"Speaking truth to power" is a noble ideal that often falls apart in the workplace. Dana Theus, writing for smartblogs.com, references a survey reporting that nearly half the professionals questioned kept silent when they anticipated a bad reaction from their boss. 

This data is consistent with a recent study by Corporate Executive Board with even scarier results:

• Companies whose employees were afraid to speak up suffered 5.8% lower total shareholder return than those with cultures that encouraged open communications.
• Where fear was more prevalent, fraud and misconduct were higher.
• 59% of companies surveyed said that $1 million worth of harm would have to be at stake for employees to share honest negative feedback (29% said $10 million).

Theus reports that respondents to the first survey said at some point in their careers they'd been penalized for speaking their truth; penalties ranged from being passed over for promotion to being pushed aside and fired. Of those, 70% said it was because the boss's ego got in the way. So even if you're not a jerk, your employees are probably walking on eggshells around you anyway because their last jerk-boss made them wary.

Want scientific backup for this point? CEB found "a fear of retaliation" was the most important driver for employee discomfort in speaking up.

Theus writes that many people report that being penalized for speaking the truth made them quit or seek employment elsewhere. Speaking truth isn't just a career skill, it's an important component of a person's identity. When they withheld the truth, 76% of those surveyed said they regretted it later. "So if almost half your employees aren't comfortable speaking their truth to you, and the majority of them regret having to bite their tongues, it's logical to think that this issue is contributing to the increased levels of job dissatisfaction and loyalty we see being reported," says Theus.

What you can do about it ...

Business owners and managers use different criteria to evaluate their leadership skills. You may focus on whether your team accomplishes major goals. Or on how many of your employees develop new skills or get promotions. Or maybe you focus largely on the bottom line. But here's another option, offered by Jeff Haden, blogging for bnet.com:

The more your employees think about you, the worse you are as a leader. If your employees always have you in mind, you're not charismatic or influential, at least not in a good way. You're not a leader; you're like a king.

When that is the case, he writes, you or your company may set standards but to your employees those standards won't be priorities. You may set goals but those goals won't be important. You may establish guidelines and rules and processes, but whether employees follow them won't matter.

When you're a king, what matters most to your employees?  You - and the very large shadow cast by your royal personage.

Haden urges leaders to take a look at how you operate:

• What questions do you ask? What is truly most important to your business and, therefore, your team?  Is that the focus of your questions? If you claim to value your employees, do you frequently check in with them to ask if they need any help or to see how they're doing?  The questions you ask on a regular basis signal your real priorities. 

• What gets you energized? Think about what is most likely to upset or frustrate you. If you say you're concerned about quality but you really get worked up by schedule delays, your employees will soon realize "when in doubt, ship it out" is the guideline to follow.

• What example do you set? If managing up is your priority, for example, your employees will catch on - and will manage you the same way. When you hide bad news from your boss, your employees assume managing information is more important than managing operations.

Employees should think about productivity, quality, teamwork, achieving goals... in short, about doing a great job. When you're a great leader, your employees rarely think about you.

They don't need to, says Haden, because the shadow you cast aligns with the goals and values of your business.

While many employers shy away from hiring overqualified candidates, new research shows they might be the best people for the job.

While past investigations have revealed that overqualified employees are generally dissatisfied with their jobs and looking for a new employer, a recent study by Aleksandra Luksyte, a professor at the University of Western Australia, finds that giving those same employees challenging assignments may have a strong positive impact on the business.

Specifically, the study, as reported by Chad Brooks for businessnewsdaily.com, shows that overqualified employees who are given assignments that give them an opportunity to freely make decisions, coordinate or lead others, or be responsible for the outcomes of their work actions, were more likely to put greater effort into both their performance and the organization.

"When overqualified people are placed into challenging jobs, they seem to be motivated to use all their under-realized potential," Luksyte said. "Our results suggest that by placing overqualified employees in complex jobs, employers may be able to influence their work behavior positively," to the benefit of the employee, other employees and the organization.

The research also found that overqualified employees given challenging tasks were more apt to help their co-workers with both professional and personal concerns. "Interestingly, they were reluctant to display counterproductive work behaviors such as ignoring their supervisors' instructions," Luksyte said.

Luksyte believes her research shows that hiring and retaining overqualified people can be a competitive advantage, if done right.

