.jpg){kind=logo}
Rose Royce: "Car Wash"
If you're a child of the 70's (or even if you're not) you'll get a laugh out of the video clip.
Monday, March 30, 2009
Monday, March 23, 2009
Monday, March 16, 2009
Friday, March 13, 2009
Job Seekers: Ideas and Inspiration - Our favorite links this week
Here are some articles that I liked this week. They offer up some food for thought, a little inspiration, and possibly some chuckles in the face of what can be an aggravating process.
Enjoy and have a great weekend!
Will Hand-Delivered Resumes Help Me Stand Out?
As the unemployed ranks continue to swell, I find it is becoming more and more difficult to set myself apart.
Wall Street Journal - March 12, 2009
The comments on this one are every bit as interesting and informative as the article itself.
Reinventing your career in a tough economy
For starters, identify your transferable skills or go back to school.
MSNBC - March 12, 2009
Working from transferable skills in addition to experience can open up more opportunities.
Career Couch - Getting Up in Years, and Getting the Job ...If you are over 55 and looking for a job, will potential employers be leery of hiring you because of your age?March 1, 2009 - By EILENE ZIMMERMAN - Job Market
Punk Rock HR Myth #1: Perfect Job
Laurie's posts are always fun, give a different perspective, and the comments are worth the read.
Enjoy and have a great weekend!
Will Hand-Delivered Resumes Help Me Stand Out?
As the unemployed ranks continue to swell, I find it is becoming more and more difficult to set myself apart.
Wall Street Journal - March 12, 2009
The comments on this one are every bit as interesting and informative as the article itself.
Reinventing your career in a tough economy
For starters, identify your transferable skills or go back to school.
MSNBC - March 12, 2009
Working from transferable skills in addition to experience can open up more opportunities.
Career Couch - Getting Up in Years, and Getting the Job ...If you are over 55 and looking for a job, will potential employers be leery of hiring you because of your age?March 1, 2009 - By EILENE ZIMMERMAN - Job Market
Punk Rock HR Myth #1: Perfect Job
Laurie's posts are always fun, give a different perspective, and the comments are worth the read.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
HR-Bashing, A New Trend?
Ok, I'll be one of the first to admit that the HR profession can certainly do better at being a more strategic business partner. But, I've been reading quite a few articles this week that are making some huge generalizations about the overwhelming incompetency of HR. All of these articles were written by professors, mind you.
As an individual HR professional, I am really ticked off. There are a huge number of us out here who "get it". We know how to put metrics in place and analyze financial data. We know how to connect HR initiatives to strategic goals. And we understand good workforce planning.
In my experience, some of the roadblocks that HR comes up against are from the very people that are complaining about us. The state of the business world today is horrible. And we didn't get here just because HR sucks. We got here in large part because the various groups within organizations are operating as islands and adversaries. The only way for an organization to succeed over the long term is for those groups to work together.
So, if HR needs to up their expertise in metrics and analysis, what if the Finance group stopped bitching about HR and offered themselves up as a resource? After all, they do this for a living, right?
What if each department manager actually sat down and figured out what they are going to need for talent and skills to accomplish their goals, and then worked WITH human resources to develop a plan. It's not HR's workforce, it's the organization's.
What if the same amount of money were spent to develop the expertise of the HR group as is spent to develop sales?
My suggestion to the professors is - you're teachers, put your money where your mouth is and start helping in some real way instead of pontificating at your speaking engagements.
As an individual HR professional, I am really ticked off. There are a huge number of us out here who "get it". We know how to put metrics in place and analyze financial data. We know how to connect HR initiatives to strategic goals. And we understand good workforce planning.
In my experience, some of the roadblocks that HR comes up against are from the very people that are complaining about us. The state of the business world today is horrible. And we didn't get here just because HR sucks. We got here in large part because the various groups within organizations are operating as islands and adversaries. The only way for an organization to succeed over the long term is for those groups to work together.
So, if HR needs to up their expertise in metrics and analysis, what if the Finance group stopped bitching about HR and offered themselves up as a resource? After all, they do this for a living, right?
What if each department manager actually sat down and figured out what they are going to need for talent and skills to accomplish their goals, and then worked WITH human resources to develop a plan. It's not HR's workforce, it's the organization's.
What if the same amount of money were spent to develop the expertise of the HR group as is spent to develop sales?
My suggestion to the professors is - you're teachers, put your money where your mouth is and start helping in some real way instead of pontificating at your speaking engagements.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Is Your HR Functions Really Supporting Your Business?
The following post is an exerpt from an article that I wrote some time ago. Given the current state of business, it's worth a second look:
Strategic vs Transactional HR
Strategic vs Transactional HR
There are two kinds of HR functions – Transactional HR and Strategic HR. They are very different and both are necessary for your business to succeed. Having only one or the other is like hiring an employee with only half the skills to do the job. It only ends up costing your business time and money.
