Category: Archive

Posted on

Sample Consulting Proposal

Below is a sample of a proposal for consulting work that was used by a $1.3 billion company in the early 1990s.


To: Samuel F. Jones, Chief Financial Officer, The Concept Corporation


From: Arthur M. Freedman, QUANTUM Associates


Proposal: Factors Contributing to Dissatisfaction and Low Morale



Provisional Statement of the Current State:


The members of the Finance Department’s senior management team (SMT) are concerned about the low morale of its approximately seventy members. The SMT believes that this is caused in part by the interactions the members have with members of the department’s clients — the major subsystems of the corporation. The SMT believes the Finance Department is held in low esteem by the rest of the corporation and that the CFO is not granted appropriate recognition in establishing corporate goals and policy.


As a result, Finance Department members are treated with disrespect and feel they are unable to optimize their potential contributions to their corporation, department, division, team, and their own careers.


Goals of the Consultation:

  1. Validate and specify the primary indications and root causes of low morale and dissatisfaction within the department.

  2. Demonstrate that the CFO and the SMT are firmly committed to take viable actions to correct unacceptable conditions with the department and between the department and the rest of the corporation.

Phase One: Announcement


Meet with CFO to do the following:

  1. Confirm (or modify) this proposed plan;

  2. Determine what will be said in the CFO’s announcement of his intention to move forward with this effort. This announcement should include:

    1. Indicators of dissatisfaction with current conditions in the Finance Department;

    2. The need to identify the root causes; and

    3. The CFO’s commitment to take both corrective and preventive actions by either changing conditions or enabling department members to adapt and adjust to changing conditions.

Estimated Costs:


Two hours, plus expenses.

Phase Two: Organizational Diagnosis


Establish and distribute composition and schedules for ten focus group sessions.


Activities:

  1. In each focus group, Finance Department members conduct self-assessments of factors that contribute to dissatisfaction and also establish the ten high-priority factors.

  2. Members identify the root causes of the ten highest priority factors.

  3. Each focus group selects one (or two) representatives for Phase Three.

Method:

  1. Form ten focus groups to include all Finance Department members (one group for senior management team; seven accounting groups with seven or eight members, maximum; mix by function and level, one group each for tax and finance with seven members each).

  2. Conduct ten focus group interviews (two hours each, fifteen-minute breaks, three per day).

  3. Identify factors that contribute to current dissatisfaction; members identify and organize issues into factor clusters (self-assessments).

  4. Establish priorities among factor clusters; identify the five highest priorities.

  5. Present “root cause analysis” format.

  6. Identify root causes for each of the five high-priority factors.

  7. Prepare self-assessments for Phase Three.

Products:

  1. Completed self-assessments from each of the ten focus groups.

  2. One (or two) members from each focus group prepared to represent their groups.

Estimated Costs:


Three and one-half days, plus expenses.

Phase Three: Data Organization and Preparation


Activities:


Representatives from each focus group form a single team and do the following:

  1. Integrate the ten sets of data; and

  2. Prepare for feedback session to CFO and directors.

Method:


Management team chooses from three alternatives:

  1. In private.

  2. With validation by a second set of representatives from each focus group.

  3. In a “fishbowl” with all other finance members invited to observe and provide input through an “empty chair.”

Products:

  1. Format and process for data feedback meetings are selected.

  2. Root cause analysis of the current state is completed.

  3. Recommendations for corrective and preventive actions are developed.

Estimated Costs:


Two days, plus expenses.

Phase four: Data Feedback Meeting


Activities:

  1. Feedback of results (prioritized issues and recommendations) to CFO and directors by team of representatives.

  2. Develop criteria for determining priorities (for example, members’ personal concerns, degree of control over the issue, costs incurred to make the change, time to make change, visibility of the effort, and /or alternatives and additions from management team).

  3. Establish priorities among the issues.

Method:


Management team chooses from two alternatives:

  1. Focus group representatives interface with CFO and directors.

  2. “All hands on deck” meeting.

Products:

  1. Prioritized issues are accepted by most involved parties.

  2. Proposals or commitments for “next steps” are determined.

Estimated Costs:


One day, plus expenses.



Reprinted with permission from Finding Your Way in the Consulting Jungle, by Arthur M. Freedman and Richard E. Zackrison, Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer, 2001.

Posted on

Rank & Yank The Problems With Forced Ranking

Recently The Wall Street Journal ran an article on merit pay and the process several companies go through. They spent a good deal of time talking about forced ranking and actually talked about one company where the process was nicknamed “Rank and Yank.”


Forced ranking, as most of you know, is the performance management process where everyone in a company, division or department, is ranked “best to worst” in an effort to determine how to allocate pay and/or the implementation of a reduction of force. It is easy to rationalize forced ranking when the economy is down, when your industry is hurting, and/or when your company has had a bad year.


However, when a company is expected to do well, how does it explain a process whereby it is admitting that some of the people it hires “aren’t up to snuff”? Would it not be better simply to attack hiring on the premise of only hiring “A” players thereby eliminating the need to ever force rank?


Merit pay, as it was meant to be, is the concept that employees should be paid different rates for various levels of competence and performance. The underlying criteria of a merit pay system can be summarized as (1) the employee’s performance in relation to pre-established, understandable job responsibilities and (2) the employer’s financial ability to pay.

Merit pay is oftentimes only a catchy cliché.

In the 1980s, it was much easier to differentiate performance when merit budgets averaged 8 percent to 10 percent. In the ’90s, however, we have seen the merit budget erode by as much as 3 percent to 4 percent, making it much more difficult for companies to distinguish exceptional work using performance-based merit increases. When this occurs, it is difficult to truly link an individual’s compensation and benefits to his or her efforts to improve the company’s bottom line.


Does forced ranking really reward merit?
Today, forced ranking can actually encourage average or mediocre performance. Once performance evaluation time rolls around, over half of the workforce typically will be force-ranked as average (or very close), while remaining employees will be ranked below and above this standard.


In order to stay on track with the merit budget, employers, who force-rank, generally align employees in accordance with the pre-assigned performance distribution percentages. As you can imagine, this scenario results in intense internal conflict and can destroy any resemblance of employee teamwork and cooperation. Consider the employee who improves his or her performance; presumably, someone else will, in turn, be “squeezed down” to maintain a balance “fit” within the guidelines.


