10 “Don’ts" When it Comes to HR Metrics





I am asked what lessons I have learned when it comes to HR metrics a lot when I am speaking. There are so many lessons as this field has come such a long way in such a short period of time. When I first started reading and speaking on the subject back in the late 1990’s the top HR measure was cost per hire. Fast forward to today and we can analyze things like: PREDICT ING who will be successful in our organization by using recruiting and performance data and we can PREDICT who is at risk for leaving our organization. Fascinating, and the possibilities are endless.

Here is a shortened version of my lessons learned in regards to HR metrics. (They are in no particular order)

  1. Don’t just start measuring the usual suspects, start with your organizational strategy and work from there
  2. Don’t copy your neighbor’s HR metrics for the reason listed above
  3. Don’t use benchmarks for the sake of benchmarking because average does not equal better result
  4. Don’t just email metrics out and expect your managers to understand them. Make sure the metrics tell a compelling story
  5. Don’t celebrate metrics that aren’t impactful. No one cares how many days it takes you to fill requisitions on average or if you have 100% participation in the performance management process. They care about what impacts revenue, profit and costs-DIRECTLY
  6. Don’t use unreliable data or data that has not been verified. This will make you lose credibility points fast
  7. Don’t go through a lesson in correlations and regressions…no one cares. Just tell the story on how the data analysis has uncovered something that impacts the business
  8. Don’t measure for measuring sake. Tracking hundreds of metrics is not smart nor does it move the dial. Determine what are those levers that move your organizational success factors and measure those
  9. Don’t use fancy technology when an Excel spreadsheet will do. Start small and if you get traction and buy in organizational wide then move to a more robust solution
  10. Don’t depend on current staff to have the analytical muscle to perform statistical testing. Not everyone is a quant jock…if you have that talent on staff great, but that skill set is not one that is usually found in HR departments.

I would love to hear your lessons out there…I am sure you have your own metrics stories…do tell!!

Six Employee Engagement Ideas to Help Re-engage Your Employees After An Economic Crisis

A lot of what you hear today from HR executives and consultants is the issue of employee engagement. Are your employees engaged or does it just seem that way? Do you feel your employees get what the company strategy is and are they helping to really achieve it? 
This is a re-post but I still believe that we are all facing uncertainty within our workforce. I feel as though we are seeing things improve (slowly) but many of our employees are still not sure of their future. If you are looking for a few ideas to re-engage your employees, read the list below to see how you can make a difference.
For your employees, for your leaders as we optimistically look for a more solid recovery from this economic crisis:
1. Increase employee communications
· Bad news is better than no news
· Build trust - be open and forthcoming with information
· Seek feedback from direct reports
· Be innovative – design new methods for employees to communicate with management
· Be a good listener - allow employees to vent and express their concerns
2. Understand and plan for future staffing needs today
· Continuously assess employee workloads
· Downsizing or ‘rightsizing’ causes stress
· Job consolidation causes stress
· Stress impacts quality and productivity
3. Continuously coach employees and managers who have not worked during an economic crisis
· Purpose is to maximize core strengths and minimize weakness
· Teach active listening skills
· Offer group sessions to talk through different economic issues impacting the business
4. Emphasize training & development
· Identify and better utilize the strengths of existing staff
· Focus on developing existing talent through ongoing training
· Assess those who may have skills that may be needed elsewhere in the company
· Shift your highly flexible and cross-trained workforce to other functions as needed
5. Strategically add and/or upgrade your staff
· This activity will strengthen your company when the economic recovery begins
· This kind of thinking enables competitive advantage
· Place an emphasis deploying a more highly skilled workforce
6. Focus on retention efforts to deflect the higher turnover rates expected as the economic recovery takes hold
· As more jobs become available, turnover risks increase
· Focus on your top talent to ensure that they stay with your company as outside opportunities increase

What are your thoughts on this and are you making headway in getting your employees really engaged? 

Posted by Lisa Wojtkowiak, SPHR




Identify Your Managerial Style - Who Are You?

