Category: Archive

Posted on

Dealing with Conflict

Discussion and decision making inevitably lead to conflict.But conflict that’s merely smoothed over alwaysresurfaces in a number of different ways, cutting down productivity. Dealingwith conflicts effectively is vital to the well-being both of the company andthe organization.

Companies who effectively deal with conflict:

·   Value high levels of interaction.

·   Tolerate—even welcome—conflict for the airing ofdifferences.

·   Take a problem-solving approach to conflict.

·   Process the feelings behind statements, as well as thecontent.

·   Wait to proceed with a task until conflict is managedsatisfactorily.

·   Realize that moderately high levels of well-managedconflict result in greater creativity and higher-quality solutions.

SOURCE: Steven H. Larson, “The Behavioral Side ofProductive Meetings,” excerpted from the Workforce Classic Reprint Series “Successful Meetings,”April 1980.

Posted on

Employee Retention Through Mergers & Acquisitions

When a company undergoes a critical transition such as a merger or acquisition, human elements often get lost in the shuffle. One of the most crucial of those overlooked issues is how to retain people who have been instrumental in the organization’s success.


As part of a study titled, “Lessons Learned from Mergers and Acquisitions,” Right Management Consultants recently interviewed a number of executives who had dealt directly with the people side of such events. Their comments on employee retention point to six important principles that can make these transactions more successful:


  1. Decide how critical employee retention really is.
    There is no single formula for measuring the importance of employee retention. As one executive pointed out, “In a lot of … talent-driven firms, what you’re buying is the people, and if you don’t pay attention … you essentially will have spent a lot of money and gained absolutely nothing.” In contrast, another acquisition veteran observed, “I’ve seen acquisitions where the bottom line is that we are acquiring patents, contracts, receivables, and other hard assets … In some acquisitions, the people aspects are less pre-eminent.”


  2. Look for talent in unexpected places.
    One survey respondent warned against focusing too much attention on top management personnel. “They may be key in some respects,” he said, “but (there are) other employees that may actually be more important … They may be the critical technologists, for example, who might represent the value of what you’re actually buying … Worry about retaining them, maybe even more than the top management.”


  3. Recognize that nothing is forever.
    “You’ve got to think about timelines,” explained one executive. “It may be important to retain someone just for a very short period of time, to successfully make a transition, to do a handoff to existing managers in the acquiring firm. You have to get it down to a ‘onesies and twosies’ level, asking, ‘Why is it important to retain this person and for how long?’”


  4. Don’t be too desperate to retain any one person.
    This often occurs when a principal of an acquired company insists that the acquisition agreement guarantees his or her ability to continue calling the shots. If the new management tries to make changes later, the former owner may claim they are reneging on the contract. If such a problem seems possible down the road, you may be better off offering a six-month employment contract with a severance bonus at the end.


  5. Retention bonuses often backfire.
    “For a number of employees, the bonus offer kept them there until the end of the year,” recalled one rueful executive. “Then they left—with the bonus.” Even worse, many good employees who did not receive retention bonuses logically concluded they were not valued. “I think it maybe pushed some people to leave the organization because they didn’t get a bonus,” he observed.


  6. Be open to creative approaches that earn trust.
    Instead of cash bonuses—or in addition to them—many companies demonstrate their commitment to people through tools such as ongoing career management. As one executive put it: “We used to say, ‘Don’t worry, trust us. When the time comes, you’ll get promoted.’ But the whole employee contract is changing and, ‘Trust me, we’ll take care of you’ isn’t good enough anymore.”


Another executive recommends something called “creative redeployment.”
Identify the top performers in the company—perhaps 10 percent of the workforce—and work to retain them, regardless of what happens to the positions they hold. If their job is eliminated, keep them on board and retrain them in a new position. Not only do you keep the best people, you also offer them new opportunities, responsibility and career growth—a “win-win” for both employer and employee.

