Upsdude,
If it is any consolation I have seen some of the lowest ERI scores this year that I have witnessed in my 11 years at Ups.
We are facing enormous external competitive pressures at Ups right now. Perception is everything in life and FedEx's return to investors coupled with their success in the ground product has left many Ups districts in chaos. I posted just last week on the Yahoo board some of the reasons that I thought FedEx is a sleeping giant right now. They do a much better job at public perception, whether it is their advertising campaigns or their customer service and they have always defined and measured their success against Ups and made the necessary adjustments to compete with us.
As the marketplace tightens up we have never had to face the pressures of competition that we face now. Pressure on making the sort time, getting out of our centers on time and dealing with the whole issue of jamming ten pounds of potatoes into a five pound bag (our business-everyday) is pressure enough. For most of the almost 100 hundred years in our existence that was pressure and standards that WE placed on ourselves. We set the bar pretty high, but were not always the most responsive organization when the customer had an issue. The primary reason for this is we never measured ourselves against any other organization. We only measured our policies, successes, and methods against history, our own history-and the results were outstanding.
The marketplace has changed-rapidly in the last thirty years, but many of our policies and procedures have remained rigid and totalitarian.
Especially in the areas of management. There are a lot of good things that happen when you promote from within-but there is a massive downside also. The management style that was so effective as we moved through the 50's 60's and 70's saw unprecedented success. Return on investment and unbelievable growth were the earmarks of these decades. It also entrenched a management style that manifested itself over years as inbred, stale and ill equipped to handle the pressure of a competitive marketplace where things change with dynamic simultaneity.
The primary requirements to become a Ups manager have always been a clean employment record, a desire to move up and a lengthy tenure with the organization. Everything else could be taught on the job-trial by fire. Historically, there was not a lot of training and an individuals core skill set and aptitude were often overlooked when they were placed in a specific work area.
Traditionally, if you do not steal, fudge numbers or violate the fraternization policy, your chances of remaining employed at Ups for a lengthy tenure are very good. Even if you prove to be an ineffective and downright poor manager. Your work assignments, feedback from employees and performance reviews will all reflect your ineptitude, but you will probably be allowed to continue to work at Ups.
As you continue to erode the morale and performance of those who are unfortunate enough to find themselves in your charge, you will undoubtedly be exposed to the wrath of your superior and peer managers in your work area. Instead of doing the right thing and firing you, Ups will put you through the wringer. You will be bitched at, threatened, moved around and the most motivating of all moves- possibly demoted. When push comes to shove your peers and senior managers will give you a passable performance review, keeping you around because of your tenure and stockholder status-thus weakening the partnership immeasurably by refusing to step up and saying enough is enough.
This system of management has crippled Ups and we are faced with literally thousands of incapable managers with 15- 20 years on the job that are in their early to mid forties. So entrenched are they in their ways and so close-minded are they in their approach to managing our biggest resource-our people, that it makes it extremely difficult to implement change, and our frustration level is through the roof. I think its important to stress here that I am talking about bad management persons. Whose history, performance and attitude are consistent with poor decisions and bad leadership. Not people who have made a few bad decisions and are still worthy of our support. We ALL know the difference. We ALL know who these people are, and we ALL know how horrible it is to work for them.
The ERI provides one of the only opportunities to collectively comment on our management team. But the standards that management is held to for those horrible marks that we see on the ERI are unrealistic in their attempts to correct that behavior.
If you were to look at the reasons that Ups fires it's management you will not often see strict performance goals as a condition of employment. Especially if that manager is a large stockholder and been around for twenty years. There is often re-assignment, demotion and responsibilities that have no real consequence for failure. This is demaning to that employee, does nothing to motivate him/her to change and most importantly sends a strong message that mediocrity and substandard performance are acceptable forms of management.
In many other organizations people are routinely fired for the type of feedback that a score of 50 on The ERI represents. Performance goals and accountability are hollow objectives at Ups. Bad managers are allowed to continue making bad decisions because the process for identifying and exposing these mangers rest squarely on the shoulders of other managers. Abject fear has always been the main motivating tool at Ups to drive management. That fear cripples the decision making process and the ability to hold accountable people who are incapable of doing the job. Most management people think that they are betraying their peers and superiors if they report egregious errors in judgement or policy. They in turn become less confident of there own performance and decisions-so they say nothing, move on and mind their own business.
If a management person proves over a period of time that he/she doesn't have what it takes to make effective decisions and perform in a manner consistent with the responsibilities that their specific work areas demand, they should be fired.
Not summarily, or without proper documentation of specific goals in a finite period of review-but separated nonetheless. Tie made an earlier point responding to a management situation whereby drivers were not getting out of the center until 45 minutes after start time. He stated that there probably would not be a public flogging but that guy is catching more "grief than anyone of us would want" Why try and motivate people with the age-old Ups method of yelling, screaming and threatening? It doesn't work-It used to work but it has long lost its appeal. Why not treat that individual like many other fortune 100 companies treat their employees that are incapable of making the grade. Cut your losses, humanely and quickly, make outplacement services available to them at no cost and give them a good professional review that will help them on their next career move. Why continue the cycle and desroy morale?
Not every organization is a good fit for every person. If someone has been in management for twenty years and has made bad decisions and received negative feedback in most of his/her respective work areas over that time-what value are they providing to the organization? I can definitively tell you what harm they can do to a company; they destroy morale, and are devastating to the performance of good conscientious employees whose job requirements rely on a strong leader and capable decision maker. There is another valuable lesson that can be learned from getting rid of bad /ineffective employees. You learn to exercise greater prudence in the employees you have marked for promotion into management. You are careful not to make a similar mistake and expend valuable time and resources toward the training and development of someone who never had the qualifications for the responsibilities of a management position other than he/she had a certain amount of tenure with the company.
Ups is doing a better job of requiring new management personnel to have a college degree or be in pursuit of one, but we are a long, long way from eradicating the closed loop of promotion from within that fostered so many poor managers over the years.