Category Archives: transparency

Survey: It Pays To Be Fair

Employers are keenly aware that employee engagement and satisfaction have fast become two of those seemingly elusive culture goals. Surveys from a variety of sources over the past few years peg engagement levels in the low-to-mid thirties.

Gallup, for example, which follows employee engagement closely, reports that in 2016 employee engagement remained stagnant from the previous years, barely budging from 31.4 in 2014 and 32 percent in 2015. Of course, there are many factors that go into high levels of employee satisfaction.

Now, a study out this week reveals that the pay process at an organization, in terms of fairness and transparency, is 5.4 times more impactful on how satisfied employees are than how they are paid relative to their market value.

PayScale, Inc., a cloud-based compensation data and software provider, designed the survey to identify the drivers of employee engagement. It queried more than 500,000 employees for its employee engagement research on various aspects of their job that could potentially contribute to both employee satisfaction and potential attrition.

“This research aims to shed new light on employee satisfaction and intent to leave in an era where engagement is at an all-time low,” Lydia Frank, vice president of Content Strategy at PayScale, said in a news release. “Our study shows that just by having an open dialogue about the pay process and employees’ contributions at the company, employers can ultimately drive better outcomes for their businesses.”

Another interesting finding is that when employees feel appreciated by their employer – and believe their company has a bright future – they are far more likely to be satisfied at work and remain at the company.

Other findings include: employees don’t know whether they’re paid fairly. Of the respondents who felt they were paid below market rate, nearly 90 percent were actually paid at or above market rate. That means only 11 percent of people who felt they were underpaid were correct; also, paying fairly really matters. The research shows 75 percent of respondents who think they are paid at or above the market rate said they were satisfied with their job, compared to only 59 percent of workers who felt they are paid below the market rate.

“This is provocative research that comes at a time when more and more companies are looking for ways to increase satisfaction with employees so they can get the biggest return from their talent investments,” said Pete DeBellis, research leader at the analyst firm Bersin by Deloitte. “The results are surprising and show us just how crucial it is for employers to make the leap and start talking more openly about pay in order to build more trusting relationships with their employees.”

The Price of Secrecy

The most comprehensive, carefully thought-out company policies are basically rendered void if they’re not enforced.

And, moreover, not letting employees know that violations of these rules are being dealt with can actually have a pretty corrosive effect on an organization over time.

So says a new study from researchers at the University of California, Irvine, who used questionnaire data from “a large U.S. governmental agency” to find that “lower employee trust with tenure is incrementally linearly lower over the course of employment, not the result of an early breach of the psychological contract.”

This occurs, the authors continue, “for employees at all hierarchical levels, but is steepest for non-supervisory employees, suggesting that employees [lacking] information about policy enforcement may be driving this phenomenon.”

In other, plainer words, your people want to know that policies are being enforced, and keeping them in the dark about enforcement proceedings only serves to chip away at employees’ trust in the organization.

“The decline happens incrementally over the span of an employee’s tenure with their organization when policy enforcement is kept secret from other employees,” says lead author Jone Pearce, dean’s professor of organization and management at the UCI Paul Merage School of Business, in a statement.

“Secret proceedings weaken, rather than support, employees’ perceptions that policy enforcement is taken seriously, which then works to undermine trust in their organizations.”

Unlike legal trial proceedings, the authors write, most companies’ policy enforcement proceedings “lack the fundamental feature of due process procedures: They are not open.”

In addition, they note, organizational secrecy can spread as employees “assume secrecy is what the organization expects, and so they withhold information that they should be sharing, potentially causing additional harm to organizations and employees alike.”

While the company might contend that keeping policy proceedings hush-hush is done in the interest of privacy, being open about enforcement proceedings actually “helps protect against someone making false charges and allows all employees to know that violations have consequences,” according to Pearce.

“Openness keeps those rendering judgement honest, while secrecy undermines accountability. Hiding enforcement proceedings may help a company or its employees avoid embarrassment; however, it comes at a price. And, that price is a loss of trust in the authorities and their policies.”

And, compounding the problem is the possibility that this skepticism might trickle down from veteran workers to more junior colleagues who are still forming impressions of their employer.

