Skip to content

Workforce

Category: Archive

Posted on March 22, 2005July 10, 2018

Hopes Dim for Bush Proposal Passing in 2005

With the war in Iraq, an increasing budget deficit and the ever-more contentious issue of Social Security reform on their agendas, the Bush administration and lawmakers have plenty to do in the coming months. And that has pension experts worried that the administration’s sweeping pension funding reform proposals might not be passed this year.

“The president’s focus on Social Security alone will make it very difficult for Congress to have time to address the pension funding reform issue,” says Dallas Salisbury, president and CEO of the Employee Benefit Research Institute. “Employers should pay attention,” he says, but they should not view these proposals as having a high probability of enactment.


Bush’s plan has already been met with staunch opposition from employer groups.


In February, the American Benefits Council came out with a 32-page report that critiqued the proposal and provided alternatives. The council calls for a permanent implementation of the long-term corporate bond rate to determine current liability, opposes the use of termination liability instead of current liability calculations for funding, and seeks greater disclosure of funding in general.


Days after the council released its report, Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, who is chairman of the board of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., expressed her disappointment with the report. She said it “fails to recognize the reality that the pension funding rules are broken, causing workers and retirees harm and putting taxpayers at risk.”


With such discord among key players, the passage of pension funding reform this year seems doubtful, according to Salisbury. “When everyone is in disagreement with the government, it makes it very difficult for something to happen,” he says.


But the government has to do something to address the issue. The temporary fix Congress implemented with the Pension Funding Equity Act of 2004 is set to expire at the end of 2005. That fix entailed replacing the use of the 30-year Treasury bond rate to determine a plan’s liability with a long-term investment-grade corporate bond rate.


The change, which was made because the 30-year Treasury bond rate had gotten artificially low, was supposed to be a temporary one, however. There was an expectation of a broader, more long-term fix. The question needs to be resolved one way or another this year, notes Steve Mirante, managing consultant of Watson Wyatt’s New Jersey office. But in the wake of opposition and an overflowing agenda, the concern is that Congress will just decide to raise premiums and extend the current interest rate. “This would not be a good thing. … It would just be a patch,” Mirante says.


Merely raising premiums and extending the rate would do nothing but add to the problems, says James Klein, president of the American Benefits Council. After all, it’s the way the PBGC is funded that has caused the current situation, not a lack of premium revenue, he says.


While Klein’s group has taken issue with several points of the pension funding reform proposal, he remains optimistic that legislation could be passed this year. “It will be difficult to get this done this year—. Everyone knows this,” he says. “But I think everyone is committed in good faith to getting something done both in the administration and Congress.”


–Jessica Marquez

Posted on March 22, 2005June 29, 2023

Keeping Tabs on Productivity of Recruiting Tools

Today, only a minority of companies nationwide are able to make investment decisions about staffing and recruitment based on hard data, rather than anecdotal evidence.



    Those that keep track of their hires and measure the success of recruitment channels have slashed budgets and saved valuable time. Here is a look at some of these forward thinkers, starting with Valero Energy Corp.


    Two years ago, the San Antonio-based company hired Dan Hilbert as employment manager to transform a staffing group for a company with a couple of hundred people into a human resources department for a Fortune 25 company.


    Valero had acquired Ultramar Diamond Shamrock Corp., making it one of the top three U.S. refiners of petroleum products, a $55 billion company with 15 refineries and 4,700 stores. Hilbert believes strongly that what you can’t measure, you can’t improve.


    A year ago, the company began using HR Smart’s Smart Reporter product, which allows it to keep track of the effectiveness of recruitment advertising and gives Hilbert a weekly snapshot of which sources produce the most hires. His metrics show how well each advertising channel is delivering.


    Valero then created a tool that integrates employment data pulled from the company’s HR information system, budgetary data and performance data from employee reviews and uses it to predict which channels will be most effective at filling a position and producing a quality employee. “It has been a monstrous undertaking,” Hilbert says.


    Hilbert has saved the company money. February’s data, for example, showed that of the 30 recruitment channels Valero uses, it got better candidates by advertising on niche industry sites than on major job boards or through other channels. Hilbert said the average cost-to-hire for candidates from niche boards is about $1,100; from major job boards it’s about $1,600; and outside recruiters cost the company nearly $22,000 per hire. “We’ve reduced our cost-to-hire 60 percent over the last two years and rely on outside recruiters now for less than 10 percent of our hires,” he says.



