Skip to content

Workforce

Category: Archive

Posted on March 5, 2000July 10, 2018

Dear Workforce How Long Should We Hold on to Applications?

Q

 

Dear Workforce:

 
How long should HR keep employment applications?
Leticia, Baptist Hospital.

A
Dear Leticia:



For auditing purposes, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) require that applications for individuals who have been considered for a position be kept on file for up to three years.

For example, at the end of 1999, a company could dispose of applications dated 1997, and so on. One exception–if a job candidate has filed a lawsuit, their application should be kept permanently.

 

 

SOURCE: Ceridian Employer Services, Minneapolis, February 8, 2000.

E-mail your Dear Workforce questions to Online Editor Todd Raphael at raphaelt@workforceonline.com, along with your name, title, organization and location. Unless you state otherwise, your identifying info may be used on Workforce.com and in Workforce magazine. We can’t guarantee we’ll be able to answer every question.

Posted on March 3, 2000July 10, 2018

So You Want a Raise

People’s expectations are on the upswing they want to participate in the global economic boom. Also many predict talent shortages will be a chronic condition of business life. In our book Pay People Right! Breakthrough Reward Strategies to Create Great Companies, we provide a roadmap for managing total rewards.


Here’s some ready guidance for everyone — whether you’re searching for a new opportunity yourself or for people to work for your company. The name of the total rewards game has changed — it’s time for a “tune up” on “getting and giving” raises.


You need to look at getting a raise as a business issue, not just an emotional one.


One alternative you (and everybody else — in your company) have is to quit and go someplace else. We’re seeing a lot about this in the press. But does it really pay to quit in the long run? It seems to many people that new hires with skills and performance that may not even be up to theirs are paid more.


You’re not alone in asking this question — companies also ask what to do with people inside a company who are paid less than people they must hire from outside — so the question of how to give and get a raise is on everyone’s mind.


What not to do


Let’s start with some raise-getting tactics that don’t make sense to us:


  1. It’s a beautiful dream, but few of us are really going to make a killing by becoming a “talent gypsy,” roaming from company to company “reloading” stock options. While you may hear a lot about the “option millionaires,” you don’t hear about most everyone else who doesn’t become instantly rich.

  2. Not many of us are really smart enough to outwit our bosses and manipulate an undeserved raise — it just doesn’t work. Not in the long run, anyway (nor should it, in our view). Frankly, few long-term careers have been assured by “putting a con” on the boss for short-term economic gain.

  3. Using what fellow workers make to leverage a raise isn’t a real career-building tactic over time either. Whether you’re right or not about your pay compared to others, it’s what you do and not what others do that counts. We have never seen a “see what he or she gets” career comparison strategy endear anyone to their company.

  4. Quitting and moving on is a workable short-term tactic to get paid more, but few want to make a habit of short-term employment. Do you really want a “quit to grow” career strategy? Even an entrepreneur wants to be part of something lasting and meaningful.

 


New realities


Now, let’s look at some new realities about how to “pay people right”:


  1. Companies now realize that giving raises is a business issue. They look at the “deal” they’re making with their workforce — most want it to be a win-win arrangement. So, you need to look at getting a raise as a business issue, not just an emotional one.

  2. The top companies that everyone wants to work for are paying for value; they don’t want old-fashioned “protect me” loyalty. They want loyal people who continue to grow and add value to the business.

  3. Super people want to work for super companies. They also want to work for more than just high pay. The best people want to work for a company that has a compelling future, invests in people, and provides a positive workplace. Everyone wants to work for a winner!

  4. Getting a raise from the best places to work depends mostly on how you help the business. Today high pay goes with high value — companies can’t afford anything else. It’s necessary to understand what your company wants and deliver it. In exchange, the company should share its future with you.

  5. In a world where rapid change drives everything, you must figure out how to increase your market value and importance to the enterprise that employs you. Companies can afford to pay more to people who add more value — doesn’t this make sense?

  6. Career plans can partner people with the enterprise this can produce a “win-win.” As workforce members become more important to their company, it makes it worthwhile for them to stay and add value.

 


What to do


If you decide to listen to our message, what’s next? What can you really do to get a raise? Here’s what we think counts:


  1. Prepare a detail of your skills and competencies. Don’t write a boring and stagnant “job description,” but a capability description. Don’t focus on how long you’ve done something or even the companies you’ve worked for. Emphasize what you know and who uses it — companies that need what you know and do. What skills and competencies do you have that they need?
  2. Go on the Internet to see what the Web sites say you’re worth. The Internet has a host of salary surveys, search organization information, and professional association data on pay, benefits and even total rewards you can use. It takes a bit of digging, but you can find a lot of information, and most of it is free.