Forced ranking forces evaluators to make determinations on a person-versus-person basis rather than a person-to-established-standards basis. In my opinion, this also causes management to move away from focusing on pre-established, objective job standards, and toward evaluations based on personal attributes. A Pandora’s Box subsequently opens to all sorts of problems, including corporate infighting, person-rater bias, management subjectivity, and even lawsuits (all demotivating factors), which negatively impact the overall productivity of the organization. In the final analysis, “merit pay” is oftentimes only a catchy cliché.


A solution
I like what Herb Kelleher and Don Murray (CEOs of Southwest Airlines and Resources Connection, respectively) have done. They propose, from the outset, to hire the very best and train all hires to the fullest extent possible. Both believe they hire only on the “right-side” of the curve, so there is never a need to force rank. It is actually part of the cultures these two companies have developed, and as a result, the motivation of their workforces are higher than most other employers.


Based on the company’s performance of both companies, they may be on to something. As opposed to “rank and yank” they appear to “bank” on hiring the right people. And hiring and retaining the right, quality people is a lot more efficient than hiring a large quantity of people to be laid off in slow times, based on ranking systems. Corporations ultimately can increase productivity by following this smart hiring philosophy: Hire and keep the best in order to reap the best performance.

Posted on

How Three Companies Shave Health Costs

With health-care premiums increasing at an estimated 10 to 12 percent annually,HR professionals are being forced to walk a tightrope between managing costsand staying competitive. And they have to work this magic in a market whereattractive benefits packages are as enticing to valuable employees as high salaries.


    Fixed HR budgets restrict the burden that companies can take on to providethe quality of care that their employees have come to expect, but pushing thecosts to employees or cutting services can limit a company’s ability to drawand retain both business and talented people.


    “It’s a terribly fine line to walk, especially when turnover is high,”says Susan Patterson, editor at the Institute of Management and Administration(IOMA), the New York City-based publisher of newsletters and reports for businessprofessionals. IOMA’s HR division gathers data annually on how companies managetheir health-care costs.


    HR professionals are forced to constantly evaluate their health-care packages,researching the market for the best deals and looking for ways to trim costs,Patterson says. The most popular approaches include giving employees flexibilityin their coverage options, choosing less expensive prescription drug programs,and using brokers and third-party administrators (TPAs) to help find betterrates, even if it means changing providers frequently.


    No matter how effective the cost-cutting efforts are, however, prices are goingup, and there are only so many dollars that can be eliminated. “Benefitsare the biggest out-of-pocket expense companies pay every year,” says TomParry, the president and principal investigator for the Integrated BenefitsInstitute, a private nonprofit research benchmarking educational organizationin San Francisco. “There have been double-digit premium increases for thelast two years, and there is no magic bullet to keep costs flat.”


    The rest has to be paid by someone, and it’s likely to be, at least in part,the employee, Patterson says. According to IOMA’s 2001 survey, 51.7 percentof companies say the most successful method for controlling health-care costsin the last year was increased cost sharing by employees. “Employees haveto pay more of the burden of health care,” she says. “Ultimately,it’s the only answer.”


    Another approach to cutting health-care costs is to focus on keeping employeeshealthy, Parry says. A 2001 IBI research report on emerging health-care andproductivity issues shows that productivity loss accounts for three of everyfour dollars spent on health care.


    “You have to think differently about the true cost of medical care,”Parry says. “Focusing on preventing and managing illnesses has a directimpact on the bottom line and productivity.”


    Offering disease-management seminars and creating healthful work environmentsdirectly affect bottom-line costs for many companies because employees spendless time away from the job and are more productive when they are there. Largercompanies have more options for implementing wellness and disease-managementprograms, Parry says, but smaller companies can make simple efforts, such asoffering flu shots and encouraging exercise as a way to reduce sick days andincrease productivity. “The principle of wellness applies across the board,”he says. “It brings together a benefits strategy with a business strategy.”


    Whatever the approach, finding the right combination of quality care at a reasonableprice is an ongoing challenge for companies of all sizes. HR professionals areforced to spend more hours every year tweaking or replacing their health-carepackages to keep employees happy and costs down.


Workforce, August 2001,pp. 78-83 — SubscribeNow!

Posted on

Employees Profit from Cutting Costs

Londen Insurance Group has always had a policy of not sharing insurance premiums with employees, even as health-care prices rise. But finding a health-care provider that was willing to insure its contract agents at a reasonable price was a challenge, says Kathy Demarino, vice president of HR and industry relations for the Phoenix-based insurance company. Londen offers benefits to agents who consistently achieve their quotas as an incentive for them to sell more policies.

SmallCompany
Name: Londen Insurance Group
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Business: provider of small whole-life insurance policies
Employees: 85 + contract agents

The insurers are happy to cover staffers, but they charge exorbitant premiums for the 150 agents who take advantage of the benefits program, she says. That is why the company opts to self-insure, paying claims through a TPA, with reinsurance kicking in when individual claims reach $40,000. To keep costs in check, Demarino has become a pro at shopping around for coverage packages, with the help of insurance brokers, and giving employees incentives to manage costs. “Staff bonuses are directly tied to general expenses, which include health care,” she says. “Everyone here thinks about how their actions affect bonuses, so they don’t abuse their coverage.”


When Demarino switched to a mail-order prescription drug program, Express Scripts, along with offering lower deductibles for using generic drugs, employee support made it a success. The mail-order service costs the company less and it benefits employees, Demarino says. They can order prescriptions online or through an 800 number, and the drugs are mailed directly to their homes. The co-pay for generics is only a few dollars for a three-month supply, versus only one month at the pharmacy.


Demarino saw immediate results from the program. Prescription claims had accounted for 25 percent of Londen’s medical costs before the switch, but that dropped to 15 percent in the first year that they used the mail-order service, from 1999 to 2000. And even though the company’s health-care costs went up, prescription drug costs dropped $75,000.


