DEAR REWORKER: WHAT SHOULD I DO WHEN AN EMPLOYEE COMES TO ME WITH A PERSONAL PROBLEM?

Dear ReWorker,
What do you do when an employee comes to you with a personal problem? I’m not a therapist or lawyer. I don’t want to send people away from my office, but am I supposed to do anything with this type of information? People tell me about divorce, abuse, financial issues, kid problems — everything! Help!
Sincerely,
Overly Involved
_________________________________________________________________________
Dear Overly Involved,
This is a common problem for human resources managers. We are the people employees go to when they need to take time off for a health problem, so it makes sense that they want to discuss their health with us. We are the people they go to when they need help managing their relationship with your boss, so why shouldn’t they mention their marital problems?
When workers come to you, you need to divide everything into two categories: issues that call for you to act and those that don’t. Here is what goes where.

When You Need to Act

Health problems: If a condition qualifies for FMLA or ADA coverage, you’ll need to act immediately. Provide the employee with the necessary paperwork and instructions on how to speak with their doctors.
If the employee needs an accommodation, begin the process immediately. Yes, you can technically wait for the ADA paperwork to come in, but many accommodations are easy and you should be looking for a way to say yes. Helping employees when they are sick is not only the right thing to do, but it also ultimately benefits the business and reduces the likelihood that employees will leave down the road.  
Often, employees don’t know the laws that protect them, so they may not know when they come to you, say, upset about a spouse’s cancer diagnosis, that they may be eligible to take time off to care for their partner. Make sure you let them know.
And remember: Mental health issues can be covered by FMLA and ADA as well. Never discount a mental health problem. 
Domestic violence: FMLA can cover injuries resulting from domestic violence, including PTSD. If your employee is a victim of domestic violence, you’ll want to ask about security measures (transferring the employee to another site, changing phone numbers, providing a special parking spot close to the building, or any other number of measures), especially if the employee is in the process of leaving an abusive partner. Domestic violence may seem like personal drama that you’d prefer to keep out of the office, but ensuring the safety of all your employees should be a top priority.
Some states have laws specifically to protect the jobs of domestic violence victims. Make sure you know the law in your state.

When You Should Not Act

Finances, legal issues and therapy: Never give financial or legal advice. You’re neither a lawyer nor a licensed financial planner. You do represent the business, and if someone acts on your advice, you could put the company at risk.
You are also not a therapist and should not offer counseling. “Refer, refer, refer” should be your mantra. If you have an employee assistance program (EAP), direct employees to call for help from a specialist. You can coach an employee on how to interact with a supervisor, but you should advise the employee to seek out a marriage counselor to deal with communication problems at home. 
You can arrange a company-sponsored pay advance, but you should never loan an employee money out of your own pocket. If the company wants to give an advance to help with a financial issue, then it needs to be according to policy with the proper documentation and plan for repayment.
You can be a listening ear, but make sure you set proper boundaries and avoid the urge to jump in with friendly advice based on your own personal experiences. 
You want to have an open-door policy, but sometimes that open door means you learn things you didn’t want to know. Try your best to be professional, act when you’re required to and send people to the proper experts for everything else.
Sincerely,
Your ReWorker

DEAR REWORKER: IS THERE EVER A CASE FOR REHIRING SOMEONE YOU ONCE FIRED?

Dear ReWorker,
We had a long-term employee who was unreliable—coming in late, calling in sick often, leaving early—who we eventually fired. Now, three years later, he’s applied again. My boss says it’s better to hire him, as we won’t have to train. I’m hesitant to rehire someone who we fired in the first place. What do you think?
Sincerely,
Skeptical of Second Chances
_________________________________________________________________________
Dear Skeptical of Second Chances,
Let me get right to it. 
Rehiring people who you fired for poor performance, unreliability or cause? Probably not the best idea. 
This individual, in particular, was a long-term employee who repeatedly showed you who he was. You have no reason to believe that he’s changed. If you rehire him, chances are he’ll call in sick, come in late and leave early. (I am assuming that he didn’t call in sick, but “sick” and didn’t have a genuine disability or illness that would be protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act or the Family Medical Leave Act. If that’s the case, shame on you for firing him!). And you’ll likely want to fire him all over again.

Does rehiring former employees make sense?

Yes. It can make a lot of sense. Some companies even have alumni groups to encourage people to remain in contact and eventually rehire those people. You send your employees out into the world; they get training and experience elsewhere and can come back and contribute to your business on a higher level. It’s a great benefit to the company.
Rehiring people who you laid off for business reasons (not performance reasons) is also a great idea. You know what they can do, they know your business and it can be a great fit. If you’ve had layoffs in the past couple of years and need to hire, you can start by targeting these former employees. It can save you time in recruiting and training. 

But in your situation, why is rehiring this person a consideration?

