Evolved Employer

A Better Workplace


Corporate Social Responsibility

Corporate Responsibility Roles Increase in Number and Responsibility


Multi-ethnic business team

By Melissa J. Anderson

According to the latest global Corporate Responsibility Best Practices survey, the number of global companies with a lead role overseeing CR increased to 62% last year, compared to 42% in 2010. The survey also revealed that 77% of companies plan to grow their corporate responsibility programs in the next three years.

The report, released by Corporate Responsibility Magazine, the Corporate Responsibility Officer Association and NYSE Euronext, is based on a poll of companies on NYSE Euronex Indices, plus other companies within the magazine’s database, reported Environmental Leader.

The study showed that companies are expanding CR programming and recognizing that it does have an impact on their market competitiveness and employee engagement levels. In fact, the study showed, even corporate leadership is working to drive the CR conversation within their companies.

Diversity

New Federal Rule Proposed to Boost Employment of Individuals with Disabilities


Friendly Disabled Businesswoman

By Melissa J. Anderson

According to a new US Labor Department proposal, companies with federal contracts will have to have 7% of their workforces made up of people with disabilities. With roughly 200,000 federal contractors, the Associated Press reported, that means a quarter of the nation’s companies would be affected by the rule – federal contractors take in about $700 billion annually.

Patricia Shiu, Director of the Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, said, “This is probably the greatest proposal for real substantive change since the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act” of 1990.

She continued, “For nearly 40 years, the rules have said that contractors simply need to make a `good faith’ effort to recruit and hire people with disabilities. Clearly, that’s not working.” The unemployment rate for federal workers is 13%, while the rate for all workers is about 8%, according to recent numbers.

And according to recent Bureau of Labor Statistics numbers, 79% of working-age people with disabilities are outside the labor force. Only 30.5% of people without disabilities are outside the labor force. This rule would increase the diversity of the workforce significantly.

Barbara Otto, Executive Director of the Chicago-based organization Health & Disability Advocates, said, “This is a huge step toward transparency and accountability. It’s great that, given that one fifth of Americans now has a disability, now we’re going to try to bring in hiring incentives to bring them into the labor force.”

She added, “This will have a positive impact on the economy and on a population that has been traditionally underemployed.”

Diversity, Gender

Three Excuses That Keep Women Off Boards


Three serious business people talking in boardroom

By Melissa J. Anderson

The Financial Times recently reported that the number of female executive directors on FTSE 350 boards has slipped in the past year – all this after significant work to raise awareness of the benefits of board diversity in the UK following the release of the Lord Davies Report.

In fact, wrote Elizabeth Rigsby, the FT’s Chief Political Correspondent, “89 per cent of FTSE 350 companies have no female executives on their boards.”

Prospective female directors in the US are faring better – but not by much. According to Catalyst research released late last year, women occupy only 16.1 percent of Fortune 500 board directorships. That means over four out of five board seats belong to men. And, the report said, about one in ten Fortune 500 companies had no women on their boards.

Why is it that, despite all the research pointing to the business value of boardroom diversity, companies still stubbornly refuse to open the boardroom door to diverse candidates? Here are three convenient non-excuses that boards make for their lack of business-building diversity – and to counter them.

Diversity, LGBT

Canadian Workplaces Becoming More LGBT Inclusive


Strength in Numbers

By Melissa J. Anderson

A recent Angus Reid Public Opinion survey of almost 1000 employed lesbian, gay, and bisexual Canadians revealed that “one third of gays (34%) and two-in-five lesbians (40%) have experienced some form of discrimination throughout the course of their professional lives.” But the survey showed that those polled felt the situation was improving, and that workplaces were becoming more tolerant.

Seventy-two percent of respondents said that attitudes toward LGBT people have improved in the past five years. In fact, the survey continued, “only two per cent of respondents who are ‘out’ at work say that their colleagues had a negative attitude towards that aspect of their lives.”

Angus Reid Public Opinion Vice President Jaideep Mukerji told the Toronto Sun, “The survey shows that the average Canadian workplace has become kinder for LGBT people, with most employers and co-workers being regarded as tolerant towards the LGBT community.”

Nevertheless, the study revealed, a sizeable portion of survey respondents still reported a level of fear around coming out and being out in the workplace.

Diversity, Ethnicity/Nationality

Companies Making Slow Progress in Hispanic Inclusion


iStock_000017097876XSmall

By Melissa J. Anderson

The Hispanic Association on Corporate Responsibility has released its 2011 Corporate Inclusion Index. The CII measures Hispanic inclusion on behalf of companies by measuring the attraction, retention, and promotion of Hispanic employees, procurement practices, community outreach, and governance.

The 16 board directors of the HACR praised the steps corporations have taken over the past few years toward the inclusion of Hispanic individuals. They wrote, “The last three years have seen an increase in participation, better reporting, and overall a clearer, more transparent sense of what corporations are doing in terms of diversity best practices.”