Posted on

Home Work Area Safety

OSHA won’t be knocking at the average telecommuter’s door anytime in the near future. Still, it’s a good idea to remember that home office space, as well as traditional office space, is prone to fire and other physical hazards. Here’s what to watch for.


Make sure:


  • Pathways are clear and uncluttered. Office furnishings and equipment, file drawers and electrical cords don’t interfere with a fast and easy ability to exit the area.
  • A working smoke detector and fire extinguisher are close by.
  • Adequate electrical outlets are available. A separate circuit breaker may be needed to prevent overloading the existing electrical system. Employees may want to consider a home inspection by their local power utility.
  • Air quality and ventilation are good and adequate means of heating and cooling exist. Home offices can get warm fast with all that equipment buzzing in what is likely to be a small space.
  • Stands and shelves for equipment and reference materials are sturdy and correctly set up.

SOURCE: CCH Incorporated, Riverwoods, IL, January 2000.

Posted on

IDear Workforce-I More Salary Sites

Q

 

Dear Workforce:

 

Thanks for referring me to that BLR comp survey. Now I am trying to find a wage range for a Manufacturing Quality Control Manager located in the Bay Area. I have checked BLR but am unable to locate a job in either report. Can you advise where I might find this information?

 

A

 

Dear Bay Blues:

 

Here’s another BLR section you may want to try:
http://stats.bls.gov/ocohome.htm

 

Also, here are several other sites to check out salaries for your candidates or yourself.

 

SOURCE: Personnel Decisions International, Minneapolis, MN, January 6, 2000 and Workforce Online Editor Todd Raphael, January 12, 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

Deciding What’s Important

Whenever you decide to take initiative at work, it’s important to first weigh the impact of doing so against all the other alternatives available to you. While some initiatives can have tremendous impact on the organization’s bottom line, others may have little or no impact on the company or your co-workers. Use the following guidelines as you decide where to concentrate your own efforts:


  1. What effect does your initiative have on the organization’s bottom line, mission, or strategic objectives? Rank your initiatives based on how strongly they contribute to increasing your organization’s revenues and profit. If you work for a nonprofit organization, consider which initiatives will help you most directly achieve your organization’s mission in the most timely and cost-effective way. Initiatives that approve working conditions and employee morale are also important because they lead to improved financial performance.


  2. Urgency does not necessarily equal importance. Assess urgent tasks first to determine their relative importance and to see where they fit in the overall scheme of your responsibilities. Only then should you react.


  3. Is your initiative someone else’s responsibility? Although you may be tempted to take initiative throughout your organization, in some cases it is best to defer your efforts to the person who is responsible for the particular product, service or process that you wish to address. If this is the case, bring up your ideas or concerns with that person, and then let him or her take the ball and run with it.

Posted on

Avoiding ‘I-9’ Penalties

He was a great hire. Excellent credentials, glowing references, a stellar job interview. Although foreign-born, he graduated with honors from an outstanding U.S. university and his papers appeared to be in order. Your company never had a second thought about hiring him until today.


Today, immigration officers arrived at your office and asked to see documents proving that your new employee is authorized to work for you. You thought you followed all the specified procedures, but now you wish you knew more about the immigration responsibilities of employers.


Here’s a short primer that may help you if you ever find yourself in this situation.


Requirements of the Law.
Included in the Immigration and Nationality Act is section 274A(a). This section provides that it is unlawful for an employer to hire an “alien” (i.e., a non-citizen) knowing that he or she is not authorized to work in the United States. To do so is a “knowing” or “substantive” violation of the law.


It also is unlawful to hire anyone without complying with certain “employment verification procedures.” Section 274A(b) directs each employer to verify that every employee hired after November 6, 1986, is authorized to work in the United States. This obligation applies to citizens and alien job applicants alike.


Verification takes place when the employer and employee complete the “Employment Eligibility Form,” commonly known as form “I-9.” The I-9 serves two functions: First, it allows employers to assist the INS in enforcing the immigration laws. Second, the I-9 may be used as evidence against an employer who fails to properly complete and store the forms, whether or not any of its employees are illegal aliens.


