The class on thursday talked about designing jobs that motivate. We talked about forecasting a lot, and I think that it is a very important topic.
If used appropriately, it can save your company a lot of money, or even help it make a lot of money. In the case of the mass retirement move projected for the next few years down the road a company can find out how many of their employees are going to reach retirement age in the next few years and start recruiting for replacements so they can take a few months to a year to train the new hire for the job, which would cost less than to have to bring the retiree back later on to do the same thing.
If used inappropriately, or not at all, a company would miss that the opportunity to get as much of the knowledge and experience out of the retirees before they leave, or in an economic downturn would not have time to prepare their employees for any lay-offs, cut-backs, etc. They could prepare by finding out if people would be willing to take paycuts so they didn't have to lay anyone off, or do a hiring freeze, or hire temps rather than regular employers.
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Chapter 5 Discussion Topic
The company I work for is big on nepotism, which in many areas can be seen as a bad thing. Unless it gets me a job, which it did, after having been unemployed for 3 months and the feds being too tight to pay out so my parents were kind enough to cover my bills until I got back on my feet.
The company doesn't just use relatives, but it has a few direct applicants, mostly from internship programs and referrals. I haven't found anyone there yet who didn't come from one of these three categories, in some cases this is very limiting, but for them it works. The benefits are pretty great, they do tuition reimbursement, several companies for insurance so you can find a good fit for your budget and situation, and flexible scheduling.
Direct applicants are pepople who apply for a vacancy without prompting from the organization. Referrals are people who apply because someone in the organization prompted them to do so.
The book said that there are advantages and disadvantages to all of these, the biggest concern being that using referrals and nepotism you keep a lot of the same kinds of people in your organization and that you limit the likelihood of exposing the organization to fresh viewpoints. Advantages would be that its cheaper and easier on the company since they don't have to do any of the recruiting.
I think at the company I work for because they offer tuition reimbursement more of the employees are going back to college or going to college for the first time and learning about things and situations and software they wouldn't have normally learned about. I haven't noticed much of the CEO's kids getting hired above us more quickly either, one of the Heads of Recruiting has a son that is in my department and he is treated like everyone else...possibly because everyone has a parent or friend or relative that works there too.
What issues do you foresee for a company such as mine? Or other company's that run based on nepotism? What do you think could be done better/differently?
The company doesn't just use relatives, but it has a few direct applicants, mostly from internship programs and referrals. I haven't found anyone there yet who didn't come from one of these three categories, in some cases this is very limiting, but for them it works. The benefits are pretty great, they do tuition reimbursement, several companies for insurance so you can find a good fit for your budget and situation, and flexible scheduling.
Direct applicants are pepople who apply for a vacancy without prompting from the organization. Referrals are people who apply because someone in the organization prompted them to do so.
The book said that there are advantages and disadvantages to all of these, the biggest concern being that using referrals and nepotism you keep a lot of the same kinds of people in your organization and that you limit the likelihood of exposing the organization to fresh viewpoints. Advantages would be that its cheaper and easier on the company since they don't have to do any of the recruiting.
I think at the company I work for because they offer tuition reimbursement more of the employees are going back to college or going to college for the first time and learning about things and situations and software they wouldn't have normally learned about. I haven't noticed much of the CEO's kids getting hired above us more quickly either, one of the Heads of Recruiting has a son that is in my department and he is treated like everyone else...possibly because everyone has a parent or friend or relative that works there too.
What issues do you foresee for a company such as mine? Or other company's that run based on nepotism? What do you think could be done better/differently?
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Reflection January 25, 2010
Today's class had a lot of information, although when we got to chapter 4 I think I really go the most out of it. I think that it is so right that in order to train an employee well you need to really understand what they need to do and to have a good job description. I liked what someone said in class about starting out slowly in monitoring an employee's training and progress with their tasks, and then slowly giving them "the reins" and let them do the job their way as long as everything gets done and done well. I agree that this will help you find a good fit for the job.
Monday, January 25, 2010
January 25 Discussion Topic - Chapter 4
It's kind of amazing to me that there is a field of study for making a job better, yet most jobs still blow chunks and contain redundancies right and left. Industrial Engineering is the study of jobs to find the simplest way to structure work in order to maximize efficiency. The authors of the book are smart enough to realize that as important as that is it's not the most important aspect of the workplace. Employees need to find their jobs interesting and satisfying and should be able to see aspects of the job motivating to do their jobs the best they can.
