What to do with staff survey data
February 16, 2009
In my organisation we have recently carried out an employee survey, which was done through face to face meetings with each employee. I am part way through analysing the results and there have been some interesting responses. It’s always surprising how different people have widely different feelings about what makes them happy and motivated at work. There were comments about many different aspects of work, ranging from the level of feedback employees receive on a regular basis, to what is provided in the food and drinks machines! It just goes to show that the smallest things that management may not consider to be important can actually have an effect on the general mood of the workforce; and this is why I personally am quite a big fan of staff surveys.
Carrying out a survey is one thing, but it is what you actually do with the results of the survey that is really important. When I have carried out surveys in the past I have always worked hard to try to at least put together a report for the management team or company leadership, so that a response can be put together and actions made as a result of what staff have been saying. There’s nothing more damaging to the sense of ‘employee voice’ than when a staff survey is carried out and employees hear nothing more about it after they have submitted their response. Even if the results are used positively and management make workplace changes as a result of survey responses, the communication of this is almost as important as the action itself; as it is vital that employees know that this has been a direct result of their opinions and ideas.
There’s an interesting article in the latest People Management magazine (The Big Ask: 12th Feb) which talks about linking employee survey results to business performance. Employee engagement is the main buzzword of the moment in terms of how employees feel about and respond to the organisation; and this can be shown to have an effect on the bottom line and other business performance indicators. Research has shown that organisations that have high employee engagement also have better business performance, including in particular, net profit.
For more information on employee engagement and staff surveys have a look at previous articles Let’s get engaged (13 June 08) and Developing engagement (14 June 08).
Reviewing employee benefits
February 6, 2009
In the current economic climate, employee benefits are possibly one of the last things on many employers’ minds; unless they are thinking of ways to cut back on costs by reducing spending on benefits or removing schemes altogether. For example, the company that my colleague formerly worked for removed the employer’s contribution from the pension scheme following a consultation exercise. Basically the choice was that the pension contribution had to be removed, otherwise redundancies would be necessary.
These often necessary changes to employee benefits are nonetheless extremely damaging to employee morale, and to keep hearing negative news with nothing to counteract it will increase the negative effects of the recession, i.e. employee insecurity, depression and de-motivation. However the budgets for employee benefits will continue to be squeezed, making it hard for HR or Reward/Benefits departments to maintain morale and faith in the company when they’re taking away the very things they have used to increase it in the past.
This is a perfect time to review the benefits package on offer to employees. In the same way that different benefits will appeal to different employees due to their varying personal circumstances, benefit choices will change depending on the external environment and the ways in which employees need to be supported.
As I said a few weeks ago, when I recently visited my GP he told me that his workload had increase due to the recession as he was treating a lot of stress and depression related illnesses. When I have consulted in the past on employee benefits, an employee assistance programme has been one of the least popular choices, but at the moment I bet a lot of workers across the company could really benefit from this kind of service. Another option that could help out a lot of people at the moment might be providing some time with a financial advisor; so that people can discuss their options if they have concerns about mortgage, bad credit loans or credit card repayments. This would be a fairly low-cost option but shows that the employer is aware of the personal issues facing many people at this time.
Companies should also consider flexible working options as an alternative to financially-based benefits, for example offering flexitime would be a great boost to many people; and although this might be quite difficult to set up initially, does not have a long term cost. Giving employees the opportunity to purchase additional holidays means that people can choose to take more time off if they wish (and therefore does not impose another benefit that some people may not necessarily want) and if employees purchase the days, can actually save the company money in salary and National Insurance payments.
This is a time for HR and benefits professionals to be creative with their budgets and time, rather than simply taking everything away and sending out the message that there is nothing that can be done because of the recession.
British jobs for British workers: is ‘protectionism’ valid?
February 5, 2009
You’d have to have been living in a cave somewhere in the middle of nowhere to have not heard this week’s big news story. This is about the widespread industrial action that has taken place in a row over Italian workers being imported to work on a contracted job at a Total oil refinery in Lincolnshire.