I suspect that hiring might be difficult for your business right now. That’s not unusual, as unemployment is at record lows. Bringing on someone who you’ll want to fire in a few months isn’t a solution to that.  
What is the solution? Change. Check your salaries. Are you paying market rate? Do you need to bump them up? (Remember, don’t just increase wages for new hires, but for your current staff as well.) How does your PTO look? Do people have a sufficient amount of vacation and sick time? How is your health insurance? Does it compare to your competitors? 
I know you (probably) don’t have spare cash for all of this, and it’s easier just to hire this guy. But think of all the money you’ll spend managing him, coaching him, training and retraining him. Consider your overall turnover. Every new hire costs more than just their salary. You can save money in the long run by making your business a more attractive place to work now.

Are there times when you should consider rehiring someone you fired? 

Sure. For instance, the goof-off intern who is now 30 and has both experience and maturity is worth another shot. The person who was going through a terrible time in their personal life and explains how things are under control now? Sure. People can change.
But, as a general rule, rehire the people who left you or who you laid off—not the people you fired.
Sincerely, 

HOW TO RECOVER FROM A DECADE OF LOST EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT

Despite years of effort by HR professionals, Gallup’s latest findings indicate that 70 percent of the U.S. and 87 percent of the global workforce are disengaged or emotionally disconnected from their work, costing businesses billions of dollars each year. Little progress has been made on the state of employee engagement since 1999, when the Gallup Organization’s groundbreaking work First Break All the Rules: What the World’s Greatest Managers Do Differently took the industry (and New York Times bestseller list) by storm. 
How is this possible?
Interestingly, a 2014 survey of HR leaders found the top three methods currently used to promote engagement are recognition, work-life balance and wellness. In the survey, retention was the most frequently used metric to gauge the effectiveness of engagement programs. Recently, I was pleased to see a Forbes post recognizing that corporate leaders are concerned that engagement has not been improving, then surprised to find its recommended solution: hosting “fizzy Fridays,” a random day for pizzas, or mid-day ice cream deliveries at the office.  
Though building a positive workplace is a worthy goal, employee satisfaction is not enough. We must be careful not to confuse workplace fun and contentment with engagement. Likewise, let’s not assume that improving retention increases engagement. Statistically, we are more likely retaining disengaged employees. (Blessing White would refer to them as “free loaders,” those who are content and deriving maximum satisfaction from the job but contributing little to the organization). 
So what are we missing? Gallup, CEB and White all point to the critical role of the immediate manager. Eleven of Gallup’s 12 engagement indicators are under the direct control or influence of the manager. CEB identified the “Top 50 Levers of Engagement,” 43 of which are controlled or influenced by the manager. 
Great. So let’s make sure all of our managers are engaged in engaging their employees, right?
But that brings us to the root cause of the problem. CEB found that 57 percent of managers would have opted for non-management roles if there was an option. Even more alarming, 65 percent of managers would “opt-out” of a management role if given a chance to take another equally attractive role. A CEB study of 9000 managers concluded that only 19 percent were both committed and effective at managing. Given the current state of management, we shouldn’t be surprised that employee engagement levels remain stagnant. We have been solving the wrong problems!
In Gallup’s 2013 State of the American Workforce report, CEO Jim Clifton states, “The single biggest decision you can make in your job — bigger than all of the rest — is who you name manager.” I couldn’t agree more. Organizations must develop what I call “manager effectiveness systems” that include programs and processes for selecting, assimilating, developing, assessing, recognizing, rewarding and promoting managers to the next level. The role and expectations of a manager must be clearly defined. Those organizations who dedicate the necessary effort to manager effectiveness will reap the rewards of a more engaged workforce, an improved leadership pipeline and sustained competitive advantage. 

