Skip to content

Workforce

Author: Site Staff

Posted on December 30, 2002July 10, 2018

Employee Loyalty Acid Test

This survey can help in feedback of employees, and help you figure out whatneeds issues need to be addressed and fixed within the company.

Section 1: Your Feelings about [name of company]


    How likely are you to be working at [company] two years from now?


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Very Likely 
  • Somewhat Likely 
  • Not Very Likely 
  • Not at All Likely

    How much do you agree or disagree that…


    I really feel like part of the family at [company]?


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    I am proud to work for [company]?


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    I feel a strong personal attachment to [company]?


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    When [company] has problems, I think of them as my problems too?


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

Section 2: Your Relationship with [company]


    Use this scale to show how much you agree or disagree that…


    a. Customers can rely on [company] to deliver outstanding quality, service,and value.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    b. [company] values my relationship, really cares about me, and invests in mysuccess.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    c. [company] attracts and retains outstanding employees and partners.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    d. [company] sets the standard for excellence in its industry.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    e. [company] communicates openly and honestly.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    f. [company] is committed to win/win solutions and will not profit at theexpense of partners or customers.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    g. [company] listens well and responds quickly to feedback.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    h. I would like to see my relationship with [company] grow in the foreseeablefuture.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    i. I understand the values and principles that guide [company] leadership.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    j. I provide enthusiastic referrals for [company].


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    k. I trust [company] leaders to behave with fairness and integrity.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    l. I understand our strategy and the role I must play for our success.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    m. [company] has a winning strategy (superior economics in serving ourcustomers).


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    n. [company] focuses all of its energy and resources in areas where it can bethe best.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    o. I always know where I stand with [company].


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    p. [company] has sufficient opportunities to grow its business.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    q. [company] provides me with the information I need to make good decisions.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    r. [company] involves the right people in decisions and then takes actionquickly.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    s. Employee loyalty is appropriately valued and rewarded at [company].


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    t. At [company], we keep organizational structure simple by utilizing smallteams.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    u. People are fairly rewarded for their contributions to [company]’s longterm success.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    v. Leaders respect my time and help me manage my time effectively.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    w. [company] treats me like a real partner.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    x. Customer loyalty is appropriately valued and rewarded at [company].


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    y. I believe that [company] deserves my loyalty.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    z. Over the past year, my loyalty to [company] has grown stronger.


  • Strongly Agree 
  • Agree 
  • Neither Agree nor Disagree 
  • Disagree 
  • Strongly Disagree

    How would you rate the overall quality of the products and services providedby [company]?


  • Excellent 
  • Very Good 
  • Good Fair 
  • Poor

What is the single improvement that [company] could make to increase yourloyalty to it? 


________________________________________________


________________________________________________


Section 3: Descriptive Information


    This last part may help you divide people into groups.


    How long have you been an employee of [company]?


  • Less than one year
  • One to under three years
  • Three to under five years
  • Five to under ten years
  • Ten years or more

    At what location do you work?


  • Corporate/administrative headquarters
  • Field

    What is your position?


  • Executive/upper management
  • Middle management
  • Supervisor
  • Individual contributor

This material is used by permission of Bain & Company from Loyalty Rules!How Today’s Leaders Build Lasting Relationships, by Frederick Reichheld,Copyright 2001, Harvard Business SchoolPublishing.

Posted on November 12, 2002July 10, 2018

Reader Feedback Traveling With a Gay Employee

Some ideas and opinions shared by readers who responded to recent advice onhow to handle employees who don’t want to sleep in the same room with anemployee who might be gay.

    “I believe the question and your answer missed a valid consideration. I amrequired to travel extensively in my profession. Perhaps I am fortunate comparedto others, but I have always maintained a travel persona that mirrors my homecity persona. That is to say, what I do and how I live when traveling is nodifferent that when at home. Thus, if I don’t share a room at home I certainlydo not — and will not — do so when traveling. It has nothing to do withhomophobia or anything else.
    Employees that travel, contrary to the mythical beliefs of others, areinconvenienced enough to be away from home on behalf of the company. To imposesuch ridiculous expectations under the guise of “cutting costs” ispenny-wise and dollar stupid. If the trip is of value to send an employee, it isof value to allow that employee the basic comforts of home. Any company thatexpects otherwise from its employees needs to take a long look at its policiesand expectations.”–Lou Mavredes, PHR, Vice President, Organizational Development, LandAmericaFinancial Group, Inc., Richmond, Virginia


    “What if the company gave a “room allowance” also for those thatreally didn’t want to share? People don’t have to be homophobic to not want toshare rooms. Those folks might be willing to foot a portion of the bill inexchange for privacy.”–Mary Sanders


    “Regarding your article about rooming up with a gay coworker, I believe youmiss the point entirely, as do many when addressing the diversity issue. I askyou this: Would you pair up men and women in a room together? The subject hereis not about acceptance of another’s lifestyle. What one person does behindclosed doors is completely up to themselves. However, consider the feelings ofthe ‘straight’ individual placed in this setting as you would a woman forced toroom with a man.
    Would you expect her to feel comfortable in this venue? I believe youwouldn’t and shouldn’t. The same applies in the scenario outlined in yourarticle. Unwanted attention is still unwanted attention, whether it be straightor gay. It creates unneeded attention and, ultimately a hostile environment. Iexperienced this firsthand as an insurance representative, when my roommate (agay man) made advances towards me of an aggressive nature while on the road. Ifit had been a male-female encounter, what would it have been called? Sexualharassment of course!
    Unacceptance of another’s lifestyle does NOT necessarily imply intolerance!Rather, tolerance is not a unilateral issue, and to respect one person’s sexualpreference also carries the responsibility to respect another’s moral or ethicaldecision regarding homosexuality. You can’t honor one at the expense of theother.
    In the workplace, some boundaries are necessary and this is such a case. Thisbeing a rather unique situation, farsighted individuals should have accountedfor the potential for difficulties and acted preemptively.”–MichaelYarnall, MBA, M.A. in Human Resources, Phoenix, Arizona


