6 Simple Secrets to Employee Recognition

I find as HR Professionals, we tend to overthink the whole concept of employee recognition. We tend to create complicated programs, rewards systems, qualifying criteria/methods and ceremonies in order to recognize employees. This further bogs managers down as they try to make sense of the programs that have been created and they get frustrated with any administration required around the execution of these recognition programs. Ultimately, they throw their hands up in the air and want nothing to do these programs. It becomes easier for them to simply NOT recognize their employees and just focus on the work at hand. Of course, we know that this isn’t a desired outcome either. So what should we do?

Let me be clear about one thing first, I am not adverse to formal recognition programs per se. I have worked in organizations that had some great formal programs and for the most part, they achieved the desired effect of recognizing good performance, discretionary effort, support of company values, etc. However, I am more of an advocate of having managers “own” the recognition of their staff while also allowing peers to have a vehicle for recognizing each other.

Whether, as an organization, you go the route of developing a formal recognition program or have managers manage this within the context of their own department, there are 6 simple secrets to ensure that it takes hold within your organizational DNA. This then will allow your organization to achieve some key outcomes like improving employee engagement, reducing turnover and reinforcing your organizational values. I also believe that recognition should also have a reward element outcome. That is, when an employee is “recognized” it positively reinforces the behaviour, effort, etc. that led to the recognition. Therefore, the employee will want to repeat said behaviour. The recognition instills a sense of pride, self-worth and achievement within the employee and it adds an element of mutual respect in the employer/employee relationship.

With any type of recognition, here are 6 simple secrets to making it work:

1. Clarity – as an organization, and as leaders, you need to make it clear to your managers and staff what is important to you as an organization (values, client service, performance, etc.) and what you will be recognizing your employees for.
2. Ease of use – for managers to recognize staff. They should have their own budget that can be used for recognition. Managers, at their discretion, can use these funds to recognize individuals and/or groups. This could be done in the form of a thank you card, a gift certificate to a restaurant, a project team lunch, etc. Either way, the manager does not need to seek “approval” to do this because they have their own budget and it is clear (see point #1) on what the organization wants recognized. The element here is the timeliness of the recognition – if it occurs months after the behaviour/outcome, than forget it…..it is too late. (bureaucratic approval processes will instantly stifle any type of recognition effort).
3. Allow peer recognition – employees should be encouraged and enabled to recognize their peers. There is nothing quite as powerful as sincere peer recognition. You need to establish an environment where staff feel comfortable going to their manager (or their peer’s manager) and identifying what their peer did and why they should be recognized. Again, this can be as simple as the peer and/or manager thanking the employee for what they did or presenting some token gift as a thank you. Either way, peers are enabled to recognize each other and that makes the recognition very powerful.
4. Coach – managers on how to identify behaviours that should be recognized, how to individualize recognition efforts and coach on why recognition results in important business outcomes. Managers need to understand the importance and power of employee recognition and why they have a critical role to play, via proper recognition, in reducing turnover, increasing engagement, etc.
5. Individualize and make it specific – when a(n) employee(s) is (are) being recognized, they need to know what they did and why they are being recognized. Whatever you do, do not dilute your recognition efforts. In other words, if 5 staff members were directly responsible for a critical client deliverable, than you recognize those 5 for their efforts and only those 5. You don’t provide general recognition to the entire department because you “don’t want to single someone out” or because at some point in time everyone in the department played a bit role in the deliverable (i.e. answered a phone call). It is ok to single out the key players that made it happen and recognize them (and be specific about what they did and why they are being recognized).
6. Accountability – make managers accountable, in terms of the job competencies and performance outcomes, for delivering on their recognition efforts. As an organization, you need to make the link between managerial outcomes and desired recognition efforts. Recognition efforts need to be a managerial competency and/or a performance objective that is captured formally somewhere (annual goals, performance review, etc.). What gets measured gets done, and if recognition is being measured and managers are accountable, than you will have a greater deal of success with your organizational recognition efforts. The reason this one is last, is because the previous 5 all need to be in place first, especially the coaching support that is required to make this happen.

