Hello everyone! I'm hoping for some advice.

I'm the training manager for a department, which trains about 1000 employees. I have 7 total trainers that direct report to me and regionally located throughout the state. Half work with me in central office, and the other half are located throughout the state. We often have conference call strategy meetings aimed at the training development process. The trainers also function as development specialists (although I've moved one to a pure documentation role) as a pilot.

My problem is this. One of my employees (not the Doc Spec) has developed a sour attitude towards several of the other trainers. This trainer has voiced on different occasions his "disgust" with others inability to see his point of view on some topics. Often during meetings, I have to say what he's saying in a different way to get his point across, and it's frustrating him even more that they seem to understand "me" and not him the first time. I've spoken with him to give suggestions about how to handle himself in a group of creative trainers that are so strongly opinionated and it doesn't seem to be working. He consistently uses phrases like "no, but..." and "there's absolutely no oppositional argument that is valid..." and it's putting his co-workers on the defensive.

I'm interested in keeping him on the team in some capacity because his work ethic, drive, and creative contributions are through the roof...but his group skills and communication is lacking. I'm worried it will carry over in the training room. I'm watching him closely on that side. How can I get him to be less critical of others and work more within the group? Or should I try? Have you guys noticed that basic hard headedness can't be "trained" out of someone? Any success stories or suggestions would help.

Thanks in advance...

quote:

Often during meetings, I have to say what he's saying in a different way to get his point across,

The first thing I would do is ask a lot of questions (some to myself and some of him)...

Why do you think he says "no, but..." and "there's no evidence to refute this" -- is he right? Is he trying to avoid debate? Has someone explained to him that lack of evidence isn't proof of anything, and that perhaps it would be best for him to supply evidence to support what he's saying? Does he supply evidence to support what he's saying?
Does he debate everything or just specific topics? If it's specific topics, is there a pattern?
Is it the content of his messages or merely the tone with which people take issue?
Is it that his words are not making sense that you find you have to reword them...or do you paraphrase for him to save feelings?
Is he the only one who expresses his opinions... or is he the only one who expresses them without prefacing everything in soft tones?
Does he get along with noone or just a select few of the trainers?
Are the trainers with whom he takes issue demonstrating the same level of work ethic and production as he is?
Has he demonstrated this type of behavior with learners, or is it only with his coworkers?
Does he ever end up doing work that anybody else on the team should also know?
Are the other team members well-equipped to dispute his arguments?
Is he well-equipped and prepared to offer evidence to support his arguments?
When he does offer well-grounded opinions, do people (particularly you, as you are in charge) take it and do something with it, or do his opinions/suggestions continually go without response or action?
Is he at the central location or on his own?
Is he more experienced than the others and possibly not being used to the capacity he could be?
Is it possible that he is frustrated by not having a more important role in the scheme of things?
Maybe he needs more autonomy?
Has anybody on the team confronted him directly with these concerns and offered constructive feedback?
Has this been building up for a while with no feedback to him about how its impacting the team?
Is it possible that there is something personal going on that isn't work-related at all (either in his private life or personally between him and a team member)?
Is it possible that the entire team needs to learn that communication goes both ways, and that while perhaps he could explore new ways to express opinions, his team members may need to find ways to ask questions and challenge him when he says things they disagree with, instead of always having a moderator step in and reword things for him?

etc...etc...

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Laura L,

Is he in the central office? Does he fit in to your strategic plan ? When did this behavior start? Has he been rewarded and recognized for his contribution? He is ready for more interesting or specialized work? Is he burned out or has private issues. Could the rest
of the group be somewhat to blame?

Nero

Wow, you guys are making me think...
Great stuff!!

The content of his messages are good...but his presentation is poor. It's shutting down the other trainers before they even listen to his idea. I can present the exact same idea two days later and they are all for it. Then he's frustrated because..."They obviously didn't listen to him the first time." (his words)

I sat down with him and explained that it's all in the presentation, just like when we try to "sell" a class to someone. He understands sales techniques, and uses them regularly in other settings with success, but when he gets into a meeting with peers, he changes his tone and becomes an "authority" rather than a "salesman". The other trainers arent reacting well at all to the "authority" he's projecting.

He's the least experienced within our workforce, but he brings training experience from outside of our organisation.

Centrally located in my building, yes. To my knowledge, no one within the group has confronted him seriously, other than myself. That is to say, it's been joked with him in the manner of "dang you're hard headed." and I've sat down and explained some things that I felt would help. In an informal setting, of course.

More autonomy is a possible solution. I have the means to assign more development and less class-room work to him, which would remove him from the group discussions a little more. This sets a precedent I'm hesitant about. Others may think "well, you don't have to train if you're rude in the meetings."

Can the hard headedness be trained out of someone? I've sent workers to seminars on topics that can be "learned" and we're all in the business of "training" people in some way, but this seems like a personality issue. I'm getting the impression that more of a long term solution is needed. But in the mean time, the other trainers aren't likely to sit by while (we'll call him Fred) figures out how to act in group strategy discussions.

quote:

The other trainers arent reacting well at all to the "authority" he's projecting.

He's the least experienced within our workforce, but he brings training experience from outside of our organisation.

AHA! This might not be the only issue or even the main one, but this should be an eye opener. Maybe he has every right to project some authority about what he's saying, and they need to focus on the content and get over their need to be stroked like an external customer. Just something to think about.

There ought to be a slightly different environment within a team that allows for communication with guards down. Have you tried any team building to build trust and commeraderie amongst them? That often creates an environment that allows for all sorts of blunt communication.