Onboarding matters. Organizations hire employees to get a job done. Those organizations which are able to harness the power of new employee knowledge, skills, and abilities quickly are more effective than those who do not. Understanding what new employee onboarding is, how to do it well, and how to facilitate the integration between the new employee and hiring manager is a major key to success. Organizations considered in the top 20% in terms of onboarding had 91% first year retention and 62% of new employees reaching first year goals compared to the bottom 30% of organizations who reported only 30% retention and 17% goal completion for the same time frame. The person within your organization who has the power to make or break a new employee’s success is the hiring manager. This white paper describes best practices and shows the importance of managers employing these best practices for onboarding new employees.
How Do We Solve a Managerial Behavior Issue?
Dear Personality Clash:
I understand the desire to be gentle, but what is your motive? Are you afraid of being fired? Is it to avoid having the leader quit? Is trying to be gentle coming from a fear of the unknown reaction this leader might present with a more candid and direct approach? Or is your desire to be gentle an indication of a general distaste for conflict or a lack of the necessary skills to address conflict?
It would be very simple for me to advise you to document the observed effects of this leader’s behavior, and then give him or her clear feedback and discuss the paths that are available and required (the good, the bad and the ugly). That won’t work out because there are two bigger issues that I recommend you address as part of that HR consulting step. I’ll touch on both here.
The first issue is to address the questions I posed above about your motives. I’ll briefly address each question here.
If you are trying to avoid getting fired, a consultant and/or coach must place the needs of the client above their own self-preservation. How you do that successfully might be more a combination of skill and art.
If you are trying to avoid having the leader resign, this leader’s “witch hunt” issue may be the tip of the iceberg and a resignation may be just what the organization needs. I have found however those most low-skilled leaders that are politically motivated tend to recognize their own issues when confronted properly. The job they have is better than the alternative, so giving direct feedback generally doesn’t result in their self-destruction. Just keep in mind, no matter how we see it, this leader seriously lacks leadership skills. Those skills must be developed for the person to be successful.
If you are concerned about how the leader will react to candid, direct and transparent feedback, having the facts and being articulate and resolute when you address the issue will help to mitigate a poor reaction. Keep in mind, an extremely poor reaction will simply confirm that the person’s leadership skills are lacking. A great leader is proactive about their own weaknesses, looking to address them before they become an issue.
And for my last question posed, if you lack experience and skill in conflict management, perhaps you need to delegate the issue up the chain in HR. If the problem leader is a person in HR, or even worse, the chief human resources officer of the organization, you need to evaluate your role and what this person expects from you. You might ask him or her if they want your honest and transparent feedback. The answer will be, “Yes, of course.” Before giving your feedback, ask, “As the leader of this organization, what are your goals?” You can then position the issue as one getting in the way of those goals. This leads me to the second issue to address.
The second issue to address is something I call role awareness and acumen. This leader appears to lack a clear understanding of their role’s key accountabilities. I’m guessing they don’t include conducting effective witch hunts as part of a tactical self-preservation strategy. This leader’s acumen is also suspect of being weak. I use the term acumen to refer to “the ability to see self, others, tasks and roles, systems and self-direction with clarity and proper bias.” Ineffective or poor Leaders with poor acumen tend to create distraction and conflict.
With all of that said, the leader may be at wits end trying to create change in the organization and has emotionally spiraled out of control because of an inability to understand where the issue is and why there is so much resistance. Addressing the matter by keeping an open mind about what is going on is critical. Be prepared to support the leader by gaining a better understanding of the root cause. This is where an effective outside coach can be very effective.
SOURCE: Carl Nielson, The Nielson Group, Dallas, Texas.
Are We All Really Just Unconscious?
We all make quick decisions, sometimes unaware that we’ve even made them. But unless we’re part of the walking dead, the majority of our actions include conscious thoughts on issues like what type of careers we’ll pursue, who will be our friends and where we’ll live.
