Group resistance
Many private managers complain about employees. It seems to be knowledgeable specialists, but the work does not work. Moreover, they often take time away from those who do work. Although dismissed.
Many parents complain about something similar in relation to children. And here it is impossible to dismiss.
Both employees and children often act in similar ways. Implementation is different, and the types of actions are similar:
Each of these species has its own formal attributes and standard medicines.
According to my personal statistics, most IT managers grew out of engineers. From programmers, QA, admins, etc. How does this happen? The best employee is given an assistant to perform routine tasks. Then the second. Then - trust to teach beginners. So, little by little, a man is overgrown with a team. And here it turns out that the skills for work are now completely different. That for each person in a team takes from half an hour to an hour and a half per day to set and verify tasks. And that for solving the problem “how to make a project on time, efficiently, and with the available resource” it is very useful to be able to work with the team. And in this case we will be confronted with its two curious features - group dynamics and group resistances.
It seems that a person does not do anything bad, and he seems to be behaving rationally, but by his behavior he slows down the work.
How can it look like? Let's present a meeting at which one of the employees begins to sort out the insignificant details of further work in detail. At the same time, a hidden aggressiveness is heard in the intonations, and sometimes sarcasm skips over: “Why did you decide that A is better than B?” He asks, “How can you make a decision without the necessary information?” He asks us and looks at the employees. It seems to be the case, but intuition whispers: “there’s something wrong here,” and consciousness adds: “there are still a lot of questions in the task list with a higher and more important rank”, “and Agile requires quick planning without detailing long-range plans”. And most importantly - confuses the language of our interlocutor. In other situations, we would say that the employee trolls us.
Externally, group resistances may look different: disputes, emotional outbursts, petty quibbles, apologies, assaults, clownish notions, suggestions on the merits and on auxiliary topics, complaints and questions. The main thing is that they prevent the continuation of work, distract from the topic, create emotions that are not related to the topic of the audience. For example: we are about the delivery of the project tomorrow, and they are about the economic status of Greece.
There are four types of group resistance - drawing attention, the struggle for power, revenge and helplessness. Sometimes they allocate more, but, in our opinion, four is enough for effective work.
The person seems to be actively helping, making approving comments and making them loud. Sometimes he asks questions, and when you start answering a question, you understand that the answer does not interest him, and the question was one of banal. Sometimes leads away from the topic and switching attention to something or someone else. At meetings, he asks questions that could be solved personally. Interrupts Clarifies. Lightly troll - gently, without much aggression. Is joking. He begins to speak in such a way that the essence of what has been said comes after the 20th word. Rustles bag, opens the window, closes the door, blinds, adjusts the air conditioner. It often passes through a discussion center. He twirls something in his hands, plays gadgets, from time to time loudly dropping and apologizing.
Often this behavior causes irritation and the desire to shut up, plant, tie hands, etc., very often this behavior keeps the collective’s attention on the “irritant”. The time of discussion is delayed, thoughts are scattered and we understand that something needs to be done.
It makes sense to ignore a small attraction of attention (for example: someone threw a paper airplane). If the situation repeats (the employee came to the next meeting with a parachute and wearing glasses of the pilot and with 54 airplanes, who threw a speaker after each sentence) - it is better to change tactics. The escalation of attracting attention hints that our attention will continue to attract more and more aggressive methods. This is reminiscent of the child's behavior - if they do not pay attention to your cry, then they will pay attention to the broken vase.
Ignoring can be strengthened by the technique, which in hypnosis is called ratification.
The essence of the technique is to reinforce the desired behavior and ignore the behavior we do not need. Therefore, we give attention not when the “irritant” attracts attention, but when the employee's behavior corresponds to the goals of the team. For example, he attentively listens or offers sensible suggestions - here we give him the attention in a way he likes. For example: ask his opinion, listen carefully, say a compliment. If attention is attracted by “childish” ways, we react adequately, but minimally.