Next time you are trying to kick off recognition efforts in your company and/or are trying to change your organizational DNA, try following these 6 simple tricks. Best of luck in your efforts!

Image courtesy of Kittikun Atsawintarangkul/ FreeDigitalPhotos.net

How to strike the right employee engagement balance (Guest Post)

Employee engagement is certainly a buzzword that gets thrown around a lot in the HR industry – but can anyone really pin down what it is?

Many definitions of an engaged employee have done the rounds over the years, such as “an employee having clarity in their role in achieving the company’s goals” or “an employee who is prepared to go the extra mile”.

However, while these phrases could certainly be considered useful in the wider context of a company, they don’t really hammer down what employee engagement actually is. Instead, they are just promoting ideas about employee engagement from the perspective of a company boss. Mix the two definitions together, however, and you have something along the lines of “someone knowing what they have to do and doing what is needed of them to help the organization”.

While this is closer to a measure of internal engagement, if it is considered to be the accurate measure, companies could simply look at their most productive employees and assume they are naturally the most engaged. Indeed, many companies do have processes in place for measuring productivity. However, companies which rely on productivity levels to learn about employee engagement should consider that the issue goes deeper than this and look outside these ‘internal’ measures of engagement.

With this in mind, it is key to consider how you can get your employees to do more for the company by ensuring they are truly engaged. The first thing to rule out is pay incentives, because paying more for productivity does not add any real value to employee engagement. What’s more, while it has often been argued that using pay creates short-term motivation to perform, once your employees have spent the money, they are likely to be left deflated and in need of another fix.

Fostering a great office culture, good communication, strong management, clear roles and career progression are all often touted as the best ways to promote employee engagement. But let’s get a little bit more specific.

It’s all about the relationship between the employee and the brand

Rather than thinking about employee engagement in terms of productivity, consider that it is about the relationship between the individual and the brand.

So how can you gauge this? Well, think about what the response would be should an impartial individual ask one of your employees what your company is like to work for? Would they rank you as great, good, or less than satisfactory?

How can you reward your employees in a way that improves engagement?

This is a vital question for bosses looking to drive employee engagement, so they can use this (rewards) to create a happier, more productive workforce. It is important to leave behind the ‘internal’ aspect of engagement and look to the ‘external’ aspect, which is about the emotional connection an employee has to the company.

While a cash reward is something of a taboo subject – and therefore is not particularly emotive – employee benefits surrounding financial security, individual and family health, and how workers like to spend their free time, are all issues close to the heart.

This means that employers can shout from the rooftops about their benefits, with the aim of driving up employee engagement. By sending messages to employees about these benefits, you can promote the values of your organization while also treating employees as individuals. Consider your employees as consumers – thereby tapping into their desires.

Today’s guest post is from Thomsons Online Benefits

About the Author
Thomsons Online Benefits are experienced in flexible benefits scheme design, pensions and employee communication, our team of highly experienced consultants develop innovative programmes with clients that maximise the value of their reward spend.

Image courtesy of David Castillo Dominici/ FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Tell me why I Matter – Making the Connection

In our roles as HR Pros, we deal with a myriad of issues on a day in day out basis. For those in a primarily “employee relations” facing role, the gamut runs from anything pertaining to compensation issues, performance feedback, workplace conflict, etc. During my years in HR, I think I have been there done that enough that I don’t have any more room for the T-shirts! That is why I feel confident in stating that there is a common theme/thread that I have noticed during my years in HR as to what a major dis-satisfier is for many employees. Either their organizational leaders or their manager(s) fail to connect with the employee and show/tell them why they matter.

At the end of the day, for most of us in our roles, all we really want is to feel loved. We want to know that what we are doing each day matters, that it is all contributing towards some greater organizational good. Assuming (BIG assumption here) we are all reasonably compensated in our roles and are not being subjected to unsafe work conditions or harassing behaviour at work, then feeling loved and knowing we matter are the keys to happiness……do I dare say, “engagement?” (please, no stone throwing!) Seriously though, sure developmental opportunities are important, recognition and rewards programs are great (although very few are designed and supported properly), but for most of us, we just want to feel the love at work. We want to know that our manager understands us and “gets” us as an individual. We want to feel like we have a stake in the game and we are important to what is going on with our company. Just as important, we want/need to hear that from our managers and leaders.

