Author: Allan Halcrow

When we asked you to identify the worst crisis you ever faced first thing in the morning, one respondent asked, “Aren’t all HR problems a crisis from someone’s perspective?”

Clearly the answer is yes: One person’s crisis (“the fax machine wasn’t working”) is another person’s minor inconvenience. Still, with all due respect, some crises seem distinctly more serious than others. This year, we were particularly struck by the remarkable number of you who have faced workplace violence. Here are some of the other crises you shared. We aren’t so presumptuous as to say any one is the worst, but collectively, they show the range of problems faced by HR:

1. Four women got into a fight during class. They all had to go to the hospital by ambulance.
2. Employees that were held at gunpoint during a robbery needed counseling.
3. I had to report a stolen car after an employee didn’t return with a corporate vehicle.
4. Medical insurance was canceled in error over the weekend.
5. A rogue supervisor started a mutiny. There were petitions and mass resignations.
6. The morning newspaper included a letter to the editorfrom an employee that charged racial discrimination.
7. Lightning struck one of our employees through his computer.
8. No espresso for our French staff. Eeeeck!
9. Placed an order for 10 temps, and none reported.
10. A high-level sales employee, who was supposed to be making sales calls, instead had flown to Las Vegas, gone on a drinking binge and was gambling using the corporate credit card.
11. A female employee pursued a male co-worker. When he did not respond, she killed his cat.
12. An employee was trapped at the airport in Lithuania. I had to get diplomatic authorities to intervene.
13. I came back from vacation to find that five vice presidents had resigned after receiving their bonuses.
14. Union organizers were onsite passing out cards.
15. We had to justify our entire budget by 11:30 or lose $500,000 in funds.

Workforce, June 1999, Vol. 78, No. 6, p. 48.

Some CEOs may be clueless, but most are working hand-in-hand with HR to make businesses better. For evidence that HR is playing a more strategic role in organizations, look no further than some of the provocative, challenging questions that CEOs have posed to HR professionals. How would you answer these questions?

1. What can we do to attract valuable employees in a climate of 3 percent unemployment?
2. On what basis should we evaluate senior employees?
3. Is there anything you are currently doing in HR that you do just because you’ve been doing it for a long time? Can you stop doing it?
4. Are you proud of working for this company?
5. Every day, we should try to find someone whose work/life we can impact and increase their work output or experience. Are we doing that?
6. How can we use the collective bargaining agreements to forward the goals of this organization?
7. How do you think we should be structured as an organization?
8. How do we develop a diversity program that really makes a difference?
9. If you could change three things about this company regardless of time, funds or manpower, what would they be?
10. If we continue with our current practice of matching the external market in compensation, won’t we have trouble recruiting and retaining the best?
11. How can I get HR more involved in solving business problems?
12. Do we always remember that employees must put their family responsibilities first?
13. What are we going to do to ensure that we have skilled people to run this company 10 years from now?
14. What can we do to increase participatory management in the company?
15. Why is our turnover rate increasing?

Workforce, June 1999, Vol. 78, No. 6, p. 36.

If you’re among those who believe that there are no dumb questions, read no further. If, on the other hand, you’re among those who believe you’ve heard it all, read on: Perhaps you haven’t. Here are some of the most memorable examples of dumb questions, along with some thoughts on how we might have answered them:

1. Can I have my salary deferred until next year so I don’t have to pay taxes this year? I don’t need the money this year.
   You may not need the money this year, but the IRS does.
2. I falsified my résumé. Now that I’m working here, can I change it?
   Sure. Can we change your employment status?
3. Which exit should I use on the evacuation map—primary or secondary?
   Which thought process were you using when you asked that question? Primary or secondary?
4. Why do we have to offer family leave to male employees?
   Because male employees have families, and if we don’t they’ll leave.
5. Can my supervisor require me to have specific working hours?
   We could waive the requirement if you waive the requirement that we provide a specific paycheck at a specific time.
6. Can I wear a swimsuit and towel on casual day?
   It’d be appropriate for taking a dip in the job candidate pool.
7. Every day my supervisor tells me to stop chatting and get back to work. Can he do that?
   Yes. Now get back to work.
8. Will you give me a raise if I stop smoking marijuana?
   Sorry. There’s no rainbow at the end of this pot.
9. I know I’ve been terminated, but shouldn’t the insurance plan cover the hospital bills from the birth of my baby since the child was conceived in accordance with the guidelines of the insurance policy manual?
   Sorry. We’ve read the manual, too, and we can’t conceive how we can help.
10. Since my mother and father both died before I came to work at this company, will I be credited for bereavement leave I didn’t have to take?
    Well, you’ve apparently been credited with intelligence you don’t intend to use, so let’s call it even.

Workforce, June 1999, Vol. 78, No. 6, p. 44.

It isn’t surprising that recruitment has become HR’s No. 1 challenge. But it’s surprising what can happen during job interviews. Here are some of the most unusual experiences you shared.

Given the current labor market, it isn’t surprising that recruitment has become HR’s No. 1 challenge. But it’s surprising what can happen during job interviews. Here are some of the most unusual experiences you shared:

1. The CEO conducted interviews at candidates’ homes so that he could meet the family. He would ask the candidates’ spouses why we should hire that person.
2. A management candidate arrived for his interview so drunk he couldn’t stand straight.
3. A job candidate said that he didn’t use Windows 95® because Microsoft asked him not to.
4. During an interview, an applicant (who was also a musician) sang a song—and really belted it out.
5. I was called out of my office during an interview. While standing just outside my door, my colleague and I heard the candidate opening the drawers of my desk and file cabinets.
6. A candidate explained that she was no longer living at the address on her résumé because her home had been taken over by aliens.
7. A candidate for a factory job stripped off her pullover sweater during an interview. She wasn’t wearing anything underneath it.
8. A candidate came in for an interview wearing an ear on a chain around his neck.
9. An applicant told all her friends she was hired for a receptionist opening, and then just showed up and sat at the reception desk. We had not made her an offer.
10. A woman came into the office to apply for a job with a 4-inch knife blade sticking out of her purse.
11. A candidate asked about the salary for a position because he wanted to be sure he would earn enough to have beer money for the weekend.
12. A candidate brought lunch to an interview because it was scheduled during his lunch time.

