International Mobility

International mobility, where professional employees are required to work cross-border and remotely in order to meet corporate and client needs, is set to become even more virtual and certainly more widespread in the future. The need for an internationally mobile workforce comes as a result of sharpened competition, the pace of globalisation and the pressure to operate on a trans-national basis. Although expected to expand increasingly over the coming years, cost pressures, lifestyle choices, changing work practices and improved technology will be making changes to the traditional nature of international mobility. But having good people amounts to nothing if a company doesn’t have good people management. For companies that do business globally, the need for broad, comprehensive HR programs that anticipate, and address, the myriad issues that come with having an internationally-dispersed workforce is absolutely crucial. It’s essential that you have in place a competitive international mobility programme that is not only aligned with your business strategy but also facilitates the transactional aspects of international mobility.

If this is your situation:

• You need to ensure that your international assignment policies are aligned with and meet the needs of your business while being cost efficient.
• You want your international assignment delivery structure to be efficient and to use technology effectively.
• You need tax-efficient international assignment structures and policies.
• You need to manage risks by complying with regulations in the locations where your global workforce is deployed.
• You need tax-efficient international assignment structures and policies.
• You want to ensure you are selecting the right staff for international assignments and that their performance is meeting business objectives.

Your comments and ideas are welcomed please reply to this blog.

Human Resource Strategy & Business Effectiveness

The world of work is changing: outsourcing, international mobility, talent shortages, new labour laws, globalisation, shifting demographics, an ageing workforce. Where, how, and for whom, people work is, in turn, transforming company structures and cultures. Over the next decade, the convergence of dominant business, demographic, and social trends will only accelerate the changes sweeping through today's workplace. In fact, people issues within the workplace are now a priority on the boardroom agenda. Companies have realised that a successful business depends on how you design and implement a people strategy that is properly aligned with, and supports, your business strategy. Only then can HR become an actively participating strategic business partner in implementing plans and achieving budgets. As a result, HR leaders are under more pressure than ever to demonstrate results from their workforce practices and policies; they are being encouraged to implement people strategies that support the organisation's business objectives and increase accountability and transparency around people management and reporting. The bottom line: HR is increasingly seen as a strategic linchpin—one that needs to work closely with operations, finance, and other corporate departments to help drive business strategy and success.

If this is your situation:

• You need guidance in developing and deploying HR strategy and planning services.
• You want to create a new HR service delivery model.
• You have decided to create and implement HR scorecards but don’t know where to begin.
• You have to benchmark your core HR processes—locally and globally.
• You need to identify key performance indicators for your HR function.
• You must align your HR strategy with your organisational culture, values and business strategies.
• You want to leverage your HR resources so that you become an employer of choice.

Your comments and additional ideas are welcomed.

EEO-1 Deadline is September 30

Employers have less than two weeks to prepare and submit their EEO-1 reports. SHRM members can receive resources on this topic from SHRM's Express Request service (select key term "FALL: EEO-1.")

2009 HR Budgets

I am sure by now most of you have begun your 2009 budget cycling and for HR 2009 will be a bell weather year. As you look at the economy, recent corporate layoffs, corporations that are or have been crashing and burning, you need to make sure you place your budget dollars in the right spots. So, where are they you may ask? You need to look carefully at the following areas to ensure that you focus on retention of your stars as well as those in key positions that you do not want to lose.

It is also time to look at those resources that you have outsourced. It is critical that you look at those costs carefully and renegotiate with those providers harder than you ever have before. The budget dollars you save on renegotiating fees you can place in retention programs and general employee based programs that will keep your employees at your company and also as an attraction mechanism for those you intend to recruit. Here are some areas to concentrate on if you have not already:

1. it goes without saying that you should zero base your 2009 HR budget for every line item
2. renegotiate your recruitment fees for contingent and retained searches
3. review and renegotiate where necessary web-based expenses
4. renegotiate wellness programs you already have in place
5. strong review of your benefit packages and survey to make sure you have the right mix of programs
6. training programs and web-based learning
7. employee satisfaction survey to make sure your employees are in harmony with the strategy of the company and your entire employee program mix
8. review of compensation programs to ensure you are maximizing productivity
9. orientation is key to what an employee feels about a company in the early stages of their employment
10. travel & relocation, making sure you have the appropriate dollars in place to keep in front of your employees to stop-gap any impending issues
11. utilize your dues and subscriptions that build your team and strengthen the organization as a whole
12. make sure there are budget dollars for your intranet so it is the first place employees go for information

These are just a few key budget items that you should be looking at to maximize your budget and how you spend your budget dollars.

As always your input and comments are welcomed.

New Law Will Allay Fears of Genetic Discrimination

On May 21st, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) became law. The new law was enacted to protect individuals on the basis of their genetic information in both employment and health care.

What is genetic information? GINA explains that genetic information is information about a persons’ genetic composition, or a persons’ family history of inherited traits and disorders.

Perhaps the most relevant to HR professionals, the new law will make it illegal for an employer to discriminate against an employee due to the employee’s genetic information or family member’s genetic information. GINA will further make it illegal for an insured or self-insured health care plan to deny eligibility to enroll for health care coverage or change plan premium or contribution rates because of an individual’s or family member’s genetic information.

The new genetic nondiscrimination law will prohibit an employer form requesting or otherwise acquiring a person’s genetic information, except when such information is needed for FMLA compliance, used for an employer-sponsored genetic service or wellness program, or when such information is commercially available. Some inadvertent acquisitions or genetic information may also be permitted under GINA.

In addition to the new federal statute, most states have their own restrictions on genetic information (only PA, ND, & MS have no genetic information statutes). HR professionals should know that GINA will allow state laws that provide additional protections to individuals, above and beyond the federal statute, to supersede the new federal law.

The employment provisions for GINA do not become effective until November 2009, or 18 months after President Bush signed the bill into law. The provisions pertaining to group health plans become effective May 2009 – one year after the date of enactment.

As legislation develops, keep in mind that you can get involved in the issues that may impact your workplace by expressing your views through SHRMs HRVoice program. SHRM members can plan an instrumental part in influencing HR related-information at the federal and state levels by using HRVoice. Visit www.shrm.org/government/hrvoice .

Today's Best and Worst Cities for Salary Growth

Let's face it, most of us wouldn't complain if we were offered a raise. Used to be, you could expect at least a cost of living raise once a year. But these days, that's not necessarily a given.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports the average cost of living in the United States grew by 4.1 percent in all of 2007. But average wage growth was 3.4 percent, according to CBsalary.com. This year, the BLS reports the cost of living has already grown 5.5 percent. These numbers, unfortunately, are troubling to the average worker.

