|
|
|||||
|
|||||
| Path: Main Street : NewsWeek : Archive : Human Resources Q & A Articles : Article |
Please note: While we ensure that all links and e-mail addresses are accurate at their publishing date, the quick-changing nature of the web means that some links to other web sites and e-mail addresses may no longer be accurate.
***********Human Resources Q & A
November 12, 2007
By Tim Rutledge
The question:
I’m curious about the proliferation of ‘Best Employers’ and ‘Best Places To Work’ lists. Are people tempted to apply for jobs with organizations that make it onto lists like these?Tim's Response:
Many of you probably noticed the coverage given to Canada’s 100 Best Employers for 2008 in the October 15th edition of Maclean’s. This annual compilation lists the companies without ranking them, and in each case highlights two or three practices that propel the organizations onto the list.
What strikes me about the highlights is the extent to which, in most instances, they focus on employee benefits and employee fun. It’s also interesting to note that many of these benefits have been around for a long time and are offered by lots of companies, both on the top 100 list and off it. In other words, there’s nothing particularly groundbreaking about them. Here are some examples of employee benefits that are mentioned for more than one company on the list:
- Tuition assistance
- Employer match of RSP contributions
- Profit sharing
- Bonuses
- Parental leave
These are old, familiar employee benefits or forms of compensation that are used widely. (The oldest by far, mentioned once, is ‘free Christmas turkeys’. That predates me!) Yet we are told that companies that offer one or more of these perks are therefore among the best employers in Canada.
The other way to get on the list is to sponsor employee fun events. Here are some examples:
- Weekly office beer cart
- Private dock
- Free trips to exotic locations
- Movie nights
- Use of lakeside lodge
- Caribbean cruise weekend
(There’s even a company with a trout pond. Good for the trout, I’m sure, but it’s not clear how the employees benefit. Unless, maybe, that’s where the private dock is.)
I have nothing against employee fun or employee benefits. But the link between the presence of these things and ‘Top Employer’ is at best tenuous.
Employee engagement is the result of the work itself and the environment in which it’s performed. Looking at the two lists above, the only item that is found in the work environment is the beer cart. All the others are external to the work environment. They are not engagers.
To be fair, there are a few practices mentioned in the highlights that are engagers. Here we find real innovation:
- Flexible working conditions. Teleworking is frequently mentioned.
- On-site day care. This is effective in bringing women back into the workforce, in keeping them there, and in engaging them with their work.
- Global career opportunities. Knowing that they can pursue their career interests without leaving the company is engaging for employees.
- Time off for volunteering.
Employee benefits and fun are powerless to retain employees in the face of:
- Micro- or absentee managers
- Lack of recognition for achievements
- Working alongside poor performers
- Equipment that breaks down frequently
- Command and control management style
- No sense of how work contributes to mission or vision
- Absence of actionable performance feedback
I suspect that some of the employers offer certain fun times and benefits as carrots to attract candidates for job openings. And this can be an effective practice. The social networking phenomenon increases the chances that people will share information about their workplaces, including some of those benefits and fun events. Recruiters are sure to mention them.
If you’ve never had a free gym membership, the lure of one might get you in an employer’s door. But if you’re being micro-managed, or if your contributions aren’t being recognized, I very much doubt that you’ll put up with that for the sake of the gym membership.
You’re getting the impression, I assume, that I have a problem with putting money into a budget bucket labelled ‘Tuition Assistance’ or ’Movie Passes’ and equating the practice with being a superior employer. It’s easy for senior management to approve these allocations, congratulate themselves on their commitment to their employees, and never give the matter an additional moment’s thought.
They’ll be surprised when their best employees leave for more engaging work experiences without so much as a backward glance at the trout pond.
|
|||
