"The U.S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness,
only the pursuit of it.
You have to catch up with it yourself."
Benjamin Franklin (1706–1790) American statesman, scientist & printer
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
The "No Jobs" Myth -
Recently the news media, economists and any pundit who could get space in a newspaper, on TV or on the radio talked about the US losing over 500,000 jobs in the month of November. For those who lost jobs, as we know, these are difficult times, financially, socially and emotionally.
We do not minimize that loss for anyone.
As we consider what this means to our company (and the unemployed we continue to help), it is important to keep things in perspective. Compared to the media's version of our job market, the real data is encouraging when we consider our economy's: 1) total jobs and, more importantly, 2) overall hiring activity.
First, consider the number of jobs lost in November – 533,000. We're told that: "It was the most jobs lost in one month since December 1974." That's a nice sound bite if you are writing a newspaper article. Another accurate sound bite is: "In the month of November, we lost 34 one hundredths of one percent of the total jobs in America." And it looks like this:
And consider that in each month of the first 10 months of this recession over six times as many people were hired. How does that make sense? How can we be hiring millions and be losing jobs at the same time? The answer is employee turnover and what economists call "churn".
Churn refers to the natural number of businesses failures and startups. Employee turnover refers to such things as employee quits, relocations, deaths, terminations and retirements. Even when there is not economic growth, both churn and turnover lead to job openings, which in turn lead to hires. And the number of hires each month is a more relevant and meaningful number for both the unemployed and the staffing industry.
So how many hires do we normally have and how has this recession affected the number of hires? In a good economy such as September 2006- September 2007 the number of hires was 58 million. In our current recession the following year (2007-2008) it has fallen by only 8% to 54 million according to the latest data. And it looks like this:
So, even in the middle of this recession, though you wouldn't know it from the media, there were 54 million hires. This means that if you were in an average US town of 100,000, employers hired 17,500 people in the last year. In the year before, they would have hired 19,000 people. Fortunately, for our company and the job seekers we place, employers keep hiring, even in a downturn.
Staffing has grown to be a great solution for employers who need people to keep their businesses healthy as well as for job seekers who need jobs to keep their lives and families healthy. Staffing companies save both employers and job seekers time and money and are a key in keeping our country healthy in this economic downturn. Instead of stepping back and waiting for a recovery, this is a time to step forward and help make it happen.
We do not minimize that loss for anyone.
As we consider what this means to our company (and the unemployed we continue to help), it is important to keep things in perspective. Compared to the media's version of our job market, the real data is encouraging when we consider our economy's: 1) total jobs and, more importantly, 2) overall hiring activity.
First, consider the number of jobs lost in November – 533,000. We're told that: "It was the most jobs lost in one month since December 1974." That's a nice sound bite if you are writing a newspaper article. Another accurate sound bite is: "In the month of November, we lost 34 one hundredths of one percent of the total jobs in America." And it looks like this:
And consider that in each month of the first 10 months of this recession over six times as many people were hired. How does that make sense? How can we be hiring millions and be losing jobs at the same time? The answer is employee turnover and what economists call "churn".
Churn refers to the natural number of businesses failures and startups. Employee turnover refers to such things as employee quits, relocations, deaths, terminations and retirements. Even when there is not economic growth, both churn and turnover lead to job openings, which in turn lead to hires. And the number of hires each month is a more relevant and meaningful number for both the unemployed and the staffing industry.
So how many hires do we normally have and how has this recession affected the number of hires? In a good economy such as September 2006- September 2007 the number of hires was 58 million. In our current recession the following year (2007-2008) it has fallen by only 8% to 54 million according to the latest data. And it looks like this:
So, even in the middle of this recession, though you wouldn't know it from the media, there were 54 million hires. This means that if you were in an average US town of 100,000, employers hired 17,500 people in the last year. In the year before, they would have hired 19,000 people. Fortunately, for our company and the job seekers we place, employers keep hiring, even in a downturn.
Staffing has grown to be a great solution for employers who need people to keep their businesses healthy as well as for job seekers who need jobs to keep their lives and families healthy. Staffing companies save both employers and job seekers time and money and are a key in keeping our country healthy in this economic downturn. Instead of stepping back and waiting for a recovery, this is a time to step forward and help make it happen.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
“It’s the visionaries that are searching and hiring right now, those companies who are able to take advantage of the top talent that is available right now like never before.”
“I am seeing this in both big and small companies, public and even more so private companies who still have access to capital, willing to reduce today’s profits to have an explosive payout when the economy turns around, AND even take advantage of market share opportunities in this economy.”
Stan Taylor, CSAM
Management Recruiters of Vancouver.
“I am seeing this in both big and small companies, public and even more so private companies who still have access to capital, willing to reduce today’s profits to have an explosive payout when the economy turns around, AND even take advantage of market share opportunities in this economy.”
Stan Taylor, CSAM
Management Recruiters of Vancouver.
Friday, November 7, 2008
What Recruiting Will Look Like After the Recession
by Kevin WheelerNov 6, 2008, 6:00 am ET
This is a strange recession.
