The Secret to Successful HR Projects

I think the world is broken into two types of people: 1. People who do things the hard way. 2. People who let other people do things the hard way. I’m going to tell you what kind of person I am, but I actually didn’t write this piece, I shopped it out to someone on FreeLance.com for $5. The Secret Sauce ingredients to great HR Projects aren’t much different!   Too often we let our own pride get in our way to really do great HR work, fast. Let me explain.  There is almost nothing you can come up with in HR, that someone in a bigger company, with more budget money and resources, hasn’t already designed, launched, given up on, went back through the process of re-launching and made it successful.  Your problem is – you want this to be “your” project.  “You” want to take credit for it.  Stop that! You know what that is? That’s Pride.  I think Marsellus Wallace in Pulp Fiction said it best:

Tags: change, employee communications, employee relations, good hr, Hr Technology, Industry Chat, innovation, Metrics, onboarding, performance, recruiting, Relocation, Shrm, sourcing, succession-planning

Wait, I have to go change. I forgot to wear SEQUINS!

I am an honest person.  I’m sure any psychologist reading this would psychoanalyze my statement and say, “Oh yeah, she’s got something to hide”, but really, I am. As I type this, I’m sitting in a jury assembly room in downtown Houston.  I’ve been told, by people who will remain nameless , I could have ignored my jury summons, pretended I never saw it or given my nanny the day off so I was the primary caregiver of my toddler.  All tactics I’m sure work for a number of people, but I couldn’t bring myself to do any of them…so here I sit for hour 4 and counting. As I looked around the very crowded room, I thought about “jury of my peers” and wondered if I’d want to be judged by anyone in this room.  I guess this is another reason I AM here as I’d want ME to show up if I needed a jury. The jury info tells you to come dressed in “business attire”.  If you’ve read any of my past posts you know I don’t believe in dress codes, but I do believe I have a decent understanding of what business attire means.  I’ll use this as a simple example of how my peers in my particular room interpreted this requirement: Jeans are OBVIOUSLY business attire as are tennis/running shoes Sweats are also very business appropriate Tight clothing and Ed Hardy t-shirts Cleavage bearing tops made for the club scene SEQUINS and glittery eye shadow (particularly in blue and purple) Short – I mean short – skirts Un-tucked (don’t even need to say un-ironed do I?) men’s shirts Hats of all shapes and sizes Large “jewels” on women and men So really, if my peers can’t come to agreement on what constitutes “business attire”, how would they come to agreement on innocence or guilt? But alas, I really don’t believe in dress codes.  I am just as productive, smart and capable of making decisions in my jeans as I am in my suit.  So it really shouldn’t matter what people wear to jury selection/service as they can be just as fit to determine someone’s fate dressed in sequined hot pants as they would in a blazer and slacks. Again, as 2012 unfolds and as a HR pro you’re asked about dress code, either just say no, pretend like you never got the email or call out because your nanny is suddenly sick and needs the day off.  OR you can deem your “policy” as one of trust and honesty – as in I trust people to be adults and come to work dressed appropriately or I’ll be really honest with her about the sequins and no one should be surprised. And no, I didn’t snap any pics of my peers as I thought that might get me in trouble, but I did smile as hot pants got selected and I left the courthouse after 3 selection rounds and only 6 hours of having to amuse myself.

Tags: culture, driving productivity, employee relations, honest, Industry Chat, kathy rapp, person, result

Can Autonomy Mastery and Purpose Work in Today’s Business Environment?

We’ve all been beat over the head for the last 18 months or so with the idea that incentives don’t work.  We’ve watched Wall Street bonuses become the “it girl” for bad incentives.  We’ve read and listened to Dan Pink talk about how incentives are not the best way to drive performance in an organization.  As HR people we get it.  We know a more holistic and enlightened approach is the best way forward. But a thought struck me as I read yet another survey about employee engagement scores dropping and how companies must apply a longer-term focus on employee development and engagement. Autonomy, Mastery and Purpose (AMP) – the Dan Pink solution – can only work if you have a long runway.  In other words… AMP cannot be implemented in a quarter or month or a day.  In order for a company to see any results from a strategy that uses these tools, they need time. And time we don’t have. We don’t have it as an organization.  And we don’t have it as employees. We NEED (Want) It Now The economy has taken a huge financial toll on our employees.  Raises have become scarce and if they are found at all they are in the very low single digits.  All the while, inflation has maintained its speed.  Even with raises, employees have less money for the lifestyle they’ve grown accustomed to.  An article on MarketWatch from August  says:  “Employees will get an average increase of about 2.8% in 2012 on average, up slightly from the 2.6% employers said they plan to shell out this year, according to a survey of 773 U.S. companies by Towers Watson, a consulting firm. Those figures include all types of workers, from executives to clerical workers, exempt and nonexempt, salaried and those paid by the hour.” But the article goes on to say… “The consumer price index for all urban consumers rose 3.6% in the 12 months ending July 2011.” This creates a real problem.  Employees are looking for a better way… a better job… better pay, a better benefits package.  And they are looking to get that in the short term.  They need it in the short term.  Companies are looking for more engagement, innovation and commitment.  And they are looking for that in the short term.  They need it in the short term. Unfortunately, what we all want – can’t be done quickly.  As good, moral corporate people we want to be more sophisticated and run the company based on autonomy, mastery and purpose. And as employees we want to work at a company that gives us those things.  But neither audience wants to wait for them.  The employee needs security and safety.  The company wants confidence the employees will stay long enough so that the AMP approach shows a return.  But it won’t happen. It’s a push. Everyone Blinks When given the opportunity to jump ship to a new company (which always looks better – grass being greener and all) the employee will take that chance.  The devil you know is always scarier than the devil you don’t.  The companies, having little faith their employees will stick around and contribute once given autonomy, mastery and purpose – don’t invest in those elements and end up falling back on the tried and true – reward them now or get them out. My read – in order for companies and employees to really reach their potential and get what they both want, both groups have to have faith in the future. But no one does.  Employees don’t trust the company.  The company doesn’t trust the employee.  Result?  They both retreat and go with the less risky approach.  They hold back, they go for the quick win.  They go for the sure thing that is visible and tangible. For employees, they look for the quick reward –typically the salary increase from a new employer.  For the company – it’s quick rewards and easy interventions– whether incentives for measurable short-term sales increases, cost cutting or impacting some other line item that can be measured in the quarterly reports. Real engagement that drives real company results is a function of trust and time.  Both of which are in short supply for all interested parties. For Autonomy, Mastery and Purpose to work, you need to trust your employees and they need to trust your company. So… my questions:  As employees and organizations, are we in a negative feedback loop?  And if so, what is the way out?  I have some thoughts – but am more interested in yours. Can we actually create the trust needed on both sides in order to leverage the more sustainable motivation and engagement principles or are we doomed to continue short-termism? Editor's Note -  Paul Hebert is the Managing Director for  i2i  (an influence consultancy), the brain behind  Incentive Intelligence  and a recognized authority on incentives and performance motivation. Want to know what's going to motivate your people to perform at their best and impact the bottom line? Want to know whether your service award program really means anything at all? And are there psychological principles that drive your employees' behavior? Paul's your guy… unless you fervently bow down to Maslow.