Demarino has also gotten costs under control by changing reinsurers and TPAs twice in two years — to get better rates and better customer service. By doing this, she’s kept Londen’s service costs flat even though industry prices have risen. “We spend a lot of hours dealing with health-insurance costs,” she says. It’s certainly paid off.


Workforce, August 2001, pp. 79-80 — Subscribe Now!

Posted on

Retaliation Hitchhiker to Workplace Claims

Suppose an employee in your organization submits a written complaint allegingsexual harassment by her supervisor. The supervisor denies the claim and reportsthat the person is a chronic complainer. Nevertheless, a higher-level managerhas the employee moved to a different position just to get the two parties separated.Thus may be born a retaliation claim against the company, with the employee claimingthat the transfer amounted to a demotion and happened as a result of the complaint.


    Consider the following case: In Contreras v. Corinthian Vigor Ins. Brokerage,Inc., Silvia Contreras filed a retaliation claim against her former employerafter Corinthian reported her to the INS for being in the country illegallyand using a fraudulent Social Security number. Contreras alleged that she wasreported in retaliation for filing an administrative complaint for unpaid wagesand overtime pay. The federal district court found in her favor, regardlessof her illegal status, on the grounds that her activities were protected bythe Fair Labor Standards Act and that her complaint was what led to her beingreported.


What’s retaliation?
    In a nutshell, a retaliation claim is one filed by anemployee alleging that he or she has been harmed by some adverse employeraction — an action that adversely affects the employee’s terms and conditionsof employment — taken in retaliation for some prior complaint or protestby the employee. Quite often, a retaliation claim is filed in conjunction withthe filing of the prior claim or protest.


    Once relatively uncommon, retaliation lawsuits filed with the Equal EmploymentOpportunity Commission (EEOC) more than doubled between 1991 and 1998, with31,059 cases filed in 1998. The bad news for organizations is a trend by thecourts to order companies to proceed to trial on claims of unlawful retaliationeven after the original complaint (e.g., for discrimination or sexual harassment)has been dismissed.


    In Kania v. Archdiocese of Philadelphia, a Polish-American housekeepersued her employer for national origin discrimination because of their English-onlypolicy. Subsequent to her claim, she was fired. The court dismissed her originalsuit, holding that the English-only rule was not discriminatory, but it allowedher to pursue a retaliation claim on grounds that she had had a “reasonablebelief” that the English-only rule was discriminatory.


    Companies can find themselves in serious legal difficulties if they crack downon a complainant, regardless of the merits of the complaint. Words of wisdomto employers: forget about the merits of any complaint or claim from an employee;treat all complaints seriously and avoid any hint of retaliation.


    In particular, avoid the following types of action, which are most likely tobe perceived as retaliatory when they come on the heels of a complaint.

  • Disciplinary action such as a written reprimand, demotion, or termination.In the case of an employee who has resigned, discipline can be a poor jobreference.

  • A change in work conditions, including a job reassignment, changes in jobduties, or change in work schedule.

  • Increased or unequal monitoring of activities.

  • A poor job evaluation.

  • Ostracizing or withholding information from a complaining employee, primarilyby supervisory personnel.

Chilling effect
    The EEOC applies a “test” to a claim of adverseemployer action: Would a particular employer action likely have a chillingeffect on the inclination of other employees to oppose illegal acts? A caseis far more likely to be advanced by the EEOC if it believes that a claimedretaliatory act by an employer is aimed at discouraging others from filing complaintsor protesting some organizational activity.


    Be on guard as soon as you are aware that an employee has made a formal claimor complaint (i.e., engaged in protected activity). To prove retaliation,a plaintiff must be able to show that he/she engaged in a protected activity,and then suffered from an adverse employer action, and that the originalcomplaint was what caused the adverse action. Protected activities include:

  • Discrimination Claims. Under Title VII of the 1964 Civil RightsAct, it is unlawful to discriminate (retaliate) against an employee whohas raised a bias or discrimination claim. Protected activity also includesclaims filed in connection with the Americans with Disabilities Act, theEqual Pay Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and the Familyand Medical Leave Act.

  • Information Revealed in Connection with a Claim. Protected activityincludes information revealed while a person participates in an investigation,legal proceeding, or hearing associated with a federal employment claim.

  • Sexual Harassment Claims. The 1964 Civil Rights Act also applieshere and is the basis for protected opposition to acts of harassment.

  • Whistle-Blowing. Employment discrimination statutes bar retaliationagainst employees who have been involved in protesting what they believeto be illegal activities by an organization.

  • Written Complaints and Grievances. Formal complaints, both internaland external, are considered protected activity under the Fair Labor StandardsAct.

    Does someone who files a claim or complaint deservespecial consideration from supervisors or bosses or temporary immunity fromreprimand? Maybe and maybe not, but that is a risky issue for you or your employerto tackle. Better to play it safe and avoid a costly retaliation lawsuit.


What you can do

  • Make people aware of the issue. Have written policies banning retaliation(similar to those that ban discrimination and sexual harassment). Zealouslyenforce these policies; disseminate information on them; train managersand supervisors in what types of actions constitute retaliation and howto avoid them. Advise employees at all levels that retaliation will notbe tolerated and will result in disciplinary action.

  • Maintain an open-door policy in your human resources department and encourageemployees to report problems to you internally, before they go to an outsideagency or attorney. A good track record on taking complaints seriously andinvestigating them will encourage employees to come forward and, in theevent of a claim, support the organization’s position as a responsible employer.

  • Promptly investigate any complaint or claim as soon as it is filed, andnotify your attorney (attorney consultation costs are minuscule comparedto costs of litigation). Counsel the supervisor of a complaining employeeto:

    • Treat that employee in the same manner as other employees with respectto documentation, performance standards, and reprimands.

    • Avoid undocumented job changes, assignments, performance evaluations,or disciplinary actions that may be misconstrued as retaliatory in nature.If necessary to reassign a complainant as part of a “correctiveaction,” try to obtain the person’s informed consent prior to themove.

    • Keep the employee fully informed of organizational and departmentalevents and meetings.

    • If it is necessary to discipline or fire the employee, base decisionson facts and documentation collected independently and not related tothe prior complaint or lawsuit. At a minimum, you need to be able toshow that you would have followed the same course of action with thisemployee whether or not he or she had filed a complaint.

