Category: Archive

Posted on

Should Recruiting Be Part of Marketing

Should the recruiting function of a company be part of the marketing department? If so, why? If not, why not?

Several experts offer their opinions below:

Cynthia Kay Stevens, associate professor, Robert H. Smith School of Business, University of Maryland

“The suggestion to shift recruitment to marketing has greater merit than it might initially seem.

Recently, many recruitment researchers have found that prospective applicants rely on product or services marketing campaigns to form ideas of what it would be like to work in the firm. Thus, brand image plays a critical role in the decision to apply. In fact, many job-seekers fail to reconsider a decision not to apply even when they simply lack information about the firm they disregarded.

For these reasons, marketing staff should be actively involved in recruitment initiatives and should consider spillover effects of marketing campaigns on recruitment. Then again, recruiters need specialized knowledge that marketers may lack about particular jobs–how to interview, compensation trends, etc. I suspect that the best organizational structure is one involving cross-functional teams of marketing and recruitment specialists that can capture natural similarities involved in outreach to prospective consumers and applicants.”

Stephen A. Sasser, president and CEO, Peopleclick, a recruiting and workforce-technology company

“Recruitment is and should remain ā€˜the businessā€™ of the human resources function. Human resources should have the domain expertise to drive and manage the recruitment process more effectively than any other function within a company. Just as marketingā€™s traditional responsibility is to support the selling efforts of the companyā€™s products and services, the same should apply to supporting human resources and its selling efforts in recruitment.

Human resources needs to ensure that the recruitment process is viewed as important enough to command a similar level of assistance. By using marketingā€™s capabilities, human resources can increase its effectiveness and accomplish one of its main business goals–attracting quality people to the company.”

Mike Temkin, vice president, strategic planning and development, Shaker Recruitment Advertising & Communications

“While recruiting should not be part of the marketing department, HR and recruiters should rely on marketing expertise to enhance employment strategies.

Recruiting prospective employees–as well as retaining current employees and encouraging referrals from your current workforce–is clearly a sales strategy, not a clerical function. From establishing and maintaining an employer brand to converting an inquiry into an actual hire, the recruitment function is part of a sales process as crucial to your company as the marketing of a new product or service.

As a recruiter, you want to have access to every possible means for identifying appropriate applicant pools, reaching prospective applicants with compelling messages and then persuading qualified candidates to consider and accept your offer of employment. You need more than just a job description, a list of benefits and an initial offer of compensation. You must be able to market your company as a preferred employer, create interest in an immediate job opening and establish a commitment to a possible long-term career path with your company.

To begin this process, a human resources department has to partner with either an internal marketing department or an outside marketing/advertising agency. You need to use all the tools of motivation and persuasion to attract top talent to your company. You have to consider various aspects of advertising and public relations to support the marketing of your human resources objectives.

As part of this marketing partnership, you should evaluate your investment on more than just the cost per applicant and cost per hire. Your messaging and interaction with unqualified employment candidates can be just as crucial as your ability to reach highly qualified candidates. Each prospective applicant will most likely be a possible customer or client for your company; no one can afford to alienate a possible employment candidate who then might decide not to patronize a company.”

Julia Long, marketing director of service excellence, Clarian Health Partners, Indianapolis

“Historically, the department of human resources assumed the sole responsibility for seeking applicants who possessed the appropriate skills to fill a vacant position. These responsibilities included the posting of positions, interviewing, processing and some degree of orientation. While these functions are still necessary, attracting talent and finding a good fit for an organization is the role and expertise of marketing.

These activities–attracting talent, finding a good fit–are increasingly difficult in this shrinking job market, and many organizations make the mistake of filling positions on the basis of skill qualifications alone. Hiring talent involves the selection of applicants with behavioral skills and personal values that are in alignment with the organization.

To attract talent aligned with the organization, a company must first create a strong product or image that increases customersā€™ trust in and loyalty to the organization. However, if customersā€™ (in this case, job candidatesā€™) experiences differ from the advertising message, customers will believe their experiences and not the advertising. Therefore, itā€™s equally important that marketing also brand the organization as an Employer of ChoiceĀ®–in a way that connects with peopleā€™s emotions–in order to attract a pool of talent.”

David Pantano, national recruiting manager, Boston Scientific, a $3 billion medical-device manufacturer

“Recruiting is best based within human resources. There are a lot of legal issues you need to pay attention to from a recruiting standpoint, and you need to be sensitive to different legal requirements in different regions of the country. You also have a lot of EEO reporting. Rules and regulations change, and the focal point for regulations affecting recruiting and affecting labor is human resources.

Yes, thereā€™s a certain component of salesmanship with recruiting. I get out and talk to groups of people about how great Boston Scientific is to work for, so in effect Iā€™m selling the company to them. But you have to look at the skill sets of the people doing the recruiting. Part of that skill set has to be salesmanship, but thatā€™s only one part of it. Being a good listener isnā€™t a skill set every salesperson has to have, but itā€™s a skill set every recruiter has to have. Also, a lot of the selling has already been done, and by the time recruiters talk to a candidate, they already have an interest in Boston Scientific.”

Farhan Yasin, vice president of business development for the CareerBuilder job site

“The recruitment function of an organization should fall into the hands of the human resources department and/or the hiring managers of a specific department. These individuals are closer to the open positions and respective job requirements and bring expertise to the process of finding the right candidates that will be a good fit for the company culture.

However, to attract the right candidates, human resources departments and hiring managers should team up with their marketing departments to create an employee brand for the company. Every company has two unique brands–their customer brand and their employee brand. People buy Nike shoes because they offer high quality and sporty comfort. People work for Nike because they see a good career opportunity. When you message your brand to customers, you are selling a product or service. When you message your brand to employees, you are selling a work experience.

Knowing this, the question at hand is: How do you market your company to attract the right candidates? Different messages will appeal to different candidates. How do you present your culture? Is it developmental, diverse, quick-paced? Do you offer autonomy and opportunities for career advancement? How do you present the benefits of your industry and your financial strengths? How do you present your leadership style and what the employee will get out of working for you?

Human resources departments, hiring managers and marketing departments working together to sell the company’s work experience effectively is key to finding top performers.”

Posted on

Staffing the United States Senate

The World’s Most Exclusive Club–as the U.S. Senate has been called–is a tough place to enter as an elected official. It’s not so easy to get a job as a staff member, either.



    The U.S. Senate Placement Office acts as a sort of gateway or screening office for senators, who don’t have nearly enough staff to manage the tremendous demand for Capitol Hill (“the Hill” to insiders) jobs on their own. “The offices get overwhelmed sometimes with job applicants and résumés because the Hill is so sought after,” says Brian Bean, who’s in charge of the placement office.


    Bean and two other placement-office staff members work with all 100 senators, though senators are free to hire however they like and aren’t obligated to use the placement office when they have openings. Each senator has about 35 to 40 staff members. While senators structure their staffs as they wish, they all tend to have a chief of staff—the highest workforce-management job–as well as an administrative manager, normally the second-in-charge of workforce management. Senators also employ a press secretary or communications director, numerous legislative aides (usually headed up by a legislative director), support staff and others.


The jobs arrive
    Candidates looking for full-time, part-time and temp jobs arrive at the Senate Placement Office by way of several different sources. For one, candidates may hear about openings through the weekly Senate Employment Bulletin. The placement office edits and produces the bulletin, which lists 30-40 jobs each Tuesday; about 8 to 10 of those jobs are new for that week. (Candidates can also access the bulletin by phone, at 202-228-JOBS.)