Read this article:

Tags: clerical, consulting, consumer, dan pink, economy, employee, employee relations, employment, incentive

It’s not personal. It’s just business. Except for when it’s personal…

Repeat after me HR folks, “TERMINATING EMPLOYEES IS PERSONAL.”   I hate it when you guys think otherwise.  If someone no longer works for your company, it has personally affected that person and their family. We sold part of our company last week to another company.  We used to be a mega semi-truck and car dealership.  Now we're focused on cars and buying more car franchises to become a super duper mega car dealership (I don't know if that's the exact industry phrase for a major player). You can't sell people (I think there are laws against that sort of thing), but during this asset sale, the people were all welcome to continue on with the new company, thankfully, and no one lost their job.  This was a welcome change from the situation in 2009 that required me to terminate 80 people in two days, and they had no jobs to go to. But even when people get to keep their jobs, and they just work for a new guy, there is still a certain amount of sadness.  Some of these people had worked for us for over 30 years.  And what's worse is they keep asking, “Why did you sell us?”  Well, again, we didn't sell you, we sold the assets.  But I “get” how they're feeling.  Betrayed.   I want this new company to do well and treat our people the way we treat people.  The right way.  So in order to help them suddenly more than double their size, and because they do not have things like an HR department, I have spent a lot of time giving them whatever information they need. Pay plans?  Check. Benefit plans?  Check. Vacation accruals?  Check. Wonderlic scores?  Check. DISC profiles?  Check. Our employee handbook?  Check. All the new hire forms they need for Ohio?  Check. Information about the best local vendors?  Check. We even went as far as keeping them on our health insurance through December 31st since they had already probably met their annual deductibles.  It was the right thing to do. But that's the whole point; you HAVE to exit people out of your company the right way.  You owe it to those employees and to your reputation.  Take time to write each person a letter explaining what is happening (I personalize the first paragraph to each individual).  Make sure your owner is visible through the process.  And communicate openly with the employees. And this HR-y thinking that you cannot tell people what is happening because they cannot handle the truth… is B.S.   TELL people the truth as you can.  Don't lie.  And address any rumors.  We are all adults. This was the one thing we did wrong.  We didn't address the rumors about the sale.  Word was on the street for two months that we were selling the semi-truck division, and we acted like we didn't know what was going on.  We didn't want anything to leak out and screw up the deal.  Well, duh.  It was already leaked somehow to everyone else in the truck dealership community.  We should have addressed our employees' concerns sooner and at least told them we were considering selling the assets (even if that does come with fear that they'll all quit and go work somewhere else).  So as the economy bounces back, and we start to buy and sell each other's assets, let's try to be more human HR people.  We are supposed to like people.  So let's do our best by them on their way out of our companies and help them feel comfortable with the new company (or help them apply to other companies if they don't like the new company).  How you treat people on their way out is just as important, if not more important, than how you treat them on their way in.  It's what your reputation on an HR practitioner is built upon.  People judge you by how you react under pressure.  So don't clam up.  This isn't the time for you to sit on your hands and ignore people. I should know, I've personally mass exited about 150 employees over the past few years. Editor's Note -  Meredith Soleau is an HR pro out of Toledo. An HR pro for an automobile dealership in Toledo. An HR pro for an automobile dealership in Toledo which happens to have more restaurants and bars per capita than any other city in the United States which makes her an HR pro for an automobile dealership in a town full of foodies and drunks which she counts as her talent pool and employee population. Which really just means that the stories about their holiday parties must be really, really good. But more than likely, the best stories include Meredith herself because  life's one crazy joke …  

Originally posted here:

Tags: car, career paths, dealership, employee communications, employee relations, employees, Industry Chat, meredith soleau, outplacement, result, semi, terminating, truck

Subtle Signals of Disengagement – The “Out of Office” Email…

Is there anything more self-serving and ridiculous than an “out of office” email reply?  You send a message to someone and within two seconds a message hits your inbox that says something along the lines of… “I am out of the office with limited access to email.  If your message is important please contact May Jo Doesn’tCareAboutYourProblem in the Department of No Action .  I will be back in two days and will respond to your email then (maybe.)” “Limited access to email.”  Really?  (McDonalds has FREE wifi at 11,500 locations.) “If it is important – (I’m too lazy to forward these things automatically so…) you do the work (not me) and resend your email to someone else.” Really? ( link to how to forward emails here .) We Are Connected The research shows we’re a nation of phone users ( over 880 million subscriptions in North America ) and 35 percent of American adults have a smartphone – ¼ of which them use it as their primary access to the internet (I’m making a leap here and saying that includes email as well- but that wasn’t mentioned specifically in the research.) In other words – between cell phone access and McDonalds – there is no “out of office.”  Unless you’re climbing mountains in Machu Picchu or you’re on a 24 hour plane ride you are “in” the office. There is no out of office any more.  There is a “not working during these hours” option – say 11:00 pm until 7:00 am – sleep is still part of the human condition.  But there is no “out of office.” Out of Office=Disengagement To me the “out of office” message is just an acceptable way to say… “I really could care less about my job or the outcomes of the organization so I’m going to find the easiest way to absolve myself from responsibility by using the 21 st century version of the dog ate my homework, and tell you I can’t get email.  Even though I could, with a little effort, I’m not going to, because I don’t really want to solve your problem or do my job for the next few hours/days/weeks.” Yup… out of office message is a mini-vacation from responsibility.  It’s a way of getting out of work without looking like a laggard.  And I firmly believe anyone who uses it is disengaged. Why Out of Office Isn’t Needed Why I think you should abandon out of office messages… It is rare someone will be in a position where email communication matters and not have an email enabled phone.  Rare hell… I’ll bet it is a certainty in today’s world.  Get, and answer, your email on your phone; even if it is a quick message saying you’ll handle it. .  It is rare that someone would be unconnected to a cell phone signal for longer than say – 4 hours. Coast to coast flights are a reality so you may be out of cell range.    But if you have a laptop and are on a plane with an internet connection then bill the access fee to your expense account (you know you expense the headsets to watch cleaned up versions of “The Santa Clause” right?) and get to work checking emails.  Your plane seat is probably as comfortable as your office chair.   If you are out of cell range and you don’t have a laptop or a plane with internet you still don’t get a pass… see #3 below… .  If you really are going to be away from email for an extended period of time then AUTOMATICALLY forward emails to specific people in your office responsible for handling your business while you’re out of the office.  Don’t make me send two emails.  Let the system handle the logic.   If you’re on your honeymoon then get with your team and make sure they know what’s going on and then tell IT (or learn to do it yourself – it ain’t that hard) to set up temp forwarding rules so messages go to specific people.  You can do this with certain keywords or other criteria in the message or from the sender – i.e.:  From BIG CLIENT X – route that to your boss no?  This could be embarrassing if you have a lot of personal stuff routed to your work email – but even then you can probably filter your “special” emails about the little blue pills to go to a personal folder. .  Eliminate “out of office” email responses.  It is a loophole in the system and needs to be shut down.  Every time I get an out of office email I think – “that person really doesn’t care about their job.”  Is it just me – or am I channeling Andy Rooney here?  And oh yeah, GET OFF MY DAMN LAWN! Editor's Note - 

See the rest here:

Tags: employee relations, employees, engagement, hr (& life!) advice, inbox, Industry Chat, Mcdonalds, paul hebert, result, Wifi, work life balance

Employees Cheating Time… But What Can You Do About It?

FOT Nation – Meet Jon Hyman:    Jon Hyman is a  partner  at  Kohrman, Jackson & Krantz . He is the author of the nationally recognized  Ohio Employer’s Law Blog  and tweets about employment law issues, follow him at  @jonhyman . His colleagues affectionately refer to him as “Social Media Guy.” He parlayed his status as a social media early-adopter to author and edit  Think Before You Click… , the first book to address the evolving intersection of human resources and social media. He also appeared on an episode of 'Who Wants to be a Millionaire', but lacked the fastest fingers.   This is Jon's first run with FOT, so take read and leave some love…(or a snarky comment – we promote that sort of stuff here…) According to a recent survey released by time-clock vendor Kronos, your employees are cheating your timekeeping systems. The survey reveals that employees routinely steal pay from their employers for time they have not worked. Such thievery includes clocking-in earlier or clocking-out later than scheduled, having someone else clock them in or out, neglecting to clock out for lunch or breaks, or adding time to timesheets. Is anyone surprised that your employees might try to cheat your timekeeping system to steal a few extra bucks? Now that I’ve reported on what should be obvious to anyone who runs a business or works in HR, I present a more practical issue—what can you do about it?  Here’s what the law says about the use of time clocks for payroll purposes: Time clocks are not required. In those cases where time clocks are used, employees who voluntarily come in before their regular starting time or remain after their closing time do not have to be paid for such periods provided, of course, that they do not engage in any work. Their early or late clock punching may be disregarded. Minor differences between the clock records and actual hours worked cannot ordinarily be avoided, but major discrepancies should be discouraged since they raise a doubt as to the accuracy of the records of the hours actually worked. In practice, this rule, coupled with these survey results, places employers in a bad position. Because employers have to keep accurate records of the hours their employees work, routinely failing to pay employees for inaccurately recorded time might cause the Department of Labor to distrust the validity of your recordkeeping, which, in turn, could lead to a costly recordkeeping violation of the statute. Refusing to pay employees per your recording system also opens your business to a potential Department of Labor investigation or class action lawsuit for unpaid wages. The Hobson’s Choice employers face in this area—as a result of the web woven by the FLSA’s anachronistic rules and regulations—is either to grind your businesses to a halt through strict compliance, or to roll the compliance dice and hope that the Department of Labor or a plaintiffs’ class action lawyer will not come knocking on your doors.   As a solution, I offer a three-pronged approach:  1.    Create a culture of honesty in your business, and train your managers and supervisors on the importance of honesty in timekeeping and the consequences that will result from dishonesty. You cannot hope to change employees’ dishonest behavior without first creating a workplace gestalt of honest behavior.  2.   Pay per your timekeeping system, which may result in some employees receiving pay for un-worked time. It is usually not a defense to a wage and hour lawsuit that you did not authorize work that the employee performed. If it’s documented as time worked, pay for it (but see number 3 below).  3.   Discipline —routinely, consistently, and with sufficient warning—those employees who are caught falsifying their time records. Just because you have to pay for recorded time does not mean that you lack recourse against employees you reasonably believe are being dishonest. Discipline or termination will reinforce your culture of honesty by creating consequences for those that breach.  Following these three steps cannot prevent dishonest employees from trying to steal pay for time not worked. But, it will create the appropriate workplace environment to encourage greater honesty in time recordation, which should pay exponential dividends by spilling over into other facets of your business.  

