HR Daily Advisor is BLR’s FREE daily source of HR tips, news, and advice. HR Daily Advisor offers free webcasts, articles, and reports on topics important to HR and compensation professionals.
More than half of all people in the United States (53.8%) have now been vaccinated, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). While still a far cry from the 70% goal President Joe Biden had predicted, it does show some progress is being made.
For workplaces, though, some thorny questions are emerging: Should employees who have not yet been vaccinated be asked, or required, to return to the workplace? Should employers require employees to be vaccinated in order to return to work?
Opinions vary widely about the best approach to take. But employees themselves seem to favor an approach that errs on the side of safety, according to recent research from Haven Life. Respondents overwhelmingly (83%) believe their employers will provide them with a safe environment once they return to the workplace.
Erring on the Side of Safety
Respondents to Haven Life’s research are pro-vaccine and pro-mask: 53% indicate they believe vaccinations should be mandatory for employees to return to work, and 71% feel employers should continue to require mask-wearing.
Amid this environment, employers have a slippery slope to navigate. When opinions are split—or polarized—it’s obviously impossible to address all employees’ needs and preferences.
To Mandate or Not to Mandate
While the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has indicated that employers can require employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19 before returning to the workplace, some remain wary of doing so. This is based on both concerns that the vaccines have not yet been fully approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the uncertain legal environment that still exists and “the long list of legal considerations the E.E.O.C. says they must follow before mandating vaccines.”
There is no “one size fits all” approach to vaccine-related considerations. Employers will need to consider their unique situations, where they’re located, the state of the virus in their area, the demographic nature of their workforce, the customers they serve, and more as they navigate the uncertainty of bringing employees back to work before vaccines have been fully approved.
Communication Is Key
As with any workplace considerations and policies, communication is going to be critical as employees return and employers develop and share their policies around vaccination.
Employee and customer safety needs to be top of mind, and employers will need to remain flexible as they address varying employee sentiment and concerns around their own health and safety.
Opening up lines of communication and gathering input from employees can help employers determine the best steps to take. Ongoing polls monitoring employee sentiment can help employers stay abreast of concerns and how those concerns may be ebbing and flowing.
Though there is evidence to support the glass ceiling as a real problem, there is not currently enough empirical evidence backing the existence of the glass cliff.
The “glass cliff” has been back in the media as of late, with both Forbes and Fast Company recently publishing articles on the subject. This may have been triggered by the appointment of Jane Fraser as the new CEO of Citigroup—a move that led some commentators to express concerns that Fraser was being put on a glass cliff. An obvious allusion to the glass ceiling, the glass cliff, for those unfamiliar, is a theoretical concept holding that when organizations seek to change leadership during times of crisis, women are more likely than men to be appointed to positions of said leadership. It further holds that these female leaders are then more likely to fail due to the volatility of whatever crisis situation the organization is facing, thus reinforcing the implicit bias that women are less capable leaders than men.
There’s just one problem with the glass cliff theory: Though there is evidence to support the glass ceiling as a real problem, there is not currently enough empirical evidence backing the existence of the glass cliff. Moreover, while the motivational drive behind the glass cliff theory—the desire for greater gender diversity in corporate leadership—is a positive one, it actually distracts from the real causes behind the perception that female CEOs are disproportionately being appointed leaders in times of crisis and that, as a result of this, they are failing more often. Addressing these causes effectively will require us to have a clear understanding of what they are so we don’t waste effort and resources on a phantom problem.
The Need for More Research and Evidence
Before we get into it, there are just two things I wish to clarify upfront. First, like many in my field, I am an advocate of greater diversity in corporate leadership. Hopefully, it goes without saying that one can support diversity but also feel the need to approach any and all claims of causation with analytical rigor and a measure of warranted skepticism. Second, questioning the glass cliff hypothesis isn’t the same as denying the possibility it may be correct. It may very well be correct, but as of right now, there isn’t enough data and evidence to either confirm or refute this, so it would be wise to exercise caution before making sweeping claims.
Much of the discussion around the glass cliff concept is based on a 2005 study by two U.K. researchers, Michelle Ryan and Alexander Haslam. Ryan and Haslam’s study looked at FTSE 100 companies, basically the U.K. equivalent to the Dow Jones Industrial Average, during 2003 to determine specific company stock performance around the appointment of a new male or female board member. In total, 19 female board appointments were made in 2003 with respect to FTSE 100 companies.
What these researchers concluded was that female board members were more likely to be appointed during times of crisis, whereas male board members were more likely to be appointed during periods of stability, and being appointed during a period of crisis put these female board members at higher risk for failure. What I am skeptical of is not the numbers cited in the study but rather the authors’ interpretation and the way their research has been framed in the general media.
Let’s start with the researchers’ original interpretation that women were being appointed board members in times of crisis and that this put them at higher risk for failure. For context, it’s helpful to remember that during the late 1990s and 2000s, amid calls for greater gender diversity on corporate boards, efforts were made to diversify representation on corporate boards both in the United Kingdom (which the aforementioned study focuses on) and in the United States. If more women were being appointed board members during this period overall, then naturally, there were board vacancies filled by females at companies that were performing strongly, as well as those that were underperforming.
It’s also critical to note that this study observes board appointments, not executive management of the company. The authors incorrectly characterize board governance as management of the company. It is well-founded in corporate governance literature that the main role of a board of directors is advisory, oversight, and monitoring. Effective directors are diligent monitors but not managers of business operations. They exercise attentive oversight of a company’s affairs, but they do not manage the daily affairs of the company’s business. These female directors are one, perhaps two members of a much larger board of directors. A board of directors functions as one governing body. So, it’s inaccurate to conclude that the female board members were “set up to fail” because if the company underperforms, the “buck stops” with the entire board. There is no distinction between genders of individual board members with respect to company performance.