But, they continued, companies have significant work to do. “Hispanics are the largest minority group in the U.S. and we have the largest buying power of any minority group. Yet, Hispanics are the most underrepresented group in Corporate America.”

Corporations that are ignoring a group whose buying power is projected to reach 1$.5 trillion by 2015 are doing their stakeholders a disservice, they suggested. Carlos F. Ota, President and CEO of the HACR pointed out that the Hispanic market is 50 million consumers strong. He added, “market reciprocity dictates that we should be represented across all levels of a corporation, from internships all the way to the corporate boardrooms. But we are not, and that needs to change.”

Hispanic representation on corporate boards by participating companies increased from 6.46% in 2010 to 8.33% in 2011. But the percentage of C-Suite Hispanics decreased from 8% in 2010 to 7% in 2011. Ota noted that participating companies generally improved their ratings, as well as improved the quality of reporting. But, he said, “the results still pointed out the gap between our goals for diversity and inclusion and what is really taking place inside Corporate America.”

Employee Engagement

Involving Employees in Efforts to Boost Engagement


iStock_000004868416XSmall

By Rebecca Pyne

While initiatives to increase employee engagement have been a hot topic for some time, many companies continue to struggle to keep high numbers of their employees feeling engaged at work. What can companies do to make their employee engagement initiatives more effective?

A case study published last month in the Gallup Management Journal shows that including employees in the process of designing and implementing employee engagement initiatives can reap rewards. With Gallup’s help, Stryker Navigation, a global manufacturer of navigation systems for computer-assisted surgery, has been able to involve its employees in the process of bringing about significant increases in employee engagement.

The case study, written by Marco Nink, a Practice Consultant for Gallup and Klaus Welte, a Vice President at Stryker Navigation, has promising implications for employers interested in novel ways of increasing employee engagement.

Asking the Right Questions

While employee surveys assessing engagement are commonly used, Nink and Welte suggest that companies’ employee surveys often fail to effectively measure employee engagement because they ask the wrong questions, confusing employee satisfaction with engagement.

According to Nink and Welte, employee satisfaction is not the same thing as engagement; in fact, employee satisfaction can be connected to passivity. Nink and Welte write, “An employee who is satisfied with his salary or the amount of annual leave is not necessarily, of his own free will, going to lend full support to his employer and his employer’s goals.”

Meanwhile, engagement, which in Gallup’s terms is emotional attachment to one’s work, has a positive impact on productivity and increases the likelihood that employees will act in the interests of the employer.

When Stryker Navigation reached out to Gallup for assistance in increasing employee engagement, Gallup began by utilizing a 12-item questionnaire, the Q12, which assesses employee engagement by measuring the degree to which employees’ core needs and expectations of the workplace are being met. The Q12 asks employees to what extent they agree with key statements such as, “I know what is expected of me at work” and “At work, I have the opportunity to do what I do best every day.”

The results of the first Stryker Navigation employee engagement survey demonstrated that only 32% of employers were engaged. Gallup found that Stryker employees had provided particularly low ratings for two items: “I know what is expected of me at work” and “I have the materials and equipment I need to do my work right.”

Creating a Transparent Follow-through Process

Armed with a new understanding of the factors contributing to its employee engagement levels, Stryker’s management worked to more clearly describe what was expected of employees on individual teams and projects and to increase the frequency of feedback discussions. In order to include employees in the implementation process, Stryker began discussing and monitoring action plans for addressing engagement-related challenges at monthly project team meetings.

In doing so, Stryker’s management deliberately shared responsibility for progress in its action plans with its employees while creating a structure for monitoring engagement over the long-term.

Stryker Navigation’s employee engagement efforts led to the percentage of engaged employees doubling from 32% to 64% within the first year and reaching 73% in 2011. Nink and Welte note, “The atmosphere in the company has changed for the better. Employees and managers feel that together they can get things moving and make improvements.”

Additionally, Stryker Navigation has increased its output of products considerably while the quality of new products has also increased as measured by the number of repairs and customer complaints. Nink and Welte emphasize the value of correlating the results of the employee surveys with key performance indicators or KPIs. They write, “By combining these two types of organizational data — the ‘soft’ employee engagement data with the ‘hard’ KPI data — we can demonstrate the direct economic benefit of the actions on costs and growth.”

Lessons from Stryker Navigation and Gallup

Nink and Welte highlight the importance of asking employees the right questions so that a company can develop a clear understanding of what is causing lower levels of engagement and then target those areas. They emphasize the potential of creating a transparent follow-through process that shares the responsibility for progress with employees by involving them in frequent monitoring. Additionally, Nink and Welte call attention to the value of correlating the results of employee engagement surveys with performance indicators and carrying out these surveys regularly, tracking changes over time.