See the original post:

Tags: employee relations, hyman, Industry Chat, jon hyman, policies, result

Employees Cheating Time… But What Can You Do About It?

FOT Nation – Meet Jon Hyman:    Jon Hyman is a  partner  at  Kohrman, Jackson & Krantz . He is the author of the nationally recognized  Ohio Employer’s Law Blog  and tweets about employment law issues, follow him at  @jonhyman . His colleagues affectionately refer to him as “Social Media Guy.” He parlayed his status as a social media early-adopter to author and edit  Think Before You Click… , the first book to address the evolving intersection of human resources and social media. He also appeared on an episode of 'Who Wants to be a Millionaire', but lacked the fastest fingers.   This is Jon's first run with FOT, so take read and leave some love…(or a snarky comment – we promote that sort of stuff here…) According to a recent survey released by time-clock vendor Kronos, your employees are cheating your timekeeping systems. The survey reveals that employees routinely steal pay from their employers for time they have not worked. Such thievery includes clocking-in earlier or clocking-out later than scheduled, having someone else clock them in or out, neglecting to clock out for lunch or breaks, or adding time to timesheets. Is anyone surprised that your employees might try to cheat your timekeeping system to steal a few extra bucks? Now that I’ve reported on what should be obvious to anyone who runs a business or works in HR, I present a more practical issue—what can you do about it?  Here’s what the law says about the use of time clocks for payroll purposes: Time clocks are not required. In those cases where time clocks are used, employees who voluntarily come in before their regular starting time or remain after their closing time do not have to be paid for such periods provided, of course, that they do not engage in any work. Their early or late clock punching may be disregarded. Minor differences between the clock records and actual hours worked cannot ordinarily be avoided, but major discrepancies should be discouraged since they raise a doubt as to the accuracy of the records of the hours actually worked. In practice, this rule, coupled with these survey results, places employers in a bad position. Because employers have to keep accurate records of the hours their employees work, routinely failing to pay employees for inaccurately recorded time might cause the Department of Labor to distrust the validity of your recordkeeping, which, in turn, could lead to a costly recordkeeping violation of the statute. Refusing to pay employees per your recording system also opens your business to a potential Department of Labor investigation or class action lawsuit for unpaid wages. The Hobson’s Choice employers face in this area—as a result of the web woven by the FLSA’s anachronistic rules and regulations—is either to grind your businesses to a halt through strict compliance, or to roll the compliance dice and hope that the Department of Labor or a plaintiffs’ class action lawyer will not come knocking on your doors.   As a solution, I offer a three-pronged approach:  1.    Create a culture of honesty in your business, and train your managers and supervisors on the importance of honesty in timekeeping and the consequences that will result from dishonesty. You cannot hope to change employees’ dishonest behavior without first creating a workplace gestalt of honest behavior.  2.   Pay per your timekeeping system, which may result in some employees receiving pay for un-worked time. It is usually not a defense to a wage and hour lawsuit that you did not authorize work that the employee performed. If it’s documented as time worked, pay for it (but see number 3 below).  3.   Discipline —routinely, consistently, and with sufficient warning—those employees who are caught falsifying their time records. Just because you have to pay for recorded time does not mean that you lack recourse against employees you reasonably believe are being dishonest. Discipline or termination will reinforce your culture of honesty by creating consequences for those that breach.  Following these three steps cannot prevent dishonest employees from trying to steal pay for time not worked. But, it will create the appropriate workplace environment to encourage greater honesty in time recordation, which should pay exponential dividends by spilling over into other facets of your business.  

Read more:

Tags: employee relations, hyman, Industry Chat, jon hyman, policies, result

HR Needs To Be The Department of Errors and Corrections…

To be successful HR needs to move from the department of enforcement to the department of corrections.  I’m cereal folks, super cereal. HR needs to become the department that allows mistakes and then helps correct for them rather than the department that creates rules and regulations to ensure no one makes mistakes in the first place.  I know some of you are saying that this would surely lead to chaos and the end of life on this planet as we know it.  But bear with me (or is it bare?) – mistakes are the best way your organization will succeed in the future and the best way to be sure your people get better and better and whoop on the competition. Making mistakes is more valuable than experience in today’s organizations. Ch…ch…ch… changes Here’s an example:  the biggest change for most consumers in telephone technology from about 1910 to 1980 was the big change from pulse to touch tone dialing (at least from a consumer standpoint.)  The phone your great-grandparents used was pretty much the exact same phone you used growing up.  The tech behind it was pretty much the same from a user experience.  Then came digital and we could now push a button on our phone and create a tone that the computers could interpret as a number.  Before that the phone system counted the number of clicks (pulses) that the rotary phone made.  I remember as a kid we had a phone that had a switch that would convert the push button sound to a click so the old phone lines could interpret it.  When you pressed the button the phone wouldn’t go beep… it would go… click, click, click (if you dialed 3.) That’s roughly 70 years without a major consumer change in the telephone market. I’d suggest we’ve had more change in telephone technology in the last 5 years than the previous 100.  Is Experience Valuable? That’s just an example but in general, change used to be slower.  A person could go an entire business career without a major change in the way they did their job.  That meant that what you learned your first day on the job was pretty good for the next 40 years. Experience mattered.  Experience was valuable.  Having the most experienced employees was a real benefit to the organization.  You could put in place rules and regs based on that experience and keep people from making mistakes and hurting themselves or the organization.  Not so any more. Change is Constant and Learning Is Key I’m not the first one to say it but learning is more important than experience.  Experience in what “used” to be is only value if nothing changes.  If everything changes – then you have zero experience right?  The real key to organizational growth and success is learning and change.  And dealing with change is a function of how well you can manage and navigate uncertain waters. Mistakes = Learning Without mistakes the brain has no way of knowing what the boundaries are for making future decisions.  In other words, if you've always been right, how can you make a good decision in a unique and different scenario?  You can't.  Mistakes allow you to have an inventory of options to bounce around to help you narrow down choices and make better decisions in unfamiliar and unconventional situations.  If change is accelerating (and it is) then the best organizations will be those that have the largest inventory of mistakes to compare options against.  So the real value is “experience in making mistakes.” Niels Bohr, the physicist, said that an expert is someone who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field. Safety Is The New Regulation Instead of policies and procedures to keep people from making mistakes, HR should think about how they can create safe zones for employees to experiment and teach managers how to create a mistake tolerant culture.  While HR may have been created to reduce the risk to a company from failing because of mistakes an employee made… it is now in their best interest to create a way for a company to succeed because employees make mistakes. Or is that a mistake?  Editor's Note -  Paul Hebert is the Managing Director for  i2i  (an influence consultancy), the brain behind  Incentive Intelligence  and a recognized authority on incentives and performance motivation. Want to know what's going to motivate your people to perform at their best and impact the bottom line? Want to know whether your service award program really means anything at all? And are there psychological principles that drive your employees behavior? Paul's your guy… unless you fervently bow down to Maslow.

See the rest here:

Tags: beep, business, button, chaos, employee relations, grandparents, innovation, result, rotary, science, telephone, user

Hair Band Help for Dealing with Counter Offers….

