Effectively Using Employees’ Opinions to Shape HR Strategy

Without a prompt and visible response, even the best designed employee opinion survey or exit interview process will fall prey to employee cynicism. If employees feel that management is ignoring their feedback, an effort to involve their opinions will likely cause a drop in morale.

Utilizing employee opinion and exit interview data well is a challenge. In this Astronology®, we share methods for strategic analysis that can help you turn your opinion-based data into concrete strategic objectives.

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES IN HR
Strategic objectives in human resources are set to reinforce employee efforts and behaviors in support of an organization’s critical success factors – factors that will determine the future success or failure of an organization.

Many successful human resource functions have taken a page from the book of Drs. Kaplan and Norton and adapted the Balanced Scorecard approach to their strategies. In terms of HR, this approach involves viewing the organization through five strategic lenses:

• Learning and growth
• Customer
• Financial
• Quality
• Human Resources

This approach involves developing metrics (criteria for measurement), collecting data, and analyzing it as it relates to each of these perspectives.

In the quest to link the needs of the organization and the needs of its employees, conflicts often arise. Whether they arise from miscommunication, lack of acceptance, or a discord between organizational and employee values, HR is at a disadvantage when it does not strive to understand these conflicts and their foundations.

DATA ANALYSIS
Two powerful tools for collecting the data needed for this effort are employee opinion surveys and exit interviews.

Successful strategic planning in human resources begins with linking the information from opinion surveys and exit interviews. Trend analysis will become easier with time, but using both sources in tandem will reveal a clearer picture of working conditions. The following questions may be of use in this analysis:

• What do both sources identify as common sources of dissatisfaction?
• What do both sources identify as common motivators?
• What perceptions of the organization and its leadership are common?
• Are particular supervisors singled out as strong or weak leaders?
• How is human resources perceived in both sources?
• What are employee perceptions regarding the organization’s mission, vision, values, and objectives in both sources?

SWOT ANALYSIS
Once these sources of data are analyzed, it is the responsibility of human resources to conduct an internal analysis of its programs as they relate to communicating and reinforcing the strategic values of the organization. To this end, SWOT Analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) is an excellent strategic tool.

SWOT Analysis is a flexible line of questioning that can be used for organizational, individual, or competitive ends. In this context, the data analysis described above will be further organized:

• What are the current strengths of the organization?
• What are the obvious weaknesses to be modified?
• What opportunities exist to modify systems and / or programs that will better reinforce those employee activities and behaviors needed by the organization?
• What threats could interfere with successful implementation of necessary changes?

HR has an obligation to provide the organization’s leadership with insights regarding employee perceptions, as well as with concrete recommendations for reinforcing what is working and what needs to be changed. Employee opinion survey and exit analysis data are prime sources of information in this endeavor, but their collection could result in a backlash if results are not both shared and acted upon. After analysis is complete, share some version of the results with your employees, and tell them what will be done about the problems they have identified.

For instance, if an employee opinion survey communicates a lack of understanding about the organization’s mission, vision, values, and objectives, a training program could be instituted to address the problem. As this information can be distributed via e-mail, a technically savvy organization can raise employee awareness with no greater cost than a few hours of writing time.

Effective use of employee opinion and exit interview data provides the backing and justification the organization’s senior leadership team needs to support HR’s recommendations. Linking this supportive data to concrete proposals and programs that demonstrate ROI, return on investment, is key. The lack of response to employee concerns raised in the collected data can lead to increased turnover, inability to recruit effectively, and, potentially, lower productivity and efficiency due to lower morale.

The Onboarding & Retention Relationship

         O.C. Tanner reports that 69% of employees are more likely to stay with their places of employment for at least three years after a great onboarding experience. Back in 2009, an Aberdeen Group survey reported that 86% of senior executives and HR professionals believe that a new hire’s decision to stay with an organization long-term is made within the first six months of employment. Is the process of onboarding really that critical to retention?

