Author: Site Staff

Posted on

What’s the Business Case for Diversity?

Dear Melting Pot:

    Organizations implement diversity and inclusion initiatives to create an environment in which individuals from different backgrounds are treated fairly and given equal access to opportunities and resources. Embracing diversity and inclusion can bring a broader range of mindsets and backgrounds into the organization, leading to more effective decision-making or drawing in a wider customer base.

    Companies are investing in this area: 77 percent of executives strongly support diversity initiatives, and organizations expect to focus and invest even more on diversity and inclusion in the coming years. However, success at improving the perceptions of diversity and inclusiveness in the organization are not as strong as most organizations would like or need; only 40 percent of employees actually believe their organization is actually diverse and inclusive.

    The gap between investment and results is problematic as organizations are missing out on some very real benefits of building a more diverse and inclusive workforce. When employees feel that they have a more diverse and inclusive workforce, turnover is almost 20 percent lower and employee effort is nearly 12 percent higher.

    This gap is generated by the fact that most executives underestimate the importance of investing in building diversity and inclusiveness. They equate it with simply hiring more people from more diverse backgrounds, and fail to truly appreciate the investment that is required to build a more diverse and inclusive working environment.

    After analyzing the behaviors of hundreds of thousands of employees and conducting interviews with hundreds of heads of human resources and heads of diversity, we have identified four lessons to implementing a diversity and inclusion initiative:

Build diversity and inclusion strategies that link diversity with outcomes that matter to business leaders.

    While building a diverse and inclusive organization as a goal unto itself is certainly worthy, success at improving diversity and inclusion is rarely achieved when organizations simply set ambitious goals. Rather by tying diversity and inclusion objectives into the broader business strategy buy-in for and delivery of diversity and inclusion strategies is much more likely to be successful.
 

Define relevant diversity and inclusion objectives.

    Allow business leaders to create locally relevant diversity and inclusion objectives, and assess incremental progress against those objectives, not just final results. Frustration is generated without creating a way to show incremental progress on the goals. This disconnect prevents progress.

Build a diverse and inclusive workforce.

    Diverse candidates are often bombarded with information. Rather than trying to exclusively influence diverse candidates through direct organizational recruiting outreach, leading organizations are influencing the career influencers of diverse candidates to shape perceptions and to expand the diverse talent pool rather than fighting fierce battles over a limited talent supply.

Create a path to leadership positions for diverse talent.

    Most organizations highlight the career experiences of some of their diverse senior leader talent. However, these strategies have limited success since many diverse employees fail to see the connection between their current situation and the final destination of other employees. Instead, leading organizations are helping diverse employees see the link between their skills and leadership position requirements, and build processes that minimize the impact of biases in talent management decisions to show how diverse talent can move into leadership positions.

SOURCE: Brian Kropp, The Corporate Executive Board Co., Washington, D.C., Oct. 22, 2013

Posted on

People Moves, November 2013

Kimberly Abel
Maritz Motivation Solutions named Kimberly Abel as employee solutions leader, leading Maritz’s employee recognition and engagement issues. Abel brings more than 20 years’ experience in design and development in the areas of recognition, applied behavior analysis, talent management, performance management and workforce reward strategies. Before joining Maritz, Abel was vice president of strategy and business development
at Inspirus.

 

 

 

 

 

Ami Patel

Jones Lang LaSalle, a commercial real estate company, hired Ami Patel for the newly created role of senior vice president, total rewards. With 20 years of HR experience, Patel joins Jones Lang from MillerCoors, where she was senior director of compensation and people operations. There, she developed practices to manage executive compensation strategies while also overseeing HR systems.

 

 

 

 

Burton Reiter
The law firm Ogletree Deakins has named Burton Reiter of counsel in its Chicago office. Reiter will be representing management in labor and employment matters. Previously, Reiter was chief counsel at Kraft Foods.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

To be considered for People Moves, email a brief announcement and a high-resolution photo to editors@workforce.com. Include People Moves in the subject line.

Comment below or email editors@workforce.com. Follow Workforce on Twitter at @workforcenews.

Posted on

What Do I Do if the Boss and a Colleague Hook Up?

Dear Too Close:

Few things can disrupt a culturally healthy team like a dating relationship between co-worker and team leader, and it may be more common than you think. CareerBuilder reports 38 percent of women and 21 percent of menhave dated someone above them in the organization hierarchy.  Unfortunately, when that happens, the prognosis for the team is not good.

