Workforce Insight Archives | Page 12 of 13

To gain insight on the role Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) currently plays for US employers, we spoke with Conrad Woody, Managing Partner of Odgers Berndston’s Washington Office, and Marty Belle, Partner at OrgShakers.

“I would say in the US, the topic has always been more performative than really heartfelt,” Marty reflected. “For the majority of employers, it’s all about the bottom line… and if you’re not totally convinced that having a diverse and inclusive workplace drives profitability for you, you won’t focus on it.”

Conrad built on this, highlighting the fact that some employers are simply hiring people who look and act like their best workers because they believe this will ensure that their recruiting standards are always being met. “There is a commitment to conventional wisdom, because it’s easy to do – staying within your comfort zone is always easy!”

It is a tough mindset to crack, but it is one that Conrad and his team take every opportunity to challenge. “What we’ve been doing in our practice is using radical honesty and authenticity to help clients understand and open up the aperture to be more inclusive in the recruiting process. And we’re also advising them on how to ensure that the environment that people arrive in is consistent with the reality they are trying to create.”

Meanwhile, for those companies that are trying to be diverse, Marty pointed out that there is another mindset ‘trap’ to be avoided: “Organizations tend to choose where they feel more comfortable ‘being different’.” In other words, they become comfortable hiring individuals from one or two underrepresented groups yet fail to achieve a broader mix of diversity dimensions.

On the other hand, Conrad pointed out, “there is also this sort of ‘everybody’s diverse’ thing that’s happening.”

“I would agree, everyone is now in that conversation, because we are all unique, so that makes us diverse,” Marty offered, “But if you want to peel it back and say, ‘Well, where do I get my biggest innovation and creativity?’, then I would tell you that there are aspects of diversity that make the biggest difference. And that would be ethnicity, gender, race, sexual orientation, marital status, physical ability, socio-economic status, religion, mental ability…to really drive the whole spectrum, you have to have those, what we might tend to call underrepresented groups or protected groups, in there. Otherwise, you’re not going to bring as much innovation to a complex problem as you could get with all of those broader elements.”

“Diversity by itself doesn’t drive you to greater productivity,” Marty continued, “but diversity with inclusion does. And this means figuring out how to get that mix of people’s best thinking incorporated into solving a customer problem.”

And Conrad believed that figuring this out “really starts with our behavior as partners to our clients. If the Partners in our own firm don’t demonstrate inclusive behaviors, how can we authentically advise our clients on it?”

“To truly unlock the power that diversity and inclusion can offer your company”, Conrad continued, “you have to realize that it’s about how people with those identities see you and value you, and that you make the time to go and get to know these people, because then they’ll trust you to have their best interests at heart.”

As well as this moral imperative, there is also the reality that millennial and Gen Z employees will no longer entertain non-inclusive companies, and so investors are quickly becoming more passionate about the social issues that organizations are pursuing. In this sense, there is a strong business case alongside the moral one to really make your culture a welcoming and inclusive one. So how do employers begin to close this gap and unlock the power of inclusion their business?

“I might say just have the conversation,” Marty concluded, “and be okay that you don’t understand the topic. Be willing to see what you can learn and be vulnerable.”

Conrad agreed, “getting comfortable with uncomfortable conversations is a huge step towards bridging into inclusive territory – knowing when to admit that you do not know everything simply opens up the opportunity for you to gain more knowledge and wisdom, and this is never wasted.”

Since being free of the pandemic’s grip, there has been a noticeable change in our approach to many things – including how we do our jobs.

Remote working introduced us to a range of new day-to-day experiences, some of which challenged working practices we had regarded as ‘normal’ for decades. I like to call these ‘lockdown legacy behaviors’ which I think will become standard as part of the new normal:

1. Being ‘On Time’ Actually Means Being On Time

In the pre-pandemic days, everyone knew that a meeting that was scheduled to start at a given time would not get going properly until about 10 minutes later. Stragglers would trickle in, hands filled with coffee cups, finishing the last dregs of a passing conversation. This was without the mandatory exchange of ‘hellos’ and ‘how are yous’ once inside the meeting room.

Nowadays, however, being ‘fashionably late’ is no longer in fashion. With the sudden shift to a remote working style over lockdown, the opportunities for being distracted or getting caught in traffic suddenly faded. People were ready to go on-the-dot, and for those logging on late, they would feel the need to apologise for not being there on time.

2. Desk Bombing

The repertoire of office catchphrases has recently extended by one – ‘desk bombing’. This is in reference to a worker who approaches someone at their desk without warning and begins speaking with them.

In pre-Covid office life, this was completely normal and acceptable. We had no designated phrase for describing this act because it was just part of being at work. Grabbing someone for a quick chat and embarking into a five-minute unofficial meeting was considered a legitimate way of getting stuff done.