STAR EMPLOYEES AREN'T ALWAYS MANAGEMENT MATERIAL – AND THAT'S OKAY

My colleague once shared a story about managing that I will never forget. At the conclusion of her company’s performance management process, one of the new manager’s evaluations were the most thoughtful, honest and actionable she’d ever seen – despite it being his first time providing formal feedback. Unfortunately, it was also his last time. Upon realizing the effort required to manage people, the employee decided to relinquish his managing role and return to his passion as a software developer. 
I love this story because it highlights the importance of truly understanding people management. “Manager” is a responsibility – not just a fancy title – that requires a special set of skills and immense effort. And it’s not for everybody: It should be okay for ambitious high performers to decline the management career path.
The many consequences of ineffective and uncommitted managers take a high toll on organization effectiveness. Far too often, top individual contributors transition into management roles for the wrong reasons and without knowing what the role truly entails. In a previous post, I shared some alarming data from the Corporate Executive Board’s (CEB) Corporate Leadership Council research:
  • 57 percent of managers would have opted for non-management roles if there were an option.
  • 65 percent of managers would “opt-out” of their management roles today if given a chance to take another equally attractive role.
  • 31 percent of managers were neither committed nor effective at their management roles.
  • Only 19 percent (out of 9000 managers studied) were both committed and effective at managing.
In order to avoid the mediocre management syndrome, human resource professionals need to provide career path alternatives, help high performers consider alternatives and then carefully select qualified and committed managers. Below are three ways to cultivate the best managers for your company and determine the best paths for your employees:
1. Offer alternative career ladders
Commonly found in technology industries, dual career ladders allow those not well-suited or interested in management to advance their careers up a comparable professional ladder. “Distinguished engineer” might be the job-level equivalent of a senior manager or director, for example. And an engineering or scientific “fellow” may be the equivalent of a vice president.
2. Mentor aspiring managers
You can design a set of tools, programs and experiences to help top performers gain an understanding of the management path – and make an informed decision about whether it’s right for them. At 2020 Talent Management, for example, we developed a one-day program to mentor aspiring managers in Bangalore, India. During the pilot program, two engineers approached me after lunch, having already decided management was not right for them. This was a true win-win – the engineers avoided accepting an ill-fitting job and the company avoided appointing disengaged managers.
The next time I delivered the program in Boston, I shared the Bangalore story with the group. By 11:00 a.m. that morning, one of the participants told me he did not have to wait until after lunch – he already understood management was not the best fit. 
3. Design a comprehensive selection process
Jim Clifton, the chairman and CEO of Gallup Inc., said, “The single biggest decision you make in your job – bigger than all the rest – is who you name manager. When you name the wrong person manager, nothing fixes that bad decision.”  
Establishing a formal process for selecting new managers is critical to the future success of your organization. While the hiring manager is ultimately responsible for any decision, the smartest hiring choices are made in consultation with others (i.e. HR, Leadership Development, current colleagues). When selecting new manager candidates, consider their skills and experiences, such as leadership on informal teams or projects, collaboration and ability to establish relationships beyond their immediate team, as well as their personal motivation and commitment to being a manager. Consider utilizing standardized tools that assess attributes that correlate with manager/leader success, such as Emotional Intelligence and Learning Agility.

If you offer a mentorship or self-selection management program as described above, did the candidate take advantage of it? You can also ask candidates to work through a manager-oriented case study, such as the HBR case study, Is the Rookie Ready.

Great leaders foster engaged teams that deliver great results. By carefully selecting and developing effective and committed managers, you can enhance your organization’s competitive advantage and ensure a sustainable future for your company. 

STAR EMPLOYEES AREN'T ALWAYS MANAGEMENT MATERIAL – AND THAT'S OKAY

My colleague once shared a story about managing that I will never forget. At the conclusion of her company’s performance management process, one of the new manager’s evaluations were the most thoughtful, honest and actionable she’d ever seen – despite it being his first time providing formal feedback. Unfortunately, it was also his last time. Upon realizing the effort required to manage people, the employee decided to relinquish his managing role and return to his passion as a software developer. 
I love this story because it highlights the importance of truly understanding people management. “Manager” is a responsibility – not just a fancy title – that requires a special set of skills and immense effort. And it’s not for everybody: It should be okay for ambitious high performers to decline the management career path.
The many consequences of ineffective and uncommitted managers take a high toll on organization effectiveness. Far too often, top individual contributors transition into management roles for the wrong reasons and without knowing what the role truly entails. In a previous post, I shared some alarming data from the Corporate Executive Board’s (CEB) Corporate Leadership Council research:
  • 57 percent of managers would have opted for non-management roles if there were an option.
  • 65 percent of managers would “opt-out” of their management roles today if given a chance to take another equally attractive role.
  • 31 percent of managers were neither committed nor effective at their management roles.
  • Only 19 percent (out of 9000 managers studied) were both committed and effective at managing.
In order to avoid the mediocre management syndrome, human resource professionals need to provide career path alternatives, help high performers consider alternatives and then carefully select qualified and committed managers. Below are three ways to cultivate the best managers for your company and determine the best paths for your employees:
1. Offer alternative career ladders
Commonly found in technology industries, dual career ladders allow those not well-suited or interested in management to advance their careers up a comparable professional ladder. “Distinguished engineer” might be the job-level equivalent of a senior manager or director, for example. And an engineering or scientific “fellow” may be the equivalent of a vice president.
2. Mentor aspiring managers
You can design a set of tools, programs and experiences to help top performers gain an understanding of the management path – and make an informed decision about whether it’s right for them. At 2020 Talent Management, for example, we developed a one-day program to mentor aspiring managers in Bangalore, India. During the pilot program, two engineers approached me after lunch, having already decided management was not right for them. This was a true win-win – the engineers avoided accepting an ill-fitting job and the company avoided appointing disengaged managers.
The next time I delivered the program in Boston, I shared the Bangalore story with the group. By 11:00 a.m. that morning, one of the participants told me he did not have to wait until after lunch – he already understood management was not the best fit. 
3. Design a comprehensive selection process
Jim Clifton, the chairman and CEO of Gallup Inc., said, “The single biggest decision you make in your job – bigger than all the rest – is who you name manager. When you name the wrong person manager, nothing fixes that bad decision.”  
Establishing a formal process for selecting new managers is critical to the future success of your organization. While the hiring manager is ultimately responsible for any decision, the smartest hiring choices are made in consultation with others (i.e. HR, Leadership Development, current colleagues). When selecting new manager candidates, consider their skills and experiences, such as leadership on informal teams or projects, collaboration and ability to establish relationships beyond their immediate team, as well as their personal motivation and commitment to being a manager. Consider utilizing standardized tools that assess attributes that correlate with manager/leader success, such as Emotional Intelligence and Learning Agility.