    Some job openings from the July 22, 2003, Senate Employment Bulletin:

FOREIGN AFFAIRS LEGISLATIVE ASSISTANT: A Democratic member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee seeks a Legislative Assistant primarily to handle foreign affairs, trade and defense issues. Candidates must possess strong research and writing skills. Successful applicant will have substantial legislative and foreign policy experience.


ELEVATOR OPERATOR: Senior Republican Senator seeks Elevator Operator for a full-time position in the Capitol. Ideal candidate will have Hill experience and knowledge of the Capitol. Salary in the low 20k’s.


POLICY ADVISOR: Democratic Senator seeks senior-level staff person to handle budget and tax policy. Ideal candidate has strong verbal and written communication skills, and at least five years of Capitol Hill experience working with tax and/or budget issues.

    Not all applicants arrive at the placement office because of the Bulletin. Some simply walk into the office, situated on the ground floor of the Hart Senate Office Building, where numerous senators’ offices are located as well. Often, these walk-ins are the result of a candidate’s visit to a senator’s office. Senator Kennedy’s office, for example, would rather not tell a constituent that they have no openings. Kennedy’s people would prefer to say, “We don’t have openings, but let me tell you about the placement office.”


    When it comes to getting re-elected, service to constituents is sometimes even more important than a senator’s voting record. And because helping voters is so important to senators, it’s important to the placement office, which tries to treat all candidates like customers or constituents, particularly when they arrive via a senator’s office.


A good fit
    Walk-in candidates range from high-school graduates to attorneys with decades of experience. Applicants fill out an employment application on a computer in the placement office and then attach a résumé. For about four hours a day, the placement office conducts 15- to 20-minute informational interviews with these candidates, asking about their party preference, education, salary needs, areas of interest and experience. Candidates are advised on how to rework their résumés, how to market themselves and otherwise how to get a job on the Hill.


    Bean says that candidates should consider how important their political experience and party preference is to a senator. “If you have demonstrated ties to one political party, I don’t know how marketable that will be to the opposite party,” Bean says. “If it’s a really moderate or centrist member of Congress, that may be less of an issue.” This kind of thing varies widely by senator. One senator may say “Republicans only” when advertising a given job, while another may say “Republicans preferred.”


    “You have to have cohesion among staff,” Bean says. “Staff have to work together as a team and support the member’s views and agenda. If there’s incompatibility there [in someone’s views], that’s not always a good fit.” For administrative jobs, a person’s political party is often less of an issue than for a legislative job.


All over the board
    In addition to handling candidates–sort of the “supply side” of the Senate employment stream–the placement office handles the “demand side,” consisting of requisitions from Senate offices.


    While Senate employees all have the same federal health and retirement benefits, when it comes to staffing, Bean says, “it’s like 100 separate employers. There’s a lot of subjectivity in terms of what they require.” Two senators may both be hiring for a legislative assistant to handle transportation issues, but each position will have different requirements.


    A senator’s staff member might contact the placement office and say, “I’m looking for a speechwriter who lives in my state and has at least two years’ experience writing speeches.” The placement office will look in its database (a home-grown applicant-tracking system) for appropriate candidates and forward the résumés to the senator’s office.


    The placement office often advises candidates to try to use their own senators to get a job. A job candidate, for example, may be a Democrat from Alaska who really wants to work for a Democratic senator. If both Alaska senators are Republicans, and the candidate doesn’t want to work for them, all is not lost. The candidate can still go to her own senators and ask for help. They may know of a position with a Democratic senator, and would love to help out a constituent of either party by telling her about the opening. “Networking is key in any environment,” Bean says, “but particularly so here, because it’s so competitive.”


Busy season
    The placement office’s big rush comes around election time, and particularly right afterward. Senators retire or lose elections, which means that hundreds of employees are out of work. In addition, people who have worked on campaigns need jobs and are looking for political work. “Campaign staff flood the hill,” Bean says. Turnover during the election and post-election season is tremendous, and the function of the placement office really becomes part placement, part outplacement.


    The influx is compounded when a new administration takes office. “In the presidential year of 2000, we had such an exodus of the Clinton/Gore administration descending on the Hill,” Bean says. “We were overwhelmed with people from the executive branch.”

Posted on

Curing the Turnover Disease

A troubled merger–in a mature industry–leads to a culture clash. Crucial employees defect, en masse, to the competition. Costs soar at the merged company, as recruiting replacement workers proves time-consuming. The company’s reputation for service slips.



    Sound familiar?


    Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, created in the late 1990s by the merger of Beth Israel, a Harvard Medical School training hospital, and Deaconess, a community hospital in Boston, made many of the management mistakes seen in other industries after mergers. Now, a holistic approach to personnel management is helping Beth Israel Deaconess reach its nurse recruiting and retention goals after several troubled years.


Frustration and turnover
    The hospital faced a 14 percent vacancy rate for nurses last year–nearly double the national average. Unable to cope with the crisis effectively at the 526-bed hospital, senior management hired a new vice president of patient care services, Dianne Anderson, who had a reputation for helping turn around troubled nursing staffs.


    “Our medical center had gone through a very difficult period after a merger about seven years ago,” says Anderson. “There was a serious financial situation, and several challenging years, which led to the increased turnover of nurses and physicians.”


    Anderson convinced senior management, including CEO Paul Levy, to hold a series of “town hall meetings” with the nursing staff, to hear why so many nurses were so frustrated with their jobs there. Consider it a 360-degree performance review–in public. Management heard–quite clearly–that it wasn’t listening to the new workforce. This was quite a challenge for them.


    “They started off with a lot of hostility, a lot of anger and emotions,” says Anderson. “And it ended up being very, very positive.”


    Those who had worked for Deaconess felt that the merger wasn’t really a deal between equals but was “rather an acquisition,” says Ira Wolfe, a recruiting and retention consultant who has worked with one of the hospital’s departments. Many Deaconess employees felt that they were treated as inferior by the Beth Israel staff because they worked for a hospital that would no longer exist because of financial difficulties.


    Executives also learned that nurses felt mistreated by the physicians at the hospital, many of whom were perceived as being haughty Harvard graduates who couldn’t care less what the nurses’ opinions were about patient care. Many of the nurses felt stuck in dead-end jobs, with few prospects for career growth or personal enrichment.


    And, oh yes, the pay was not competitive with what was being offered at the other hospitals in town.


Jobs, careers and pay
    The solutions emerged slowly but have proved to be effective for the hospital. Anderson says that the vacancy rate for nurses has dropped to below the national average.



    Beth Israel Deaconess redesigned the nurses’ jobs as a first step in the retention effort. Gradually, nurses were allowed more autonomy and decision-making authority in areas in which they were expert.


    Senior management instructed doctors to treat nurses as valuable team members in patient care, not lackeys who were there to conduct menial tasks. “The main reason that people go into nursing is to help people,” says Wolfe, who is also a director of a hospital in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. “If they feel like they’re not helping people, they feel as if they have no purpose in life there, and they leave.”


    Nurses’ potential paths up the career ladder became clearer. Registered nurses with two years of college were given help with tuition to complete their bachelor of science in nursing degree. Those who had their BSNs were given help in completing a master’s degree in a higher-paying specialty.


    Pay was raised. Flexible hours were introduced, allowing employees to work on schedules that better fit their lives. Employees who lived a long distance away–such as in New Hampshire or New York–were given a housing allowance to enable them to maintain a local apartment while they were working a few days a week in Boston.


