Inside the Cubicle

The power of common courtesy

Man, life at high-profile international law firm Sullivan & Cromwell LLP must have been pretty rough before they launched their "charm offensive." According to The Wall Street Journal the firm is looking to change how senior employees treats junior lawyers:

"To deal with low associate morale and high attrition, a confidential slide presentation reviewed by The Wall Street Journal urged partners to say things like "thank you" and "good work" to associates they supervise."

Other revolutionary ideas include returning colleagues phone calls in a reasonable time, trying not to make people cancel vacations, and weekly associate lunches with the firm's chairman. The company is also looking at instituting 360-degree performance reviews.

In an industry where the salary for associates runs upwards of $150,000 a year, the cost of turnover can be extremely high. 

It is assumed that young lawyers will be abused with long hours and a lot of grunt work. But - and I say this as a member of the "entitlement" generation - why does it have to be this way? The answer that, "Well, that is how we have always done things" is not enough anymore. This is not to say that people entering the workplace are not willing to put in the time and effort - in fact the contrary is true as we are working more hours and productivity continues to climb.

The paradox is that young employees have become more demanding about workplace conditions because they recognize the importance a job has in defining their personality, their health and their happiness. This becomes even more important as the line between work an life continues to blur.

The ability for an organization to create a welcoming and attractive work environment will become a key differentiator. Companies cannot bank on name alone anymore - a crowded marketplace, globalization, and a mobile workforce means that people have more options. And in white-collar circles this is even more of an issue.

So next time you assign your suboordinate a 20-page research report on a Friday afternoon, remember to say "please" and "thank you." It is just good business.

---

Technorati Tags: recognition, law

Best Buy rethinks the idea of the workplace

The cover story in BusinessWeek looks at a radical experiment at Best Buy that allows employees to work when they want, where they want, as long as they get their work done. The program is called ROWE for alled ROWE, for "results-only work environment." The goal is to have all 4,000 corporate staffers on ROWE by the end of 2007.

What makes this so cool?

Aside from the obvious trust and flexibility it gives employees, I love the fact this program started in one business unit and spread naturally before becoming corporate policy. In short, it was an innovative solution to a business program and when it proved successfull, employees shared it with others. It was a product of constructive experimentation and a sign of a healthy culture that would let something like this evolve, and then embrace it.

Why does this matter?

As the article says, "A recent Boston Consulting Group study found that 85% of executives expect a big rise in the number of unleashed workers over the next five years. In fact, at many companies the most innovative new product may be the structure of the workplace itself."

A work environment that rethinks the ideas of set time and place can:

• Save significant overhead costs in terms of office space, supplies and utilities required
• Have more time to work - think about it, the hour plus that most people commute to the office could be spent on business activities
• Be more productive - No more meetings for the sake of meetings. People will be forced to be more purposeful with communications
• Allow a focus on contribution - No longer is a person rewarded for just showing up, they actually have to provide value

Favorite quote
From Phyllis Moen, sociology professor at University of Minnesota: "Best Buy is recognizing that sitting in a chair is no longer working."

To give credit where credit is due, I first heard about Best Buy's experiment on a 60 Minutes segment in July titled "Working 24/7." The employees interviewed in the segment noted that they often work longer hours on the ROWE system than they did during a regular office schedule.

---

Technorati Tags: Best+Buy, work+life

The Benefit of Benefits

McKinsey just posted the results of a study looking at executives' perspectives on employee benefits. (if you don't have a subscription, go here).

Surprise, surprise, benefits are important. 89 percent of executives said that benefits were somewhat or extremely important to their company's ability to compete.

What does this mean? Competition to attract, retain and engage talented individuals will define success and failure in today's business world.

However, the more important statistics in here have to do with management not making the effort to understand whether their benefits make sense.

Only 57 percent of those surveyed said they understand the benefit preferences of employees and a whopping 78 percent do not measure the ROI of benefit investments (45 percent never even considered it).

