Category: Archive

Posted on

Consider Medical Aids When Determining Disability Status

New decisions from the US Supreme Court will limit the scope of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The rulings, which represent a victory for employers, make it clear that people with high blood pressure, poor eyesight, and other common health problems are not covered by the ADA if their conditions can be easily corrected.


Mitigating factors.
Whether or not an individual is disabled under the ADA should be determined by reference to measures (such as eyeglasses, contact lenses, or blood pressure medication) that mitigate the individual’s impairment, the US Supreme Court ruled, 7-2, in a pair of high profile cases. The Court rejected the approach taken by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Department of Justice, both of which have issued guidelines instructing that persons be judged in their uncorrected or unmitigated state.


Both cases before the Court involved individuals who could function the same as individuals without similar impairments. In Sutton v. United Air Lines (Dkt No. 97-1943), United did not hire applicants whose eyesight, without glasses, failed to meet the company’s minimum standard for international pilots; the pilots who applied had uncorrected 20/200 vision. Similarly, in Murphy v. United Parcel Service, Inc. (Dkt No. 97-1943), an individual with high blood pressure was disqualified from a mechanic job that required limited driving.


Individualized inquiry.
The EEOC/DOJ guidelines run directly counter to the individualized inquiry required by the statute, according to the majority opinion. Disregarding corrective measures creates a system in which persons would often be treated as members of a group having similar impairments, and deprives courts and employers of an opportunity to consider any negative side effects resulting from the use of mitigating measure–even when those side effects are very severe.


Also significant to the majority was the Congressional finding that 43 million Americans have one or more physical disabilities. That finding requires the conclusion that Congress did not intend to bring under the ADA’s protection all those whose uncorrected conditions amount to disabilities, said the majority, because that group would include more than 160 million people.


Artificial measures vs. natural compensating.
In a third case released the same day, the Court clarified that when gauging the existence of a disability, mitigating measures must be taken into account whether the measures are undertaken with artificial aids (like medications and devices) or with the body’s own systems. That case involved a truck driver whose vision was effectively monocular. (Albertson’s, Inc. v. Kirkingburg, SCt Dkt No. 98-591)


The driver’s ADA claim was allowed by a lower court because the manner in which he sees differs significantly from the manner in which most people see. The Supreme Court noted that people with monocular vision “ordinarily” will meet the ADA’s definition of disability. However, the Court criticized the appeals court for appearing to suggest that it need not take account of a monocular individual’s ability to compensate for the impairment, even though the appeals court acknowledged that the driver’s brain subconsciously had done just that. The Supreme Court said that some impairments may invariably cause a substantial limitation of a major life activity but held that monocularity is not one of them. Rather, monocular individuals must offer evidence of the extent of the limitation in terms of their own experience.


SOURCE: CCH Incorporated is a leading provider of information and software for human resources, legal, accounting, health care and small business professionals. CCH offers human resource management, payroll, employment, benefits, and worker safety products and publications in print, CD, online and via the Internet. For more information and other updates on the latest HR news, check our Web site at http://hr.cch.com.


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

Filling Jobs Is Only the Beginning

As we go to press this month, the national unemployment rate is just 5.2 percent. In Orange County, California—the labor market that most affects our ability to fill jobs—the rate is an incredible 2.5 percent. I’ll let you imagine some of the candidates that we’ve interviewed.


Employment statistics have dominated the business headlines for months. For all practical purposes, we’re living in an era of full employment. Many experts argue that those who are without jobs at this point are unemployable—permanently outside the job market.


But even that’s beginning to change. Recent studies show single mothers and young African-American men—groups that never before have seen the real rewards of even our greatest prosperity—are entering the workforce in record numbers. Now comes news that even ex-convicts are being offered jobs. Sherwood Ross, a business writer for Reuters, reports that more than 400 companies are hiring through the Federal Bureau of Prisons.


All of this is good news. It means that the economy is continuing to grow, and that, at last, everyone in society may benefit from that growth. It also means that many previously unemployable people will get job training and experience, which will help alleviate the looming long-term labor shortage.


That’s if—and this is a big if—we do the right things now. We can’t simply extend the reach of our candidate sourcing efforts and then breathe a collective sigh of relief when jobs are filled. And yet that’s often what’s happening.


As people are brought into the workforce who have no job skills and no job experience, it’s a fact that most of them lack the skills they need to succeed. That seems logical, doesn’t it? What doesn’t seem logical is that expenditures on training are pretty flat.


Once again, we’re falling victim to our own propensity for short-term solutions. Fill the jobs and we’ll worry about the rest later. The problem is that in today’s business climate, “later” is never very long from now.


Much of what we’re seeing, I think, is a reflection of the belief that the current labor shortage will just go away sometime soon. It won’t. We’ll be much better off if we make a deliberate decision now to invest in training, development, communication, and more.


Part of our focus should be on what we’ve traditionally labeled as “soft skills,” too. As Shari Caudron makes crystal clear in her story on emotional intelligence, it’s the soft skills that actually are better predictors of job success.


I realize that my suggestion is a lot like asking a driver to change his flat tire while the car is still zooming down the freeway. How are we to address such massive training when we’re still dealing with sexual harassment, new technologies and, yes, even employee sabotage?


The answer, I think, is to accept that we will reach some of our destinations later than we planned or than we may like. But if we don’t stop to address the issues, then we surely won’t ever get where we’re going. We can only drive with a flat tire for just so long before we are overrun or forced off the road. That moment is imminent.


Workforce, July 1999, Vol. 78, No. 7, p. 8.


Posted on

Tips If You’re Considering Offshore Moves

When your company explores the possibility ofmoving operations to another country, there are myriad issues to ponder. Hereare crucial elements to consider: 

  • Tap into your network to draw on the expertise of other organizations about the legalities and challenges they’ve faced when they employed people outside the United States.
 
  • Benchmark against experienced, competitive-practice companies to see if they’ve chosen to source labor overseas and what they have done to make it successful. See if you can find colleagues to speak with.
 
  • Remember that wages aren’t the only issue. Be sure you have access to the kind of labor force that has the skills your company needs. You don’t want to be surprised that the skills you need aren’t available.
 
  • Approach the experience with an attitude of caution. Adopt a “toe-in-the-water” perspective to become familiar with offshore markets. You might start with a joint venture or subcontractor to build your experience in the area.
 
  • Hire qualified people from the time you begin staffing your operations.
 
  • Consider moving only a part of your work overseas as you ease into the new location.
 
  • Remember the basics – learn about compensation, culture, language, laws and tax regulations before you start operations in other countries.

Workforce,July 1999, Vol. 78, No. 7, p. 52  SubscribeNow!

 
Posted on

Moving Jobs to Offshore Markets Why It’s Done, and How It Works.

You know the seamy images, the squalidstereotypes. There’s nothing pretty about sweatshops in Latin America or childlabor in Africa. There’s nothing pleasing about downsizing American jobs andmoving them so work can be performed more cheaply elsewhere.