    “This is all part of our new practice model, which we call the Premiere Practice model,” says Anderson. “That includes a positive work environment, professional involvement in decision-making, maintaining a primary nursing focus and shared governance–ways that the staff are involved in making decisions on their work and a variety of other things.”


200 nurses = $1 million
    To reinforce the changes, the hospital launched an advertising campaign on TV and radio and in print to extol the working environment at Beth Israel Deaconess. The ads featured nurses talking about how great their jobs were.


    “We’ve made a very serious effort, and deliberate, to make this the best hospital for nurses to work in Boston,” says Anderson. “We made a market adjustment to make sure we were competitive with salary. But it’s not all about that. It’s about the workplace environment and aspects of the work situation.”


    These tactics were undergirded by an aggressive recruiting strategy. The hospital wanted to recruit 200 new nurses in one year, starting in early 2002.


    “When we started off, our vacancy rate was something like 14 percent,” says Anderson. “And it is now down to 6 percent. The same thing for our turnover rate, which is now down to 6 percent, which was also at 14 percent.” The medical center employs close to 1,000 nurses overall.


    Senior management continues to listen to employee concerns through “management councils,” which are made up of senior nurses and department heads. They handle issues of professional practice, career development, research, quality of care and the like.


    As a result of these management councils, some new lessons have emerged since the initial town hall meetings, feedback that has reached the executive suite. Many departments of the hospital, for example, found that nurses lacked the proper supplies to do their jobs effectively, like syringes or bandages. Increasing the on-site supply of these materials increased job satisfaction for workers.


    How much has this saved the hospital? Wolfe estimates that it costs upwards of $35,000 to replace a nurse who leaves, according to one study of nurse employment-transition costs. With around 200 nurses leaving the hospital, and being replaced, each year, the cost to Beth Israel was close to $1 million annually.


They’re not alone
    Hospital employers around the country face many of these same challenges. A study by the American Journal of Nursing, the nation’s oldest and largest nursing magazine, exposed the impact of “disruptive physician behavior” on the morale of nurses and on their job satisfaction.


    Hospitals are trying to address these problems, and exploringnumerous other strategies, like recruiting more males, something the U.S. Army Nurse Corps has had success at.


    The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is trying to do its part, giving grants to college nursing programs to encourage them to recruit and graduate nursing students “from under-represented backgrounds,” says Kelly Adams, a spokeswoman for Utica College, one of the recipients of the federal largess.


    Meanwhile, large health-care providers like New York-Presbyterian Healthcare System have hired outside firms like Watson Wyatt to get help in attracting nurses and keeping them on board.


    Another large health-care system, the Geisinger Health System, which serves 2.5 million patients in rural Pennsylvania, is working with the Pennsylvania State University School of Nursing to help 40 hospital employees “earn their nursing degrees without leaving their present jobs,” says Mike Ferlazzo, a spokesman for Geisinger. Ferlazzo says that enrollees include LPNs, clerks, secretaries and other employees of Geisinger and local community hospitals. The students are receiving tuition reimbursement, loans and other financial aid from their respective hospitals.


    It has helped that the economy has been weak. The University of Phoenix, an accredited online school, now offers a nursing program. A spokeswoman, Charlotte Tomic, says, “More and more people are going into nursing in this economy.”

Posted on

A Sample Employee Survey

The employee opinion survey that follows was created and used by a small New England HMO and was one of a series of annual surveys. Because the survey is presented as written by the company, some of the terms used are specific to that company. It is provided so you can review a relatively simple but complete survey that was actually used by a company.



    Also included: an instruction letter. Although this survey is for a specific company, many of its questions and other wording may be of assistance to you. The intro letter includes a references to “personal information”–that’s because participants were asked their race, gender, job type, and length of service along with the survey.


Sample Introductory Letter


(Company Letterhead)
(Date)


To all employees:


You are about to participate in an employee opinion survey. We conduct such a survey every year to provide an opportunity for you to communicate your opinions about the conditions of employment at our company. All employees will have an opportunity to complete a survey, and some will also be invited to participate in small groups to provide any needed additional information.


We will have the results of the survey within two months. At that time, an all-employee meeting will be held to review those results. That meeting will be followed by department meetings in which you can raise questions and develop suggestions for contributing to our company’s conditions of employment.


Your responses to the survey questions will be held in confidence. You will not be asked to identify yourself. For those who wish to do so, a place is provided at the end of the survey, but that is optional. You are not required or expected to give your name.


The completed surveys will be collected by representatives of our employee opinion survey consulting firm. They will tabulate and report the results. They will be the only ones to actually see the completed surveys.


As with past surveys, you will be asked to provide some personal information. Such information allows the results to be reported by different groupings of employees such as department and length of service.


If you are uncomfortable supplying that type of data, you may leave those questions blank, but it is hoped you will see their value and supply the requested responses.


We view our annual employee opinion surveys as an opportunity to continue to improve the two-way communication process at our company.


Thank you for your participation,


(Signature and Title)


Employee Opinion Survey


On this page, the survey questions begin. Note they are each identified here and on the answer sheet by a number. Be sure to mark your response after the appropriate number on the answer sheet.


Each of the following questions requests you to indicate how important to you various conditions of employment at our company are. Indicate your response using the following scale. Be sure to darken the appropriate lettered box.

Very Important A
Important B
Neither Important nor Unimportant C
Unimportant D
Very Unimportant E

1. How important to you is it to work at our company?


2. How important to you are employee policies at the company for which you work?


3. How important to you is the consistent administration of company policies?


4. How important is the work you do to our company’s success?


5. How important to you is the job you do?


6. How important to you is the fairness of the way your company treats all employees?


7. How important to you is the overall training and development provided by your company?


8. How important to you is job security?


9. How important to you is the type of supervision you receive?


10. How important to you is it to be involved in quality customer service?


11. How important to you is the way your company deals with change?


12. How important to you is the overall communication at your company?


13. How important to you is the salary you receive?


14. How important to you is your total cash compensation?


15. How important to you are the benefits you receive?


16. How important to you are the overall operating procedures of the department in which you work?


17. How important to you are the opportunities to advance at our company?


18. How important to you is the performance of executive management?


19. How important to you is the quality of customer service provided by your company?


20. How important to you is the recognition you receive from your company?


How important are each of the benefits provided by our company?


21. Vision Benefits


22. Eyeglasses Discount


23. Employee Life Insurance


24. Dependant Life Insurance


25. Additional Employee Life Insurance


26. Employee Referral Plan


27. Accidental Death and Dismemberment Insurance


28. Travel Insurance


29. Time Away from Work


30. Employee Dental Insurance


31. Dependant Dental Insurance


32. Flexible Work Hours


33. Employee Health Care Coverage


34. Dependant Health Care Coverage


35. Pension Plan


36. Gainsharing


37. Tuition Reimbursement


38. Short-Term Disability Insurance


39. Long-Term Disability Insurance


40. Employee Assistance Plan


41. Prescription Drug Plan


The next statements are concerning your job and our company. Indicate the extent to which you personally agree or disagree with each one using the following scale for your responses:

Strongly Agree A
Agree B
Neither Agree nor Disagree C
Disagree D
Strongly Disagree E