Now, after months of solitary working, a new culture has developed where it has become strange, and almost inconsiderate, to disturb your colleagues.

3. The Non-Linear Workday

Probably the most powerful legacy of lockdown is the rise of the non-linear workday. Flexibility has become the new normal of corporate life, with remote and hybrid working making it so that people can plan work around their personal lives, rather than the other way around.

Working from home has recalibrated employers to put employee wellbeing at its forefront – and this model looks as if it will not be going anywhere anytime soon. 40% of global workers even said that flexibility was a top motivator in whether they would stay in a role, according to McKinsey.

What comes next is learning to adapt to these legacies. Meeting the ever-changing needs of the workforce can seem challenging, but by being able to respond to these new practices quickly and effectively, your company will be able to tailor its attraction and retention strategies. This will help it gain access to the widest talent pool, as well as retain that newfound talent.

For a detailed understanding and guidance of workforce insights, you can get in touch with us here or with me directly at andy@orgshakers.com

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

Optimizing the performance of teams and individuals is one of the biggest challenges any leader faces. And it comes down to figuring out the approach that your people will best respond to. Rewarding overperformance? Punishing underperformance? Or a bit of both?

But which is the way to go?

Rewarding overperformance:

The behaviourist B.F. Skinner’s operant learning theory argued that by adding a rewarding stimulus after a behaviour, that behaviour becomes reinforced and is therefore more likely to recur.

As a leader, if you make a conscious effort to reward those at work who are exhibiting your company’s values through the quality of their output, then this will likely lead to them repeating this effort because they begin to associate that standard of work with some sort of reward (and this can be anything from a monetary bonus, to an extra day of paid leave, to a ‘thank you’ note).

This positive reinforcement can have a knock-on effect – other colleagues will see that by working to a certain level, they too would be rewarded, and so will mimic this behaviour. This leads to a chain reaction of improved productivity and engagement. In theory at least.

In reality, there is a fine line that needs to be walked with this.

Although one study found that 92% of workers were more likely to repeat a specific action after receiving recognition for it – leaders must be careful not to promote the idea that working your fingers to the bone will get you rewards. This can lead to burnout in staff, as well as a noticeable downwards effect on their wellbeing, with productivity falling just as quickly as it had risen.

However, calibrated correctly, rewarding good behaviour can deliver a significant improvement in output, as well as staff that feel they are being appreciated for their efforts.

Punishing underperformance:

Skinner also created the concept of operant conditioning, which is essentially the opposite to operant learning theory and involves taking something good or desirable away to reduce the occurrence of a particular behaviour.

In corporate terms, this is most commonly translated as: if you are not meeting expectations, you will be at risk of losing your job. Some leaders opt to promote a widespread feeling of job insecurity in their workplace to foster this idea of competition and to stoke fears of job loss to motivate workers to be at the top of their game. Some commentators have suggested this is likely to be Elon Musk’s gameplan for Twitter where he has sacked half the workforce.

However, Harvard Business Review conducted a series of surveys to explore whether perceived job insecurity actually made people work better. What they found was that job insecurity drove a culture of presenteeism with workers going out of their way to look as productive as possible – but with the quality of the output waning. This is most likely due to the fact that feeling the need to always look busy can lead to stress build up and have increasingly detrimental effects on an employee’s health and performance.

But underperformance can have virus-like tendencies when unleashed in the workplace. If high-performance employees see that their low performance colleagues are not being reprimanded for putting little in, then this can lead to a domino-effect of high performers starting to work less hard because they do not want to pick up the slack of others around them. This mindset can spread like an infection amongst the office, and so it is extremely important for employers to manage those who are deemed low performers. But, the way you approach this requires a leader to be clear about what they need from this member of staff in order to help them improve – this list of top tips is a great place to start.

So, reward and punishment both have their pros and cons. The secret is knowing which to use in a given situation – and deploying them in a professional, purposeful way.

If you would like to explore more deeply the best ways to optimize the performance of your employees, you can get in touch with us here.

Remote work seems to be here to stay. And if that is the case, then so are the burgeoning social challenges that accompany it.

As it stands, around 14% of UK workers are exclusively remote, with nearly double that proportion in the US at 26%. And what seems to be emerging is a growing sense of loneliness and isolation amongst these workers, as well as a significant lack of social interaction.

A survey by Statista found that after at-home distractions, a lack of social interaction with colleagues and feeling isolated/lonely were tied as the second highest challenge of remote work, with 35% of respondents citing either as their main struggle.

If you delve deeper, it also becomes apparent that these issues are affecting younger workers more severely. Chargifi did a study across the UK and the US and found that 81% of those aged under 35 would feel more isolated without time in the office, and 70% of them fear missing out on opportunities to socialise if remote work becomes the permanent norm.