Employers also are liable for any discrimination, whether intentional or inadvertent, that results from an overzealous attempt to comply with the sanctions provisions of the law.


There are a variety of penalties under the law. They begin with penalties for paperwork violations, such as faulty completion of the I-9 form. A simple paperwork violation can result in fines ranging from $100 to $1,000. Considering that a single I-9 may contain multiple violations, and that an employer with a single illegal worker may have committed hundreds of paperwork violations, such fines can be very damaging. For example, Disneyland paid a fine of $260,000 to the INS, even though the company claimed that it never had violated the laws knowingly.


There are additional penalties for “knowingly hiring” an alien or for continuing to employ an alien not authorized to work in the U.S. Fines start at $250 to $2,000 per alien for first violations, and can increase to $10,000 per alien for subsequent violations. Employers also are subject to criminal penalties for a “pattern or practice” of knowing violations which can include jail sentences.


Practical Advice for Employers
In a move to help educate employers, the INS published a “Handbook for Employers.” The booklet is designed to educate employers as to their obligations under the employer sanctions section of the immigration law. It contains the latest version of the I-9 form and walks the employer through the employment verification process.


For all the INS’ efforts, however, the handbook leaves many important questions unanswered, particularly with respect to effective, practical ways that employers can protect themselves from sanctions. The following are some recommendations.


  1. Make certain each I-9 is completed fully, and in a timely manner. Make sure that every new employee completes Section One of the I-9 on his or her first day of employment. By the third day of employment, each new hire must provide acceptable documentation showing identity and employment eligibility, and the employer must complete Section Two of the I-9. An employer who observes these two deadlines already has avoided the most common mistakes.

    The employer need not, and probably should not, examine these documents prior to the date of hire. Asking questions concerning the potential employee’s age and ethnicity may leave the employer open to a charge of discrimination in the event that the candidate is rejected. The courts have ruled that an offer of employment does not constitute a “hire,” and therefore does not require employment verification prior to the commencement of employment.

  2. Keep adequate records. The regulations clearly require employers to retain the original I-9s or a microfiche copy of them. As a safeguard, employers may go one step further and photocopy all documents presented by an employee in support of an I-9, as is permitted, but not required, by INS regulations.

    If a supporting document turns out to be fraudulent, the photocopy will establish that the employer examined the document and that it appeared to be genuine on its face. Since an employer is not required to be a document expert, a photocopy helps to establish that the employer examined the document and had no visual cues to doubt the document’s authenticity. Photocopying the documentation may help to insulate an employer from sanctions liability.

    The employer must examine original or certified rather than photocopied documents in completing the I-9. The courts have ruled that employers must exercise “due care” in accepting documentation and cannot simply accept the representations of an employee regarding employment eligibility.

    Furthermore, the employer should always make a photocopy of the original I-9 and accompanying documents for its own personnel records, separate from the records it keeps in the event of an INS audit. The INS requires inspection of the original documents and is very likely to confiscate the originals in the course of an investigation, leaving the employer and employer’s counsel with no records from which to build a defense.

  3. Establish a system for updating I-9 records. It is prudent to establish a “tickler” system for those I-9s, which require periodic re-verification. A tickler system will avoid any inadvertent failure to update the I-9, a clear violation of the law. Given the volume of I-9 records, a tickler system also will serve to remind the employer to discard outdated I-9s.

    Keep in mind that termination does not necessarily mean that the employee’s I-9 may be discarded immediately. Remember the rule: Maintain the I-9 for three years after hire or one year after termination, whichever comes later.

  4. Segregate I-9 forms from personnel files. It’s a useful precaution to create a separate file for I-9s, apart from standard personnel files. Employers are frequently caught unprepared for I-9 audits, and often must scramble to compile the necessary records. This simple precaution greatly reduces the employer’s burden and anxiety should an audit ever be conducted.