It truly amazes me how many managers struggle with this basic concept. When managing and coaching your people and addressing their employee relations concerns, they might be telling you that the issue is pay, or vacation, or workload, etc. but for most of them, what they are really saying is “Does what I do make a difference?” “Is this really contributing towards something and If so, what?” Managers and leaders have a responsibility to help identify and communicate this with their staff. They need to tell them, “Hey Joe, I wanted to tell you, great work on the xyz project. Without your knowledge and input, we never could have delivered that Wobbedysplat to ACME industries. Thanks for your help, now we can go after even bigger contracts with ACME because we proved ourselves so well on this project.” Joe walks away from that conversation feeling empowered, recognized and that his contributions make a difference. He knows that he is adding value to his company and isn’t just a cog in the wheel, or some replaceable drone. Joe knows that HE MATTERS!

Next time you are having conversations with your employees, really listen to what they are “saying.” I bet they are just looking for some love and some line of sight into the work they are doing and where the organization is going. As a manager and more importantly as a leader, it is your job to coach and communicate that with your employee(s). Tell them why they matter……..you will be surprised at the (positive) impact and results you get from it.

Image courtesy of cooldesign/FreeDigitalPhotos.net

The Leadership and Employee Engagement Connection – Is it really that hard?

I recently got my hands on a Conference Board report from a few years ago. The report was focused on insights on Leadership Development, Organizational Learning, HR & Talent Management and Diversity and Inclusion. The theme of the report was “Go Where There Be Dragons – Leadership Essentials for 2020 and Beyond.” The section of the report that grabbed my attention the most was when it started delving into Leadership Development and the link to employee engagement. I realize that the entire concept of employee engagement has received much ink and discussion over the years and in some circles is even considered overplayed; however, I thought the results of this report were worth sharing and commenting on a bit further.
The Conference Board defined employee engagement as, “a heightened emotional and intellectual connection that an employee has for his/her job, organization, manager, or co-workers that, in turn, influences him/her to apply additional discretionary effort to his/her work.” A bit of a mouthful but you get the point. The report goes on to cite the cost of disengaged employees and then identifies enablers linked to engagement. The identified the follow as key enablers within organizations that either increase engagement levels, or when not present, decrease engagement:

1) Leadership needs to focuses on creating a transparent culture; one in which its leadership team provides line of sight between the employee’s job and the organizational goals.

Translation = share the vision with your employees, treat them like adults and help connect what they do to the big picture of where the company is going. Show how they are making a difference.

2) Managers, who appreciate their employee’s efforts, treat them like individuals and that focus on ensuring that their employees’ work is organized efficiently and effectively will drive higher levels of engagement.

Translation = provide recognition for what your staff does. Make sure to individualize your recognition efforts and help remove obstacles to their success.

3) Employees need to be able to voice their ideas and be listened to with regards to how they do their job and how decisions are made at a departmental level.

Translation = Managers who are good at communicating with their team, along with employing a participative style will foster employee engagement at a departmental level. Further, employees want a say in what they do and don’t want to be treated like cogs in a machine!

4) Organizations need to live their values. This results in trust from its employees and sense that the organization is operating with integrity its business dealing.

Translation = Make sure that values are not just posters on the wall. Leaders need to lead by example and openly live the values. Make sure actions speak louder than words; this way your employees will trust you and where you want to lead them. Oh yeah, they also don’t want to work for crooks.

When you look back at the four enablers, they don’t really seem all that complex do they? What the report is telling us is that employees want to know that what they do matters, they want to be recognized (personalized) for what they contribute, they want to have a say in how their work is done and they want to work for companies that demonstrate ethical behaviour and integrity in how they do business. So why is this “magic” formula so hard to get right for so many companies? Is it the communicating part? Is it the integrity part? Is it the difficulty in recognizing employees for the work they do? I dare say it is the mix of all those factors.