    Daily, we read aboutcompanies that are moving offshore to take advantage of cheaper labor in anynumber of industries: apparel, toys, electronics, small equipment. There’sevidence of it everywhere, and it’s clear that searching worldwide forpersonnel – as well as production capability – isn’t a new phenomenon. It’sjust occurring at a fast-forward pace in this increasingly borderlessmarketplace.


    But consider this:Those dramatic images are only part of an intricate puzzle of possibilities whenlabor moves from shore to shore in the global marketplace. When you think aboutmoving jobs overseas, the focus is often on those who are losing jobs in theUnited States and on the negative impact American businesses may have in othercountries. But, like puzzle pieces that form an integrated whole, it sometimestakes a little distance, some perspective, and a different outlook to view theentire picture and see the positives along with the negatives. Of course, thefollowing discussion assumes that the companies seeking labor abroad areresponsible and ethical in their treatment of both U.S. and foreign workers.


    Contrary to popularthought, moving labor offshore isn’t all bad. In fact, it’s often very goodfor business. As jobs move offshore from the United States, they not only allowU.S. manufacturers to procure cheaper labor abroad, but they also free up talentwithin the U.S. that can be reskilled and used elsewhere in this tight labormarket. Furthermore, it’s not only the U.S. that’s moving jobs. At the sametime we move jobs offshore, so do other countries whose businesses are lookingfor lower-priced workers. In many cases, some of them, such as Japanese andGerman automakers, move into the U.S.


    Indeed, today’srealities intertwine strategic business and financial goals with complicatedhuman resources issues. This requires looking at HR management from a macroperspective. HR may find itself responsible for such tasks as: reallocatingtalent to needed positions, integrating offshore employees in ways that makesense to the overall goals of the company, and creating training that will helpdisplaced American workers learn new skills while accomplishing business needs.


    “It’s a verycompetitive world now, and if you want to stay in business, you have to look atthe cost of doing business and the cost of labor from that perspective,” saysPatrick Morgan, global staffing manager for San Francisco-based Bechtel Corp.“In my mind, global sourcing of workers is the next level of outsourcing. Infact, you can see it as a competitive advantage.”


 


This isn’t new
   Jobs migrating in search of cheaperlabor has been happening for decades. The kinds of jobs that migrate used to bethe ones that were low-skilled and labor intensive, such as assembly of smallappliances, apparel and agriculture. However, with the dearth of available labortoday, some jobs that are being moved overseas are more highly skilled, such aspositions within the information technology sector.


“TheUnited States has been losing textile workers for the last five decades,” saysKen Goldstein, economist for The Conference Board, based in New York City.“[American business] started moving jobs out of textile mills in Massachusettsand into South Carolina in the 1930s when it became apparent that businessescould find workers who could do the jobs and also get them to work for lessmoney per hour. After that, jobs started migrating to other countries, as well.


    “What’s going on in the ’80s and’90s,” Goldstein continues, “is that companies can find people in Hondurasor Belize who can do the work for even less. It actually costs less to haveclothes sewn and stamped in Honduras and then shipped to the United States thanto have the work performed in South Carolina and shipped to a [domestic] outlet.It’s the same as it’s always been, but now it’s between at least two orthree international borders.”


    In fact, many jobs first migrated toMexico. But there was such demand for labor in textiles and agriculture that itdrove up the cost of Mexican wages, and the jobs moved to other countries.Similarly, in Europe, jobs usually go to East Germany, and when they get tooexpensive, they move to Bulgaria and the Ukraine. In Asia, when they leaveJapan, they go to Korea and to Indonesia or Malaysia. The migration is a globalphenomenon.


    The reason? In post-industrialsocieties, such as the U.S., Japan and Western Europe, it’s simply tooexpensive today to perform low-tech, labor-intensive work. The jobs then moveoffshore, and the ones that remain tend to have their wage rates driven down tothe going rates in the global marketplace.


 


Working with the puzzle pieces
   There’s a concept called creativedestruction, in which new situations are enabled because old conditions aredestroyed, which makes room for change. You can think of it like a good puzzle;the challenge is to continually move pieces around to make room for others,which will complete the design. In this business case, when one industry goesout of business in a particular country, the money and the workforce getrefocused elsewhere.


    Here’s the way it works. As early asthe late 1950s, the United States had roughly 20 million blue-collarmanufacturing workers in a workforce of about 60 million. Today, those 20million blue-collar manufacturing workers are in a workforce of about 130million. Essentially, for over a generation, the only workers who found jobs inthese blue-collar factories were the first sons who replaced their fathers. Thesecond and third sons, and all the daughters, went to work in other industries.Because of the change in needs, the workforce had its energy refocused frommanufacturing to service.


    At the same time, when you look at thejob creation rate in the United States in the last few years, you find thoserates are higher than the job creation rates in a lot of other countries.“You’ve had a much freer mobility of these jobs than you would’ve hadpreviously,” says David Lewin, Neil Jacoby Professor of Management, HumanResources and Organizational Behavior at the Anderson School of Business atUCLA. In other words, workers are more assured of jobs because more jobs arebeing created. “By the same token, the American workforce has benefited by themovement of jobs to the States by many other countries, especially Japan andGermany,” says Lewin. “There’s also been a great rate of job expansion inthe U.S. fueled by startups and the newer entrepreneurial ventures.”


    According to Lewin, the United Statesis adding approximately 3 million jobs a year, thus increasing total employmentby 3 million on a base of about 130 million. This is a 3 percent to 4 percentincrease a year, whereas European job creation rates are 0 percent or 1 percent.“You find a much more fluid labor market in the United States,” says Lewin.“A lot of companies – both domestic and international – are attracted byemployees who easily move from job to job because it means that if there’s adownturn in demand, or other changes occur where you’d want to reduce yourworkforce, you’re able to do that with few obstacles.” The stringent laborregulations in many other nations won’t allow employers to terminate employeeswithout severe consequences.


 


How do jobs move?
   For jobs to migrate, two interlockingparts of the puzzle have to be present. First, although these are low-tech,labor-intensive and relatively low-skilled jobs, there must be a sufficientlyskilled workforce to accomplish the work. Then this labor force must have wagelevels that are low. Interestingly, the lower-wage jobs are always the mostvulnerable to migrate. So the process is a continuous one.


    Two types of jobs are less susceptibleto migration. One kind requires a highly skilled workforce, such as high-tech orscientific endeavors. The other, less vulnerable jobs are sufficientlycustomized so that operations need to be near the place where the product orservice is actually going to be used.


    For example, in Birmingham, Alabama,where a lot of customized steel is manufactured, companies are less susceptibleto job loss even though long rolls of standard steel can be manufacturedanywhere and shipped to the U.S. This is because specialty steel is cut to thecustomer’s request and is difficult to move. It’s easier to keep the productnear the customers, and therefore, the jobs stay put.


    The automotive industry, for instance,provides an example of how labor and manufacturing are part of a complex web ofactivity. Instead of manufacturing being done exclusively offshore, someautomotive parts are manufactured in Detroit and Dearborn, Michigan, thenshipped to Mexico where processing and assembly occurs, then shipped back tohave other items completed and to be stamped, “Made in the USA.” This alsohappens in the electronics industry, and even in some kinds of agriculture(although most of these jobs remain completely outside the U.S.).


