In facilities with an open door policy in place, managers keep their office doors open to welcome feedback, encourage in-house resolution of problems, better observe and manage their departments, and remain accessible to their staff. While an open door policy has the potential to do all of these things, employees who work in facilities with such a policy don’t, in actuality, communicate more openly with their managers. As a matter of fact, 44% of these employees indicate that they don’t feel free to speak openly and honestly with their managers and 20% said they fear repercussions.
There is more to an effective open door policy than meets the eye; keeping the doors to manager offices open should be only one component of a multi-faceted policy. When the policy is written appropriately and followed, open door policies are vital for preventing disengagement and even potential litigation as a result of unresolved issues at work.
The following components can transform an open door policy from ineffective to necessary for survival:
Open Doors
The first and most literal element is an open door. Of course, doors will be closed during private meetings, disciplines, and crunch time before a deadline, but for the most part, office doors should be open to indicate interest in others and openness to their feedback. An open door is welcoming and has the potential to open the lines of communication, increase respect for management, and provide transparency that may improve trust.
No Repercussion
A primary reason employees working in open door facilities don’t communicate more with their supervisors is fear of repercussion or retaliation. An effective open door policy can address this fear by clearly communicating protection for a reporter. A few ways to say this include:
“Questions, comments, and concerns brought forth as a result of the open door policy will not be used as a means of discipline for the reporter. Managers within the organization have made a commitment to take such questions, concerns, and comments seriously and protect employees from the repercussions that may accompany reporting them. “
“There will be no retaliation by management against employees who report violations or concerns, and coworkers who retaliate against a reporter will be disciplined or terminated. Retaliation will not be supported or tolerated.”
“To extent legally permissible, reporters will remain anonymous.”
The best way to illustrate commitment to repercussion-free reporting of incidents, violations, and problems at work is to follow through with organizational open door policy consistently. When an employee reports a concern and receives adequate feedback with no change in treatment from management or coworkers, they’re more likely to report their concerns next time.
Follow Up
An open door policy loses its power when managers fail to follow up to concerns in a timely manner. A well-defined schedule for follow up after a complaint has been filed includes three primary elements:
- Notification to the employee in writing that a complaint or request has been received and is being investigated or discussed within 24 hours of receipt of complaint. In this letter, employees should be given an estimated date of resolution.
- A face to face meeting with the employee within seven days of receipt of complaint to gain understanding, clarify points, and learn about their expectations in terms of outcome.
- A final written response to the employee, detailing what was found (if permissible and appropriate to share), indicating resolution of the issue, thanking the employee for their efforts to improve the workplace, and encouraging them to share future concerns.
An open door policy can work when all elements are in place and managers are committed to the policy.
Take the quiz:
What's your generosity quotient?
To become a groundbreaking leader, you need to know where you stand. Discover your default generosity style with our free assessment.
I find the best way to create an open door is to do so when people just need to chat. When team members recognize you are a resource rather than a boss they tend to share the things that challenge them day-to-day. When the truly big issues may occur, I find myself “in the loop.” Being a coach rather than a boss allows me the opportunity to provide “fertilizer” to my team members. Conversations lead to mutual growth and to successor building. The only way to achieve this is to schedule touch points and keep those commitments. It helps if in between touch points, when the need arises, you make yourself available to listen. Being accessible in being in relationship.
Thanks for the note, Mike. Being in close touch, accessible and relatable are essential. Psyched to see you and the team in LA!
What if the complaint is with the manager and because he is constantly writing me up for something. Some write ups are not even true and also with other write ups, he knows my situation and health problems. Also we know each other from several years ago so that’s a conflict of interests. But at the end of the shift he depends on me to do most of the cleaning responsibilities while all my coworkers are already clocked out. I’ve been employed with Walmart DC for almost 3 years and I’ve never encountered these issues with any other previous management
I’m sorry you’re having that experience. It sounds challenging. Have you had an opportunity to provide feedback? The R.O.G. episodes with Kim Scott are helpful and give specific advice on how to conduct those conversations. Another episode is Daisy Auger-Dominquez. In her new book, Burnt Out to Lit Up she give scripts on ways to handle difficult conversations. She shares some examples in her episode. Hope it works out well for you! Thanks for listening and sharing.