I laughed out loud when I first heard the term “tattoo regret,” but I know first-hand that, in a human workplace, there’s a threshold moment when a manager realizes he’s got employee regret.  An employee isn’t working out - but it’s not funny, and not easy to fix.

The actual problem might be the employee’s abilities, or it might be a “motivation” issue - or some combination of both – that adds up to a non-fit. The main thing is, the difference between what had been originally hoped for, and what has turned out to be true, can no longer be ignored.

Handling the particular situation well requires one kind of strategy. Insuring that it mostly doesn’t happen again – prevention – is the better approach for the long haul, and hinges on learning the right lessons.

Obviously, a manager begins by managing his or her own feelings.  That’s crucial, especially since everything changes the instant an employee senses you’re no longer thrilled they’re on your team. Be prepared for a range of responses, including denial and aggression, when you broach the problem.

For you, the manager, remember – it’s always about the work and work performance. Your demeanor and use of language should convey that, and only that.

Prevention is the key:

Monitor that “uh oh” feeling, and head toward problems early.

Invest time in mentoring and/or coaching the employee without even hinting that you’re too busy, or that you’re annoyed you have to do it.

Remember, until that threshold (time to terminate) is crossed – it isn’t. Your focus is helping your employee succeed, and first approaching things as problems to be understood and solved – really.

As a purely practical matter, authentically helping an employee succeed increases the likelihood the effort will bear fruit, and decreases the likelihood there will be unreasonable fallout if it doesn’t.

It’s not quite win-win, but it’s a reasonable facsimile. After that, yes, you may have to do what was going to need to be done anyway. But you’ll know you did it the right way.

The thing I like best about coaching is how straightforward it is: either our sessions are useful in a tangible way, or they’re not. If they’re not, the sessions should stop.

Sometimes it’s crystal clear why the sessions are helping. The interactions are stimulating, validating, liberating, or something that feels right. Sometimes it’s less obvious, but it’s usually about external structure and accountability.

Either way, positive actions follow from the sessions – and that’s positive as defined by the client.

Even people who do pretty well working alone can find that having someone to brainstorm with, someone to run things past, someone to think out loud with in a risk-free situation – above all, someone to help move things forward is an invaluable asset.

No longer is it only the rich and famous who have personal assistants, advisors, and personal trainers. Now anyone trying to get from Point A to Point B can hire a trained, credentialed, insured professional.

Study after study keeps showing that people like coaching and their coaches. It’s the complete opposite of being sold a bill of goods, or getting into a dependent relationship with a guru.

Coaches are allies, but not sycophants. They support, but also reflect back honestly how what they’re hearing seems to fit with where things are supposed to be going.

Above all, the process is “positive” not painful, and clients should be looking forward to the meetings.

When I read business articles, I often get the feeling that the work world I see isn‘t quite what those folks are thinking of when they write about the workplace.

The problems they focus on always somehow seem the same – either non-strategic thinking or poor communication, or both. As I read, in my minds eye I see focused people with careers they’re pursuing and mortgages they’re paying, and it’s just that, according to the article, somehow things aren‘t quite coming together. So there‘s all this potential lying there waiting to be unleashed – if only management would get it right.

Enter – stage left – the right person, or the right management idea, or both.

I suppose I might be exaggerating a tad, and maybe it‘s nothing more than the feeling that they’re writing about a parallel universe where virtually everyone’s a professional, or at least has work skills, and knows the basics of adult functioning like shaking hands, returning phone calls, making minimal eye contact, wearing clean clothes, and using deodorant.

At some of the workplaces I’ve been called to consult, nothing could be taken for granted. I remember sitting in a conference room with a freshly promoted young supervisor having a very animated discussion about basic things like the need to give regular feedback, respond early to identified problems, while also addressing her anxiety about doing performance reviews.

We could look out onto a floor full of cubicles, and as we talked, a small squad converged around a particular one. My new supervisor shook her head and said, “We found rotting food in her file drawers, and unopened mail from months ago. “

I’m not suggesting that happens every day, but there are many, many workplaces where the human condition runs rampant in all its multi-faceted richness. “The Office” and “Dilbert” cartoons capture a slice of it, but a lot of what I see isn’t that funny. Pecking order stuff, raw aggression, dysfunction, and pure venality occur with sad regularity across the fruited plain.

