Archive

Archive for August, 2009

Dual-Unemployed Spouses

August 31, 2009 Leave a comment

by David Mezzapelle
Read bio here

HR Compendium Sponsor

In the current economic climate it is not difficult to find a household where both spouses are out of work. When you add that to the fact that a majority of those people have children, mortgages, insurance and taxes, it is quite a stressful situation. Our company, in conjunction with The Wall Street Journal, did a story on this topic featuring a family in New Canaan Connecticut that recently experienced this exact scenario.

The wife worked for GE Capital as a Loan Manager and the husband was a Trust Officer with UBS. She lost her job in Nov (2008) and he was terminated in December. Neither layoff was based on performance – they were both downsized. Her severance was for 6 months and he did not receive any severance.

At First

At first it was tough for them, they felt empty when Mondays rolled around but at least their children were in school instead of hanging around. They started feeling sorry for themselves. Tensions built up quickly and they would snap at each other over the dumbest things. Financial constraints hit home during the holidays and explaining that to their kids was difficult. However, within a few weeks they got a handle on improving the situation.

During the day they would network to find new employment. They actually networked for each other among family, friends, business contacts, etc. When you combine each other’s resource list it is amazing how much further you can dig. One of our GoliathJobs’ Support Reps actually advised them to go this route and it ultimately proved successful.

Evenings & weekends they continued on like before but were much more careful about expenditures (i.e. restaurants, trips, clothes, etc). They still enjoyed wine but had certainly lowered their price point! Taking walks, exercising and spending more time with their children actually added to their job search efficiency. Exercise always makes tough times more tolerable and keeps the head clear. Financially they were ok but unfortunately many of their investments had taken hits. They admit that both sets of parents were very frugal – now they respect and see why.

The bottom line for this couple was to not dwell on the current situation and simply look forward to the future. Positive thinking & optimism had ultimately made them closer.

Effective Tactics

We spoke with many couples that were going through this hardship and came up with a list of the most common effective tactics:

  • No discussion on the job loss topic is permitted at night or on the weekends. One couple actually made a bet that if one slips the other has to cook dinner that night and clean.
  • Critiquing each other’s emails and resumes. Constructive criticism is important.
  • Mock interviews and videos (to see where the other person was weak). “My husband kept telling me that i need to be more relaxed during an interview. Once we started videotaping the sessions he was able to point out my less-relaxed nuances. Keeping that in mind I am careful to avoid those flaws now. Conversely, I kept telling him to talk louder during his interviews. I finally showed a close friend a copy of one of the tapes. As soon as she commented he improved his decibels!”
  • Help each other network and share contacts. In the case of the Connecticut couple, they wife’s old manager at GE was married to a financial advisor at JP Morgan. Using that connection they were able to get the husband an interview there. They made a similar connection for the wife in regards to the husband’s contacts at IBM Global Finance and Mercedes Benz Credit Corp.

The Least Effective Tactic

Being present when the other person is on the phone networking or speaking with a potential employer. It makes it hard for that person to relax and speak well. You need to leave the room so the other person is at ease.

Which Spouse is More Marketable?

In many cases we see a bottleneck in this area. Which spouse brings more to the table and is most likely to win the higher paying job first? This question has led to marital problems and needs to be handled carefully. The couple from Connecticut both agreed that “There is no least marketable spouse.” According to the wife, “We both worked in industries that took a hit. However, the Trust business is getting more complicated and i believe my husband will get a job soon. And as business lending starts to resume I am sure that my experience will open doors for me as well.” Living in Southern Connecticut, with a close proximity to the NY-Metropolitan area, also contributes to more potential opportunities in this case.

The Happy Ending

This story ends well and can serve couples world-wide with valuable advice & optimism. The husband landed the job at JP Morgan after connecting with the wives ex-manager’s spouse who worked there. The wife landed the job at Mercedes Benz Credit Corp after connecting with her husband’s contact at that company. This demonstrates the power of simple networking just within your own circles. The market may be difficult for job seekers especially dual-unemployed spouses. However, it is clearly improving and remaining optimistic can only help. Charge forward and stay confident. Dear Abby once said, “You might feel impatient when things are not as final as you hoped. Let go of the fear… and the world comes to you.”