If you offer a mentorship or self-selection management program as described above, did the candidate take advantage of it? You can also ask candidates to work through a manager-oriented case study, such as the HBR case study, Is the Rookie Ready.

Great leaders foster engaged teams that deliver great results. By carefully selecting and developing effective and committed managers, you can enhance your organization’s competitive advantage and ensure a sustainable future for your company. 

STAR EMPLOYEES AREN'T ALWAYS MANAGEMENT MATERIAL – AND THAT'S OKAY

My colleague once shared a story about managing that I will never forget. At the conclusion of her company’s performance management process, one of the new manager’s evaluations were the most thoughtful, honest and actionable she’d ever seen – despite it being his first time providing formal feedback. Unfortunately, it was also his last time. Upon realizing the effort required to manage people, the employee decided to relinquish his managing role and return to his passion as a software developer. 
I love this story because it highlights the importance of truly understanding people management. “Manager” is a responsibility – not just a fancy title – that requires a special set of skills and immense effort. And it’s not for everybody: It should be okay for ambitious high performers to decline the management career path.
The many consequences of ineffective and uncommitted managers take a high toll on organization effectiveness. Far too often, top individual contributors transition into management roles for the wrong reasons and without knowing what the role truly entails. In a previous post, I shared some alarming data from the Corporate Executive Board’s (CEB) Corporate Leadership Council research:
  • 57 percent of managers would have opted for non-management roles if there were an option.
  • 65 percent of managers would “opt-out” of their management roles today if given a chance to take another equally attractive role.
  • 31 percent of managers were neither committed nor effective at their management roles.
  • Only 19 percent (out of 9000 managers studied) were both committed and effective at managing.
In order to avoid the mediocre management syndrome, human resource professionals need to provide career path alternatives, help high performers consider alternatives and then carefully select qualified and committed managers. Below are three ways to cultivate the best managers for your company and determine the best paths for your employees:
1. Offer alternative career ladders
Commonly found in technology industries, dual career ladders allow those not well-suited or interested in management to advance their careers up a comparable professional ladder. “Distinguished engineer” might be the job-level equivalent of a senior manager or director, for example. And an engineering or scientific “fellow” may be the equivalent of a vice president.
2. Mentor aspiring managers
You can design a set of tools, programs and experiences to help top performers gain an understanding of the management path – and make an informed decision about whether it’s right for them. At 2020 Talent Management, for example, we developed a one-day program to mentor aspiring managers in Bangalore, India. During the pilot program, two engineers approached me after lunch, having already decided management was not right for them. This was a true win-win – the engineers avoided accepting an ill-fitting job and the company avoided appointing disengaged managers.
The next time I delivered the program in Boston, I shared the Bangalore story with the group. By 11:00 a.m. that morning, one of the participants told me he did not have to wait until after lunch – he already understood management was not the best fit. 
3. Design a comprehensive selection process
Jim Clifton, the chairman and CEO of Gallup Inc., said, “The single biggest decision you make in your job – bigger than all the rest – is who you name manager. When you name the wrong person manager, nothing fixes that bad decision.”  
Establishing a formal process for selecting new managers is critical to the future success of your organization. While the hiring manager is ultimately responsible for any decision, the smartest hiring choices are made in consultation with others (i.e. HR, Leadership Development, current colleagues). When selecting new manager candidates, consider their skills and experiences, such as leadership on informal teams or projects, collaboration and ability to establish relationships beyond their immediate team, as well as their personal motivation and commitment to being a manager. Consider utilizing standardized tools that assess attributes that correlate with manager/leader success, such as Emotional Intelligence and Learning Agility.

If you offer a mentorship or self-selection management program as described above, did the candidate take advantage of it? You can also ask candidates to work through a manager-oriented case study, such as the HBR case study, Is the Rookie Ready.

Great leaders foster engaged teams that deliver great results. By carefully selecting and developing effective and committed managers, you can enhance your organization’s competitive advantage and ensure a sustainable future for your company. 