So where do you have a better chance of earning a raise that at least matches the cost of living increase? And where is salary growth seriously lagging? We looked at the top 200 metropolitan statistical areas in the United States and identified the 20 cities with the fastest wage growth and the 20 cities with the slowest.

The results varied even within individual states. While wage growth in College Station and Waco, Texas grew at a healthy clip in 2007, growth in other Texas cities like Amarillo, Tyler and Victoria, was sluggish. California had three cities among the 20 with the speediest growth. The Northwest (Idaho and Wyoming) and Southeast (Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas) regions had solid growth as well.

Fastest Wage Growth
College Station-Bryan, Texas2007 salary growth: 9.5 percent
Gulfport-Biloxi, Miss.2007 salary growth: 7.2 percent
New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, La.2007 salary growth: 6.8 percent
Redding, Calif.2007 salary growth: 5.9 percent
Merced, Calif.2007 salary growth: 5.7 percent
Boise City-Nampa, Idaho2007 salary growth: 5.5 percent
Dover, Del.2007 salary growth: 5.4 percent
Pocatello, Idaho2007 salary growth: 5.3 percent
Baltimore-Towson, Md.2007 salary growth: 5.3 percent
Wilmington, Del.-Md.-N.J. 2007 salary growth: 5.2 percent
Jackson, Tenn.2007 salary growth: 5.2 percent
Casper, Wyo. 2007 salary growth: 5.1 percent
Atlantic City, N.J.2007 salary growth: 5.1 percent
Santa Rosa-Petaluma, Calif.2007 salary growth: 5.1 percent
Lakeland, Fla. 2007 salary growth: 5.1 percent
Waco, Texas 2007 salary growth: 5.0 percent
Houma-Bayou Cane-Thibodaux, La. 2007 salary growth: 4.9 percent
Athens-Clarke County, Ga. 2007 salary growth: 4.9 percent
Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, Ill. 2007 salary growth: 4.8 percent
Chico, Calif. 2007 salary growth: 4.8 percent
Slowest Wage Growth
Florence-Muscle Shoals, Ala. 2007 salary growth: 0.1 percent
Ocala, Fla. 2007 salary growth: 0.9 percent
Alexandria, La.2007 salary growth: 0.9 percent
Kalamazoo-Portage, Mich. 2007 salary growth: 0.9 percent
Saginaw-Saginaw Township North, Mich.2007 salary growth: 1 percent
Springfield, Ill.2007 salary growth: 1.1 percent
Visalia-Porterville, Calif. 2007 salary growth: 1.1 percent
Brockton-Bridgewater-Easton, Mass. 2007 salary growth: 1.2 percent
Waterloo-Cedar Falls, Iowa 2007 salary growth: 1.2 percent
Decatur, Ala. 2007 salary growth: 1.4 percent
Dubuque, Iowa 2007 salary growth: 1.4 percent
Cedar Rapids, Iowa 2007 salary growth: 1.4 percent
Amarillo, Texas 2007 salary growth: 1.5 percent
Weirton-Steubenville, W.Va.-Ohio 2007 salary growth: 1.6 percent
Greenville, N.C. 2007 salary growth: 1.7 percent
Gainesville, Fla. 2007 salary growth: 1.7 percent
Victoria, Texas 2007 salary growth: 1.8 percent
Sheboygan, Wis. 2007 salary growth: 1.8 percent
Tyler, Texas 2007 salary growth: 1.8 percent

How Do You Identify Your Company's Future Leaders

In observing the future leaders of companies I have worked for over the past 30 years there are certain traits that you as human resources practitioners should look. Here are some key helpful hints on how to identify your future leaders. If you install these into your succession planning your company will benefit:

1. individuals who deliver consistent results;
2. individuals who demonstrate that they can grow, adapt, are flexible, and lave the penchant to learn faster and better than their peer group;
3. continually demonstrate looking for challenges, assignments, move out of their comfort zone while showing excellent judgement;
4. individuals who take leaps of faith in innovation to grow your business;
5. individuals who are not satisfied with the status-quo and who look to take opportunities to the next higher level;
6. individuals who have excellent decision making, looking for team input rather than shooting from the hip;
7. individuals who think through a problem or opportunity clearly and have the guts to be open, honest, and authentic in a point of view, and
8. individuals who question voraciously to determine the proper direction and instill a sense of innovation and imagination in their resolve.

What are your thoughts and opinions. Your comments are welcome.

Corporate & Social Return on Investment

In early August (August 5 post) I outlined the need and importance of social and corporate responsibility. As the cultural landscape continues to change, we have found that there are big returns when companies and their employees give back to the community. This is coupled with employees continued interest in giving back to the community and the environment where their company is resident or the city/town/hamlet where they live.

I discussed the compelling rationale on this benefit and what companies can do. In a recent study, there is evidence that employees who give back tend to remain longer with their company than those who do not. Think about your retention rate. As well, 27% of customers define corporate and social responsibility as a company's commitment to the community or environment & 76% of consumers who purchase goods & services produced by companies with strong social, corporate, or environmental output make their decision to buy based on that commitment.

So, if you are a smart company with smart employees you will benefit from providing the opportunity for employees to give back to their communities as well as the company you have to opportunity to gain additional market share. For that your shareholders will see a greater return on their investment (look at General Electric's 2007 Annual Report). These are powerful dynamics at work in our ever changing world. In addition, there is overwhelming evidence that companies with these type incentive and social conscience programs will significantly outperform those companies that do not.

Your comments and concerns are of interest and I would like to hear your feedback. Please email me.

Hiring from Outside the Company: How New People Can Bring Unexpected Problems

As life-long employment fades and the workforce becomes increasingly mobile, many companies look to hire skilled, experienced workers to improve productivity quickly. Those workers, however, often bring baggage from prior jobs that can negate the benefits of their prior experience, according to new Wharton research.

Companies might be better off investing in training fresh recruits with little experience in an industry so the companies can have more control over how the new workers adapt to their new employer's corporate strategy and culture. The research found that training may be more productive than paying a premium to hire experienced workers who might come from a different sort of corporate environment.

"Human resources managers will want to [hire] people who worked in a related industry or firm for the skills they bring. That makes sense from a human capital perspective, but we question whether that's all they bring with them. Do they bring other experiences ... positive or negative?" asks Wharton management professor Nancy Rothbard, co-author of a paper titled Unpacking Prior Experience: How Career History Affects Job Performance. Rothbard wrote the paper with Gina Dokko of New York University's Stern School of Business and Steffanie L. Wilk of Ohio State University's Fisher College of Business.

Drawing on psychological theory, the authors examined employment applications and hiring records at two call centers for a major property and casualty insurance firm. The authors set out to assess not only the impact of bringing in skilled and knowledgeable workers, but also cognitive and behavioral responses that developed during [the new workers'] previous employment.

