iSearch
Have a Conversation about Conversation
Gather a group of colleagues to talk about the state ofdialogue in your workplace. Have each person complete this brief assessmentindividually, then talk about the five items one by one, with people sharingtheir ratings and explaining why they feel that way. Reach a consensus rating,then shift gears and start talking about possibilities. What can people do,individually and collectively, to foster healthy dialogue in the workplace?Narrow the list of potential ideas to three or four action-oriented commitments,and sketch out a plan for making them happen. Be sure to get back together as agroup to check your progress.
1 = very strongly agree
2 = strongly disagree
3 = disagree
4 = neither disagree nor agree
5 = agree
6 = strongly agree
7 = very strongly agree
Mental Disabilities in the Workplace
Oneof every two Americans alive today will suffer from a mental illness at some point intheir lifetime, according to a recent report by the U.S. Surgeon General. Despite (orperhaps because of) its prevalence, mental illness has been stigmatized and feared. Inyears past, employees were reluctant to admit their mental impairment to coworkers andsupervisors. That is changing, thanks in part to the Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA), enacted by Congress in 1990.
So,too, is the amount of employment litigation related to mental disabilities. Employeespreviously reluctant or unable to litigate mental disability discrimination claims aredoing so with increasing frequency. As a result, employers face a host of thorny problemsranging from limits on independent psychiatric evaluations to requests for accommodationof “stress” and other vague, uncorroborated, or hidden emotional problems.
Familiaritywith the ADA and its interpretation by courts and the U.S. Equal Employment OpportunityCommission (EEOC) is essential if an employer is to avoid litigation.
Congressexpressly excluded the following conditions, among others, from the ADA’s definitionof “disability”: kleptomania, pyromania, exhibitionism, voyeurism, other sexualbehavior disorders, and psychoactive substance use disorders resulting from currentillegal drug use. Nor are common personality traits protected. Covered mental impairmentsdo not include, for example, poor judgment, a quick temper, or irritability, so long asthe traits are not a symptom of a protected mental impairment.
Excludedconditions aside, neither the EEOC nor the ADA itself provides a comprehensive list of allpotentially protected mental impairments. Rather, EEOC regulations broadly define a mental
As a general rule, the ADA places mental impairments onan equal footing with physical impairments. The ADA prohibits employers fromdiscriminating against a “qualified individual with a disability” because of thedisability, in regard to the terms, conditions, and privileges of employment. A personwith a mental or physical impairment is a “qualified individual” if he or she isable to perform the essential functions of the job with or without reasonableaccommodation.
Evenif an individual is a “qualified individual,” a mental impairment is notautomatically a disability. Under the ADA, a mental or physical impairment must “substantiallylimit” one or more major life activities of an individual. If a qualified employeehas a mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activity, has arecord of such an impairment, or is regarded as having such an impairment, the employeewill likely be entitled to protection under the ADA. Protected status, however, does notentitle an employee to each and every accommodation requested. An employer is not requiredto accommodate an employee’s mental or physical impairment if doing so would resultin an undue hardship.
Litigationof mental disability claims often focuses on whether the employee’s claim meets thestatutory criteria: is the employee a “qualified individual”?; is the employeesubstantially limited in a major life activity?; is the requested accommodation areasonable accommodation?; and/or would the accommodation cause the employer an unduehardship?
Tipsfor Employers
Ifan employee appears or claims to have a mental impairment, scrupulously avoid relying ongeneralizations or stereotypes regarding mental illness. Analyze situations on acase-by-case basis.
TheEEOC cautions that the ADA was enacted, in part, to combat the myths and stereotypes uponwhich employment discrimination against mentally disabled individuals is based.Stereotypes and uncorroborated information about mental impairments should never be thebasis for an employment decision. Reject generalizations about mental impairments and,when appropriate, conduct a fact-specific case-by-case analysis.
Resistthe temptation to play armchair psychologist.
Acompassionate response to an employee’s workplace problem is always appropriate;playing armchair psychologist is not. An employee with attendance infractions or conductproblems will find it easier to claim disability discrimination if a supervisor askswhether the employee’s difficulties are symptomatic of “too much stress” ora “nervous breakdown.” Instruct managers to document an employee’sperformance problem or misconduct by specifically describing the deficiency or behavior atissue.
Ifan employee complains that working with his supervisor is too stressful and causesemotional problems, elicit a written admission that he will be able to perform essentialjob duties only if he has a different supervisor or works in a different location.
