Category Archives: Communication

Why Hasn’t Paying Employees To Leave Caught On?

Posted on by
Reply

Remember a few years back when Zappos, the darling of the HR world, announced it was offering new employees $1000 on their 90 day anniversary to Leave the company?  At the time that’s all HR people talked about – it was revolutionary – pretty soon every company would be paying their employees to leave.  What happened to that?  Zappos is still offering to pay employees to leave.  Is your company? Why not?

It hasn’t caught on because your leadership is afraid your good hires would actually take you up on your offer!

Of all the HR gimmicks Zappos does, offering employees at bonus at 90 days is the best one – because it puts everything on the table.  It’s the one thing they did that other companies are too afraid to steal!   When you go to an employee and say we need you to be all in – so – if you can’t be all in, here’s $1000 bill, all you have to do is leave.  That’s having true faith in your organization, your culture.  We only want people to work here – that really want to be here.  Many of say it, but 99.9% aren’t willing to back it up with an offer.

It hasn’t caught on, because your HR team is too weak!

Think about the HR person who takes that idea to the executive conference room.  They’re either really good at what they do, or crazy.  Because most leadership teams are not going to buy in on the initial idea.  To get an idea like that approved, you have to have executive buy in, in a major way.  You have to be able to sell it.  That person is not your average HR person. That’s an HR person willing to do thing different, willing to put their beliefs on the line.  Those kind of HR folks are the ones who get the corporate logo tattooed on their ass – and don’t even tell you about it.

It hasn’t caught on because the recession put people 2nd and business 1st. (Remember when your employees were 1st!)

In a down economy the importance of your workforce has taken a back seat.  It has.  Leadership and management training was almost non-existent, retention programs disappeared and work-life balance turned into get-your-ass-back-to-work balance.  That’s simple economics.  When your pool of labor far outreaches your needs, the employer holds more of the power.  This makes the exercise of giving people money to leave, seem a little silly.  First, people aren’t leaving because they have no where else to go. Second, if someone sucks, I’m getting rid of them because I have 100 others waiting to take their spot.

HR Pros discount this policy.  They say it’s meaningless. It wouldn’t make a difference in their environment.  They have a performance management process that gets rid of ‘those’ kinds of employees. The fact is, we are scared.  We are scared to go and do this because we know the truth.  That it would cause turnover, that would cause our systems and processes to be taxed.  We don’t have the resources to handle it.  We don’t have the leadership to handle it.  We don’t have the guts to try it.

It’s the single most brilliant thing that Zappos has done in the HR space, and you’re not doing it.

 

Your Full Court Press Engagement Program Is Lessening Engagement

Posted on by
Reply

Psychology has a funny way of playing tricks on basic common sense.  Want more motivation? Why just do more motivating things, right?  Want higher employee engagement? Better put together an employee engagement plan and do all those things to get our employees more engaged.  Simple – straight forward.  So, it would seem.  The problem is the human psyche is not straight forward and studies will tell us, actually, the more you try to tell your employees about your great work environment and great leadership – the more they’ll believe the opposite!  From the the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology:

“the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology published a paper showing that when people get feedback that they believe is overly positive, they actually feel worse, not better. If you try to tell your dim friend that he has the potential of an Einstein, he won’t think he’s any smarter; he will probably just disbelieve your contradictory theory, hew more closely to his own self-assessment and, in the end, feel even dumber. In one fascinating 1990s experiment demonstrating this effect — called cognitive dissonance in official terms — a team including psychologist Joel Cooper of Princeton asked participants to write hard-hearted essays opposing funding for the disabled. When these participants were later told they were compassionate, they felt even worse about what they had written.”

