Rick Bell – Page 38

May 28, 2019June 29, 2023

A Collective Concept for Conflict Resolution

All kinds of personal issues at work escalate into conflicts, and we usually resolve them privately.

Making the process public is a recipe for awkward, messy feelings, isn’t it?

Maybe not.

My consulting firm recently experimented with working through a conflict between two staff members in a collective way. That positive experience, along with insights from our culture work with clients and other research suggests we need to rethink the way we resolve interpersonal clashes in the workplace. In particular, there are four reasons why in many cases we should shift to collective conflict resolution.

And when we do, we help our organizations “go horizontal” — move toward non-hierarchical cultures that I and others see as the future of work.

The four reasons for resolving conflicts publicly are:

1. People feel safer to communicate. How can you feel safer with a bunch of people observing you? Because individuals can stretch truths and even (ouch) sometimes full-out lie. When there are witnesses, those behaviors are less likely. One of my colleagues who has experimented with a group approach to conflict resolution puts it this way: “Having witnesses helps me work my way through my emotions and communicate in the most precise and exact way I can.”

2. Conflict is usually wider than the pair being mediated. When we are upset with a situation we often talk about it to others. This usually leads to a one-sided perspective and some emotional offloading. If I go into a private room and experience a successful mediation process, those people who have been pulled into the conflict are still feeling it. The conflict still exists in others and can linger and return, like hot coals. If we acknowledge that conflict is in the system, we should invite those involved in the system to witness the untangling of it. That puts out the conflict “out” properly.

3. When a tension gets untangled it usually ends with solutions. If a conflict is settled privately it puts a lot of pressure on those in the situation to handle the follow up on their own. But if the resolution process is public, everyone understands the situation more fully and understands what else must be done. This generates a sense of mutual support. If you aren’t there to witness the untangling, you miss out on creating that help system and feeling shared responsibility thereafter.

4. Well-resolved conflicts can have a bigger societal impact. When people work out differences in a positive way, it can lead to profound change that ripples beyond the individuals involved. Author Diane Musho Hamilton notes that every tension with another person is an opportunity to transform the conflict into “patience, mutual understanding, and creativity.” She continues: “When we use the opportunity, we contribute to the shared endeavor of learning how to live peacefully with each other.”

When we see interpersonal conflicts at work as inevitable, as connected to wider systems and as a chance to cultivate a more nonviolent human race, we start to see why they may not be suited for hidden encounters between just two people. Or two people and a mediator. When quarrels are privately addressed, they not only carry a whiff of shame to them, they are lost opportunities. Why shouldn’t we bring the advantages of the full team to these snags, and allow the team to receive the full benefits of straightening them out — with positive outcomes spreading outward from every individual witnessing the work?

This rippling out gets at how collective conflict resolution helps organizations become more horizontal. By horizontal cultures, I’m referring to workplaces that are characterized by a focus on purpose, by transparency, by employees participating in decision-making and by relationships that are more deeply human than the transactional ones often found in traditional, top-down organizations.

Any two individuals involved in a spat are typically part of a wider social web. Treating the conflict as an opportunity to heal not just their immediate rift but strengthen the broader community reinforces an organization’s commitment to horizontal principles.

And those principles are increasingly vital to success. Hierarchical organizations are proving too slow and stultifying to solve today’s problems. Examples of companies embracing flatter, more participatory structures range from computer chip maker and artificial intelligence leader Nvidia to tomato processor Morning Star to Dutch home health care provider Buurtzorg Nederland. As these and other organizations show, the future of work is in flatter, horizontal cultures.

Publicly resolving conflicts in your organization can help you go horizontal, too.

May 27, 2019June 29, 2023

A History Lesson for #FixItSHRM Followers

Nearly a decade ago a well-intentioned group of HR leaders banded together to dispute several Society for Human Resource Management policies.

Not just some radical fringe group, the SHRM Members for Transparency questioned issues tarnishing the organization’s integrity, from doubling board members’ annual honoraria to allowing reimbursement for business-class travel to wanting more board members who carried HR credentials.

These veteran HR leaders had the pull to garner media attention as well as that of SHRM’s membership. And that caught SHRM’s attention. For a while, anyway.

Fast-forward to 2019 and we find a loose-knit group of today’s HR professionals taking to social media to dispute SHRM’s ties with the Trump administration and relationships with politically conservative companies, most notably the right-leaning Koch Industries. Like the transparency group, these are issues they believe harm SHRM’s reputation and mission. The objectors call themselves #fixitSHRM.

As we approach SHRM 2019 in mid-June in Las Vegas, #fixitSHRM’s protests aren’t aimed so much at internal SHRM policies as the perception of what SHRM represents.

The #fixitSHRM movement traces back to last August when relative unknown HR practitioner Victorio Milian originated the hashtag. Later that fall he fired off a string of tweets explaining the hashtag’s purpose to protest SHRM CEO Johnny C. Taylor Jr. and SHRM leadership embracing the “white supremacist Republican administration.”

