F&H Solutions Group

"I NEVER PLAY FAVORITES"

2011-05-16T10:19:00.012-04:00

Most managers view themselves as being fair and believe they don’t show favoritism. In our survey, we ask employees whether they agree with the statement, “My manager does not play favorites.”

a. 58%
b. 68%
c. 78%
d. 88%

Choose one on the poll to the right and click the link below to check your answer.

The answer is 68% favorable.

Managers try to be fair because they know perceived favoritism will destroy teamwork and the morale of their department. However, various actions may cause employees to believe a manager has favorites. Two common contributors are:

- Managers are friendlier or have more in common with certain employees, and it shows.
- Managers have certain employees they “count on” and therefore they give them special attention.

Correcting these and other perceived issues of favoritism is not easy. In the first case, perhaps the manager needs to make a concerted effort in getting to know each of his/her employees as people. The second situation should be addressed by holding every employee accountable. Outstanding employees may appear to receive favoritism, but if all employees are held accountable to perform their fair share of the work then the favoritism issue will decline.

Several pages could be dedicated to this issue, but the lesson learned should be that top management must monitor this issue in order to know who is showing favoritism and take actions to reduce it.

"The Survey Says" is written by Richard Reinhardt, Vice President of F&H Solutions Group. You may contact Richard by email at rreinhardt@fhsolutionsgroup.com or by phone at 901.291.1546.

“THANK YOU, THANK YOU VERY MUCH” – ELVIS PRESLEY

2011-05-09T09:52:00.003-04:00

The King of Rock & Roll was famous for showing his appreciation, even when he gave me his autograph in 1957. (I still have it.) He didn’t need to show appreciation to me, I needed to show it to him.

Many managers don’t believe they need to show appreciation to their employees. What percentage of employees agree with the statement, “My supervisor tells me when I do a good job?”

a. 52%
b. 62%
c. 72%
d. 82%

Choose one on the poll to the right and click the link below to check your answer.

The answer is 62%.

Some managers tell me that getting a paycheck is enough appreciation for their employees. Well Elvis received some good paychecks, but the adoration from his fans was priceless. The intangible rewards for great performances are as meaningful as a weekly paycheck. Showing true appreciation doesn’t cost a manager a penny and the impact can make you a living legend.

"The Survey Says" is written by Richard Reinhardt, Vice President of F&H Solutions Group. You may contact Richard by email at rreinhardt@fhsolutionsgroup.com or by phone at 901.291.1546.

"TRAINING – THE GREAT DISCONNECT"

2011-05-02T10:50:00.006-04:00

Providing quality training so that employees can do their job well is a basic ingredient for organizational success. As a result, everyone agrees that training is extremely important to the employee, their co-workers, customers and the Company. With that said, what average percentage favorable rating do you think we receive to the question, “Does your supervisor see that employees get the proper training?”

a. 54%
b. 64%
c. 74%
d. 84%

Choose one on the poll to the right and click the link below to check your answer.

The answer is 64% favorable from employees and 80% favorable from supervisors. This represents a sizable disconnect between those who are responsible for the training, the supervisors, and their employees.

Supervisors frequently delegate the responsibility for training to one of their employees, often the best performer. Whether this person knows how to train or devotes the time required to share his or her knowledge is a significant issue. Even if the best performer is a good trainer, the supervisor still remains responsible. He or she should periodically follow-up to make sure that what is being taught is being learned. In addition, the supervisor should help the trainers develop a process whereby the new employee gains the proper knowledge and skills to perform the job. Too often there is no training process and it amounts to the “sink or swim” approach.

In other words, all members of management should not just evaluate the outcome of the training, but rather they should help establish the training process. If this is done, the employee, co-workers, the Company and most importantly, the customers, will benefit.

"SHOW ME THE MONEY"

2011-04-25T10:18:00.006-04:00

Do you have any employees earning more than the job is worth? Do you have new employees starting at higher pay rates than employees who have been in the same job for a few years? Employees react more negatively to being paid unfairly compared to co-workers than to the pay rates offered by other companies. On our survey one compensation related question is “As far as you know, are you paid fairly compared to others in your department?” What do you think is the average percentage favorable response?

a. 51%
b. 61%
c. 71%
d. 81%

Choose one on the poll to the right and click the link below to check your answer.

The answer is 71% favorable. How would your employees respond?

If you believe it would be less favorable, then we suggest that you:

1. Evaluate the jobs using an objective methodology. (We typically use a point system.)
2. Group the jobs into pay grades based on the results of the evaluation.
3. Create pay ranges for each grade that the Company can afford and are competitive with the labor market.
4. Establish pay policies whereby the new pay plan is properly implemented and maintained.

A structured pay plan will not only ensure internal equity of pay, but will also control payroll costs.

"The Survey Says" is written by Richard Reinhardt, Vice President of F&H Solutions Group. You may contact Richard by email at rreinhardt@fhsolutionsgroup.com or by phone at 901.291.1546.

"YOUR REPUTATION IS ALL YOU HAVE"

2011-04-08T10:32:00.009-04:00

How would your employees rate the reputation of your Company in the community? On our survey we ask, “Does the Company have a good name in the community?” What do you think is the average percentage favorable response?

a. 62%
b. 72%
c. 82%
d. 92%

Choose one on the poll to the right and click the link below to check your answer.

The answer is 82% favorable. This is a good response. If a Company receives a rating below that they not only have problems externally, but probably greater ones internally.

Your employees are the ambassadors for your Company. Their attitudes toward the Company influence everyone they “touch.” The type of people you attract as new employees are affected by those who currently work for the organization. If your employees are proud of their Company, your organization will shine in the community.

However, to add extra polish involvement in the community will give your organization more recognition and re-enforce your employees’ pride in the Company. Therefore, investing in your community is a benefit to everyone in the Company. Also, don’t forget, sometimes you may have to ask the community for help. If you have been a great employer and citizen, you will profit from this investment.

"The Survey Says" is written by Richard Reinhardt, Vice President of F&H Solutions Group. You may contact Richard by email at rreinhardt@fhsolutionsgroup.com or by phone at 901.291.1546.

"HAVE YOU CHECKED THE RESTROOM LATELY?"

2011-03-25T10:15:00.006-04:00

The employee restroom speaks volumes about the Company. A dirty restroom typically indicates that management does not care about the employees and employees don’t respect the Company. We ask employees, “Are the restrooms, lunch rooms, etc. kept clean?” What do you think is the percentage favorable rating to this question?

a. 51%
b. 61%
c. 71%
d. 81%

Choose one on the poll to the right and click the link below to check your answer.

The answer is 71% favorable. This number indicates that we have been in quite a few companies with dirty restrooms and lunch rooms, but also a lot of clean ones. Often management is ready to blame employees for leaving a mess and even the co-workers will say they work with “a bunch of pigs.” The problem is that management is responsible for hiring the “pigs” and for allowing the “pigs” to continue to behave this way.

The quickest and most visible way to demonstrate you care is to clean the restrooms, break areas and the whole facility. This reflects who you are to employees and customers alike. It re-enforces the fact that quality is important to every aspect of your business.

If you haven’t visited your restrooms lately (not counting the one management uses), you need to make a visit. Hopefully, you will be very proud of what you see.

"The Survey Says" is written by Richard Reinhardt, Vice President of F&H Solutions Group. You may contact Richard by email at rreinhardt@fhsolutionsgroup.com or by phone at 901.291.1546.

"TAKE THIS JOB AND SHOVE IT"

2011-03-10T14:58:00.016-05:00

Through the years quite a few professors and consultants have written articles about the need to enrich jobs. From their studies or perspective they claim that many American workers do not like their job. Our survey asks employees and supervisors the question, “Do you like your job?” So, what do you think is the percentage favorable response to this question?

a. 56%

b. 66%

c. 76%

d. 86%

Choose one on the poll to the right and click the link below to check your answer.

86% of the non-supervisory employees and 93% of managers and supervisors responded favorably. Thus, from our client data it appears that the world of work is not as bad as many experts believe. It is further illustrated by the written comments we receive regarding what people say they like about their job and the company.For instance, employees and supervisors comment favorably on how they like their coworkers, the hours, closeness to home, importance of the job, their supervisor, the money, benefits, etc.

In other words, going to work is not such a bad experience. Yes, a job may appear to be boring to one person but to another it could be considered an easy way to make money. Thus, my belief is management should not worry too much about enriching the list of tasks an employee must perform, but rather focus on all the factors that employees say contribute toward making the job a satisfying experience.

"The Survey Says" is written by Richard Reinhardt, Vice President of F&H Solutions Group. You may contact Richard by email at rreinhardt@fhsolutionsgroup.com or by phone at 901.291.1546.

"TEAMWORK, TEAMWORK, TEAMWORK"

2011-02-28T10:24:00.006-05:00

One of the most frequently used words in sports and business must be teamwork. Greater success or more victories can be achieved if we play or work together as a team. So what do you think is the rating to one of our Employee Opinion Survey questions regarding teamwork, “Is there good cooperation between departments?”

a. 55%
b. 65%
c. 75%
d. 85%

Choose one on the poll to the right and click the link below to check your answer.

