(This is the fourth in a series of articles on entrepreneurship.)
IN THE 2nd of this series I touched on the topic of recruiting employees who can hit the ground running, viz. employees who needed very little training on the job. After you have recruited such talent, how would you retain them?
Direction, decision and funds
I have this colleague who would tell his boss each time he was assigned a new project, "Give me three things: Direction, Decision and Funds" . From conversations of this kind, the employer could derive that the staff was interested in the project but he would not be able to steer the project nor would he be able to generate the money to fund the project. However, the employee wants a hand in making decisions in the project.
Employers faced with such a dilemma would find it difficult to give in to such a wish. Decision-making normally lies at managerial and planning levels as strategies within an organisation are interconnected. Money, a form of resource within any organization, can never be sufficient. Thus, will the employer empower a staffer with making decision if he is not at the planning nor financing levels? Not likely.
Managing the supply chain
In this modern world of out-sourcing, successful execution lies in a manager's ability in analysis of the supply chain and evaluation of performance.
Making money through supremacy in managing the supply chains of products has been proven by Dell and Amazon.com. Translated into small localized projects, this called for the necessity of at least a process flow with supporting procedures. Employers need to first determine the type of talent needed for the success of his business before endeavouring to retain. Every stage of the supply chain needs to be screened for vulnerabilities that could trigger attrition.
The cost of replacing an employee is often estimated at between 30% - 46% his annual salary. A survey (2010) revealed that in a recovering economy, mangers, too, leave on voluntary separation. In such a case where the cost of replacing a manager was estimated as three times the cost of replacing a non-manager, the proficiency detriments to the company could be formidable.
Keeping the nexus
In a networked organization, it is imperative to always keep in view what are the possible repercussions that could spread across the organization. The result of such analysis is another indicator as to who to keep.
At an exit interview of a company, a senior financial analyst admitted that she did not have any grudge against the company. She resigned because her boss had not met nor spoken to her for more than two weeks. Their rooms were next to each other. The senior financial analyst told the HR Director that such a vacuum made it difficult for her to give directions to her team of junior researchers. She was coaxed to stay and her boss was transferred.
Perimeters of professionalism
In this case, it was the management style of her boss which surfaced as the cause of concern to senior management. Managers who exhibit such likes and likes openly without a care for the good of the organization need to take a lesson from the legal profession. The amount of interaction among lawyers outside the court room (their battlefield ) demonstrated their command of their personal sentiments as well as the amount of responsibilities entrusted on them.
In a modern flat organizational structure, it is essential that each staff recognizes his or her perimeters of professionalism within each team. The staff who can provide the factor for gelling together these concentric circles of duties and responsibilities and at the same time intertwine them with each other is often likened to the aorta of the heart of the organization. Such an employee not only needs to be retained, his ability needs to be continuously cultivated and further developed.
Supervisor fall-outs
Employees often lament that companies do not announce to their staff the organization's future directions. Organizations where such transparency is lacking often face high attrition rates. A recent (2009) survey of 118 companies in the USA revealed that 36% employees felt neutral or were dissatisfied with their companies. One-third of the employees surveyed expected to leave for another job in the following year.
Pay and perks no longer form the main reason for leaving a company. The No.1 factor was the quality of relationship with the employee's supervisor or immediate superior. Such relationship could cover matters of denying the subordinate of ownership of credits to tasks completed. Supervisors often felt that they themselves were the rightful owners to such credits in order to look good to Management.
Other factors on relationship with supervisors included erratic changes of mind, last minute instructions, deceit and not walking the talk. In short, they reflect on the supervisor's management ability.
Making a difference
Whereas married employees needed to maintain the ability to balance between work and home life, younger employees looked at the amount of meaningful work in their positions. Young employees, in particular, want the feeling of making a difference in the organization. High achievers want to be in contact with the rest of the organization and know how can they contribute towards the organization's future developments.
Generation Y
Generation Y talents in a National University of Singapore Career Centre survey in March 2010 revealed that finding a job which related to their interests helped them to decide to stay on in a company rather than salary and the prestige of the organization. Young people are more interested in building rewarding and sustaining careers. This rings a note of concern in consumer interest. If brand is not an important factor of selection when choosing an employer, does this phenomenon also reflect the consumer behavior of the Gen Y'ers?
Managers In Other Worlds
With women heading global conglomerates these days, some of us have accepted the presence of women managers in our workplace. Male members of the Malaysian Civil Service are complaining of too many female bosses above them. G.C. Spivak (1987) called them the workforce "in other worlds". In a KPMG research (2008), it concluded that organizations having women in senior positions were more likely to prosper. To retain this group of talent, better terms in the form of maternity leave and childcare flexibility were introduced in KPMG.
Openness in communications
One outstanding feature highlighted in the above surveys and researches was the call for improving openness of communication between management and employees. To management scientists, this feature was taken for granted. In reality, to what extent will this cloak be lifted is a question which only employers themselves can answer.