For one company that produces artery stents the maker of the products invited production workers to an annual party where they get to meet patients whose lives were actually saved by the product they helped produce. That is an amazing motivator. A tangible motivator. A lot of times we feel that our jobs are meaningless or we're so low on the totem pole no one would notice we weren't working at all if it weren't for that monkey on our shoulder (i.e. our boss or cameras).
The five characteristics listed in the book as a way to make a job more motivating seems pretty basic; skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback. How many times have we worked a job where we went into work and did the same mindless task for hours and hours and had no idea why were doing it or if there was an easier or better way of doing that task, knowing full well your boss couldn't care less about what you thought?
How can we make sure that this time of lax thinking about the empowerment of employees doesn't occur in the workplace when we are in HR? We have a say, in fact it's an important aspect of our jobs, so what would you do if you saw employees so bored their eyes are glazing? Or that turnover is high because people can't handle doing the job for long because of exhaustion, boredom, or because they wish they could make the job more interesting but don't feel they can speak to their supervisor.
For one company that produces artery stents the maker of the products invited production workers to an annual party where they get to meet patients whose lives were actually saved by the product they helped produce. That is an amazing motivator. A tangible motivator. A lot of times we feel that our jobs are meaningless or we're so low on the totem pole no one would notice we weren't working at all if it weren't for that monkey on our shoulder (i.e. our boss or cameras).
The five characteristics listed in the book as a way to make a job more motivating seems pretty basic; skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback. How many times have we worked a job where we went into work and did the same mindless task for hours and hours and had no idea why were doing it or if there was an easier or better way of doing that task, knowing full well your boss couldn't care less about what you thought?
How can we make sure that this time of lax thinking about the empowerment of employees doesn't occur in the workplace when we are in HR? We have a say, in fact it's an important aspect of our jobs, so what would you do if you saw employees so bored their eyes are glazing? Or that turnover is high because people can't handle doing the job for long because of exhaustion, boredom, or because they wish they could make the job more interesting but don't feel they can speak to their supervisor.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Reflection January 21, 2010
What I got out of class today is that we need to document, document, document. Everything. Have some sort of tracking record for your employees for conduct, work ethic, injuries, timeliness, productivity. Be prepared to have to be a jerk. I mean this in the way that you can't give someone missed opportunity after missed opportunity where they screw up and aren't learning from their mistakes, because it can come back and bite you. People are awesome sometimes. Some people are just amazing when you try to give them opportunities and chances and they just don't want to take them, but man if you decide you've had enough they will make your life a living hell and try to ruin you for not being understanding or for discrimination or some other ludicrous claim, take it to court and get that judge who accepted the lawsuit against McD's and their suprisingly hot coffee.
I can see why employers can get so cynical.
I can see why employers can get so cynical.
Reflection January 19, 2010
Today in class we discussed more about the issue of the Aging Workforce. I know I'm part of the stuck-up generation where we think that because we have all this new technology and new way of doing things, etc. that most of the aging population really isn't going to be a huge issue. I realized however that just because we have this massive amount of unemployed people out there, most of them probably don't have the skills or training for most upper-level and specialized jobs. We are much fewer in number than the Baby-Boomers generation and with our specialized jobs and new technology we require more people to do the same job that used to take only one or two people. So this makes the off-shoring and out-sourcing much more important to stay competitive.
This discussion brought us to a comparison of the old and new psychological contract. With the Baby-Boomers, and most generations before them, you came to work, did your job and stayed there your whole working life. Now we show up to work, do the job, share our ideas, gain new ideas and skills then move on to bigger and better things (i.e. jobs). This is so different from past generations, you used to be in the same company if not position for so long you knew your job inside and out. Now we stick around for long enough to either make it look good on a resume, to get out of the job/company all that you think you can before you move on to something that pays better or is in a better or more interesting location, or offers a schedule we like better.
I don't like job hopping much, but I know that if I know that a different company works to keep their employees as long as they can and treats their employees better I'm more likely to want to go to them than stay at a job that the employers treat me like I'm already half-way out the door the second I'm hired on. It's kind of a new slant on the chicken and egg scenario.