"A fruitful strategy could be one that involves improving aspects of job complexity, such as freedom to make decisions, work structure, participative decision making, heightened responsibility for outcomes or results, and communication with others," Luksyte said. She offers two suggestions for tasks for overqualified employees: assigning them mentoring responsibilities for newly hired staff or asking them to lead a workplace quality improvement team.

Luksyte said the research is particularly relevant in today's work environment, when companies often have access to many extremely qualified or overqualified employees, and are faced with deciding whether to hire them.

Disgruntled employees pose a risk to your company. In addition to providing poor service, thus turning customers off, they may also create a negative working environment, creating stress within the company.

The sooner a disgruntled employee is dealt with, the better. Here, Mike Michalowicz, writing for openforum.com, suggests five steps for managers:

1. Remain professional: Regardless of how the disgruntled employee behaves, it is important for you to remain professional. Avoid yelling, swearing and stooping to their level.

2. Don't let it fester: When you first see there is a problem, address it. Nip it in the bud right away, before it can grow into a bigger problem, says Michalowicz. Also, after dealing with the employee, don't let rumors build. Take a moment to address that the issue has been taken care of and it is time for everyone to refocus and get back to work.

3. Keep it private: Michalowicz suggests that rather than confronting a disgruntled employee in front of others, always take it to a more private setting, such as meeting in a conference room or private office. Part of being professional is handling the situation as a matter that needs to be addressed privately.

4. Document everything: Lawsuits often happen for the most trivial of reasons. The best policy is to document everything that is taking place. Whatever the disgruntled employee has done that needed to be corrected should be documented, as should how you addressed it.

5. Don't empower them: If your disgruntled employee has the company stalled while everyone tries to deal with their drama, then they are being empowered. Do not give them that kind of power within your company, says Michalowicz. If there is a problem, have the most appropriate person address it, and keep everyone else on task. If you feel you may have an employee who could escalate the situation into a potentially dangerous one, don't hesitate to get assistance.

When you fire an employee, you only have two goals, says Jeff Haden, blogging for bnet.com:

1. To treat the employee as respectfully and humanely as possible, and
2. To protect your business from legal issues.

Your feelings about the firing, while very real, are basically irrelevant. For you, firing someone is hard. But for the employee, being fired is financially and emotionally devastating. Make sure you don't make a bad situation worse by saying:

• "This is really hard for me..." Who cares? The employee thinks, "Oh yeah? What about me? How hard do you think this is on me?"

• "We've decided to go in a different direction." Save the platitudes. If you've done your job right the employee already knows why he/she is being fired. Either give the reason for your decision as clearly and succinctly as possible or just say, "John, I have to let you go."

• "I'll have to get with HR to figure out..." It's your job to know how the HR process works when someone has been fired. Know your stuff and never make an employee wait to meet with others who are part of the process.

• "Compared to Mike, you just aren't cutting it." Never compare employees when you fire an individual (or just in general). The cause is a failure to meet standards or targets or behavioral expectations. Drawing comparisons between employees makes it possible for what should be an objective decision to veer into the personality zone.

• "I disagree with you, and here's why..." Some employees plead, most are quiet, and a few argue. Never let yourself be dragged into a back-and-forth discussion, says Haden. Just say, "John, I'll be happy to talk about this as long as you like, but you should understand that nothing we discuss will change the decision." Arguing or even "discussing" almost always makes the employee feel worse and could open you up to potential legal issues. Be professional, be empathetic, and stick to the facts.

• "Fine - if it makes you feel better, I'll go get my boss." Occasionally an employee will want to discuss things with someone above you. Never open that door. Firing is final.

• "You're a good employee... but we have to cut staffing." If you're downsizing, leave performance out and just say so. "But what if you're not actually downsizing and you're hiding behind an excuse so the conversation is easier for you?" asks Haden. By doing that, you do the employee a disservice - and you open your business up to potential problems.

• "I need to walk you to the door." A fired employee is not a criminal, so don't put him or her through the fired walk of shame. "To keep a terminated employee from hanging around all day, set simple parameters," suggests Haden. Say, "John, go ahead and gather up your personal belongings and I'll meet you back here in 10 minutes." Then, if John doesn't come back, go get him.

• "If there is anything I can do for you, just let me know." Instead say, "If you have any questions about benefits, final paychecks, or other details, call me. I'll make sure you get the answers you need." Don't offer to do things you can't do.