Since there have been numerous articles on retention of employees every HR executive should be asking 2 very important and mission critical questions as a strategic partner with your CEO: (1)what kind of manager am I?, and (2) what kind of managers do I have in my organization? (this includes your CEO too). As we all know, the biggest untapped opportunity within your organization is how managers and you as a manager shape the way people work together to deliver results. So, what kind of manager are you?a micro-manager (you know what this is), an arms length manager (macro-manager), a cloistered manager,  a secret manager (never tell the staff anything even the need to know stuff), a good people manager, a task master, an on and on. Well, I extend the challenge to each of you to look inside yourself and ask those 2 very important questions. Then you should reflect to see if your style is getting the best results from each individual, department, group, and business. If the answer is yes then you win the lottery and you have tapped the greatest opportunity in business by unleashing the energy, creativity, and knowledge of your workforce. If the answer is no then you really need to reassess how you manage, as well as your managers so you get the best results, return on your investment, employees that are engaged, and limit your turnover.


You should ask yourself these two questions every year because as we all know we change and when upper level management changes, so do we and how we operate. 


Your comments and opinions on this post are welcome to wgstevens2@gmail.com

Performance Management and The Atlanta Public School System





Our Atlanta City Public School System has been in the news lately for its highly publicized cheating scandal. You can read about this here and here.

Being an Atlanta native, it breaks my heart on many levels, the worst being what this has done to our children and all for what? More dollars in the bonus checks of high-ranking APS employees. I cringe every time I see that logo. "Our focus...Student Success," at what cost?

I do not have all the facts in this case, all I know is what I have read and heard on our local and national news on the subject. But at the heart of the matter, these teachers and schools were being rated and bonused based on CRCT standardized test scores.

Of course, that made me think as performance management is something I do know a little something about. Did anyone at APS ever hear that, "What gets measured gets done?" And just sometimes employees take this to the extreme to make more money.

I have no idea what the teacher's and principal's performance management system looks like. I do know that there are many other factors that play into this mess, like integrity and chain of command issues and culture. But I also know that a balanced set of performance measures might have tipped some folks off that something wasn't right.

I think about performance management systems for our military, it is very structured and highly technical like our men in uniform. A one size all approach is definitely not the answer at APS or really anywhere I can think of.

One article cited above stated that the "culture of fear" and "higher than attainable growth targets" as the root causes for the crisis. I am sure this situation will be dissected to near death, but at the end of the day....you have some management basics that were either ignored or not acted on. WHAT A SHAME!

When you are designing performance management systems you must consider these basics:
1) What is at stake (revenue, profits, people's lives, children, homeless individuals, etc.)?
2) What behavior do I want repeated in a consistent manner?
3) How do I incent that desired behavior and keep that going?
4) How do I measure desired behavior and other business results (operational, customer, etc.)?
5) How do I stop/track/punish unwanted behaviors (cheating, dishonesty, etc)?
6) Goal setting is an art and a science. You set them too low and you have under performance, you set them too high....and you can have an even worse situation given the right circumstances.

I don't think that a performance management system could have prevented this debacle as there are many things that led to something like this. But, if you have great leadership, that instills a culture of TRUE accountability, with rock solid VALUES that are rewarded though a highly customized performance managements system....then you have won about half the battle.

The other half is that you must HIRE the people that can execute ON and IN the above described situation.

And if they don't fire them instead of promoting them!


APS...call me!

What Legacy Media Can Learn from Eastman Kodak

What do you do when your industry is changing? What do you do when your innovations are fueling the changes? Those problems have plagued Eastman Kodak Co. for three decades and the company’s experience provides some lessons for those running legacy media businesses.

Eastman Kodak’s success began when it introduced the first effective camera for non-professionals in the late 19th century and in continual improvements to cameras and black and white and color films throughout the twentieth century. Its products became iconic global brands.

The company’s maintained its position through enviable research and development activities, which in 1975 created the first digital camera. Since that time it has amassed more than 1,100 patents involving electronic sensing, digital imaging, electronic photo processing, and digital printing. These developments, however, continually created innovations damaging to its core film-based business.

Digital photography created a strategic dilemma for the company. It could move into digital photography and destroy the highly profitable film-based business or it could exploit the film-based business while it slowly declined and then--when it was no longer profitable--try to leap out of the business into digital world. It was an ugly choice and the company chose the latter.