However, based on Ryan and Haslam’s own research, it turns out it wasn’t even the case that female board members appointed during this time performed poorly on average. In fact, generally speaking, they performed quite well. So, while it may be true that the FTSE 100 companies in the study disproportionately appointed female board members during periods of recent underperformance (and that could certainly be something to examine more closely), share prices actually went up or enjoyed stability following those appointments. This seems to somewhat conflict with the idea that the female board members were put at higher risk for failure. To be sure, one could conclude that the appointment of female board members led to improved company performance.
Next, let’s look at the way this study and its conclusions have been framed more recently in the general media. There are two ideas being put forth. One is the implication that women who are appointed to leadership positions are somehow being set up to fail. As anyone who has served on a board or is familiar with the way boards are run would probably agree, corporate boards and the shareholders who elect them simply don’t think this way. It is in their own self-interests that their companies succeed, and they are not going to purposely make decisions to undermine that, regardless of their ideological stances on gender and leadership.
The other suggestion being made is that perhaps women may be appointed CEOs or board members during times of crisis due to the perception that women are more likely to have leadership styles that emphasize cooperation and that this would serve companies well during those times of crisis. This line of reasoning seems more plausible, as there’s been research in recent years making the case for female leadership during crisis, and it’s possible that companies may appoint more women to leadership roles as a natural response to this, partially.
But, again, the desired outcome in this scenario is for the appointed women to succeed so the company performs well and generates abnormal shareholder returns, not to set the women up for failure. Moreover, there are generally only two situations in which CEO and board member positions become available: when leaders voluntarily decide they’ve served long enough or when organizations are facing a crisis. The first situation doesn’t happen very often, while the second, unfortunately, does. Therefore, we may inevitably see women being appointed leaders during times of crisis, especially because there are more women in mid-management roles, poised to move into senior leadership or the C-suite. But it is happening organically, not insidiously.
The Real Problems Companies Should Focus On
Part of the reason for the appeal of the glass cliff theory may just be the disparity between men and women in senior leadership roles. This is something I do agree is a problem, albeit one we have made progress on. Despite that progress, there is admittedly still a gap, and for this reason, there may be more scrutiny toward female leaders in ways both good and bad—good if it helps us keep improving and bad if it leads to theories that distract us from the more fundamental problems. In other words, both men and women will be appointed to leadership roles, and for some of them, this will inevitably happen during crisis situations. Some of these leaders will succeed, and some of them will not.
However, because of the gender disparity, and also because more women are being appointed leaders now than before, we may just be noticing it more when the leaders who fail are women (even though men are also failing). The solution to this, therefore, is not to devote inordinate attention on the glass cliff but to keep improving gender diversity within senior leadership so the significance when female leaders fail isn’t exaggerated. It’s beyond the scope of this article to discuss the precise ways to improve corporate diversity, but there are already many helpful articles out there on this very topic.
Next, if we can agree that male and female leaders are equally capable of both success and failure, then the other problem to focus on is one of better succession planning. Unfortunately, most companies in general don’t distinguish between leaders who are good for times of stability and those who are good for times of crisis. Often, leaders who’d be perfectly suitable during normal times are not cut out for leading during crisis situations and vice versa.
Take CEOs. Typically, when a board looks for a new CEO, they’ll consider three broad categories or buckets:
Knowledge and skills (Does the individual know the organization and the industry?)
Leadership (Can the person build trust, develop talent, and articulate the company’s mission?)
Culture carrier (Does he or she have the right mindset, inspiration, and personal attributes?)
But I suggest that a fourth principle be added. We could call it situational awareness, which assesses whether a candidate’s other three criteria are best suited for a period of stability or adversity. Good leaders are generally suited for one or the other; “great” leaders are adaptable and resilient and can succeed in both environments. This also applies to low- and midlevel management just as much as it does to senior and executive management.
Combined, these two approaches would work together to (a) further diversify gender representation in corporate leadership and (b) add the missing component to succession planning to ensure that more leaders appointed during times of crisis, male and female alike, succeed. Succeeding during times of crisis and instability may very well be like climbing a cliff—difficult and challenging. But perhaps it is just a regular rocky cliff, not a glass cliff, and there is plenty organizations can do to ensure the leaders they place on those cliffs are skilled mountaineers with the right kind of experience and equipment they need to climb successfully.
Using tech to automate extraneous tasks, HR teams can focus their effort on communication and building relationships that promote a thriving workforce.
The world of HR is becoming more tech-focused all the time. With the implementation of automation, data tracking, artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms, and more, we are constantly pivoting to a new reality of HR as a tech-adjacent field. In the face of these changes, HR professionals may feel they are losing sight of the human element of their jobs.
However, this does not have to be the case. Tech-driven processes like automation are helping HR become the new face of business, and in doing so, these tools are transforming the workload of HR pros to mitigate tedium. As a result, HR experts can refocus on what makes their positions irreplaceable: being the focal point for human needs in an increasingly virtual world.
HR is about relationships, listening ears, and adaptive resources. With the power of tech to automate extraneous tasks, HR teams can put all their time and effort into bridging gaps in communication and building relationships that promote a thriving workforce. When integrating new tech into your HR workflow, these are the items to keep in mind.
Tech Saves Time
The importance of any tech strategy comes down to its ability to save a company time and reduce costs. In HR, these features are also vital to managing lengthy paperwork and information-heavy processes that take away from the more human aspects of the job. From payroll to résumé sorting, automation saves time.
As one of the most time-consuming jobs HR teams manage, payroll is one area where automation removes barriers to better practices without sacrificing human interaction. In the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, it’s time to reassess your payroll strategies to produce a system that can reduce the time you spend answering common queries, adjusting paid-time-off (PTO) hours, evaluating benefits, and more.
Instead, payroll automation can streamline all these processes, giving you ample time for handling the needs of a remote, hybrid, or fully physical workforce. Software options abound that allow you to navigate all these needs in one comprehensive dashboard, with automatic features for generating pay stubs and personal employee info. These can even be accessed through employees’ mobile phones to give them a full view of their paycheck. As a result, they can work with you to adjust pay issues on the spot.
Additionally, the recent growth in the remote working market means you’ll need help sorting through the large pool of résumés that will come your way. Automated systems can assist you through semantic algorithm filtering that matches candidates with keywords and associated language. In turn, you’ll be able to spend more time directly with ideal candidates, establishing a better feel for prospective workers.