    Moreover, maintaining a separate I-9 file will better serve an employee’s privacy interests and lessen the employer’s liability for failing to protect those interests. Most employers wouldn’t care to have government investigators combing through their personnel files and thereby gain access to confidential information irrelevant to the I-9 audit. In the event of government inspection, counsel should be aware that employers are entitled to three days notice to produce their I-9 forms.

  5. Be judicious in locating the I-9 originals. Designate where you will store your I-9s and who will be responsible for their safekeeping. Retaining I-9s at a central location could pose logistical problems if the INS decides to conduct an inspection at a lone local office. For example, if the INS is auditing a business in Los Angeles but the forms are stored at the company headquarters in another state, the employer still must produce the I-9s for inspection within three days or face monetary penalties.

    This situation illustrates how photocopies of the I-9s and their accompanying documents may be of use. While this courtesy in no way alleviates the employer’s duty to provide the original I-9s for inspection, it does at least show the employer’s good faith compliance with the inspection.

  6. Conduct internal audits periodically. Conduct in-house audits on a regular basis to ensure that you are in compliance with the law. These in-house audits should be conducted by someone who has knowledge of what INS investigators look for when they conduct audits.

    The government recently increased the number of temporary (H-1B) visas that are available to foreign professionals, creating a larger talent pool from which employers may choose. The current labor crunch ensures that U.S. employers will seek qualified candidates wherever they can find them. Therefore, it’s more important than ever to ensure that immigration hiring laws are followed as scrupulously as possible. Awareness of the requirements, and a few simple precautions, should eliminate the risk of penalties should your company incur unwanted INS scrutiny.

The information contained in this article is intended to provide useful information on the topic covered, but should not be construed as legal advice or a legal opinion.

Posted on

The Edsel of Communication

Remember the Edsel the 1957 mid-sized car that Ford introduced with great fanfare, only to be pulled two years and $200 million in the red later? Ford only thought it knew what customers wanted, without verification from customers themselves. The Edsel has come to epitomize how not to market a product.


Look, too, at IBM’s experience from converting to a cash-balance pension plan. In early May 1999, IBM announced that it was considering a cash-balance pension plan for its 141,000 U.S. employees, effective July 1, 1999.


IBM used e-mail and internal Web sites to announce the proposal. The communication highlighted how the new plan would provide incentives for younger employees who tend to have numerous employers during a career.


Many long-term IBM employees became outraged when they discovered their pensions would be reduced by 30 percent to 50 percent when compared to what they expected to receive under the traditional pension plan.


In response, IBM workers established a Web site as a way to communicate amongst themselves, and plan next steps. Because of the “employee revolt,” IBM eventually modified its position. According to an IBM spokesperson: “The change was driven entirely by employees who barraged the company with e-mails and other correspondence, and used the Internet to stoke their collective anger. We heard from enough of them to make the changes.” (Wall Street Journal, 9/20/99).


The fallout from IBM’s decision to switch to a cash-balance pension plan caused the IRS to suspend approving cash-balance plans; led the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to investigate whether cash-balance plans run afoul of federal discrimination laws; and added fuel for a serious union drive among IBM’s’ employees.


Guess which department at Big Blue was marked as the scapegoat? Look at what one article said:


“The mathematically disadvantaged half-wits in HR can’t hold up a conversation on the topic of calculating anything. They are more like used-car salesmen trying to sell a car with a sawdust-filled transmission (my apology to any used-car salesmen as you probably have more integrity than HR).” (Wall Street Journal 6/14/99)


Why isn’t HR listening?
How could this disaster happen? Isn’t HR the leader of “listening to employees”? Before you answer, think about this: You’re planning to revise your employee handbook. Who would you ask to review the new draft before going to press? In asking this question to HR and benefit managers, answers have included HR director, company lawyer, benefit consultant, senior executives, and HR staff.


