I recently spoke with a frustrated friend who works as a manager at his company. This friend was struggling with feelings of betrayal; he had confronted one of his subordinates about some suspicious behavior - rumors were spreading that this individual was looking for a new job - yet, this subordinate adamantly denied these allegations and pledged his loyalty to his current occupation. As you might guess, a short time later this person handed over his resignation - an act that my friend interpreted as malicious dishonesty and infidelity. Along with the burden of suddenly scrambling to try and replace the skills of the departing employee, my friend was also coping with feelings of betrayal and lost faith in the rest of his subordinates.
Having experienced similar dilemmas in my own managerial experience, I am nothing if not sympathetic for what my friend is feeling; nevertheless, I stop short of assigning the worst motives and harshest labels to employees who are sometimes less-than-honest in a declaration of loyalty to their jobs. I’ve discovered that this dishonesty is generally not a product of malice, but simply a natural result of the inequality that exists in the relationship between managers and the people they lead.
This dilemma is easy to understand when we approach it from a practical point-of-view. Managers wield tremendous power regarding the professional fortunes of their people. All the states in the U.S. (with the exception of Montana) adhere to an “at will” employment doctrine; this doctrine generally allows companies to hire and fire people as they please. Thus, an employee who is testing the waters for better opportunities in the job market has good reason to be fearful of the impact this search could have on his relationship with his current employer. If his boss has reason to doubt his loyalty or commitment, and if he (the subordinate) is unable to secure a new job, such an employee may find his opportunities with his current employer significantly diminished - some employers will even go so far as to mistreat or fire employees they believe to be disloyal.
To prevent unpleasant surprises, many managers will go out of their way to assure their people that their motives for enquiring about a subordinate’s loyalty are completely benign. They insist that employees can freely share their thoughts about leaving the company without any fear of reprisal. Nevertheless, such assurance can seem hollow when compared with the practical reality that managers don’t actually need to state a clear reason for firing or mistreating a disloyal employee. Ultimately, there is very little an employee can do to hold his/her manager accountable for any broken promises in this regard.
This dilemma prevails beyond simple employer/employee relationships - I believe it applies to most relationships in life: pure honesty and trust are almost impossible to cultivate in any relationship where one party can exercise clear power and dominion over the other. Regardless of how responsibly this power is used (or not used) its mere existence will generally serve as a barrier to absolute fidelity. This is not to suggest that loyalty can’t exist between managers and their people, but managers should take care not to harbor unreasonable expectations of the how far this loyalty should apply. The loss or betryal of a valued and trusted employee can be a bitter pill for any manager to digest; nevertheless, it is simply one of the periodic burdens endured by those who aspire to leadership and authority.
I’m interested in what you have to say about this article! Whether you agree or disagree, please feel free to leave a comment. If you are reading this article from the main page, you can get to the comments area by clicking on the “Comment” link seen below; otherwise, just type your comment in the box displayed below. You can also use any of the social networking links below to recommend this article to others. I look forward to hearing from you!