I like to file this under: Employees aren’t as dumb as we think they are!
Here’s how it works.  You have crappy leaders and and a crappy work environment, but you’re being told you need to raise employee engagement.  To raise engagement you need to have better leaders and a better work environment.  So, you give your leaders a couple of hours of solid leadership training, rearrange the chairs in the lobby and buy every employee a new Satchel with your companies logo on it.  Bam!  Engagement engaged.  The problem is – your leaders aren’t really any better – the work environment is the same – the f’ing handle already broke on the $10 Satchel you gave me.  Engagement disengaged.
So, what can you do?  Engagement comes when your people feel like everyone is on the same train, same track.  Try this:
1.  Measure current engagement and tell your folks – the good, the bad and the crap we will stop right now, this instance.
2. Have your leaders talk about your current state, worse than it really is, as transparent as possible.
3. Have your leaders share the vision of where they want to see engagement to be – reality, not pie in the sky (under promise, over deliver)
4. Work to try and move the needle on measurable items. Don’t celebrate fluff – it comes off as fake.  Communicate reality constantly – reality with positive tone.
Employee Engagement programs are at their worse when they turn into Marketing programs – when you begin selling your employee on something they know is not true.  This puts HR in a tough spot, because the engagement your executives feel and see, are often quite different than what your employees feel and see.  It’s HR’s job to get your executives to see that the employees perception, is their reality.  To them, there isn’t a difference.  Don’t sell your employees that they’re working in the Four Seasons, when they go to work every morning to the Motel 6.

HR – An Autopsy

Posted on by
9

HR is Dead. I got called yesterday to come down and ID the body.

They ran an Autopsy to discover the cause of death and to know one’s surprise they found a number of issues, including:

–Deficient creativity – apparently HR bored itself to death.  So caught up in ‘creating’ process, it forgot what ‘creating’ actually meant.

–Lack of Soul – Organizations need that immortal essence that is given by it’s people.

–Formality Glutinous –  To be stuffed so much with formality that you explode from the inside that people can’t stand being around you.

–Analysis Paralysis – Stuck in indecision unable to move forward surrounded by so many metrics.

–Feline Rabies – Yep, in the end, having 4+ cats on average, did in HR.

HR wont’ be missed by many.  The fact is not many really knew HR.  For years locked behind a department door that had not only a keycode to gain entry, but a palm and retinal scanner as well – security of your employee files being of the utmost importance to the organization.  Where we once knew them from the annual company picnic, alas, it has been years since HR was willing to plan that employee event.  Even our annual open enrollment meetings were cancelled for online, interaction-less, enrollment – efficiency over relationship.  Survey Monkey engagement surveys, email follow-up, phone screen interviews – some have questioned was HR really ever a person at all.  One time, through the sliding window, I once spoke to someone, “Here” I said, as I handed in an exchange of address form, “Thanks” she said.  HR seemed friendly enough.

I don’t mean this to be an anthem to a dead profession, but let’s face it – HR as we have known it, thankfully, is almost there.  I’m asked frequently – “What’s the future of HR?” and I say, “HR will change organizations more than any other single functional area in business.  We have ways to hire a more talented workforce.  We have ways to increase engagement of our workforce. We can increase performance and productivity that has a direct bottom-line impact.  We can make the workers we have better, faster, stronger.  The future of HR – won’t be like ‘HR’ at all.”  But let’s forget the future.  Let’s focus on the present. Let’s make HR not HR.  Let’s make HR everything we want it to be.

Let HR be technology leaders. Let HR be financial leaders. Let HR be Performance leaders.  Let HR be operational leaders.  Let’s plan the picnic and at the same time drive the highest productivity our organizations have ever seen.  Let’s flawlessly administer benefits and simultaneously attract complete freaking studs and studettes to our organizations.  Let HR not be HR.  Let HR be a driver of every part of our business – not a functional area – but an integration into what we do best.

And if we don’t, then yes, HR, as we know it, will be completely dead.