When More Experience Means Less Success

In interviews with managers early on in the project, Rothbard and her colleagues discovered that the issue of cross-corporation baggage kept coming up. A senior human resource manager told the research team, "We tried to hire from our competitors and paid a premium for the experience -- but those hires were the least successful." Another manager quoted in the paper said: "People are weighed down by the baggage they bring in."

Rothbard says executives at the insurance company told of hiring a talented and highly trained adjustor from another insurance company. While the hiring company provided high-end insurance with a strong emphasis on customer service, the adjustor came from a company that was more focused on keeping costs down. Rothbard says the adjustor just could not help himself from "nickel and diming" customers on their claims, even though that attitude conflicted sharply with the firm's strategic direction and culture.

"It was so embedded in his ideas about how to do the job that even at this other firm, where management tried to instill the other set of values, it didn't translate," explains Rothbard. "He had the skills to get up and running quickly in the [basics] of what an adjustor does, but ... he was ultimately not adaptable to the strategy and norms of the new firm. His experience tended to trap him."

Rothbard describes employment "baggage" as a set of norms and experiences that shape the workers' response to their jobs as much as, if not more than, the industry and occupation-related skills and knowledge they bring to their work.

According to the paper, "Habits, routines, and scripts that contribute to performance in one organizational context may detract from performance in a different organizational context. That is, the relationship between prior related experience and performance may not be wholly positive. Indeed, despite the common assumption that prior related experience will improve performance, past research findings have been mixed about the effect of work experience on performance."

Rothbard and the other researchers were intrigued by the notion that the norms and values employees pick up in the culture of one firm are not easily shed as they cross organizational boundaries. "Those kinds of transfers really are not discussed at all when we talk about mobility of the workforce. We assume people are cogs that can be plugged in and they will perform similarly in different environments."

Incidentally, Rothbard says, managers in certain industries may find the research particularly important. "For example, consulting firms have very large differences in culture and strategy and mission. It can be very difficult to overcome the years of acculturation you get from one firm."

The transition between companies is an increasingly important issue for employers and workers. In the late 1970s, Americans were estimated to have an average of seven employers during their working years. By 2005, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics found the average American worker born in the later years of the baby boom had 10.5 employers by age 40.

The research team reviewed the work history of more than 7,200 employees and applicants to explore the relationships between prior experience and productivity. Their findings show a strong relationship between prior experience and knowledge and skills on the job. At the same time, however, the models indicate that prior experience does not always signal increased productivity.

A Factor in Reviews: 'Cultural Fit'

Beyond those results, the researchers were able to examine employment reviews to delve into the question of individual employee adaptability and the impact on productivity. Supervisors rated employees on adaptability. The researchers found that people who were more adaptable did not reflect a negative relationship between prior experience and effectiveness on the job.

The authors also looked at "cultural fit" within the organization. For employees who felt they fit into the culture of the firm, the negative effects of prior experience in the occupation are not pronounced. For employees who said they did not fit well into the organization, there was a significant indication of the negative effect of prior "baggage."

Rothbard says the research findings are important not only in light of the increasingly mobile workforce, but also because so many companies are in a constant state of change themselves. "If your business has changed, you need to consider trying to retool people, not just in terms of their skills, but in terms of their values," Rothbard suggests. "Not that people can't shed these things. But it may take more training and socialization than you" first expected.

According to Rothbard, companies may want to use a mentoring program to help employees from similar companies readjust to the culture and mores of their new firm. "I know it seems odd that if you hire someone with experience to then say, 'Here's your mentor,'" Rothbard acknowledges. "But maybe they need a mentor for the values of the company, not so much the skills needed for the job."

Rothbard says that when companies hire employees with experience, they tend to rely on that experience as a substitute for training. "Maybe they pay more for those people and invest less in training, but we suggest that might be a mistake. You really need to think carefully about your training and socialization to mitigate the negative effects of the trouble people have transferring the way they think about how the job is done."

Finally the researchers used the data to gain insights into the role of cross-company transfers of skills, as well as cultural baggage, on long-term careers. The research indicates that the advantage of prior task-relevant knowledge and skills diminishes the longer an employee stays at the new firm.

"Over time as individuals become socialized into the new firm, the amount of prior work experience they brought with them matters less for the skills they demonstrate on the job," says Rothbard. "However, the negative direct relationship between prior work experience and performance does not diminish as much, suggesting that the norms and values people bring with them may persist quite substantially."

The new research findings should help companies develop hiring and training strategies that fit well with their own culture, Rothbard adds.

"If you have a strong culture and a clear strategy in doing things that differ from your competitor, you may want to think carefully about whether you want to hire for experience or whether you want to hire people with less experience and invest more in training them in your model," Rothbard advises. "If your competitive advantage is the culture of your company, you want to be careful about bringing in people with a long tenure in their occupation or industry and think about how that prior experience is going to bring positives as well as negatives to the firm."

What Kind of an HR Manager Are You?

Since there have been numerous articles on retention of employees every HR executive should be asking 2 very important and mission critical questions as a strategic partner with your CEO:

• what kind of manager am I?, and
• what kind of managers do I have in my organization? (this includes your CEO too)

As we all know, the biggest untapped opportunity within your organization is how managers and you as a manager shape the way people work together to deliver results. So, what kind of manager are you?

• a micro-manager (you know what this is)
• an arms length manager (macro-manager)
• a cloistered manager
• a secret manager (never tell the staff anything even the need to know stuff)
• a good people manager
• a task master
• an on and on

Well, I extend the challenge to each of you to look inside yourself and ask those 2 very important questions. Then you should reflect to see if your style is getting the best results from each individual, department, group, and business.

If the answer is yes then you win the lottery and you have tapped the greatest opportunity in business by unleashing the energy, creativity, and knowledge of your workforce.

If the answer is no then you really need to reassess how you manage, as well as your managers so you get the best results, return on your investment, employees that are engaged, and limit your turnover.

Your comments and opinions on this post are welcome to wgstevens2@gmail.com

LINE Report Shows Need for Long-Term Talent Outlook

The soft labor market of August 2008 is expected to continue into September with hiring expectations for manufacturing and service sector jobs predicted at their lowest September levels in four years, according to the latest LINE Report. As a result, HR will have to take a longer-term view of finding top job candidates, the experts say.

The Leading Indicators of National Employment (LINE) Report identifies early trends and changes in the national job market. It is a joint effort by the Society for Human Resource Management and the Rutgers University School of Management and Labor Relations, and is released more than a month ahead of the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) Employment Situation Report for the same period.

