« June 2005 | Main | August 2005 »
July 25, 2005
Fewer companies offering flexible working schedules
The number of employees with flexible work schedules is dropping even as research shows that non-traditional hours can enhance productivity, according to a July 25 USA Today article. The number of full-time wage and salary workers age 16 and older on flexible schedules in the U.S. dropped from 29 million in May 2001 to 27.4 million in 2004, according to a July report from the U.S Department of Labor. Industries leading the way with workers on flexible schedules include information and financial, professional and business services.
Behind the decline:
• Some companies are dropping formal flexible-working programs. A 2005 Society for Human Resource Management study found fewer companies offer flex time: 56 percent offered flex time to workers in 2005, vs. 64 percent in 2002.
• Workers are skittish about asking for flexibility. News of recent layoffs, such as Hewlett-Packard’s plan to cut 14,500 jobs, may make employees feel they can’t ask for extra accommodation. Also, companies are outsourcing jobs overseas and no longer need to offer flexible schedules to cover off hours.
This is some interesting data and would seem to run counter to other studies out there showing high percentages of employees who plan to look for new employment in the near future. Work flexibility has always been important to me as a worker, as well as a boss, and one of the ways that I let people who work for me have a little more control over their lives. Is anyone else surprised by this?
Posted by Christopher at 2:51 PM
Comments
Post a comment
| TrackBackJuly 24, 2005
Better office design can increase engagement
A recent study conducted by Gensler, an architecture firm, provided some interesting insight into the role environment and work space play in increasing productivity. The talked to 200 UK managers in law firms, financial services and media companies, and here's what they found:
Four out of five of these UK-based managers say the quality of their working environment is very important to their job satisfaction and one-third say it has counted in their decision to accept or reject a job.
Personal space is the most important factor in creating a good office environment, followed by climate control and daylight, they say.
Most feel their offices have not been designed with the company's business or their own function in mind.
More than one-third think cost-saving was the prime motive behind design and nearly one in five would be embarrassed to show customers around their premises.
While estimates about the extra productivity to be gained from better office design may be subjective, surveys do show that offices are not the best places for creative thinking. 38 percent of professionals say they find it hard to be creative or innovative in the office, and 36 percent believe they are more productive when working at home. Only 20 percent have their best ideas at their desk, although 30 percent find meetings, or interacting with colleagues, to be the most productive source of ideas.
Modern design needs to take account of the fact that employees are generally creatures of habit who like their personal space. For those who feel guilty about having, or hankering after, their own office, there is good and bad news. The good news is that they are not alone: half the respondents say they would most like to work in a solo or shared private office.
The bad news is that they will not necessarily be liked for it: just over half the professionals say they have greater respect for leaders who work in an open plan environment with their team. Women feel more strongly about this symbol of egalitarianism than men.
Posted by Christopher at 10:37 AM
Comments
Post a comment
| TrackBackJuly 17, 2005
Costco Reaps Benefits of Engaged Employees
The discount retailer Costco (operating primarily in the US but also in Canada, Britian, South Korea, Taiwan and Japan) comes under frequent criticism by analysts for being TOO generous with its employees. Costco's average pay, for example, is US$17/hour, which is 42 percent higher than its biggest rival. Part-time workers are eligible for health insurance after just six months on the job, compared to a two-year minimum at Wal-Mart.
While analysts say the company should return some of that money to shareholders instead of doling it out to employees, their actions speak differently: Costco's share price has risen 10 percent in the last 12 months, while Wal-Mart's has fallen 5 percent. Costco's chief executive, Jim Sinegal, has instructed his HR department to maintain wage and benefits packages that are not just "better than everybody else," but "demonstrably better than everyone else" according to a recent interview.
I have to believe, however, that there is more to the Costco story. Simply focusing on pay and benefits might result in higher levels of engagement over a very short period, but there needs to be more for this to be sustainable. Studies over the years have actually proven that if companies focus on maximizing engagement of their employees, they can actually pay them BELOW market rates.