Better Performance Through Hanging Out with Ugly Coworkers

Posted on by
2

Girls and guys both do this at the bar.  Want to look prettier?  Hang out with your ugly friends! Believe me, being a 5’7″ ginger, I’ve had my share of invitation from my better looking friends to hang out, knowing I was just a prop in their little scheme to look great.   Don’t feel bad for me, gingers are resilient, being the ugly prop has a ton of advantages – you can negotiate free drinks with your good looking friend, maybe even free dinner.  This is why I was so excited this week when Science finally validated what I’ve always known – The better looking you are, the better performance people will perceive you to have!

Check this out from the Time article, Guppies Use Ugly Friends to Seem More Attractive:

“An article published Wednesday by Britain’s Royal Society says that male guppies prefer to associate with their drab-colored counterparts when females are around.  Males actively choose the social context that maximizes their relative attractiveness,” the article said. Or, as lead author Clelia Gasparini put it, “If you are surrounded by ugly friends, you look better.”

Gasparini and her colleagues at Italy’s University of Padua built their theory on a kind of guppy dating game. An aquarium was set up with one female in partition on either end. Guppy bachelorette No. 1 had two attractive, brightly-colored males placed on either side of her. Guppy bachelorette No. 2 was stuck with uglier, drab-colored fish.

When a male guppy was put in the middle of the tank, and given the choice of which female to sidle up to, Bachelorette No. 2 was the more popular pick, with male guppies spending about 62 percent of their time hanging around her side of the aquarium.”

Science!
I know that no one who reads this blog would ever mistakenly give higher performance feedback versus that of their uglier peers!  My readers are Pros! They’re above this.  This begs the question, though, why is it executives, male and female, on average, are better looking and taller than their workforce on average?
Answer: We’re all stupid.  We like pretty things.  It’s why makeup is a multi-billion dollar industry.  It’s why we all want to date the prom queen. It’s how the fashion industry gets you to believe you need that new outfit.  We’re all lemmings.
We, deep down in our subconscious, believe that how someone looks, outwardly, speaks positively about how they perform (or will perform if we’re talking about selection).  We’ve heard it since we were kids from our parents and grandparents – “Oh, I like him, he’s ‘sharp'” or “Look the part”. Physical attractiveness =’s Better Performance, is one the hardest stereotypes you’ll ever face as an HR Pro – because it seems like a victimless crime.  What’s wrong with have a sharp looking, smart team!?  Nothing. But you’re selling yourself fools gold.  Physical attractiveness and High Performance do not correlate at all – Zero.
I will tell you, though, if you’re struggling with your performance, you’re probably hanging with a coworker peer group that is substantially better looking than you. Stop that.  Go find a whole bunch of ugly coworkers and start hanging with them.  It’s the cure for bad performance, guaranteed!

3 Steps to Getting Rid of an Overpaid Employee

Posted on by
1

One of the biggest issues we face as HR Pros is trying to get rid of our overpriced employees.  Let’s be real – we made our own bed with this issue!  We were the ones going to our ‘comp’ guy, going “No, we have to go over range, this talent is worth it!”  Now you’re living with an employee making $20K more than the rest of team and all hell is breaking loose!  To be fair, we aren’t the only ones who do this.  Pro sports are classic for overpaying talent, that when the person signs looks like a great deal, but by year 4 or 5 all of sudden you wonder how do we get rid of this stiff! Hello, A-Rod!   The Yankees overpay worse than any other pro sports team in history.  For those who have been following recent developments with the Yankees – they have a major overpay problem with Alex Rodriguez.  From CBS Sports:

“Rodriguez has five years and at least $114 million left on his deal and is recovering from a major hip injury that will cause him to miss a huge chunk of the 2013 season, if not all of it. He’s 37 years old and, while still productive when healthy, is clearly in the decline phase of his career. So obviously the Yankees would love to get out of this contract.

The only issue is … they likely have no shot at doing so.”

$114M – for a broken down, can’t hit his weight, third baseman!  Makes you feel better about your overpaid employees, right!?