    • If terminating the employee, avoid giving a poor or unfair reference,or references of any sort not mandated, to outside persons.

    • If asked by a government agency such as the EEOC to respond to complaints,follow the agency guidelines in detail.

    • Investigate any allegation of retaliation by an employee that is broughtto your attention. Keep your attorney informed.

  • If a retaliation claim is filed, work with counsel to mediate, or if necessaryarbitrate, the dispute. Avoid going to court, if at all possible. Punitivedamages can be high.

  • Maintain sound personnel practices and consistently document how all employeesperform. Terminate problem employees early on, before they file a claim.

    There will always be problem employees who will tryto take advantage of legal protections to “milk” the system for allit’s worth. But there will be others with legitimate complaints that deserveto be addressed. The job of deciding who falls into which category is a difficult,often subjective one with plenty of margin for error.


    To be on the safe side, treat all complaints and claimsseriously and fairly, until or unless you are certain that you are dealing witha problem employee or someone with trumped-up charges. If you do have to dealwith a problem employee, keep in mind that it is just this type of person whomay be on the lookout for retaliation or may try to provoke a supervisor intoretaliating. As the old saying goes, an ounce of prevention is worth 10 gallonsof legal cure.

Posted on

For Managers How HR Can Help You Get The Most Out of Your Team

Anew best-selling book, TheBoss’s Survival Guide, is just what it says: A handbook to help bossesnavigate the minefield of running their businesses. In this section, the authors(who include a regular Workforce contributor and Workforce‘s formereditor and publisher), explain the ins and outs of HR. You already know howvaluable HR is, and so co-author Bob Rosner suggests printing this story out,clipping an “FYI” note to it, and handing it around to the managerswho work with you. You might find they develop a whole new attitude about workingwith you.


Know the issue
Using a popularity scale of one to 10 with 10 beingwildly popular (Mickey Mouse, a free lunch, and after-Christmas sales) and onebeing wildly unpopular (telemarketers, Congress, and rush-hour grid-lock), wherewould you place human resources?


Many people who have been working more than 10 yearswould rate HR a two — right in there with the IRS and members of the AmericanDental Association. Those people remember when HR worshipped the rules and theirfavorite word was “No.” They have learned to work around HR if theythink about it at all.


Newer entrants to the workforce are more enlightened.They know that in many places, the paper pushing, picnic-planning policy policeof yore have gone the way of the T-Rex and the Dodo bird. That’s because asbusiness has changed, HR has changed, too. Today’s HR still respects the rules,but they jump right in to help solve problems and now their favorite word is”Yes.” No wonder today’s employees are more likely to rate HR an eightor nine.


Of course, a few holdouts of the old guard are lurkingout there and giving HR a bad name. How do you know whether your HR departmentis friend or foe? Here is a simple test: Do they understand your part of thebusiness? If no one in HR can tell you your department’s turnover rate, howlong it takes (on average) to fill a job in your department, how much your departmentcontributes to the bottom line, or what your best performers actually doall day, then they are probably a foe. We encourage you to ignore them — exceptwhen it comes to legal matters, or if you think you have a chance to turn theminto a friend.


Today’s HR pros are business-focused. They help engineerways to make the business better, and to do this they have to under-stand thebusiness and all its components. This means that someone in HR can offer youmuch more than just accurate information about the vacation plan. She couldhelp you redesign jobs, create an incentive plan to drive up profits, or findan assessment tool to improve your hiring success. If someone from HR asks aboutyour business, is willing to hear about your business, or (best of all) worksalongside you in your part of the business, you’ve just found a valuable partner.


The trick is then getting the most out of that partnership.As with any successful relationship, it demands give and take. But if you investin a partnership with HR (assuming you have an HR function where you work),you’re sure to reap sizeable dividends.


Take action

  • Identify your resources. Start by figuring out how HR is structured.In some cases, a central HR function serves the entire organization. Thedepartment has specialists in each discipline of HR, such as staffing, compensation,and benefits. In other organizations, each business unit or department hasits own HR function; they are usually staffed by HR generalists who havebroad knowledge in all areas of HR. Some large companies have a hybrid ofthese two models.None of these is the “right” approach. The onlything that matters is that you know who to go to for help. The ideal isto bond with an HR generalist who can either work with you directly or connectyou with the appropriate specialist. That person can also advocate for youwithin HR. If you can’t identify a single person to work with, find a handfulof specialists and build relationships with them.

  • Teach a crash course. For anyone in HR to really help, they needto understand your part of the business and understand it almost as wellas you do. Offer to take your HR contact to lunch once a week and spendthe time teaching. Be willing to invest some serious time because your courseneeds to be thorough:

    • What do you see as the primary purpose of your department?

    • How is your department’s success measured?

    • Where is your department excelling and where is it failing? Why?

    • Who are your star performers? What sets them apart?

    • Who are your poorest performers? What sets them apart?

    • What are your biggest frustrations and challenges?

    • What do you see as your key strengths?

    • Where would you like the department to be in a year? Why? How do youplan to get there?

    • What happens in your department every day? What are your productionschedules, budgets, deadlines, productivity goals, and so forth? Behonest. Painting an artificially rosy picture won’t get you the helpyou need.

  • Take a crash course. Invest some time learning about HR, too. Listento what your contact tells you about his job. And if you don’t know, askthe following questions:

    • How does HR function every day? How are priorities set?

    • What expertise does HR have to offer?

    • Who do they see as HR’s key customers?

    • What makes them say yes or no?

    • How is HR’s performance measured? How do they win or lose?

    • Which HR programs or initiatives do they think are working best? Why?

    • What challenges does HR face? (Budgetary? Staffing HR? Time?)

    • How do HR initiatives in your company (pay rates, benefits, employeedevelopment) compare to those of your competitors? How do they compareto the average company in your area?

  • Put your cards on the table. This relationship — like any other– demands honesty. Share how you really feel about HR, pro and con.Explain where those feelings come from. Are they based on bad experiences,successes, or hearsay? Talk about what you appreciate about HR and whatdrives you crazy. Bring up HR efforts in other companies that you’ve heardabout and like or don’t like. Then ask HR for the same feedback about youand your department.

