Skip to content

Workforce

Author: Site Staff

Posted on May 10, 2010August 9, 2018

Report Dont Ostracize Temp Employees

Traditionally hired employees are less satisfied with co-workers and bosses when working with larger proportions of temporary workers, research from the University of Arizona found. However, companies can help fix the situation by not treating temps as a separate workforce.


“Using temporary workers can be a good thing for organizations,” said Joseph Broschak, associate professor of management and organizations at the University of Arizona’s Eller College of Management. “But managers must think carefully about how they manage nonstandard work arrangements, such as temporary and contract work. Treating the population of nonstandard employees as a separate workforce can have unintended consequences for everyone.”


Broschak, along with Alison Davis-Blake of the University of Minnesota, studied the issue in a recent paper. The University of Arizona reported on the findings last week as the U.S. continues to add temp jobs.


Why are traditionally hired workers less satisfied?


“First, in many organizations the task of training and socializing temporary workers on company-specific processes is often delegated to full-time workers,” Broschak said. “Having more temporary co-workers makes full-time workers’ jobs more complicated, since they are always training new people. Second, regularly helping temporary workers can get in the way of full-time employees completing their work. Further, in the minds of full-time employees their jobs have diminished status when temporary workers occupy similar jobs.”


The effect is particularly strong among people at lower levels of an organization where traditionally hired and temporary workers are most similar.


Employers can improve the situation by encouraging social interaction among all workers and including temps in thinks such as formal and informal departmental lunches and holiday parties, according to the research.


“Allowing workers who are employed under different work arrangements to develop social ties at work is a key to developing a cohesive and well-functioning workforce,” Broschak said.


Another paper, published in 2008, by Broschak, Davis-Blake and Emily Block of Notre Dame University found that voluntary part-time workers tended to be more positive and temporary workers more negative about their work arrangements compared with standard workers. However, temporary workers who had opportunities to transition to standard employment had better attitudes and were better performers than their peers in standard work arrangements.


“Temporary workers want to work hard and want to fit in when they see a job as an avenue to getting ahead,” Broschak said. “This can be a real plus to organizations that use this as a method of finding standard workers.”  


Filed by Staffing Industry Analysts, a sister company of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.


 


Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.

Posted on May 10, 2010August 9, 2018

Workers Comp Insurers in Precarious Position

The state of the U.S. workers’ compensation insurance industry is in a “precarious position” following a trying 2009, while economic uncertainties remain ahead, said NCCI Holdings Inc.


The pace of economic recovery and unknown factors related to health care reform and financial regulation are among uncertainties facing the U.S. industry, NCCI said Thursday, May 6, in its annual “State of the Line” market analysis.


Meanwhile, workers’ comp insurers’ 2009 combined ratio rose to 110 percent from 101 percent the previous year—the largest single-year increase since the mid-1980s, said the Boca Raton, Florida-based unit of the National Council on Compensation Insurance Inc.  


Three percentage points of that combined ratio, however, stem from a single insurer adding $1 billion to its reserves. NCCI did not name the insurer, but it said the combined ratio coupled with inadequate investment yields are among market challenges faced by workers’ comp insurers.


Price decreases due to competition and a 23 percent decline in written premiums over the past two years also weighed on private insurers and state workers comp funds, NCCI said.


The report is available online at www.ncci.com.  


 Filed by Roberto Ceniceros of Business Insurance, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.


 


Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.

Posted on May 5, 2010August 9, 2018

HHS Issues Rules for Retiree Care Reimbursements

Final interim rules unveiled Tuesday, May 4, detail the requirements that employers must meet to receive federal reimbursement of claims by pre-Medicare-eligible retirees.


Under a $5 billion program—authorized by the new health care reform law—employers with health care plans covering retirees from age 55 through 64 will be reimbursed for 80 percent of such retirees’ claims between $15,000 and $90,000.