If the new normal is remote work, then this requires organizations to push the boundaries of what that really means and help employees find innovative ways to solve these feelings of isolation.

Here are some creative ways employers can encourage their remote workers to get the social interaction they need:

Public Outdoor Spaces

This is a weather-dependant option, but it is well known that getting some fresh air has many physical and mental health benefits, including giving your brain more energy and making your thinking sharper. Public parks, gardens and beaches are all lovely days out, but there’s no reason why someone can’t set up their laptop and work surrounded by like-minded nature lovers and the sound soothing waves and beautiful blooms.

Pubs/Bars/Cafes

This is one of the most popular options. There is always a lively ambience in a pub or café, and many people find working in these environments much more mentally stimulating. This is largely due to the psychological effect known as social facilitation, in which a person’s performance will improve due to being in the presence of other people. For UK employers, encouraging your remote workers to set up shop in a Wetherspoons could benefit them financially, as the chain offers free refills on tea and coffee all day, and will help ease the effects of cost of living by saving on electricity usage.

Airports/Train Stations

A slightly unconventional place, but perfect when looking at the social facilitation effect mentioned above. The hustling and bustling of people can actually help, with ‘background noise’ known to improve cognitive function and focus. And the constant sea of new faces can reduce an individual’s feelings of isolation.

Fast Food Restaurants

Across both the UK and the US, the beauty of fast-food restaurants during typical working hours are that they tend not to be too loud, they offer free WiFi, and have affordable lunch options. Whether it is burgers, tacos, or fried chicken, being in an environment with other people can make someone feel less alone.

Coworking Spaces

Coworking spaces are becoming an increasingly popular option for companies that are fully remote. These comprise of office spaces that can be rented, where your staff will work alongside remote workers from other organizations and have the opportunity to interact and build relationships. It allows for the ‘office feel’ without having to actually rent an entire office block, so it is cost effective and will likely increase the wellbeing of your workers. Alternatively, encouraging employees to set up remote working hubs with friends who also work remotely allows for them to create small, sub-cultures at work where they are surrounded by friendly faces and can stimulate their socialising needs.

Remote work can very easily become lonely, and if employers are adept in responding to this then they can continue to reap the financial and wellness benefits it has to offer. As a company that operates fully remotely, we are experts in offering in-depth guidance on how to mitigate the challenges that remote work can bring, so for strategic guidance on this topic, you can get in touch with us here.

Benefit programs play a pivotal role in attracting and retaining talent – but how can you ensure that your benefits programs meet the diverse needs of employees of different ages?

Currently, there are four different generations in the workforce: so what does each generation value most?

Boomers:

Born between 1946 – 1964, the boomers are well into their midlife. And yet, it is no secret that a lot of mature workers are still active, with 25% of the US workforce being comprised of those aged 58 and above. This is largely due to the fact that people are living longer and healthier lives, and so are better able to work to retirement and beyond.

Therefore, it may come as no surprise that the benefits these people tend to value most are health related – health insurance, dental and vision coverage, as well as retirement plans and discounts on health services (such as chiropractic care).

Generation X:

This generation make up the highest percentage of executive roles, as well as being typically very skilled and specialized. While they have most likely paid off any student debts, they usually have families to support financially and emotionally, and so the benefits they value the most reflect this.

Gen Xers look for 401K plans with matching benefits, opportunities for advancement and opportunities for work-life balance. This would make the offering of increased time off or sabbatical particularly attractive to this generation. As well as being parents and supporting their young-adult children, this generation are likely to have unpaid caring duties towards their elderly parents, and so having specific benefits to help with this caregiving would also be incredibly attractive to this group.

Millennials:

Millennials are those born between 1981 – 1995, and currently make up the majority of the US workforce, at 35%. This group of people are starting to grow their families, pay back student loans and purchase property, and so the benefits they tend to value the most are paid time off, flexible spending for dependent care and health, flexible working schedules, and financial advice.

A survey found that among millennials who already had children, 72% of them cited that the lack of affordable childcare was a barrier to meeting their career goals. When paired with student loan debts and the rising prices of housing, basing your benefit programs around financial assistance in these areas will be extremely enticing to this generation of the workforce.

Generation Z:

The most recent influx into the workforce, Gen Z currently only make up 5% of it in the US, but the number is quickly rising. The youngest generation are bringing with them a new attitude towards working life, and prioritize boundaries and balance so that they can indulge in a personal life and avoid physical and mental burnout from being overworked, as seen from the quiet quitting phenomenon.

They value many similar benefits to millennials – paid time off, student loan assistance, flexible working options – but are also the most socially progressive of any generation. A lot of Gen Z candidates are looking for what mental health support services companies are offering, as well as how diverse and inclusive they are, as this reflects the type of culture they will be working in.