Advertisements

Facts? I Don’t Need No Stinkin’ Facts!

August 18, 2009 Leave a comment

by John Wentworth
View bio here

mentalking“Data are bunk when it comes to picking employees.  I know!  I can tell who to hire in five seconds by just listening to them.” 

Jim, the recruiting director of Acceleration Service, sat at lunch with Fredrico, one of Acceleration Service’s divisional general managers.  Jim really liked him.  Fred was frighteningly bright, equally perceptive, but haunted by high achiever demons.

The demons included hubris.  Fred was sure that he was right.  About everything.  The problem was that he usually was, even when everyone around him disagreed with him.  His pattern recognition skills were superb, able to understand the essence of a situation from just shreds of facts.

But he overestimated his ability to pick new employees.  He ran a sales call center and kept one out of every ten employees hired.  As he and Jim sat there at lunch, Fred refused to use any data-driven selection tools.

Jim sighed.  “You are flaunting the entire discipline of psychology, you know,” he said to Fred.

Fred just smiled.  “I know what I know.”

Jim sighed again.

Jim was particularly frustrated because of some data-driven revelations that he had engineered and that Fred had acted on and which had turned out to be pivotal to Fred’s success, and which Fred had seemingly forgotten.

Fred at one point could not get anyone hired.  He was using a test and his recruiter had not been able to find anyone who could pass the test.  He reached out to Jim who assigned one of his corporate recruiters to the task.  Soon, they had candidates who passed the test and who got hired.  Everyone rejoiced.

But the rejoicing was premature.  Virtually everyone who was hired either left or was fired.

Jim sat down with Fred.  “What’s going on?”

“I don’t know Dude,” Fred said.  “It’s always been this way.  I have been able to create a cadre of loyal producers who are making a lot of money, but we can’t find any more of them.  I thought the test would help.  It’s normed to my top people, but it’s letting too many of the wrong people through.  I’m worrying about whether we have the right test.”

Jim growled under his breath.  He knew the test and he knew it was respectable.  And he knew that any respectable test, if it was normed to the right people, would create a filter that let people who were like the normed group through.  He recognized the limits to tests, too.  If you did not measure anything that actually correlated to on the job success, testing was useless.

And it was here that Jim had some sympathy for Fred’s point of view.  His environment was not like other call centers.  His management was not like other call center management.  Many of his successful employees had not been salespeople before.  They had been karate instructors, beach bums, nurses…there were a few that had sold, too, but they had not been particularly successful until they came to Fred’s shop.  So possibly, he thought to himself, Fred’s shop is so weird that the test is just not measuring what drives success here.

Jim called up the psychologist who had developed the test. 

“Ya know,” the Southern, folksy psychologist said, “we did gather some data when we normed the test that we are not currently gathering.”

“Why not?”

“No particular reason other than we had such a clear profile of success from the other data that we thought we probably didn’t need it.”

Jim just looked out the window, wishing he was doing anything other than having this phone call.

“Well, there is another reason, too.”

“What’s that?”

“The data have to do with dark side tendencies.”

“Which are?”

“Things like being suspicious, shy, sad, pessimistic, a sufferer, eccentric, loving risks too much and that sort of thing.  Not many managers want to hear that their top performers are high on these measures since, in extremis, they get you pretty close to mental illness.”

“So Fred’s top performers are nuts?”

“ ‘Nuts’ is not a word found in most psychology texts, but, yes.”

“So let’s measure the dark sides of the candidates.”

“And so we shall.”

And so they did.  Because they did not really know what they were looking for, they did more.  They quantified candidate profiles against the job requirements, which mostly had to do with their skills and prior successes, against the light side test scores and against the dark side scores.

Jim and Fred were having lunch.  They really did enjoy each other’s company, so they did not get to work topics until coffee.