I am sorry to report that the average favorable rating received from non-supervisors is 55%.

Supervisors’ and managers’ responses generated a 65% rating which is very poor considering they should be the ones who have the most power to create a team environment.

The reasons for the lack of teamwork can be endless but like any organizational issue we need to look toward the top to find a solution. It is at the top where leadership styles, organizational structures, reward systems, or other barriers to teamwork are created or approved and passed down. Thus the challenge for those organizations wanting to improve teamwork is to seek an objective method of identifying the root causes for poor cooperation and develop a plan to eliminate them. This may not be as much fun as having your managers join in a “team building” exercise, but it is the more long lasting approach to addressing the problem and not the symptoms.

Maybe we can help provide an objective analysis and recommendations for improvement.

"The Survey Says" is written by Richard Reinhardt, Vice President of F&H Solutions Group. You may contact Richard by email at rreinhardt@fhsolutionsgroup.com or by phone at 901.291.1546.

"THE LAND OF OPPORTUNITY"

2011-02-17T15:04:00.017-05:00

America is a land of opportunity, and in the business world, many employees take a job with the hope that it will lead to an even better job within the Company. Yet, the data we collected from forty years of Employee Opinion Surveys indicates that employees consistently give negative ratings to the question, “Do you have a good opportunity to move up in the Company to a higher rated job?”

What percentage of employees surveyed believed they had a good opportunity for a promotion? Do you think it is . . .

a. 34%
b. 44%
c. 54%
d. 64%

Choose one on the poll to the right and click the link below to check your answer.

A 44% favorable rating is the correct answer. There are several reasons for this poor rating that may be beyond management’s control. For instance, the Company may not be growing, the workforce is stable, and therefore, no job openings. Another reason is that many of its employees are satisfied in their current position and are not seeking greater responsibility. Furthermore, the one person who receives the promotion will typically be satisfied with the process while those who are rejected may voice their displeasure.

However, our analysis of these results causes us to find that the low favorable rating often relates to how promotional opportunities are communicated and/or the process used for selection. That is, there is still reluctance by some companies to communicate job openings. They believe that letting employees know about opportunities creates more problems than the benefits it provides. We disagree with that philosophy and find that companies who are more transparent about job openings get better candidates. The more challenging part of the promotion process is in selecting the right person for the job. However, the establishment of clearly-defined job expectations, conducting multiple interviews or establishing interview panels that may include employees, and utilizing validated tests, all help identify the most qualified person for the job. In addition, utilizing these multiple methods for selection will increases the credibility of the process.

What can you do to help your high performers realize that there are good opportunities within your organization?

"The Survey Says" is written by Richard Reinhardt, Vice President of F&H Solutions Group. You may contact Richard by email at rreinhardt@fhsolutionsgroup.com or by phone at 901.291.1546.

"WE'LL LOOK INTO IT"

2011-02-04T14:09:00.010-05:00

“Engage” and “involve” are two words repeatedly used by executives, consultants and other business leaders to describe what management should be doing with their employees. Yet during the past 40 years the results of our Employee Opinion Surveys have shown little variation in the rating to the question, "Do you believe your suggestions are listened to?” What percentage of employees surveyed believed their suggestions were listened to?

a. 47%
b. 57 %
c. 67%
d. 77%

Choose one on the poll to the right and click the link below to check your answer.

A 57% favorable rating is the correct answer. Why is this poor rating occurring since we supposedly have more skilled managers who have been trained or told that they “should listen to the person doing the job, because they know it best.” The reality is that hourly paid employees, particularly in manufacturing and distribution, are provided little opportunity to give input. Some employees question why their ideas are not sought when changes are being made that affect their job. Others marvel at being asked to participate in a confidential Employee Opinion Survey, a management tool that has been around for decades. Still a few wonder what ever happened to those various employee involvement programs such as quality improvement groups or the Kaizan process, both of which achieved success in many companies but in recent years seem to have faded from the scene.

Most successful leaders recognize that to be an industry leader, everyone should feel a part of the Company. Asking for employee input is one of the best ways of generating this attitude. So what can you do to improve in this area? How about:

Creating various methods for upwards communications ranging form town halls, lunch with the President, Opinion Surveys, telephone hot lines, restarting the Kaizen process, etc.
Training your supervisors to solicit employee concerns and suggestions.
Establishing a process which ensures that every employee’s idea or concern is addressed, whether it is accepted or not.

Don’t create an employee communications process whereby supervisors and managers receive employee questions, but fail to give answers. If you say “we’ll look into it,” do it, using whatever process is available, and get back to your employees with a timely answer.

"The Survey Says" is written by Richard Reinhardt, Vice President of F&H Solutions Group. You may contact Richard by email at rreinhardt@fhsolutionsgroup.com or by phone at 901.291.1546.

“YOUR IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR IS THE COMPANY”

2011-01-18T09:00:00.006-05:00

2011 begins my 40th year as a management consultant. (I began my career when I was very young so that has allowed me time to learn about management and consulting.) One of the consulting services I have provided hundreds of clients in various industries has been our Employee Opinion Survey. Through the survey process I have developed a better understanding of the attitudes of over a million employees and supervisors. This is the first of a series of articles that share a few of my thoughts.

Richard Reinhardt, Vice President

Whether you are in upper management or an hourly employee, the leadership ability of the person to whom you directly report is a major contributor to your job satisfaction. If your supervisor cares about you, listens, provides positive and negative feedback in a proper way, supports you when you need help, etc., then the Company is a good place to work. Conversely, if you work for someone who treats you with disrespect, then regardless of the pay, benefits and working conditions your attitude toward your work and Company will be negative.

Therefore, top management needs to focus more attention on improving the performance and attitudes of all managers, especially front-line supervisors. One way is to make sure they are well informed and too often they are not. For instance, we ask supervisors “Do you usually receive information about Company plans and changes before your employees?” The percentage that respond to this question favorably is:

a. 67%
b. 73%
c. 79%
d. 86%

Choose one on the poll to the right and click the link below to check your answer.

The favorable rating from supervisors is 73%. This indicates that a large number of the front-line supervisors are not being kept as informed as they should. One consequence is that employees will not view them as being very knowledgeable. Yet one major criteria of being a good supervisor, from the employee’s perspective, is that they can provide answers.

If supervisors are “the Company” to their employees, we need to make sure they know what is going on --- before their employees. Thus, they need to be included in the development of plans or policies that affect them and their employees. By doing this they can communicate and implement them properly and thus they are the “answer person.”

How would your supervisors answer the question, “Do you usually receive information about the Company plans and changes before your employees?” Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

"The Survey Says" is written by Richard Reinhardt, Vice President of F&H Solutions Group. You may contact Richard by email at rreinhardt@fhsolutionsgroup.com or by phone at 901.291.1546.

"UNCOVERING THE UNDERCOVER BOSS" - Episode 9, 1-800-Flowers

2010-04-13T11:03:00.006-04:00

What are two basic actions that can improve the leadership within a Company or department? This season’s final episode of “Undercover Boss” clearly identifies such actions and Chris McCann, President of 1-800-Flowers, the largest florist and gift shop in the U.S. promises to use them to improve his leadership.

Basic Action 1. “Build Relationships First and Do Business Second.”

The truth surrounding this quote was exemplified by Dee, who manages the highest grossing store in the Company. She knew all of her customers and they loved her. Regular viewers of the series will recall that Delores, the employee at 7-Eleven, treated her customers the same way and that is why the 7 Eleven store in which she worked sold the most coffee in the U.S.

This quote applies to successfully managing employees as well as customer relations. All of the CEO’s in the Undercover Boss episodes discovered the most effective managers are the ones who knew and cared about their people. Each CEO walked away from this experience recognizing that to be a more successful Company, they need to get to know, appreciate and recognize their employees. As Chris said, “1-800-Flowers is in the business of being thoughtful,” and his new commitment is to be more thoughtful about his employees.

Basic Action 2. Involve your employees in decisions that affect them.
Chris found that:

Pauline, a floral designer with the Company since 1997, was never asked for her input regarding floral arrangements. She didn’t even know who came up with the designs except to say it was “someone at Corporate.”
Nicole, a line operator at the Fannie May chocolate factory, owned by 1-800-Flowers, had no input in setting production goals. Furthermore, she wondered if the “bosses knew how hard the employees worked since they don’t come out of their offices.”

Because a person is in management doesn’t mean they have all the knowledge and ideas to improve the company. This is especially true if the supervisors spend little time with their employees. The fact is that many managers may give lip service to wanting to listen to their employees but they don’t take the time to do it. Some CEO’s repeatedly say that “our employees are the Company’s greatest asset”, but too many companies do not tap into this asset.

