What do you do with graduate students who don't want to work, sit around talk all day, and are negative such that others don't want to be there?

Question

I have a biomedical lab. There are graduate students who don't do their work. Instead, both of them spend most of their time talking (not about their research). They also complain a lot and make a negative environment for others so other people do not want to join the lab. What do I do? I am up at night worrying about it. There are other good students in the lab who do work.

Answer 1

This is a great question. A critical task for anyone running a lab is keeping up team morale and the environment from turning toxic. It's a never ending task. And you are right to worry about it, as the situation can deteriorate into a negative filter, in which good people move away and only the complainers stay.

I'll make some recommendations, in order of escalation. But a few caveats before that:

The first thing to do is a little bit of introspection. Ask all students about their complaints. Perhaps some of the complaints are legitimate and the issues are bothering all students, but only a few are sitting around complaining. As the lab leader, it's your responsibility to address any and all valid complaints.

Second, be aware that many people (myself included) engage in intellectual work by cycling through intense concentration and intense diversion. We work for 3 hours without breaks, then recharge by breaking off the concentration with unrelated tasks for 15-30m. This can include chatting, browsing the Internet, etc. Make sure it's not that you are only catching them in the diversion part of their cycle. Pit bosses don't motivate academics.

Third, recognize that academics complain like it's a sport. Myself, I log 3 complaints every morning before having coffee.

However, if you actually have your ear on the lab floor and you know for sure that all legitimate complaints are taken care of, then these are some strategies:

One colleague of mine has two sets of grad student offices, one near the lab, one in the basement. He moves toxic people to the basement. I'll just say that the method works.

Another colleague is very hands-on, modeling positive behavior, countering toxic behavior and complaints with positive behavior and talk: having coffee in the break room every morning and listening to people's concerns, fixing any issues as early as possible, having a weekly lab lunch, etc. Nobody likes unfairness, and your other grad students might take it to themselves to tell the complainers, "hey man, why don't you shut up and get some work done?"

You can always address the complainers directly by asking if anything is wrong. They'll deny it. Just take their denial at face value, but the cognitive dissonance might make them change their behavior.

You should avoid trying to counter their negativity with negativity (scolding, passive-aggressive emails, nagging, etc.) It doesn't work.

Finally, the nuclear option if nothing else works: presumably these people are not getting anything done. If they are interrupting the work of other students, it's your responsibility to protect the other students. Write the problematic students a warning for lack of academic progress. At the third warning, fire them (check your institution's policies about the necessary steps, it probably won't involve HR, but it will probably involve more than a few administrators.) Do it for the sake of your good students.

Answer 2

Top three answers are spot on. The only things I would add are:

1. Document everything. You need to have a file for each individual grad student (at least the trouble makers). If they complain, cause trouble, or when you talk to them seeking resolution etc. you need to immediately document. The reason is this: should you have to fire them, or seriously reprimand them, you better be able to show a pattern of behavior on their part, and an effort by you, to resolve it. This is without a doubt the most important protection you can have. Lawsuits can be filed, both against the university and you personally.

2. It doesn’t matter if you are principle investigator, or the PIs assistant. You are an authority figure. Me personally, it’s the assistants to the PIs, directors, etc. that really have the most power. If whoever is your boss doesn’t allow you this authority, or undermines you, that is the problem—and in that case, they are dumping this on you without granting you authority nor their help. That isn’t just and you should be held in a much higher regard.