Even though different generations want different things, there are ways of appealing to them all through your benefit programs. One way of approaching this is offering a standardized set that considers a key element from each, therefore making you more attractive as an employer to a larger population of workers.

Another way you could do this is by working with your HR team to design benefit programs to support and meet your people in various seasons of life. There are strategic ways you can vary your benefit plan offerings, while managing your benefit compliance responsibilities.

With the cost-of-living crisis happening in real time, understanding the needs of the workforce is paramount to finding, securing, and retaining the right talent for your business. So, if you need detailed guidance on how to design strong, appealing benefit programs, get in touch with us here or with me directly at victoria.sprenger@orgshakers.com

HR teams can find themselves in a crossfire between employer and employee. At first blush, the HR department recruits, enables, and fosters employee growth, and so would appear as a service for the people. And yet, contrary to this, it is those in the higher leadership ranks who regularly seek HR counsel and guidance and ultimately hire and pay these HR professionals.

How does HR effectively balance the services it offers to the employer and the employees?

Balance can be difficult to determine and perceived differently in varying contexts. For example, in a business where there is a strong union environment, would it make sense for HR to provide additional support to managers and leadership in order to level the playing field, so to speak? If so, would employees feel limited or disinclined to express issues they have to HR?

A workforce perception that HR teams are only there to help “higher up” already exists, with one study finding that 70% of employees do not trust their personnel department. If we look at it from this perspective, HR teams need to seek ways they can recalibrate the balance so employees trust in HR’s neutrality and feel comfortable communicating their issues. A fundamental aspect of Human Resources is to be a connection between management and staff, and if they are being iced out by employees – who make up the majority of any company – then they will not be able to effectively enhance the workforce experience or workplace culture. Conversely, managers and leadership must also be able to trust HR’s neutrality and advice, viewing them as a strategic partner in meeting company goals and objectives.

Is there a ‘default’ view HR professionals can take when caught in the middle?

Simply put, their job is to help guide leaders on how they can optimize their company through their staff while also supporting workforce health, growth, and development. In this sense, HR teams are always advocating for the people, because those same people make up the foundation that buttresses managers, leadership, and business outcomes.

With the contemporary workforce undergoing a great rebirth of their outlook on work and what they seek to gain from it, more people want to work in a person-centric environment. A 2022 report by Gallup found 61% of respondents said greater work-life balance and better personal wellbeing was a very important consideration when looking for a new job. Both attributes are key HR services, and it could be argued the true balance HR should seek leans more in favor of employees. By being consciously people-centric, this could ultimately benefit the employer through an engaged, energized, and dedicated workforce.

The reality is, there can be no one set approach. Companies vary in their needs and organizational dynamics, and so HR must seek to calibrate the unique balance for each company, department, division, team, or individual with whom they work.

If you need help navigating that journey, OrgShakers has a breadth of experience across all different types of organizations – whether that be public, private, global, unionized, or non-unionized. Head over to our contact page to get in touch, or you can email me directly at amanda@orgshakers.com

With a post-pandemic wellbeing mindset on the rise, as well as the influx of Generation Z into the workforce, many are starting to realise that a leader’s ability to utilise their soft skills is becoming increasingly valuable.

For the most part, hard skills are the ones that have been considered of greatest value to employers, simply because the word “hard” suggests that these skills are more difficult and complex to acquire. In reality, however, soft skills are ever-changing and ever-growing, and so can prove to be much more difficult to keep up with, despite the implied fluffiness of the word “soft”.

Soft skills relate to an individual’s emotional and cognitive capabilities: empathy, flexibility, curiosity, vulnerability…the list goes on. And what has been highlighted during and post-pandemic is that these skills are actually the most powerful ones to be harnessing, and if utilized correctly, can make all the difference in improving management approaches.

The International Institute for Management Development identified four key attributes for a manager to be successful in today’s workplace – and three of these were soft skills. This is largely due to the fact that we are seeing a new generation entering into the world of work with new mindsets, fresh perspectives and an openness that has not been seen in previous generations.

Gen Z are the first generation to have grown up with social media, an environment where expressing and sharing ones innermost thoughts and feelings is considered the norm. As a result, these younger workers will value the ‘power skills’ of honesty and vulnerability in their leaders and they would be more likely to respect a manager who is willing to openly share challenges they are facing.

A McKinsey Global Institute Report reflects this, predicting that global workplaces will see a 24% increase in the need for social and emotional skills by 2030.

So, vulnerability amongst executives is emerging as a highly beneficial quality, but the reality is that showing that vulnerability – especially for those leaders from previous generations – is not something that they are used to (or comfortable) doing.