The same is true in our daily work lives where the combination of our non-thinking and purposeful choices affects the quality of what we do and the impact that our decisions have on others. To build inclusive workplaces, both must be given proper attention. Ultimately, though, it’s how we act, rather than why we act, that matters most and where leaders should be focusing their attention.
Right now, many organizations are giving special consideration to the role that our unconscious thought processes, or biases, have on workplace decisions. These decisions range from hiring among slates of candidates to how individuals are perceived and treated due to characteristics such as their race, gender, ethnicity, age and religion.
The premise is that blatant actions of discrimination, harassment, and exclusion are largely behind us and that we now need to be focusing on subtle, unconscious processes at work. Consequently, organizations are giving laser-focus to ferreting out the pernicious split-second reflexive actions that can boost or stall careers.
It’s critical that these biases be addressed. But we’re deluding ourselves if we believe that the world of the conscious has been cured of bias and that the majority of employment harms are arising from reflexive non-thinking actions, real though they are. But today, this is often how organizations perceive their workplaces.
Within a four-day span this month, the Justice Department released its Ferguson, Missouri Police Department reportcompiling intentional and outrageous acts of disparate treatment and impact, and a shocking video of a University of Oklahoma fraternity chant hit the news. Admittedly they are the most extreme stories from our recent news, though other outrageous situations are frequently reported.
These stories are significant beyond their own facts. What happens in our communities and universities is part of our national patchwork of cultures and is often mirrored in our workplaces, only with different actors and fact patterns. In our offices, plants, and field locations, blatantly improper actions – words and deeds, whether aired publicly or privately − still occur.
Some may be illegal and are challenged. Incredibly offensive stories hit the legal reports every day. Other actions may be just as severe but occur behind closed doors, may not be challenged, or lead to settlements and confidentiality agreements. What’s also overlooked is that subtle actions can be, and often are, the product of conscious thoughts whose intent is carefully concealed from the general public.
Intent is important; it determines whether an action is innocent, negligent, malicious, or purposeful. In our workplaces, it’s used to assess responsibility for actions that cause individual harm and business damage. The focus, however, should be on avoiding behaviors that can harm our workplaces.
As we try to improve the quality of our decisions and actions in our workplaces, irrespective of whether they occur consciously or unconsciously, let’s continue to emphasize standards of conduct that prevent problems across a wide range of situations – from hiring and promotion decisions to social interactions.
Should We Adopt a Training Policy?
Dear Development Dilemma:
Behavioral researchers say people are intrinsically motivated to get proficient in their work, achieve “mastery” and job/career growth. If you have to “force participation,” the training is either missing the mark or you’re training the wrong people.
An effective training program is judged by a couple of key metrics: participation and impact. To help ensure your policy and program achieve its goal, define and prioritize the company’s training needs and develop methods and content that align with participant’s abilities, needs, interests and personal motivators. Here are a few ideas to get started.
Youneed support from top management and other key influencers to champion this endeavor. Form a small team of six to eight people from across the company with enlightened self-interest in developing a high performance workforce.
Discuss the vision, or aspirations. Some guiding questions: What are the impact outcomes we want? What might be success indicators? What internal knowledge and skills do we need to address competitive pressures and/or market demands? Do we have the skills and talent we need? What are the gaps? What are the benefits and trade offs for investing in the workforce?
Identify and prioritize the company’s training needs. Get diverse input from across the system. Develop a short online survey of 10 questions or fewer. Host focus groups for managers and individual contributors to discuss training needs and interests. Research external information on industry and market trends. Are there gaps and opportunities to strengthen previously unidentified areas?
Understand individual learning styles and preferences.There are excellent, budget-friendly online assessment tools and resources available to identify cognitive strengths, learning style and preferences. When assured it’s safe to participate and responses are confidential and won’t affect employment standing, employees are willing and eager to learn and share more about themselves. Provide assessment results to each participant, and begin a meaningful dialogue on what the results suggest about their preferred learning method.