Paradoxically, for some people work actually is “home” – a sanctuary, a model of sanity and reliability contrasting with the train wreck back at their own residence.

This can’t simply be dismissed as the other world of low-enders, where most wouldn‘t be caught dead.

Many of us have been there, are there now, or have siblings, cousins, and even children who are in that world.

Helping line managers do their tough jobs has only partly – if ever – been about “thinking outside the box.“

In fact, It‘s mostly about keeping your own concentration, and behaving like the person you aspire to be, despite what‘s happening in front of you, all the while learning, improving, and planning your “strategic” exit when the time is right.

It may sound a bit schmaltzy, but it really has been an honor and a privelege to occasionally be able to help some of those folks.

Every once in awhile I dream of coming up with some phrase that’s so memorable and evocative, I can copywrite it. Then it would get picked up out there somehow, create some “buzz,”, generate a ton ideas and comments – as well as a bestselling book. So far, no luck.

But I was leafing through some notes having to do with employees describing what made a good boss, and I noticed how often what got said connected to feeling “encouraged” to stretch, take something new on, and so many times the boss had more confidence in the employees than they did in themselves.

I’ve also noticed that some managers are “naturals” – almost effortlessly good at explaining a goal or a project so that the employee “sees” what’s expected while also feeling assured it’s “do-able.”

It’s a real skill to combine describing the process, anticipating the trouble spots, assuring support and adequate resources, and accurately describing the good outcome long before it happens. When a supervisor handles it well, it results in less anxiety (which means better initial listening and comprehension), less outright resistance, and a much higher probability of overall success.

Some supervisors are just more comfortable dealing with human nature – in all its splendor – than some others. For some, displays of anxiety or self doubt are weaknesses not suitable to a workplace – and some barely hide their true feelings behind that manufactured smile.

Most supervisors have been around long enough to recognize that not all line employees share their commitment to the job– but the “naturals” are consistently slower to be irritated or get exasperated at employees for being so needy – a repeat of instructions, say, or yet another reassurance about real and imagined “problems.”

Relaxed supervisors smile through the initial static, then slowly, appreciatively – but relentlessly – expect people to perform and the job to get done.   Their message:

“We can do this.”

Most of us have heard, at least vaguely, of the Hawthorne Effect: behavior is modified when people know they’re being observed. Even though the Hawthorne Effect may ultimately turn out to be unscientific folklore, it still has that ring of truth that also seems to square with common sense.

The principles behind the Hawthorne Effect are definitely part of how and why coaching works, and it’s embedded in a lot of management ideas that have fancy names and big time gurus. Management by Walking Around – one of my all-time favorites – is an obvious example.

What happens when people know they’re being observed? Mostly good things, actually – more honesty, more productivity, more accountability. Sure, some people in some situations may feel put upon – intimidated even. But that’s not really where most of the difficulties come from.

So what’s the problem? In a celebrated business article written in 1974, the authors (Oncken & Wass) entertainingly posed the question, “whose monkeys are on whose back?” – very cleverly highlighting time management as a key managerial skill. More precisely, it’s about managing management time. So, from the other direction, managers are urged – not just to delegate – but to actively rebuff attempts by employees to put “monkeys” on their backs.

I can see how managers can come to resent, or at least view negatively, an employee’s need to be reassured, reinforced, praised, validated, or ”checked-in” with and communicated with, so constantly. Since managers are usually squeezed for time themselves, their ideal employee is a self-starter who takes initiative, works fast and efficiently, doesn’t make mistakes, doesn’t need hand-holding and – above all – doesn’t take up managerial time.

There are workplaces where that’s what happens, but not many. Human nature is ubiquitous and relentless. Plus, the self-starters move up (or move on) quickly, usually replaced by an employee closer to the norm – someone wired to abhor isolation, and to at least minimally need basic reinforcement, and regular communication with the supervisor, to stay on track.

Two plus two equals four, the sun rises in the East, and – like it or not – employees need to know the manager is coming, intends to check in, and that he or she will figure out what’s going on by observing and asking questions. Managers who keep wishing it wasn’t the case are in for a rocky career.