Thought Leadership

Fixing the “Pyramid Problem:” A New Approach


carolineturner

Contributed by Caroline Turner, author of Difference Works: Improving Retention, Productivity and Profitability through Inclusion

Women are still not proportionally represented at the upper levels of business. Women represent about half of entry-level employees and lower level management positions. But at each level up the corporate hierarchy, the percentage of women is lower.

According to Catalyst, in 2011 in the Fortune 500 women represented only 14.1% of executive officers, 7.5% of top earners and 3.2% of CEO’s. In law firms in 2010, Catalyst reports, women made up 45% of associates but only 19% of partners. These declining percentages form a pyramid: the “pyramid problem.”

This is more than a problem for women. It is a problem for business. The pyramid problem results in substantial, unnecessary costs for business and it prevents business from realizing the documented upsides of gender diversity. It’s time to shift the focus from how women need to change in order to succeed to how corporate culture can change in order to achieve gender diversity in leadership. That takes framing and talking about the issue differently.

How can women change agents climbing the corporate ladder talk about the pyramid problem and enroll men and leadership in wanting to fix it? I suggest three things:

  1. Present the business case for fixing the pyramid problem
  2. Bring attention to the strengths of both masculine and feminine approaches to work without stereotyping
  3. Find a few male allies who see and will speak up on the issue.

Generations

Why Companies Can’t Ignore Gen X


iStock_000015971038XSmall

By Melissa J. Anderson

Much of the information about generational conflict in the workplace revolves around smoothing out the differences between Baby Boomers and Millennial employees, often ignoring the talented, diverse, and highly adaptable middle child – Gen X.

According to a recent report from the Center for Work Life Policy, The X Factor: Tapping into the Strengths of the 33- to 46-Year-Old Generation, the generation of individuals between the ages of 33 and 46 are hard at work, highly educated, and highly ambitious.

At the same time, the report says, Gen Xers are frustrated – the Baby Boomers ahead won’t seem to retire and the horde of ambitious Millennials behind them are eager to push them out of the way. In fact, according to the study, 41% of Gen Xers were not satisfied with their rate of advancement, and roughly half (49%) said they felt their career was stalled.

Having survived three recessions since entering the workforce, and many deeply in debt, one would assume that this generation of workers was living up to its characteristic sullenness. But, according to a new report out of the University of Michigan, Gen X’s gloominess faded away in the 90s. Today, this generation is happy.

That gives employers a big reason to take notice – rather than focusing career development and advancement initiatives solely on its youngest workers, they need to pay attention to Gen X employees too. Or else they will happily take their education, experience, drive, and adaptability to another company that will better support their needs.

Employee Engagement

How Work Life Policy Reflects National Priorities – and What Companies Can Do About It


iStock_000004040061XSmall

By Melissa J. Anderson

Recently the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) released its Your Better Life Index, a report which ranks the OECD’s 34 member countries on a number of topics, including work life balance.

According to the OECD, work life balance per country can be measured by comparing the percentage of workers in a country working more than 50 hours a week, the amount of time spent on “leisure and personal care” per day (including sleeping, eating, hobbies, etc), and the rate of employment of mothers.

The organization explains:

“This [work life balance] is a challenge to governments because if parents cannot achieve their desired work/life balance, not only is their welfare lowered but so is development in the country. If parents have to choose between earning money and looking after their children, the result is that there will be too few babies and too little employment.”

The OECD’s concept of work life balance is mainly focused on the well-being of children and ability of parents to be productive. It does take productivity and worker happiness into account, but not as a strong focus. Nevertheless, the measure is an interesting way to see how different countries allocate resources to family-related issues as they pertain to workers.

Corporate Social Responsibility

Making Corporate Responsibility Really Work


iStock_000016501136XSmall

By Melissa J. Anderson

In a recent Harvard Business Review blog post, leadership expert Frances Hesselbein wrote about the critical importance of corporate responsibility – not just as a means to provide visibility to companies, but as a way to nourish deep pools of talent within the community. She wrote:

For leaders in all three sectors there is a new appreciation that when we build the healthy community, it is for the greater good. And even for a leader with little concern about the greater good, there is the reality that a sick and ailing community cannot produce the healthy, energetic, productive workforce our enterprises demand if indeed they are to be viable and even present at the end of this turbulent decade.

Hesselbein was writing in 2010, when, mired in a recession, companies were cutting the budgets of any corporate program that didn’t seem crucial in the short term. She cautioned against this, explaining that leadership had the ability to instill a dedication to corporate responsibility in a high-performing workplace culture.

She also said that the commitment to corporate responsibility must not be superficial, but rather a deep and earnest effort on behalf of the corporation. She writes:

“Ignoring externalities threatens excellence, ethics, and engagement in organizations, but addressing these externalities can transform challenges into opportunities. When we truly focus on the common good, service is a privilege —not a chore but a remarkable opportunity.”

A new study confirms that notion – and goes further. Not only must corporate leadership truly believe in its corporate responsibility efforts for them to have an impact on stakeholders, but the company has to be respected in the marketplace as a high value company as well.