')
There are many ways:
You can talk and find out why the employee thinks that way, or why he objects, the main thing is just to listen carefully to the answer without interrupting. If a question or objection was said to attract attention, then, often, the objection is removed, and the question is answered by the person who asked it. The main thing is to listen.
You can indirectly attract attention and verbally. Call by name, tell the life story associated with it (if it fits the situation), recall the successful decisions of this person at the meeting.
There is a man, he may even be a leader in this team (or not, but he wants to prove that he can). He does not quite like the current, appointed manager (or he considers himself to be more competent). Many things can be done better and more correctly, and he knows how, and is ready to fight. And outwardly, this struggle may not look aggressive. Small proposals "essentially", constant amendments, "to make it clearer," the manner to do in their own way and incite the rest. And maybe a direct challenge to the leader of his actions, a call under the banner of the other participants, distribution of instructions to employees. Can start arguing about architecture, technical solutions, and where to go for corporate. He can play in public, he can push populist decisions.
Objected, did not complete the job? Sometimes the best thing to do is to not mess. The power struggle is expensive (in relation to the goals of the team), if the case is single - it is better to pretend that they did not notice anything. But if you plan to work with the team for a long time, then it makes sense to talk with the “irritant” one-on-one. Without the presence of the group, such a conversation will be easier and cheaper in time. The task of such communication is to show that this behavior does not suit you and not fuel the conflict. Therefore I can use the “I-message” technique. And to say in the format “when you said that you would not do the work with such an illiterate task setting, I felt annoyed and angry, I wanted us to pay more attention at the meetings to the fact that can be done, and not what is bad. One on one, I will gratefully hear your view of the situation "
Rarely when is the best move. However, it is often used. If you entered the battle - try to avoid conflicts. For example, it makes sense to use conflict conflict less. In this case, you can use both the Socratic dialogue and the constructive ultimatum.
It also happens. Another argument in the fight not to enter, you can easily lose all respect from the team.
Extreme measure. If in the eyes of the team it was not necessary, then it is a huge minus in karma. Accordingly, if we drive out, it is necessary to clearly and clearly convey the idea “for what and what does it threaten in the future.” However, let this option be a plan "B"
And if you push away from the essence of the request of the employee, even if expressed in an inconvenient form for us, then the person wants power. It is quite possible that we will be able to let him show himself from the position of a leader, even a small sector. For example: to teach beginners, to establish a testing process, to provide effective meetings (short, with a written summary, etc.), to organize writing articles in a corporate blog or on Habr, etc.
Did you want power? No problem, you can choose, we will go for option A or option B? The main thing is that both options suit us. You can choose in what order to fix these bugs. But you need to fix now. Of course, you can prioritize when overtime - on Saturday or Friday night. Just a fix should be on Monday morning.
Another method that can be used here is to offer a choice from the list in three positions. Preferred position comes last for us. The first position for an employee is very laborious and risky, but with a high return, the second gives little and requires little investment, the third is optimal in terms of the ratio of investment of forces and return. Very often people choose the third. If the “fighter” chooses the second position, he is probably not going to invest heavily in the struggle for power, either the goal is not desired, or there is no faith in what the power can or is worthy of getting.
The disadvantages of this approach are obvious, such a manipulation may simply not play if the “stimulus” does not get involved in the game.
This is usually expressed in personal attacks when you suddenly realize that you are hooked. Provocative questions, caustic comments, minor nasty things and dirty tricks about you. It seems to be a trifling question, but the intonation, but the form ... It seems to clarify the details, but the implied answer ... It's a shame, and most importantly, you understand that they wanted to offend you, make you hurt and unpleasant.
If you know the reason for the attacks, you can openly announce this and apologize.
In order to strengthen and, at the same time, soften the apologies, one can admit to apologies that they were wrong.
Periodically, we are mistaken, but few people like to admit their mistakes, prefer to keep silent. The big problem of smart people is the habit of living in an expert position “in life”. And for many of us, “being right” is equal to “having value in the eyes of others.” But addition is also true, if I am always right, then you either agree with me or are wrong. A. Maslow singled out the desire for security, respect, self-respect, the basic needs of each person. This additional logic is perceived unconsciously. And often it repels interlocutors, customers, employees from the “life experts”. Constant self-righteousness worsens the relationship (even if it is justified).