When you consider the amount of time in your day that automated processes like this can give you back, the need for an effective automated approach is clear.
Putting the Focus Back on People
Making use of tech can be immensely powerful in returning the focus of HR to the people you work with. The best part is, integrating and managing these tools doesn’t even have to fall on the heads of HR professionals but instead can be an area where information systems professionals help out. These tech experts, who typically already work in and around HR departments, can handle the implementation and IT side of your automated systems so you can handle the people side.
Nothing has proven the necessity of a people-focused HR approach quite like COVID-19. As workers adjusted to new policies, hours, pay scales, and practices, HR bore the brunt of navigating communication across the workforce. In light of these challenges, the benefits of automation are clear.
But without the right approach to implementing these tools, you might still lose focus on the human element of tech integration. People need help and guidance to make use of the tools that improve their lives. Old habits die hard, and adjusting to a new workflow can be difficult. To ensure your tech approach focuses on people, follow these tips:
Map out your workflow, with clear illustrations of where tech will add value to the role of HR.
Work with information systems managers to define exactly what is possible and what isn’t.
Advocate for HR tech to your company’s executives, ensuring they understand these tools will assist rather than replace you.
Implement employee education and awareness programs to train workers on using self-service platforms that ultimately make their lives easier.
Check in with employees to gauge their experiences with new tools and practices, allowing for an open-door policy for questions and issues.
By considering these strategies, you can better cement the focus of any tech innovations in the HR department to support people. As a result, you can promote better morale and efficiency companywide, adding value to your overall business processes.
Remember that when it comes to a role like HR, which relies heavily on emotional intelligence, your job is far from vulnerable when it comes to automation displacement. Instead, AI and automation are here to help.
Assisting Rather Than Replacing
You can build a better, timesaving approach to HR with the help of the right tech. Unfortunately, however, automation is often a word we recoil from in the working world. After all, no one wants to be replaced by a robot.
But assistive technology will only underscore the importance of human beings in HR positions. By helping you manage payroll issues, sort through résumés, and eliminate tedious data management burdens, software advancements will save you hours that can then be used to truly get to know people and address their problems in the workplace. Explore these tools, then follow these tips for refocusing HR on the people you work with.
A diversity, equity, and inclusion manager’s prime focus is ensuring all employees understand DEIB—what it means, how it affects them, and why it matters.
Diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB) initiatives have become top of mind for businesses. According to a PwC survey, three-quarters of organizations are investing in DEIB programs. “In doing so,” the report said, “they hope to not only drive higher engagement” with employees, customers, and investors “but enhance financial performance and enable innovation.”
It’s critical, however, that businesses not just talk about meeting DEIB goals but also actually do the work of creating and nurturing a community in which everyone feels safe, valued, and heard.
After all, nearly 80% of workers surveyed by CNBC said they want to work for a company that cherishes diversity, equity, and inclusion. And no one wants to do business any longer with a company that just doesn’t get it.
A diversity, equity, and inclusion manager’s prime focus is ensuring all employees understand DEIB—what it means, how it affects them, and why it matters.
The work has many moving parts—a DEIB plan should encompass all of a company’s leadership, stakeholders, and employees—and it needs to encompass sophisticated, highly empathetic thinking about factors that can promote or get in the way of DEIB.
Before putting pen to paper to draft a plan, it’s vital to keep three concepts in mind.
1. Remember That Diversity Is Not Binary
When we discuss diversity, we often liken and attach it only to race and ethnicity. When the concept is used within a business, it is regularly expressed as “We need to find a diverse employee,” which all too often is code for “We need to find an employee of color.”
This “binaryness” is, unfortunately, woven into the fabric of our society. Social media and media outlets hype up this simple division—one must be on “this side” or “that side.”
In fact, diversity is not one of two extremes; it’s all-encompassing. If the concept had historically been presented as a spectrum, in a similar way to autism, it probably wouldn’t be so simplistically understood. Beyond race and ethnicity, diversity also includes sexual orientation, personal space, tenure within an organization, how one feels within an organization, and much more.
Diversity also includes “intersectionality.” For example, a person can identify as part of the LGBTQ+ population and be a person of color and be conservative. (Gasp!) Yes, this is possible, and yes, one person could be all three. This may be alarming to some because the idea has been perpetuated for so long that one could only be “one or the other.”
2. Eliminate ‘Othering’
The concept of “othering” is tied to inclusion because othering is the idea of not being included. It is a stage at which microaggressions can develop, stereotypes are blown up, and other harmful effects can come into being.
Most people understand the concept, especially through school, of “the in crowd.” If they weren’t part of that crowd, they were “othered.” Some never had the opportunity to be part of the “in crowd” because of who they are, what they were when they were born, or how they self-identify. That is just a small taste of what it is to be othered just for being born a certain way.
The remedy for othering is to, first, make people aware of the concept. Bring them to understand how unconscious bias takes root. Talk about how unspoken invisible barriers have been erected by systems and processes over time that prevent certain people from being included or feeling a sense of belonging.
A company should aim to reduce and eliminate feelings of being othered. We can elevate productivity through inclusion and belonging. A company becomes successful to the degree that employees want to work there—and they will if they feel they belong and are included.
3. Value Emotional Intelligence
Emotional intelligence involves understanding and controlling one’s emotions while being able to effectively communicate and understand others. The better people know themselves, the better they’ll understand how they relate to others and the better they’ll be able to work and lead. However, how emotional intelligence relates to DEIB is often ignored because people might have an aversion to discussing feelings at work, but this aversion is waning in this era of reignited social justice reform, as more companies are finding these discussions are critical to leadership and organizational success.
One of the pillars of emotional intelligence is psychological safety. Does a person feel safe enough to be his or her authentic self at work? This is where DEIB and emotional intelligence cross because it involves empathy, self-awareness, self-regulation, self-control, and an understanding of how to relate to others.
If we’re going to learn to accept others despite the fact that their beliefs or lifestyles are vastly different from our own, then empathy plus self-awareness must be the cornerstone of emotional intelligence.