It is not affecting employment across the board as many of the past ones have, but rather seems to be targeting specific sectors and types of work. Obviously banking and financial services, but also manufacturing and anyone in a semi-skilled job such as auto workers are especially affected. Needs are pocketed and specific. Talent shortages remain.
Yet, I have had calls from search firms looking for key sales and marketing people, and for R&D talent. Senior HR executives are in demand, especially if they have global experience. Sectors still largely unscathed by the recession – healthcare, gaming, entertainment, pharmaceuticals, and biotech – are still facing talent shortages and global competition.
The growth of global supply chains, increasing automation, and greater process efficiency means we can do more with fewer. New jobs are being created daily, but they all require education and skill beyond that of many current candidates.
This, combined with the different attitudes candidates and employees have about work and about how they live their lives, changes how we recruit and employ people.
The highly skilled, experienced, and educated will have an increasing edge in employment. And this recession should be a clarion call for an increased focus on education, training, and employment development. Everyone involved with talent will need to look at both development and acquisition as channels to meet their needs, rather than focus entirely on recruiting.
There are a number of permanent changes we will see.
Candidates Become Smarter, Warier
The first change is that many candidates will be reluctant to work under the same conditions as usual. Candidates have access to unparalleled information about a prospective employer through the Internet and its many sources. Reliance on a single firm for security has already eroded, and this recession will strengthen employees’ wariness about promises and deferred compensation. More top employees will seek employment contracts that include clauses that spell out layoff pay and benefits.
Candidates will probe positions more deeply and they will want more influence over the type of work they do. Prepare for candidates to negotiate what they will and won’t do.
Free Agency
Recessions have, in the past, increased the pool of people who decide to become free agents – contractors, consultants, and part-time workers. More people than ever are trying out life as independent workers. Many will not make it and return to the corporate fold, but they will be wiser and better prepared to abandon ship than they were before.
Many others will find they would rather work on their own than go back under the very insecure and fragile corporate umbrella. Companies will have to identify and take care of their key producers better than ever. While many firms do work hard to keep key talent, they will have to increase this effort and explore more creative ways to engage those people.
Charles Handy, a management writer and educator who has written numerous books on the organizations of the future, predicted that up to half of some company’s talent may eventually work as free agent, contracting to those firms as temporary staff, contractors, or part-timers. This will be a lasting change that is accelerated because of the recession.
Recruiters and HR staff will have to accommodate these free agents. Our internal regulations will have to be modified to make the use of contractors legal and compliant with IRS regulations and it may be necessary to lease employees, employ more employment contracts, and learn to share talent between organizations.
These changes will be fought by the legal department and more HR leaders, yet I believe companies will eventually have to embrace these ideas to be competitive.
Values Rule
Gen Y candidates, in particular, but all employees to a growing degree, are seeking companies that hold values high and make and keep commitments to their employees and their families. They seek environmentally sensitive, charitable, and ethical firms.
Gen Y is the tip of a spear followed by the even more morally and environmentally committed Gen M. They will have even higher expectations than the Baby Boomers ever did. While shareholder value will always be a core concern of the management team, they will also have to understand how important employees feel that values are and how close a scrutiny they will give every corporate action and statement.
Recruiters have to understand the values of the firms they work for and find better ways to match people to those values. They will have to also convince the management of firms that what they DO is just as important as what they say and that this emerging candidate pool focuses on actions almost entirely.
Flexible Work Arrangements
Employees now want to work where they want. The Internet has made it possible for most services and knowledge workers to be located far away from the physical center of their company.
Designers, call-center staff, sales people, some HR folks, and most anyone who works with information, writing, or data can effectively work wherever they wish. Only a handful of people – those whose work requires their hands or eyes on the work being produced – will need to physically be present. Even jobs we cannot yet imagine being remote, such as that of a diagnostic physician, may soon be possible using instruments and video from anywhere.
Recruiters will need to encourage flexible work arrangements and lobby with hiring managers to make these arrangements normal.
Recruiting will be more challenging and those recruiters who like to “fill positions” will find themselves looking for other kinds of work. Recruiters will need to be proactive, great influences, technically savvy, and adaptable to emerging work trends.
Article printed from ERE.net: http://www.ere.net
This is a strange recession.
It is not affecting employment across the board as many of the past ones have, but rather seems to be targeting specific sectors and types of work. Obviously banking and financial services, but also manufacturing and anyone in a semi-skilled job such as auto workers are especially affected. Needs are pocketed and specific. Talent shortages remain.
Yet, I have had calls from search firms looking for key sales and marketing people, and for R&D talent. Senior HR executives are in demand, especially if they have global experience. Sectors still largely unscathed by the recession – healthcare, gaming, entertainment, pharmaceuticals, and biotech – are still facing talent shortages and global competition.
The growth of global supply chains, increasing automation, and greater process efficiency means we can do more with fewer. New jobs are being created daily, but they all require education and skill beyond that of many current candidates.
This, combined with the different attitudes candidates and employees have about work and about how they live their lives, changes how we recruit and employ people.