“Don't know what you've got (till it's gone)” – perhaps a not so classic tune from the band  Cinderella , but a classic statement.  Is Kathy digging back into 80's rock for inspiration you ask?  No, but week after week I'm reminded of this tune by candidates, friends and colleagues who are faced with the dreaded COUNTER OFFER . The scenario – you've given notice and decided to leave for an incredible new role, challenge in a different industry, a better commute or let's be honest – more money .  You are the ultimate professional and give 3, even a 4 week notice, make sure the transition is smooth and perhaps even offer to interview replacement candidates.  Then, it happens.  It could be on the 2nd day of notice or your last day…you get the call from the BIG boss with a counter offer.  What now?  Are you flattered?  Are you pissed?  Most certainly, you are confused. Seriously, how are you supposed to feel about a counter offer? I admit, I'm biased.  I never liked extending them while I was in corporate HR and I certainly don't appreciate them in my current role; however, bias aside, how are you going to respond given a counter offer situation? On one hand, it's extremely flattering.  You obviously are in high demand, you have a skill set the organization knows it can't easily replace and you're liked.  On the other hand, why did it take you giving notice for these things to be recognized and/or rewarded? Some thoughts as you're making the pro/con list: Am I running from my current company or am I truly excited about the new company? Do I feel undervalued and/or underpaid in my current company? Have I done and learned all I can in my current role? What is the growth potential for me here vs. there? Is my new boss someone I can visualize as a mentor? Will this role give me exposure to a new industry, technology, functional skill set or anything else that will help build my career? Will the new role give me more flexibility? Will I be able to expand beyond my current role quickly? Do I believe I will be a strong cultural fit in the new company?  Does it share my value set? Will the new role push me?  Am I excited or afraid by that? How do I ensure I don't burn any bridges as I exit? Again, my biased opinion is once you've made the decision to go on the final interview and have a strong offer in hand, it doesn't bode well if you back out or play one company against the other.  You most certainly will have burned a bridge with the new company and likely the internal or external recruiter (ok – you've for sure flamed this bridge). Tough spot, I know, I've been there.  So before you decide to test the waters, be sure you're really ready to get wet.  Then you hand your ex-boss your old Cinderella CD so he/she is more proactive about keeping rock stars like you engaged!   Editors Note – Kathy Rapp is the Managing Director of  hrQ  in Texas, where she helps progressive companies find groovy HR Talent to drive business results.  Prior to joining hrQ, Kathy booked more than 15 years of human resources leadership experience working for such companies as Morgan Stanley and First Data Corporation.  A connoisseur of the intersection between pop culture and business, Kathy believes many talent issues can be addressed via the succession planning lessons experienced by Van Halen (David Lee/Sammy and sadly,  Gary Cherone ).

Read the original:

Tags: employee relations, Industry Chat, kathy rapp, offer process

Are You Taking Enough Griswold Vacations?

When was the last time you truly took a vacation? You know the kind - Clark Griswold style where you pack up the family for weeks of adventure without a care in the world!  With the end of summer hopefully approaching (I'm SO done with record 100 degree temps in Houston), you may be trying to fit in a last minute vacation.  Vacations have been a topic in the news with President Obama electing to take time-off when many thought he should be working.  I took my first vacation of the year in August and it's not something I'm proud of. While I've been absent from FOT, it wasn't due to vacations but to the demands of being a first-time parent, P&L owner and honestly just not enough hours in the day. Excuses, excuses….I know and I must be a better example to my team by actually taking time off! So can leaders and/or HR pros really take vacations?  We are all tethered to our jobs via technology, so unless you are going someplace really, really remote or your company has an awesome policy like Employee Benefit Solutions where they confiscate your smart phone and laptop for a month after 5 years of service and tell you to “just stay away” (the really cool name for their program) – chances are you are checking emails at least once a day. After the question of “can you” is “should you”?  Is the timing right?  Have you prepared your team enough?  What is going on in the business and are there other leaders out at the same time you'll be gone?  I personally believe you are not doing your job as a leader if you can't really leave and trust your team to have your back. Yes, I still checked emails while I was away, but I knew my team could handle anything that came up without needing my two cents.  I think this applies whether you are leading a small team or you're the CEO…likely up for debate about President Obama, but do you really think he wasn't connected to what was going on every day he was out of D.C.? Additionally, the globalization of our workplaces means taking a look at your PTO practices and also understanding the cultural elements of taking time off.  My friends in Europe laugh at Americans who think 3-4 weeks of vacation is excessive.  Our multi-national clients all have negotiable programs and PTO is one of the easiest perks for an organization to give on – but are your people really using all their time?  After having a child, I cringe at remembering the many moms I've worked with over the years who returned just after 6 weeks of paid LOA. There is no way you are physically, mentally or emotionally ready to be back at 100% after just 6 weeks, yet it is expected in the U.S. if you are in a leadership role. Lastly, there is the issue of preparing to go on vacation and then the work you face upon your return.  There have been times I've spent more time working on the front and back end of a vacation than the actual time off itself.  Is it worth it, and how do you get yourself out of that unhealthy state? Time off to decompress, refresh or do something meaningful for yourself or your family is absolutely worth it.  Organizations have to look at outdated policies and unintended penalties, which prevent employees from really disconnecting.  More and more people are looking for meaningful work AND meaningful time away from work to volunteer, spend time on professional development or just be with family.  If you are one of those HR folks who brag about never using all of your PTO, you're probably not the right person to be structuring programs for the go-forward. Set the example and truly leave!  The exotic tan or diminished bags under your eyes will encourage others to do the same, which ultimately benefits the health of your entire organization.  And while the Griswold vacation may be a thing of the past, don't let yourself get to such a state that your vacation ends up like theirs either: ” This is no longer a vacation .  It's a quest, a quest for fun.  I'm gonna have fun and you're gonna have fun.  We're gonna have so much #$%^ing fun they're gonna need plastic surgeons to remove the smiles from our +$#*ing faces.” Editors Note – Kathy Rapp is the Managing Director of  hrQ  in Texas, where she helps progressive companies find groovy HR Talent to drive business results.  Prior to joining hrQ, Kathy booked more than 15 years of human resources leadership experience working for such companies as Morgan Stanley and First Data Corporation.  A connoisseur of the intersection between pop culture and business, Kathy believes many talent issues can be addressed via the succession planning lessons experienced by Van Halen (David Lee/Sammy and sadly,  Gary Cherone ).

Read the original:

Tags: clark, employee relations, griswold, Industry Chat, kathy rapp, result, time, work life balance

Would You Fire an Employee For Not Getting a Flu Shot?

That's the big question people in Northern Michigan are asking themselves recently when news of a major, award winning, health system in Traverse City, MI came down with a policy that all employees must get a Flu shot, and those who don't will be fired!  From the Associated Press article: A major northern Michigan health care group has issued an ultimatum for employees: Get a flu shot by Dec. 31 or get fired. Munson Healthcare, which includes its flagship Munson Medical Center in Traverse City, says individual rights must be sacrificed for the welfare of patients whose health could be threatened if exposed to flu. Medical Center chief operating officer Kathleen McManus told the Traverse City Record-Eagle that officials decided to make it mandatory because voluntary compliance has never topped 65 percent. “The people we serve here are very sick,” McManus said. “And I will not put a patient at risk .” As you can imagine some employees are pretty upset about being told what they have to do, in concern of their own bodies: But some employees are up in arms over baring an arm. About 50 turned out for a recent meeting of Michigan Opposing Mandatory Vaccines, a Detroit-area group that promotes vaccine choice. Employees also circulated petitions and hope to get the community behind them. “I have a really hard time believing I'm going to be forced to do something against my will,” said nursing administrator Dianne Lopez-Wild, who works in an office. “It's like something out of a sci-fi movie. It's bizarre to me. It seems so unreal.” She said it's a “civil rights issue.” There are limited exemptions to the vaccine mandate, such as allergies or faith-based objections. But a religious exemption requires a letter from a pastor. Personally, I love it!  Let's face it, most employees wouldn't get a shot if you didn't force them to do it. These are the same people who bring 5 gallon buckets of ranch dressing to work, to dip their microwaved lean pockets into, while sitting in the back of your building smoking unfiltered Camel lights, and drinking Diet Coke! Bravo, Munson Medical Center!  Let me give you one more policy suggestion that I think will be right up your alley! Forced Sterilization!  I mean all those employees missing time to have kids is such a pain! Then you have a good 18 years of dealing with them asking for time off to go to dance recitals, soccer matches, and G*d forbid the little monkeys get the Flu!  You get savings on insurance costs, reduced loss of worked hours, and you can completely eliminate that annoying “Take Your Child To Work Day”! I don't know much, but I know one thing – someone's HR shop just blew up because a senior leader went rogue and no one had the guts to stop them.  Can you say bye-bye to your union-free workplace? Editor's Note : Tim Sackett, SPHR is the EVP of HRU Technical Resources in Lansing, MI. Tim loves everything talent acquisition and believes every corporate recruitment department in America can and must get better. He has 15+ years of human resource leadership experience, across multiple industries, on both the corporate and agency side – so he gets it from both sides of the desk. Want more?  Um, OK… He has a Masters of HR and… well, he was recently voted #5 best assistant little league coach of his son’s five team league. Check out his newest blog venture at  www.timsackett.com . Because he's got A LOT to say, and FOT just isn't enough for him.