The "Undercover Boss" series has consistently shown the value of getting to know and listen to your people. The great companies continually strive to improve relationships and upward communications because they realize that their employees are the competitive edge between their company and the competition. We hope that your leaders will get to know their employees as people, listen to and involve them in the business. By doing this you will never have to go “undercover” to discover the quality of your people.

“Uncovering the Undercover Boss” is written by Richard Reinhardt, Vice President of F&H Solutions Group LLC. You may contact Richard by email at rreinhardt@fhsolutionsgroup.com or by phone at 901.291.1546.

"UNCOVERING THE UNDERCOVER BOSS" - Episode 8, Roto-Rooter

2010-04-08T07:21:00.004-04:00

They have one of the most recognizable names in corporate America. And like many companies, making the Roto-Rooter stronger during tough economic times was the primary goal for Rick Arquilla, President and COO of the company. As we followed this week’s “Undercover Boss,” can we say that Rick is really doing all he can to make this 75-year old Company stronger?

It is hard to imagine how your company gets stronger when employees are “giving away” your service. We found out that if you don’t like Roto-Rooter’s quote of $1,200, just tell the top technician, Henry you can’t afford it. The price will be instantly lowered. . Rick rationalized this decision by saying Henry is on commission so it affected his compensation. Does Rick think Henry’s actions really help the Company become stronger?

Perhaps it resulted in one satisfied one customer, but what about the other customers? How does reducing revenue of your company help the job security of Roto-Rooter employees? Shouldn’t this well known Company have adopted fair prices for all customers which could not be reduced based on the customer’s financial condition? It is also unfair to the other employees, especially since the Roto-Rooter plant employees are concerned about losing their jobs during this recession. And what message does Henry’s action send when, at the close of the show, Henry is promoted to a field supervisor position. This valuable technician, who Rick admired for his knowledge and contribution to the community, may now have a chance to “give away” more work to the citizens of New Orleans. It is certainly the compassionate thing to do, but it will not make the Company financially stronger nor provide greater job security for its employees.

Rick also had the opportunity to work at the Chicago Call Center, which dispatches technicians to the customers across the U.S. What we learned is that selecting the right person for a customer service position is critical and unfortunately for Rick, he did not fit the profile. For instance, as Candice the trainer pointed out, Rick “talked at the customer” rather than listened. He also tended to sell services to the customer rather than listening and learning about the real problem. He even interrupted the customer when he gave the person a chance to speak.

Call Center personnel are critical to the business because they are the face of the company and often a customer’s first point of contact. So, a customer’s first impressions of Roto-Rooter are often based on how well that call center employee interacts with the customer. And as we learned, not everyone has the ability to do this job. Rick can be a great COO and he even designed the Call Center routing system. However, those skills did not match the requirements for the customer service job. The lesson is, hire the right person with the right skills for the job.

Roto Rooter is a great Company and will be stronger under Rick’s very compassionate leadership, but sticking to the basics regarding the pricing jobs or hiring practices will go far in achieving the goal of becoming a stronger Company.

“Uncovering the Undercover Boss” is written by Richard Reinhardt, Vice President of F&H Solutions Group LLC. You may contact Richard by email at rreinhardt@fhsolutionsgroup.com or by phone at 901.291.1546.

"UNCOVERING THE UNDERCOVER BOSS" - Episode 7, Herschend Family Entertainment

2010-03-29T15:56:00.007-04:00

Is every Herschend Family Entertainment employee a great performer? It appears that Joel Manby, the CEO of this $400 million business, would say, “yes” based on his undercover experience. He was very thankful for this “incredible week” and considered it the best experience of his career, but if a viewer was looking for real lessons in leadership, they were few and far between.

Each employee on the show was a top performer, which for a reality show seemed to be a bit unreal. Each of these employees had personal issues, which is real life, but besides using these issues as a way to pull at the emotional strings of the viewer, very little was learned about actual leadership. Joel didn’t learn much about what his Company needed to do to address the problem of declining attendance at his 22 theme park properties, and if he can’t fix the declining revenue problem, employees are going to be very unhappy when they start to lose their jobs.

If Joel, acting as John Briggs a new recruit, wanted to get a real sense of how his employees felt about the Company and what corporate could do to make it better, he could have asked questions such as:

What’s good about this Company?

What can be done to improve attendance?

What are the obstacles you and other employees face that make your job more difficult than it should be?

How can employees provide greater service to customers?

How are the communications in the Company?

How do people get a pay raise or promotion? Is it based on performance, seniority or perceived favoritism?

Does the Company have sound policies and are they administered fairly?

What kind of shape is the equipment in and do you have the right tools or supplies?

How is your supervisor to work for?

I believe answers to those questions would not only make good TV, but it would also provide Joel with valuable information which he could use to benefit the business, all employees and not just the few who were on TV.

"UNCOVERING THE UNDERCOVER BOSS" - Episode 6, GSI Commerce

2010-03-22T17:23:00.002-04:00

In this week’s episode, Michael Rubin, Founder and CEO of GSI Commerce, went undercover as Gary Rodgers, a seasonal employee. GSI Commerce provides e-commerce and interactive marketing services for retailers. The Company has 5,000 regular employees but during the holiday peak season the numbers increase to 10,000.

His first day as a seasonal employee was spent working at the Company’s fulfillment center loading a trailer with Rochelle, another seasonal employee, who had three weeks’ experience. Matt was the floor supervisor and his only guidance was to tell both employees to stack the boxes “high and tight.” Rochelle worked quickly but the two of them did a terrible job of loading a trailer. The boxes were in disarray and some were falling as they were being loaded. The Company’s failure to train either employee on how to load and stack boxes could have been disastrous. Either employee could have sustained an injury, the unbalanced load could have affected the driver’s ability to properly steer the vehicle, and it most certainly would have resulted in crushing a few boxes.

Nothing was ever mentioned about the need for training or the lack of supervision. At the end of the show, Michael rewarded Rochelle for being a hard worker, which she was, but the supervisor and all of management failed.

The lesson learned is that most jobs, in this case loading a trailer, require training and nothing should be taken for granted. This is a job that is not only physically demanding but the consequences of loading a trailer poorly will affect the employees, the truck driver, others on the highway and the customers. Michael only recognized that it was a physically exhausting job. He did not even think about the financial repercussions of not properly training employees –workers compensation claims, damaged goods, and a potentially dangerous vehicle on the highway. Could Michael have been pennywise and pound foolish for not spending money on properly training employees?

Michael’s other major experience occurred at the Company’s call center in Florida. He assisted operators who receive calls from disgruntled customers. One of the operators, Danielle, had an extremely poor attitude. She explained to Michael that you had to show the customer who was the boss. Danielle demonstrated this in dealing with a customer who was dissatisfied with the merchandise received in a crushed box. Danielle told the customer that she could not receive $50 credit immediately, because the system would not allow it to happen. The customer did not accept Danielle’s answer and Michael was so mad at Danielle that he almost blew his cover. He thought that she was not satisfying the customer and he would have fired her on the spot if the cameras were not present.

There are several problems with this situation and they don’t only center on Danielle. First, based on what little we know, Danielle was a bad hire as her personality was a poor fit for the job. Second, what kind of training had she received? At the end of the show we find that she was only provided with two days of customer service training. In a customer oriented position, we doubt that this was enough to handle calls from disgruntled customers, which are the most challenging. Third, as is often the case, the system designed to fix the problem, was, in fact, the major cause of the problem. It prevented Danielle from immediately satisfying the customer. Fourth, Michael wanted to fire her on the spot. Instead of hearing her side of the story, understanding the system’s short comings or evaluating the training process, he was ready to attack the person. A good manager should never fire a person on the spot. Before any discipline occurs he should have invested what led to this serious failure in performance.

This episode concludes, as have the others, with the CEO “taking care” of the individuals with whom he came in contact. Cameron, a warehouse picker, was promoted because Michael thought he would be a good supervisor. Adam, a call center employee, was given $10,000 so that he could have a nice wedding. Shannon, a line processor, was given $5,000 for the community football league. Is Michael’s way of fixing problems, with money, really the right way to motivate a work force? What if you were an employee of Michael’s company, working as hard as possible, and you found out on television that Michael rewarded a few select employees with cash? How would you feel?

These were all very nice gestures, but how does Michael’s actions affect the other employees in the organization? Of the 10,000 other great regular and seasonal employees many of them have needs or desires, but they will not receive similar rewards. This type of favoritism from the CEO causes far more organizational problems than it is worth. A sincere thank you from the CEO is better for the overall organizational well being than choosing a few lucky employees who not only benefit from celebrity status but also receive money and/or promotions.

“Uncovering the Undercover Boss” is written by Richard Reinhardt, Vice President of F&H Solutions Group LLC. You may contact Richard by email at rreinhardt@fhsolutionsgroup.com or by phone at 901.291.1546.

"UNCOVERING THE UNDERCOVER BOSS" - Episode 5, Churchill Downs

2010-03-15T15:50:00.005-04:00

Who doesn’t think running Churchill Downs, the famed locale for the Kentucky Derby, wouldn’t be fun?

