If you are a manager, what would you do with this employee

[CrawleyJ]

You hire someone full time (37.5hrs) to do a job which has always taken previous employees 37.5hrs to do.

New employee changes processes/way of working and the job gets done in a quarter of the time and to a higher standard (we can measure the metrics). Employee then requests other work to do as now under employed.

However, other employees are not happy to hand over their responsibilities as its part of their job role. When employee went on annual leave colleague covered their job role. Even accounting for new process put in place they couldn't do it in the same amount of time as new employee can.

We now have the problem of a) this job only takes a portion of the time so job role is changed to reflect that, employee leaves as needs full time hours and job cannot be done by someone else in that time. b) find other work/projects for employee to do, however other staff reluctant to hand over their responsibilities to someone else. c) Tell employee they are under employed and maybe would want to seek work elsewhere (we have no promotions coming up)

Employee was given a project to do, delivered 3 days before deadline to a v high standard.

I am at a loss as to what to do with this person (disclaimer I am not the line manager, but a line manager across and up from her iyswim!)

Unusual or not. I'd find them something or create an add on to their role. If they are slightly jr. Could you not put in place more training or an external qualification? Recognise and reward ability. If your more senior ppl feel threatened, great! It may wake up your old gaurd. They sound like a keeper. With the right training, guidance and growth plan you could have an amazing long term team member on your hands. These ppl dont come along very often. If they get bored or feel under valued they will jump ship fairly quickly.

Could you ask the new employee to review other roles and put in place similar procedures which will reduce time spent in other roles within the company. It's an excellent time to do it as it could be brought in under corona management policies and could also be cost effective for the company going forward.

This has got to be civil service - you are so unbelievably casual when you describe how the other staff are cruising doing things half arsed and resisting new procedures to make things more efficient.

Create a new “Process change lead” role; get the person to apply. Double productivity in less than a year. Job done.

It's not unusual for people to shadow, but it would be unusual for this employee to, they would be jumping over people above them who would be 'next up' for shadowing/mentoring etc

It isn't civil service, promise! There are a few people who have been in their jobs for a very long time plodding at their own pace and who are very resistant to change. One who is covered by the DDA so it is very difficult to change their job role. If they can't adapt to the change it is discriminating. A few others who are part of the furniture and very very reluctant to change and very possessive over 'their' work. We are tackling this and Covid has given everyone a jolt

Great to talk about something other than the Virus-Which-Shall-Not-Be-Named!

Hmmm. They said they wanted to "get on,"but did they have any specific ideas of what they might be interested in? I was asked to do that by a manager once, and I brainstormed things/saw needs she hadn't even considered.

I also asked for some coursework, which she was able to procure for me at little expense to the company. That kept me busy!

Definitely public sector! I’ve got barely anything to do at the moment so I wouldn’t be handing anything over, no way. I’m almost having to make stuff up so I can look busy eg follow up on emails where I don’t really need to and that sort of thing. However, even on the office the work I get wouldn’t fill 37.5 hours a week.

Job takes half the time, so employee made pt.
Surely if they can do it, other staff can do it, unless employee has super powers?

Tricky

You need to be managing the process and the staff need to fall in line. Tell staff who don't want to do the new process , the new process is x and I'd appreciate if you complied. The evolution of being successful in this job role is for you to now do x instead of y, can I trust that you will evolve with the job?

If its better for the company, this is what your main focus should be. You also need to be onside of the new fantastic employee, and deliver this to the team. "A has found a fantastic new way of doing x which I want us all to implement this week". There's no "no thank you". It's not a choice.

This new employee needs to have an opportunity to continue to feel appreciated and supported.

But why make this employee wait for development opportunities? They’ve clearly pushed hard and shown promise. Why should they get pushed to the back of the queue behind people who just bumble along with zero effort?

It sounds like the new employee is too bright for the role to be honest. Encouraging further education is the best long term thing you can do for her. To do this within your organisation may mean you need to create a new role and in doing so transfer her into a new area in a more senior position, which makes it much harder for others to refuse to hand over project work.

