If you have ever worked with Maister, Green & Galford’s Trust Equation, you’ll know that perceived self-orientation (i.e. someone who comes across as focused on their own agenda) is the quickest way to undermine a relationship of trust.

Generally, we have come to associate the word ‘ego’ with this idea of being self-centered, but actually, an ego is not always as bad as its initial connotations. While leaders being egotistical can lead to retention problems (especially with more than two in five employees having left a job because of a bad manager), they can also be a force for good. However, it is important to get the balance right – leaders need to develop and utilize a ‘healthy ego’ in order to optimize their leadership abilities.

So, what does a ‘healthy ego’ look like?

Well, one way to think about this is by considering the airplane safety briefing. When the cabin crew are doing the safety demonstration just before take-off, they remind everyone that in the event of needing oxygen masks, it is imperative that you put your own mask on first before attending to those of children or others around you. This is a great analogy for a healthy ego!

The fact is, nothing is going to unsettle an organization more than employees lacking faith in their leader. Staff want to know that their higher-ups know what they are doing, are good at what they do, and have confidence in the future of the company. There is some level of ego that every leader must have in order to believe that they are the right person for the job and have the ability to make the hard decisions and delegate where need be.

I believe the key to balancing this out and making this ego healthy is inclusivity – even though a leader benefits from being confident and having credible experience, they need to also have a growth mindset and be willing to listen and incorporate other opinions and use this when making a decision.

As well as this, if a leader is making their intentions clear by being transparent and communicative with their teams, then they do not risk this display of ‘ego’ being misconstrued as vanity or self-orientation.

If you would like to discuss how to find that perfect balance to create healthy egos in leaders, please get in touch with me at anya@orgshakers.com

When an employee passes away, it is difficult to know what to do and how to respond – especially as an employer. It is important, however, that leaders approach the bereavement as compassionately and as empathetically as possible, as failing to do so can have a noticeable and long-lasting impact on the workforce.

There are three main areas that employers need to address if a staff member dies, and these will allow the organization to offer its support and condolences, while also dealing with the legal and administrative implications.

1. Supporting the family of the staff member:

Upon hearing the news, employers should reach out to the family of the employee and offer their sympathy, as well as ask if there is anything they can do to help. After this initial contact, a more formal set of condolences can be sent – potentially in the form of flowers, or a book of condolences from the team.

It may also be appropriate to ask the family about the best way to commemorate their loved one at work – this will help highlight how valued they were as a team member and that the family is in the employer’s thoughts. Additionally, if the family agree, colleagues may wish to attend the funeral to pay their respects and have some closure.

It is also important to ensure that the family are aware of who and how to get in contact with the company in regard to the legalities of a sudden termination of employment due to these circumstances (such as pay, pension, life insurance).

2. Supporting colleagues:

It is very likely that some employees are going to be hit hard by the loss of a colleague, especially those who were particularly close to the deceased. It may be appropriate to consider offering compassionate leave to those greatly affected, as well as either directing them to in-house support services (such as Employee Assistance Programs) or external services such as Mind or the Good Grief Trust.

Be mindful that employees may grieve differently. If employers notice a dip in productivity or a change in the quality of an individual’s output, they should consider having a one-on-one meeting to see what they can do to help. From an inclusion perspective, religious and cultural beliefs can also influence how someone grieves, so this has to be taken into account (for instance, if someone requires a space to pray).

3. Dealing with the formalities:

From an organizational perspective, it is important for employers to ensure that they are taking the necessary and correct legal and administrative steps after the loss of an employee. While it can seem harsh, it is important that employers formally terminate the contract of the deceased staff member. This will be marked down as their ‘leaving date’ from a payroll perspective, and they should be paid the remainder of their salary for the month, as well as any accrued holiday pay.

Employers must also contact pension providers and notify their revenue service of the employee’s passing, as well as pass on the appropriate information about life insurance benefits the employee may have been receiving to their next of kin.

Dealing with the death of a co-worker is difficult and can have reverberating effects on colleagues and the wider organization. HR plays a vital role in helping to respond to, manage, and mitigate these effects, and so if you would like to discuss how we can help assist you in consolidating policies around this topic, please get in touch with us.