Military trick in a conflict situation: admit that you may be wrong. If it is done on time, it will save our contact, nerves, time, money, etc. There are methods to do this beautifully: the Socratic dialogue and the I-sentence.
Often a bad choice: you can lose, you can win and get a minus in karma, you will not fight off all attacks. Blaming is much easier than making excuses, the result is a minus in karma.
If, nevertheless, to go to such a step, speech techniques of a dispute can help.
For example. If you wrap your arguments in a Socratic dialogue, then you can save some of the karma.
It is possible, and it is important, to show that your interlocutor behaves incorrectly, tactlessly and generally discredits himself as a source of information. To do this, you can directly say that the attacks are not at the right place, and are groundless. You can question his expert position: maybe he didn’t come up with the title, or there is no experience, or theoretical background, or he doesn’t know what the “programming patterns” are ... but how can you continue to communicate with such ignoramus ...
It is important to limit communication, ideally speaking in the style of “you want me to prove that I am not a camel” and complete the topic with a short counterargument and close the topic without giving the other party an answer.
By themselves, such methods of karma will not add, but will reduce its loss - if they are carried out quite technically and artistically.
You can patiently answer questions, ignoring the background, until the team itself becomes your defense. The downside is that protection can not wait, and employees will learn to think that they have a weak leader.
If we know what is happening, and what is the reason for this behavior, we can voice it. Then give the team the most "educate" the aggressor. Exit with an open visor is a very good tactic. Important! The description should be as objective as possible and as emotionally minimal as possible. For example: “It seems to me that unflattering statements and criticism from your side are more connected with our joint work on a previous project than on this one”
You can say what you feel. For example "I was stung by what you said. I do not know if you wanted this, but I was unpleasant. But we have urgent and important tasks that need to be addressed now. ”
I-saying here also helps.
Sometimes it makes sense to give up. Sometimes, it’s really cheaper to assign a task to another one or to do it yourself. It makes sense if the task is not repetitive, or the employee in the team for a short time, and / or a similar situation suits both the customer and your management. If you are going to work with this person for a long time and this is his core activity - then it is better to find other ways.
Give the task again, put it differently, convince him that he will succeed if he makes an effort. Sometimes it helps. Sometimes it gives a delay in solving this problem for you personally (it makes sense in strong loading mode). If we go this way, it is better to use motivating techniques. For example, a crocodile-assortment scheme: “if you tighten this task, it will be bad, if you do it on time, you will receive a bonus”
A good way is to start learning. Split the task into small subtasks that cannot be accomplished, and praise (reinforce) the execution of each small fragment.
Give mentoring helpless to the one who wants it. For example, “fighter for power”, if he is nearby. Power fighter and helpless often made for each other. Helpless gets a teacher, a fighter for power - recognition.
In general, group resistance is not what awaits us. It is quite possible to prevent group resistance, engaging in prevention, and participating in the selection of personnel. But if group resistances appear on the background of the deadline, then it would be good to work with them from the position of the instrumental, and less to invest in them emotional forces. It will be better, as well as for our health, and for the project as a whole.
Many parents complain about something similar in relation to children. And here it is impossible to dismiss.
Both employees and children often act in similar ways. Implementation is different, and the types of actions are similar:
- To attract attention
- Power struggle
- Revenge and personal attacks
- Helplessness
Each of these species has its own formal attributes and standard medicines.
About the problem
According to my personal statistics, most IT managers grew out of engineers. From programmers, QA, admins, etc. How does this happen? The best employee is given an assistant to perform routine tasks. Then the second. Then - trust to teach beginners. So, little by little, a man is overgrown with a team. And here it turns out that the skills for work are now completely different. That for each person in a team takes from half an hour to an hour and a half per day to set and verify tasks. And that for solving the problem “how to make a project on time, efficiently, and with the available resource” it is very useful to be able to work with the team. And in this case we will be confronted with its two curious features - group dynamics and group resistances.