HOW TO CREATE PERSONAL PERFORMANCE GOALS (HINT: THERE'S AN 'I' IN 'TEAM')

Over the past few months I have been exploring the reasons why I struggle with individual performance goals even though I am a professional in the performance management system design industry. What I keep coming back to is that individual performance management goals are difficult to write, time consuming to develop, and quick to become outdated. 
I also think that calling them “goals” is misleading. To me, a “goal” denotes special work that is accomplished outside of regular duties, something that has a finite beginning and end.

Bring the Team to the Individual

So what do we do? Perhaps we’re over-thinking the process. Perhaps it’s as simple as sharing team goals with all employees, augmenting them with one or two work statements that have an element of “regular job” with a component of added speed, accuracy or service to help work towards some of the team goals.
The team goals come directly from the team business plan, which is shared and dissected by the team, generating ideas that can lead to team success. It is not so much the process of breaking down the goals as it is collaborating on achievement. Even if an employee’s role is tangential to the work described, she can still participate in the accomplishment of the team business plan. By being involved in dissecting the business plan, she has ownership in the result.
Performance review dialogue for team goals can be a conversation about contribution — reflecting on what went well, and what didn’t.

Don’t Stop at Documentation

The reality is that, unless the administrative work of setting, reviewing, adjusting and documenting goals actually adds value to the organization, I challenge the need to do it.
The documentation is not the end game — the successful accomplishment of the work is the end game. We document to ensure that leaders are doing their jobs and developing and challenging their teams. After all, isn’t that what performance management really is?
So rather than going through the annual exercise of breaking organizational goals into individual goals, why not take the interim step to develop the team or unit plan to accomplish the organizational goals, sharing and dialoguing with team members about the plan, the successes, the challenges and the results, and engaging team members in making real meaning in their work by clearly seeing how it contributes to the whole.

HOW TO CREATE PERSONAL PERFORMANCE GOALS (HINT: THERE'S AN 'I' IN 'TEAM')

Over the past few months I have been exploring the reasons why I struggle with individual performance goals even though I am a professional in the performance management system design industry. What I keep coming back to is that individual performance management goals are difficult to write, time consuming to develop, and quick to become outdated. 
I also think that calling them “goals” is misleading. To me, a “goal” denotes special work that is accomplished outside of regular duties, something that has a finite beginning and end.

Bring the Team to the Individual

So what do we do? Perhaps we’re over-thinking the process. Perhaps it’s as simple as sharing team goals with all employees, augmenting them with one or two work statements that have an element of “regular job” with a component of added speed, accuracy or service to help work towards some of the team goals.
The team goals come directly from the team business plan, which is shared and dissected by the team, generating ideas that can lead to team success. It is not so much the process of breaking down the goals as it is collaborating on achievement. Even if an employee’s role is tangential to the work described, she can still participate in the accomplishment of the team business plan. By being involved in dissecting the business plan, she has ownership in the result.
Performance review dialogue for team goals can be a conversation about contribution — reflecting on what went well, and what didn’t.

Don’t Stop at Documentation

The reality is that, unless the administrative work of setting, reviewing, adjusting and documenting goals actually adds value to the organization, I challenge the need to do it.
The documentation is not the end game — the successful accomplishment of the work is the end game. We document to ensure that leaders are doing their jobs and developing and challenging their teams. After all, isn’t that what performance management really is?
So rather than going through the annual exercise of breaking organizational goals into individual goals, why not take the interim step to develop the team or unit plan to accomplish the organizational goals, sharing and dialoguing with team members about the plan, the successes, the challenges and the results, and engaging team members in making real meaning in their work by clearly seeing how it contributes to the whole.

HOW TO CREATE PERSONAL PERFORMANCE GOALS (HINT: THERE'S AN 'I' IN 'TEAM')

Over the past few months I have been exploring the reasons why I struggle with individual performance goals even though I am a professional in the performance management system design industry. What I keep coming back to is that individual performance management goals are difficult to write, time consuming to develop, and quick to become outdated. 
I also think that calling them “goals” is misleading. To me, a “goal” denotes special work that is accomplished outside of regular duties, something that has a finite beginning and end.

Bring the Team to the Individual

So what do we do? Perhaps we’re over-thinking the process. Perhaps it’s as simple as sharing team goals with all employees, augmenting them with one or two work statements that have an element of “regular job” with a component of added speed, accuracy or service to help work towards some of the team goals.
The team goals come directly from the team business plan, which is shared and dissected by the team, generating ideas that can lead to team success. It is not so much the process of breaking down the goals as it is collaborating on achievement. Even if an employee’s role is tangential to the work described, she can still participate in the accomplishment of the team business plan. By being involved in dissecting the business plan, she has ownership in the result.
Performance review dialogue for team goals can be a conversation about contribution — reflecting on what went well, and what didn’t.