However, a shift in mindset which views vulnerability as a powerful skill rather than an admission of weakness, is a great way to bridge the generational gap between executives and the younger workforce. And it is key for this to start from the top, so that it trickles down the hierarchy and settles into a refreshed workplace culture which recognises the ever-growing importance of these power skills.

To discuss and seek further guidance on how to turn power skills into the skills of success, get in touch with us here.

The recent Wagestream Cost of Living Report 2022 has found that close to all UK employees (96%) have seen their living costs rise and, as a result, 70% now worry more about money.

Three quarters (76%) of those worrying more have seen their mental health decline. Unsurprisingly, therefore, one in five (19%) of those who have asked their employer for support in the last three months asked for help with mental health.

In this podcast, Chris and Adam Morris speak to OrgShakers’ Therese Procter about the report and what businesses can do to help their employees through these difficult times.

You can access the podcast by clicking on the image below:

The recent rise of what is apparently called ‘quiet quitting’ has sparked the need for organizations to re-examine the modern psychological contract between employer and employee.

‘Quiet quitting’, in terms of working with reduced motivation, has always existed since work first began, and usually resulted in the individual leaving to find a new role that inspired them. However, working less hard while looking for a new role is not the same as consciously setting boundaries around your work in order to have a life – which is what I believe the new ‘phenomenon’ actually represents.

Employers risk falling into the trap of conflating demotivated employees – who are in the process of leaving – with those who love their work but are setting boundaries. And what strikes me the most is that ‘quiet quitting’ is a derogative term which is being used to describe, in many cases, employees doing the job that they were hired to do, for the amount of time they were hired to do it.

It is the younger workers who have been described as igniting this quiet revolution in the workplace, opting to operate broadly within the boundaries of their job and not expanding beyond it if they so choose. If they work certain agreed hours, then they do not expect to be contacted before or after those hours except in exceptional circumstances. If they are given a project beyond their job title, they may choose to politely decline if they do not have the capacity or if they were not contracted to do so.

They value time to live their lives, as well as do their work, and this does not mean they are any less dedicated, talented or that their output is reduced. No one is ‘quitting’ and they should not be accused of such!

They are rejecting the ‘always on’ culture that they have seen work so badly for their parents and older work colleagues. The additional work hours that once were paid as overtime became gradually seen as a badge of honour for the ‘workaholic’, and an expectation by employers as something you had to do if you wanted to ‘get on’ and reach the senior echelons of an organisation. Now with remote working making it possible to work 24/7, working way in excess of your contracted hours has become an expectation that has generated a tidal wave of stress-related mental health issues.

So, why did young people feel the need to push back against the relentless tide of work coming their way?

For one thing, people are working an increasing number of unpaid hours. A global study by ADP Research found that 1 in 10 people work at least 20 extra hours a week unpaid. To add context, they are often working for global organisations which are making millions in profit to give to the shareholders, yet their workers are ‘donating’ swathes of their time for free. Hours being ‘donated’ to organisations by their workers had also doubled in North America, while in the UK, the number of unpaid hours worked in 2021 was equivalent to £27 billion.

The idea of an unpaid overtime-work-ethic has arisen from a toxic mindset that equates commitment and effectiveness with working very long hours and never saying ‘no’. The younger generation are entering into a corporate world with some leaders who believe that giving your ‘all’ to a job (i.e., prioritising your work above everything else in your life including family, friends, hobbies and health) is a good way of measuring productivity and passion.

I believe it is the responsibility of leaders to manage their people resources such that they have sufficient people to deliver what they expect to deliver, not the ‘do more work with less people’ attitude that seems to prevail. Managers also need to support individuals and role model what it means to set boundaries, as well as being alert to when enough is enough.

Knowledge and awareness of the huge impact of overwork and stress on mental and physical health was scarce for previous generations, but we are now much better informed and amongst Gen Z, the stigma attached to discussing wellbeing has largely decreased. And yet, a generation that are more aware of what it means to have a balanced, brain-healthy lifestyle and want to work in a high quality, output-measured way, are having to operate within an outdated working culture.

And so ‘quiet quitting’ was born. Originally starting as a movement in China, ‘quiet quitting’ is a phrase used to describe workers putting in reasonable boundaries between their work and their home time, and rejecting the idea that work has to take over your life. Chinese companies responded by trying to persuade workers that to ‘struggle’ was to achieve a happy life. Younger workers were not convinced.

This is a wake-up call to companies and leaders everywhere, that individuals are deciding that their job cannot consume their entire life. There is both a strong moral and business case for this message needing to be heard:

Morally, companies should not come to rely on the additional cashflow produced through its workers not being paid for the time they are working. This is a fundamental breaking of the work/payment psychological contract. Good resource management does not mean expecting people to work 12 hours but paying them for 8 hours. This ‘discretionary effort’ ethos has got so out of hand that it is no longer the badge of a hardworking and ambitious person, but rather an expectation of all, which is creating a mental health crisis.

