1 week ago
4
Upgrade to High-Speed Internet for only ₱1499/month!
Enjoy up to 100 Mbps fiber broadband, perfect for browsing, streaming, and gaming.
Visit Suniway.ph to learn
ELBONOMICS - Rey Elbo - The Philippine Star
May 27, 2025 | 12:00am
The provocative question of whether worker absenteeism is caused by a manager’s incompetence pushes us to consider its direct impact on employee behavior. For example, when one department exhibits a significantly higher absenteeism rate, say at 20 percent compared to similarly situated departments at an average of three percent, the former department strongly indicates its problem.
It could be that their department is running on tobacco fumes – high on smoke, low on productivity. Absenteeism, in this context, is a symptom of deeper issues such as low employee morale, disengagement, stress and burnout, which are often caused by the manager, wittingly or unwittingly.
It is crucial to understand that absenteeism is a controllable issue that ultimately rests with each department head working through their line executives. At the same time, the human resources department may offer solutions, but effective implementation hinges on the concerned department manager. That’s assuming that the concerned manager doesn’t automatically blame the workers.
This blame-shifting is a common occurrence, often without the organization equally holding the manager accountable. It’s the classic “dog ate my homework” excuse, but with more spreadsheets and less actual homework. Imagine if that extends to other problems like a high turnover rate.
The Deming Principle
W. Edwards Deming (1900-1993), a renowned American statistician and management expert, famously stated that “workers are responsible for 10 to 20 percent of the quality problems in a factory, and that the remaining 80 to 90 percent is under management’s control.” This is a universal principle we can’t ignore.
So, if you’re blaming your team for that lukewarm performance, Deming says to look in the mirror! The core role of management is to cultivate a positive, enjoyable and productive workplace. This requires a paradigm shift, where the word “control” is removed from a manager’s vocabulary.
Instead, managers must focus on ensuring that robust systems and procedures are in place to simplify the worker’s job and provide consistent support, fostering productivity at every step. Think of it as being a helpful guide from a career coach, not from a drill sergeant in a combat zone. Without such a framework, chaos inevitably ensues. This is encapsulated in Deming’s powerful insight: “A bad system can always beat a good person.”
If management itself creates “bad systems” – often driven by a desire for excessive control – it becomes nearly impossible to proactively identify and correct workplace issues. It’s like trying to navigate a maze with a blindfold.
Drucker and Jobs
Peter Drucker (1909-2005), the guru of modern management, observed that: “Most of what we know about management is how to make it difficult for people to get their work done.” Known for coining the term “knowledge worker” and his people-centric philosophy, Drucker advocated for decentralization and simplification of operations.
His advice was to “set the goals and get out of the way. Help unblock people, enable and empower people to reach the goals.” He was saying, “Trust your smart people, they probably know a thing or two!”
Even Steve Jobs (1955-2011), despite his reputation as a toxic manager, recognized the value of empowering smart people. His philosophy: “It doesn’t make sense to hire smart people and then tell them what to do. We hire smart people so they can tell us what to do.”
The Pareto Principle
Joseph Juran (1904-2008), another pioneer in total quality management, developed the “80/20 rule,” also known as the Pareto Principle, which suggests that “20 percent of the process causes 80 percent of the problem.” Applying this to absenteeism, ignoring a 20 percent absenteeism rate in a department while continuously blaming workers can have severe adverse effects.
It’s like repeatedly patching a leaky roof while the foundation is crumbling – eventually, you’re just going to have a very wet, very expensive problem. Therefore, take a good look at the following red flags:
Employee resignation. When employees suddenly become allergic to the office, it’s often due to a toxic manager. Sure, they may start with a few “sick” days, but soon they would disappear faster than free donuts in the break room.
Declining morale. If team meetings feel like awkward family dinners and every suggestion is met with the emotional warmth of a root canal, your team might be over you. Morale matters. Respect and trust aren’t perks – they’re prerequisites.
Poor performance. You can lead a horse to water, but if it thinks you’re the villain from its childhood storybook, it’s not going to drink, trot, or even look in your direction. Good bosses bring out the best in people. Bad bosses bring out the resume updates.
Remember, you can lead a horse to water, but if the horse thinks you’re a grumpy old hag, it’s not going to drink, let alone gallop!
Ultimately, an organization cannot blame the “puppet” for poor performance if the “puppeteer” is creating the conditions for failure. Addressing problem workers requires looking inward at management practices and organizational systems. After all, a truly effective manager knows that sometimes, the best way to fix a problem is to look in the mirror.
Because the answer to “What’s wrong?” is simply: “Maybe it’s me.”
Admitting it that way doesn’t make you weak. It makes you a better leader. Or at least one who doesn’t cause a mass flu epidemic every Monday morning.
* * *
Rey Elbo is a quality and productivity improvement enthusiast. Email your management story to [email protected] or DM him on Facebook, LinkedIn, X, or via reyelbo.com. Anonymity is guaranteed even if you’re not a problem manager.
