-By Maggie Bayless

I've written many times about the importance of documenting clear expectations -- for trainees in particular and for employees in general. Most people want to succeed. And when they are clear about what is expected of them, people are more likely to meet those expectations. In addition, as studied by the Gallup Organization and documented in First, Break All the Rules by Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman, employees rank "I know what is expected of me at work" of top importance when assessing their job satisfaction.

So why don't more managers clearly document their expectations of the people who report to them? In my experience, there are many reasons but the two that seem to come up most often are that 1) this stuff is so simple it's just obvious, so I shouldn't have to write it down, and 2) documenting takes too much time.

Set the Stage for Success
In ZingTrain's Bottom-Line Training Seminar, we do a hands-on simulation that consistently illustrates that a) there's room for misinterpretation in even the most "simple" requests, and b) documenting clear expectations can be done much more quickly and effectively than most people anticipate. We call this exercise Acme Sandwich, and it involves training a group of "new recruits" on how to make a "quality" Acme peanut butter and jelly (PB&J) sandwich. There are two sessions, each of which takes about 20 minutes. Many seminar participants have gone home to recreate the simulation in their own organizations, so I know that the results we see in the seminars can be replicated -- and be equally effective as a teaching tool -- elsewhere.

Two leaders facilitate the sessions: one in the role of the company owner (Mr./Ms. Acme) and the other as the company HR manager (Mr./Ms. Traynor). In the first session, the leaders model the all-too-common method of training: just watch me, it's easy. In the second session, the trainees are given written expectations but no demonstration.

In session one, the leaders go on at length about the importance of holding up the company's reputation for "quality." The trainer then does a hands-on demonstration of how to make an Acme PB&J, constructing the sandwich according to a predetermined set of standards but without clarifying what exactly the specifications are. In addition, the trainer is wearing a disposable apron and a paper hat, and sanitizes his/her hands before starting work on the sandwich -- but doesn't bother to say anything about expectations for either uniform or sanitation (because, of course, those things are obvious!).

The trainer keeps up a steady banter that both narrates what s/he is doing ("so you take two slices of bread, put peanut butter on one, spread it around, jelly on the other, spread it around, put the two slices together, cut the sandwich in half, put in on one of these plates and then put a frill pick in each half") and also reinforces the idea that this is all really easy and that s/he is sure they will be able to do it correctly ("now you've all made PB&Js before -- we asked you that in your interview -- so you know this isn't rocket science, etc., etc."). We tell them that speed is important ("time is money, after all") but that quality is more important. However, "most of our trainee teams are able to complete 10 sandwiches in about 10 minutes." At the end of the "training," there's a cursory "Any questions?" but before waiting for an answer, trainees are sent off in their groups to make "10 quality PB&J sandwiches."

While the teams are working, the boss and the trainer make themselves scarce, so that the trainees don't really have anyone to ask questions of. As each group finishes, Mr./Ms. Acme and the trainer quality-check their sandwiches and, based upon the existing -- but unshared -- expectations, determine how many are acceptable. It is rare for a group to have even one acceptable sandwich and very often none of them put on the hats or aprons (although these are lying near each group's work space). We calculate the profit for each team, with the cost of ingredients @ $1.50 per sandwich and a $3.95 selling price for any acceptable sandwiches. Inevitably, the team has lost money.

In the second session, we give everyone a brief one-page list of expectations that includes the need to wear a hat and apron, to sanitize their hands before starting, and the specifications for a "quality" Acme PB&J. We also offer a real opportunity for people to ask questions and we take the time to answer them completely. We also go around to each group to ask if they have questions while they are making the sandwiches. What we don't do is a hands-on demonstration. Often, all 10 sandwiches from each group are acceptable. And everybody has worn an apron and hat -- and has sanitized his/her hands before starting!

The results are dramatic. Every time we've run the simulation, the groups are unsuccessful in session one, because their work results in a negative bottom line (not enough "saleable" sandwiches to cover the ingredient costs). And in the second session, their bottom line results are always positive -- even when not every sandwich has been made perfectly.

In addition to demonstrating that even the most "simple" expectations aren't always obvious and that getting them documented can be as quick as jotting down a list on a single sheet of paper, this simulation gives people who are usually in the role of being trainers themselves the chance to be in the trainee's shoes. When we debrief the exercise, many participants acknowledge that they felt somewhat nervous -- even though it was a training exercise, not a real-life situation. Typically after session one, the general feeling is along the lines of "It felt frustrating and confusing -- like we were being set up to fail," while after the second session, the most common feedback is, "I was more nervous this time because the standards were pretty picky, but I also knew what we needed to do to be successful."

And isn't that exactly what we want for our trainees -- to care about doing well and meeting our standards, but feeling that they have the information they need to succeed? And, as quantified by the Gallup research -- and played out in each of our businesses -- staff who are successful are more satisfied with their jobs and are more likely to remain in the organization. Lower turnover generally means lower training costs -- both in dollars and in lost productivity, resulting in a positive bottom line impact.

Think you'd like to try this simulation yourself? Please send an e-mail to zingtrain@zingermans.com with "Acme Sandwich" in the subject line, and we'll send you a detailed Leaders' Guide.

Maggie Bayless is the managing partner of ZingTrain, which is the consulting arm of Zingerman's, the specialty food retailer in Ann Arbor, Mich. If you have specific topics you would like to see addressed, please send your suggestions to Maggie at mbayless@zingermans.com.

Comments? mmoran@gourmetretailer.com