  • Keep HR in the loop. Once HR has a solid understanding of your department,they need to stay current. The more they know, the better, and the morethey can observe firsthand, the better. There are lots of ways to do that:

    • Invite your contact to shadow you for a day or parts of days — letthem watch you and your department in action.

    • Invite HR to sit in on your staff meetings.

    • Send HR copies of key memos, status reports, and other informationtied to department milestones.

    • Plan regular lunches or meetings with your HR contact.

  • Choose your battles. Don’t drop 15 problems in HR’s lap and expectequal attention to them all. Other departments need help, too! Identifyyour top concern and work with HR to resolve it. Getting one thing donewill give you a sense of accomplishment and boost everyone’s credibility.

  • Don’t jump to conclusions. It’s great to go to HR with ideas, butdon’t get too invested into a single course of action. Your HR partner maysee other options. Managers often request a training program, for example,when they face a challenge. But changes in hiring practices or even jobdesign may ultimately be the better solution. Respect HR’s expertise.

  • Be willing to be a guinea pig. Perhaps you read about a cool HReffort in the Wall Street Journal. Or perhaps you had a great ideayourself. If you find yourself wondering, “Why don’t we …,”considervolunteering to pilot a program. You can team up with HR to develop a program,and then test it in your department. Together you can work out the kinks.If it works, you’ll get the benefits and you can enjoy the acclaim as theprogram is rolled out through the rest of the company.

Stay out of jail

  • If you have an HR function, you should always consult with them about:

    • Hiring

    • Discipline

    • Termination

    • Employee leave

    • Workers’ compensation

    • Employee complaints (such as sexual harassment and discrimination)Check with HR before you take action.

  • No matter how great your partnership is, HR will sometimes say no.It doesn’t mean they don’t like you. Remember that one of HR’s greatestresponsibilities is to protect the company from lawsuits. (As one HR executiveobserved, “The better we do our job, the less visible we become.”)Employment law is complex; trust HR’s counsel.

Real life examples
How would you like to have a binder on your desk thatwalked you through every stage of employee development for every employee youmanage? A binder that includes job descriptions, required competencies, aptitudetests, specific interview questions, tailored performance appraisal forms, andmore? A binder that gave you enough information that you could focus on day-to-dayoperations and helping employees solve problems?


If you worked at Valspar Corporation, you’d have one.That’s because HR has created those binders for every one of the company’s morethan 3,800 jobs. The effort started as a small-scale attempt to identify corecompetencies in the manufacturing department and spread from there.


Salespeople at Buckman Laboratories International,Inc. make big sales pitches — pitches in which million of dollars in revenueare at stake. But how can a salesperson in Thailand get the information sheneeds to close a sale if the home office is closed?


At Buckman, the salesperson can get the informationanytime, from anywhere in the world. That’s because HR has worked with managersto promote knowledge sharing. The idea is to take the axiom “two headsare better than one” and turbo-charge it with technology. Thanks to onlineforums, connected knowledge bases, electronic bulletin boards, and virtual conferencerooms, employees can tap into each other’s knowledge and experience like nowhereelse.


At one time, Continental Airlines was the laughingstockof the airline industry. The carrier had been through two bankruptcies and therewas a revolving door in the executive suite. Passengers could expect poor service,late arrivals, and lost bags. No wonder employees tore the company patches offtheir uniforms at the end of the day; they didn’t want anyone to know wherethey worked.


Then management teamed up with HR and took the airlinefrom worst to first. An incentive pay program, streamlined policies (to replacethe policy manual that management publicly burned), and aggressive communicationimproved every area of performance. Today, employees keep the patches on theiruniforms and share in the airline’s newfound profits.


Employee teams setting goals and measurements for themselves?Employees teams managing themselves while managers act as coaches? Believeit. It’s a profit-driving reality at GE Fanuc Automation of North America, Inc.More than 40 work teams are proving it can be done and the best coaches arethe managers earning the greatest rewards. It works because HR partners withmanagers in the coaching process; an HR staffer is part of every department.

Get more information

From TheBoss’s Survival Guide by Bob Rosner, Allan Halcrow, and Alan Levins. Copyright© 2001 by Bob Rosner and Allan Halcrow. Reprinted by permisson of The McGraw-HillCompanies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Posted on

Developing Your Part-Time Employee Practices

Today’s growth in part-time work expands the demands on management, particularlyin determining policies and practices relating to job structure, education andtraining, career development, supervision, and the extent of part-time employees’involvement.


    In interviews, professionals who have made the transition from full-time topart-time work and their respective managers discussed the continual challengesfaced in “working through” several key issues related to part-timestatus. Of paramount concern to managers is how to ensure equitable treatmentfor all employees — whatever their schedules. Of paramount concern to part-timeemployees is how to address the often-present perception that they give lessthan full-time effort in their jobs.


    On the basis of “themes of concerns” emerging from our discussions,we have identified questions that both managers and employees might find usefulas catalysts for developing and expanding their own agendas in dealing withpart-time professional employees. The four themes focus on concerns relatedto organizational culture and structure, human resource practices, individualpart-time employee behaviors, and managerial behaviors. The questions shouldserve managers across a broad spectrum of organizational settings.


Organizational culture and structure issues and concerns
    Both culture and structure play central roles in contributingto the success of different work schedules. Changing an individual’s work schedulefrom full- to part-time directly affects relationships with coworkers and taskresponsibilities. Before a manager implements part-time work schedules, it isimportant to assess whether or not the culture of the organization supportssuch a move. While culture sets the tone for generating commitment and providinga source of collective identity, it also reinforces the organization’s acceptablestandards of behavior.


    Working hand-in-hand with the culture of the organization is the company’sstructure, which can enhance or impede successful implementation of part-timework schedules. Technologies such as e-mail, voice mail, conference calls, andfax machines contribute significantly to facilitating workable organizationalstructures and communications processes. If communication networks are not inplace, then there is a greater likelihood that an employee moving from a full-timeto part-time schedule will feel as did the following marketing specialist andpsychiatric counselor:


    “You’re not as much a part of the place as when you’re full-time. UsuallyI was on top of what was happening; being part-time, it’s not like that anymore.I had to adjust to that . . . I had become someone who was on the side, theperiphery.