Read the original post:

Tags: audacious ideas, employee relations, Industry Chat, tim sackett

Abercrombie & Fitch – Tough “Situation” – Buh-bye Jersey Shore

A&F gots no love for the “Situation” – or pretty much anyone on the show “Jersey Shore.” FTR – I have never watched – and do not ever plan to watch “Jersey Shore” – unless, of course, it is part of some sort of “A Clockwork Orange” behavioral modification program.  But…I do peruse the interwebs and watch “The Soup” on the E! Channel, so I’m somewhat familiar with the “concept.” According to a Reuters’ article : “The preppy retailer has offered to pay cast members from MTV's popular show 'Jersey Shore' to stop wearing its clothes, it said in a news release late Tuesday. The company is 'deeply concerned' that Michael “The Situation” Sorrentino 'could cause significant damage' to the brand's 'aspirational nature.' ” Ya think? Some speculate it’s a publicity stunt since this is coming from a company that previously sold T-shirts emblazoned with the wording “The Fitchuation.” But, A&F wants to move into Europe, and they are concerned their association with the Jersey crowd could cause problems in that market.  (What does it say about us here in the USA – they weren’t concerned about us where they?) I’m not convinced it’s not a stunt but it did start me thinking about HR.  Weirdness I know. Who’s Your “Situation?” Every company has one – or two or three – people who bring home the bacon, make the donuts – whatever – and have a personality or style that is contrary to the business value and brand.  I’ve been at too many companies that ignore the “situation” and just let things go as long as the money tree is bearing fruit.  Just like A&F – it’s fine as long as it’s making dough (can you tell I’m hungry as I write this?) But it will end.  There will be a day when the amount of fruit harvested can’t make up for the amount of toxins being spewed back into the organization.  Like A&F – there will be a time when the benefits of having someone like the “Situation” connected to your brand are outweighed by the costs and the risks.  So… you can pay for it now or pay for it later.  In A&F’s case – they could have distanced themselves from the cast early on (and risked losing some dough from the association in the US market) – or they can pay them now – to NOT wear the clothes to keep their losses to a minimum in Europe.  In either case, they are paying. From an HR perspective – allowing these kinds of bad folks, toxic behaviors, etc., never plays out well.  The costs are too high.  While at the time you may think the baddies are a revenue positive “situation” – the reality is they will always be profit negative – from toxic sales people bringing in problem clients to horrible managers increasing turnover to poor employees creating bad relationships with vendors.  Wherever these people are – they never, read that again, never add long-term value.  Never. They always take more than they leave behind when they’re gone.  This is one of the reasons people come to HR and say “We have a situation we have to deal with.”   Editor's Note -  Paul Hebert is the Managing Director for  i2i  (an influence consultancy), the brain behind  Incentive Intelligence  and a recognized authority on incentives and performance motivation. Want to know what's going to motivate your people to perform at their best and impact the bottom line? Want to know whether your service award program really means anything at all? And are there psychological principles that drive your employees behavior? Paul's your guy… unless you fervently bow down to Maslow.

Read the original here:

Tags: abercrombie & fitch, bad hr, culture, employee relations, employees, Industry Chat, Jersey Shore, michael sorrentino, paul hebert, performance management

Tony La Russa: Performance Focused or Really Big Jerk?

Growing up, my mom took me to Cardinal baseball games every year, even though she didn’t really like baseball. She let me ask 100 questions, listened to me beg for overpriced food and listened to me whine about not catching a foul ball.  Mom knew baseball was important in this town, so she taught me the game. It worked—I am a fan of the franchise in good times and bad. So I took notice when fellow St. Louisan and really smart guy Dwane Lay from LeanHR  told me at lunch that he has boycotted home games since 2008. What? No home baseball in 3+ years? Why would someone take this crazy stand? Dwane told me: He won’t buy a ticket to a game until Cardinal manager Tony La Russa gets fired or quits. Unfortunately, Dwane’s stance did not surprise me, because La Russa inspires passion. Some call him a genius and others call him a prima donna, and he is the subject of today’s FOT question: Can you allow a manager who gets results to lose talented people just because he can’t get along with them? Dwane is boycotting the Cardinals because La Russa made them trade one of his favorite players, Scott Rolen in 2008, because Rolen and La Russa could not get along. Similarly, the Cardinals, two weeks ago traded top prospect Colby Rasmus after years of reports that the two could not click. Fans of La Russa call him no nonsense, intense and hyper focused on performance. Critics say he is unable to connect with players, he’s cold, inflexible and a jerk. You have this guy in your company right now, don’t you? His results trump relationships. Dwane shared his thoughts on La Russa's philosophy: “Tony needs to be in charge at all times. I think he just doesn't deal well with those who push back too hard. Tony Rasmus (player’s father) said that La Russa  knows how to win, and knows what kinds of players will work for his teams. He's earned the right to pick those kinds of players.” Do managers at your shop get to only pick players who will succeed, or are they supposed to develop people, as well? I asked Kris Dunn , Founder of FOT, the HR Capitalist  and Cardinals fan, about La Russa chasing off talent: “I guess the best way to summarize it is that if you're going to do that, you better win consistently, which he has. People who struggle can't make calls like that…. Rolen? How could you run him out of town? The guy plays hard and doesn't mouth off, runs out walks, etc…. Crazy, one of the only things that frustrates me about La Russa.” So two of the smartest HR guys I know are both frustrated with La Russa losing key players over personality issues. One other note to help provide context: At a charity event I attended, La Russa said this about difficult players: “The coach gets an office, but the player get a locker. The player needs to figure out who is more permanent.” Tough stance, and I wonder how many companies run the same way. Even if you do win, people inside and outside the organization will think you’re a jerk if you lose good players along the way. Do you need to get along with everybody? No, but watching talent go out the door is a risky way to make a living. If that’s your style, you better win a whole lot. Editor's Note –  R.J. Morris is a staffing/talent acquisition director for McCarthy Building Companies based out of STL. Like many others in the FOT clan, he's a sports nut who can endlessly draw the parallels between athletes, sports and the talent management game. I know, I know, as if we needed more of that. That aside, he's got two master's degrees and more than a dozen years under his belt as an HR practitioner including as an HRD focused on staffing for McCarthy Building Companies, Inc.

View post:

Tags: Cardinal, cardinals, employee relations, games, performance management, prima, rasmus, result, retention, rolen, smart, sports

Tony LaRussa: Performance Focused or Really Big Jerk?