Today, the company has just 15% of the employees it once had and its stock prices are about 15% of what they were before it finally stripped out its production capacity and distribution systems. An enduring benefit of its research and development activities is that the company now owns patents on much of the underlying technology used in all digital cameras including those in mobile phones. It is building a new digital revenue stream on licenses and infringement payments for use of those technologies. Those alone now account for 10% of its turnover.

Eastman Kodak’s situation is not unlike that of legacy media firms, especially those in print, whose uses of digital technologies two decades before the arrival Internet and whose experiments with teletext and other telecommunication based information distribution systems foreshadowed the arrival of the Internet.

Today, newspapers and magazines—and increasingly broadcasters—are faced with dilemma of whether to keep exploiting their base legacy product or to dump the old business and jump fully into digital. It is as ugly a choice as that faced by Eastman Kodak in the 1980s and 1990s. So, what lessons can be learned from its experience?

1)      Don’t try to fight change

You may not like its direction and may understand how it will affect your current business, but you will not be able to stop its momentum and trajectory if it is beneficial to many customers. In such conditions you can only protect your existing product by making it as productive and competitive as possible, by adjusting its strategies to better serve those who are most loyal and resist change, and by carefully monitoring the pace of change and the investments you make in the existing product. Simultaneously, existing companies that want to benefit from the change need to be creating new products for the new markets and allow them to develop and mature with the pace of change even though they may be compounding the challenges in the pre-existing product.

2)      Don’t wait too long to change

Waiting to move into new markets with new products gives upstart companies and other competitors opportunities to become players with better products and larger market shares once you decide to enter. Although there are sometimes reasons not to be first movers, you should not wait too long because it is very difficult and expensive to enter and become a major player once a new market moves into its maturation phase.

3)      Be willing to sacrifice some short-term profit for long-term gain and sustainability

Careful strategic consideration must be given profits during transitional periods and managers needs to make the strategy clear to the company and its investors. It may be desirable to boost research and development costs even though there is no guarantee they may produce results; it may be necessary to harm the profits of the existing product by building up its replacement and cannibalizing some of its market; it may be appropriate to make investments in the new product that may not pay off in the short-term. Whatever the strategy, it should be the result of clear and deliberate choices and managers need to ensure that investors and entire company understand the reasons for it.

4)      Own the rights to technologies and services your competitors will employ

Use your R&D efforts and make strategic acquisitions to acquire the technologies and services that competitors will need to employ in the new market so they must turn to you and share the benefits of their growth. Unfortunately, few legacy media companies invested in research and development to early exploit opportunities in digital media by creating the underlying hardware and software for content control and distribution online and in phones, tablets, and computers. Thus, they own few intellectual property rights other than trademarks to their legacy media names and most are not benefiting as Eastman Kodak from patents being used by those eroding the business base. However, the new products still need content products and content management services that legacy media have long produced and companies need to be open to cooperating with the new competitors rather than giving them incentives to go elsewhere or to develop their own content capabilities.

These are turbulent times for legacy media and they require making choices and positioning firms for the future. It is no time for timidity or keeping on with business as usual.

Capacity for Change: New Skill Set for Employees?


I thought long and hard last week about an individual's capacity to handle change in the workplace. So many times when we are called in on a project we are changing something in the organization. Whether it is strategy or a performance management system. The way things used to look, now look different. And every time we are involved in a change project, we have those employees that embrace change and those that go and hide in a corner.

I am wondering if through this recession, we have increased our personal capacity for change?

I mean people have lost jobs, people have lost their homes and finances....but I hear stories of resilience and perseverance.

Then, I thought about my own situation I am going through all of life's greatest changes all at once and I feel I have a different perspective on change. It almost makes me feel like if change isn't happening something is wrong.

Back to the organization...change is here to stay and I believe change is even more prevalent now. Companies have to course correct and react to competition and environmental issues. They have to do this quickly or be left behind. They depend on their employees to make this shift.

If this is the case, how do you "train" your employees to handle change? Is it change management training? How do you hire employees that can handle change?

