Managing difficult people - The Pietersen Factor

Howzat for a problem?

Sometimes managing larger than life characters is just not cricket. Just ask Andrew Strauss. Amongst the England cricket Captain's latest headaches is how to deal with one of his star players who appears to have taken things a step too far.

The man causing Strauss problems is a cricketing superstar. Kevin Pietersen's performances on the pitch can be breathtaking, with an astonishing ability to turn on the style and take the game out of the reach of the opponent with some destructive hitting. As a cricketer he is simply awesome. But when it comes to team management Pietersen is a headache, especially over the past two weeks, when it is alleged he sent some less than flattering text messages to his opponents about Strauss, his own captain. That's just not cricket.

Many organisations have their own Kevin Pietersen (or 'KP' as he is known to England fans). Managing difficult people is...well....difficult. Larger than life characters such as Pietersen have a massive influence on team dynamics  and need careful handling. If you can harness the positive energy from the Kevin Pietersen in your team then awesome success could be yours, but more often than not the energies remain unharnessed, become increasingly inconsistent or create destructive and disruptive patterns that can have a negative impact on team performance.

Dealing with the issues like this in teams is time consuming, energy zapping and just bloody difficult. Don't give up on positive outcomes and above all else try not to let your view be tarnished. This is very hard, requires a lot of self discipline and, at times, swallowed pride. Refresh yourself about all the positive things this person brings to your team. If you really want to witness and experience the awesome and inspiring positives of people like KP, then why wouldn't you go the extra mile to keep them on board?

So how can these situations be resolved? Here's a few things to remember.

Seek the views of others. Your own feelings, whilst valid, may not tell the whole story. Just because somebody gets your back up, doesn't mean they have the same effect on everyone. Be aware of how other people interact with your problem person.  This not only helps you to validate you own position but, from a political perspective, can give you some indication of where your peers, managers and co-workers stand. Their support could be crucial in ensuring the best outcome for you.

Next, turn the tables. Be fair to the problem person. Try to understand life as your problem person sees it. Why do they behave the way that they do? What motivates them? If you are unsure about this then just ask. When we don't know the facts we tend to create our own theories. Often these theories are magnified by our own fears to the point where they become fantasy about what is going on. We assume the worst. When this happens innocent text messages and behaviours are easily blown into character assasinations. Be aware of these fantasies.

To help you do this, talking is important. It's not just a cliche. Try talking through things in confidence with the individual - maybe with a neutral third party if you need to. Opportunities to come together, far from being flashpoints, might actually be the best way towards integration. When it does, don't assign blame, try to focus on the outcomes and discuss how different actions can have unintended consequences. Often, disruptive behaviour is not intentional. Talking to the person will help you both understand more about this and where they are coming from. It also gives you a chance to explain where you are at, and the repercussions of their behaviour on the team. The more that you know them the better equipped you will be to get the best out of them.

Be aware though during any conversation that emotions will influence you and them. Clashes at work can make people feel pretty lonely and unsupported. The chances are that right now both Andrew Strauss and Kevin Pietersen are feeling pretty isolated, upset and anxious about where they are at. You have a duty of care to yourself and to them.

If talking has no impact, try something more experiential. It may be that if the person understands the nature of their disruptive behaviour then they can change. Consider creating a role play where they take on the role of the team leader with responsibility for managing someone who exhibits the same disruptive tendencies as they do. Seeing the effect of their own actions can be a powerful learning experience. Take care though, this option is not to be entered into lightly!

Be aware of personal power. Disruptive employees can have lots of power. It gives them influence in the workplace that they otherwise might not have. Ceasing the disruptive behaviour might mean that they lose some of that power, which might be a reason why it's hard for them to stop. Consider how the balance of personal power sits in your team. Someone with a lot to lose is unlikely to change. Holding the space for that change to occur is your job as manager. What upside potential can you create for them to change?

Remember too that disruption often impacts the entire team and, possibly, wider groups (such as customers). Each member of that wider circle will be processing their own data, feelings and fantasies about the situation. This can create rifts and, in the case of customers, lost business. Teams might either be wary of backing one person's view over another, or might show their allegence towards one camp early on. Either way this needs to be carefully managed, keeping a weather eye out for bullying or scapegoating. Openness will help here, as well as alleviating team anxiety by ensuring a good flow of information to help prevent people creating their own fantasies about what is happening.

Sad truths

But the truth is that once our core values are impacted then bridges are harder to build. Repairing the trust and respect which are so crucial if ongoing relationships are to prosper can be impossible. Sometimes it can come down to the truism that no one person is bigger than the team. This can result in the large personality parting company with the team, as seems to be the case with KP. Sometimes, (especially if the diruptive person has more power, it is the other person who goes). Either way, parties can end up going their separate ways. Terminations of this kind are not good outcomes for anyone. I can't help but feel that this represents little more than a victory for the status quo and a cop out for real progress in harnessing potential excellence.  It can also leave lots of unfinished business and a nasty taste in the mouth that can continue to impact team performance.

And in the case of Straussy and KP, the real losers are the crowds, who are robbed of the delights of a sporting great at the peak of his game.

www.poppyfish.co.uk