    With results like that, tracking and measuring exactly where new hires come from would seem to be a no-brainer. It’s not.Nick Burkholder, founder of Staffing.org, an organization that helps members use human capital measurements to make hiring decisions, says one reason more companies aren’t measuring recruiting performance is that workforce management executives are obsessed with strategies rather than numbers. “Real leaders are obsessed with objectives, not strategy. You can’t measure strategy,” Burkholder says. “The No. 1 reason HR execs lose their jobs is because they can’t document what they do for the organization.”


    Mark Mehler and Gerry Crispin, co-founders of CareerXroads, a recruiting consulting firm in Kendall Park, New Jersey, released the results of their annual Sources of Hire survey in March. Of the 150-plus Fortune 500 companies contacted, only 40 were able to participate, a sign that many don’t track source of hire. “If you are hiring thousands and tens of thousands of people, that’s a lot of data to manage,” Mehler says. “A recruiter is trying to source candidates, set up interviews. They have 50 jobs on their plates, and then you’re asking them to do more administrative work? It’s not high on their list of priorities.”


Convincing engineers
    Drew Farren, staffing manager for North America, the Middle East, Europe and Africa at Corning Inc. in Corning, New York, says the company has been tracking hiring data since 1999. Corning is ahead of the curve, Farren says, because numbers are at the heart of the engineering company’s culture. “Everyone we have to convince when we want to make changes are engineers, and we need numbers to convince them,” he says.


    Although Corning outsources all its recruiting to outside vendors, Farren says the company decides how recruiters spend their money and gives them specific objectives in terms of hires needed, when they’re needed and what qualifications are required.


    Farren gets monthly reports from Corning’s recruiting partner (an outside vendor that Farren declined to disclose) showing the number of applicants versus hires from each source, including all major and niche job boards. That data allows Farren to dictate to recruiters what percentage of their budget is spent on each sourcing channel. Thirty percent of Corning’s open positions are filled internally, and 40 percent come from employee referrals.


    “We would probably spend 50 percent more on recruiting if we didn’t track this information and look at it,” Farren says. “We would be throwing money away on the wrong sources. Especially with online job boards, they can’t tell you the true ROI numbers. They tell you they have X amount of resumes for a position you’ve posted, but do those resumes match your industry?”


    Based on its hiring data, Corning has decreased its visibility at career fairs and spends more now on networking for employee referrals and lists of people that either could be candidates or who may know others that would make suitable candidates for jobs at Corning. Two years ago, it spent no money on such lists.


Getting better rates
    Plantronics, a leading manufacturer of lightweight communication headsets, uses metrics to back up every decision made, says Layne Buckley. The human resources manager at the Santa Cruz, California, company uses tools from Hire.com to track applicants and hires. Buckley looks at the results at least monthly, usually more often. The cost to track hires is minimal, he says, because the technology to do it exists in the automated services the company gets from Hire.com anyway.


    Buckley also uses the data to gauge the effectiveness of a direct-mail campaign he conducts every month, where a targeted marketing mailer is e-mailed to a specific group of potential candidates. Buckley determines who gets the mailer–sent to 10,000-35,000 people a month—by mining his database for those who have not been hired but who have a particular skill set. “We keep track of how many open the e-mail, click through to apply for positions and how many get hired,” he says.


    Plantronics uses tracking data from job boards to improve the terms of its contracts. “One major job board we were using went from constituting about 40 percent of our applicant traffic to less than 5 percent, and we were able to show (the job board) we weren’t as heavily dependant on them as we once were,” Buckley says. “We wound up securing greater services from them without increasing our investment.”


Most productive, most effective
    Federated Department Stores–owner of Macy’s, Bloomingdale’s and, after a February merger with May Department Stores Co., 15 other brands–has been tracking its hires since 2001 using WetFeet Recruiter, which supports all of the company’s online recruiting efforts.