         Research suggests that perhaps the first 90 days of employment are more critical than we think in terms of retention. The Wynhurst Group found that 22% of employee turnover happens in the first 45 days of employment. BambooHR found that one-third of 1,000 individuals surveyed quit a job within six months of hire. A study from Kronos Incorporated earlier this year also indicates that many feel the onboarding process can affect employee retention, as it should include more than orientation paperwork. Also of note is that

• 60% of survey respondents felt the main purpose of onboarding is to integrate employees into the organization’s culture.
• 36% blame insufficient technology for their inability to automate and better organize onboarding programs…resulting in the inability to properly train managers in proper onboarding techniques.

        Sharlyn Lauby, the HR Bartender & president of ITM Group, Inc. explains, “We all know turnover is expensive, both in terms of direct costs and intellectual capital. Organizations can increase retention by focusing on those activities that get employees engaged from the start. One way to do that is by taking care of administrative paperwork before day one so employees can focus on their role and other things that matter to them most. Onboarding processes set new hires up for success by building positive work relationships, making good on promises made during interviews, and providing a career roadmap.”

        What should an organization consider when creating an onboarding program geared to retain an employee? In an article on the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) site, Roy Maurer quoted Amber Hyatt from SilkRoad, suggesting these reflective, brainstorming questions:

• When will onboarding start?
• How long will it last?
• What impression do you want new employees to walk away with at the end of the first day?
• What do new employees need to know about the culture and work environment?
• What role will HR play in the onboarding process? What about direct managers? Co-workers?
• What kind of goals do you want to set for new employees?
• How will you gather feedback on the program and measure its success?

          Another aspect to consider is technology. Although nothing will replace one-on-one conversation and experience within an organization’s culture, some organizations have taken the step to use technology to make the onboarding experience more robust:

• Ashoka: the non-profit organization has an onboarding management system that allows new staff to complete tasks and set their own goals. It is said to empower new hires to “own their development.”
• ADP: the software developers at ADP have software that give text and video introductions to new hires before they even enter the workplace.
• Yoi: the onboarding platform Yoi is based on the concept of “experiential learning.” Through a range of assignments and assessments, managers are able to customize the onboarding experience for all new employees.

         Have you given thought to updating the onboarding process at your organization? What are some changes you are considering? Will you be adding some technological upgrades? Share your thoughts in the comment section below!

Translating Military Experience into Civilian Organizational Needs: A How-To (Guest Article)

Contributed by: Rich Virgilio

Congratulations, HR Professional! You made it into 2018 and now you get to take on the challenge of achieving the goals your executive leadership set forth in the strategic plan for the year. Most of the goals are straightforward, but a new wrinkle has appeared. Your organization’s execs have made it a specific goal to bring in more talented, former military people as a way to add another dimension of experience that can be shared among the workforce. This is intended to improve teamwork, generate some fresh views on finding solutions to problems, and increase productivity by promoting a “selfless service” culture found in the uniformed services.

Certainly, your recruiting has always included sourcing from the veterans’ community, but expressly targeting military experience is a step beyond, and certainly challenging. You find yourself asking, “How do I know that the skills I need specifically fit what a veteran has to offer?” Maybe you feel hamstrung since you don’t have first-hand military experience, or that you’re unfamiliar with what the military actually does behind those walls and gates, or that certain knowledge that there’s a whole lot more that goes into daily operations besides “killing people and breaking things (as some wags occasionally express it).” Certainly your organization doesn’t do those things!

Well, OK, as a methodology, let’s think generically about what the services have to do to function as the organizations that they are. Yes, they are huge, but they are made up of many, many smaller and subordinate units. Subordination implies a degree of both responsibility (to a next higher supervisor, let us say) and specialized function (which is a necessary portion of a bigger one). Organizational relationships and communications exist in your organization as well as in these units where they wear uniforms.

Are you following my line of thinking so far? See how we’re getting away from thinking that being in the military is isolated from the skills your organization’s needs?

“But we need people who can sell, and military people don’t sell anything.”