Workforce, June 1999, Vol. 78, No. 6, p. 42.

Response to this year’s “Day in the Life of HR” survey was impressive-we received 848 questionnaires. The following is a summary of the answers that were received, listing the percentages of the selections that were chosen. The majority of respondents were female (75 percent), between the ages of 41 and 50 (34 percent).

1. What time do you usually wake up on workdays?
		In the pre-dawn pitch black 43% 6:00-6:30 35% 6:30-7:00 13% 7:00-7:30 6% 7:30-8:00 2% After 8:00 1%
2. Which of the following do you usually do before work? (Respondents were asked to mark all that apply.)
		Make lunch for yourself 34% Are you kidding? It takes all I have just to get to work 30% Watch TV 29% Get the kids ready for school/day care 27% Read the newspaper 21% Exercise/jog 18% Drive the kids to school/day care 18% Make lunch for the kids 11% Run errands 10% Work on office tasks brought home 10% Check in with the office 8% Attend work-related function (e.g., breakfast meeting) 8% Care for parent or elderly relative 2%
3. Do you usually eat breakfast?
			Yes 60% No 32% There is no “usually” 8%
4. If your answer is yes, what do you usually eat?
									Cereal 47% Toast 25% Fruit 15% Whatever I can find 11% Yogurt 8% Donuts or muffins 6% Eggs and/or bacon 4% Fast food 2% Last night’s leftovers 1%
5. What do you usually wear to work?
									Business casual 37% Business attire other than a suit (e.g., shirt and tie without jacket) 22% Depends on what’s happening that day 20% Complete business suit 20% Really casual 5%
6. How many cups of coffee do you drink on the average work day?
									None 37% Two or three 29% One 19% Four or five 13% So many that the employees at the local Starbucks raise their arms and sing “Hallelujah!” when I arrive 4%
7. How do you usually get to work?
									Drive alone 88% Drive in carpool 6% Bus or subway 3% Train 2% Walk 2% Bicycle 1% Chauffeur-driven limo 0%
8. Which of the following do you commonly do during your commute? (Respondents were asked to mark all that apply.)
								Listen to the radio 85% Listen to tapes/CDs 36% Use cell phone for business 22% Use cell phone for personal calls 14% Eat 13% Other (please specify) 11% Personal grooming (e.g., apply make-up or shave) 9% Read 7% The most common activities that were cited by those who marked “other” include planning for the day, praying and talking to family members. Several respondents, however, admit to “cursing at idiotic drivers.”
9. What time do you usually arrive at the office?
									Between 7:00 and 8:00 52% Between 8:00 and 9:00 36% In the dark 9% After 9:00 3% There is no “usually” 1%
10. If you drive and park, where do you usually park?
									Any open spot in company lot 70% Assigned parking space 18% Any open space in city lot 5% Wherever I can find a spot after circling the building several times 4% On the street 3%
11. When entering the work place, do you pass through a security check?
								No 66% Yes 31% Depends which part of the facility I enter 3%
12. Do you wear a name badge or security badge at work?
									No 66% Yes, both name badge and security badge 14% Yes, name badge only 12% Yes, security badge only 8%
13. Where do you, personally, have office space?
							Private office with door 73% Open workstation 21% Share an office with door 6% I have no assigned work space 1%
14. How much time on an average day do you spend in your workspace?
							Most of it 43% About half the day 31% Almost all of it 21% Only a couple of hours a day 5% Almost none 1%
15. What have you done to personalize your office space? (Respondents were asked to choose all that apply.)
					Photos of family/friends 81% Calendar 61% Desk accessories other than what the company provides 60% Books 59% Artwork 57% Plants 51% Toys 34% Diplomas or professional awards 32% Vacation souvenirs 16% Other (please specify) 12% Among the items most often identified by respondents who chose “other” were candy, cartoons and inspirational messages. Also mentioned were sports memorabilia, coffee mugs, candles, Disney collectibles and “my whip.”
16. To whom do you report?
							Senior HR officer 32% President/CEO 31% Other (please specify) 17% CFO 10% Plant/Site manager 8% COO 4%
17. Does anyone report directly to you?
							Yes 61% No 39%
18. What are you most likely to do after you first arrive? (Respondents chose more than one answer.)
							Check voice-mail 46% Check e-mail 42% Get coffee 12% Get right to work 11% Talk with co-workers about work 4% Talk with co-workers about the week- end, TV shows, the news, etc. 4% Check regular mail 4% Use restroom 2% Read newspaper 1%
19. When you begin working, what are you most likely to do first?
							Respond to messages (voice-mail or e-mail) 71% Begin with task determined previously 17% Deal with the crisis of the day (unknown to me before my arrival) 12% Check with direct reports 4% Attend scheduled meeting 2%
20. Have you ever knowingly violated company policy?
							No 78% Yes 22%
21. If yes, which one? What was the reason?
							Of those who said they had violated a policy, the examples given ranged from using the office copier for personal business to eating at a desk. Most often, however, policies were violated to help employees: medical conditions were kept confidential, extra time was given to employees so that they could deal with personal crises, paychecks were issued early during emergencies.
22. How often does your computer or network crash?
							Almost never 51% Once a month or so 21% Once a week or so 17% Only when I am depending on it most 8% At least once daily 4%
23. How many e-mails do you get on an average day?
							5-25 50% 25-50 24% 1-5 16% More than 50 6% None 3% I stop counting when the computer overloads 1%
24. How long do you spend answering e-mail on the average day?
							15-30 minutes 34% 30-60 minutes 29% 15 minutes or less 19% More than an hour 18% It has become a full-time job; I do the rest of my work after hours 2%
25. How much of your e-mail is spam, jokes, notes from friends, chain e-mail and other non-work mail?
						Some 68% None 20% About half 10% Most of it 2% All of it 0%
26. What percentage of your day do you estimate is spent on routine or administrative tasks?
						Some—two or three hours a day 42% About half the time 27% Very little-less than an hour a day 21% Most of the time-five or six hours a day 9% Almost all the time 1% None 0%
27. What percentage of your day do you estimate is spent on strategic or big-picture issues?
						Some—two or three hours a day 41% Very little-less than an hour a day 37% About half the time 16% Most of the time-five or six hours a day 5% None 2% Almost all the time 1%
28. What percentage of your day do you estimate you spend on consultative or developmental projects?
						Some—two or three hours a day 46% Very little-less than an hour a day 32% About half the time 11% Most of the time-five or six hours a day 6% None 5% Almost all the time 1%
29. What percentage of your day do you estimate is spent responding to a crisis or problem presented to you by someone else in the organization?
						Some-two or three hours a day 43% Very little-less than an hour a day 33% About half the time 16% Most of the time-five or six hours a day 6% None 1% Almost all the time 1%
30. How many meetings do you attend on the average day?
							1 52% 2-3 35% None 9% 4-6 4% More than 6 0%
31. How long does the average meeting last?
							31-60 minutes 59% 1-2 hours 23% 15-30 minutes 16% More than 2 hours 2%
32. How would you characterize the average meeting that you attend?
							Necessary but disorganized 33% Necessary and efficient but uninspiring 30% Largely worthless with scattered moments of value 20% Well organized, compelling and productive 19% A complete waste of time 1%
33. How do you occupy your mind during meetings? (Respondents were asked to mark all that apply.)
				Listening carefully 72% Considering how best to make my point 55% Thinking about the work that isn’t getting done while I’m in the meeting 42% Talking 25% Thinking about personal things (e.g., tonight’s dinner) 14% Doodling 14% Playing buzzword bingo 1%
34. Whose numbers are programmed into the speed-dial of your phone? (Respondents could choose more than one option.)
						None—phone doesn’t have speed-dial option 34% None-I don’t know how to use speed-dial option 20% Other (please specify) 17% Others in my department 10% Home 12% My boss 7% The corporate labor attorney 4% My secretary 3% Corporate insurance carrier 4% Among the examples cited most often by those who selected “other” were branch offices, department heads, emergency services, vendors and spouses at work.
