I once worked with an individual who always started group work by saying, “we only have one rule in this group and that is that we must treat each other with respect.” He was not referring to respect that requires individuals refrain from challenging the authority of someone in a higher position than them;  he was referring to the need to show “esteem for or a sense of worth or excellence of a person, a personal quality, or ability” and “to show regard or consideration for: to respect someone’s rights” (dictionary.com).

The conversation, however, would not end with that initial statement. A discussion always ensued to make sure that all the members of the group agreed on the same definition of respect. Once all the group members agreed, the only time the rule was mentioned again was when someone broke it. Sometimes a visual reminder of the initial agreement was posted.

The definition often referred to  the following elements:
-listen to gain understanding
-see the value in different approaches
-value all contributions and skill sets
-state disagreement in a non-confrontative manner
-say what you mean and mean what you say
-be open to suggestions
-deliver on your promises
-support other team members when appropriate

Having this discussion upfront before work commenced, saved time later on if a conflict arose. Yet, time had to be devoted to this discussion; lip service was not enough.

Respect is critical to the performance management process. An employee who does not respect his or her direct supervisor is not as likely to accept guidance and feedback and vice versa. If this is the case, how many managers make a sincere effort to define respect with their direct reports?