It sounds like the area needs an overhaul anyway. Could she shadow every department and devise a change implementation plan? You may not agree with all her suggestions but some may be very worthwhile. Another thing to consider is her personality and whether she is suited to lead a team. She may not be and may be far more suited to projects.

you'll note the use of 'they' not she or he. I'm sure you'll also note the lack of any detail re sector, work involved or identifying actions

I hate to say it, but you have actually given away this person's gender (sex?)...

Employee offered to help one of them change a way of doing something to make it more efficient and was told no thank you. It was changed eventually and has made a difference but hasn't helped with people not wanting to hand over work.

You have to ask yourself why the previous person took a lot longer to complete these tasks. It sounds like the entire team don't have enough work to do and have been deliberately stretching things out to last longer. Is there a lot of office chitchat and going out for frequent breaks etc? Is this new person really that much of a superstar, or do they just look like it in comparison to everyone else who's been deliberately stalling?

Do you have a way of making your staff account for their time, making them submit a detailed timesheet or something like that? I reckon everyone knows that if they did their job properly they'd be at risk of redundancy.

Job takes half the time, so employee made pt.

The problem is that this person needs a full time job, so if they get made part time they'd probably leave altogether.

I know it's difficult when there's long-serving members of staff who've Always Done It This Way, but something's got to give.

Get the employee to write up process notes, training manuals for their area first and then roll him / her out to other areas to put together or review their training materials. They can then propose to management any changes they would implement and why

I would undertake a review of roles and workloads to see if we really need that many employees - with corona this is to be expected.

If shadowing is a bit tricky, add something along the lines of "assistant to senior management" or "any other jobs requested by senior manager "?

Although do bear in mind that if you deliberately take work away from someone and give it to someone else, you can't then complain that first someone isn't doing enough work. It could get seen as bullying or even constructive dismissal.

Or pay them more for fewer hours, or put them into training of some sort for one day a week, or second them out of the business to suppliers, clients or volunteer work to increase theri working knowledge of different environments

I think Id pay for them to do further training and allow them to study during their working hours. Shadowing is a good idea to get a feel for which direction they would be best to go in.

I would undertake a review of roles and workloads to see if we really need that many employees Based on one person being faster at doing work than others?

I’ve worked in environments that were, as described by the OP. Some ppl had worked there for 30 years. They were the most unproductive, change resistant, argumentative, know it all people but they could not be made redundant. The only way to deal with them was to separate (less powerful in small numbers), encourage part time (they never took up part time though), or offer voluntary redundancy. They were unlikely to take this either BUT they could then be transferred to other departments to fill positions due to ‘business needs’.

B), but as you should with internal vacancies anyway make sure they are well circulated to all staff so they are likely to see when new opportunities arise. Why are others so hesitant to hand over some of their workload? Are they concerned about potential redundancies? They sound fab though, anyone who can make efficiencies in ways of working to the same or a higher standard is worth their weight in gold; however others might feel threatened and worry that they become too efficient and workloads start to decrease enough to let people go.

I think you should do what it takes to hang on to that employee. It would be awful to keep the others at her expense. People often dislike change but if there's a quicker way of doing something then they should be made to do it that way - choosing to stay with the old way shouldn't be an option. Could the good employee train people individually? How do you think they'd take that?

Could the good employee train people individually? How do you think they'd take that?

Can you imagine! They'd probably be well offended and say "'I've been doing my job for thirty years, I don't need training thank you very much". You can train someone as much as you like but if they're determined to ignore the training then something else needs to budge.

The problem is with the manager, this is a leadership issue.

One excellent performer may not be representative of the 'average', but what you've described is an environment that enables and accepts mediocracy from a group of complacent and possibly lazy employees. Are they the future of the organization and do you want people like that?

It's not the employee's role to 'take' work. The manager determines what happens and should 'lead' a redistribution or assessment of how work is undertaken if that's necessary.

Grow a pair and actually manage the others.