    Federated’s No 1. priority is its own recruitment Web sites, such as Bloomingdalesjobs.com and Macysjobs.com, because of the tremendous overlap between job seeker and consumer. Susan Burns, director of employment initiatives at Federated, says her data shows that both employee referrals and company sites are key sources of good hires. “Not only are our own corporate recruiting sites the most productive–in terms of hires and conversion rate from applicant to hire–but they are the most cost-effective,” she says.


    Burns looks at how successful a source is in driving traffic that results in a completed application and a hire. Last year, Federated noticed that a major job board had changed its list of affiliated job sites–the smaller sites to which larger ones like Monster sometimes funnel jobs. “For us it was a pretty significant thing, very positive. And based on our hiring data, we made a decision to aggressively reallocate funds,” Burns says. “A year later we looked at the numbers and saw it was the right move.”


    Sarah George, senior vice president and director of recruiting business, strategy and operations atWachovia, used hiring information to change the company’s Internet recruiting strategy. Three years ago, Wachovia decided to look more closely at its data and found that although Internet job boards were the cheapest way to get hires, the volume of applicants was overwhelming. “It was costing us money to deal with it,” she says. “You get a lot of spam. Abundance is what the Internet is good at, but in this labor market we don’t need abundance, we need quality,” George says.


    Peter Weddle, who publishes an annual guide to employment Web sites, says volume is a problem for many companies. He estimates that there are about 40,000 commercial job sites on the Internet at any one time. “That’s a good reason to use niche sites–at least everyone is an engineer or a software designer. We are in the third generation of job postings online, and we need to be more savvy buyers than we were as early adopters,” he says.


    Wachovia’s George used sources-of-hire tracking data to see where the company’s investment in Internet advertising was paying off. “We began looking at sites in terms of quality of hire, rather than number of hires,” she says. Her analysis led to more limited posting of jobs through job boards and for shorter periods of time.


    Technology from Kenexa, a human capital management company in Wayne, Pennsylvania, allows George to track her hires at minimal cost, following them from application through employment and also giving information about where potential hires drop out of the process. Her goal is to get more qualified candidates faster. Today Wachovia’s recruiters deal with hundreds of candidates as they try to fill open positions; George says that a year from now she hopes each recruiter will have 10 well-qualified people in the palm of their hand.

Posted on March 18, 2005July 10, 2018

Better Days for Executive Search Firms

Thanks to greater economic activity, executive search firms are posting improved results as their clients shop for new talent at the top.

According to the Association of Executive Search Consultants, the average consultant enjoyed revenue growth of 26 percent in 2004. Top firms, like industry giant Korn/Ferry International, saw even more improvement: Revenue in the United States rose by 31 percent in the 12-month period ending January 31, 2005.


The biggest overall contributor to the search industry was financial services, which accounted for nearly a quarter of search firms’ revenue last year. But the hottest sector was in life sciences and health care. In the fourth quarter of 2004 alone, that industry began 27 percent more searches than it had in the third quarter of 2004.


According to Jeffrey Frerichs, a consultant with the search firm Witt/Kieffer in New York, increased demand for executive talent in health care exists not because the sector is performing particularly well, but because “change is accelerating.”


On that point, Frerichs says health care firms seek leaders who can deal with “a business where revenue may be declining, but accountability continues to rise.” Profit may be slipping for some health care organizations, but the need for leaders who understand government regulations such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act is not.


Candidates also need to possess a firm grasp of financial matters and an understanding of global business and know how to work with doctors, Frerichs says.


Alicia Russell, associate director of the Alexander Group in Houston, says that in the first quarter of the year, individuals tend to be more proactive about finding new opportunities. That, coupled with improving business and employment climates, could mean the most recent quarter’s results will look even better than the last.

Posted on March 18, 2005July 10, 2018

Dear Workforce How Do We Boost Participation in Our Wellness Programs

Dear Worrier:



Yours is the $64,000 question that remains largely unanswered. Although you should encourage employees to be healthy, getting them to take action is very difficult. If it were easy, wellness programs would not exist. What motivates one person to improve personal health may not motivate someone else.

Monetary rewards may be beyond your financial resources, and would have tax implications for employees. However, early data from consumer-driven health plans indicates that people are beginning to pay more attention to wellness and self-care issues when it affects their wallets.