  3. Take a look at the articles on “the best places to work” and “employers of preference” that have been appearing over the last few years. These tell about things other than base pay and incentives that makes a business attractive — what the workplace, development and investment in people, and the company’s future are like. This is essential to consider because total rewards are what you’re after, not just total pay.

  4. Find out everything you can on the total reward package in your company — more than just base pay and total pay, remember? Understand your stock option plan; your 401(k); your base pay plan; what it takes to get an incentive award, stock option grant and recognition; and all about development and training and career opportunities. Be open about what you are doing. Quality companies are happy to provide these data to you.

  5. Talk with your manager and team leader to find out what the future is for you. Get into the performance-management solution. Explore what’s needed to make yourself more valuable to your company. It’s not a negative to tell your boss you want to be worth more. Good leaders will welcome the chance to help you.

  6. Ask how your company decides what you’re worth. How do they pay for the acquisition and application of the skills you have? How do they correlate what you are paid with what you learn? Where do goals come from? How is performance measured? What can you do to meet and exceed goals? What happens if you meet and exceed goals? Understand base pay progression, incentives, and stock options completely.

Now you have the information you need, you can explore your alternatives inside or outside your company. You and your present company have discussed your future, and you both know what you’re worth. Decades of reward consulting experience suggest to us that if you have come this far, your present employer is by far the best chance for your future.


All we are recommending here is how you can test this out. If you find it’s time to move, you now have super information that can prepare you to seek a career elsewhere. If you stay, this guidance makes sense as well.

Posted on March 3, 2000July 10, 2018

The Labor Department is Leaving No Options

Apparently, stock options are just too much of a good thing.


The Department of Labor recently issued an advisory opinion letter concluding that the gain from stock options must be retroactively added to the wage base of non-exempt salaried and hourly employees.


This recalculated wage base must then be used to determine overtime pay. The effect of this opinion, if allowed to stand, would be to significantly decrease participation, if not completely eliminate, non-exempt employees from inclusion in their companies’ broad-based stock option plans due to the added costs, complex administrative requirements and uncertainty in calculating actual wage costs.


About the letter
The DOL advisory letter applied to a company that granted a one-time discretionary grant of stock options to non-exempt employees.


The letter states that the extra pay realized by the employees through the exercise of the stock option must be retroactively applied to the period the employee worked from the time the option was granted to the time the option was exercised, up to a maximum of 104 weeks.


Can you imagine doing this for a company like Starbucks where every employee is a “partner?”


The corporate sponsor would then be obligated to pro-rate the added value to the employee’s base wage and, for the weeks during that period in which the employee earned overtime, the overtime pay would be recalculated at the higher rate.


How options work
To fully understand the issue and the implications for corporate sponsors, it’s necessary to understand how stock options work.


An option is a contract right to purchase shares in a corporation for a fixed period of time at a fixed price. In most cases the price is the fair market value of the stock on the date the option is granted.


Assume an employee is given an option to purchase 100 shares of stock when the fair market value of the stock is $1 per share. Typically, the grant may be exercised anytime in the next ten years. Now assume that when the employee exercises or purchases the shares granted under the option the fair market value has risen to $5. The employee has to pay the $100 ($1 X 100 shares) to the employer but in return s/he receives $500 ($5 x 100 shares) worth of stock.


Lots of calculations
Tax considerations aside (different types of options are treated differently under the tax code) it’s possible that the employer will have no idea when that sale takes place and at what price.


According to the advisory opinion, the $400 in the example is required to be spread over the employees’ regular pay rate between the date of exercise and the date of grant, up to a maximum of two years.


Employees typically have several years, ten in our example, to exercise options and they frequently receive new option grants each year. Therefore, several calculations would have to be made for each stock option grant to the employee in order to comply with the advisory opinion. After the gain is spread to the hours worked, the overtime adjustment must be made and paid.


Can you imagine doing this for a company like Starbucks where every employee is a “partner?”


Presumably, in issuing this opinion someone at DOL thought they were increasing compensation and doing a good thing for non-exempt employees. But the effect is clearly going to be the opposite. It will curb the use of broad-based stock option plans at American companies who will be unwilling to accept the added costs and financial uncertainties associated with retroactive overtime costs associated with a stock-based compensation award.