I woke up at night, thinking how to deal with the team on the project. I did not succeed, and I left the project.Like programming, working with a team is usually learned through experience and intuition. Up to some limit, it works, and then long-lasting conflicts, aggression, statements “in hearts”, resentment, low self-esteem, like a manager may appear (“I don’t get anything, I want to go back to the code ...”) and team members (“Again, nothing happens ...”).
(c) familiar PM
What is group resistance?
Every time I lead a new group into the mountains, conflicts arise on the evening of the second day. People and occasions change, but time remains the same. It is suggestive.For the first time, group resistances were identified by psychologists and psychotherapists in group psychotherapy, and when working with children. Later, we noticed that this behavior can be observed in any groups, just in psychological groups the atmosphere allows us to better reveal its non-constructivity.
Personal experience
Group resistance in IT is the conscious or unconscious behavior of a team member, which goes against the goals of the project and with its own declared goals.
It seems that a person does not do anything bad, and he seems to be behaving rationally, but by his behavior he slows down the work.
How can it look like? Let's present a meeting at which one of the employees begins to sort out the insignificant details of further work in detail. At the same time, a hidden aggressiveness is heard in the intonations, and sometimes sarcasm skips over: “Why did you decide that A is better than B?” He asks, “How can you make a decision without the necessary information?” He asks us and looks at the employees. It seems to be the case, but intuition whispers: “there’s something wrong here,” and consciousness adds: “there are still a lot of questions in the task list with a higher and more important rank”, “and Agile requires quick planning without detailing long-range plans”. And most importantly - confuses the language of our interlocutor. In other situations, we would say that the employee trolls us.
Externally, group resistances may look different: disputes, emotional outbursts, petty quibbles, apologies, assaults, clownish notions, suggestions on the merits and on auxiliary topics, complaints and questions. The main thing is that they prevent the continuation of work, distract from the topic, create emotions that are not related to the topic of the audience. For example: we are about the delivery of the project tomorrow, and they are about the economic status of Greece.
A person during group resistance very rarely realizes what exactly he is doing. And can sincerely believe that he is now working for the good of the project
Types of group resistance
There are four types of group resistance - drawing attention, the struggle for power, revenge and helplessness. Sometimes they allocate more, but, in our opinion, four is enough for effective work.
To attract attention
Signs of
The person seems to be actively helping, making approving comments and making them loud. Sometimes he asks questions, and when you start answering a question, you understand that the answer does not interest him, and the question was one of banal. Sometimes leads away from the topic and switching attention to something or someone else. At meetings, he asks questions that could be solved personally. Interrupts Clarifies. Lightly troll - gently, without much aggression. Is joking. He begins to speak in such a way that the essence of what has been said comes after the 20th word. Rustles bag, opens the window, closes the door, blinds, adjusts the air conditioner. It often passes through a discussion center. He twirls something in his hands, plays gadgets, from time to time loudly dropping and apologizing.
Often this behavior causes irritation and the desire to shut up, plant, tie hands, etc., very often this behavior keeps the collective’s attention on the “irritant”. The time of discussion is delayed, thoughts are scattered and we understand that something needs to be done.
What to do?
Ignore + validation (for gain)
It makes sense to ignore a small attraction of attention (for example: someone threw a paper airplane). If the situation repeats (the employee came to the next meeting with a parachute and wearing glasses of the pilot and with 54 airplanes, who threw a speaker after each sentence) - it is better to change tactics. The escalation of attracting attention hints that our attention will continue to attract more and more aggressive methods. This is reminiscent of the child's behavior - if they do not pay attention to your cry, then they will pay attention to the broken vase.
Ignoring can be strengthened by the technique, which in hypnosis is called ratification.