Expand training beyond classroom instruction. Your company’s training needs may include legal requirements, compliance and safety regulations, technical or job-specific skill building, certifications, sales, customer service, supervisor, manager and leader development. Regardless, explore all available methods for content and delivery. Beyond traditional workshops and online webinars, create access to internal internships, job sharing or swapping, mentor programs, or volunteers for special projects.
Create personal development opportunitiesfocus on work behaviors and competencies that focus on howthey work. Make development a part of succession planning for career advancement. Customized plans might include coaching with opportunities to lead projects.
In summary, a good training policy and program includes a variety of creative approaches and solutions. The company must determine how serious it is by communicating the purpose, benefits and in some cases requiring participation as a condition of employment.
SOURCE: Patricia Duarte, Decision Insight, Inc., Boston, Dec. 14, 2014.
The Importance of Being Accommodating
Yesterday, I wrote about the need for employers to be more accommodating for their employees’ protected needs. Today, I bring you two real-world illustrations.
- Yesterday, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission announced that it had filed suit on behalf of an employee who was denied the opportunity to return to work following some time off for a cardiac condition.
- Late last year, the EEOC reached an $85,000 settlement with an employer who fired an employee attempting to return to work following time off for cancer chemotherapy treatments.
In both instances, the EEOC made the same point — the Americans with Disabilities Act imposes on employers an absolute duty to determine whether or not they can accommodate an employee’s disability. Absent that consideration, the law has been violated. Moreover, after engaging in that interactive process, the employer can only deny the request: 1) if it poses an undue hardship, or 2) if the employee cannot perform the essential functions of the job with or without the accommodation. Otherwise, you may find yourself on the receiving end of an EEOC press release, which is not the position you want to be in.
Consider Outsourced Training
Designing and conducting in-house training can impose significant costs. Training often requires specialized knowledge that must be regularly updated.
In addition, the limited number of in-house trainers may not reach all necessary personnel in a timely manner.
For these reasons, outsourcing training is a popular option for employers looking to reduce operating costs while increasing workplace expertise. When deciding whether outsourcing is the best option, consider the following:
1. Analyze the organization and its industry. Employers who require specialization — for example, pharmaceuticals and technological manufacturing entities —
are prime candidates. For businesses requiring employees to stay up-to-date
with regulatory compliance issues, new technologies, equipment and techniques, outsourced training can provide new information on a consistent and efficient basis while allowing the company to focus on competitive services and products. Employers operating globally or in numerous locations may also find outsourcing viable because training can be online or through comprehensive seminars in a cost-effective, timely fashion.
2. Find a specialized training partner that “fits” the organization. A training partner should mirror the organization’s culture and goals. Employers should also partner with training firms with an established specialization. This maximizes efficiency and leverages what could be a significant cost.
3. Consider how the training should be delivered. External training can be computer-based online training, in-person or on-the-job training, all of which can vary significantly in length. Employers should balance a variety of factors to determine which meets their needs: the type of jobs employees are engaged in; time constraints of the audience; the location and number of employees to be trained; accessibility to technology; and the sensitivity of the training material.
4. Execute a thoughtful contract. After choosing the right trainer, enter into a written agreement that may include ownership of written materials and standards for conducting training. If the training firm has access to sensitive company information, address confidentiality. In addition, the parties should be clear on who is responsible for the accuracy and content of the training. If the trainer is guaranteeing “up-to-date” information or compliance with governing laws, the company should document that warranty, and request indemnification by the trainer for claims relating to negligent training.
5. Consider the positive effect of outsourced training, beyond saving money. It might appear that outsourcing training will cause the employer’s in-house trainers to lose their job, but training is often peripheral to the core business. Trainers may be shifted into other positions within the company, pivoting their talents to train customers or outside sales people. Outsourced training allows greater flexibility by offering training precisely when and where it’s needed and providing technological or product updates. In addition, trainers are experts in a particular field, and may open the doors to additional resources and business opportunities.
Employers should coordinate with management to ensure outsourcing is the best avenue to meet their training needs, and with counsel on contractual issues.
