April Fools' Pranks at Work - Laughter or Liability?

Tomorrow is the day that many of us dust off our most convincing tales and elaborate pranks in an attempt to put one over on friends, co-workers or foes. Can't think of any pranks on your own? Simply check out the web for a slew of ideas, including the article posted today on careerbuilder.com, Top Ten April Fools' Pranks to Play at Work

Although humor is often a welcome addition to the workday, can there be consequences to what some see as harmless fun? How do you really know how a colleague will react to your prank? Putting a whoopie cushion on the chair of a co-worker may be hilarious to some, but mortifying to others. Can a prank that you think is completely innocent turn into a harassment complaint?

Human resources and employment attorneys are often seen as the "police" of an organization whose sole job is to set policies that take the fun out of work and create an overly sensitive environment. Will "I was just kidding!" and "What's the big deal?" become your defense of choice if a complaint is brought against you?

Do you think workplaces have become too sensitive? Have you experienced a prank gone bad at your company? Are employees sue crazy or are we finally setting examples of appropriate behavior at work?

Posted by Nancy Ledvina, Human Resource Consultant, The H.S. Group

Harassment Training: Is Yours Really Protecting Your Bottom-Line?

Would you pay more than $98,000 for harassment training for a location with 30 employees? Thanks to a settlement with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission one company is doing just that.

This week the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission stated that Yellow Book has agreed to pay a claimant $98,000 and improve its sexual harassment training in order to settle a lawsuit brought by the agency.

An article appearing in the Asbury Park Press, written by Michael L. Diamond provides a summary of the charges and the settlement. According to the article the company failed to protect itself and its employees in numerous ways; training was offered but was clearly ineffective, when the complaint was filed with the Director of Human Resources the result was a general presentation on professional behavior – an actual investigation was not conducted and finally, after taking a leave of absence due to stress-related disorders the employee was “constructively discharged”.

All of this occurred in a company that had actually conducted “sexual harassment training”!!!!

The courts are slowly chipping away at companies’ ability to offer an affirmative defense when only a cursory attempt is made at offering harassment training. It’s not enough to offer training that simply says harassment is wrong. A program that does not result in sustained behavioral changes and is not supported by appropriate policies as well as investigatory and disciplinary measures is not an effective program and may not protect you in court.

If you are doing harassment training the quick and easy way, you may want to stop and calculate the actual potential costs of the training. What kind of cushion does your company have in its bottom – line to support a $98,000 harassment settlement plus legal costs plus lost productivity plus . . . ? As an HR professional, doing the right thing when it comes to addressing Harassment and Harassment Training is one avenue you have of making a direct contribution to your company's profits.

Click here Harassment Suit Brings $98,000 to read Diamond’s full article as posted by the Asbury Park Press.

Posted by Denise Knutson, Senior Consultant, The H.S. Group

I'm Still Waiting . . .

You just might have to keep waiting! Rudeness in today’s work place appears to be on the upswing. Changes in today’s styles of communication may be playing a factor in work place rudeness. With more emails and phone calls and less face-to-face interactions communication becomes more challenging.

We’ve all waited for what seems like an eternity for someone to reply to our email, return a phone call, or simply say “hello”. But are today’s managers feeding the unfriendly working environment? Is this “office” rudeness simply an extension of the rudeness in today’s society? Or is what you perceive to be rudeness simply a misinterpretation of someone’s communication style?

These negative interactions you have with others might be preventing you from getting your work done. Some experts say that not only does work place rudeness put a damper on productivity it also hurts the organization’s ability to retain employees. With the talent shortages facing today’s job markets can employers really afford this?

In today’s diverse workforce age, gender, and cultural differences all play into how we work together. Maybe acknowledgement and education are the keys to keeping peace at the office. Or maybe that’s not the answer at all. To find out more about how rudeness may affect your work place or be addressed read Loretta Chao’s article “Rise in Office Rudeness Weighs on Productivity and Retention” in the Wall Street Journal. Rise in Office Rudeness

Posted by Heidi Brown, Recruiting Coordinator, The H.S. Group

I Have NEVER Made a Mistake!