I'm guessing that Costco has realized its success not only because of the high pay, but also its training of managers and involvement of employees in relentlessly keeping prices down. If anyone has a perspective on this, I'd be interested to hear it.
Posted by Christopher at 3:53 PM
Comments
There was an article a few months ago - heck, it might be a year ago now - that compared Sam's Clubs to Costco. It was frightening, how well Costco did in that head-to-head competition.
You treat people well, and they will work hard for you.
Plus, Costco hot dogs rock.
Posted by: Jeremy Pepper at July 18, 2005 11:40 PM
Costco is proof positive that you can still make a profit AND pay your employees well. Paying a living wage is definitely where building loyalty begins. Where was the study done that said you can pay below market rates and have maximum engagement? India?
Posted by: B.L. Ochman at July 21, 2005 1:07 PM
I am a 13yr. employee of Costco. Yes, we are taken care of and in return we take care of our members. I cannot say enough of how well we are treated. I am on the virge of wanting to quit due to a progressing medical condition. BUT I was told that as a Company they will help me find something to do at work without having the pain and worries of whether I am failing Costco. Thank You Jim (OUR CEO) for your wonderful attitude you are truly amazing!!!
Posted by: S. Simmons at September 2, 2005 4:25 AM
Post a comment
| TrackBackJuly 15, 2005
PR's shaky credibility on blogging
At a meeting of Edelman's global leadership a few weeks ago, we had a very interesting panel discussion hosted by David Weinberger from Harvard and Fiona MacDonald from Forrester Research about the role of blogs in shaping public opinion. One of David's most emphatic comments was that PR folks need to try blogging on their own and really get immersed in the blogosphere before attempting to have credibility in advising clients on the matter of blogs. He was proven right shortly thereafter by the burst of negative comments in the blogosphere about PR firm Ketchum, who was the first to found a actual client offering around blogs, yet has no blogs of its own. Some interesting commentary about this and a lesson to us all:
Posted by Christopher at 6:45 AM
Comments
Post a comment
| TrackBackJuly 11, 2005
Coordination of external and internal communications helps both in the end
I've been noticing a growing awareness within companies of the need to do a better job of coorindating external and internal communications as of late. While this may seem like an obvious thing to some of you, I have seen plenty of cases in my years in the business where companies do a poor job at this. If you're on the corporate side and reading this, here are some things to keep in mind if you're trying to make the case for better coordination:
External media coverage should never be used as a substitute to effective internal communications. Companies cannot rely on employees reading things in newspapers or seeing them on TV, as it diminishes trust between management and employees and catches employees off guard. Organizations must do their best to ensure that employees hear about it from the company first. In cases of privately held companies not subject to fair disclosure regulations, it is often appropriate to communicate with employees hours or even a day before a major external announcement. Especially when news is big, we advise companies to prepare managers and supervisors with talking points and give them the chance to ask questions and ensure they understand what's happening so they can adequately answer employee questions.
External and internal communications strategies must be developed and executed in tandem. We advise organizations to regularly coordinate and plan internal and external communications strategies to ensure maximum benefit of each. Especially in larger organizations, this is often easier said than done. One strategy that often helps are weekly discussions of upcoming announcements or issues that may surface to ensure the appropriate employee communications can be ready to go if and when needed. It is usually not sufficient to simply email or post an external press release to employees; rather the information contained in the release should be rewritten in language appropriate to the internal culture and should be supplemented with additional information that might not be relevant detail to outside audiences.
Strategic seeding of letters to the editor, op-eds or feature stories can reinforce internal strategy. When organizations are trying to make certain points or explain changes in strategy via internal communications, the information is also often of interest to external stakeholders. Points of view on industry issues or how the organization is responding to a market dynamic can make for interesting op-eds or feature stories if a good relationship with the journalist is already present. Letters to the editor (usually from the CEO or chairman) to address negative coverage or correct misleading coverage can make employees feel like they’re being stood up for.