So as a start and as an illustration of this approach, let’s break this idea of selling into the component parts of the selling process. Fundamentally, selling is recognizing a prospect’s shortfall that can be fulfilled by a product or service offered by the seller. The skill is in characterizing the shortfall, communicating the identified need to the prospect, communicating the beneficial characteristics of the product or service, and then obtaining a commitment to utilize the offering. Here’s the piece that’s missing from most people’s understanding of the military: it’s not static. Things change. Old ways of doing things, or applying old solutions, don’t improve matters. Corporals bring up new ideas to sergeants, lieutenants present new options to captains, commanders present new tactics to admirals. All of these communications are sales. Yes, sales. So your position description or requisition doesn’t just say “Sales experience a plus;” it says “Sales or military decision briefing experience a plus.”

Or, you need an operations manager at one of your warehouses. Instead of “Warehouse operations experience desired,” you open up the aperture a bit and add “military supply and logistics fulfillment experience a plus,” because you know that somehow those soldiers overseas need to get food at their deployed site and they aren’t going to shop at the local grocery –somebody is in charge of moving that food from warehouses stateside, across interstate highways, across oceans, across local roads, and into the hands of cooks. If someone has successfully done that for a couple of years, they could surely manage your warehouse. But making that connection requires both you and the candidate to be speaking the same language, otherwise you won’t realize that although one is talking blintzes and the other crêpes, you’re both talking pancakes.

An out-of-the-box (somewhat) suggestion for you to consider. This takes some time, but if your organization is serious about taking some proactive steps to increase your veteran “inventory,” the investment in effort and time could pay off. Don’t take it all on yourself! Communication is a two-way street, so think about reaching out to someone in the candidate pool whose résumé has at least a hint of what you’re looking for. Phrase it as a “request for more information.” Maybe like this: “Dear John, your résumé has some characteristics of what we’re looking for in our new widget production manager, but I need some better description in civilian terms of your experience at the Navy’s Widget Command so we can better understand if you’re a close enough fit to see if we should further invest time together.” Let the candidate take on the responsibility of presenting himself in your language. He will have been forewarned by his career change advisors to do it, and will do his best to better break out of any military-ese still remaining. And that will benefit you.

Give yourself a chance to effect this wrinkle in your recruiting. It’s not hard, but does take some focus and a bit of adjustment. And it’s a good way to assure yourself you haven’t missed some great talent because you weren’t thinking about how to connect with the veterans who are out there looking for you.

Rich Virgilio is a retired HR Professional and an occasional contributor to Astronology®. He currently resides just outside San Antonio, Texas.

To Ask or Not to Ask: The Salary History Question in Today’s Hiring Process

With increasing interest in the issue of gender-based pay gaps, legislation continues to make small movements to meet the challenge of eliminating pay inequity. One such movement has been recent legislation in a number of jurisdictions that bans asking job applicants / new hires about their salary histories. In this issue of Astronology®, we explore this new trend and what it means for employers.

It is heavily thought that asking an applicant his / her salary history continues the spiral of the gender-based pay gap and pay discrimination. For starters, if you begin your career with low pay at an early job, that pay rate could naturally affect the salary earned at the next job if hiring managers base their salary offers off your previous salary. In addition, historically, women tend to be offered lower salaries than men, even if the women negotiate with their employers.

This past summer, Massachusetts unanimously became the first state to enact a law that bans employers from requiring job candidates to reveal salary information, information that would be considered the basis for future pay. The law becomes effective on July 1, 2018. Jim Rooney, President and Chief Executive of the Boston Chamber of Commerce, mentions that the law does allow for candidates to be asked about salary expectations, thus providing hiring managers with an opening point for negotiations.

Another jurisdiction following Massachusetts’ lead is New York City. On April 5th, the New York City Council approved a similar law that prohibits employers from inquiring about, relying on, and verifying a job applicant’s salary history. According to a SHRM newsletter article, the new law, to be effective in six months’ time, will not apply to:

•  New York City employers acting pursuant to any federal, state or local law authorizing the disclosure or verification of salary history or requiring knowledge of salary history for employment purposes.
•  Current employees applying for an internal promotion or transfer.
• Public employee positions for which salary, benefits or other compensation are determined pursuant to procedures established in collective bargaining.