“Understanding why employees with more tenure trust their organizations less also has important theoretical and practical implications for human resource management practices,” the authors point out. “Longer tenured employees are often sources of guidance for newer employees on understanding organizational values and expectations, and may spread their low trust to their less experienced co-workers, further undermining others’ organizational trust.”

 

 

 

 

 

Retaliation for ‘Playing by the Rules’

There’s a troubling new HR-centric theme spinning out of the Wells Fargo illicit-accounts mess, according to today’s New York Times: A group of aggrieved Wells Fargo workers who say they faced retaliation in some form from their employer — by being either fired or demoted — for staying honest and falling short of sales goals they say were unrealistic.

These workers who claim that they played by the rules and were punished for it, the NYT reports, are starting to coalesce around two lawsuits that were just filed and that seek class-action status:

The first was filed in Los Angeles last week by former Wells Fargo workers who say that while their colleagues created unauthorized accounts to meet cross-selling quotas, they were penalized or terminated for refusing to do the same. The bank’s chief executive, John Stumpf, has often stated his goal that each Wells customer should have at least eight accounts with the company. That aggressive target has made the bank’s stock a darling on Wall Street, the lawsuit notes.

The story notes that a federal lawsuit with analogous claims was filed on Monday in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, seeking to create a class of current and former Wells employees across the country who had similar experiences.

“These are the people who have been left holding the bag,” said Jonathan Delshad, the lawyer representing the workers in both suits. “It was a revolving door. If you weren’t willing to engage in these types of illegal practices, they just booted you out the door and replaced you.”

One of those people, Yesenia Guitron, told the paper that she did everything the company had taught employees to do to report such misconduct internally. She told her manager about her concerns. She called Wells Fargo’s ethics hotline. When those steps yielded no results, she went up the chain, contacting a human resources representative and the bank’s regional manager:

In a statement on Monday, Wells Fargo said: “We disagree with the allegations in the complaint and will vigorously defend against the misrepresentations it contains about Wells Fargo and all of the Wells Fargo team members whose careers have been built on doing the right thing by our customers every day.”

No matter the ultimate resolution to this dark chapter of the venerable bank’s history, this latest twist to the story should serve as a reminder to HR leaders to ensure that the processes they have put in place to catch illicit activity in the workplace are actually doing their jobs.

 

 

Intel’s Diversity Progress is Now ‘In the Book’

Considering all the steps Intel’s leaders have been taking to improve diversity at the giant Santa Clara, Calif.-based chipmaker, it should 79084610 --diversity in techcome as no surprise that the company’s first mid-year Diversity in Technology Report released last week shows considerable progress.

Details of that progress — mentioned in a blog post by Chief Diversity Officer Rosalind Hudnell and a public letter to employees from Chief Executive Officer Brian Krzanich —  include the fact that Intel is now “tracking to 43 percent of its diverse hires in 2015,” exceeding its U.S. goal for 2015 of 40 percent, according to the report.

Also, it says, more blacks and women are now working at Intel than were at the beginning of the year. Of new employees this year, 35 percent were women and 5 percent were black, well above Intel’s current workforce representation. In addition, according to the report, more women and minorities are in leadership today at Intel than at the beginning of the year, with an 11-percent increase for senior women employees and a 19-percent increase in senior leadership for blacks. In her blog post, Hudnell touts her organization’s commitment, from the top down, to improving these numbers:

“Our team has used the same laser focus that has brought innovation to the world [around] the issue of diversity and inclusion.  And while we have strengthened our focus in our programs, systems and measurements, the game changer has been the level of accountability driven from the top.”

Indeed, in January, Krzanich announced plans to make Intel more representative of the U.S. population by 2020, with some $300 million dedicated to the effort. Four months later, he unveiled some impressive movement in that direction that I blogged about at the time.

More recently, on July 29, the company announced it would double its referral bonus for employees who help the organization diversify its workforce. Specifically, as Senior Editor Andrew R. McIlvaine blogged the next day, employees who refer a woman, underrepresented minority or veteran who is ultimately hired will receive $4,000.

Mind you, Intel is not alone among Silicon Valley’s tech companies to address this, or to open its books for the public to see exactly where it stands when it comes to women and minority hiring. Way back in May of 2014, Laszlo Bock, senior vice president of people operations for Google, came clean with the public on his company’s numbers in an effort to move the needle, according to this blog post by Editor David Shadovitz.