“The first piece of stunning news I have to report is that we have an inverse correlation between candidates you have hired and their having done well in their past sales jobs.  If they were successful salespeople before they came here, they have left or been fired from your shop.”

“I told you that the karate instructor was the model we should be emulating,” Fred said, more serious than not.

“Then we found that there was no correlation one way or the other with light side scores on the test.”

“I told you that the test was no good!” roared Fred.

“And there is a very tight correlation between high dark side scores and strong performance.  Your top people are all nuts.”

Fred knew what dark side tendencies were.  And he knew he had them.  He just looked at Jim, for once in his life without words.

“Plus this: my recruiter has been living in your facility as you know.  He’s been taking his coffee breaks in your bullpen.  He has heard your Inside Sales Manager just beating up the new hires.  This might explain that several of the high dark side hires, whom you guys rated as stars, up and left suddenly.”

“So you are telling me that my environment and culture don’t match the people I’m hiring?”

“I am.  You are hiring eccentric and driven people who are pretty thin skinned and then your manager is beating them up.  It does not work.”

“OK, I get that he should not beat them up, but what kind of culture should I have?”

“You are a high dark side score person.  What culture do you want?”

“I make my own culture wherever I go!”

“Yeah, yeah.  And you fly, too.  Be serious.  Think back to when you were a kid.  What did you want your world to be?”

“I was surrounded by criticism.  I wanted unconditional love.  I felt different from other kids.  I wanted to be reassured that I was OK.”

Suddenly Fred’s face lit up.  “I got it! So I should provide that to my employees.  Unconditional love and belonging.”

“Yup,” Jim said.

Fred had gone back and made the conversion in his mind and actions.  Given that he was a man of extremes, it was not a surprise when the next day he started hugging all the new employees and telling them he loved them.  They were surprised and a few were a little put off, but on balance they liked it.  And they still quit.

“Why?” Jim asked Fred.

“I don’t know,” Fred answered.  Your theory must be wrong.”

“And your sales manager is abusive.”

“There is that!”

Fred went back again and started listening to the sales manager as he “trained” his new hires.  It turned out that “trained” meant berated, humiliated and scorned.

Fred fired him.  Jim helped him hire a new one.  The new one had the opposite problem.  Everyone stayed.  They just did not produce.

And the new sales manager, who was actually brought in as a VP, talked Fred into getting rid of the test and Jim’s recruiter.  He generated his own flow from his prior acquaintances and then hired the ones he liked…but they did not produce.  Fred go so enraged that he took over the inside sales himself, moved the new guy to outside sales and reengaged Jim.

Jim sat with him.  “You do know, I trust, that the research on good salespeople is that they start slow and take about six months to hit stride.”

“Not mine.  They do it faster.”

“But, considering for just a second that you might be wrong, I wonder if you gave them more of a conventional environment including a less enthusiastic training and a longer fuse, if they would not perform after a while…just like the majority of sales people.”

“I’m not abusive!”

“You are not as abusive as the guy you fired, but you do everything you can to make them go away.  Their training is like one big long stress interview.  Only the super-strong survive.”

“And those are successful.”

“There might be a better way.”

“Not for my shop!”

“Keeripes, you are stubborn.”

“And…I am right!”

So they kept hiring, not using a test or really anything else except Fred raging and swearing and threatening in the mass interviews.  Fred’s theory was that what he asked them to do, learning to sell his way, was difficult but could be mastered by those with extraordinary strong constitutions, those who were desperate to make a lot of money.  So he brought people in almost indiscriminately and then abused them in the interview process.  He hired those who responded right and were sufficiently drawn to the stress environment that they accepted his offers.

But they did not perform, either.  Jim suspected that they took the job to get the salary and then bolted as soon as they could find a less stressful job.

Fred hired a new inside sales manager.  Jim had personally watched over this search, including using a test.  The test showed that he was a mini-Fred.

“This guy is just like you,” Jim told Fred.  “Are you sure you want to hire a mini-you?”