It’s not by accident that HR executives who are more in touch with employees become more successful.


Aren’t employees missing from this group? The purpose of an employee handbook is to help employees understand policies. Therefore, it makes a lot of sense to review drafts of an employee handbook with employees before implementation. Yet it’s amazing how many companies don’t do it.


To try to find out why HR executives don’t routinely ask employees for their opinions regarding handbooks or benefit changes, I began asking questions to HR managers who attend courses that I teach. I asked what kinds of risks there were in asking employees for their opinions before implementing a new employee handbook or benefit change. The responses were grouped into six identified risks, then ranked by greatest to least amount of risk:


  1. Employees not liking some policies.
  2. Employees taking too much time, thus causing a delay in implementation.
  3. Employees not understanding policies.
  4. Employees becoming argumentative.
  5. Employees offering better ideas.
  6. Employees showing-up management.

No one is blaming HR for taking these risks into consideration asking employees for their reaction is not benign. You can expect resistance. Based on follow-up discussions, HR managers expressed considerable pressure to “get the handbook out” by the deadline.


One manager stated: “In theory it sounds nice to involve employees. However, you don’t know my company’s culture. We must meet deadlines.”


Another manager commented on the difficulty of having to redraft a policy. It can take a lot of time. Other managers were worried about having to respond to angry employees. It was a lot easier and safer just to send out a memo. Besides, who wants to be the messenger?


Great concern also was raised about employees wanting to change a policy or asking a lot of questions. With all these worries, it’s no wonder why HR may be reluctant to share changes with employees.


Ask. There are more benefits than risks.
In contrast, here’s an example of healthy communication between a service and its customers whether they’re internal or external. Microsoft Corp. and Ford Motor Co. created a strategic alliance to develop an online build-to-order system. The system will enable customers to customize their cars and order them on the Internet.


This new business approach is 180 degrees from the traditional approach of auto companies that build cars based on consumer surveys. The problem is consumer surveys aren’t perfect. Consequently, salespeople end up selling cars with some features that customers don’t really want. Or dealers are stuck with hard to sell cars due to unpopular packages or models.


By bringing the Internet into the factory, Ford expects to reduce costs and respond quicker to consumer needs than the current manufacturing and distribution arrangement.


Also, Dell Computer Co. has made a fortune by selling just what the customer wants. You call Dell and tell them what you want in a system. The computer is then configured based on the order. What Dell really did was change the method of communication between itself and its customers.


Now Ford is attempting to do something radical in the car industry. Ford views the new relationship with customers as a way to enhance customer loyalty, sales, and profits. Ford, like Dell, sees advantages in having customers be well-informed and active players in the selection of desired products.


In light of these examples, perhaps HR needs to rethink how to go about doing business. It’s not by accident that HR executives who are more in touch with employees become more successful.


As a mentor told me, the more controversial the change, the greater the need to invest time to involve employees in face-to-face communication before the change. Sometimes changes are initially perceived as take-a-ways or negatives. But the interaction from HR should help employees understand why the change is happening, the positive and negative effects on employees, and how employees can benefit from the change.


The reality is companies need to keep pace with changes and be able to respond to new competition. Change doesn’t have to be feared. Change is inevitable. The key is how change is managed and communicated.


Perhaps some good can come from IBM’s experience. Hopefully, HR executives will see the merit to actively involving employees. The most important thing is for HR managers to ask employees for their opinions before implementing a change, and be willing to respond, even if it means modifying what was initially presented or delaying implementation.


You’ll see that “customizing” policy or benefit changes with the help of employee feedback much the same way that Dell or Ford does with their customers will be worth your while in the long run.

Posted on

A 17-Year Old Talks About His Campaign for the Ohio Senate

Derrick Seaver, who this month becomes old enough to vote, is running for state representative in Ohio’s 85th district, which lies near Dayton and includes Wapakoneta, the hometown of Neil Armstrong.


