At FlashPoint, we work with some clients to provide career transition coaching to outplaced employees. We always encourage these individuals to use their networks to help them identify job opportunities. After all, most people find jobs not through ads but rather because of a personal connection. Some sources say that up to 75 percent of jobs are filled as a result of networking.

One tip I’ve begun to share focuses on improving the networking experience. The idea comes from an acquaintance who was herself looking for a job a couple of years ago.

As she was beginning her search, this acquaintance e-mailed me and others. She asked if we’d serve on her job search network. The purpose, she said, was to e-mail us regularly with updates on where she had applied and was interviewing, as well as to ask us for help in connecting with people at companies she was interested in.

She did what she promised. Every week or two she’d send the group a brief message outlining her activities. It was a great way to ensure we kept her in mind. (How often do we promise others to our eyes peeled for job opportunities, only to forget about it amid our work demands?)

Eventually the acquaintance got an interview at a company where I knew the HR director, and I e-mailed the director with a recommendation. I’m not sure that my input had any sway, but the acquaintance did get the job–just three months after her search began.

The key in all this is to think of creative ways to leverage your connections. Using e-mail, social media, and other technology to communicate effectively, make an impression, and stand apart from the crowd is important, and as this example shows, it often pays off.

George Hanlin is a consultant at FlashPoint.

Image: Avolore

This post currently has no responses.

The numbers have not been especially good this fall.

November’s unemployment rate remained stubbornly high at 8.6 percent. Recent news reports indicate that in the past few years the housing market dropped even worse than original figures indicated. And as European debt concerns continue, the stock market has taken another downturn this week.

Now word comes from Gallup that nearly three-fourths of American workers (71 percent) are either “not engaged” or “actively disengaged” in their jobs. Gallup uncovered these figures during a survey it conducted with 2,341 adults from July 1 to September 30, 2011.

As part of the survey, Gallup looked at demographics and came up with some interesting findings. For example, researchers learned that the better educated workers are, the more likely they are to be disengaged (which seems counterintuitive since one assumes that employees with less education tend to do more menial work). They also found that middle-aged workers are not as engaged as younger or older workers and that men are considerably less engaged than women.

On the whole, this amounts to bad news for American businesses. Why? Because as studies indicate, unengaged and disengaged employees are a drain on their companies. They’re wasteful and cost a lot in terms of turnover.  Organizations with high levels of employee disengagement are not nearly as productive and profitable as companies where employees feel more connected to their work.

So yes, add this study to the list of poor or mediocre economic indicators for the year—but take heart as well. After all, a new year awaits us along with opportunities for improvement.

And things could always be worse. At least we’re not Congress. A poll released Tuesday shows that many more Americans—a record-breaking 86 percent—are disengaged with it.

Now that’s a really bad number.

George Hanlin is a consultant at FlashPoint.

Image: Stuart Miles

This post currently has no responses.

I recently came across a couple of articles published by the Society for Human Resource Management, both with the same theme—how performance reviews are ineffective and put organizations at risk (rather than offering legal protection, as most people think). The articles, both written by employment attorneys, highlight the following flaws: 

• Supervisors are not prepared to conduct the reviews
• Supervisors are not honest in their feedback
• The feedback isn’t objective or timely

The authors point out that in their long legal careers, they’ve found that performance reviews most often work against employers and often serve as the plaintiff’s key piece of evidence. One author was forthright—throw the review form in the recycle bin!

Advice such as this seems counterintuitive to most HR professionals and refutes what most of us have learned and advocate. When I read the articles, I had to pause and consider how to reconcile the two positions.

The key reasons the authors list for why performance reviews fail boil down to a common element—supervisors don’t have the skills they need to conduct them. I’m still convinced that a well-developed and well-executed performance review serves a useful role if the organization invests in the process and in preparing supervisors to carry it out. Some areas to focus on include: 

• Creating a well-thought-out form that not only promotes open and meaningful dialogue around the employee’s performance but also provides sections to spell out yearly goals and development plans.
• Outlining a process that includes quarterly update meetings, encourages regular feedback, and involves both employees and supervisors.
• Training supervisors so they understand the review process and tools and how to use them effectively.
• Regularly evaluating completed forms, asking questions, and coaching supervisors on how they can better carry out their reviews.

