This article explores how managers handle performance problems. Consistent with recent descriptions of sequences of managers' confrontations, the analysis isolates particular confrontive techniques recommended by managers, and addresses how these techniques enhance both alignment between managers and employees and managerial control. Techniques fall into three broad categories: (a) alternatives to confrontation, (b) investigative actions, and (c) fault finding. It was found, based upon managers' responses to scenarios of problematic events, that they opt out of either investigative or fault-finding moves about one-fifth of the time, they commence with investigative moves about one-third of the time, and although they engage in fault finding about one-half the time, they avoid more aggravated forms of fault finding and reserve formal procedures for severe and/or intransigent cases. Implications for alignment theory and management practice are discussed, as are limitations of the research and ideas for subsequent research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Beach, W. A. (1989a). Initiating and pursuing blame in interaction. Paper presented to the Western Speech Communication Association Annual Convention, Spokane, WA.
2.
Beach, W. A. (1989b). Interactional techniques for blame avoidance. Paper presented to the International Communication Association Annual Convention, San Francisco.
3.
Bies, R. J. , Shapiro, D. L., & Cummings, L. L. (1988). Causal accounts and managing organizational conflict: Is it enough to say it's not my fault?Communication Research, 15, 381-399.
4.
Buttny, R. (1985). Accounts as a reconstruction of an event's context. Communication Monographs, 52, 57-77.
5.
Buttny, R. (1989). Blame-accounts sequences in therapy: The negotiation of relational meanings. Paper presented to the International Communication Association Annual Convention, San Francisco.
6.
Cody, M. J. , & McLaughlin, M. L. (1985). Models for the sequential construction of accounting episodes: Situational and interactional constraints on messages selection and evaluation. In R. L. Street, Jr. & J. N. Cappella (Eds.), Sequence and pattern in communicative behaviour (pp. 50-69). London: Edward Arnold.
7.
Deal, T. , & Kennedy, A. A. (1982). Corporate cultures: The rites and rituals of corporate life. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
8.
Drew, P. (1978). Accusations: The occasioned use of members' knowledge of “religious geography” in describing events. Sociology, 12, 1-22.
9.
Fairhurst, G. T. , Green, S. G., & Snavely, B. K. (1984a). Managerial control: Whips and chains. In R. N. Bostrom (Ed.), Communication yearbook 8 (pp. 558-593). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
10.
Fairhurst, G. T. , Green, S. G., & Snavely, B. K. (1984b). Face support in controlling poor performance. Human Communication Research, 11(2), 272-295.
11.
Goffman, E. (1971). Relations in public. New York: Harper & Row.
12.
Green, S. G. , Fairhurst, G. T., Snavely, B. K. (1986). Chains of poor performance and supervisory control. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 38, 7-27.
13.
Heritage, J. (1989). Accounts as explanations: A conversation analytic perspective. In C. Antaki (Ed.), Analysing everyday explanation (pp. 127-144). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
14.
Hewitt, J. P. (1984). Self and society: A symbolic interactionist social psychology. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
15.
Huberman, J. (1975). “Discipline without punishment” lives. Harvard Business Review54(4), 6-8.
16.
McLaughlin, M. L. , Cody, M. J., & O'Hair, H. D. (1983). The management of failure events: Some contextual determinants of accounting behavior. Human Communication Research, 9, 208-224.
17.
Mills, C. W. (1940). Situated actions and vocabularies of motive. American Sociological Review, 5, 904-913.
18.
Morris, G. H. (1985). The remedial episode as a negotiation of rules. In R. L. Street, Jr. & J. N. Cappella (Eds.), Sequence and pattern in communicative behaviour (pp. 70-84). London: Edward Arnold.
19.
Morris, G. H. (1988). Finding fault. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 7, 1-25.
20.
Morris, G. H. , & Coursey, M. L. (1989). Negotiating the meaning of employees' conduct: How managers evaluate employees' accounts. Southern Communication Journal54(2), 185-205.
21.
Morris, G. H. , & Hopper, R. (1980). Remediation and legislation in everyday talk: How communicators achieve consensus. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 66, 266-274.
22.
Morris, G. H. , & Hopper, R. (1987). Symbolic action as alignment. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 28, 1-21.
23.
Newell, S. E. , & Stutman, R. K. (1989). Perceived situational factors in the decision to confront: Facilitators and constraints. Paper presented at the International Communication Association Convention, San Francisco.
24.
O'Reilly, C. A. , & Weitz, B. A. (1980). Managing marginal employees: The use of warnings and dismissals. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 467-484.
25.
Ouchi, W. , & MaQuire, M. (1975). Organizational control: Two functions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 20, 559-569.
26.
Pomerantz, A. (1978). Attributions of responsibility: Blamings. Sociology, 12, 115-121.
27.
Schonbach, P. (1986). A theory of conflict escalation in account episodes. Unpublished manuscript, University of Bochum.
28.
Scott, M. , & Lyman, S. (1968). Accounts. American Sociological Review, 22, 46-62.
29.
Stokes, R. , & Hewitt, J. (1976). Aligning actions. American Sociological Review, 41, 838-849.
30.
Steinmetz, L. L. (1985). Managing the marginal and unsatisfactory performer. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
31.
Tompkins, P. K. , & Cheney, G. (1983). Account analysis of organizations: Decision making and identification. In L. Putnam & M. Pacanowski (Eds.), Communication and organizations: An interpretive approach (pp. 123-146). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
32.
Wohlking, W. (1975). Effective discipline in employee relations. Personnel Journal, 54, 489-493.
