Workforce Development - A Good Investment?

Why On-boarding makes sound financial sense

Mark Stein, a colleague over at Kaiser Associates just sent me this update on on-boarding, and it's information you need to think carefully about...

• According the U.S. Department of Labor, over 25 percent of the workforce has been at their current company for under a year
• Young people entering the workforce today will change jobs an average of 10 times before they turn 40
• Employees are most likely to leave an organization in the first 18 months after they are hired, according to the U.S. Department of Labor

It may take significant time for new employees at your organization to become functioning members of the team:

• According to Mellon Financial Corporation, the average times to full productivity are
  • Eight weeks for clerical jobs
  • 20 weeks for professionals
  • 26 weeks for executives

Also, there are significant costs to ineffectively On-boarding your new hires:

• The direct cost of recruitment, according to Staffing.org and the Bureau of National Affairs, ranges from 5 percent to about 21 percent of annual compensation, and ineffective On-boarding could mean wasting these investments

• The Institute of Industrial Relations at the University of California, Berkeley, has estimated that the total cost of employee turnover is 150 percent of annual compensation, including hiring costs and more intangible elements such as “ramp-up time and lost productivity while the job is vacant”

is Your "BRAND" Helping or Hurting Your Recuitment Efforts?

In today's war for the best talent, if you are an employer, it's essential to remember that you understand the "brand" that your company represents.  This is sometimes difficult to get a handle on, as your "insider" perception may not be same as what people are thinking, feeling, or saying on the street about you.

A while back I had authored an article entitled "Creating a More Democratic Work Environment" in which I discussed a site called "InsideArch" which provides an "insiders" view into Design firms across the country and their "Professional Culture".  Following this article, I was besieged by people wanting to know if there was a comparable site for  other firms. 

I recently came across JobVent, a web site for anyone who has ever said 'I hate my job', or 'I love my job'. JobVent, besides a web site for people who are about to start a new job (and want to see what other people think of working there), also is a useful tool for company management and HR professionals to get external opinions about how the company is viewed.

Sure, I have heard some HR people tell me that it's only the "over the top - happy" or "really PO'd" people on these sites.  We know from experience (and past research) that unhappy people tell LOTS of people about their unhappy experience, while happy people will only tell a handful.  What is important to remember, is that these are "word of mouth" traditions.  In the "internet age" where social networks rule, anything GOOD or BAD about your company takes on a new life and comments become memorialized. 

This is imperative that firms take active control of their destiny by putting plans in place to calibrate with accuracy, what your "brand" (reputation) is in the marketplace.  Because does anyone really believe that these matters can be left to chance?

Why the HR function needs to change

Too much valuable talent is slipping through the fingers of organizations doe to an HR function that is out of step with the time.  Look around you and you will observe in many organizations the evidence of inability to attract and retain new talent and loss of existing skilled professionals.

I believe that the traditional approach to talent and career management often evident in the HR function is not working well anymore for a number of reasons:

• Based on hierarchy and focusing on vertical movement
• Represents a rigid and mechanistic approach for promotion
• Career path is handled as one size fits all
• Main HR function is based on philosophy that past performance and the belief that today is not okay
• A one sided, biased company perspective
• That employee's focus is on salary increase
  … resulting in a lack of ownership by the employee

Times have changed in significant ways - and HR needs to get with the new picture.

The standard HR department filters resumes, handles grievances, conducts training, purchases salary surveys and has some form of a diversity program. While this is a start, it is not strategic. This process becomes automated and bureaucratic and, as the world changes around it,it has become increasingly out of touch.

A strategic HR department is looking at the age make up at varioius levels and functions of the firm, is looking to understand the generational differences and address them (not change the preferences of people in different generations, but actually reach out to meet their different preferences). Having such a strategic HR function is working to make the firm a great place to work (beyond financial incentives).

Which would you prefer to have?