Earlier this month, President Barack Obama issued a call to action to the tech industry, asking companies to step up their game on workforce diversity. Seven of the 14 companies responding to his challenge — including Intel — have agreed to try out something called the Rooney Rule, which was implemented in 2003 in the National Football League by Pittsburgh Steelers Chairman Dan Rooney.

Basically, according to the rule (which Rooney was applying to head-coach hiring), at least one woman and one minority must be considered for every open position. This Fortune.com story goes into far more detail about the rule, and its pros and cons.

I think what impresses me the most about what’s happening in the Silicon Valley around diversity in technology is the transparency serving as a kind of foundation to it all. Bock’s unveiling was a breath of fresh air. And now, at least according to Krzanich, Intel is sharing “more data than any company in our industry,” specifically “more information that [what’s] available on the EEO-1 form or [what’s] been reported in the past for our U.S. workforce.”

That has to be the best road to the kind of sweeping, mammoth demographic change being called for here — to openly admit reality in order to create a new one. Hudnell’s post certainly speaks to this. As she puts it, Intel’s intention “is to do all we can to collaborate and share openly so that what we all desire becomes the reality.”

Not a bad rule to live by, whatever business change you’re trying to effect.

 

 

 

 

Gazing Into the Crystal Ball

As 2014 draws to a close, folks — as you might expect — now have their eyes set on 2015, and are figuring out what might be in store for their organizations as far as HR and the workplace are concerned. For this final post of the year, I did a quick search of the web to see what  people are predicting for next year. For your reading pleasure, here are a few of the things I stumbled upon. (Feel free, of course, to click on any of the links to see the sources’ full list of predictions.)

159188661Establishing a “chief of work.” Peter Andrew, workplace strategy director for Asia at real-estate company CBRE, predicts in Fortune the addition of a new position: chief of work. Most C-suites have not added new roles since the chief-information-officer title took hold about 20 years ago, but CBRE’s research suggests that’s about to change. For one thing, Andrew writes, companies today have human resources, IT and real-estate all acting separately and, often, unwittingly working against each other. He suggests that a chief of work would coordinate all that, with an eye toward building a culture that attracts top talent. Finding the most efficient balance between full-time employees and a growing army of independent contractors, he adds, will also be in that individual’s wheelhouse.

The rise of mobile assessments. From website CPA Practice Advisor: Mobile assessments will be increasingly tapped for selection, performance management, and training and development decisions. Technology, including social media and social collaboration, is changing the science and practice of selection, recruitment, performance management, engagement and learning, the article says. And I-O psychologists, it continues, will work to design assessments that are valid and reliable, regardless of how and where they are delivered.

Every child born in the next 12 months will learn coding as a core subject. Increasingly, Samsung writes, governments are recognizing that computer literacy is a fundamental, basic skill and are incorporate coding into their curriculums. For example, the UK, it says, launched a new computing curriculum during the current academic year, in which children as young as five are taught programming skills. In 2015 and beyond, Samsung predicts, such education innovations will gradually become the norm, with businesses, educators and governments working together to raise skills across Europe. Longer-term, it says, this trend will help spur the use of internships, as businesses recognize that they can benefit from welcoming young, computer-literate people into their organizations. “The need for employees to be computer literate,” Samsung says, will result in a wave of coding schools that will help longtime employees learn coding quickly.

Honesty will become a revered leadership trait. In a Forbes article, contributor Dan Schawbel predicts that “companies are going to start embracing transparency more next year as younger generations are demanding it.” Leaders, Schawbel writes, won’t just have to be good at inspiring and educating; they will have to be able to instill trust through honesty. “It’s only natural that people would want to work under leaders who are open about what the company is doing [and] where it’s heading in the future, and give honest feedback regularly,” he writes.

Niche becomes the norm. Korn Ferry’s Futurestep unit predicts “niche will become the norm” in talent acquisition.Now that organizations grasp the power of data,” Futurestep says, “next year, the challenge will be to prove ROI on all activities using analytics.” Organizations, it notes, need to be clear on the touch points that fit best with the types of candidates they are looking to attract. To that end, it says, interest and demand in creating functional talent communities is becoming top of mind as businesses strive to target hard to reach groups.