We all know this person. We may even be this person. Do any of us like this person? It’s common for people to confuse high self-esteem with the myth of perfection. The difference lies in how the person perceives a problem and how they address it.

One with high self-esteem will see the problem as a challenge and take responsibility to face it - knowing it’s a prime opportunity to learn, grow, move on and be better for it. While a person who needs to be perfect will find another person or event to blame and make it known that it’s not their fault. This perfect person may even keep track of others’ imperfections in an attempt to deflect any notice of their own - gulp - imperfections.

Do you work with either of these people? Both? Which type exemplifies leadership qualities and gives the best of themselves to their organization?

No one has to like everyone else in the office, but businesses will get the most out of their workforce when employees are more concerned about what they learned from their last mistake and less concerned that the mistake occurred and who is to blame.

Read a column by Liz Ryan as posted on BusinessWeek Online: Cursed by a “Perfect" Colleague

Posted by Amy Dennis, Career Management Coordinator, The H.S. Group

Name That Tune

22.5 million iPods were sold in 2005. How many of them have appeared in your workplace? It has become more and more common to walk through a company and see individuals wearing earphones attached to an MP3 player; some singing along, some moving to the beat and some drumming on their desk. In other cases you may see employees receiving training via podcasts.

Has the MP3 player become a tool to enhance workplace productivity or a distraction? Needless to say there are arguments on both sides of issue. In a USAToday article, Stephanie Armour explores this growing workplace trend.

Have MP3 players become a part of your workplace landscape? How do you personally feel about their use at work? What is your company's stand on their use?

To read Stephanie Armour's article click here: Music hath charm for some workers - others it annoys

Posted by Denise Knutson, Senior Consultant, The H.S. Group

I'm Not Slacking Off - I'm Thinking

When was the last time you had time at work to just sit and think? No phone calls, no e-mail, no meetings - just thinking?

In her recent Ask Annie column on Fortune.com, Anne Fisher offers a commentary on why slacking off at the office may be the best way to beat the competition. According to Fisher:

"Consider that for most industries, the U.S. can't hope to be the low-cost producer in a global economy. With innovation now our main competitive strength, creativity is crucial for anyone who wants to move up.
But it's really, really hard, if not impossible, for the human brain to come up with fresh new ideas when its owner is overworked, overtired, and stressed out. And in today's wonderful world of nonstop work, 40% of American adults get less than seven hours of sleep on weeknights."

Fisher also cites a University of Michigan study that demonstrated that multi-tasking actually reduces efficiency 20% to 40%.

How many of you are under pressure to find a better way to do your job, to implement continuous improvements, to think out of the box? Yet, when was the last time you or someone you work with came up with a really good or creative idea? An idea that wasn't simply a slight tweak of an exisiting process or policy?

In her column, Fisher points out that the danger of our current time traps were identified by Peter Drucker in his classic The Effective Executive which was written over 40 years ago.

"The late Peter Drucker agreed. He wrote in The Effective Executive (an eerily prescient 40 years ago), "All one can think and do in a short time is to think what one already knows and to do as one has always done." Gulp.

Moreover, in Drucker's view, simply working longer and longer hours won't help. "To be effective, every knowledge worker, and especially every executive...needs to dispose of time in fairly large chunks," he wrote. "To have small dribs and drabs of time at his disposal will not be sufficient even if the total is an impressive number of hours."

Hmm, small dribs and drabs of time...and, just think, the BlackBerry hadn't been invented yet."

Maybe it is time for all of us to shout TIMEOUT!!!! To actually set aside time to think. And when a co-worker asks why you are "slacking off" you can reply, ""I am not slacking off -I am THINKING!"

To read Anne Fisher's entire column on Fortune.com click here: Be Smarter at Work, Slack Off

Posted by Denise Knutson, Senior Consultant, The H.S. Group

Shhhhh

What is your workplace pet peeve? In a recent survey 32% of the responding workers indicated that loud talkers is one of their biggest pet peeves when it comes to co-worker behavior, followed by ringing cellphones (30%) and use of speakerphones in public places (22%).