The report looks at four areas—employers’ hiring expectations in the manufacturing and service sectors; the degree that compensation levels for new hires fluctuates for that month; the job vacancy index, and difficulty in recruiting A-level talent to fill strategically important vacancies.
Data for the report are collected through a monthly survey of HR executives at more than 500 manufacturing and 500 service sector organizations. LINE has been measuring the manufacturing trends since 2004 and the service sector trends since 2005.

“All of these indicators are really down” in August 2008 “from any other year we’ve been doing it (LINE),” said Steven M. Director, Ph.D, of Rutgers University’s School of Management and Labor Relations. Director is the principal investigator for the SHRM/Rutgers LINE Report.

Overall, the September employment expectations report shows a continuation of the trend toward a generally softer labor market, according to Jennifer Schramm, SHRM manager of workplace trends and forecasting.

“We’ve got lower employment expectations than we saw at this time last year,” she stated.

When it comes to recruiting for A-level talent, “HR has got to look at it a little bit more long-term, and what we’ve seen long-term is that LINE has accurately reflected the weakening economy over the last six months,” Director said.

Both the service and manufacturing sectors need to take a longer view of their staffing needs. “Even though manufacturing in the U.S. has been declining since 1979 … a lot of manufacturers still have difficulty finding the key people for those strategic roles,” he observed.

Despite that, he added, there is an “increasing difficulty in recruiting people for key positions” in the service sector. This means it’s “probably a good time for HR managers to be opportunistic and cream the market for the best talent” to go beyond filling positions in the immediate future.

To do that, manufacturing has to address how it can attract top talent in what is perceived as a declining sector.

“Your industry or firm has to show growth potential. Make an argument that either your segment [of the industry] has long-run potential or your firm has above-average potential for your industry,” Director said.

Show how your organization is different or how the part of the sector your firm is in is different, he advised.

Tailor recruitment to that A talent by telling them that “you can help us be the exception to the rule and take advantage of those opportunities others may be walking away from,” he said.

“What’s going to limit a firm’s competiveness, the economy’s competiveness, is not going to be the number of raw workers out there,” he said, but how successful organizations are in filling those A-level positions.

Employment Expectations

In a repeat of the August LINE Report, the September LINE Report shows substantial drops in employment expectations in the manufacturing and service sectors. In fact, the expectation is that hiring in both sectors will be at the lowest September levels in four years.

New-Hire Compensation

This index measures whether compensation for new hires is going up or down.
For the manufacturing sector, compensation for new hires fell slightly from 9.5 in August 2007 to 8.5 in August 2008, but it rose in the service sector from 10.2 in August 2007 to 14.2 in August 2008.

Job Vacancies

The change in the number of vacancies in exempt and nonexempt employment sectors that employers are actively trying to fill is an early indicator of the supply and demand of labor.
Job vacancies for exempt and nonexempt positions for both sectors are down substantially for August 2008 from a year ago, noted Schramm.

Recruiting

The recruiting difficulty index measures how difficult it is for employers to recruit A-level candidates to fill positions that are of greatest strategic value to the employers.

The difficulty in recruiting A-level candidates fell for both sectors in August 2008 compared to August 2007, with manufacturing experiencing a “substantial” drop in recruiting difficulty.

Director characterized the drop in the recruiting difficulty index for the service sector as a “temporary, cyclical dip.”

Kathy Gurchiek can be reached at kathy.gurchiek@shrm.org.

Recruiters See Pockets of Hiring Growth, Despite Economic Challenges

While the U.S. unemployment rate reached its highest level in four years in July, search firms continue to report strong demand for executive talent in several industries, indicating that job growth at the top of the market is not moving in lock step with Labor Department data.

According to a recent survey of 147 executive recruiters conducted by ExecuNet, the executive business, career and recruiting network, 71 percent expect at least a 10-percent increase in search assignments received from corporate clients during the next six months. The industries expected to generate the greatest growth in six-figure job opportunities during this period of time include:

Top Industries for Executive Level Job Growth:

• Healthcare
• Energy/Utilities
• Life Sciences
• High Tech
• Business Service

"Despite several well-documented economic hurdles, pockets of growth remain in the executive employment market," says Mark Anderson, president of ExecuNet. "The rapid rise of the energy and utilities sector is particularly notable. Having spent much of the past decade below the radar of many recruiters, companies within these industries are increasingly relying on executive search firms to grow their leadership teams."

The survey also reveals that concerns about the economy’s prospects are indeed impacting the executive search industry’s outlook. Approximately half of all executive recruiters (49 percent) are confident or very confident that the executive employment market will improve during the next six months — down from 64 percent in June.

Introduced in May 2003, the Recruiter Confidence Index is based on a monthly survey of executive recruiters conducted by ExecuNet. Independent analysis of the RCI has confirmed it is a leading indicator of projected executive recruitment activity.

Your comments and input is appreciated. Please send your comments to wgstevens2@gmail.com .

Optimizing Internet Job Postings for Maximum Visibility and Conversion

Over the last ten years, the Internet transformed recruiting and recruitment advertising. Besides networking and personal connections, the Internet is now the leading source of job search and employment placement. However, we are currently undergoing a shift no less radical: the democratization of the Internet through ubiquitous search capability. Because of this shift, recruiting and recruitment advertising will undergo a severe upheaval and transformation within the next few years.

We might think of the first major period of the Information Age as being the generation of information: moving personal and business processes onto the web and producing massive amounts of data. We are now in the second period, which can be understood as the transformation of information extraction and production processes. It is commonly called
“Web 2.0” emphasizing user communication and application-like interfaces. It is more simply just the movement toward information accessibility for both input and output of data. The popularity of Google and other search engines is also rapidly transforming the availability of information. In short, we are just now dipping our toes in the great pool of information that we have been filling for so many years.

As long as the methods for accessing and extracting data and information on the Internet is imperfect, data that is related to other data must reside in the same location in order to be found. Because of this trend, data related to job postings (and data in general) quickly became clustered around a few central sites. For example, people go to Monster.com to find jobs, Amazon.com to find books, eHarmony.com to find a life partner, etc… With the very imperfect data accessing processes available in the last decade and even now, these types of sites are an absolute necessity. However, this is about to change.

When content is more universally and quickly accessible, information does not have to be clustered. For instance, jobs will no longer have to reside in the "same place" in order to be found. With the prevalence of search engines, job search will become increasingly decentralized - because it finally can be decentralized. Information (i.e. job descriptions) can be found on an individual company's website just as easily as through a congested pile of job descriptions in a commercial website. Internet users no longer must travel pathways to find information. For instance to find this article, people no longer go to TalentBar - they just type in Internet Job Postings in Google and look for relevant topics. Therefore for the first time, companies have a tremendous opportunity to finally centralize and host their own job descriptions while still obtaining visibility.