Bill Carstanjen is the COO of Churchill Downs, a $500 million racing and gaming Company based in Louisville, Kentucky and the home of the Kentucky Derby. Bill went undercover as an entry level employee by the name of Billy Johns.

As COO, Bill says he spends much of his time, “looking at the numbers, spreadsheets, and PowerPoint presentations.” Halfway through this episode he admits to having lost sight of the fact that this is a “people business.” This sounds all too familiar because in each episode the “undercover boss” recognizes the same shortcoming. Clearly, this is a very common problem among companies, both large and small, and across virtually all industries.

Bill concludes the episode with comments such as . . . “I wouldn’t trade this experience for anything.” “We are losing a connection with our employees.” “Executives have lost sight of the need to talk to and show that we care about our employees.” Why do we hear the same refrain over and over again from corporate executives?

What we need to figure out is how a company keeps this from happening? What will it take until executives understand that without employees, it is hard to have a successful business?

Rest assured, top executives can not and should not resolve this problem by themselves. However, they must set the tone and expect, no, demand that the rest of management make sure employees know the company cares about them as people. For instance, when I am out meeting clients, I ask supervisors to identify their best performers, but when I ask them any questions about the employee as individuals, they are clueless. It is sad that a supervisor can spend forty (40) hours a week with their “best” employee and not know the people who report to them.

It is so easy to learn about the people you work with. At a minimum, supervisors should know the following about each of their employees:

· The spouse’s name, if married;
· The children’s names, if they have kids;
· Interests outside of work;
· The name of their friends at work;
· Who they eat lunch with; and
· Their birthday.

Other items can be added to the list without the supervisor getting involved in their personal lives. Top management may not know this information, but if the Company philosophy embraces the fact that people are important, then the employee’s immediate supervisor must show he or she sincerely cares.

The point is, if you care about your employees as people, they will care about you as an employer.

“Uncovering the Undercover Boss” is written by Richard Reinhardt, Vice President of F&H Solutions Group LLC. You may contact Richard by email at rreinhardt@fhsolutionsgroup.com or by phone at 901.291.1546.

"UNCOVERING THE UNDERCOVER BOSS" - The Repeat

2010-03-08T10:10:00.011-05:00

This week, CBS chose to replay the third episode of Undercover Boss, featuring the CEO of 7-Eleven. This was probably done because the viewers wanted to see:

A. Bad Boys II on NBC
B. Family Guy on FOX
C. The 82nd Academy Awards on ABC
D. The CEO of 7-Eleven mess up making coffee

The answer is probably "C," but the lessons learned from this "reality" show are twofold:

1. Recognition -- Recognize people for being the best.
2. Gratitude -- Thank everyone for doing a great job.

That's what you saw and heard on the Academy Awards. Are you and your managers providing recognition and showing gratitude to the front line employees within your company? We hope so, but the results of our Employee Opinion Surveys tell us something different. We ask, "Are you told when you do a good job?" and often employees respond very negatively.

Showing your appreciation costs you nothing and to those on the receiving end it can be like receiving the Academy Award.

"UNCOVERING THE UNDERCOVER BOSS" Episode 4, White Castle

2010-03-02T09:29:00.002-05:00

Dave Rife is one of the owners of White Castle, the company best known for introducing fast food hamburgers to the masses. It is, in fact, the oldest fast food company in the U.S. This family business was started by Dave’s grandfather and is headquartered in Columbus, Ohio. The business began 88 years ago and has 421 restaurants in the U.S.

Dave Rife went undercover as an entry level employee by the name of David Allen. It was quite an eye-opening experience for Dave.

In this episode, there were two examples of how new employee training is not helping the employee, the Company or the customer. The first was where Dave was one of 70 other employees and managers at a new store opening. The situation was chaotic, the employees were receiving poor training, and the managers were wasting time while providing conflicting advice, which means that the customer must have suffered. The second example took place at a White Castle bakery. Here Dave continually asked his production supervisor, “What am I doing wrong?” as he proceeded to destroy 4800 buns in the packing machine. He never received much help from his supervisor or anyone else.

Too often employees are trained by the “sink or swim” method. White Castle has a detailed procedures manual and Dave, as an owner, was interested in improving the operational process of the Company. However, it appears the Company needs to do a better job of understanding the realities of operations and translating them into an effective training process.

So what did we learn from this experience? A quality new employee training process conveys to employees that you want them to succeed. It also sends the message that it is important to do the job right in order to give the customer a great experience. Furthermore, it helps achieve consistency in the product or service whether delivered by an employee who is on the job for one week or one decade. This lesson is critical to any customer service job, whether it is serving fast food or the finest culinary.

Another part of the episode was at the White Castle frozen food factory where Dave loaded cheeseburgers on a production line with other employees. One of his co-workers, Vicki, commented that the operation ran smoother and the quality was better eight years ago. She attributes the decline to the fact that the supervisor is not as involved as she once was. In this case, Brenda, the supervisor, was not involved and spent her time in the break room while Dave, Vicki and the others struggled to run production.

At the end of the show, after Dave revealed himself to Vicki and Brenda, he asked the employee, what do you look for in a good supervisor? Her answer was one that I have heard numerous times from employees. They want their supervisor to provide help when needed. Employees resent it when their immediate supervisor stays in the office, or as Brenda did, sat in the break room while employees struggled. A front line supervisor is “the Company” and they must demonstrate that they care and that they know what is going on.

In this particular situation, I do wonder where Brenda’s supervisor was during this time. Brenda’s job title was assistant supervisor so you would think that her supervisor or a manager would expect her to help the employees. If I were Dave I would be as concerned about what the members of middle management are focusing on within this plant, rather than only expecting Brenda to improve her supervisory abilities.

One of the things that makes “Undercover Boss” such a great program is that management experiences a reawakening to the fact that most employees take pride in their work, want to do a good job, and that they really care about what they do. One example was Joe, an excellent multi-tasking order taker who also dealt with customers in the most pleasant and efficient manner.

Joe is the result of a good selection process which brought the right person to the right job. Once in the job he must have received good training and supervision. As Dave said, “the Company needs a lot more people like Joe,” and every Company can attract and retain “Joe’s” with the right employee relations culture, management systems and supervisory skills.

At the end of this episode and the three preceding ones each of the employees discovers that members of top management actually care about their employees. This comes as a surprise to employees and yet it should not. Conversely, top management discovers how much employees care about their jobs and the impact their work life has on their families. This comes as a surprise to each undercover boss and yet it should not. That’s because we are all people with many of the same needs and concerns.

“Uncovering the Undercover Boss” is written by Richard Reinhardt, Vice President of F&H Solutions Group LLC. You may contact Richard by email at rreinhardt@fhsolutionsgroup.com or by phone at 901.291.1546.

"UNCOVERING THE UNDERCOVER BOSS" - Episode 3, 7-Eleven

2010-02-22T16:19:00.007-05:00

Joe De Pinto is the CEO of 7-Eleven, a $17 billion company with more than 36,000 locations and 200,000 associates. Joe went undercover as “Danny Rossi” and in this episode he learned several lessons. Some of the lessons those of us in management should have learned are as follows:

1. It is relatively easy to find or train people to stock shelves, clean restrooms, fill coffee urns and even rapidly put dough in the oven. The challenge is to hire people with the right attitude. Every one of the 7-Eleven associates on the program had the “right attitude.” I am sure that 7-Eleven has some people with bad attitudes, but this show proves that even in the most mundane jobs you can find great, hard working and talented people that have the “right attitude.” What are you doing to determine if applicants have the right attitude?

2. A store in New York sells the most coffee of any 7-Eleven, so Joe De Pinto wanted to know whether it was the store’s location, quality of coffee or the employees that caused this to happen. He quickly learned it was the employees, particularly a person like Delores.
Your competition can find a great location or in time imitate your product. The only truly unique differentiating factor between you and the competition, regardless of the industry, is your people. In this case everyone knew Delores and she knew them. To the customers she is “the Company” and as a result they flocked into this store. Some executives give lip service to the fact that their employees are an asset, but employees like Delores prove it to be the case. If an employee is a liability get rid of them.

3. Phil, who was “Danny’s” trainer at the bakery, illustrated the fact that employees are people. They can be good at their jobs, which he was, but they also have other skills, talents or interests. In his case he was very artistic.

A good manager gets to know his employees as people. Once you know them you may be amazed at what other talents or knowledge they can bring to your Company. You will also discover that if you care about them as people, they will care more about you as an employer.

4. At the third store Danny learned about the failure of downward communication. There were two examples:

(a) Corporate may establish a policy, but who is making sure it is being implemented? In this case, a simple policy of donating day old pastries to charities was ignored. The food was thrown away each evening. Did the employees know the policy? If they did, why was it not adhered to? If they were unaware of the policy, what went wrong with the communication?