Coaching is a fantastic way to draw the potential out of leaders. It helps improve confidence, productivity, and is a sustainable form of development, as what is learned is taken and applied independently afterwards. And this is a proven fact – on average, an individual increases their productivity by 86% when training is combined with coaching, compared to only 22% with training alone. But in order for coaching to be effective, the context of who is being coached, and when, must align with what coaching has to offer in order to actually reap a significant return on investment (ROI). Coaching works well alongside training when it supports the embedding of new skill sets which have been the subject of the skill building. More often, however, coaching at this level is focused on shifting a mindset. In that situation employers must first be able to identify if the leader’s needs are, indeed, coachable.

Coaching requires you to explore, support and challenge a leader’s thinking in order to help realign their perspective. However, an executive can only be coached to think and operate differently if they are open to doing so. Coaching isn’t designed to change people fundamentally, it acts as a way of unlocking unrealized potential – this new approach was always an option, it just needed to be teased out in a methodical way.

How can you tell if this is the case?

The individual should have exhibited a desire to be coached in some way, and previously displayed behavior of wanting to learn, as well as change in response to feedback. Coaching can be an intimate experience and can sometimes feel judgmental, when in reality it is designed to push the coachee so that they gain a sustainable form of development. If a leader has previously shown the want to improve and strengthen their abilities, then this person will be a perfect fit for executive coaching and will likely benefit greatly from it.

Also, timing matters! Coaching is extremely effective when a leader is at a learning inflection point. This can take shape in many different ways, but will typically be a moment of realization, a challenge they are facing, or noticeable dissonance. These all act as coaching catalysts, as they spark the focus needed for coaching to be successful. Once this inflection point has been identified, the coach can then help the leader map out the goals of their sessions and pave a clear path to meet them.

Executive coaching is rising in popularity – in 2022, it was estimated that the global executive coaching market was valued at $9.3 billion – which is almost a $1 billion increase from the previous year. This is because the satisfaction rate for coaching is near to 100%, but to ensure that it remains that way, employers must be able to identify the correct context for successful and meaningful coaching to take place. This ensures that money is not being wasted, but instead converted into a high ROI.

If you would like to seek out coaching at a leadership level or are interested in being coached yourself, please get in touch with me at anya@orgshakers.com

A trial of the 4-day working week commenced last year in the UK, and 90% of participating businesses have opted to stick with it.

This has naturally created interest around the prospect of a 4-day working week and what this might look like, with one statistic standing out: a recent poll led by Hays discovered that almost two-thirds of workers would prefer to shift from a 5-day week to an office-based 4-day week – and a third of employers would be more likely to make the switch if all four days were spent in the workplace.

So, could this be the ‘Great Resolution’ that employers have been searching for?

It is no secret that since emerging from the pandemic, many employers have been resistant to embedding hybrid and remote working models into their business practices. But after many attempts to rope employees back into the office, the dust seems to finally be settling, with hybrid work looking like it’s here to stay. And yet now, with the possibility of a 4-day week being adopted, is this going to be used as an opportunity for employers to strike a deal with their workers?

Well, some evidence suggests it still may not be enough. For one thing, over a third of workers have said they would resign if they were told to return to the office full-time. And the reason for this can be found in IWG’s ground-breaking study, which discovered that hybrid workers are the healthiest workers – they are exercising more, sleeping better, and eating more healthily than ever. It’s not surprising, therefore, that employees are reluctant to return to in-office full time.

But it seems, at the root of this tussle, that there is a bigger issue. Employers are seemingly suffering from what has been dubbed ‘productivity paranoia’, in which they are convinced that their employees are not being as productive working from home as they would be onsite.

A study by Microsoft confirmed this, with 87% of hybrid employees claiming they were more productive, whereas only 12% of leaders said they had full confidence that their teams were actually being productive.

However, by consistently demonstrating this lack of trust in their people, leaders risk having a negative impact on productivity and engagement. According to a study in Harvard Business Review, people at high-trust companies report 74% less stress, 106% more energy at work, 50% higher productivity, 76% more engagement and 40% less burnout.

Trust is the foundation of any relationship – especially those formed in the workplace. It is clear that most employees have the means of being just as productive from home as they do in the office, so their willingness to have a 4-day work week solely in-office may be driven by a desire to rekindle a trusting relationship with their boss than a concern for their ability to do the job.