Putting a DEIB Plan into Action
By working through these concepts, a company may encounter varying degrees of acceptance to DEIB training. We all have different belief systems, so people will have various perspectives on being open to this concept.
Whenever I do an educational session, I always set working agreements at the beginning of the meeting. I point out that it’s OK for us to have personal beliefs and experiences that influence where we are today.
What’s not OK is when we use those beliefs to oppress or limit other people’s success because of who they are and how they self-identify. This idea comes from James Baldwin, one of the leading equal rights activists and writers of the 20th century, who said, “We can disagree and still love each other, unless your disagreement is rooted in my oppression and denial of my humanity and right to exist.”
Resistance can occur because of unconscious bias. It is called “unconscious” because we don’t know it’s happening. Think of it as the binary system creeping in; in this case, individuals are labeled either “good” or “bad” based on where they are in their own understanding. Having bias does not make a person bad; it makes a person human.
That said, when one becomes aware of bias, it’s now his or her responsibility to change it. DEIB initiatives should facilitate awareness; understanding; and, when necessary, change.
By keeping these three concepts in mind—recognition that diversity is not binary, othering is poisonous, and emotional intelligence is a key skill—organizations can build DEIB plans that are hard-wired to real truths. Those truths are necessary to move companies past mere conversation to substantive action for years to come.
The first impression potential new employees will have of your office is your interview process. That’s why it’s so important to make an applicant’s experience a positive one. You’d hate to find someone you think would be perfect for the role, only for the person to turn you down based on a negative interview experience. You also want to ensure that the applicants are able to truly show the best version of themselves. That’s hard to do in a situation where they feel stressed out, nervous, or overly anxious. In order to get the best read on someone, the process should be smooth and streamlined.
So how can you go about creating a positive interview experience for a job candidate? Take some time to think through your process and make any necessary changes. It helps to think about the interview in three stages: before, during, and after.
Before the Interview
First of all, how do job candidates know where to go? You may shrug and say that if they aren’t capable of Googling your office location, they aren’t a great fit for your company. But the more details you can provide, the better. Is there construction on the highway exit for your business, and if so, what route should they take instead? Where should they park? Where are the elevators? Will a receptionist be greeting them, or the person who’s interviewing them? Would you like them to wait in a conference room, or in the lobby? By providing all of this information, the interview candidate will feel comfortable walking in—they know exactly what they should be looking for.
You may also want to consider sending an itinerary for the interview. Particularly if there’s any kind of technical test, it’s a basic courtesy to let candidates know that ahead of time so they can be prepared as possible. Also, this is a great way to let the candidate know who will be interviewing them at what time. An above-and-beyond potential employee will check out the LinkedIn profile of those they’ll be speaking with and try to familiarize themselves with the various interviewers. It also takes away some of the awkwardness of a first meeting.
It’s also important that you do proper research on your end. Knowing basic facts about the interviewee, like where they went to college or where their previous place of employment was, will go a long way. You should have their resume printed out and in front of you so you can reference it when needed, but it shouldn’t be the first time you have eyes on it.
During the Interview
Making sure small details are in place, like the time you arrive and offering the opportunity a coffee or other beverage, may seem insignificant. But this job interview is probably the most important part of the candidate’s day, even if it’s just another meeting on your calendar. Show respect and ask as if you’re interested in being there and what they have to say. Seeming distracted or being late are subtle signs about your company culture that may rub the candidate the wrong way.
When you’re interviewing a potential candidate, your questions should be purposeful and thoughtful. They shouldn’t be a random list you found on Google or something you pull out of your brain on the fly. This is an important opportunity to learn about the candidate in front of you, so take some time to brainstorm questions that will really have an impact. You want to strike the right balance between being friendly and not leading someone on. If you’re overly chummy, the person may think they already have the job in the bag, which might not be the case. But you obviously want to give off a warm and friendly demeanor. Try to be respectful, kind, and interested without seeming like you’ve met your new best friend.
Before the job candidate leaves, ask if there’s anything you didn’t cover in the interview that you should be made aware of or that they’d like to share. This is a great opportunity for candidates to share out-of-the-box things about themselves that may help you get a better view of who they are and how they would fit in a role.
Lastly, consider giving candidates you’re serious about a brief tour of the office. Even if you’re unsure whether you’re going to hire them, it can be a good chance for people to get a grasp on your office culture. You want the job to be filled by someone who really wants to work for you, and that means making sure it’s a good fit for both the company and the candidate. It’s a two-way street. Giving them the opportunity to look around your office a bit will help them make that decision, should it come to that point.
Before the candidate leaves, let them know the timeline for when they should hear from you so that they aren’t left hanging.
After the Interview
Whether or not you decide to go with this particular candidate, feel free to provide a bit of feedback. You don’t need to be overly harsh or critical if you’re turning him or her down, but letting them know something like “the person we decided to go with had a little more experience, something we believe will be integral to the role” can help a person understand why things didn’t go their way. Also, never, ever ghost a candidate. This person took the time to prepare for an interview, show up, and give their all: they deserve to know the status of their application.
Finally, if you do end up hiring the person, ask for any feedback on the interview process. Someone who’s recently been through it is the best person to provide feedback on what worked or didn’t work. This can help you continuously improve your process to get more and more qualified people in the door and make hires you feel confident in.
Some organizations look at culture as in-person experiences and quality-of-life benefits and perks. I recently asked Cassie Whitlock, Director of HR at BambooHR, if culture could be translated to a remote or hybrid workplace. She agreed, saying that at her organization, they define culture as how you think, act, and interact. Through that lens, culture can be identified and supported regardless of how a company is organized. Perhaps the most important ingredient for success in a remote and/or hybrid workplace is HR and leadership working together every day to understand and support the employee experience.
How did you find yourself in HR?
