THE DEVIL YOU KNOW?

Steven Cesare, Ph.D.

A business owner from Minnesota called me the other day to discuss the age-old dilemma of having to decide whether to terminate a problematic employee and fill that soon-to-be-open vacancy, or keep the troublesome employee in place thereby preserving the status quo, albeit at a palpable subpar level.

As a capitalist, I say terminate the employee today.

I know that sounds abrupt to many business owners loath to enter the unpredictable recruitment waters of never knowing what the current labor market will produce, instead choosing to cling ever-so tightly onto their homespun security blanket being someone who lacks reciprocity, respect, and return on investment.

During our contemplative conversation, the business owner engaged in lengthy self-debate, waxing fancifully between “She really is a strong crew leader, if only she would create less drama, be more responsible, and position herself as a role model,” juxtaposed against “She really doesn’t fit with the culture, nobody wants to work with her, but if I fire her, she will likely lawyer up and I don’t need that headache.”

Once a third pensive pause crept into our dialogue, I asked the business owner “Are you a leader or a hostage? Are you a business owner or a social worker? Does our company manage change or fear it?”

Silence. Epitomizing reflection. Interwoven with doubt; militated by duty.

The business owner then recited the banal expression I hear on a weekly basis, “But Steve, the devil I know is better than the devil I don’t know!”

Puhleeeeze.

Spare me the cosplay, virtue signaling, and gratuitous prose.

If the owner did not want to terminate the under-performing employee, she never would have called me in the first place. She knows the employee represents a sacrilege against the company culture of meritocracy she publicly espouses, all the while losing credibility with other employees who assuredly interpret her hesitation as professional weakness posing theatrically as interpersonal patience, hope, and compassion.

My role in these discussions is purely objective, focused exclusively on making decisions that benefit the organization by leveraging its results-based team-oriented company culture. I seldom know the employees, typically having only a basic understanding of the context, all the while possessing manifest insight into the business owner’s strategic mindset. Invariably, that mindset is commonly mistakenly replaced by personal emotion. So, instead of making business decisions, we are now making case-by-case verdicts. Hmmm.

Don’t misinterpret me. All decisions warrant due diligence, consideration, and contingency thinking; as long as those factors revolve around the singularity of the company’s business goals, not the employee’s self-interest, nor the business owner’s desire to avoid conflict, guilt, or blame.

I don’t understand going back to the same bad restaurant hoping the food will be better this time, continuing to buy bad quality plants from a local vendor because they are cheap and will likely have to be returned, or keeping poor employees on the payroll expecting them to miraculously improve. Rather, business owners should allocate their time, money, and energy on a new engagement, replete with risk instead of being sustained by continued disappointment. Why knowingly settle for something predictably unfavorable?

Enact the future, do not imprison yourself to repeat the past. The past is what got you here to begin with.

The business owner decided to keep the employee on the payroll.

While I naturally support the business owner’s decision, I wonder if the devil she chose will do the same.

When you look at your past, which devil have you chosen?

If you have any questions or comments about this topic or anything else related to human resources, Sign Up for Steve’s HR Helpdesk!