Let’s assume your overpaid employee isn’t horrible, but has become just average.  Familiar? How do you get rid of an overpaid, high priced, average employee?  I’ve got a few ideas:

1. Buy Out/Severance/Job Eliminataion – These aren’t all the same – but can be used to help you with this issue. For those HR Pros who have never used these options – you’re missing out.  Let’s be clear, it costs money – but it also gives you legal protection and gets rid of a problem very quickly.  Don’t blow this option off – you would be shocked at what amounts of money an employee would accept to go away.  Start low in your negotiations! Make sure you work with legal to get the right paperwork drawn up to protect yourself against future litigation!

(I’ve been able to get middle management levels folks to go away for $25K!  Huge positive impact to the team, production, engagement, etc.  Best $25K I’ve ever spent)

2. Put them in a box – Most of our leadership teams suck at accountability – to get rid of an overpaid person you need to turn up the accountability to an uncomfortable level – this usually pushes them out the door. You can’t let off the gas – you really have to follow up on the accountability until the person bails.  This can be painful and loud – and usually isn’t the cleanest way to get rid of person – if they’re smart, they’ll know exactly what you’re doing and could cause further problems then your overpay issue! Ironically, most HR Pros use this technique, over all else.

3. The Breakup Conversation – I’ve also had some good success having the breakup conversation.  Face-to-face, nothing in writing, close the door and just get ‘real’.  “Tim – we need to talk. You’re making $20K more than the next highest person on the team, and you’re not delivering that level of compensation.  We’ve got to do something. That could be you leaving in some form – or, what do you think?”  I’ve been amazed what my overpaid workers have come up with in terms of possible solutions.  I’ve had people retire after these conversations. Put themselves into a tighter box then I ever would have created. Even offered up taking a pay cut because they love the company and the job – and realize ‘we’ made an error and it’s become a problem.  I’ll be honest – in my career – pay cuts rarely work out – be cautious using them – but breakup conversations can lead you to a solution!

The Importance of ‘Dear John’ Letters

Posted on by
1

Check out this great letter from Coach K to Michael Jordan, after Jordan told Coach K he was going to North Carolina:

Jordan letter

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coach K gets it.  Yeah, Jordan went to North Carolina, won a national championship and became the greatest basketball player of all time.  But Coach K gets it!

Coach K understands what over half of HR and Talent Pros don’t get – in recruiting top talent – you never burn a bridge.  I’m sure he was upset about losing MJ to UNC – but he never let on that he was.  He sent a very cordial letter, complimenting him and wishing him well.  How many of you do that when a candidate turns you down?  My guess is – not many.  Better yet, how many actually have these letters coming from the hiring manager that interviewed the person, hand signed?  BETTER YET, how many of you have these letters coming from the CEO of your company, hand signed?

The world is a small place and you’re going to be on for a long time.  MJ respects Coach K, because Coach K treated him with respect and always left the door open.

People make mistakes all the time.  Candidates take jobs thinking its going to be great, and some times it turns out to awful.  Many of those folks believe, since they turned you down, and her nothing after – you were pissed.  So, they’ll never reach back out to you and say – “Hey, give me a second chance – this current place sucks!”  Takes about 33 seconds to send this letter out – could have years worth of payback.

 

 

The Most Dangerous Word In Performance

Posted on by
Reply

What is the one thing you can count on a supervisor saying in 99% of all performance evaluations? Try.  It probably comes in the form of: “You can ‘try’ harder” or “Maybe you should ‘try’ to do…” or “Give this a ‘try’…” But that little 3 letter word – Try – is a very dangerous word.  Remember Yoda from Star Wars –

Fortune had a great article on the use of the word ‘try’ recently:

“Whether in a job interview, on a resume, or in the office, try simply shows a lack of belief, passion, commitment, and confidence — all the qualities you need to succeed in today’s tight job market. Grammarly’s contextual thesaurus has a whopping 66 different synonyms for try, yet none of them are as convincing as words like do, believe, act, tackle, accomplish, or succeed. While try might get you 10%, or even halfway there, employers are looking for strong problem solving skills and unwavering dedication.