The essence of the technique is to reinforce the desired behavior and ignore the behavior we do not need. Therefore, we give attention not when the “irritant” attracts attention, but when the employee's behavior corresponds to the goals of the team. For example, he attentively listens or offers sensible suggestions - here we give him the attention in a way he likes. For example: ask his opinion, listen carefully, say a compliment. If attention is attracted by “childish” ways, we react adequately, but minimally.
')
Give attention
There are many ways:
You can talk and find out why the employee thinks that way, or why he objects, the main thing is just to listen carefully to the answer without interrupting. If a question or objection was said to attract attention, then, often, the objection is removed, and the question is answered by the person who asked it. The main thing is to listen.
If a person wants attention - let him speak without interruptingYou can give attention non-verbally - with the help of body position or with the help of gestures and facial expressions. The main point is to draw indirect attention to the “irritant”. For example, ask to distribute all sheets of paper for writing. Or bring a marker or ask to keep a record of the conclusions reached at the meeting. And even a simple smile or nod often helps. If you give attention in advance, then a person usually does not need much.
You can indirectly attract attention and verbally. Call by name, tell the life story associated with it (if it fits the situation), recall the successful decisions of this person at the meeting.
Power struggle
Signs of
There is a man, he may even be a leader in this team (or not, but he wants to prove that he can). He does not quite like the current, appointed manager (or he considers himself to be more competent). Many things can be done better and more correctly, and he knows how, and is ready to fight. And outwardly, this struggle may not look aggressive. Small proposals "essentially", constant amendments, "to make it clearer," the manner to do in their own way and incite the rest. And maybe a direct challenge to the leader of his actions, a call under the banner of the other participants, distribution of instructions to employees. Can start arguing about architecture, technical solutions, and where to go for corporate. He can play in public, he can push populist decisions.
- You say that you need three hours for this task ?! Yes, I'll do it myself in an hour! Let Sasha take this task, and you will do this one - and just try to tighten it more than for two hours!Good power fighter show gestures, his gestures show a claim to leadership. He is more focused on the group, and not on the leader. He draws attention to himself, pushes the speaker (if it is a manager).
QA at a meeting of programmers.
What to do?
Ignore
Objected, did not complete the job? Sometimes the best thing to do is to not mess. The power struggle is expensive (in relation to the goals of the team), if the case is single - it is better to pretend that they did not notice anything. But if you plan to work with the team for a long time, then it makes sense to talk with the “irritant” one-on-one. Without the presence of the group, such a conversation will be easier and cheaper in time. The task of such communication is to show that this behavior does not suit you and not fuel the conflict. Therefore I can use the “I-message” technique. And to say in the format “when you said that you would not do the work with such an illiterate task setting, I felt annoyed and angry, I wanted us to pay more attention at the meetings to the fact that can be done, and not what is bad. One on one, I will gratefully hear your view of the situation "
“I-statement” or “I-message”. First, we describe the situation in the first person (that is, us), then we describe the emotions, and only after that we explain or ask to behave differently. For example: “When, when discussing technical issues, you switched to assessing my abilities, I felt anger and resentment. Please, let's talk in essence. It will be easier for me and more efficient in time for both of us. ”
Fight and win
Rarely when is the best move. However, it is often used. If you entered the battle - try to avoid conflicts. For example, it makes sense to use conflict conflict less. In this case, you can use both the Socratic dialogue and the constructive ultimatum.
Fight and lose
It also happens. Another argument in the fight not to enter, you can easily lose all respect from the team.
Expel
Extreme measure. If in the eyes of the team it was not necessary, then it is a huge minus in karma. Accordingly, if we drive out, it is necessary to clearly and clearly convey the idea “for what and what does it threaten in the future.” However, let this option be a plan "B"
Load work
And if you push away from the essence of the request of the employee, even if expressed in an inconvenient form for us, then the person wants power. It is quite possible that we will be able to let him show himself from the position of a leader, even a small sector. For example: to teach beginners, to establish a testing process, to provide effective meetings (short, with a written summary, etc.), to organize writing articles in a corporate blog or on Habr, etc.