    “Here’s another option that companies may want to consider when faced withtrying to deal with employee concerns about having to share hotel rooms due to acompany’s need to cut costs.
    When I was working at IBM Canada we had a similar policy of having to sharerooms at conferences to allow more people to attend while keeping costs down.They did provide a time period for people to find their own roommates otherwiseas you suggested, they would be paired up randomly.
    Still we had some people who were uncomfortable sharing rooms no matter what.I proposed to management to give employees the option of paying for the otherhalf of the costs of the hotel room so that they can have their own private roomif they weren’t comfortable with sharing. This solution worked since it gaveemployees another option, the company was able to keep costs down and the otheremployees didn’t feel resentment since those who had private rooms paid theextra costs.”–Vicki Cal, Senior Manager, Analytics, Customer Relationship Management,Hudson’s Bay Company, Toronto, Ontario, Canada


    “I think that this is all wrong. Wouldn’t this be the same as asking awoman to share a room with a man to control costs? This is not the right way tocontrol costs. Personally, I would elect not to go to the conference.”—Mike O’Neal, Human Resource Manager


    “At our company, first we offer the option of choosing a roommate. Then weoffer people the option of paying the difference between the price of a singleroom and the price of a shared room. Some people are not comfortable withsharing a room with anyone, regardless of how they feel about sexualorientation.”–Susan Long, HR Consultant, Customer Works, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada


    “The obvious solution is for the company to be professional and give eachadult their own room. If the company can’t afford two rooms then a cheaper hotelor locale is warranted. Most adults gave up sleeping in rooms with strangerswhen they left college. It is absurd to require employees to room with’strangers’ of either sex or any sexual orientation (heterosexual, homosexual,bi-sexual etc).–Name withheld upon request, 18 years experience in human resources


    “Thanks for addressing the issue oftraveling with a Gay Co-Worker. I like the advice you gave. My concern is thatyou didn’t address the core of the issue. The writer seems to assume that thosewho don’t want to share a room with a Gay co-worker are homophobic. I takeexception to that. Not wanting to share a room with a gay co-worker is in asense, respecting that person’s sexual orientation. Would this company pair aheterosexual man and a woman in the same room? No. Because they respect the factthat the apparent differences make the pairing of the two inappropriate. Thesame is true for putting a gay coworker in the room with a straight coworker ofthe same gender. It is just as inappropriate as putting two people of oppositegenders in the room.” — Meloney J. Sallie-Dosunmu, Employee Relations& Development Manager, Just Born, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania


Workforce Online, December 2002 — Register Now!

Posted on November 12, 2002July 10, 2018

People, Performance, and Profits at MetLife

Life is pretty good at MetLife, the New York company whose profits got hithard after last year’s terrorist attacks. MetLife’s quarterly earnings,announced this month, more than doubled from a year ago. The company has avoidedlarge-scale layoffs. Turnover is low; as Senior Vice President of HR and ChiefLearning Officer Deb Capolarello puts it, employees right now would rather workfor “the devil they know, not the devil they don’t know.” MetLife fillsabout 39 percent of jobs from within.

    Meanwhile, MetLife is still doing the controversial practice of “forcedranking,” or “forced distribution,” as she calls it. MetLife is stickingwith the system because, she says, the company does a good job of explaining toemployees what they need to do to improve their performance. “As an employee,you want to know where you stand, how you did, and how you can improve,” shesays, adding that her system does just that. Employees are rated one, two,three, four, or five. A four or five employee can receive about 40 percent intotal compensation more than a three.


    MetLife’s HR team has about 400 HR professionals, or about one for everyhundred MetLife employees. The HR professionals are working on moving employeesto different jobs within their departments and around other departments, MetLifeis upgrading the company’s HRMS. They’re also hoping to improve the company’sbenefits, which include plenty of the popular and growing “flextime” benefitbut not a lot of eldercare assistance. Eldercare questions–more than any othersubject–are generating phone calls from MetLife employees to the company’sEAP.


    Capolarello says that HR executives that want to be influential cogs in thesenior management of a company can’t do it on their own. They need, more thananything, to find the right company and the right CEO to work for. “You’reonly as good as the company you sit in,” she says. “You need to find a placewhere (the CEO) believes in human capital and developing it, knows how importantthe policies you have are, and knows that employees are what makes your businessrun.”


Workforce Online, December 2002 — Register Now!

Posted on November 8, 2002July 10, 2018

A Worksheet for Measuring Competencies

W orkplace learning competence is the ability to be effective in learning inreal time in workplace settings. Use this instrument to rate the competence of aworkplace learner who is known to you. There is not a scorecard – it is up toyou to use this as you best see fit.

For each competency listed, rate his or her level of perceived competence. Usethe following scale:


1 = Not applicable.


2 = I perceive him or her to be functioning at a less than effective level inhis or her present workplace on this workplace learning competency.


3 = I perceive him or her to be functioning at a somewhat effective level inhis or her present workplace on this workplace learningcompetency.


4 = I perceive him or her to be functioning at an effective level in his orher present workplace on this workplace learning competency.


5 = I perceive him or her to be functioning at a highly effective level inhis or her present workplace on this workplace learningcompetency.


Then, place a number from 1 to 7 to indicate how important you believe it tobe for this person to improve this workplace learning competency. A 1 indicatesthat taking action to build this workplace learning competency is of highestpriority. A 7 indicates that improvement on the competency is of lowestpriority.