In business terms, tired people create tired ideas. Businesses need to recognise that, with the rise of AI taking on repetitive tasks, the next generation of workers will be hired and valued for the quality of their ideas, their innovations, and their thinking. Therefore, we need to work in a way that fosters the best of this thinking. Businesses need to start placing real value on creating environments of mental wellness and brain health, so that they can optimize the best brains and gain a competitive advantage. This is forward-thinking and makes great business sense.

The first steps towards this can be seen in the UK, as the trial for a 4-day working week commenced amongst participating organizations. This was in response to a successful trial in Japan, which found a 40% boost in productivity due to improved wellbeing. A shorter working week acknowledges that a person’s happiness is just as important as their job – having an extra day to indulge in one’s personal life can make all the difference to one’s mental health.

However, there is a fine line to this. As pointed out in the above citation, attempting to cram five days’ worth of work into four can lead to increased feelings of stress and burnout. If companies are shortening the week, they also have a responsibility to decrease the load. It is about playing the long game – productivity will go up despite the loss of a working day because staff will be more rested and motivated. As well as this, their brains will be able to work consistently at an optimal level, creating higher quality output, because they will feel less pressure and have more time to rest.

Henry Ford proved this in 1914 when he upped his workers’ wages and reduced their hours, as well as reducing the work week from 6 to 5 days. Described as a stroke of brilliance, he built a sense of loyalty and pride in his workers and as a result actually boosted productivity.

His son Edsel Ford said, “we believe that in order to live properly every man should have more time to spend with his family”. This seems to have been forgotten in 2022.

The 4-day week suggestion is only one solution. For most businesses currently operating within a five-day working week, it is time to think about shifting the focus from hours being put in, to the work that is being generated. We need to be output-focused whilst being utterly realistic about what any human being can be expected to achieve in the timeframe needed for the desired output.

Neuroscience already informs us what we need to do in order to create optimal brain function. Why do businesses not draw on this wealth of knowledge and create working practices that support this?

Humans are not computers, we cannot operate for hours on end without a marked drop off in our cognitive abilities, as well as a huge decline in our thinking, decision-making and creativity. In the end, overwork and stress can deeply damage mental and physical health, so it is no wonder that younger workers are rejecting this.

As a leader you have the responsibility to hire well, train well and trust your people to do their jobs. Focus on output and quality, whilst being realistic about what a human being can achieve, and resource effectively whilst supporting them to find the best pattern of working to suit their cognitive needs. A study by Harvard Business Review found that managers who were rated the highest at balancing results with relationships saw 62% of employees willing to give extra effort, while only 3% were ‘quiet quitting’.

Leaders who are implementing policies that promote mental wellness and brain health will need to realise that this means re-evaluating the psychological contract that they have with their employees.

For their mental and physical health, and to reverse this epidemic of stress related illness, people need to be able to switch off from work and embrace a personal life. If this is being encouraged by their employers, then these workers will reward their employers with fresh, inspired, and innovative thinking instead of bad decision making and ‘tired ideas’.

If you would like to discuss implementing mental wellness practices in your workplace and developing brain health programs, get in touch with me at pamela@orgshakers.com

The war for talent has never been more intense. In many sectors, there are simply not enough workers to meet demand. Yet still there remains one group of individuals who continue to be underrepresented in the workforce – Generation Z. This is often because many companies fixate on recruiting staff with an established set of qualifications and skills, and this can alienate a large proportion of the younger generation who have opted not to follow the traditional higher-education path.

Interestingly, some companies are beginning to broaden their approach; PwC have recently removed their requirement for new employees to have a minimum of a 2:1 in their degree. However, does only considering the “graduate” population go far enough when there is still so much potential talent being overlooked? 

Tapping into Gen Z is a different prospect to recruiting the post graduate population. While companies are starting to broaden their recruitment criteria to take on traditional students (those that went into university/college), there are many non-traditional students (those who left college/high school but did not continue studying) who are not being considered. In the UK, 12.6% of ‘Gen Zers’ are unemployed according to Research Briefings , and this is without considering those potential non-traditional students who are working in the retail and hospitality sectors as an interim job.

Additionally, Pew Research discovered that 57% of 18–21-year-olds who graduated high school continued into college/university in the US. This leaves 43% of Gen Zers as potential non-traditional students – which in terms of US population equates to approximately 17 million people; so, while many companies will continue to compete over the traditional 57%, the smart money will be looking at ways of targeting the untapped 43%.

