Remedying 2004 Employment Problems

Copyright © 2004 by Ethan A. Winning. All rights reserved.

The Survey: Our survey read, "Assuming that recent surveys are correct and that compensation, health insurance, and job security are very important to employees today, what can you do or have you done to meet these needs?" Just 120 people responded to the survey, yet the results are telling.

The first question asked whether or not the person taking the survey accepted our other recent surveys that compensation, benefits, and security are important to employees. We didn't ask if those factors were "motivators." We asked whether o no they were important. Two persons said no without further comment, and we dismissed them as living on a different planet.

Management, We Have A Problem: Next, "Has the company taken any action toward meeting those needs?" 80 said yes, 40 no. And now it gets interesting.

 

Eighty percent of the total are experiencing problems with hiring and/or retention. It is still somewhat surprising that retention is a problem during a down cycle in the employment market. I don't know if this is an anomaly. The figure was much higher among high tech during the the high-tech boom. The boom is long gone, and I don't think we've put enough years behind us to define a "normal" employment market. Perhaps a survey regarding turnover is also necessary to ascertain just how fluid the market is. If retention is the problem that it seems to be, then one could surmise that employees are willing and perhaps forced to look elsewhere to stay ahead of inflation and make real progress toward economic growth.

 

But hiring is also a problem, not as much as retention, but a third of the total group seems to be having trouble finding qualified applicants. Of course, some of these respondents said that hiring and retention were both problems in the same company. And, though I didn't do a thorough analysis, those who answered both also said that trust and communications were issues within the company. What many fail to realize is that even a small company's reputation is better known in the "community" than one would think and affects hiring. A company doesn't have to be an Enron to suffer from a bad reputation. At the same time, several companies which reported are small, well-regarded, and having no problem with retaining their employees or, when openings occur -- usually because of growth -- they are inundated with resumes and applications.

When it comes to trust and communications, there is no better word for the results than "scary." I have never conducted a survey where a lack of communications and/or trust was so evident. Though I wonder, being surrounded by a pervasively negative media as we are, whether employees are having trouble seeing anything positive or whether management has lost its ability and willingness to communicate. When it came to "solutions," only four responded with an increase in communications! Only two mentioned training.

Solutions: If communications and trust are such issues, why is it that an increase in communications was so rarely mentioned? Rather, most solutions involved benefits and compensation. That is not to say that meeting basic needs isn't important. Quite the contrary. On the other hand, I think that many think of "communications" as a one-way street. Only nine persons responded with a statement that the company was going to ask employees for input.

 

 

In the survey and initial discussions, I was careful not to use the words "satisfaction" and "motivation." If I had asked how one motivates employees, the answers would have been quite different and, I'm fairly certain, stilted toward the classic theories. No, anyone even moderately in tune with what is happening in business on a global basis, can see that we are involved with both old and very new problems. When it comes to satisfying employees' basic needs, I haven't much to offer and, in fact, what I will suggest is going to seem stale to some if not most. Some will also feel that I'm chiding management for not being more creative.

That is ot true. Creativity is making something new out of existing elements. Well, part of the problem is that we have fewer elements that management had 10, 20, 30 years ago. The most creative things I can think of today which would motivate, stimulate, and/or satisfy employees are all illegal.

However, I am still surprised that more didn't respond by talking to employees, by getting their input, by involving them in the solutions and suggestions, even involving them in the investigation of how to remedy the company's, hence their issues.In my article, Problem Prevention and Problem Solving, three of the four basic principles of both these situations are:

 

Sometimes, even using the system that I designed, this fails. But when it works, it works for a very long time ... or until management pulls the plug on such processes. Of course, it requires training and education, and if I were trying to retain employees, I'd try internal training where the employee can prepare for promotion. We've already had many discussions about whether or not we're training employees for jobs at other companies and, yes, sometimes you'll lose one of your best employees. At the same time, you may gain someone from another company who has also been cross trained or whose education has been paid for. It's a risk worth taking.

Many of the steps that are listed above are absolutely essential to retain employees and meet some of their basic needs. The problem is that almost every solution posed has limitations. We can't hold insurance premiums where they are, and carriers are never going to go back on their charges. The California supermarket strike is a perfect example of how tampering with basic needs dissatisfy, no matter how fair and equitable it may be.

You can give more holidays and vacation days, but where does that stop? You're not the post office, you know.

We can try to compensate employees fairly, but surveying competition is getting more and more difficult. (Still, there is internal equity.) Still, surveying both benefits and compensation should be a continuous process and should be done by all companies. Involving employees is the best idea. Going back to the supermarket employees who think that $5 a week ($15 for families) out of their pay for health insurance is unfair and way too much have never been involvd in reasearching how much insurance costs nowadays. Of course, unions are involved in this dispute, but the unions should not have isolated their members from realities. (When this ends, there will have been a give and take, and employees will end up paying something. That's the trouble with a lack of communication. Both entities will have lost millions.)

I conduct some of these surveys to get you to think. This survey is going to lead to others because some of your answers have brought up more questions. What did you mean when you answered "yes" to trust or communications being a problem? Does communicating more solve the problem? Is there "quality" in communications? And other than a lack of trust, what other ramifications are there to not following through on communications with any or all employees?

All Rights Reserved. Copyright 2004. E. A. Winning Associates, Inc.