The best thing you can do is to learn about issues that discourage employees from making positive health changes. Use focus groups or surveys to identify barriers to health improvement. Employees may complain they don’t have time to exercise or attend wellness programs, or that the programs are too expensive or inconveniently located. Employees sometimes also presume that their health issues are not serious enough to merit concern. Attack each barrier head-on; it will help you encourage employees to change their behavior.

Initiate an employee-wellness committee composed of both individuals who participate in wellness programs and some who don’t. Ask the committee to brainstorm for ideas to motivate other employees, including reasonable rewards or incentives.

Consider a customized employee-communication campaign that explains the connection between poor health and rising health-insurance premiums. Use employee newsletters, company meetings and other avenues to tout the success of employees who participate in wellness programs. Over time, these techniques could nudge fence-sitters into taking action.

The healthier your employee population, the greater the chance your insurance premiums will tumble. Perhaps you could link this to a modest rewards program as an incentive for employees to continue their participation in wellness programs. Of course, the point of wellness programs is not only to improve the health of employees but also to reduce health-plan costs associated with acute episodes of chronic illness. Any progress you make in this regard will help you over the long term.

SOURCE: Nancy Hakes, registered nurse and health consultant, and Dr. Tom Barela, national medical director, disease management practice, The Segal Co., Phoenix, April 21, 2004.

LEARN MORE:More Care, Less Cost.

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 Workforce Newsletter
Posted on March 17, 2005July 10, 2018

U.S. Regulators Notify the Most Dangerous Workplaces

The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration has written to about 14,000 employers to let them know their injury and illness rates are higher than average.


Jonathan L. Snare, acting assistant secretary of labor for OSHA, says that the letter was sent to raise employers’ awareness of the problem and let them know the federal agency can offer assistance in making their businesses safer. It’s not necessarily a precursor to a visit from the agency, OSHA said in a news release.


To identify who would get the letter, OSHA examined data from a 2004 Bureau of Labor Statistics survey of 80,000 work sites. The survey was conducted in 2004 and looked at injuries and illnesses that occurred in 2003. Some of the occupations with high rates of fatal injuries include logging and aircraft jobs. Jobs with high overall numbers of fatal injuries include truck driving, farming/ranching and construction.


Organizations targeted for the OSHA letter had 6.5 or more injuries or illnesses resulting in days away from work, restricted work activity or job transfer for every 100 full-time workers. The national average during is about 2.6 injuries or illnesses.


The lengthy list of the businesses with these high injury rates is available in a “zip file.” It does not include employers in the 21 states and one territory (Puerto Rico) that operate OSHA-approved state plans.

David Galt, a safety expert with Business & Legal Reports Inc., says OSHA’s letter is part of a general trend in the U.S. government, regardless of the political party in the White House, to take a less heavy-handed approach to enforcement. According to Galt, government regulators have said, “We’ve got to move to voluntary compliance on the part of business because government just can’t handle the workload. OSHA doesn’t have all the staff to inspect everybody.”


Paula Brantner, program director for the San Francisco-based nonprofit Workplace Fairness, which advocates for employee rights, agrees that OSHA is moving away from enforcement activity and is more focused on voluntary compliance. “This is all well and good if it happens,” she says, “but there doesn’t seem to be much evidence that voluntary compliance is happening. Sometimes it takes a real threat of enforcement to see the real changes we need, and we’re just not seeing it.”


Brantner agrees with Galt that the government is sometimes stretched thin. But even in times of tight budgets, she says, “There’s still a message from the top that they’re either going to be really strict on violators or they’re going to turn a blind eye and handle things really mildly.” The latter message, she says, is getting through.


A copy of OSHA’s letter is below.


Date
Name of Employer
Address

Dear_______:

Last year, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) surveyed employers to identify the workplaces with the highest Days Away from work, Restricted, or Transferred (DART) rates. Your establishment was one of those identified as having a DART rate higher than most other businesses in this country.

I am writing you to alert you to this fact, and to offer ways that you can obtain assistance in addressing safety and health hazards in your workplace. OSHA recognizes that your elevated DART rate does not necessarily indicate a lack of interest in safety and health. Whatever the cause, a high rate is costly to your company in both personal and financial terms.