Companies should share significant media coverage with employees, whether it's positive or negative. Whether it's postings on bulletin boards, electronic distribution of scanned clips or summaries of major media coverage, we advise companies to share what the outside world is saying about them on a regular basis. Especially in cases of negative coverage, companies have the opportunity to provide a different viewpoint and help employees respond to informal inquiries from family and friends who may ask about negative coverage. Organizations reluctant to share negative coverage often forget that employees will see it anyway and that they can use that opportunity to build increased credibility with employees by showing they are committed to talking about both the good and the bad.
Effective internal communications strategies can have positive impact on external media coverage, especially during times of bad news. Although companies typically try to prohibit employees from talking to the media, it often happens. Especially during times of layoffs, restructurings or scandals, the news media is likely to ambush employees and ask their opinion about what's happening. Our experience has shown time and time again that when companies do a good job explaining current events to employees and give them ample opportunity to engage in conversation about it, media coverage of ambushed employees is more balanced and positive and is characterized by comments such as "Although I didn't like the news I heard, the company was respectful and honest in how they communicated it to us and helped us understand what the person impact would be on me."
Posted by Christopher at 10:11 AM
Comments
Christopher,
I just came across this excellent post. Coincidentally, I wrote today in my blog http://commakazispeekez.blogspot.com/
about Abbott's apparent failure to coordinate communications to employees regarding pending layoffs. The emotional carnage is as real as it was preventable.
Posted by: Tom Keefe at July 22, 2005 9:07 AM
Just read a few good articles on this topic on http://www.simply-communicate.com (I have a subscription but there is useful free information on internal communications too). The gist was that internal and external communication have to be synchronised because otherwise messages will leak out of your company in ways you have no control over. In fact, if your message is badly communicated to your employees, it is more likely to be sniffed out by the press.
http://www.simply-communicate.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=72
There's also an excellent article on communicating with your employees during times of crisis, especially mergers and acquisitions - http://www.simply-communicate.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=55
Posted by: Heather Clay at August 1, 2005 11:10 AM
Post a comment
| TrackBackJuly 7, 2005
Developing employee blogging guidelines
I've had a lot of questions from companies lately on how to create employee blogging guidelines and thought the following tips might be of interest.
The first step is to decide if you really need guidelines. My point-of-view is that they're usually a good idea, as long as organizations create them to shape discussion by employees in the blogosphere, rather than trying to clamp down on it.
Organizations should first contemplate aspects of their internal culture and assess their vulnerability in the blogosphere, including questions like:
-- Are we a "listening" culture?
-- Are we open and comfortable with honest feedback, and can we actually handle and manage it?
-- How critical is stakeholder management to brand building and corporate reputation?
-- Is our company or brand committed to transparency?
-- Is our category disproportionately being shaped by external perceptions on the Internet?
-- What is the morale, motivation and commitment of our employees?
-- Are employees already blogging and what are they saying?
This last question, while perhaps obvious, is an important one. Many an organization has been surprised to learn what’s being said about them in general in the blogosphere, but even more surprised to learn how many of those comments are coming from their own employees. Conversely, companies that deploy some kind of Internet-monitoring services typically have a better handle on the real-time pulse of what's being said about them, both in content, tone and source, in public areas of the Internet. As a result, they're also in far better positions to respond intelligently rather than react on the fly.
Each company should develop policies or guidelines that are specific to its mission, its employee base and its company goals, but some commonsense rules should apply. Boiled down, they spell out some simple rules of the road:
1. Employees are responsible for their own commentary
2. Employees blog at their own risk (including the risk of being sued for obscenity, libel, defamation, trade secrets, etc.)
3. All company proprietary information is off-limits and grounds for dismissal
4. Media coverage, if any, is to be routed through normal PR channels
Companies also might want to consider other provisions, especially those governing privacy and existing privacy policies, under-13 Internet users, copyright laws and the like. And in general, the admonishment to "think before you hit the publish button" is a wise approach, as well.
After contemplating the questions above and deciding what parameters to put around employee blogging, organizations can benefit from a number of insightful blog guidelines already in existence. We’ll be publishing a list of those very shortly.
Posted by Christopher at 5:29 AM