The dispute occurred because a contract at the Lindsey Oil Refinery was awarded to IREM; an Italian Company, who gained an agreement that they could bring in their own workers from Italy and Portugal to carry out the work. British workers and their unions were dissatisfied with this because they feel that British workers are being denied work; as many jobs like this are being given to foreign workers instead. Of course, the recession has exacerbated this debate because so many jobs are being lost or are at risk, so it is angering some people even more to see foreign workers taking jobs that could potentially be carried out by British workers. Once workers had staged a protest at Lindsey, thousands of workers at other sites across the country carried out their own unofficial industrial action in sympathy.
The dispute has been settled to an extent, with strikers having voted today to return to work on Monday after a deal was struck in which an additional 102 jobs will be created for British workers on the contract, without sacrificing any of the jobs that will be given to the Italian and Portuguese workers. However it is likely that the general dispute about these sorts of actions will continue for a long time, especially as job security and financial stability continue to cause concerns for UK workers during the recession. Even union officials have been saying “the fight does not stop here” and there is now more strike action taking place at Staythorpe power station in Nottinghamshire over lack of work.
This is a very strange and interesting debate. On the one hand it is easy to see why people in one country who are worried about their jobs would feel aggrieved to see people from another country effectively ‘stealing’ their opportunity to work; and therefore ‘protectionism’ appears to be a legitimate course of action. On the other hand, we are part of the European Union, and this means that anyone from the EU has a right to work anywhere within it. The unions are trying to argue that giving British companies the opportunity to make agreements with contractors in which they can bring in their own employees is direct discrimination against British workers. If this argument succeeds, then could we see new legislation dictating the way contracts are agreed with foreign contractors in future?
This sounds like an argument that could stretch into other realms of ‘who should be allowed to work (stroke, be) where?’ and it’s a little unsettling for me. What happens when ‘British jobs’ are kept for ‘British people’ and then it turns out that the people that get them are immigrant workers from foreign countries? Will the workers and unions feel that the right person has got the job in the end? John Philpott, Chief Economist for the CIPD, describes:
‘the worrying undercurrent of xenophobia evident in the current rash of unofficial strikes’
and this effectively describes the way that I feel about this situation. What is your opinion on the events that have taken place and the implications for the future of foreign contracts?
Don’t wait a year to have those important conversations!
January 26, 2009
In my organisation we’ve been carrying out annual appraisals over the last few weeks, and I would say that overall the process has been a success. Managers have had very informative conversations with their members of staff, and have been able to better understand their concerns, ideas and future aims as a result. For more than one employee, the appraisal has been an extremely positive event, because they have finally been able to air their issues and explain what is making them unhappy in work – and as a result a clear action plan has been developed to resolve these problems which will have a positive effect on the employee’s job satisfaction, and will ultimately help to retain those important members of staff, some of whom have openly admitted that they have considered changing their job in recent months.
Whilst I am really pleased with the outcomes of the appraisals, and I feel that many people’s futures will be better because of the open conversations that have taken place, I am disappointed that valued employees have had to wait for a number of months before being able to voice their concerns and find a resolution. I wonder how many leavers we could have saved in the last year if we had made more of an effort to ask them how they are feeling and listen to their concerns on a more regular basis than an annual appraisal?
It might sound silly saying all this, but I bet that in many organisations employees go a long time without having the important conversations with their line managers; there’s a difference between speaking to someone every day and giving them the opportunity to discuss their overall happiness and job satisfaction. There are different types of people of course – some people don’t have a problem approaching their manager without being asked if they have a concern, others will sit back and keep all their worries in, whilst feeling that the company does not care about how they are doing – and these are the people companies will eventually lose.
So basically the message is this: managers need to take more time to speak to their staff at regular intervals, and not just once a year in the annual appraisals. The key is listening to (and not simply ‘hearing’) what the employee has to say and acting on anything that may be negatively impacting on the employee’s job satisfaction or ability to achieve their job effectively. It’s simple stuff but will make a huge difference in the workplace.