I cringe when I hear, “I’ll give it a try,” because the phrase suggests failure. “I’ll do it” inspires confidence every time.”

When I coach supervisors on delivering performance feedback this is a concept I work hard on getting them to understand – the words you choose to use have great impact.  Also, the words they allow the employee to respond with, sets them up for future success or failure.  One thing I’ve always done with performance feedback is allow the employee to give me their performance objectives, instead of dictating what performance I expect.  How I coach the performance, though, is to frequently help in rewording their objectives with the words that is going to ensure they go after the performance they want – not to ‘try’ and get the performance they want.

This might seem a bit nit-picky to some – but using words the convey conviction of a goal do wonders for setting someone off on the right track to reaching that goal.  I can’t say it any better than the Yoda, Jedi Master, “Do, Or do not. There is no Try.”

To Be Honest, We Hate Analytics

Posted on by
4

Don’t kid yourself – you hate analytics.  It wouldn’t be politically correct to say that you hate analytics, so you won’t.  That’s why I’m here.

You hate analytics because using them in your organization increases accountability.

Increased accountability = Increased stress.

Increased stress = Increased job dissatisfaction.

Increased job dissatisfaction = Increased Turnover.

You see the cycle, right?

So, who likes Analytics?  Bosses. Why?  Because they like having increased accountability on you.  It makes them feel all strategic and shit.   When analytics are used against you like a weapon – they suck.  Too many organizations are analytics as a weapon to judge your performance.  Leadership justifies this because ultimately they are held accountable to the ultimate analytic – the bottom line.  So, they feel you should be held accountable to.  We would like analytics better if they weren’t used to bash us over the head.  If they were used to help make us better, to help us improve, to help us understand.

Harvard Business Review had a great post on this subject: The Real Reason Organizations Resist Analytics by Michael Schrage

The evolving marriage of big data to analytics increasingly leads to a phenomenon I’d describe as “accountability creep” — the technocratic counterpart to military “mission creep.” The more data organizations gather from more sources and algorithmically analyze, the more individuals, managers and executives become accountable for any unpleasant surprises and/or inefficiencies that emerge.

For example, an Asia-based supply chain manager can discover that the remarkably inexpensive subassembly he’s successfully procured typically leads to the most complex, time-consuming and expensive in-field repairs. Of course, engineering design and test should be held accountable, but more sophisticated data-driven analytics makes the cost-driven, compliance-oriented supply chain employee culpable, as well.

This helps explain why, when working with organizations implementing big data initiatives and/or analytics, I’ve observed the most serious obstacles tend to have less to do with real quantitative or technical competence than perceived professional vulnerability. The more managements learn about what analytics might mean, the more they fear that the business benefits may be overshadowed by the risk of weakness, dysfunction and incompetence exposed.

I recall a very technical business acronym I was taught in my Master’s program called: CYA.  Be very careful with your big data initiatives because many turn into CYA projects.  If I can show these analytics – it will show why this major issue doesn’t have anything to do with my department, but everything to do with another department.  Days To Fill reports are filled with CYA.  “It’s the hiring managers not getting back to us in a timely matter to set up interviews – this is why are Days to Fill is so high.”

Accountability sucks – when it is happening to you.  It’s great when you’re holding someone to it. Big Data might be the biggest weapon you have in your tool box – be very careful who you point it at.

 

How Does HR Think?

Posted on by
2

I’m not sure how HR thinks.  I know how I think, and from what people tell me, I don’t think like a ‘normal’ HR person.  One thing I really like, though, is to see how other pros think.  I learn a lot from how maybe an engineer addresses an issue versus say how a Designer would address the same issue.  I like to take aspects of how other professionals think and incorporate those thought processes into how I think about HR.  I think this helps me solve HR issues in ways that the business can grasp onto better.

