The Performance Improvement Blog

Layoff Survivors

The pink slip parade is getting longer and longer. A CBS graph of layoffs in U.S. companies makes it clear that people are being put out of work at an alarming rate. We should be very concerned about what will happen to these newly unemployed workers and their families. However, we should also be concerned about the survivors. These are the employees who must deal with guilt over still being on the job after watching their friends escorted out the door, who fear that they will be next, and who are frustrated with trying to do the work of two or three people while receiving compensation for less than one person. At the same time, companies desperately need these surviving employees to be engaged, motivated workers who will help the company remain viable during the recession and position the company well when the economy turns around.

Advice for conducting layoffs and helping survivors so that they are engaged and motivated is quite abundant these days. Some experts talk about how to restore morale (See bnet.). These writers offer good suggestions, but I question the leap to restoring morale when many of these companies never had high morale in the first place. Maybe if they had a great workplace, they wouldn’t have to be implementing mass layoffs, at least not at the current levels.

Some experts talk about how to lay-off people. For example, Kawasaki offers his list of the right things to do. He advises CEOs to be visible to survivors and connect with them so that they have confidence the company will weather the poor economy. Still other experts talk about how to keep employees engaged in their work during a period of layoffs. Some talk about holding feel-good events.

All of these suggestions are helpful, but I believe the best way to keep morale up and keep surviving employees engaged in their work after layoffs is to keep employees informed about the issues in the company long before layoffs. As I wrote in a previous blog post:

… I think “communication” is the most important. Keep employees informed whether they request the information or not. In difficult economic times, it is more important than ever to push the information out and make sure that everyone in the organization hears the messages. Keeping open lines of communication is good, but don’t wait for questions and concerns; anticipate what employees want to know and get that information to them. And listen, listen, listen. Offer opportunities for individuals and small groups to express their worries and concerns even if there is nothing that can be said at the moment to allay their fears. Tell them what you know about the situation, acknowledge their strong feelings, and show respect for their views. This will go a long way toward building trust and increasing the level of employee engagement.

Don’t wait for a crisis; communicate now. This will make layoffs a little easier on the employees who are leaving and will give survivors a sense of control over their lives. Nothing is more unsettling to employees than not knowing and feeling helpless and vulnerable in the wake of change.

What are you doing to support the survivors in your organization? What suggestions would you give others for helping survivors continue to be productive contributors to the organization?

Alliance: Manager and Learner Collaborate For Learning

Learning in organizations should not be a solitary activity, at least not if you want employees to apply what they learned to their work and to achieving the strategic goals of the organization. Tim Mooney and Rob Brinkerhoff write in their book Courageous Training:

Training cannot succeed unless there is consistent commitment and action from several of the nontraining parts of the organization. Managers of trainees, for example, must provide the support, encouragement, and expectation for accountability so that employees try out training-acquired capabilities. Senior leaders must buy into and express a belief in the direction that training is steering toward. They must do this not only with words but also with actions. (p. 26)

Learners need to believe that learning is valued in the organization. They need to hear this message from senior management. Employees need to believe that someone in the organization cares about their development. This will usually be a boss or supervisor. Together, they should come to agreement about what is to be learned, why it is to be learned, and how the employee will apply the new knowledge or skills. The boss/supervisor should serve in a coaching role, guiding the learner to maximize opportunity for success. Learner and boss/supervisor should work toward these goals together - in alliance. They should have regular conversations about what the learner should be getting out of the training and how it will be applied to achieve intended work outcomes and contribute to achieve business goals.

Evidence strongly suggests that this alliance between employee and boss/supervisor has a positive effect on employee engagement. This is the conclusion from Fast Company's analysis of the Gallup research. Tony Schwartz writes:

The single most important variable in employee productivity and loyalty turns out to be not pay or perks or benefits or workplace environment. Rather, according to the Gallup Organization, it's the quality of the relationship between employees and their direct supervisors. More specifically, what people want most from their supervisors is the same thing that kids want most from their parents: someone who sets clear and consistent expectations, cares for them, values their unique qualities, and encourages and supports their growth and development.

This observation is supported by many studies conducted by the Advantage Performance Group of the impact of management and leadership training programs. These studies consistently show that when trainees talk with their bosses before and after training, they are much more likely to apply what they learned to achieve important business goals.

Employee Engagement in a Recession

Employees are being laid off. Departmental budgets are being cut. Revenue is down and costs are up. Is this the right time to be thinking about employee engagement? If you want to retain valuable employees, if you want to continue to be competitive, if you want to be positioned well for the eventual economic recovery, then the answer is a resounding “yes”…but it’s not easy.