FOUNDATIONAL COMPETENCIES

    Reading skill: Read to a level of proficiency appropriate for learning in aworkplace setting.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Writing skill: Write to a level of proficiency appropriate for learning in aworkplace setting.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Computation skill: Apply mathematics to a level of proficiency appropriatefor learning in a workplace setting.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Listening skill: Listen effectively and to a level of proficiency appropriatefor learning in a workplace setting.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Questioning skill: Pose appropriate questions to others and obtain meaningfuland unambiguous answers to those questions.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Speaking skill: Speak to individuals or present to groups with a level ofproficiency appropriate for learning in a workplace setting.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Cognitive skills: Think, draw conclusions, think creatively, make decisions,and solve problems.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Individual skills: Demonstrate a willingness to accept responsibility anddisplay self-esteem.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Resource skills: Allocate such resources as time, money, people, andinformation appropriately to learn in the workplace.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Interpersonal skill: Work cooperatively with others, carry out formal orinformal training or mentoring of others, and maintain effective interpersonalrelations with customers.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Informational and technological skill: Acquire and analyze data from varioussources.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


INTERMEDIATE COMPETENCIES

    Systems thinking: View organizations and work from a systems perspective.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Personal mastery: Show willingness to learn and take pride in learning.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Mental modeling: Create, communicate, and critique ingrained (and otherwisetaken-for granted) assumptions, beliefs, or values.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Shared visioning: Formulate, communicate, and build enthusiasm about sharedviews of the future.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Team learning skill: Participate effectively and actively in workplace groupsand use dialogue and other approaches to formulate, communicate, and test ideasgenerated by himself or herself or others.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Self-knowledge: Demonstrate awareness and understanding of self aslearner.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Short-term memory skill: Remember facts, people, and situations for shorttime spans, usually about 48 hours or less.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Long-term memory skill: Remember facts, people, and situations for longertime spans, usually exceeding 48 hours.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Subject matter knowledge: Possess a solid foundation of background knowledgeon the issue or subject that he or she sets out to learn about in theworkplace.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Enjoyment of learning and work: Display joy in the learning process itselfand in the work that he or she performs.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Flexibility: Show a willingness to apply what he or she knows in new ways asconditions warrant their application.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Persistence and confidence: Show determination to pursue new knowledge orskill, even when finding it or mastering it proves more difficult than expected.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Sense of urgency: Display sensitivity to the importance of time to self andothers.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Honesty: Give information in a straightforward manner, free of deception, andelicit similar behavior from others.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Giving respect to others: Defer to others with more experience or knowledge.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


THE PERCEPTIVIST ROLE

    Work environment analytical skills: Examine work environments for issues orcharacteristics affecting human performance.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Sensory awareness: Show sensitivity to stimuli received from the outsideworld based on the use of any one or all of the five senses.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Open-mindedness: Demonstrate a willingness to see, to observe, and tointernalize what the world presents and reinterpret it afresh.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Humility: Display modesty about what he or she does or does not know, awillingness to listen to fresh perspectives without pretending to know when heor she does not know.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Analytical skill (synthesis): Break down the components of a larger whole andreassemble them to achieve improved human performance.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Intuition: Show sensitivity to stimuli generated by him or her from memory orfrom the application of nonverbal logic.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


THE INFORMATION-GATHERER ROLE

Information-sourcing skill: Identify the kind of information needed tosatisfy curiosity and show an ability to locate such information from crediblesources.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Information-gathering skill: Collect information by talking to others, askingquestions of others, facilitating groups to answer questions, and findinginformation from other sources.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Information-organizing skill: Organize or structure information obtained fromone or many sources and categorize it into schemes that permit recall,comparison, or creative reexamination.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Feedback solicitation skill: Display an ability to solicit feedback on whathe or she has learned from others.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


THE ANALYST ROLE

    Willingness to experiment and gain experience: Show an openness to try outnew ideas or approaches, even when they are untested or their results areunknown.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Internalization skill: Translate general knowledge or information intospecific information that can be immediately applied or tested.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Application of new knowledge skill: Use new knowledge or skill in harmonywith the way it was described or characterized from the original source(s).


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


    Ability to adapt knowledge to new situations or events: Use new knowledge orskill in creative, unusual, or novel ways.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


THE EVALUATOR ROLE

    Critical examination of information skill: Reflect on what was learnedcritically, offering follow-up questions or new ideas based on the information.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important


    Learning how to learn skill: Reflect on how he or she acquired newinformation or knowledge and find ways to improve the acquisition andapplication of new knowledge or skill in the future.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


Self-directedness skill: Display a willingness to be proactive about hisor her own learning, to take action without needing to be directed to learnor to act by other people.


Not applicable: 1
Less than effective: 2
Somewhat effective: 3
Effective: 4
Highly Effective: 5


    How important do you believe it to be to improve this workplace learningcompetency? (Rate from 1 to 7, with 1 = Most important)


Excerpted from The Workplace Learner by William J. Rothwell. Copyright @ 2002William J. Rothwell. Published by AMACOM Books, a division of AmericanManagement Association, New York, NY. Used with permission. All rights reserved.


Visitors to this site are granted permission to download or print out 1 (one)copy of the content from the Web site and agree not to reproduce, retransmit,distribute, disseminate, sell, publish, broadcast or circulate this materialwithout prior written permission of the copyright owner (AMA) with this oneexception:


Users may, on an occasional basis, include insubstantial portions of thecontent in reviews and articles, but only if such materials are distributed ormade available for non-commercial use in non-electronic form. All such materialsmust include all copyright and other proprietary notices for the informationused from the Web site, original attribution, and the phrase: “Used with thepermission of the American Management Association.” Users are prohibited fromposting any content to any electronic bulletin boards, newsgroups or mail lists.