So in essence this means:

• Businesses know benefits are important in order to attract employees
• Businesses have no little idea if their benefits work for employees
• Businesses don't really bother to check if their benefits investment pays off

Now I am no corporate executive, I am just a measly ol' communications counselor, but that logic seems a little silly to me.

Personally, I don't think businesses should be in the habit of giving money away without even making an attempt to see if they are getting anything out

---

Technorati Tags: benefits, McKinsey, employee

detrmining winners, when the game changes

Knowledge@Wharton (a e-zine from Penn's Business School) has an interesting article looking at the difficulty of managing employee incentives amidst changes in business strategy.

The article is based on a study: "Inertia and Incentives: Bridging Organizational Economics and Organizational Theory" (in case you hadn't noticed, I am a sucker for research)

The conclusion of both the article and the paper is not startling: Employees are likely to adopt patterns of behavior that they feel will result in rewards. Therefore, organizations (especially large ones) often build rigid reward systems so that "positive" behaviors become entrenched. These reward systems become embedded, both in policy and in the minds of employees. This can create conflict in a change management situation where either employers want to reward other things or employees no longer know what gets rewarded.

Takeaway: Incentives are not to be taken lightly. In many companies they are at the heart of the culture. Furthermore, incentives are one the easiest ways to engage employees around business objectives and values.

- Make a habit of regularly reexamining your incentives to see if they make sense for your organization
- Aim for a mix of formal and less rigid incentives. There is nothing wrong with rewarding employees for hitting sales targets, but also consider rewards for working well with colleagues, or demonstrating innovative problem-solving skills
- Rewards send the message "this is how we want things done." Answer that question for your organization and consider how to design an incentive system that supports that goal.

---

Technorati Tags: incentive, employee, Wharton

Sharing the wealth

I'm always looking to add a little international flair to the blog, so I was pleased to see my boss blog about a move by UK retailer Marks & Spencer to distribute $105 million (60 million pounds) among its staff of 63,000.

When I spent the summer in London in 2004, the biggest business story was the potential takeover of M&S. CEO Stuart Rose was under attack and the stock was tanking.

With the company now healthier than ever, it appears Rose has decided to reward those who have helped makes the turnaround happen.

Next time I make it out to London (which hopefully will be sooner than later) I will be buying all of my Lion bars from M&S.

---

Technorati Tags: M&S, rewards

Another one bites the dust

Corporate giant GM announced today that it is discontinuing its pension plan for salaried workers in favor of a less expensive retirement program.

This comes as no surprise given that GM is in a freefall right now and the move will save $1.6 billion in 2006 alone.

As pensions quickly disappear, and healthcare costs rise, companies are forced to reconsider their benefits offerings. Tough as this is, it is often the reality of business.

The job for corporate communicators is to engage employees so that they understand why and how changes are taking place. No one wants to their benefits reduced, but no one wants to lose their job either.

Perhaps more companies will take the lead of Whole Foods, which put its new healthcare package up for a vote amongst workers in 2003. The employees got to decide what made sense to them given the parameters they had to work with.

Quote from Whole Foods CEO and Chariman John Mackey: "I realized I am not smart enough to figure out the right benefits to give to team members. Let's let them vote."

Employee-driven benefits program. Think about it, seems to make sense.

What is your reward priority?

SystematicHR looks at a Deloitte study listing the top 5 rewards priorities for benefits practitioners. Health benefits top the list as they have for the past decade, but attracting, retaining and motivating employees is second.

Beyond traditional benefits, companies have a chance to differentiate themselves through their reward and recognition programs. The entry recommends that companies reexamine their rewards programs to better recognize top performers. Rewards programs need not be costly to be effective. In fact, creative, personally designed recognition is often more effective in motivating employees than mere financial bonuses. Additionally, more original reward programs can send signals to other employees while bonuses can often create an environment of secrecy and jealously.