What's Your Bench Strength?

Photo by Amine rock hoovr on Unsplash

Many companies focus on their A players to the exclusion of almost everyone else. There's nothing wrong with A players, but failing to focus on bench strength is a serious mistake. 

Do you have depth on your bench? Will a customer get the assistance they need if an employee is out of the office for lunch, sickness, or vacation? Will the loss of a key employee (whether short or long-term) have a significant negative impact on your organization? What about your succession planning? Do you have more than one person who is being prepared for each position? It may not always be possible on that last one, but we should strive to make that happen. After all, we never know what might happen tomorrow.

If your bench is shallow or has gaps, it's time to address the issue. What are some actions you can take to build your bench strength?

• Have a training plan. On-the-job training in many organizations is haphazard at best. 
• Cross-training is essential. Set up a matrix, identifying the major tasks, and assign names. Who has the primary responsibility for this task? Who is their backup? For critical tasks, it might be a good idea to add someone who is expected to at least be able to muddle through.
• Plan for succession. Who do you have with the potential to move up? Once you identify them, get them on a development plan to prepare them for future responsibilities.
• Build a learning culture. Teaching people how to learn is critical and builds capacity for quick reskilling.
• Set up a support structure that captures knowledge in some fashion. Documenting processes can help train tasks more quickly or as a last resort, make it possible for someone to step in and figure things out much more quickly.

Yes, it's great to have some stars on the team, but personally, I would prefer to have a full bench of solid players.

 

It's All Funny Until It's Not

Photo by Tengyart on Unsplash

Let's talk about professionalism in the workplace. There is nothing wrong with having fun at work--you can still get your work done and enjoy the people you work with. However, I am fairly strict about keeping the fun within certain parameters. 

I have done many workplace investigations for sexual harassment and discrimination of various types. A large percentage of the time, the complaints have come about because people were "joking around" and everyone thought it was funny until it went too far, or a new person came in who didn't find the banter funny, or it reached the point where a person no longer felt they could pretend they thought it was funny. Yes, I do know some people seem to get offended over what seem to be very minor things, but often these microaggressions are very hurtful. We don't recognize them because we have different life experiences.

So my general rule of thumb is that it's okay to have fun but certain types of humor are out of bounds, and that is humor relating to sex or gender or any other protected class. Slurs, name-calling, or other types of personal attacks are also not okay. Boundaries for physical contact also need to be clear. Texas is the hugging capital of the United States, I think, but as a rule, unless you know the other party is open to that, control yourself. Even if hugging is accepted, there is a matter of degree.

Managers should set the example and correct behavior that crosses the line. Have fun, but be responsible. (Think drinking--one or two drinks is usually acceptable, but too many can land you in trouble.)

If You Can't Hire Them

 

Photo by Lagos Techie on Unsplash

There is a lot of talk about not being able to hire right now (see this Capelli article for a rebuttal), but periodically, I help employers talk through the "buy versus develop" question about people. I have always been predisposed to grow my own versus buy new, so I suppose it is best to just get that bias on the table to start with. It's part of the reason I keep a car until it falls apart in the street. I know what I have and as long as it is performing satisfactorily, why take a chance on an expensive shiny new vehicle? Regular maintenance and an occasional part overhaul have tended to be less expensive and more satisfactory for me.

Regardless of your current hiring situation, there is a seismic shift in the skills needed in the economy going on. New career fields are opening up, with the numbers of skilled workers needed growing very quickly. If you have watched the news lately, cybersecurity should be an obvious example. You can hire the technical expertise for cybersecurity from an IT company with that expertise, but much of the risk involves people, not hardware and software. So even having the best company on retainer can't always keep you safe. This means pretty much every employee who has access to a computer or other smart device needs to have some level of expertise in cybersecurity. In addition to cybersecurity, changes in laws and regulations in many industries call for a constant update in compliance, tools, and techniques.

I was talking to someone this week who told me the employers she talks to just want someone who will show up dependably and work. I hear that some as well, but I also find employers also want experience and proven expertise so they don't have to spend much time training. I get it. As in most things, there is always a tradeoff between I need it now, I need it good, and I need it cheap. For some reason, employers tend to think they can get it all. Not so.

I would suggest companies need to do a thorough review to determine the types of skills that employees need now and may not have (gap analysis), but also look ahead to prepare for the future, in order to develop some skills before the need is upon you. You may not be able to hire that skill set--so begin developing your good people with updated skills.

Time Off? Or Not?

 

Photo by Toa Heftiba on Unsplash

This week I have had some discussions around paid time off and about hiring/retention. They are interrelated. Most companies offer time off to be competitive in recruitment and retention. However, paid time off is also important for employee health, and it is a good internal control measure for the company. However, let's focus on paid time off as a recruitment and retention tool. Paid time off is especially appreciated by younger employees.

Many employers try to keep track of what other employers are doing in order to stay competitive in the marketplace. Since there are really no rules federally or in Texas for vacation/sick/PTO/holiday time, employers can be fairly creative in designing their programs and have a lot of options for how they structure their paid time off programs.