This discussion brought us to a comparison of the old and new psychological contract. With the Baby-Boomers, and most generations before them, you came to work, did your job and stayed there your whole working life. Now we show up to work, do the job, share our ideas, gain new ideas and skills then move on to bigger and better things (i.e. jobs). This is so different from past generations, you used to be in the same company if not position for so long you knew your job inside and out. Now we stick around for long enough to either make it look good on a resume, to get out of the job/company all that you think you can before you move on to something that pays better or is in a better or more interesting location, or offers a schedule we like better.
I don't like job hopping much, but I know that if I know that a different company works to keep their employees as long as they can and treats their employees better I'm more likely to want to go to them than stay at a job that the employers treat me like I'm already half-way out the door the second I'm hired on. It's kind of a new slant on the chicken and egg scenario.
News Article - HR Legal Concerns
http://www.hrlegalnews.com/will-obama-make-sick-days-mandatory/#more-1263
This article is about a bill that is in the House of Representatives that may require all companies with at least 15 employees to offer their full-time employees 7 paid sick days. This would include taking off time to care for a "family member", which can be anyone with a relationship that is equivalent to a family member. If a company already has a policy in place that is equivalent to the time required by the bill. Companies would not be able to lower other PTO in order to off-set the costs of the extra paid sick leave.
Apparently this was kicked out of the House a few years ago, and now our dear President Obama is trying to get this through again and is backing it with gusto. Most states have already attempted to make sick leave mandatory but all attempts have failed completely. There are a few cities, three that were listed in the article; Milwaukee, Washington, D.C, and San Francisco, that approved the mandatory paid sick leave.
I think that this is going to, hopefully, fail again in the House. This would incur a lot of financial issues to a lot of smaller companies, let alone the larger ones. I like the idea of paid sick leave, and at the job I have I believe we do get some paid sick time, but I don't like the idea of the government sticking their noses in every nook and cranny of our lives when we don't really need it. Companies, like people, should be allowed some autonomy to do their best.
What do you think would be some of the issues that would arise if this bill passes? Do you think this would open up a window for the feds to input more of their oh-so-helpful opinions into more ways that a company should run or compensate their employees?
This article is about a bill that is in the House of Representatives that may require all companies with at least 15 employees to offer their full-time employees 7 paid sick days. This would include taking off time to care for a "family member", which can be anyone with a relationship that is equivalent to a family member. If a company already has a policy in place that is equivalent to the time required by the bill. Companies would not be able to lower other PTO in order to off-set the costs of the extra paid sick leave.
Apparently this was kicked out of the House a few years ago, and now our dear President Obama is trying to get this through again and is backing it with gusto. Most states have already attempted to make sick leave mandatory but all attempts have failed completely. There are a few cities, three that were listed in the article; Milwaukee, Washington, D.C, and San Francisco, that approved the mandatory paid sick leave.
I think that this is going to, hopefully, fail again in the House. This would incur a lot of financial issues to a lot of smaller companies, let alone the larger ones. I like the idea of paid sick leave, and at the job I have I believe we do get some paid sick time, but I don't like the idea of the government sticking their noses in every nook and cranny of our lives when we don't really need it. Companies, like people, should be allowed some autonomy to do their best.
What do you think would be some of the issues that would arise if this bill passes? Do you think this would open up a window for the feds to input more of their oh-so-helpful opinions into more ways that a company should run or compensate their employees?
Monday, January 18, 2010
Chapter 3 Discussion January 18, 2010
I want to start this out by saying that for the last half of this chapter I was in training for every job I've ever had, and that's a lot of jobs. Okay, down to business.
Discrimination in the workplace is such a tough subject, if you look at the laws and legislation that have been set forth at a distance then it looks pretty basic. Don't say something stupid about anybody's race, gender, religion, disabilities, etc even in jest. The more you look at it, though, the more sketchy and difficult to navigate it becomes.