Erin White in the article, How to Motivate Workers in Tough Times, addresses the fundamental question: “How do you keep employees focused, motivated and energetic when everything's lousy?” White interviewed Jim Harter from Gallup about the advice he would give managers regarding employee engagement. Harter argues that employee engagement is important in a bad economy because it makes employees resilient, which helps them get through tough times. Resilient employees have the flexibility to bounce back from bad news and immediately focus on ways to improve the business. Many of Harter's suggestions for increasing employee engagement are things a good manager would do anyway, such as clarifying expectations for employees, helping employees build relationships, giving recognition to employees.

Amal Aziz, CEO of MGM Grand Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas, is another one who thinks that employee engagement should continue to be maintained in a downturn. He believes it is a competitive advantage. He said to BusinessWeek,

Employee engagement in times of difficulties and severe economic climate is far more profoundly important now. Employees are willing to give their all when they are well-treated, appreciated. And the ability to unlock that potential is a competitive distinction…It's their decisions, their actions, their attitude that really make the difference. Imagine taking 10,000 employees, and each and every one of them wanting to give more. That's really the difference between [us and] a company that has its employees just punching the clock and trying to get through the day.

However, CEO Aziz has had to balance his investment in employee engagement with cuts he has had to make due to decreasing revenue. Prior to the recession he surveyed his 10,000 employees and found a lack of communication was contributing to low engagement. In response, he implemented pre-shift meetings to get information to all employees. He also expanded MGM Grand University, involving employees in decisions about its programs, and then offering those programs to employees in all 17 properties of MGM MIRAGE, the parent company of MGM Grand. Aziz’s current problem is that he has to reduce expenses substantially which is affecting these employee engagement efforts. For example, he is doing the same employee appreciation events that he was doing before but he has cut event costs in half.

For additional suggestions on how to keep employees engaged in these difficult economic times, see The Workforce Institute’s blog “The Workforce Stimulus Plan”. Their suggestions fall within six categories: 1) leadership; 2) employee involvement; 3) communication; 4) rewards and incentives; 5) talent management and learning; and 6) creative ways to reduce operating expenses.

Out of this list, I think “communication” is the most important. Keep employees informed whether they request the information or not. In difficult economic times, it is more important than ever to push the information out and make sure that everyone in the organization hears the messages. Keeping open lines of communication is good, but don’t wait for questions and concerns; anticipate what employees want to know and get that information to them. And listen, listen, listen. Offer opportunities for individuals and small groups to express their worries and concerns even if there is nothing that can be said at the moment to allay their fears. Tell them what you know about the situation, acknowledge their strong feelings, and show respect for their views. This will go a long way toward building trust and increasing the level of employee engagement.

Meetings, Don't Waste Your Time!

We can count on seeing something fairly regularly in the popular business press about problems with meetings. After public speaking and death, meeting management must be one of the things that causes managers the most anxiety. We spend a lot of time in them, yet they continue to be a frustrating and challenging part of work-life. In a recent article in The New York Times, Reid Hastie, a professor in the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, writes that our inattention to the careful planning of meetings wastes everyone’s time. He says:

As a general rule, meetings make individuals perform below their capacity and skill levels…This doesn’t mean we should always avoid face-to-face meetings — but it is certain that every organization has too many meetings, and far too many poorly designed ones…The main reason we don’t make meetings more productive is that we don’t value our time properly. The people who call meetings and those who attend them are not thinking about time as their most valuable resource.

Hastie argues that somebody needs to take responsibility for clarifying the objectives of a meeting, structuring the meeting appropriately, and being accountable for results. I addressed similar issues in a previous blog post where I talked about the proliferation of teleconference meetings and how they are not always the best way to achieve intended goals.

Whether face-to-face or teleconference, there is help for managers who want more effective meetings. John Tropman, in his book Making Meetings Work: Achieving High Quality Group Decisions, offers very specific suggestions and tools for planning and conducting meetings based on his observations of “meeting masters.” He compares their meetings to conducting an orchestra:

Meeting masters saw their meeting as if they were orchestra performances. The hall had been prepared, the pieces selected, and some rehearsal accomplished. Everyone there was an expert, trying to do his or her best. The job of the chairperson was to facilitate, to help, to conduct the committee orchestra.

Productivity Swap Bubble

And you thought "credit swaps" were bad! Wait until we get into the "productivity swap" bubble. This is the warning from John Psarouthakis, successful entrepreneur, and Tom Ferguson, musical entertainer. They say in Other Voices column of the January 12 issue of Crain's Detroit Business that the productivity of companies is shifting from employees to customers and this shift is not being recognized in measures of output. They write:

For every tick of productivity a customer expends, productivity ascribed to that company should be reduced two ticks: one because it didn't do the work, another because it outsourced the work, making it a debt.