Growing up, my mom took me to Cardinal baseball games every year, even though she didn’t really like baseball. She let me ask 100 questions, listened to me beg for overpriced food and listened to me whine about not catching a foul ball.  Mom knew baseball was important in this town, so she taught me the game. It worked—I am a fan of the franchise in good times and bad. So I took notice when fellow St. Louisan and really smart guy Dwane Lay from LeanHR told me at lunch that he has boycotted home games since 2008. What? No home baseball in 3+ years? Why would someone take this crazy stand? Dwane told me: He won’t buy a ticket to a game until Cardinal manager Tony La Russa gets fired or quits. Unfortunately, Dwane’s stance did not surprise me, because La Russa inspires passion. Some call him a genius and others call him a prima donna, and he is the subject of today’s FOT question: Can you allow a manager who gets results to lose talented people just because he can’t get along with them? Dwane is boycotting the Cardinals because La Russa made them trade one of his favorite players, Scott Rolen in 2008, because Rolen and La Russa could not get along. Similarly, the Cardinals two weeks ago traded top prospect Colby Rasmus after years of reports that the two could not click. Fans of La Russa call him no nonsense, intense and hyper focused on performance. Critics say he is unable to connect with players, he’s cold, inflexible and a jerk. You have this guy in your company right now, don’t you? His results trump relationships. Dwane shared his thoughts on La Russa's philosophy: “Tony needs to be in charge at all times. I think he just doesn't deal well with those who push back too hard. Tony Rasmus (player’s father) said that La Russa  knows how to win, and knows what kinds of players will work for his teams. He's earned the right to pick those kinds of players.” Do managers at your shop get to only pick players who will succeed, or are they supposed to develop people, as well? I asked Kris Dunn , Founder of FOT, the HR Capitalist  and Cardinals fan, about La Russa chasing off talent: “I guess the best way to summarize it is that if you're going to do that, you better win consistently, which he has. People who struggle can't make calls like that…. Rolen? How could you run him out of town? The guy plays hard and doesn't mouth off, runs out walks, etc…. Crazy, one of the only things that frustrate me about La Russa.” So two of the smartest HR guys I know are both frustrated with La Russa losing key players over personality issues. One other note to help provide context: At a charity event I attended, La Russa said this about difficult players: “The coach gets an office, but the player gets a locker. The player needs to figure out who is more permanent.” Tough stance, and I wonder how many companies run the same way. Even if you do win, people inside and outside the organization will think you’re a jerk if you lose good players along the way. Do you need to get along with everybody? No, but watching talent go out the door is a risky way to make a living. If that’s your style, you better win a whole lot. Editor's Note –  R.J. Morris is a staffing/talent acquisition director for McCarthy Building Companies based out of STL. Like many others in the FOT clan, he's a sports nut who can endlessly draw the parallels between athletes, sports and the talent management game. I know, I know, as if we needed more of that. That aside, he's got two master's degrees and more than a dozen years under his belt as an HR practitioner including as an HRD focused on staffing for McCarthy Building Companies, Inc.

Visit link:

Tags: cardinals, employee relations, fellow, Industry Chat, jerk, kris dunn, prima, result, rj morris, rolen, russa, sports, times, Trump, years

The 5 Managerial Responses to Sabotage At Work…

Human behavior is so… well… human. How many times have you seen it?  The pressure's on at work, and maybe even layoffs look like they might be around corner – or another round of layoffs, depending on your company's situation.  And when the pressure's on, you can bet that questionable human behavior is right around the corner. Self-Preservation 101.  I'm good, he's bad.  Pick me, pick me!… What type of human behavior?  How about the type that will cheat to ensure an edge is gained against a co-worker you are directly or indirectly competing against?  The type of behavior you see when someone's trying to keep his job and will apparently DO WHAT IT TAKES TO CLOSE THE DEAL vs. his competitor, who also happens to be a teammate.  How do deal with that when it involves actions that are labeled as “sabotage”?  You know the type of internal cheating I'm talking about – email tips, gossip about someone's performance, misinformation and yes, even stealing the ideas of others and presenting them as your own. For my money, here are the 5 most common managerial responses to sabotage/cheating at work : 1.  You ignore it because you created the system .  You tell your folks to take every inch they can get.  No such thing as a bad edge to you, right?  You wink at zero sum players of the world, even as their teammates cry.  If he'll cheat now, what will he do when you pressure him to cheat?  Cheat even more – you like that. 2.  You ingore it because you're passive and scared .  I know, I know, Johnny.  You don't condone it, but you won't confront it.  “Where's the proof?” is your mantra that keeps you on the sidelines.  Whether that's your stance because you're scared or you really want your talent to push the edge?  That's subject to public opinion. 3.  You're in support of a FIRM REPRIMAND .  But you won't disqualify the cheater from competing, or even penalize him as a result.  If this is your stance, you also like to discuss the merits of committee rules. 4.  You regularly throw a crazy Nolan Ryan fastball at the head of anyone in the margins of cheating to gain a competitive advantage.  They can stay the first time you catch them, but with severe prejudice that can only be overcome by lengthy periods of high performance with no artificial advantages. 5. Get a box and pack it with your stuff, because you're gone if you cheat .  This is the one we all think we would respond with, but we don't.  It's uncommon, blocked by rationalizations like: –”I won't be able to replace them” –”Can I still hit my budget number?” –”I don't have enough proof” –”We could be sued” Ah yes, the rationalizations when the employees we love cheat.  Which response is yours?  What's your rationalization? Editor's Note:  Kris Dunn is Chief Human Resources Officer at  Kinetix  and a blogger at  The HR Capitalist  and the Founder and Executive Editor of Fistful of Talent. That makes him a career VP of HR, a blogger, a dad and a hoops junkie, the order of which changes based on his mood. Tweet him  @kris_dunn . Oh, and in case you hadn't heard the good word, he's also jumped into the RPO game as part owner of a rising shop out of ATL,  Kinetix HR . Not your mama's recruiting process outsourcing, that's for sure… check 'em out.

Originally posted here:

Tags: behavior, employee coaching, employee relations, human, Industry Chat, kris dunn, result

Pulled The Trigger On a Bad Hire? Pay Up My Friend…

Who pays for a bad hire? The natural and slightly knee-jerk reaction to this scenario is that the organization mostly pays. The company feels the pain of the wasted time, effort, and cash associated with advertising, promoting, screening, assessing, interviewing, deliberating, offering, negotiating, closing, welcoming, onboarding , training, coaching, correcting, coaching some more, warning, warning again, deliberating, and finally separating from the ‘ bad hire’ . But these are 'soft' costs to some extent.  Once the Monster.com invoice is paid, most of the rest of the affair is 'just' internal time. But it is a ton of effort. It takes time. It costs real money. And when that new hire, particularly one that is hired in a position of authority, or one that is highly visible in the organization or in the marketplace doesn’t work out, well, it looks bad. It can look really bad. Recently in an article in the New York Times, Jonathan Kaplan , founder and chief executive of Pure Digital, the company that made the wildly successful Flip camcorders, the company that Cisco bought two years ago for $590 million, (and later killed, but that is a story for another day), talked about how he dealt with the ‘bad hire’ – “If you hire someone bad, fire them immediately and give them a big severance package so they feel good about you. We gave our workers four to six months’ severance, even if they’d worked only four months. You might think that’s crazy. But it was our mistake to hire that person. And it’s not that much money, really.” Is that crazy? Does it make any sense to ‘pay off’ short tenured employees that did not work out in order to cement a reputation as a good employer to work for? Are there other compelling reasons to offer such a generous package to failed hires? It is a tough question for sure. The thing is that relationships of all kinds fail, and they fail for a myriad of possible reasons. Basketball stars leave the hometown teams they have grown up with, seemingly bullet-proof marriages fail, even iconic brands once in a while change their look , feel, or formula in an attempt to make a fresh start, only to see legions of previously loyal customers flee. So why do new hires fail? What are the most common reasons why the lengthy, detailed, immersive , introspective, and sophisticated courtship process between candidate (and eventual employee) and company fail to accurately provide proper and adequate warning to one side or another that the imminent and seemingly perfect match they are about to make will, in short order, go awry as fast as a remorseful Las Vegas bride can Google, ‘Are drive-though weddings officiated by someone in an Elvis costume actually legal?’ And beyond that, which entity, (recruiter, hiring manager, new employee), should bear the bulk of the responsibility and perhaps the penalty, for these ‘bad hires?’. And finally, should ‘failed’ new hires be rewarded, as Kaplan describes, with generous severance agreements? As my esteemed FOT colleague R.J. Morris pointed out in one of the famous (or infamous) FOT crew email chains, new hires go wrong for (essentially), three different reasons: 1. There is a basic and fundamental misalignment between the employee and the role. In other words, the person hired, based on their experience, education, or demeanor; had no realistic chance for success. Did the employee embellish their credentials, or fail to mention factors or circumstances that would have caused the recruiter or hiring manager to pause? Possibly. Or even probably. But when people are in need of a job, when the specter of mortgages and tuitions and car payments factor in, well, who would not embellish a little? So eventually the new hire fails, and the organization has to sort out what went wrong. 2. The new hire seems to be a fit, starts strong, full of enthusiasm and fire, but soon after starts to fade, and their level of effort and commitment trails off. Soon, they seem to disappear into the background, and the initial excitement and expectations for success that were espoused by both the company and the employee become tempered, or even forgotten. Sure, the new employee is doing ok, but the company was not hiring for ‘ok’, it was looking for something much, much more impactful . 3. The new hire joins the company and almost immediately fails to deliver on the most basic expectations. They are late, disinterested, seriously and perhaps dangerously incompetent, have interpersonal issues with the staff, and otherwise screw up the new gig they managed to talk themselves into. This is the archetypal ‘bad hire’ we hear about so often. So let’s assume R.J. is right, and the above three reasons, (or close approximations of the same), constitute the vast majority of so-called ‘bad hires’. In these scenarios, would the Jonathan Kaplan ‘big severance package’ strategy make sense for organizations, or at least hold up as the right thing to do? Scenario 1 – A complete whiff on the hire. Someone, either the recruiter or the hiring manager totally missed on this, and brought in someone clearly not suited for the job. Who is at fault on this one? The new hire? I think not, as even if they fudged or embellished a little about their skills or experience, what can you expect? They wanted the job. They probably needed the job. If you hire them and they have no shot at being successful then that is your fault. Pay the severance . Scenario 2 – A strong start, then the new hire fades and disappears. What is the most likely reason for this scenario? Probably lack of attention, effort, and engagement from the manager, team leaders, or project leaders who can’t seem to find time or a method to engage the new hire in their existing work processes. Sort of a ‘Hi, welcome to the team, sit over there and read these manuals’ kind of approach to integrating the new employee into the flow. Maybe the new hire tries to get some attention, get involved, and get noticed, but eventually they give up. The company really did not need or want to bring them in in the first place. They have mostly wasted everyone's time. Pay the severance . Scenario 3 – The new hire is a complete train wreck. Shows up late, if at all, can’t perform the basic and required job functions, and essentially is a total mess. Most companies do smartly cut their losses quickly, and move on. Sure, their is probably some responsibility on the part of the recruiter and hiring manager for the mess, ultimately the situation is such a disaster, that the company can usually just walk away. Don’t pay the severance . But have a LONG talk with whoever signed off on the hire. What is the bottom line? To me, bad hires are mostly a function of inadequate screening, interviewing, onboarding , coaching, managing, or mentoring. These are all (or at least mostly), the responsibility and duty of the hiring organization. Most people don’t take new jobs planning to fail . When new hires fail, and the failure can be ascribed to one of these common scenarios, then yes, a generous, even overly generous severance package might be one way to inject some humanity into the process and also serve as a message to recruiters and hiring managers (whose budgets should be dinged by these severance package payments), that making the right hire is the most important job they have. Go ahead and let me have it in the comments… Editor's Note  -   Steve Boese is fondly known to many as the  HR Technology  blogger. By day, he is an HR Technology Consultant and part-time instructor at the  Rochester Institute of Technology .  That's right, he's educating some of HR's future, folks. How's that for literally shaping the future of HR? Steve can also be found hosting the  HR Happy Hour on Thursdays at 8PM ET  … you know, where a bunch of HR pros get together and call in to talk about HR stuff. Sounds like a real happy time… yep. Okay then…