42. I am proud to work for our company.


43. Company employee policies are administered the same in all departments.


44. I like my job–the work I do.


45. I am satisfied with the training provided for my current job.


46. I am satisfied with the amount of training offered for advancement.


47. Our company is concerned with the long-term welfare of its employees.


48. I feel secure that I will be able to work for our company as long as I do a good job.


49. I feel I can voice my opinion without fear of reprisal.


50. My supervisor is technically competent.


51. My supervisor is competent in human relations.


52. My supervisor deals with all employees fairly.


53. My supervisor deals with employee problems fairly.


54. Our company handles change well.


55. The communication I receive from the company is accurate.


56. The communication I receive from the company is timely.


57. Our company maintains salary levels that compare well to other companies in the area.


58. Our new incentive program is part of my total cash compensation.


59. Our company maintains benefits that compare well to other companies in the area.


60. I receive cooperation from other departments.


61. My department is well organized for the work it does.


62. The employees in my department work well as a team.


63. Company employee policies are properly and equally administered in my department.


64. I feel there is adequate opportunity for me to move to a better job within our company.


65. The job posting policy and procedure supports the advancement opportunities at our company.


66. My supervisor is concerned with providing quality service.


67. The employees of other departments are concerned with quality customer service.


68. Other departments are concerned with providing quality service.


69. I feel executive management is committed to quality customer service.


70. The company’s executive management is concerned with providing quality service.


71. My supervisor recognizes my performance.


72. I have an annual set of performance standards.


73. Our company recognizes the accomplishments of employees.


74. I receive regular performance reviews.


On this page and the next one are questions to be answered using the following rating scale:

Excellent A
Very Good B
Typical C
Fair D
Poor E

75. How do you rate our company as a place to work compared with other companies you know about?


76. How do you rate our company on treating employee problems fairly?


77. How do you rate the overall relationship between the company and its employees?


78. All things considered, how do you rate our company?


79. How do the company’s employee policies compare with those of other companies you know about?


80. All things considered, how do you rate our company’s employee policies and procedures?


81. All things considered, how do you like your job?


82. All things considered, how do you rate the fairness with which our company treats all employees?


83. All things considered, how do you rate the overall training and development provided?


84. How do you rate our company’s business prospects for the next five years?


85. All things considered, how do you rate the job security provided by our company?


86. How do you rate your supervisor’s credibility?


87. All things considered, how do you rate the supervision you receive?


88. All things considered, how do you rate the way in which our company deals with change as it relates to your job?


89. How do you rate the amount of communication you receive from our company?


90. How do you rate the level of communication of employee policies and procedures?


91. How do you rate the amount of communication you receive regarding quality customer service?


92. How do you rate the amount of communication you receive regarding the company’s plans?


93. How do you rate the amount of communication you receive regarding reorganization?


94. All things considered, how do you rate the overall communication at our company?


95. How do you rate the total cash compensation you receive compared to what you could receive for similar work from another company in the area?


96. How do you rate the relationship between the amount of compensation you receive and your performance?


97. All things considered, how do you rate our company’s overall total cash compensation program?


98. How do you rate the benefits you receive compared to those you could receive from another company in the area?


99. All things considered, how do you rate our company’s overall benefits?


100. In your opinion, how do employees of other departments rate your department?


101. All things considered, how do you rate your department’s overall operating procedures?


102. How do you rate your long-term career potential at our company?


103. All things considered, how do you rate the opportunities to advance at our company?


104. How do you rate the credibility of our executive management?


105. All things considered, how do you rate executive management’s performance?


106. All things considered, how do you rate the quality of our customer service?


107. All things considered, how do you rate the recognition you receive at our company?


On this page are questions to be answered using the following scale:

Much Too Much A
Too Much B
Just Right C
Too Little D
Much Too Little E

108. How do you feel about the quantity of work you are asked to perform?


109. How do you feel about the quality of work you are asked to perform?


110. How do you feel about the amount of time your supervisor spends with you?


111. How do you feel about the amount of change occurring within our company?


112. How do you feel about the amount of organizational change as it relates to our company?


113. How do you feel about the amount of organizational change as it relates to quality customer service?


114. How do you feel about the number of approvals required to get a decision made?


115. How much concern do you feel our company’s executive management has for our company members?


116. How much concern do you feel our company’s executive management has for our providers?


117. How much concern do you feel our company’s executive management has for our employees?


118. How much concern do you feel our company’s executive management has for customers?


119. How much has the quality of our company’s customer service changed over the last year?


120. What is your level of understanding of quality customer service?


On this page are questions to be answered using the following scale:

Very Satisfied A
Satisfied B
Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied C
Dissatisfied D
Very Dissatisfied E

121. All things considered, how satisfied are you with our company?


122. All things considered, how satisfied are you with our company’s employee policies?


123. All things considered, how satisfied are you with your job?


124. All things considered, how satisfied are you with the fairness of the way the company treats all employees?


125. All things considered, how satisfied are you with the training and development provided by our company?


126. All things considered, how satisfied are you with your job security at our company?


127. All things considered, how satisfied are you with the supervision you receive?


128. All things considered, how satisfied are you with your level of involvement in quality customer service?


129. All things considered, how satisfied are you with the way our company deals with change as it relates to your job?


130. All things considered, how satisfied are you with the overall communication at our company?


131. All things considered, how satisfied are you with your salary at our company?


132. All things considered, how satisfied are you with the benefits provided by our company?


133. All things considered, how satisfied are you with your department’s overall operating procedures?


134. All things considered, how satisfied are you with the opportunities to advance at our company?


135. All things considered, how satisfied are you with the company’s quality standards?


136. All things considered, how satisfied are you with the changes that have been made to the quality standards?


137. All things considered, how satisfied are you with the quality of customer service?


138. How satisfied are you with the amount of change occurring within our company?


139. How satisfied are you with the amount of organizational change as it relates to our company?


140. How satisfied are you with the amount of organizational change as it relates to quality customer service?


141. All things considered, how satisfied are you with the recognition you receive at our company?


Rate your satisfaction with each of the benefits provided by our company.


142. Vision Benefits


143. Eyeglasses Discount


144. Employee Life Insurance


145. Dependant Life Insurance


146. Additional Employee Life Insurance


147. Employee Referral Plan


148. Accidental Death and Dismemberment Insurance


149. Travel Insurance


150. Time Away from Work


151. Employee Dental Insurance


152. Dependant Dental Insurance


153. Flexible Work Hours


154. Employee Health Care Coverage


155. Dependant Health Care Coverage


156. Pension Plan


157. Gainsharing


158. Tuition Reimbursement


159. Short-Term Disability Insurance


160. Long-Term Disability Insurance


161. Employee Assistance Plan


162. Prescription Drug Plan


For the following question, use the answers shown and respond by darkening the appropriate letter.


163. From what source do you receive most of your information about our company and your job?


163. A Grapevine


163. B Supervisor


163. C Other employees


163. D Company publications


163. E Meetings


163. F Bulletin boards


163. G Newsletter


163. H Other


164. If you have any additional information or comments that you feel will be of assistance to this survey, please write them in the space below.


Excerpted from How to Design, Implement, and Interpret and Employee Survey by John H. McConnell Copyright © 2003 John H. McConnell Published byAMACOM Books, a division of American Management Association. New York, N.Y. Used with permission. All rights reserved.

Posted on

What to Look for in an E-Learning Vendor

Below is a checklist for choosing potential e-learning vendors and also for creating an effective RFP.
 



A Checklist for Potential Vendors

1. Has an established track record.


2. E-learning development is their main business (not a sideline).


3. Gathers all the information before recommending specific media recommendations for the project. Demonstrates state-of-the-art technology in current projects (even though it might not be appropriate for yours).


