| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Astronology - A Recap of The Road Show: What's New from the 2010 Human Resources Conferences
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Happy Thanksgiving!
Here at the Astron blog, we have a lot to be thankful for this Thanksgiving but most of all we want to thank all of you for coming to the blog and making us part of your daily Human Resources reading.
While you're busy shopping for presents between now and New Years, let us give you many presents as we provide great content here on the blog. Hope all of you have a great weekend of turkey (or tofurkey or turduken or turturkeykey) and football and family. Happy Thanksgiving!
-Andrew
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
What HR Can Learn From the Derek Jeter/Yankees Negotiations
Being played out in the New York media is a very public contract dispute between an employee and an employer. This isn't strange--especially not for sports--where the New York Jets' Darrelle Revis (who already had a contract, mind you) had a long contract dispute before it was finally settled in equally public fashion. But there have been few contract negotiations quite like this one--a legend who embodies an organization fighting on the back pages with a legendary organization that demands professionalism and results from its employees. In the end, the Yankees need Jeter and Jeter needs the Yankees...but in the meantime, they're left to squabble it out to sports writers.
But that doesn't mean that similar things don't go on in your own company. How many employees do you currently manage who are unhappy with their salaries but their loss would sting your company more than the financial outlay? How many employers have employees that they can probably do without but have meant so much to an organization that added financial incentive to stay around (and maybe as a reward for past results) may be appropriate? How many times does this situation become contentious and lead to a standstill between the perceived value of the employee and the offering value of the company?
The problem is that it doesn't look good from either side, but the employer has to figure a way to solve it before the problem spreads to other employees. Can you imagine if all the Yankees free agents were involved in this much of a public spectacle over the contract negotiations? If the Yankees were actually playing right now (and corporate America rarely has an off-season like baseball does) imagine the distraction this would cause--is the proposed cost savings worth it? The lesson here is not to pay employees just because they become disgruntled or to reward bad behavior, but sometimes a little extra pay (or other types of incentives) goes a long way to making sure a dispute does not get out of hand. As many people would find it weird to see Derek Jeter in anything other than Pinstripes, so you should find it weird to imagine your best employees working for one of your competitors.
 |
| HardballTalk |
But that doesn't mean that similar things don't go on in your own company. How many employees do you currently manage who are unhappy with their salaries but their loss would sting your company more than the financial outlay? How many employers have employees that they can probably do without but have meant so much to an organization that added financial incentive to stay around (and maybe as a reward for past results) may be appropriate? How many times does this situation become contentious and lead to a standstill between the perceived value of the employee and the offering value of the company?
The problem is that it doesn't look good from either side, but the employer has to figure a way to solve it before the problem spreads to other employees. Can you imagine if all the Yankees free agents were involved in this much of a public spectacle over the contract negotiations? If the Yankees were actually playing right now (and corporate America rarely has an off-season like baseball does) imagine the distraction this would cause--is the proposed cost savings worth it? The lesson here is not to pay employees just because they become disgruntled or to reward bad behavior, but sometimes a little extra pay (or other types of incentives) goes a long way to making sure a dispute does not get out of hand. As many people would find it weird to see Derek Jeter in anything other than Pinstripes, so you should find it weird to imagine your best employees working for one of your competitors.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Hiring or Not for 2010?
Since it is a week before Thanksgiving, many would think that hiring for 2010 would be, for the most part, done. And with an economy bouncing up and down, many companies would seem to be wise to halt hiring for the time being. But judging by the amount of new job postings floating around the interwebs, it would seem that the opposite may be the case. More and more companies are listing for positions and looking to hire "immediately". So where is the disconnect here?
Well it seems that while many companies are posting for jobs, and some are even interviewing candidates, very few are actually hiring. Some companies are just using this as a "feeling out" period, trying to figure out what type of candidate pool they have to choose from and about how much it would cost them if they wanted to actually hire the candidates. Other companies want to get candidates in the door so they can have their names and their interviews taken care of so when the 2011 budget dollars get released, they can go ahead and spend.
But there is yet another class of companies that just seem to be interviewing for the sake of interviewing. I have spoken to more than one person who said their company has instituted a hiring freeze, but still continue to list jobs online and even bring in people to interview knowing full well they can't hire them.
One of the questions hiring managers, human resources, and even the candidate being interviewed need to ask is: when is this job for? Is it really immediate hire or is the budget there for sometime in 2011--or is this just a fishing expedition? An understanding between all parties in this process will make for a much more effective and trustworthy hiring process.