While a workplace tryst may provide temporary bliss for the couple involved, bliss is not what the rest of the team will experience. Team openness, trust, collaboration, and commitment all suffer when a leader and one team member form an “item.” 

Whether they intend to or not, the couple will naturally raise their personal relationship above that of the team — including team objectives and commitments. This is probably the source of the perceived favoritism.

If your suspicions are correct, your involved co-worker now exerts a special influence over the team leader. As a result, members of your team probably find themselves less willing to share information both with the team leader and co-worker. Your team may fracture as those within the involved co-worker’s personal circle become “insiders.” Or, team members may alienate the co-worker.

If your team was previously a high-performing unit, the fallout could substantially disrupt the business, damaging morale, employee engagement, or work processes. These reasons, and your commitment to team success, obligate you to do what you can to resolve it. But consider this: As long as you only suspect the couple is having an affair and have only circumstantial evidence, treat the situation as if it’s something the team can handle. If the evidence is undeniable, you should take your concerns to an HR leader or a trusted leader who is at least the same level as your team leader.

Let’s assume for a moment that you really only have a sneaking suspicion about the couple’s relationship, but it’s clear that the leader’s recent behaviors are hurting the team’s ability to execute the mission. You are still probably hesitant to raise this ticklish issue. After all, the person you need to confront is someone with control over your livelihood – you will want some reassurance that you can address the problem without damaging the relationship or your career.

If you decide to confront your leader about the problem, here are some important guidelines to follow:

Make a list beforehand of the three most problematic leader practices stemming from what you have observed and the affects they have on the team’s ability to produce results. Be as specific as you can with descriptions of lower morale, reduced productivity, wasted time, inefficient communications, and so on. Provide metrics, if possible, to back up your observations.

When you meet with your leader, show thoughtfulness and compassion, focusing on team goals rather than his relationship with the co-worker. Begin by explaining why the topic is important to the team, hold the conversation you prepared beforehand, and suggest ways the leader could improve team results. Ask him how he feels about your ideas and what concerns he has about them. Offer to help him and the team with these challenges and thank him for considering your ideas.

If you manage the conversation well, your leader should recognize your sincere concern for the team and thoughtfully consider your suggestions. Although it won’t solve the greater problems inherent in a dalliance between your leader and co-worker, the conversation may encourage your leader to mitigate them at some level, if your suspicions are accurate.

If things don’t improve, the bad news is you will have to consider the possibility that your suspicions about your leader and co-worker were correct and that your team will never be the same. At that point, you will be faced with the prospect of living with a damaged team that may never recover, asking for a transfer, or polishing your resume for a new beginning elsewhere.

SOURCE: Kevin Herring, President, Ascent Management Consulting, Ltd., Oro Valley, Arizona

 

 

Posted on

Team Coaching for Highly Motivated Employees

Dear Pleased:

A proactive approach, sometimes referred to as continuous improvement, is often an expectation we place on the individual employee. You’ll find that companies ranked as “best places to work” are more likely to take that same proactive approach to team development. Unfortunately, more often it is after a team begins failing that management pulls in the team building. There is so much to be gained by taking a proactive approach to ensuring your team’s continued success.

Executing projects and drumming up innovation happens in a collaborative environment. A collaborative environment requires trust and communications skills. There are other components too such as personal accountability and self-management that contribute to the success of a team. Having clear goals and priorities are important as well. And team resiliency is a critical component that is often overlooked yet easy to maintain through team coaching.

Team coaching is used to clarify and align goals and priorities as well as develop and maintain trust, collaboration, communication skills, personal accountability and self-management. We see highly effective teams using this kind of coaching to bring new energy, solve problems and accomplish greater goals. Team coaching also serves to reduce the risk of unwanted turnover. And designed and delivered appropriately, team coaching can be incredibly enjoyable for the team.

An assessment can be used to diagnose where the team wants to improve. I use one that focuses survey questions in four main areas of a team: 1) Processes 2) Work Management 3) Leadership 4) Relationships. The results of the assessment will help you determine what to focus on and how to design a team-coaching program. As for individual coaching, the team leader will benefit from one-on-one coaching, which will have a broader positive impact on the entire team.