Too many organizations simply thrust people into management roles and expect them to “lead.” They are provided little to no training or preparation to take on these roles. Furthermore, many organizations do not, as part of their performance system, have any goals, objectives, KPI’s or rewards/recognition focused on leadership capability – i.e. retention metrics of key staff, departmental engagement levels, etc. I think ultimately the breakdown is in the fact that you manage processes, systems, technology etc. but you need to lead people.

While many elements of the leadership/engagement enablers identified may be a matter of skill, the report also identifies several “derailers” in the form of personality characteristics that surface in current “leaders” during times of stress. The report identifies the following derailers that “waylay even the best and brightest:”

• Controlling leadership style; unwilling or unable to delegate
• Arrogance and insensitivity; unwillingness to ask questions or accept failure
• Poor communication/listening skills
• Lack of global mindset; failure to grasp complexity
• Risk aversion
• Ambivalence toward ambiguity
• Discomfort with diversity

So I would ask you ask HR professionals reading this list, the next time your leadership team talks about improving “engagement scores/levels”, you need to figure out first and foremost, are your “leaders” displaying these derailers? If they are, you must be prepared to address these first before the enablers can be acted upon and improved.

Image courtesy of cooldesign/FreeDigitalPhotos.net

What I learned about leadership from watching The Voice

Ok, I have to admit it, not only do I watch the reality t.v. show The Voice, I really, really enjoy it! I used to be embarrassed to admit that but after my counseling sessions, I no longer have that embarrassment factor. For those of you not familiar, (which I bet is no one!) The Voice is a show on NBC that has a cast of want to be singers vying for a recording deal. Along the way, there are 4 teams formed that are led by (mostly) famous folks in the music industry. They lead their teams each week through various vocal performances that a U.S. audience votes for. The contestants with the lowest vote(s) each week are systematically eliminated until there is only one left – kind of like Survivor for singers, or American Idol – except it has people with talent on it.

What I am fascinated about though is the dynamic of the celebrity music coaches and their various leadership/coaching styles they use to try and be the one that has the winning contestant on their team. Here is what I have observed about the coaches (leaders) and the impact of their style(s):

Christina Aguilera – tends to focus too much on herself and not on her team. When coaching her team through their vocal preparation she focus a lot on what she would do and why that is the only way to sing/deliver a particular song. During the actual singing competition, she tends to focus on herself and steal the moment away from her team member(s). She also tends to pick team members based on their “looks” and potential visual appeal to the audience/viewers vs. picking those that can actually sing the best. Not surprising, this spotlight stealing, self-centered leadership approach has been unsuccessful. By selecting team members for reasons unrelated to their singing ability, she typically has had the weaker teams with members eliminated early on in the competition. Aguilera has yet to have one of her team members win The Voice and last season didn’t even have anyone in the finals.

Shakira – is new this year – replacing Aguilera. As a new coach (leader) she tended to get overwhelmed by the more experienced coaches earlier in the show and lost out on getting team members she wanted because of this. She is starting to establish her niche and like Levine (see below), cares about her team as people as well as performers. She is very strong technically in her understanding of music and how to portray it, but I find she struggles to transfer that knowledge to her team members in the form of useful information. I compare Shakira to a new manager that has the passion and motivation to succeed, but ultimately requires more experience and polish before they will truly be successful. I don’t suspect she will have a team member win The Voice this year, but I could see it happening next season based on her style and ability to focus on talent and skills.

Cee Lo Green – CeeLo’s style reminds me of that boss you had that was a pretty cool guy to hang out with. He didn’t hassle you too much, or ask too much of you. He was great to shoot the crap with and have a beverage with, but he wasn’t the type of leader who was going to challenge you, or provide you with any type of constructive career advice or help propel you to the next level in your career. CeeLo tends to employ a whimsical approach to selecting his team members – i.e. no obvious reason other than personality. His teams tends to get along well and CeeLo always has fun working with them, but, like Aguilera, one of his team members has never won The Voice. His most successful team members (that have lasted the longest on the show) seem to be self-motivated individuals that already possess a high degree of skill and ability and are self-starters – so they don’t really require all that much from him as a coach anyway.