(b) Danny’s trainer had four years’ experience with 7-Eleven. He was in college during the day and viewed his job as a dead end. In many companies this night shift employee would be seen as promotional material based on his work ethic and commitment to further his education. Clearly the Company should have been doing a better job of letting employees know about internal promotional opportunities. Is your internal promotion system one that employees understand and believe in?

5. The role of Corporate is to support the stores so they can achieve success. Too often people at Corporate lose sight of this, which is what happened when one of the best stores in the organization had to wait a month to get lights replaced. It appeared as if the bureaucracy was functioning in a stereotypical way when the person on the other end of the phone routinely said it would be 30 days before it could be fixed. It is the job of the corporate office to support, not hamper, the operation of a Company. How can obstacles to that philosophy be removed?

So far, in three episodes of Undercover Boss each CEO has experienced a significant emotional experience by going undercover. By listening to their employees, they were able to learn. You may not be able or inclined to go “undercover” but many CEO’s we work with listen directly to all of their employees. Using a confidential Employee Opinion Survey process enables an employer to ask all of its employees to let senior management know what can be done to make the Company more successful and a better place to work.

“Uncovering the Undercover Boss” is written by Richard Reinhardt, Vice President of F&H Solutions Group LLC. You may contact Richard by email at rreinhardt@fhsolutionsgroup.com or by phone at 901.291.1546.

"UNCOVERING THE UNDERCOVER BOSS" - EPISODE 2, HOOTERS

2010-02-16T13:06:00.006-05:00

Coby Brooks, President and CEO of Hooters, the restaurant Company with over a billion dollars in sales and 460 locations in 27 countries, was this week’s undercover boss on the CBS television reality show. Hooters was started by Coby’s father in 1983 in Clearwater, Florida and it remains a family business. Like many restaurant businesses, sales are currently down and Coby believes that going undercover may help him learn what needs to be done to improve the operation and increase sales. The lessons he learned as Scott Archer, a new recruit working undercover for seven days, caused him to “love the Company more than ever before.”

What are some lessons that we can learn from his experience?

1. Scott Archer’s first job was at the largest Hooters in the world. He worked in the “back of the house,” emptying the garbage, loading mugs into the cooler, cleaning and coating the wings and other tasks removed from the customer. At the end of the day Scott was tired and his manager said he probably would not hire him.

As CEO, Scott recognized that the “back of the house” gets forgotten when the focus is primarily on one part of the business, in this case sales. Hooters, like other sales driven organizations, wants to take care of the customer, sometimes to the detriment of the rest of the organization. For instance, if the leadership of a manufacturing organization focuses too much on sales, production loses efficiency because sales may demand unrealistic timeframes or too many unique products in order to make the sale. Conversely, if the organization is engineering or manufacturing driven, the response to the needs of sales may be too slow or resistant to change, because it will hamper production.

The most effective CEO’s are those that can strive for a balance among the sales, finance and operational divisions of the business. Just think, if Hooters had too many people who performed poorly in the “back of the house” jobs, then the Hooters girls would become lonely “out front.”

2. Jimbo was a successful Store Manager but his management style was considered to be completely unacceptable by Scott. Jimbo showed no respect toward his employees. He walked around with a toothpick in his mouth, shot rubber bands and made inappropriate comments to his employees. He determined which girl would be able to leave work early based upon who would be the first to finish eating a plate of beans without using their hands. This was a degrading act that almost caused Scott to come out from his undercover.

There are still plenty of “Jimbos” in management. They are not just men managing females, but there are male and female supervisors who don’t know how to treat people with respect. They bully a few or all employees, they treat them unfairly, inconsistently or without respect. They may be quick to use terms such as “it’s my way or the highway,” or “do it because I said so.” Jimbo mentioned that “there are no rules” so he makes up the rules. To avoid having a “Jimbo” in management it requires things such as,

Establishing a culture that will not tolerate such behavior and then hire people who fit the culture.
Establishing and adhering to rules and policies that set forth what the Company expects from employees and equally important, what employees can expect from the Company.
Ensuring that upper management, in this case Jimbo’s immediate supervisor, identifies poor management skills and initiate corrective actions regardless of what the “numbers” look like.

It is very difficult to change a management style such as Jimbo’s. Even though Jimbo was given a chance to improve, my guess is that he will not change.

3. The stark contrast to Jimbo was the female manager, Marcee. Marcee talks to her people with respect and all of her actions show that she is there to help them be successful. Her rationale for this type of management is that she has “been in their shoes.” That may help, but good managers learn from other good managers combined with effective training and the inherent qualities of how to deal with people.

4. Hooters is a family business and apparently Coby’s dad was known and revered by the employees, particularly those in the Atlanta food processing plant. The founder of a successful family business creates an aura that is often difficult to follow by the second generation. However, sometimes the next CEO performs better than “the old man.” In Coby’s case he discovered that the employees did not know him and they attributed morale problems, including the lack of bonuses, to the fact that his father was no longer managing the Company.

A billion dollar family business can retain the “family touch” without the founder. Coby plans to restore this feeling with visits to the plant which will help, but given the Company size it will be difficult. However, if he establishes better communications with subordinate managers, which he seems to have also lost, then they can represent him better to their people. Creating policies that still reflect the feeling of family will also help maintain the culture that was established by his father.

Coby learned more about his Company and himself as a President by listening to his employees. Are you and your management team listening? What would your employees tell you about improving the operation and increasing sales?

“Uncovering the Undercover Boss” is written by Richard Reinhardt, Vice President of F&H Solutions Group LLC. You may contact Richard by email at rreinhardt@fhsolutionsgroup.com or by phone at 901.291.1546.

“UNCOVERING THE UNDERCOVER BOSS” – Episode 1, Waste Management

2010-02-08T16:56:00.002-05:00

Larry O’Donnell, President and COO of Waste Management, becomes “Randy the trainee” in the new CBS television reality show, “Undercover Boss.” Larry comes across as a caring person, and a family man. He wants the Company to be more effective and recognizes that his employees can help him accomplish this. So he goes “undercover” to get unfiltered information from the real stars of the show, the hourly paid employees, Sandy, Walter, Jacquelyn, Fred and Janice.

The question is - what did we learn from Larry and his employees? The following paragraphs provide a few answers.

1. Even though most executives spend more time communicating down, Larry demonstrated that there is more value in receiving upward communication. Larry accomplished this by asking questions and listening, as a result, he learned. Too often, executives feel like their role should be the provider of answers.

2. Picking up trash by hand or thoroughly cleaning port-a-potties are jobs that the employees, Walter and Fred, know a lot about. By watching and listening to these two, it becomes clear that selecting the right person with the right attitude for each job (regardless of their duties) is one of the most important tasks of a manager. It is obvious that Larry didn’t have the skills to pick up trash. However, according to Fred, he had potential for port-a-potty cleaning.

3. Employees must be recognized as people first. Too often front-line supervisors only seem to care about what their employee does at work. A good manager shows an interest in the whole person. As a leader, Larry got to know each employee as a person. He recognized that if you care about the person, they will care about you and the Company.

4. A Company policy may be very sound, but the administration of the policy is what counts. For example, being on time at Waste Management is very important to the success of the operation. However, correcting for lateness through a supervisor-created policy of punishing employees by docking them two minutes for every minute late is unfair within their culture and in most other organizations that practice positive employer relations. Correcting behavior should be done on an individual basis in a positive way, which excludes docking employees’ pay.

5. Establishing productivity standards are goals by which performance can be measured. However, Larry learned that by using only one dimension, in this case 300 stops a day on a trash collection route, is counter-productive. It appears that this number is too high because it reduces the time for customer contact, and it created intolerable working conditions which included no time to stop at a restroom. Standards should be realistic and achievable. They should not be counter-productive, but in this case, they seemed to be since they allowed for little customer contact.

6. In today’s economy, many employees have to perform multiple jobs. Jacquelyn was seen functioning as an administrative assistant, scale operator, office manager, and mail clerk. Because a person performs many jobs, doesn’t mean they should automatically be paid more. Jobs are paid based on such factors as the required skills, responsibilities, and working conditions, not the number of different tasks. Furthermore, Jacquelyn needed more money to prevent the loss of her family’s home, but again that should not be a factor as to whether she receives more money for her job. However, jobs should be re-evaluated periodically to ensure that they are paid fairly. This is what was done by Waste Management, and in her case the operation was restructured which benefited her and the Company.

In conclusion, the employees and Waste Management gained because Larry asked questions, listened, learned, and then acted. Are you and your managers receiving a good flow of upward communication from your employees? If not, you need to explore ways of becoming an “Undercover Boss.”

“Uncovering the Undercover Boss” is written by Richard Reinhardt, Vice President of F&H Solutions Group LLC. You may contact Richard by email at rreinhardt@fhsolutionsgroup.com
or by phone at 901.291.1546.

What Would Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Say?

