Posts belonging to Category retention

From our neighbors to the north comes some insight into what employees really want when it comes to rewards and recognition. Spoiler alert: it’s not money.

Well, it’s not just money.

Ceridian Canada’s Pulse of Talent 2013 survey recently asked more than 800 employees from three generations—baby boomers, Generation X and Generation Y—for their perceptions of job security, technology, performance reviews, job recognition and career satisfaction.

When discussing the rewards they would like to see their companies offer, the majority of respondents in each group said they would prefer non-monetary awards. Seventy-four percent of Generation Y employees indicated as much, with 65 percent of Gen Xers and 56 percent of boomers saying the same.

What specifically would they like to receive for a job well done?

Preferred non-monetary awards included:

• Free personal days off (37 percent)

• Free food/meals (20 percent)

• Event tickets (19 percent)

• Club memberships (17 percent)

• Technology resources (15 percent)

An iPad, the occasional comp day or tickets to the ballgame, however, may not be enough to hang on to your talent. Indeed, 29 percent of surveyed employees who said they expect a salary increase, bonus or promotion within the next year said they would look for other opportunities if they didn’t receive one. And, take special note if your workforce skews younger: That number jumped to 52 percent among Gen Y respondents.

Share on Facebook

Much has been made of the mass employee exodus we may start to see as the long-sluggish job market slowly stabilizes, and how companies must work to retain critical talent now if they want to thrive in the near future.

Well, employers don’t seem to be making too much of it.

That’s according to a study from AMA Enterprise, a division of the New York-based American Management Association, which asked nearly 1,000 companies what they think of employees expressing their intentions to seek new positions. Employers answered:

• It’s nothing new for employees to keep an eye out for new opportunities, and I don’t regard the present situation as something unusual (69 percent).

• This is a growing mindset among our employees, and I expect many to seek a new job as soon as they’re able (24 percent).

• This has become a prevalent attitude among our employees and an urgent issue our organization needs to address (7 percent).

So, that’s nearly three-quarters of participating companies shrugging off the notion that their employees could be eyeballing the exits in large numbers. And, when asked how urgent senior management at their organizations regards the potential or actual turnover situation, 39 percent said “not so urgent,” with another 22 percent saying leadership considers the matter “not at all urgent.”

Maybe your organization shouldn’t be more concerned with workers dreaming of greener pastures now than at any other time. Or maybe its ignoring the symptoms of what could prove to be a big problem. Either way, keeping a close watch on the door probably wouldn’t hurt, according to Sandi Edwards, senior vice president of AMA Enterprise.

“The lack of focus on turnover tells me that many top-level executives are not tuned into the widespread worker dissatisfaction found in so much recent research,” said Edwards, in a statement.

Intent to leave is a key indicator of engagement and commitment to the organization. If management wants the best out of its people, they need to be aware of their stress and contribution levels. Management needs to work with them individually to understand what will meet their career goals along with what has to be done to drive the organization forward.”

Share on Facebook

All’s fair in love and recruitment.

Robert Mellwig, SVP, Really Cool People, Destination Hotels & Resorts/Lowe Enterprises, offered no apologies for his company’s “shameless” search function, external referral program and other outreach efforts.

Mellwig was part of a panel that offered a variety of tips to HR professionals at the HR in Hospitality® Conference & Expo in Las Vegas.  Other panel members included Dina Barmasse-Gray, SVP, HR, Cheesecake Factory; Rebecca Henry, VP, People Services, Allegiant Travel Co., and Diane Turek-Pire, SVP, HR, Wyndham Hotel Group. Bruce Tracey, associate professor, school of hotel administration, Cornell University, moderated the panel.

Members had plenty to say about how their HR function operated. Henry explained that HR contacts its alumni group (former employees) several times a year for referrals, connects its HR system with its ticketing system to drive efficiency and spends 80 percent of its efforts on the top 20 percent of the company’s highest performers. Barmasse-Gray discussed the company’s video café, featuring employee videos addressing work tips, and how diversity is never taken for granted but is no longer a “top strategic imperative”. Turek-Pire mentioned a move from individual toward constellation or team awards and that HR was shifting its focus from employee engagement to trust, which builds loyalty.

Surprisingly, no one seemed concerned over Obamacare. Henry said the biggest needle-mover was getting spouses or adult children involved in healthcare. “People have the highest level of dissatisfaction when they don’t understand how it works,” she said.