Illustrated by a smiling Taylor — now in his second year as SHRM’s CEO — shaking hands with President Trump, Milian’s tweets continued, saying, “@johnnyctaylorjr shaking the current U.S. President’s hand was the spark that lit the #fixitSHRM movement. @SHRM’s ongoing silence to its members who are (rightfully, in my opinion), angry and disappointed about this alliance continues to keep the fire burning. … In my opinion, @SHRM’s alliance does not represent the ethical leadership that #HRpros should be demonstrating.”

Milian’s movement has garnered plenty of online support. Among many others, @k_boulder tweeted in mid-April, “Altered videos to promote racist tropes fanning the flames of hatred, & direction to underlings to break the law, promising no consequences. Ready to renounce this partnership yet, SHRM? #fixitSHRM”.

<blockquote class=”twitter-tweet”><p lang=”en” dir=”ltr”>Altered videos to promote racist tropes fanning the flames of hatred, & direction to underlings to break the law, promising no consequences. Ready to renounce this partnership yet, SHRM? <a href=”https://twitter.com/hashtag/fixitshrm?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw”>#fixitshrm</a></p>— Kelly (@k_boulder) <a href=”https://twitter.com/k_boulder/status/1117042317653757952?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw”>April 13, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src=”https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js” charset=”utf-8″></script>

It’s also caught SHRM’s attention to the extent where Taylor doubled down on affirming SHRM’s relationship with the Trump administration as well as SHRM’s affiliation with Koch Industries, according to HRDive.

That doesn’t necessarily bode well for #fixitSHRM’s quest. Still, questioning the motives of SHRM’s relationship with those who do not share or represent their values — and in the larger picture the values HR should practice in every workplace — is inherently a good thing.

I get their frustration. The Trump administration has done most everything you don’t want in a company: constant turmoil and turnover among senior leadership, shunning of D&I, and if recent reports are true, attempting to dismantle the Office of Personnel Management, the federal government’s HR department for civilian employees.

And your HR association is complicit with that? I’d be angry, too.

Taylor’s response though makes it clear that sniping through social media won’t change anything, especially with the 800-pound gorilla known as SHRM. They won’t alter relationships because a social media crusade dislikes their ties with the Trump administration and a financial deal with Koch Industries. I’d also wager that a majority of SHRM members either don’t care, are completely oblivious or actually agree with SHRM’s business dealings.

That means #fixitSHRM’s options to modify SHRM’s operations are limited. But history may hold lessons that could offer them hope for change.

The transparency group had the presence and panache to draw SHRM into two meetings. SHRM then abruptly chose to stop meeting. One transparency group member told Workforce at the time, “Their tactic was delay, delay, delay. We realized that they weren’t going to change.” Disappointing, but if #fixitSHRM is serious they can still push for face time. It’s happened before.

If you can’t get SHRM’s attention in the board room, there’s always the ballot box.

“A SHRM member told me, ‘If you want to change the society, the way you should do it is change the board,’ ” said Mike Losey, a former SHRM president and founding member of the transparency group in a 2011 Workforce interview.

Muster a slate of candidates, continue your barrage on social media and get out the vote. It’s a long shot. And FYI, the transparency group’s candidates never achieved its goal.

History offers a sobering realization that it will take more than a social media campaign to create change. Study the past, #fixitSHRM. Blend it with what you know and perhaps you’ll succeed where Members for Transparency couldn’t.

May 24, 2019June 29, 2023

The Precarious Legalities of Socially Conscious Workplace Policies

More and more employers are adopting socially conscious practices that impact the manner in which the employer operates.

My firm’s headquarters are in a Certified LEED “green building.” Generally, companies in such buildings commit to reducing the use of plasticware.

In July 2018, American Airlines and Starbucks announced they will no longer use plastic straws. But, how far can and should these practices go? Could a company in a Certified LEED green building refuse a reimbursement request from an employee who had a business meal at a restaurant that uses only plasticware? Could American Airlines or Starbucks discipline an employee who was caught using a plastic straw at work? Likely, yes.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act protects employees from discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex and national origin. The American with Disabilities Act protects employees with disabilities; the Age Discrimination in Employment Act prohibits age discrimination.

But there is no employment law protecting an employee’s right to use plastic.

Should an employer’s “social consciousness” go that far? While an employer may legally be permitted to influence employee behavior by disciplinary enforcement of the employers’ socially conscious policies, should it do so? Let’s address socially motivated policies that may be legally permissible as well as questions employers should consider when determining whether such policies are good business practices.

Considerations for Employers

Shared workspaces provider WeWork recently announced that it is imposing a companywide ban on all meat. As part of the ban, the company announced it will no longer reimburse employees for meals that include red meat, poultry and pork (presumably fish and seafood are OK). Failed startup Juicero reportedly had refused to reimburse the cost of any business meals other than meals at vegan restaurants.