The highly skilled, experienced, and educated will have an increasing edge in employment. And this recession should be a clarion call for an increased focus on education, training, and employment development. Everyone involved with talent will need to look at both development and acquisition as channels to meet their needs, rather than focus entirely on recruiting.
There are a number of permanent changes we will see.
Candidates Become Smarter, Warier
The first change is that many candidates will be reluctant to work under the same conditions as usual. Candidates have access to unparalleled information about a prospective employer through the Internet and its many sources. Reliance on a single firm for security has already eroded, and this recession will strengthen employees’ wariness about promises and deferred compensation. More top employees will seek employment contracts that include clauses that spell out layoff pay and benefits.
Candidates will probe positions more deeply and they will want more influence over the type of work they do. Prepare for candidates to negotiate what they will and won’t do.
Free Agency
Recessions have, in the past, increased the pool of people who decide to become free agents – contractors, consultants, and part-time workers. More people than ever are trying out life as independent workers. Many will not make it and return to the corporate fold, but they will be wiser and better prepared to abandon ship than they were before.
Many others will find they would rather work on their own than go back under the very insecure and fragile corporate umbrella. Companies will have to identify and take care of their key producers better than ever. While many firms do work hard to keep key talent, they will have to increase this effort and explore more creative ways to engage those people.
Charles Handy, a management writer and educator who has written numerous books on the organizations of the future, predicted that up to half of some company’s talent may eventually work as free agent, contracting to those firms as temporary staff, contractors, or part-timers. This will be a lasting change that is accelerated because of the recession.
Recruiters and HR staff will have to accommodate these free agents. Our internal regulations will have to be modified to make the use of contractors legal and compliant with IRS regulations and it may be necessary to lease employees, employ more employment contracts, and learn to share talent between organizations.
These changes will be fought by the legal department and more HR leaders, yet I believe companies will eventually have to embrace these ideas to be competitive.
Values Rule
Gen Y candidates, in particular, but all employees to a growing degree, are seeking companies that hold values high and make and keep commitments to their employees and their families. They seek environmentally sensitive, charitable, and ethical firms.
Gen Y is the tip of a spear followed by the even more morally and environmentally committed Gen M. They will have even higher expectations than the Baby Boomers ever did. While shareholder value will always be a core concern of the management team, they will also have to understand how important employees feel that values are and how close a scrutiny they will give every corporate action and statement.
Recruiters have to understand the values of the firms they work for and find better ways to match people to those values. They will have to also convince the management of firms that what they DO is just as important as what they say and that this emerging candidate pool focuses on actions almost entirely.
Flexible Work Arrangements
Employees now want to work where they want. The Internet has made it possible for most services and knowledge workers to be located far away from the physical center of their company.
Designers, call-center staff, sales people, some HR folks, and most anyone who works with information, writing, or data can effectively work wherever they wish. Only a handful of people – those whose work requires their hands or eyes on the work being produced – will need to physically be present. Even jobs we cannot yet imagine being remote, such as that of a diagnostic physician, may soon be possible using instruments and video from anywhere.
Recruiters will need to encourage flexible work arrangements and lobby with hiring managers to make these arrangements normal.
Recruiting will be more challenging and those recruiters who like to “fill positions” will find themselves looking for other kinds of work. Recruiters will need to be proactive, great influences, technically savvy, and adaptable to emerging work trends.
Article printed from ERE.net: http://www.ere.net
Thursday, October 30, 2008
PayScale’s 2008 Market Pricing Practice Survey
Summary of results:
· Organization’s employment growth between 2007 and 2008 was not as bad as economic news might indicate. Only 23% of organizations reported downsizing their workforce between the period, while 45% of organizations reported increasing their size and 32% remained unchanged.
The average decline rate was 15% of the total workforce. Organizations employing less than 100 full time employees declining by 22% while organizations employing more than 100 full time employees reported declining by just 11%.
Industries that experienced employment growth were Telecommunications, Pharmaceuticals, Banking, Staffing/Recruiting and Human Resource Consulting, Healthcare and Technology/Computers/Software. Industries that declined were Real Estate, Hospitality, Mortgage Financing, Wholesale, Insurance and Construction.
· Only 11.6% of organizations reported that their compensation data budgets declined from 2007 to 2008, while 48.5% reported that their budget had increased. Additionally, 48.7% of organizations reported that they expected their 2009 budgets to increase, while only 9.7% believed that their budgets would decrease in 2009.
· While 2007 industry forecasts indicated that employee retention would be the top HR priority of 2008, only 28.2% of organizations reported retention as their top concern. 26.3% of organizations reported that retention was only one of many concerns and almost half of all respondents, 47.5%, indicated that retention was only a minor concern or not at all.
Interestingly, organizations were split between whether employee retention would be an issue in 2009, with 52.5% of respondents indicating that they thought it would be, and only 47.5% thinking that it would not.
The top three reasons that HR professionals reported employees leaving a job were personal reasons, 41.4%, poor performance, 41.1%, and seeking advancement opportunities elsewhere,34.6%.