Well it seems that while many companies are posting for jobs, and some are even interviewing candidates, very few are actually hiring. Some companies are just using this as a "feeling out" period, trying to figure out what type of candidate pool they have to choose from and about how much it would cost them if they wanted to actually hire the candidates. Other companies want to get candidates in the door so they can have their names and their interviews taken care of so when the 2011 budget dollars get released, they can go ahead and spend.
But there is yet another class of companies that just seem to be interviewing for the sake of interviewing. I have spoken to more than one person who said their company has instituted a hiring freeze, but still continue to list jobs online and even bring in people to interview knowing full well they can't hire them.
One of the questions hiring managers, human resources, and even the candidate being interviewed need to ask is: when is this job for? Is it really immediate hire or is the budget there for sometime in 2011--or is this just a fishing expedition? An understanding between all parties in this process will make for a much more effective and trustworthy hiring process.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Astronology - Affirmative Action Compliance Essential in Stimulus Era
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Friday, November 12, 2010
Performance Review Time
Yes ladies and gentlemen, it's that time of year again. It's time to give and receive performance reviews. But while most people dread that time--and since it's usually tied to bonuses and raises, that's totally understandable--it should be a time where an employee can reflect on their progress from the previous year and managers and Human Resources can access an employee's year-to-year performance AND development.
The development aspect of it can be the most important part of the process. It is important to look at what happened in the past year but other than compensation or layoff purposes, it's all information of what's already happened. What can be just as important--or more important in many cases--are the development growth planned to build on the the current year's performances for next year and beyond. Since the goal is to retain most of your employees and make sure they perform to the highest capabilities, the development plan for the future--and employees goals being aligned with that plan--is vital to make sure that you meeting your overall corporate goals.
And that's why goal planning should always be tied into the performance review. That isn't to say that there needs to be punishment for not meeting goals or great rewards for exceeding them, but it is important to make sure everyone is rowing in the same direction. That way, when the actual performance review takes place, the employees next-year development plan can be ironed out more easily. Employees would go from fearing reprimand to wondering what they needed to incorporate into their own planning for the next year. In the end, if their goals are tied to the company's goals, then they can actually feel like they're making a difference--which makes performance reviews just a little more palatable.
The development aspect of it can be the most important part of the process. It is important to look at what happened in the past year but other than compensation or layoff purposes, it's all information of what's already happened. What can be just as important--or more important in many cases--are the development growth planned to build on the the current year's performances for next year and beyond. Since the goal is to retain most of your employees and make sure they perform to the highest capabilities, the development plan for the future--and employees goals being aligned with that plan--is vital to make sure that you meeting your overall corporate goals.
And that's why goal planning should always be tied into the performance review. That isn't to say that there needs to be punishment for not meeting goals or great rewards for exceeding them, but it is important to make sure everyone is rowing in the same direction. That way, when the actual performance review takes place, the employees next-year development plan can be ironed out more easily. Employees would go from fearing reprimand to wondering what they needed to incorporate into their own planning for the next year. In the end, if their goals are tied to the company's goals, then they can actually feel like they're making a difference--which makes performance reviews just a little more palatable.
Thursday, November 04, 2010
Fake Companies Are All Over the Place
When I was finishing up my Masters studies, I scoured Monster.com, Careerbuilder and Craigslist to see who would hire me. I wasn't sure exactly what I wanted to do (I still don't know), but at the time I was just looking for something that sounded fun and exciting. So when I saw an advertisement for a sports marketing firm that was hiring for an executive training program, I was very excited. I was even more excited when I got a call about setting up an interview at the office in New Jersey. I had no clue what I was in store for, though.
I completed my 45 minute commute to the company's offices in an office park and since I was early, I camped out for a little while in my car and read up on what I knew about the company. From their website they seemed to be a large sports marketing company that worked with the New York Yankees--among other accounts. As I was sitting in the car, I saw many young people leaving the building in suits and thought that this seemed like a cool work environment.
I decided to enter the office 15 minutes early and was surprised to find that the area I was ushered into seemed to be a single office. In the waiting room were a ton of other young people like me in suits and looked much like the people I'd seen leaving the building. I checked in and sat in the large waiting area. Someone came out of the office and a name was called and they went in to interview. Seeing about 10 people in front of me, I wondered how I was going to get interviewed any time soon.
My answer came when the door opened 5 minutes later and the person in there left. I thought this was odd, but figured maybe the interview didn't go well and they were just cutting it short. Except the next person had the same time limit--and the next person as well.
I completed my 45 minute commute to the company's offices in an office park and since I was early, I camped out for a little while in my car and read up on what I knew about the company. From their website they seemed to be a large sports marketing company that worked with the New York Yankees--among other accounts. As I was sitting in the car, I saw many young people leaving the building in suits and thought that this seemed like a cool work environment.