Here is a short list of objectives that your team coaching might address to keep your teams performing at a high level:

  • Increasing self-awareness – those who really know who they are and how they operate (strengths and weaknesses) are found to be much more effective and successful in a team environment
  • Communication skills – recognizing, understanding, appreciating and adapting to the communication needs of others on the team
  • Communication strategy for problem solving – learn and apply a simple 5-step model for coaching each other
  • Team goals – articulating and aligning purpose, goals and outcomes for clarity
  • Building trust and collaboration skills
  • Defining and clarifying each role’s key accountabilities
  • Identifying and eliminating waste in teamwork
  • For leadership teams or teams responsible for organizational change initiatives, build coaching on change management for teams

Team coaching reduces the risk of failure and increases goal achievement. Everyone is expected to contribute to being faster, better and cheaper toward goal achievement. Team leaders and executives who have utilized development strategies such as team coaching are likely to tell you their teams are much more likely to surpass all expectations and achieve more.  

SOURCE: Carl Nielson, The Nielson Group, Dallas, Texas, August 6, 2013

Posted on

What Are the Pitfalls of Job Rotation Programs?

Dear Cautious but Curious:

Job rotation programs are an outstanding tool for employee recruitment and retention and typically serve one of two purposes:

  1. Grooming future leaders.  Rotation programs can give top talent a broad experience that will serve them well in senior management roles down the road.
  2. “Cross training” employees.  Once completed, a rotation program ensures participants can do their “regular jobs,” better with a strong understanding of perspectives from several functions.

In either case, the experiential nature of the learning excites, challenges, and motivates employees, who are constantly bringing a fresh perspective and new ideas to separate entities within the company.  However, there always are caution items to consider before launching into a job rotation.  Here are some tips to consider:

  1.  Determine your goals for a job rotation program.  Like everything else in business, a job rotation program initiative must begin with answering the question: ‘Why?’ Pinpoint desired goals and outcomes that will be achieved as a result of the rotation program. Remember that these goals and outcomes should result from the organization’s human resources and business strategy.  The percentage of employees you have involved will be dependent on your goals. Typically, most rotation programs include relatively small percentage of employees. As for where to start, it’s typically easier to start in one location. In addition to lower start-up costs, this enables you to pilot the program and see what works before rolling it out across the entire organization. 
  2. The devil is in the details.  Rotation programs sound amazing, but there are a lot of details to think through.  How long will each rotation be?  Who will be included?  What manager training is necessary in advance of each rotation?  How will you manage participant expectations?  The list goes on and on.  If your program is not well-thought-out, it’s destined to fail.  As such, ensure you have the support in place to tackle all of the details.  Appoint a line manager from each function to sit on a task force and own the rotation process in their function from start to finish.   
  3. Communicate, communicate, communicate.  Job rotation isn’t always met with initial excitement from every employee. An employee who loves his or her existing role may not be eager to move around. Some employees could be reluctant to pass along a project in which have a vested interest to someone else when their rotation is up.  It’s critical to communicate the goals, intentions and logistics of the rotation program to ensure employee buy-in – and that includes senior leadership. 

SOURCE: Brad Karsh, JB Training Solutions, Chicago, October 3, 2013

Posted on

The (In)effectiveness of Criticism as a Motivator

Dear Providing Constructive Feedback:

To begin to answer your question, we first need to ask why we need motivated employees? Will it really make a difference in our organization? Most will respond, of course it will, and I agree. Motivated employees help organizations survive. Motivated employees are more productive than non-motivated employees and they area a critical component in our rapidly and ever changing workplaces.   

Motivating employees looks different for every person and every manager. You are likely struggling with the manager in your organization who feels that criticism is a great way to motivate employees because your style and approach is different and you haven’t seen a benefit in his approach. How we interact with our employees can be the difference in them being engaged, wanting to give the extra effort and frankly, wanting to stay with the organization.  

To be effective, leaders need to understand what motivates his/her employees within the roles they perform. Of all the functions a leader performs, motivating employees is one of the most challenging, but it can also have the biggest return. Leaders have a profound influence on their employees and their organization’s success. Employees seek guidance, coaching, support and feedback from their leaders and when it is positive, they are more likely to deliver the results leaders want to see. 