Over the years OSHA has found that many employers need additional expertise in the field of workplace safety and health, and welcome assistance by other experts in this field. An excellent way for small business employers with 250 or fewer workers to address safety and health in their workplaces is to ask for assistance from OSHA’s onsite consultation program. This program is administered by a state agency and operated separately from OSHA’s enforcement program.


The service is free to small businesses and confidential. Since it is not associated with enforcement, citations and penalties cannot be issued. Designed for small employers, the onsite consultation program can help you identify hazards in your workplace and find effective and economical solutions for eliminating or controlling those hazards. In addition, the OSHA state consultant can assist you in developing and implementing a safety and health management system for your workplace.

In your state, the OSHA onsite consultation program may be contacted at: (Name/address/phone number varied here)


Often your employees can also be a source for identifying hazards and finding solutions. In addition, private consultants, your insurance carrier, or state’s workers’ compensation agency might be a source of onsite assistance. We encourage you to consider these suggestions as well as visit OSHA’s home page at www.osha.gov for information to ensure safe and healthful working conditions in your establishment. Just like last year, a list of all the employers receiving this letter will be available from the OSHA Web site on the Freedom of Information Act page.


Sincerely,
Jonathan L. Snare
Acting Assistant Secretary


 

Posted on March 17, 2005June 29, 2023

Discrimination Suit Can Be a Damaging Workplace Distraction

W hen a lawsuit is filed against a company, the company’s leaders are often so consumed with proving the legal allegations to be false that they ignore the ripple effect of disruption that the mere filing can have on a workforce.



    The problem will spread unless the employer deals with the suit head-on, striking a balance between running business as usual and keeping tabs on potential ticking bombs.


    It will take the shape of retaliation by managers and even workers, poor employee morale, a hostile work environment and branding the employer a discriminator. And all this, labor experts say, can lead to a loss of productivity and ultimately hurt the bottom line.


“Your company discriminates”
    Large companies typically have some sort of litigation or action pending at any given time, but there is nothing more damaging to the company’s internal fiber than a discrimination suit, especially wide-reaching class-action suits or those backed by the credibility of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.


    In February, Cincinnati-basedCintas Corp. found out that the EEOC was supporting a suit brought by workers alleging gender and race discrimination at the nation’s largest maker of work uniforms. In the summer, a district court judge gave the go-ahead for a gender discrimination lawsuit against retail giant Wal-Mart Stores Inc. in Bentonville, Arkansas, to obtain class-action status.


    Liz Ryan–a Boulder, Colorado-based workplace consultant and CEO and founder of WorldWIT, a networking group for women in business and technology–says that once the suit is filed, the firm has to realize it will be fighting a PR battle not only outside but inside its walls. Each night, Ryan says, employees are going home and hearing their families and neighbors saying, “Your company discriminates against women, blacks, whatever.”


    And, labor and legal experts warn, workers not part of the action may start thinking they could be victims ofdiscrimination. Others take sides in the case, and morale can plummet.


    Patricia Eyres, a management trainer and author of The Legal Handbook for Trainers, Speakers and Consultants, says that keeping the workplace running smoothly during a legal action is one of the hardest challenges employers can face. It gets even more challenging, she says, when the workers who are plaintiffs in the suit remain employed at the company.


The silent treatment
    While most employers are smart enough to know they shouldn’t retaliate against employees who bring such claims, they tend to get tripped up by not looking at specific acts as retaliatory, says D. Michael Reilly, an employment attorney for companies and author of Handling Employment Liability Claims in Washington.


    Reilly gives the example of an employee who files a lawsuit and has a performance review coming up. The reviewer makes a comment about the plaintiff’s communication skills and how he or she has to improve relationships with others. Making such a criticism when there is no lawsuit could be just fine, but when there’s a suit the wording of aperformance review will be looked at closely. “Someone can make an argument that that was retaliatory,” Reilly points out.


    Michael Lieder of Sprenger & Lang in Washington, D.C., who represents workers in class-action discrimination cases, says he rarely sees blatant forms of retaliation such as firing a plaintiff. It’s typically subtler, he notes, like giving an employee the silent treatment or not considering him or her for a promotion.


