took place in a private office. “When Anthony walked in and saw the HR person, his facial expression turned blank,” he recalls. Moe says he did “a quick rehash of how we got to this point and told him that effective immediately, his position was terminated.” After the HR person had finished explaining the details of the severance package, Moe stood up, thanked Anthony for his service to the company, and wished him well.

Anthony left the office and Moe called a meeting with his team to announce the departure. Moe says he “didn’t want to add insult to injury by unnecessarily badmouthing” Anthony, since the team was well aware of his performance issues. “I then opened the floor up to suggestions for carrying the load until his replacement could be found and hired,” he says. “I felt that by allowing everyone to engage, it would help alleviate what undoubtedly were mixed emotions from the team.”