· Employee retirement does not appear to be affecting many employer’s recruiting or retention efforts. Only 15.5% of organizations reported that retirement affected their 2008 staffing efforts and only 21% believe that it will be a factor in 2009.
· When it comes to structuring compensation, it appears that organizations broadly fall into two buckets: ad hoc programs to meet objectives and formal structures. 65.8% of organizations use Salary Ranges to structure their pay while 26.5% set pay on a case-by-case basis. Only 7.7% of organizations reported setting pay using broad bands.
Half of all organizations, 49.5%, adjust their pay structures as needed, while 44% of organizations set their pay every year. Only 7.7% of organizations reported adjusting their pay structures every other year. Of the organizations that structured their pay as needed, only 40% reported doing a benchmarking project in 2007. 62.6% of organizations conduct focal point reviews at a specific time each year, while the remaining 37.4% adjusted compensation on the employee’s anniversary.
· Types of bonuses used vary significantly across organizations. 72.1% of organizations offer incentive bonuses, but only 29% of those organizations offer bonuses across the board. 59.8% of organizations reported using spot bonuses, 27.3% hiring bonuses, 17.5% retention and 67.1 target incentives.
Survey Results:
How has your workforce changed in size in 2008?
Increased – 45%
Decreased – 23%
Remained the same – 32%
By Organization Size: Increased Decreased Remained the Same
<100>1,500 Employees: 49% 21% 29%
By Industry: Increased Decreased Remained the Same
Telecommunications: 65% 25% 10%
Pharmaceuticals: 63% 25% 13%
Staffing/Recruiting: 62% 23% 15%
Human Resource Consulting: 57% 14% 29%
Banking: 54% 21% 25%
Healthcare: 54% 10% 36%
Retail: 48% 15% 38%
Finance: 47% 26% 26%
Technology: 44% 33% 22%
Manufacturing: 42% 24% 33%
Government: 41% 14% 45%
Construction: 36% 43% 21%
Insurance: 34% 34% 31%
Wholesale: 33% 24% 43%
Hospitality: 13% 19% 69%
Real Estate: 7% 57% 36%
Total 45% 23% 32%
How big a concern has retention been to your organization in 2008?
Not at all/somewhat – 47.5%
One of many concerns – 26.3%
Top concern – 28.2%
Do you believe that retention will be a major issue in 2009?
Yes – 52.5%
No – 47.5%
What are the top three reasons people leave your organization in 2008?
Personal reasons (family, relocation, work/life balance) 41.4%
Poor performance (organization initiated) – 41.1%
Seeking advancement opportunities elsewhere – 34.6%
PayScale, Inc. - (886) 699-0709 www.payscale.com
· Organization’s employment growth between 2007 and 2008 was not as bad as economic news might indicate. Only 23% of organizations reported downsizing their workforce between the period, while 45% of organizations reported increasing their size and 32% remained unchanged.
The average decline rate was 15% of the total workforce. Organizations employing less than 100 full time employees declining by 22% while organizations employing more than 100 full time employees reported declining by just 11%.
Industries that experienced employment growth were Telecommunications, Pharmaceuticals, Banking, Staffing/Recruiting and Human Resource Consulting, Healthcare and Technology/Computers/Software. Industries that declined were Real Estate, Hospitality, Mortgage Financing, Wholesale, Insurance and Construction.
· Only 11.6% of organizations reported that their compensation data budgets declined from 2007 to 2008, while 48.5% reported that their budget had increased. Additionally, 48.7% of organizations reported that they expected their 2009 budgets to increase, while only 9.7% believed that their budgets would decrease in 2009.
· While 2007 industry forecasts indicated that employee retention would be the top HR priority of 2008, only 28.2% of organizations reported retention as their top concern. 26.3% of organizations reported that retention was only one of many concerns and almost half of all respondents, 47.5%, indicated that retention was only a minor concern or not at all.
Interestingly, organizations were split between whether employee retention would be an issue in 2009, with 52.5% of respondents indicating that they thought it would be, and only 47.5% thinking that it would not.
The top three reasons that HR professionals reported employees leaving a job were personal reasons, 41.4%, poor performance, 41.1%, and seeking advancement opportunities elsewhere,34.6%.
· Employee retirement does not appear to be affecting many employer’s recruiting or retention efforts. Only 15.5% of organizations reported that retirement affected their 2008 staffing efforts and only 21% believe that it will be a factor in 2009.
· When it comes to structuring compensation, it appears that organizations broadly fall into two buckets: ad hoc programs to meet objectives and formal structures. 65.8% of organizations use Salary Ranges to structure their pay while 26.5% set pay on a case-by-case basis. Only 7.7% of organizations reported setting pay using broad bands.
Half of all organizations, 49.5%, adjust their pay structures as needed, while 44% of organizations set their pay every year. Only 7.7% of organizations reported adjusting their pay structures every other year. Of the organizations that structured their pay as needed, only 40% reported doing a benchmarking project in 2007. 62.6% of organizations conduct focal point reviews at a specific time each year, while the remaining 37.4% adjusted compensation on the employee’s anniversary.