Therefore, the time has come for your company to use your website as a recruiting engine. Every company should be asking how they can migrate their job postings to their own site. There are tremendous advantages to hosting your own jobs, including greater prospective candidate knowledge, interest, understanding, and application rate. You may also enjoy greater market awareness, partnership opportunities, etc... as people learn more about your company and understand your employment branding strategy.

Once your organization has decided to take advantage of this new accessibility and transformation of the Internet, there are many considerations to maximum visibility and conversions for your job postings. These include:

Driving traffic to your site: There are many search engines for jobs that can drive prospective candidates directly to your site. You may also consider standard Google, MSN, or Yahoo advertising to drive traffic to your jobs.

Verbiage: Job descriptions should strive for descriptive simplicity - meaning that they should be fleshed out and descriptive, with lots of keyword-rich phrases, but still clear and focused. For instance, if you are writing a description for a Java Developer, your job should contain the word Java many times, all other associated technologies, and associated verbs: program, develop, code, etc... Strive not to get a "job description," but more of a daily action description. It will lead to dynamic, keyword rich text.

Sell your Company: Once you get a candidate to your site, the real work begins. All throughout your site and through your job descriptions, you should develop and propagate your employment branding strategy. Do your strive for excellence, do you want to foster creativity, or perhaps put family first? Drive this message home throughout your website. Offer realistic assessments of your work environment - they will be appreciated, and you will receive more targeted applications.

Keep it simple: You should make it just about as dumb and easy as possible to apply to your organization. How about a big red button in the middle of the page? Companies often offer the candidate a bewildering pathway to application, and then make it difficult to send in their resume. Do not make the mistake of thinking that your most intelligent candidates will "figure it out." The brightest minds in the market are often impetuous multi-taskers who will cruise in and out of your site within one minute.

The Internet has changed dramatically, but Job Posting and online recruitment is still mired in its own initial transformation away from newspapers. The time has come for your company to get ahead of the curve and take advantage of this new accessibility and universality of information on the Internet.

How Does Your Company Become Admired Like Google?

When the big 3 came out this year with the most admired companies in America, guess what, Google was either #1 or in the top 5. So how did it get there and what can you do to get your company in the Fortune, Workforce, Best Places To Work list? Here are some helpful hints and surely you need to read Workforce Management's article on Google and their top HR executive Laszlo Bock. He comments that " if you took out all the dogs and cafes, the culture would remain". That is the most important element.

You as a change agent need to take a good hard look at your culture to determine is it appropriate for your business today rather than some historical remnant from your past successes. Laszlo's main argument for success is that you explain what you are doing or trying to do, employees will be far more engaged and aligned with your business objectives than they would at any company where you simply tell them what to do.

I moved to Atlanta to help change an ailing business at the request of the CEO of the parent. Change the culture and make an impact I was told, I have to put my best employees where they are needed most he said. It was for that challenge and opportunity why I moved here to make change happen. We told employees what to do rather than getting their buy-in and explaining it in detail. So what did they understand about us or the business, virtually nothing. Further, once they understood it put into better prospective how are where their particular job fit in. It took some time and a couple of local presidents but we did change the culture and the business began to thrive as it still is today in a very competitive market.

Don't tell me or your peers that this won't work at your company. You need to provide the following elements for employees to thrive, Google does this and we incorporated these pieces into the business I managed:

• freedom;
• respect;
• connect emotionally to employees;
• leverage assets;
• allow employees to thrive by not over managing them;
• set the stage for powerful communication then communicate, communicate, communicate on levels employees will understand, not HR or corporate speak;
• provide guidance to their core position/job, and tell them if you can do this better, faster, smarter, "just do it" and make sure it is integrated into the way you run your business
• provide a venue for freedom to speak;
• provide a constant flow of information about the business, market, competition so they understand fully the playing field.

If you look back on the posts over the last several months, the consistent theme is leadership, talent, how to sit at the table and be heard, and make an impact. If Google wants to continue to be as successful as it has been, no matter who heads the HR group these elements will stay in place and as keepers of the culture, will continue to nurture this type of environment.

Your comments and suggestions are important to me and readers of this blog, please send me your comments to wgstevens2@gmail.com

Social Networking Woes

With the rise in popularity of social networking websites, such as MySpace (www.myspace.com ), Linkedin (www.linkedin.com ), and Facebook (www.facebook.com ) as well as an increase of personal information being posted on Internet blogs and message boards, employers need to think about the implications to their business. While it’s impossible to ban employees from using social networking websites, you can restrict the type of information employees post.A policy related to online postings should be designed to protect the company’s image, trade secrets, clients, and staff. But, how far can employers go to protect themselves? Where do you draw the line between an employee’s privacy rights and the company’s right to protect its business? A policy on social networking should be written to address legitimate business concerns, such as the dissemination of confidential information or the bullying and harassment of co-workers. It should not attempt to control an employee’s private life and off-duty activities that have no affect on the company.

Below are some important points to address in a social networking policy:

1. Confidentiality. First and foremost, a policy on social networking should prohibit the dissemination of confidential company information, which may include customer information, internal policies and procedures, product information, financial records, and trade secrets. It’s recommended that upon hire you have employees sign a confidentiality agreement so that your staff is aware of what types of information is considered confidential as well as the importance of confidentiality to the company.
2. Company email addresses. Employees should not be permitted to use company email addresses in their personal profiles or when writing and posting blogs and comments. This will serve to distance the company from the individual posting information online.
   Access to employee profiles. Request, but don’t require, that only friends rather than the entire public, view and access employees’ online profiles, blogs, and video uploads. Most social networking websites have privacy protections that can restrict assess to such information. This is another way to protect the company from its affiliation with the information posted by an employee.
3. Co-worker information. The use of a co-worker’s name as well as the company’s name should be banned, unless otherwise authorized. The policy should also indicate that employees are prohibited from revealing personal information about their co-workers, such as their phone number, address, and related personally identifying information.
4. Harassment. There should be a provision that states employees are prohibited from bullying, harassing, and discriminating against co-workers while at work and when posting information on social networking websites, including information provided via pictures, blogs, comments, videos and messaging.
5. Image. Employees indicating the company they work for, whether by posting pictures of themselves wearing a company uniform or by mentioning it in a blog or personal profile, can negatively affect the company’s image should a client or customer disagree with the employee’s postings. Information that has the potential to tarnish the company’s image should be prohibited. This includes information in the form of written comments or pictures that allude to an employee’s illegal activities, sexually explicit information or photos, racist or discriminatory remarks, and defamatory or derogatory comments about co-workers, bosses, or the company.
6. Social networking on work time. Of course the policy should also address the act of social networking while on work time. Blogging, posting comments, and reading others’ profiles should be banned during an employee’s scheduled shift. You may even consider blocking employees’ access to these websites.
7. Disciplinary action. Although your policy most certainly should include disciplinary procedures should an employee post prohibited information, sometimes you will have to take what you find online with a grain of salt. There is a certain level of anonymity on the Internet and you will need to determine if the information you’ve discovered was in fact posted by the employee. Basing an employment decision on doctored photographs or blogs written by the employee’s friend, could present a problem if you first don’t do some investigating. As with any disciplinary situation, provide the employee an opportunity to share their side of the story before rushing to any conclusions.

