Debunking the Compensation Myth Surrounding Retention
A driving need for obtaining talent is retention. It is a huge issue when you take into account that, according to a September 2018 article from CNBC, “workers are quitting at the highest rate since 2001.” When retention rates are low due to high undesirable attrition, many business leaders look to recruitment to fill that gap and solve the problem. However, the reasons that candidates wield so much power in today’s market is because of a growing skills gap and talent shortage. The need is high and the supply is low, so it is unreasonable to believe that workforce headcount issues can be solved by recruiting alone. Most business leaders understand the laws of supply and demand as it relates to the products and services that they produce and sell. When demand is high and supply is low, prices rise. Conversely, when supply is high and demand is low, prices fall. The challenge is finding the equilibrium where the right price stimulates movement of the product or service rather than warehousing or letting it sit idle and unproductive. People, however, are not the same as a product and that is a hard pill for many business owners to accept. In other words, retention is not exclusively about price. Recently, Forbes published an article entitled, Why American Workers Quit Their Jobs, and provided an infographic to summarize and showcase the results. Unfortunately, the article and corresponding infographic can be misleading. The results are based on a survey conducted by PayScale; whose core business revolves around compensation metrics. Thus, is it any wonder that “I want higher pay” is identified as the highest percentage motivator for quitting? While informative, the article did not provide the complete picture leading most business leaders whose time is short and consume data and information in quick, easy bites to come to a quick conclusion. “Well, according to Forbes, a very well respected and trusted source of news and business information, retention IS about paying my people more.” WRONG! With all due respect to Forbes and the article’s author, it’s just not that simple and everyone who deals with recruitment and retention as a core function of their role and responsibilities knows it. Even PayScale knows it. The very same report cited in the Forbes article reflects that compensation is not the key to retention. A deeper look into the numbers reveals the following: Top Reasons for Quitting: I want higher pay (25%) I am unhappy at my current organization (16%) I want to work at an organization more aligned with my values (14%) Top Attraction to a New Organization: The opportunity to do more meaningful work (27%) Increased responsibilities in this role (17%) Increased pay for this position (16%). If compensation were the single most important retention tool, it would be at the top of the reasons for quitting and the attraction to the new organization. What this study reflects is that what exiting employees tell us, and what their real motivations are, are two different things. Additionally, one has to look even deeper to understand that retention differs across different levels of the organization. What motivates retention for front-line workers is different than what motivates top executives, which is even different from what motivates managers or directors. As in any sales interaction, price is the most common objection encountered. “That product/service is just too expensive.” Every salesperson worth their weight is prepared and knows that such objections are often just chicken poop, and this is when the real sales work begins. What the client/customer does not see is the VALUE for the price but rather they see the PRICE for the value. When it comes to employee retention, it’s the same thing. Exiting employees use the price objection all the time as an avoidance, but if the business is to really solve its problems then they have to perform true root cause analysis, dig deeper and understand the actual underlying reasons for employee attrition. Let’s not fool ourselves either. Compensation IS a legitimate factor that DOES impact and factor into why people leave. For example, when an employee perceives discrimination in the workplace or mistreatment, being skipped over for a promotion when deserving of it, not receiving the training and development they need, a lack of recognition or reward for a job well done, or even something as severe as harassment or workplace bullying. The overriding perception in these scenarios often becomes, “I don’t get paid enough to put up with this.” Therein lies the reason pay is provided as the chief motivator for leaving. The last thing they want to do, especially once they have made up their minds and they are ready to leave, is to burn bridges, make waves, or fight their way out the door. Mentally, it is best to make a smooth and conflict-free exit. As such, they often hide their real objection to remaining for fear of offending someone, getting into an argument, or painting themselves into a corner where they cannot leave an environment they no longer want and are unable to go to where they believe they will be happy and prosper. Incidentally, compensation is also the easiest excuse for a company or manager to accept. So, what are business leaders to do about this? How are they going to retain top talent? First and foremost, don’t immediately jump to the conclusion that compensation is the silver bullet or the magic wand that will solve all problems. That’s a surefire way to price yourself right out of business. Rather, work collaboratively with your HR department and managers. Engage in the same root cause analysis with your team’s motivations that you do when solving production or operational problems. LISTEN to the employees and what truly motivates them. Conduct engagement surveys to confirm it. But most importantly, when you listen, be prepared to ACT on what you hear. Demonstrate to your people that they are valued, and you are willing to invest in them through training and development.
