If I Were Running A Company…Again with Jobs

You know it is serious that when a politician starts with the topic, jobs. Jobs boost the economy, bring confidence to employees to spend on goods, and help growth. The problem is there are not a lot of jobs out there and the field is limited to mostly tech and cubicle jobs. There are many different theories as to why the unemployment rate is above 9%, but there are many more questions on how to solve it. Here are the most popular answers from experts:

Create More Jobs

It is easy to say that you’re willing to provide jobs; it is hard to execute them. In my opening, politicians mention jobs because not only it is an important issue; it gives them points heading up to signing a bill or for elections. Politicians can say they can create more jobs, but in reality the can create more government/government contracting jobs and that’s it. Jobs are basically in sole discretion with the private sector if they someone or not. Businesses can decide to create jobs if the environment fits their bottom line. Even if businesses create jobs, will the position last for a long time? With new technology coming out quicker and global competition, jobs can be shifted or be eliminated at any time. Although having a job is fine for now, the long-term ramifications could be damaging if you don’t adopt or pick up the pace to the changing environment.

Training

I always preach training inside your business so they can keep up the pace on current trends and how they can adapt with these new tools. Paul DeBettignies points out in his post the benefits of training and tend to agree businesses need more internships and apprenticeships, and to adapt. Then again, the same thing as creating jobs, training only works with the resources given and it has a small payoff as only it can prolong their job until something new comes in that people need to retrain again on the newest thing, which takes a lot of resources (money, time).

Education

This is where, to me, is the primary reason there are not enough skilled workers working in the workforce. Part of it is cause of our school system being broken as funding in that area gets cut. Some argue the diverse (race, to be specific) workforce could be a cause because of the language barrier. However, the main factor of why education is the leading cause of the shortage of skilled workers is from an article that SAT reading scores are at its lowest in four decades. I don’t specifically blame teachers, the school system, or politicians for the low scores…everyone should share the blame.

The real problem is we haven’t teach to others why the subject matter is important. Let me take an example of a simple phrase, “being green.” For some, it means the environment, but for others, it could mean paint yourself green or surround yourself with green materials, or make money. This is why some people have trouble defining “net neutrality” or “broadband” because some or most have no idea what it is, even politicians. That is why comprehension is important to have workers and the unemployed understand why they business made these changes and they can get behind the meaning. I think the “skills gap” is more about people going way ahead on their field, and then telling us this is important, instead of why this is important. We, as individuals, forget to tell them why they should need to learn this stuff.

You don’t need a degree to understand, just have a network surround you to keep up what’s going on. Of course, the difficulty is each individuals’ comprehension is different. Some can comprehend very quickly, some can comprehend in the next year, but for others, it might take them a long time to get it or not. Education won’t solve all the problems since it varies from each person, but it could resolve why job seekers need to step up their game.

Conclusion

Creating jobs is a great way to boost the economy, but only for the short-term. Training can enhance an employee/job seeker skill set, but only for so long. Educating our workers and job seekers the meaning for the changes should help them with the purpose of the job. What I mean by educating, I don’t mean spending money on courses, but we can teach others, who are in need, on their field. No sound bytes or snippets; give them an explanation why these changes are important. It is up to them they’re content where they are or they’re willing learn and develop these new skills.

People have to realize the world is on a very fast pace that we have new technologies every day it seems, global competition where companies can outsource to save money, and our environment is making us feel we are in a rush with a variety of options. It seems that we don’t have enough time educating others, but that’s the conundrum we’re facing: do we want everything in the short-term with jobs and training or we look long-term and teach kids and our peers about what’s going on? To that, I don’t know if there’s a right answer based on who you ask.

If I Was Running A Company…Training and Development

Retention and talent have been the staple for human resources for almost 20 years.  Organizations use retention programs to encourage employees to stay with the organization for a long time.  On the talent side, the philosophy for many organizations back then is stockpiling top talent.  Those programs and ideas coincided with the economy back in the 1990s: drop in unemployment and a booming economic growth.  In today’s climate, those philosophies are gone.  The economy could be a great excuse for the changing workforce, but there is one thing that is making a bigger impact of the changing workforce: our lifestyle.

I am not talking about workplace culture where people gets a certificate for hard work and everyone has work/life blending, flex scheduling.  I am talking about our short attention spans, time getting faster, our numerous choices of clothing, technology, housing, people and others.  In essence, if we can divorce people either once or 8 times, why not in the business place?  If we can get bribed, why not go to a place that has a lot of resources?  The working environment is revolving and most organizations don’t know how to deal with it.  How can organizations deal with all this change?  Training and Development.

Organizations must realize people want to do their job, get results, and are not tied to yours or any organization.  Simply put, they want an opportunity for something big down the line.  Organizations need to stop thinking about retaining employees and start building them up.  All of the paychecks, benefits, perks can only go so far.   Organizations need to help employees to develop new skills and bring in people who can collaborate with the employee so the organization can force the issue that they might want to stay with the organization.  There is no guarantee the employee will stay, but at least you made an attempt since you brought the person in, train, develop and build up the person where he/she is today.

Compensation and style will play part in the person’s decision, but in the overall picture, if you treat your employees well, give them the proper development, and the right employees, it benefits for both sides if the person either leaves or stays. It shows both sides were a great match and if the employee bails, you can always leave the door open for a return, like Pamela Anderson or Tommy Lee (or Kid Rock).

Side note: If your really want to keep an employee, don’t do this.