2010-01-14T11:31:00.004-05:00

The “I Have a Dream Speech” written by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was so futuristic. We made national history on November 4, 2008, when we elected our first African-American President: Barack Hussein Obama. Dr. King would have been quite proud, despite the fact that race was the elephant in the room throughout the entire 2008 presidential campaign. Fast forward to January 2, 2010: the news breaks that Mayor L.E. Godwin III of Plains, Georgia has discovered an effigy of our elected President hanging by a noose from a building. A sign had been placed next to the doll that read, “Plains, Georgia. Home of Jimmy Carter, our 39th President.” Undoubtedly, the use of a noose for the effigy evokes a powerful racial symbol. Moreover, it pours salt into the still unhealed wounds of those who are painfully reminded of the history of racially-charged lynchings by White mobs that plagued the U.S. South years ago. This was certainly not the first time. We would be remiss to forget Mike Lumsford, the Ohio resident who intentionally hung an effigy of Barack Obama in his front yard in October of 2008 to express his opposition to the presidential candidate because of his race.

Yet as we approach the 2010 national celebration of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday on January 18th, followed by Black History Month in February -- another fast-moving news story regarding President Obama has erupted. Even as I write this article, all political pundits from the news media outlets are still buzzing. What’s the buzz all about? Journalists Mark Halperin and John Heilermann reported in their newly released book entitled, “Game Change” that Democratic Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, had privately voiced some inappropriate comments about the then presidential candidate. The authors quote Reid as saying that Obama, as a Black candidate, could be successful thanks, in part, to his “light-skinned” appearance and speaking patterns “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.” “He [Reid] was wowed by Obama’s oratorical gifts and believed that the country was ready to embrace a Black presidential candidate, especially one such as Obama …” Halperin and Heilermann write, “Reid was convinced, in fact, that Obama’s race would help him more than hurt him in a bid for the Democratic nomination.” It goes without saying that all eyes were on President Obama for his reaction to the controversy.

Senator Reid immediately apologized for the highly publicized statement, stating that “I deeply regret using such a poor choice of words.” Okay, beam me up, Scottie. How quickly we forget the eloquently spoken words from Dr. King’s “I Have a Dream” speech: “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. I have a dream today.” Clearly, Reid’s statement suggests that because President Obama is “light-skinned,” highly educated and possesses “oratorical gifts” that somehow the country would more openly embrace him as a presidential candidate than if he had a darker complexion and had a “Negro dialect.” In other words, as long as he maintains the outward features that White America deems acceptable, he will succeed in his role as President. Is this really the message that we want to send to our young children -- who are today’s students and positioning themselves to be tomorrow’s employees and leaders? I would surely hope not.

President Obama later responded to Senator Reid’s apology, stating that, “I accepted Harry’s apology without question because I’ve known him for years. I’ve seen the passionate leadership he’s shown on issues of social justice and I know what’s in his heart. As far as I am concerned, the book is closed.” The book is “closed?” As a light-skinned, Ivy League educated African-American professional female and an expert in the field of Diversity for over 25 years, I myself was appalled to hear that President Obama has simply accepted Senator Reid’s apology and has no further comment on the matter. Further, it is disappointing that he has decidedly dismissed this travesty and has turned his focus to “more pressing issues” such as the economy, healthcare and the wars in Pakistan and Iraq. For the first time in my adult life, I agree with the Republican perspective. Don’t get me wrong, the real issue here is not whether Senator Reid keeps his seat in the Senate. The fact of the matter is that as President of the United States, Obama has missed the opportunity to use this unfortunate misstep on the part of Senator Reid as a “teachable moment” -- a platform in which all of America can participate and offer insight. We are not just talking about a late afternoon beer summit, either. Naturally, I expect that some may argue that the uproar is without merit and has taken on the appearance of a call for reparation, but I am encouraged that others would instead see its relevance in the context of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream.

That said, regardless of how supportive Senator Reid was during President Obama’s presidential campaign, and how deeply involved Senator Reid has been over the years in the advancement of issues within the African-American community, his words speak volumes as to how out of touch he and other Americans like him are when it comes to Black America. And it doesn’t just stop there. Allow me to share another unique example: On January 11, 2010, ousted Illinois Governor, Rod Blagojevich, was quoted as saying that he was “blacker than Barack Obama.” Here is his statement: “I’m blacker than Barack Obama. I shined shoes. I grew up in a five-room apartment. My father had a little laundromat in a black community not far from where we lived. I saw it all growing up.” Keep in mind that Blagojevich was a twice-elected Democrat who was impeached and removed from office last year after federal prosecutors arrested him on corruption charges that included trying to sell Obama’s old U.S. Senate seat. He has pleaded not guilty. I shudder to think that the very same people who share this skewed perception of Black America hold prominent positions in our state and federal government systems.

Republican Party Chairman, Michael Steele, says that Senator Reid is “mortified” by the statement he’s made. And well he should be. In 2002, Senate Republican leader, Trent Lott, was forced to step down from his post during the aftermath that followed his speaking favorably of the 1948 segregationist presidential campaign of Strom Thurmond. And in spite of repeated apologies for those remarks at Thurmond’s 100th birthday, Lott was forced out as leader. A double standard, you say? Most certainly. But if President Obama would at least consider taking the time to hold a summit and have the conversation that we’ve been waiting to have for the last 400 years – America would be more inclined to move forward and fulfill Dr. King’s heartfelt dream. That national dialogue – in whatever skin tone that we are graced with – and whatever dialect we choose – will reveal that the problem of inequality and ethnocentrism is far more reaching than Senator Harry Reid. The celebration of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday is not simply about having a day off from work. It is about stepping up to the plate and grabbing the baton in the continuing push for racial equality, as Dr. King did in the 1950’s and 1960’s. In the words of Dr. King, “And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true.” Mr. President: I have a dream today.

Written by: Jennifer Melton, EEO/Diversity Management Consultant & Certified Facilitator - Leadership Development, F&H Solutions Group

A “TEACHABLE MOMENT” FOR CORPORATE AMERICA

2009-08-03T10:42:00.002-04:00

On July 16, 2009, Professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr., 58, the world-renowned Alphonse Fletcher University Professor of Harvard University became a statistic -- one of a million Black men in the prison system today. Professor Gates had just arrived home from a trip to China, where he was filming his latest PBS documentary entitled, “Faces of America.” Upon attempting to enter his rental home in Harvard Square, he found that his front door had jammed. Professor Gates and his cabbie together successfully released the door and carried the luggage into the home. Minutes later, Professor Gates was approached by uniformed Cambridge police officers responding to a neighbor’s 911 call about a possible breaking and entering in progress.

One of the officers that immediately arrived on the scene, later identified as Cambridge Police Sgt. James Crowley, asked Professor Gates for proof of identification. Professor Gates informed the officer that he lived there and was a faculty member at Harvard University and presented his Harvard University identification and valid Massachusetts driver’s license to the officer. Both of these documents included his photograph and current address. As Professor Gates stepped onto the front porch of the home, he asked one of Sgt. Crowley’s colleagues the officer’s name and badge number. No information was offered to Professor Gates. After repeated inquiries by Professor Gates, coupled with significant verbal exchanges between the two individuals, Sgt. Crowley, a Caucasian male, handcuffed Professor Gates and placed him under arrest for disorderly conduct. News reports indicate that Professor Gates was not even read his Miranda rights until after he arrived at the Cambridge Police Station to be fingerprinted and fully processed.

On Tuesday, July 21, 2009, prosecutors dropped the disorderly conduct charge against Professor Gates. The city of Cambridge called the arrest, “regrettable and unfortunate.” During his news conference on health care reform, President Obama stated that the Cambridge police “acted stupidly” in handling the situation with Professor Gates, whom he has known for many years. I call it an undeniable debacle, to say the least.

Here we stand in the 21st Century, the year 2009. We as a nation are still struggling with the very same stereotypes and prejudices that have plagued our society for decades. Despite the tragic incidents involving police and African-American victims like Rodney King, Amadou Diallo and the innocent 92 year-old Atlanta shooting victim, Kathryn Johnson – we have not yet learned any lessons. Even given historic decisions such as Brown v. Board of Education and Roe v. Wade, we are regrettably poor students.

Similarly, those of us who work in Corporate America should view the Gates controversy as a real “wake-up call” and utilize it as an impetus for change in our respective working environments. The successful implementation of any diversity initiative requires a changing of the mindset. Lacking that, the biases that continue to permeate our organizations (whether conscious or unconscious) will take control and override any finely scripted diversity initiative. We have to ensure that our hiring practices are focused on being all-inclusive, with equitable representation across all levels of the organization. We need to be consistent in the implementation of company policies and procedures, as well as in each of our employment decisions.

Most importantly, we as professionals have to strategically reinforce one of the basic requirements of diversity: understanding and embracing differences. We are not a “melting pot” - a term commonly used to describe our society, but rather, a mosaic of individuals, who are each derived from different races, educational and socio-economic backgrounds, religions, marital status, work experiences, etc. These differences are significant to the organization and, regardless of size or industry, can dramatically impact a company’s bottom line.