“I’m not sure, but I’m going to try it.”

The guy reported for work with a load of inside salespeople who had told him they wanted to follow him.  Jim got fired again.  This time he was amused, not irritated. 

The new guy figured out in about a month that it was no fun working for an older clone of himself and took off.  The sales reps that he tried to hire him came in, sat through the stress interview and then left, never to be heard from again.

This left Fred as the acting inside sales manager with his payroll burdened with the VP who had been marginalized into an outside sales manager role and whose morale, and productivity, stank.

There is no happy ending to this story.  It is closely based on a real life experience of our company with a client whom I consider to be a close friend.  But his flaws prevent him from creating a stable, smoothly functioning organization that can grow.

He is not the only one.  Many entrepreneurs, me included, own businesses because we were lousy employees.  We are infantile and narcissistic, wanting to create an organization in our image, wanting to see ourselves reflected in our corporate mirror.

The only solution is to build a barrier of individuals who can both lead and follow between the entrepreneur and the rest of the organization.  This, however, requires trust, something the infantile and narcissistic have a hard time embracing.

The other issue this story drives home to me is that recruiting is very heavily influenced by the organizational context in which it is done.  Many recruiters try to do recruiting the same way every time, for every company.  They frequently fail.  The wiser recruiter looks at the organization, identifies the obstacles and resolves them.

If the organization wants to hire candidates who just don’t exist, or are not available for the money the company wants to pay, that issue needs to be resolved or recruiting will fail.  If a hiring manager does not want to hire because s/he is not sure of his/her boss and is afraid of being criticized for his/her hiring decision, that issue needs to be resolved or no hires will be made and recruiting will fail.  If the hiring manager makes erroneous hiring decisions, s/he must only be shown candidates who will succeed in the job, or turnover and low productivity will overwhelm what benefit the organization gets from filling jobs.

Recruiting, if fully done, is as complex as any other organizational matter.  Recruiting does not have a history of stepping up to that complexity, but, if it does not, recruiting will fail.

10 Best Practices for Managing the Aging Workforce

August 4, 2009 3 comments

 

by Richard Anthony, Sr.
View bio here

sponsored by HR Compendium

10 Best Practices for Managing the Aging Workforce

When introducing himself to the class I was teaching on managing the aging workforce, a Gen Xer in his early 30s said he had enrolled in my course because he was anxious about a promotion he was about to receive: supervising a group of people several years his senior in years and experience. A few of the Boomers in the class voiced a similar concern, but in reverse. They took the course in hopes of better understanding their “younger” coworkers or subordinates.

For the first time ever, we have four, and some people argue five, generations in the workforce. Each markedly different. Each variously hailed and reviled because of the myths about how they think and behave. All challenged to work toward common goals in spite of their differences.

The young man in my class had good reason to be anxious. Though bright and articulate, he had no prior supervisory experience. He did have the good sense to recognize that, without preparation, he risked failure in his first opportunity to exhibit the skills and competencies required of executives, managers and coworkers in today’s increasingly pluralistic and contentious workforce. Enlightened employers are devising new ways to recruit, develop and reward workers of all ages. However, studies show that most employers appear to be oblivious to the shifts occurring in the workforce and are therefore applying management principles and techniques that were better suited to the comparatively simpler shop floor and office venue of more than a half century ago, when the predominantly white male workforce was made up of Traditionals (born before 1946) and early Boomers (those born between 1946 and 1964).

In another time, the potential for stress among the generations gradually would have been dissipated by the natural course of events; that is, older workers would retire and move on to the next stage of their lives, making room for the generation eager to displace them. That historical phenomenon is no longer as predictable as it was for half of the last century and beyond. Because they can look forward to longer, healthier life expectancies and are accustomed to being busy, the majority of the nation’s 78 million Boomers approaching “normal” retirement age want to remain gainfully employed on a full time or part time basis. Furthermore, in hard economic times, they are not in a hurry to trade their paychecks and health care benefits for decimated 401(k) and IRA account balances. The reluctance or inability of the Boomers to move out so that younger workers can move up adds to intergenerational stress and, in my opinion, may ultimately lead to seismic intergenerational conflict over opportunity, compensation and benefits, especially health care.