If it ain’t broke…
Over the years, we’ve encouraged and worked with hundreds of companies, large and small, to install broad-based ownership plans, including but not limited to stock option plans.


When coupled with good communications and participatory management we have seen these plans bring workers, exempt and non-exempt, together as a cohesive team with a common incentive to help grow the business.


The government should not be putting up roadblocks to compensation approaches that are demonstratively beneficial to workers and clearly result in increased productivity, efficiency and competitiveness.

Posted on March 1, 2000July 10, 2018

IDear Workforce-I How Do I Grade Salaries

Q


Dear Workforce:


I am the Recruiter/Staffing Manager for a growing company with over 600 employees. To date, we have not had any salary ranges/grades for any of our positions and are looking into doing this. We do have job descriptions for each position. Does anyone know where I can get information on how to go about grading each position?


We sell discounted china, crystal, flatware, and collectibles and have a telephone call center, retail store, shipping department and inventory department.


Dear Grade:


Two resources for information to get you started on this project are the American Compensation Association and the Society for Human Resource Management.


These organizations both carry a wealth of information in published materials regarding job evaluation that can be purchased from their Web sites and are available to both members and non-members. There will be a variety of books that contain the know-how for you to develop a job evaluation process.


Regardless of the position evaluation process you end-up with, we offer you the following advice:


  1. For positions where you have competitive compensation data, external equity (competitive pay rates) should be the first consideration when slotting positions into pay grades, not internal equity (as determined by your internal position evaluation process). For example, positions are “slotted” into grades based on the salary midpoint that best approximates the position’s competitive pay rate.
  2. For positions that are unique or have additional responsibilities compared to available survey position matches, internal equity of a position is typically utilized to slot a position into a salary grade.
  3. Hourly pay rates for the same position may vary significantly by geographic location. This will be an important consideration for you because, based on the description of your organization, you probably have a relatively large hourly workforce.
  4. Keep the position evaluation system simple!

You should trust your own judgment as to what type of system will be within your staffs’ ability to perform and get the most management and employee buy-in.


Good Luck.


SOURCE: Thomas M. Tabaczynski, Rewards & Performance Management Practice, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP.


 


E-mail your Dear Workforce questions to Online Editor Todd Raphael at raphaelt@workforceonline.com, along with your name, title, organization and location. Unless you state otherwise, your identifying info may be used on Workforce.com and in Workforce magazine. We can’t guarantee we’ll be able to answer every question.

Posted on March 1, 2000June 29, 2023

British vs. American Communication Styles

Consider the following examples of workplace incidents between American and British employees:


1. Leaving Early
A British worker asks his new American manager if he can have permission to leave work two hours early the following day as he has some personal errands to run.


The American replies that he trusts the worker to get his projects done, so if the employee needs to leave early one day, then that is a decision he can make on his own.


“Well, I wanted to make sure and get your permission,” says the Brit. “I am planning to stay later on another day to make up the time.”


“You know what needs to be done,” answers the American. “As long as your work gets done, you can adjust your schedule as you see fit.”

2. Styles of communication
An American executive is on a new work assignment in the U.K. One day, he overhears one of his British employees giving wrong information to a secretary about some proposals that are being sent out.


The American goes up to the British worker and corrects him. “You have those contact names completely backwards,” he tells the employee. “The name on the Berlin package is for our contact in Frankfurt and the name on the Frankfurt package is for a firm in Berlin. If these proposals had gone out like this, it would have been a great embarrassment. You need to be a lot more careful in the future, do you understand?”

Why the Confusion?
Both of the above incidents are simple enough so that cultural differences wouldn’t seem to get in the way. However, there are subtle but important cultural factors involved in each case.


In the first, the British worker is simply trying to get permission or approval from his manager to adjust his daily schedule. It is normal in the more hierarchical U.K. for workers to receive clear directions and approval from their superiors. In the more egalitarian and individualistic U.S., however, it is common for workers to have more control over their daily work.


Americans have specified goals and are often expected to use their own discretion in completing their jobs. The British, on the other hand, take more direction from their superiors and are a bit more concerned with conforming to expectations on the job.


In the second incident, the American executive feels a need to let an employee know of his mistake so that it won’t be repeated in the future. The difference between the American and British styles is that an executive in the U.K. is unlikely to scold an individual so publicly.


It is more common in Great Britain to speak to people privately if their work needs to be corrected. To be reprimanded publicly would be quite unusual and may affect workplace relations between the two individuals.



Cartoon by Marc Tyler Nobleman.

