Consider providing the EAP with a complete list of the performance problems experienced by your employee when you make a supervisor referral. (Be sure you have discussed each problem with your employee so the EAP is not the first to do so.) The more complete the list of performance problems, the more helpful it is to the EA professional. A complete list permits the EA professional to use her past experience and training more effectively to identify patterns of performance that could point to specific personal problems. EA professionals typically interview employees using the list of performance problems provided by the supervisor. How employees explain performance problems and answer follow-up questions plays a significant role in the assessment or diagnostic process. Obviously, your employee is more likely to have a successful experience with the EAP if the performance picture is complete.

It is always preferable to give a written list of performance problems to the EA professional when making a supervisor referral. (The employee should have the same list, and should have discussed it with the supervisor.) A written list prevents the EA professional from needing to restate performance problems to the employee second-hand. Restatements can be inaccurate. Employees typically identify such inaccuracies and argue that the performance complaint by the supervisor is untrue or exaggerated. This can increase the employee's resistance in the EAP interview and even cause the employee to reject EAP help. A written list also facilitates an effective interview and focus on personal problems rather than a lengthy examination of the performance issues.

There are three common reasons some supervisors feel unable to do more than badger an employee to visit the EAP. The most common is a real or imagined belief that disciplinary action - no matter how well proposed - would not be supported by upper management. A second common reason is awareness that the undesirable performance problem is one that has historically been accepted, making it awkward to consider disciplinary tools to correct it. Still another common reason is fear that an employee might retaliate in response to use of discipline. Troubled employees who continue for years with performance problems may eventually appear more in control of the employment relationship than their supervisors. Supervisors faced with such a problem may feel they are being held hostage, a strong indication for seeking assistance from the EAP for guidance on how to intervene.

The most extensive research on the prevalence of alcoholism in the workplace was conducted in the 1970's and mid-1990's by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. That research showed seven percent of the workforce across all industries suffered from alcoholism. The figure fluctuates among certain industry categories. Generally, a workforce with 1000 employees will have about 70 employees diagnosable as alcoholic and falling within a continuum of severity ranging from complete abstinence or recovery, to late-stage obvious symptoms of the illness. Ironically, some employees with early symptoms of the illness, typically characterized by high tolerance of alcohol (the ability to drink large amounts and still feel and act unaffected), could be perceived as among the best performing, most socially accepted workers in the organization.

It is tempting to conclude that employees who are unsatisfactory performers must have some underlying character flaw that explains their inability to change. Viewing an employee as lazy, or not being a "go-getter," is an easy way for some supervisors to passively accept underachievement or unsatisfactory performance. Such supervisors are unwittingly participating in "armchair diagnosing" of employees. Employees are less likely to be referred to the EAP if supervisors conclude that no personal problem exists. This is also called ruling out a diagnosis. Highly treatable, mild symptoms of clinical depression that do not match the stereotype of a depressed person may explain less acute behaviors that many people view as simply low energy or problems with initiative. Be careful not to pre-screen your employees with performance problems when considering a supervisor referral to the EAP.

Information contained in The FrontLine Supervisor is for general information purposes only and is not intended to be specific guidance for any particular supervisor or human resource management concern. For specific guidance on handling individual employee problems, consult with your Employee Assistance Professional. Copyright ©2000 by The FrontLine Supervisor.

***ETSU NOTE: Referrals/concerns by supervisors should be made to the Office of Human Resources at ETSU, extension 5890.

Permission to post newsletter has been granted by Tennessee State Employee Assistance Program.

Mailing Address:  Office of Human Resources
ETSU Box 70564
Johnson City, TN  37614-1707
Telephone:  423-439-4457
Fax:  423-439-8354
TDD:  423-439-4710

Office Hours:  8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. E.S.T. Monday - Friday
Office Location:  Rooms 307 and 311, Dossett Hall

Webmaster

Updated on 11/11/05