I'm Not Absent But I'm Not Totally Present Either

The majority of companies large and small have some type of applied policy regarding absences in the workplace.  Undoubtedly, the policy outlines some sort of threshold on what constitutes abuse and may even outline the measures that will be taken to address and curb abuse.  Having such a policy is part of Human Resources 101.  Any experienced manager can name which employees are reliable and which ones can't seem to get to the office on time on a regular basis.  It is easy to list the effects of employee absenteeism: you've got your usual negative affect on productivity, the cost of paying out sick leave while also having to incur the cost of another employee covering the absent employee's workload, and there are the associated administrative costs.  It can be fairly safe to say that much of what affects employee absenteeism is employee health.  The more health issues an employee has, the more likely (not in all cases but in the majority) that the employee will have a higher frequency of call-outs.  After watching an episode of HBO's documentary series The Weight of the Nation, I was reminded of another, greater, impact on a company's bottom-line......presenteeism.

               Presenteeism is defined by Dictionary.com as:  "the practice of coming to work despite illness, injury, anxiety, etc., often resulting in reduced productivity"   This definition can also be expanded to include the loss of productivity that occurs when employees come to work with general limitations as a result of their health status.  For example, WebMD cites a study that indicates presenteeism is a cost of obesity.  According to the 2010 study, "the health-related cost of obesity among U.S. workers is $73.1 billion a year - enough to pay the salaries of 1.8 million new workers".  Staggering figures, right? Remember, this is over and above costs to a company connected to absenteeism. 

What I think the great take-away here is that the importance of company health plans cannot be stressed enough.  Specifically those that have intertwined health tools, incentives, and strong support.  

Go Ahead - Try It!

I like to learn. No, maybe that's not entirely true.  I like to have knowledge but I'm not always amenable to the process of leaning.  I tend to want the knowledge to somehow download into my brain like Neo learning kung fu (yes, that was a complete nerdy Matrix reference I am proud to say). What I also know, though, is that the best way for me to learn is to process the knowledge in smaller pieces. This way I reduce my chances for frustration and increase the chances that I will retain what I have learned as it is easier to apply a bit of knowledge at a time rather than large volumes of data.  It's just how most of our brains work. 

Reducing the learning process to a shorter period of time is also a great way to introduce yourself to something new.  Matt Cutts, an engineer at Google, would agree.  In this short TED talk he mentions the various 30-day "experiments" he completed where he committed to trying new things for 30 days.  It is surprising how little time you need to practice something before it becomes ingrained as habit.

Check out the talk below and go out there and try it!

More $$ = Less Innovation

Why have business practices seemingly stagnated over since, say, the invention of management? Notice I said invention of management.  I refer to management (or the act of managing) as an invention because I agree with Dan Pink, a career analyst and former speechwriter, who makes the point in a TED - managing is a creation of man. Business, as a whole, seems to be fixated on the traditional model of employees and manager and how compensation is structured. Most organizations, as well, like to think they are driving productivity and even innovation by offering incentives (bonuses, stipends, trips, special parking spots, tickets to a game, a private bathroom stall with the toilet paper roll guaranteed to be loaded where you don't have to spin the roll to find the starting point, you know - the usual).

Guess what - those incentives are not working. Incentives are extrinsic motivators - motivators that are unrelated to the task the person is performing or to the problem that needs to be solved. Want to know what works? Creating a business climate where employees feel their work is meaningful and where employees can make a connection between what they are working on and a larger purpose - intrinsic motivators. Yes, this is sounding a lot like your college psychology teacher's lecture on Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs but this is science supported by a large number of studies and real-life examples. Take a look at Pink's TED talk below and do a little research yourself - it's pretty interesting stuff that directly relates to how we manage our human resources:

Pinch a Penny Now, Lose a Dollar Later

What was your last shopping experience like when you ventured into a discount retailer (and, yes you have been in one admit it)? If your experience was like many other individuals' you were greeted by a retail store with merchandise strewn about, items in the wrong locations, advertised items missing from store shelves, not many employees around to ask questions of, and (if you found an employee) were met with a gaze from a tired, distracted, and overextended (or worse - a disinterested) employee. Conversely, what was your last experience when shopping at a "full price" retailer? For the most part, polls have shown that shoppers are willing to pay a small premium for better service and a better selection. People like to feel their shopping list is as important to the retailer as it is to them (after all, you earned your money, they should earn the right to take it as well). Don't worry there is a human resource connection coming.....

Let's go back to the discount store with the unhappy employees. What we know, as human resource professionals, is that unhappy employees = lower productivity, increased use of sick time, and lower ratings on customer service. So why are discount retailers (and many other areas of industry) lowering wages and shedding experienced employees? Yeah, yeah - we know - it's to be able to make those shrinking budgets. What if, though, we were actually accomplishing the reverse with our actions? Instead of steering our organization through an economic downturn we were further jeopardizing its health by driving customers away?