Nomatter how debilitating the effects of a mental impairment, it will not be protected underthe ADA if it stems solely from an inability to work with a particular supervisor or in asingle particular job. Courts and the EEOC agree that an employee is not substantiallylimited in the major life activity of working unless the employee is significantlyrestricted in the ability to perform either a class of jobs or a broad range of jobs invarious classes. Accordingly, ask (but not mandate) that the employee submit anaccommodation request in writing.
Consider even vague requests for accommodation from employees, their familymembers, or their representatives as triggering a duty to engage in an interactive processwith the employee.
Requestsfor accommodation of emotional problems are often as vague and ill defined as theunderlying impairment. A family member may inform a supervisor that the employee is “fallingapart” and needs professional help and “time off”; an employee may blurtout in the midst of a rush project that he is so “depressed and stressed out”that he can “no longer cope emotionally unless something changes.” Such commentsare more than mere complaints; they are, in part, requests.
Inresponse to the “requests” described above, the employer should speak with theemployee to clarify his needs and create a written record of the meeting. Assuming thatthe employee articulates specific requests, the employer need not provide each of therequested accommodations. Rather, it may choose among reasonable accommodations so long asthe chosen one is effective.
Whenconsidering requests for accommodation, remember that the ADA requires employers toaccommodate only disabilities that cause substantial limitations, not all disabilities. Inother words, a psychiatric diagnosis is not determinative.
Inresponse to an employee’s request for accommodation, an employer’s fact-specificanalysis should focus not just on the employee’s psychiatric diagnosis but also onthe extent to which the employee is limited, if at all, in a major life activity. Theanalysis should be grounded on the employee’s limitation at the time of the requestedaccommodation.
Inmisconduct situations, distinguish between prospective and retrospective requests foraccommodation and ensure that disciplinary rules are uniformly applied.
Courtsand the EEOC agree that reasonable accommodation is always prospective, not retrospective. A prospective request for an accommodation thatwill assist an employee in complying with the company’s conduct rules shouldgenerally be granted, so long as it does not cause the employer an undue hardship.However, if an employee is unable to perform essential functions of her job even withreasonable accommodation, she is not a qualified individual under the ADA.
Don’tbe intimidated by psychiatric jargon; mentally impaired employees can often beaccommodated in the same ways as physically impaired employees.
Mostindividuals are more familiar with physical than mental disorders. The same types ofaccommodations (e.g., sick leave, time off, reduced hours) that are afforded to employeeswith physical impairments should be considered for employees with mental impairments.
Designateone person or office to review all company requests for additional medical informationabout employees; ensure that such requests are narrowly tailored.
Requestsfor accommodation based on claims of “stress ” or “difficulty coping ”are often suspect because the mental impairments on which they are based are hidden,unlike some physical impairments. In response to such vague complaints or equally vaguediagnoses from mental health professionals, employers may request certain additionalmedical information. Imposing limits on the type and scope of the information requested isthe key to avoiding liability. As a general rule, when the medical impairment or need foraccommodation is not obvious, an employer may ask an employee for reasonable documentationabout his or her purported disability and functional limitations. Reasonable documentationdoes not mean an employee’s entire medical record; it is limited to documentsnecessary to establish that the employee has an ADA disability and that the disabilitynecessitates a reasonable accommodation.
Requirethat employees submit to an independent psychiatric examination only in limitedcircumstances; designate one person or office to review and issue such requests.
Toguard against abuse and malingering, an employer may require that a psychiatrist orpsychologist of its choice evaluate an employee if one of three conditions is met.
First,a psychiatric examination may be required if an employer has a reasonable belief based onobjective evidence that an employee’s ability to perform essential job functions willbe impaired by a medical/psychiatric condition.
Second,if an employee requests a reasonable accommodation, and either the mental impairment orneed for accommodation is not obvious, an employer may request an independent psychiatricexam.
Third,an employer may require a psychiatric examination if, based on objective, scientific information, theemployee poses a direct threat to the health or safety of himself or others because of amedical condition.
Treatall information about an employee’s psychiatric impairment as confidential, whetherdisclosed by the employee, a mental health professional, or a coworker.
TheADA requires that employers keep confidential all information regarding their employees’medical conditions, including information about their psychiatric disabilities. Evenmedical information voluntarily disclosed by an employee should be treated as highlyconfidential.
Reviewand revise job descriptions to include references to employees’ ability to cope withstressful circumstances and to cordially interact with coworkers to accomplish commontasks.
Numerouscourts have held that mental stability and the ability to get along with coworkers areessential functions of a job, without which an employee is not qualified. Courts have alsoheld that the inability to cope with a stressful work environment does not constitute aprotected disability.
Developrelationships with mental health professionals and accommodation experts and maintain adatabase regarding their work.