Nidhi Srivastava is an associate in the litigation department of Taft Stettinius & Hollister in Chicago. Comment below or email editors@workforce.com. Follow Workforce on Twitter at @workforcenews.
How Do We Put Logic Behind Talent Management?
Dear Theory:
This is an excellent question. Of course, every organization is different, but if there is a single universal factor that most affects talent management and engagement, it is weak managers. They are the primary cause of low productivity, low innovation, low engagement and high turnover.
In my experience, the next most powerful impact factors are rapid learning and giving employees the opportunity to “do the best work of your life." Firms like Apple are highly successful despite a relatively harsh and secretive management approach, simply because the work itself is important and exciting.
Having unclear career paths also negatively affects engagement and thus performance, but here, too, there are anomalies. Firms like Google and Apple are notorious for having imprecise career paths, yet they remain productive and innovative.
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 rare cases in which managers rely on metrics and data, rather than their own assessment opinions). The Gallup organization has a list of productivity factors (i.e., the 12 questions) that have been developed over many years. I find it to be quite accurate.
SOURCE: Dr. John Sullivan, professor of management, San Francisco State University
What Are Best Practices for Onboarding Interns?
Dear We Might be Hiring,
If you follow these 4 C’s of onboarding, you and your intern will have an enjoyable and successful onboarding experience:
- Communicate
- Challenge
- Coach
- Connect
Communicate
Pre-onboarding communication usually goes like this: An offer is made over the phone, confirmed with a signed letter, and a logistical email is sent to confirm first day location and necessary documents. In short, it’s boring and unengaging!
UrbanBound, a web-based platform offering relocation services to enterprise companies, asserts that onboarding needs to begin not the interns’ first day at the office, but the day the offer letter is signed. Keep the intern excited for their first day by:
- Staying in touch:Send a welcome card signed by everyone on the new team.
- Making it personalized:Ask for their favorite food and send a congratulatory gift card to dinner.
- Giving a glimpse:Check in with stories of company highlights and events.
Once the intern has entered the office, it is important to have a conversation around managing expectations. Be candid with the intern to let him know that there will be some awesome parts of the internship and some grunt work, but it all is part of the learning process.
Challenge
Interns leave companies or reject full-time positions most often because they aren’t feeling challenged. Set challenges for interns. Offer experiences by allowing the intern to shadow in multiple departments within the organization, sit in on client meetings and perhaps interact with customers. Provide interns the opportunity to take ownership by managing a low-risk project. Responsibility will give her more buy in with the company and give her personal fulfillment in the role.
Coach
Millennial interns have spent their whole lives looking up to a parent, teacher, coach, sensei or tutor. When they enter into the workplace, they look up for this same type of guidance. Instill a culture of coaching within your organization to give them the tools to learn most effectively.
Pair interns with high-potential “near peers,” so they can receive candid insights on the organization and career paths from someone relevant to them, and set up a mentorship with a senior leader to serve as an additional resource for advice and guidance. Don’t assume interns will just know something just because you know it. This generation has been looking up and asking questions their whole lives, so they will need some upfront work on teaching the critical workplace skills like office communication, conflict resolution, and proper work attire and behavior.
Connect
During onboarding, interns need to feel connected to your organization, know their importance, and see that they are part of the bigger picture or they will leave. Ask what motivates them. Ashley may be really interested in a management role at the company, and Noah may be taking this internship for a course credit. Ask to pinpoint passion projects, causes, individual interests and reasons why interns joined your company, so you can set the stage for a successful internship. Employers and interns can employ the 4 C’s — communicate, challenge, coach, and connect — to create a more enjoyable and genuine experience when it comes to onboarding.
SOURCE: Brad Karsh, JB Training Solutions, Chicago, Aug. 13, 2014.
Ebola and Workplace Learning
One patient has died.
Two health care providers have been infected with the ebola virus in Texas. It's too early to know for sure what happened, but somewhere there is a "learning” issue that needs attention.