This outsourcing of productivity is obvious to me...now that Psarouthakis and Ferguson have brought it to my attention. The classic is customers pumping gas, washing car windows,and checking oil at so-called "service stations". Also, customers must already know the answers to their own questions when calling an automated (so-called) "help desk" or else they won't get to the right information. Grocery stores are installing automated check-out stations where customers do all the work pricing and bagging groceries. Airlines penalize customers for not using online services to make their own travel arrangements and issue their own tickets and then airlines want customers to check their own bags at the airport. Book stores are rewarding their customers for ordering books online, thereby eliminating the need for knowledgeable, helpful store clerks. And, of course, there are the ubiquitous ATMs which have shifted the work of personal banking from tellers and bankers to bank customers.

The swap is on. What will happen when this productivity bubble bursts? Will we discover that our GNP has been a sham and that much of what was thought to be worker productivity is really customer productivity? Will there be a backlash against this shift? What effect will this have on our fragile economy?

Employee Engagement Across Generations

Boomers (born between 1946 and 1964) live to work; Millennials (born after 1980) work to live. At least, that’s what the popular media seems to be suggesting. But this is a huge over-generalization of what is important to these different generations. Some things are motivating to all employees, whether they are Traditionalists (born between 1928 and 1945), Boomers, Xers (born between 1965 and 1980), or Millennials. Roberta Matteson, in her blog Generation Integration, offers five things that companies can do to engage all employees, regardless of age, in their work.

1. Provide opportunities to do interesting work.
2. Offer flexible work options so employees can on-ramp and off-ramp as life events dictate changes.
3. Adjust your benefit plans to reflect the needs of your population.
4. Encourage collaboration-Think mentor programs and reverse mentor programs.
5. Pay competitive wages. Don't believe everything you hear. Money still matters and it does so now more than ever with the rising cost of fuel, food and debt.

It's refreshing to read that there are things that are the same for all employees across the generations. No doubt age affects some individual differences, but many motivators affect each employee in similar ways. And at a basic psychological level, all workers become more engaged when they experience mutual respect, a sense of control over their lives and careers, and meaning in what they do.

What generational similarities and differences have you observed among employees of these different age groups?

Predictions for 2009: Baby Boomers; Engagement; and Learning

Given the new year, I feel compelled to offer some thoughts about three major trends I see for 2009 related to organizational learning and leadership development. It seems like everybody is making predictions at this time. My caveat is that I'm like the economist who has trouble predicting the past, let alone the future. But I'm going to give it a try, anyway.

First, let's look at what will be happening with Baby Boomers, the 76 million people who are beginning to reach traditional retirement age. Given the economy and their personal financial situations, many will have to work longer than they had planned. Some will remain in the workforce but disengage because of their disappointment with having to work longer and the anger they feel regarding their situations. Others will appreciate not being "put out to pasture" yet and they will become highly engaged. Some of these workers will be in "encore careers" and very excited about the opportunity. However, for those who are working because they feel they don't have a choice, organizations will have a difficult time increasing levels of engagement. Unless these organizations address this issue head-on, they will have large numbers of workers who are "not in the game."

Second, employers will risk losing the talent of all employees during the worst economic slump since the Great Depression, unless they take special care to be honest, forthright, and fair. And they need to communicate, communicate, and communicate. They must keep employees informed, even if it's only to say that they don't know anything new at this time. Employees already are feeling a great deal of generalized anxiety. If employees believe that they are not being told the truth or they are not being treated fairly and with respect, this anxiety will just increase. This could affect the health of many workers. Uncertainty leads to chronic stress which results in serious health problems. Right now we are faced with a time of tremendous national and global uncertainty. Employers should not be making it worse for their employees.

The third major trend I see is an increasing emphasis on efficient use of resources. Money will not be as readily available as it once was. Companies will have to do more with less. To be competitive they will have to lower their costs and make sure that every dollar is spent wisely. This has always has been true for the mom-and-pop company, but it is also becoming true for the multi-national conglomerate. Learning interventions, whether training, coaching, elearning, internships, or any other employee development activity, will have to show positive results to justify continuation. It won't be enough to have good attendance and happy participants in workshops. Executives will demand to know how those events are contributing to achieving business goals of companies.

Do you agree with these predictions? What trends in organizational learning and leadership development do you see for 2009?