Accommodationrequests for mental impairments are typically supported by psychiatrists andpsychologists. Employers can employ such professionals to their advantage. In situationsinvolving a direct threat, for example, the immediate referral of an employee to apsychiatrist with expertise in violence assessment is often imperative.
All Skill, No Finesse
Atthe May 2000 Human Resources Forum, aboard the Queen Elizabeth 2 cruise liner, JimCollins, author of Built to Last (HarperBusiness, 1994), wisely said, âPeopleare your most important asset. Actually, the right people are your most important assetand you canât get the right behavior [performance] from the wrong people. Therefore,how do you measure the right behavior?â
Selectingan awesome employee can be more difficult than finding the perfect mate. At least datingdisasters occur in a matter of hours; bad hires are not as immediately evident. If couplescomplain about not really knowing their mates even after years of marriage, how canfront-line hiring managers truly know a job applicant after a 30- to 45-minute interview?They canât. Itâs virtually impossible to really know someone in such a shorttime.
Traditionally,potential hires are assessed on experience, skills, and appearance. But thatâs aminuscule part of the big picture. The paradox is that 50 to 70 percent of most jobqualifications may be more inherent in personality than skill. For example, consider thequalities you would seek out in the interview process. If youâre looking for asalesperson, you might want an individual who is assertive, convincing, self-confident, anexcellent communicator, pressure oriented, competitive, independent, resourceful, andgoal-oriented.
Butwhat about a bookkeeper? You would probably seek an individual who is detail-oriented,patient, methodical, analytical, a problem solver, accommodating, agreeable, a teamplayer, and a follower.
Now,ask which of these adjectives are skills — things you go to school for or take classes tolearn — and which are more naturally determined by our personality. The answer is most ofthese qualities are personality traits, not skills, that may be learned for the short termbut arenât usually sustainable characteristics.
Unfortunately,without objective assessment, appropriate behavioral traits are the least-known assets inthe decision-makerâs arsenal. Traditional hiring practices focus the interviewer ondemeanor, personal appearance, and what applicants have done, not who they actually are.Ultimately, job performance — good or bad — hinges on how well the individualâspersonality meshes with the job. Behavioral assessments, when accurately implemented, arequintessential tools for managing and motivating individuals and matching the right personto the right position.
Whatâsyour picture of the perfect employee?
âIfwe take job fit into account when making selection decisions, we have a much better chanceof matching the right person into the job, and thatâs better for everybody,âsays Maureen Townson, vice president and marketing director of The McQuaig Institute.McQuaig, a Toronto-based company, produces software tools for assessing behavioralattributes in the workplace. âWe spend an inordinate amount of time at work and Ithink it is absolutely critical there be a good fit,â she says.
TheMcQuaig System measures the behavior thatâs required by a given job, and then itcompares that measurement to the behavioral attributes of the applicant or incumbent.Measuring the required job behaviors is done through a process called benchmarking.Looking at the personalities of several high performers in a given position, who have beenon the job at least six months to one year, helps to spell out the behavioral requisitesassociated with the position.
Typically,this is conducted by the HR department, in concert with the management team that willultimately be responsible for the position. No one knows the culture of a givencorporation better than those who are in the human resources department. Yet anotherapproach is to have a manager indicate his or her impression of the best personality forthe position. The managerâs profile is then compared to the feedback thatâscollected from the top performers. The end result is a composite about what the jobrequires from a person behaviorally.
Justas every job has a set of ideal characteristics, every individual has strong personalityattributes that determine fitness for a specific job, promotion, or company culture. Forexample, most executives assume everyone wants to be a leader. But according to statisticsfrom a 12-year study conducted by Hagberg & Associates, 36 percent of engineerspromoted from line positions had problems in a position of leadership. Even though theypossessed the skills, many did not have the personality for the promotion; thus, the PeterPrinciple.
RossWeinberg, president of Line One Teleservices in New Rochelle, New York, a telemarketingcompany for the financial industry, knew his companyâs employee turnover rate was toohigh. Three years ago, for every 10 new employees, seven were performing poorly on the jobduring the first three weeks. âNew hires were initially enthusiastic, but they didnot know what they were getting into, and they ultimately hated it,â he says.
Today,seven of 10 new hires are performing well in that same time frame. The turning point forLine One Teleservices was when personality testing was implemented in order to standardizehiring practices.
âBeforethat, we did not have an understanding of the behavioral profiles necessary fortelemarketers. The assessments gave structure and framework to our hiring process,âWeinberg says. âI would never run a business without them now. It hits me every day,especially when hiring telemarketing salespeople.â Anytime a company is hiringsalespeople, the evaluation of behavior becomes more critical because so much of theirsuccess is behaviorally driven. On the other hand, when a surgeon is being hired, skillsfar outweigh the promise of a pleasant personality. So personality testing is particularlyhelpful in determining candidates for positions in which person-to-person contact is apriority.
