When you find an excellent employee, retention is of the upmost importance. Here are a few top tips to keep in mind to reduce turn-over and develop a succession plan to create positive company morale and a positive bottom line.
1. Turn a compliment into an interview. When an employee does an excellent job, don't merely praise her. Pinpoint the strengths of her accomplishment and ask her how she did it - in other words, to share her process. The interview will bring to consciousness - both yours and hers - insights that can be transferred to new tasks.
2. Analyse how people think, not just what they do. Performance assessments rightly focus on the achievement of goals and other measurable markers of success. However, what's often behind such accomplishments is a way of thinking, particular to an individual that made success possible. Describe those habits of mind in the employee's next evaluation.
3. Ask for the reasons behind preferences. Good managers know what their individual employees like to do (what tasks they enjoy, which projects motivate them). Great managers find out why someone has those preferences - i.e., which project characteristics are the root sources of fulfilment.
4. Inquire about people's dreams. "David, if you could be in an entirely different career, what would it be?" If David says he always wanted to be a translator, ask him if he'd like to give working with international clients a whirl. By getting a little taste of his dream in his current position, David is more likely to feel fulfilled than if he keeps treading water - and less likely to get restless and head out to sea.
Treating each employee as an ocean of talent allows you to find troves of precious gems. What hidden treasures have you discovered in your employees? And what jewels of your own have you brought to the surface because a manager cared enough to look for them?
Wednesday, December 02, 2009
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Money Talk in an Interview
The Money Question – it always comes up in interviews …
The money question always comes up in job interviews. If you are a candidate looking at a new position, you can safely assume the person on the other side of the desk will ask some form of the money question. Your answer may be the difference between moving forward and being eliminated.
In an interview, the employer has four basic questions in mind. However they dress them up, whatever creative spin they put on them, employers really want to know four things:
Who are you?
Why are you here?
What can you do for me?
How much will it cost?
That final question can make or break the situation. If you answer it wrong, you're done. The correct answer is non - numerical. A number, whether too high or too low, is ALWAYS wrong.
The employer will invariably ask something like, "How much money do you need to consider for this position?" Or else, "What will it take for you to come to work for our company?"
If you want to be considered for the position do NOT, under any circumstances, give a numerical answer. The correct answer is something on the order of, "I'm here to discuss the position and assess my fit with your organization. I want to make sure my talents are a good match for the duties you're outlining. You're probably thinking along the same lines. I am sure, if we get to that place, we can reach an accommodation."
Why answer that way? Because it's the truth.
The demand - interest barometer tells us that, for a candidate, as demands go up, interest goes down. And as interest goes up, demands go down. If you as a candidate articulate a number too early in the process, you're drawing a line in the sand and creating an impression that you're more about reward than effort, more about price than value.
A number which is either too high or too low is wrong for several reasons.
The interviewer will eliminate you from consideration if you articulate a number that's too high. Whether they can afford the amount you say or whether you're worth that amount is immaterial. If you as the candidate create the impression that you overvalue your skills (in other words say any number above the range they've calculated), they are concerned you will never "settle" for the amount they're offering. So they will remove you from the process.
Conversely, if you say a number that's too low, you might inadvertently wind up accepting compensation less than the amount the company budgeted because that's what you said. You reduced your ability to negotiate because you have too little information.
Over the years, in coaching people on successful interviewing techniques, the money question is the one where people stumble most often. Many times people will tell me, "I just wasn't prepared for the question ... the number just popped out of my mouth." Or else they will say, "I told her $X because I think I'm worth it."
Bottom line, it doesn't matter what YOU think you're worth. The magic number is always somewhere in the range between what they want to pay and what you think you should get. This has been my experience.
When the employer asks, "How much ... ? " the right answer is, "We'll know when we get there." If they ask again, insisting on an answer, defer diplomatically a second time. Something on the order of, "I appreciate you want a number. I'm a little uncomfortable making anything which could be perceived as a demand at this early stage. I'm interested in the position and would like to learn more."
And if they ask a third time, the correct answer is, "My year to date compensation is $Z."
But why give a number that way? Simple. It's a statement of fact, not an estimate of self-esteem. You compensation is verifiable. An employer can ask for and receive verification of income. You pay taxes. Your income is a public record. In the real world, your current or most recent employer valued you at an identified level. That's the number to share.