    “I felt very disconnected from information pertaining to patient careor change in policy. This could be due to the fact that, being part-time andworking nights, I was out of the mainstream of information dispersion.”

Managers can help to avoid some unnecessary pitfalls for employees by sortingthrough many cultural and structural issues that may arise from a change topart-time status. Questions that will help in deciding whether part-time statuswill work in your organization include the following:

  • To what extent does the organizational culture support part-time work schedules?Have there been any part-time professional employees in your organization?

  • What are the known beliefs of top management toward flexibility in workscheduling?

  • What specific organizational-culture issues are essential to address whencontemplating movement from full-time to part-time positions? For example,if your organization has particular employee-involvement practices thatcontribute to its unique culture, how will part-time positions be integratedinto these practices?

  • How will the current organizational structure accommodate part-time professionals?Particularly, how amenable is the organization to reconceptualizing jobs,developing new job descriptions, and “institutionalizing” flexibilityin work scheduling?

  • To what extent will/do organizational practices need to be revisited and/orrevised in order to accommodate part-time professionals? For example, howmight communication networks have to be enhanced to ensure that part-timeemployees are equitably connected to the daily activities of the departmentor organization?

Human resources issues and concerns
    The manager’s challenge in successfully orchestratingthe change to part-time status for employees will always be linked to specificindividual human resource concerns. However, before an employee’s work statusis changed, there are four areas in particular that a manager should assesswithin the organization and discuss with the individual. These four human resourceconcerns, which may be of direct cost to both the personal and professionallife of the employee, are benefits and compensation, education and training,performance appraisal, and career development.


    Most employees who change their work status from full- to part-time anticipatea change in benefits. The degree to which the level of benefits provided changesdepends on the number of hours worked, which varies from one organization tothe next. However, most interviewees were “mavericks” in changingto a part-time schedule and often discovered that policies were not in placefor governing a new status. One part-time financial analyst told us:

“I lost most of my benefits — health is gone, personal days, sick days,stock option plan. Although my stated pay is cut in half, my real pay is cutby much more than that. I also have to fill in a time card, which is new forme.”

    Another cost that is often unrecognized is the lack of career mobility availableto those working a part-time schedule. Part-time employees who were passed overfor promotion began to question their perceived value by supervisors in general,and the organization overall.


    Many part-time professionals we interviewed revealed that no formal guidelinesexisted in their organizations that would mitigate the potential impact on theircareer mobility, and that the realization that promotion was virtually impossiblebecame clear only after others (full-time) were promoted.


    Part-time employees also indicated that they had experienced a significantdecline in feedback from managers. In fact, in several situations, formal performanceappraisals were not conducted. Since they serve as a vehicle for promotion andsubsequent career development, as well as for salary adjustments, if performanceappraisals are not completed on employees, opportunities for advancement maybecome limited. One part-time worker at a high-tech company stated the following:


    “Everything is a bit lax as far as administration of my job. I don’t havebenefits, no health or dental; job reviews and salary reviews are more lax.That’s partly my fault, but I don’t think I’d have to remind people if I werehere full-time.”


    Preparing individuals for a change to part-time work will help not only theindividual but the organization as well. Managers who have thoroughly investigatedtheir organization’s human resource practices with respect to part-time employmentcan help ease the transition for individual employees and prevent unpleasantexperiences like those mentioned above. Questioning current practices can alsolead to the necessity of making changes in human resource practices. To facilitatesuch an assessment, the following questions should be addressed:


Benefits/compensation

  • How will each of the following benefits change as a result of moving topart-time status: medical, dental, paid time off, employee assistance program,life insurance, paid sick leave, short-term disability, long-term disability,savings plan, flexible spending account, stock purchase plan? Other?

  • On what basis will compensation be calculated? Will part-time status resultin pay being calculated on an hourly basis? Other changes?

Education/training

  • What specific types of education and training are needed to ensure thatpart-time workers remain current in their work knowledge?

  • How can the delivery of education and training programs be designed toaccommodate the diverse schedule(s) of the part-time employee(s)?

Performance appraisal

  • How do performance appraisals for part-time employees differ, if at all,from those of full-time employees?

  • If performance appraisal is tied to bonuses or raises, does one use thesame criteria for full- and part-time employees?

  • How should performance-appraisal systems be redesigned/reconceptualizedin order to equitably account for contributions of part-time employees?

Career development

  • What actions can be taken to ensure that part-time professionals do notfall between the cracks with respect to career development?

  • How can organizational career paths be designed to include career-advancementopportunities for part-time employees?

  • How can reward systems (pay, bonus, promotion) be redesigned to ensureequitable treatment of part-time employees?

    Depending on the questions, exploration with both management and the employeebecomes crucial in developing job descriptions and setting the stage for a changein status. Of course, individual employees will have their own specific concerns.Creating opportunities for addressing these concerns can eliminate further misunderstandingsand stresses that might contribute to dissatisfaction with an employee’s changein work status.


Individual employee issues and concerns
    While many professional employees may find a reductionin the number of hours worked appealing, as well as a panacea for balancinglife both in and out of the organization, a part-time work status poses demandson an individual that are not as apparent as a reduction in benefits or derailedcareer progression. For many part-time professional workers, their change instatus from full-time represents a new direction for their particular organizations,one in which there are few precedents.


    These individuals may be considered “pioneers,” and their successis crucial to the future of part-time work in their companies. Some may feelthat this pressure is more than they can bear. For example, one part-time computerprogrammer interviewed felt the following:

“It was the weight of the world. Part-time was what I wanted. There wasa lot of pressure on me to set a good example. A lot of people wanted to gopart-time. If I went part-time and then quit, it would ruin things for a lotof people.”

    The manager, therefore, faces the challenge of assessing the desirability ofmoving a particular individual to part-time status. In addition to determiningwhether a position can be reduced to part-time status, it is critical that boththe manager and the individual employee conduct a realistic appraisal of theperson’s skills, abilities, and knowledge to be successful in this changed role.The following questions may help a manager in his/her personal assessment ofthe individual’s likelihood of success in this new work status:

  • Given the job responsibilities in the part-time position, to what extentwill the individual be able to be successful in this reduced schedule? Forexample, some individuals find the interpersonal relationships at work tobe a catalyst in accomplishing work. Sharing ideas, being part of the dailycommunication networks, and experiencing team successes may all play importantroles in how they work. Without those familiar and stimulating relationships,how well will they function in their part-time jobs?