Whilebehavioral testing can make the difference for a company, the effectiveness of thistesting depends on a few factors:
- The type of survey for which people are being promoted or selected.
- The type of test being used. Personality, IQ, and skill-based surveys range widely. Pricesrange from the Wonderlic Survey ($8 per survey) to the Caliper Survey which may costseveral hundreds of dollars.
The insight and knowledge of the people doing the testing. What type of person should conduct the survey depends largely uponwhether the company uses the surveys for tactical or strategic purposes. If testing isconducted on an annual basis, typically the user provides an individual fully trained inimplementation and follow-up.
On the contrary, the strategic application of personalitytests gives any executive team a better overall understanding of the people side of thebusiness. Other benefits: fewer levels of management can manage greater numbers ofemployees, companies will be able to maintain higher levels of alignment among their staffmembers, and turnover, absenteeism, and accidents will go down while profits surge.
- The factoring of test results in the overall evaluation process. In other words, what isthe ease of administration? Are the tests scored in-house or elsewhere? Has the companybeen trained in how to interpret the test results or will an outside source provideobjective interpretation?
Turnovercost takes its toll
Althoughthe true cost of employee turnover is difficult to calculate, and rarely seen on a profitand loss statement, few disagree that bad hiring decisions affect the bottom line.
Assessingtangible and non-tangible (or soft) costs can be an eye-opener for most managers. Sincetime is money, personnel costs — the number of hours multiplied by wages — plus burdencosts mount up when one considers staffâs time to interview, check references, reviewrĂ©sumĂ©s, and place employment ads.
Hardcosts also include advertising, employment agency fees, professional assessment,relocation expenses, start-up costs (business cards and incidentals), training, salariesand benefits, staff changes, termination, and outplacement fees. Meanwhile, the intangiblecosts, those that cannot be weighed accurately, are business losses resulting fromcustomer relations problems and lost sales, ebbing employee morale, lost productivity, andmissed opportunities.
EricMcDonald, vice president of operations for Dallas-based Mutuals.com, a fee-less,international mutual fund investment company, started using personality surveys as aninitial screening tool, via the Internet, about two and a half years ago. âWe arelooking for very select people here. We only hire two employees for every 80 applicants,âMcDonald says. In the case of Mutuals.com, their turnover rate dropped by as much as 70percent, but they had to screen more applicants in the process.
UsingInternet job lines, the company throws a wide net and receives a high volume of queries.Interested parties are then linked to the companyâs Web site, and an onlineintelligence test and personality survey are given.
Thequestions are prioritized into 11 groupings of four words each. Typically, it can becompleted in 10 to 20 minutes. This process eliminates about 50 percent of the applicantsbefore the first in-person interview, says McDonald, who believes his 25-employee companysaved more than $50,000 last year alone. âNo one has quit since we began doing this,âhe says.
âPersonalityprofiling is very helpful in hiring and retaining the right people,â says MaryGeving, HR manager for Netcom Systems, a Calabasas, California-based company that producestesting equipment for Internet systems and employs 270 people. âWe had a need forbetter retention, and this was a tool for making better decisions in hiring and keepingthe right people. We use assessments prior to the first interview. These assessmentsgenerate questions based on personalities. After the hiring decision is made, we use theinformation as a guide to the doâs and donâts on how to manage people,âGeving says.
Personalitycounts
Awesomeperformance takes place naturally when key behavioral requirements of the job, and acandidateâs personality attributes, are well matched for the position. Coaching andmotivating people are far more successful when employers treat employees as individuals.Many managers have one style of management, which works best with employees with similarpersonalities. For employees with a different type of personality, itâs important formanagers to modify their approach in order to get peak performance. Generally, behavioraltesting helps managers
AnthonyFolan is manager of employee relations for Russell Metals Inc. in Mississauga, Ontario,which employs 2,000 people. They initially used the McQuaig System as a recruitment andassessment tool. The feedback reports have since become an integral part of supervisionand management strategies at Russell.
âWetry to hire people with the ideal profile, combined with their experience and academicbackground. Personality testing is a check-and-balance system. We also provide in-housetraining on conducting behavioral-based interviews. It is both a competency andbehaviorally based interview,â Folan says.