Mellwig appeared to be the rebel of the group. He said HR awards employees for their contributions, not tenure, and ignores routine raises. “We believe in wild (salary) swings that are performance-driven.  It creates controversy but we get better results.”

Share on Facebook

“People join companies and leave managers,” the old saying goes.

Well, if a recent Monster.com poll is any clue, you may want to keep one eye on the door.

The informal survey of 577 Monster.com users from around the world found more than three-quarters of respondents saying they would boot their boss from their position if given the chance.

Not all of these respondents, however, thought they were necessarily the ones to fill the void. Here’s what participants had to say when asked who they would put in the big chair:

• I’d vote for the current boss to keep his or her job (24 percent).

• I’d vote for a colleague who’d make a better manager (25 percent).

• I’d vote for myself (30 percent).

• I’d hope for a new candidate to enter the race (21 percent).

Workers surveyed in Mexico were the most likely to believe they were ready to take the reins, with 46 percent saying they would prefer to see themselves in their manager’s role. Forty-five percent of employees in France said the same. Overall though, workers in Europe expressed less confidence in their potential managerial prowess, with just 28 percent reporting they would vote for themselves.

Respondents in the United States were among the most supportive of their colleagues’ abilities, with 27 percent saying they believe a co-worker would be a step up from their current boss.

From an employer standpoint, findings from the poll—which Monster notes was not scientific and reflects only the opinions of users who chose to participate—are a sort of mixed bag.

“The fact we see such a large percentage of people who would vote themselves into their boss’s position shows many workers have confidence and drive, which is ultimately good for any organization,” says Mary Ellen Slayter, Monster.com career expert.

On the other hand, employees who are less than thrilled with their supervisors often start to entertain thoughts of leaving their current role, or exiting the organization altogether. And rightfully so, says Slayter.  

“If people don’t feel confident with their current leadership, they should consider alternatives, such as moving to a new group within their organization where managers have a good reputation for their leadership qualities, and failing that, explore better opportunities elsewhere outside the company.”

Share on Facebook

How much of a role does social media play in shaping perceptions of your company?

Depends on who you’re asking, according to a recent poll. 

The study of 225 HR managers and 2,035 employed adults, conducted by Harris Interactive for Ft. Lauderdale, Fla.-based Spherion Staffing Services, found some significant differences in how employers and employees see the importance of a company’s online reputation.

In the study, nearly half of workers (47 percent) said they “strongly agree” or “agree” that, when considering new employment, a company’s online reputation is just as important as the offer they’re given. Just 27 percent of companies, however, said they believe social media outlets are influential in how a candidate views their organization.

Some other findings suggest a connection between companies’ online cachet and satisfaction among existing employees, but declining employer interest in using social media to recruit, retain and rally the troops.

According to the survey, employees who are highly satisfied with their employer’s online reputation are nearly four times as likely to have high job satisfaction (76 percent) than those who are not satisfied with their organization’s online reputation (20 percent).”

However, fewer employers (6 percent) reported using social media to motivate and retain existing employees in comparison to its 2010 study, in which 20 percent said they relied on social media for such purposes. Companies also appear to be turning less to social media as a recruiting tool, with 28 percent of respondents using social media to find new talent; a 16 percent drop from 2010.

Employers would be well-served to reverse this particular trend, says Sandy Mazur, division president of Spherion Staffing Services.

“Organizations must become socially engaged in order to drive key business outcomes such as talent attraction, engagement, satisfaction and positive brand awareness, and reputation,” according to Mazur.

Decisions, including whether people want to work for your organization, stay with your organization, and sing your praises socially are all highly dependent on your ability to be socially engaged and socially adept.”

Share on Facebook

On this, the last Saturday in 2012, I went hunting and pecking for a few things I might share about the HR profession — looking back on the year that will soon be history as well as anticipating the one to come.

With healthcare and the impending Affordable Care Act enactments that much closer, this list from Mercer of the top five priorities for employer-sponsored health plans in 2013 seemed a helpful one. I was especially drawn to its specific suggestions for customizing plan designs and contributions in today’s high-health-cost environment, and for making health exchanges work best for you.

One blog post from an Edwardsville, Ill.-based employment, payroll and workforce-services company, Extra Help Inc., lays out its leading seven concerns HR professionals should be attending to right now. Though some of the list is aimed at Missouri and Illinois businesses, and promotes its services, it’s still a nice, succinct rundown of things you should have on your front burner — such as whether you’re fully versed in healthcare-reform requirements, whether you’re up on all you’re supposed to have posted around your environs and whether you really have the best plan in place when employees start leaving as the economy continues to improve.