 


Issues for domestic and internationalHR
    “The point is we’ve freed up laborfrom some processes in this creative destruction process, and in turn, not justcreated new jobs, but new services that people hadn’t thought of before anddidn’t even know that they wanted,” says The Conference Board’s Goldstein.“It’s irreversible. It’s not going to go back to the way it was, and allwe can do is argue about whether we can or should speed it up or slow itdown.”


    It becomes HR’s responsibility tohelp all workers change – to adapt to the new global business environment and toreskill to be valuable in the organization.


    “A positive argument can be made thatwhen companies follow these macroeconomic trends and go offshore, they create ablessing in disguise. First, they release talented, able workers into this tightlabor market. Human resource staffs within organizations can make more efficientuse of their skills. Secondly, this allows U.S. workers in low-skilled jobs tobe allocated to other areas where there’s a higher demand,” says Diego J.Veitia, chairman and CEO of Winter Park Florida-based International AssetsHolding Corporation.


    The key, of course, is training thedomestic workforce. And HR must play a role that continually allows theworkforce to learn and build their talents for the changing global organization.Twenty years ago, there were draftsmen with pencil drawings. Unless they learnedhow to do the same function on the computer, they were no longer employed.


    Another critical issue is where and howto use talented people. Bechtel Corp. is one company that’s been dealing withsourcing labor in unique ways. The company forms teams for projects that finishquickly, and then the groups are demobilized when the undertaking isaccomplished. For example, they have copper and gold mines in Chile.Historically they’d do all the engineering, design and equipment purchase inthe U.S. and send construction people to work with employees in Chile to build aplant. These days, Bechtel does the conceptual engineering in the United States,and hires Chilean mechanical and electrical engineers to do all the detailengineering in Chile.


    There are advantages to this approach,beyond the lower-priced labor. “When you start with a clean sheet of paper,you can leapfrog technology and go to the state-of-the art instead of simplybuilding on what’s already in place,” says Morgan. “It’s gotten to thestage where some of the people doing the work are so experienced that we’rebringing them to San Francisco so they can help us move to the next stage. Infact, some of the local engineers often give you a better product because theyunderstand what’s going on locally.”


    However, communicating with your staffis crucial to a successful endeavor. You want to explain the reasons whyyou’re considering moving labor and emphasize that it doesn’t necessarilymean jobs will be lost in the United States (unless that’s the case). Explainthe strategic plans and the need for individuals to develop their skill sets.


    And remember that communication ismultidirectional. In other words, you need to listen to what’s coming backfrom employees. What are their concerns? What are their reactions? Have amechanism built in to address those worries, which usually focus on the fear oflosing their jobs. Listen. And respond.


    Certainly, with the complicated,intertwined succession of global mobility leading to dissolution and creation ofjobs, the role of HR is central. Having a more complete understanding of all thepuzzle pieces can help HR professionals position and communicate offshorestaffing as a positive rather than a negative solution. And that’s somethingthat ultimately moves the workforce and the organization closer to globalizationand the emerging world economy.


Workforce, July 1999, Vol.78, No. 7, pp. 50-55  SubscribeNow!

Posted on

How to Prescribe Drug Testing

Few things are more potentially devastating to a workplace than an employee with a drug or alcohol problem—and few things are more difficult to prove. With the heightened awareness of privacy issues, instituting a drug-testing policy can land a company on shaky legal ground. Yet such a policy can be useful. Many experts consider the decrease in positive employment-related drug test results as a sign that employees take testing seriously. If your company does drug testing, or wants to implement a program, Nancy Bertrando, chair of the employment law department for Greenberg Glusker Fields Claman & Machtinger LLP in Los Angeles, offers some rules.


How common is drug use in the workplace?
SmithKline Beecham Corp., one of the primary testing agencies based in Philadelphia, has an interesting study. In 1987, its statistical information showed that in employment-related testing, 18.1 percent of those tested showed positive drug use. In 1997, only 5 percent of approximately 5 million employment-related tests came back positive. I think, in part, that’s a sign that drug-testing programs are working.


Almost 98 percent of Fortune 200 companies have drug-testing policies. As more employers implement drug-testing policies, it seems to have an effect on drug use in the workplace. As far as the drugs of choice in these tests, according to SmithKline, 60 percent of positive tests are for marijuana, 16 percent of positive tests are for cocaine, and opiates make up 9 to 10 percent.


How difficult is it to conduct legally defensible drug testing?
A lot of it depends on the state. In California, for example, there’s tension between privacy rights of employees and rights of employers to test. The California state constitution contains an individual right to privacy which has been applied fairly rigorously to drug testing, so it’s hard to implement random testing in California. Unless it’s a safety position or there are some real signs that drug use is going on, employers in that state don’t have the right to test current employees. Random testing is a risk in many states [for similar reasons]. Even if a company already has a drug-testing policy, HR should look at the state law—especially if it’s an employer that has multiple state offices. Make sure the state supports random testing. And be cognizant of state laws concerning privacy.


What does a good drug policy have?
At a minimum, a policy should prohibit the use, possession, sale or transfer of illegal drugs in the workplace. Most employers have that. It doesn’t say drug testing may be implemented, but it says drugs and alcohol won’t be permitted and no one is allowed to work under the influence. More detailed policies are going to prohibit the use, possession, sale or transfer of illegal drugs on or off company time. That kind of policy brings privacy issues into play.


In certain jurisdictions, you have to be very careful of a policy that’s going to regulate your employees’ time away from the company. The conflict is privacy—regulating off-duty hours that don’t affect the workplace. There’s going to be a conflict created by that. Somebody terminated because of off-premises drug use that doesn’t affect the workplace may well have a claim for invasion of privacy. California’s privacy consideration is unique in that it’s part of the constitution, but even if other states don’t have constitutional privacy rights, they will have common-law developments that deal with the same issues.


How do you decide which side wins in drug testing vs. privacy?
In any of these balancing acts, you’ll look at workplace safety vs. employee privacy, and if you have safety or security issues, you’ll have much more latitude implementing drug testing with those types of employees—a forklift driver versus an accountant, for example. Also, prohibiting work under the influence of drugs or alcohol, even if the employee didn’t use it on company property, is a valuable and enforceable policy in any jurisdiction. But with those policies, employers must be cognizant of their obligations under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which, although it doesn’t protect employees from use of illegal drugs, it does protect them from discrimination once they’ve been rehabilitated.


Is an employee protected by the ADA if he or she hasn’t been rehabilitated?
The ADA will only protect them in instances in which they’ve been rehabilitated. The ADA has specific qualifiers that current users of drugs aren’t protected, but former users of drugs—individuals participating in or completing drug programs—are a different story.