Thetemplate of success for salespeople is a dominant, independent, driven, competitive,results-oriented personality, not compliant and accepting, he explains. âWe focus onthose behavioral traits,â says Folan. Clearly, this approach allows management tobetter understand an individualâs motivation for doing a good job. In turn, it allowsfor management and motivation based on each individualâs personal needs.
McDonaldfrom Mutuals.com adds, âA personality profile is only as useful as you make it. Youhave to understand the tool and use it to successfully integrate it into the culture ofthe company. Management has to make a commitment. Itâs an excellent tool if you useit right.â
Abouta year ago, when he presented the largest check ever to his highest sales producer, thesalesman replied, âI want a plaque. I produce more than anyone else here.âMcDonald was surprised. âIf I had understood this salesmanâs personality inadvance, I would have known that he likes accolades and public recognition in front ofothers, and I may not have had to pay him as much,â says McDonald, tongue in cheek.
Donâtrely on skills alone
RonKrueger II, chief operations officer of Wehrenberg Theatres Inc. of St. Louis, knows thatsome turnover is unavoidable. âWe went through the highest level of transient people,âsays Krueger, who owns and operates movie theaters, traditionally the first workenvironment for many teens. âNow we make better hiring decisions for teens. We use itfor everybody in the organization, from executives to new hires.â Wehrenberg adoptedpersonality profiling 15 months ago, and Krueger is a self-proclaimed champion of thesystem.
Thenature of the tool, as with any personnel process, dictates the need for caution. Forexample, behavioral assessments are created to measure people for their specific fit witha job and shouldnât be used for any abstract measurements. Ethically, the informationmust be treated with confidentiality. Also, itâs required that any behavioral toolsused in an organization be validated and pass EEOC guidelines.
Otherareas of caution to consider when conducting personality tests include measuring peoplestrictly for their ability to perform their jobs and not just for abstract profiles. Inaddition, testing helps uncover cases in which, for instance, people performing job âAâwould be better off performing job âB.â As long as companies remember that thesetest devices are to be used as tools, not weapons, theyâll provide the benefits thatare intended.
Traditionalmethods of judging applicants on experience or how they present themselves in an interviewcanât accurately measure a candidateâs true fit for the job. Though people areusually hired based on the basis of qualifications, most people are fired fornon-performance. People rarely succeed or fail through skills or intelligence alone.
Successor failure is usually the result of personal characteristics, such as attitude,motivation, and especially, temperament. Regardless of the industry or the nature of thebusiness, periodically itâs important for CEOs and human resource professionals tostand back and determine who is winning the war for talent. If your company isnât,remember there are viable options, and surrender is not one of them.
Workforce
The Workforce team will be at the show and we’d love to meet you. Stop by and see us at booth #1114 so we can show you all the ways our site and magazine can answer your toughest HR questions and move your business forward. If you’re already familiar with Workforce, just stop by and say hello.
While you’re at the booth, make sure you register for our drawing. See you in Boston!
ijob
ijob is a Web-based recruitment management service that improves relationships, information, and speed throughout the hiring process. ijob provides organizations automated sourcing, profiling, matching, tracking and hiring. The ijob service saves money and time, giving recruiters the tools needed to deliver the perfect candidate for any position-every time. SPECIAL OFFER: Sign up for an ijob subscription by 8/25/2000, and receive the ijob “baker’s dozen”, 13 months for the price of 12. ijob can save you time and with this offer – ijob can save you money!
Table of Contents June 2000
BODY
Give People Belief in the Future
AnnSanders, a vice-president with a large financial-services company, is a success by mostpeople’s standards. She has moved ahead rapidly in her career, while managing tomaintain a strong family life. But lately, she feels close to the breaking point. “Mostdays I go into work early and stay late, but somehow I never catch up with the work. There’salways some new priority, some new fire to fight. My boss is mad at me because I’mnot delivering; my husband is mad because I’m always home late; and my kids are upsetbecause they hardly see me. More and more I find myself thinking: Is it really worth it?If not for the money, I would quit tomorrow.”
MarkMiller, a manager for a high technology company, is coping with the aftermath of a majordownsizing. Forced to produce more work with fewer resources, he feels under siege. “BeforeI finish one project to my own satisfaction, I have to start on another,” he says.“I’m not managing anymore, I’m just reacting to events. I really feel as ifI’m losing my edge.”
LindaGraves, a compensation specialist in an HR department that has shrunk from 12 people to 5,is being called upon to function in a generalist’s role, juggling a broad range ofissues. “I’m not happy in this new work, nor do I feel like I’m doing agood job,” she says.