What about the employees who see nothing wrong with eating meat? Or with eating at a non-vegan restaurant? There is no law entitling employees to the right to eat meat (or eat non-vegan), so technically these policies are legal. While one could conjure up some possible “selective enforcement” argument that it is unfair, the practice is not likely unlawful (though in some very few instances it could run afoul of stringent state laws on reimbursing employees who spend their own funds for business purposes).

But are they advisable? Are employers who are implementing these socially conscious policies actually creating a more positive workplace culture? Or, are they inviting cries of hypocrisy from those who think they do not go far enough or cries of unfairness from those who think they go too far?

“These policies are easily attacked as hypocritical. WeWork, for example, claims its policy of not reimbursing for meals with meat supports sustainability. But what about the use of plasticware? Or what about car allowances only for electric vehicles? Without a policy on the use of plastic or about gas vehicles, is their sustainability stance pure or merely selective?

What of taking this benefit from those who see nothing wrong with meat? Or worse, what about the workplace morale of an employee whose family owns a cattle farm that produces beef? Perhaps that was the only way the family could afford to support themselves or send the children to college, and perhaps the family even supports other meaningful causes with its income from cattle. And, what of our culture’s “no one should tell others what to do” individualism?

Also read: Welcome To The Era of the Activist CEO

The professed sustainability purpose, on the one hand, or the professed “inclusiveness” and camaraderie of the workplace environment on the other hand, can only reach so far. Both the purists and those excluded for not having “right” ideas are marginalized.

How Employers Should Move Forward

So where does this leave us? Certainly, employers should take into consideration employee rights and employment laws in having socially conscious policies that reach so far as to attempt to impact employee behavior. But the harder question is whether employers should make such attempts.

The answer is nuanced, and often the very purposes an employer seeks to serve with these policies have unintended consequences that weaken, rather than strengthen, employee morale or a greater purpose of workplace “culture.”

One other point deserves mention. Do employers make these decisions based on principle or on a market analysis? Are these decisions borne of a desire to cultivate a healthy workplace community by being part of a bigger, socially conscious vision?

Or, are these market-based decisions borne primarily of a desire to use social consciousness as a marketing tool? For example, what if we learned that WeWork, when first deciding on this policy, had conducted market research predicting that such a decision to adopt a vegetarian stance would enhance customer loyalty and market penetration and consequently increase revenue, and that this research was the primary driver of its decision? Would this socially conscious principle lose its power?

Also read: Charitable Holiday Season Best Practices for Employers

A principled decision often sees the bigger vision of work as an attempt to cultivate deeper meaning beyond a cost-benefit economic analysis. Such decisions can have a powerful positive impact on the workplace.

But, the market-based approach, the view that we should be socially conscious because it is good for business and a great marketing strategy, can certainly backfire. It is impossible to promote selflessness by touting its selfish benefits.

May 24, 2019June 29, 2023

The Ongoing Struggle to Lower Health Care Costs for Employers and Employees

It’s the human resources dilemma: how to balance what’s best for the business with what’s best for employees.

The place where you feel it the most? Medical benefit costs. With health care costs increasing nationally, HR is stuck in the middle trying to decide between savings for the company and easing the cost burden on employees.

Finding new strategies to lower costs is a constant challenge — one that doesn’t always prove fruitful. Employers that tried 14 or more tactics to curb rising health benefit costs, such as having healthy food choices available or offering onsite fitness facilities, only realized .4 percent savings, according to a recent Mercer survey. That’s a lot of work for little payoff.

Barry Rose, superintendent of Cumberland School District in Wisconsin, cycled through numerous health plans in the last six years, none of which struck the right balance between saving the district money and satisfying employees. “I couldn’t keep taking money out of the budget to spend on health insurance. Our district needs that $2 million for a new high school and teacher salaries.”

One hidden culprit behind the health benefits struggle? High-deductible health plans. Today’s average deductible is $3,000. Yet, many Americans don’t have $400 in savings to cover medical costs.

Deductibles often are preventing people from seeking the care they need. Due to cost, 44 percent of Americans say they avoided the doctor last year when they were sick or injured. In addition to lower company morale, care avoidance is costing businesses a lot of money. Illness-related productivity losses cost employers $530 billion on top of the $880 billion they spent on health benefits in 2018.

When J&E Manufacturing Co., a custom metal manufacturing company in the Midwest, learned from their existing health insurance provider their premiums were set to balloon over 30 percent in 2019 along with a deductible of $6,500, Ha Nguyen, corporate human resources manager, took a hard look at alternatives for their 200 employees.

“I couldn’t stand before our employees and tell them that,” said Nguyen, “It would upset most people, and we would risk some of them deciding to explore the marketplace to find a different job. Manufacturing is in a talent shortage right now, so we can’t afford to lose employees.”

