Control Employees By Controlling Yourself

Understanding the Root of the Conflict

When a team member repeatedly ignores directives or acts disrespectfully, the problem isn't simply a personality flaw. Often, it stems from deeper communication gaps, unclear expectations, or a mismatch between roles and responsibilities. To tackle the issue constructively, first gain a clear picture of the situation, including the roles of everyone involved, the organization’s policies, and the specific behaviors that create friction. Begin by mapping out the context: how the assistant’s role is defined, how the director’s responsibilities intersect with that role, and where the board’s expectations align - or clash - with the day‑to‑day operations. By articulating the underlying structure, you set the stage for targeted action and prevent the discussion from devolving into blame or defensive posturing.

Take a look at how tasks flow within a small nonprofit setting. The director often sets the overall strategic agenda and ensures board support, while the assistant handles administrative duties, scheduling, and communication. In this environment, the assistant’s responsiveness to the director’s instructions is vital. A simple act like not picking up the phone during a call or rolling eyes at a brief directive can ripple through the entire team, lowering morale, disrupting workflow, and eroding trust. If the board rewards the assistant with perks such as an informal lunch break or flexible hours, those perks reinforce the behavior, creating an environment where disrespect becomes the norm rather than the exception. Recognizing this dynamic helps shift the conversation from blame to behavior modification.

During this stage, gather concrete examples of the assistant’s behavior. Write them down as specific incidents: dates, times, what was said, how the assistant reacted, and the impact on the team. Documenting these events objectively allows you to present a clear case rather than a vague complaint. This record will guide your conversation and also prepare you for any potential escalation to the board. The goal is to keep the discussion grounded in facts, not in perceptions of character. When you can demonstrate that the behavior consistently interferes with work and that the board has been encouraging or at least indifferent to it, the conversation becomes a matter of compliance and performance, not of personal dislike.

At this point, take a step back to assess your own role. Reflect on any hesitations that may have prevented earlier intervention. Have you been too busy to speak up? Or have you let the board’s rewards go unchallenged? By openly acknowledging these gaps, you show integrity and willingness to improve. This transparency invites the assistant to engage without feeling attacked. It frames the conversation as a mutual problem‑solving session instead of a punitive lecture. When you set the tone like this, you keep the assistant’s focus on the work and how they can realign their actions, rather than being overwhelmed by personal criticism.

Having a clear narrative also helps prepare for potential escalation. In a nonprofit, the board ultimately has the authority to award perks or decide on staffing matters. If you decide to involve the board, you’ll need to articulate the specific conflict and the board’s involvement. The director’s first step is to meet privately with the chairperson or the board’s human resources officer to explain how the assistant’s behavior undermines the organization’s mission and the expectations of all staff. Propose that the board revisit its reward system and ensure it aligns with organizational values. Bring documented examples and show how consistent, respectful communication supports efficiency. If the board is persuaded, they can revoke the perks that may have been inadvertently reinforcing the assistant’s disrespectful actions.

Now, with a clear understanding of context, move toward a concrete strategy for the conversation. The conversation should occur in a neutral, private setting where you both feel comfortable and unhurried. Plan for a 30‑minute session at a time when you’re both not under immediate pressure. Start with a quick check‑in: ask how the assistant is feeling overall. A simple “How are you finding the week so far?” can open the door to honest dialogue and set a calmer tone. This question signals that you care about the person, not just the problem.

Next, present the concrete observations. “Last Tuesday at 9:15 a.m., I asked you to review the new grant proposal while you were on the phone. You continued talking without looking up or acknowledging my request.” Keep the focus on the action, not on an accusation of disrespect. Describe the impact: “When I can’t get your attention, the team misses critical updates, which slows our project timelines.” By linking the behavior to tangible outcomes, you help the assistant understand the stakes.

Invite the assistant to share her perspective. “I’m curious about how you feel when I ask you for help.” Listening actively shows respect and may reveal hidden frustrations. Perhaps the assistant feels overwhelmed or believes that the director’s expectations are too abrupt. By exploring these views, you create a two‑way conversation that prevents defensiveness. If she acknowledges that her behavior causes stress, the conversation becomes collaborative.

After hearing her side, outline the desired expectations in precise terms. “I would expect you to answer when I ask a question, no matter what you are doing. That means putting down the phone or pausing the conversation to listen.” Be explicit. “If you need to finish a call, please let me know in advance and I can adjust my timeline.” Clear guidelines replace vague notions of “respect.” By defining concrete steps, you give the assistant a measurable target to work toward.

