Difficult employees: A question of perspective

What it’s all about

Managers often complain that they have difficult employees. This perspective may seem plausible on the surface, but a deeper analysis suggests that the problem is often not the employees themselves, but rather difficult dialogue situations that managers fail to manage effectively. The inability to have these conversations is deeply rooted in psychological processes and has far-reaching consequences for the manager and the entire organisation.

The origin of perception

Difficult employees or difficult situations?

The perception that employees are difficult often arises from a combination of misunderstandings and inadequate communication. Managers who have difficulty overcoming these challenges often project their own insecurities onto their employees. This leads to the causes of the problems being transferred to the employees instead of critically reflecting on their own role in the dialogue situation.

In order to understand the origins of this perception, it is necessary to look at the basic psychological mechanisms that often lead managers to unconsciously blame others. Social and cognitive biases play a particularly important role here.

Social perception and the role of prejudice

Prejudices and stereotypes are deeply rooted in the human psyche and influence how we perceive our environment. Managers working in stressful environments tend to use these cognitive “shortcuts” to make quick decisions. The consequence is that they categorise employees who deviate from the norm or who do not fit into their preconceived image of an “ideal” employee as problematic. These prejudices unconsciously influence communication and the willingness to approach employees openly and objectively.

Psychological mechanisms of misperception

Perceptual distortions and their role

Perceptual distortions play a central role in how managers see their employees. These distortions, such as confirmation bias, contribute to managers selectively perceiving and interpreting information. They then only pay attention to information that supports their existing beliefs. An employee’s behaviour is perceived as difficult, even if there is objective evidence to suggest that it is a reaction to a misunderstood instruction or unclear communication.

Another example of perceptual bias is the halo effect, where a single characteristic of a person, such as a previous mistake or unpleasant interaction, unduly influences the manager’s overall impression of that employee. This effect causes managers to be less objective and unbiased in conversations with these employees.

Cognitive dissonance and the defence mechanisms

Cognitive dissonance occurs when new information contradicts existing beliefs. Supervisors who consider themselves effective communicators experience dissonance when conversations with employees do not go as expected. To reduce this discomfort, they often use defence mechanisms such as projection to transfer their own communication failures onto employees. Projection leads to the externalisation of one’s own weaknesses and insecurities, whereby employees are perceived as problematic, although the root of the problem lies within the manager themselves.

Another example of defence mechanisms is rationalisation, where managers “invent” a logical but often flawed explanation for the failure of communication. Instead of questioning their own role in a failed conversation, they cite external factors or the employee’s alleged difficulty as the cause.

The role of emotions in communication

Fear and uncertainty in leadership

Leaders are often faced with the challenge of maintaining authority and control. However, this position can cause anxiety, especially when difficult conversations are about to take place. The fear of losing control of the dialogue situation or showing weakness often results in defensive or aggressive reactions. These emotional reactions contribute to the escalation of conflicts and reinforce the perception that the employee is the problem, despite the fact that the dialogue situation was poorly managed.

The psychological pressure associated with the expectation to be confident and competent in all situations often results in managers excessively projecting the challenges of dialogue situations onto the emotional state of the employee. This distorts perception and reinforces the idea that the employee is difficult.

Emotional intelligence and its limits

Emotional intelligence is crucial for dealing with difficult dialogue situations. If it is lacking, employees’ emotional signals are not interpreted correctly or managers are not sufficiently capable of controlling their own emotional reactions appropriately. These shortcomings make it difficult to have constructive conversations and emphasise the perception that employees are difficult.

Emotional intelligence also includes the ability to show empathy and put oneself in the other person’s shoes. Those with deficits in this area are often unable to recognise the needs and motivations of staff and respond accordingly. Due to this deficiency, employees are then perceived as stubborn or reluctant, whereas in reality they simply need to be heard and understood.

