Today’s HR leaders are working in a highly disruptive era. New technologies quickly outpace old ways of doing business. Employers are seeking individuals with skills and competencies that didn’t exist in the job market five years ago. HR is poised to embrace these changes and empower their larger organizations to successfully navigate this new world of business. In order to do so, a recent survey of 601 CHROs revealed that the most perceptive CHROs are capitalizing on emerging technologies to improve the employee experience, building a flexible skills base and drawing on analytics to predict future workforce trends.
Employers added 287,000 jobs in June, 2016 and many believe America is at - or near - full employment. In addition, 10 thousand people reach the retirement age each day. With these eye opening statistics in mind, there is one thing we can all agree on: the talent market is in full flux.
Diversity in the workplace is a major focal point for human resources professionals. There are classes designated to learning about implementing diversity, researchers who study it and entire publications that write about it. But what if without even realizing it the very hiring professionals that are committed to diversity and equal opportunity were making the same kinds of hires over and over? What if humans just aren’t good at making unbiased hiring decisions?
Organizations spend a considerable amount of time, money and effort in hiring the right people. Once the employees are in the system it makes good sense to have the tenure balance the investment cost. However, as any working professional would tell you, the calculation isn’t always that simple.
Has the C-suite sent you a directive to improve employee engagement? Great. Now what? It’s safe to say that if you practice the standard employee engagement tactics, you’re going to fail. Sending out a leadership-curated survey on engagement once a year just doesn’t cut it anymore.
We know the stats. Your organization is aware of the engagement issues, and they are attempting to tackle them every, single day. We’ve seen the surveys to prove it, and they are numerous and unanimous… So, the question is, why hasn’t there been a noticeable change? Why are we still dealing with a hefty statistic of disengaged, unenthusiastic workers that has not moved for the better?
As companies struggle to acclimate and flex to the Millennial generation’s attitudes and behaviors in the workplace, many are also realizing that they must ready themselves for the next generation of employees that is fast approaching.
Whether software or hardware robots, computerization is going to affect jobs dramatically in the next decade—perhaps more than any decade in history. Increasingly, it’s on you to manage your own career to be prepared for tomorrow.
It’s no secret top performers contribute a disproportionate amount of output in our organizations. Rather than seeing an even distribution of performance throughout the workforce, one study found that 10% of productivity comes from the top 1% of employees and 26% of output is a product of the top 5%. That means top talent produces 4X as much as the average employee, and companies like Apple and Google report even greater gaps between average and high-performers. So who are these impressive individuals that make outsized contributions to our businesses, and how can we hire more of them so that we reach our business goals faster?
Is your talent acquisition function consistently delivering quality hires? A recent survey conducted by Cielo discovered alarming discrepancies in the importance of quality of hire and HR’s ability to deliver quality hires.
Millennials have a bad rap for being an entitled, job-hopping generation. Is it possible that companies are behaving as though they are entitled to loyalty they no longer deserve – from any generation?
You marry someone for who they are, not who you think they might become. So why do so many HR professionals not take the same approach with their recruiting initiatives?
A new employee’s first days on the job are crucial! They come into new hire orientation looking to affirm that they made the right decision joining the company. And whether their orientation experience is good or bad, that doesn’t stop them from moving on into their role – ready or not, here they come!
Talent acquisition is a highly technology driven, dynamic sector of the human resources function in any organization. In today’s candidate-driven market, new sourcing strategies and technologies appear almost as often as candidates change or alter their personal job-seeking strategies. How can organizations keep up with this constantly changing dynamic?
Who experiences greater levels of stress: you or your boss? When we ask this question while teaching workshops on leadership, nearly all the bosses in the room respond that they are the ones under greater stress. They’re wrong. Hard data makes it clear that non-leaders experience greater stress, and in many instances it has a negative effect on their performance.
What does it mean to be an engaged employee? Recent HCI research reveals that 93% of HR leaders agree that engagement is critical to business success. How can HR leaders know if their employees feel engaged in their work?
Employee engagement continues to vex employers globally. Despite all that’s been written and the billion dollars plus spent annually on this issue, engagement rates have remained essentially unchanged since Gallup first shared its groundbreaking research. Why is this?
You know that the time and resources your company sinks into training new hires each year is costing you, but have you ever really calculated how much? Almost all onboarding and training programs are focused solely on giving participants basic information about their job and the company, which in most cases amounts to only a small portion of the information new employees need to be effective. Obviously, employees that aren’t effective in their role are costing you money.
We have to deal with it once, twice and for the lucky ones even four times a year. It makes a small minority happy, a large majority upset and the overall organization better off, or so the theory goes. Yes, it’s the time of the season for performance evaluations. The nucleus of the meritocratic organization where the ‘good’ advance, the ‘challenged’ depart and the organization develops. Performance reviews just don’t take people into consideration.
The traditional model of survey-based action planning is simple enough. Managers get their survey results. Discuss those results with their teams. Identify two or three areas to take action on (and don’t forget to maintain those strengths!). Come up with an action plan for each. Implement. And then repeat in the next survey cycle. Yet for such a simple concept, it creates a lot of headache and discomfort for managers. It takes too much time. They don’t know what to do. It doesn’t seem relevant to their work.