35. For what do you use your company or department break area? (Respondents could choose more than one option.)
						To get coffee 35% To store food 33% To get water 32% To eat 19% Nothing-I never use the area we have 18% Nothing-we don’t have a break area 14% To get aspirin or other remedies 13% To catch up on office gossip 8% To catch up on newspapers/magazines 7% Other (please specify) 3% Those that chose “other” cited such examples as having meetings, posting items on bulletin boards, getting tea or soda, and celebrating birthdays.
36. How would you characterize your typical behavior in the break area?
						I’m careful not to make a mess so that I don’t feel guilty about not cleaning it 68% I’m the kitchen elf who always straightens things, makes a new pot of coffee or changes the water bottle 27% I’m a frustrated chef and bring goodies for the office to share 5% I leave my dishes and trash around for someone else to deal with 0% I bring dirty dishes from home and leave them in the break area so that they get washed 0%
37. How do you usually spend your lunch hour? (Respondents could choose more than one answer.)
							I work through lunch 42% Eating 35% Reading 10% Running errands 14% Working out 4% In a meeting or business lunch 6% Other 4%
38. Which best characterizes how you have your meal?
							I eat alone at my desk 51% I eat with colleagues at the company food facility 19% I join colleagues outside the office 13% I eat alone outside the office 10% I go home to eat 6% I meet colleagues for a working lunch 5%
39. What do you usually eat for lunch?
							Sandwich 29% There is no “usually” 24% Hot entrée 19% Salad 14% Fast food or junk food 10% Soup 6% Cold entrée 2%
40. How many voice-mail messages do you get on an average day?
							1-10 50% 10-25 33% None 11% 25-50 6% More than 50 0%
41. How deep is the stack of papers that are in your in-box right now?
						Between 1″ and 2″ 29% 2-6″ 29% 1″ or less 23% 6-12″ 13% More than 1′ 5% It’s taller than my children 2%
42. Do you have files in your office?
							Yes 98% No 2%
43. If yes, what’s in those files? (Respondents were asked to choose all that apply.)
							Copies of policy manual 83% Legal documents/correspondence 78% Training materials 73% Documents related to company benefit plan 70% Résumés of job candidates/prospects 56% Personal papers (e.g., my own résumé, correspondence, etc.) 50% Employee files from throughout the company 45% Employee files of my direct reports 29% Other (please specify) 24% Among the material cited most often by those who selected “other” were union contracts, project material, payroll data, grievances, budget material and job descriptions. One respondent’s files include “every other paper that ever existed.”
44. How often do you give a formal business presentation or speech to a group of at least 20 people?
						Several times a year 37% Once or twice a year 28% Monthly 15% Never 15% Weekly 5% Several times a week 1%
45. How often do you travel for business?
							Once or twice a year 37% Several times a year 30% Never 18% Monthly 12% Weekly 4%
46. What is the most common reason for your business travel?
							To visit corporate subsidiary/satellite office 29% Training 26% To attend trade show or conference 21% Other (please specify) 10% To visit corporate headquarters 9% To visit vendor/supplier 3% The reasons for travel cited most often by those who chose “other” were recruitment and to attend board meetings.
47. How long is an average trip?
							Two or three days 54% Overnight 38% Five days 7% Longer than 5 days 1%
48. How often do you telecommute from home?
							Never 63% A few days a year 27% Once a month 6% More than one day a week 3% Once a week 2%
49. How long a vacation do you usually take?
							A series of short (2-4 days) vacations 41% One week 38% Two weeks 12% Three weeks 5% More than three weeks 3% I don’t take vacations 2%
50. Where are you most likely to go on vacation?
							Major U.S. city other than my own 22% Other (please specify) 19% Recreation (e.g., ski resort) 16% Recreation (e.g., ski resort) nearby (within 100 miles) 13% Tropics (e.g., Hawaii, Caribbean) 13% My living room 12% Major city outside U.S. 7% “I survived another HR crisis … I’m going to Disney World!” 5% Favorite vacation spots of those who selected “other” include Australia, Mexico, a family vacation home and golf resorts.
51. What’s your ideal vacation?
							R&R on the beach 37% Sightseeing 21% Not being at work 18% Recreation/sports 14% Visiting friends/family 11% Cultural activities 9% Cruise 7%
52. Whom do you spend most of your time with on an average day?
							Colleagues in HR 34% Employees 33% Line managers 21% No one … I work alone 11% My boss (other than the CEO) 4% The CEO 3%
53. How much time do you spend on the Internet during the average day?
						15-30 minutes 36% 15 minutes or less 24% 30-60 minutes 21% More than an hour 13% None 7%
54. Which Internet search engine(s) do you use? (Respondents were asked to mark all that apply.)
							Yahoo! 74% AltaVista 38% Infoseek 37% Excite 36% Lycos 34% Other 22% America Online 17%
55. When you’re browsing the Internet during work hours, what do you use it for? (Respondents were asked to mark all that apply.)
						HR research 78% HR legal tips/advice 60% Non-HR sites 52% HR breaking news 48% Posting open jobs 22% Looking for job candidates 22% HR networking (e.g., discussion forums) 21% HR humor, surveys, etc. 18% Looking for another job myself 10%
56. If you were limited to using the Internet for just one thing, which would you choose?
						HR research 42% HR legal tips/advice 16% Non-HR sites 16% HR breaking news 8% Posting open jobs 6% HR networking (e.g., discussion forums) 5% Looking for job candidates 4% Looking for another job myself 2% HR humor, surveys, etc. 1%
57. What time do you usually leave the office?
							5:30-6:00 28% 5:00-5:30 26% 6:00-7:00 19% 4:00-5:00 16% After 7:00 6% There is no “usually” 4% Before 4:00 2%
58. During your commute between the office and home, which do you usually do?
						Nothing-I go straight home 48% Run errands 25% Stop at grocery store 13% Pick up children 13% Stop at gym to work out 7% Stop at fast-food or take-out restaurant 2% Meet someone at a restaurant 1% Stop to visit elderly parent or relative 1%
59. Which of these activities are you most likely to do on a typical evening? (Respondents were asked to mark all that apply.)
						Eat dinner 91% Watch TV 76% Household chores 65% Read 64% Cook dinner 58% Do work brought from the office 39% Care for children 29% Exercise alone 29% Surf the Internet 26% Help children with homework 22% Pursue hobby 20% Go to community meeting, school meeting, etc. 14% Go out to a movie, sporting event or cultural event 11% Volunteer 8% Play computer games 9% Participate in competitive sports event 4%
60. Which office leash do you use?
							None-when I’m home, my time is my own 38% Regular phone 36% Cellular phone 27% E-mail at home 27% Pager 15% Fax machine at home 8% Palm Pilot (or similar) 5% Other (please specify) 2% Laptop computers were the leash cited most often by those who chose “other.”
61. What do you do for exercise? (Respondents were asked to check all that apply.)
						Walking 59% Nothing—I’m a couch potato 17% Running/jogging 17% Chase my kids 15% Aerobics 15% Participate in organized sports (e.g., softball league) 8% Swim 5% Weightlifting 2%
62. What TV show do you most look forward to watching?
				Other (please specify) 23% “ER” 17% “Ally McBeal” 16% “Friends” 14% “Frasier” 10% “Dateline” 8% “The X Files” 8% “60 Minutes” 6% “Touched by an Angel” 6% Monday Night Football 5% Other sports telecast 5% The TV shows that were cited most often by those who selected “other” include “Dharma and Greg,” “Law and Order,” “NYPD Blue,” soap operas, and various cable networks. Numerous respondents said they don’t watch TV.
63. Below are movies that recently were released. Which are you most likely to go see in a theater?
						“Shakespeare in Love” 26% “Saving Private Ryan” 22% Are you kidding? Who has time to go to a movie? 16% None, I only watch movies on video 15% “Patch Adams” 14% “Life Is Beautiful” 13% “A Bug’s Life” 7% “Payback” 6%
64. What is your living situation?
							Live with spouse/significant other and child or children 39% Live with spouse/significant other 33% Live alone 16% Live with child/children only 5% Live with roommate 4% Live with parents 2% Other (please specify) 2%
65. What time do you usually get to sleep?
							10:30-11:00 26% 10:00-10:30 19% 11:00-11:30 17% 11:30-12:00 16% 9:00-10:00 14% After 12:00 7%
66. What is your gender?
							Female 75% Male 25%
67. What is your age?
							41-50 34% 31-40 32% 30 or younger 20% 51-60 13% 61 or older 1%