I decided to enter the office 15 minutes early and was surprised to find that the area I was ushered into seemed to be a single office. In the waiting room were a ton of other young people like me in suits and looked much like the people I'd seen leaving the building. I checked in and sat in the large waiting area. Someone came out of the office and a name was called and they went in to interview. Seeing about 10 people in front of me, I wondered how I was going to get interviewed any time soon.
My answer came when the door opened 5 minutes later and the person in there left. I thought this was odd, but figured maybe the interview didn't go well and they were just cutting it short. Except the next person had the same time limit--and the next person as well.
Tuesday, November 02, 2010
Astronology - Giving Constructive Criticism
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Thursday, October 28, 2010
To Allow Telecommuting or Not?
A lot of office places are grappling with the pros and cons of allowing their employees to telecommute. In this age where cost-cutting is a premium, minimizing used office space and allowing employees the flexibility of working from home seems to be growing in popularity. But with it comes pitfalls such as chance of lost productivity, a lack of oversight, and decreased amount of teamwork and camaraderie, among other negatives.
FINS has the 5 worst and best things about telecommuting from an employees side. The last negative is one to warn employees about if the option is given to them: "It could totally backfire. We hope it doesn't, really, but it's hard to know how you'll do working at home until you make a real commitment to it. Spending all day at home could leave you feeling cooped up, it can create tensions in your family life, especially if there's not a well-thought-out system in place, and you could find yourself really overwhelmed, or really bored."
If you allow co-workers to work remotely and issue them a smartphone, beware of the legal implications of overtime having to be issued to those workers as Workforce Management writes. The article cites one case from the Chicago Police Department but warns that it is "one of a handful nationwide in which employees have claimed overtime pay for smart-phone use—and apparently the first involving public employees. But lawyers say such cases are a clear warning to employers to put a smart-phone usage policy in place before they end up in potentially costly litigation."
And lastly, if you plan to have your employees work in the office or out of it, Monster.com has some tips for successful meetings (H/T Wendy). Warding off the "meeting vampires" is the key to making sure that meetings are effective and efficient.
FINS has the 5 worst and best things about telecommuting from an employees side. The last negative is one to warn employees about if the option is given to them: "It could totally backfire. We hope it doesn't, really, but it's hard to know how you'll do working at home until you make a real commitment to it. Spending all day at home could leave you feeling cooped up, it can create tensions in your family life, especially if there's not a well-thought-out system in place, and you could find yourself really overwhelmed, or really bored."
If you allow co-workers to work remotely and issue them a smartphone, beware of the legal implications of overtime having to be issued to those workers as Workforce Management writes. The article cites one case from the Chicago Police Department but warns that it is "one of a handful nationwide in which employees have claimed overtime pay for smart-phone use—and apparently the first involving public employees. But lawyers say such cases are a clear warning to employers to put a smart-phone usage policy in place before they end up in potentially costly litigation."
And lastly, if you plan to have your employees work in the office or out of it, Monster.com has some tips for successful meetings (H/T Wendy). Warding off the "meeting vampires" is the key to making sure that meetings are effective and efficient.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Women in the Workplace
The past few months, two somewhat conflicting reports about women (and their looks) in the workplace have come out.
In August, Reuters reported that attractive women were being overlooked for certain jobs. The study by the University of Colorado Denver Business School published in the Journal of Social Psychology concluded "Attractive women faced discrimination when they applied for jobs where appearance was not seen as important. These positions included job titles like manager of research and development, director of finance, mechanical engineer and construction supervisor."
Then, earlier this month, the New York Post reported that skinnier women earn significantly more than those who are of average weight or classified as obese. The study published in the Journal of Applied Psychology found that "being 30 pounds below the average American female weight of 164 pounds can result in roughly $10,719 more in annual salary -- above the average woman's pay of $40,000. Being 30 pounds overweight can mean making $9,873 less than average." I think that this may be more of a case of skinnier people being more energetic, healthier, and confident than the case of discrimination, but it is interesting indeed.
Lastly, the EU parliament voted in favor of a number of measures to strengthen maternity protection in Europe including a 20-week full maternity pay for new mothers according to HR Magazine. The proposal also contains "rules employers will be banned from dismissing pregnant workers until six months after the end of their maternity leave."
In August, Reuters reported that attractive women were being overlooked for certain jobs. The study by the University of Colorado Denver Business School published in the Journal of Social Psychology concluded "Attractive women faced discrimination when they applied for jobs where appearance was not seen as important. These positions included job titles like manager of research and development, director of finance, mechanical engineer and construction supervisor."