I started with an accounting background. It was a very interesting story for me as a person. I was divorced, I had two children, I was in my twenties with no education, and I had no career. I was thinking, "Wow, how am I going to take care of these two human beings?" I knew I was good with numbers; I always enjoyed math in school and decided, "Well, hey, people in accounting can put food on the table. I'm going to go do that job." I went back to school and quickly got my degree. Part of the degree includes a class on human resources. I enjoyed it, but it didn't necessarily spark anything for me. Then as I entered into the career world, working in small and midsize businesses, I found that accounting and HR are often housed in the same office or in the same person. And that was true for me.
I quickly took on all HR responsibilities, and it's a fun place where you can learn and grow just in the middle of doing the job. I found I was really good at it. Having a data background marries well, I think, with human resources, just because of all of the detailed things you have to keep track of and follow up on and reporting and compliance, and even some of the analytics are there. I had done that for a long, long time, and I finally decided that I felt that the challenges in human capital management and the HR space were far more exciting to me than my spreadsheets. Don't get me wrong, I'm never going to give up my spreadsheets. I decided that I needed to go back to school because you don't know what you don't know.
I went back and got a master's in HR and found it hugely beneficial. I did the program through Utah State University, which has a phenomenal program, and just loved the learning experience. So a while back, I specifically transitioned my career to focus strictly on the HR opportunities.
Accounting to me always seemed—and I'm not an accountant—like you're completing tasks and then they're done and you move on to the next task, making it fairly process-oriented. Right? But then you move to the next step of applying, well, what does it all mean? The application of all the information must have been quite exciting. I know I love getting into the numbers over here. It's probably not as strategic as it could be, but it's always fun to see what's working and what's not working and try to figure out why and what you can do next and where you will be.
That is probably some of the work I enjoy the most where I work with our leadership team. We're just now going through our next employee net promoter score survey. I'm gearing up to dive deep into the data and to bring forward the information to our executive leadership team to talk about what employees are saying and what they're feeling and experiencing, as well as how we want to continue to invest in the experience our team members have every day. I'm getting all excited for that one.
That's fantastic. I’ve interviewed a few folks at BambooHR before, and I’m not sure if this is still the case, but do you guys still pay people to go on vacation?
We do. One of our benefits is affectionately called a paid-paid vacation. The first paid is you get paid time off—most people are familiar with that. The second one is annually, you get paid money for going on vacation. The idea here is this is part of how we support our company value of enjoy quality of life.
We hope to provide opportunities that really enhance people's existence and the experiences they have. I have seen employees use it for everything from the traditional to unique uses. I think we're keeping Disneyland alive financially. That is the top visited spot; we have lots of littles among our employee base, and they have growing families. I've also seen people use it for some of the hard things, the unexpected things in life. We've had individuals who have lost loved ones, and because of the paid-paid, they were actually able to bring out a family member to be able to attend memorial services and come together at such a difficult but important time in their life. That's the whole idea behind it: spending time with the people you love and doing things that are important to you. While that's a very sad and difficult example, it's also very powerful.
Then you have the other side where people can go out and experience new cultures and have that trip they could never afford before and now they can with this extra money. My favorite paid-paid was exactly that; I took a trip to South Africa and got to experience a beautiful culture. My favorite experience there was working with an orphanage and being with those children and hopefully creating something positive in their life in the time I was with them.
And just to be extra clear, you only get the money if you prove that you're using your vacation to go do something, right?
Yeah. So you have to submit your receipts. We try not to make it too burdensome on an administrative level. And while we’re not here to buy souvenirs, we are here to help you have experiences. We cover things like flights, hotels, tickets, meals, and kind of all of the central basic things. Outside of that, we just encourage people to use it in the ways that best enhance and enrich their lives.
It's a great program. I think the spirit of it is clear. We know as HR people that when people take the time off and they genuinely cut loose or they have new and fresh experiences, it's better for everybody, it's better for them, it's better for their families, it's better for their employers, and it's better for their mental health. Unfortunately there's this energy, particularly in this country, that people feel bad taking time off, even if it's paid, even if they earned it, and even if they're taking less time than they normally would or than they're allowed.
Yeah.
They still feel guilty, which is just unfortunate. By giving someone money and saying “go do it,” it's putting your money where your mouth is.
Your point, I think, is very valid. It really takes a thoughtful, integrated approach. Yes, we have a paid-paid, but we've also been super thoughtful about our paid-time-off policies and whether they are constructed in ways that promote taking time off. A lot of people go into unlimited PTO, right? But studies show that you actually take less.
When you do take it, there is such internal political pressure on how much, when, and why that it turns it into a bad experience, and we do the opposite. We try to be generous with our time off, but we also have a use-it-or-lose-it program. We force you to take time off, and if you're bumping up against that top edge, then we try to say, "Hey, what's going on? And when can you take some time away?" And we make sure that we're staffing appropriately so that no one feels tied to the job out of an appropriate sense of duty and the work that needs to get done. Let's staff our teams correctly, and then let's require people to take breaks and go on vacations.
How long have you been with Bamboo?
This September will be 9 years. I started as employee 21. I had known the founders and had worked with them previously, and they were ready to grow the organization and said, "Hey, come on over." And that was actually when I ended up transitioning my career. I said, "I'd love to, but I do need you to know that I have made a decision to angle my career and strictly focus on the HR space." They said "That's OK, but would you do both for a while?" because they knew I could do all of the accounting for small business. It matters that you're able to wear many hats. So I did that, and then when the time was right, they said, "OK, we're ready to go get a CFO, if you're willing?" I'm like, "Let's do it." And so that's been a fun journey, and I worked with an amazing CFO and just love the teams I get to work with here.
That's excellent. It's not every day that an organization gets to watch someone transition and evolve. It's kind of a risk, too, right? On the organization’s part but a worthwhile one.
Yeah. Potentially. I had done both roles before at other organizations, so they'd already seen it. The question is, with that kind of a focus, what is the new thing that you get? That's what the big question mark in the air was. I'd say that I feel good about the work we've been able to accomplish with my having this not split focus but really just dedicated and thinking about the employee experience all day, every day.
Have you got any upcoming projects you're excited about?