Workforce Extra, June 1999, pp. 1-6.

It’s true: Not even HR is perfect. We asked you to identify the biggest mistake you ever made in the course of doing your job. One defiant respondent said simply, “I won’t tell you!” and several others volunteered that their marriages were the biggest mistake. A few claimed that choosing HR as a career was their biggest error. Hiring the wrong person was the answer given most often. These mistakes, however, struck us as the best excuses to get a drink after work:

1. Accidentally faxed a termination document to the employee, rather than to his manager.
2. Called the current employer of a job candidate instead of a reference.
3. Forgot to transfer money to the payroll account.
4. Left some paperwork about a layoff in the copier, where employees found it.
5. Miscalculated the bonus for an underperforming manager and paid him an extra $2,000.
6. Didn’t read the small print in the group life insurance policy I purchased.
7. Slept with the boss.
8. Tried to be a strategic partner in a completely dysfunctional organization.
9. Canceled an existing health insurance policy before a new policy took effect.
10. When my boss was feeling like a failure and asked my advice, I told her she should carve out a job she’d be good at.
11. Didn’t file the S-8 paperwork for the directors’ stock option plan, which made it impossible for them to exercise stock options.
12. Played with a new HRMS system and gave 850 employees a 5 percent raise. I didn’t think it went through until pay day. It took three people three days to correct the error.