The three biggest pet peeves identified by the survey relate to how employees are managed or supervised and include being spoken to in condescending tones (44%), public reprimands (37%) and micromanaging (34%).

What is your workplace pet peeve? How do breaches in workplace etiquette impact your productivity? Do you find yourself spending excessive time managing your work around the culprit behind the boorish behavior?

To read a summary of the Randstadt USA survey click here: Office Pet Peeves

Posted by Denise Knutson, Senior Consultant, The H.S. Group

How Are Your Brackets Holding Up?

Some sources estimate that March Madness will cost American companies $4 billion in lost productivity this year. If you are a bracket watcher, this year it has become even easier to be distracted as CBSSportsline.com is offering free live coverage of all games. But, in the event that the boss walks into the office, the site also offers a "boss button" which immediately turns off the game and brings up a spreadsheet. Hmmm . . .have you noticed more people than normal using spreadsheets this past week?

Some companies have gone so far as to block internet access to the live broadcasts and to the scores. I guess their employees will have to resort to podcasts or to good old-fashioned radio.

Are companies carrying their March Madness avoidance tactics too far? Are employees carrying their fan enthusiasm too far? Or is it just a few days of fun and sport?

To read NBC News' report on the tourney's impact, click here: March Madness + Webcasts = Lost Prodcutivity

Posted by Denise Knutson, Senior Consultant, The H.S. Group

A Hostile Work Environment - By a Woman's Standards

Sexual Harassment in it's simplest quid pro quo form should be pretty easy for most managers to understand. Over time however the courts have continued to expand the Harassment definition to include that of Hostile Work Environment which managers may feel is more subjective in its definition. Combine that with the fact that the "Reasonable Person Standard" has a partner measurement called the "Reasonable Woman Standard" and identifying Harassment in the Workplace has become quite muddy.

According to an article by Christopher Cornell in Human Resource Executive magazine, a recent ruling by the 9th Circuit Court may muddy the waters even more. The article includes the following excerpts from the court's rulings.

"There is no legal requirement that hostile acts be overtly sex- or gender-specific in content," Judge Alfred T. Goodwin wrote for the court.

Goodwin said the lower court should have applied a standard, devised in an earlier case, to determine whether a hypothetical "reasonable woman" would find the behavior discriminatory. The "reasonable woman" standard requires the court to take into account both qualitative differences in the treatment of subordinates of different sexes as well as differences in the objective effects of the behavior. This standard, according to the court, ignores the intent of the person committing the offense and focuses on the effect of the behavior."

An attorney quoted in the article offered this advice to employers:

". . .This decision suggests employers should:

• Take firm disciplinary action against abusive workplace behavior and document the disciplinary action. Termination of repeat offenders may be necessary to avoid potential liability.
  
• Adopt workplace policies that prohibit abusive, bullying behavior and enforce the policies.
  
• Make sure that discrimination-prevention training includes the concept that abusive conduct that is not gender-specific could be considered gender-based discrimination, if the conduct has a subjectively and objectively more adverse effect on women."

For their own protection and the protection of their bottom-line, employers should heed the advice regarding policies and training. Many companies have gone the route of seeking out the quickest, least expensive means of delivering so-called Sexual Harassment training without scrutinizing the content and means of delivery. Simply offering a training program, regardless of quality, for the sake of establishing a potential affirmative defense in the event of a harassment claim may backfire. Other recent rulings have indicated that the courts may begin to more broadly scrutinize the legitimacy and actual effectiveness of training efforts being touted as an affirmative defense.

When evaluating your options regarding Harassment training keep the following statistic in mind:

The average cost to defend a sexual harassment lawsuit is $150,000 per plaintiff, WIN OR LOSE.

To read Cornell's complete article from Human Resource Executive click here: Court:Nonsexual Abusive Behavior May Be Sexual Harassment

Posted by Denise Knutson, Senior Consultant, The H.S. Group

“I Quit!”