JackThompson was once a highly effective sales manager in a midsize manufacturing company,reporting to the vice-president of marketing. Following a corporate restructuring, Jackreports directly to the CEO and is being asked to play a more strategic marketing role.“I’m great at selling, but handling these more strategic issues just isn’tmy strength,” Jack says. “More and more, I feel that I just can’t do whatthey’re asking me to do. It makes me start to question myself: Am I stupid?Incompetent? I never used to feel that way.”
FewerRungs Left to Climb
Restructuring.Downsizing. Organizational change. As we have seen, these have become fixtures in the newlandscape of work as companies scramble to meet the challenges of an increasinglycompetitive marketplace. Widespread elimination of jobs and reporting levels has createdincreased workloads for managers and professionals, while other jobs have changed to thepoint where they demand different competencies. And, always, there is the relentlesspressure to produce.
Manypeople caught up in these sweeping changes are feeling beleaguered by the demands placedupon them now, and chronically anxious about the future. Often, they are working at such afrantic pace they are losing any sense of satisfaction or accomplishment in their work;are worried about the security of their income; no longer feel that they are making ameaningful contribution; have begun to doubt their own competence; are having increasingdifficulty balancing work demands with their personal and family life.
Atthe same time, many people feel that the whole effort-reward equation has becomeunbalanced. Not only are they working harder than ever, they are often doing so for whatthey perceive as fewer rewards. Their career progress has slowed to a crawl. And when theylook ahead they find it difficult to see where they can go. As reporting levels have beeneliminated, there are fewer rungs left to climb on the traditional career ladder. And theyknow that jobs that exist now may not do so five years from now.
Thissense of malaise is compounded when people are in the wrong job or work environment –something that happens all too often in the wake of restructuring and downsizing. Highlycompetent specialists like Linda Graves, in the example above, are turned into barelycompetent generalists. People with real strengths, like Jack Thompson, are shuffled intopositions where their weaknesses come to the fore.
Perhapsthe most pervasive stressor of all, however, is coping on a daily basis with theall-encompassing state of ambiguity that characterizes contemporary organizational life.People are plagued with such questions as:
- Will my organization restructure/downsize (again)?
- How will I be affected? Will I still have a job? What will it be? Who will I be reportingto?
- What will happen to the people reporting to me?
- Will this company/unit/division still exist a year from now?
Mostpeople who work for organizations have been socialized to expect a much more orderly world– one in which the future is relatively predictable, and in which it is possible toengage in particular tasks to achieve particular outcomes. What we are seeing today is apervasive anxiety, as people try to come to grips with a world in which the present isuncertain and the future almost completely unpredictable and uncontrollable. Faced withthis chronic ambiguity, their whole sense of personal efficacy is being eroded.
HelpingPeople Cope
Peoplework to derive a variety of rewards: not only salary and the prospect of advancement, butalso a sense of collegiality with co-workers; a feeling of purpose in their work;opportunities for development; identification with the goals of the organization; a sensethat their activities are instrumental in contributing to producing desirable outcomes inthe future. When these rewards are progressively stripped away, morale and performancewill inevitably suffer.
Thepressures on people in organizations are unlikely to abate for the foreseeable future.Instead we will likely see much more of the same. Jobs will continue to change ordisappear entirely; companies will continue to sell off, or shut down, whole businessareas; new technology will continue to transform how people do their work; market changeswill require an ever-shifting mix of skills. There will be more restructuring, moredownsizing and even more pressure on the individuals caught up in these changes.
Thechallenge facing organizations is to help their people cope with these pressures byproviding them with a renewed sense of purpose. People need to feel that they are making areal contribution in their jobs and that they are valuable both to themselves and to theorganization.
Whatcan organizations do to help their people cope, and restore their sense of the future?Here are five strategies:
- Recognizethat people are a nonrenewable resource.People today are juggling demands on many fronts: work, family, finances. They don’thave endless resources for coping with the pressures placed upon them. Eventually theywill be worn down, and their performance and productivity will decline. There is only somuch you can ask of them.
Communicateclearly and honestly.Whether the issue is a downsizing, a potential merger or sell-off of assets, or simply theneed to cut costs and improve productivity, organizations need to let their people knowwhat is going on. When organizations keep their people in the dark, gossip and rumor willflourish — usually with a much more devastating impact on morale and productivity thanthe plain truth would have had.
Theorganization must paint a compelling picture of the future so that the staff will have asense of how they can benefit from the coming changes. All too often, senior managers hidebehind closed doors during a significant organizational change. When they come out, theywalk about mournfully, looking like they just lost their best friend. They shouldrecognize what they are actually communicating through such behavior, and fulfill theirresponsibility to deal openly and positively with staff.