4. Works with a variety of authoring/development products.


5. Uses the current releases of the development products they recommend.


6. Provided demos to illustrate sound principles of instructional design.


7. Their definitions of terms such as “interactive” and “engaging” agree with yours.


8. Their idea of what constitutes great material agrees with yours.


9. Recommends nonproprietary technology that is commercially available.


10. Development team possesses all of the skills required for the project.


11. The team members that will be assigned to the project have worked together before.


12. Provides good customer support (from your own pre-project experience and from the experience of the vendor’s references that you interview).


13. Can convince you that they know all of the proper steps to complete your project to your satisfaction.


14. Pricing is in line with other quotations (Be careful of the ultra-low bid to get the foot in the door or the ultra-high bid that accompanies claims of a superior deliverable).


15. Is in the custom e-learning development business where each project’s design is unique to achieve specific objectives (as opposed to being a commercial developer where a “generic” design is applied to all projects).


16. The vendor is flexible. They are willing to do just some of the work (e.g., you do the storyboard design and content development and they do the programming).


17. The physical location of the development personnel is not an issue. Remember, you are developing written communication and graphics. All are easily transmitted as e-mail attachments or via overnight delivery of a CD, regardless of where the vendor is located.


18. The vendor is willing to work at or near your facility, if necessary. If you insist on the vendor being on-site, consider the occasional on-site meeting. Even with travel costs factored in, a “right-priced” vendor can still be more cost-effective than a local provider.


19. Has or has access to video- or Web-conferencing facilities if a “face to face” is required over a distance.


20. The vendor does not insist on retaining any rights to the program. If they do, look elsewhere. Future “rights” entanglements can be costly.


21. The vendor is willing to provide maintenance services for the program.


22. The vendor is willing to design the program and use development tools that will minimize maintenance charges.


23. If subsequent translation to additional languages is anticipated, the same vendor can at least design the project to minimize the effort required for translation. Ideally the vendor can also provide the translation services if required.

Creating an Effective RFP


Your RFP needs to include the following information:

1. The size, geographical distribution and makeup of the intended audience.


2. Estimated e-learning course duration based on estimated traditional training.


3. Intended purpose of the training (product launch, ongoing training, classroom supplement, etc.).


4. The intended platforms (LAN, Web, dialup, CD-based, both Web and CD, existing standards or requirements, etc.).


5. CD quantities required (if applicable).


6. Packaging design needs if a CD is required (artwork and content creation for the CD, mailing envelope, etc.).


7. Identify if high-bandwidth elements are required via a slow dialup connection (indicating a need for a hybrid CD solution).


8. If an Internet implementation is required, indicate that IT has been contacted to insure necessary bandwidth availability, willingness to support plug-ins and/or external hosting (if necessary).


9. Indicate the desired course completion timeframe.


10. Indicate the degree of desired on-site presence of the vendor (initial meeting only, periodic review meetings, all development on-site, etc.).


11. Need for a “pay and play” Web-based solution (do you want to sell per-student access to the course via the Internet)?


12. Desired outputs (tracking and reporting). Do you just want completion information or full tracking of responses by date and time?


13. Identify what resource materials already exist (user guides, system specifications, product literature, etc.).


14. Describe the e-learning experience level of the group issuing the RFP (no prior experience, some experience, etc.).


15. Indicate the perceived needs for graphics, photographs, animations, audio and video. Do any of these elements already exist?


16. Will the product initially or eventually need to be translated into other languages?


17. What are acceptable timeframes for client reviews (three days, two weeks, etc.)? This is a significant factor in meeting the desired development timeframe.


18. Will vendor assistance be needed with implementation (technical startup, course administration, promotion, etc.)?


19. Who will be maintaining the program (you or the vendor)? An “easier” but “less powerful” tool may be appropriate depending on the situation.

From THE AMA HANDBOOK OF E-LEARNING: Effective Design, Implementation, and Technology Solutions. ©2003 AMACOM, Published byAMACOM Books Division of American Management Association. 1601 Broadway, New York, NY 10019. Used with permission. All rights reserved.

Posted on

Workforce Management ā€” August 2003

Holmes’ Improvement
By Andy Meisler
Despite a bear market, St. Louis retail broker Edward Jones has a 38 percent growth rate, delights its customers and reigns supreme on Fortune‘s list of best companies to work for. Chief human resources officer Michael Holmes doesn’t claim credit, but it couldn’t have happened without him.

Irreplaceable You
By Sheila Anne Feeney
You know the names: Don Hewitt. Sandy Weill. Sumner Redstone. None wanted to name successors, despite directors’ and shareholders’ pleas. But when leaders are reluctant to cooperate in succession planning, the results can be destabilized companies, demoralized employees and downturned stock prices.

That Sartain Touch
By Douglas P. Shuit
  If human resources has a household name, it’s Libby Sartain, who earned her stripes at Southwest Airlines, mended a fracture at SHRM, made a leap to Yahoo and now has written a road map for human resources professionals who want to be like her.

Big, Fast and Easily Bungled
By Ken Gordon
 
Virtually overnight, the Transportation Security Administration had to hire more than 55,000 workers. Its problems with mishires and layoffs illustrate the issues inherent in fast large-scale hires..

A Cure for Contingent Costs
By Leslie Gross Klaff
Companies that already use the Web as a tool for buying materials are now using it to manage contract workers. Shell Oil Products U.S. expects to cut its contingent-labor cost in half by the end of the year by using Web-based processes.

Optimas Award: Managing Change:
Almost Curtains
By Maryann Hammers
The workforce management leadership at Designer Blinds in Omaha had a narrow window of opportunity to rescue the company from failure. Their efforts won them the Optimas Award for managing change.

Between the Lines
Tongue-tied
Jargon isn’t just confusing. It’s costing you money.
   Reactions From Readers
Letters on Carly Fiorina’s impact on HP and the pros and cons of forced ranking.

In This Corner
Unreasonable Accommodation
Some courts say employers should favor disabled employees over more qualified coworkers. If they do so, trouble will surely follow.

Legal Briefings
High risks posed by top executives.

Data Bank
Stronger growth is a no-show.
 

The high cost of employee violence
Nationally, the toll for incidents of workplace violence is $36 billion. And while there is some immunity from claims, it’s not a given. Also: A green light for diversity programs, the sound of money talking and a candid comment from IBM.
  
 

Benefits
A broker wins thanks from firefighters
Richard Travers handled benefits for uniformed firefighter offices in the wake of 9/11.
  

Compensation
Microsoft leads the way in opting out of options
Not all companies will follow, but many see the value of granting stock instead.
  

Benefits
A “family friendly” backlash
Resentment festers if employees believe that flexible-work programs are only for parents.
  

Rewards & Recognition
Hiking with the honchos
Swanky dinners, trips and everyday praise are part of The Container Store culture.
  

Health Benefits
Taking health-risk assessments to the next level
“Smart” software gives employees instant feedback and concrete plans for change.
  

Product Showcase
Recognition &  Incentives

see it now >>>


July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
If you’re not currently receiving Workforce Management magazine, click here to request a FREE trial issue today!

 

Posted on

A Family Friendly Backlash

You can’t please everyone–not that employers haven’t tried. Eager to attract and retain top talent, corporations have paid heed to the pleas of working moms and dads in the past decade or so with an array of “family-friendly” policies. But instead of receiving notes of thanks for flextime, day-care centers, telecommuting opportunities, child-care reimbursement accounts and the like, human resources executives often face angry backlash from employees who don’t have children and believe they aren’t getting their fair share of benefits.



