Wednesday, December 13, 2017

Can't Find Good People?

Every service company I speak with is concerned about their ability to find good, quality workers. In an environment where the competition for talent is fierce, which companies are going to be most successful? What's the recipe for winning?

Let's start with the basic myth. When I'm training foremen and supervisors, I'll often ask them if today's young people have a poorer work ethic than their generation had. Almost unanimously they say "yes!" 

They're shocked when I tell them every generation believes this and every generation is wrong. I heard the "young people today don't want to work" thing when I was a helper on construction sites in the 1970s. Engineers building the Taj Mahal in the 1640s were saying it, as were stone masons building the pyramids 4,000 years ago.

What is true is that some individuals have a stronger work ethic than others (in every generation). In periods of relatively low unemployment, we run across more candidates with lower motivation and weaker work-ethic than periods of higher unemployment rates. 

What is also true is that work ethic and motivation is not all genetic. Work ethic can be learned and motivation can be tapped. Which leads us back to the question, which companies are going to win in this economy?

The service companies that are going to win are not the companies that invest in finding that secret supply of excellent workers that no one else can find. The companies that win are going to be the ones that find ways to be successful with less than ideal candidates.

The service companies that are going to win aren't simply complaining about the current talent pool, they're building systems that help a candidate who isn't an exact fit to have a reasonable chance at becoming successful. They're building on-boarding, training and feedback systems as well as mentoring programs and career paths to keep people who aren't natural-born stars to build a skill set, become engaged and remain on-track.

The service companies that are going to win aren't going to simply outspend everyone else on talent. If your culture sucks (read: your supervisors and foremen treat people like they're disposable), it doesn't matter how much money you throw at compensation, you'll eventually lose to the company that knows how to build a culture that workers embrace. If you can get $16 of value out of a $13 employee, you're going to handily outperform the company that's having to spend $23 to get that same $16 of value. 

The service companies that are going to win will say "thanks" and "well done" a lot. The service companies that are going to struggle are going to generally ignore good performance as something that's expected and spend their energy berating poor performance.

The service companies that are going to win are going to be employers of choice who build their total rewards programs around what their workers really want versus what they'd prefer to give them. (Think: maybe an afternoon off with pay rather than a gift card?).

The service companies that are going to win are going to win with less than ideal candidates. If your organization is determined to find plug-and-play, immediately productive workers that don't need to be trained or managed, you're going to spend a lot of time recruiting.



What Matt Lauer Means to Your Business

There has been an avalanche of sexual harassment and misconduct claims making the headlines in recent weeks. I'm sure that a lot of politicians and public figures are sitting on pins and needles hoping their name doesn't make the news. This is good news for employees, mostly but not exclusively women who have tolerated much more of this type of behavior than they ever should have. Employers of all sizes will likely have more of these claims to process and more judgement calls to make as victims feel empowered to come forward.

With regard to the Matt Lauer situation, NBC is going to be facing the same questions your organization would be facing, albeit much more publicly - what is your policy, what kinds of training did you have in place, who knew about the behavior and what happened when management found out?

Here are some tips for any organization that is concerned about their own vulnerability to situations like NBCs current predicament:

1. Review your harassment policies. You likely have boilerplate language in your handbook. Nothing wrong with that, just make sure the language is clear and especially make sure that your employees know whom they may contact in the event they are harassed in any manner, including sexually. Make sure that there are several avenues for reporting the harassment, don't limit them to chain of command. Many Davidson Group clients include our phone number as an outside third-party option for employees to contact.

2. Train your managers and supervisors. Now is a great time to offer training to your managers and supervisors on what is and isn't harassment, what to do if they suspect harassment, and what to do if one of their team members reports harassment to them.

3. Train your employees. Now is a great time to remind your employees what types of behaviors are not acceptable in the workplace, what to do if they are victims of those types of behaviors, and what might happen to them if they are the one doing the harassing.

4. Treat all accusations seriously, investigate thoroughly and apply consequences consistently. This is the hard part because harassment claims are so personal and can vary so much in nature and substance. The very clear-cut cases, like when the behavior is caught on video or when there are multiple witnesses, are not as difficult. But sometimes these situations are much grayer. In some cases it may not even be clear that something happened at all. With these we can find ourselves torn between supporting the accuser and being fair to the accused. 

We can learn something from observing the political personalities that have been in the news recently. What I have observed is when a figure considered a political opponent stands accused, it's portrayed as outrageous behavior that needs to be dealt with sternly and immediately, but when someone considered a political ally stands accused, we are urged not to rush to judgement. 

How does this translate to your company? When the accused is a mediocre performer whose contributions are easily replaced, it's easy to stand with the accuser. When the accused is a rain-maker who is not so easily replaced, it's tempting to impugn the accuser or to raise our burden of proof requirements. 

It takes courage of leadership to do the right thing, even if it temporarily hurts the organization. NBC will probably find that it would have been better off addressing the situation with Matt Lauer after the first credible complaint versus what they are now facing. It is the organization's responsibility to treat every case with the same level of seriousness, whether the accused or accuser is a low level employee or an executive, and attempt to apply consequences for bad behavior that are consistent and appropriate.

If your organization could use some help with developing policies, delivering training, conducting an investigation, or helping with a messy situation, contact The Davidson Group and we'd be happy to help.