The Department of Health and Human Services’ rules specify that only health care expenses incurred after June 1, 2010, are eligible for reimbursement. Health benefits that qualify for reimbursement include medical, hospital, surgical, prescription drug, mental health and other benefits that may be specified by the HHS secretary.


To receive reimbursement, health care plans must have programs in place that save costs or have the potential to save costs for participants with chronic and high-cost conditions, according to a White House fact sheet. 


Filed by Jerry Geisel of Business Insurance, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.


 


Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.

Posted on May 4, 2010August 9, 2018

Dear Workforce How Do We Persuade Management to Vary Our Recognition Program

Dear Pigeonholed:

You have a big challenge, to state the obvious. The challenge with your boss isn’t as big as you may think. The challenge is with addressing the core issue: how to create and apply a recognition program that meets the needs of a large and diverse employee population. A recognition program strategy will be supported if it is possible to implement, is reasonable and is tied to results.

To make employee recognition programs more effective, it is crucial that managers:

1. Think more strategically about how to tie awards directly to results.
2. Reward employees for great work in a much more timely manner.
3. Use a wider menu of options for employee recognition.

There are many kinds of recognition. One of the easiest and most effective—and underutilized—forms of recognition is praise. To look at it another way, it is difficult to provide too much positive feedback to deserving employees. We’re not talking about superficial pats on the back here. Giving sincere praise is a skill that is developed. So be sure to list this as a key part of your strategy. Beyond that, here are a few ideas.

Create your own award certificate templates: This might involve a small investment in a professional document designer or perhaps the leveraging of your in-house creative graphic artist to develop certificate templates. But before you design the certificate, design the recognition criteria. Who gets the certificate is most important. Examples of templates might be: a Great Idea Award, Customer Service Award, Quality Award or High Performance Award. Putting the certificate in a nice frame is a plus.

Generationally sensitive awards (cash-based awards): To address your concern about the generational differences, conduct small, informal focus groups to gain a better understanding of different ideas and see the reaction (body language) of participants. When the creative juices start flowing, individual responses to ideas that come from the group, or from you, will be easy to read compared with doing a survey. Here is a range, based on investment required:

Three-day/four-night trip for two to anywhere (location must fit the time frame): I’ve seen too many “trips” to a specific destination be received with a rather “Oh, thanks” response. For example, there was a time I was visiting Orlando, Florida, much too often. If I had been rewarded with a trip for two to Disney World, I would have donated it to my assistant. Whether the recipients choose the wine country in Northern California or the Cayman Islands, the cost won’t be very different. You can also put a top cap on the total price. Think how much fun someone of any age will have being able to choose the trip they’ve always wanted to take but hadn’t been able to.

Local weekend package for two: Use the same concept, capping the value at whatever amount is appropriate. The recipient gets to investigate and choose/design his or her own weekend. All arrangements made by the company’s concierge service (in-house or delegate it out). The idea here is to not just hand over the equal value in money.

Parking space for a month: This can be a great one for the shy person. Shy people want to be recognized, just not embarrassed. One “watch out” is to ensure the award is completely results-based and not politically based.

Dinner for four at their favorite restaurant: This isn’t very expensive (even for the most expensive restaurants) when it comes to recognition programs. Same concept: Let the recipient choose; the company handles all the details. Many restaurants will go along with a direct bill to a company credit card and treat the foursome with royalty and special amenities such as the best table, guest’s name on the special entrée of the night, etc. Make it for four so the recipient can “explain” (nice form of bragging—and they deserve some bragging rights) to their closest friends how they received the special gift.

Tickets to the company’s reserve seats at sporting events: These are usually owned by the marketing department. Then, when the tickets can’t be given away, they turn them over to HR to find someone to give them to. What if you were to reverse that? HR owns the tickets, gives them out as recognition awards, and when an employee says, “No thanks”—because it is on the worst day to go to a football game, or the team is in last place—then HR can turn them over to the marketing department to give to their best clients/customers/business partners. If you are going to give away reserved-seat tickets to sporting events as part of your recognition program, pick out the best dates and games.