Today is day 1 of our phase 1 of returning to the office. We have made a choice to adopt a hybrid work model, and this is our prototype phase, which means we're going to try it out as a test. I keep reminding leaders that I don't want them putting narrow blinders on and trying to stay in their lane. I want them pressing out against the boundaries and thinking. Let's find out what works for us and what doesn't. As we get through this initial prototyping phase, I think the big project ahead of us is that we will have a more distributed workforce. How do we plan to maintain and scale our culture, which has always been a culture focused on individual respect and belonging? How are we going to do that when we see each other less often?
It's a big question. I think that's probably the biggest concern for organizations, other than earlier concerns about motivation and productivity—we spend all this time and all of this effort saying who we are, so can that translate into a remote workplace? What do you think?
I think it can when you step back and ask, what is culture? We define “culture” at BambooHR as how you think, act, and interact. The thinking still happens in a remote work scenario, and so do the interacting and the acting; it's just through different forms and mediums. But, it does mean you have to be intentional about very specific behaviors. Maybe you and a lot of your listeners or readers have had this experience in transitioning to a remote workforce under a pandemic. I'm in back-to-back Zooms all day long. I'm lucky if I get a 5-minute bathroom break.
We have to think differently when we're in a remote work environment about how we can take care of the humans in the middle of this potentially more efficient time of working when we’re remote and you can just jump into the meeting; I don't have to waste time walking to a conference room or going to so-and-so's office. And yet what are the good things that happen in those small moments that we don't value as part of the employee experience? They do matter, and what should they look like now in remote statuses, or in hybrid, where someone's in the office and someone's remote, and what are those new social behaviors that we need to put in place?
Again, how we're interacting is going to matter, and how you think about those opportunities will make all of the difference for the person who feels on the outside. If you have a leadership meeting and 9 of the 10 leaders come in the office that day but one can't, is that one person on video and no one pays attention to him or her? Or is everyone still on video, even though they're also in the same room, and do you invest in technologies to improve that experience?
There are so many ways to do it, but I think culture can and does exist, and being intentional is the only way to get the results you want. You also have to be willing to listen to failure.
Think iteratively. Are you willing to practice and experiment, and where and how are you going to be gathering feedback on what it's really like? You can suppose, but until you're there doing it, you don't really know. It matters when you make sure that all of your employees and team members are part of building and driving your culture. It's not going to be centrally driven, per se. Leadership has to be bought in, and they have to care about it at the top, think about it, and talk about it all day, every day. But ultimately, the employees are doing the majority of the interacting every day, so they have to be part of that.
Yeah. It sounds like you have a very healthy approach, particularly what you mentioned about talking to your leaders about not necessarily finding these stuck in a lane because it's uncharted territory; not everybody wants to go back, even to a hybrid model, and some people really do. It's a new kind of division among your workers that didn't exist before.
Absolutely. If you have offices, you have got to be intentional with what the purpose is. The office is no longer the only place where work can happen. We already know that and understand it.
We're looking at our office spaces as a place where learning happens, where collaboration happens, and where connection happens. But we also have a set of employees who need it just to be functional, which is why we want a hybrid model. We're trying to support great work happening no matter what your individual situation is. That means having that flexibility and personal choice. So as long as we're taking good care of our clients and, through that, taking good care of the organization and taking good care of each other as teammates, then we want you to lean into choice and learn how you do your best work. Here are three different ways you can do it; choose the ones that matter the most so you can have the biggest impact and be the most successful in your role.
Soft skills are related to how individuals act, interact, react, and more and are often considered components of one's personality. However, they can be learned or improved upon, though doing so isn't as simple as with hard skills, and include things like resilience, communication, emotional intelligence, and more.
Employers have always looked for soft skills when searching for new talent. In fact, they're often a key differentiator when candidates have similar education or experience levels. When someone appears to be a great team player or a skillful communicator, employers know that candidate has additional assets to bring to the role that will help that person succeed.
Let's take a look at some of the soft skills that are currently in high demand.
Communication. This one never leaves this list. The ability to communicate effectively and appropriately can help someone be more effective and get things done more efficiently and succeed in any role.
Emotional intelligence. Those with emotional intelligence recognize and can react to emotional cues in both themselves and those around them in a constructive way. The ability to connect to others' emotions and react appropriately is important.
Social awareness and appropriate responses to social cues. Acting appropriately around others can help the team feel cohesive.
Self-awareness. Being aware of how you're coming across to others can go a long way toward being able to work well with others.
Ability to adapt to continually changing situations. Adaptability will always be important, but a pandemic showed us just how quickly and dramatically things can change. While this level of change is not expected day to day, situations continually evolve, and having the ability to roll with the changes, be flexible, and adapt can go a long way.
Willingness to learn new things and consider new perspectives. This might be called a learning mindset or growth mindset and is a component of adaptability. The key is to be willing to learn new ideas, processes, and more.
Reliability, dependability, and overall work ethic.
Problem-solving and ability to think critically. Being able to assess a situation and come up with an appropriate solution without always asking for help can go a long way.
Working well with others and resolving conflicts that arise. Conflict resolution doesn't come naturally to a lot of people, but it's a skill that's important to have any time teamwork is involved. Miscellaneous conflict is bound to happen occasionally, and being able to navigate these situations without always needing assistance is a useful skill.
Integrity. Employees who always act with integrity go a long way toward establishing good teams and good customer relationships. Employees who consistently show they act with integrity are valuable.
Resilience. Being flexible and adaptable is one thing, but being able to do this while staying resilient is a true skill that is difficult to master.
Soft skills are often more important than hard skills. They can typically be utilized at almost any job and can make a big difference in how effective someone is in his or her role and team. However, these skills are tougher to train on, so employers should look for these skills in potential new employees.
*This article does not constitute legal advice. Always consult legal counsel with specific questions.
The post-pandemic race is on to attract new employees—and as HR and finance executives both know, the solution can't always be higher wages.
Fortunately, other factors still mean a lot to jobseekers in the revived economy. Casual Fridays and office snack bars may help, but as research shows, health insurance is still at or near the top of virtually every list of candidate must-haves. A 2020 Insure.com research study of U.S. workers found that 70% considered health insurance to be an essential part of recruitment and retention.