If I Was Running A Company…Succession

The workplace has change through the years.  From a lifetime guarantee at the workplace, then to a 10 year plan, and now to a year-to-year plan; the workplace is turning over everyday for better or worse, which means employees change.  This brings up what every company needs: a succession plan.

You got your protocol on succession planning: hire employees, then develop your employees, then the execution, which  leads to the result and decision.  Between that, there will be variables the manager has to deal.

Let’s get real;  the hiring portion of the job is the easiest part of the process.  However, when work begins, the manager has to deal with two people: the people who exceed beyond their resume and the people who do not live up to their resume.  The manager has to see who can work independently and who needs guidance.  The employees have to agree to their roles and if they don’t, then we have a mess in the department.  It’s up to the manager to form a department into a well-oiled machine.  The result will come on how the department performs, which is influence by the manager.  This leads to the main point of the post.

It’s a simple equation: if your department does well, the manager will take most of the credit, but if the department falters, the manager will get most of the blame.  Either way, there’s going to be an end since the current workplace has intervals.  It’s also simple that if the department fails to do the job, most likely everyone is on the chopping block and change is likely to happen.  If the department is successful, everyone will get rewarded and get notoriety, but what if the manager quits for a better opportunity.  What does the organization do?

There are several factors in play to look for manager:

1. Has the manager taught enough of their department of the knowledge and wisdom within the organization/industry?
2. Did the employees learn from their manager?
3. Do any of the employees want to be in a managerial and leadership role?
4. Is the manager leaving in a transition or for a better opportunity?
5. Are the employees loyal to the company or to the manager?

Organizations have to think about this and decide if they want to hire within or go to a totally different direction.  In this case, the organization needs to have an open mind of what is best out there.  Sure, the employees know the system and the organization, but can it be better and most importantly, can the potential manager adapt to a new culture? Organizations must be one hundred percent sure that the current employees are not only leaders and managers, but can adapt to the current situation they’re in.

Basically, it is up to the manager to shape up the future of the organization.  The manager can setup their department to succeed now, where everyone is happy in the current state, or succeed in the future where the manager not only share their insight and trends of the organization, but the intangibles that can never be taught.  When the manager is gone, it is up to the employee who needs to step up and if they’re willing to take that role and adapt.  Simply put, does your employees have the onions to take it to the next level?

If I Was Running A Company…Pop Culture HR Award #4

For the fourth recipient of the Pop Culture HR Award, this person has been there for 10 years and this week, there will be a huge celebration.  This person could be also be known to help a certain employee reach to their maximum potential.  Ladies and gentlemen, I bring to you the fourth winner of the Pop Culture HR Award:

MR. EUGENE H. KRABS

Mr. Krabs started his business a while ago with other fry cooks and employees.  His business was stable, but 10 years ago, one employee came to The Krusty Krab and made it a household name.

Mr. Krabs saw Spongebob Squarepants walking to his restaurant and wanted to see if Spongebob can handle the job.  When Spongebob got the job done, the rest is history.

Mr. Krabs also can bring the best out of his employees.  For Spongebob, Mr. Krabs knows he will cook for 24/7 and for Squidward, he knows he needs money and has no motivation on anything except being lucky and famous.  Mr. Krabs has dealt with a lot of HR issues from compensation, paid vacation, motivation, performance evaluations, succession planning, and development and training.  Although Mr. Krabs is cheap, he does create the best training video there is:

Krusty Krab Training Video Part 1

Krusty Krab Training Video Part 2

Mr. Krabs:  he’s successful, business-savvy, cheap, alert, tons of wisdom, a true motivator, a leader, and the fourth recipient of the Pop Culture HR Award.

If I Was Running A Company…Development

Last week, I mention about teaching where teachers can mold their students to find their comfort zone and do well in classes.  This week, we’re going to age quickly from the kids to the adults.

In these times, organizations must decide to go after the big hitters or develop within.  The most likely choice during these down times is to develop within and hopefully the organization can rise out of this recession.  However, they must think about this: Does it cost a lot to develop an employee or hire a new person who can make an immediate impact?  Looking at the paper, developing your employee is a likely choice, but it does not include the emotional and physical cost for the supervisor (or manager) and employee.  If you add that to the “cost,” it is a dead heat.

So, what is the best solution?  That depends on the supervisor and the developing employee.  This is a perfect time for the supervisor and the employee to discuss long-term plans and how to re-shape their organization.  The supervisor and employee must discuss their strengths and what areas they need to improve.  From there, the two have to decide can they cover each other tracks and do they have the time.  If either answer is no, then start searching for someone who can help, either in a consultant, part-time, temp, or possibly a full-time position if it’s that bad. 

However, if both say they can handle this, then there must be collaboration and trust for both the supervisor and the employee and be prepared for the long-term ramifications, either good or bad.  It can be bad if the organization sinks further, but if the organization can come out of this, it not only benefits the organization, but it raises the profile for both the supervisor and the employee. 

For the supervisor, they will have the trust from the organization that not only they know the organization from the inside-out, but can handle personalities and mold them into effective workers. For the developing employee, the possibilities are endless from better job opportunities, a promotion, or notoriety (speaking, training, etc.). 

Consider this recession as an opportunity to rise to the challenge and use it for your advantage.  Then again, from this article, HR (or some) have not step up to the plate yet.  This is going to be a long process, but by developing a trust, collaboration, and the willingness to take your organization out of quicksand, your organization can come out of this.  Just remember, it is up to you (supervisor or employee) to do it, not the outside the forces.