“Niche talent requires niche strategies,” says Chong Ng, president of Futurestep’s Asia- Pacific operation. “Whether it is businesses seeking high-demand talent such as STEM candidates, or organizations located in high-potential growth locations looking to specifically attract local talent back in the country, employers need to be more sophisticated in their attraction and retention methodologies in order to find and keep candidates.”

Companies will set new hiring priorities. Website Customer Think predicts employers will pay a lot closer attention to soft skills in 2015. “In the past,” writes Marcelo Brahimllari, “candidates were hired for open positions based primarily on their skills and experience. The ability to ‘do the work’ was traditionally valued over other skills.” But with more competition for jobs and deeper talent pools today, Brahimllari says, many employers are considering candidates’ so-called “soft” skills just as much, if not more, than education and experience. Employers, he writes, want to hire applicants who fit with the culture of the organization and share in its values. Traits such as honesty, flexibility, positive mind-set, creativity and leadership skills, he says, are being looked upon as being just as important as the ability to crunch numbers or write code.

Look forward to seeing you back here in 2015! Happy New Year!

Another Sign Your Talent May Be Bolting: Hooky

160611067-- sick employeeA month ago, almost to the day, Editor David Shadovitz posted this about a Utah State University professor’s study laying out specific behaviors to look for in top talent about to head out the door.

I thought the signs themselves, as revealed by researcher Tim Gardner, were interesting and deserve repeating. Employees about to leave, he found:

  • Offered fewer constructive contributions in meetings;
  • Were more reluctant to commit to long-term projects;
  • Became more reserved and quiet;
  • Became less interested in advancing in the organization;
  • Were less interested in pleasing their boss than before;
  • Avoided social interactions with their boss and other members of management; and
  • Began doing the minimum amount of work needed and no longer went beyond the call of duty.

Now, thanks to this from Monster Worldwide, we have another dimension to offer up in this flight-detection protocol: playing hooky. Or at least playing “I have a doctor’s appointment.”

According to Monster’s global poll, based on votes cast by Monster visitors from Dec. 2 through 6 of last year, 44 percent of respondents consider telling their boss they have a medical appointment to be the best excuse to leave work for a job interview.

The second-most-popular choice for getting out of work to interview for other work is also health-related: saying they’re sick, weighing in at 15 percent. Of course, the way I see it, both excuses — especially the latter — requires some play-acting as well, so perhaps there are some additional behavior traits we can read between the lines.

There were other non-health-related excuses — childcare, at 12 percent, and delivery/repairman at 8 percent — but faking personal health challenges topped the chart.

Especially interesting, I thought, were the differences in faking forte by country. As the Monster release states:

French respondents are the most likely to create faux doctor’s appointments when sneaking out for interviews, with 54 percent answering that they believe it is the best excuse;      conversely, French respondents are the least likely to fake an illness to excuse an interview-related absence, with only 7 percent selecting it as the best option. Respondents in the United States were the biggest proponents of the call-in-sick method, with 16 percent choosing illness as their preferred excuse. Canadian respondents were the least likely to use a delivery/repairman excuse, with under 7 percent selecting this option and were the most inclined to use a childcare-related excuse, with 16 percent picking this answer.”

Mary Ellen Slayter, a career-advice expert for Monster, says all employers ought to look at this as a reminder that “they have no choice but to be on both sides of this coin.”

“Making it easy for people to be honest is a good approach,” she says. “That means when you’re recruiting, make an effort to schedule interviews before or after work hours — or perhaps at lunch. With your own workers, don’t press them about how they’re spending their requested time off.”

As for what you’re supposed to do when you notice your top talent scheduling an inordinate number of doctor’s appointments, that’s anyone’s guess. I would think that might be a good time to start examining their engagement levels.

‘Trans-parency’ Boosts Job Satisfaction, Commitment

Intriguing research out of Rice and Pennsylvania State universities: It appears transsexuals who self-identify are more likely to be happier in, and more committed to, their jobs.