Don’t Stop at Documentation

The reality is that, unless the administrative work of setting, reviewing, adjusting and documenting goals actually adds value to the organization, I challenge the need to do it.
The documentation is not the end game — the successful accomplishment of the work is the end game. We document to ensure that leaders are doing their jobs and developing and challenging their teams. After all, isn’t that what performance management really is?
So rather than going through the annual exercise of breaking organizational goals into individual goals, why not take the interim step to develop the team or unit plan to accomplish the organizational goals, sharing and dialoguing with team members about the plan, the successes, the challenges and the results, and engaging team members in making real meaning in their work by clearly seeing how it contributes to the whole.

HOW TO TAKE THE EVIL OUT OF HR

I have heard this too many times: “Here comes HR. Something bad is about to happen.” 
Simply put, HR walks into workspaces and people worry about their jobs. In an effort to gain respect for our profession, I wonder if we’ve allowed ourselves to assume a role that is absolutely wrong for what we really want to achieve — trust.
Termination of an employee is a significant risk to the organization, even if all the proper steps are taken and the conversation is honest and accurate. HR is charged with managing the risk and, by golly, if we’re going to assume the risk, we are going to manage it. After all, it is our opportunity to grab a little power in the organization.
The performance and disciplinary process in organizations is cumbersome. If leaders were proactive about setting performance expectations, giving regular and clear feedback, and providing ample warning when the end is near, they would own the process and HR could go back to being a trusted advisor to leadership.
Do we in HR really want to allow ourselves to jeopardize the very trust we are trying to gain by micro-managing leaders in the performance and discipline process?
Many HR professionals have already turned this role back to managers. Some develop management skills, while others trust their managers to carry out disciplinary meetings without HR. Some still point the terminated employees back to HR to collect their ID, keys, cards, and get all of the appropriate forms signed.
But here is the challenge in that — at least from my perspective. HR should be trusted by leaders and by employees. By putting them in the position of being associated with terminating employees, we damage their reputation and put trust at risk.
Is there a better way? I have a couple thoughts:
  • HR should actively coach leaders in how to discuss performance and termination with their employees. When I say actively coach, I mean role play and pretend to be the employee and allow the manager to practice to the point where both have confidence that the manager will communicate clearly and not put the organization at risk.
  • If there is a difficult situation anticipated, have the next level manager participate rather than HR. This gives the next level manager insight into how the manager communicates and manages the organizational risk. It also keeps HR out of the “evil HR” role.
  • Provide a checklist to the manager for terminated employees, so that they collect the employee’s ID, keys and completed forms.
Allowing HR to distance themselves from the actual employee meetings may help in preserving a reputation of trust. Visiting business units for positive reasons is also a great way to avoid being seen as “the terminator.”

LEADERSHIP LEARNING IN THE TIME OF EBOLA

This isn’t a trick question, but a serious inquiry. I believe that learning happens at three levels in any organization: the individual level, the team level and the organizational level. Higher levels of learning are not necessarily the sum of individual or team learning, but a dynamic and evolutionary way that people come together to accomplish something.
Individuals can learn by reading a book, writing a paper, talking with others, and reflecting internally. Teams and organizations cannot learn by reading or writing. Given that teams and organizations are comprised of individuals, learning occurs in the spaces between the people — through interaction, dialogue and debate.
Apparently the Center for Disease Control counted on reading and writing as learning tools to protect against Ebola outbreaks, sending their protocol to healthcare providers to read and implement. I suspect that the two nurses who cared for Mr. Duncan would agree with me that reading the protocol wasn’t enough. Thankfully, in most organizations, we don’t face life and death situations, but perhaps there is a lesson for us to learn from this horrible situation so that we can avoid falling into the trap of thinking that simply communicating a change in behavior is sufficient to actually enact behavior change. 
Even without dire situations facing us, we do find ourselves needing to change behavior. Take, for example, those in leadership positions. As a leader, our behavior must change the moment we accept the role. We now have responsibility for the work, the people, and the results. That is a sobering responsibility, to have so much hinging on our leadership skill.
Yet we send new leaders into their roles without helping them to learn how to lead.  We may communicate to them the content that they need to know. We may even do a really good job of teaching them how to budget, complete performances reviews, and allocate other administrative work. Rarely have I seen organizations that help a new leader learn leadership behaviors, though.
Changing behavior requires practice, reflection, feedback and more practice, particularly when the behaviors are contrary to someone’s instinct, or are difficult to carry out. Helping someone learn these behaviors requires a systematic, consistent process of stating clear expectations, establishing consequences, and allowing the new leader to practice in a safe space.
What happens if a new leader is not given the opportunity to learn? She may have great instincts or have looked up to and observed a great leader. She may not have the instincts or role models. Everything that an organization accomplishes is through people, and leaders are in the unique position to either motivate or stagnate a group of people. Is leadership of the people of an organization something with which we want to take a chance?
Perhaps had the CDC realized the significance of the behavioral change required by the Ebola protocol, they may have sent advisors to help ensure that the learning was, in fact, taking place when the first case appeared. Like the CDC promulgating a protocol document and expecting that everyone will do the right thing and take it upon himself or herself to learn and practice, we cannot leave leadership skill to chance. It is too important to the success of our organizations.