Workforce, June 1999, Vol. 78, No. 6, p. 38.

Quick—which of these examples reflect HR as it really is: a) The CEO s inquiry about how pending collective bargaining agreements can be used to forward organizational goals; b) Laying off 40 people on Friday and needing to fill 60 jobs the following Monday; c) Binders for line managers that offer detailed guidance about performance reviews, training programs, recognition and more; d) The job applicant who explains that the government has put radio transmitters in her teeth; or e) A line of 80 people outside the HR department because their paychecks were incorrect.

It s a trick question, really—the answer is “all of the above.” In fact, we might have chosen any five of the thousands of anecdotes that were shared in response to our annual survey, “A Day in the Life of HR,” to make the same point: HR is part strategic thinking and part consulting, some administrative tasks and some crisis management. Those results are hardly surprising to even the most casual observer of HR. But it s one thing to think about these concepts in the abstract, and quite another to read anecdotes that bring them vividly to life.

Here s what the anecdotes and other survey data tell us: Business is more demanding than ever. Meeting those demands is taking an ever-greater toll on people. And HR—which must grapple with both realities and must often find a way to balance the demands that each reality poses—is today s toughest corporate job.

If you doubt it, spend a day with Kathy Davis. She s a fictional character, but the circumstances and events in Kathy s story are all drawn directly from the nearly 850 responses to the “Day in the Life of HR” survey. The “typical” Monday that Kathy faces after returning from her much-deserved vacation is exaggerated for dramatic effect and humor, but it offers an accurate picture of the breadth of HR s responsibilities and the challenges of the job.

If you still doubt that HR is today s toughest corporate job, spend the day with the six human resources professionals who allowed our writers to shadow them for a day. They work in organizations as disparate as E! Entertainment, Dole Foods, AirTouch and the United Nations. If Kathy s story shows the commonalities that characterize HR, these portraits make it clear that HR also is very much shaped by specific business goals and corporate values. The professionals we followed show passion, enthusiasm and commitment. HR may be challenging, but it also is hugely rewarding.

Last, but not least, we invite you to laugh and learn, to cry and cringe. Hundreds of you were willing to confess the biggest mistakes of your careers, to point fingers at clueless employees and CEOs, and to share memorable tales form the trenches. The best anecdotes are outlined throughout the report. Also see the results of the survey in this month s Workforce Extra.

This “Day in the Life of HR” special report is the first in a series of articles that will explore the human resources function at the end of the 20th century. In August, look for the results of The Official End-of-the-Millennium State-of-HR survey. The project, sponsored by Scantron, captures HR s attitudes about the profession, employees, corporate leadership and more.

In the meantime, we hope you find “A Day in the Life of HR” a day to remember.

Workforce, June 1999, Vol. 78, No. 6, pp. 32-33.

The obstacles that organizations facewhen they globally conduct business are daunting: political turmoil, economiccrises, complex labor laws, poor infrastructures and more. How ironic, then,that one of the greatest threats to business success comes from within: thefailure to effectively manage expatriate assignments. That failure is widespreadeven though expatriate assignments are the first step most companies take whenthey establish operations overseas, and despite the prevailing wisdom that thoseassignments routinely cost $1 million – or more.

    Evidence ofCorporate America’s failure is found throughout the results of “MeasuringExpatriate Success,” a survey of HR professionals recently conducted byWorkforce in conjunction with Valhalla, New York-based Prudential RelocationInternational. More than 300 professionals answered the survey, which looked atnumerous aspects of expatriate assignments. The results show that companies withexpatriate employees are generally providing pre-assignment support effectively. 

    But the results alsoshow several causes for concern. Many assignees are sent abroad without clearlydefined goals for the assignment. Costs are often not projected or measured.Women are almost completely overlooked for assignments. And the repatriationprocess is rocky, at best. It’s little wonder that the assignment failure rateis significant, or that companies lose many repatriated employees within a yearof their return. 

    Given the importanceof expatriate assignments, why are the problems so widespread? According to theexperts in global HR that Workforce spoke with, the reasons are plentiful:internal corporate politics, cultural issues, family concerns and more. 

    The problems alsoreflect the fact that in most organizations, HR has a limited (or nonexistent)role in expatriate selection, management and repatriation. Instead, HR’s roleis primarily administrative support. That’s true even in organizations inwhich some HR staff members are dedicated solely to international issues. 

    Clearly, HR has yetto become a full strategic partner in all aspects of the business. Much of thework that is now routinely done within HR relative to domestic issues has yet tobe applied to offshore operations. The good news is that HR has a powerfulopportunity to make a real impact on businesses expanding abroad. To have thatimpact, HR must begin at the beginning: with selection. 

HR’s role is limited
    There are manybusiness reasons for sending employees on an expatriate assignment. Respondentscited more than 11 different objectives for assignments, including opening newmarkets, transferring skills, facilitating a merger or acquisition, and settingup new technologies and systems. Given the breadth of purpose, it isn’tsurprising that many types of employees are being sent abroad. (It’s importantto note that the study looked at employees sent from their home country toanother country on company assignment. Therefore, some expatriates are citizensof other countries coming into the United States.) 

    Middle managers arethe employees selected for assignment most often. But the list also includessenior managers, sales staff, engineers, IS programmers, scientists and HRprofessionals. 

    What is surprisingis the selection process. The overwhelming priority in selecting candidates istheir technical, management or other job-related skills. Almost 100 percent ofrespondents cited skills as the “most important” or a “very important”consideration in selection. A candidate’s personality traits – adaptability,flexibility or preference for autonomy – are given much lower priority, eventhough personality traits often play a larger role in an employee’s success atadapting to a new culture and working productively. 

    “Even thoughpeople probably have seen enough failed assignments, there isn’t a lot ofrecognition that there are different skills needed for internationalassignments,” says Kevin Oakley, international HR manager for PhillipsPetroleum Co. in Bartles Bille, Oklahoma. 