Seaver talked to Workforce about his campaign plans, his platform and his generation.


 


Workforce: Tell me a little about you. What you’re into.


Seaver:: Well, politics dominates my time, especially these days. However, I enjoy professional athletics and I have a girlfriend who I have been dating for a year and half. I consider myself a pretty popular person and I enjoy all forms of social interaction. It goes with the territory.


 


Workforce: Why are you running? Why are there no other Democrats running?


Seaver:: I’m running for the same reason that I hope all candidates run. I care for the people of the district that I live in and I believe my opinions and viewpoints are good for the district. I feel that now is as good of time as any to express them publicly.


There are four Republicans vying for the position, and their names are Dave Shiffer, Richard Herron, Bill Ross and John Adams. I don’t know much about them individually, except maybe their professions.


No other Democrats are running because of the Republican stronghold on this area. They believe that I am probably what they need to break it, because of the novelty, the free press, and the excitement.


 


Workforce: How are you campaigning?


Seaver:: Lately, I’ve taken my campaign to two fronts.


I have made appearances on the CBS Early Show and the Ohio News Network—’Ohio’s Talking’ program. I have also been included in many newspaper articles and radio shows.


More importantly than the media aspect, I have been scheduled to speak at nine local organizations over the next three weeks. I feel that this is the most important of a campaign that I have vowed to keep on the grassroots and in the hands of the people. I look forward to taking these one day at a time, and spreading my message across the district.


I consider myself a pretty popular person and I enjoy all forms of social interaction. It goes with the territory.


Workforce: Have your opponents acknowledged your presence in the race?


Seaver:: No they haven’t, due to their own primary. They have their priorities set like that, as I would too. (But) the media has been more than good to me, from the local to the national level.


 


Workforce: What do you care about?


Seaver:: Education, abortion, gun rights, agriculture, and campaign finance reform make my “plank.”


I am anti-vouchers, and anti-proficiency testing. I am pro-life, pro-2nd Amendment. I am in favor of extending low-interest deposit loans to small farmers. I am an agricultural preservationist, and oppose most forms of corporate farming. I am in favor of hard campaign finance reform.


 


Workforce: Who will you hire to do constituent services? Other folks in your graduating class?


Seaver:: No, currently I have a five-person committee. The head of that committee is my 34-year old history teacher, who is a life-long conservative Republican.


 


Workforce: If you hire a 40-year-old, or a 60-year-old, will that be a little awkward?


Seaver:: Not at all, those are the kind of people I would like to represent.


 


Workforce: What’s the difference between the people your generation and people in their late 20s and 30s, Generation X? Is there more of a “go-getter” attitude?


Seaver:: People my age tend to me more apathetic, as opposed to the overly politically active people of a generation past. But there are exceptions to both rules. Technology makes politics a lot easier, and I’m pleased to be knowledgeable in it.


 


Workforce: Is the older generation taking you seriously, or are they treating you like a novelty?


Seaver:: The older generation thinks, for the most part, that I am something that all generations need to see. It breaks the apathetic mold of my own generation. The novelty is there, of course, and it is a good thing too.

Posted on

How is the Internet Used for Relocation-related Matters

Results of Atlas Van Lines’ “1999 Survey of Corporate Relocation Policies.”


29%

Internet is not used by this department.

33%

Internet is used by this department, but not for relocation-related matters.

22%

Internet is used to research relocation-related matters, including survey information, real estate, and trailing spouse assistance.

27%

Internet is used to communicate via e-mail with relocating employees, including pre-move and post-move information.

4%

Other

Posted on

Dollars Versus Value Relocating Key People

Relocating an employee or recruit to a new location can be risky. Aside from the stress of the actual physical move, the impact of the transition to a new community is tough on the transferee and often tougher on spouses and other family who come along.


Employers know the costs of losing a good employee because of an unsuccessful relocation. And when the person making the move is a key executive or manager, the stakes for all parties involved can escalate.