Posted on November 8, 2002June 29, 2023

Table of Contents November 2002

Features


Who Are You Really Hiring?
Companies often don’t screen executive-level applicants. They should. High echelon crooks and cons can cost your company a fortune. But there are ways to safeguard a firm from liars and cheats at the top.
By Shari Caudron
Reining in Relocation Costs
Rising costs are prompting companies to institute home-sale programs, tiered relocation packages, and cafeteria plans.
By Fay Hansen
7 Steps Before Strategy
In the rush to get a seat at the corporate table, some HR professionals skip the basics. That ruins HR’s credibility and holds it back. Here’s what you must do before you can strategize.
By Bruce N. Pfau and Bonnie Bell Cundiff
Workforce Planning: Why to Start Now
Workforce planning lets HR manage talent shortages and surpluses. By understanding business cycles and tending to “talent pipelines” and current talent inventories, HR can act, instead of just react.
By John Sullivan
Take the Gamble Out of an LMS
Leaning management systems are used to automate the administration of online training programs. They can save a lot of money–if you know how to make a smart choice, and if there’s organizational support.
By Kevin Dobbs
Optimas Award Service: Health Partners
When there’s fast, effective training to be done, Health Partner’s Organizational Learning Center is on the job. It has saved the organization money, allayed fears of change, and made the transition to a new $3million date-processing system a success.
By Patick J. Kiger

Special Advertising Section


HR Technology 2003
HR technology focuses on streamlining and ROI: HR technologies continue to make processes faster, easier and more efficient. But with the economy in slow mode and budgets down, companies are refocusing their technology investments. The emphasis is on upgrading and integrating HRMS functions, automating recruiting tasks, including risk management, and using analytics for strategic planning.

Departments


Between the Lines
Playing the HR Game
Mailbox
Viva Barbie • The misuse of e-mail • How long does it take to recover from carpel tunnel surgery?
The Buzz
W-mail Reveals a Literacy Gap • Well Done: At Home at Fannie Mae • HR in Pop Culture: Consenting Adults at Work
On the Contrary
Why We Work: Is it the cash, the perks, the glory? Not entirely, Shari Caudron tells her niece. HR understands that people work because it fulfills them in innumerable ways.
What Works
The Problem with Know-It-Alls: Tom Terez has worked for the guy who has all the answers, and it left him questioning why anyone would bother listening to him.
Dear Workforce:
Giving disabled employees a chance • Making the case for adding staff • Bonuses in non-profit organizations.
Small, Medium, Large
Incentives and the Art of Changing Behavior: If you want people to take on new roles, or act differently, it helps if you reward the new behavior. Here’s how three companies rewarded the employers who made change work.
Legal Insight
Watch Out for Pregnancy Discrimination: Pregnancy-bias claims have jumped 25 percent in the last decade. Here’s what companies need to know about the law around expectant parenthood. Legal Posts: The employee is overpaid–literally.
Think Twice
It Their Debt, But It’s Your Problem: Your employees are up to their eyeballs in debt. And that makes your job tougher: they’re less productive and prone to job-jumping. Todd Raphael has some ideas for how you can help them. It will make your life easier.

Posted on October 31, 2002June 29, 2023

Holiday Online Gift Guide

Workforce Holiday Online Gift Guide

This holiday season, show your appreciation with a gift from these premiere recognition and rewards companies. Click on the links below for special holiday gift offers, and give your employees the recognition they deserve!

 

Looking for a warmer reception to your holiday incentives? Look to Premiere Choice Awards!

Say Thank You or Job Well Done With Delicious Gourmet Gifts From Omaha Steaks. Click here!

 Gift Giving Made Easy!

Everyone Loves Music!

Reward with FREE CDs. Music Awards are fun, easy and great for all demographics. Try it yourself and get a FREE CD. Click here or call 1-877-BMG-SP44

Celebrate the holidays with GiftCards and Certificates from EddieBauer, a provider of quality apparel and gearfor 82 years and counting.

Order now and receive a 10% discount
off your first incentive gift card order!
(FREE catalogs and NO administration costs)!

Give them all the endless possibilities
that come with a Sears Gift Card.

Posted on October 30, 2002July 10, 2018

Delta Dental, The Driving Force


If you want a dental program that offers a variety of programs placing an emphasis on prevention and flexible product options, then Delta Dental is something to look into.


A Tradition of Leadership
As America’s largest and most experienced dental benefits carrier, Delta Dental (deltadental.com) has helped employers improve and maintain the oral health of their employees since 1954. A nationwide system of dental health service plans, Delta Dental offers employers, large and small, custom programs and reporting systems that provide employees with quality, cost-effective dental benefit programs and services.


The Delta system consists of 37 independent dental plans operating in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. About one quarter of all Americans with dental insurance enjoy the advantages and comprehensive protection afforded by Delta Dental coverage — that’s more than 42 million people in 75,000 employer groups across the nation. More facts about our healthcare leadership can be found on our Web site at deltadental.com


Dental benefits are now a mainstay in the benefits mix of many employers. More than three-quarters of respondents to a recent survey said they considered it important for a prospective employer to offer dental benefits.¹ While dental coverage is only one component of a benefits package, a comprehensive, well-administered dental program can be an asset in recruiting and retaining superior employees.


Delta Dental offers its members a unique advantage through contractual relationships with our network dentists that go far beyond traditional insurance. Our partnerships result in real solutions to oral health care with a focus on prevention. More facts about our healthcare leadership are at deltadental.com.


 Here are some of the ways Delta Dental can put its unmatched industry experience to work for you:


Our Network Advantage
Three out of every four dentists in America are part of Delta Dental’s Premier provider network, giving Delta the most extensive network of participating dentists in the nation. Affordable, appropriate care within the network comes as a result of unique cost management measures and contractual agreements with dentists, saving group purchasers and subscribers $2.6 billion in 2001 alone.


Delta Dental’s comprehensive dentist network access enables you to meet your group’s needs consistently, whether your employees are in the same state or spread across the country.


Something for Everyone
Delta Dental offers a variety of programs that range from managed fee-for-service and preferred-provider programs (PPOs), to dental health maintenance organizations (DHMOs) and point-of-service (POS) offerings. Customized programs can also be created to meet your needs.