The bottom line, however, is that as the prospect of a 4-day working week – remote, hybrid, or in the office – inches closer to reality, it is important for employers to consider how they can optimize this to attract, retain and motivate the talent their organization needs.

If you would like support with managing hybrid working policies, as well as solidifying trust into your organization’s culture, please get in touch with us here.

After recently examining the reality of unlimited paid time off (PTO), it got me thinking about the concept of ‘time off work’ as a whole. Having true time off work would (or should) mean that for the time that an employee has opted to take off, their responsibilities should be covered by another member of staff. However, the reality is, when people take PTO, they find themselves either cramming to do the work they are going to miss before they go, or rushing to catch up when they return.

A new study from Pew Research Centre confirms this, as it found that 48% of US workers have vacation days that go unused, and 49% cited that this was because they were worried they might fall behind on work. Another survey discovered that 40% of men and 46% of women said that just thinking about the ‘mountain of work’ they would return to after a holiday was a major reason why they hadn’t used vacation days.

What we are seeing is that paid vacation is translating to ‘the days someone spends away from the office’, when it should be ‘the time someone spends away’. PTO is meant to be getting paid for a day where you would be working – but if employees are doing the work they would have missed before and after their time off, it defeats the purpose. This isn’t time away, it’s just a shifted schedule.

Having true time away from work is vital for the wellbeing of employees and for ensuring that the quality of their output remains strong for the organization. Research shows that nearly three quarters of people who take time off work report better emotional and physical health, happier relationships, and improved productivity.

So how can employers create a culture of true time away from work which allows people to remove themselves and return with ease?

• Collaborate from the beginning – try not to have employees that are lone rangers on projects. A great way to think of this is by looking at theatre; every cast member will always have an understudy who knows how to do their role if need be. This same logic should be applied in the workplace, as it allows for developmental and mentoring opportunities for more junior staff members and relieves stress for the person taking time off.
• Set communication boundaries – when someone is taking time off, boundaries need to be in place so that the employee taking time away doesn’t have to always be checking their phone for any work emergencies. This can be done from an IT perspective, by setting it up so that all work-related communications are blocked for that time off, and instead are being redirected to the person who is overseeing the employee’s work in their time away.
• Briefing upon return – when an employee does come back to work, they should be coming back to a short, succinct brief from the person who has overseen their responsibilities to update them on the progress of their projects. This avoids the fear of returning to a mountain of work to do, and means that the employee has had the opportunity to truly disconnect, destress and enjoy their time away.
• For smaller companies, it may be more difficult to have staff who can take over someone’s responsibilities. And so, it is very important in this instance to ensure that as an employer, you are recognising and rewarding your staff for taking the time to pre-prepare their work before their vacation. And while larger companies may have more people, this doesn’t cover up the fact that large companies can tend to have a more competitive culture, and so staff can sometimes be territorial over their work and not want someone to have the opportunity to take credit for it.

It is not all down to employers, however. Employees should try to plan their time off as much in advance as possible so that this transition can be as smooth for the company as it is for them.

If you would like to discuss PTO policies and workplace culture strategies, please don’t hesitate to get in touch with me at Brittany@orgshakers.com

Positive workplace ‘banter’ is a good thing.

Having a cohesive workforce and a strong workplace culture is something that all employers strive for. And friendly relationships in the workplace increase productivity, as employees are more committed, communicate better, and encourage each other. Banter can play a pivotal role in cementing these relationships.

There is, however, a fine line between ‘playful’ banter and what might be considered bullying and harassment.

Recent research found that a third (32%) of UK workers have experienced bullying masked as ‘banter’, while it is estimated that about 30% of the American workforce (which equates to roughly 48.6 million workers) feel bullied at work. And the number of employment tribunal claims citing allegations of bullying increased by 44% in 2022, which was a record high.

To mitigate the risk of this happening, regularly updated management training is essential.

The current workforce has the largest ever mix of generations working together, which means that lot of workplace banter risks being ‘lost in translation’ due to the fact that the boundaries of acceptability and what is tolerated have shifted so much across the decades. Consequently, what one person may intend as a joke, another may perceive quite differently.

Having managers who have been trained to understand what is acceptable means that they can diffuse these situations and act accordingly if someone feels that banter is going too far. But this training needs to be regularly updated as boundaries of acceptability are constantly shifting.

It is also vital that managers appreciate that cyberbullying is becoming much more common at work– especially with the rise of remote and hybrid working models.