Let’s talk about different types of drug testing policies, starting with pre-employment. Many employers have drug testing as a condition of employment. Done properly, that type of testing will be allowed. So a lot of employment applications say that hiring will be effective upon completion of a drug test. If you’re going to do pre-employment testing, employers want to be sure prospective employees have been given notice of this, that all applicants are treated similarly, and that testing is conducted by a reputable lab that respects each individual’s rights of privacy. The applicant should have the opportunity to explain positive test results. Generally, these tests will be upheld if they’re done right.


What about random drug testing?
In safety-sensitive environments, random drug testing will be upheld. Random drug testing for companies that aren’t safety-sensitive, like accounting, is going to be much more difficult because there’s the argument that the employer has violated the right to privacy. It’s the biggest area of vulnerability to employers. If your industry is covered by federal regulations that provide for drug testing, or if an employee is in a sensitive position or in a position in which use could result in the employee’s death or death of others, random testing will probably be OK. But this is a risky area for employers.


What about testing for “reasonable suspicion?”
When a supervisor determines an employee is acting improperly and elects to implement drug testing, that’s liable to be challenged based on privacy. According to SmithKline, last year, 73 percent of employees sent to them for “reasonable-suspicion” testing were clean. All those employees have cases for invasion of privacy, infliction of emotional distress and so on.


It’s particularly important in reasonable-suspicion testing to make sure managers are well trained to understand signs of potential drug abuse: bloodshot eyes, frequent sniffling, tremors, sunglasses worn indoors, profuse perspiration, appearing confused, refusing to talk, talking too loudly, mood swings, lack of coordination, aggressive or violent behavior, frequent unreported absences, unexplained disappearances during work time, difficulty remembering tasks and lapses in concentration. But managers need to be trained to look for all these signs, things that taken together would give reasonable suspicion of drug use. The more objective information you have to support a drug test, the better off you’ll be in defending a challenge to it. Also, always put employees on notice—don’t just tell them one day that they seem like they’re on drugs. They have to be tested.


What if a drug test shows up positive for prescribed legal drugs, but drugs that can affect performance, like sedatives?
Drugs for depression or other mental conditions get into some more of the ADA issues. Employers can’t discriminate against an employee for taking a medically prescribed drug for a condition. And once the employer has knowledge of that condition, the employer has to worry about potentially violating the ADA if the company takes action. Mental illnesses like depression are covered under the ADA. Employers need to be cognizant of their obligations under the ADA. So only certain banned substances should be looked at.


How do new state laws that allow marijuana use for certain conditions fit in here?
For those laws in California and Arizona [that support] medical-need marijuana use, the ADA comes into play. If the person is in a safety-sensitive position and marijuana use could hurt the employee or others, there’s no obligation to reasonably accommodate.


For employers currently implementing a policy, how much warning should they give employees?
If the testing isn’t based on a particular incident, they can implement today and start testing within a month or two. If it’s a particular individual you want to test, first objectively document the information that supports testing. Make sure the proper homework is done. Then send the employee to a reputable lab—hopefully with he or she having been on warning already. Also, don’t tell anyone that doesn’t have to know about the employee being tested.


And if the results are positive?
The employee should have the ability to explain any positive results. For current drug use, the ADA isn’t going to prohibit you from terminating somebody if you feel that it’s warranted under the circumstances. Some states require employers to accommodate an employee’s request for unpaid time off for rehab. If an employee requests time off, the best thing is to work with that employee. If the employee isn’t willing to face the issue, then you may have no option but to terminate. But from various perspectives, it may be in everyone’s best interest to allow an employee time for rehabilitation because if a good employee is saved, everyone benefits.


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 legal opinion.


Workforce, January 1999, Vol. 78, No. 1, pp. 107-109.


Posted on

American Express Taps into the Power of Emotional Intelligence

Long before psychologist and former New York Times reporter Daniel Goleman published his international bestseller, Minneapolis-based American Express Financial Advisors (AEFA) already had tapped into the power of “emotional intelligence.”


In 1992, AEFA researched why only 28 percent of customers the company advised had purchased life insurance. The official answer, it seemed, had little to do with policy coverage and cost. Rather, there appeared to be a direct correlation between the emotional intelligence of the company’s financial advisors and business success. It was hypothesized that if financial decisions are driven by emotion (pride, trust, a sense of security), and not just facts and figures, then developing the emotional competence (EC) of financial advisors just might drive more insurance policies.


Financial advisors who became more receptive to a client’s emotions were better able to discuss the relevance of a life insurance policy. For example, a financial advisor might not only talk about financial goals, but also how they can work together as a team, which helps build the client’s trust.


One year later, the company launched a program designed to help managers develop a greater awareness of their own emotional reactions and those of their clients, and to more fully appreciate the role of emotion in the workplace.


Kate Cannon is AEFA’s former director of leadership development and president of Minneapolis-based Kate Cannon and Associates, a consulting and training firm in the area of emotional intelligence. She says the EC program was developed to help leaders carry the company into the future. “So much had changed, we needed leaders who could support the business—leaders who were flexible and adaptable, who could develop relationships. There was a whole set of new characteristics that turned out to be based on emotional competencies.”


The company went through an evaluation process to identify the appropriate competency model. The in-house psychologist and program officers then developed a program covering all five domains of emotional intelligence: self-awareness, self-management, interpersonal effectiveness, social skills and empathy.


A follow-up experiment found that, as a group, the 60 or so financial planners who went through the original program outperformed their associates hands-down. “There’s a lot of emotion around the financial planning process,” says Pam Smith, program manager for the company’s Emotional Competence Program. “One way to build a better relationship with clients is to understand what emotions are driving their decisions.”


Soft-skills training creates better managers.
A more recent evaluation study suggests that participation in the program has contributed to an increase in sales revenue. For example, advisors of managers trained in emotional competence grew their businesses by 18.1 percent compared to 16.2 percent for those whose managers were untrained. “Individuals who have gone through our program have certainly seen that emotional competence applies not only to their professional lives, but to their own personal growth and development,” says Smith.


In fact, 88 percent of AEFA leaders who have completed the training say EC is important to job performance. And a July 1998 survey of human resources professions at Fortune 1000 companies would seem to concur that interpersonal skills are vital to an organization’s overall success. The survey, conducted by the Memphis-based communications firm O’Connor Kenny Partners, asked HR directors to rank the importance of training in 10 different communication skills. Interpersonal skills ranked highest, along with such other emotional competencies as listening and persuasion.


As of January 1996, every new financial advisor at AEFA must complete an emotional competence program as part of the training at the American Express Financial Advisors University in Minneapolis. The six-day session starts with how to recognize and talk about emotions, and how emotions affect people, especially in the workplace. Scattered throughout the rest of the program are courses on relationships and communication skills, and work/family balance. “We focus on creating greater success in our personal and professional lives through learning more about ourselves and communicating better with others,” says Smith.


Program costs can vary from business to business.
AEFA now employs more than 8,000 individuals and 9,000 advisors, and holds more than $210 billion in assets in the financial services industry. And since 1992, the company has provided training to roughly half of its field and leadership teams. Still, it often takes months or even years before someone effects change to his or her behavior. Ideally, you want employees to try out their new behavior on the job where it really counts. In the past at AEFA, it’s been a one-shot deal—a six-day training session and zero follow-up. Only recently have efforts been made by senior executives to incorporate EC training into some sales conferences and some quarterly performance reviews.