Nothing short of a transformational overhaul of public and corporate policies can avert intergenerational conflict in the workforce. That could take a full generation. In the interim, employers who see the competitive advantage of recruiting and retaining older workers can adopt some of the best practices developed by organizations that are managing the shifts in the workforce rather than being victimized by them.

Best Practices

Any approach to managing the aging workforce must be undertaken within the full context of the four generations, not just the older generation. Here are some examples of initiatives employers can take to establish a work environment that values the past, present and future contributions of older workers.

1. Study generational composition of your workforce.
The first step is to take stock of what you’ve got by developing a census of the workforce by age, gender and skill level. Then plot the age data according to the four generations (Traditionals, Boomers, Generation X, Generation Y). Next, study the similarities and dissimilarities among the four generations to understand the underlying motivations for each group.

2. Prepare a workforce forecast.
Now that you know what you’ve got, prepare a forecast of the human capital in terms of competencies and experience your firm is likely to need based on certain scenarios. Do a side-by-side comparison of the workforce you have and the workforce you believe you will need three to five years out; then decide what adjustments should be made and how best to make them.

3. Train managers and supervisors about intergenerational differences and issues.
Most managers and supervisors need to step back from their daily routines to understand the causes of intergenerational stress. On the one hand, they must be fair arbiters of age-related disputes. However, they must also be aware of the emotional, cognitive and physical changes older workers experience and the possible influence on the worker’s ability to perform.

4. Match HR policies to the needs of the workforce.
HR policies should be reviewed at least every two years to ensure that they are aligned with needs of the employer and the employee. Older workers, for example, may need customized training or retraining, different types of communications and more time to prepare for the transition to retirement.

5. Be creative in designing compensation plans.
Cash compensation is important to all workers, regardless of age. As needs and time horizons change, however, how and when compensation is received become strategic issues for older workers who have the foresight to manage their assets for gain and tax effectiveness.

6. Include all generations on committees and task groups.
One very effective way to recognize the experience and skills of older workers is to include them on committees and task groups whose opinions and recommendations are solicited by management. It may be advisable to have someone outside of the group facilitate the first few sessions to help ensure that potential conflicts don’t impede communication.

7. Design and implement a comprehensive communication plan.
The differences among generations concerning sources of information are well documented. Communicating with older workers may require greater frequency and more dependence on print media. Older workers also tend to rely more on peer communications than their younger counterparts.

8. Offer lateral movement.
Boomers are achievers, but personal growth and professional advancement need no longer be equated with climbing the career ladder. Particularly in the later stages of their careers, older workers can derive personal satisfaction and make a valuable contribution by moving laterally or diagonally into a different position or function. Often, lateral moves can also offer greater flexibility as well as opportunities for interim assignments or mentoring.

9. Offer flexibility.
Flexible scheduling, job sharing, part time work, sabbaticals for community service and leaves of absence for continuing education are only a few of the ways employers can accommodate the lifestyles of older workers and retain the experience and know-how the company needs. Such programs must be designed carefully and implemented consistently to avoid resentment on the part of younger employees who may feel they are being disadvantaged.

10. Reward managers for retention.
People do what is valued, observed, measured and rewarded. Consequently, managers and supervisors should receive an unambiguous message that retaining older workers who can contribute to achieving organizational goals is valued, will be included in performance evaluations and will be rewarded.

Summary
Unlike their predecessors, the majority of Boomers want to remain actively engaged in meaningful work. In sharp contrast, most employers are either oblivious to the pending exodus of older workers or they are inclined to encourage it in the belief that older workers are expendable and can be replaced at less cost (cash compensation and benefits). As millions of Boomers approach normal retirement age, employers will be forced to make staffing decisions that may have long-lasting consequences. The solution is to plan for and manage the shift occurring in the workforce, to the mutual benefit of the employer and the employee.