https://www.brighthr.com/partners/blog/managing-employee-culture-during-change

Guest post on Bright HR discussing the HR aspects of M&A

Blacklarke quoted in Personnel Today discussing how employers should manage questions around Brexit

http://www.personneltoday.com/hr/reassure-staff-brexit-vote/

Employee Engagement Issues? Get Your EmployER Engagement Right First

The Sports Direct scandal is all over the news. The owner Mike Ashley has been quoted as saying that the business became so big that he didn’t know what was going on, despite conditions for workers being described as ‘Victorian’. This lament has been met with dubious cynicism, and whether true or not, his reputation as an employer and businessman has taken a massive hit.

However, let’s assume he’s telling the truth. Regardless of whether a business treats its workers well or badly, is there a case for owners and CEOs to remain ignorant of what’s happening on the shop floor, even if they aren’t involved in the day to day management? 

It’s clear that Sports Direct’s workforce was unengaged, unhappy and stressed. Workers stayed because they needed the work, not because they had anything good to say about the business. But needing the work isn’t enough to make anyone do a good job, it’s enough to make people jump through hoops (for example in the case of Sports Direct, allegedly working when they should be in hospital giving birth), to give the appearance of doing their job, however badly, in order to keep their position. It may keep the business turning over, but imagine how much more profitable a company would be with an engaged, broadly contented workforce which strives to perform well.

Essentially it is about understanding and engaging with your business. Whether a decision maker is looking to grow, promote or even sell their business, they’ll usually look at costs, market share and profit. But if they don’t know what’s happening in their own backyard, they run the risk of the same sort of humiliation that Mike Ashley has just faced across our TV screens.

In many cases it’s not a question of pay and conditions, but the day to issues and frustrations employees face when doing their jobs. One disgruntled employee of an extremely profitable multinational recently told me how he had faced a 30 minute wait at either end of the day to switch on and shut down his PC, because they would not replace their machines and no executive would take an interest in the situation. As a result the company lost an hour of his time every day; he already worked an average of 9-10 hours per day with an hour commute and refused to start earlier or leave later to make up for the company’s short sightedness.

Being engaged with your staff doesn’t mean you can solve all their problems or give them everything they ask for. Mike Ashley declared that he wasn’t Santa Claus and nobody (except perhaps some of the less pragmatic trade unions) expects him to be. But being engaged as an employer does mean you can relate to staff, sort out minor issues, jointly explore where investment may add greatest value (e.g. PCs that work properly) and evaluate whether procedures and processes designed with all right intentions, actually deliver the results you originally sought. It also means that if you are looking to sell or buy a business, there’s a much smaller chance of any hidden nasties emerging which will come back to bite you.

Thanks for all the germs, now will you just go home!

We all know the ones. The people who come into the office spluttering, coughing and spreading their germs everywhere. They’re clearly not welcome. But they’ve gritted their teeth and shown up to work, often with a proud ‘Oh I’m fine. I’ve not had a day off sick in seventeen years!’ Then there are those at the other end of the spectrum; one sneeze at 4 o’clock and they leave a bit early, not to be seen for the rest of the week.

As with any issue with people, a reasonable moderate approach somewhere between these two extremes of presenteeism and absenteeism is obviously the most logical solution. It’s useful to remember that everyone is different, for example with colds some people may be sneezing and coughing but feel OK, whilst others can feel feverish and weak for several days without showing many obvious symptoms.

No employer wants staff taking time off sick unnecessarily, but neither do they want someone to come in who is spreading their germs to make everyone else sick, and is feeling so lousy that they’re probably being utterly unproductive anyway. Looking at the issue more widely, is the person who always stays an extra couple of hours at the end of the day actually a more productive and dedicated employee than the one who leaves on time?

Most companies monitor absences, but it’s much harder to monitor presenteeism. Where do you draw the line between someone coming into the workplace who is mildly unwell but perfectly fine to work and someone who just should not be there? How do you genuinely distinguish between the employee who puts in a huge amount of discretionary effort and the one who merely occupies their desk till 7pm in order to manage others’ perceptions, or because they cannot work efficiently?

The ability to work from home in many jobs also adds to the complexity. In some cases, for example contagious colds, or issues with mobility, working from home provides a way for companies and staff to avoid sickness absence while remaining just as productive as if they had come into the workplace. 