The study, “Trans-parency in the Workplace: How the Experiences of Transsexual Employees Can Be Improved,” is one of the first forms of empirical research — if not the first — on transsexuals’ experiences at work, says Michelle Hebl, the study’s co-author and a professor of psychology at Rice.

“Our research sheds light on this severely understudied population’s common workplace experiences and how such experiences can be improved,” she says.

For the study, 88 transsexual employees in the United States were surveyed about their workplace experiences to determine what factors impact their job satisfaction and organizational commitment. The more open they were about their gender identity, it found, the happier and more productive they were.

The study, which will appear in an upcoming issue of the Journal of Vocational Behavior, also found transsexuals who were more open with their family and friends about their lifestyle and who identified strongly as transsexuals were more likely to disclose their gender identity in the workplace than those who were less open and strongly identified.

“It’s important for individuals to have a consistent identity in the workplace and at home,” says Larry Martinez, a co-author of the study and Rice graduate student. “Having a strong support system at home can give transsexual employees the courage to disclose to their colleagues in the workplace.”

The finding of greater satisfaction at, and commitment to, work does come with one caveat: If work environments arent supportive and if co-workers or supervisors react negatively to their news, those engagement factors decline.

“Often, what’s good for the worker is good for the workplace — in this case, an open and accepting culture is really a win-win situation for all involved,” says Enrica Ruggs, also a co-author and Rice graduate student.

“The employees feel accepted, are more productive and have better experiences with co-workers,” she says. “This creates a positive working environment that may lead to decreased turnover and greater profits.”

The research, Ruggs adds, could be generalized to other groups of people who face workplace discrimination and struggle trying to decide whether to disclose their concealable stigmas, such as sexual orientation, chronic illness or a learning disability.

 

SHRM Transparency Group Granted Long-Sought Meeting with SHRM Board

What was intended to be a meeting to announce an aggressive new move to get members of the board of the Society for Human Resource Management to speak to the SHRM Members for Transparency changed course Sunday when Kathryn McKee, a leading member of the transparency group, announced somewhat of an olive branch from the SHRM board.

It wasn’t any formal move by either group, McKee told attendees at a luncheon near the site of SHRM’s 2011 Annual Conference & Exposition in Las Vegas. The branch came in the form of a chance meeting Saturday in one of the conference halls between McKee; Henry Hart, corporate counsel for SHRM; Rob Van Cleave, immediate past chair; and Jose Berrios, current board chairman.

“Henry Hart said to me that the board of directors had just voted to agree to meet with this group,” McKee said. “There’s a hole in the soul of SHRM, but a miracle just happened yesterday that may begin” to repair that hole.

Though no firm date for the meeting has been set, McKee said she had the SHRM board’s word that the two groups would meet shortly after the conference to begin discussion about future leadership and leadership practices that had become a bone of contention since the transparency group began expressing concerns and hopes for such a meeting as far back as 2005.

“I looked in each one of their eyes,” McKee said, after also telling the luncheon group that she had demanded, and got, hugs from each. “I believe them.”

Issues the transparency group hopes will soon be put on the table include its  contention that SHRM board members should be SHRM-certified and many currently are not, the fact that many board members are not current or former practitioners, and the fact that SHRM board directors had voted recently to pay themselves fees for their voluntary services (something transparency group leader Mike Losey called “absolutely wrong” and in defiance of the SHRM bylaws he followed himself through many years as the association’s past president and CEO).

The group — in anticipation of an upcoming announcement just hours away that SHRM had just named a new CEO, Hank Jackson, past interim president and CEO — is also hoping Jackson will also be a part of that meeting, or meetings, between SHRM and the SHRM transparency group going forward.

Gerry Crispin, a leading member of both groups and founder and co-CEO of staffing site CareerXroads, told those in attendance that the transparency group was prepared to activate a section of Article 7 of the SHRM bylaws that would have forced the meeting if 10 percent of SHRM members would express favor for such a meeting. Crispin detailed how the transparency group was prepared to employ social media pushes — through LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter — to garner that support, something he and others assured listeners would be, no doubt, very successful.

More importantly, they say, should the promised meeting fail to happen, or fail to lead to their desired goals, such a push to force a meeting would be instituted after all.

“We are very excited that this is a step in the right direction,” said transparency group member Kate Herbst.