How aggressive is that employee?

Describing an employee as aggressive can be tricky. We want

the sales person to be very aggressive in closing deals while the customer

service representative should check aggressive tendencies at the door. But

maybe the service professional needs to be aggressive when they are seeking a

solution to a problem.

This is one of those descriptive words that is important but

can be mushy when applied to the people and has landed employers in hot water.

The same word describes desirable and undesirable behaviors. Webster defines it

as, “marked by combative readiness” and “marked by obtrusive energy.”  (I had to look up obtrusive and learned that

it means, “forward in manner or conduct,” “undesirably prominent.”) There are

lots of jobs where obtrusive energy won’t help the outcome. On the positive side,

there are frequent occasions where aggressive defined as, “marked by driving

forceful energy or initiative” would be a huge benefit, particularly in a tough

economy.

Stereotypes about this behavior abound and this is where

employers have been caught in claims of discrimination. Female employees have

been labeled too aggressive, while the same approach is rewarded with

promotions for men. If it doesn’t sound like something you have heard or seen

in the workplace think back to recent political campaigns.

Is this a case of another behavioral term that needs to be

removed from your management vocabulary? No need to rush and place aggressive

on the list of banned workplace words. But when you do use it, as a negative or

positive, quantify or qualify the term with measurable back up. “Fred missed

his quota by 32% during the last quarter, he was not aggressive in identifying

new clients.”  “Shelly was too aggressive

in screening every phone call when company policy clearly states that all

callers with complaints should be sent directly to customer service.”

Without specifics aggressive can seem like a code word to

label people inappropriately. The mis-perception can be used against you in an employment

related claim. If the term is not clarified the employee won’t understand the

real issue and have difficulty redirecting performance. The next time you use

the term in an evaluation, disciplinary action or coaching session, make

certain any reader will understand your intent.