Looking across the pond, I found this post from CIP HR, based in Buckinghamshire, England, that — interestingly — echoes many of the same cost-centered concerns HR professionals in the United States face in 2013: making sure the right talent gets into the right post to begin with, making sure younger workers get the kind of development opportunities that will encourage them to stay since they can’t climb the corporate ladder the way their parents did, and making sure social-media policies are crafted correctly, to keep you out of court.

Couldn’t find quite as much out there on top HR issues of 2012, but probably wouldn’t/couldn’t have found anything better than our own Winners and Losers list for 2012 from HRE Editor David Shadovitz. And, in keeping with other lists’ overriding focus on healthcare and healthcare reform, no surprise that his No. 1 winner is Obamacare.

Also, for the record, here again is Web Editor Michael J. O’Brien’s blog post on what you blog readers read the most this past year on The Leader Board. May be a reflection of what caught your eye more than what has been or will be keeping you up at night, but a reflection nonetheless.

And, as I intimated up top, there’s probably no better time to reflect than when one year bites the dust and another one is born.

Happy New Year everyone.

Share on Facebook

Guess I’m not the only one who is a bit surprised to see Facebook land the No. 1 spot on Glassdoor’s 2013 Top 50 Best Places to Work list, released earlier today. You can include Glassdoor CEO Robert Hohman in that group, too.

As I’m sure you already know, Facebook has had some tough sledding since going public in May. Yesterday, FB closed around $27.87, more than $10 below its opening IPO price. It’s no secret that many on Wall Street have questioned whether founder, CEO and Chairman Mark Zuckerberg has what it takes to lead the now publicly traded company.

So it wouldn’t be a stretch to think that might get in the way of Facebook’s repeat of its 2011 achievement, when it topped the Glassdoor list for the first time. Right? Well, not so fast.

Evidently, Facebook employees, despite the company’s troubles, are more satisfied with their employer, and its leader, than ever.

When I asked Hohman for his thoughts on the reasons behind Facebook’s strong ratings, he posited that Zuckerberg has used the company’s Wall Street troubles to “galvanize the internal troops.” Today, he says, they have more faith in Zuckerberg than ever. In fact, Glassdoor reports that Zuckerberg’s approval ratings jumped from 90 percent to 99 percent over the past year.

“I think he [Zuckerberg] deserves a lot of credit for turning this external pressure into motivation for the workforce,” he says.

In addition to their trust in their CEO, Facebook employees also commented favorably on their ability to impact a billion people, the company’s continued commitment to its unique culture, and the great perks and benefits that enable them to balance work and their personal lives. No doubt some of these have a hand as to why tech companies tend to dominate the list, with this year 20 out of the 50 coming from that sector.

(For more on Facebook’s practices, check out the following video feature Facebook Vice President of People and HR Lori Goler.)

In case you’re wondering, McKinsey & Co., Riverbed Technology, Bain & Co. and MD Anderson Cancer Center filled out the list’s top five.

It’s also worth noting that, for the first time ever, a fast-food restaurant chain not only made the list, but cracked the top 10 at No. 9. And perhaps not coincidentally, it just so happened to be one of my few favorites: In-N-Out Burger (based in the west and Southwest). Among other things, Hohman says, employees at In-N-Out have great things to say about the company’s flexible work hours, fair pay (compared to others in that sector) and, yes, the free food they’re entitled to.

Share on Facebook

The number of federal employees choosing to retire is up, year over year, by 25 percent, according to a new survey of federal executives by the Partnership for Public Service, a Washington-based nonprofit. And finding replacements for those workers–particularly ones with backgrounds in science, engineering and technology–will be especially tough, according to the report.

Declining budgets, high turnover due in part to retirements, inadequate leadership development and succession planning and competency gaps in HR and agency leadership skills are some of the biggest hurdles facing federal executives, respondents to the survey (about half of them CHROs, or “Chief Human Capital Officers,” in government parlance) said.

It’s getting harder than ever for federal executives to manage effectively because of attrition, said John Pagluta, the PPS’ vice president for policy, in a recent interview with the Baltimore Sun. “Experienced folks are leaving, partly from negative public attitudes” about government employment, he said.