Posted on March 1, 2000July 10, 2018

UK Culture Shock

There has been a great deal of publicity of late about the “new Britain.” This has been attributed to such factors as a revived cultural scene in London, the Britons’ growing acceptance of their status as a multicultural, European nation, and even the emergence of Tony Blair as a popular young Prime Minister.


The Boston Globe, for example, recently wrote that Blair s “government has devoted much energy to ‘rebranding Britain, de-emphasizing its imperial past and marketing a Britain that is young, hip and on line.” In just the past year, the British have opened the much-hyped Millennium Dome in London and abolished hereditary seats in the House of Lords.


When these changes are considered along with the already strong historical links between the United Kingdom and the United States, it would be easy for an expatriate to believe that he or she would have no trouble adjusting to life in Great Britain. Other than driving on the left side of the road, of course.


However, there are actually a number of subtle but important differences between the two cultures. Following are some key themes that are helpful to understanding the British.



A more hierarchical society
Although the British monarchy has no real power, it remains symbolic of a structured, aristocratic lifestyle. The fact that the monarchy exists alongside a democratic government is somewhat representative of the tension in Britain between a hierarchical society and a more egalitarian one.


The British are more risk-averse than Americans are. Their culture values security and tends toward the status quo.


Power in the U.K. tends to be more hierarchical. Government power is centralized at the national level. There is no British equivalent to U.S. state governments, although regional legislatures have recently been introduced in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.


In business, power also concentrates in the upper levels. Middle managers tend to have little decision-making authority. Nigel Fielding, a Vice President for New Market Business Development at State Street Bank, says that the hierarchy affects “who you can talk to” in a business environment. “It’s difficult to operate more than one level above your own.


This means you may not always be able to speak to a decision-maker,” says Fielding, a British native who last year returned to London after three-and-a-half years in Boston and another three plus years in Hong Kong.


This hierarchical culture also results in a more structured business environment. This influences the way people act in meetings, the way they speak to each other, and the way they dress. For instance, it is less common for individuals to address each other by first name. Also, the “casual days” that have become a routine part of American corporate life are much less common in the more formal business culture of the U.K.



Class consciousness
Closely related to the hierarchical culture of Britain is the sense of class consciousness that pervades the society.


In a nation that believes in equal rights and has a diverse population, the British seem to place disproportionate emphasis on family and educational background. Although the importance of class is slowly diminishing, there is nevertheless an “old boy” network of government and business leaders who are from wealthy families and who have been educated at the best schools.


Deborah Parker-Fielding, a British native who has lived in the United States, Hong Kong and Switzerland, believes that the old boy network of Great Britain is not so different from that of the U.S., but that the British are much more conscious of class than Americans are. “In the U.K., they talk about it more openly,” she said. “There is also less social mobility. In the U.S., with hard work, it is possible to move up socially. But in the U.K., you are born into a class. You can move up within a class, but it is practically impossible to move to another class just through your work efforts.”


A different but somewhat related issue is that of women in the workplace. There are fewer female executives in Britain’s more traditional society.


John Crees, a British native who has worked for a number of years in the U.S. banking industry, says that one of the most apparent differences between the two countries is the number of American women who hold senior positions in corporations. Other observers have also noted that British society is still more male-dominated.



Less entrepreneurship, more relationship-building
For a country that gave birth to the Industrial Revolution, there is a surprising lack of innovation and entrepreneurship in British society. It does exist, but not to the degree that is common in the U.S. The British and Americans are similar to the extent that they share a belief in individualism. However, the British brand of individualism differs from the American style. The self-made entrepreneur who is so much a part of the American mind does not exist in the same way for the British.


Tim Palmer, a U.S. native who recently spent four years working in London, said he noticed that the British “service culture is quite a bit different.” In addition, many companies don’t take advantage of “simple opportunities to make money” because they are wary of altering their traditional way of doing business, he said.


Fielding made a similar observation, noting that the British “are not always conscious of asking whether we are getting the best deal.” One of the reasons for this, he said, is that “the U.K. is more reliant on relationships.”


The fact that it takes time to build relationships accounts for some of the differences between British and American businesses. For one, the British are more risk-averse than Americans are. Their culture values security and tends toward the status quo.


Because of this, they prefer to take time getting to know another person in an effort to find a better long-term business partnership, whereas Americans are more often interested in securing the best immediate deal.


In addition, the emphasis on relationships accounts for differences in some daily habits, such as the fact that most British businesspeople think nothing of having a beer over lunch in a pub, while many Americans wouldn’t think of drinking during the workday. The difference, most people say, is that the British see the act of sharing a drink as part of the process of relationship-building.