Although outright banning employees from social networking while off duty is not permitted, employers can enact measures in order to protect themselves from the posting of unscrupulous information about the company. By clearly defining the types of information considered to be confidential, prohibiting employees from indicating their affiliation with the company, and forbidding employees to post information about clients, customers, and co-workers, you are taking the first step toward protecting the company’s reputation and the employees who work for you.

What Does Your CEO Think of You?

I am sure if you read all my postings you get the sense that strategy, talent management/development, and being in the forefront of your business is the most important aspect of human resources. That said, what does your CEO think of you?

I am a big Jack Welch fan, and a student of his management processes. He has said on many occasions that "the head of human resources should be at least as important as the CFO". So do you think your CEO feels this way about you? I have been lucky over my many years in human resources to hear my CEOs (yes, that's plural) say that about me. I was very lucky in my early years to have a CEO mentor and boss, Willard Sweetser, who was a true believer in HR and utilized me to the max as well as be open to my innovation on talent management, hiring, and cross functional teams in the late 70's. The list goes on in Oak Ridge with Henry A. Morgan, a ex US Navy Trident submarine commander to Mike Wisner, the wiz bang innovator from Chicago who never let me out of his sight to my latest CEO Ian Melville. All were instrumental in growing the business with HR at their side to manage the talent, succession planning, and help to run the business.
So again, what does your CEO think of you?

Corporate and Individual Social Responsibility

In today's world we have seen fundamental and multifaceted disruption to our planet's environment. More since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. This disruption presents profound social and environmental opportunities for change and great challenges to every individual, business, community, and country as we see this global economy continue to be transparent.

You continually hear conversations with CEOs, heads of state and, communities from every part of the world what can we do or this is what we are doing socially as a corporation, individual, etc. Globalization is creating multiple levels of competition (some new, some old) creating new forms of innovation and seamless integration of technology, business and society than the world has ever seen. Aggressive innovation will prevail, innovation that changes an organization from top to bottom and that engages each employee at all levels intimately with a broad societal ecosystem of businesses, communities and countries.

The most visible impact as we note above is a change in the corporation itself. So how do you operate your business, community or country? Today's focus on the environment offers new hope for progressive globalization. We cannot be oblivious to all this, if we are we will not achieve the benefits or navigate through this disruptive change by operating status quo. Here are some tip on social and corporate responsibility from an environmental prospective:

• integrate the environment with your business or community
• form a social or responsibility committee focusing on giving back
• pick a key cause and get employees to buy into it
• save water campaigns through automatic shut offs faucets and insta-flushes
• get your employees involved in the community and provide them the time off for this volunteerism
• paperless campaigns both home and in the workplace
• build a bridge between the business and community that benefits both entities, that is is there sustainable development
• contribute to the arts and be a corporate patron
• lend your employees expertise, skills, and knowledge to schools and universities as well as non-profit groups.

The nature of competition and the forces of innovation are shifting the frontiers of science, business and technology continuously. Expertise today is not static. To be competitive, any individual—like any company, community or country—has to adapt continuously, learning new fields and new skills. This is true within any given job, and it’s true across the span of an entire career. This should be shared with the local community and helps the environment

All this requires a new relationship among the company, employees and society. Empower your employees to make decisions and to act. A company, family or individual to make this a great planet for our children should be measured by three key things:

• contributed hours of volunteerism
• how much has the company or individual contributed year over year
• has this effort made an impact and can it be measured - sustainability

So, I ask you as an individual, corporation, community, and global inhabitants of this planet are you doing your social responsibility or CSR(for corporations).

Your opinion counts so please email me with your ocmments at wgstevens2@gmail.com

Giants of Enterprise

I just finished a book entitled " Giants of Enterprise" by Richard S. Tedlow. It summarizes the rise of 7 great business innovators and the enterprises they built in the last century. It included Andrew Carnegie (USS), George Eastman(Kodak), Henry Ford(Ford), Thomas Watson, Sr.(IBM), Charles Revson(Revlon), Sam Walton(Wal-Mart), and Robert Noyce(Intel). What I took away from this great read was that each of these giants had one key thing in common. They did not take their markets for granted and in some cases created a market that did not exist before, or at least not on a mass scale. That key take-a-way is - THEY DID NOT TAKE ANYTHING FOR GRANTED AND THEY LOOKED BEYOND THEIR IMMEDIATE MARKET AND COMPETITION. What I mean is they went farther that just differentiating from their competition, their mantra was to bury it.

If you look at the posting I published earlier in July called Adapt of Die on July 8th, it accentuates what this book was all about. If you do not change you will be left in the dust. All business leaders need to think broadly about where their business is going, have a solid strategic plan, be able to adjust along the way, and most of all have the right people in place to execute against the strategy.

I highly recommend this book to all product business leaders, marketing managers, and of course CEOs.

Matching the Right People to the Right Jobs

Your workforce's skills change over time, and so does your business. Getting the right people into the right jobs is key to your company's growth Who's on the bus? To management guru and best-selling author Jim Collins, this is the most important question business owners need to ask themselves. The bus is your company, and getting the right people is crucial to success—more important, even, than your strategy.

So how would you answer? And what do you do if you've got the wrong people on the bus? Or the right people doing the wrong things? Kevin Rees, president of New York-based translation company LanguageWorks, had a great team on his bus—until he didn't. Rees started LanguageWorks in 1993 by hiring friends and acquaintances. "I was looking for anyone I could entice to stick with me," he says. "I was a first-time entrepreneur, had little in the way of credentials, and I was undercapitalized." But as LanguageWorks was growing into a $10 million, 45-person company, Rees worried his staff didn't have the management abilities he was looking for. Between 2001 and 2006, six people from the company's early days were let go or left. Those departures ended a few friendships. Says Rees: "It was incredibly traumatic."

There are a host of reasons a once-solid—or even star—employee may no longer be right for your company. A topflight salesperson who gets promoted to be head of sales might be a lousy manager. A jack-of-all-trades could get restless if asked to focus on one area. And employees who thrive in a startup environment may chafe when asked to follow the rules and procedures of a larger company.