Expand Your Candidate Pool: Best Behaviors Lead to the Best Candidates
I don’t know about you, but it’s starting to get old hearing the “it’s a candidate’s market” comments from nearly everyone in social media, news articles and in far too many blogs to count (The BEST Blog included). It’s one thing to call it out, but it’s entirely different to address and solve the problem. While there are currently no silver bullets, there are some innovative and different ways of looking at the workforce that can give you the edge over your competition. In January 2019, I came across an article that highlighted a professional’s path to business leadership. It walked us through how she got started in the industry, her background and expertise, recounted the obstacles she faced and how she changed with the times. These last two, obstacles and changing with the times, are often missed by so many when hiring. The Obstacle With un- and even under-employment at historic lows and such a significant skill mismatch, it’s becoming harder to backfill roles when the talent pool seems to be shrinking at an alarming rate. In fact, in Bloomberg (April 4, 2019 – U.S. Jobless Claims Fall to 49-Year Low, Below All Forecasts) it was reported that employers are “holding onto workers and loath to let them go.” This makes pulling talent from competitors even more challenging than ever before! Much of the issue is based on how one defines the talent pool. Hiring managers tend to select candidates only if they have the exact pedigree, experience and knowledge required for the position. Usually, this means they want a sales candidate’s “book of business” to come with them. For technical roles, they want candidates to make a parallel shift into the same role they are leaving. However, this is not the 1980’s. Candidates today are more career savvy and they have choices both in and outside their current industries. To add another layer of complexity, many business leaders are stuck in two camps: clone the current aging employee population or hire the younger generation. In cloning the current aging employee population, hiring managers want someone who has done it before in their industry and, if possible, for their clients or clients’ competitors. This first camp leads to low or no innovation, a decreasing talent pool, and the challenge of pulling from a competitor, which is the only place to find those who have done the exact same role you are trying to fill. Hiring the younger generation appears to be a terrific alternative! Get them in early in their career and they will stay forever, just like the Baby Boomer generation or Gen Xers, right? WRONG! Specifically targeting younger candidates over older candidates equally able, capable, and willing to perform the same job at the same rate of pay is a violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). Additionally, there are challenges that must be overcome such as client perceptions that they lack the knowledge, skills, and abilities to help them. There are also the challenges of keeping these early career professionals engaged in the business when they are hungry to grow their careers. So, how do we get around these issues? Changing with the Times: It is About Behaviors The solution does not have to be an either/or situation. In fact, age never has to be a factor at all, and legally it’s safer if it isn’t. Every role has certain behavior traits and competencies that lead to success no matter who is in the role. These traits provide us insight into each candidate around what motivates them, how they act or interact, and the thought processes they engage in. Competencies that candidates bring are developed over time and can be seen through their innate and learned behaviors. Competencies might be core to the role or company, demonstrated leadership or individual contributions, and may even be very unique based on the positions they have held. In the context of a job, people must possess a particular set of competencies to be a good “fit” and achieve success. The three critical dimensions of job-related competencies are: Behavior Traits that are required to accomplish the job Experience or job-related education and training that contribute to greater productivity Chemistry or the personality that is compatible with the company and work group. We need to change our hiring thinking by realizing the importance and specific identification of the behavior traits required in a role. This will open a wider, more qualified talent pool. Experience, or hiring the exact same position from your competitor, is too often viewed as the most important dimension. However, it’s actually the LEAST critical to success. Outside of highly technical roles, we can hire a lower level of specific experience because technical, product and industry knowledge can be trained. If a professional has the right behaviors and experience but the chemistry is lacking, a person may still be successful if the company and person recognize, and choose to work through, their differences. The same is true for professionals with the right behaviors but little experience and poor chemistry. The common hiring success denominator is behaviors – not experience or chemistry. We are all looking to hire the ideal candidate with adequate levels of behaviors, experience and chemistry. Unfortunately, this is akin to looking for a purple squirrel – good luck finding that in today’s dynamic hiring market. How Do We Identify these Behaviors? There are 25 specific professional behaviors that make up behavior trait families. We define these 4 families as: MOTIVATIONS – The fundamental drive of an individual characterized by more than the simple desire to earn money. What provides the individual the personal fulfillment in their work? MODES OF ACTING – Functional behavioral traits that address the individual’s approach and skills for accomplishing work functions. These include organizational and time management skills, planning and prioritization, initiative, work focus and physical and mental stamina. MODES OF INTERACTING – Addresses an individual’s interpersonal skills in how they influence, interact and get along with others.