Passive aggressive emails, pestering messages, and group chat banter can all result in employees feeling they are being put down, so it is just as important to establish positive online working policies in an evolving working world.

Finding the balance of banter at work can be difficult – but it is important to embed a culture of acceptance and inclusivity to avoid playful exchanges tipping over into bullying and harassment.

To discuss creating a positive and inclusive workplace culture in more detail, please get in touch with us.

Today’s economic and social climate plays a big role in perpetuating stress in the workplace. Executives who know how to leverage personal pressure while effectively managing stressed employees possess a vital skillset, particularly in a cost-of-living or organizational identity crisis.

For example, leaders who successfully practice healthy personal habits and foster wellbeing in their organization’s workforce hold a significant competitive advantage. Knowing how to manage their own feelings of stress can also increase an executive’s longevity in the demanding world of c-suite leadership.

The above global report recently found 41% of senior leaders were stressed, and 69% of executives were thinking about quitting because of their wellbeing. Therefore, effective stress management can be key for reducing executive turnover. And in the same breath, stress management in the C-suite will have a trickle-down effect on their company. The idea of ‘follow the leader’ rings true in today’s world of work – if the C-suite is experiencing burnout from stress overload, how can they also effectively mitigate the stress levels of those who work with and for them?

This article focuses on three of the actions C-suite leaders can take to leverage the tensions inherent in their roles as organizational leaders. For information around mitigation of stress in the workforce, check out our article here.

How can executives leverage personal stress?

Know the Difference:

Savvy executives start by recognizing the difference between feeling stress and feeling pressure. A certain level of pressure and expectation is inherent in any executive role. This tension is often motivating and a beneficial by-product of personal and organizational success (e.g., company growth). When working in a high-stakes position, however, stress can easily mask itself as ‘just part of the job’, when this isn’t the case. By correctly identifying stress versus pressure, senior leaders can take advantage of tension-ridden scenarios through innovation, perseverance, and focus.  They can rally flagging troops to achieve objectives and recharge themselves by accomplishing challenging goals or navigating rough waters. Conversely, failing to identify personal stress can result in questionable decisions, divisive behavior, and decreasing productivity and morale. Choosing the most effective path forward begins with correct identification of stress vs. pressure.

Schedule for Health:

Stress management has been heavily researched, and a myriad of resources, training, techniques, and approaches exist, and this is because stress is known to have negative effects on the body and the mind. Chances are, most C-suite executives have studied and built their stress management skills over the course of their career. Executives can be experts in ways to mitigate stress in their organization while failing to prioritize their personal physical and mental health management. One study found CEOs work an average of 79% of all weekend days, 70% of their vacation days, and 62.5 hours per week. Knowing how to best mitigate stress helps lessen negative influence, but only if stress management is a scheduled, prioritized, and practiced part of an executive’s daily routine.

Successful executives schedule their health into their lives just as they would schedule shareholder meetings. Allocating specific time in the day to exercise, eat, and reflect is essential. There is no one set thing executives should do in the time they block out for themselves. Rather, it’s important to take that time and do something restful, rejuvenating, or just plain fun. Executives need balance as much as employees do, so establishing a clear work-life balance is instrumental to managing stress and mental health.

Be the Leader:

It is also important to remember that executives are role models – their behavior has a direct effect on the culture and tone of the company they oversee. If they are trying to promote values of mental and physical wellbeing while choosing not to comply themselves, their team will likely feel less comfortable asking for support or assistance when it is needed. The classic example? Coming to work when sick, but then encouraging staff to take the day off if they are unwell. This type of mixed message has a trickle-down effect on the organization and can elevate workforce stress levels.

While these actions may feel simple or obvious, getting started may not be easy. One path to greater personal and organizational wellbeing is through executive coaching.

Another is bringing a consultant on board to help identify effective health and welfare strategies. Taking action to intentionally manage stress and pressure can result in a domino-effect of improved productivity, organizational culture evolution, and improved attraction and retention rates.

Knowing how to manage stress at an executive level in a healthy manner can cascade down the hierarchy of your business and foster a healthy, happy, and productive workforce. To get in touch to discuss coaching for stress or implementing health and wellbeing strategies, please connect with me at amanda@orgshakers.com

I have no doubt that most of us have come across the recent artificial intelligence (AI) phenomenon that is ChatGPT.  