Maybe we become "change seekers" by experience. Like in my example, this year I think I have experienced about as many changes as a person can. I feel it has made me stronger and has given me perspective. It makes a new organizational change seem like child's play.

We use an instrument called the CSI, Change Style Instrument, that assesses your style when it comes to change. I like the instrument because it is all about awareness and how you can communicate change to people that have different change styles. Here are the styles CSI has indentified:

My question is this...are we all moving to an "originator" style, based on our experiences? Can we be a conserver and then over time become an originator?

What are your thoughts on the subject of change capacity....


A Day in the Life of a Consultant-Post Recession


So you think you want to be a consultant. You better think about it long and hard. It's not the glamorous "get on an airplane and bill $3K a day life" that has been rumored.

It's tough out there. Clients are more informed than ever, competition is stiff and pricing is all about who is the best negotiator. We have been involved in bidding where large companies "give" the business away because they have extra capacity and they "just can." TOUGH!

Before you order those business cards, here is a day in the life of Cathy Missildine-Martin, Consultant and HR Rock Star!

A typical day starts (7:00AM) by scanning Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, WallStreet Journal and Google to see what's going on in the business world. Then, if it is blog day, I have to get inspired to write something interesting that HR professionals will read and retweet. This inspiration usually comes in the shower or from something experiential from a client, colleague or student. I love to write now, I thought I would never say that.

After all that, it is time to start the clock ($$$). This year it is all about content. So, whether I am developing a keynote address or a customized training session, or an all day HR Boot Camp, I am building content 24x7. I am thinking about content in my sleep and how to design interactive activities in the shower...it's crazy.

My partner, Barbara Hughes and I decided to write a book this year. It has been a great experience, but very time consuming...again more and more content. (I secretly love this process as well, but don't tell her!)

Most of my days are spent marketing, networking, meeting, chatting, and conferencing with potential new clients. it is very challenging and yes sometimes frustrating, in this environment. CEO's are more demanding as far as HR deliverables go, so that is great as that usually comes in the form of HR metrics which happens to be a passion of mine. We see more and more clients focused on their organizational strategy and more importantly, the EXECUTION of their current strategy. I believe this is a result of our current economic environment, companies must be able to change direction when necessary and do it rather quickly. Again, this is good for us, as we love this type of work!

You never can stop the marketing process, it's all about the pipeline and keeping it full of interested possibilities. I feel that if you have something interesting and relevant to say, that is half the battle.

After all of that, I then am off to a SHRM meeting or to teach HR certification or maybe to have drinks with some of my collegues to discuss what's hot in HR.

At the end of my day it may be 10 or 11PM, but I put my head down at night, knowing that I do what I LOVE, with whom I want to work with. Even in a recession, I will take this job over any other!

Can you say that?


News of the World Closure Shows the Business Cost of a Bad Reputation

The decision to close the News of the World in the UK because of the fallout from the phone hacking scandal shows the importance of ethical behavior and public credibility for media firms.

The paper had been hacking the private communications of celebrities, politicians, crime victims, and even relatives of soldiers killed in Afghanistan and then spent four years trying to cover it up by paying hush money and—according to some reports—bribing police officers to ignore its crimes.

The paper, owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp., was Britain’s largest selling Sunday newspaper until it spectacularly unraveled in recent weeks. Continuing revelations of illicit activities and the announcement of Parliamentary and police investigations led advertisers including Ford, Sainsbury, Lloyds Banking Group, Virgin Media, Dixons, and Vauxhall to pull their advertising.

Perhaps it was embarrassment—but it was more likely the loss of revenue, the loss of almost $3 billion in market value for the parent company because of declining share prices, the hundreds of millions of pounds in damages that will have to be paid, and the fact that the paper’s meltdown was endangering Murdoch’s takeover of BskyB—that led him to kill the paper.

Unfortunately, the scandal shows that some journalists and news organizations will go to any length to get a story, no matter how disgraceful and unethical it may be. Fortunately, the number of journalists who will go as far as those at the News of the World are limited, but the outrageous conduct highlights the growing chasm between those who believe everything should be public and that journalists have a right to do anything to get information and those who believe in a right to privacy and a right to be left alone.