There are various socio-economic factors that influence this, but a consistent underlying theme is how the education system(s) encourage students to choose subjects they like. This helps improve the chances that they will excel and ultimately pass the final examinations with good grades. While this is of course good for the school/colleges ultimate ranking in the education tables, the unfortunate and (probably unintended consequence) of this key-performance-indicator-focused approach is that students often leave with a disjointed mix of qualifications that do not support any given career path. Subsequently, when employers remain focused on traditional qualification sets, they are missing out on this wealth of new talent. If companies want to tap into this pool, they should start relying less on specific qualifications and focus more on aptitude and attitude.

Yet, a change in thinking is now becoming evident. As companies strive to find innovative ways to engage with this non-traditional student population many are offering educational assistance or, in the UK, degree apprenticeships. This fosters a genuine win-win for both the organisation and the employee, as by allowing them to study and work in parallel the organisation immediately bridges its resource gap, the employee gains the qualifications suited to their career path and both prosper from the requisite hands-on experience gained from working.

These sponsored leaners/employees also build a strong affinity with the organisation as they are given the opportunity to grow alongside the business, which ultimately fosters a sense of loyalty. This allows for a foundation to be created for leaders to build real relationships with their staff from the start, which in turn improves retention rates in the long-term.

This phenomenon is readily seen and proven with apprenticeships, as the National Apprenticeship Service’s recent guide found that 69% of employers said that employing apprentices improved staff retention. 

Attitude is not something you can train, so by offering recruitment opportunities to those who are eager to learn new skills, you will also be adding fresh, diverse and digitally savvy perspectives to your workplace culture. 

With September being the seasonal hotspot for taking on recent graduates, companies urgently need to re-evaluate their hiring criteria. Assessing whether a candidate has the right attitude to learn and develop to fulfil your businesses skill gaps will allow you to broaden your hiring prospects. By adopting an experiential learning approach, you will be able to take full advantage of this recruitment window and gain access to a largely untapped pool of talent.

If you need advice on how to approach this opportunity, please get in touch with me at gavin.jones@orgshakers.com 

Now that you have been introduced to what life as a first-time CEO has in store, here are three recommendations for emerging CEOs:

Build, develop and lead through your leadership team

Building their leadership team has always been an important part of the CEO job; but the composition and purpose of this team is changing as businesses themselves take on a wider understanding of their purpose.

Traditionally a CEO’s goal was to develop a “high performing team,” in which each member was responsible for a different function that created value for investors and customers. But thanks to a growing emphasis on Environmental, Social & Governance (ESG) considerations, today’s leadership team must now serve a wider caste of stakeholders than its predecessors. Employees, for example, are now considered primary and equal stakeholders to investors and customers. Similarly, many investors are now evaluating companies based on their social and environmental relationships with the communities in which they operate.

As a result, modern CEOs need to build “high value creating” teams, in which success is measured by the team’s ability to create simultaneous value for a broad array of stakeholders. A side effect of this widened imperative is that success is no longer measured by looking at how individual members of the leadership team execute their individual functions. Instead, a successful leadership team has to work interactively, across functions, to ensure that it represent the interests of (and creates value for) all stakeholders.

For first-time or new CEOs, building a value-creating leadership team—and making sure that you get the right people on it—is crucial to your ability to focus broadly across the needs of the organization and to increase value by steering company purpose and culture. But it is not easy to do. A Systemic Leadership Team coach can be invaluable in helping the CEO build, lead and motivate the perfect team.

Build informal relationships with individual board members

The board can be an excellent source of guidance for CEOs, and newly appointed CEOs should go out of their way to build informal relationships with individual board members who can provide the advice, feedback, and support that CEOs often fail to receive from other members of their organizations.

But building these relationships can be harder than it sounds. Your board members, after all, do not work in the office down the hall; they may not even live in the same country. This is why close relationships between CEOs and board members rarely just fall into place like they often do between CEOs and key members of the leadership team. Instead, building relationships with board members often requires conscious effort. New CEOs will need to go out of their way to creatively engage their directors on a regular basis outside of the formal strictures of the boardroom.

Work with a coach

Executive coaches are an excellent resource for first-time CEOs. As neutral third-party observers, coaches provide the kind of constructive feedback and skills training that CEOs, as bosses, often struggle to get from their team members. They also help CEOs improve their skills in conflict management, responsibility delegation, time management, and listening—all of which are necessary for new CEOs to successfully adapt to the role.

The purpose of executive coaching is to increase performance by improving emotional intelligence, which leads to a more empathic and self-aware leader. Even the best CEOs can get better at their jobs. Some of the most influential CEOs in the last decades—Microsoft’s Bill Gates and Alphabet’s Eric Schmidt among them—have benefited tremendously from executive coaching.