A Business Insider online article mentions that this new law amends the New York City Human Rights Law. This means that there will be two ways in which individuals can bring action against employers who violate the rule. After filing a complaint, if the City or court rules in favor of the plaintiff, damages could be awarded to the plaintiff. In addition, the City could choose to issue civil penalties to the employer. These penalties and fines can reach up to $250,000. The article also notes that since New York City houses not only national but also international organizations, there is speculation that this law could have a far reaching impact on many well beyond the five boroughs.

While we expect other cities and states to adopt similar laws, there also are cases where similar legislation is being disputed. Recently, the Chamber of Commerce for Greater Philadelphia filed a federal lawsuit to block the City’s signed wage equity law, a month before its May 23rd effective date. The lawsuit hinges on the argument that the law violates businesses’ freedom of speech and that the new law won’t do much to close gender pay gap issues. The lawsuit also suggests that the new law would deprive employers of information they could use to make effective decisions in the hiring process. We will have to keep a close watch on what happens in the “city of brotherly love” to see how this impending lawsuit affects other cities and states considering their own salary question ban laws. In the meantime, what can you do?

Organizations not subject to such a law can prepare now. Besides keeping a close eye on jurisdictions that have already passed such a law, pay attention to organizational reaction and changes that employers make in response. Proactively, review your organization’s job application to see if such a question is listed. Consider other options to the question that are in compliance with legal trends. Organizations also should consider training HR staff, line managers, and anyone involved in the hiring process on how to handle interviews after the implementation of new laws.

An additional step proactive employers should take is to ensure that their base pay compensation systems are market sensitive, up to date, and free from discrimination. As National Director Jennifer Loftus explains, “organizations should focus new hire salary offers on the value of the position, not the person’s last salary. While of course there will be natural variations in salary due to years of experience, education, or other factors deemed acceptable under the Equal Pay Act, using the job as the basis for salaries addresses the gender-based pay gap in an equitable fashion.”

Linking Gainshare Plans to Strategic Performance Assessment

Strategically aligned performance assessment processes have given attention to increased creativity in reward programs. A suggested rewards program can include gainsharing. While gainsharing has existed for many years, most equate it with profit sharing or a way to legitimize previously scheduled bonus payments. In this two-part Astronology®, we will discuss how to increase organizational success by combining gainsharing and the “Balanced Scorecard” strategic performance method.

Curiously, with combining the use of a simplified two-page performance assessment outline, focusing primarily on "Balanced Scorecard" strategic objectives and each employee's contribution to the organization through his / her essential functions, a strategic performance assessment plan can be created to give an organization enhanced success. How so? If designed properly, gainsharing can focus on the behaviors of individual employees and employee teams, resulting in a more motivated, successful organizational culture.

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) website describes gainsharing as: “a reward program that allows employees to share in an award based upon productivity gains or savings in excess of a predetermined baseline of performance. If an organization's goals include improving productivity, reducing waste, reducing costs, and/or creating a savings in production costs, a gainsharing program focuses employees on those goals.”

Organizations should keep in mind when considering any form of gainsharing that

1. An organization cannot expect its employees to continuously improve organization performance when:

• Their jobs limit their latitude & ability to change work processes, and
• When they are given little information about the business and / or management systems' focus on control.

2. Gainsharing’s primary goal is to support a philosophy of participative management. When commitment to change is lacking, the involvement process will be ineffective. Gainsharing then will fall short of expectations.

There are six basic components of and processes to build a successful gainshare program.