Still, the cost for setting up the program isn’t cheap. Cost per person can average anywhere from $100 to $1,500, based on the duration of the program and the instructor (and that’s not counting the millions of dollars American Express spent to implement the program). Advisors typically pay for the cost of the program, while the company subsidizes the course entirely for employees. “But that’s a relatively small investment compared to the potential return,” says Cannon. “In my 25 years of going through a million training programs, EC is the only one I know that has a positive impact. It produces behavioral changes at an individual level, which has an impact on everyday life.”


Last year, American Express conducted an extensive survey on employees who have gone through the program. More than 90 percent said the training was relevant to their jobs, and more than half of those surveyed said the training had a “significant” impact on business.


As author Goleman points out in his book, Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ (Bantam Books, 1995), workplace rules are changing and everyone’s being judged not just by how smart they are, but also by how well they handle themselves and others. It’s a lesson clearly articulated at the corporate offices of American Express.


“You can change your emotional competence over a lifetime through purposeful activities, maturity and experience,” says Smith. “That’s why our leaders are trained first on emotional competence—so they can be more effective in relationships that benefit everyone—employer, employee and client.”


Workforce, July 1999, Vol. 78, No. 7, pp. 72-74.


Posted on

Making Emotional Intelligence Work

Training employees on the topic of emotional intelligence isn’t the same as plopping people down in front of computer screens and teaching them how to use, say, Microsoft Office 2000 . Teaching someone to be emotionally competent can be a long process, taking weeks of time, hours of practice and lots of patience and coaching. It’s an endeavor that invades personal territory while improving professional performance. In short, it’s an adventure into both the heart and the mind. Many organizations that take the plunge experience many positive benefits, for employees and for their organizations.


EI training is an emerging trend.
Emotional intelligence training is just now blipping on the training radar screen. “It’s so small that we’re not really picking it up,” says Laurie Bassi, vice president of research and enterprise solutions at the American Society for Training and Development (ASTD), based in Alexandria, Virginia. So far, training that’s specifically pegged as “emotional intelligence” hasn’t emerged as a category, although aspects of soft-skills training, such as interpersonal communications, have been on the training agenda for years.


Yet Bassi sees it as a growing category. Daniel Goleman, the EI guru and author of Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ (Bantam Books, 1995) and Working with Emotional Intelligence (Bantam Books, 1998), spoke at ASTD’s recent conference in Atlanta, Georgia.


Although there’s growing interest in the topic, corporate trainers, in general, aren’t pouncing on emotional-intelligence training over other skill areas. “What people are saying and what they’re actually doing are two different things,” notes Bassi. “If you ask HR people, they’ll say, ‘These skills are more necessary than ever. We give them high priority.’” Yet, from ASTD’s measurements on what training activities companies are spending the most money on, it’s primarily technical and computer-related skills. “That may be because the demands for computer literacy and skills are even more overwhelming right now,” adds Bassi.


According to The Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations—which was founded in 1996 in conjunction with Goleman and the Graduate School of Applied and Professional Psychology at Rutgers University in Piscataway, New Jersey—there are thousands of consultants and HR professionals who are engaged in efforts to promote social and emotional competencies in employees.


The mission of the Consortium, whose members are from such organizations as American Express Financial Advisors, Johnson & Johnson and Egon Zehnder International, is to aid the advancement of research and practice related to emotional intelligence in organizations. Its mandate is to study all that is known about EI in the workplace, including identifying ways in which EI may traditionally have been taught as soft skills, but can now be identified under other rubrics, such as management and executive development, stress management and diversity courses.


The Consortium has identified 14 empirically supported models of best practice for developing emotional intelligence in the workplace. The Consortium also has developed a set of practice guidelines for organizations that want to excel in this area. (Find these models and guidelines at the Consortium’s Web site at www.eiconsortium.org.) The guidelines are based on an exhaustive review of the research on training and development in organizations, behavior change, and social and emotional learning.


Different than other types of training.
Although emotional intelligence training comprises the best of any other good training program, there are important differences. This material isn’t touchy-feely, EST-like fluff. Social and emotional learning is different from cognitive and technical learning, and it requires a different approach to training and development. Developing emotional competence requires learners to unlearn old habits of thought, feeling and action that are deeply ingrained and learn new ones. Such a process takes motivation, effort, time, support and sustained practice.


“It’s fundamentally about behavior change,” says Kate Cannon, president of Kate Cannon & Associates, Inc., based in Minneapolis. It’s similar to other kinds of soft-skills training, but it’s very different from technical training.


And in EI training, it’s often good to give learners time during the training for a fair amount of personal time. “This kind of training is often new to them, so it’s important for them to have moments of down time not only when they learn, but when they’re able to reflect on what they’re learning and what the impact is on them,” says Cannon. “Some people may think that’s a waste of time.” But she explains that because it’s important for people to absorb this material and get to points of mastery with it, it can take longer for people to “get it” than other types of training. Even when people may understand the material cognitively, it can take some time for them to be able to internalize it and change their behavior.


Basic elements of good EI training.
According to The Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations, the optimal process for developing EI in organizations is by following these four steps: 1) preparing for change, 2) training, 3) transfer and maintenance and 4) evaluating change.


A good training program on this topic should have all the elements of a good adult-learning program, such as appealing to different learning styles. A typical program might incorporate visual, sensory, auditory and interactive elements—such as role playing and group discussion.


When Cannon trains a group in EI, she sticks to three basic elements: theory, practice and application. That means she provides the background on what EI is and why it’s important in the workplace, she teaches skills people can use to become more emotionally intelligent, and finally, she helps people apply those tools to their own situations and needs. Training sessions on emotional intelligence can range from a few hours to one day sessions, and up to five days, spread out over several weeks.


Much of emotional-competence training centers around giving people techniques to deal with emotions in the workplace, especially negative ones. “Emotions are quick things,” says Byron Stock, president of Byron Stock and Associates in St. Joseph, Michigan. Stock describes himself as a “recovering engineer” who’s been in the training arena for 15 years, and three years exclusively training people in emotional intelligence. “You have to give people techniques that help people deal with emotions quickly and easily.” For instance, in some of his training sessions, he teaches people a skill called “Freeze Frame” (Freeze Frame is a registered trademark of the Institute of HeartMath). It’s a five-step process that, once mastered, can help people deal with stress and anxiety in a matter of a few seconds. The skill, in a nutshell, goes like this: 1) Recognize the stressful feeling and FREEZE FRAME(R) it! Take a time out. 2) Make a sincere effort to shift your focus away from the racing mind or disturbed emotions to the area around your heart. Pretend you’re breathing through your heart to help focus your energy in this area. Keep your focus there for 10 seconds or more. 3) Recall a positive, fun feeling or positive time you’ve had and attempt to reexperience it. 4) Using your intuition, common sense, and sincerity, ask your heart what would be a more efficient response to the situation, one that will minimize future stress? 5) Listen to what your heart says in answer to your question.