Direct, formal and polite communicators
The British tend to be direct communicators and are not known for speaking in euphemisms. They can be quite honest in their opinions. However, this directness is sometimes masked by the fact that the British are also known to be polite and courteous, almost to a fault.


If they are inconvenienced by a missed deadline or bad service, for example, they may make a polite comment and leave it at that. They may very well be upset, but are not in the habit of showing a great deal of emotion.


In the U.S., however, the situation sometimes appears to be the direct opposite. In conversation, Americans often cushion harsh words with more comforting comments, yet they are more direct about voicing their displeasure in public.


“We call a spade a spade,” says Mrs. Parker-Fielding of the British, “but we’re non-confrontational. We wouldn’t tell someone off in front of others. We’d always take them aside in private.”



English insularity
Perhaps it is the inevitable result of living in an island nation, but the British have traditionally been an insular people. They have not always liked to think of themselves as European, seeing that designation as being reserved for residents of the continent. Also, like Americans, many British citizens do not speak another language.


This insularity has typically extended to individual lives, as well. The British are not given to talking about themselves at great length, there is more of a sense of the importance of personal space, and individuals are not likely to casually invite visitors into their homes.


This insularity does seem to be changing, at least among the younger generations of Britons, who have traveled more extensively and are more aware of the links between the U.K. and other nations. Britain’s participation in the European Union also seems to be changing the country’s sense of its own identity.


While the future is hard to predict, brushing up on your cultural knowledge can go a long way toward helping you do business on both sides of the Atlantic.

Posted on March 1, 2000July 10, 2018

Making Value-driven Decisions

It’s wise to evaluate your decision-making process to ensure your decisions have as positive an impact as possible on your business. Consider these suggestions for making decisions which are both well-timed and reflective of company values:


  • Avoid the decision-making extremes: Knee-Jerk Reactions (acting too quickly without considering alternatives or all the facts) and Paralysis of Analysis (stalling on a decision with too much analysis and research). Remember that no decision is a “no” decision.
  • Involve those who must implement decisions in the decision-making process. Consider the ideas and opinions of those who do the work, because they frequently know best and have a great deal to contribute. In addition, they’ll be more likely to support decisions they help make.
  • Become an In-Sync-Erator. Ensure your decisions are in sync with organizational values before you implement them. If there’s a conflict, pursue alternatives that are a better match with stated values.
  • When announcing a decision, always explain the reason for it as well as the process used to arrive at it.

 


SOURCE: Reprinted with permission: 144 Ways to Walk the Talk. Copyright Performance Systems Corp., Dallas, TX.

Posted on March 1, 2000July 10, 2018

Lessons to Learn from Greg, Debbie, John, and Gary

Excerpted with permission of the publisher Jossey-Bass, a Wiley company, from “The 21st Century Supervisor.” Copyright (c) 2000 by Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer. This book is available at all bookstores, Amazon, and from the Jossey-Bass Web site at www.jbp.com, or call 1-800-956-7739.



We hope you have gained a sense of appreciation and respect for these four leaders. Although each followed a different path to becoming a twenty-first-century supervisor, each path will provide years of opportunities for further success.


Here are the key elements in these stories:


1. Each supervisor made a conscious decision to become a better supervisor. Whether it was going to college (like Greg) or responding appropriately to the challenge presented by another employee (like Gary), each supervisor made a personal choice to become better.


2. Each supervisor possessed a strong commitment to learning. There is no substitute for learning and acquiring more education. Whether in the area of technical skills (such as computers) or social skills (such as coaching or facilitating), learning must be continuous.


3. Each supervisor is committed to continuous improvement. Continuous improvement is not a program or project — it is a lifestyle. If you are committed to continuous improvement, your example will naturally drive others to become better.


There are no easy answers to becoming a twenty-first-century supervisor. But acquiring the people skills, technical skills, and administrative skills will empower you to be a better leader. As you become more and more confident and competent in these three vital skill areas, you will become the kind of leader your company will need in the twenty-first century.

Posted on March 1, 2000July 10, 2018

Five Questions Supervisors Can Ask Themselves

Excerpted with permission of the publisher Jossey-Bass, a Wiley company, from “The 21st Century Supervisor.” Copyright (c) 2000 by Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer. This book is available at all bookstores, Amazon, and from the Jossey-Bass Web site at www.jbp.com, or call 1-800-956-7739.