1. Define the group to be included. Many organizations attempt to make these programs all-inclusive. However, one must address the "line of sight" issue. All-inclusive programs sometimes lose their effectiveness since employees may not understand how they personally impact results.
2. Define the formula for measuring success and funding the share. According to the OPM website, “a gainsharing program is self-funding. Therefore, it requires reliable financial measures to calculate the ‘gains’ (i.e., profits or savings) that the organization and employees will share.” This is where the strategic balanced scorecard comes into play. Most organizations focus only on the financial aspects of the scorecard. While this financial emphasis ensures the funds for rewards will be available, this approach jeopardizes the other scorecard components. On the other hand, having four or five objectives can complicate the formula to the point that all are confused and have little trust in the outcomes.
3. Set the baselines and targets. The baseline for measurement should focus on historic information from the past fiscal year or quarter. Three levels of targets work best for all types of reward and recognition programs: threshold, target, and optimum. However, most gainshare programs focus on one specific level at which the actual share begins.
4. Determine the share between the organization and the employee. While organization culture often defines this, the most common ratio is 25% to employees and 75% to the organization. Some organizations first determine what percentage they want to reserve as retained earnings and then calculate the share. This ensures the ability to invest in future organizational improvements and, in public companies, to provide for stockholder equity.
5. Determine payout frequency. Many manufacturing organizations focus on an annual gainshare payout. There is an increasing trend towards quarterly shares to quickly reinforce the behaviors exhibited by employees. However, there may be financial reporting barriers that prevent this from happening. Those on a quarterly program commit to a payout within thirty days of the end of the quarter.
6. Develop the method to distribute shares to employees. Many advocate an equal share to all involved so as to reinforce the team aspect of the program. Some creative methods include distributing equal shares based on the total hours actually worked during the measurement period. Another determines the share based on the pay grade in which the job is classified. Care must be taken when distributing funds to non-exempt employees. Overtime payment is required on gainshare distributions.

Naturally, the next questions are “what are some critical tips in developing a strategically aligned gainshare program?” and “are there any negative impacts to using such a program?” In our next Astronology® article we will discuss these topics in more depth.

End of 2016, Beginning of 2017 - Astronology® Looks Back on an Exciting Year in HR

We find ourselves again at the end of another year! Can you believe the 4th quarter of 2016 is coming to a close? Continuing with previous year ending Astronology® releases, we will review some hot button issues & events in Human Resources in 2016, and how they may reappear in the HR realm during 2017.

Work Stoppage…to reappear again?
In September, many were surprised to learn that a college campus, Long Island University’s Brooklyn Campus (LIK-Brooklyn), was undergoing a faculty lockout. In a September Astronology®, we discussed work stoppages and learned that they are not held often. Lockouts and other forms of work stoppage occur with even large organizations, such as the NFL and Kellogg’s. Is it possible that other organizations can possibly find themselves in a similar bind in 2017? We certainly hope not. However, there have been murmurs of another sports franchise narrowly avoiding a lockout in the upcoming year. As a result, we do need to be mindful of the issue.

Minimum Wage Challenges?
In recent years, we have been peppered with discussions over living wages, the “Fight for $15” campaign, and their impacts on Human Resources and compensation. In April of this year, we saw New York Governor Andrew Cuomo reveal plans to raise the minimum wage to $15 by 2021. Other cities have also followed suit…or have already begun rolling schedules to reach higher wages. With the presidential elections over, and President-Elect Donald Trump making cabinet selections, many wonder what will become of the federal minimum wage. We all eagerly wait to see what happens with the minimum wage in 2017.

FLSA Final Rule. Is it on? Or off?
A number of organizations worked closely with their Human Resources partners and departments to prepare for the enactment of the FLSA Final Rule announced in May 2016. In some cases, job descriptions had to be clarified in order to help distinguish levels of positions. In other cases, adjustments in pay had to be made to ensure compliance. Then suddenly in November, a few days shy of the December 1 active date, an injunction was called and everything was put on pause. With a new presidential administration coming in, organizations are left with questions. Will the FLSA Final Rule push through? Will it be completely thrown out? Is it possible the mandate will be reformed? Only time will tell. We all anxiously await. In the meantime, it’s been suggested that organizations that have already made adjustments keep them, as the federal hold on the FLSA rule does not change any city or state laws.

Technology Marches Onward!
It’s predicted that by the year 2020, millennials will make up 75% of the workforce. This advancing change in workforce makeup also has accompanied an advance in technology. This technology can take many forms, including automation, gamification in performance reviews, and data analysis. Astron is especially hopeful to seeing more advancements in the area of HR technology and data analysis as a part of organizations’ strategic decision making processes.

As 2016 comes to a close, we eagerly look forward to 2017 for some answers to questions and some surprises in Human Resources. Were there other topics from 2016 that you think may make a resurgence in 2017? Why not share your thoughts with Astronology®! We’d love to hear your opinions!