I was amazed at the book's examples of discrimination against pregnant workers, especially the one where the CEO told the woman who turned down a promotion while she was pregnant that she showed a lack of dedication and she should just leave. I started thinking about it, and I realized that I didn't even think of that as a type of discrimination. Not hiring someone that is already pregnant, or if there are cutbacks letting go of the women that are near their due dates just seemed like an easy and smart way to bypass the issue of having to figure out what to do about making up for the loss of work when the women leave for maternity leave. The more I read about it, though, I began to think about if one of my friends or I was pregnant and our employers just decided to let us go, or we couldn't get a job because we were going to be gone in a few months seems ridiculous. As we discussed in the last chapter people are not staying in their jobs for as long as they used to, so even if the woman was gone for only a few days to a few months after giving birth the company should have policies in place to prepare for these types of occurrences just as they should be prepared if someone was injured and unable to work or became ill and had to be out of work for a short amount of time.
How can we be more aware of pregnancy discrimination? How can we help prevent pregnancy discrimination? What sorts of policies and procedures could we have in place for employees that become pregnant or future employees that are already pregnant to prevent any discrimination and to handle the workload when they are gone?
Discrimination in the workplace is such a tough subject, if you look at the laws and legislation that have been set forth at a distance then it looks pretty basic. Don't say something stupid about anybody's race, gender, religion, disabilities, etc even in jest. The more you look at it, though, the more sketchy and difficult to navigate it becomes.
I was amazed at the book's examples of discrimination against pregnant workers, especially the one where the CEO told the woman who turned down a promotion while she was pregnant that she showed a lack of dedication and she should just leave. I started thinking about it, and I realized that I didn't even think of that as a type of discrimination. Not hiring someone that is already pregnant, or if there are cutbacks letting go of the women that are near their due dates just seemed like an easy and smart way to bypass the issue of having to figure out what to do about making up for the loss of work when the women leave for maternity leave. The more I read about it, though, I began to think about if one of my friends or I was pregnant and our employers just decided to let us go, or we couldn't get a job because we were going to be gone in a few months seems ridiculous. As we discussed in the last chapter people are not staying in their jobs for as long as they used to, so even if the woman was gone for only a few days to a few months after giving birth the company should have policies in place to prepare for these types of occurrences just as they should be prepared if someone was injured and unable to work or became ill and had to be out of work for a short amount of time.
How can we be more aware of pregnancy discrimination? How can we help prevent pregnancy discrimination? What sorts of policies and procedures could we have in place for employees that become pregnant or future employees that are already pregnant to prevent any discrimination and to handle the workload when they are gone?
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Reflection 01/14/10
I've been to Pikeplace Fish Market before, when I was 17, and I remember thinking how amazing it was that hundreds of people show up to this place everyday just to check out a place that sells fish. That the environment that the employees worked in was so fun, they loved their jobs and they got their work done while having fun and joking around and taking pictures with all the tourists. After seeing the video in class, I took away the idea that the environment was created on purpose. It didn't just happen. The fun with the productivity didn't just happen by accident or show up one day, that it was worked on and not just by the employees trying to make their day a little easier, but the management took the time to get the ball rolling on this revolutionary ideal.
The management at Pikeplace Fish Market may not have been trained on the concept of Human capital and they may have but either way they "got it". They understood; or rather, understand, their employees need to be trained well and then empowered to become better. How many companies do we see, or have we worked with that just think of the majority of their employees as just numbers? Or an expendable asset? Or even, think of their customers as just numbers? As income?
Employees are so important to our business, we need their talents, insight, and creativity to yes, bring in the money, but also to keep the company in business. Customers don't like going to businesses where they don't feel respected, or where the employees don't like their jobs and aren't afraid to show it. It's all tied together, and as HR managers we will need to make sure we are aware of this and that we use this information to the advantage of the company and the people that can come in to either help or frustrate the efforts of the company.
The management at Pikeplace Fish Market may not have been trained on the concept of Human capital and they may have but either way they "got it". They understood; or rather, understand, their employees need to be trained well and then empowered to become better. How many companies do we see, or have we worked with that just think of the majority of their employees as just numbers? Or an expendable asset? Or even, think of their customers as just numbers? As income?
Employees are so important to our business, we need their talents, insight, and creativity to yes, bring in the money, but also to keep the company in business. Customers don't like going to businesses where they don't feel respected, or where the employees don't like their jobs and aren't afraid to show it. It's all tied together, and as HR managers we will need to make sure we are aware of this and that we use this information to the advantage of the company and the people that can come in to either help or frustrate the efforts of the company.