The end of a 99 year era for Woolworths
December 11, 2008
Today brings the sad news that all 815 Woolworths stores across the country will start closing down sales this morning. The famous retail chain went into administration at the end of November with debts of £385million, and Deloitte, the administrator has been trying to find a buyer, but with nobody having come forward, the closing down sale starts today to try to pay back some of the debt. Many stores already have 50% off sales, but this looks set to drop even further, and flocks of bargain hunters are expected to descend on stores looking for cheap Christmas presents such as CDs, DVDs and children’s toys.
This is very sad news for 30,000 employees who are now worried about the likely loss of their employment at the worst possible time. Consultation on redundancy is due to start with all staff, some of which have very long service with the company. It is hoped that if some of the store sites are bought by other retailers such as Sainsbury’s and Asda, then some of the staff will be offered employment at the new store.
According to reports, this is the most striking indication of the devastating effect of the credit crunch so far.
Dealing with survivor syndrome
December 2, 2008
With more and more large scale redundancies being announced each day, it’s clear what the main challenge for HR practitioners is at the moment and will be in the coming months. But whilst dealing with the redundancy process is hard enough, the challenge does not stop when this process has ended and the employees unfortunate enough to lose their jobs have left the company.
Dubbed ‘survivor guilt’, the main problem HR will have to deal with will be the loss of morale in remaining employees after a redundancy process has taken place. It is claimed by HR experts that this is a big contributor to productivity losses in a time when motivation and high productivity are needed most. Seeing close colleagues leave, and then staying in contact afterwards can leave existing employees emotionally damaged, especially if they know the ex-employee is struggling to find new employment. In addition, if the employer hasn’t been fully open in the time leading up to the redundancies, e.g. saying that no jobs will be lost when it must have been known that there would be, this can lead the survivors to lose trust in the employer going forward, which is another morale and productivity killer.
I was speaking to my GP the other day and he was saying that his workload has increased in recent months due to the increase in stress and depression related illnesses caused by the economic difficulties in the country. Recently experts have found that people who keep their jobs after redundancy processes have taken place are almost as likely to suffer from stress and depression as those who have been made redundant, so a lot needs to be done to protect the mental health of employees who remain in the company after redundancy and restructure exercises have taken place.
One of the key ways to avoid this problem is to approach any possible change processes, including redundancy and restructure, in a completely honest and open way. Whilst secrecy may seem like the appropriate approach initially to avoid panic and de-motivation, in the long run employees will appreciate being given the truth and the opportunity to comment and ask questions as early as possible. Another good idea is to organise coaching and counselling sessions with surviving employees after the redundancies have been made. It’s never going to be easy for anyone to just think ‘oh well’ and move on after the shock of losing a number of colleagues, and employers should not ignore this fact.
If you are going through this process at the moment or have done recently, I’d love to hear form you so leave a comment below.
Use social networking to drive communication
October 30, 2008
Yesterday I read a news item on the BBC about a Demos study that has advised employers to embrace social networking sites such as facebook and myspace in the workplace, rather than enforcing blanket bans and dismissing staff who spend time on the sites as ‘time-wasters’.
The report suggests that social networking sites can help the way staff communicate, and can have a positive effect on communication and creativity, if implemented in the correct way. Peter Bradwell, the report’s author said:
“Banning Facebook and the like goes against the grain of how people want to interact. Often people are friends with colleagues through these networks and it is how some develop their relationships.”
However the report did warn that employers need to ensure the use of social networking sites in work can be linked to the achievement of business goals, and that staff who are abusing their rights on the internet should still be managed and disciplined if necessary. This poses the question of how to monitor the use of social networking sites when there may be legitimate reasons for staff to spend time on them. How would you identify an unreasonable amount of time on facebook?