  • Reducing work schedules will affect how one feels about his/her work. Howsuccessful will this individual be at confronting those feelings and dealingwith changed perceptions of the work environment?

  • Depending on the nature of a particular position, there are times whenflexibility in hours worked becomes essential to organizational performance.For example, if an individual is working on a team project and a deadlinegets changed, how likely is it that this individual will be willing to workwith others at times other than their normal working hours?

Managerial issues and concerns
    Movement from full-time to part-time status for an employeecreates many managerial challenges. In addition to the general organizationalissues cited above regarding structure, culture, human resources, and the individual,managers must focus energies on balancing full-time and part-time employees’job-content responsibilities and managing a variety of culture-related issueswithin the specific department that surface as a result of introducing differingwork schedules.


    How well one manages the change will influence the likelihood of a successfultransition for part-time employees and, most likely, will facilitate positiveworking relationships between full- and part-time employees. As a manager, itis necessary to ensure that the goals of the organization are attained, andthat an employee’s reduction in hours does not compromise the completion oftasks, duties, projects, etc.


    Limiting the involvement of any worker in the organization may result in aloss of efficiency and/or effectiveness in attaining departmental or projectgoals. It is imperative that the manager does not give the impression that thepart-time worker status is temporary, or that these workers’ value to the organizationis diminished. Many part-time workers felt that they fully met their work responsibilitiesin productivity and quality, and although they gave their full-time attentionto the job, their contributions were not recognized:

“Some people perceive that I am less than a full-class citizen for theposition I’m in . . . that I’m cheating the system. I always feel so vulnerablesince I’ve gone part-time, not wanting to make myself too visible, not wantingto make waves. Whenever I have to tell someone that I don’t work on a specificday when they are planning a meeting or doing something, it always strikes achord with me and I wonder what the ripple effect of that will be.”

    Managers are confronted with organizational, departmental, individual, andpersonal issues related to facilitating a change in an employee’s schedule.Essential to ensuring a successful move for all parties involved is to addressearly on the following managerial-related questions:

  • How do I effectively change a full-time job to part-time and ensure thatthe organizational needs are met? What other jobs in my department willbe affected by a change in status of one position? What departmental issuesmust be simultaneously addressed as changes in a particular position aremade?

  • What strategies can be developed to ensure that both external and internalclients perceive the part-time professional as a full organizational contributor?

  • How can I ensure that part-time status is not perceived as a temporary,experimental status by other organizational members?

  • If several employees are working part-time schedules, how will I ensurefairness in meeting their needs and the needs of full-time employees? Whatstrategies can be utilized to address the often predictable resentment thatis expressed toward part-time employees by full-time employees?

  • What strategies can be developed for keeping part-time professionals inthe departmental/organizational loop? How can part-timers be integratedinto both formal and informal information networks within the organization?Outside the organization?

  • How can I facilitate building cohesion and developing teamwork among part-timeand full-time workers? What role can technology play in accomplishing thisgoal?

  • How can I ensure that organizational rewards are perceived as fair andequitable for all employees, regardless of work schedule differences?

  • To what extent do I need to plan for the part-timer to return to full-timestatus? Are there organizational policies governing this transition? Whatare they? If not, what are the issues that ought to be addressed?

  • What actions do I need to take in order to keep upper management abreastof part-time professionals’ contributions?

  • How might layoffs, downsizing, or mergers affect the status of these part-timeprofessional employees? What, if anything, can be done to address the potentialimpact of these kinds of organizational changes?

  • Can I identify additional skills needed to manage a mixed-schedule workforce?Are there particular behaviors and/or practices that I will have to changein order to continue to be effective in my managerial role?

  • To what extent and in what ways will employees in part-time work increase/limitmy flexibility as a manager? How do I address this?

  • What special concerns might arise if, as the manager, I have negotiateda change of status to part-time for myself? What issues would be importantto address? To management? To my employees? To clients?

    The increase in part-time professional schedules is imminent. The need to preparemanagers to effectively plan for and manage a variety of individual schedulesworked in a department or organization is apparent. Specific policies and practicesregarding part-time employees, particularly professional employees, have inthe past been made haphazardly by organizations.


    This has resulted in less than desirable organizational and personal outcomes.At all levels of the organization, it’s time to move forward and to preparefor impending changes. Those organizations that do so will undoubtedly benefitall organizational players.

Posted on

Table of Contents August 2001

Faculty internships, Disney-style HR, low-cost inpatriation, and more! All in this month’s issue of Workforce magazine — Subscribe Now!

Features

Can Pay For Performance Really Work?
As economic pressures increase, so does interest in pay for performance. But it’s not for every organization. Here is when it works, and when it doesn’t.
By Janet Wiscombe
 
Faculty Interns: A Bargain for Business, a Bonus for the Classroom
When college instructors are your interns, companies gain knowledge, and send teachers back to their classrooms with a better understanding of business.
By Evelyn Beck
 
Low-Cost Tips for Successful Inpatriation
Foreign employees who relocate to the United States often need help adjusting to America’s sometimes strange ways. Even on a tight budget, HR can help.
By Carroll Lachnit

Special Advertising Section
Recognition & Incentives Product Showcase
Recognition and incentives can make employees more loyal, productive, and happy. This section gives you easy ways to reward them for their hard work.
 

Departments
Between the Lines
Human-scale heroism.
 
Mailbox
Gossip story “insulting” • Kindergarten lessons
The Buzz
Business wakes up to workplace napping • Well Done: Intel’s valuable volunteers • Raw Data: A class-action Web site
 
On the Contrary
Shari Caudron turns Cinderella in the Magic Kingdom, learns Disney’s way with HR, and grapples with her sense of obligation.
 
What Works
When a workplace runs on fear, productivity plummets. Tom Terez explains how to stamp out the creeping menace.
 