With unemployment at an all-time low, it’s a candidate’s market; they have negotiating leverage and little tolerance for inferior benefits. Recruiters are struggling to offer attractive new incentives — commuter reimbursement, stock options, and personal trainers. Between the 14 tactics to lower costs and the myriad efforts to attract and retain talent, human resource professionals are juggling a lot.

HR managers need solutions that lower everyone’s health care costs and also promote compelling talent acquisition and retention. How can they do that? By giving employees what they want:

Clarity on what care is covered.
Clarity on the exact cost for that care.

Employees want access to both those things before they obtain care, not weeks after. When employees have access to these things in their health insurance plan, it can drive down costs for the employer.

Both J&E and Cumberland found such a solution in on-demand health insurance, a new model of health insurance that gives employees more control. Instead of a deductible and unpredictable costs, they have simple copays, easy coverage verification, and price certainty before they step foot into a doctor’s office.

“Our employees became better consumers because they see exactly what they’re paying for care,” Rose said. Seventy percent of members on the plan spent less than $500 in total copays — that’s one-sixth the cost of the average deductible.

And they have a compelling new advantage to attract talent.

“Top tier labor is hard to find. When people look at our benefits package and compare it to others, they see our plan is superior,” said Nguyen. “In the past, I just glossed over the health insurance plan during interviews. Now, it’s one of the first things I mention.”

Take some time to evaluate your current health insurance offering. Are you feeling like you are trapped between your employees and your C-suite? You don’t have to be. It’s time to make health care easy and affordable, and it’s time to empower your employees to make informed care choices.

May 22, 2019September 5, 2023

Welcome to Your Employee Communication Road Map

Road maps are a form of content that will help you navigate key areas of people management. Each road map includes an orientation guide that gives a high-level overview of the subject as well as articles and other resources that provide more detailed directions on how to find your way to success. This road map focuses on the changing terrain of employee communication. The orientation guide below will get you started, and we invite you to see other Workforce road maps by visiting workforce.com/roadmaps.

Effective employee communication is the foundation of a good human resources program. Setting guidelines for how and when to communicate with employees, and what you are going to say sets the tone for the company culture and paves the way for business success. However, most companies — even big global firms — often leave this important element of human resource management to chance.

Only 20 percent of organizations have an internal communications role somewhere within their HR department, according to a 2018 Newsweaver study. In other organizations this role falls to sales and marketing teams, individual managers or no one in particular.

“They just let the communication culture emerge, and assume everyone knows what to do,” said Craig Johnson, partner in Mercer’s Career Business focusing on communication and technology. “That’s not the right approach.”

This “do-it-yourself” attitude leads to mixed messages, missed opportunities to engage, and a negative communication experience when employees are deluged with messages from management that they eventually just tune out, according to Rachel Miller, director of All Things IC, an internal communications consultancy.

“Internal communications should be part of your business strategy and plan,” she said. It ensures that internal messaging is consistent, relevant to the brand, and reflective of the company culture and business goals. “Every message should reflect what the company is trying to achieve.”

If you don’t have a communication plan — or haven’t reviewed yours in years — this road map will help you get started.

PART 1: Make a Plan

Put someone in charge. A communication strategy needs a leader, said Johnson. Putting someone from HR in change of the overarching company communication plan ensures a consistent tone and prevents disparate, confusing or conflicting information bombarding employees from all sides.

Identify stakeholders. Effective employee communication requires planning and buy-in from leaders across the organization. Miller suggests bringing together a cross functional team of executives, HR leaders, managers and employees to write the plan and ensure it aligns with the corporate vision.

Define your goals. A good communication plan links communication strategies to the purpose of the company, its mission and its vision. “Don’t just copy the words off a vision statement,” Miller warned. Really think about what the company is trying to do and how internal communication supports those goals.

Consider your audience. It’s not enough to know what information you want to send, you need to customize it for the reader. If you are announcing a merger, the information you share with front-line workers or IT teams will be far different from the messages you send to VPs and managers. “Understanding your audience is how you get the right information to the right people at the right time so that they can do their jobs,” Miller said.

Choose your channels. Do your employees read emails every day? Visit the company portal? Communicate via Slack? “It’s easy to attach a document to an email, but if three-fourths of your employees won’t click on it, what is the point?” Johnson said. Understanding how, where and when employees want to engage with company content will increase the chance that your messages will get read.

Create a calendar. Large companies may have dozens of vendors sending information to employees about benefits packages, 401(k) plans, insurance offerings, etc. If they all send messages at the same time it creates a tremendous amount of noise, Johnson said. To reduce the deluge, he advises clients to audit all communications — including vendor messages — then eliminate the ones that aren’t necessary, and create a schedule for those that are. “A plan helps you think through what you are sending instead of always reacting.”