So ... don't get caught by the money question. Role play with a friend or practice in the mirror. Be prepared for this inevitable question. Your ability to answer the money question with an non-answer can get you the job or get you more money for the job you really want.
The money question always comes up in job interviews. If you are a candidate looking at a new position, you can safely assume the person on the other side of the desk will ask some form of the money question. Your answer may be the difference between moving forward and being eliminated.
In an interview, the employer has four basic questions in mind. However they dress them up, whatever creative spin they put on them, employers really want to know four things:
Who are you?
Why are you here?
What can you do for me?
How much will it cost?
That final question can make or break the situation. If you answer it wrong, you're done. The correct answer is non - numerical. A number, whether too high or too low, is ALWAYS wrong.
The employer will invariably ask something like, "How much money do you need to consider for this position?" Or else, "What will it take for you to come to work for our company?"
If you want to be considered for the position do NOT, under any circumstances, give a numerical answer. The correct answer is something on the order of, "I'm here to discuss the position and assess my fit with your organization. I want to make sure my talents are a good match for the duties you're outlining. You're probably thinking along the same lines. I am sure, if we get to that place, we can reach an accommodation."
Why answer that way? Because it's the truth.
The demand - interest barometer tells us that, for a candidate, as demands go up, interest goes down. And as interest goes up, demands go down. If you as a candidate articulate a number too early in the process, you're drawing a line in the sand and creating an impression that you're more about reward than effort, more about price than value.
A number which is either too high or too low is wrong for several reasons.
The interviewer will eliminate you from consideration if you articulate a number that's too high. Whether they can afford the amount you say or whether you're worth that amount is immaterial. If you as the candidate create the impression that you overvalue your skills (in other words say any number above the range they've calculated), they are concerned you will never "settle" for the amount they're offering. So they will remove you from the process.
Conversely, if you say a number that's too low, you might inadvertently wind up accepting compensation less than the amount the company budgeted because that's what you said. You reduced your ability to negotiate because you have too little information.
Over the years, in coaching people on successful interviewing techniques, the money question is the one where people stumble most often. Many times people will tell me, "I just wasn't prepared for the question ... the number just popped out of my mouth." Or else they will say, "I told her $X because I think I'm worth it."
Bottom line, it doesn't matter what YOU think you're worth. The magic number is always somewhere in the range between what they want to pay and what you think you should get. This has been my experience.
When the employer asks, "How much ... ? " the right answer is, "We'll know when we get there." If they ask again, insisting on an answer, defer diplomatically a second time. Something on the order of, "I appreciate you want a number. I'm a little uncomfortable making anything which could be perceived as a demand at this early stage. I'm interested in the position and would like to learn more."
And if they ask a third time, the correct answer is, "My year to date compensation is $Z."
But why give a number that way? Simple. It's a statement of fact, not an estimate of self-esteem. You compensation is verifiable. An employer can ask for and receive verification of income. You pay taxes. Your income is a public record. In the real world, your current or most recent employer valued you at an identified level. That's the number to share.
So ... don't get caught by the money question. Role play with a friend or practice in the mirror. Be prepared for this inevitable question. Your ability to answer the money question with an non-answer can get you the job or get you more money for the job you really want.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
When Will You Retire?
As the global market volatility continues to cut into many superannuation balances, an increasing number of workers are planning to delay their retirement - whether they like it or not.
Across much of Canada, mandatory retirement has been given the pink slip.
On July 1, 2009, Nova Scotia became the latest province to enact legislation to amend its human rights code and end the practice. As of that date, workers in the province are no longer forced to quit when they turn 65. "Many want to continue working, as they still have a lot to contribute," says Graham Steele, who was at the time the acting minister responsible for the Human Rights Act.
That was certainly the thinking in other provinces — such as British Columbia, Newfoundland and Labrador, Saskatchewan, and Ontario — when they moved in the past few years to eliminate mandatory retirement.
As people remain in the workforce for longer - many out of necessity rather than want - HR managers will need to closely monitor changing employee attitudes and consider redefining some of their policies to fit.
It has been shown that those with the most education tend to enjoy their work and are reluctant to be turfed out. And many people want to keep working for a variety of other reasons, including because they enjoy the office camaraderie, sense of purpose or routine.
Sometimes it's a case of economic survival.