However much you may dread doing so, these issues need to be tackled head on. Cornell University associate professor Christopher Collins, in a study with Bradenton (Fla.)-based human resources firm Gevity, found that managing employees is one of the top three things that keep business owners awake at night. And he says that while many entrepreneurs are visionaries or innovators, they can feel challenged managing talent.

Where Rees ended up—without a big chunk of his startup team—isn't always the best answer. You owe it to your company and your staff to try to find out exactly why a certain employee may not be up to par. Then you've got to decide how much you really want to keep the person and see if his performance problems can be fixed. You may be surprised by how willing employees are to work with you, and how open they'll be about which tasks suit them and which do not. Here are five strategies to get the right people into the right jobs.

TALK IT OUT

When Vickie Pullins and Jackie Frazier founded their Hurricane (W. Va.)-based speech pathology company, LinguaCare Associates, in 1990, they were confident they could work well together. They'd been friends since meeting in college almost 20 years earlier. But as the company grew, they started to feel overwhelmed. It wasn't until 2006 that they brought in S.K. Miller, a coach with Margate (N.J.)-based Collaborative Strategies, for some outside perspective.
Miller asked the partners four questions: What are you good at? What are you not good at? What do you love about your job? What do you really dislike about it? Soon Pullins and Frazier had hired an administrative assistant to pick up the paperwork that was weighing them down. Pullins now focuses on long-term strategy, while Frazier handles the bulk of the personnel and management issues. The two became so much more productive that they decided to extend the analysis to all the employees at their $1.3 million company. With a shortage of speech pathologists nationwide, particularly in West Virginia, Pullins says LinguaCare can ill afford to let a qualified person leave or to allow anyone in the company to be underemployed.

The results of those four simple questions were just as eye-opening the second time around. Kristy Stowers, who was working for LinguaCare in a rehabilitation center, had been consistently unable to hit her target of five hours of patient work a day. After the evaluation, Pullins and Frazier discovered that Stowers was up against some internal problems at that particular rehab center, including too few patients. Yet Stowers thought she had strong organizational skills and an ability to manage big projects.

So when Stowers moved on to the next contract, with a large medical center, Pullins and Frazier had her manage two other workers. Stowers has thrived, even initiating some new screening protocols. "She has become somewhat of a visionary leader," Pullins says. "We are so surprised." Stowers is pleased, too. "This facility is more fast-paced," she says. "I'm always busy and I feel more productive." Pullins says the company now plans to reevaluate the 18-person staff on a regular basis: "We need to ask every couple of years whether we are tapping into our people's gifts and interests."

BRING IN A PRO

Pullins and Frazier did fine by chatting with their employees themselves. But sometimes it takes a third party to lead these conversations, especially if you suspect workers will be reluctant to discuss their own or others' shortcomings with the boss.

Dan Kopman knew he needed help. Kopman is the co-founder and chief executive officer of Saint Louis Brewery in Missouri, which runs two breweries and two restaurants with 90 full-time and 60 part-time workers. Saint Louis' revenues have more than doubled since 2003, to about $8.5 million. But it has also had some growing pains. For about a year, the six workers at the main brewing operation had been complaining about frequent last-minute schedule changes, and some clients were confused about how much lead time was needed for orders. Things were running "fine when we were producing 10,000 barrels a year," says Kopman. But as the company hit the 20,000-barrel mark, "we needed to be more organized."

Part of the problem was that the head of brewery operations, Jim "Otto" Ottolini, had too much to do. "Otto has a degree in French literature, so he's the natural person to be head of engineering," jokes Kopman. But after joining the company in 1992, Ottolini learned quickly, overseeing the construction of the new brewing facility from 2001 to 2003, managing it once it came online and taking a course at the University of Wisconsin at Madison to improve his technical knowledge of beermaking. Kopman had been trying to get Ottolini to delegate more effectively for two years, but it hadn't happened. And Kopman didn't want to install another layer of management.

Last fall, Kopman asked Marvis Meyers, vice-president of training at the nonprofit AAIM Management Assn., of which Kopman is a member, for help. Meyers spent a few days interviewing the brewery employees, including Ottolini. "She allowed people to speak their minds and they felt comfortable talking to her in part because she was from the outside," says Kopman. During those conversations, everyone agreed that Ottolini needed to delegate more, and, unlike Kopman, none of the brewery staff had a problem with establishing another layer of management. They said they wouldn't mind if some from their ranks were promoted to assist Ottolini. Says Ottolini: "Dan involved me in this process. I was a partner in figuring out [what had to change]. I didn't feel like I was being scrutinized, but that our process was being scrutinized."

So Kopman created two new positions, both reporting to Ottolini. One person oversees production planning; the other manages packaging. The brewery team was unanimous in choosing who should be promoted to those jobs. "We didn't want to break up the cohesiveness of the group by creating some rigid structure," Kopman says. "But we found the change didn't bother the group the way we thought it would." And while there are still issues that need to be worked out, Kopman says, "We are producing and shipping more beer with fewer mistakes. I see light at the end of the tunnel."

TAKE A TEST

When an employee issue stems from a clash in work styles, personality tests can help bridge the gap. Rees of LanguageWorks realized early in 2007 that while his right-hand manager, vice-president Christine Muller, was extremely talented, her work performance wasn't all that he wanted. Rees arranged for the two to take an assessment called the Predictive Index. He and Muller spent about 15 minutes taking the test online. They each went through a long list of adjectives—descriptors such as "dynamic," "demanding," and "persevering"—and checked off those that applied to them. A consultant then helped interpret the results. The test showed that Rees often makes decisions even with incomplete information, and that he's perfectly comfortable doing so. Muller, on the other hand, wants clear and concrete directions before acting. That knowledge makes Rees a better manager and Muller a better co-worker. Rees says he gives Muller clearer direction, and that her work is much better and her morale higher as a result. For her part, Muller says, "The way we work together is much more natural. I can read him much better now."

BE A MENTOR

Sometimes it's not the company that changes—it's the industry. Such was the case when Leon "Chip" Marrano III took over the $50 million, 27-person Marson Contracting in Bronx, N.Y., from his father.

Marrano says general contractors such as his used to control all aspects of a job, including the hiring of subcontractors. Now many developers prefer to pay construction firms a straight management fee, then collaborate on everything from design to subcontractor selection. Financial information, once closely guarded by the construction company, is now shared openly with developers. But Marson's chief estimator, Anthony Bochichio, had been with the company since 1960 and was well-schooled in the old ways of doing things, including keeping financial information confidential.