    “Employees without children have lives outside of work and consider their needs and responsibilities just as important as those of workers with kids,” says Tom Coleman, an attorney and executive director of Unmarried America (formerly called American Association for Single People), a nonprofit advocacy group in Glendale, California. “Resentment occurs and festers if employers expand programs that cater to married couples or workers with minor children without offering alternative benefits to those who are not married or who aren’t raising children.” He ticks off a list of policies that often favor families and parents, from working hours to health benefits and even company-sponsored “family” picnics.


    But Joan Williams, director of the Program on Gender, Work and Family and professor at American University’s Washington College of Law, maintains that there’s nothing inherently inequitable about being family-friendly. “We need these policies because a lot of the talent pool is made up of women, as well as men who aren’t willing to make the work/family trade-offs that their fathers made,” she says. “If there’s a backlash by singles, the problem isn’t with the policies. It’s with their implementation and management.”


    Supervisors frequently make the mistake of cutting “secret side deals” with individual workers who request special arrangements for flexible hours, compressed workweeks or telecommuting. Such informal agreements are surefire recipes for bad feelings and charges of favoritism, says Williams, who also wrote the book Unbending Gender: Why Family and Work Conflict and What to Do About It. To avoid ill will, companies can institute a formal application process available to all employees, whether they want the time to take a yoga class, play golf or attend junior’s soccer game. “That sends the message that you understand that adults need flexibility for a whole range of reasons,” she says. “End the special deals, open the process to everyone who is qualified and can make a business case for it, and the resentment and stigma will evaporate.”


    At Deloitte & Touche, parental status is “irrelevant,” says Stan Smith, national director of the company’s Employer of Choice-Next Generation Initiatives. Employees who request a flexible work arrangement are not asked to state their marital/family status or explain why they are making the request. They need only prove that they can meet their job requirements. “We believe that a flexible environment that helps our people navigate their personal and professional responsibilities is a part of sound business practice,” Smith says. “Flexible arrangements are available to all of our people, whether they’re married or single, parents or non-parents, provided that they continue to meet the service needs of their clients and the arrangement makes business sense.”


    That emphasis on “business sense” is critical for deflecting negative feedback from naysayers. While many companies institute such programs under the guise of “social consciousness,” they are, in fact, business decisions. And that’s the frank message that employees need to hear, says David Russo, who spent 20 years as vice president of human resources for SAS Institute and now runs Eno River Associates, Inc., a human resources consulting practice in Durham, North Carolina. “By and large, companies don’t effectively communicate that these benefits are recruitment and retention tools that heighten workforce productivity and create more effective and efficient business environments,” he says. “Companies need to explain how the programs benefit all employees, how they benefit the company, that they are not gifts you are giving to someone else, and how they do not infringe on any one person’s piece of the action.”


    Communication and positioning are key. At Household International, for example, Mary Bilbrey, vice president of employee benefits, presents the company’s Complete Rewards benefit package as a “menu of choices,” so employees can pick and choose programs that suit their particular needs, lifestyle and stage of life. The comprehensive offerings include something for everyone–from flexible work hours, training opportunities and incentive plans to subsidized dependent-care accounts, tuition reimbursement and various discounts and services. In addition, a Life Balance program offers phone consultations, crisis counseling and literature on a variety of issues, as well as “concierge” benefits, which vary from personalized referrals for child/elder-care resources to information on where to get the best deal on a major appliance or car.


    It’s important to publicize the benefits through the intranet, in-house newsletters and other mediums. Connie Jacot, global work/life effectiveness manager at Intel, publicizes individual success stories and makes the company’s broad spectrum of benefit choices as visible as possible. One such story: An employee who has a passion for painting is at his most creative in the morning, so he was able to rearrange his daily schedule to arrive at work a few hours late. Another employee, a musician, leaves at 4 p.m. when he has a gig. “Because we continually communicate all the choices we offer, from flextime to financial-planning seminars or our fitness center, we don’t have the appearance of favoring one group over another and employees see that work/life doesn’t equal child care,” she says.


    Before instituting such benefits, however, companies should understand their employee demographics–how many are married, how many have children and what percentages are in various age tiers–and use focus groups, surveys and similar tools to solicit their input in the program’s design. “Do due diligence. Conduct a proper analysis that takes into account your employees’ needs and desires,” Russo says. “And when designing programs, look for cost-accountable ways to apply them universally.” The idea is to open up as many benefits as possible to as many people as possible. For example: Lactation rooms can be instead called “personal space” and made available to anyone who needs to escape for a bit–whether to pump breast milk or seek relief from a migraine. Child-care programs can be expanded to include elder care.


    That three-pronged approach–understanding the employees’ needs, soliciting their input and making the benefit accessible to everyone–is precisely the tactic that the Hartford took when it recently revamped its paid-time-off program. Previously, employees could take days off for vacation, personal time or sick days. “But those three ‘buckets’ often didn’t mirror people’s lives,” says Lynn Farrell, assistant vice president of human resources strategy and planning. Through surveys and focus groups, the insurance giant learned that employees with families, especially single parents, wanted a more lenient unscheduled-absence policy. In response, the company designed a paid-time-off program that provides a set number of days for employees to use as they wish. “Whether someone wants to take an afternoon to attend a school assembly, close on a house or go to a yoga class, the decision is up to the individual. This meets the needs of single and non-parent employees as well as those who have families,” Farrell says.


    When it comes down to it, the very notion of “family-friendly” benefits may be passé–or at least have outlived its usefulness. “Many companies have dropped the term in favor of other descriptions that do not use the word ‘family,’ ” says Martha Muldoon, who previously led BankBoston’s work/life strategy and today is a Boston-area independent consultant who specializes in contemporary workforce issues.


    “Almost all of us have traditional concerns that transcend family status, whether we’re caring for aging parents or partners who are ill, fulfilling volunteer commitments, furthering our education, managing difficult commutes or saving to buy a home.”


    The bottom line for human resources is that the solution–and the challenge–is to realize that when it comes to benefits, one size does not fit everyone, Muldoon says. Companies must establish and publicize programs and policies that all employees can participate in, whether they are married or single, parents or not. She adds that it’s also important that the benefits be part of a larger culture of fairness and respect. “If employees are listened to and allowed to share their concerns, and if actions are taken in response to those concerns, the sense of favoritism will be minimized. Companies that recognize the diversity, complexity and reality of people’s lives both on and off the job, and create a menu of benefit options that address their differing needs, will be rewarded by a more committed and productive workforce.”


Workforce Management, August 2003, pp. 77-79 — Subscribe Now!

Posted on

iOptimas Award -I Managing Change Almost Curtains

Designer Blinds was in a world of hurt, and Deb Franklin, human resources manager, couldn’t blame the old building anymore. Until 1998, the family-owned custom window-coverings manufacturer had occupied a few floors in a dilapidated old department store building in a gang-infested part of South Omaha, Nebraska. So when employees quit one after another and Franklin’s help-wanted ads drew dismal responses, she had ready excuses. It was the location, she told herself. It was the building. It was the bad neighborhood.


    Then the company relocated to a newer, nicer building in a better area–but the recruitment and retention troubles followed. Out of the 215 workers employed at the time, five or six were quitting every week. “Our issues came with us,” Franklin says. “For every person I hired, I would lose two. I was spending all my time putting out fires and running ads.”