He suggests organizing messages into three categories:

Annual events: Messages related to benefits enrollment and updates about annual meetings can be scheduled months in advance.
Ad hoc scheduled events. These include one-time scheduled events, including information about workshops, announcement about technology upgrades or reminders to complete required training.
Ad hoc unplanned events. Leave some space in the calendar for urgent messages that can’t wait.

Remember, Johnson added, “even if emails from vendors are part of the service, if the message isn’t useful it won’t add value.”

PART 2: Start Communicating

Customize each message. Every communication should begin with an overarching message about why this information ties back to the company’s goals and values, Johnson said. For example, if you are hosting a financial wellness workshop, start the announcement with, “As part of our commitment to helping employees achieve a better work-life balance, we are offering this financial wellness workshop to … .’ ”

It shows that the workshop is tied to something broader, Johnson said.

Create a review step. Having someone else review messages before they get sent to the entire company can minimize the risk that grammar errors, inaccurate information and embarrassing gaffes get sent out.

Provide training. HR isn’t the only group sending company communiques. To ensure there is a consistent cadence in all internal messages, provide training to managers and leaders about how to craft messages that align with the business goals.

PART 3: Measure Results

Define success. Every communication campaign should have a goal. “That is what makes measurement possible,” Miller said.

Establish key performance indicators. When setting measures, focus on outcomes not output. Counting messages sent or number of people who signed up for a class doesn’t tell you much, Miller said, whereas tracking the results of these programs will. Some useful measures might include proof of changed behavior, improved employee engagement, increased participation in rewards programs or fewer safety incidences. “Outcomes are tangible if you know what you are looking for,” she added. “We don’t do this enough.”

Ask employees what they think. Include questions in employee surveys about the quality of company communication, their top communication issues and/or what could be done better. This can provide evidence of the impact of HR communication efforts and help identify areas that require improvement.

Adapt accordingly. A communication plan is always evolving. Measuring outcomes can help you identify which messages, channels and cadence of content is having the biggest impact, so you can continue to adjust it to meet employees’ needs.

May 22, 2019June 29, 2023

In Harassment Cases, the Context of Profanities Matters (But Only Sometimes)

Editor’s note: This post contains extremely graphic language.

“Why is everyone suddenly using the C-word?” asks Stan Carey in The Guardian. He blames Game of Thrones (video very NSFW — you’ve been warned).

Assuming Stan’s correct, and more people are becoming more comfortable openly using this generally considered highly offensive and taboo word, how should you react if your employees start using it among each other? Swiftly and decisively, that’s how.

Consider Reeves v. C.H. Robinson Worldwide, which decided the issue of whether vulgar language to which all employees (male and female) are equally exposed is actionable as sexual harassment.

The court made a clear distinction between general, gender-nonspecific swear words, such as shit and fuck, (maybe improper, but not necessarily unlawful) as compared to gender-specific epithets such as bitch, whore, and the granddaddy of them all, cunt (unlawful harassment).

[T]he context may illuminate whether the use of an extremely vulgar, gender-neutral term such as “fucking” would contribute to a hostile work environment. “Fucking” can be used as an intensifying adjective before gender-specific epithets such as “bitch.” In that context, “fucking” is used to strengthen the attack on women, and is therefore relevant to the Title VII analysis. However, the obscene word does not itself afford a gender-specific meaning. Thus, when used in context without reference to gender, “fuck” and “fucking” fall more aptly under the rubric of general vulgarity that Title VII does not regulate. …

[W]ords and conduct that are sufficiently gender-specific and either severe or pervasive may state a claim of a hostile work environment, even if the words are not directed specifically at the plaintiff. … It is enough to hear co-workers on a daily basis refer to female colleagues as … “cunts,” to understand that they view women negatively, and in a humiliating or degrading way. The harasser need not close the circle with reference to the plaintiff specifically: “and you are a ‘bitch,’ too.” …

“Cunt,” referring to a woman’s vagina, is the essence of a gender-specific slur. …

The social context at C.H. Robinson detailed by Reeves allows for the inference to be drawn that the abuse did not amount to simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents, but rather constituted repeated and intentional discrimination directed at women as a group, if not at Reeves specifically. It is not fatal to her claim that Reeves’s co-workers never directly called her a “bitch,” a “fucking whore,” or a “cunt.” Reeves claims that the offensive conduct occurred “every single day,” and that the manager “accepted and tolerated that same behavior” over her repeated complaints. If C.H. Robinson tolerated this environment, it may be found to have adopted “the offending conduct and its results,” just as if the employer affirmatively authorized it.

Thus, while general vulgarities are not typically actionable as harassment, severe or pervasive gender-specific words or phrases are actionable even if the words are not specifically directed at one employee, but are merely generally used in the workplace. The aforementioned “c-word” is the perfect example.

The takeaway for employers? Words are sometimes not just words, and businesses should respond to complaints about coarse or vulgar language as they would to any other complaint of harassment. An employer cannot just assume that words are harmless and ignore the complaint. And if you do, you’re just being a … .

