THE PROBLEM OF MICROMANAGEMENT

Many trainers mistakenly tried to micromanagement their assistants. The trainers spent a disproportionate amount of time and energy offering assistants “tips and suggestions” on how to do their jobs. Studies show that this type of excessive control and meddling is bad for business. Wayne Hastings, well-known author, lecturer, and business consultant, in an article posted on his site about the evils of micromanaging, noted what other experts have said:

We agree completely that micromanagement is a big mistake. It diminishes people’s self-confidence, saps their initiative, and stifles their ability to think for themselves. It’s also a recipe for screwing things up—micromanagers rarely know as much about what needs to be done as the people they’re harassing, the ones who actually do it

Trainers who tried to excessively control their assistants created a hostile work environment. I disliked being told to violate standard operating procedure and BOE policy just to comply with a trainer’s personal whims. The days of my following as an assistant trainer the incomprehensible directives of trainers have officially come to an end.

Over the years, the people who served as my training teammates represented all levels of proficiency. I’ve been fortunate to work with a few assistants whose performance met or exceeded BOE expectations. We taught each other ways to improve doing our jobs.

While working this cycle with one of these first-rate assistants, we experienced the worst in trainer micromanagement. Unlike the trainers, we discussed at the beginning of the class the day’s tasks. We divided the workload. We assigned ourselves tasks for the training session and went about our work to offer good customer service. Towards the end of the class, the more senior trainer complimented us on our efforts. Little did he know that his training partner had instructed us “to do things her way.” We worked double to accommodate the trainer’s irrational requests. In the process, were rendered an inferior customer service. The trainer’s noticeable interference gave the class the impression that we were less than competent at our jobs. We stomached this obsessive meddling.

I could go on for a while about incidents where trainers tried to micromanage my activities as an assistant. It is not difficult to imagine the customer services fiasco that ensues when one trainer micromanages the other.

Everyone on the training team must allow their partners to do their jobs free of disruptive interference.

A BETTER EXAMINATION

In a note to poll workers, the Board of Elections acknowledges that protecting the right to vote and offering voting opportunities to registered voters could not be accomplished without their hard work.  Most citizens cherish their right to vote. They expect the government to provide them with the best voter experience possible. The BOE’s mission is to make sure that everyone who is entitled to vote can exercise their right to do so. Facilitating citizens to vote in complete privacy and according to their preferences is the job of the poll workers. It makes sense that poll workers must be competent enough to carry out the BOE’s mission and legal requirements.

The application to become a poll worker does not require a person to list his education or work experience. The prospective candidate does not state why he would be a good fit for the position. A resume need not be submitted. The application states in bold print that “All inspectors are required to attend a mandatory training class.” The BOE does not conduct in-person interviews for becoming a poll worker.

Most companies use pre-employment tests as a basis for selecting the best candidates. A well-developed test adds an element of objectivity to the hiring process. Candidates who pass the test are more likely to succeed in their jobs. Consequently, the tests often lead to increased productivity. The organization experiences less turnover of workers. More importantly, the use of metrics allows for a better defense of the hiring process. If an organization seeks the best people to employ, then the hiring process should include measurable objectivity.

To become a poll worker, the BOE requires a person to attend a mandatory training class or a re-certification class.  A certification test on the subject taught is administered at the end of the class. The BOE selects poll workers from those who pass the test.

Unfortunately, the test does not separate the trainees by their abilities.  The test is an open-book examination. The question sheet tells the trainee where to find the answers in the manual. The trainers emphasize that the training certification “tests the ability to use the manual.”  Few people honestly accept this reasoning.

Polling sites during elections buzz with activity. There is certainty along with massive confusion. Tension levels hover close to the ceiling. Poll workers are busy working in their private worlds, oblivious to their surroundings. When poll workers encounter a problem, and they turn to their manuals, nothing tells them where to find the solution.  If they cannot properly use the index and glossary poll workers will not find the answer. No one disagrees with this observation. I do not think the BOE is doing enough to select the best candidates to be poll workers. It seems like the BOE is trying not to deny anyone the chance to become poll workers.

This training cycle, I asked some of the trainees upon collecting their certification tests what they thought about the examination. Many said it was easy. Others questioned why the BOE used last year’s exam again without any changes. Paraphrasing what a few said to me; “if someone wants to pay me for taking an easy open-book examine than that’s fine with me.” Let’s not forget that the trainees are being well paid for their attendance.

Most poll workers already with the BOE are intelligent and patriotic. They believe in the American brand of democracy. Based on my conversations with them, there appears to be a belief in required civic duty. I am sure that they would prefer an election team consisting of competent workers rather than the contrary. During each training session, trainees shared their “poll day horror stories” that related to workers and, sadly many election site coordinators, who failed to do their jobs.  Workers who did not discharge their duties for whatever reason disrupted the smooth working of the election day team. No one wants to work with teammates who cannot carry the own weight.

I think that many poll workers seek to be a part of a team with an Esprit de Corps. Therefore, fielding competent teams of poll workers will increase worker retention and improve morale. Productivity will increase while errors will diminish. The BOE can place itself in a win-win situation by using most qualified people as poll workers. Consequently, becoming a poll worker should be more competitive. The BOE should implement procedures and policy changes to allow it to hire and retain the most qualified people as poll workers and trainers.