I found a cool article recently on how Designers think.  Here are some of the ways Designers think:

– “Design is not about solving problems.  It’s about making people happy. And there are always so many personalities and ideas to consider. So you’re trying to simplify it to its fundamental structure.” 

– “You have to understand when the timing is right for dialogue, and when its time to move the limits. Designers arrive at a company to move its limits.”

– “Try to pare things down. Very few moves do a lot.”

– “Unoriginal, ugly and cheap. Revolutionary, gorgeous and luxurious. These do not have to be contradictions.”

– “The idea of innovation as a structured process has been taken to the extreme, where it is no longer a really useful or robust concept. You’ve got to go about letting people take sensible risks.”

– “…Pain is temporary. Suck is forever.”

In HR, I tend to believe that most HR pros don’t believe they work in a creative function.  In reality what you create in HR speaks volumes about the culture you’re shaping in your work environment.  If HR lacks creativity – your work environment is going to lack creativity.  The rule setters need to show the organization that from time to time, we need to break the rules to get us to the next level.  Sensibly, but rule breaking nonetheless.  Breaking the rules is like ‘kryptonite’ to HR Pros.  It goes against our very being.  Most HR Pros pride themselves on being ‘the one’ part of the organization that actually follows the rules. “If we don’t do it, Tim, who will?”

I don’t know.  What I know is I like how designers think.  It seems like a thought process that opens my mind and gets me thinking about how I can make things better.  It’s a thought process that challenges me to rethink what I’m doing and why.  That seems like a good thing. I don’t want to suck.  I hear suck is forever.

 

 

Job Description Killers

Posted on by
Reply

You know what position I would love to apply for!?  Jr. Human Resource Manager – said no one ever!

I hate spending 3 seconds on Job Descriptions – because JD’s just scream “Personnel Department” but I have to just take a few minutes to help out some of my HR brothers and sisters.  Recently, I came across a classic JD mistake when someone had posted an opening and then broadcasted it out to the world for a “Jr. Industrial Engineer”.  I almost cried.

Really!  No, Really!  “Jr.”  You actually took time, typed out the actual title and then thought to yourself – “Oh yeah! There’s an Industrial Engineer out there just waiting to become a ‘Jr. Industrial Engineer’!”  Don’t tell me you didn’t – because that’s exactly what it says.  “But Tim, you don’t understand – we’ve always called our less experienced Industrial Engineers, Junior, so we can differentiate them from our ‘Industrial Engineers’ and our ‘Sr. Industrial Engineers’.  What do you want us to to do, call them: Industrial Engineer I, Industrial Engineer II and Industrial Engineer III?”

No – I don’t want you to do that either.

Here’s what I want you to do.  I want you to title this position as “Lesser Paid Industrial Engineer” – you’ll get the same quality of responses!

You know how to solve this – but why you won’t – just have one pay band for “Industrial Engineer” – from $38K to $100K.  Pay the individuals within that band appropriately for their years of experience and education.  This is why you won’t do it.  Your ‘Sr.’ Compensation Manager knows you aren’t capable of handling this level of responsibility and within 24 months your entire Industrial Engineering staff would all be making $100K – Jr’s, Middles and Sr’s!

And please don’t make me explain how idiotic it looks when you list out your little number system on your post as well (Accountant I, Accountant II, etc.). Because you know there just might be an Accountant out there going – “Some day I just might be an Accountant II!” If SHRM actually did anything, I wish they would just go around to HR Pros who do this crap and visit their work place and personally cut up their PHR or SPHR certificates in front of them – like a maxed out credit card that gets flagged in the check out line.  That would be awesome!

All this does is make it look like you took a time machine in from a 1970 Personnel Department.

But, seriously, if you know of any Sr. Associate HR Manager III positions please let me know.