With software company OpenAI recently announcing the program’s next iteration (titled ChatGPT-4), there has been a lot of speculation around whether employers – and people in general – should be ‘freaked out’ by the expanding capabilities and eerie similarities to being human that this AI has.  

However, is this simply just another tool that will help employees to work smarter rather than harder?  

All throughout history, whenever a new piece of technology has been introduced that can do something that humans do but more efficiently and instantaneously, there has been hesitation and resistance.  

When the calculator was initially introduced on a mass scale, it raised a lot of cause for concern from schooling systems as they feared that students wouldn’t learn how to do maths without the assistance of a machine. But as the calculator became integrated in everyday learning, it actually proved to expand the horizons of mathematics that was able to be taught at school level – it allowed students to attempt much more complex equations. And, by having one exam paper that remained ‘non-calculator’, this ensured that children were still being taught a suitable level of mental arithmetic to apply to everyday life.  

The same thing happened years later with the introduction of Google and other search engines. All of a sudden information was at our fingertips, which sparked controversy around something that was labelled the ‘Google Effect’ (or digital amnesia), which theorised that because answers to all questions were now readily available, people stopped bothering to store any information in their brains.  

Nowadays, across all sectors of work, the calculator and Google play vital parts for many jobs, and the idea of being without them would seem unbelievable. All they did was ensure that those doing their jobs were able to do so in a more efficient and time effective manner, all while saving them a lot of mental effort.  

These were the first steps towards the age of working smart, and now AI-based technologies seem to be the next. Working smart has never been a bad thing – in fact, it usually boasts better and faster results for organizations. Employees are using tools and resources to achieve the best potential outcomes within an allotted time without having to overexert themselves and risk burning out.  

And so, adopting this perspective, a program like ChatGPT may initially seem questionable considering its capabilities, but it should be viewed with the intention of making employees better and more equipped rather than replacing them altogether. AI is not perfect, and neither are people, but combining the two offers the best probability of producing near-perfect results. For example, AI is being used in the medical sector to help improve the accuracy of diagnoses. One recent study found that the new AI was more accurate when diagnosing cases than actual doctors, but noticed that doctors were better and faster at identifying common problems due to the volume and consistency at which they encountered them. This is why AI is used in conjunction with workers, as it is an extra tool that helps them work smarter.  

Employers may potentially resist this implementation of AI and view it as ‘doing all the work’, but the reality is that there’s no point having an employee put in hours and hours to do a task that could be done in half the time with the assistance of AI and that produces stronger output. From a business perspective, using these new resources to their advantage will have profitable benefits, as well as social ones for staff.  

What it boils down to is the age-old grapple of input vs. output mindsets. It is now an outdated view for an employer to believe that hard work is measured through the time someone puts in, as what should take precedent is the quality of output that is coming out. The world of work continues to change and evolve every day, and new technology is always going to be a part of this change, so it may be time for employers to stop worrying about how to get work back to the way it was, and instead start adapting to what it continues to become.  

It is not uncommon to feel stressed at work, and so how employers manage this can be vital to ensuring that their teams are being supported so they can produce their strongest output. CIPD’s Health and Wellbeing at Work report found that four-fifths (79%) of companies reported some stress-related absences over the last year (and this figure rises to 90% for larger organizations).  

So, what can leaders be doing to ward off these stresses?  

• Leadership Alignment – during periods of economic uncertainty, it’s particularly important that management are aligned on the top priorities for their organization. We already know that the ongoing cost of living crisis is causing stress for employees– an ACAS survey found that three out of five (63%) employees felt stressed because of the rising cost of living – so it’s key that people have confidence in the long-term financial stability of the companies they work for. Having a strong leadership team who are all on the same page sets a great precedent for the overall tone of the business.  
• Senior Executive Support – it’s not always easy for senior leaders to find that perfect balance between demonstrating optimism for the future of the business and being authentic and transparent with employees. But being calm and clear can prevent staff stressing over assumptions and ‘what ifs’. This reliability and consistency of behavior in higher-ups builds trust with teams, and so it’s important that the messages don’t appear to swing between good and bad news on different days – acknowledging the challenges and connecting them to the company strategy is key. Executive coaching can be a great way of supporting senior leaders as they process their own thoughts and feelings and explore options and solutions. 