May 22, 2019June 29, 2023

3 Ways HR Leaders Can Stay Ahead of Changing Immigration Policies

Listen to an intense conversation among people-management professionals these days and there’s a good chance the discussion will include immigration.

Organizations are constantly subject to changing regulations and high-stakes political developments affecting the growing global workforce, making immigration a huge pain point, surpassing even costs as a concern in some quarters.

Global uncertainty, changes in H-1B visa availability and countless other immigration-related factors make worldwide recruiting increasingly complex. At the same time, historically low unemployment, widening skills gaps, an aging workforce and the desire to be more diverse and inclusive to compete effectively in a global economy have increased demand for foreign-born workers.

U.S. Census Bureau data show that about 17 percent of the workforce is foreign-born, and without international migration, nearly 45 percent of the nation’s population would be in shrinking regions, with economic concerns related to population decline.

Without an influx of immigrants, the total U.S. population of working-age adults is expected to decline over the next 20 years. It’s clear that HR professionals need a way to prepare for a changing immigration landscape to recruit the talent they need. Here are three tips on how to be prepared.

Build broad support for a diverse workforce. Organizations pursue diversity and inclusion initiatives for a variety of reasons, including a desire to improve employee morale, a sense of social responsibility, greater internal parity and a drive to appeal to a diverse customer base. In addition to these worthy objectives, a growing body of evidence suggests diversity improves performance and competitive standing.

A Barron’s article published earlier this year cites two studies demonstrating diversity’s value. The studies found gender diversity improves investment performance from 4 to 10 percent—and diverse leadership teams outperformed peers on profitability by 21 percent, and on value creation by 27 percent.

Building broad support for a diverse workforce across the organization is critical, not only for gaining buy-in for corporate diversity and inclusion initiatives, but also to prepare for changes in immigration regulations which make recruiting more expensive and time-consuming. With a strong commitment to diversity, company leaders are more likely to allocate the necessary resources.

Stay current on trends and events by following industry sources. Most HR professionals have enough on their plate already and struggle to find time to research immigration policy proposals and keep close tabs on political developments which may affect employment-based immigration programs. This is especially true for those who manage large, global workforces.

One way to stay up to date without investing an inordinate amount of time in research is to follow a variety of industry sources for immigration policy news. In some cases, sectors adjacent to employment-based immigration might spot trends before HR outlets identify an emerging pattern and alert their readers and followers. Immigration law associations frequently provide a roundup on the status of proposed regulations and court cases impacting employment-based immigration.

Prepare policies and workforce strategy for changes. A Pearl Law Group survey conducted last year found 68 percent of employers felt their strategic talent planning has been impacted by recent immigration changes. That’s unlikely to change as long as immigration remains a polarizing political issue around the world. HR leaders who acknowledge uncertainty is the new normal can be more prepared than their peers who are caught off guard by changing immigration regulations. Engaging in what-if scenarios and preparing for likely contingencies can put forward-thinking companies ahead of competitors in the war for global talent. For example, exploring remote working policies can expand the pool of available employees to include offsite candidates who can be a part of the team without relocating. HR can also work closely with counsel to develop policies to address possible scenarios, such as the judicial extension of the DACA program and changes in H-1B visa administration.

A recent National Foundation for American Policy analysis underscored the scope of the challenge HR professionals face on immigration, reporting on a recent spike in visa denials in the United States. The denial rate for visa extensions rose from 4 percent in 2016 to 18 percent in the first quarter of 2019. Over that same time, rejection rates for visa petitions rose from 10 percent to 32 percent.

These changes are happening against a backdrop of a decrease in the number of visa applicants and independent of specific changes in policies or laws. That emphasizes the need for HR professionals to proactively address employment-based immigration policies.

By building a commitment to a diverse workforce, staying informed on trends, and gaming out possible scenarios and strategies to future-proof policies, HR leaders can stay ahead of the curve in a rapidly changing environment.

Peggy Smith is president and CEO of Worldwide ERC. A frequent keynoter and panelist at mobility and HR-related conferences, Smith shares her thoughts on global workforce issues, talent and skills shortages, multigenerational workplace considerations and future mobility strategy.

May 21, 2019June 29, 2023

3 Ways for HR Professionals to Cultivate a Global Business Mindset

In today’s increasingly connected and international marketplace, HR professionals who have a strong understanding of global dynamics are going to have an advantage.

The question I often hear is, “How do I develop that global mindset?”

Many people in HR assume they can’t travel abroad and build valuable global knowledge unless their company sends them on an official work trip overseas. The reality is that you can take that initiative yourself and learn to become an effective global leader — whether you travel abroad regularly or not — and there’s a good chance your employer will take notice if you do.

These three steps will help you get started.

1. Develop Global Relationships Online

No matter what function you’re in within an organization, there’s a global community you can join via Facebook, LinkedIn or a professional association. These online communities are excellent ways to connect with your peers in other parts of the world and start meaningful conversations.