************

The CEO job can be one of the most rewarding jobs in business. It is also unquestionably one of the most difficult. Incoming first-time CEOs should expect the role to bring a variety of changes to their lives, most of them positive, some of them negative, others downright confusing. By surrounding yourself with trusted advisors, by consulting mentors, and by hiring a coach, both new and seasoned CEOs can minimize their isolation and get the feedback they need for success.

If you are reading this, chances are you have encountered articles telling you that a good chief executive officer (CEO) needs to be a decisive, results-oriented leader who can simultaneously articulate a strategic vision for the company, embody its culture and values, and represent it to outside entities—all while driving growth.

You probably also know that CEOs walk a tightrope between the often-contradictory imperatives of their job. They must be optimistic, capable of seeing opportunities wherever they look, and at the same time be capable of assessing the risks that lie beneath those opportunities. They must be great listeners and team-builders, able to synthesize information and opinions from a variety of sources; but they must also be decisive, willing to make decisions without consensus in moments of informational uncertainty.

The CEO position is comprised of psychological and emotional complexities; knowing what a CEO does and knowing how being a CEO feels are very different, and making the leap to the lead executive chair is one of the single most challenging job changes of most CEOs’ careers.

So, here are eight things you should know when making the transition:

Being boss-less is not all fun and games

Most first-time CEOs come to the role after decades of hard work—decades during which they had peers with whom they could informally trade feedback and superiors to whom they could refer certain hard-to-make decisions. The fact that CEOs have neither bosses nor peers within the company constitutes a real and drastic change, one that requires adjustment and often drives the social isolation, lack of feedback, and fear of decisiveness that first-time CEOs frequently experience.

Responsibility can be isolating and painful

Almost by definition, when you have boss, you also have someone to whom you can defer responsibility for the most consequential or challenging decisions. But when you are the CEO, you are that boss. For many executives, this is something they have longed for: the moment when they get to give orders without having to run them by someone else. But with this authority comes an intense emotional burden: suddenly you are the person making decisions—often based on limited information—that can have serious ramifications for the company’s health and the quality of your people’s lives. Indeed, at times you will have to choose between those exact things. Even experienced CEOs can find the weight of authority incredibly taxing, especially in times of crisis.

People will treat you differently

CEOs hold an almost reverential position in many companies. There are several explanations for this fact, but one of them is that it is the simple consequence of power disparity. If you are an employee, the CEO of your company is not just in charge of what you do at your job every day, they are in charge of whether you have your job at all. And this fact understandably influences the ways in which employees interpret and behave around their CEO.

People will do what you say

One by-product of your authority as a CEO is that what you say—and how you look when you say it—matters more than it did earlier in your career. For this reason, experienced CEOs are often quite careful when they speak; they know that even a spur-of-the-moment idea or opinion can, if voiced, have lasting impacts on the company’s culture, behavior, and reputation. As a new CEO, you can’t bounce ideas off just anyone. You can’t have emotional reactions around just anyone. You must calculate the potential interpretations and ramifications of every idea and opinion before you voice them.

People will act as you act

As the CEO, you embody—whether you intend to or not—the culture you want to see in your company. The way you speak, the way you comport yourself, the kinds of financial decisions you make on and off the job—all of these things send a message to the people who work for you. You may be astonished to learn, as a new CEO, that your employees talk about the model of car you drive and how much you paid for your house. But they will; and they’ll infer things about you and your values from that information.

Culturally speaking, CEOs need to understand (and leverage) the fact that their behavior has a symbolic dimension. Getting rid of corporate jets, for example, may have a tiny impact on the bottom line in the greater scheme of things, but it can go a long way in revising the tone of the company’s culture.

You are the external face of the company

Your own employees are not the only ones hanging on your every word and deed. As most first-time CEOs know, chief executives spend a significant amount of time and energy representing the company to the public—that is, to the media, to investors, and to stakeholder communities. But it is important to note that as the CEO, you are always serving in this capacity. Your life is now a symbol for something larger, and there are certain penalties that come with being a symbol. You give up a significant amount of anonymity, for example, and you give up certain freedoms that come with that anonymity. For some new CEOs and their families, this takes some getting used to.

You are overseeing something that pre-exists you

If you are coming into the company as a CEO, you are inheriting years, even decades, of relationships, precedents, expectations, and practices—many of which will never be described to you.

You will not have total control over your success and failure

Our culture tends to credit an organization’s successes and failures to the person in charge. If the company performs well, the CEO is applauded. If it stumbles, the CEO is blamed. But factors beyond the CEO’s control can dictate both successes and failures. As a CEO, you will be blamed for things that you feel like you had no control over, things you feel like you inherited, just as you’ll be applauded for successes that may not be directly linked to your actions. Either way, you must understand that the core responsibility of your job is to focus on creating value in the space between these extremes.