On top of all this, government executives are finding they can’t turn to contractors to fill in for departing talent because of reduced budgets, said Pagluta.

Trained cybersecurity experts are but one example of the skilled workers Uncle Sam is in desperate need of, according to the report. These experts are the ones who protect computer networks used by the Defense Department, intelligence agencies and other units that do vital work.

I think we’ll all sleep a bit better at night once the government learns how to more effectively attract and retain such folks. “Good enough for government work?” Maybe an attitude check (for those of us outside as well as inside the federal workforce) is needed.

Share on Facebook

I was reminded more than a few times at this year’s SHRM that employers are clearly worried about losing their top talent.

Yesterday, I stumbled across further proof: an overflow area, where audio and PPT for a session titled “Succession Management and High Potentials: How to Connect Your Most Critical Leadership Programs” were “streamed” to attendees sitting outside the packed workshop room. Best for HR professionals to be prepared, no?

Then, later in the day, I sat down with executives from Aflac, who shared with me the findings of their most recent workforce study, the 2012 Aflac WorkForces Report.

In the survey of 6,100 employees, Aflac found that nearly half of the workers (49 percent) questioned said they were  somewhat likely to look for a new job in the next 12 months; 27 percent indicated they were very or extremely likely.

The findings raise the question, “What are employers doing to retain workers?” says Audrey Boone Tillman, executive vice president of corporate services for Aflac.

Not surprisingly—especially when you consider Aflac happens to be in the business of providing group benefits—the study also shows a clear correlation between satisfaction with benefits and satisfaction overall. Seventy-three percent of the respondents who indicated they were extremely or very satisfied with their benefits were very satisfied with their jobs.

When employees were asked what their employers could do to retain them, nearly half (49 percent) said “improve my benefits,” according to Tillman.

Despite this, employee benefits hasn’t really budged all that much since the economy went south late last decade. Proof of that could be found in SHRM’s 2012 Employee Benefits Survey, which was released yesterday. The study of 550 HR professionals revealed that employer spending remained pretty much stable this year. Organizations spent 19 percent of an employee’s annual salary on voluntary benefits, 18 percent on mandatory benefits and 10 percent on pay for time employees didn’t work.

Companies, however, are apparently making an investment when it comes to initiatives aimed at promoting healthier behaviors among its employees, the SHRM survey found. For example, the percent of employers offering health and lifestyle coaching jumped from 33 percent in 2008 to 45 percent in 2012. Rewards and bonuses for completing a health and wellness program, meanwhile, increased from 23 percent to 35 percent over that same period. No question these are pretty significant changes.

Of course, no one knows what might lie ahead. But it’s safe to assume we’ll begin to see more movement on other benefit fronts as employers start to see more of their talent head for the doors.

Share on Facebook

At this week’s Total Rewards 2012 conference in Orlando, speakers from Boeing reminded attendees that there often is more than one way to read a piece of data.

During a session titled “Compensation, Fix Employee Pay! When Compensation Professionals are Asked to Address Low Scores on Employee Surveys,” two Boeing comp professionals—Senior Compensation Specialist Cindy Jorgensen and Compensation Specialist Ron Steele Jr.—talked about their efforts to get to bottom of why employees at Boeing’s South Carolina facility had a low opinion of the company’s pay practices.

Steele told those in the room that Boeing’s pay is extremely competitive in South Carolina—where the company employs about 6,000 workers who are dedicated to the building of its 787 (pictured here). But apparently that wasn’t the consensus among Boeing employees there.

Asked to rate the fairness of pay during a 2011 employee survey, workers at the South Carolina operation gave Boeing low marks. (The survey was conducted with the help of Kenexa.)

At first glance, Steele said, the data pointed to a pay system that needed fixing.  But a closer look suggested there might be other factors at work here.

To figure out what those factors might be,  the comp folks began to drill deeper into the data, looking at (among other things) how the South Carolina findings compared to those found at other Boeing operations and in other industries; and by reading through page after page of verbatim comments from the employee surveys. (Boeing employees “aren’t shy,” Steele said.)

This was followed by a series of employee focus groups, which eventually shed some much-needed light on the issue.

In the end, the group’s persistence paid off.

Jorgensen and Steele concluded that the low scores had less to do with what employees were being paid and more to do with employees who didn’t really understand the pay system at Boeing.

That, in turn, led to a much more meaningful response (my words) focusing on initiatives that could have a positive impact, such as managerial training and employee education.

Share on Facebook