As America’s leading dental plan, Delta Dental can help you maximize the value of your dental program through well-designed programs with an emphasis on prevention, flexible product options, unrivaled network access and easy-to-read reporting.


DeltaUSA Delivers for Multistate Employers
Businesses with employees located in different parts of the country need a dental plan that can adapt to their business geography. DeltaUSA, Delta Dental’s national dental benefits program, makes managing dental benefits easy, regardless of where your business is located. From coast to coast and everywhere in between, Delta Dental takes the hassle out of national account administration for customers. That’s because we have years of experience delivering quality national programs to our groups and subscribers.


With DeltaUSA, you get uniform benefits from state to state and access to the nation’s largest network of contracted dental providers, along with savings and satisfaction for both you and your employees — no matter where they live or work.


DeltaUSA groups range in size from 11 subscribers to hundreds of thousands of individuals working in a variety of companies and organizations. Clients include everything from national trade associations and unions, to health care systems and Fortune 500 companies.


Through years of experience delivering national programs to a diverse group of multistate employers, your group program can be tailored to meet local needs and concerns. DeltaUSA offers four core products for our national program clients.


DeltaPremier USA, our national, managed fee-for-service program provides a comprehensive package of benefits, coupled with Delta Dental’s cost management techniques. DeltaPremier features:


  • A provider network with more than 105,000 contracted dentists practicing in 128,000 office locations.
  • The freedom to choose any dentist.
  • A variety of incentives and lower out-of-pocket cost options when Delta Dental participating dentists are selected.
  • Dentists’ fees are pre-approved against specified fee criteria for cost effectiveness.
  • No balance billing. Contracting dentists accept agreed upon fees.
  • No paperwork for patients to file.

DeltaPreferred Option USA, our national preferred provider program (dental PPO), is the solution for groups seeking lower cost advantages while providing subscribers with a high level of freedom of choice in selecting providers. DeltaPreferred Option USA offers:


  • A growing national network of more than 38,800 contracted dentists practicing in more than 47,000 locations.
  • Freedom to choose either a participating dentist or, for a higher out-of-pocket cost, any non-network provider.
  • Considerable cost savings when using a dentist who is a preferred provider in the Delta Dental network.
  • No paperwork for patients to file.
  • No balance billing. Contracted dentists accept agreed upon fees.

DeltaCare USA, our dental health maintenance organization (DHMO), extends subscribers access to a select group of DeltaCare dentists, with even greater cost savings for employers and the elimination of deductibles and annual maximums for subscribers. DeltaCare USA is the choice for groups seeking lower costs, an emphasis on prevention and a pre-selected network of dentists from which to choose. DeltaCare USA offers:


  • An increasing network of over 10,000 contracted dentists in more than 5,600 offices that are assessed for experience, range of service, location, accessibility and the ability to accommodate new patients.
  • Minimal and/or no patient co-payments for preventive care.
  • A quality, affordable dental benefits program.
  • Multi-year contracts with annual rate ceiling guarantees.
  • Detailed program management reports.

DeltaSelect USA is an excellent option for employers seeking a group voluntary (enrollee-paid) product. It offers a national network of dentists who have agreed to accept regional fee schedules and program policies.


Of course, we can easily combine our fee-for-service program with a dental PPO, dental HMO or both. Such dual- or triple-option programs can further lower costs and give subscribers a wider range of choices.


More information about DeltaUSA can be found at deltadental.com


Protecting Your Interests
Purchasers for groups of all sizes are seeking efficient cost management and streamlined administrative procedures that provide real, short-term and long-term savings. Delta’s understandable management reporting means you receive easy-to-read actuarial, accounting and administration reports that are customized to meet your needs.


Delta Dental offers these advantages even in the most basic of program designs through efficient claims service, flexibility in program design, competitive prices and an extensive and effective network of participating dentists.


Among all major competitors, benefits decision-makers ranked Delta Dental highest in these critical areas:²


  • Customer service
  • Fast quality claims processing
  • Quality of care
  • Ease of plan
  • Number of dentists
  • Service reputation
  • Rate stability.

For more than 45 years, Delta Dental has led the way in controlling costs and savings for both employers and employees, year after year. To learn how you can maximize quality, value and performance with Delta Dental benefits programs, contact your broker, consultant or Delta Dental representative.



DELTA DENTAL

Visit our Web site at
deltadental.com



¹Source: Taylor Nelson/Sofres Intersearch
²Source: The Long Group, 1998

Posted on October 28, 2002July 10, 2018

Sample At-Will Employment Statement

One example of employment-at-will language:

    If hired, I agree as follows: My employment and compensation is terminableat-will, is for no definite period, and my employment and compensation may beterminated by the Company (employer) at any time and for any reason whatsoever,with or without good cause at the option of either the Company or myself.


    No implied, oral, or written agreements contrary to the express language ofthis agreement are valid unless they are in writing and signed by the Presidentof the Company (or majority owner or owners if Company is not a corporation).


    No supervisor or representative of the Company, other than the President ofthe Company (or majority owner or owners if Company is not a corporation), hasany authority to make any agreements contrary to the foregoing. This agreementis the entire agreement between the Company and the employee regarding therights of the Company or employee to terminate employment with or without goodcause, and this agreement takes the place of all prior and contemporaneousagreements, representations, and understandings of the employee and the Company.


    The information contained here is intended to provide useful information onthe topic covered, but should not be construed as legal advice or a legalopinion. Also remember that state laws may differ from the federal law.


    This material is used by permission of John Wiley & Sons, Inc.  Reprinted with permission from Hire With YourHead, by Lou Adler, copyright2002 John Wiley & Sons. This was taken from a chapter by Robert J. Bekken.


Workforce Online, November 2002 — Register Now!