There are still some companies that have no paid time off or any kind, but most companies have at least some. Here are a couple of questions for consideration:

1. If an employer feels that an employee who takes all of the time allowed under their policy is somehow taking advantage of the employer, then should you be offering that much paid time off?
2. If an employee feels they cannot take the time off permitted under their employer's policy (regardless of the reason), then is your paid time off really an effective retention tool or could it be a source of dissatisfaction?

In asking these questions, I am not talking about unscheduled time off. It is always a problem to have to shuffle schedules without notice, although there is no way to avoid it occasionally. What I am talking about is scheduled time off that does not exceed the amount of time permitted under the policy you made.

Paid time off is a part of an employee's compensation. Just as an employee would feel cheated if you shorted their paycheck, they often feel cheated if you short them on time, whether it is because you express frustration if they ask for time off or they know there is so much work to do that taking the time makes them feel guilty.

Is your time off policy a true reflection of the benefit your company offers or is it a false promise?

Carrots and Sticks

Photo by Dan Burton on Unsplash

 I hear many employers complain about the "everybody gets a trophy" mindset of "young people today." Our younger employees (and really, the Millennials many complain about are not that young anymore) want many of the same things we do, they are just more willing to ask for it. Everyone wants to be recognized for doing a good job.

Some of you have probably heard the expression, "The absence of pain is its own reward." In other words, if no one is yelling at you, life is good. You have probably also heard, "What gets measured, gets done." The stick aligns with the first statement. The stick tells an employee the minimum bar. If I go below this, I'll get yelled at. So the goal is to stay above that line. However, the stick doesn't tell me what you really want, just what you don't want.

This brings us to the carrot. We tend to think of the carrot as money, but the carrot is recognition. Yes, money can be a carrot, but truthfully, it isn't the most effective carrot over the long term. The carrot is feedback to show what gets measured, gets done. In other words, I know what you want, so I can give it to you. Carrots allow us to raise performance, not just get it to exceed the minimum required.

We Boomers may have grown up in the era of the stick, but we liked the carrots too and we worked at our best for those who served them to us. Some methods are more effective than others, especially if you are trying to change behaviors or raise performance to higher levels. You need to tell people exactly what they did that you are pleased with and why it's important. If I know what you are happy about, I will likely repeat that behavior again.

Regular servings of carrots will get you more than regular beatings with sticks.

Looking Ahead

Photo by Kristian Løvstad on Unsplash

 Happy New Year! Aren't we glad 2020 is behind us? Not that 2021 is all that great starting out on the COVID-19 front, but somehow, it seems there is light at the end of the tunnel. It may all be psychological, but I don't care. I'll take what I can get.

I don't know about you, but 2020 took a toll on business. I went from very busy to nothing in a matter of a couple of weeks. That should have meant I got a lot of business things off the ground that had been in the "when I get around to it" pile and this blog should have been easy to keep up. But I have to admit, those things did not happen. In part, because we were homeschooling the granddaughter and babysitting the grandkids, since their parents luckily were able to continue to work. There were also parent care issues in 2020. But I think the biggest issue was uncertainty. 

I had a plan for 2020 and was making progress and all of a sudden, that plan wasn't going to work. I made adjustments, but my clients' plans were also going bust. If there had been an end date in sight, it would have been okay, but most of my clients are very small businesses, and the uncertainty meant they hunkered down. I answered a lot of questions about the FFCRA and the CARES Act, but for the most part, my clients put everything on hold and went into survival mode. Other than a few employee issues that absolutely could not wait, those businesses put everything else on ice. They're starting to peek out of their shelters now, but none appear to be returning to anything approaching normal.

We're in a new year. Other than for lessons learned, 2020 is in the rearview mirror. And I did learn some lessons. Hopefully, you did too, or 2020 could be a complete bust.

Uncertainty still exists, but I have made a plan for 2021 that takes that into consideration, and I am working on new lines of business. I'll let you know when I am ready to announce the launch. I'm in a full-court press for the end of the first quarter.

High Potential or Right Potential?

Photo by Chris Chow on Unsplash

I hear a lot about high potential employees. I also hear many references to A, B and C players. The first is about the future and the other is about current performance. Personally, I am not much in favor of categorizing people in either system, although I understand what the proponents are trying to do.

Both systems are based upon subjective opinions and often, unclear criteria. They are also judgments made at a specific point in time. I have seen people move between the categories depending upon the organization, job, manager and life circumstances at that time.

But the issue that causes me the most concern is the focus on individual contribution. I am not saying individual contributions are not important, because they are. However, most companies state teamwork is important to them. The best individual contributors are not necessarily the best in a team environment (although they can be). You have only to look at various team sports to see how a high-performing star performer can disrupt the performance of the overall team.

Yes, if the job we have is largely independent, then a star performer may be the best option. However, in a team environment, I am more interested in bench strength and complementary talents. I want the right potential for the position I want them to play--both now and in the future. Once I place a person in a position, I need to constantly evaluate if they may be more effective to the team in another role. That may change over time.