    Sometimes a suit can put a deep freeze on day-to-day operations. “Managers begin to feel paralyzed, afraid to give feedback to people who are or might be perceived to be part of the litigation,” Eyres says. “Then you end up with a business problem. Managers have to continue to lead, but lead within legal limits.”


    Reilly offered an example of a legal department for a major financial institution that ended up grinding to a halt following claims of a disparity in pay between men and women.


    A female attorney in the department was the whistle-blower in the case, and her fellow attorneys began avoiding contact with one another and canceling meetings. They didn’t want to become witnesses in the case and were worried if they said something it could be taken out of context. The result: The 15 lawyers in the department were suddenly not talking to one another, no deals were being completed, and the bulk of e-mail exchanges were “more about covering your rear as opposed to getting work done,” Reilly says. 


    The institution had to hire an outside legal firm. Everyone at the company ended up suffering in the form of layoffs and added expenditures, Reilly says.


    Such suits can also create a hostile work environment as workers, line managers and executives all jockey to take sides in the dispute. In one racial discrimination suit, Eyres says, some managers and workers at a company she would not name took pieces of rope in the shape of a noose and hung them on their rear view mirrors. When the black worker who brought the suit walked by they would swing the nooses back and fourth. While the worker did not prevail in the discrimination suit, he did win a retaliation claim, costing the firm more than $1 million.


Keep busy
    Since a lawsuit is often the first inkling the higher-ups have that there is a discrimination problem, legal and labor experts suggest doing an internal investigation immediately. “You want to talk to employees, supervisors, any witnesses whose names come up,” says Ted Meyer, a labor and employment attorney for Jones Day in Houston. “It’s important to try and get to the bottom of what really happened.” Executives in workforce management positions have to make sure the managers working with employees involved in the suit are trained in how to handle the situation.


    Meyer’s most successful clients have involved human resources staff in the general decision-making as it relates to the suit and in the performance evaluation process of all employees. Meyer says a good HR person will verify performance evaluations and any actions that may be taken. Bringing in a third party to mediate the suit early on might also be helpful. “It allows employees to come in and vent with the employer and tell his or her story. On the flip side, it allows the employer to explain why they did what they did.”


    It’s also a good time, he adds, “to do some employee relations work, do some teamwork training. Keep everyone very, very busy. People with too much time tend to focus on things they shouldn’t be focusing on.”


    Ryan, the consultant from Boulder, suggests “small-group meetings to talk about the issue, process employee reactions and decide how to handle it inside the group.”


    Many legal observers point toTexaco, which settled a large class-action discrimination lawsuit in 1996, as a good example of how to deal with a discrimination suit, saying the oil company’s then-CEO, Peter Bijur, was key in mitigating the fallout.


    During the litigation, a tape recording surfaced with senior executives making disparaging racial remarks. A 2000 article in BusinessWeek states that Bijur quickly acknowledged in public that the company had a serious problem and launched an internal investigation. “For 60 straight days after the scandal broke,” the article says, “Bijur put aside the oil business to focus on fixing what he realized was a poisonous workplace culture. Bijur insisted that each one of Texaco’s human resource committees have at least one racial minority and one woman as a member. And he moved swiftly to hire prominent African Americans in Texaco’s senior ranks. Bijur also tied bonuses to achieving diversity.”


    In a more recent high-profile discrimination case,Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott may be taking a page from Bijur’s book. While Wal-Mart is maintaining its stand that it does not discriminate against women, the retailer established an office of diversity in an effort to boost diversity in employment practices and recruitment. It also tied executive bonuses to diversity targets.


    Having a deliberate strategy and communicating a firm’s objectives in one voice, Eyres says, will help mitigate the negative impact of a discrimination suit. Absolute silence or pat denials with no steps toward improvement “breeds discontent within and out of a company.”

Posted on March 15, 2005July 10, 2018

Retirement Health Benefits Are Down For the Count

Only one-third of all midsize and large employers offer retiree health benefits, and a growing number of those are terminating coverage for future retirees or shifting to an access-only approach with retirees paying the full cost.

Eight percent of employers with retiree health plans terminated coverage for future retirees in 2004, and an additional 11 percent are very or somewhat likely to end coverage this year, according to the new Kaiser Family Foundation/Hewitt Associates survey of 333 large employers with retiree health plans.