Investing time and energy in global social media groups can both help you with your professional development and expand your understanding of the global scope of your industry — all from your home or office.

2. Travel to an Overseas Conference, Then Hang Out

However, even if you’re active in every available international social media group for your profession, to fully expand your global understanding you’re going to have to travel. I would suggest figuring out how to travel internationally once a year — with an intention to visit a different country every trip. While this may sound daunting at first, there are practical ways to make it happen.

An excellent starting point is to attend a conference in another country or schedule an annual professional development trip overseas, then tack on some time to explore and network after your official business is wrapped.

For example, if you’re traveling to a three-day conference in another country, add a few days and use the connections that you’re making in your online groups to meet with people face-to-face in that city. There’s nothing better than immersing yourself in another culture.

3. Explore International Development Opportunities

A very powerful way to expand your global mindset is to travel with a group of like-minded professionals to really explore a specific country. A good place to begin is Nanda Journeys, a travel company that brings together travelers with purpose and passion to explore the world in a meaningful way — whether it’s nurses to Vietnam, dentists to Ecuador or HR people to Singapore.

An associate and I organize an HR delegation every year to a different country. In recent years, we’ve taken 21 HR-related professionals to Cuba for a week and another dozen to Japan. Last year we traveled with an HR group to the Czech Republic and Hungary. In each location, we meet with government officials, academics and business leaders about HR topics and talent issues.

On one of the trips, an attendee was the head of talent acquisition for a specific business unit inside a global organization, and she said the trip was part of her strategy to take on a more global job. This person was wisely investing in her ability to understand talent acquisition dynamics in other parts of the world.

When she returned her company took note of her willingness to invest her own funds and time in an international learning perspective and put her into a global job within a few months.

If you truly want to understand how things work in other parts of the world and make the investment to start your learning curve, your employer is likely to notice that effort and support your journey. And if they don’t then you have a great foundation to find an organization that’s more conducive to your global learning.

May 21, 2019June 29, 2023

You Just Discovered You Hired a Sex Offender. Now What?

A reader sent me the following question.

I worked for a grocery store. Can a child molester be employed by the grocery store? I reported it to the manager, and showed proof and nothing was done about it.

There’s a lot going on here. What does the law require an employer to do (if anything) under these circumstances? And what should an employer do when it discovers it is employing a sex offender?

Legally speaking, it depends on the state in which you are operating. Laws that mandate state sex offender registries are more commonly known as Megan’s Law. All 50 states and the District of Columbia maintain these sex offender registries that are open to the public via websites. As of 2016, there were 859,500 registered sex offenders in United States. Some of these Megan’s Laws expressly prohibit an employer from using the state sex offender registry information for employment purposes (California, for example). Ohio’s Megan’s Law has no such requirement. Because these law do vary from state to state, you should check with your lawyer before refusing to hire, or fire, a registered sex offender.

Separately, the EEOC’s Enforcement Guidance on the Consideration of Arrest and Conviction Records in Employment Decisions under Title VII prohibits an employer from instituting a blanket rule against the employment of anyone with a criminal history, including sex crimes. Instead, employers must make an individualized assessment of the employee’s fit for the specific job at issue in light of the criminal history, taking into consideration factors such as the facts or circumstances surrounding the offense, the length and consistency of employment history before and after the offense or conduct, rehabilitation efforts, and the essential functions of the job. Thus, the EEOC might take issue with a blanket policy against the employment of sex offenders in all cases.

These legal limits on an employer’s ability to fire a sex offender notwithstanding, I still see liability red flags that should make you very jumpy if you are deciding whether to hire or fire someone with this background. Specifically, what happens if you choose to employ this individual, and he or she commits a sex crime while on-the-clock or otherwise relating to the employment.

First, you should be worried about liability for negligent hiring/retention. An employer has an affirmative duty to protect its employees, customers, and anyone else that comes in contact with the business from risks of harm of which the employer knows or should know. If an employer hires or retains an individual despite knowledge of prior improper behavior (i.e., sex crimes), and the employee then sexually assaults someone, that injured party could argue the employer knew, or should have known, that the employee might hurt someone. You could even face liability for punitive damages for consciously disregarding for the rights and safety of other employees. This could potentially be a very expensive mistake for an employer to learn. And, I’m speaking from experience, having defended an employer in a case with these facts.

Second, I can envision an argument that the employment of a registered sex offender violates OSHA’s General Duty Clause, which requires employers to provide their employees with a place of employment that “is free from recognizable hazards that are causing or likely to cause death or serious harm to employees.” The courts have interpreted OSHA’s general duty clause to impose upon employers a legal obligation to provide a workplace free from conditions that cause, or are likely to cause, death or serious physical harm to employees. It’s not a stretch to imagine the employment of a registered sex offender violating this duty.

