OVERVIEW

Most people do well under most, even extreme, conditions. The majority of people handle challenges, small to catastrophic, with differing levels of grace and skill. But they succeed. Then why fuss over a few "rotten apples" or emotionally dramatic people who just get upset at the drop of a hat? Aren't they just a bunch of troublemakers? Shouldn't they just mature?

The answer to these questions from an Emotional Continuity Management perspective is that managers need to manage all employees, including those who do not adjust well. Managers manage healthy people, unhealthy people, and even employees who intentionally exploit emotional variances to create chaotic environments for their own ambitions. But the single most important answer to the question of "why fuss over a few people?" is that if even one person in a system is out of balance in a way that affects anyone else, the entire system is at risk. The most difficult part of the question is the inquiry about what emotion will tip the scale and set an emotional spin reeling.

That is absolutely as unpredictable as trying to know exactly where and when a tornado will touch down. The weather or climate creates strong indications and evidence that gets us close, but the tornado seems to have a mind of its own. Human emotional nature is like that also. Just when someone creates a foolproof methodology to manage emotions, some pesky person tips the balance in an unprecedented manner and the research starts again. Science can be fun!

There are indications of higher levels of possibility in weather and emotions. If you see a clear blue sky, there is less chance for a tornado. Looming black clouds in spring in Oklahoma raise the stakes. Emotionally charged risks elevate in emotionally charged climates. Managers have to watch for looming dark clouds, and be prepared to sudden storms. Of course, there is always the clear sky day that is free from tornadoes but hosts a wildfire or earthquake. Predictions and risks are filled with variables , some constant, some not so much.

Managing workplace emotions is a bit like gambling for really big stakes. Some companies gamble that they are immune from the risks of out-of-balance emotions. They make assumptions and make hunches and have hopes. This isn't bad thinking, but it is incomplete. Hoping for the best while planning for the worst is better for business.

Case Example

Beloved teacher and coach murdered at his work site (Benton City, WA, September, 2004).

Learning Byte

Violence at the work site is real and on the rise.

DO THIS : Learn to recognize the difference between regular and irregular problems.

DON'T : Mislabel an incident just because you haven't done your homework.

 

Experts claim that workplace violence rarely strikes without warning, but according to a new study on the issue, the majority of the work force does not recognize those potential warning signs. A recent study commissioned by the American Association of Occupational Health Nurses Inc. (AAOHN, www.aaohn.org ) indicates the need for employee education and training on workplace violence. AAOHN's study found that nearly 20 percent of the entire work force claimed they have experienced an episode of workplace violence first-hand, yet the majority still do not know what to look for when it comes to determining potential offender characteristics (Randolph, 2004).

Healthy, well-adjusted people are less likely to be caught up in a workplace spin. These same people can be caught off guard during a time of personal vulnerability, or manipulated by a career spinner. Describing the risk factors of those people who are more likely and those who are less likely to turn some incident into a spin may begin with

Spins are less likely to happen as a consequence of:

• The Normal Problems/Incidents of Normal People; or,

• The Abnormal Problems /Incidents of Normal People.

Spins are more likely to happen as a consequence of:

• The Normal Problems/Incidents of Abnormal People; or,

• The Abnormal Problems /Incidents of Abnormal People.