It may be tempting for some employers, especially those seeking to control costs, to provide a single, high-deductible health insurance option. But this is a shortsighted approach. In a highly competitive market, even hourly employees are looking for choices. Candidates with young children, for example, may pass on a job offer that includes high-deductible health care in favor of another company that makes multiple plans available.
A range of options will give employers the best chance of landing the most desirable workers. While a healthy, single person in his or her 20s might prefer a high-deductible option, others may want a health maintenance organization (HMO) or a preferred provider organization (PPO) plan. If your company employs workers exclusively in metro areas with wide provider networks, an HMO alternative may suffice, but rural employees with fewer provider options may want a PPO, especially if a particular HMO-approved specialist requires a 50-mile drive.
Focus on Choice
To hire and retain the best talent in this tight market, your health insurance menu must be on par with the marketplace. Keep these disciplines and strategies in mind:
Offer comprehensive coverage. Seekers want to know that if they get sick, or simply need routine eye or dental care, their plan will cover them. For most Americans, the Affordable Care Act eliminated preexisting conditions as a hurdle for coverage; the challenge now for employers is to offer the widest-possible range of services while balancing overall cost.
Another facet of comprehensive coverage is geography. COVID-19 changed the employment game forever because for many companies, hiring is no longer local. If your new employee will be working remotely from the other side of the country, your regional provider may not have the necessary service footprint. A broader solution will become imperative.
It's helpful, especially if a high-deductible plan is on the list, to also include a health savings account (HSA) benefit. HSAs are a great way for workers to save money for future healthcare needs, tax-free, as well as to cover high deductibles. If your company can contribute even a small amount each year to employee HSA accounts, you have a highly marketable plus to present during a job offer.
As another way to round out your coverage, consider supplemental life insurance. A group plan with $10,000 death benefits can be obtained at little to no cost yet helps to demonstrate the company's concern and commitment.
Use health insurance as a sales tool. All too often, companies don't emphasize their health insurance benefits during negotiations. Jobseekers, on the other hand, may see things quite differently. If your company has assembled a strong offering, make sure it is communicated clearly and prominently as part of your compensation package.
As you make an offer, tell the prospect what options are available and why each is important. Employees are often concerned about what their monthly out-of-pocket cost is for premiums, so where appropriate, stress affordable premiums instead of deductibles and coinsurance costs.
Educate before and after hiring. Health insurance is a complex subject for most people. Just as it's important to demonstrate the breadth of your company's insurance plans to prospective employees, the education process must also continue after hiring—especially before and during open enrollment periods.
It's not wrong to start with topics as basic as "What is a copay?" "What is coinsurance?" and "What is a deductible?" It's also important to educate employees about the difference between plan types, e.g., HMOs, PPOs, and exclusive provider organizations (EPOs). An educated workforce will make better decisions and keep costs down for everyone.
Don't assume that educational content on your online benefits portal is enough. Most employees visit portals rarely; instead, focus on other avenues such as e-mail and company meetings, especially during enrollment periods.
Benefits Are Important
Clearly, it's not possible to remake a health benefits program in a few short months to accommodate a hiring crunch. But these challenges will likely be with us for a while, so it's worth the effort to optimize your benefits package.
Take the time to carefully measure the life stage and lifestyle needs of your workforce, and tailor your range of options to not only meet but also exceed those expectations if you can. A well-rounded, affordable program will give your prospective employees the confidence that they're joining an organization that cares about them. Wages are important, but a well-designed health insurance offering will help your organization stay competitive now and in the future.
When Ellen Bailey, Senior Director of Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging at Harvard Business Publishing Corporate Learning, was growing up, she remembers her parents telling her, "You can be anything you want." She took that to heart when she was a kid, but when she grew up and started looking at the statistics, she found out that "the reality is very, very different than the ideal."
For example, Bailey cites a report from Fortune saying the number of female CEOs of Fortune 500 companies hit an all-time high in 2020. That sounds encouraging, but the tally is just 37 women leading the nation's largest companies. None of those women was Black, and just three were women of color.
"So, there's still a long way to go, and there's still quite the equity gap when it comes to gender for sure," Bailey says. "It's like women can get to a certain level, but actually running these large Fortune 500 companies doesn't seem to be as realistic as we would like."
That's why Bailey, who began her career in the learning and development space, decided to move into the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) field. Since making the move, she's thought about solutions that can solve the equity gap related not just to gender but also to various races and ethnicities.
Seeking Solutions
Recent years have seen corporations tout the benefits of diversity. Those organizations have been shown to be more productive because they're more collaborative and innovative and therefore perform better financially, Bailey says. "We know that but taking that and applying it to practice and actually doing it is easier said than done."
Even though many organizations embrace the idea of diversity, they often miss the mark. Bailey cites a November–December 2020 Harvard Business Review article by researchers Robin J. Ely and David A. Thomas that explains the problem.
Titled "Getting Serious About Diversity: Enough Already with the Business Case," the article points out that employers don't realize the benefits of diversity unless they actually learn from their people of diverse backgrounds.
Organizations need to do more than recruit and retain people from underrepresented groups. They benefit by "tapping their identity-related knowledge and experiences as resources for learning how the organization could perform its core work better," the authors state.
"Our research showed that when companies take this approach, their teams are more effective than either homogeneous teams or diverse teams that don't learn from their members' differences," the article says.
Learning from diverse team members is key to finding solutions to the equity gap. Also, promoting awareness of the problem is important, along with having some minimum requirements and standard policies and procedures, Bailey says.
Organizations need to make sure, as they review candidates for promotions, that the methods of evaluating candidates and the questions that are asked are equitable and designed to remove biases or microaggressions that people may have based on how decisions have been made in the past, she adds.
Convincing Management
When working to increase diversity and equity within an organization, helping senior management understand the problem is key. How does Bailey communicate the issue? "I honestly just continue to pull out the statistics, and I align it then to what our business strategy is."
