Canadian Management Centre's Training Blog

Many Workers Change Jobs After Three Years

As reported by HRI, significant proportions of workers aged 30 to 50 anticipate leaving their current employers within three years' time, reports the American Business Collaboration, a consortium of seven major U.S. companies that offers management advice relating to employee issues. The consortium polled 2,775 individuals nationwide in 2006, finding that a third of workers in the 30-40 age group and 25% of those from 40 to 50 said they'd change employment before three years passed. The survey found that employees who worked hourly said they expected to average a half-dozen different employers during their careers, while salaried workers estimated that they'd work for an average of five employers. Surveyed workers aged 30 to 60 reported a lack of career development options as the leading driver of job dissatisfaction. (DallasNews.com [Moos], October 16, 2006)

Many Workers Change Jobs After Three Years

As reported by HRI, significant proportions of workers aged 30 to 50 anticipate leaving their current employers within three years' time, reports the American Business Collaboration, a consortium of seven major U.S. companies that offers management advice relating to employee issues. The consortium polled 2,775 individuals nationwide in 2006, finding that a third of workers in the 30-40 age group and 25% of those from 40 to 50 said they'd change employment before three years passed. The survey found that employees who worked hourly said they expected to average a half-dozen different employers during their careers, while salaried workers estimated that they'd work for an average of five employers. Surveyed workers aged 30 to 60 reported a lack of career development options as the leading driver of job dissatisfaction. (DallasNews.com [Moos], October 16, 2006)

Continuous Partial Attention

I am fascinated, perhaps morbidly, by Linda Stone’s writings on what she calls “Continuous Partial Attention”.  This new behaviour, in my view, is negatively influencing the conduct and the effectiveness of business meetings, which were never all that efficient in the first place.  I hope in this blog, to stimulate a debate and forum for ideas to help harness this phenomenom and tame it.

Stone defines continuous partial attention as being in an artificial sense of constant crisis requiring us to continuously scan for opportunity, activities and contacts at any and all given moments.  This means continuously accepting distractions by staying connected to our networks at all times.

I see it manifest in meetings at its most benign form when people sit down and place their Blackberries on the table in front of them, unashamedly declaring that their commitment to the purpose of the meeting is limited and will be bumped at the first buzz from the machine.

I can handle the disrespect to me as the meeting organizer and other committed attendees.  What really bothers me is the damage this does to the prospect of getting a great result from a group of people whose single-minded attention might be required to crack the problem, generate the breakthrough, establish keen commitment and get us out of the meeting in the shortest possible time.

I have lots more to say about this but I would like to learn from others too.  I will check in later.

John Eckmire- Vice President, Public Programs & Education

Canadian Management Centre

The Benefits of Hiring Older Workers Outweigh the Costs

As reported by HRI, The savings gained from hiring and retaining older workers can more than offset what they may require in compensation and benefits costs, according to a 2005 cost analysis of older versus younger workers conducted by Towers Perrin for AARP. The study tallied the considerable turnover-related costs associated with search fees, exit interviewing, and termination processing, along with the diminished productivity levels typical of employees on their way out. Added to these were the costs of training new hires, who generally take some time before achieving desired levels of productivity. By contrast, the study identified a significantly smaller cost impact from workers age 50 and over with regard to retention (3%) and recruitment (1%) strategies. It thus argues that discouraging turnover among older workers and valuing the experience they bring as new hires can create both stability and cost savings that far outweigh the budget demands associated with compensation and benefits for older employees. (WorldatWork Journal [Feinsod and Davenport], Third Quarter 2006, pp. 18, 19)

Beware the Dumbing Down of Metrics

As reported by HRI, The practice of "dumbing down measures," although a time saver, is hazardous to the development of top performance, according to Paul Walsh, a senior lecturer at the Australian Graduate School of Management, University of NSW, Australia. Walsh describes how this practice is occurring due to the widespread use of dashboards and scorecards. He defines the dumbing down of measures as "the practice of repeatedly substituting measures of achievement with less and less relevant surrogate measures until what remains is an activity or initiative measure, not a measure of outcomes achieved." In practice, however, available measures are not always perfect. Referring to R. Simons' work in 2000, Walsh recommends first identifying types of measures used. This system classifies measures as: objective (can be verified through audit), subjective (relies on judgment), complete (reflects all relevant components) and responsive (management action can affect it). Walsh suggests that initiative measures and process measures alone report on activities rather than strategic outcomes, but outcome measures - either through exact measures or proxy measures - cover more of the attributes of good performance measures. When faced with less-than-perfect measures, Walsh recommends, make use of the following workarounds: 1) identify the type of measure to allow those interpreting the data to make necessary adjustments; 2) link measures to a strategic theme to provide more clarity and 3) based upon Simons' work, use a "rule-based decision tree," which takes into consideration the organizational climate when evaluating the adequacy of measures. (Measuring Business Excellence [Walsh], 2005, pp. 37-45) 