Donation to a nonprofit of the recipient’s choice: This one can be tricky, but with certain parameters spelled out ahead of time can be very effective. There are some people who believe strongly in a nonprofit organization’s cause. By excluding religious and political organizations, you can have more confidence that the donation (amount based on the level of recognition) will go to an acceptable organization (from a company PR standpoint).

To summarize the points, keep quality a part of the recognition selection process, spell out the policy for recognition so that selection of recipients supports a “results-based” program, and build in as much flexibility and variability as possible so that the recipient has a say in the award’s makeup.

SOURCE: Carl Nielson, Dallas, The Nielson Group, April 7, 2010

LEARN MORE: Cutting budgets for recognition programs during recession may be worse than keeping the funding intact.

Workforce Management Online, May 2010 — Register Now!

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

Ask a Question
Dear WorkforceNewsletter
Posted on April 30, 2010August 9, 2018

Recruiting Flurry at LPL Eases Upfor Now

After a year of record-setting recruiting, LPL Investment Holdings reported Wednesday, April 28, that the pace of bringing in new advisors has decreased substantially in 2010.


For the 12 months ended March 31, LPL added 450 net new reps and advisors, the company said in its quarterly earnings report. That’s a decrease of 40 percent when compared with recruiting for the 12 months that ended in December. Over that time, LPL added 750 net new reps and advisors.


The results also did not include the brokers who left the firm when it integrated three separate broker-dealers—Mutual Service Corp., Associated Securities Corp. and Waterstone Financial Group—onto its platform in September.


Robert Moore, LPL’s chief financial officer, would not comment specifically about the firm’s recent recruiting results, saying that it was “premature” to announce any trend and that LPL does not look at these results on a quarterly basis.


“The trend of movement into independent advice is a longer-term trend,” he said. “We are well positioned to benefit from that and still feel good about the fundamentals of the marketplace.”


Last year was a banner year for recruiting in the independent broker industry, with the first six months being particularly strong. One reason: The stock market finally bottomed out, causing many brokers’ clients to turn away from traditional firms. Their brokers followed.


In addition, the upheaval at three broker-dealers under the AIG Advisor Group, now simply Advisor Group, sparked an exodus of brokers from AIG.


Moreover, the merger of Morgan Stanley and Smith Barney—and, crucially, management’s subsequent decision to cut the lowest-producing advisors—put many of those brokers in play.


This year has yet to see the kind of event that would spark brokers to move in droves, noted Larry Papike, president of Cross-Search, a recruiting and executive search firm for independent broker-dealers.


While recruiting slowed last quarter at LPL, its net income for the first three months of the year increased 72.7 percent compared with the same period last year, reaching $25.6 million. LPL’s net revenue increased 15.6 percent, reaching $743.4 million.


LPL is the largest independent broker-dealer in the U.S., with about 12,000 brokers and advisors. 


Filed by Bruce Kelly of InvestmentNews, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.


 


Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.

Posted on April 30, 2010August 9, 2018

Search Firm Heidricks Revenue Rises 28 Percent

First-quarter net revenue at Heidrick & Struggles International Inc. rose 27.5 percent on a year-over-year basis to $113.7 million. The Chicago-based executive search firm said it got a boost from its financial services business.


“The financial services practice was the first to show a significant decline beginning in 2007 and has been the strongest driver of growth coming out of the recession,” CEO L. Kevin Kelly said in a press release.


This year’s first-quarter report is a sharp contrast to the same quarter a year ago. First-quarter net revenue in 2009 fell 41.8 percent year over year to $89.1 million as the number of executive searches confirmed fell 38.4 percent. The executive search firm also announced a $13.4 million restructuring charge for the quarter that primarily involved severance payments.