Posted on October 26, 2002July 10, 2018

Top 25 Corporate Staffing Sites for 2002

Listed below are CAREERXROADS’s top 25 corporate staffing sites for 2002.The list was compiled from a study of employment sections on Fortune 500 Websites. In order to create the top 25, Gerry Crispin and Mark Mehler formed achecklist of five factors to help them assess each site: readiness, navigation,image, relevance, and feedback.

    One of their main priorities was how user-friendly the Web sites were; forexample, how the site motivates or intrigues visitors to apply for jobs orinteract with the site. Also taken into consideration: the amount ofinformation, and the ease of navigation through the sites.


Apple – www.apple.com


Capital One – www.capitalone.com


Corning – www.corning.com


Dell – www.dell.com


Kodak – www.kodak.com


EMC – www.emc.com


Exxon – www.exxon.mobil.com


Federated Stores – www.federated-fds.com, www.retailology.com


General Motors – www.gm.com


Intel – www.intel.com


Kellogg – www.kelloggs.com


Eli Lilly – www.lilly.com


McDonalds – www.mcdonalds.com


Micron – www.micron.com


Microsoft – www.microsoft.com


3M – www.3m.com


NCR – www.ncr.com


Nike – www.nike.com


Proctor & Gamble – www.pg.com


Robinson (CH) – www.chrobinson.com


Rockwell Int’l – www.rockwell.com


Southwest Airlines – www.southwest.com


Sun – www.sun.com


TI – www.ti.com


Xerox – www.xerox.com


Workforce Online, October 2002 — Register Now!

Posted on October 17, 2002July 10, 2018

13 Myths and Facts About Downsizing

MYTH # 1: Jobs are secure at firms that are doing well financially.


FACT: Preemptive layoffs by large firms are common.
    Today’s job cuts are not solely about large, sick companies trying to savethemselves, as often the case in the early 1990’s (e.g. IBM, Sears). They arealso about healthy companies hoping to reduce costs and boost earnings byreducing head count (e.g. Goldman Sachs, AOL). They are about trying to preempttough times instead of simply reacting to them. These layoffs are radical,preventative first aid.


    On the other hand, small companies, especially small manufacturers, tend toresist layoffs because they are trying to protect the substantial investmentsthey made in finding and training workers.


MYTH # 2: Companies that are laying off workers are not hiring new ones.


FACT: Companies are tailoring their complements of skills.
    When it comes to layoffs, appearances can be deceiving. At the same time asfirms are firing some people, they are hiring others, presumably people with theskills to execute new strategies. Walmart.com laid off more than 20 employees atits online enterprise in early 2001, but subsequently added as many new hiresand even grew by more than 25 percent. Hewlett-Packard shed some marketing jobswhile adding new positions in sales and consulting. Fully one-third ofbusinesses that downsized since 1994 wound up restoring some of the eliminatedpositions, and nearly 50 percent created positions to meet emerging needs,according to recent study by career services firm Lee Hecht Harrison.


    According to the American Management Association’s year 2000 survey of itsmember companies, companies that employ one-quarter of American workforce, 36percent of firms that eliminated jobs in the previous 12 months said they hadalso created new positions. That’s up 31 percent in 1996. The Society forHuman Resources Management found similar results in a 2001 survey.


    As companies lose workers in one department, they are adding people withdifferent skills in another, continually tailoring their workforces to fit theavailable work and adjusting quickly to swings in demand for products andservices. What makes this flexibility possible is the rise of temporary andcontract workers. On a typical day they allow companies to meet 12 percent oftheir staffing needs. On peak days that figure may reach 20 percent.


MYTH #3: Downsizing employees boosts profits.


FACT: Profitability does not necessarily follow downsizing.
    Data from the S&P 500, 1982-2000, showed clearlythat profitability, as measured by the return on assets, does not necessarilyfollow downsizing, even as long as two years later. Survey data support thisconclusion.


    Thus the 2001 Layoffs and Job Security Survey, conducted by the Society forHuman Resources Management, reported that only 32 percent of respondentsindicated that layoffs improved profits. Even massive staff cutbacks at firmssuch as Eastman Kodak, Apple Computer, and AT&T have not produced increasedearnings years later.


MYTH #4: Downsizing employees boosts productivity.


FACT: Productivity results after downsizing are mixed.
    The American Management Association surveyed 700 companies that had downsizedin the 1990s. In 34 percent of the cases, productivity rose, but it fell in 30percent of them. These results are consistent with those reported in anotherstudy of 250,000 manufacturing plants by the National Bureau of EconomicResearch.


    That study concluded that the productivity-enhancing role of employmentdownsizing has been exaggerated. While some plants did downsize and post healthygains in productivity, even more (including many of the largest facilities)managed to raise output per worker while expanding employment. They contributedabout as much to overall productivity increases in manufacturing as did thesuccessful downsizes.


MYTH #5: Downsizing employees has no effect on the quality of products orservices.


FACT: For most employers, downsizing employees does not lead to long-termimprovements in the quality of products or services.
    Poor labor relations has affected product quality in one tire-manufacturingplant at Bridgestone/Firestone. However, that example alone does not address thequestion “Does employment downsizing per se affect product quality?” In its1996 survey on corporate downsizing, job elimination, and job creation, theAmerican Management Association reported that over the long term, that only 35percent of responding companies increased the quality of their products andservices after laying off employees.


    However, among those that did increase profits. While there is a strongrelationship between improvements in the quality of products and services andincreases in profits, downsizing the workforce is not the way to get there.


MYTH #6: Downsizing employees is a one-time event for most companies.


FACT: The best predictor of whether a company will downsize in a given yearis whether it has downsized the previous year.
    One of the clearest trends is that downsizing begets more downsizing, asongoing staff reductions are etched into the corporate culture. On averagetwo-thirds of firms that lay off employees in a given year do so again thefollowing year. Among companies that laid off employees since 2000, according tothe 2001 Layoffs and Job Security Survey, 45 percent rehired laid-off employeesfull time, and 17 percent rehired laid-off employees as consultants. Fully 56percent have hired new employees since the layoff.