Marrano took advantage of the good relationship he'd built with Bochichio. He let him know that everyone had to change how they operated, and he made it clear he valued Bochichio's experience and wanted him to stay with the company. Then Marrano began bringing Bochichio to preconstruction meetings with architects and developers to familiarize him with the new rules of the game. Together, Marrano and Bochichio would contribute their suggestions for bringing costs down without sacrificing quality. It's worked: Marrano says Bochichio has been "great at adapting." Bochichio says he always had a good relationship with Marrano, but that "things are even better now and more open between us." And Marson found that clients really appreciated Bochichio's expertise, so Bochichio is now a regular participant in preconstruction planning.

MAKE A TOUGH CALL

Coaching isn't always as successful as it was for Marson. In such cases, business owners face some tough decisions.

Kenny Sayes, owner of Sayes Office Supplies, based in Alexandria, La., didn't realize he had issues with any of his employees until clients started to complain. Some of his customers were putting in requests for photocopier repairs but were not getting responses. When Sayes looked more closely at his copier operation, he saw weak cash flow. He soon found that some bills weren't being put through, which was Daniel Littleton's responsibility.

In 2007, after sales at Sayes' 34-person, $7 million company jumped 25%, Sayes had promoted Littleton. Littleton had been hired to link customers' copiers to their computer equipment; now he would also be dispatching other technicians and handling invoicing. When clients began to complain, Sayes asked Littleton to keep a notebook recording exactly what he had to do each day, what he got done, and what was still outstanding.

Sayes checked the notebook every few days and sat down with Littleton and other employees when there were problems. Within a month it became clear Littleton was not following through on some required tasks. "It was like baby-sitting," Sayes recalls of the fact-finding. "But I had to do it."

Sayes says he worked closely with Littleton to improve his performance and made it clear the bills needed to be up to date in two weeks. Littleton says he told Sayes repeatedly that he was overworked. And he says some of his time was still taken up going out on service calls. Littleton says: "There were not enough hours in the day for a single person to do what he wanted." Sayes says Littleton was going out on just a few calls and that the workload was not excessive.

A month went by, and the backlog remained. Eventually Sayes demoted Littleton back to his original position. Littleton quit shortly thereafter and says his replacement doesn't have as many job responsibilities as he did, a claim Sayes disputes. But things are now running smoothly. "She knows the job better than I do," Littleton says of the new hire. A sure sign that he matched the right person to the right job.

Adapt or Die

On Wednesday April 2 of this year an article ran in the Atlanta Business Chronicle with the headline “CEO, CFO turnover jumps in first quarter.” This article made the comparison 1st Q to Q, ‘07 to ’08 and was derived from a report by Liberum, a management change research firm. The data showed a 19 percent jump in CEO turnover and a 21 percent jump in CFO turnover. Overall, the article said other “C-level” jobs turned over at only 5 percent. Moreover, the report said in March ’08 alone, CFO’s turned over at an alarming rate of 41 percent as compared to March ‘07.

This may not come as a great surprise to many considering that there were several factors present in the business environment that made 1Q 2008 challenging. Consider these:

• A downturn in corporate performance overall
• Increased business complexity due to a difficult economy and the intricacies of Globalization
• Intensifying competition both domestically and probably more importantly, internationally
• Shareholder dissatisfaction with diminishing returns
• General market instability
• The sub-prime credit crises
  

OK, I agree. This is very logical and makes sense due to the fact that in most companies the CEO and/or CFO are accountable for broad company shortfalls, especially associated with things more strategic in nature.

Subsequently, on May 22, I read an article in the Atlanta Journal Constitution about a speech ex-Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina gave to a group of executives where she said “adapt or die”! Then I really got it!

Turnover of a CEO and/or a CFO is clearly an indication of a company that did not achieve what it was expected to achieve. Whether it be financial results, share price, market share or other measurements of progress, growth, and success, the bottom line is that when the leader leaves or is removed, the entire company is almost certainly off course. Sure, people retire - but when turnover rises so dramatically, negative factors are likely in play. While the six items listed above were obviously large contributors, they were just factors that contributed to a bigger problem. I suspect the main reason for the sudden and precipitous increase in turnover relates more to a failure of leadership and the failure of that leadership to adapt, to change and to plan ahead and was simply amplified by the six items listed above.

It is human nature that when things are going well to stay the course and to bask in the glory of your current success. When business is going smoothly it’s a great time to hit the golf course or take your family on an extended vacation. I remember when I was a CEO I actually began to feel a little nervous when things seemed to go “on cruise control” and all was running smoothly. I never could understand the uneasy feeling I was having. Results were good, I was paying my shareholders dividends that exceeded expectations, the plan was being met and life was rosy. Ms. Fiorina addresses what I was feeling when she said “To make good decisions, business leaders must look beyond quarterly reports and trailing indicators and focus on customer service, the pace of innovation in their industry, the diversity of their work force and client bases, and ethics.” In other words, don’t sit back basking in your success, rather look forward and use your success as a platform to move to the next level and clearly determine what that next level needs to be. The best time to plan for the worst time is when it seems as if things are well under control. That is when a leader can show real leadership - by looking forward and anticipating the next step before it is even necessary.

There is no doubt that much of the increase in turnover for CEO’s and CFO’s referenced in the report resulted from the six factors listed. However, the deeper cause is the failure of business leaders, over the last several years when the overall business environment was relatively stable, to look forward and anticipate the changing global market place. They failed to anticipate where the company needed to be at a future point in time within that changing marketplace and to develop the plan it needed to navigate the company through the change. Is it a failure of planning? Partly yes, and I am still surprised at how many companies do not have business plans that relate to reality and use changeable, living documents that are designed to provide some quantifiable answers to hard questions asked by managers that should always be asking “what if” and “if I did this, what would happen.” Planning is a key component of leadership, one that allows questions to be asked whose answers can lead the company to adopt the strategies and tactics needed to meet new and different challenges.

“Adapt or die” - where looking forward rather than backward, planning rather than sitting still and providing real leadership rather than passive acceptance of the status quo differentiates the successful from the unsuccessful. A failure of many to look forward and anticipate the magnitude of change and the potential of a worse case scenario would help explain the sudden rise in turnover at the most senior levels. That failure of vision is a failure to lead.

Finding the right talent and the right leaders to lead during the toughest of times in a difficult marketplace remains the most important ingredient of a successful company, even when things are running smoothly. Leadership ability is probably the single most difficult skill to “ferret out” during the interviewing and screening process. Business skills can be evidenced by actual results and quantifiable data but that doesn’t always translate to leadership. Leadership reveals itself when things are tough. Unfortunately many companies realize their lack of leadership only after the company is in trouble. When circumstances turn difficult you can only hope that it is not too late to find a new and better leader to change the direction, vision and plan of the company in order to turn it around. Or, you can make sure you have the right leadership in place before trouble strikes, leaders that will “adapt and thrive”!