· Types of bonuses used vary significantly across organizations. 72.1% of organizations offer incentive bonuses, but only 29% of those organizations offer bonuses across the board. 59.8% of organizations reported using spot bonuses, 27.3% hiring bonuses, 17.5% retention and 67.1 target incentives.
Survey Results:
How has your workforce changed in size in 2008?
Increased – 45%
Decreased – 23%
Remained the same – 32%
By Organization Size: Increased Decreased Remained the Same
<100>1,500 Employees: 49% 21% 29%
By Industry: Increased Decreased Remained the Same
Telecommunications: 65% 25% 10%
Pharmaceuticals: 63% 25% 13%
Staffing/Recruiting: 62% 23% 15%
Human Resource Consulting: 57% 14% 29%
Banking: 54% 21% 25%
Healthcare: 54% 10% 36%
Retail: 48% 15% 38%
Finance: 47% 26% 26%
Technology: 44% 33% 22%
Manufacturing: 42% 24% 33%
Government: 41% 14% 45%
Construction: 36% 43% 21%
Insurance: 34% 34% 31%
Wholesale: 33% 24% 43%
Hospitality: 13% 19% 69%
Real Estate: 7% 57% 36%
Total 45% 23% 32%
How big a concern has retention been to your organization in 2008?
Not at all/somewhat – 47.5%
One of many concerns – 26.3%
Top concern – 28.2%
Do you believe that retention will be a major issue in 2009?
Yes – 52.5%
No – 47.5%
What are the top three reasons people leave your organization in 2008?
Personal reasons (family, relocation, work/life balance) 41.4%
Poor performance (organization initiated) – 41.1%
Seeking advancement opportunities elsewhere – 34.6%
PayScale, Inc. - (886) 699-0709 www.payscale.com
Friday, April 11, 2008
Note from Boss Saved 50 Years: Little Things Do Matter
It's amazing how the little things mean so much, stan.
By Elaine Quayle, BLR Editor
Just MY E-pinion
We may think that small tokens of appreciation don't matter to workers, but here's the story of a boss's congratulatory letter that was treasured for 50 years.
My mother put only her most valuable things in her white leather jewelry box. And since her jewelry collection was meager, she used the drawer in the box to hold pictures, newspaper clippings, and other important memorabilia.
After she died, as I was going through the drawer, I came across an ecru vellum envelope with my father's name handwritten in script across the front. When I took the letter out, the first thing I noticed was the indentations made in the translucent paper by the punctuation marks, hit hard by the keys of a typewriter. Then I noticed the dark blue embossing on the top: William S. Simpson, General Manager, Raybestos Division, Raybestos-Manhattan. It was a letter from my father's employer that my mother had kept for more than 50 years!
This letter came to mind when I was editing BLR's update of the Encyclopedia of Prewritten Personnel Letters (see below for info), which includes sample letters of congratulations. And that is exactly what this letter was.
Dear George:
Congratulations on winning the Men's Industrial Horseshoe Championship. Raybestos is proud of the record set by our team and hopes that you enjoyed being a part of this activity. In recognition of your victory, we have arranged to give you an award, which we trust will serve as a reminder of your accomplishment.
Sincerely,
Bill Simpson (signed in ink)
It may have been the "Bill" that prompted my parents to save this letter; he was always referred to as "Mr. Simpson" out of respect for his position and the esteem the workers held him in. Or it may have been because the company was "proud" of my father's "accomplishment."
Raybestos-Manhattan in Stratford, Connecticut, was a "family-friendly" company long before the term was coined. My father, uncle, and several other relatives worked there making brake linings. I had seen Mr. Simpson several times at the annual children's Christmas Party, where there were goodies, clowns, and presents in a giant pile for a child to select from. And his face was on the monthly factory newsletter, along with the bowling scores, births, birthdays, and results of the safety incentive program. I had even spoken to Mr. Simpson when he attended the wake of my father, who was a 30-year employee.
I recently thought of this letter again when I read in our newsletter Best Practices in HR an interview with Judith M. Barwick, Ph.D., about what she has named the "Psychological Recession" in American's workplace, which is causing low productivity, employee apathy, and high turnover. "When people are perceived as a cost and not a resource, when they are treated as a liability and not an asset, when no one seems to know or care that they are there, [employees] don't work well, and they don't stay," says Barwick.
This statement made me wonder if, in our current workplace culture, a worker would have anything meaningful from an employer (and I don't think a printout of a generic email would count) to save in a jewelry box for 50 years. Would your employees? Are your employees a part of the psychological recession, or are they made to feel, like my father was, that they are important to the company no matter what their job?
By Elaine Quayle, BLR Editor
Just MY E-pinion
We may think that small tokens of appreciation don't matter to workers, but here's the story of a boss's congratulatory letter that was treasured for 50 years.
My mother put only her most valuable things in her white leather jewelry box. And since her jewelry collection was meager, she used the drawer in the box to hold pictures, newspaper clippings, and other important memorabilia.