Usher – is a new coach this season (replacing Green). I would classify his style as “Aguilera light.” Usher is very over the top in his coaching style and tends to “put on a performance” vs. actually “coaching” his team members. He too has tended to pick some team members based on visual appearance vs. actual singing ability and his coaching comments and feedback tend to focus on things not related to their singing ability. He too, like Aguilera, tends to draw a lot of attention to himself after his team members perform and tends to make it more about him. While the competition is still underway, my early impressions are that out of the four teams, his group is the weakest and he will not have the winning singer come from his team.

Adam Levine – is fairly outspoken and very passionate about the music that is sung and how it is interpreted by the various artists. He focuses a lot of his coaching on making sure his team members understand the music and its history – he is quite adept at helping them make that connection to make them better singers (just like a good leader helps his/her employees make a connection to their work and how it fits into the overall organization.) Levine genuinely cares about his team as performers and people. He tends to lose focus a bit and often his coaching/feedback becomes rambling and irrelevant as he tries to say too much – this communication breakdown causes confusion for some of his team members and his message is sometimes lost. Levine has won The Voice once and I believe the winner of this season may come from his team too. He tends to focus on skills, ability and passion for what they do as his team selection criteria.

Blake Shelton – utilizes a (strategically) laid back approach with his team. He tends to use a lot of self-deprecating humour to bring the focus back to his singers and away from himself. He is very adept at selecting the right songs for his team to sing – he has shown great skill and ability in picking songs that play to their strengths, but also make them stretch and gives them an opportunity to shine. Shelton tends to spend more time understanding his team members personally than the other coaches and he utilizes that knowledge to enhance their performances and make connections to the music. Shelton is also very adept at providing candid feedback to his team but also balances this with timely praise. When there is time for public recognition on the stage, he always makes sure the spotlight is on his team not himself. Shelton (who is a huge figure in the country music industry) really does his best to downplay his celebrity status and makes the moment about his team – not him. Not surprisingly, Shelton has won The Voice twice and if I were making a prediction, he has a strong chance to win it this year too.

Based on these observations and musings, The Voice draws many parallels to the work environment – who would have thought that! The best leaders:

1. Are strong coaches; and
2. Adjust their style to the individual
3. Make it about their team, not themselves
4. Encourage two-way dialogue
5. Downplay their “status” as a leader/coach
6. Are good at identifying talent and recognizing them for the skills and abilities for the job at hand

Not exactly rocket science stuff, but a fun comparison for a Friday blog post!

Image courtesy of Wikipedia.org

Recruiting and the Art of Push vs. Pull

Followers of The Armchair HR Manager will recall that back in early January, I blogged about the “5 Attributes of Exceptional Recruiters.” Since then, I have received numerous inquiries and questions asking me to further expand on this topic. I figured since so many people were asking, it was worth another blog post on the topic! A lot of the dialogue I had with colleagues after the blog post went up centered on how lacking these skill sets are/were in many recruiters today – both in-house and agency. When I take a 2nd look at what makes a successful recruiter, setting aside sourcing and sales/negotiation skills (as a given), I think what fundamentally separates good from great recruiters is their communication skills. Now I know for many of you this may seem obvious but I am not referring to things like the ability to communicate effectively verbally and in written form (although that is sorely lacking as well!) What I am getting at is how a recruiter “owns” communication during the recruiting process.

Based on my experience running recruiting shops and HR departments, the very best recruiters have an innate ability to “own” communication during the recruiting cycle – both with the hiring manager and with the candidate. They do so by utilizing a “push” approach vs. “pull” when it comes to communicating to all parties. The best recruiters are those that push communication to hiring managers in the form of candidate updates, potential obstacles, “gateways” that been successfully passed during the hiring process (i.e. pre-employment testing) and they are able to create a sense of urgency with the hiring manager so as not to lose the best candidates. By employing a push strategy, these recruiters instill a sense of confidence with their clients as they are showing that they are on top of things. They also push communications with their candidates by keeping them in the loop when hiring managers are delayed in their decision making. They find reasons to contact candidates on a regular basis in order to continue to create those communication touch points. This allows for greater rapport building with candidates and it also prevents a recruiter from being blindsided by the candidate coming forward and saying they have another offer. Great recruiters know when and where their candidates are during the hiring process for both jobs they are staffing for and for other positions the candidate is applying for.