Statistics Canada says the numbers of retirement-aged Canadians in the workforce will continue to increase — in less than 10 years, one in five people in the workforce will be aged 55 to 64.
This shift in demographics is not new, but what's surprising is the extent of the delay in planned retirement, indicating that potentially, we could be in for an even more dramatic shift in the makeup of our labour force than first expected.
As older workers remain at organisations for longer, it will be important for employers to reconsider how they will retain the engagement of their older employees to ensure they are able to continue to propel their organiaation forward.
Some workers may feel forced to remain in their jobs when they'd rather not be there. Employers will have to consider how they can best approach this: If older workers feel compelled to continue working when they'd rather be doing something else, employers will need to work doubly hard to maintain their motivation and job satisfaction, both of which impact their productivity.
Organizations may have to be more creative and flexible in their workplace strategies to allow older workers to remain productive and engaged in their roles. They may need to consider adjusting some of their workplace practices to suit the increased flexibility older workers are looking for. This may extend beyond the more typical work-life balance policies to pay and leave practices, work-from-home arrangements, even to job and role redesign to get the greatest productivity from older workers.
Employers need to consider how best to assist older workers to stay focused on work. As an example, concern about money matters can be a great source of stress or distraction for employees, and the employer can be an important conduit to providing information to help alleviate these concerns and assist employees in preparing for their retirement. Providing access to financial education and advice could be of great value to older workers.
For those employees nearing retirement, the employer has an important role to play in helping to smooth the path to retirement. Their role can range from providing access to information or a professional adviser - who can help older workers recalibrate their financial plan or investment allocation to help them meet their financial goals and ensure they have the most appropriate strategy in place - through to working in partnership to find solutions such as phased retirement strategies that will benefit both employer and employee.
Across much of Canada, mandatory retirement has been given the pink slip.
On July 1, 2009, Nova Scotia became the latest province to enact legislation to amend its human rights code and end the practice. As of that date, workers in the province are no longer forced to quit when they turn 65. "Many want to continue working, as they still have a lot to contribute," says Graham Steele, who was at the time the acting minister responsible for the Human Rights Act.
That was certainly the thinking in other provinces — such as British Columbia, Newfoundland and Labrador, Saskatchewan, and Ontario — when they moved in the past few years to eliminate mandatory retirement.
As people remain in the workforce for longer - many out of necessity rather than want - HR managers will need to closely monitor changing employee attitudes and consider redefining some of their policies to fit.
It has been shown that those with the most education tend to enjoy their work and are reluctant to be turfed out. And many people want to keep working for a variety of other reasons, including because they enjoy the office camaraderie, sense of purpose or routine.
Sometimes it's a case of economic survival.
Statistics Canada says the numbers of retirement-aged Canadians in the workforce will continue to increase — in less than 10 years, one in five people in the workforce will be aged 55 to 64.
This shift in demographics is not new, but what's surprising is the extent of the delay in planned retirement, indicating that potentially, we could be in for an even more dramatic shift in the makeup of our labour force than first expected.
As older workers remain at organisations for longer, it will be important for employers to reconsider how they will retain the engagement of their older employees to ensure they are able to continue to propel their organiaation forward.
Some workers may feel forced to remain in their jobs when they'd rather not be there. Employers will have to consider how they can best approach this: If older workers feel compelled to continue working when they'd rather be doing something else, employers will need to work doubly hard to maintain their motivation and job satisfaction, both of which impact their productivity.
Organizations may have to be more creative and flexible in their workplace strategies to allow older workers to remain productive and engaged in their roles. They may need to consider adjusting some of their workplace practices to suit the increased flexibility older workers are looking for. This may extend beyond the more typical work-life balance policies to pay and leave practices, work-from-home arrangements, even to job and role redesign to get the greatest productivity from older workers.
Employers need to consider how best to assist older workers to stay focused on work. As an example, concern about money matters can be a great source of stress or distraction for employees, and the employer can be an important conduit to providing information to help alleviate these concerns and assist employees in preparing for their retirement. Providing access to financial education and advice could be of great value to older workers.
For those employees nearing retirement, the employer has an important role to play in helping to smooth the path to retirement. Their role can range from providing access to information or a professional adviser - who can help older workers recalibrate their financial plan or investment allocation to help them meet their financial goals and ensure they have the most appropriate strategy in place - through to working in partnership to find solutions such as phased retirement strategies that will benefit both employer and employee.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