Transactional HR
Transactional HR deals with all of the traditional things that most people think of when we refer to Human Resources:
Policies and procedures
Compliance and legal issues
Employee benefits
Recruitment
The life of a transactional HR professional is filled with forms, lines of employees outside their office, and a lot of stress. Processes are largely reactive rather than proactive.
Strategic HR
Strategic HR, on the other hand, is always proactive. It is intimately familiar with the company’s business and the business environment. It has a seat in all of the meetings pertaining to business planning and objectives.
The role of the strategic HR professional is to ensure that the HR function is prepared to support the objectives of the business. If the business needs to grow, move into a new area, revamp its customer service or image, Strategic HR is there to help. It provides workforce plans to support growth, skills assessments and recruiting methods to raise employee skillsets, and develops incentives to motivate employees to follow the company vision.
Human Resources is an integral part of the internal operations of your company. When partnered with Finance and IT, the resulting group touches every part of the day-to-day business. When that group is focused on meeting business objectives, as opposed to isolated department objectives, it can bring about large changes very quickly.
Transactional HR will always be part of Human Resources. It is necessary and not going away any time soon. However, it must be streamlined, and sometimes outsourced, to make way for the additional scope that HR must provide.
For your HR function to meet the needs of the future, it must participate in the following areas:
Understanding your company’s industry
Understanding your company’s business
Helping to set business objectives
Developing HR initiatives that serve company objectives
Every business objective your company has will be met (or not) by the human beings who work with you. Requiring that HR be part of the business planning, and requiring that it have business-related goals, will put your company in a strong position for future success.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Friday, March 6, 2009
An Introspective Friday
This morning I was doing my regular reading on SHRM's home page. I got stalled at the headline about US employers laying off 651,000 workers in February. It's a little hard to be upbeat and motivating after that bit of information.
It's not that I'm unaware of the numbers, but for some reason that just hit me today. It got me to thinking about my family, my friends, and my colleagues. So far, those close to me are still doing what they do and earning a living - some even prospering. But, how far are any of us from being in dire straits?
So, here's what I'm contemplating today...
How can we all pitch in and help those close to us, and in our communities, cope and survive with some dignity and some optimism? I'm not talking about donating to charities (although we should do that if we can), but real, hands-on, personally-involved help? This isn't someone else's problem. It's personal.
Tell me what you think, what you do, and what others you know are doing...
It's not that I'm unaware of the numbers, but for some reason that just hit me today. It got me to thinking about my family, my friends, and my colleagues. So far, those close to me are still doing what they do and earning a living - some even prospering. But, how far are any of us from being in dire straits?
So, here's what I'm contemplating today...
How can we all pitch in and help those close to us, and in our communities, cope and survive with some dignity and some optimism? I'm not talking about donating to charities (although we should do that if we can), but real, hands-on, personally-involved help? This isn't someone else's problem. It's personal.
Tell me what you think, what you do, and what others you know are doing...
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Is Your Handbook Tying Your Hands?
I've been doing a lot of handbook work for my clients lately. First quarter is the time to incorporate the new regulations, and just generally update things.
There's something I've been noticing with a few clients who constructed their handbook themselves, or have added on to it without having a comprehensive review - hyper-detailed policies. They've attempted to cover every foreseeable situation and how to deal with them in the handbook. Or, every time they have a situation come up that results in management action, they add that scenario to the handbook. Sometimes the hyper detail results from management trying to be generous.
Whatever the case, the result is a handbook that is long, confusing, and unintentionally restrictive. And, in most cases it ends up being restrictive for management rather than employees. Once you put something in writing, you are obligated to follow that policy.
I've also noticed another interesting side-effect of being overly specific: employees are compelled to start looking for loopholes. Often you wind up with someone who is skating along just outside of the actionable parameters that you've put in the handbook. Now you can't discipline them because they haven't technically violated the policy in question.
Your handbook should not be managing your employees for you. You should be doing that. And, you should have enough flexibility to deal with behavior and performance that is detrimental to the company.
Lay out your expectations clearly, but but broadly enough to leave managers room to maneuver. State that related behavior which results in a negative impact on the company or the team may result in disciplinary action, including termination of employment. Make it clear that managers will determine when discipline is necessary. Provide some broad subject areas that will be taken into consideration in making a determination.
Once your handbook is written, make sure your managers have the leadership skills to make appropriate determinations. Teach them how - and when - to document their actions. Don't compensate for lack of management skills by using your handbook as a band aide. Train your managers instead.