    Most of the turnover troubles involved employees who worked in production. Without a stable, experienced workforce in the factory, orders went unfilled and were marred by quality problems. Customers were defecting, and profits were sinking. The company’s future was clearly at risk. That’s when, Franklin says, “the light went on. I realized that human resources has an incredible impact on the organization’s health and future, and I could make a huge difference in turning the company around. I knew that I had to re-invent my department.”


    Franklin embarked on an all-out recruitment and retention campaign, involving community outreach, better orientation and communication, and management training. The results surpassed her wildest hopes. Turnover plummeted, productivity skyrocketed and worker safety improved. Quality is near perfect. And today, Franklin has a waiting list of prospective employees lining up to join the Designer Blinds team. “After an extremely challenging two or three years, we had more than a 30 percent improvement in bottom-line profit from January 2001 to June 2002.” Productivity jumped more than 14 percent between January 2002 and February 2003; turnover dropped from a horrifying 165 percent in 1996 to 6.7 percent.


    Until that point, her recruitment efforts had been what she calls “traditional.” Her approach pretty much consisted of “run an ad and they will come.” She became much more proactive and began participating in job fairs and visiting state employment agencies, community centers and chambers of commerce. “I did a huge blitz to get people in the door, doing everything from running ads on local radio shows and in church bulletins to making friends with security guards at state agencies and job counselors,” Franklin says.


    She also broke with tradition by actively reaching out to Omaha’s Sudanese community. Since 1995, thousands of refugees from Sudan have migrated to the upper Midwest to escape religious persecution at home. Most of them settled in Omaha because of its established Sudanese community, affordable housing, plentiful jobs and good schools. “Many employers did not consider other cultures as a viable workforce, but I recognized them as an underutilized market,” says Franklin, who also began outreach efforts to the growing Hispanic population. She offered ESL classes, adjusted new-hire training to better reflect the way other cultures learn, and developed presentations for the current workforce and supervisors to promote understanding and empathy among the staff. Today, Sudanese and Hispanic employees make up approximately 25 percent of the workforce at Designer Blinds. Even better, the new diverse workforce results in more employee referrals. “They recruit for us,” Franklin says.


The next step was boosting retention. Designer Blinds had developed an unfortunate but well-deserved reputation as a place where “people came in, did a little bit of time and went on their way,” Franklin says. To encourage employees to stay put, she implemented a new-hire training program, including classroom and on-the-job learning. She also appointed a “buddy” for new employees–not only to teach things like where the time clock is located, but also to help them socialize, join them for lunch and introduce them around. “No new hire should ever sit in the break room alone,” Franklin says.


    A new “rolls and roundtable” program was instituted, during which eight employees at a time mix and mingle with senior leadership in an unstructured, casual setting. Those sessions, perhaps more than any other single activity, help employees feel valued and involved in the company, says CEO Lloyd “Woody” Woodworth. “Too often, folks don’t feel safe saying what’s on their minds,” he says. “But in this environment, they say things they wouldn’t anywhere else. Whether it’s a little thing like needing better lighting or filing cabinets, or something significant, such as a complaint about a manager, they are not afraid to speak up because they’ve learned it’s OK.”


    Better supervisory training was also key to retention. Before 1998, the company had simply promoted the best technicians to managerial positions–whether or not they were management material. “Our leadership crew was running on autopilot–with no pilot,” Woodworth concedes. Realizing that better-trained supervisors were integral to making Designer Blinds a better place to work, the company began a formal management-development program, including both leadership and technical skills. During weekly meetings, supervisors learn about management issues ranging from attitude adjustment to sexual harassment.


    “The word is out that Designer Blinds is a good place to work,” Franklin says. Thanks to the more stable and experienced workforce, productivity has soared. The company is producing the same amount of blinds with 180 employees, 30 fewer than in 1997, when Franklin launched the human resources initiative. Its safety record, which was 16 percent worse than average in 1999, is now 25 percent better than average. And the company’s 99 percent perfect quality record has become an industry benchmark.


    “We were able to dramatically impact the business without asking for increased wages or benefits,” Franklin says. But the company’s newfound success isn’t just about compliance or recruitment and retention. “It’s about engaging with the managers in how to run their part of the business. And it’s about engaging employees’ hearts and minds.”


Workforce Management, August 2003, pp. 54-55 — Subscribe Now!

Posted on

Unreasonable Accomodation

The last thing an employer wants to do is play workplace favorites. It’s certain to stir up trouble and resentment, and in some cases, it’s a direct path to a lawsuit. But some courts are pushing employers in that direction, telling them that the rights of disabled employees trump those of nondisabled coworkers who are better qualified.



    Here’s the problem. Two years ago, a California Court of Appeals ruled that under California law, employers must prefer disabled employees over more qualified coworkers when the disabled workers seek reassignment as a “reasonable accommodation.” In another case, a federal appeals court rightly dubbed that policy “affirmative action with a vengeance” under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Other courts in the federal system, meanwhile, can’t agree on this principle, either.


    So as jurists continue arguing, employers have no clear and geographically uniform answer to rely on. You can only hope that the courts in your jurisdiction ultimately will see one thing clearly: that antidiscrimination laws should guarantee disabled individuals an opportunity to compete equally, with or without accommodation. They shouldn’t mandate preferences that infringe upon your right to select the most qualified worker. And they certainly should not sanction the creation of a new class of victims–the nondisabled workers who are more qualified for a position but are passed over in favor of less-qualified disabled people. Preferential treatment for the disabled over more highly qualified persons could result in reverse discrimination in your organization.


    Here are some examples of what could happen. These scenarios don’t necessarily reflect the current state of the law, but they are the logical extensions of taking preferential treatment beyond just job-reassignment decisions:

  • An employer has for years been grooming an African-American candidate for the position of chief accountant. The candidate correctly understands that, after a lengthy stint as second in command, she will eventually take the leadership position. When the job becomes vacant, a disabled employee who no longer can perform her current job and is minimally qualified for the chief accountant position asks for reassignment. If preferential treatment is the rule, the job will go to the less-qualified disabled employee.

  • Several typists apply for the position of typing supervisor. One is disabled but, as a result of accommodations such as ergonomic office equipment and a voice-recognition word-processing program, meets the minimum job requirements. The others are nondisabled, are better qualified and have more seniority than the disabled employee. But the less qualified typist, with her preferential consideration, must be promoted.

  • Two graduates of Harvard Law School apply to the Supreme Court to clerk for the Chief Justice. One was first in her class and is not disabled. The other is disabled, with academic credentials that are less impressive but comparable to those of at least some past Supreme Court clerks (that is, she is minimally qualified). The principle of preferential treatment for disabled employees–disability before qualifications–requires that the highest court in the land hire the less qualified applicant.

  • Two salespeople, one of whom is disabled, work side by side. The disabled employee, whose accommodations include regular time off for physical therapy and a modified work schedule, sells far less than the nondisabled employee. When the economy sours and the employer has to eliminate one sales position, the disabled employee asserts his right to preferential treatment as a reasonable accommodation. Under the principle of preferential treatment, who gets fired? The more productive employee.

    There’s no doubt that the reasonable-accommodation requirement should offer some form of special consideration for disabled employees. But there’s a world of difference between consideration, which lets a disabled individual compete on a level playing field with the nondisabled worker, and preferential treatment. The first guarantees equal opportunity. The second erodes the rights of nondisabled workers.


    Traditional antidiscrimination principles that underlie laws like Title VII have never questioned the idea that the most qualified applicant has the right to be hired for a vacant position. When disabled employees with inferior qualifications demand preferential treatment to get jobs or promotions, nondisabled employees will claim reverse discrimination. Employers will be stuck, uncertain how to balance the rights of disabled employees against the rights of the nondisabled.