Introductory Essay - Get to know you..er me
My Name is Catie Wangberg. I am a Project Management major in the Digital Media Department.
I am working full time in Salt Lake for a company called L-3 Communications and hope I can get an internship there in HR or using my degree in some aspect or another there as they have many different opportunities for their employees.
I am a senior credit-wise, but I still have a solid 4 semesters to look forward to since I've changed my major a number of times.
I am the oldest of 3 girls and so I am the experiment child; however I think that being the oldest has helped me to be comfortable with being in charge and delegating responsibility early in life. I grew up moving all over the country so I generally have a tough time answering the question "Where are you from?". I moved here in january for the second time after an almost 2 year hiatus and back to school after an almost 3 year hiatus and I'm glad to be back in Utah and back at school.
I'm looking forward to graduating and moving past the single college-student aspect of my life, even if getting a "real" job is mildly terrifying.
I am working full time in Salt Lake for a company called L-3 Communications and hope I can get an internship there in HR or using my degree in some aspect or another there as they have many different opportunities for their employees.
I am a senior credit-wise, but I still have a solid 4 semesters to look forward to since I've changed my major a number of times.
I am the oldest of 3 girls and so I am the experiment child; however I think that being the oldest has helped me to be comfortable with being in charge and delegating responsibility early in life. I grew up moving all over the country so I generally have a tough time answering the question "Where are you from?". I moved here in january for the second time after an almost 2 year hiatus and back to school after an almost 3 year hiatus and I'm glad to be back in Utah and back at school.
I'm looking forward to graduating and moving past the single college-student aspect of my life, even if getting a "real" job is mildly terrifying.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Chapter 2 Discussion - Psychological Contract/Flexibility
I was really interested in the idea of a psychological contract. I find it so interesting that people aren't staying in the same job as long as they used to in past generations. People used to stay in their jobs their whole lives and now I can't imagine staying at the same job for more than a few years unless there is opportunity for growth. I like the idea of companies working with employees to train them and offer job experiences for future jobs. Companies know full well that people aren't going to stick around for long, and most of the time the company wouldn't be able to keep people around anyway for very long due to changes in technology, skill requirements, mergers, layoffs and organizational restructering. I think people now see there are a lot of opportunities and we are a generation that likes our choices, whether its with food, clothing, music or our jobs. We see the choices and want to sample each one and see how it works for us.
For myself, I have a difficult time thinking of a job I would want to do for the rest of my life other than be a parent/spouse. I get bored easily and seek out new and more exciting opportunities just because they are out there ready for the taking. I know in the economy we have right now we all have to think more about keeping the jobs we have, but luckily so many employers have seen that we need flexible schedules because of family, school and other out of work activities.
I think that its important to have some quid pro quo in the workplace, the employer will offer better benefits, training, job experience, and in turn the employees will work hard, maintain a good morale, provide good if not excellent customer service and loyalty.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Reflection on class 01/12/10
I think this is going to be a rough semester. We are going to be learning a lot and hopefully we can actually learn all of this important information rather than just memorize it for the test and forget about it later since the content of this class is going to be so helpful in our future.
I really liked the assessment of Southwest Airlines because they seem to have it right and are doing so well financially as well as with their reputation as a company that provides excellent customer service and satisfaction. It seems so easy; look at the big picture, yet so many companies and execs look at the immediate cost or bottom - line. So many companies focus on being able to bring in the big bucks but don't stop and think about the fact that they are dealing with people and that people will pay more if they enjoy the experience as well as the product. It's amazing to me that these execs have pigeon-holed their view and seem completely unable or interested in improving their game.
I really liked the assessment of Southwest Airlines because they seem to have it right and are doing so well financially as well as with their reputation as a company that provides excellent customer service and satisfaction. It seems so easy; look at the big picture, yet so many companies and execs look at the immediate cost or bottom - line. So many companies focus on being able to bring in the big bucks but don't stop and think about the fact that they are dealing with people and that people will pay more if they enjoy the experience as well as the product. It's amazing to me that these execs have pigeon-holed their view and seem completely unable or interested in improving their game.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)