    Fewer thantwo-thirds of respondents said that personality is a very importantconsideration in expat selection, and 11 percent said it has little or noimportance. Family issues (such as spouse’s dual career concerns, the healthof family members or concerns for children) are the lowest priority. Just overone-third of respondents said family issues are important, while 25 percent saidthey aren’t important. 

    The relatively lowpriority of family issues in the decision-making process is somewhat surprisingbecause respondents report that accompanied employees (those on assignment withtheir spouse or domestic partner and/or children) are slower to becomeproductive on assignment and leave their organizations in greater numbers afterrepatriating. 

    The emphasis ontechnical skills (“hard data”) over “soft” issues (such as job fit orpersonality) in the selection process may reflect the discouraging reality thatof all the constituencies involved in the selection process, HR has the leastinfluence on the decision. 

    The primaryselection roles are played by senior management (such as the CEO), line managersin the country of origin, and line managers in the destination country – eachwas identified as playing the most significant or a very important role by 60 to65 percent of respondents. Functional managers were cited as most important orvery important by 55 percent of respondents. (Figures total more than 100percent because respondents were asked to identify everyone who played a role inthe selection process and to weigh their importance in the process.) 

    In contrast, HR wascited by just 31 percent as playing the most important or a very important rolein selection. A stunning 34 percent report that HR plays very little or no rolein the process. The results weren’t any more encouraging when respondents wereasked to specify HR’s role in the selection process. Five percent report thatHR has no role at all. Almost two-thirds say HR “serves in an advisorycapacity only.” A small but significant number (almost 20 percent) “presenta group of candidates from which the selection is made.” Just 7 percent havethe “authority to veto a selection,” while a tiny 3.5 percent actuallyselects employees for overseas assignments. 

    Of course, it’snot always appropriate for HR to select candidates for assignments abroad. “HRis here to support the business manager, but not really to make those decisionsfor them,” says Jerry Strickert, manager of international assignments forDallas-based EDS. 

    Brenda Spilker,director of HR planning and development for Calgary-based Suncor Energy Inc.,agrees, noting that usually HR doesn’t have final accountability for theselection. “Project managers want the final accountability for thedecision,” she says. 

    But they agree thatHR should still be involved. “The best way for HR to be involved is really tomake the tools available and to try to get involved early on in the selectionprocess,” says Oakley. 

    He suggests usingtools to help employees self-select for assignments. “Everyone wants aninternational assignment, but they really don’t know what’s involved untilafter they’ve accepted it,” he says. Even a simple questionnaire for theemployee and family members can help raise the issues they’ll face livingabroad, Oakley says. 

    Strickert takes it astep further. EDS encourages employees who are interested in an overseasassignment to assess their own skills and readiness. The employee’s currentmanager is then encouraged to use a behavioral interviewing tool to assess thecandidate. In three major business units at EDS, that process yields a pool ofpotential candidates from which assignees can be chosen. 

    However, in mostorganizations, HR’s current value is in providing pre-departure services toexpatriates and their families. In that role, HR is largely successful. Mostexpats are given a wide variety of support, including a pre-assignmenthome-finding trip, language training and cultural preparation. 

    Therefore, employeesare generally well prepared for their assignments. However, what they’reexpected to do is often an open question. 

Assignment goals and costs often areunclear
    Although the averageexpat assignment lasts 2.7 years and costs hundreds of thousands of dollars,there’s still a large gap between identifying the broad business purpose (suchas opening a new market or facilitating a merger) and setting specific goals forthe assignment. 

    Just 33.5 percent ofrespondents say their organization always sets measurable goals for assignments.Another 22.5 percent set measurable goals 75 percent of the time. But almost athird (31 percent) set measurable goals half the time or less. And a shocking 13percent say measurable goals are never set for expat assignments. 

    Respondentsacknowledge inadequate planning is a problem. Almost two-thirds of respondentssay that the lack of a defined goal has impeded the success of assignments, andanother 57 percent say ambiguity in communicating the goal to the assignee hasbeen a problem. 

    So why does theproblem persist? Some organizations get so focused on the logistics of theassignment that its purpose gets lost in the shuffle. “I’m working with acompany right now that is sending its first expatriate,” says Carrie Shearer,a consultant with The Thobe Group in Dallas. “I had a hard time getting thecompany to understand that it was important to specify what the person wasexpected to be doing. They eventually realized they wouldn’t want to get onthe plane if they didn’t know why they were going.” 

    In other situations,the company may have set goals. “Sometimes what happens is the sending companythinks they’ve set a goal, but when the person actually gets to the location,they find out that’s not what the company actually needs,” says Shearer, whowas a global HR professional with CalTex for almost 18 years and has been anexpatriate herself. 

    Because there arealmost always two constituencies involved in an assignment – the sending companyand the host – there can be disagreements between them. Shearer says the clientthat was about to send its first expat discovered during the preparation phasethat the sending organization and the company accepting the assignee haddifferent ideas about the purpose of the assignment. 

    That situation wasresolved, but in some cases, the antipathy lingers. Goals may be unclear, saysone HR professional, because employees in the host country don’t really wantthe expat, or see him or her as temporary and, therefore, unworthy of the timeand effort required to set and measure goals. 

    But the distance canmanifest itself in other ways, too. “The sending organization can’t alwaysset the goals,” says Malou Roth, vice president, human resources training anddevelopment for Molex, winner of 1999’s Workforce Optimas Award for GlobalOutlook. 

    To illustrate thepoint, she mentions a hypothetical situation in which a marketing professionalis being sent to Germany. HR may have a broad outline of what he or she issupposed to accomplish. But specific goals, relative to account management,customer service and market share, are likely to be set in Germany. “I reallydon’t need to know the details in Chicago,” she says. 

    Ultimately, howspecific the goals for an assignment are, and who sets them, are very muchdriven by the broad purpose of the assignment, how much experience a company haswith expatriates, and where the company is in its life cycle. It may also beaffected by the location of the assignment – the experts note that goal setting,in the American sense, isn’t part of the culture in some other parts of theworld. 