3. I suspect moral is quite low. This is not because you are lacking. It happens everywhere. When people don’t know exactly what the hierarchy is, and they don’t meet with the “leaders” frequently and aren’t told what their role and responsibilities are, they begin to feel neglected. They feel like they are going to fail and the negativity over flows. Regular meetings (ie: every week, every day—or whenever, regardless of what is going on) are pitfall. It’s usually a bad idea to have regular meetings, especially if those meetings are only informative, as in you are only providing them information. However, many labs have so much to cover that daily meetings are a must. So, try to provide the information they need in emails, postings on the white boards, hand outs, etc. This will allow you to cut straight to the important aspects at meetings, specifically hearing their progress, sharing ideas and providing feedback.
   At first, I would have regular meetings, every morning and every evening. Set a tone. Let them know this is the way it is. They are kids. They won’t like being called kids, but they are. They aren’t hardened experienced adults like you. In the meetings, tell them the goals for the morning/day/week. Make them specifically say what they are doing to meet said goals, where they are, and if they are having difficulties. This way, everyone in lab knows what others are doing. After all, it’s every grad students responsibility to make sure they do everything in their power to help their colleagues be successful. If one is sick or away, others can step in. Once they catch the tempo and are a smooth running machine, cut back in the meetings.

Above all else, do not ever let them push you around.

And if someone complains, your response should be, “How do you propose to fix this?” If they don’t have an answer, show them the door and tell them to not complain again unless they have a reasonable solution to the problem. They aren’t undergrads anymore and you expect them to begin acting like it.

Good luck.

Answer 3

In addition to @cheery.beach’s suggestion you can jointly set their weekly goals and track the progress closely by having them present in the weekly meeting. Usually just walking through the lab at multiple points during the day makes the students more likely to focus on their work. One on one meeting to listen to their grievances would also be helpful. But the bottom line is either they don’t have enough work that they enjoy. This is an easier problem to solve. If they don’t like field or the lab at all it’s better to just share maybe they don’t want to spend their whole life in the area they don’t enjoy and ask them to find other opportunities

Answer 4

This sucks, but reassured that you are not the first one to face this situation. The bad news is that this will not fix itself. Don't make the mistake of waiting too long before addressing issues, idly hoping things would just magically clear up. They won't. Negativity and toxicity spread and fester and if you are losing sleep over it, that's a telltale sign that something needs to happen and unfortunately as the PI it is your job to step in.

If you have not yet done so, then you are probably dreading it or are at a loss what to do. In that case, first seek advice. Talk to colleagues, or HR, or anyone else you think can help you out here. Then at least you will go in feeling you are not just winging it. Also sit down by yourself, and look at the situation from every angle.

Then go and talk to your people. Up to you how you want to do that.

You might opt for a group setting, and call in everyone to address this - but this will only work if you feel confident and in the lead (which you are, but may not feel like). You could consider having a third party present, but this needs to be someone who has experience with these group dynamics.

You could opt for an e-mail to the lab expressing your concern (not about specific people obviously but about the atmosphere in general) and announcing that you will address this with everyone 1-on-1 in the upcoming weeks. Then it's out in the open and people can prepare (and so can you), but it might also result in gossip and different stories going around because you are not talking with everyone at once.

What is your relationship with these two toxic people like? How often do you speak to them 1-on-1? Can you have coffee with them and tell them you get the impression that they are unhappy and complain a lot and maybe this will allow them to open up on you?

Alternatively, do you have one person in your lab whom you trust who might fill you in on what is going on? Don't make your problem their problem, but sometimes it helps to get an idea.

Whatever you end up doing, prepare yourself and remain calm (which can be the hardest thing) during these interactions. Thank people for sharing their perspectives. Do something with the input, and keep the lines of communication open. Also be aware that this is a process, not a quick fix and something that you continually need to pay attention to (maybe not to the extent of your weekly lunches colleague but more than you are doing now). And finally, be aware that there might be the possibility that someone might end up leaving the lab if they are not happy. This too will pass and it comes with the job. You've got this and over time you will get more experienced and better at dealing with these things.

Answer 5

I will separate the issue into different aspects.

You seem to have too much of a "laissez faire" attitude in your lab. This is possible with a team of extremely high morale and it is possible to develop such team spirit, but it is a long process to get there, especially from where you start. Clearly, it does not work in your lab at this stage. You have to pull in the reins.