The culture at the News of the World that led to the behavior shows that pressures on organizations to put their interests above those of the public needs to be resisted. It is hardly a culture reputable news organizations and companies should emulate. Not only the reputational costs—but the economic costs as well—are far to high.

You As A Manager

How many times have you asked yourself how am I as a manager? I can tell you that I asked that question to myself at least once a week for 30 years in business. I am sure you are like me, you want to constantly improve as a person and as a manager so that the people that work for you respect you and not fear you. I also asked my subordinates how I was as a manager once a month in our staff meeting to make sure that we were(1) on the same page in tasks and timetables,(2) that we were moving in the same direction on projects and people issues,(3) we were aware of each others issues so we did not bump into each other or do double work. 


I always made sure that I was a boss first and friend second. I really do not have to go into the details of how you do that or discuss why you may think it should be reversed. And with that here are the challenges you may face :

  • co-worker issues
  • motivating team members
  • performance reviews
  • providing enough resources for workers to succeed
  • career pathing where your co-workers feel they are moving in a positive direction at a speed they are comfortable with based on their skills
  • no being a good listener
  • providing positive or negative feedback
  • following through on promises 
I think you have to let your co-workers be in the forefront and let them shine and be recognized for their work. Stretch their comfort zone so they grow and feel comfortable in that growth mode. Complement them in public and any negative feedback in private. Does this all sound familiar, what do you think or add to this blog post? 

Happy 4th of July America

MySpace Sale Underscores the Risks of Exuberant Digital Investments

The decision by News Corp. to dump MySpace once again reveals the risks of over exuberance toward digital companies that do not have a proven business model or long-term customer loyalty.

There are plenty of digital investments that meet those requirements, but a number of the most hyped firms moving toward IPOs and acquisitions do not. They need to be considered with hard headed pragmatism.

MySpace was launched 2003 and rapidly became the toast of the digital world as a social networking site and “the place” for musical stars and fans to connect. By 2005 it was the fifth most visited site on the Internet.

New Corp., which was anxious to benefit from growth in digital media, jumped at the opportunity to acquire the service and paid $580 million in 2005. It was an enormous price for a company with an unclear revenue potential.

Within two years MySpace had grown to be the world’s number one social networking site and was receiving 100 million unique monthly visitors. But it still had revenue problems; its visitors weren't paying customers and advertising wasn't paying its costs.

Despite landing a $900 million ad deal with Google, MySpace reported just one period of profitability. On top of that, it lost its cache with users and its leading position was soon eclipsed by Facebook.

Overall, it is estimated that the MySpace lost at least $1.5 billion under News Corp. and those losses dragged down the News Corp.’s overall earnings. The extent of its losses has never been completely clear because its results were not transparently presented in News Corp. financial reports.

After desperately trying to revive MySpace, News Corp. put it up for sale with an asking price was $100 million. It was sold in June to the online advertising network Specific Media for $35 million (about 6% of what News Corp paid for it), but the company was really just giving it away to get it off its books. As part of the deal, News Corp. took a minority equity stake in Specific Media.

Investing in emerging industries is always more risky than investing in established ones, so it requires a good deal of realism and clear headedness about the opportunities and their potential. It is not good enough merely to throw money on the table in hopes of drawing a winning hand or because the crowd is encouraging you on. A solid business plan that it is already working and producing financial growth and a user model based on more than popularity and status are required unless you investing high-risk capital you can afford to lose, as well as other opportunities it might have funded.

Why Do Employees Hate Change?

Suppose your supervisor offered you a 50% increase in pay, and 2 weeks of additional vacation just because she thought you were a great employee.  Would you accept the changes?  How likely are you to dig in your heels and refuse them because you don’t like change?
For many years, William Gould and I as well attributed organizational resistance to change to the fact that people simply hate change.  I no longer think that is true.  It’s not that employees hate change, but rather we don’t like the personal aspects of change that will adversely impact us, and our jobs.  The most basic question we often ask ourselves upon hearing of change is, “What is the worst possible way this will affect me?”  When there are losses (either real or perceived) associated with change, we are more likely to resist. 
Why do you think employees resist organizational change?
Credit by: William Gould of HRSoot.com