Average revenue per executive search was $98,400 in the first quarter, compared with $98,900 in the year-ago quarter. The number of executive search confirmations rose 26.9 percent in the first quarter compared with the first quarter of 2009.


Heidrick’s Americas net revenue rose 24 percent to $57.5 million. The Americas segment includes the U.S., Canada, Mexico and Latin America.


The company posted a first-quarter net loss of $1.8 million, compared with a net loss of $18.9 million in the first quarter of last year.


Heidrick said the first quarter of 2010 included $4.7 million in charges related to moving to a smaller office in London and a judgment against the company in a court case involving a former European employee.


“Operating expenses in the quarter were higher than we had forecasted,” Kelly said. “In addition to the $4.7 million in other charges noted above, margins were negatively impacted by certain other unanticipated costs which we do not expect to recur.”


The company posted a loss per diluted share of 10 cents. Analysts had expected earnings of 15 cents per share, according to Yahoo.com.


The company estimated second-quarter revenue of $117 million to $123 million, a year-over-year increase of 26 to 32 percent.


Heidrick estimated full-year 2010 revenue of $440 million to $480 million, year-over-year growth of 11 to 21 percent.  


Filed by Staffing Industry Analysts, a sister company of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.


 


Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.

Posted on April 30, 2010August 9, 2018

Many Plans Fail Health Reform Affordability Test

More than one in three employers have at least some employees for whom coverage would be considered “unaffordable” under the new health care reform law, according to a new analysis.


Under a health care reform law provision that begins in 2014, employers are subject to stiff penalties if premiums paid by full-time employees exceed 9.5 percent of their household income. The annual penalty for unaffordable coverage is $3,000 for each full-time employee who receives government assistance and uses it to buy coverage in state insurance exchanges, up to a maximum of $2,000 times all of an employer’s full-time workers, excluding the first 30.


Using information obtained from its 2009 health care cost survey of nearly 3,000 employers, New York-based benefit consultant Mercer estimates that 38 percent of employers have at least some employees who pay premiums of more than 9.5 percent of household income, exposing employers to the penalties unless they reduce affected employees’ premium contributions.


The likelihood of employers offering unaffordable coverage is inversely related to employer size, with smaller employers having a higher percentage of workers paying more than 9.5 percent of household income. For example, 20 percent of employers with more than 20,000 employees have at least some employees paying more than 9.5 percent of household income, compared with 38 percent of employers with 10 to 499 employees.


The affordability provision will be one of the more challenging ones for employers to interpret, Mercer notes.


“Lawmakers did not take into account that employers don’t have access to information on employee household income,” Tracy Watts, a partner in Mercer’s Washington office, said in a statement.


“Employers question how they are going to get that information and what other administrative challenges might come along with this new requirement. For example, what happens if an employee’s total family income changes during the course of a plan year?” Watts asked.


The provision also will require government regulations to implement, as the law does not clearly define household income.


Numerous other provisions will force employers to make design changes or face penalties. For example, the law requires employers to offer affordable coverage to employees who work at least 30 hours a week.


However, Mercer, in its analysis, found that only 51 percent of employers with at least 500 employees offer coverage to part-time employees who work at least 30 hours a week. The remainder either don’t cover any part-time employees, require them to work more than 30 hours a week to be eligible or impose other eligibility requirements.


“This rule will require employers with a lot of part-time employees to make some hard choices,” Watts said. “If they don’t offer coverage to part-timers, can they afford to start, or to raise the minimum hours required for coverage?”


The Mercer analysis also found 71 percent of employers with at least 500 employees now impose a lifetime dollar limit in at least one of their preferred provider or point-of-service plans, which will be illegal beginning on January 1, 2011. The median lifetime dollar limit now is $2 million.


On the other hand, only 22 percent of large employers with HMOs have a lifetime dollar limit. 


Filed by Jerry Geisel of Business Insurance, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.


 


Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitterfeed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.