Professor Zeynep Ton, of MIT's Sloan School of Management, has ten years of research to back up why it might not be such a good idea to put the squeeze on your employees. In the Future of Retail: Companies That Profit By Investing in Employees at Time.com, Ton's research finds "companies that buck the status quo and invest heavily in their workforce actually are able to not only compete with their competitors on service but on price too". This upends the notion that to compete in the market as a low-cost leader, a company must have a low-cost workforce. In fact, Ton states that retail chains that experience high levels of success "invest heavily in store employees, but also have the lowest prices in their industries, solid financial performance, and better customer service than their competitors".  

What, exactly, makes successful companies successful anyway? It's in their "business card".  Remember the old standby in business - it holds true today: your employees are the face, the "business card" of your company. The experience customers have with your company is heavily influenced by their interactions with your employees. Ton's research found "all sorts of efficiencies that become unlocked once you have a highly trained, highly motivated workforce". 

So take a cue from those that are successful now, and are set to continue their success and growth once the economy turns in their favor: invest in your employees. Yes, pay them a decent wage, provide a content rich and inclusive training program, offer great benefits, and promote a culture of innovation - then, maintain as you enjoy success...   

Professional, Personal, or Puerile

Have you chanced upon an employee viewing family pictures from Aunt Sadie or found them chuckling at the latest Internet video sensation while at their desk? My educated guess is that you have and likely have on more than one occasion. Do you think these employees would be shocked to know just how much time they actually spend clicking on every link sent their way? I think so and, according to a recent Wall Street Journal article there are applications that will serve to assist them. Employees, Measure Yourselves author H. James Wilson offers up a few such apps designed to do anything from measure how much time users spend on various websites to those that requests the user enter what tasks were accomplished each day.

Benefits to self-tracking and monitoring include understanding individual habits and productivity and devising the most productive task schedule. For example, some employees may find that they switch to social media, etc... when they feel a lull in their creativity and may find a boost of creativity after an off-task break. Don't believe this? Take a look at this article based on a University of Copenhagen study (the title says it all): Why Wasting Time on the Internet at Work Makes You a More Focused Employee. Others, may find that the pull of social media sites too enticing and find out they are much less productive on days where their YouTube viewing escalates. How will employees feel about being encouraged to utilize web sites that they may view as the company looking over their shoulder? Wilson offers this advice:

   "Many workers might be reluctant to track what they do if they think the company might get access to the information, or use it against them. Companies should emphasize that this type of software usually comes with lots of privacy controls. Workers can often store their data in the cloud, for instance, or locally on their machines. In some cases, they can pause tracking and delete pieces of personal data they choose. Likewise, they can also create a list of sites that they want to track by name and label all the other sites they visit as generic."

A Tech-Connected Employee is a Happy Employee

You begin the day by checking your iPad for emails and respond while sipping your morning brew. You then take a call from one of your staff while on your way into work (after pulling off the road, of course). Once you get to work you jump onto your computer, update yourself on what's going on in the organization, and spend the rest of the morning pulling and analyzing some reports. You then grab your laptop and head into an afternoon meeting. On the way home for the day you might make a call to a work associate before arriving home. While watching television you jump onto your iPad and decide to check email one last time. Sound like a few days in your life? Today's issue of The Wall Street Journal contained a point/counterpoint article regarding the use of personal electronic devices for completing work-related tasks. The article, entitled Should Employees Be Allowed to Use Their Own Devices for Work?, takes the opposing positions of inevitability versus legality. 

Often, employees' personal devices are newer, faster, and easier to use than the technology available at the office. As John Parkinson, managing director of ParkWood Advisors, states: "They're being asked to do more work outside the office; why should they be saddled with the office technology at home?" Erik Sherman, blogger for CBS Moneywatch, does not feel this is a compelling enough reason to allow usage of personal devices for work. Sherman asks "Has anyone undertaken a study that actually showed employees to be more productive because they choose the type of computer, smartphone or tablet they used?"

What about cost savings? When a company leaves it up to the employee to purchase their own devices (by reimbursing a set amount or a percentage based on usage) the company is freeing up capital it can then use in other areas. Or at least that's the general idea. When employees are allowed to use their personal devices for both work and recreation, the potential for unwanted viruses or glitches increases. This can tap the IT department even more and negate any cost savings. 

How about the privacy issue? Loosening up restrictions on personal devices also makes an organization more vulnerable to violations of privacy laws, leaks of proprietary information, and a host of related legal issues. So, what to do?

Go proactive (no, not the skin clearing regimen, the actual practice) and ensure your organization addresses these concerns in policy. Clearly outline what is acceptable usage and let employees know that the organization has the right to monitor "anyone who connects to your business network, regardless of whose device they are using" as Parkinson outlines. 

I leave you with one final quote, this one from John Zappe, blogger for the recruiting community ere.net who noted results from a CareerXroads survey: The "survey found only 20 percent of policies were written by HR, but 100 percent of them will sooner or later involve HR."