- Demonstratean appreciation for individuals.Organizations can show that they care about their people in a variety of ways, rangingfrom simple gestures (like taking the trouble to say thank you for a job well done) tomore complex interventions, such as the provision of opportunities for self-assessment andself-determination (see below).
- Liveup to the new employment contract.By now everyone knows that no organization can guarantee its people lifelong job security.But what organizations can and should do is ensure that their staff remain marketable,whether inside or outside the organization. And what that requires is supportingindividuals in taking responsibility for managing their own careers. Loyalty can no longerbe bought with promises of security — but it can be earned, by treating people withdignity and respect.
- Provideopportunities for self-assessment and self-determination. As well as encouragingpeople to take responsibility for managing their careers, organizations should providethem with the proper tools to do the job. People should have the opportunity to go througha meaningful process of self-assessment that enables them to plan out their goals. Thiscan be provided in a number of ways, from the “Cadillac option” of executivecoaching to career-planning workshops and one-on-one counseling.
HowEffective Career-Management Programs Can Help
Atfirst glance, this may seem to be a paradoxical suggestion. Why undertake acareer-management program when, for most organizations and industries, so many questionmarks abound about future jobs or careers?
Butit is precisely the uncertainty that makes career planning so vital. Career planningpromotes morale and employability by:
Fosteringself-knowledge:Career management helps staff move beyond identification with their existing jobs and jobtitles. Individuals no longer see themselves as filling a specific job (e.g., “I’ma marketing manager for ABC Company”). Instead, they recognize themselves as theowner of a portfolio of skills and experiences (e.g., “competencies and knowledge inmarketing and sales; knowledge of financial products aimed at baby boomers; team-buildingabilities”). They can then reconfigure these skills and experiences in new ways,either in the organization or outside it.
Restoringa sense of self-efficacy:Providing people buffeted by change with the opportunity for self-assessment can beextremely valuable in promoting individual and organizational renewal. The career-planningexperience builds confidence and boosts self-esteem by reminding individuals of theiraccomplishments. It promotes an understanding of their marketability, both within andoutside the organization.
Throughself-assessment, people have the opportunity to sit back and reflect on how much theyreally are contributing now, if they only had the time to realize it. Reviewing theiraccomplishments gives people a renewed sense of self-efficacy in their work. As a result,their morale and commitment are renewed, too.
Communicating“we care”:Supporting individuals in their career management shows them that management cares and isliving up to its side of the new employment contract. The message is that people do have afuture, whether it’s inside the organization or outside.
Somesenior managers might fear that introducing career planning in a period of uncertaintywill only create panic by leading staff to believe they are about to lose their jobs. That’san old-fashioned concern, however. Today’s workers aren’t fools. They understandthe challenges of the new employment contract and all but a few realize, at leastintellectually, that they are responsible for managing their own careers. Implementing acareer-planning initiative doesn’t communicate they are about to lose their jobs. Itcommunicates that the company wants them to be the strongest and most capable individualsthey can be, and is willing to invest in them.
Someexecutives, of course, might harbor an opposite fear: that the initiative will onlyencourage their best staff to leave. In my experience, that fear is unfounded. If theorganization is properly communicating with its staff, career planning won’tencourage people to jump ship.
Indeed,the opposite has been the case. People come to career-planning workshops excited andappreciative that the company is finally doing something to support them in ensuring theiremployability, rather than simply paying lip service to the new employment contract. Andeven if at times they are nervous because their jobs are vulnerable, they come out feelingsignificantly more competent. Participants realize that they are much more employable thanthey thought, whether inside or outside the organization. People say, “I recognizethat I’m marketable, and I’m comfortable waiting out this change, because thiscould represent an exciting opportunity.”
Consider,also, whether you want individuals working for your organization who aren’t highlyemployable elsewhere — and are clueless about their appeal?
Preparingpeople for the future:Self-assessment also assists people in preparing themselves to adapt to change in thefuture. It shows them how to look beyond their job tides to identify key underlying skillsthat can be transferred to other work settings. Once people gain a sense of their own“marketability,” whether inside or outside the organization, they will be moreconfident in themselves and less anxious about the future.
Goingthrough a career-planning experience typically assures staff that they have the strengthto thrive in the future organization, whatever its shape — or that if they do lose theirjobs, they have skills that can be used in other work. That makes them less defensive,more willing to accept change.
Improving“fit”:It’s crucial that organizations, as they change and evolve, ensure that people don’twind up in the wrong slots. By helping people understand their abilities and by boostingtheir confidence, career planning reduces the chance that individuals will grab at anyopening just for the sake of continuing to hold a job with the company. Instead, they willunderstand what roles they are best geared to fit and which ones will further growth andadvancement.