Posted on April 27, 2010August 9, 2018

Two Accused of Sending Out Illegal Temps

Two Illinois men face charges of unlawfully hiring dozens of illegal aliens to send out as temporary workers, the U.S. Department of Justice for the Northern District of Illinois reported.


Clinton Roy Perkins was the president of Anna II Inc. and Can Do It Inc., both located in Bensenville, Illinois, according to the Department of Justice. Perkins’ son-in-law, Christopher Reindl, was office manager.


The businessmen allegedly hired illegal workers and paid their wages in cash without deducting payroll taxes or other withholdings, the Department of Justice reported. Their companies supplied workers for janitorial services, freight handling and other jobs.


Perkins and Reindl repeatedly withdrew money in the amount of $9,800 from bank accounts to pay their workers’ wages in cash, believing that withdrawing amounts of less than $10,000 would not trigger banks’ currency transaction reporting requirements, according to the Department of Justice.


The two face a maximum sentence of up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine, according to the Department of Justice. Perkins may also face the forfeiture of $488,095.  


Filed by Staffing Industry Analysts, a sister company of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.


 


Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.

Posted on April 23, 2010August 9, 2018

New Federal Bill Targets Misclassification

A new federal bill to get tough on companies that misclassify employees as independent contractors was introduced Thursday, April 22, by Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, and Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-California.


The Employee Misclassification and Prevention Act would require employers to keep records on the status of each worker and increase penalties on employers that misclassify workers, according to Sherrod’s office. It would also create an employee rights Web site to inform workers about their rights and would create protections for workers discriminated against because they sought accurate classification.


The bill also would require states to conduct audits to identify misclassification, and to strengthen their own penalties for misclassification. In addition, the bill would allow the Department of Labor and IRS to refer incidents of misclassification to each other and to direct states.


Also, the Department of Labor would be directed to conduct targeted audits of industries that frequently misclassify workers.


Brown cited a study by the Ohio Attorney General’s Office that the state loses at least $160 million a year because of worker misclassification.


Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis lauded the bill, and said her department is already addressing the issue of misclassification.


“The Department of Labor is working with the vice president’s Middle Class Task Force and the Department of Treasury on a multi-agency initiative to develop strategies to address this issue,” Solis said in a release. “The administration’s budget request for fiscal year 2011 includes $25 million for the Department of Labor as part of this initiative, including $12 million for increased enforcement of wage and overtime laws in cases where employees have been misclassified.


“The Wage and Hour Division is currently considering how to best target its FY 2011 enforcement efforts and is emphasizing misclassification in its ongoing FY 2010 enforcement strategy.”  


Filed by Staffing Industry Analysts, a sister company of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.


 


Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.


 

Posted on April 20, 2010August 9, 2018

Financial Advisors Once Again Open Doors to Interns

In an early sign that the worst days of the recession are behind them, financial advisory firms once again are hiring summer interns, with the hope of grooming young prospects to become full-time professionals.


“There was a falloff last year, but this year, we’re placing kids like crazy,” said Deena Katz, associate professor in the Division of Personal Financial Planning at Texas Tech University and chairman of wealth management firm Evensky & Katz.


She noted that 90 percent of the 60 students seeking internships have been placed with employers so far this year, compared with 70 percent a year ago. By the end of spring, Katz predicted, every student seeking an internship will get one.


Although it is still early in the hiring season, other organizations are seeing similar spikes. At internships.com, the number of financial services internships is up 250 percent compared with last year, according to spokesman Josh Morgan, who would not provide specific numbers.


The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania reported an 80 percent increase in off-campus internships being posted so far this year compared with a year ago, according to Michelle Antonio, director of Wharton MBA Career Management.


About half of the 65 to 75 students at Virginia Tech seeking internships have been hired, Ruth Lytton, a professor of financial planning, wrote in an e-mail. She said it is still early in the hiring season, and she expects that nearly all will be placed. Last year, about 42 students found internships.


“We are also seeing a trend for firms offering internship opportunities for the first time, which offers new potential for both the firms and the student interns,” Lytton said.