Because of your experience with a nasty lab leader, you do not want to be like them, so you are ready to err on the opposite end of the spectrum. But a too permissive attitude can be as eroding (though for different reasons) as a too rigid/nasty one. There is a fundamental difference between nasty and strict, which is often confused.

In fact, the key to success in a difficult environment is strictness, but fairness. This is the magic combination. You can afford to be strict if you are very balanced and fair. Any hard measure you take that is supported by healthy reasoning is less hard. People will get used to it and if you are predictable (not a pushover, just consistent in how you handle things), your life will become much easier.

Your problem is that your "problem children" already know your weaknesses and triggers. They have sensed what they perceive as your weakness, and you have now to retrain them to understand that compassion and friendliness is not weakness. This will be a major issue to fix. For now, accept that compassion and friendliness have to take a back seat. They can be in the back of your mind for the future, but they are not your allies in the moment.

Your problem children will probably not admit to what they do and they may skirt the issue when confronted directly, so I suspect, just sitting down with them and having a polite professional conversation to find out if they have a point is probably no longer (or never was) an option. If you think it is, you can try this as a first step to get things under control. Right now, it looks like the time for that has long passed (if it was ever there).

So, you need to start by rebuilding your reputation from scratch. Set the new ground rules. If they attack you as a person, make clear that this is what they do ("you just insulted me"). They are more likely than not to deny it, but if the attack is personal, insist that it is and that this is not an option and not acceptable, either, strictly no excuses. It's most effective if you do it very dispassionately, as if for a third party that you do not care about (think as if you were defending some neighbour from gossip which you see, but never talked to; that it happens to be yourself is of no consequence here). Importantly, establish their personal attack as a fact of the conversation. People like that do not like to be nailed down, as the fogginess of their grievance is their main tool to camouflage their agenda.

Explain that they are free to express any valid grievance in writing to you; explain also that you will try to take it seriously and address it if possible, mitigate its disadvantages if it is not. Sometimes, this is not possible at all, in which case, you tell them that they will have to live with the constraints. Your person, however, is not up for discussion. If they persist, you get up, say, "when you are again prepared to have a constructive and respectful discussion, we can continue." and leave.

I am not sure who threatens to cut you off from students if you fire them. This is something you have to find out. More likely than not, this is a bluff. However, if there is someone in the department that actually threatened you with this, find out from the upper echelons what your disciplinary options are with these candidates. Do not fear them talking to other students - the students that will be discouraged are the ones that you do not want to have on board, either. Others will like the fact that you have your group under control.

Scientifically, you can discuss goals with all your students, including them. But I would not give them substantially more time than to others. First, it is not a good investment, second, it is unfair to the others. You will, however, have to plan their agenda in the background, to more extent, so that you are meticulously prepared when you meet them. Meticulous preparation and indisputable competence is the strongest weapon against such people.

Good luck!

Summary:

1. build yourself into a situation where you distinguish between actionable/valid criticism and ad hominem. Accept the first, reject the second.
2. develop a dispassionate persona
3. develop a stricter, but always fair and predictable persona.
4. build up a more stringent cycle of planning and monitoring; as well as clearer intermediate targets (papers, posters, presentations)
5. learn what your formal options are if you continued being trolled by these disruptors
6. build up your competence and preparation levels for meetings with the problem candidates

Answer 6

These are students, not children. Take this as a teaching opportunity. If you feel their behavior is inappropriate tell them this and teach them why, listen to their concerns and set expectations for the future. Following that if their behavior continues you can ask them to continue their work in an environment they find more suitable to their needs.

Answer 7

You already have some great answers here, but reading through them I don't see mention of "motivational interviewing" - an effective method (anchored on listening and reinforcing more than lecturing) for building trust, eliciting goals, reflecting on behavior, and helping the other person develop/reinforce behaviors & strategies aligned with those goals.

As a lab PI, I have used this method (initially unconsciously, based on experience as a physician), but then in a more informed way after seeing the mature literature on this topic.