MYTH #7: Since companies are just “cutting fat” by downsizing employees,there are no adverse effects on those who remain.


FACT: For the majority of companies, downsizing has had adverse effects onthe morale, workload, and commitment of “survivors.”
    It has often been said that employee morale is the first casualty in adownsizing. Survey data bear this out. Right Associates found that 70 percent ofsenior managers that remained in downsized firms reported that morale and trustdeclined. Study after study found similar results. A recent national surveyfound the following among survivors: feel overworked (54 percent), areoverwhelmed by workload (55 percent), lack time for reflection (59 percent), don’thave time to complete tasks (56 percent), and have to multitask too much (45percent).


    Between 1993 and 1995, an Australian bank, identified simply as Onebank,implemented a “restructuring improvement program” (yielding the ominousacronym RIP). It’s objective was to improve the banks competitiveness byreducing costs, instigating a sales culture, and installing new technology. RIPeliminated 350 branches and 10,000 employees, although 4,500 new jobs werecreated in central processing sites. RIP involved a “spill and fill” processin which all staff lost their jobs and had to compete for the jobs remaining inthe new structure. It was like a giant game of musical chairs, with about 20percent fewer chairs than people.


    An academic’s survey of the bank’s middle managers (to which a remarkable80 percent responded) revealed an almost complete turnaround in attitudestowards their careers. The survey found a decline in the managers’ commitmentat all levels: to their job, to their branch or department, and, most of all, toOnebank and its goals. This is true even through 83 percent considered RIPessential for the long-term future of the bank, and 76 percent said they werefully committed to making it a success.


How had the restructuring changed the nature of the managers’ jobs? Morethan 30 percent of the managers said they now had more staff reporting to them,64 percent had increased responsibility, 69 percent had a wider range of duties,77 percent worked longer hours, 83 percent experienced increased street, and 85percent had increased workload overall.


    Against all that, however, only 37 percent said they’d received a salaryincrease. Is it any surprise that 49 percent felt a decreased sense ofcommitment to Onebank or that 64 percent experienced decreased job satisfaction?Asked about their level of commitment and their views on working for the bank,the managers offered 8 positive and 390 negative comments


MYTH #8: Most employees are surprised to learn they’ve been laid off. Theyask, “Why me?”


FACT: Downsized employees often express sympathy toward an employer’sreasons for layoffs, and many refuse to personalize the experience.
    From the perspective of the employees, layoffs have a new character. Moremanagers are briefing employees regularly about the economic status of theircompanies. This raises awareness and actually prepares employees for what mighthappen to them. To many, the layoffs seem justified because of the slowdown ineconomic growth, the plunge in corporate profits, and the dive in stock prices.While it used to be (and still is) traumatic to be laid off even once, someemployees can now expect to go through that experience twice or even three timesbefore they reach 50.


MYTH #9: At outplacement centers, laid-off employees tend to keep tothemselves as they pursue jobs.


FACT: Outplacement centers have become America’s new hiring halls–gatheringplaces for those between assignments.
    There seems to be a new matter-of-factness about downsizing. As the managingprincipal of the New York office of outplacement firm Right Associates put it,“These people are not ashamed, but they do feel dislocated, and there isanger. They were on track and now they are trying to get back on track.”


    Right has redesigned its offices to accommodate this new trend. Instead ofenclosed offices and cubicles, where the downsized of the 1990’s kept tothemselves as they perused jobs, there are many more glass walls and opengathering places where the downsized of the 21st century get to know each other.They socialize, and they even re-create office buzz. Said the managingprincipal, “It took a while to recognize this had become important.”


MYTH #10: The number of employees let go, including their associated costs,is the total cost of downsizing.


FACT: In knowledge-based or relationship-based businesses, the most seriouscost is the loss of employee contacts, business foregone, and lack ofinnovation.
    In knowledge- and relationship-based businesses, the company’s mostimportant assets walk out the door every night. The Economist magazine notedthat people are not interchangeable. They all have different skills and addvalue in different ways. “Down-sizing can have a devastating impact oninnovation, as skills and contacts that have been developed over the years aredestroyed at a stroke.”


    Knowledge-based businesses, from high-technology firms to financial servicesindustry, depend heavily on their employees–their stock of human capital–toinnovate and grow. They are “learning organizations”–collections ofnetworks in which inter-relationships among individuals (i.e., social networks)generate learning and knowledge. This knowledge base constitutes a firm’s “memory.”


    Downsizing is especially hazardous to learning organizations. Because asingle individual has multiple relationships in such an organization,indiscriminate, nonselective downsizing has the potential to inflictconsiderable damage on the learning and memory capacity of organizations. Thatdamage is far greater than might be implied by a simple tally of the number ofindividuals let go.


    When one considers the multiple relationships generated by one individual, itis clear that restructuring that involves significant reductions in employeescan inflict damage and create the loss of significant “chunks” oforganizational memory. Such a loss damages ongoing processes and operations,forfeits current contacts, and may lead to foregone business opportunities.Which kinds of organizations are at greatest risk? Those that operate in rapidlyevolving industries, such as biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, and software, inwhich survival depends on a firm’s ability to innovate constantly.


MYTH #11: Violence, sabotage, or other vengeful acts from laid-off employeesare remote possibilities.


FACT: They are less remote than you think, and the consequences may besevere.
    The good news is that the 2001 Layoffs and Job Security Survey, conducted bythe Society for Human Resources Management, reported that 86 percent ofcompanies have not experienced discrimination charges, and 93 percent have notexperienced workplace violence. The bad news, however, is that the most commonprecipitator of workplace violence is a layoff or firing.