For advisory firms ramping up to hire interns this spring, the process requires more than simply posting an ad on a college campus bulletin board or Web site. To be successful, advisors must perform the same kind of due diligence they use with other hires to identify good fits.


They must also be ready to train their interns, with specific projects in mind, both to introduce them to the business and see whether they might make a good full-time addition to their firms down the road.


Identifying the right students is the biggest challenge, according to Natalie Pine, COO of Briaud Financial Planning Inc. in Bryan, Texas, which manages $450 million. Her firm halted its internship program a few years ago after several of its interns fled the advisory business for other careers.


“It was frustrating,” Pine said. “We’d train them and give them work experience, and a lot of them left for other industries.”


This year, for the first time, Pine is working closely with professors at Texas A&M University to screen student candidates and find ones who are committed to the financial services industry. She has not hired an intern yet but will start interviewing candidates soon.


Partnering with universities to recruit interns is also key for Jon Yankee, a partner at Fox Joss & Yankee in Reston, Virginia, which manages $275 million. He visited Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University recently to meet with planning students and speak to two financial planning classes about the industry. He said these recruiting trips help the firm become better known among students and faculty members.


“Part of our goal has been to establish our firm’s reputation so students think of us as the firm to go to,” he said. “When that happens, we’ll have a choice of the best students.”


For advisory firms far from universities or colleges with planning programs, hiring a top-notch intern can be much more of a challenge. For example, Rick Kahler, a certified financial planner and owner of Kahler Financial Group, said his firm’s Rapid City, South Dakota, location is a major disadvantage when recruiting interns.


“It’s hard for me to find any student that wants to come to Rapid City,” Kahler said. “And there’s no college within 400 miles of my location that has a financial planning program.”


This year, however, Kahler got lucky: A student from Iowa State University who’s getting her master’s degree in financial planning will join him this summer because she has family in the area.


Once advisors have selected an intern, it’s critical that he or she be assigned meaningful work and be allowed to get a real feel for the job; relegating interns to administrative work such as filing or making coffee has little long-term value for the firm or the intern.


For example, interns at Burns Advisory Group in Oklahoma City, which manages $400 million, work with the firm’s research team analyzing new clients’ portfolios, crafting projections for those clients and analyzing companies’ 401(k) costs, founder John Burns said. Allowing interns to help with these kinds of tasks also gives firms a better idea of whether they’re good candidates for full-time employment after college.


“You get to see the work ethic, their attitude, what they bring to the table,” Burns said.
In fact, Burns’ firm hired its most recent intern, Jarrod Sandra, who graduated last year from the University of Central Oklahoma, as an investment analyst. Sandra impressed his bosses by overseeing a major project—moving the firm’s portfolio data to its customer relationship management system, said Joy Parduhn, chief compliance officer and COO.


Lee Munson, a certified financial planner with Portfolio LLC, a registered investment advisory firm in Albuquerque, New Mexico, with $100 million in assets, gives his interns assignments such as writing research reports on funds and fund managers that are eventually posted on the firm’s Web site.


While most firms—including Burns Advisory, Fox Joss & Yankee and Briaud—pay their interns competitively, Munson said he believes he can still snag top-notch interns without compensating them.


“If you pay them, I feel it discourages their passion to learn and really suck it up,” he said. “If they’re not on the clock, they can be there because they really want to be there, and you can let them roam free and spend hours expanding their intellectual curiosity.”


Advisors who aren’t paying their interns should be careful they don’t run afoul of state and federal labor laws, which in most cases require that interns be paid. 


But Munson said that when an intern impresses him, he tries to hire him or her with competitive pay and benefits. He recently hired former intern Bryon Giron, who graduates next month from the University of New Mexico, to become a trader at the firm.


 


Filed by Lisa Shidler of InvestmentNews, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.


 


Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.

Posts navigation

Previous page Page 1 … Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 … 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