The frontline leaders presented in here each tell a different story of success. Although their paths have been different, they embody all that is needed to be a twenty-first-century supervisor. Actual job titles may differ from one organization to another, but people who support others and provide leadership qualify themselves for positions of trust in the twenty-first century.


Here are five questions that only you can answer. Be truthful with yourself as you respond to each statement by circling Yes or No.


Yes No 1. I understand all internal reports that are provided to me.


Yes No 2. In the past year I have taken classes on my own time to improve my understanding of business principles, computers, or quality.


Yes No 3. I spend a portion of my day talking with my employees one-on-one to better understand their needs.


Yes No 4. I believe education for supervisors is a never-ending process.


Yes No 5. I am committed to educating my employees on the new things I’m learning.


If you cannot respond yes to all these statements at this time, take heart. As the stories of Greg, Debbie, John, and Gary demonstrate, it is never too late to begin. However, to succeed as a twenty-first-century supervisor, you must make your own decision to seek improvements in your career, just as these four supervisors did. Take a good look at the questions to which you had to answer no and determine today to work on these areas. All the benefits of becoming a twenty-first-century supervisor are waiting for you.

Posted on March 1, 2000July 10, 2018

Testimonies from Four 21st Century Supervisors

Excerpted with permission of the publisher Jossey-Bass, a Wiley company, from “The 21st Century Supervisor.” Copyright (c) 2000 by Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer. This book is available at all bookstores, Amazon, and from the Jossey-Bass Web site at www.jbp.com, or call 1-800-956-7739.



We all need encouragement from time to time, and supervisors are no exception. In your continuous development, visit other companies and see what other supervisors are accomplishing. Observing supervisors who practice people, technical, and administrative skills can be a great educational and motivational experience. A growing number of organizations are learning the benefits of exchanging experiences, ideas, and strategies with other companies and opening their doors to outside tourists.


Although we cannot physically transport you to organizations that are practicing twenty-first-century supervision, we can give you a taste of what it is like to visit other companies. You will meet four supervisors who share their experiences in the never-ending climb to become better supervisors. Their testimonies reflect the character, strength, and skills you must have to be a twenty-first-century supervisor.


These four supervisors do not consider themselves heroes or models. In fact, if you were to sit down with them yourself, you would find each of them very interested in asking about your experiences as a supervisor. They are continually on the lookout for new ideas to help them with their continual development. But don t be fooled by their humility. These individuals have set themselves apart from their peers by demonstrating actions and attitudes that truly reflect the twenty-first-century supervisor.


The four supervisors are at different stages in their careers. Greg is just beginning his career, but he brings to the supervisor role many skills that were once considered skills only managers possessed. Debbie has more than eleven years at the front lines and exemplifies what supervisors in the twenty-first century will look like. She is a living example of the specialized generalist. John has more than fifteen years experience as a supervisor.


However, only in the last three years has he truly realized the advantages of expanding his skills and knowledge. Finally, there is Gary, the most senior in age of the four. His transition from traditional to twenty-first-century supervisor reflects the rewards that often come to those who are students of the continuous improvement and team processes. Together, these four individuals represent a cross section of many supervisors across the United States.


As you read about these supervisors, keep in mind that they are very much like you. They come to work each day to face that day s opportunities, problems, and people. They share many of your same struggles and fears, and they ve all made some mistakes along the way. However, they continue to push ahead in their own education and development.


As you read their stories and the changes they made, think of similar opportunities for your personal improvement. Be encouraged by their words and experiences, and know that the same positive results can happen in your life if you persevere and focus on raising your effectiveness as a frontline leader.

Posts navigation

Previous page Page 1 … Page 446 Page 447 Page 448 … Page 591 Next page

 

Webinars

 

White Papers

 

 
  • Topics

    • Benefits
    • Compensation
    • HR Administration
    • Legal
    • Recruitment
    • Staffing Management
    • Training
    • Technology
    • Workplace Culture
  • Resources

    • Subscribe
    • Current Issue
    • Email Sign Up
    • Contribute
    • Research
    • Awards
    • White Papers
  • Events

    • Upcoming Events
    • Webinars
    • Spotlight Webinars
    • Speakers Bureau
    • Custom Events
  • Follow Us

    • LinkedIn
    • Twitter
    • Facebook
    • YouTube
    • RSS
  • Advertise

    • Editorial Calendar
    • Media Kit
    • Contact a Strategy Consultant
    • Vendor Directory
  • About Us

    • Our Company
    • Our Team
    • Press
    • Contact Us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms Of Use
Proudly powered by WordPress