The first part of last year ushered in more than New Year’s resolutions for HR Managers. New concerns emerged in the workplace as the workforce saw up to 24% of workers voluntarily resign, a sharp increase over the previous year, according to Ajilon Professional Staffing in New Jersey. And that trend will only continue its rise in 2006.

The main cause for this growing rate of employee turnover is a tightening labor market. Managers are faced with the choice of upping the ante, that is, offering better benefit packages along with higher salaries, or undertaking an even higher cost of re-staffing some of their top-notch positions.

"Employers aren't treating applicants or departing employees as they did in the early '90s. Hiring practices are changing. Interviewing is becoming more effective. Benefits programs are improving. And more companies are bringing consultants on board."

Is your organization prepared to handle this workplace surge? How much will it cost you to replace your top employees if they should leave?

Read more from Susan Kreimer at The Dallas Morning News.

Posted by Shelly Paul, Career Management Coordinator, The H.S. Group

HR - By The Book

Has your HR department created clearly stated policies that define what is and isn't acceptable within your company? Do some of those policies defy common sense and logic? What are those policies costing you in terms of employee turnover?

Many companies and HR departments have opted to replace effective leadership and sound judgment with black and white "foolproof" policies that even the weakest leader can read, understand and point to in lieu of making a sound judgment call. Apparently it's quicker and easier (and probably less expensive) to write a rule than it is to institute strong leadership development initiatives.

A recent article by Elaine Varelas entitled "Law & Order: strict policies may be bad business" sums up this trend. In her article Varelas states, "Gifted managers often get into trouble under strict policy regimes. Good managers look at individuals, not policies. When necessary, they make exceptions-and get caught. This is where HR needs to step in and give managers back that control. Instead of insisting they "arrest" employees for breaking "laws," give them the skills, tools, and authority needed to assess particular situations. Let them make decisions based on what is best for the individual employee, the department, and the organization. Train managers to think strategically and globally, and help them develop their people and management skills."

Let's stop "dummying down" the leadership process, get back to developing leaders and then letting them lead.

To read Varelas' article as posted on bostonworks.com, click here: Law & Order

Posted by Denise Knutson, Senior Consultant, The H.S. Group

Broken Glass

“Despite significant gains in the past 10 years, women executives around the world still face an uphill battle in workplace equality, a new study by Accenture shows.”

This statistic may not come as a huge surprise; however, we might ask ourselves why it is taking so long to flip the tables on this controversial issue. Interesting evidence comes in the form of a study on workplace satisfaction.

“…overall the women executives were about as personally satisfied with their own career opportunities and positions as men were with theirs. For instance, the same percentage of men and women respondents (58 percent) said they are fairly compensated or that their salary reflects their personal achievements. In addition, about the same number of women as men (66 percent vs. 70 percent, respectively) said they feel secure in their jobs.”

Is this difference in equality a social injustice or is it an individual barrier? Read more from Accenture.com.

Posted by Shelly Paul, Career Management Coordinator, The H.S. Group

Juggling Our Way To Inefficiency?

How many of you are reading this posting while also checking voice mail, carrying on a telephone conversation or maybe just partially listening to the person standing in your doorway trying to carry on a conversation with you? How many of you are smiling as you read this, recognizing yourself and your pattern of multi-tasking?

The ability to multi-task has become a badge of honor - the more tasks being juggled the more productive and efficient we are. Right? Maybe, maybe not.

An article by Nancy Jones-Bonbrest, originally published in the Baltimore Sun, challenges the assumption of efficiency and productivity associated with multi-tasking. According to the article:

"While studies demonstrate efficiency and productivity levels can be affected negatively at the hands of multitasking employees, convincing workers of that is challenging, Stack said. With many workers being asked to do more in their jobs, multitasking seems to be one way they're hoping to cope with those added duties.

But a 2001 study published by the American Psychological Association found that for all types of tasks, time is lost when switching from one task to another and lost time increased with the complexity of each task.

"Thus, multitasking may seem more efficient on the surface, but may actually take more time in the end," according to the study."

That being said, slow down and take a few minutes to read the entire article by clicking here: Juggling on the Job is Just Addictive


Posted by Denise Knutson, Senior Consultant, The H.S. Group

Oh Where, Oh Where Do New Employees Come From?