Statistically, discrimination charges filed each year with the EEOC are at record high levels. This means that employment-related issues are not going to somehow disappear on their own. It also means that the supervisors and managers who work directly on the front line need to be properly trained in the EEO laws and work as a team to enhance the multi-cultural and social awareness among their constituents.

Let’s be honest. The election of President Obama was a truly historic moment – the first Black African-American man to be elected to serve as the 44th President of the United States. The same holds true in regards to the appointment of Judge Sonia Sotomayor as the first Hispanic female to serve as the 11th Court Justice to the U.S. Supreme Court. These events have provided a new platform for which we as a society can again talk openly about the importance of diversity in America and all over the world. What these events have not done, however, is completely eradicate the “-isms.” Ostensibly, the overall concept of embracing diversity has evolved and race relations have progressed over the years. But as evidenced by the Gates incident, we have yet to attain the level of acceptance that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and other civil rights activists envisioned.

Professor Gates is now considering filing a lawsuit against Sgt. Crowley, the city and/or the Cambridge Police Department on the basis of what constitutes racial profiling. President Obama has offered to step in and extend an invitation to the two to share a beer with him at the White House, representing a symbolic conciliatory summit. According to the President, the controversy over the Gates issue is a “teachable moment.” There are some who argue that perhaps each party simply overreacted to the situation, stating that had Crowley and Gates engaged in a more civil communication with each other on that front porch, we would not be talking about this travesty today. Hindsight is 20/20. Speculation aside, what we do know for sure is that it is imperative that we as business leaders get our arms around these issues before too long. The “teachable moment” for us today should be crystal clear.

Written by: Jennifer Melton, EEO/Diversity Management Consultant & Certified Facilitator - Leadership Development, F&H Solutions Group

ARE YOU VIOLATING THE LAW, INCREASING UNION VULNERABILITY AND WASTING PAYROLL DOLLARS?

2009-05-21T13:28:00.003-04:00

Most employers, even during this economic period, must pay a competitive rate relative to the market place in order to attract quality people. However, once they are your employee, their attitudes are affected by the fairness of pay among jobs within the company. Thus, the concept of internal equity of pay will affect the company's exposure to discrimination lawsuits, union vulnerability, and productivity.

Properly managing pay is not a new phenomenon. However, with the recently passed pay discrimination law called the Ledbetter Act and the proposed Fair Pay Act of 2009, companies need to assess their compensation plans to avoid more law suits. Such an assessment will also help counter employee complaints regarding favoritism relative to pay which often can spark a union organizing attempt. Furthermore, a sound compensation plan will save the company money and increase productivity by paying jobs what they are truly worth relative to one another.

Various types of assessments can be done, but one that should occur is an objective analysis of internal equity of pay. Such an assessment will help companies address whether:

The Marketing Assistant's job should be in the same pay range as the Engineering Assistant's;
The Assembler's job should be paid the same, more or less than the Fork Lift Operator's; or
The Production Supervisor’s job should be in the same pay grade as a Warehouse Supervisor.

The most common objective method of assessment is the point system job evaluation process. This process determines if jobs are paid fairly based on the required skills, responsibilities and working conditions of the job. This is not an individual performance evaluation and it is sex, age, race, etc. neutral. We have assisted companies in all types of industries evaluate jobs using such a procedure. This course of action helps companies avoid pay discrimination issues addressed by the Ledbetter Act. Equally important, it will reduce union vulnerability and help control labor costs.

Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio…..?

2009-05-04T15:39:00.002-04:00

Is there a more recognizable set of lyrics then those from one of the most popular songs ever written by Simon and Garfunkel, “Mrs. Robinson”?

Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio?

(A nation turns its lonely eyes to you )

What's that you say, Mrs. Robinson

Joltin' Joe has left and gone away

(Hey, hey, hey...hey, hey, hey)

We appear to be a nation in search of a leader we can look up to, whether it be in sports, politics, or business, as so many people did of Joe DiMaggio. Even going back to the 1970s, those of us old enough to remember still recall the leadership showed by Lee Iaccoca, the former head of Chrysler, who helped the company through some very though times by securing government loans and even agreeing to take an annual salary of one dollar.

Now, when I watch television, pick up the newspaper, or read something online about a misstep at a particular organization, whether it is a corporation, non-profit, politician, or public sector entity, I shake my head and ask myself, where has the leadership gone in this country? Our new President is doing his best to lead by example, but what will it take to develop a new set of leaders in this country and how are we going to achieve that goal?

The problem is too many organizations are cutting back on critical training needs. We keep hearing, “the training budget is being cut,” or “It’s not in the budget at all.”

There is a widely held view that training is “soft” and it doesn’t provide any real return to an organization. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Think about this:

· No money for supervisor training, diversity training, sexual harassment or discrimination training?
· Can’t afford to send someone to learn about the alphabet soup of laws and regulations affecting employees like ADA, FLSA, FMLA, OSHA, and many, many more?
· Can’t retain someone because there is no career development plan, succession plan, or his or her boss is dysfunctional?

Why do we still see corporations as the lead story in the newspaper, online, or on television under negative publicity? It costs those companies tens of millions of dollars in revenue fighting the negative publicity.

It is still hard to believe that we see adverse court decisions being issued because of discrimination or harassment convictions that it costs corporations millions, or worse yet.

At some point, one hopes the light bulb will go off and executives will realize that training isn’t “soft” at all and that a sound training program is one of the smartest investments an organization can make.

The perception of training is all wrong. It can’t be viewed as a luxury item for organizations to use only when times are good. If you think about the examples I have used, you would agree it is one of the wisest investments an organization can make in its employees. Would a corporation ever think about not investing its cash reserves, or not having the necessary D&O liability coverage? Would any organization want to see its best and brightest people leave because they cannot get the support needed to nurture and grow the people who work for them?

Organizations have never needed training more. There are way too many managers who fly off the handle at the smallest thing and berate their co-workers or subordinates. There are too many analytic types that barely show any emotion and who their co-workers or subordinates barely know are alive.

It is time we teach the proper balance between emotion and process, how to get organized in your day to day work activities, make a meeting on time, accept others who are different than us, communicate better, put together a business plan, conduct a meeting so people aren’t nodding off or reading their BlackBerrys, and most importantly, how to inspire others to be great.

Until organizations commit to these goals, we are going to keep hearing about the dysfunctional organization.

There is the view that leaders are born and cannot be taught. Sure, there are a few people so gifted that they don’t need any training, but the bulk of managers learn their skills from people they worked for and all that does is perpetuate a lot of very poor management skills and habits. Leaders learn to lead by being taught or mentored, not by happenstance.

It is time for the private and public sector organizations to wake up. Let’s not keep having our nation turn its lonely eyes to someone who doesn’t exist any longer. There is no Joltin’ Joe to save us.

What are “market based wages anyway?”

2009-04-23T14:35:00.001-04:00

Whether you are negotiating a collective bargaining agreement with unions or conducting an annual review of compensation plans at your company or organization, one of the first things you hear is the phrase “market based wages.”

In a unionized environment, labor wants management to believe that market based wages mean wages higher than the most recent settlement reached for a particular work group. In other words, classic pattern bargaining. The relative cost of living where your employees live does not matter to the union. Neither does the company’s financial performance. It is all about an ever escalation of wages with little regard for internal or external conditions.

On the flip side, the conventional view of market based wages by management is far more complex than just looking at the most recent settlement. One factor that always comes into play is answering the question -- How much do I need to pay to attract and retain a qualified person to do the job being recruited for?

If I want to review a pay scale or a salary range for a teacher in Columbus, Ohio, will I look at what teachers are being paid in Los Angeles? Highly doubtful. Will I look at what other teachers in comparably sized cities are paid? Yes. Will I look at what increases other public sector employees received in the same city? Absolutely.

If I am considering pay increases for the accountants at my mid-sized firm in Louisville, Kentucky, will I be interested in knowing what KPMG is paying its accountants? I may be interested, but since I cannot compete for that talent, it is not very relevant.

Identifying the critical business characteristics for determining what can and should be paid is a key component in establishing your market based wages.

The bottom line is that companies and organizations cannot ignore competitive, market, and financial conditions. If companies allow themselves to be swayed by pattern bargaining or comparing themselves to jobs in other cities with different demographics or financial situations, they will be doomed to fail in having real market based wages.

The case for keeping bonus and retention plans

2009-04-06T10:01:00.005-04:00

In the wake of recent disclosures about bonus and retention payments being made at AIG and other larger companies that have received financial assistance from the federal government, a number of corporate boards at public companies are reviewing the compensation plans they have in place for their own management teams.

Sound corporate governance dictates that boards should periodically review compensation programs to make sure they are reflective of the marketplace and competition.

Given all the negative publicity surrounding this issue, should companies be running scared? Absolutely not! The number one concern should always be to attract and retain your high achievers and future stars in an organization.