By utilizing this push strategy, the recruiter provides the hiring manager with a sense of confidence that everything is under control during the hiring process, in essence they bring a sense of calmness that all is under control. They also give the hiring manager an opportunity to address/respond to obstacles that may interfere with a potential hire (i.e. salary, start date, counter offers, etc.) and are able to effectively partner to remove those obstacles whenever possible. In the ideal world, hiring managers would own more of this process and be accountable for timely decision making; however, the reality is that for many recruiters and organizations this just isn’t the case. That is why, in order to be successful, the best recruiters take ownership of this and make themselves personally accountable for pushing the communication and decision-making process. In essence, they force-feed all the data points to the hiring manager as they press towards a close with the candidate and the manager.

Conversely, the pull approach, as you can imagine, is the complete opposite. Without going point by point, this is simply a case where the hiring manager is the one reaching out to the recruiter to find out where their candidate is in the process, asking why they aren’t hired yet and trying to ascertain what else needs to be done to get that person onboard. The best recruiters have regular check-ins with hiring managers to keep them apprised of their progress, thereby eliminating the need for a manager to even need to pull communication from a recruiter. I have seen far too many cases where a recruiter allows communication to dwindle between themselves and a hiring manager because they had not been receiving any feedback/responses from the manager re. candidates, etc. Recruiters then tend to leave it up to the manage to get back to them, unfortunately, unbeknownst to the recruiter, things suddenly take a magical urgent turn and the manager is left wondering where their candidate is and why they aren’t hired yesterday! The solution – be proactive and push communication! That is what separates the best from all the rest.

Image courtesy of David Castillo Dominici/FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Leveraging LinkedIn - 7 ways to enhance your online presence

Reblogged from The Armchair HR Manager:

No doubt about it – LinkedIn is a powerful networking tool. With its exponential growth and seemingly limitless reach, it is a great database/social networking platform for people of all professions. That being said, I get a lot of questions from people that are looking to start up or expand their LinkedIn presence or even to better understand how they can leverage LinkedIn and expand their profile.  

Read more… 913 more words

On the 10th anniversary of LinkedIn, I thought this would be a relevant re-post from the (not so) dusty archives.

(Un)Common Sense Leadership Tips

Back on Feb 11th I blogged about Simple Truths of Leadership – Micromanagement. In that post I shared some key missives from a book I was reading at that time, “Creating Magic – 10 Common Sense Leadership Strategies from a Life at Disney.” Since then, I was able to finish reading the book and I wanted to share some practical tips from the book with my blog followers. My intent was to take the most salient points from the book and provide the information as quick hits ways of improving your leadership capabilities – or those that you coach. I waded through the pieces that were not practical or feasible for some organizations and I simply focused on leadership strategies that were easily implemented. I am not sure that all of these are leadership ‘strategies’ per se as much as they are leadership tips. The other piece of the pie for your consideration is whether or not they are all that ‘common’ as many managers and leaders in organizations don’t seem to employ them! To that extent, I will provide the top “tips” from the book:

TIP #1 – Focus on the COACH model:

Care – by focusing on individuals’ development.
Observe – close observation of the workplace will allow leaders to identify what needs to be improved with their staff (i.e. employee behaviour, work practices, etc.)
Act – in a timely fashion when addressing performance or behavioural issues – in other words, do not delay in addressing these types of issues.
Communicate – self-explanatory, but you need to be able to get the attention of your employees and be able to convey messages effectively in order to be a successful leader.
Help – this follows on to the entire coaching concept whereby great leaders show their staff how to perform better and they are clear about setting the proper performance expectations for their staff that align with the organizational operating guidelines.