Trends show that the push toward a streamlined, no-frills relocation policy during the nineties is giving way to more in the way of full-service transitional support. That can be especially true for a key company person whose position poses weighty questions regarding relocation costs, the privileges of rank, and dollars versus relative value.


Spending more dollars on soft issues.
For the past several years, the average cost of an employee relocation has stood at $45,000 to $50,000. For a variety of reasons for instance, a valuable wine collection, a large house or an antique car the cost of moving a corporate executive often runs well above the average. But the cost of relocation can involve more than just the packing and moving.


Companies increasingly are offering transferees and recruits “soft” services, such as family transitional programs, spousal job-search assistance and support for special needs. Many say they have to offer these benefits to compete with the benefits other corporations are offering.


“What used to be considered soft issues are looked at more often as bottom-line issues today because employers are learning that investing money in a successful relocation can be the smartest and least expensive route in the end,” says Laura Herring, president and CEO of The IMPACT Group, a St. Louis-based firm specializing in global employee relocation assistance services.


“An unsuccessful or traumatic move means loss of productivity, loss of the money invested in this relocation, and possibly the loss of a valuable employee,” she continues. “That’s why companies are starting to respond more proactively to the personal and family dynamics of a move.”


According to Herring, the cost of transitional services provided by an outside consulting firm can run from $650 to $3,000. She adds the relocation assistance industry has seen 20 percent annual growth in providing transitional services for corporate employees.


“The younger segment of the workforce has learned to expect and ask for these kinds of benefits because they’re coming up in a labor market that’s forced to be more accommodating,” says Herring.


More seasoned executives may also be in the position to expect more when it comes to a crucial move, some HR managers say.


“If we are moving one of our executives, that person is usually a seasoned employee someone who’s been here awhile, and who is very valuable to us,” says Sandy Christensen, vice president of Northern Trust Company, a financial services company in Chicago. “That person’s level demands that we review any extra requests with upper management. We don’t always agree to everything, but often we’ll grant reasonable requests because we want the move to go as smoothly as possible for a key person.”


More relocation of your most valuable people.
The current philosophy for a growing number of companies today is that the relative value of a person who is key to the organization makes a successful relocation doubly important.


There’s a growing consensus that the last thing companies need is an employee starting out in a new location with the stress of unsettled family concerns, or any other unresolved issues.


Of the companies that participated in Atlas Van Lines’ most recent corporate relocation survey, 71 percent said they expect the number of relocations by their organizations to increase through the year 2003.


Bill Agopian, human resources consultant for Toyota Motor Sales USA Inc., says he anticipates geography will become a greater issue in relocation negotiations, along with cost-of-living differentials and family and spousal needs.


“People are not so quick to agree to go to a place just because the company asks, like they were years ago,” says Agopian. “HR people today are especially challenged to meet the needs and demands of employees and their families because if they don’t, another employer might. That’s when companies have to decide if they’re willing to make concessions on costs and spending. In the case of a highly valued employee, we look at concerns and do what’s needed, within reason, for long-term solutions.”


Some companies are actually going well outside the lines to insure against the loss of a highly valued employee if the relocation goes bad. For example, it may be written in the employer’s agreement up front that if after one year of employment the employee decides that the move isn’t working, the company will pay expenses to move the employee back to his or her former position and community.


Locate the gray areas.
Many HR and relocation professionals advise that a “living” relocation policy one that can be changed and find-tuned along the way will better serve both company and employee.


A hard, fast policy might feel secure on paper, Agopian notes, but it can be very cumbersome when individual employee situations can vary so widely. “I worked for a wise woman who once said that you write a policy so that you can make exceptions to it,” he says.


It is estimated that about 70 percent of companies are using relocation benefits as a tool in recruiting and retention efforts. Most human resources managers concur that ultimately, what their organizations perceive as the relative value of an employee will drive what they invest in an important relocation.


Workforce, February 2000, Vol. 79, No. 2, pp. 78-80.