I’ve been working at least part time since the age of sixteen. I’ve had a lot of time to observe different management styles and formulate opinions on what does and doesn’t work. In evaluating my bosses I’d say it’s a fair split down the middle between the cruel psychopathic slave-drivers and the decent, fair-minded partner-in-process (I’ll define that phrase to mean a boss who wants to work with her employees to drive a successful team spirit and isn’t afraid to roll up her sleeves when the need arises.)
I’d be lying if I didn’t confess that, on the surface, both styles seem to work. They tend to get the immediate job done. Worse, the former probably results in greater expediency than the latter. But that’s only if you look at short-term results. I don’t think it takes a great deal of thought to conclude which process probably results in sustainable, long-term results (hint, nobody wants to stick around a psychopath for long).
I feel there are many ways that kindness pays and we’ll cover them in detail as time goes on but, specifically as applies to managing, consider the alternatives. A mean boss is far less likely to retain employees over the long term. That means turnover and turnover costs dearly. In my own workplace, turnover means a 3-5 month search for a replacement. That’s 3-5 months during which an already lean staff has to absorb additional workload. Once secured, it takes about 3 months just for the replacement employee to come up to speed (not to excel, mind you, just until they are proficient enough not to require constant training and mentoring). That’s 3 months in which other, already trained employees are distracted from their work while they mentor the new guy. The bottom line is that an unpleasant boss can result in as much as 6 months or more during which productivity and efficiency are hampered and, worse, existing resources are being pushed in the direction of departure due to the frustrating workload increase. The wrong captain at the helm can result in a self-perpetuating cycle of sub-par performance and results.
In addition, employees will act out against a cruel boss. They will find ways to sabotage the success of their organization by dragging their heels, missing deadlines and calling in sick. While I may not have the statistics in front of me, I think you’d agree that an unhappy employee is going to be absent from the workplace far more than a happy employee and far less engaged when they do bother to come in. Yes, a grumpy boss is probably going to manage to get a few hours, days or weeks of solid productivity out of their employees by mistreating them into submission, but the results are simply NOT sustainable.
On the other hand, a kind (I’m not talking about being a pushover), reasonable boss who shows an interest in their employee’s success garners loyalty and confidence. You feel your boss is a team member with authority. You understand your boss may be forced to require things of you they may not wish to ask but that understanding inclines you away from resentment rather than towards it. Employees last because they form a loyalty to that manager even though they may feel the company itself thinks of them as just a cog in the machine. An employee who feels their boss is actually interested in that employee’s growth and success is far less likely to leave unless there is simply too good of opportunity waiting for them elsewhere. An unhappy employee, on the other hand, will sooner or later take the gamble on ANYTHING that will get them away from the torture.
Does kindness pay? Well, when applied to the workforce, I think it does. You can decide for yourself by simply asking what hidden costs are associated with mistreatment of your employees and answering the question honestly.