When determining whether someone should be receiving a bonus and/or retention payment, one needs to ask the following questions:

· How critical is this person to the success of the organization?
· Are other people dependent on this person for their own success?
· What would happen if this person leaves? Is there someone who can take his/her place?
· Is this person a serious risk to leave?
· Do you know if the person is satisfied in the job?
· Are you working on a realistic career development path with this person?

There are plenty of reasons not to want to let a valuable manager leave. That person has important institutional knowledge and could end up at a competitor. You make a big investment in this person’s success. And it can be very expensive to replace someone.

It can cost a company up to 100 percent of salary to replace a mid to senior level manager. Hiring an executive search firm is about 30 percent of the first year’s salary and bonus. Relocation of an executive can add another 10 to 20 percent of salary. Then, add a signing bonus and possibly a higher salary than the person they are replacing, and lo and behold, it cost you a fortune to replace the person you let leave. This doesn’t even take into account the time it takes for the new hire to “get up to speed.”

Of course, there are times when it is fine to let someone leave. But compensation structures that exist in American business are built on variable compensation. Base salary, short and long term incentive compensation plans, equity, and other forms of compensation are all part of the package. That is how managers and executives get paid.

The trick is to makes sure that your plans make sense and are not in such bad taste as to offend one’s sensibilities.

Come up with a well thought out plan to identify who is worth keeping and who you let leave. When you are trying to figure all of this out, ask yourself these two questions: Will my world end of this person is no longer with my organization, and how difficult will it be to replace them?

Design your compensation plan with enough flexibility in it to reward the solid achievers, but don’t be forced to dole out money to people who don’t deserve it.

Is your compensation program designed this way?

Be Careful, Or I May Shoot Myself!

2009-03-16T12:01:00.000-04:00

A major airline and its pilots are in contract negotiations. The union is demanding increases of more than 50 percent. So it caught my attention when I read an article about how this airline’s pilots are telling the public that they don’t intend to shut down their company if they fail to get an agreement, but rather, they plan on canceling selected flights or delaying others by 3 or 4 hours at times and locations unknown to the passenger in what has been dubbed by another airline union as CHAOS (Create Havoc Around Our System).

This kind of rhetoric is nothing new in the airline industry. Airline unions call for the resignations of their CEOs. They tell passengers that it may not be safe to fly their airline. Informational picketing is quite common with leaflets saying unflattering things about their company and its executives. They even go as far as renting billboards that are designed to publicly embarrass the company and undermine customer confidence in them.

This type of behavior begs the question, what are these people thinking? Name another industry where unions go out of their way to drive customers away, all but daring them to travel on a competitor. Who pays the employee’s salaries? The passenger! And how does airline labor say thank you? They try to drive them to the competition.

Of course, this is all done in the name of creating leverage in contract negotiations so they can get their members more money, better working conditions, and improved benefits. How can they achieve those goals if their company is being hurt financially by union corporate campaigns? The only way to make sure employees can earn more money and have a secure future is for their company to have a growing stream of revenue and be profitable. If your union is driving away its customers, it is going to be pretty hard to increase your revenues. Their behavior is completely counterintuitive to the stated goals of the union. Make your company more profitable so you can get a bigger piece of the pie, don’t kill the goose that laid the golden egg.

Can you imagine the UAW telling the public not to buy one of their cars? Yeah, let’s get more people to buy Japanese or German cars. That will surely help our plight!!

How about nurse’s unions saying you don’t want to be in our hospital? How about a passenger railroad union telling its customers they’d be better off driving instead of riding the rails? Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face!!

So what can management do in the face of these tactics? Well, the only sensible thing to do is to talk to your employees in a very straightforward way and get them to understand this isn’t a game of chicken. People’s livelihoods are at stake and behavior designed to drive any customers is just plain dumb as it has consequences on the business and the people who are employed by their company.

Unions have done some wonderful things for the American worker in the past, but if labor wants to be relevant in today’s tough economic environment, this sure isn’t the way to do it.

Give us your thoughts on this matter or any of the other postings we have made.

Why won’t we invest in our managers?

2009-02-26T09:00:00.001-05:00

This is not a fun time to be a corporate manager. Even if you aren’t worried about losing your own job, you’re probably concerned about laying people off who work for you.

You start thinking to yourself, “No one ever trained me for this. What do I say? How do I act when I have to break the news to them? Can I answer their questions? How will they react? What happens if someone ‘loses it’ during our conversation?”

Too often, a manager’s own leadership development skills are based on the behaviors of people they worked for at one time in their careers. While it may not be totally analogous to the child who grows up in a dysfunctional family and then mimics their parent’s behavior as an adult, I think you get the picture.

If this is the way some managers learn to lead, how do we fix it?

In professional sports, athletes spend thousands of hours at their craft away from the playing field. They become better at what they do through arduous training sessions, lots of repetition, studying, and just plain hard work. For every game a professional athlete plays, they practice and train 10 times longer. If we want our corporate managers to be the best at what they do, shouldn’t we be taking a page from professional athletes and invest in our managers through proper training and teaching?

Of course the answer is yes, but the reality is that when corporate budgets are cut, what is one of the first items to get the ax? You’ve got it—management and leadership training. When you take a step back and think about it rationally, the most critical time to invest in your management team is when the business is not going well. That’s the time you need your professionals to lead, manage, and be engaged with other employees. This is when you discover who the real leaders are in an organization.

We go to college and train people to become engineers, teachers, analysts, accountants and scores of other professions. We train people to be firefighters, policemen, mechanics, plumbers and other critical skilled professionals. But we forget that once we become professionals, corporations don’t spend a lot of time training us on how to manage and lead others.

We need to re-think the way we look at managers. No more jokes about the Peter Principle. No more assumptions that just because an employee did a great job in a previous position, that same person will make a great manager.

Corporate America is filled with managers who use their time inefficiently, put themselves before the people they manage, and make decisions that are solely based either on emotion or are so analytical, they fail to consider human emotions at all.

I recently read that corporations spend about $1,000 per employee each year on training management/leadership training. If that is the case, it is no wonder we are having trouble developing leaders. We are spending hundreds of billions of dollars to reinvest in our infrastructure. Isn’t it time to start reinvesting in our future leaders of Corporate America?

I’m calling in sick to play golf

2009-02-26T09:00:00.000-05:00

How many people work for companies that allow its employees to accrue sick leave each month, capped at a certain number of days? OK, you can put your hands down. Nearly everyone raised their hands.

Do you know anyone who has called in sick when they were perfectly healthy? Maybe they caught Spring Fever and wanted to play golf, or needed a “mental health day”.

Call me old fashioned, but I was brought up to believe that sick leave was to be used only when you were actually sick. In my book, if you call in sick when otherwise healthy, you’re being dishonest. Sick leave isn’t meant to be used so you can sleep in, get an extra day off before or after the weekend, or maybe even tack on a couple of days to a vacation.

Yes, I know the responses.
“Sick leave is a ‘use or lose it’ benefit, so if I don’t take my sick days, I will lose them when I retire or take another job.”

How about this one?
“If my employer paid me for my sick days when I left, then I wouldn’t have to take them.”

We’ve all heard someone say,
“I had a doctor’s appointment or a parent-teacher conference at school so I needed to use my sick leave because my company doesn’t give me any time off.”

While I would agree that not every employer is always willing to help an employee with taking time off for a doctor’s appointment or a parent-teacher conference, in many instances, it is possible to schedule around someone’s work schedule.

Sick leave is not an entitlement like vacation, it is an insurance policy. Employers provide the benefit so you don’t come to work sick and you get paid for staying home to get healthy.

Think of it like life insurance. Most employers provide you with basic life insurance coverage, but you wouldn’t think of using the benefit, would you? If you do use the benefit, it means you’re dead. In the case of sick leave, shouldn’t you only be using the benefit when you’re actually sick?

Not only is calling in sick when healthy wrong, misuse of sick leave can get you fired. It is also inconsiderate to other collegues. If you are a shift worker, when you are out sick, someone else is going to have to cover your shift, either through mandatory overtime or getting called in on a day off. I am betting that the person calling in sick when healthy doesn’t ever think about the inconvenience to his or her fellow employee.

At most companies, only a small percentage of people who call in sick are being dishonest. The problem is that lost time costs are enormously expensive to the employer. The most conservative estimates of lost time are that for every day someone is not at work, the costs run between 2 and 5 times someone’s pay. If that sounds extreme, think about paying the person who called in sick, the person who had to be called in from home, the overtime, the lost productivity, and the administrative burden on the employer to track the lost time.

Now, let’s say you work for a company with 10,000 employees. The average wage is $15 per hour, and 10 percent of the work force calls in sick each year. Another 20 percent take FMLA, and another 2 percent are out on workers compensation or disability. The average number of days out due to absences are 5 per year. The cost to this employer can run from $4 million to about $20 million a year.

What employee wouldn’t prefer to have at least some of that money in their pocket?