Can you identify your primary source for filling open positions? Really? Honestly? Or are you guessing or going by your gut feeling?

CareerXRoads recently released thier 5th Annual Sources of Hire Survey. While the survey cites some interesting data and trends about sourcing, perhaps one of the most telling statistics is the small number of companies able to provide hard data. (The data included in the survey does represent an aggregate of more than 1,000,000 employees and 188,000 filled positions.)

The survey asks some interesting questions regarding sourcing of employees that HR professionals should consider. They include:

• "What is your profile and what are the characteristics of the firms you would most likely compare yourself to?
• Is your data solid enough to act on?
• What sources of hire are most relevant for your firm's critical openings?
• What sources are most reliable?
• For what level, job, location, etc., can you compare yields? What would you do to improve upon them?
• How do you allocate your sourcing dollars in 2006 if you don't have solid data for 2005... until the spring?
• Will additional investments in one approach over another enjoy a better yield?"

If your CEO isn't asking these questions and challenging your tracking mechanisms, you should be asking them of yourself. HR needs to continue to establish itself as a viable business operation and having ready access to the data that answers the above questions can be a critical element.

To read the CareerXroads survey report and analysis click here: CareerXroads 5th Annual Sources of Hire Survey


Posted by Denise Knutson, Senior Consultant, The H.S. Group

The light bulb...Where Would We Be Today Without It?

As I sit at my computer composing the content for this posting, realizing that it has taken me over a week to write it, I find myself wondering, do I have adult ADHD? My symptoms…inability to focus, starting tasks without finishing them, inability to concentrate. Should I be tested for ADHD? Would medication be recommended? If so, what are the negative side effects of the medications? How would my personality change? Or, am I simply trying to do 100 things at one time and not finishing any of them?

An article written by Jeffrey Zaslow, Those Afflicted with ADHD are Often the Most Creative, brings up an interesting point regarding the long term effects of ADHD. What would have happened if Thomas Edison was diagnosed and medicated with ADHD? Would we all be sitting in the dark? And without Albert Einstein’s inventions?

It is estimated that 12% of children today have been labeled with ADHD and the number of kids’ prescriptions for ADHD drugs rose 23% from 2000 to 2003. Will the increased usage of medications zap the creativity, initiative, inspiration and ingenuity of our future workforce? What will be the repercussions in corporations, Marketing Departments, research labs, etc? Or, will the ability to focus, concentrate and plan create a fierce competitor to Bill Gates and Microsoft?

To read more about this topic, below are several of Jeffrey Zaslow’s articles.
Those Afflicted with ADHD Are Often the Most Creative

Our Readers Reveal Their ADHD Dilemmas

Posted by Stacie Schneider, Consultant for The H.S. Group, Inc.

When Good Employees Go Bad

Every workplace has them -- employees who miss deadlines, spend a little too much time visiting at the water cooler and hinder projects with their procrastination. Perhaps others tend to get their work done, yet you can’t help but ask HOW since they never seem to be at their desk. These employees fall into two problematic categories: Physical Slackers and Optical Slackers.

“The Physical Slacker works with you so closely that you rely on his or her results. That’s a problem, because the Physical Slacker doesn’t do what he or she promises to…he has a list of reasons why he let you down, and none of them are his fault.”

On the other hand, you might be dealing with the Optical Slacker. “The Optical Slacker doesn’t slow you down in your work. It’s not clear that he or she slows anyone down, and in fact, his manager may be very happy with his results. It’s not that the person isn’t getting his work done -- it’s just that you see him on the phone to his girlfriend, or taking a long coffee break, or otherwise not working really hard. The problem isn’t material, but it sure is visible.”

Both present unique challenges and require delicate approaches. Who steps in and at what time? Would your co-workers classify you in one of these categories? Read some helpful hints from Liz Ryan at BusinessWeek online.

Discussion: Have you ever dealt with a slacker at your workplace? How did you handle the situation?

Posted by Shelly Paul, Career Management Coordinator, The H.S. Group