Then, earlier this month, the New York Post reported that skinnier women earn significantly more than those who are of average weight or classified as obese. The study published in the Journal of Applied Psychology found that "being 30 pounds below the average American female weight of 164 pounds can result in roughly $10,719 more in annual salary -- above the average woman's pay of $40,000. Being 30 pounds overweight can mean making $9,873 less than average." I think that this may be more of a case of skinnier people being more energetic, healthier, and confident than the case of discrimination, but it is interesting indeed.
Lastly, the EU parliament voted in favor of a number of measures to strengthen maternity protection in Europe including a 20-week full maternity pay for new mothers according to HR Magazine. The proposal also contains "rules employers will be banned from dismissing pregnant workers until six months after the end of their maternity leave."
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Astronology - 2011 Compensation Budget Forecasts
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Back to New York and Collaboration
After spending the week at a conference in Richmond, Virginia, I'm in a cab heading back to Manhattan. The conference I went to was the "Global Compliance, Legal and Government Relations" conference for my company. Two takeaways that I want to share on the blog are "Cool-aboration" and the "GFC".
"Cool-aboration" was a fun term for a presentation about collaborating with others. While most companies preach this, the conference had a big difference to talk about: actually listening to other people. When we discussed the great things each group had done the past year, it was all because of collaborative efforts--but even more important it was the communication and the listening of our associates that allowed for these great things to continue. Being able to feed off others and work with them in a collaborative manner is a sign of a great organization.
The other term I used above--the "GFC"--was a term I learned that the rest of the world was using for this recession which either stood for the Great Financial Crisis or Global Financial Crisis. But the important takeaway here was to understand the impact of Dodd Frank and other international regulations to your organization. Just because you are not located in your European office does not mean that what they are doing there doesn't effect your job, especially if you work in Human Resources and deal with employees' whistleblowing or executive compensation.
Although there were many other things I took away from the conference, those are two that I wanted to share here on the Astron blog. Although many companies are already thinking about it, some "cool-aboration" is always needed to make sure good policies and procedures are implemented and enforced.
-Andrew
"Cool-aboration" was a fun term for a presentation about collaborating with others. While most companies preach this, the conference had a big difference to talk about: actually listening to other people. When we discussed the great things each group had done the past year, it was all because of collaborative efforts--but even more important it was the communication and the listening of our associates that allowed for these great things to continue. Being able to feed off others and work with them in a collaborative manner is a sign of a great organization.
The other term I used above--the "GFC"--was a term I learned that the rest of the world was using for this recession which either stood for the Great Financial Crisis or Global Financial Crisis. But the important takeaway here was to understand the impact of Dodd Frank and other international regulations to your organization. Just because you are not located in your European office does not mean that what they are doing there doesn't effect your job, especially if you work in Human Resources and deal with employees' whistleblowing or executive compensation.
Although there were many other things I took away from the conference, those are two that I wanted to share here on the Astron blog. Although many companies are already thinking about it, some "cool-aboration" is always needed to make sure good policies and procedures are implemented and enforced.
-Andrew
Thursday, October 07, 2010
Literal Self-Promotion and Human Resources
Besides being the baseball playoffs, tonight is also The Office night. The show is nowhere near as funny as it was in the earlier years, but it still is a funny, enjoyable half hour and well-worth the watch (at least until Steve Carrell leaves at the end of the year). Last week's episode was an interesting one, though because of Pam's literal "self-promotion" and Toby's mediation with Michael due to his "corporate punishment" from the week before.
Usually when we think about "self-promotion" we think of someone promoting their own brand. What happened on the last episode of The Office was quite different. When a sales person walked into the office and asked who the office manager was, Pam stepped up and took the position even though it wasn't hers. She then set out to convince the rest of the office that she had the position but had not received her salary bump. In the end, she got her way, but through less-than-savory means (well, she lied).
Now Human Resources should be encouraging employees to promote themselves to other members of the office. Taking responsibilities that are not there's to help out in the office is great as well and should be encouraged. But that's where this should end. Actually giving yourself a promotion and a raise was funny on the show, but is not exactly ethical.
As for Toby, he had another classic showdown with Michael. Toby is Michael's punching bag and usually doesn't bring a good face to Human Resources, but he shined much of this episode (except when he had Michael fill out his own form). Toby's inability to stop Michael from acting out has been one of his toughest thing to deal with but his ability to work with Michael despite all the abuse gets kudos from me.
We'll see what types of office hijinx happen on tonight's episode, but last week's episodes was certainly chock-full of laughs and Human Resource topics.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Stat Counter