After she died, as I was going through the drawer, I came across an ecru vellum envelope with my father's name handwritten in script across the front. When I took the letter out, the first thing I noticed was the indentations made in the translucent paper by the punctuation marks, hit hard by the keys of a typewriter. Then I noticed the dark blue embossing on the top: William S. Simpson, General Manager, Raybestos Division, Raybestos-Manhattan. It was a letter from my father's employer that my mother had kept for more than 50 years!
This letter came to mind when I was editing BLR's update of the Encyclopedia of Prewritten Personnel Letters (see below for info), which includes sample letters of congratulations. And that is exactly what this letter was.
Dear George:
Congratulations on winning the Men's Industrial Horseshoe Championship. Raybestos is proud of the record set by our team and hopes that you enjoyed being a part of this activity. In recognition of your victory, we have arranged to give you an award, which we trust will serve as a reminder of your accomplishment.
Sincerely,
Bill Simpson (signed in ink)
It may have been the "Bill" that prompted my parents to save this letter; he was always referred to as "Mr. Simpson" out of respect for his position and the esteem the workers held him in. Or it may have been because the company was "proud" of my father's "accomplishment."
Raybestos-Manhattan in Stratford, Connecticut, was a "family-friendly" company long before the term was coined. My father, uncle, and several other relatives worked there making brake linings. I had seen Mr. Simpson several times at the annual children's Christmas Party, where there were goodies, clowns, and presents in a giant pile for a child to select from. And his face was on the monthly factory newsletter, along with the bowling scores, births, birthdays, and results of the safety incentive program. I had even spoken to Mr. Simpson when he attended the wake of my father, who was a 30-year employee.
I recently thought of this letter again when I read in our newsletter Best Practices in HR an interview with Judith M. Barwick, Ph.D., about what she has named the "Psychological Recession" in American's workplace, which is causing low productivity, employee apathy, and high turnover. "When people are perceived as a cost and not a resource, when they are treated as a liability and not an asset, when no one seems to know or care that they are there, [employees] don't work well, and they don't stay," says Barwick.
This statement made me wonder if, in our current workplace culture, a worker would have anything meaningful from an employer (and I don't think a printout of a generic email would count) to save in a jewelry box for 50 years. Would your employees? Are your employees a part of the psychological recession, or are they made to feel, like my father was, that they are important to the company no matter what their job?
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Positioning the Strategic Role of Recruiters in Volatile Economic Times
Is your organization marching down the wrong path?
Monday, February 11, 2008 by Dr. John Sullivan
by Dr. John Sullivan and Master Burnett
The U.S. economy is like a sprinter trying his best to run a long-distance race. It takes off at full speed until it burns up its resources and has to slow down while it recovers, only to take off again shortly thereafter. Time and time again, companies in the U.S. have weathered periods of economic expansion and contraction, but for the first time in recent history (since the Romans ruled civilization), the circumstances are a little different. The conditions are so different, in fact, that the recruiting profession may avoid being decimated this time around.
While many economists agree that the U.S. will likely avoid a recession despite the collapse of the housing market (which is leading to widespread layoffs in construction, mortgage financing, and supporting industries), macroeconomic growth rates are going to be much lower than we have become accustomed to, but they will still be positive.
In January, layoffs by U.S. employers surged 69% to 74,986 according to Challenger, Gray, & Christmas. Despite that gloomy news, more than 58,000 of those cut from their organizations found other employment by the month's end, resulting in a net increase among the jobless of just 17,000. These numbers are pretty good when you consider that natural attrition associated with the aging workforce should already be leading to a significant reduction in the available labor pool. But, the housing crisis isn't over. Some say we have only experienced the tip of the iceberg, so the volume and size of layoff announcements are likely to grow in coming months.
So what's the good news? From a recruiting perspective, this period of economic contraction is different than ones we previously endured for a number of reasons, including:
· The Weak Dollar. While many Americans bemoan the dollar's current value, its relative weakness is doing something very important for the U.S. economy: It is making goods and services produced in the U.S. more affordable to consumers in other nations, which is bringing money back to the United States. This trend is contributing to a growing number of U.S. companies achieving record revenue growth based primary on sales in Europe, Asia, and Latin America. Whirlpool, for instance, reported record results despite a dramatic decline in demand among U.S. consumers. Sales in Europe were up 12%, Latin America 30%, and Asia 26%. Growth abroad creates new jobs here as corporate functions grow to support operations.
· The Aging Workforce. We know this topic has been beaten to death, but 2008 is only the first year of the projected contraction in the U.S. labor force. It's possible that we talked about it too much before it actually got here, leading people to believe it was a non-issue because they were not feeling the pain. While it is likely that older workers will remain in the workforce longer due to a decline in the value of their retirement funds, not every older worker will have that as an option as medical conditions, skill obsolescence, and declines in physical capability play out.