“The prospects for retiree health coverage are slowly disappearing for America’s workers, and retirees who have it will be paying more,” says Kaiser president Drew Altman.


Last year, 13 percent of employers with plans ended their subsidies and offered retirees access to benefits with retirees paying 100 percent of the costs. Eighteen percent of employers expect to do so this year. Companies that continued subsidized coverage in 2004 raised the retirees’ share of costs by an average of 25 percent, and almost all expect to raise the retirees’ share again this year. More than half of all the companies with subsidized plans have capped their contributions, with half of these hitting their cap in 2004 and 28 percent anticipating that they will hit it within the next three years. The survey report is available at www.kff.org.


–Fay Hansen

Posted on March 15, 2005July 10, 2018

Strategic Planning A Self-Assessment

Use this self-scored worksheet to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the organization’s strategic planning process. For each step in strategic planning listed in the left column, rate the effectiveness of the step as it currently exists. Use the following scale:
 


1 = Very Ineffective4 = Somewhat Effective
2 = Ineffective5 = Effective
3 = Somewhat Ineffective6 = Very Effective



Step in the Strategic Planning Process

Effectiveness


Very IneffectiveIneffectiveSomewhat IneffectiveSomewhat EffectiveEffectiveVery Effective
How well have the organization’s decision makers and employees:123456
1. Established a clear mission statement of why the organization exists and what it should be doing?123456
2. Formulated clear, specific goals and measurable objectives that are logically derived from the organization’s mission?123456
3. Identified and addressed future threats and opportunities resulting from external environmental change?123456
4. Identified and addressed the organization’s present strengths and weaknesses?123456
5. Considered possible grand strategies to guide the organization?123456
6. Selected a realistic, optimal grand strategy, given the constraints within which the organization must operate?123456
7. Implemented the grand strategy over time by ensuring that:123456
A. The organization’s reporting relationships (structure) match the strategy?123456
B. Appropriate leaders have been identified and empowered based on the competencies necessary to make the strategy successful?123456
C. Appropriate rewards have been tied to desired results?123456
D. Appropriate policies have been formulated (or revised) so that internal coordination exists across divisions, departments, work groups or teams, and individuals?123456
E. The strategy is effectively communicated to employees and other relevant groups?123456
8. Established a means by which to evaluate the strategy before, during, and after implementation?123456
SOURCE: Excerpted fromBeyond Training and Development by William J. Rothwell. Copyright © 2005 Williams J. Rothwell. Published by AMACOM Books, a division of American Management Association, New York, NY. Used with permission.

Posted on March 11, 2005July 10, 2018

Dear Workforce How Do I Sell Human Resources as a Vital Contributor When Rolling Out a Retention Program

Dear In the Dark:



Although you report to corporate human resources, it sounds like the individual leading the retention initiative is your true customer or, at minimum, a very important influencer of your relationship with the company. Everything you need to begin a dialogue with her flows directly from that starting point. Once you accept that, you’re on the road to success. This is the first step on the journey to a great relationship with your “customer.”

Start by inviting her to lunch. Set the tone by being open with her and telling her you recognize that she’s not only a customer, but also a very important one. You might say something like: “I’d really like to better understand your perspective and priorities on how human resources can best support you during the initiative.” Also, let her know that you have ideas on how human resources can support business performance.

You’ll also want to determine why human resources was not included.

Three key habits will do more than anything else to open the dialogue.

1. Proactively bring your customer a steady stream of new ideas through human resources. Dig into your merger and acquisition files and search the Internet. Describe the situation (without mentioning names) to friends you trust and to colleagues in your firm. The best advice will come from people who have been directly involved in other situations like yours, and will be familiar with a range of best practices.

2. Speak the language of money. Prepare yourself to talk specifically and anecdotally about how every program and initiative you champion either cuts costs or increases revenue. Collect success stories. Develop return-on-investment models and business cases for your largest expenditures. Employees are the single largest expense for most businesses, and employee engagement (along with customer engagement) is one of the best indicators of future business performance, so it’s important to discuss how this workforce-management-related money is being spent. There’s a lot of research on the degree to which various expenditures (on training, rewards, workforce technology and more) affect business results.