Dear Workforce:
You need a development plan to keep employees motivated • HR’s evolving sructure • The dangers of a group termination
 
Legal Insight
Privacy in an age of online record-keeping • How to react when employees bad-mouth management • An employer report to police is not retaliatory.
 
Small, Medium, Large
How do three companies shave health-care costs? It’s a never-ending challenge, and includes cost-sharing, wellness programs, mail-order prescription programs, and savvy shopping.
 
Think Twice
You know the conventional wisdom: Always be polite. Everyone should be strategic. Make your workplace so wonderful that no one will want to go home. Hold it, Todd Raphael says. All of that wise thinking is flawed. Here’s why.
Posted on

How MetLife Measures Core Behaviors for Leaders, Managers, and Employees

Lisa Weber, the executive vice president of human resources at MetLife, creditsthe company’s upswing to a pay-for-performance program that was implemented threeyears ago. One of the most essential aspects of developing a good plan is to beclear about expectations, she says.


At MetLife, employees are rated on a 1-to-5 scale based on the following competency models of core behaviors — one for leaders andmanagers, another for individual employees:


For leaders/managers:

  • Champions change. Proactively leads and embraces change with innovation,courage, and resiliency. Questions the existing ways of getting things doneand endeavors to improve quality and efficiency.

  • Inspires a shared vision. Creates a compelling mission and purposefor the organization and energizes people to work toward shared goals.

  • Promotes key values. Consistently demonstrates MetLife values. Emphasizesthat people count, and that the company promotes winning from within.

  • Communicates effectively. Shares information and encourages candidand open dialogue. Ensures that people share information and have accessto the information they need to meet their business objectives.

  • Develops talent for the future. Identifies critical skills neededto get results. Creates a work environment that attracts and retains toptalent.

  • Focuses on customers. Works to exceed expectations of customersexternally and internally. Takes immediate action to resolve customers’problems.

  • Produces results. Directs action toward achieving goals that arecritical to MetLife’s success. Sets clear performance expectations thatare aligned to business priorities. Ensures that rewards — financial andnon-financial — are linked to performance.

  • Uses sound business judgment. Applies knowledge of the businessand the industry, and common sense, to make the best decisions.

  • Builds relationships. Excels at building partnerships and fosteringteamwork. Works collaboratively within and across organizational boundariesto achieve common goals.

For individual employees:

  • Adapts to and implements change. Embraces change with innovation,courage, and resiliency.

  • Promotes key values. Consistently demonstrates company values. Conductsbusiness endeavors with truth, sincerity, and fairness.

  • Communicates effectively. Shares information and engages in candidand open dialogue.

  • Focuses on customers. Works to exceed customers’ expectations.

  • Produces results. Directs action toward achieving goals that arecritical to the company’s success.

  • Completes work without close supervision.

  • Manages own performance effectively. Organizes time and prioritiesto achieve business results.

  • Uses sound business judgment. Applies knowledge of the businessand the industry, and common sense, to make the best decisions.

  • Builds relationships and works collaboratively. Excels at buildingpartnerships and working as part of a team.

  • Demonstrates technical and functional expertise.

Workforce, August 2001, p. 30— Subscribe Now!

Posted on

Wellness, A Novel Approach

The health-care strategy at Bank One is to change our benefits in ways thatmake our employees better consumers,” says Dr. Wayne Burton, senior vicepresident and corporate medical director. A big part of this technique is teachingemployees how to stay healthy. Bank One started focusing on wellness and diseasemanagement in 1982, in an effort to lower health-care costs. “It was a novelapproach back then,” he says.

LargeCompany
Name: BankOne Corporation
Location: Headquartersin Chicago
Business: bank
Employees: 80,000

    Because 70 percent of Bank One’s workforce is female, Burton began with a seriesof programs targeting women’s health issues. Research showed that pregnancywas the most common reason for a disability claim, and it was the most commonhealth-care cost. So, through the March of Dimes, he launched an on-site healthypregnancy program to educate employees and their spouses about things like healthyeating and how to avoid complications and pre-term labor. “We found thatemployees who participated had far fewer incidents of low birth weight and C-sections,”he says.


    In response to increasing mental-health costs in the 1980s, senior managementdecided to cover only outpatient mental-health treatment instead of inpatientcare. The reasoning, says Burton, was that employees would remain on the jobwhile being treated, the cost of care would be less, and people would be morelikely to pursue help sooner. They also employed psychologists and counselors,giving employees confidential access to mental-health professionals at the office.


    “The idea,” Burton says, “was not to cover mental health butto manage it.” And it worked. Costs came under control, people didn’t endup in the hospital as frequently, and they took better care of themselves, hesays. “We saved a lot of money.”


    In the late 1980s, as the population began to age, Burton added on-site mammographyprograms, because “even though we covered mammographies, employees weren’tgetting them.” Mobile mammography equipment was brought to work sites,and breast cancer screenings were offered at no cost to the employees. Burtontracked the results and found that breast cancer diagnoses were made earlier,which meant the cost of treatment was less and employees missed less than halfas many workdays.


    Programs for asthma and diabetes management had similar results. Three monthsafter a five-session diabetes awareness program was offered on-site for diabeticemployees, their overall blood sugar levels had dropped dramatically, he says.”The participants felt like they had more control over the disease.”Participants in the asthma awareness program also had fewer missed days andshowed fewer symptoms.


    “Not only are these programs good for the employees, but they manage costsand reduce disability. When you control the disease, you save money and peopleare more productive.”


Customization cures what ails you
    Whatever the combination of programs, these HR professionalshave discovered that customizing healthcare to the needs of employees resultsin happier, healthier users and a more cost effective solution. From wellnessprograms to cafeteria style packages, these approaches give employees controlover their health management and eliminate unnecessary costs and treatments– up front and down the line.


    “It’s dangerous to take a silo view of controlling healthcare costs,”says Parry. “When companies just try to focus on making premiums smaller,they end up with lower quality care and the loss of key employees.”


    But, when you look at the true costs of healthcare, including disability andproductivity, choosing wellness programs and opting for niche services thatappeal to the user population is the solution that leaves the most people satisfied.


Workforce,August 2001, pp. 82-83 — SubscribeNow!