    When goals are set,once again HR plays a minor role. Respondents say that senior management in thedestination country is involved most often in setting goals (63 percent reportthat such is the case in their organizations). Others involved include seniormanagement in the home country (cited by 48 percent), line managers (46percent), employees themselves (39 percent) and department managers (29percent). HR was cited as playing a role in goal setting by just 16 percent ofrespondents. 

    Those involved insetting goals are also the people who measure them, and in very similar numbers.Again, HR’s role is smallest – only 16 percent of respondents say HR plays anyrole in measuring the goals. Most often, goals are measured annually (by 74percent of respondents), but in some instances every six months (22 percent).Almost half of respondents (45 percent) say that goals are sometimesre-evaluated and altered. Equal percentages of respondents (33 percent) say thatif goals are unmet, then assignments are extended until the goal is met or,conversely, assignments are curtailed if goals are met early. 

    HR’s peripheralinvolvement in setting and measuring goals is reflected in the actions taken inresponse to measurement. Mid-assignment interventions that take best advantageof HR’s expertise are relatively rare. The most common – cited by 38 percentof respondents – is to implement a performance management strategy. But only 13percent of respondents say that job training is offered to expats who aren’tmeeting goals, and only 8 percent say that cross-cultural training is used as anintervention.

    With goal-settingroutine in just one-third of organizations, it shouldn’t be surprising thatcosts often aren’t projected, either. Only about 40 percent of respondents saythat their organizations project both direct and indirect costs of expatriateassignments. Another 30 percent say they project direct costs only. But asurprising 17 percent report that whether they project costs depends on theassignment and the managers involved. And 14 percent don’t project any costs. 

    Lance Richards,director of international staff for Irving, Texas-based GTE International,“can’t imagine” business environments in which direct costs aren’tcarefully projected. HR partners at GTE calculate costs from the outset. Forexample, if the business-development division is developing a project inBotswana, HR will calculate the cost of an assignment including everything frompre-assignment assessment to housing, utilities and repatriation costs. 

    “On the front end,we can say this expatriate assignment is going to cost us X dollars,” Richardssays. “That’s very valuable to business-development people. It helps themanswer the question, ‘Can we make a profit on this?’” 

    But even when costsare projected, they’re often irrelevant. Almost one-third of respondents saytheir organizations never compare the actual cost of an assignment to theprojected costs. About 70 percent of respondents say comparisons are madebetween projected and actual costs, usually during the assignment. 

    Collectively, thesenumbers show that only about one-third of all expatriate assignments havemeasurable goals and fully complete projected costs. About one in sevenexpatriates are sent abroad with no articulated goal, and with no projection ofthe assignment’s cost. The rest of assignments are somewhere in between. 

    Almost nodemographic slice holds a monopoly on good or bad expat management. Settinggoals and projecting costs (or failing to) doesn’t correlate to company size,expat population, size of the HR function, number of HR professionals dedicatedto international issues, or years of experience in managing expats. In fact, theonly reliable predictor of effectiveness in managing expats is industry:Companies in education and legal or management consulting have by far the besttrack record, while those in oil, gas, mining and chemicals have by far theworst. 

    Given theuniversality of the issues, it shouldn’t be surprising that the failure ratefor assignments is high. 

    In definingassignment failure, several scenarios were evaluated. Respondents assigned thegreatest importance to damaged relationships with clients/vendors; 69 percentsaid it’s the “most important” or a “very important” factor indefining a failed assignment. The next greatest importance in defining a failedassignment was given to an expatriate’s decision to return home early (62percent cited it as “most important” or “very important”), followed byfailing to meet revenue goals (59 percent report that it is most or veryimportant).

    Least importance indefining failure was given to an expat’s inability to replace him- or herselfwith a local hire (just 30 percent said it was most or very important). 

    Using all thesepossible scenarios to define the problem, 75 percent of respondents report atleast some failed assignments in their organizations. The greatest number ofrespondents (28 percent) report a failure rate between 10 to 19 percent. Butsome organizations have been particularly unsuccessful: 5 percent report thatmore than half of their expat assignments have failed, and 2 percent say thatall their assignments have been failures. 

    Given the relativescarcity of expatriate assignments (the average responding organization has3,200 employees and 24 expatriates), each assignment is clearly important. Eachfailed assignment is costly and potentially very significant. It’s clear thatresources are being squandered on overseas assignments. And even greaterproblems arise involving repatriation. 

Repatriation gets less attention
    When it comes timeto repatriate employees, the same one-third of organizations who set goals andproject costs also plan the return home: They have a plan in place before theassignment begins. 

    Other organizationsaren’t so effective. One in four don’t begin formal repatriation discussions(to address not only the move home, but next job assignments, as well) untilthree to six months before the end of the assignment. But 4 percent wait untilonly two months before the return to discuss it, and a whopping 27 percent ofrespondents say their organizations may not have a repatriation discussion atall. 

    Expats oftenaren’t given much notice before the move home, either. Although 42 percent ofrespondents say that their expats are given 3 to 6 months notice, 14 percent saythat expats get two months notice or less – and 18 percent say that expats getno formal notice at all. 

    Organizations alsoare much less likely to offer help to employees as they return home than theywere given at the outset of the assignment, despite the fact that experts saythe return home can be just as great an adjustment. Almost three-fourths ofrespondents say that expats are given home-finding assistance when they return.But only 30 percent say that employees receive orientation counseling (toaddress such issues as the financial implications of a return), and only 21percent report providing career counseling. 

    “The perception isthat if you are coming back home, you shouldn’t have any difficulties,” saysFranchette Richards, manager of the human capital services area for ArthurAndersen. “Companies are unaware of the very real, very painful things thathappen to an expat coming home.” 