Effective Change Management Means Handling Emotional Factors

Effective change management requires leaders to balance business objectives with factors that affect their workforces on a personal level, according to Kerry Bunker and Michael Wakefield, authors of Leading with Authenticity in Times of Transition. The pair points out six specific balances that change leaders must achieve, beginning with the need to act as a catalyst for organizational change while also helping employees handle the emotional ramifications of transition. Leaders also must convey urgency in order to generate momentum for change, the authors say, while remaining patient enough to give workers time to adapt. The third balance weighs a leader's strength to make difficult decisions against her/his ability to empathize with employees, while Bunker and Wakefield's fourth area of balance pits the need for an optimistic outlook against the equal need to approach change realistically. Leaders' ability to depend on themselves versus their need to work with others to achieve change constitutes the fifth area of balance that the authors identify. Their final balancing act encompasses leaders' skill at finding and exploiting workers' strengths while remaining open to new concepts and new ways of operating. "Leading change is largely about managing paradox and making sense of competing views," the authors conclude. (Harvard Management Update [Bunker and Wakefield], May 2006, pp. 1-4)

Lack of Qualified Candidates Top Factor Affecting Relocation

As reported by HRI, A lack of qualified local candidates was cited by 58% of respondents as the major external factor affecting relocation in 2005, according to the 39th Annual Corporate Relocation Survey conducted by Atlas World Group. The survey of 421 corporate relocation specialists found that 27% of respondents saw economic conditions as a major external factor in relocation volume, while impact of international competition (14%) and domestic competition (14%) remained steady from the previous years' results. The top internal factors affecting relocation in 2005 were company growth (57%), promotions/resignations (43%), knowledge/skills transfers (29%) and corporate reorganization (28%). Fifty-five percent of firms outsourced relocation services in 2005, down from 63% in 2004 and 66% in 2003. Service was the top reason cited for choosing an outside household goods carrier, with reputation second and price third. Full reimbursement of relocation expenses for transferees and new hires was down in 2005, while lump-sum and partial reimbursement was up. For 2006, 28% of companies expected relocation volume increases, with 31% expecting their relocation budgets to increase. (Atlas 2006 Corporate Relocation Survey [Atlas World Group], April 2006)

More Companies Turn to Performance Shares

Many companies are turning to performance shares as a way to tie employee compensation to performance. Performance shares are stock awards given for performance over a two- to five-year period. Most plans pay out only when actual performance reaches 80% of the goal, with additional rewards for results above and beyond the target. Employers like them because they are very cost-effective and don't dilute stock like stock options. They are also tied directly to performance in two ways: Employees will want to perform individually to receive the shares, and they will also want the company to perform to increase the value of the shares. Accounting for these incentive plans is easier now that the cost is based on the fixed stock value at the grant date and does not need to follow share price changes. Another benefit is that share costs can be completely reversed if the performance targets are not met. (Workspan [Schmidt], July 2006, pp. 33-36)

Change Requires a Number of Crucial Components

As reported by HRI. Senior management support for change initiatives was judged a crucial component for a successful change outcome, based on research conducted by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD). From its studies of change initiatives in 11 large UK organizations and a survey of more than 800 senior executives, the CIPD developed a seven-step approach to organizational change. Along with leaders' support, change initiatives require these elements:

• Proposed changes should fit logically within the organization's overall business strategy.
• Employees' involvement in shaping and implementing initiatives should be genuine and pervasive.
• Communications programs must be ongoing, must reach all parties involved in the change and must provide a two-way flow of information.
• HR staff should play an active role in leading change initiatives.
• Organizational leaders must be able to apply sound project management skills to change initiatives.
• Interdisciplinary teams should be formed to ensure that a variety of skills can be applied to implement the change initiative.
  ("Regular Reorganisations in UK Organisations" [Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development], press release, September 13, 2005)

Leaders Jobs Often Hinge on Change Management Success

As reported by HRI, failure to oversee change effectively is the leading reason that organizations' governing boards discharge chief executives, according to Leadership IQ Inc. The leadership training organization interviewed more than one thousand public- and private-sector board members during the course of a four-year study and found that 31% of the nearly 300 organizations represented in the study fired CEOs for botching change initiatives. The most frequently cited problem, according to Leadership IQ, was leaders' inability to convince managers and employees that change was necessary. Failure to attend to customers and their needs motivated CEO terminations in 28% of the organizations represented, while tolerance of poor performers was cited as a cause by 27%. ("Leadership IQ Study: Mismanagement, Inaction Among the Real Reasons Why CEOs Get Fired" [Leadership IQ Inc.], press release, June 20, 2005)