Ability to choose + false dichotomies (choice without choice)
- Who wants to be captain? You?You can give the "wrestler" the opportunity to make decisions, choose. And, accordingly, be responsible for the choice. Only in the framework specified by us. False dichotomy is a sentence of choice in a limited list, where each option suits us. The choice here is replaced by the illusion of choice - any solution will suit us.
- Great, Ruslan - you are the captain!
- Katya, what kind of weapon do you take - a machine gun or a rocket? Rocket? Fine!
- Ruslan, you are the captain, lead us along this path!
Overheard by second-graders in a campaign on the lake
Did you want power? No problem, you can choose, we will go for option A or option B? The main thing is that both options suit us. You can choose in what order to fix these bugs. But you need to fix now. Of course, you can prioritize when overtime - on Saturday or Friday night. Just a fix should be on Monday morning.
Another method that can be used here is to offer a choice from the list in three positions. Preferred position comes last for us. The first position for an employee is very laborious and risky, but with a high return, the second gives little and requires little investment, the third is optimal in terms of the ratio of investment of forces and return. Very often people choose the third. If the “fighter” chooses the second position, he is probably not going to invest heavily in the struggle for power, either the goal is not desired, or there is no faith in what the power can or is worthy of getting.
The disadvantages of this approach are obvious, such a manipulation may simply not play if the “stimulus” does not get involved in the game.
Revenge and personal attacks
Signs of
xxx: in 2007 I was joking: I forced the accountants to keep the USB flash drive connected vertically to keep the files running to the computer faster.
xxx: half a year they did it and even believed that it was really faster.
xxx: in 2008 the people saw the light and I stayed for a month without a prize
(c) bash
XXX: That's funny. The last admin, it turns out, was with a strange sense of humor.This person has a personal claim to the leader. Maybe the manager killed or didn’t notice a great idea. Maybe forced to go on the weekend to fix someone else's bug. Maybe a favorite value, or maybe just do not like the way of speaking or doing. Or maybe he doesn’t like that the leader’s position was received by this man, and not himself. Or something else. Maybe even on the past project. The main thing - there is a subjective reason for not loving the speaker.
XXX: Chiefs in postal workers have a signature that they crave for various perversions (with variations).
YYY: Why not be removed?
XXX: And they do not see. It is in white font. Only if you do Ctrl + A.
YYY: Oh well!
YYY: * went to configure outlook *
(c) bash
This is usually expressed in personal attacks when you suddenly realize that you are hooked. Provocative questions, caustic comments, minor nasty things and dirty tricks about you. It seems to be a trifling question, but the intonation, but the form ... It seems to clarify the details, but the implied answer ... It's a shame, and most importantly, you understand that they wanted to offend you, make you hurt and unpleasant.
What to do?
Apologize + admit they are wrong
If you know the reason for the attacks, you can openly announce this and apologize.
In order to strengthen and, at the same time, soften the apologies, one can admit to apologies that they were wrong.
Periodically, we are mistaken, but few people like to admit their mistakes, prefer to keep silent. The big problem of smart people is the habit of living in an expert position “in life”. And for many of us, “being right” is equal to “having value in the eyes of others.” But addition is also true, if I am always right, then you either agree with me or are wrong. A. Maslow singled out the desire for security, respect, self-respect, the basic needs of each person. This additional logic is perceived unconsciously. And often it repels interlocutors, customers, employees from the “life experts”. Constant self-righteousness worsens the relationship (even if it is justified).
Military trick in a conflict situation: admit that you may be wrong. If it is done on time, it will save our contact, nerves, time, money, etc. There are methods to do this beautifully: the Socratic dialogue and the I-sentence.
Get into a fight
Often a bad choice: you can lose, you can win and get a minus in karma, you will not fight off all attacks. Blaming is much easier than making excuses, the result is a minus in karma.
If, nevertheless, to go to such a step, speech techniques of a dispute can help.
For example. If you wrap your arguments in a Socratic dialogue, then you can save some of the karma.