SHIFT THE PARADIGM: CAROL ANDERSON'S WISH FOR HR IN 2015

What does 2015 hold for human resources? Honestly, I don’t know. I worry a bit about our future: will it bring more of the same or will we step up and make a change in order to create real value?
We need a shift. We are under fire and often seen as a necessary evil. We function as an overhead department and are pressured to reduce expenses. We devise programs that are dreaded and implement technology that is clunky. If we were a business, would our customers be buying?
Rather than make a prediction for 2015, I want to make a wish. I wish that human resources would use this next year to make a dramatic change in their approach to work — moving from an overhead department mentality, to that of a business provider.
I have a lot of years invested in this profession, and I truly believe that HR professionals have the ability to add tremendous value to organizations. But what does it mean to “add value”?
When I became an independent consultant and started reading and talking with others in the field, one message was consistent: we must create products and services that satisfy a need and provide value. This means doing a very good needs assessment, reporting back about what you hear and confirming the validity, and then devising a plan to fill the need. Once you implement the plan, you begin the process of evaluating effectiveness — gaining candid feedback from users about whether it addresses the need, and whether it is a feasible and workable solution. If it is not, then you tweak the solution until the need is met.
We don’t do that in HR. Instead, we tell the client (aka employee) what they must do, but rarely do we ever ask them for feedback. I know this for a fact because I have been one of those HR people who really didn’t want to hear any negative feedback because I felt powerless to do anything to fix it.
What if we used 2015 to do a really good needs assessment on one or two of our products or services?
Let’s take “talent management” as an example. What does talent management mean to your organization? Can you answer that question? Would your answer mirror that of your executive team? You probably have a talent management program in place. If you can’t answer the questions about what it is supposed to do, how do you know if it is the right solution?
Make 2015 the year that you commit to adding value to your organization, find out what value means, and assess your current programs for their value.
That’s a lot to do, all while keeping the wheels turning at the same time. However, just asking the questions of your executives and leaders shifts the paradigm. It says, “HR really wants to work with the business to make a difference to the business.” Once you turn that corner, I predict that you will gain significant credibility.

SHIFT THE PARADIGM: CAROL ANDERSON'S WISH FOR HR IN 2015

What does 2015 hold for human resources? Honestly, I don’t know. I worry a bit about our future: will it bring more of the same or will we step up and make a change in order to create real value?
We need a shift. We are under fire and often seen as a necessary evil. We function as an overhead department and are pressured to reduce expenses. We devise programs that are dreaded and implement technology that is clunky. If we were a business, would our customers be buying?
Rather than make a prediction for 2015, I want to make a wish. I wish that human resources would use this next year to make a dramatic change in their approach to work — moving from an overhead department mentality, to that of a business provider.
I have a lot of years invested in this profession, and I truly believe that HR professionals have the ability to add tremendous value to organizations. But what does it mean to “add value”?
When I became an independent consultant and started reading and talking with others in the field, one message was consistent: we must create products and services that satisfy a need and provide value. This means doing a very good needs assessment, reporting back about what you hear and confirming the validity, and then devising a plan to fill the need. Once you implement the plan, you begin the process of evaluating effectiveness — gaining candid feedback from users about whether it addresses the need, and whether it is a feasible and workable solution. If it is not, then you tweak the solution until the need is met.
We don’t do that in HR. Instead, we tell the client (aka employee) what they must do, but rarely do we ever ask them for feedback. I know this for a fact because I have been one of those HR people who really didn’t want to hear any negative feedback because I felt powerless to do anything to fix it.
What if we used 2015 to do a really good needs assessment on one or two of our products or services?
Let’s take “talent management” as an example. What does talent management mean to your organization? Can you answer that question? Would your answer mirror that of your executive team? You probably have a talent management program in place. If you can’t answer the questions about what it is supposed to do, how do you know if it is the right solution?
Make 2015 the year that you commit to adding value to your organization, find out what value means, and assess your current programs for their value.
That’s a lot to do, all while keeping the wheels turning at the same time. However, just asking the questions of your executives and leaders shifts the paradigm. It says, “HR really wants to work with the business to make a difference to the business.” Once you turn that corner, I predict that you will gain significant credibility.