Be an Investor When Recruiting and Hiring
Who you hire is one of the most important decisions and investments you can make in your business. However, recruiting and hiring today is more important than finding a person with the right skills and qualifications. Do the candidates fit our culture and strategic vision? Do they share our values and have the right behaviors to make them successful and provide your company a long-term return? Will they still be around in 5 years? Warren Buffett is considered to be one of the most successful investors of all time and is currently the third wealthiest person in the world. Regardless of one’s opinion of the “Oracle of Omaha,” it is hard to argue with his amazing track record of success. As the Chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, Buffett has inspired millions, while making billions through a philosophy of investing that can also be applied to successful hiring practices in your business. Aside from utilizing financial ratios and other analytical tools to find undervalued companies he can invest in, there are other key considerations that Buffett and many other successful investors look for before making a decision. Never compromising on business quality, taking the long view, and listening to those you know and trust, to name a few hallmarks of Buffett’s investment strategy. Could thinking as an investor also be applied to hiring? After all, when recruiting and hiring a person to join your company, you are making a major investment. That same hire can often be critical for the future success of the company. Time, training, compensation, benefits and other “rewards” for the people you employ are your investments in growing your business and making a return. In today’s low-unemployment, low-retention “candidate’s market,” approaching recruiting and hiring as an investor may make the difference and lead to better decision-making in this critical area. Never Compromise on Quality “It’s far better to buy a wonderful company at a fair price than a fair company at a wonderful price.” – Warren Buffett Berkshire Hathaway was originally a textile manufacturer when Buffett first took control in 1962. He later stated that entering the textile business was one of his worst trades ever but kept the name. That experience taught Buffett that “you get what you pay for.” He was no longer interested in buying something at a bargain in the hope of getting a nice short-term return, especially when the long-term prospects for the business look terrible. He chose a path of “value investing,” in which he looks for prices that are low compared to their actual or future worth and often overlooked by other investors. Never compromising on quality can also be applied to hiring. For example, Candidate A is a high-quality candidate that matches all of the skills, qualifications, experience, behaviors and cultural alignment needed for great success in the position. “A” checks off all of the boxes, has been thoroughly screened and you can see a bright long-term future. Candidate B also has many of the same skills and qualifications. “B’s” behaviors and culture fit were not as strong and the references not as glowing, nor was there a projected long-term future with the company. Here’s the kicker— “B” wants 20% less in salary than “A.” How many would automatically gravitate to Candidate B because they felt they were saving the company money or had to stick to a budget? Quality investments yield high returns and increase in value over time, similar to Candidate A in our example. How does this apply to value investing? Candidate B will inevitably cost the company more over time and return less due to low engagement, poor cultural fit and eventual turnover – in other words a lot more than the 20% saved in Candidate A’s compensation. As Buffett has stated, “Price is what you pay. Value is what you get.” Taking the Long View Once asked how long he would hold a high-quality investment he made at what was considered a reasonable price, Buffett answered, “Our favorite holding period is forever.” Embracing a “buy and hold” investment philosophy, many of his investments have been held for decades. Buffett and investors care more about the future price than the value it was on the day it was purchased. As a business leader, you should care more about what a new hire can bring you a few years into the future instead of having them be able to “hit the ground running” and automatically start making returns on day one. Look for those candidates who are quick learners and can innovatively solve problems. They are the ones that have the experience and behaviors that will help them integrate quickly into your company and excel in the future. Smart investors also continue to invest – just as companies need to keep investing in their people. While you may not have the budget to increase their compensation, look for other ways to invest in your new hires and current top talent and leadership. In a recent Udemy “Workplace Boredom Report,” 46% of employees are looking to leave their companies because of a lack of opportunity to learn new skills, and 80% agree that being given more opportunities to learn new skills would make them more interested and engaged in their work. Do you offer continuing education, seminars, training programs and other developmental programs that will keep your employees learning new skills? There is a measurable ROI to upskilling your employees, and often it is in the form of productivity gains, increased engagement, more profitability and reduced turnover. Listen to Those You Know and Trust “Management changes, like marital changes, are painful, time-consuming, and chancy.” – Warren Buffett Warren Buffett has always noted the importance of only investing in competent and trustworthy management teams. He knows that when he selects partners or managers, their actions and decisions will be felt for many years. As a business leader, you too must be cognizant of selecting competent and trustworthy people to join your organization. They could have a