One of the first things that we need to do as leaders is get to know our employees. As we build those relationships, we gain an understanding of how best to provide feedback, positive as well as constructive. The employee sees that we care about them as people as well as guiding them in their development and career growth.  

In your scenario, your manager believes that criticism is a good way to get employees to work harder. Criticism is often considered an "art," because it involves human insight into "what one can say and cannot say" in the given situation. 

Unfortunately, criticism can actually silence people, or cause them to stay away. It can leave employees feeling that they only hear about how they’re doing when they make a mistake. An employee’s self-confidence also plays a big role in dealing with criticism – the confidence to criticize, and the confidence to face criticism. If people's emotions are not taken into consideration, criticism can be harmful, although it may be well-intentioned, or perfectly sensible.

As I read your question, it caused me to reflect on my history as a manager. I often found that my employees actually worked harder and gave more of their efforts when they were praised, supported and encouraged. And, when I did need to have to do some additional “motivating,” feedback instead of criticism always worked better.  

SOURCE:  Margaret Walker, Principal at FutureSense, Inc. , a management consulting firm, Costa Mesa, California

Posted on

Your Company’s Personnel Files Are Not Your Employees’ Personal Property

One repeat question that I seem to receive is whether employees have a right to see their personnel files. At least in Ohio, the answer is no — with three key exceptions:

  1. Medical Records. Ohio Revised Code 4113.23(A) provides employees access to their own medical records from physical examinations either that are required for employment or stem from a job-related injury or disease.

  2. Wage & Hour Records. Ohio Revised Code 4111.14(G) provides employees (or their designated representative) access to their own wage and hour records, which must include their rate of pay, total gross wages per pay period, and hours worked each day.

  3. Public Employees. Ohio Revised Code 149.43 provides employees of the state, or any county, city, village, township, or school district, access to their personnel files as public records.

Mileage may vary in your jurisdiction. According to The HR Café, 20 states require that employers provide employees periodic access to their personnel files. Thus, it is critical that you have a policy establishing rights and expectations in relation to personnel files. Something as simple as, “The Company will provide employees access to personnel files according to state law,” should suffice.

Also, unless a state law provides otherwise, if you permit access to personnel files you should make the following internal decisions about their handling:

  • Will you permit access to an entire file, or only certain parts?
  • Will you permit employees to photocopy parts of their files?
  • Will you permit employees to designate their right to inspect (for example, to a family member, union rep, or lawyer)?
  • Will you permit employees to challenge information, and if so, how?
  • Will you place limits on access to confidential information (i.e., background checks or workplace investigation reports)?
  • Will you limit how often an employee can access a personnel file?

Written by Jon Hyman, a partner in the Labor & Employment group of Kohrman Jackson & Krantz. For more information, contact Jon at (216) 736-7226 or jth@kjk.com. You can also follow Jon on Twitter @jonhyman.

Posted on

Factors That Impact Productivity

Dear Solid Foundation:

You pose an excellent question. In all, there are 20 total factors that impact output. They are:

  1. A great manager
  2. Effective plans and strategies
  3. Clear and prioritized goals to focus the work
  4. Rapid learning and “best practice” being shared
  5. The correct motivators, rewards & engagement
  6. The “right” employee skills
  7. Two-way communications
  8. Performance metrics
  9. Quality team members from great hiring & retention
  10. Collaboration for innovation
  11. Employee is placed in the “right job”
  12. The work environment is designed  for productivity
  13. Enough time is devoted to the task
  14. Identifying, and removing, barriers to productivity/innovation
  15. Integrated talent processes
  16. Information for decisions
  17. The right tools/technology
  18. Quality inputs/materials
  19. Enough budget/ resources
  20. Outside-of-work factors

Every organization is different, but the No. 1 factor that affects talent management is universal: managers.

Think of it: poorly skilled managers are the primary cause of low productivity, low innovation, low engagement – and high turnover. The next most powerful impact factors are rapid learning and being permitted to "do the best work of your life." Firms like Apple Corp. are highly successful, despite a relatively harsh and secretive management approach, simply because the work itself is so important and exciting.

Many surveys also list unclear career paths as key factor in engagement, although firms like Apple and Google Inc. are productive and innovative despite having notoriously imprecise career paths.

It’s also true that the performance-appraisal processes is mentioned as being too subjective, but this is true at almost every firm (except in the rare cases where managers rely on metrics and data, rather than opinions in their assessment) The Gallup organization has a list of 12 productivity factors that have been developed over many years which many people find to be quite accurate.