TakeGeorge, for example. A policy analyst at a large firm, he saw himself only as capable ofcontinuing in that role after a merger. But through career planning, he realized that whathad made his unit so successful was not its analytical research skills but the ability ofpeople within it to build team relationships. When an opportunity presented itself thatput a premium on team-building skills, he was comfortable in making the switch, thanks tohis heightened self-awareness.
Self-assessmentgives people who are currently in a job or work environment that represents a mismatchwith their interests and skills the opportunity to identify the causes of their stress anddo something about it. In some cases the solution will be some modification to theircurrent work, to give them more of what suits them best. In other cases, a move — whether inside or outside the company –will be necessary to achieve a more satisfactory match.
DeliveringSupport
Thereare a number of vehicles for delivering career-management support for staff during periodsof apprehension and change. The one I prefer is that which an organization would normallyuse for support in career self-management, whether it be a corporate university,leadership institute, management development program, or learning center.
Iam less enthusiastic about some of the other vehicles. Making an Employee AssistanceProgram the sole mechanism to respond to staff apprehensions, for example, can send animplicit message that anyone having problems is not as emotionally strong as his or hercolleagues. After all, an EAP is where you go when you are suffering from a personalproblem. Obviously the EAP must continue to be promoted during this period. But HR shouldalso be stressing more positive and less clinical approaches.
Careercenters have also been used with varied success to help smooth transitions. When thecareer center is viewed as a vehicle for promoting employability and change, it has beensuccessful. But when it is confined to delivering one-on-one counseling support, it canbecome like an EAP program, preoccupied with people who are hurting. That can becomeexpensive and also result in the career center eventually losing touch with the manyindividuals it should be helping.
Inother words, career planning should be positioned to help people:
- Get started on the process of framing meaningful and realistic career and life goals;
- Identify their unique work style and preferences profile;
- Learn how to look beyond their job titles and identify key underlying skills andcompetencies that can be applied in future work assignments; identify the new skills theymay need to develop to adapt to new corporate directions;
- Make informed decisions about future job assignments;
- Develop and implement personal career and life plans.
Makingthe Right Move
Tosee the potential impact of an effective career-management program, let’s lookbriefly at the experience of a financial-services company. This company had already gonethrough a downsizing and was about to place one of its divisions up for sale. Acompany-wide meeting was called to brief people on the situation. Although no promisescould be made about job security, management wanted people to understand that theyrecognized their apprehension and demoralization.
Subsequently,the company offered a series of career self-management workshops. The workshops were opento everyone, and over 80% of the employees opted to participate. Through these workshops,people were able to regain a sense of their own marketability. As a result, they were ableto face an uncertain future with much greater confidence. The program had an obvious anddirect impact on morale — including the receipt by senior management of dozens ofunsolicited thank-you letters.
GivingSomething Back
Obviously,organizations stand to gain some significant benefits from providing self-assessment andcareer-planning assistance to their people. Individuals become more flexible and adaptive.Morale and commitment are renewed.
Perhapseven more important, however, is the opportunity for organizations to show that theyreally do care about what their people are going through in these difficult times, and todemonstrate their concern by giving something back. And what they are giving back isnothing less than the individual’s sense of well-being and personal efficacy.
iDear Workforce -IWhen Must I Transfer 401(k) Money
Q
Dear Workforce:
Is there a law or standard time frame a company must follow when transferring employees’ money to the company 401(k) plan? We sometimes allow up to 10.
–Anne Harney, Human Resources Director, Collins Engineers, Inc.
A Dear Anne:
You have little to fear.
You have 15 business days from the time you received the money or the money was placed in your general business account.
SOURCE: Todd Raphael, Online Editor for Workforce, and the United States Department of Labor, April 26, 2000.
Questions to Consider When Evaluating a Personality Test Product
Here are some questions to consider in evaluating specific personality-test products:
- What methods are available to administer and process tests. Pencil-and-paper? Software? Web-based? Can results be returned by email?
- If software-based, what additional charges are involved (can add several hundred dollars)? How user-friendly is software installation and set-up?
- Are products bonded? Backed by psychologists or attorneys? Generally guaranteed?
- Is the instrument job-specific or developed with customized client input?
- What are the validity coefficients? That is, how reliably does the test measure what it purports to measure? A reasonable range is 0.4 to 0.55.
- Are quantity discounts provided? Generally such discounts are available beginning as low as 10 or 25 quantity.
- How has this product fared with legal challenges?
- What are the projected overall costs to your company associated with a particular assessment tool? Begin to track expenses, including administration costs, from the beginning to get the most accurate picture of overall success of the testing approach.