    Expatriatesreturning home find that “both their personal and professional lives havechanged,” says Franchette Richards. After being autonomous and pursuing a WildWest means of getting things done, expats return to bureaucratic red tape.“They feel stifled,” she says. “They aren’t allowed to use theircreativity.” In addition, they often face family difficulties at home. Shesays that companies need to look at what they offer employees when theyrepatriate, citing counseling and a career plan as particularly important. 

    In some instances,that happens. GTE’s Lance Richards says his organization gives expatriatesinformation about their return before they leave. Richards describes arepatriation matrix, which includes time frames for the return process up totheir placement in a new job. “The key to successful expat assignments, asidefrom the good selection process, is managing expectations,” he says. 

    Too often, thatdoesn’t happen. Repatriation plans – along with a solid selection process,effective goal setting and realistic cost projections – are happening in only aminority of companies. Consequently, the failure rate for assignments is high.As market pressures and a tight labor market escalate, failure is a luxury thatfew companies will be able to afford. Managing assignments for success isimperative, and HR has an unprecedented opportunity to get involved and to makea real impact. 

    “It’s a case ofold-school HR versus new-school HR,” Richards says. “Old school is where HRdoes what it does and no one really knows what’s going on. New school is anintegrated, business-partner approach, in which we’re closely involved andaccountable for numbers.” 

Workforce,April 1999, Vol. 78, No. 4, pp. 42-48 SubscribeNow!

If you’re an expatriate, it’s stillvery much a man’s world. Although survey respondents represent every industryand organizations of all sizes, and although employees in several types of jobsare sent on assignments, the overwhelming majority of expats are men. In theaverage organization, 90 percent of expats are men.

    But the glassceiling becomes even more apparent when respondents answer questions abouteligibility. Of employees who are eligible for an expatriate assignment,respondents say that 71 percent are men. In organizations with a list ofidentified employees from which assignments are made, 75 percent are men. Giventhat women constitute approximately half the workforce, these numbers arealarming. 

    But the news getsworse. Despite the eligibility numbers, only one woman is actually offered anassignment for every ten men who are offered one. In other words, the number ofwomen offered assignments is consistent with the number of women expats onassignment. But that number represents fewer than half of those who areeligible. 

    There doesn’tappear to be any business reason for the discrimination, either. Respondents saythat women accept assignments at a greater rate than men do (90 percent of menaccept versus 99 percent of women). Women are also less likely to return earlyand have a greater assignment success rate. 

    So why are women sounderrepresented? Some experts attribute it to a perception that family issuesare a greater concern for women. Others see it a reflection of the belief thatwomen fare less well in certain countries or cultures. 

    Although one HRprofessional admitted, “I don’t know if I would want to be the first on myblock to send a woman to Japan to do marketing,” others downplayed thecultural barriers. “I think it’s more an American perception than areality,” says Carrie Shearer. “Women will have a great deal of difficultyin Arab cultures. But if they are set up properly, women can be quite successfulin Asia, Africa, and even South America.” 

    Malou Roth suggeststhat the situation may be driven more by domestic concerns than internationalones. She says that some organizations, concerned about their affirmative actionprograms, are less likely to send women or minorities abroad than to developthem at home. Because there also may be a perception that expatriates are offthe radar screen at home, organizations may choose not to send high-potentialwomen away for two years. “I think that a lot of people really feel that womenhave a better chance of accelerating their career growth in the UnitedStates.” 

    Franchette Richardssays that that’s even more likely to be true in some organizations than inothers. She says that women are more likely to be selected in newerorganizations, and less likely in industries in which men have traditionallydominated, such as oil or gas. 

    In any case, ifcompanies are to have long-term success in the global marketplace, they can’tcontinue to overlook half the workforce. 

Workforce,April 1999, Vol. 78, No. 4, p. 46 SubscribeNow!

Money. In many ways, we talk about it more than any other subject. During the first week of January, the time at which I’m writing this, money seems to be the only thing people are talking about: The stock market has, once again, soared to record highs. The euro has just been introduced, setting the stage for a unified European economy. The basketball season has just been saved by an agreement between the millionaire players and the owners.

You get the idea. In some ways, our discussion of money is incessant. It shouldn’t be surprising that much of this month’s issue is also about money: Overtime pay, incentive pay and so on. The reason is clear enough: You can’t afford to ignore your fiscal responsibility to the organization. Therefore, we can’t ignore it, either.

But for all our talk about money in an abstract sense, or about other people’s money in particular, some subjects remain taboo. I’d be willing to bet, well, money that you’re more likely to talk about your religious beliefs, your politics or even intimate details about your personal relationships than you are to talk about how much money you make. We hate to talk about salaries.

When we do talk, we’re more likely to whine or complain than anything else. For example, employees at a local department store are about to vote on whether to unionize. The leader of the pro-union movement explained to the local newspaper that she is pushing the issue because she hasn’t had a raise in three years. On vacation recently, I heard a tirade from a bus driver, about to vote on a strike authorization, about how little he earns. The media has been full of stories about the growing wage gap, the lost earning power of the middle class, and inflated CEOsalaries. There also is ongoing coverage of the persistent reality that women often earn less than men do.

Yet for all the huffing and puffing about wages, no one talks about the real issue: What is work-any work-worth? Is Tom Cruise worth $20 million per movie? How much more is a good secretary worth than a mediocre one? Do we really believe that teachers are worth less than professional volleyball players?

Who knows? None of us knows because we don’t talk about it. We’ve never even tried to answer those questions. There’s no consensus about wages, and so we all look at the situation from our own point of view. Because there is no context in which to think about it, we conclude that everybody else earns too much and we earn too little.

Am I oversimplifying? Only slightly. As a society, we’re truly terrible about discussing things we don’t want to talk about. Sex and death are two subjects that come to mind. Wages are another. Until we have real dialogue, and reach consensus and understanding, we will continue to face anger and confusion about money, and HR jobs will be tougher.

Perhaps the questions can’t ever really be answered. But think about the issue another way: What would it be worth to get the answers, and to never have to deal with ugly salary problems again?

Workforce, February 1999, Vol. 78, No. 2, p. 8.