Sources:
Janove, Jathan. “Reviews—Good for Anything?” HR Magazine, June 2011.
Keyes, Judith Droz. “The Legal Case for Eliminating Performance Reviews.” SHRM Legal Report, April 2011.

George Hanlin is a consultant at FlashPoint.

This post currently has no responses.

Recently my coworker Tam asked me if I had heard about the clerk who got fired from Harrods, the high-end department store in London. Harrods, Tam explained, has a strict dress code that requires female clerks to wear makeup. The woman refused and was let go.

I googled to learn more and found this article  on Inc. magazine’s website. It turns out the clerk, Melanie Stark, wasn’t actually fired but instead resigned. She says that though she had worked several incident-free years at the store without lipstick, blush, or eyeliner, last year managers began pressuring her to start making herself up. She refused to apply and, she says, started paying the consequences. Managers sent her home, hid her in the stockroom, and transferred her. Finally she quit, “exhausted, stressed, and upset.”

For its part, Harrods claims that employees receive the strict dress code (all 13 pages’ worth) before they sign on, and that though managers did talk to Stark about her appearance and lack of adherence to the code, she was the one who chose to end her employment, not Harrods. Regardless, the incident has raised eyebrows worldwide.

At FlashPoint we work with clients to develop policies, many of which pertain to employee behavior and end up in the handbook. The company dress code is often one of the stickiest areas, especially when it comes to professional or service-oriented environments, where the organization needs to portray a certain image to customers. It’s often hard to define just exactly what the “image” is, and if the company keeps things too general, employees often end up confused. Go to the other extreme, and the company can run into situations like the one at Harrods.

In this case, it appears that Harrods took a sensible approach, at least from an HR perspective. The company developed a very detailed dress code policy and gave it to employees up front so they knew what they were agreeing to. When Stark didn’t follow the policy, managers discussed it with her (though it seems they didn’t do so immediately, which they should have done; it might have prevented the situation from escalating). When she continued to shun makeup, they pulled her from the floor and assigned her other duties. For the most part, it appears they consistently played things by the book.

Yet something about this still seems wrong—that Harrods was being boorish. The reason, I suppose, lies in the 13-page dress code itself, and the fact that the department store tells women that they must paint their faces in order to be attractive and presentable to customers. While many people who shop at Harrods no doubt agree, others surely find this to be offensive (and even discriminatory) in the 21st century.

It is the right and responsibility of a business to know its customers and provide them with the service they want and expect—and this includes regulating how employees dress. But as society’s standards change, companies must always reassess and update their policies to stay current. Was Harrods being reasonable in this case? Or was it trying to force an employee to fit into an old-fashioned sense of beauty?

We know you have thoughts, so please share.

George Hanlin is a consultant at FlashPoint.

Image: Louisa Stokes

This post currently has 3 responses.

As we all know, Indiana is not known for being environmentally progressive. If there’s a top ten list on which we’re bound to be included, the list of least green states is one of them (followed no doubt, by the list of most obese states and the list of states with the most smokers). So imagine my surprise the other night when I noticed on msnbc.com an article titled, “Subaru of Indiana: America’s Greenest Carmaker.” I had to check it out.

Based on the headline, the article appeared to be primarily about Subaru of Indiana’s impressive stature as the nation’s first zero-landfill auto factory. (The plant recycles 98 percent of its waste and generates power by incinerating what it can’t reuse.) But as soon as I started reading, I discovered that the heart of the piece was really more about the plant’s HR programs and how they’re tied to the organization’s strategic objectives.

As the article points out, Subaru of Indiana invests heavily in its people in order to achieve its environmental goals. It provides employees with intense training to learn tools and techniques for reducing waste. It offers financial incentives to employees who find better ways of working. It leverages its environmentally friendly brand and its excellent pay and perks to stand out as an “employer of choice” and draw top talent. The results have been astounding: even amid the recession, the plant didn’t lay anyone off, and now it’s in a position to expand.