· Reduced Product Development Life Cycles. Product life cycles are not often talked about in recruiting, but they should be. Over the course of the last decade, advancements in technology and growing competition from abroad have forced product development life cycles (the time required to take a product from conception through delivery) to become significantly shorter. Cell phones, which once took 18-36 months to develop, today start flying off store shelves in as little as 90 days. It's all about innovation. In the last decade, brands kept customers loyal and, before that, it was proximity to customer and customer service. But today, keeping customers loyal requires innovation and price control. Rapid innovation requires talent capable of producing it, and with life cycles as compressed as they are, it requires a constant stream of such talent.
· Global Competition. Would you travel to India for surgery, or would you carry a credit card issued by a financial institution in Indonesia? More and more U.S. consumers are. Nearly every industry in the U.S. is facing competition from a foreign competitor, if not for customers then for material resources. It used to be that the U.S. could win every battle simply because the dollar was so strong, but that isn't true anymore. Foreign upstarts that U.S. companies once outsourced to are now leveraging their store of U.S. dollars and starting to compete head to head with these companies they once serviced. It is a phenomenon happening around the world.
· Global Labor Demographics. When HR practitioners in the U.S. think about the aging workforce, they think about the U.S., but they should be thinking much larger. With the exception of South America and a handful of small countries elsewhere, the aging of the Baby Boom generation is a global phenomenon. Japan, China, India, Germany, and Italy are all in much worse shape than the U.S. This fact will drive the value of available labor up in these nations, further reducing the economic viability of outsourcing provided by wage labor arbitrage.
The long and short of the story is that your organization will continue to need a significant influx of talent despite a contraction in the U.S. economy.
It's All about Capability and Capacity
To survive, grow, and best the competition, organizations need to have both the capability to produce innovative products at a price point consumers will accept and the capacity to produce enough units at the right time in the right place. While capacity is a function involving talent, equipment, and material resources, capability is almost entirely derived from talent. When it comes down to manipulating the capability of an organization, corporate leaders have but two options: either build capability by training and developing talent or acquire talent through recruiting, be it for employees, consultants, contractors, strategic partnerships, or outsourcing agreements.
For most corporate leaders, the desired option is clear: Both CEOs and CFOs have ranked their organizations' ability to recruit top talent among their top concerns for a number of years. Despite the growing visibility of their unhappiness with their organizations' capability in this area, a number of HR leaders continue to adopt development over recruitment as a method to mitigate the potential impact of the aging workforce.
This critical "make" versus "buy" decision is one that organizations make without nearly enough insight. Skill sets and employees, for that matter, face obsolescence just like any other resource that organizations consume to produce goods and services. It's kind of harsh to think of it that way, but organizations often keep obsolete talent around for way too long.
When making the critical decision about how to manage the capability and capacity of the organization to achieve its objectives, organizations really need to answer the following questions:
Monday, February 11, 2008 by Dr. John Sullivan
by Dr. John Sullivan and Master Burnett
The U.S. economy is like a sprinter trying his best to run a long-distance race. It takes off at full speed until it burns up its resources and has to slow down while it recovers, only to take off again shortly thereafter. Time and time again, companies in the U.S. have weathered periods of economic expansion and contraction, but for the first time in recent history (since the Romans ruled civilization), the circumstances are a little different. The conditions are so different, in fact, that the recruiting profession may avoid being decimated this time around.
While many economists agree that the U.S. will likely avoid a recession despite the collapse of the housing market (which is leading to widespread layoffs in construction, mortgage financing, and supporting industries), macroeconomic growth rates are going to be much lower than we have become accustomed to, but they will still be positive.
In January, layoffs by U.S. employers surged 69% to 74,986 according to Challenger, Gray, & Christmas. Despite that gloomy news, more than 58,000 of those cut from their organizations found other employment by the month's end, resulting in a net increase among the jobless of just 17,000. These numbers are pretty good when you consider that natural attrition associated with the aging workforce should already be leading to a significant reduction in the available labor pool. But, the housing crisis isn't over. Some say we have only experienced the tip of the iceberg, so the volume and size of layoff announcements are likely to grow in coming months.
So what's the good news? From a recruiting perspective, this period of economic contraction is different than ones we previously endured for a number of reasons, including:
· The Weak Dollar. While many Americans bemoan the dollar's current value, its relative weakness is doing something very important for the U.S. economy: It is making goods and services produced in the U.S. more affordable to consumers in other nations, which is bringing money back to the United States. This trend is contributing to a growing number of U.S. companies achieving record revenue growth based primary on sales in Europe, Asia, and Latin America. Whirlpool, for instance, reported record results despite a dramatic decline in demand among U.S. consumers. Sales in Europe were up 12%, Latin America 30%, and Asia 26%. Growth abroad creates new jobs here as corporate functions grow to support operations.
· The Aging Workforce. We know this topic has been beaten to death, but 2008 is only the first year of the projected contraction in the U.S. labor force. It's possible that we talked about it too much before it actually got here, leading people to believe it was a non-issue because they were not feeling the pain. While it is likely that older workers will remain in the workforce longer due to a decline in the value of their retirement funds, not every older worker will have that as an option as medical conditions, skill obsolescence, and declines in physical capability play out.