Separate from these legal issues that might drive you not to employ a sex offender, there are also workplace issues you’ll have to consider and manage. Since sex offender registries are mostly public, it’s not hard to envision a situation in which (1) an employee’s registration status becomes known in the workplace, and (2) it becomes fodder for gossip, discomfort, and scorn among co-workers. Not surprisingly, employees tend not to react well to news that one of their coworkers is a sex offender. They may demand you take immediate action and fire the sex offender, walk off the job in protest, or bully the sex offender into quitting. Do you want to deal with this level of discontent? Is a registered sex offender the mountain you’re willing to die on?

Thus, to address the question that started this discussion, if I’m an employer and I find out that I’m about to employ, or am employing, a registered sex offender, my decision is a relatively easy one. I’m either not hiring or firing. I’m all for rehabilitation and second chances, but in the case, let it be in someone else’s workplace.

May 20, 2019June 29, 2023

The New Rules Around Communication to Engage Global Teams

For managers who are building or inheriting teams in today’s fast-paced, digitally enabled business environment, things are far more interesting, productive and creative. But that doesn’t simplify managing a modern global team.

Most enterprise companies now do business overseas, and they employ teams that span many boundaries: cultural, functional, geographic and global teams are becoming more of the norm. According to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, worldwide employment by U.S. multinational enterprises increased 0.4 percent from 42.1 million in 2015 to 42.3 million workers in 2016 (the latest year available).

The good news is that people typically enjoy working on global teams. Based on data from a 2019 “Global Employee Survey” conducted by my company, professional employer organization Globalization Partners, 72 percent of people said they like to be part of global teams but like them even more when they feel listened to and treated fairly. Also, the flexibility in work locations lets companies hire the best talent anywhere in the world, and the diversity that comes from global teams can be a huge benefit.

But there are challenges that generally fall into three types: communications, logistics and culture. Communication issues are no surprise, but if not tended to can snowball to become serious problems. Also, the same diversity that brings new ideas into the mix and inspires us can cause conflict and disagreement, or misunderstandings and hurt feelings.

What does it take to succeed in managing a global team? It rolls up to two kinds of activities: establishing good systems and establishing trust.

Establishing good systems means following the laws and knowing the customs in the places where your organization does business, taking the time to understand how your team will need to work together and then acquiring the technology to support it. It also means communicating with your team — in a firm, clear and inclusive way — to help them adhere to those systems and use those tools. Here are some best practices.

Understand the law. Work with finance, legal and HR teams to be sure you are always operating according to local laws.
Set up centralized information sharing. Make sure your team can all access the same files and tools, and establish centralized, cloud-based sharing to save yourself endless headaches and revision nightmares.
Establish strong communications methods. Choose your tech wisely and stick to it. Plan for differences in schedules and augment text-based communication (email, instant message, text) with face-to-face meetings whenever possible using online video tools. Difficulty with languages or accents? Try more text-based collaboration.
Rotate time zones fairly. Introduce your team to tools like world clocks, which tell you what time it is anywhere in the world. When scheduling meetings be sure not to eat up all your “golden hour overlap” time when everyone is available with meetings, leaving no time for spontaneous collaboration. Also, be aware and respectful of holidays, which of course differ from region to region.
Encourage participation and communication. Make sure the processes and tools you put into place encourage people from all backgrounds to have a voice in the conversation. People who connect daily with global team members feel more connected, engaged and involved than those who don’t.

It’s a lot easier to build processes than trust, but you will need both to be successful. In terms of establishing trust, global virtual managers don’t get the benefits of managing by walking around that local managers get, so you’ll have to make up for it in other ways. Here are a few.

Do your culture homework. The very act of expressing genuine interest in an individual and their background improves morale and understanding. According to our survey data, more than two-thirds of employees (68 percent) say their companies struggle at least some of the time to align with, be sensitive about and adhere to local laws, practices and cultures.
Understand working styles and communications. In addition to understanding cultures, get to know your employees as individuals. Be sensitive to how people from a “dominant” culture within the team may frustrate team members from a region that is less represented or that has differing cultural norms and values.
Set goals, communicate, motivate and inspire: This is Manager 101, but with all the unique challenges of managing a dispersed team it can fall by the wayside. Be sure you’re working with those team members, not just on deliverables but also on their development.
Know your tech. Be willing to tailor your communication style and medium to the needs of different employees, based on things like time zones and language barriers.
Be available. The most successful managers make themselves available across multiple time zones and through different means of technology (IM, Slack, Skype, email, phone and text).
Check in frequently and consistently. Global team members who connect daily with their co-workers feel more engaged and involved than those who don’t. Employees who feel like they belong are 93 percent more likely to say they feel optimistic about their company’s’ future.

As more companies continue to enter the global game, they will need to make it a priority to build and nurture a local team, set them up with compliant, equitable systems, demonstrate an understanding of local culture, and establish communications practices that make them feel valued and heard. If not, they risk losing the much sought-after international employees that can be so hard to find.