Practicing this skill can help people not only become more focused, it also helps change their physiological responses to stress, such as lowering blood pressure and slowing down heart rate. In the workplace, this type of technique can help people move from being constantly anxious to feeling more in control, more creative and less judgmental of co-workers and bosses. Productivity often goes up in people who’ve taken EI training, and people tend to enjoy themselves and others at work more.


Small-group training works best.
Emotional intelligence training works best in small groups; usually 15 to 25 people is optimal. As with other training that only needs cerebral or intellectual involvement, EI training thrives on group interaction that can only come with a smaller group. Although such training isn’t intended to be team building, that’s often one important outcome. Team building is especially powerful in groups of employees who work together closely, as opposed to groups of people from the same company who don’t know each other. “In my experience, the very best impact is when you have an intact group,” says Cannon, “because when people don’t know each other, you don’t have quite the same level of trust where people really jump in and participate.”


Practice, practice, practice.
It’s important for students to practice what they learn during sessions, between sessions and after the formal training is over.


Assignments between sessions reinforce the training so students continue building their skills. For example, a typical assignment might be for employees to practice the skill of self-disclosure—which is talking about yourself to develop or sustain a relationship, especially a business relationship.


A manager from one of Cannon’s classes practiced this skill during a performance review at which he had to give feedback to a direct report about developing a particular area that the employee was unhappy about. Through self-disclosure, the manager talked about how at one point in his career, he also got feedback he wasn’t happy with, but that he trusted his boss’s judgment and took the advice to heart. Later, he began to develop in the area his boss had suggested, and it was exactly the area he needed to get his career moving. The self-disclosure technique was useful because he wasn’t telling the employee how to think or feel, but through his own story, communicated what the successful outcome was for him.


Between sessions, Stock typically calls his students to check on how they’re doing. People tend to practice what they’ve just learned more if they know someone’s checking up on them. But also, Stock feels that this material hits people at a more personal level than most organizational training, and often requires a higher degree of personal contact to reinforce the training. People often have questions about how to incorporate the material into their work lives. They also typically need someone who cares about their progress. Having an EI coach helps that process along.


“These skills aren’t learned instantly,” says Bassi. “They take time. And they need reinforcement.”


Training with impact.
Emotional intelligence training often has dramatic effects. Stock says that before training one management group at a large telecommunications company, as a group, they rated themselves 45 percent on a “stress” scale. After the training, that rate plummeted to 39 percent. Because the rating was on a normative scale, these results are more like a 20 to 25 percent drop. “People generally feel more peaceful, have less sleeplessness, have fewer headaches and feel more empowered,” says Stock.


Companies that care about their employees often position this type of training as an employee benefit or perk. Many HR staffs realize that their organizations are placing ever-increasing demands on their workers. This is a way for companies to give employees a coping mechanism.


The training also has prompted many employees to make other positive changes in their health, such as eating better and exercising more. Many workers see a positive impact on their careers—especially those who weren’t able to deal well with other people before the training. Employees report feeling more in control on the job dealing with their own emotional reactions to events and people, and say they’re able to handle stress better.


On the company-impact side, organizations can experience lower health-care expenditures and lower turnover. Although EI can be viewed as soft skills, it can translate into some hard results, such as sales people who can create better and more trusting relationships with clients, customer-care representatives who can more effectively handle angry customers, and engineers who can deal not only with the technical aspects of their jobs, but also interact sensibly with co-workers.


Empathy, flexibility and self-confidence might not seem like they’re skills that would help a company improve the bottom line, but many organizations are finding that these are the things that build and sustain competitive advantage.


Advice when looking for EI training.
As with buying the services of any trainer, make sure you exercise the same caution when looking for a trainer to teach emotional intelligence. Does the trainer have the proper credentials? Can he or she demonstrate results? “I don’t think this should be treated any differently than any other purchase of skills,” says Bassi of ASTD. “Except the track record may be harder for a trainer to establish because it’s a hot topic.” Few trainers have a long history of experience in this area.


In addition, make sure that you or the trainer measures the effects of the training. ASTD surveyed 35 highly regarded “benchmark” companies in October 1997, and found that of the 27 companies that said they tried to promote emotional competence through training and development, more than two-thirds made no attempt to evaluate the effect of these efforts. Yet, according to the Consortium, EI training can be, and is being, measured effectively. The Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations estimates that between $5.6 16.8 million are being wasted each year on programs that don’t follow their established guidelines for implementation. Employers who offer or require EI training should attempt to measure its effectiveness as with any other type of training.


Workforce, July 1999, Vol. 78, No. 7, pp. 68-71. The Freeze Frame (R) technique is from the book “From Chaos to Coherence” by Doc Childre and Bruce Cryer (Butterworth Heinemann 1999.


Posted on

The Power of Personal Recognition

Just when you thought enough had beensaid on the subject, along comes another article to remind you of the obvious:Recognition increases employee satisfaction. It’s an ubiquitous message thatafter a while starts to sound like an endorsement from the surgeon generalhimself: Exercise reduces the risk of heart disease.


    Of course you knowemployee recognition is important; you’re in HR, you’ve listened to theexperts and heard their stories, and you’re probably already doing a lot toshow your employees you care. So all right, already – hasn’t enough been saidabout employees’ wants and needs? You’d think so, but the answer is no. Whenit comes to employee recognition, many companies still don’t get it. So forthat reason alone, the discussion must go on.


   What’s really worth talking about is that all forms of recognitionaren’t created equal – in fact, some are believed to be far more effectivethan others. Personal and public forms of recognition appear to be at the top ofthe list. Like it or not, employees want you to make a fuss over them. Most wantrecognition to be public, personal and done with sincerity and effort. Thepayoff? When it’s done the right way, personal and public forms of recognitioncan bring employee satisfaction, commitment and loyalty to new heights.


    So what does it taketo get to “Wow” with employees today? What experience or reward can youprovide that will move them in a way that makes them stop, think and feel“Wow, I really make a difference here. This company really appreciates what Ido”? Some believe it’s as easy as paying top dollar in the market, othersclaim it calls for stock options and bonuses, and many still insist it’sthings like onsite concierge services, exercise facilities and total flexibilityin planning work schedules that satisfy employees and make them take notice.


    Though few wouldargue the value of any or all of these benefits, it’s hard to say if theyreally do more than inspire a modest nod of approval from today’s ceaselesslypursued worker. In fact, many employees no longer consider these to be special“perks” or unique benefits. Rather, those are standard expectations they’dlook for from any employer.


    What does appear tobe a truly effective form of recognition is the type that’s based on personalattention and public celebration. You’ve probably experienced this at one timeor another yourself. Think back to a time when you were on the receiving end ofemployee recognition. What was most meaningful to you – what made you say,“Wow”? Was it the big check you used to pay off your charge cards? The giftcertificate you “re-gifted” to a friend? No, my guess is it was somethingfar more personal. It could’ve been something as simple as a handwritten notefrom the president of your company, or as grand as an airplane pulling a bannerwith a thank-you message from your manager. If it was memorable, it likelyevoked emotion and made you feel that your individual effort had made adifference.