• ‘Re-recruiting’ Employees – amid mass layoffs, it is very normal for those employees who keep their job to suffer from ‘survivors guilt’. Remaining employees may also have to flex to focus on objectives that aren’t part of their preferred or original area of work, and this can lead to lower levels of motivation. A great way to mitigate this is to have an employee engagement strategy in place. Through regular check-ins, managers can both keep teams and individuals aligned to the bigger purpose and values of the organization as well as help people see how they are adding value, and recognize achievements, in the immediate term.  Running some ‘building resilience’ workshops alongside this can also help with the management of stress during an uncertain time.  
• Encouraging Paid Time Off – PTO is a great way for employees to decompress, and if employers are encouraging this, it removes any potential awkwardness or guilt around asking. Especially in a hybrid and remote working world, where the boundaries of home and work can sometimes become blurry, it is necessary to reinforce the importance of taking personal time.  
• Employee Assistance Programs – Having EAPs or mental wellness programs are also useful when dealing with an employee whose stress may require more targeted help from a specialist.  

Adopting these practices in your organization can be extremely beneficial to help proactively deal with stress in the workplace. With the working world continuing to evolve and grow in response to the pandemic and to economic fluctuations, ensuring that you have strong protocols in place to help employees manage stress is vital for the health and wellbeing of your people and your company. If you would like to get in touch about creating and implementing organizational strategies to combat stress, get in touch with me at anya@orgshakers.com  

This time of year, there are the usual surveys and articles about merit increases and executive pay increases.   

For example, I saw a recent private company survey that said that more than 46% of organizations in the US plan to provide a more than 6% increase to the merit pool.  Similarly, I have seen many articles commenting on the ‘astounding’ increases in executive pay. 

However, you must be very wary of year over year comparisons, especially after a multi-year period where companies all took differing approaches to weathering the COVID hurricane. Because, as usual, there is no context given. 

What is not said is: how many of the companies responding gave no increases during the pandemic; how many of those execs took significant pay cuts and no bonus during the pandemic; how many of those have just been restored to their pre-pandemic pay; how much of the pay ‘increase’ is really just due to rebounding stock value.

The practical reality is that there are several national surveys that have reached a general consensus on the merit pool increases being offered for 2023 – most have agreed this will be generally in the 4% range. While this materially lags the costs of living increases that employees have been experiencing, it is a focus on cost of labor, which is expected to increase by the 4% (it should be noted that merit pools have been at or above 3% for the last 4+ years despite inflation for several of those years being at 1% or less).

So when it comes to determining executive pay, we suggest you ignore the noise and focus on fundamentals.  Are your salaries reasonable given the competitive market and the scope and complexity of your business? Is the bonus target and leverage appropriate? Are the metrics true drivers of value creation for stakeholders? Do your long-term incentives adequately align management with shareholders? Quality begins with these fundamentals, and if you can answer these questions in the affirmative, you do not need to pay attention to the media din around compensation. 

But, if you find that you need assistance in answering these, then this is where we can help. With a range of long-term expertise in compensation strategy and pay philosophy, OrgShakers are able to help your company navigate the reality of executive pay increases so that it is a true reflection of the current economic context. To get in touch, either head over to our contact page or email me directly at chris@orgshakers.com

By Marty Belle, Therese Procter and Viona Young

Chris Rainey’s latest HR Leaders podcasts featured Stephanie Murphy (People Analytics Leader at Dell Technologies), and together they discussed the topic of accountable leaders through the use of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) data.

In response to being asked some of the biggest challenges she is solving with DEI analytics, Stephanie answered, “I think the biggest thing has been accountability…it’s about making sure that if you bring people in they’re going to stay in.”

She goes on to outline how in the context of Dell, they added a separate category into their annual survey to be able to measure inclusivity in different teams, and then set up a system which would flag potential causes for concern if leaders scored below a certain point.

This completely aligned with our thinking and prompted us to consider the importance that accountability plays in the DEI space, and how holding oneself accountable can sometimes be a daunting thing, but inevitably is a strategic imperative. 

In terms of leaders and line-managers, understanding the importance that their roles play in driving DEI throughout the company and holding themselves accountable for that can be the difference between a successful and non-successful business dynamic. There has to be zero tolerance for ignorance on DEI and the spotlight has to shine on awareness, education and training where the necessary leadership skills are weak or nonexistent entirely. 