Also address the assistant’s punctuality and overall responsiveness. “We value your flexibility, but repeated late arrivals undermine the team’s rhythm. Two tardies in a month will trigger a formal review. If you can consistently arrive on time, we’ll discuss reinstating your flexibility.” The assistant should know exactly what the consequence is and how to regain trust. Document the consequences, but be ready to enforce them if necessary. A clear policy protects both the organization and the assistant from misunderstandings later.

After establishing the expectations, create a short action plan. Set weekly check‑ins to review progress. Provide feedback in real time: “Good job on taking my instructions during the last call.” Encourage the assistant to self‑reflect after each meeting and note any obstacles she faces. If the assistant struggles to meet the new standards, you might suggest specific resources or coaching, such as time‑management training or communication workshops. This shows that you are invested in her growth, not just in her compliance.

When the assistant’s behavior improves, acknowledge it. Positive reinforcement, whether verbal or written, speeds up change. A brief note like “Thank you for your promptness yesterday” helps reinforce the new pattern. Conversely, when the assistant falls short, address it directly and promptly. Delaying feedback can erode the authority of the conversation and the organization’s credibility.

Parallel to the one‑on‑one conversation, consider broader team dynamics. With a small staff, everyone interacts closely. Misaligned expectations or a lack of shared norms can create invisible friction that hinders performance. Implement a light‑touch cultural review that outlines the core values: transparency, accountability, and mutual respect. Use real scenarios to illustrate how each value applies. For instance, explain how a respectful tone during a phone call not only fosters teamwork but also protects the organization’s reputation with donors and partners. This contextual understanding keeps the focus on the collective mission rather than on a single individual’s shortcomings.

Introduce routine processes that reinforce these values. Regular, short team huddles can help everyone share status updates and voice concerns before they spiral. In such huddles, rotate the role of minute‑keeper, giving each person ownership of keeping track of deadlines. This practice trains staff to listen, respond, and hold each other accountable. When you pair the huddles with brief, supportive coaching sessions on communication skills, you create an environment where respectful behavior becomes a norm, not an exception.

Use these team sessions to revisit the director’s own practices. Leading by example, you can model calm, deliberate communication and show how to address conflict without blame. When the assistant sees that you follow the same guidelines, she is more likely to adopt them. Consistency from leadership builds trust and reduces the likelihood of recurring misbehavior.

Keep a log of the assistant’s performance. This record should be factual, including dates, times, and behaviors. Over a month, you’ll see a pattern emerge. If the assistant’s behavior improves, you can use that data to argue for a performance improvement plan. If it doesn’t, the documented evidence supports a formal decision, whether it be termination or reassignment. Having a clear record protects the board and the organization from legal complications while ensuring the assistant receives a fair chance to adjust.

Maintain open communication with the board throughout the process. They must understand that rewarding the assistant’s behavior is counterproductive to the organization’s goals. If the board is unwilling to alter its reward structure, consider presenting alternative staffing options. Highlight how a more compliant assistant would free the director to focus on strategic growth, a benefit that outweighs the short‑term flexibility you previously offered. The board’s support is crucial for sustaining any changes you implement.

After the conversation, follow up with a written summary of the discussion, including agreed actions, expectations, and deadlines. This summary serves as a reference point and a reminder of accountability. The assistant can refer to it if she forgets a detail, while you can revisit it during follow‑up meetings. Keep the tone constructive; phrase it as a shared commitment rather than an ultimatum. For example, “We agreed that you will pause the phone to respond to brief questions and arrive on time each day.” This clarity reduces the potential for misinterpretation and keeps the focus on outcomes.

Throughout the process, practice self‑regulation. You’re under significant pressure, and the board’s approval, donor expectations, and team cohesion are all on the line. A calm, measured approach to the assistant’s behavior prevents escalation and keeps your leadership credible. When you feel irritation rising, pause, take a breath, or step away for a minute. This simple act shows the assistant that you value professional composure and that you’re willing to handle conflict with dignity.

In sum, the conversation should start with factual context, move through observations and impact, invite the assistant’s perspective, set clear expectations, create an actionable plan, and reinforce the new behavior with feedback. Simultaneously, adjust broader team norms and board rewards to ensure the entire structure supports respectful, punctual, and responsive teamwork. By following this multi‑layered approach, you protect the organization’s integrity, promote professional growth, and ultimately enhance the nonprofit’s effectiveness.