SOURCE: Dr. John Sullivan, San Francisco State, September 4, 2013

Posted on

Bathroom Breaks Do Not Equal Breaks in Pay

Yesterday’s post on the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s bathroom rules generated an interesting reader question: can an employer deduct bathroom time from an employee’s pay?

The answer is no. Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, “Rest periods of short duration, running from 5 minutes to about 20 minutes … must be counted as hours worked.” The Department of Labor includes “restroom breaks” as an example of these short-duration rest periods for which an employer must pay its employees.

Thus, failing to pay your employees for time spent taking care of their personal business will subject you to a claim for unpaid wages.

Moreover, if the employees are exempt, pay deductions will also jeopardize their exempt status. You are required to pay exempt employees a weekly salary. Taking short-time deductions from an employee’s pay treat them like hourly employees, which, in turn, destroys the exemption for that job class.

In addition to these legal reasons to pay your employees for bathroom time, there is also a good practical reason. Treating your employees like tagged wildlife — tracking and recording their every move within the workplace — will create an work environment of distrust and apathy. Instead, you should treat all employees like professionals, and address performance-based issues as they arise. Is an employee failing to produce because he or she is spending too much time in the bathroom (or taking smoking breaks, or hanging around the coffee machine, or looking at Facebook, etc.)? Then address the performance issue. Is there a medical reason for which the employee needs a reasonable accommodation? Is the employee not busy enough and is looking for other way to fill time? Or is the employee a slacker that needs counseling, and if necessary, discipline?

Address the underlying performance issue on an employee-by-employee basis; avoid implementing company-wide edicts that will alienate the majority of your employees.

Written by Jon Hyman, a partner in the Labor & Employment group of Kohrman Jackson & Krantz. For more information, contact Jon at (216) 736-7226 or jth@kjk.com. You can also follow Jon on Twitter @jonhyman.

Posted on

When You Gotta Go, You Gotta Go: The Right to Workplace Bathroom Breaks

Do you know that Occupational Safety and Health Administration protects the right of employees to go to the bathroom? OSHA’s sanitation standard states:

Toilet facilities, in toilet rooms separate for each sex, shall be provided in all places of employment.

The OSHA standard tells you everything you would ever want to know about workplace bathroom facilities, including the minimum required per number of employees. Thankfully, it also forbids employees from “consum[ing] food or beverages in a toilet room.” (just in case your employees like to snack while taking care of business).

It’s not enough that employers provide toilets; they also must provide access for employees to use them. According an April 6, 1998, Director’s memorandum to the OSHA Regional Administrators, this OSHA standard mandates that “employers allow employees prompt access to bathroom facilities,” and that “restrictions on access must be reasonable, and may not cause extended delays.” Another issues to keep in mind when dealing with bathroom breaks is that the Americans with Disabilites Act might require extended or more frequent breaks as a reasonable accommodation.

What do “reasonable on restrictions on access” look like? Zwiebel v. Plastipak Packaging (Ohio Ct. App. 9/6/13) provides an answer. Plastipak terminated Mark Zwiebel, a production-line operator, for leaving his machine three times in one shift, which included once to use the bathroom.

Zwiebel claimed that his termination wrongfully violated the public policy embodied in OSHA’s restroom standard. The court of appeals disagreed:

While there is a clear public policy in favor of allowing employees access to workplace restrooms, it does not support the proposition that employees may leave their tasks or stations at any time without responsibly making sure that production is not jeopardized. In recognition of an employer’s legitimate interest in avoiding disruptions, there is also a clear public policy in favor of allowing reasonable restrictions on employees’ access to the restrooms.

Thus, the employee lost his wrongful discharge claim because his breaks unreasonably interfered with production. Going to the bathroom is one thing—abandoning one’s job is another.

Nevertheless, employers shouldn’t be the potty police. When an employee has to go, an employee has to go. Unless an employee seems to abusing bathroom rights, or, like in Zwiebel, the breaks interfere with performance or production, let employees be.

Written by Jon Hyman, a partner in the Labor & Employment group of Kohrman Jackson & Krantz. For more information, contact Jon at (216) 736-7226 or jth@kjk.com. You can also follow Jon on Twitter @jonhyman.