    It’s easy to imagine situations in which disabled employees sue their employers because they are not given preferential treatment in reassignment, promotion, hiring and discharge. And it’s just as easy to envision better-qualified employees in other protected categories suing employers for discrimination when they are denied promotion or laid off, their legally protected rights trumped by the purportedly “superior” rights of disabled employees who are, admittedly, less able to do the job.


    Here’s what you can do while the law is in flux. Remember that the fundamental rules about disabled employees are not in dispute. Talking to them about their need for possible accommodations remains very important. And continue to consider and implement reasonable accommodations that don’t result in undue hardship. If you are confronted with situations that would require preferential treatment, be sure that you’re up-to-date on the latest rulings in your jurisdiction. That probably means talking to counsel.


    But beyond that, schedule some time with legislators, through appropriate organizations and lobbyists. Workplace disability laws afford important protections to disabled applicants and employees, but they shouldn’t guarantee preferential treatment, and lawmakers need to hear that. The law should require a level playing field for all, regardless of disability.


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.

Workforce Management, August 2003, pp. 15-16 — Subscribe Now!

Posted on

Taking Health-Risk Assessments to the Next Level

The statistics are dizzying. The vast majority of health costs are generated by a very small number of employees. NCR, for example, reports that 10 percent of its employees drive 75 percent of the firm’s health costs, numbers that are typical of many companies.



    To deal with soaring health costs in new ways, the global technology company recently introduced a health-risk assessment, high-tech tools that help companies improve employee health on the basis of answers to voluntary health questionnaires. In the past three years, industry experts say, the number of employers making use of HRAs has been swiftly rising. Thirty years ago, employers assessed the health of their workers by looking at death rates. In the 1980s, they began asking questions about weight, smoking, nutrition and personal safety. Data was collected, but no one offered a way to change what seemed inevitable, given family histories of chronic deadly diseases and other health problems such as asthma attacks or obesity.


    In the mid-1990s, employees began receiving suggestions for improving their health based on HRAs, and new technology has since transformed the assessments to higher levels. Health surveys are now administered online and are usually handled by a third party to preserve privacy. Results are immediate. Employees identified as being predisposed to chronic diseases are given a concrete plan to head them off.


    Last fall during 2003 open enrollment, NCR began offering an HRA tool, CareSteps, which is owned by American Healthways, Inc., in Nashville. The program is administered and customized by Intracorp, a wholly owned subsidiary of Cigna. NCR, located in Dayton, Ohio, has about 11,000 employees in the United States in four major locations, and about 4,000 retirees still using its health-care coverage. Mike Kriner, director of compensation and benefits, says that annual health-care costs are about $72 million for active employees and another $40 million for retirees.


    CareSteps software is “smart software”–the more HRA questions an employee answers, the more specific subsequent questions become. “It’s decision-tree based,” says Lynne Harsha, senior product manager for health facilitation at Intracorp in Philadelphia. “For example, if I’m a 42-year-old female who smokes, I won’t get questions about my prostate. The software accounts for risk factors and current behavior,” Harsha says. “If I’m extremely fair-skinned, have red hair and light eyes, and answer that I wear 50 sunblock, it would ask me if I wear sunglasses.”


    In the past, HRA results included general statements about health such as “you should stop smoking” and ended there. Now, the HRA outlines a plan. For example, Wellsource, a company in Portland, Oregon, that offers clients a suite of tools for health assessment and management, gathers information from HRAs and prepares personal reports that flag individual health risks and suggest a course of action. Similarly, CareSteps makes recommendations for achieving better health that include specific instructions and hyperlinks.


    “If you’re a smoker, it would say that on your behalf, NCR has provided you with access to this smoking-cessation program. It may give a link to a Web site to enroll or a phone number,” Harsha says. Intracorp’s job is to follow up and make sure employees get to the disease-management programs. It uses more than 2,500 nurses for all aspects of medical management.


    Results at NCR after one year haven’t been overwhelming, but Kriner is still pleased. Ten percent of employees completed the HRA and the program, and 23 people were identified as high-risk and referred to disease-management programs. Thirty-one people referred themselves to company fitness centers. NCR declined to reveal the cost-per-employee for the HRA but says company analysis shows a saving of $2 to $3 in the long run for every dollar it spends on HRAs. Although costs are expected to increase initially because of referrals to disease-management programs, Kriner estimates that the company saved $23,000–about $1,000 per high-risk employee–which more than paid for implementation. “If we help someone avoid a middle-of-the-night asthma attack or a diabetes problem, in the long term we’ll have more productive employees and fewer hospital visits,” he says.


    Participation in HRAs is often accompanied by a financial incentive such as a reduction in an employee’s health-care contribution. Last year NCR held a raffle-type drawing for participants, but this year it may make contributions to a flexible spending account to help boost participation. Kriner predicts it will increase to 40 or 50 percent.


    Cynthia Burghard, a research director at Gartner specializing in medical management, says that incentives are the key to large-scale adoption of HRAs. “We still have a huge population that is obese, that smokes and drinks too much. I think you have to build in a financial incentive to get employees to use the HRAs and stay in disease-management programs,” she says. At Coors Brewing Co. in Golden, Colorado, employees receive $100 when they complete the Checkpoint program, which includes an in-person screening and an online health-risk assessment from the Mayo Clinic Custom e-Health Package. For those who complete wellness programs, such as smoking cessation or weight management, incentives are customized. “Employees pay $50 for the smoking-cessation program, but if they are smoke-free 12 weeks after their quit date, we give them back $100,” says Colleen Reilly Perkins, manager of health and productivity at Coors.


    Information from HRAs is usually aggregated and given to management at regular intervals throughout the year. Harsha says it’s rare that anyone in the industry would ever receive information about an individual employee. At Coors, the majority of participants in its Checkpoint program agreed to release information to the wellness staff for use in customizing intervention programs. “But the information would never be released to Coors management,” Reilly Perkins says. Despite these assurances and prevailing HIPAA regulations, privacy concerns are real.


“People are concerned that personal information could be hacked into. That anxiety is heightened because of a tight economy. Even though it’s against the law to lay someone off because of a health condition, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.”

    Burghard says Gartner’s most recent consumer survey, which asked questions about a variety of technology-related issues, showed high anxiety associated with having health-care information on the Web. “People are concerned that personal information could be hacked into,” she says. “That anxiety is heightened because of a tight economy. Even though it’s against the law to lay someone off because of a health condition, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.”


    Beth Givens, director of the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, a nonprofit consumer-advocacy organization in San Diego, says the issue is a real one. “Here is information about some employees with conditions that are costing the company a lot of money, and here is this compilation of sensitive data,” Givens says. “It creates a temptation for employers to try to access that data.”


    Thus far, Kriner has gotten few negative comments at NCR about the assessment and seen little concern among employees about privacy. Most seem willing to embrace health-improvement strategies and assessments, he says. Stephanie Pronk, senior consultant in the group health-care practice at Watson Wyatt Worldwide, says that acceptance and the increasing prevalence of HRAs are part of a continuing shift in the consumer mind-set toward taking more responsibility for personal health and health care. “Employers have often exhausted their options–such as trying different plan designs–to reduce health-care costs,” Pronk says. “Their employees know this isn’t a silver bullet, but it’s one strategy. There’s not much else left to do.”


Workforce Management, August 2003, pp. 83-84 — Subscribe Now!