    What do Xerox, Fireman’s Fund, and the US Postal Service all have incommon? They have employees who died violently while at work. Violence disruptsproductivity, causes untold damage to those exposed to the trauma, is related toworkplace abuse of drugs or alcohol and absenteeism, and cost employers millionsof dollars. In a stressed-out, downsized business environment, people aresearching for someone to blame for their problems. With the loss of a job orother event the employee perceives as unfair, the employer may become the focusof a disgruntled individual’s fear and frustration. Under these circumstances,some form of workplace aggression–that is, efforts by individuals to harmothers with whom they work, or have worked, or their organization itself–islikely.


    In France, laid-off workers at bankrupt householdappliance maker Moulinex SA threatened to blow up their factory if their demands for more severance pay werenot met. A sign in black marker at the entrance to the plant said it all: “Moneyor BOOM!” Their demands were met. The French labor ministry and the unionsagreed on a deal to give workers who were with Moulinex for more than 25 years aseverance bonus of 12,200 euros (about $10,785) and the rest of the workers4,600 to 7,600 euros (about $4,050 to $6,690).


    Among white-collar workers, the cyber saboteur has a emerged as a new threatamong disgruntled ex-employees. Recently axed workers have posted a company’spayroll on its intranet, planted data destroying bugs, and handed over valuableintellectual property to competitors. Although exact numbers are hard to comeby, computer security experts say it is fast becoming the top technical concernat many companies.


    Of course, fired workers have exacted revenge on their former employers inthe past. But this time, they’re capable of great damage, because more thanever, companies depend on computer networks that are vulnerable to electronicsabotage. With more than 30,000 Web sites filled with hacking tools that anygrade-school child could use, today’s brand of getting even is far easier foralienated workers to pull off. It’s also far more costly for companies. TheFBI estimates the cost of the average insider attack at $2.7 million.


MYTH #12: Training survivors during the and following layoffs is notnecessary.


FACT: Training survivors is critical to success subsequently.
    The American Management Association survey on corporate downsizing, jobelimination, and job creation clearly supports this conclusion. In firms inwhich training budgets increased after downsizing, 63 percent reported thatproductivity increased over the long term, and 69 percent reported that profitsincreased. In firms in which training budgets decreased after downsizing, only34 percent reported that productivity increased over the long term, and only 40percent reported that profits increased. A similar pattern also emerged over theshort term.


    One explanation for these results is that two-thirds of reported jobeliminations are connected to organizational restructuring or business processreengineering. Workers who receive training are far more likely to improve theirproductivity, which, in turn, leads to increases in profits.


MYTH #13: Stress-related medical disorders are more likely for those laid offthan those who remain.


FACT: Workers at downsized companies are just as likely to suffer adversehealth consequences.
    Among employees who remain after a downsizing, more than half reportincreased job stress and symptoms of “burnout.” The physical toll on workerstranslates into a financial toll on employers. Based on an analysis of 3,896disability cases, Northwestern National Life Insurance Company calculated thatthe average cost of rehabilitating an employee disabled because of stress was$1,925 ($2,850 in 2001 dollars). If he or she is not rehabilitated, companieswill need to hold in reserve an average of $73,270 ($108,450 in 2001 dollars) ormore to cover payments for employees disabled by job related stress.


    Another study of 300 large to midsize firms was conducted jointly by CignaInsurance Company and the American Management Association. Over the five-yearperiod of the study, stress-related disorders among workers at downsizingcompanies showed the greatest increase among all kinds of medical-relatedclaims, including those for mental health and substance abuse, high bloodpressure, and other cardiovascular problems. The percentage increases acrosscompanies varied from 100 to 900 percent–that is, as much as a ninefoldincrease. The same survey revealed that although supervisors comprise 5 to 8percent of the American workforce, this group is at a greater risk of being laidoff and of developing stress-related disability.


    While research has revealed a variety of negative health consequencesassociated with layoff victims, this is not necessarily true for those whoaccept voluntary buyout packages. In a recent Australian study, 71 individualswho had accepted voluntary buyout packages (after 7 to 44 years of service, withan average of 25 years) were contacted 2 to 7 years after leaving their firms.Almost 90 percent were married, and about half had dependant children.Surprisingly, 61 percent considered their health to be about the same, and 29percent considered it to be “better” or “much better.”


    Other research has shown that one’s financial situation is a major factorin how people perceive and respond to job loss, both physiologically andpsychology. Financial incentives, which often accompany voluntary severanceagreements, may well moderate the ill effects of job loss. As one set of authorsnoted, “evidence is mounting that events viewed as uncontrollable andundesirable are more likely to be associated with psychological and physicaldistress.” The findings of this study suggest that rather than consideringthemselves as “victims,” individuals who are offered voluntary buyouts maysee themselves as having the opportunity to make choices about their futureprospects that are not available to the “survivors.” As a result, theyexperience less distress later on.


    Reprinted with permission from“Responsible Restructuring, Creative andProfitable Alternatives to Layoffs,” by Wayne F. Cascio, Berrett-KoehlerPublishers, Inc., 2002.


 Workforce Online, October 2002 — Register Now!

Posts navigation

Previous page Page 1 … Page 300 Page 301 Page 302 … Page 416 Next page

 

Webinars

 

White Papers

 

 
  • Topics

    • Benefits
    • Compensation
    • HR Administration
    • Legal
    • Recruitment
    • Staffing Management
    • Training
    • Technology
    • Workplace Culture
  • Resources

    • Subscribe
    • Current Issue
    • Email Sign Up
    • Contribute
    • Research
    • Awards
    • White Papers
  • Events

    • Upcoming Events
    • Webinars
    • Spotlight Webinars
    • Speakers Bureau
    • Custom Events
  • Follow Us

    • LinkedIn
    • Twitter
    • Facebook
    • YouTube
    • RSS
  • Advertise

    • Editorial Calendar
    • Media Kit
    • Contact a Strategy Consultant
    • Vendor Directory
  • About Us

    • Our Company
    • Our Team
    • Press
    • Contact Us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms Of Use
Proudly powered by WordPress