There's something I've been noticing with a few clients who constructed their handbook themselves, or have added on to it without having a comprehensive review - hyper-detailed policies. They've attempted to cover every foreseeable situation and how to deal with them in the handbook. Or, every time they have a situation come up that results in management action, they add that scenario to the handbook. Sometimes the hyper detail results from management trying to be generous.
Whatever the case, the result is a handbook that is long, confusing, and unintentionally restrictive. And, in most cases it ends up being restrictive for management rather than employees. Once you put something in writing, you are obligated to follow that policy.
I've also noticed another interesting side-effect of being overly specific: employees are compelled to start looking for loopholes. Often you wind up with someone who is skating along just outside of the actionable parameters that you've put in the handbook. Now you can't discipline them because they haven't technically violated the policy in question.
Your handbook should not be managing your employees for you. You should be doing that. And, you should have enough flexibility to deal with behavior and performance that is detrimental to the company.
Lay out your expectations clearly, but but broadly enough to leave managers room to maneuver. State that related behavior which results in a negative impact on the company or the team may result in disciplinary action, including termination of employment. Make it clear that managers will determine when discipline is necessary. Provide some broad subject areas that will be taken into consideration in making a determination.
Once your handbook is written, make sure your managers have the leadership skills to make appropriate determinations. Teach them how - and when - to document their actions. Don't compensate for lack of management skills by using your handbook as a band aide. Train your managers instead.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
True or False - Salaried Employees Don't Get Overtime?
The answer? True and false. The fact is, whether an employee gets overtime is not determined by whether you pay them on a salaried basis. This is one of the most common misconceptions employers have. And misclassifying employees can result in large amounts of money paid in backpay and taxes, not to mention interest and penalties.
Each employee has two status labels: pay status (hourly or salary) and overtime status (exempt or non-exempt). If you pay a person on an hourly basis, they are always eligible for overtime. If you pay a person on a salary basis, then you have to evaluate job duties to determine if they should receive overtime or not.
Only a person's job duties determine overtime eligibility. And, on top of that, there is a very specific set of criteria that employees have to meet in order to be considered exempt from overtime. The FLSA Home Page has detailed information to help make that determination.
The single most useful tool in determining and justifying overtime status is a written job description. It will also be the first thing that you are asked to produce if an overtime dispute comes up. Your job descriptions should contain the following information:
Each employee has two status labels: pay status (hourly or salary) and overtime status (exempt or non-exempt). If you pay a person on an hourly basis, they are always eligible for overtime. If you pay a person on a salary basis, then you have to evaluate job duties to determine if they should receive overtime or not.
Only a person's job duties determine overtime eligibility. And, on top of that, there is a very specific set of criteria that employees have to meet in order to be considered exempt from overtime. The FLSA Home Page has detailed information to help make that determination.
The single most useful tool in determining and justifying overtime status is a written job description. It will also be the first thing that you are asked to produce if an overtime dispute comes up. Your job descriptions should contain the following information:
- Job title
- Supervisory status
- Essential job functions
- Additional job functions
- Pay status
- Overtime status
- Date of last revision
Job descriptions should be reviewed annually. Taking the time to put them together and keep them current is well worth the effort.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Avoid Overqualified Applicants? Really?
Today I was reading one of the many e-newsletters that I get every day. And there was a snippet that caught my eye. It was about how to avoid overqualified candidates applying for your positions.
Now, I know there are reasons that overqualified people are traditionally not considered for jobs:
Now, I know there are reasons that overqualified people are traditionally not considered for jobs:
- They'll expect to be paid more than the position warrants
- They'll expect to be promoted right away
- They'll be bored and end up performing poorly
While those things may indeed be true, I don't believe that you should discount these applicants based solely on their resumes. That doesn't give them much credit for being intelligent human beings, does it? They did apply for the position, after all. They must have had a reason. Maybe you should ask what the reason was. You might be surprised.
In my capacity as a recruiter, some of the hires I'm most proud of are the ones that were overqualified for the position. Why? Lots of reasons. Here are a few:
- I want to switch industries and understand that I need to step back in rank in order to do that and learn what I need to learn.
- I am making a life choice: simplifying, reducing stress, changing focus.
- My spouse got a nice promotion and I now have the luxury of not worrying about climbing the career ladder any more.
- I am extremely interested in your company and would like to work here in any capacity.
- (and don't forget in today's market: I'm qualified and I need a job to support my family. I'm happy to work in this position)
Sure, you have to talk to these people and ask a lot of questions to determine what their objectives really are. But, if you give them an accurate view of what the job is, what the work environment will be like, and what the realistic advancement opportunities are, then they should be able to make an informed decision about the job. If they choose to move forward with the recruitment process, then you may have just hit the skills and experience jackpot.
My advice is not to avoid overqualified applicants, but embrace them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