At FlashPoint we emphasize again and again the need for HR professionals to become strategic players in their organizations. The “Subaru of Indiana” article illustrates well this key point. At Subaru of Indiana the leaders had a key objective—to produce no waste (thereby reducing costs, improving efficiency, and increasing profits). Clearly, the HR staff got on board, making sure that they understood the goal, that managers and employees bought into it, and that workers had the resources they needed to achieve it. HR integrated the company’s strategy into all of its programs—including hiring, training and development, performance management, and compensation—and now the plant is reaping the rewards.

It’s an environmental success story—AND an HR success story—the Hoosier State can be proud of.

George Hanlin is a consultant at FlashPoint.

Image: bulldogza/FreeDigitalPhotos.net

This post currently has no responses.

One of my roles at FlashPoint is to review and improve all the materials that we deliver to clients. Because of that, I think a lot about the messages we create and how best to shape them.

The other day I came up with a tip—“think small.” I know that seems rather unprogressive; after all, we’re supposed to have big, bold ideas aren’t we? But when it comes to communicating, sometimes we try too hard to say too much and end up muddling the message. So whether you’re developing human resource policies or procedures, creating employee communications, or sending a memo to your CEO, be sure to:

• Keep your audience in mind. Whom are you addressing, and what does that person (or group of people) need to know most? Focus on the essentials—the who, what, when, where, and why.
• Stick to your topic. Don’t get off on tangents.
• Keep your sentences and paragraphs short so they’re easily digestible. Consider using bullet points to break up information.
• Be direct. Use active voice.
• Share only what you need to. Consider other forums for providing additional information. (For example, you don’t have to put every policy in your employee handbook—put the basics in the handbook and provide more detailed statements through your intranet or via other means.)

We all know it—the world’s a busy place. We’re all flooded with all variety of messages, including reports, voice mails, text messages, and e-mails. We have so much information to wade through that we do everyone a favor when we indeed think small, keep things simple, and stick to the point.

George Hanlin is a consultant at FlashPoint.

Image: Michal Marcol

This post currently has 1 response.

Maybe it’s because I keep such good company, but I’m always amazed at the things I learn from friends on Facebook. While a lot of people might view the popular social-networking site as a dumping ground for inane status updates and outlandish YouTube clips (and, well, yes it is), I do find a lot of great articles that I would otherwise have missed if one of my friends hadn’t reposted it.

For example, the other day my friend John (who really isn’t my friend because I’ve never met him—but that’s a subject for another blog entry) posted a link to a piece on Forbes.com. It was about how most American employees don’t use all their vacation days, and how ultimately that’s bad for them and their companies.

The article focused on a survey from Right Management that indicates that 66 percent of employees failed to use their vacation days in 2010. This is a bad thing, experts say, because it leads to higher stress levels and greater employee disengagement.

 John, the “friend” who reposted the article, more or less scoffed at the notion of not taking vacation days, and those of us in the HR profession should scoff too. We should encourage those 66 percent of employees to use their paid time off to refresh, refocus, and recharge. That way they’ll come back rested and prepared to contribute anew to the organization’s success, which will ultimately be more beneficial than will be the unused vacation days in the coffer.

With that in mind, I’m already planning my time off for the rest of the year. I’m not sure if I’ll take any trips, but I have some projects to do around the house. And it will be nice to have some downtime to hang out on Facebook, where I’ll read more of my friends’ links to New York Times and Wall Street Journal articles—and, indeed, where I’ll watch plenty of “Play Him Off, Keyboard Cat” videos.

George Hanlin is a consultant at FlashPoint.

Image: hinnamsaisuy

This post currently has no responses.

I’m not sure if it’s human nature or something about our culture, but as we approach the end of one year and start thinking about the next, most of us tend to look ahead and form plans. It’s almost expected of us—we’re supposed to make new year’s resolutions, figure out how we’re going to do things differently, or come up with ways we’re going to make our lives better in the next twelve months.

I’m itching to write that this is all trite and overblown, but I’m going to stick with the storyline and insist that yes, this is indeed a good time to evaluate where you’ve been and develop a plan for moving forward in the months ahead. Specifically, if you’re in charge of human resources at your company, it’s a great opportunity to conduct an HR assessment and set priorities for how you’re going to develop your programs in the year ahead.