The consequences of an unchanged perspective

Lack of problem solving and barriers to innovation

If managers only look for the problem with the employees, fundamental problems cannot be tackled. This unchanged perspective hinders the development of effective problem-solving strategies and prevents innovation. Employees who are perceived as difficult could actually offer valuable insights or creative solutions, but these are overlooked when they are seen in a negative light.

The lack of recognition and utilisation of employee potential blocks innovative ideas and approaches. This situation not only inhibits the individual development of employees, but also limits the overall innovation potential of the organisation.

Negative effects on the corporate culture

A corporate culture in which managers do not recognise their own communication problems and instead blame the employees can become toxic, as it promotes mistrust and reduces employee motivation. If employees feel that their concerns and perspectives are not taken seriously, the consequences are staff turnover and a loss of talent.

The perception of such a culture impairs employee commitment and satisfaction in the long term. A high turnover of employees in turn induces unstable teams and a loss of company knowledge, which in turn negatively affects the productivity and efficiency of the organisation.

Personal development and leadership effectiveness

However, the unchanged perspective also has serious consequences for the manager themselves. The inability to recognise and acknowledge one’s own weaknesses hinders personal development and the effectiveness of the role, careers stagnate and confidence in one’s own leadership skills is undermined.

Managers who remain trapped in self-perception and do not scrutinise their communication also run the risk of their leadership approaches becoming outdated or ineffective. This also stagnates their development and they miss the opportunity to adapt to the constantly changing demands of the working world.

The vicious circle of immutability

Continually blaming employees creates a vicious cycle in which leaders are repeatedly confronted with the same challenges. Without a willingness to self-reflect and change, the problem persists and the manager loses the opportunity to develop valuable leadership skills to adapt to the changing demands of the modern workplace.

Such a lack of self-reflection also prevents the development of the organisation as a whole. Teams cannot grow and adapt if their leaders are not willing to question and adapt their own practices and beliefs.

The psychological price of avoidance

Leaders who do not address their own deficits in dialogue management pay a high psychological price. Continuous avoidance leads to a growing sense of inadequacy and insecurity that undermines self-esteem. This psychological pressure can exacerbate born-out symptoms and significantly reduce job satisfaction.

The psychological impact of avoiding self-reflection can also cause increased levels of stress and frustration. These stresses can negatively impact the manager’s emotional and physical well-being and job performance.

The cycle of repeating mistakes

Another risk of the inability to change perspective is the repetition of mistakes. If managers are not willing to learn from past dialogue situations and adapt their approach, they are likely to make the same mistakes again and again. This leads to a vicious cycle in which the manager becomes stuck, ultimately undermining employee confidence and motivation.

The repetition of mistakes can also undermine the manager’s trust and credibility within the team and the organisation as a whole. Employees are less willing to commit to projects or show initiative if they feel their efforts are not recognised or appreciated.

The loss of trust and credibility

A leader who refuses to question and adapt their approach risks losing trust and credibility with their employees. Trust is a critical factor in the effectiveness of leadership and once it is lost, it can be very difficult to rebuild. Employees who lose trust in their leader are less likely to be fully engaged and give their best.

The loss of trust also reduces the quality of collaboration and communication within a team. Employees feel less secure and are less willing to share their thoughts and ideas openly, which reduces the team’s ability to innovate and succeed.

Conclusion

The mechanisms that lead managers to perceive employees as difficult when they are actually struggling with difficult dialogue situations are complex and multi-layered. Without a conscious shift in perspective and a willingness to self-reflect, the underlying problems will persist, with long-term negative effects on the effectiveness of the manager and the health of the organisation. A true understanding of the dynamic between manager and employee requires managers to be willing to critically question their own communication patterns and recognise that the biggest challenge is often not the employees themselves, but the way in which conversations are conducted and perceived.

The shift from seeing employees as difficult to understanding one’s own role in creating and maintaining difficult conversational situations is crucial for the personal development of the manager and the success of the organisation. This change requires courage and a willingness to confront one’s own weaknesses and continuously work on improving one’s own communication skills. Only in this way can managers effectively respond to the needs of their employees and create a working environment that promotes innovation, collaboration and growth.