Another issue is that the positive use of social networking assumes that all staff are motivated and excited about their work and will therefore use their social networking rights for communicative and innovative means. However we all know that many employees who spend a lot of time on facebook at work are doing so because they are bored, disinterested in their work or de-motivated in some way. I personally would urge caution in simply allowing all staff to visit sites of their choice at any time of the day, without a clear plan of how the company is going to tap into the benefits of the social networking culture.
One good way to use the concept of social networking in the workplace without the possibility of abuse, is to build a company version of a social networking site, perhaps through the company intranet. A while back I reported about how McDonalds were using an internal blogging scheme in the US, and Orange is currently building an in-house social networking platform for its staff. I think this is a great idea and, if implemented effectively, will help companies to move forward and succeed by using new cultural ways of communicating.
Managing change through good communication
October 14, 2008
A recent survey conducted by YouGov for Investors in People has found that all too often managers are not handling change effectively. The survey was carried out on 2,500 people, and more than half of the respondents said that they found out about change through gossip and the behaviour of senior staff, such as hushed conversations. The most popular way of receiving information about change was through one to one meetings with the line manager, rather than company wide announcements or group meetings.
Change is such a major part of business now, with mergers and acquisitions, large scale restructures or redundancies, or even day to day changes such as new products or services. All UK workers will experience some sort of change in their careers, and the consequences of communicating change badly can be huge. Change often be seen as the role of the very top level of management or HR to deal with, but as this survey suggests, line managers, as with so many aspects of employment, actually have the biggest role to play in communicating change, reassuring employees, listening to valuable feedback and then doing something with it. However it’s likely that in some organisations, even the line managers aren’t completely aware of what’s happening, so would find it very difficult to communicate effectively with their staff on the changes.
Managing change and communicating effectively are two very key skills for anyone with people management responsibilities, yet I wonder how many organisations deliver training on these areas for their line managers? This is something we have not done so far in my organisation, but something that is certainly needed.
Does your organisation provide any training for managers relating to change management or communication? Or have you been through a major change that was handled very well or very badly?
An alternative form of industrial action?
October 13, 2008
I’ve just read an interesting article about staff at the Criminal Records Bureau, who have decided on a different approach to industrial action than non-attendance at work. The workers at the CRB in Liverpool have started a ‘work to rule’ protest, which means they won’t do anything outside of their job description. About 450 employees are involved in this action.
This is a response to a rather pitiful pay rise of 0.5 per cent, and the action has been organised by the trade union that represents the workers: The Public and Commercial Services Union. According to the union, the amount of time it takes for a CRB check to be processed could double with employees refusing to work overtime or work above and beyond the targets set.
This kind of action is something I’m not too familiar with, but it is probably as damaging to a business or public service as strike action would be. The morale at the CRB at the moment must be rock bottom, as the majority of workers do not wish to work the absolute minimum required, and to feel that this is the only option must indicate a very low level of satisfaction with the employer.
This, unfortunately is the crisis many employers are now facing: dealing with major financial limitations versus dealing with employee dissatisfaction and unrest.
How is your company dealing with these problems?
Studies show Pensions are the most popular way to save for retirement
October 8, 2008
Despite the worsening economic climate its appears that Employee confidence in pensions is still the best way of saving for retirement.
According to the latest survey from the National Association of Pension Funds (NAPF) Worker confidence in pensions schemes has risen from 3 to 22 per cent in 2008.
41 per cent of the 1,198 UK employees believe that pensions are the most popular way to save for retirement.
The rise in Pension confidence was down to the increased uncertainty in property as an alternative way to fund a retirement.
Joanne Segars, the Chief Executive of NAPF has said:
“The welcome boost in pensions confidence shows the traditional view of ‘at least I’ve got my pension’ has started to make a comeback. Psychologically, employees are ring-fencing their pension from the other financial pressures they are facing. The decline in adverse publicity about the security of pensions has also had a part to play. The message that the system in the UK is one of the best protected in Europe must be getting through.”