Why do I say this? I do so because for many of us the past couple of years have been challenging. Our HR programs have been under stress. We’ve had to do more with less, so we need to figure out the state of our HR affairs. As we’ve asked our employees to take on more duties, are their job descriptions accurate or do we need to update them? Are our compensation programs still competitive? Are we giving employees the training they need to do their jobs?

An HR assessment can help you answer these questions and others, and it can help you figure out which areas need the most attention. If you’re interested in learning more about what an HR assessment covers and why it’s important, you can check out this article on FlashPoint’s website.

So this year maybe you’ll resist the urge to set personal resolutions that you know you’re going to break by, oh, say . . . January 2. I support that. But if you’re an HR professional, I do encourage you to consider the HR assessment and the benefits that it can bring to you and your organization. Good luck and happy new year!

George Hanlin is a consultant at FlashPoint.

Image: Salvatore Vuono

This post currently has no responses.

Here it is again—that wonderful time of the year! No, I’m not talking about the holidays (though they are indeed pretty terrific), but instead the time when many of us conduct annual performance reviews for our employees and provide merit increases for the next year.

If you’re a manager and are budgeting for merit increases, FlashPoint has helpful data for you. Julie Bingham, our senior consultant, regularly keeps up-to-date with the latest compensation-related research and trends. Julie’s a member of WorldatWork, the national compensation and benefits professional association, and she recently received results from WorldatWork’s 2010-11 salary budget survey:

• The national average merit increase in 2010 was 2.5 percent, and the national average projected 2011 increase is 2.9 percent.
• For the central U.S., the average increase in 2010 was 2.5 percent, and the projected 2011 increase is 3.0 percent.
• For Indiana, the average increase in 2010 was 2.5 percent and the projected 2011 increase is 2.9 percent.

According to Julie, this data includes those organizations that offered or plan to offer no increase (that is, it includes zeros), and if you exclude the zeros, the data comes in slightly higher.

Julie also notes that other sources, including the 2010-2011 Mercer U.S. Compensation Planning Report, indicate similar trends.

Earlier this year, Julie wrote an article on regaining control of your compensation programs, with six steps you can take to assess and adjust them. As you consider your merit increases and other compensation-related issues in the new year, it’s a great resource. You can find it here.

Meanwhile, best wishes as you wrap up your year-end HR projects (including those performance reviews—mine is December 15) and as you prepare for 2011. And amid all the hoopla, don’t forget to take time to enjoy the other activities the season has to offer! Happy holidays!

George Hanlin is a consultant at FlashPoint.

Image: nuttakit

This post currently has no responses.

Whenever I dress up for Halloween I often go as someone (or something) that’s related to a current event. Depending on who’s been in the news, and what he or she has been doing, that can sometimes be controversial.

So take it from someone who’s turned a few heads—allowing your employees to dress up for company Halloween celebrations can be trouble. The problem is, when you allow employees the opportunity to come to work in costumes, you open yourself up to claims of harassment and creating a hostile work environment. As much as you’d like to think your employees will use good judgment, sometimes they don’t; sometimes they show up to work in outfits that are inappropriate and do things that they wouldn’t dream of when not in disguise.

As an example, a few years ago we learned of a company that hosted a workplace Halloween party. A couple of employees dressed in outfits that were degrading and performed a skit that insulted some of their coworkers. The company ended up defending itself against an EEOC charge and making amends.

You don’t want this to happen to you, and the easiest way to prevent it is to prohibit Halloween costumes altogether. I know it’s not very fun, but it’s best to keep the workplace professional and leave it to your employees to celebrate on their own outside the office. If you do decide to allow costumes, at least be sure that you:

• Reiterate to your employees your company’s anti-harassment policies.
• Provide guidelines about what kind of costumes are not appropriate. Make sure that employees understand you won’t tolerate outfits that others may find insulting, offensive, or discriminatory.

Whether you’re a company owner, a manager, or head of HR, you have enough to deal with on a daily basis. The last thing you need is a Halloween nightmare on your hands. Be safe!

George Hanlin is a consultant at FlashPoint.

Image: Elvis Santana

This post currently has 4 responses.