We turned our attention to a global report published by Lee Hecht Harrison which found that despite 72% of business leaders and HR professionals recognizing that leadership accountability is a critical business issue, only 31% are satisfied with the level of accountability they see from leaders in their organization.

There can be a number of reasons for this accountability gap, and one that we have noticed on numerous occasions both in the US and the UK is the fact that the DEI space is continuously expanding its parameters to include much more than it originally did a few decades ago. 

While it is fantastic that more multidimensional diversity attributes are being addressed in DEI strategies, this does pose the potential risk of diversity efforts being diluted if organizations do not take into consideration the research conducted by Bailey Jackson, who was one of the first to identify that some differences matter more than others. Specifically, she found that the diversity attributes that make the biggest difference are ethnicity, gender, marital status (and children), race, sexual orientation, language, physical ability, socioeconomic status, religion and mental ability. From this perspective, it can be challenging to identify accountability when the scope of DEI feels like it is still being determined.

Another reason for this gap could be the fact that DEI can sometimes feel like a difficult / sensitive topic to discuss as a leader – especially if this leader is white and male. There is a tendency to stray away from uncomfortable conversations, as well as avoid topics that they may not have a deep understanding of and/or insights into. This can lead to avoidance of accountability, which can have a negative snowballing effect on the company culture as it perpetuates values that do not align with the organization. 

This is why accountability is so important when it comes to DEI, and why Stephanie’s data-driven method of measuring this has been so successful for Dell. Executives must ensure they are being very clear with leaders and managers about their DEI responsibilities, and then find the best way of tracking and enforcing these practices for their company. 

What we can conclude, therefore, is that there is no one-size-fits-all approach for cataloguing this, but we need to ensure as leaders we step up and hold ourselves and others accountable for acquiring, practicing and improving the grasp of new DEI competencies. By doing so, we can begin to perpetuate a culture of belonging at work and see true inclusion in action – one study even found that having a strong sense of belonging at a job was linked to a 56% increase in productivity, a 50% drop in turnover, and a 75% reduction in sick days.

At OrgShakers, we have a vast amount of skill and experience creating global DEI strategies across different sectors, and are able to help ensure that DEI is remaining a business priority. 

We know that having a diverse workforce has been proven to improve profitability, and so establishing accountability for DEI in your organization is the first step towards embedding this into the fabric of your company and reaping its rewards (from an economic and environmental, social and governance perspective).

To continue this discussion around DEI, don’t hesitate to reach out to us us through our contact page!

Recently, I was out with a friend, and she mentioned how she hadn’t been into work that day. I asked her why she didn’t go, and she told me, “I just wasn’t having a good mental health day, so I called in sick.”

When I asked if she’d told them the truth about her mental health, she said she’d claimed a physical illness because she was embarrassed.

And this got me thinking. With almost 8 out of 10 organizations (79%) reporting that mental health is a major driver of workplace absence, how can employers take steps to tackle the issue if employees are lying about feeling mentally fit to work?

I started looking into whether other people were doing this, and the answers echoed that of my friend’s.

Slater and Gordon discovered that 55% of employees who took mental health days claimed to be physically unwell for fear of being judged, demoted, or sacked.

According to a global report published by Aetna International, more than half of employees (52%) diagnosed with mental health issues admitted to lying to their employer about taking a sick day. It also found that those with an undiagnosed mental health condition were more likely to lie about being sick due to stress (45%) and ‘feeling down’ (42%).

The pandemic brought the mental health crisis – and the real effects it had on business – to the forefront. With nearly 80% of workers saying that having access to mental health services would make them more productive, as well as 64% adding that they would be more attracted to a company that offered these, businesses have responded.

In the US, nearly 23% of workers say their employer has introduced new mental health support, and in the UK, YouGov found that 59% of large employers were offering mental health services.

All of which means that the challenge is now one of trust. Mental health can be a tricky discussion – but when employees are lying about it, there is no ‘discussion’ to be had.

So, if you are a business who would like to find out how the introduction of mental health support can drive employee performance and productivity, or how you can open up the conversation about mental health at work, you can get in touch with us here.

Copyright OrgShakers: The global HR consultancy for workplace transformation founded by David Fairhurst in 2020