 


Personal forms of recognition can bea powerful motivator
    Disney is one organization thatunderstands the power and value of personal recognition. Next time you visitDisneyland in Anaheim, California, check out the windows of the shops on MainStreet, U.S.A. Those decorative windows do more than add an attractive elementto the overall Main Street theme. They serve a dual purpose of honoring Disneycast members who made significant contributions to the Disneyland organization.


    Having your name painted on one of theMain Street windows is the highest and rarest honor afforded to a Disneylandcast member. Cast members are actually given a replica of the window during aformal ceremony, something that Renié Bardeau says marked the highlight of hiscareer (second only to having coffee with Walt himself). Bardeau, whose name wasimmortalized last year on an upper-story window that reads “Kingdom PhotoServices – Magic Eye to the World,” served as photographer and photo archivistat Disneyland for nearly 40 years.


    When asked how he felt about receivingsuch a rare and distinguished honor, Bardeau responded “I was elated, awed,dumbstruck – and it was completely unexpected. At Disney, no job is menial. Andthe great thing about Disney is that, sure, they’re a big company and a bigprofit machine, but they still take time out to recognize their people. Itreally shows they have their values in the right place.” Bardeau, who’s nowretired from Disney, displays his replica window on the wall of his home officein Arizona. He says it serves as a constant reminder of his rewarding years withDisney and has value that money could never replace.


    Why are personal and public forms ofrecognition more meaningful than monetary rewards and traditional“off-the-shelf” programs? According to Dee Hansford, an Orlando,Florida-based recognition consultant and founding board member of theChicago-based National Association for Employee Recognition, “The powerfulimpact of peer recognition is greatly underestimated by organizations. We allneed and want to know the work we do is important, and to have that validated[publicly] is one of the greatest sources of satisfaction we can have. Public orpeer recognition that’s personal in nature answers those deep needs we allhave of belonging and contributing to something worthwhile.”


    Bob Nelson, author of the best-selling1001 Ways to Reward Employees (Workman Publishing, 1994) and 1001 Ways toEnergize Employees (Workman Publishing, 1997), says that each form ofrecognition has value to it, and therefore, it’s important to use a variety ofapproaches rather than just one or two. And although cash is nice, and fewpeople will deny the opportunity to get more, Nelson says that it doesn’t havethe same impact as personal recognition that’s public in nature, something hebelieves addresses the human requirements for security, belonging and status -all of which are at the heart of motivational theory. “Cash has no trophyvalue and is quickly forgotten, whereas a public or social form of recognitioncan create a feeling and memory that may last for a long time. A gift or mementocan be symbolic and help extend a memory of achievement.”


    Dallas-based Southwest Airlines is alsoknown for taking personal and public forms of recognition to new heights. WhenSouthwest earned the “Triple Crown” award for the fifth consecutive year in1997 for best on-time performance, best baggage handling and fewest customercomplaints, CEO Herb Kelleher honored Southwest’s 24,000 workers in a verypersonal way. Kelleher had each of their names engraved onto the overhead binsinside the “Triple Crown One,” a specially designed Boeing 737-300 plane hededicated to the workers in recognition of their outstanding contributions tothe airline’s success.


    According to Ed Stewart, Southwest’spublic relations director, it’s celebrations like this that make Southwest anemployer of choice. “We like to celebrate as many victories as possible aroundhere,” says Stewart. “We have the lowest turnover rate of any airline – onceyou’re here you never want to leave.” Stewart boasts that [the companytreats employees so well that] one family actually has 12 family membersemployed by the airline.


    You may be thinking that’s all welland good, especially for companies that have unlimited resources. But where doesthat leave the average organization that doesn’t own a Main Street and can’tafford to dedicate planes to their employees? Should you just stick to theone-size-fits-all method of recognition and hope it’s enough to get the jobdone? Definitely not – meaningful recognition doesn’t have to be costly orextravagant.


 


Personalizing recognition is easierthan you think
    The HR team at Sacramento-basedCalifornia Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) gives testimony tothe fact that making recognition meaningful is possible for any organization,regardless of size or budget. Their story shows it takes little more thanputting time and effort into some creative planning, and personalizing the eventso that the recipient feels special. Heidi Evans, labor relations analyst forCalPERS, tells what she refers to as the “Dennis Andrade Story.”


    Andrade, an associate analyst in HR forCalPERS, was responsible for developing HR’s Web page on the company’s newintranet. Evans says the project was a huge undertaking, calling for lots ofevening and weekend work, and many personal sacrifices on Andrade’s part.


    According to Evans, “Dennis managedan incredible workload during that two to three month period, but you’d neverknow it from his attitude – he just kept plugging away until he got the jobdone. He was never short with anyone, even though he was in a big crunch to meethis deadline and was also managing the duties of his regular job.” The HRstaff wanted to do something special for Andrade at the end of the project. Theyput their heads together and came up with the idea of “Dennis Andrade Day,”a special recognition day devoted to Andrade who, during the course of theproject, had affectionately been dubbed “Laptop Man” because he was neverwithout his computer.


    Evans and the HR team organized theevent so that staff from each of their 8 functional departments signed up for acertain hour during the day when they’d take time out to recognize Andrade. AsEvans tells it, “We all knew Dennis was an avid fisherman, so the day had afishing theme to it. People did everything from writing and singing specialsongs for Dennis, to giving him personal cards, pictures for his desk, and onegroup even got creative with a special fishbowl display. It was really touchingbecause you could see that everyone put a concerted effort into honoring him.”


    How did Andrade feel about theirefforts? “It was overwhelming, I knew they were planning something, but Ididn’t know the details,” he says. “It was really a once-in-a-lifetimekind of thing that I’ll never forget, and it really changed my attitude aboutrecognition. I never felt I really needed it before, but it’s made me abeliever – I think it really makes a person feel appreciated and supported.”Andrade says his family also appreciated the company’s efforts. “Theysacrificed a lot of time with me during the project, and it made them feel goodthat the company went out of their way to show their gratitude.”


    Evans said other employees got almostas much out of planning Dennis Andrade Day as he did. “I’ve never seenpeople get so revved up over planning a celebration for someone else – theenergy was incredible. One of our co-workers who’s been around for severalyears said it was the most fun he’s ever had at work.”


 


Giving personal recognition is alearned skill
    If giving employees personalrecognition is so easy and fun, why don’t more companies do it? Authors JamesM. Kouzes and Barry Z. Posner cite statistics in their book Encouraging theHeart: A Leader’s Guide to Rewarding and Recognizing Others (Jossey-BassPublishers, 1999), which suggest that only 50 percent of managers actually giverecognition for high performance. Equally concerning are data that indicate upto 40 percent of the nation’s workers feel they never get recognized foroutstanding performance. The explanation for this, according to Kouzes andPosner, has a lot to do with fear and emotions.