But again, it has its pitfalls. It can skew expectations, with employees who really should be taking some time off refusing to do so, or their employers expecting them to work, because they can do so in their pyjamas surrounded by cups of hot tea. Again the question arises as to whether the person is genuinely fit to work not just physically but mentally. On the other hand, it can be a great way for someone to avoid taking an official sick day, but in reality sitting at home doing practically no work.  

So how to deal with this in a way that works, but doesn’t treat people like robots:

• Monitor individual absences and the reasons for them, but don’t get drawn into comparing people based on how long they were absent for the same reason.

o   This only serves to create tension in the workplace and a presenteeism culture where people who shouldn’t be there force themselves to come in.

o   If you suspect someone is taking advantage, monitor the frequency of the absence and whether there are any patterns to it.

• If people are working from home due to sickness, check in on them at some point during the day to see how they are feeling and run through what they have been working on. If you suspect they are not actually in a position to be effective, or that they have done next to no work, tell them to stop and take the day off as officially sick. They won’t lose pay as they’ve worked a part day, but it does mean they’ll need to day the next day off as sick leave or be in the office.  

• Make sure staff are aware that if they are unwell and likely to be contagious, coming into the workplace is frowned upon. The increase in sickness levels is likely to be balanced out, as fewer people actually get sick in the first place.

•  If someone has a chronic condition, encourage them to be open about it.

o   It may be that there will be an adjustment to working hours, or an understanding that they are likely to have more sick days than the average employee, but it means that mutual expectations can be set and avoid both potential disciplinary action for frequent absence on one hand or a ‘blank cheque’ approach to their sickness on the other, where absence is simply unquestioned because of the persons condition.

• In the UK, you don’t have to pay any sick pay for up to the first three days of absence (if they have worked a part day, you do need to pay them). It’s a great strategy for stopping people ‘swinging the lead’ unnecessarily, and only taking the time off if they are really sick, but again can cause issues around presenteeism.

o   One solution is to give employees a certain number (no more than three) of ‘duvet days’ a year. These are paid days when they can call in and say they don’t feel like coming into work for whatever reason.

o   Everyone will of course take them, so you’ll need to incorporate costs into your overall salary and benefits package and make sure it’s affordable. However, it means that employees have a contingency when they are really ill and are not going to force themselves into work, whilst ensuring that any continual ‘offenders’ will financially lose out should they choose to take sick leave without real cause.

Essentially, the best approach to sick leave is to balance humanity, commerciality and common sense, remembering that everyone is different, both in terms of their health and their ability to be honest!  

·   

Successful Workforce Mergers - The Power of Planning and Positive Engagement

This is the executive summary of a report compiled by Blacklarke in January 2016.  To receive the full report, or for more information on help on your business journey, be it a merger, acquisition, sale or change in strategy, contact benjamin@blacklarke.com

Business changes, particularly mergers, acquisitions and sales, have a huge impact on leaders and employees of an organisation. Uncertainty, tight deadlines and a clash of cultures can all combine to create an unhealthy and unproductive working environment. Yet getting to the bottom line through the financial and legal processes is still regarded as the primary objective, while ensuring sustainable success by having employees buy into the change, is often a secondary consideration.

For this report, Blacklarke HR Consulting interviewed CEOs and HR Directors of a large number of companies which have been through mergers, acquisitions or sales over the past few years. The purpose is to establish whether there are any consistent themes to maintaining employee engagement during these periods of change and to identify a set of simple principles which the leaders of organisations should follow when embarking on a change journey.

We examined a diverse range of organisations, including family businesses with under 30 employees, professional services firms, charities and multinational corporations. Whilst the circumstances of each case were clearly different, what emerged was a set of clear and straightforward principles that are needed when approaching a project of this nature, particularly when considering the morale of the people impacted by it.

We concluded that confidence in the journey was key to success and more importantly, key to maintaining morale, even during a difficult period.

This involves the three Cs:

 Certainty

• ensuring full due diligence is completed before finalising a deal 
• having a clear vision, goal and strategy   
• not being afraid to leave behind those who do not support the vision 

Communication

• ensuring the strategy is articulated and emphasised 
• seeking feedback on the strategy from employees  
• following up with actions to demonstrate commitment to the strategy 

Consistency

• ensuring follow up takes place quickly 
• ensuring follow up is in line with the articulated strategy   
• sticking to the plans unless there is a fundamental reason to alter course, which must be justified and communicated  

Without these principles, a change programme may eventually succeed, but is likely to be a painful process with commercially detrimental legacy issues continuing to hamper progress over many subsequent years.