All’s Fair in Love and Retention
Employee retention can seem like war in the current candidate market, but it doesn’t have to be. Often, when top-grade managers leave their organization, it is because of reasons that could be addressed by company leadership and have little to do with salary. In our own internal surveys that we use with candidates, “Company Culture” is the number one motivation for making a career move. As recruiters, we often see candidates willing to take up to a 20-25% cut in base pay for an opportunity that provides more of a challenge, a better company culture, more work/life balance, and a “runway” to their future goals. To get your people to stay, you may be thinking, “Well, I’ll just increase their compensation and that should do it.” Or – when presented with an employee that is leaving, “I will make him a counteroffer he can’t refuse.” Worst case, your budget may not allow for it. Best case, you may get another year or two out of the employee, but the underlying issues for them wanting to leave still remain. The good news is that it is not just about compensation. The bad news is that if you’re not taking steps to address employee retention and understand why your talent is leaving, it is open season on your people. We have identified many clients and companies we work with that have excellent employee retention, and they all share the same four components that we call L-O-V-E (L for Learning and Development programs, O for a great Onboarding experience, V for Values and Culture, and E for Engagement). Thus, when it comes to retention, think about making LOVE, not War. Learning and Development How many of us have said to ourselves at points in our career, ”Did I learn anything new today or was it just another day at the mill?” Learning and development programs are proven ways to boost engagement and loyalty. According to Ellie Bertani, Director of HR Strategy and Innovation at Walmart, “I believe business needs to stop looking at employees as a cost center and realize they are an investment. Training them is an investment that will pay dividends in the future.” There are external factors at work as well. According to Niall McKinney, president of AVADO, “As more jobs become automated, employers need to help employees re-deploy in new or more advanced areas. Around 32% of current workers ages 16-54, regardless of their position, may need to retrain within the next 12 years. Research also shows that workers are leaving your company because they don’t see the career path and opportunity they’re looking for. They may have higher expectations, or they simply need guidance. They also may have been thrown into a position without proper onboarding or training and are learning simply by making mistakes, which can be soul-crushing. In a recent Udemy “Workplace Boredom Report,” 46% of employees are looking to leave their companies because of a lack of opportunity to learn new skills. This is where a more experienced counterpart or mentor can provide the training, skills, career/life guidance, coaching, and patience that can help them learn the position, see their fit within the company and culture, and see a future. Do you offer continuing education, seminars, training program,s and other developmental programs that will keep your employees learning new skills? Do you have a portion of your meetings dedicated to best practices or learning something new, or even a simple sharing of information? There is a measurable ROI to upskilling your employees, often in the form of productivity gains and reduced turnover. Onboarding Onboarding is a great tool for welcoming a new team member and first impressions here are lasting. Think about your own career. How many of us on our first day in a new job had to find a temporary workspace since our workstation wasn’t ready? They may not have had our email setup yet and didn’t even have new business cards printed. “I’m sorry, I didn’t get the email that you were starting today,” was often a common refrain. You can feel the love and sense of belonging in your new company, right? According to ServiceNow, 80% of workers experienced some issues when starting a new job. One-third stated they received no training at all, while 28% were unsure of their responsibilities and goals. 20% felt they were not fully onboarded after three months on the job! In fact, that same 80% would rather go on an awkward first date than attend a new job onboarding session or orientation. What do new hires want out of onboarding? In the ServiceNow survey, 58% want a walk-through of key processes or want a “buddy” or mentor they can turn to for questions. According to a recent Harris Poll, 93% of employers agree that a good onboarding experience is critical to influence the new hire’s decision to stay with the company. In fact, nearly 1 in 10 new hires leave a company due to a poor onboarding experience and the attrition rate can be up to 22% in the first 45 days of a new hire. The solution? Have a comprehensive plan for onboarding new hires. Your onboarding may include: a pre-boarding with your new hire (welcome packet and schedule, including a welcome letter from the CEO, sent prior to their first day); scheduled walk-throughs with key department heads; a longer duration for getting acclimated (most successful onboarding plans take weeks or even months); and the assignment of a coach/mentor to help them learn the new job quickly and immerse them into your company culture. Values & Company Culture Company values and culture are more important than ever when it comes to retention. Are you giving people insight into the company’s mission, values, vision and purpose? A good thing to do is write it down, not just have it on your web site, but have it visible throughout your entire operation. According to Bretton Putter, Founder and CEO of CultureGene, “The success or failure of a