It is possible, and it is important, to show that your interlocutor behaves incorrectly, tactlessly and generally discredits himself as a source of information. To do this, you can directly say that the attacks are not at the right place, and are groundless. You can question his expert position: maybe he didn’t come up with the title, or there is no experience, or theoretical background, or he doesn’t know what the “programming patterns” are ... but how can you continue to communicate with such ignoramus ...
It is important to limit communication, ideally speaking in the style of “you want me to prove that I am not a camel” and complete the topic with a short counterargument and close the topic without giving the other party an answer.
By themselves, such methods of karma will not add, but will reduce its loss - if they are carried out quite technically and artistically.
Patiently answer questions
You can patiently answer questions, ignoring the background, until the team itself becomes your defense. The downside is that protection can not wait, and employees will learn to think that they have a weak leader.
Announce to group
If we know what is happening, and what is the reason for this behavior, we can voice it. Then give the team the most "educate" the aggressor. Exit with an open visor is a very good tactic. Important! The description should be as objective as possible and as emotionally minimal as possible. For example: “It seems to me that unflattering statements and criticism from your side are more connected with our joint work on a previous project than on this one”
Openly declare your feelings
You can say what you feel. For example "I was stung by what you said. I do not know if you wanted this, but I was unpleasant. But we have urgent and important tasks that need to be addressed now. ”
I-saying here also helps.
Helplessness
Signs of
Artemonovich: Denis uchudil again, got a new job, talked with a gene. the director, they took him, and Dina betrays him here, Vitaly Borisovich, could I call at 6:00 in the morning, otherwise I like to sleep, I'm afraid to sleep through my first working day.Does not argue, does not object, does not oppose. He “honestly tries,” “tries,” “tries,” and then gives up and says “I can't.” Well, it does not work for him. True, the comrade did not apply any special efforts, he only created a little more appearance. But formally done everything. Often he says "this will not work, but this is not at all realistic." Often asks for help. Brings this assistance to the fact that he is sitting next to and is bored next to an actively working more skilled assistant.
(c) bash
What to do?
Ignore
Sometimes it makes sense to give up. Sometimes, it’s really cheaper to assign a task to another one or to do it yourself. It makes sense if the task is not repetitive, or the employee in the team for a short time, and / or a similar situation suits both the customer and your management. If you are going to work with this person for a long time and this is his core activity - then it is better to find other ways.
Keep trying
Give the task again, put it differently, convince him that he will succeed if he makes an effort. Sometimes it helps. Sometimes it gives a delay in solving this problem for you personally (it makes sense in strong loading mode). If we go this way, it is better to use motivating techniques. For example, a crocodile-assortment scheme: “if you tighten this task, it will be bad, if you do it on time, you will receive a bonus”
Start simple
A good way is to start learning. Split the task into small subtasks that cannot be accomplished, and praise (reinforce) the execution of each small fragment.
- It does not work for me…A good way, the right way, only a very expensive way, and patience must be had. True helplessness differs from attracting attention or even from the struggle for power (which is sometimes disguised as helplessness) by the fact that a person honestly does not believe in his abilities. He is convinced that he will not do this, our task is to convince him otherwise.
- where is the mistake?
- in different places, I do not know ...
- show breakpoints
- and how are they put in this IDE? I used to use TurboPascal, but here everything is different ...
- you find the right place and press ...
- ...
- yeah, great, show suspicious places
- ...
- you are right, this place is suspicious, there may be a problem
Reassign
Give mentoring helpless to the one who wants it. For example, “fighter for power”, if he is nearby. Power fighter and helpless often made for each other. Helpless gets a teacher, a fighter for power - recognition.
Conclusion
In general, group resistance is not what awaits us. It is quite possible to prevent group resistance, engaging in prevention, and participating in the selection of personnel. But if group resistances appear on the background of the deadline, then it would be good to work with them from the position of the instrumental, and less to invest in them emotional forces. It will be better, as well as for our health, and for the project as a whole.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/148046/
All Articles