The individual assigned the monitoring responsibility might do the following things:
- Get ratings on former managers. Talk to young college graduates who have been promoted or have gone on to new assignments. What were their first managers like? Check especially on how their bosses shared business information, what kinds of work were delegated, the amount of freedom and responsibility they felt they had, and any responses they received.
- Gel ratings on present "first" managers. Talk to college graduates who are still on their first jobs or who have left the company voluntarily or involuntarily. Check out the same issues.
- Interview new college graduate employees. As each recent graduate is hired, sit down with him after his first month to discuss the management he is experiencing. Spot-check the work assignments of at least a representative sample.
- Attend staff meetings of first-level managers. If the organization is large, get selected personnel specialists to help you cover staff meetings of lower-level managers to find out firsthand about the information-giving skills of managers at the bottom of the organization structure.
- Obtain assessments from higher-level managers. Request an evaluation of the abilities of first-line managers to orient and develop new college graduates as part of their overall appraisals.
- Obtain job evaluations. As new college graduates move from their first positions to ones of greater or different responsibility, ask them to complete a brief evaluation of the work they have been doing. Did it use their knowledge and skill? Did it challenge them? Did it teach them about the methods and systems of the organization? Did it provide a way for them to form working relationships with others in the firm besides their immediate work group?
- Build a preferred list. From this information, begin to build a list of suitable first supervisors or managers. Use this list when placing new employees in first assignments. For most of them, it will insure a good opportunity for a fair start.
In many organizations, it is already pretty well known who the good first bosses are. It has probably not seemed too important to highlight the fact. The suggestion here is to make this evaluation explicit so that those who appear suitable can be given special training in packaging and delegating work, encouraging personal responsibility, providing for adequate freedom of judgment, dealing with confrontations, and furnishing feedback. They will then be in an even better position to cope with the young college graduate and help him adjust to the working situation so that he'll be stimulated by it and grow from it.
Testing Reality to Learn About the Work World
Young people who take their first professional jobs are often entering a whole new world. Their idea of what it takes to be successful may have been formed by the offhand comments of a parent or other relative. Or they may have built up an image from books, movies, or television. The transition from academia to working life is a process that changes this imagined, preconceived idea of how one should act and react in a work situation into reality. The young person accomplishes this by acting as he believes he should and then observing the reactions of others along with the result or degree of success it achieves. If the reaction is not quite as he anticipated, he makes some shift or change in behavior and repeats the process. He also watches others around him for behaviors and attitudes he too might adopt. Some of this process is conscious; some is not.
This learning by trial and error and retrial is reality testing. All of us do it to a certain extent when we enter a new situation. With more mature people who have experienced similar situations before, the advance estimate is likely to be better and the swings in behavior more moderate. The young person, however, acting on less knowledge and perhaps with less fear of consequences, may display rather dramatic changes that startle the unaware manager. One example will illustrate.
Henry J. is a new engineering graduate. He is hired by a development organization to do testing for more senior men.
After his first day or two, Henry notices that the technical staff seldom arrives on time. So he begins to come late each day, too, much to his manager's chagrin. Henry has two shop people and a lab assistant involved in the tests to whom he gives technical direction. Since they are paid on an hourly basis, they must be there on time in order to be paid in full, and Henry is often needed to get them started on the day's work. What should Henry's manager do? The obvious. He should call Henry aside as soon as he notices his late arrival time and explain why his presence is needed at the beginning of the work day and why the senior technical staff has more freedom. There is no reason to believe that Henry will not alter his arrival habits as soon as he understands the situation.
This is a simple disciplinary situation. Other kinds of behavior may be more complicated and the manager's immediate, simple, factual explanation for requesting changes even more necessary.
What should managers do when new employees test the limits of the work situation? They ought to encourage it, first of all, since this experimentation is good in that it shortens the orientation period. Second, they should recognize it for what it is and should not be dismayed or discouraged by the trials. If these are successful and help the employee get better results or get them faster, his manager should tell him so and why they work. If they're awkward or poorly conceived and impair his accomplishment, his boss ought to point this out and show why they're ineffective. If he can, he should suggest an alternative, though without making a great ceremony of the discussion. Simple, factual, rapid feedback with suggestions about what to do differently and why will do the trick.
Providing Reinforcement and Feedback
The manager's rapid reaction to an employee's reality testing serves, of course, to reinforce good performance and reflect the degree of success achieved. The need of the young person for such responses, frequent and specific, cannot be underestimated. The day-to-day interaction between a man and his first managers probably does more to shape his behavior and attitude than any other single experience.
There is, however, a need for a more formal session in which daily matters can be put into perspective and trends can be discussed and evaluated. Remember that the young graduate is used to very quick, frequent responses in the classroom. A question is posed; he answers or formulates an answer. In the ensuing discussion, he learns whether he was right or wrong. He is given quizzes at intervals and receives a grade and perhaps some comments. He writes papers and they, too, are graded and evaluated. Ultimately, there is a report card for the semester.
The work situation can be quite a contrast. The manager, insensitive to the need for response, may impart an occasional word of approval or frown of displeasure. A full year or more may pass before the specifics of what has been done well and badly are put on paper and a planned appraisal session is held. During this time, the young person goes through a period of considerable conflict. Some of his friends may be charging him with selling out to the establishment. He tries very hard to convince himself he has made a sound choice. Lacking sufficient feedback during this time and not really being sure how he is doing, he may literally be unable to resolve the conflict. This can impair his performance and impede his adjustment.
For these reasons especially, then, day-to-day interactions need to be supportive. At least by the end of the first three-or four-month work period, a formal appraisal of his work and those things that help or hinder its accomplishment should be made and discussed in some depth. It can be simple in content. How well has the man achieved results? What strengths has he already displayed? What one or two things might desirably be changed to improve work during the next six months? The discussion should be long enough to let the man talk fully and get his feelings and problems out on the table. If this kind of session is held at least two or three times during a man's first year of employment, it is probable that his adjustment time will be shorter, he'll feel more satisfied with his initial career choice, and his work output will improve.
Since the first two years arc in many ways the most difficult for the young college graduate, his feelings during this time assume great importance. We know that the typical graduate expects a promotion by the end of his second or third year. Whether he receives it depends, as stated earlier, not only on his personal potential but on the capability he displays. This, in turn, depends on his assignments and on his manager's skill in delegating responsibility, giving information, and responding to his performance. Even though a manager takes steps to improve these skills, matters will seldom be perfect. So it is also wise to track employees' attitudes as they enter the firm and at intervals during the first two years.