Visit link:

Tags: effort, employee relations, Industry Chat, interviewing, knee, onboarding, reaction, steve boese, warning

From the HR Trenches: And That Is How I Will Leave This World.

I am constantly joking with my husband that I know some disgruntled employee will one day whack me on their way out of the building.  But there is a bit of truth in every joke, isn’t there?  That’s why I face my desk towards the door.  I want to see who is coming so I have time to yell out, “It’s Bob from Accounting!” before I get shot. This past week has been strange, to say the least.  My fear of being whacked seemed closer than ever.  We had a few guys who were bullying another employee.  They put pink hand soap in his hats and work boots.  The employee complained to his manager, and the manager called me. We interviewed the two guys working with our soap victim that day – only to find out that neither one of them was going to give the other one up.  Since they were in cahoots with each other – I just fired them both.  Why did I do that?  Because the kid being bullied didn’t deserve it – and these guys are pretty much jerks anyway.  Once I released them and scolded them about how ashamed they should be of themselves (because I am a mother and I like to make people feel bad when they are mean to others) the emails began. Email #1 (to me, from a bully):   I am not a bully.  You’re a bully and a bitch.  I am going to sue you. Email #2 (to bully, from me):   We have strict policies on workplace harassment and bullying.  Best of luck in your future endeavors.  Kindest Regards, Meredith Email #3 (to me, from bully):   You’re going down.  You’re two faced.  I’m going to take you down. I said nothing to this.  I laughed a little because I know he has no case since he is a white male, under 40 years-old, with a disciplinary record. He also obviously has aggression and anger issues – so he seems to be a bully.  And then I got another email after 45 minutes of not responding (Bullies loathe silence). Email #4 (to me, from bully):  I know things about you.  Like where you live.  Watch your back. Um?  Okay.  This one seems a little more serious.  Maybe my motherly guilt trip on stirred up some bad childhood memories, maybe he does know where I live, maybe he is on his way to my house right now to maim my nanny and children! So I began to panic.  Big time.  I called the nanny and made her lock up the place.  I called my son’s school and told them I would pick him up afterwards.  And finally, I called our security management company (who I have only ever called to investigate thefts) and asked them for some help. The local police were put on high alert, and the bully was paid a visit.  They explained to him that he had just destroyed any court case that he may have had since he put threatening words in writing.  Cleary this dude is a bully and a huge jerk. So did I go overboard?  I don’t think so.  At the end of the day, this is just a job.  I want to go home to my family.  Do I need to have security in every termination or discipline procedure?  No.  I think most people are generally good hearted, and I am not yet jaded. But you tell me, have you ever been afraid of an employee?  Do you know anyone who has been a victim of workplace violence? Editor's Note – Meredith Soleau is an HR pro out of Toledo. An HR pro for an automobile dealership in Toledo. An HR pro for an automobile dealership in Toledo which happens to have more restaurants and bars per capita than any other city in the United States which makes her an HR pro for an automobile dealership in a town full of foodies and drunks which she counts as her talent pool and employee population. Which really just means that the stories about their holiday parties must be really, really good. But more than likely, the best stories include Meredith herself because life's one crazy joke …

See the rest here:

Tags: Cahoots, disgruntled, employee communications, employee relations, future, good hr, record, strict, workplace

Who Knew There Was A Future HR Manager in Lord of the Flies?

‘And you shut up! Who are you, anyway? Sitting there – telling people what to do. You can’t hunt, you can’t sing – ’ ‘I’m chief. I was chosen.’ ‘Why should choosing make any difference? Just giving orders that don’t make any sense – ’ ‘Piggy’s got the conch.’ ‘That’s right – favour Piggy as you always do – ’ ‘Jack!’Jack’s voice sounded in bitter mimicry.‘Jack! Jack!’ ‘The rules!’ shouted Ralph, ‘you’re breaking the rules!’ ‘Who cares?’ Ralph summoned his wits. ‘Because the rules are the only thing we’ve got!’ But Jack was shouting against him. ‘Bollocks to the rules! We’re strong – we hunt! If there’s a beast, we’ll hunt it down! We’ll close in and beat and beat and beat – !’ He gave a wild whoop and leapt down to the pale sand. At once the plat form was full of noise and excitement, scramblings, screams and laughter. The assembly shredded away and became a discursive and random scatter form the palms to the water and away along the beach, beyond night-sight. Ralph found his cheek touching the conch and took it from Piggy. ‘What’s grown-ups going to say?’ cried Piggy again. ‘Look at ’em!’ “Lord of the Flies,”, William Golding.   HR IS About Rules… I started today’s post with that bit of high school literature.   Lord of the Flies was one of the few things I’ve ever been required to read that actually stuck with me.  The idea of HR and Lord of the Flies came to mind a while back when sitting on the porch with one of my son’s friends.  This kid had it a bit rough.  Mom and Dad split.  Father not paying attention to the kids – more to his own libido and bar tab.  Mother trying to make it work but not doing well.  He spent a lot of time with us.  We (my wife and I) bought Christmas and birthday presents for him.  We bought him shoes.  Anything we did for our real son – we did for him.  Son II so to speak. I was sitting with him on the porch one summer afternoon talking about what they (my son and him) had planned for the day.  He told me.  I told him to be sure to check in and let me know where they were and what was going on.  I told him no messing around.  He said to me, unprompted… “I like being here.  At least there are some rules.” Knock. Me. Over. With. A. Feather. A teenager.  Telling me that one of the things he likes about our house versus his own – was the rules. Normally you’d think the opposite.  But rules matter. HR – Rules – Success HR gets a bad rap for being an enforcer.  But the reality is, everyone, including your employees, needs rules.  Too often, we think that letting employees have free reign to pursue their bliss, to find autonomy, master and purpose, will create an ideal working environment.  The “rule-less” organization will create engagement and satisfaction.  No it won’t. Rules are required for safety and security.  Having rules puts people at ease.  A “no rules” environment is frightening and paralyzing.  For most of us, having an inkling of what is right/wrong, acceptable/unacceptable – is required for us to act. Without rules we either do the wrong thing or nothing. So for those that think HR is about rules and stifling creativity.  I say bullocks.  HR is about creating safe zones for activity.  Safe zones for experimenting.   HR is all about rules.  And should continue to be. Rule=#1 Here’s a rule for you.  The rule-less organization creates anarchy, confusion and zero progress. HR needs to set rules.  Boundaries within which to act.  Don’t be afraid of putting in place rules, regulations and boundaries.  It is a difficult job.  A thankless job.  And one that many who would break the rules could not handle. There is however, a fine line between creating boundaries and creating regimes.  Allow exploration – within the boundaries.  Create rules that govern the big picture and allow the little things to slide.  Find those rules that are unbreakable.  Enforce those. Editor's Note -  Paul Hebert is the Managing Director for  i2i  (an influence consultancy), the brain behind  Incentive Intelligence  and a recognized authority on incentives and performance motivation. Want to know what's going to motivate your people to perform at their best and impact the bottom line? Want to know whether your service award program really means anything at all? And are there psychological principles that drive your employees behavior? Paul's your guy… unless you fervently bow down to Maslow.