Bailey says that growing through innovation is important to her organization. So, because that's a goal, the organization needs diversity of thought, and if everyone mostly looks the same and is the same gender and the same generation, "we're not going to have the diversity of thought," she asserts. "We're not going to be able to have productive and robust debates that drive to new solutions and problem solve."
Her own company has seen success stories related to management's getting creative about improving diversity. For several years, Harvard Business Publishing's HR department put in the effort to improve gender equality.
"And it worked," Bailey says. "So, we now have over 50% of our population identify as female, she/her, and they are at all levels of the organization." As a result of that representation, the organization has seen revenue increases year after year, even in the pandemic.
Importance of Training
Diversity-related training "needs to happen for sure," Bailey says, as training can create a level of awareness about what an organization needs to do differently. And just as senior management needs to understand the importance of diverse representation throughout the organization, senior leaders also need to model the behaviors training aims to promote.
Training is not a "silver bullet," however, and shouldn't be a onetime effort, Bailey says. It needs to be integrated into the organization's daily work and behaviors.
Sometimes diversity training sparks pushback, and dealing with that can be tough, Bailey notes, but focusing on the organization's mission and values can help overcome resistance.
Anyone not in alignment with the organization's mission and values may "potentially need to consider going to another company," Bailey says, adding there "has to be some lines in the sand as far as behaviors that are tolerated and not tolerated."
Sourcing, Hiring, Retaining
Sourcing and hiring practices are vital, and just as with training, commitment from senior leadership is necessary, Bailey says. "It's not just the recruiting function. It's not an HR responsibility. It's all of us collectively. It's our responsibility."
Bailey adds that everyone needs to broaden their networks. "I always say that women and people of color are not hiding. Nobody's hiding. We just aren't going to the right places."
When she gets pushback from managers who claim attracting a diverse slate is too time-consuming, Bailey counters that once the organization's networks are built out and resources expanded—for example, by joining different groups on LinkedIn and associating with various professional groups such as those made up of women in technology or Black MBAs—positions can be filled quicker.
Being mindful of how job descriptions are written is also necessary. Instead of using the profile of the last person in a position, Bailey advises starting from scratch and thinking about what will help take a team to the next level.
"So, let us really be mindful of how we write that job description and the language we use to make sure that it is also inclusive and not exclusive," Bailey says. Having multiple sets of eyes on the job description is helpful in keeping unconscious biases from thwarting the process.
The onboarding process is another key piece. Bailey says most organizations are good at onboarding—at least at the beginning. They give new hires a mentor and help them connect and network, but too often, unless the new hire is "on some sort of high potential leadership track, after those first 90 days, it's like 'Good luck,'" she says.
That means leaders need to think about how to ensure that new hires understand they have the same opportunities as everybody else.
Getting Past the Naysayers
No matter how connected new hires feel and how committed an organization is to sustaining a diverse workforce, there will be some who feel threatened by diversity initiatives and don't understand how they might be benefiting from the privilege of being in the majority.
"When people say privilege, privilege doesn't mean you didn't work hard," Bailey says. "It didn't mean you didn't have some hard times. However, assumptions are made based on gender and appearance. When someone looks at a man versus a women, assumptions are made. This initial judgement is even more pronounced when it comes to people of color."
Bailey adds that an equitable workplace is fair for everyone, but that doesn't necessarily mean everyone has to be treated the same way. "And I think once we understand that collectively, then yes, there's a time where we need to raise others up, and that takes some extra effort and that's what we do to create equity."
A recent survey has revealed that nearly half of parents (46%) are concerned about missing key moments in their children’s development when they return to working in the office.
School and office closures have left many parents juggling work and child care during lockdowns. Although maintaining work/life balance has proved challenging for most parents, working from home has provided a rare opportunity for many to spend more time at home with loved ones.
A new study from Love Energy Savings of over 1,000 U.K. employees has revealed concerns held by parents ahead of a full return to the office.
The Data
In addition to worries about missing their children’s development, some parents are concerned that their relationship with their children may change post-pandemic.
One-third of parents (30%) said they are worried they will lose a degree of closeness with their children over the next year once they return to a normal routine, and 61% of parents also state they will miss seeing their children as often post-lockdown.
This possibly explains why 60% of parents are not in favor of the government’s suggestion of extending school hours.
It seems many fear returning to pre-COVID levels of intimacy when many parents spent fewer than 30 minutes of quality time with their children every day.
The prospect of returning to the office and not spending the majority of the week with their children is proving overwhelming for some parents and could have a real impact on mental health, exacerbating or creating conditions like anxiety and depression.
Love Energy Savings research found that 1 in 8 parents have admitted to worrying about their mental health being affected when their children return to their post-lockdown routine, with 1 in 7 men expressing concerns compared with 1 in 10 women. Because children are now back at school, many parents could already be suffering in silence.
After a year of increased involvement, it isn’t just their own mental health parents are worried about; 1 in 6 parents have also admitted they are worried about their children’s mental health suffering over the next year as they return to a normal post-lockdown routine.
However, emotions felt by parents are multifaceted, and it’s no surprise that many are looking forward to the freedom provided post-lockdown. Fifty-seven percent of parents expressed the need for space from their children.
Many also feel that a return to some form of normality will have a positive impact on children, with 96% of parents saying it will be good for their offspring to interact with a wider pool of people again.
The Return to the Office
As staff begin to return to the office, employers must take steps to ease their employees’ concerns, especially as research has suggested that companies have not been sensitive to the challenges faced by working parents throughout the pandemic.
A study conducted by Working Families in October 2020 found that 1 in 5 U.K. working parents feel they have been treated less fairly at work due to their childcare responsibilities since the onset of the pandemic. That figure equates to around 2.6 million working parents who feel they have been treated less fairly at work.
To successfully manage the return to the office and maintain an effective workforce, employers must become more empathetic toward working parents.
HR professionals at the Chartered Institute of Personnel Development (CIPD) had this suggestion for employers to become more family-friendly:
“It is important that senior leaders let working parents know that they understand the challenges they are facing and are empathetic and supportive.
“This will help to make working parents feel valued and will also give line managers greater confidence in supporting their individual team members.”