· Reduced Product Development Life Cycles. Product life cycles are not often talked about in recruiting, but they should be. Over the course of the last decade, advancements in technology and growing competition from abroad have forced product development life cycles (the time required to take a product from conception through delivery) to become significantly shorter. Cell phones, which once took 18-36 months to develop, today start flying off store shelves in as little as 90 days. It's all about innovation. In the last decade, brands kept customers loyal and, before that, it was proximity to customer and customer service. But today, keeping customers loyal requires innovation and price control. Rapid innovation requires talent capable of producing it, and with life cycles as compressed as they are, it requires a constant stream of such talent.
· Global Competition. Would you travel to India for surgery, or would you carry a credit card issued by a financial institution in Indonesia? More and more U.S. consumers are. Nearly every industry in the U.S. is facing competition from a foreign competitor, if not for customers then for material resources. It used to be that the U.S. could win every battle simply because the dollar was so strong, but that isn't true anymore. Foreign upstarts that U.S. companies once outsourced to are now leveraging their store of U.S. dollars and starting to compete head to head with these companies they once serviced. It is a phenomenon happening around the world.
· Global Labor Demographics. When HR practitioners in the U.S. think about the aging workforce, they think about the U.S., but they should be thinking much larger. With the exception of South America and a handful of small countries elsewhere, the aging of the Baby Boom generation is a global phenomenon. Japan, China, India, Germany, and Italy are all in much worse shape than the U.S. This fact will drive the value of available labor up in these nations, further reducing the economic viability of outsourcing provided by wage labor arbitrage.
The long and short of the story is that your organization will continue to need a significant influx of talent despite a contraction in the U.S. economy.
It's All about Capability and Capacity
To survive, grow, and best the competition, organizations need to have both the capability to produce innovative products at a price point consumers will accept and the capacity to produce enough units at the right time in the right place. While capacity is a function involving talent, equipment, and material resources, capability is almost entirely derived from talent. When it comes down to manipulating the capability of an organization, corporate leaders have but two options: either build capability by training and developing talent or acquire talent through recruiting, be it for employees, consultants, contractors, strategic partnerships, or outsourcing agreements.
For most corporate leaders, the desired option is clear: Both CEOs and CFOs have ranked their organizations' ability to recruit top talent among their top concerns for a number of years. Despite the growing visibility of their unhappiness with their organizations' capability in this area, a number of HR leaders continue to adopt development over recruitment as a method to mitigate the potential impact of the aging workforce.
This critical "make" versus "buy" decision is one that organizations make without nearly enough insight. Skill sets and employees, for that matter, face obsolescence just like any other resource that organizations consume to produce goods and services. It's kind of harsh to think of it that way, but organizations often keep obsolete talent around for way too long.
When making the critical decision about how to manage the capability and capacity of the organization to achieve its objectives, organizations really need to answer the following questions:
- Realistically, what percentage of the workforce will need to be replaced in the coming years either due to attrition, natural obsolescence, or business change?
- What percentage of headcount growth will be needed to fuel growth initiatives?
- Historically, what has been the cycle time associated with developing talent into the roles that will most likely be vacant?
- What percentage of talent developed fails post-attainment of the role?
- What percentage of talent developed separates from the organization prior to attainment of the role?
- Does a significant supply of talent exist inside the organization that can be developed into the role by the projected time needed, accounting for failure rate and turnover?
- What would be the cost associated with the development initiative compared to that of an acquisition initiative?
- What would be the cost of an extended vacancy in a key role should either initiative fail?
In some cases, development makes sense, but in the vast majority of cases related to professional talent, the economics involved point to talent acquisition as the more viable option.
It's All About Who You Are As a Company
Step Up and Reposition Recruiting as the Strategic Activity It Is
The economic points are clear: The skies are going to be partly cloudy with areas of sunshine. Organizations need to become more adept at routinely releasing obsolete talent and replacing it either through recruiting or development, whichever makes the most economic sense. But, the decision must be made based on data and not on personal interests or beliefs. Recruiters need to step up; understand the business strategy; figure out the impact of top talent, average talent, poor talent, and no talent; and advise corporate leaders where talent opportunities exist. No one understands the labor market better than recruiters; unfortunately, way too many accept the transactional part of their job as the job. To "build" versus "buy" is a decision that could make all the difference in an organization, but it is one that too few organizations ever research. Since no one else is doing it, step up and preserve your job. No one else will!
Dr. John Sullivan (JohnS@sfsu.edu) is a well-known thought leader in HR. He is a frequent speaker and advisor to Fortune 500 and Silicon Valley firms. Formerly the chief talent officer for Agilent Technologies (the 43,000-employee HP spin-off), he is now a professor of management at San Francisco State University. He was called the "Michael Jordan of Hiring" by Fast Company magazine. More recruiting articles by Dr. Sullivan can be found in the ER Daily archives. Information about his numerous other articles, books and manuals about recruiting and HR can be found at www.drjohnsullivan.com. Dr. Sullivan is also the editor of VP of HR, an e-newsletter providing "out of the box" solutions for senior HR managers. Free subscriptions can be obtained on his website.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)