Read this article:

Tags: Conch, employee relations, golding, Industry Chat, innovation, lord, porch, result, satisfaction, school, Screams, the hr profession

Applebee’s HR and Operations Nightmare

For those who might not know – I was once a proud member of the Applebee's corporate HR team, and actually had regional coverage over the Michigan market, where this past weekend a toddler was served alcohol by accident ( see the local story here ) and had to be taken to the hospital. Long story-short, Meredith Soleau has a take on it, – family comes to Applebee's for dinner, Mom orders her child some apple juice, Bartender gets the order to fill the apple juice, grabs bottle marked “apple juice” (which actually had a premix of an alcohol drink) that another bartender during the day had made up, and put in the mixing bottle marked “apple juice” not thinking anyone would ever mistake it (or at the very least “I” know it's not apple juice, so I won't mistake it) – and bang – a disaster waiting to happen. First let me state a few things I know: 1. Applebee's corporate does a phenomenal job training their staff and management on serve-safe alcohol. 2. In my 3+ years, with 70 restaurants and multiple sting operations by local and state police at every location, every year - we were stung once in all of that time (for those that don't know what a “sting” is: police use underage people to go into restaurants and have them order alcohol to see if the establishment will serve them – and by underage it's usually 20 year olds who look 35). All involved in the failed sting operation were fired – server, bartender, manager on duty and General Manager who wasn't even on duty at the time (now that's zero tolerance!). 3. Training doesn't happen once at Applebee's when you're hired, it happens multiple times throughout the year and many levels – this wasn't a training issue or a HR issue. So – why did this happen?  Like most major problems, there are a number of issues that happen all at the same time to cause disaster. Here's what I think happened with an issue like this: Communication failure – clearly someone put alcohol in a bottle marked “apple juice” and not everyone knew that (99.9% of the time communication comes into play with HR's biggest problems we deal with) Money – Ask yourself one thing – why does a bartender need to pour “Apple juice”? Why can't the server get the juice like they get soda, coffee and water?  You see apple juice is expensive – more expensive than soda, coffee and water – and if servers have control over it – they might drink it and that drives up food cost… (penny wise – pound foolish) Money – Ask yourself – why the heck wouldn't a giant company like Applebee's use single serving juice boxes? Oh, they are more expensive than a big old bottle of apple juice from Costco. Come on, Tim! I mean really it's not that much money. Stop yourself and multiple that out by 2000+ locations, 7 days per week – now you're are talking about hundred's of thousands of dollars over a year – for one little decision to go with juice boxes or big bottles. Money – another guess is that whoever made the original “mix” and the person taking over didn't overlap their work schedules – so that the proper communication couldn't happen – again a money savings issue – why overlap and have two people there when one can do the job? In HR we try and help mitigate risk for our operations partners, who in turn work their butts off to try and make our organizations profitable – this is what happens when those two things don't align properly. Applebee's corporate has some of the most talented HR Pros that you'll find in any industry (and I don't say that lightly – they have truly impressive people) and they'll weather this storm and make it better – because that's what good HR pros do. Editor's Note : Tim Sackett, SPHR is the EVP of HRU Technical Resources in Lansing, MI. Tim loves everything talent acquisition and believes every corporate recruitment department in America can and must get better. He has 15+ years of human resource leadership experience, across multiple industries, on both the corporate and agency side – so he gets it from both sides of the desk. Want more?  Um, OK… He has a Masters of HR and… well, he was recently voted #5 best assistant little league coach of his son’s five team league. Check out his newest blog venture at  www.timsackett.com . Because he's got A LOT to say, and FOT just isn't enough for him.

Excerpt from:

Tags: Applebee, current affairs, employee relations, Industry Chat, member, meredith soleau, result, tim sackett

Eating (and Drinking) Good in the Neighborhood?

Oh, Applebee’s, you are having such a bad week. It is time for some quick PR moves and a swift reaction to the baby who you were slipping drinks to last Friday night. In case you were living under a rock this past weekend, a 15 month-old toddler was intoxicated after an Applebee’s server gave him a margarita instead of apple juice. The juice came with his kid’s meal. The baby’s mother noticed something was wrong after her child was greeting the walls, put his head down on the table, and seemed very “happy”. When she tasted his apple juice, she realized that he had been served a margarita. His mother drove him to the hospital (no drinking and driving, baby!) and found out his blood-alcohol level was .10. Doctors say that if he had drunk (I said drunk… so witty) the entire cup, he could have died .  I have to ask myself, if I were the VP of HR for Applebee’s, and I knew that I had to do a full-on investigation, and all eyes were on my company – where would I begin? Whose head would roll first? The bartender? The manager? The waitress? Obviously, the public expects something to happen. Having worked behind a bar in college, I can see how this happened. It’s always dark behind the bar. Jugs of juice are typically kept in the same cooler as the pre-mixed jugs of alcoholic beverages. I am sure that the poor waitress was probably in a hurry, grabbed the jug, filled the cup, and never thought better of it. So do you fire her? Or do you fire the bartender who didn’t label the jugs properly to make sure this didn’t happen? What about the manager? It is his store, and all he did was apologize to the mother, telling her he didn’t know what else to do. Um? It may just be me, but he kind of set you up for a giant law suit by doing, oh I don’t know, NOTHING! If I were him, I would have started with paying for their meal. I also would have told these people that I would reach them first thing in the morning to talk about how to make this right. In this situation, I’ll bet Applebee’s wishes they were able to throw some hush money at this family before they talked to every news station in Detroit. Applebee’s has issued a statement saying that they will now serve juice at the table in single serve portions (like a juice box). But is that enough? Because really, if this were my daughter (who is about that age), I would be suing the pants off of Applebee’s. And I wouldn’t even feel bad about it. So what would you do, HR Pros? Would you fire someone? Or better yet, would you fire someone on the pure fact that the public expects you to react in a drastic way (even if that someone made an honest mistake and served alcohol to a baby)? I would be interested in what our friend, Tim Sackett, has to say about this… Editor's Note – Meredith Soleau is an HR pro out of Toledo. An HR pro for an automobile dealership in Toledo. An HR pro for an automobile dealership in Toledo which happens to have more restaurants and bars per capita than any other city in the United States which makes her an HR pro for an automobile dealership in a town full of foodies and drunks which she counts as her talent pool and employee population. Which really just means that the stories about their holiday parties must be really, really good. But more than likely, the best stories include Meredith herself because life's one crazy joke …

Read the original post:

Tags: apple, Applebee, blood, current affairs, Doctors, Drinks, employee relations, Industry Chat, juice, level, Margarita, night, reaction, result