The standard of the work done is always one that is subject to opinion. I've cleaned all types over the years, from pristine palaces to run-down shacks. The first is very difficult to clean as it is always the one thing that you didnt do that gets noticed. The latter can be a nightmare as the quality of the overall finish from cleaning is always over shadowed by the shabby surroundings. There is also a fine line as to how much effort you put into cleaning certain houses as you can spend all day cleaning just a few things (kitchens and bathrooms can be especially difficult to get looking 'clean' unless much initial cleaning time is allocated to it).
I have dealt with complaints from clients who said that the cleaning staff I managed were not doing a very good job but upon investigation found that all tasks were being done but it was a question as to how far a particular member of staff was prepared to go to get certain things 'clean'. I suppose what i am saying is that the real 'trick' is to know when to stop cleaning something and move onto the next task.
Although i work very qucikly and efficiently myself i have met people who would rival me ten-fold, people who could tear through a house in no time and do a 1st class job. These people are few and far between, but it does happen. I have a great interest in the cleaning industry and one thing i would like to see is the work being measured by the quality and not the time spent doing the job.
When i was managing the 4 teams i mentioned earlier i found i had two ladies who were consistantly late starting work. Eventually i paired them off together, and together they started late, and together they cleaned houses so fast and so thouroughly the results had to be seen to be appreciated. Neither of them stopped for breaks as such, they chose to plod on until the work was done. Well, one lady used to smoke so she had the odd ciggie throughout the day, which i never liked but i wil come to that below.
On a personal level i really disliked one of them as i thought she was brash and abrasive and i really had to be careful where i sent her (usually to an empty house where the clients were out working all day). However, she worked so very hard, neither lady lost much time through sickness, and i did let them get away with so much that i wasn't really happy about (like the lateness and the smoking) because they were such good and reliable members of staff. My hardest job was making sure that the other teams didnt know what i was turning a blind eye to (and all four teams got away with something) because i didnt want a mass walk-out. As long as they were not working stupidly or dangerously, breeching a clients confidence, stealing, or just plain taking the pee, i was quite willing to allow certain things to continue as long as the work was not compromised. The owner of the company was paying them a pittance for a wage and i felt i couldn't be too hard on them, especially the grafters.
I only took the role because the company owner was a friend of a friend and needed some help after her previous supervisor walked out. I did it for 18 months and not one member of staff left during that time, plus the quality of the work improved. Eventually i grew sick of the owner of the business and I resigned, as did several of her staff in the months that followed, i think probably due to the fact that when the owner realised how i'd been running things she wasn't very pleased and really 'cracked the whip'. I am afraid that i think her approach was very inappropriate; yes, i probably didnt help the overall situation by getting the staff on my side and to my way of thinking like i did, but then again each situation is different and she'd always had a terrible job keeping her staff before (and so i hear since) i worked for her.