The deadline was met. The customer was helped. In the meeting, you report that things are going well. But do you also know what it took to achieve that result?
The result tells only part of the story
Suppose an employee finishes the work on Friday. Everything has been delivered as agreed. What you did not see is that they worked two evenings, covered for a colleague and postponed other tasks. The result is right. Your picture of the time it required may not be.
If you use that same schedule again, you unknowingly count on the same extra effort. The employee now knows how to get the work done anyway. You see someone you can rely on. As long as nobody discusses how it was achieved, the extra strain stays out of sight.
That is an example, not an explanation for every person who works hard. People can enjoy an intensive project and deliberately do something extra. The question is whether you know when that is the case, and when extra effort has become the standard solution.
Reliability can make questions seem unnecessary
I know from my own history how convincing performance can be. I could carry a great deal and kept functioning on the outside. That also meant I paid too little attention to what it cost. I had plenty of reasons to say I was doing well.
That experience is why, as a manager, I would want to look beyond being told something is finished. How did you manage it? What had to give? What help did you need? The answers can give a different picture of the same achievement.
You do not need to investigate someone’s private life or suspect a diagnosis to ask those questions. The work itself gives you enough reason for a conversation. If the agreed hours consistently prove insufficient, that is relevant information about the assignment and the schedule.
The answer asks something of you too
Suppose someone tells you they can only finish the work by skipping breaks. It is of little help if the conversation ends with telling them to set better boundaries while you continue to expect the same amount of work. You also need to look at what is achievable.
Arboportaal, the Dutch government’s occupational health and safety information service, advises employers to involve employees in measures to address workload and to assess whether those measures work well enough. That means the conversation can lead to changes in how you organise the work.
Guidance can also address how pressure affects someone’s actions and communication. For example, why they keep solving everything themselves or find it hard to say that something does not fit. Both questions deserve room: what does the person do, and what does the work demand?
Think of a result you were recently pleased with. Do you know how it was achieved? That is a concrete starting point. If you want to explore with your team how you act and work together under pressure, we can start with that work situation.
Read more at the source
Arboportaal on addressing workload (in Dutch)From reading to your own situation