TIP #2 – Eliminate Hassles

One of the great tips provided as a leadership strategy was to “Eliminate Hassles” for your employees by “constantly querying them.” The author, Lee Cockerall, suggested that a practice he used in his career with Disney and Marriott hotels was to utilize “Start, Stop, Continue” meetings. Essentially, these were team meetings he held to encourage his employees to think about “processes, rules and operating guidelines.” Essentially he was engaging his employees to provide feedback to him in the context of which processes/rules should be stopped, (because they were impeding business success and customer service), which ones should they start (i.e. develop or commence doing) and which processes and rules needed to continue to be followed because they were providing business results. This simple practice is a great way to engage employees, build trust and foster an environment of open communication.

TIP #3 – Meet regularly with direct reports

This is another one of those common sense tips that just doesn’t seem to be followed all that commonly. The author provides a framework for discussion in employee meetings called “The Four P’s: People, Processes, Projects and Profit.” During these 1:1’s, recommend that you should be focusing on:

People – how are their direct reports doing (if they have any) and what succession/employee development plans are in place and what is being done to get non-performers back on track.
Processes – what is being done in this area to improve employee performance and customer service.
Projects – what specific initiatives are being worked on to improve things in their area of responsibility.
Profit – have your employee(s) provide reports on their department financials – sales, cost, etc.

Tip #4 – Follow the ARE model

Appreciation, Recognition and Encouragement are three (free) tools that leaders have at their disposal to motivate and engage their employees. ARE should be used to “build self-confidence and self-esteem along with individual and team performance.” This is another one of those simple tips that separates leaders from managers but is never utilized enough. Making appreciation, recognition and encouragement part of your leadership DNA is what truly separates the great leaders from everyone else. The end result is low(er) turnover, higher levels of engagement and employee satisfaction. The bottom line results are shown in sales/revenue, profit and customer satisfaction.

To learn more about these Common Sense Leadership Strategies, I encourage you to read Lee Cockerall’s book, “Creating Magic – 10 Common Sense Leadership Strategies from a Life at Disney.” The specific tips that I have commented on in this blog post are all found in Mr. Cockerall’s book. While there is nothing earth shattering contained in the book, there are some basic principles and practices identified that many managers should be employing. As always, I welcome your comments and feedback.

Image courtesy of Amazon.ca

Much Ado About Nothing

Let me paint a scenario for you. A company, let’s call them ACME Industries, decides it is a good idea to do an employee survey. Their reasons for wanting to do so may vary – i.e. their HR person told them it was a good idea, their parent company is ‘forcing’ them to do one or perhaps ACME’s CEO is a true visionary that understands the value of employee surveys. ACME goes ahead and creates a lot of fanfare about how valuable the employee’s opinions are, and that ACME is listening to them and ACME wants to know their opinions so they can affect change, etc. ACME makes a point of letting employees know that they will “share the results” with them once the survey is complete so “we can all work together to solve things and improve at ACME.”

Sound familiar? I would hazard a guess that this scenario plays out annually in thousands of companies across North America each year. So what is the problem you ask? Well, up to this point, nothing. Everything that has transpired up to now is very positive and very ‘engaging’ (see what I did there.) The “problem” comes AFTER the survey has been launched and the results tabulated. Many companies get their results back (whether positive or not) and they share the results with their management team and then the communication stops there. Some other priority takes place or a shift in business occurs and suddenly the survey and all the hoopla surrounding it weeks/months ago is gone and replaced by some other priority. Results aren’t cascaded to staff, discussions don’t take place, solutions are not discussed, communication does not occur and trust is broken.

What’s that – you disagree…trust isn’t broken? Trust me when I tell you it is. When you sing from the pulpits about all the wonderful things you are going to do with the survey info and then NOTHING is said or done about it, trust has been broken. This vicious cycle occurs annually at so many organizations. You see this in companies that are experiencing turnover, attendance problems, productivity issues, customer service challenges, etc. Then they wonder why their survey results don’t give them some magical prescriptive formula about what is wrong and how to fix it! I have heard far too often of leadership teams getting the results back and everything rated down the middle of the road (a.k.a. – everything is “o.k.”) .  The response from the leadership team is often, “see, the staff are ‘engaged’”; “everything is fine.” The reality is that your employees are sick of filling out another dumb survey of which nothing will be done with the results/info they share. There is no difference for your staff between completing the survey and filling out the annual “Employee Information Sheet” that is thrust upon them to complete each year as well.

