Ravi Chokalingham joined the business 23 years ago and has ever since been a one-company person. He joined as an engineer trainee and over time rose to become deputy general manager of manufacturing in the Chennai location of the company. Ravi’s boss has year after year said to him that he is doing fine and almost as an afterthought mentions to him that he needs to improve his business acumen. Ravi, based on his tenure and the long association with the business, believes he is doing all right— there is, after all, no other contrary data.

Then comes the recession and the company decides that it needs to reduce fixed costs. On a rather chilly morning in mid-January, without much ado, Ravi is told that he needs to go; the company is de-layering and there is no need for a deputy general manager. Ravi’s’ world falls part and he is gripped by both fear and a deep sense of anger. Somewhere deep down, he hears himself asking: is this fair?

Real threat

Much research and writing has happened on disgruntled (disengaged) employees, but what of disgruntled ex-staff? Surely, businesses face a real, potent danger from former disgruntled ex-employees.

A good HR practitioner ought to have plans and practices in place to deal with this reality in a sensitive and constructive manner.

Today’s tough economic conditions are forcing many employers to cut costs wherever they can. When this starts to impact manpower, it has a direct negative impact on employees’ perceptions of their jobs and their “value” at work. The opposite is equally true — it is also a time when managers/employees are less likely to change jobs.

However, when things start to look up, invariably, talented but disgruntled employees are often the first to leave. Generally speaking, it is also true that organisations spend disproportionately recruitment people and far less time when an employee leaves. Disengagement particularly of disgruntled employees seems to be taken as both inevitable and perhaps undeserving of attention and investment of time.

Law of EX Recently, I came across this study (Sept-Oct 2012: Journal of HRM ) of a phenomenon known in professional soccer as the “immutable law of the EX”. The study postulates that players play unusually well when pitted against their former teams. The theory was tested through an exhaustive study of 400 matches of the English Premier League (EPL) over a six-year period and an analysis of several thousand newspaper articles and interviews with several team managers. The study found that anger and pressure to prove loyalty to the new team as well as inside knowledge of the previous team’s routines led to superior performance by players who had left on bad terms.

I felt that this study, while in a different area, has a strong relevance to business settings where performance is determined largely by individual contribution, albeit through effective team working. I am sure each of us can relate to this finding with many examples from our own world of experiences. I recall rather vividly the case of a senior person in a general management role retiring from a business after almost two decades of being in senior roles and joining a competitor in the same industry.

Seemingly nothing was amiss, but over time, mutual perceptions started to get coloured and a sense of mistrust got seeded. It got to a stage where any one joining the competitor was seen as the handiwork of the former senior employee. The seeds of disgruntlement got sown when an innocuous pre-retirement request was turned down through show of the rule-book and it was such a tragedy that after all those decades of association, a small issue made the relation sour at the time of disengagement. Surely, the situation could have been managed better with greater sensitivity and respect.

The meaning of “respect” is very individually calibrated and often times get evaluated in conjunction with “fairness”, again very personalised in the way each of us understands (and feels) it and hugely contextual, too. Disgruntled employees take with them a sense of motivation to exact revenge and this, based on my many years of experience, stems from the “fairness” dimension and how individuals experience it.

Some individuals who have personally evolved do not carry this need, but there is a sizeable number, who, based on their hurt, have a strong need to practise their personalised maxim — “do unto others what others have done unto me”.

Fairness is subjective Fairness is a subjective area, no doubt, and while it is difficult to unearth and respond to every employee’s set of standards, honest and authentic behaviour practised consistently over time seems to be the differentiator for businesses that have effectively managed the threat of disgruntled ex-employees. No sudden bad news as in the case of Ravi after 23 years! Or for that matter, the show of a rule book is surely not advocated.

It is indeed impossible to please everybody is another limiting belief that we often operate under – it is important and relevant to bear in mind that every employee is important and significant and, therefore, it must be our constant endeavour to be sensitive and pay attention to each and every one of them. As we disengage, which is as inevitable as engagement itself, we need to be even more sensitive to the dignity of the individual. Any other, and we invite the “immutable power of Ex”

Disgruntlement is not binary it is linear.

The writer is currently Chairperson of the Management Development Centre of LIBA based in Chennai and is a practising Business Coach.

Related Topics
comment COMMENT NOW