SHIFT THE PARADIGM: CAROL ANDERSON'S WISH FOR HR IN 2015

What does 2015 hold for human resources? Honestly, I don’t know. I worry a bit about our future: will it bring more of the same or will we step up and make a change in order to create real value?
We need a shift. We are under fire and often seen as a necessary evil. We function as an overhead department and are pressured to reduce expenses. We devise programs that are dreaded and implement technology that is clunky. If we were a business, would our customers be buying?
Rather than make a prediction for 2015, I want to make a wish. I wish that human resources would use this next year to make a dramatic change in their approach to work — moving from an overhead department mentality, to that of a business provider.
I have a lot of years invested in this profession, and I truly believe that HR professionals have the ability to add tremendous value to organizations. But what does it mean to “add value”?
When I became an independent consultant and started reading and talking with others in the field, one message was consistent: we must create products and services that satisfy a need and provide value. This means doing a very good needs assessment, reporting back about what you hear and confirming the validity, and then devising a plan to fill the need. Once you implement the plan, you begin the process of evaluating effectiveness — gaining candid feedback from users about whether it addresses the need, and whether it is a feasible and workable solution. If it is not, then you tweak the solution until the need is met.
We don’t do that in HR. Instead, we tell the client (aka employee) what they must do, but rarely do we ever ask them for feedback. I know this for a fact because I have been one of those HR people who really didn’t want to hear any negative feedback because I felt powerless to do anything to fix it.
What if we used 2015 to do a really good needs assessment on one or two of our products or services?
Let’s take “talent management” as an example. What does talent management mean to your organization? Can you answer that question? Would your answer mirror that of your executive team? You probably have a talent management program in place. If you can’t answer the questions about what it is supposed to do, how do you know if it is the right solution?
Make 2015 the year that you commit to adding value to your organization, find out what value means, and assess your current programs for their value.
That’s a lot to do, all while keeping the wheels turning at the same time. However, just asking the questions of your executives and leaders shifts the paradigm. It says, “HR really wants to work with the business to make a difference to the business.” Once you turn that corner, I predict that you will gain significant credibility.

WHY CLEAN DATA IS THE BEST DATA

In today’s HR landscape, data is having a moment. But I’d like to suggest that not all analytics are created equal.
HR data is essentially HR business intelligence. This should be the basis on which decisions are made about the people of the organization. All of the cool technology in the world cannot override bad data, which is why the accuracy of HR data is a highly strategic function.

First, let me provide some perspective.

In 1980, I was responsible for a department that included personnel records. There was a supervisor who had been in the organization for years. Her staff had been with her for almost the same amount of time. I was used to the impeccable (and regularly audited) records from my prior position with the Marine Corps, and this department maintained similarly accurate and credible personnel information.

Next I went into banking, and while “records” were not part of my responsibility, I relied on the data for my compensation analysis. When I got there in 1989, I found another amazing records overseer who kept our data clean by checking and rechecking all of the personnel forms that arrived on his desk. Our job codes, EEO codes, departmental hierarchy — everything needed for good analysis — was clean.
Then came automation.

Technology as a Data Keeper

The records-keeper job was eliminated because our HRIS was going to take over. We worked hard reviewing, auditing and cleaning data so that the “go live” would contain good data. That lasted about a week.
The good news: We could access, sort and analyze data quickly and easily. The bad news: The data got progressively worse.
Why? Because we shifted the job of keeping the HRIS up-to-date from an individual who knew the importance of the data to managers who couldn’t care less. I haven’t seen an organization with good data since. The promise of technology, which could have been such help, fell prey to a system that didn’t review, audit, analyze or even really see the importance of clean data.

Why is Accurate Data so Important?

Today, organizations not only have an HRIS, but many also have add-on human capital management systems which provide applicant tracking, learning management, compensation planning and other specialty modules. If they are smart, however, the HRIS is the “system of record” meaning that all core data is entered in one place and is fed to other modules. This is a critical first step of having accurate data.

How to Fix Jumbled Data

You must take the accuracy of your data seriously. Here are a few ways:
  1. Every data field should have a business owner. It is the business owner’s responsibility to audit the data in that field. As an example, the compensation department “owns” job codes. They should be the only one allowed to update the job code table, but should also audit the use of job codes regularly to ensure that managers are assigning them properly. Job codes are a critical element of HR analysis, in everything from compensation to employee relations. One wrong job code can throw a job’s comp-ratio way off.
  2. Organizational hierarchies should be deliberately established by a collaborative group of HR sub-disciplines. This should happen with the understanding of the implications of each structure on data reporting. For one sub-discipline to change a hierarchy without informing others can do damage to the reporting credibility.
  3. Reports should be produced by a single source within the HR team, regardless of the “owner” of the data. HRIS and human capital systems are too complicated, and a novice analyst can pull the wrong data too easily. One source for reporting should help to catch discrepancies before reports are distributed.