Employer Strategies to Succeed in a Candidate’s Market: Lead, Match or Lag
Part 2 of a 2-Part Series on the Important and Timely Issue of Hiring in a Candidate’s Market When I turned 21 years old, I was in my Junior year at Bowling Green State University and had just changed majors from Music Education to Business. It was then that my dad gave me my first $500 to invest in the stock market. With it came a book by Louis Rukeyser titled, “How to Make Money in Wall Street.” In that book, Mr. Rukeyser introduced me to an axiom of investing that no doubt predates him, but I found the application well beyond investing: “A bull makes money, a bear makes money, but a pig goes broke.” The axiom was referencing a rising economy (as in the horns of a bull pointing up) and a declining economy (as in a bear swiping down for its prey). But the reference to the pig is about those who invest with greed, trying to time the markets and get rich quick rather than selecting the appropriate investment strategy for the current market flow. Now, I’m not a market prognosticator here to tell you how to make a quick buck on Wall Street, but the axiom has some interesting applications that can make or break your company if you know how to apply it with three critical human capital investment strategies. The last article, “Employer Strategies to Succeed in a Candidate’s Market,” addressed various direct and indirect compensation elements that can be flexed in order to build customized and compelling offers to attract top talent in the current competitive candidate’s market. In addition, the need for a compensation philosophy and strategy was outlined. What are these strategies? Simply put they are: Lead, Match or Lag. Piece of cake, right? Well, as with all things in business, it’s not that easy. Let’s understand what they mean first. LEAD: This is the most straightforward. In short, you pay more for the talent than the going market rate. After all, who wouldn’t want to take a job that pays more than anyone else in the same role in another company? MATCH: On second thought, perhaps THIS is the most straightforward. All you have to do is match the current market. Surely candidates will buy into the fact that, “this is the rate… take it or leave it?” Right? LAG: Then there is the biggest money saver of them all and an employer’s dream. Pay less than everyone else for the same talent to do the same job. You’ll rake in the money and not have to share! Well, maybe not. Unfortunately, they just are not as easy as they sound, but they are the strategies that need to be employed and each really does have its own place. The compensation philosophy of the organization should include an understanding of the underlying strategy you choose from the above. Understanding where the market is will help you better set the appropriate compensation for each position and situation. The hard part is when the market is changing right before your very eyes— as in today’s market! As SHRM points out in their article on planning and design, “There is not one strategy that will work for every employer and organizations will need to ensure the approach they choose matches their mission, vision, and culture and supports the overall business strategy.” Rather than adhere to a singular strategy across the organization, especially in the current candidate’s market, consider implementing a combination of each. As an example, you might choose to: LEAD: A great option for those mission critical and hard-to-fill roles where attracting top talent in a timely manner will make or break organizational success. MATCH: A recommended option for mission important and challenging roles that could just be a pain to have to fill and where there is a high potential of attrition due to market perception. LAG: Many businesses have roles of lower importance where labor may still be plentiful or where vacancies are less damaging to the organization. For those roles where the time sensitivity or mission impact is low, this is an excellent option. Spreading out the strategy in this fashion across roles by importance and impact can soften the blow to your P&L and provide the cash flow necessary to apply the “Lead” strategy used in other roles. However, let’s not fixate on cost too much. Remember the tools in the toolbox from the previous article? Not all of your tools revolve around base compensation, direct compensation, or even compensation at all! That’s right, the strategies COULD conceivably look like this: LEAD: Mission critical, hard-to-fill roles include a robust relocation plan, signing bonus, and/or a diverse set of PERKS not offered to any other role in the organization (but offered to all roles in this category). MATCH: Mission important, high attrition and painful-to-fill roles include lump sum relocation of a defined range based on need, flexibility for remote work, a retention bonus for 2-3 years of service and/or an attractive but narrow array of PERKS. LAG: Low time sensitivity or mission impact roles include a retention bonus for 3-5 years of service and/or a narrow array of PERKS. Still, many hiring managers, particularly those with no budgetary control or line-of-site often jump right to, “I want XYZ person so just pay them more!” If you cannot reasonably do that because you will blow your budget and risk pushing the organization into the red, then you cannot always lead the market. Leading the market may not always be the right answer for your company and may not even align with your organization’s mission, vision and culture. Here is where Mr. Rukeyser’s investment axiom comes into play. As human resource personnel, compensation managers, or even accounting/finance professionals, basically the function that often holds this responsibility in small and some mid-sized companies, we need to be prepared to educate our hiring managers around the axiom of bulls, bears, and pigs. Where necessary we should instill proper controls to reel