On Tuesday night, Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital announcedthat it had given its staff mandatory training and that it had a heavy commitment to safety.
No doubt that safety and proper procedure are urgent concerns at the hospital; they are in any health care facility. In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced that it would be stepping up safety training resources: offering seminars, webinars, and other educational tools to assist in communicating proper and safe standards regarding ebola.
Last evening, a nurses union in California issued a releaseindicating that it had spoken to several health care practitioners at Texas Health Presbyterian who indicated that protocols were not followed and that they were afraid of retaliation for speaking up.
Time will tell what happened, but just what's in the public record raises learning concerns and several questions. First, take a look at the CDC's protocols for what should be worn in handling infectious materials including ebola. There are multiple steps and, presumably, the failure to follow any one of them could lead to exposure and infection. This appears to involve a complex process with small steps of great significance.
Something happened that shouldn't have. Among many questions to consider are:
· What was the nature of the mandatory training?
· Was it a check-the-box online protocol that people could take while multitasking?
· When was the mandatory training given? Was it months ago or was it recent?
· Did the hospital take any steps to test what care givers knew and did it require them to actively demonstrate their application of what they learned?
· Did the hospital include opportunities to practice the use of protective clothing?
· Did the hospital refresh lessons that had previously been taught?
It's clear that the hospital is concerned about patient and staff safety – but how clear were the statements of leaders and team members about the importance of rigorously following procedures? There's a big difference between asking individuals to complete a protocol and then requiring that they demonstrate competence, apply what they have learned and that someone is monitoring their practices to make sure that they are as close to 100 percent as possible.
The perils of check-the-box learning are seen in many situations. It's one thing to be able to say, as I've written elsewhere, that learning has been delivered so that a technical requirement has been fulfilled. But patients, staff and ultimately the public face great dangers that require much more be done than delivering training and assuring its completion. Accurate, clear information must be delivered carefully and repeatedly and competence be demonstrated not once but on a continuous basis.
If learning cannot be distributed and its application be repeatedly verified to hospital staff then, perhaps, significant efforts need to be made to limit those responsible for dealing with individuals infected, or possibly infected, by the virus to stem its fatal spread.
Time Off for Religious Holidays
Since today is both Rosh Hashanah and a work day, I thought it appropriate to go deep into the archives, all the way to (yikes) 2008, to reprint a post discussing an employer’s obligations to an employee who asks for a day off to observe a religious holiday.
Title VII requires an employer to reasonably accommodate an employee whose sincerely held religious belief, practice, or observance conflicts with a work requirement, unless doing so would pose an undue hardship. An accommodation would pose an undue hardship if it would cause more than de minimis cost on the operation of the employer’s business. Factors relevant to undue hardship may include the type of workplace, the nature of the employee’s duties, the identifiable cost of the accommodation in relation to the size and operating costs of the employer, and the number of employees who will in fact need a particular accommodation.
Scheduling changes, voluntary substitutions, and shift swaps are all common accommodations for employees who need time off from work for a religious practice. It is typically considered an undue hardship to impose these changes on employees involuntarily. However, the reasonable accommodation requirement can often be satisfied without undue hardship where a volunteer with substantially similar qualifications is available to cover, either for a single absence or for an extended period of time.
In other words, permitting Jewish employees a day off for Rosh Hashanah may impose an undue hardship, depending on the nature of the work performed, the employee’s duties, and how many employees will need the time off. Employees can agree to move shifts around to cover for those who need the days off, but employers cannot force such scheduling changes.
In plain English, there might be ways around granting a day or two off for a Jewish employee to observe the High Holidays, but do you want to risk the inevitable lawsuit? For example, it will be difficult to assert that a day off creates an undue hardship if you have a history of permitting days off for medical reasons.
Legalities aside, however, this issue asks a larger question. What kind of employer do you want to be? Do you want to be a company that promotes tolerance or fosters exclusion? The former will help create the type of environment that not only mitigates against religious discrimination, but spills over into the type of behavior that helps prevent unlawful harassment and other liability issues.