If you aren’t prepared to act on employee survey results, or at the very least, not prepared to stand up in front of employees and acknowledge what they have said, then don’t survey them. If you really don’t want to hear what they have to say or if you spend your time discrediting the overall results, then don’t continue to survey. If you think that sharing the results with your staff and discussing the gaps is not time well spent and an investment in your people, then don’t survey. The damage that is done by creating a big to do about surveys and then not following up is often irreparable. Apathy, eye-rolling, sarcasm and cynicism amongst employees are usually found in abundance over time as companies fall into this vicious survey/non-communication cycle.

So the next time someone at your company (especially HR!) says, “It’s time to do our annual employee survey,” you need to really ask the hard questions of each other. Are you prepared to see this through to the end? Are you prepared to communicate, follow up and provide feedback? Are you prepared to take action on the results or discuss why you can’t action certain things that have been identified? If the answer isn’t “yes” to these questions, than you are making much ado about nothing.

Image courtesy of Wikipedia.org

The Importance of Separating Performance and Pay Discussions

Pay – at the end of day, it is the number one reason why most of us come to work each day. Unless you are independently wealthy, we need to earn a living in order to eat, afford our homes, cars, etc. Pay is of vital importance to us as workers, that is why discussions that involve pay are always very sensitive. In any conversation you have with your manager, (or that you as a manager have with your staff) when pay comes up, that is all you will ever hear and remember from the conversation. Trust me – your manager might call you into his/her office to tell you that you are getting a new/bigger office, an ergonomic chair and a new ipad but you are not receiving a pay increase this year. What did you hear/remember from that dialogue? If you are like most people, it is that you aren’t getting a pay increase. That is why discussions about pay need to be their own separate conversation.

So where am I going with this? Simple – when having a discussion with an employee about their performance (review) it needs to be its own separate discussion aside from whatever pay increase they are or are not getting. I have seen far too many organizations combine the two – the manager sits down, delivers a performance review and then tells the employee about their x% increase. The problem is that all your employee heard in that conversation was what their increase was….which may or may not be in line with what they thought they were going to get. Instead of focusing on the wonderfully crafted performance review and its content, that was all washed away and the employee hones in on the pay increase…or lack thereof.

This is why in organizations I have worked at I have always worked with managers to separate the discussions. Complete the performance review process first – rate the employee’s performance against their goals and KPI’s and deliver the feedback. Have a meaningful discussion about where you see their performance and where they need to improve and/or continue to excel. Outline the path to success, provide recognition where due and close the meeting on a high note. Your employee walks away feeling respected and then begins to process the performance info (in the context of goals and objectives) that you discussed with them.

After that meeting, 1 week or 1 month later (whatever your corporate timeline is), follow up with them to discuss what their performance increase is (or isn’t.) That way, there is an opportunity to context the pay discussion outside of the content of the performance review. The pay discussion should outline how the increase (or not) was determined. It is important for employees to understand what the compensation context is and how pay was determined. Managers need to understand and be comfortable explaining things like:

a) The company’s ability to pay (in relation to its overall performance)
b) Relativity to related geographical industry averages
c) The employee’s overall performance and the employee’s performance in the overall context of their peer group (this is especially critical where distribution curves apply)

Managers also need to understand (where applicable) things like compa-ratios and distribution curves if they impact the organizations’ budget and overall ability to pay. This way, the discussion is now focused on pay itself and how it was determined and not the specifics of the employee’s overall performance. It is incumbent on HR folks to provide the explanations and understandings to managers so that they can intelligently have these types of conversations with their employees. Based on the intended goals and outcomes of your performance and pay meetings, these salient points, hopefully, identify why it is critical that these conversations are separate.

What about you? What has been your experience with separating (or not) these conversations? What works? What doesn’t work? As always, I welcome your comments and feedback.

Road image courtesy of digitalart/ FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Hand and money image courtesy of creativedoxfoto/ FreeDigitalPhotos.net