    In their book, Kouzes and Posnerexplain, “Expressing genuine appreciation for the efforts and success ofothers means we have to show our emotions. We have to talk about our feelings inpublic. We have to make ourselves vulnerable to others.” And that’ssomething the authors claim is difficult for many people, and to some it’seven terrifying.


    Hansford echoes these sentiments: “Ihear all the excuses why people don’t give employees personal recognition -some say they don’t have the time, others claim they pay employees and feelthat’s recognition enough, and quite a few say past recognition effortsdidn’t work. I think the biggest reason people don’t give recognition isfear. When we put ourselves on the line to share how we feel about someone’sperformance or actions, we take a risk – and we’re not always confident in ourown skills as recognizers.”


    According to Hansford and others,giving personal praise is a learned skill. It isn’t something that comesnaturally for everyone because it requires people to make a human connection ona very personal level. “These are basic skills we can all learn, just like welearned to surf the Net. We need to view them as critical skills that will helpus motivate our people, keep our top performers and grow our businesses.”


 


Personal recognition increases employeeloyalty
    Apparently, employees substantiate theargument for perfecting the skill of personal recognition. Their commentssuggest that when they feel valued and personally appreciated, they’re not aslikely to see if the grass is greener somewhere else. Of course, that’sproviding they feel they’re being treated fairly overall, and that has a lotto do with how they view their compensation.


    John Reimnitz, a senior statisticalanalyst for The Gallup Organization, a Lincoln, Nebraska-based research companythat’s best known for conducting the Gallup Poll, believes the company’scommitment to personal recognition has increased his loyalty as an employee.Reimnitz was this year’s recipient of the prestigious “Mountain TopAward,” a designation given to an elite few viewed as the highest performersin Gallup’s worldwide organization of 3,000 employees. Reimnitz was recognizedfor successfully managing a large programming project that called for extendedhours and time away from his family.


    Earning the award also entitledReimnitz to a trip to Los Angeles to attend the prestigious “People’s ChoiceAwards,” an annual celebrity event that Gallup sponsors. Although Reimnitzsaid he had fun hobnobbing with stars from the cast of “ER” and celebritieslike Barbara Mandrel, he got the most satisfaction from receiving the awarditself and setting a new standard of performance within The Gallup Organization.


    “Receiving an award like this helpsmake the sacrifices worthwhile – it’s nice to know that you’re valued. Whatwas even more meaningful was the fact that my performance was responsible forthe company adding a senior level to the statistical analyst position; I was thefirst person to receive that title. It made me feel like I had raised the bar ofperformance for the company.” Reimnitz adds that his name has become a companysynonym for solid performance. “When managers want to hire an analyst, I’veheard that they tell recruiters to find them a ‘John Reimnitz’ – it’sreally nice to know you’re making a difference.”


    How much loyalty does this type ofrecognition buy? Reimnitz admits he’s had other offers – some that haveincluded more money – but in his words, “Money can only go so far.” Reimnitzalso feels he’s fairly compensated at Gallup, and says because he’s beentreated so well, it’s unlikely he could be wooed away by a competitor,regardless of their offer. However, Reimnitz says that his loyalty probablywouldn’t be so strong if he felt he wasn’t paid competitively. “I thinkthat would be frustrating,” he explains. “If I didn’t feel I was paidfairly, I’d question the sincerity of the recognition. It would probably tendto make me want to test the waters.”


 


Hold managers accountable for employeerecognition
   One way HR can reinforce the value andimportance of personal employee recognition is to build it into theperformance-management system and make managers and others in the organizationaccountable for supporting this behavior.


    Lisa Marks, director ofspecialty-product sales for Gallup, says that managers in the organization areresponsible for giving frequent recognition to employees. “We measureeverything at Gallup, and our employee surveys actually measure how wellmanagers are doing in the area of employee recognition. One of the questionsasks the employee whether or not they’ve received recognition or praise withinthe last seven days – we take this stuff very seriously.”    


    Stew Leonard’s, the world’s largestdairy store, located in Norwalk and Danbury, Connecticut, is known for itsoutstanding customer service. They also hold managers accountable for personallyrecognizing employees’ efforts. Jill Tavello, vice president and daughter ofStew Leonard Sr., says employee recognition is tied into the managers’performance review. “We can’t have happy customers without happy employees,so we go out of our way to recognize their efforts on a daily basis. We believethat a handwritten note from the manager is very meaningful to our employees, sowe actually track how often they send these out.” Tavello says that turnoveramong their full-time regular staff is among the lowest in the area, and wellbelow the industry average.


    Creating a culture that embraces thepower of personal recognition may take time, effort and a lot of reinforcement.And although you might be facing an uphill battle, the rewards will more thanpay off over time. Getting employees to “Wow” is about fostering the humanconnection, encouraging others to put a personal touch on their recognitionefforts, and modeling the right behavior in your own day to day activities. Sowho’s at the top of your list today?


Workforce, July 1999, Vol.78, No. 7, pp. 44-49  SubscribeNow!

Posted on

Help for the Fired

Many people will lose a job at some point in their lives. Here are some steps to take if you are one of them.


Examine why you were fired.
Hard as it may be, explore and understand the reasons why you were let go. This is your responsibility. Organizations aren’t always forthcoming with the reasons why they’re letting you go, so it may be up to you to figure it out. You need to know what to change and how to develop yourself for your next job. Learning why is a critical self-esteem building exercise.


Determine what you need to change.
This may be critical to achieving success in your next job. If it’s a personality issue, perhaps you need to learn to work with different personality styles. If it truly was a political move, maybe you don’t need to change anything. But, perhaps you do need to become more politically savvy and determine what type of organizational culture you fit in with best.


Set standards for your next job.
Then honestly compare yourself to those standards. Do you fit? Are there new skills you need to develop? While being fired is difficult, it also provides an opportunity to think about what you want in your career. It’s an opportunity to make a change.


Develop a marketing strategy.
Review your accomplishments and skills. This is important for rebuilding self-esteem. Determine what industries and companies are a good fit for your background and skills, and determine how you’ll communicate the ways you can benefit your target market.


Decide how you’ll answer the dreaded question.
“Why are you no longer at Company XYZ?” The question is likely to come up, so plan for it. What you say may vary depending on the situation. Sometimes, an honest, direct approach is best. But, no matter what your response, frame it positively. “It was mutually agreed that it was time for me to move on.” “I want my career to move in a different direction.” In the case of new management, “A new president came in and wanted to build her own team.”


SOURCE: Personnel Decisions, Minneapolis, March 10, 1999.

Posted on

The Benefit in Back

Are you looking for a new benefit to add that is reasonable inexpensive and can make you an attractive employer vis-á-vis the competition?


Massages are one to consider. For one thing, it’s a chance for employees to get a short break once a week, or once every two weeks. Also, massages can relieve stress and slow depression.


Companies who choose this benefit usually have someone come into the office and give massages for about 20 minutes per person throughout the day.


SOURCE: AlignMark, March 15, 1999.