3. Ask questions. Pay attention to the answers. Here are a few that ought to be very helpful in opening up a dialogue.

  • “Personal Connection” Questions. The intent of these is to help you find something in common with your customer by establishing a personal connection. Anything you genuinely care about and would be willing to answer is OK.
  • “Working Relationship” Questions. These questions–strategic as well as tactical–will help you learn how this individual prefers (or demands) to work with others inside or outside the company. On a strategic level, ask her to think of someone who provides services to her unit in a particularly effective way. If she’s willing, you can go to that person directly and get his or her input. If she doesn’t name the person, ask her to describe what behaviors, actions or approaches make that such a good working relationship.

Assume that going forward you’ll both share information and meet regularly. Ask questions to find out how she prefers to work, such as: “I’d like to touch base with you on a regular basis. If I need some time, can I just work with your administrator to get on your calendar?”

  • Questions to Identify Unmet Needs. Spend most of your time here to add real substance and energy to your relationship. Over time, you’ll develop your own questions, and your own style of asking them.

Here are some to consider:

“What worries you the most about this process you’re working on? Why?”

“Is there anything that human resources could be doing to free you up to run the business or make better use of your time?”

“What people-related tasks are the most time-consuming for you?”

“What are the two to three most time-consuming pieces of those tasks? Why does it take so much time?”

“Ignoring any constraints for the moment and doing a little bit of blue-sky thinking, what would the perfect retention/compensation/redeployment process look like if you could have anything you wanted? Why?”

SOURCE: Edwin “Buck” Baker, principal, Capital H Group, Detroit, April 7, 2004.

LEARN MORE:Seven Steps Before Strategy.

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.

Posted on March 11, 2005July 10, 2018

Dear Workforce How Do We Host an Open House for Recruiting

Dear Head-Scratcher:



Comedian Tom Lehrer once said: “Life is like a sewer. What you get out of it depends on what you put into it.” The same goes for open-house initiatives. There’s no generic answer for the value of an open house. Those that are well-designed and professionally executed usually are great events. Poorly executed events thrown together with the passion of a tax document are woeful failures. As usual, we tend to blame–or credit–the venue, not the planner.

If you want to have a successful open house, follow these guidelines.

Determine the type of candidates you want. Are you recruiting candidates who will come to such an event? Executive VPs of marketing rarely go to fairs. Nor do candidates from companies with close cultural histories with yours, for fear of meeting a coworker or boss.

“If you build it, they will come.” Many open-house events are little more than thinly veiled mass interviews, with all the charm and elegance of a mass deportation. Plan an event. Work with your marketing and sales folks to set up product demonstrations. Use past press videos to offer continuous information. Give candidates color-coded badges based on skill profiles, and give your employees similar color badges. Set up a “meet and greet” area where everyone–candidates and employees–can come in contact. Establish private meeting rooms where two or more of your employees can sit down with a candidate and do an informal interview/information exchange.

Security is the rule. Require photo identification for admittance to the event. Require that bags, boxes or knapsacks be checked at the front desk. Provide adequate security to deal with potential issues before they escalate.

Control expectations. Do not sell an open house as a panacea for all recruiting ills. Tell your managers it’s simply another tool for tapping top candidates. Sell the concept as an opportunity for them to judge and assess the “pool in which the bucket is dipped.” This is their chance to wade in the waters where you swim every day. Are you in the right pool?

Have real jobs to offer. Nothing spreads through a crowd faster at an open house than the fact that no jobs are to be had.

Invite the guests you want. Just because it’s an open house does not mean everyone is invited. Use your online recruiting tools to develop “guest talent profiles” and send e-mail invitations to those you select. Go after the candidates you lost 6 to 12 months ago. Search out candidates at competitors. They may not come, but if you create a buzz about your company at their place of business, the effect is the same as if they had attended.

SOURCE:Ken Gaffey, principal, Kenneth T. Gaffey Consulting, Melrose, Massachusetts, April 9, 2004.

LEARN MORE:Internship Programs: What Candidates Find Appealing.

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.

Posts navigation

Previous page Page 1 … Page 274 Page 275 Page 276 … Page 591 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