One of managers' biggest frustrations is when a rising star or experienced high-performer jumps ship to a competitor. Sometimes these occurrences are unavoidable because top-performing employees tend to be very ambitious and are not always content to wait for a principal slot or higher-level position to open up when they have an immediate opportunity to advance elsewhere. There are also personal reasons such as the employee's spouse being transferred to another area in the country that can prompt a change of jobs.

All things being equal, however, most employees enjoy the stability of working many years for one firm. While some jump ship for more pay or career advancement, the most common reason employees change jobs is related to their relationship with their boss. In interviews with two million employees at 700 companies, The Gallup Organization found that employee tenure and productivity are directly related to the relationship between employees and their immediate supervisor. The top reason employees quit their jobs is dissatisfaction with their supervisors, not their paychecks, the study found.

Often, job dissatisfaction boils down to poor manager/employee communication. One Gallup researcher, Tom Rath, co-author of the management book How Full is Your Bucket?, says that excessive negativity in many companies is a major contributor to poor company performance and permeates far too many manager/employee relationships. Rath contends that the many brief, everyday interactions between boss and employee are as important as the more formal ones such as performance reviews. He says that our relationships are formed by small moments of interaction- positive interactions fill one's "bucket," negative interactions empty it.

One of the common gripes of employees, according to Rath, is a lack of recognition for good work- missed opportunities to "fill buckets." Employees who say they do receive periodic recognition for good work are more productive, provide better customer service, and have better on-the-job safety records, Rath says. A cynic might view Rath's ideas as naïve, but they actually seem realistic when he gets specific about manager/employee interaction.

For instance, he emphasizes that although many managers should be more generous with praise towards employees, they should also be more willing to provide negative feedback. Ignoring areas that need improvement is destructive, he says, and worsens manager/employee relations in the long run. The key is to balance criticism with praise. Ideally, he says, the ratio of good to negative feedback ought to be about 3:1 to foster high morale. Of course, praise has to be genuine, and negative feedback should be framed as opportunity for improvement, not an exercise in ego bashing.

In the AEC industry, a frequent employee complaint is poor communication about the firm's vision and future. Ray Kogan, president of the management consulting firm Kogan & Co. based in Falls Church, VA, says many complaints boil down to a consistent theme: "I wish I knew where this firm is going. No one has ever told me what the future is for this firm, how we're going to get there, what my role is, and what's in it for me."

Ray, an architect himself, has consulted with AEC firms on strategic planning and other key management issues for many years. He believes communication regarding the strategic plan and the progress firms make towards it should be woven through the fabric of the organization. That means in addition to formal venues of communication such as internal newsletters, intranets, and staff meetings, managers should also impart the firm's vision and employees' roles in achieving it in day-to-day interactions with staff. That means all managers need to be well versed on the strategic vision and on the same page.

Ray says that project managers might say to their workers something along the lines of: "This project is important to our future because it moves us one step closer to achieving our goal of opening up a new market or service." That lets employees know how valuable their work is towards the firm's vision. Framing employee feedback according to the firm's strategic plan strengthens supervisor/employee relations and reinforces the firm's goals.

I think Rath's notion that the health of manager/employee relations is largely the result of the smaller, day-to-day interactions than the more formal ones hits the nail right on the head. And consistently framing interactions according to the firm's strategic vision should become a habit for all of us.