Posts Tagged “employee communication”

In an earlier post, we talked about the need for companies to use modern communication methods - such as blogs, RSS feeds and text messages - along with traditional methods - such as e-mails, posters, and newsletters - to effectively reach different generations in the workplace. Based on a new study by Randstad, communication styles are just one of the many generational differences affecting companies today.

The study claims the four different generations in the workforce: Matures, Baby Boomers, Gen X, Gen Y - have very little interaction with one another. Gen Ys, in particular, are not interacting with older generations. 

This lack of interaction feeds dysfunctionality:

• A new generation has entered the workforce. Those Gen Yers are associating most readily with those of the same age. They don’t associate with older generations.
• As Gen Yers gain experience and mature, they look to take on more responsibility.
• Although some in the older generations willingly share the knowledge necessary to help the younger generations, others view their growth as a threat.
• Information is withheld to protect individual positions of power and organizational performance suffers.

Unlike money, you can take knowledge when you go. Matures and Baby Boomers are retiring and taking knowledge out the door. If the Gen Yers had been interacting up the generational ladder (and vice versa), much of the critical knowledge would have been passed.

The coming retirement wave and near-term economically-driven reductions in workforces are combining to create a clear burning platform for businesses to act upon. To help plug the brain drain:

• Company leaders must understand there are real differences in how the different generations view leadership, respect authority, view work, relate to each other, and put simply, come to work.
• Lead by doing. Anybody who has supervisory duties has a responsibility to inspire top performance from their team, and to do so means understanding that team members will have very different drivers and definitions of success. With that understanding, strategies can be built to best inspire each generation. As an example, give Baby Boomers the recognition they desire for their contributions, while offering Gen Y employees “passion, humor and straight talk.”
• Senior managers have always needed to ensure junior managers had the right workplace sensitivities. Generational awareness must be added to that list of workplace sensitivities.

Connecting the generations will help change their perceptions, encouraging awareness and understanding about the strengths each group brings to the company. Without this awareness and understanding, employees will continue to work within their comfort zones and companies will miss opportunities to build long-term competitive advantage.

Differences in the way Millennials and other generations communicate and receive information are not the only differences companies will need to address in a very short time.

In a podcast, Barbara Keats, associate professor of management at the W.P. Carey School of Business, discusses the Millennials’ belief systems.

Keats said that, given their propensity for “frequent validation, quick rewards and permission to shape the rules to fit their lives,” academics and employers “are wondering if millennials have determined that cutting corners and cheating is an acceptable way of getting ahead” and “taking it to a new level.”

Given some recent examples of fraud and plagiarism in the U.S. – the 45 students dismissed from the University of Virginia for cheating in 2002 and allegations that three sections of Kaavya Viswanathan’s novel bore similiarites to one written by Sophie Kinsella – should give companies pause.

It also should cause companies to strengthen their ethics policies. And if they don’t yet have one, companies must begin establishing ethics policies or rules of behavior. Many professional organizations have codes of ethics in place to ensure their members abide by a level of integrity that protects the association and the profession. In the same way, companies can protect themselves and their other employees from the actions of one bad apple.

I found a recent Business Week article about what happens after the corporate layoffs to be a good example of why Dilbert continues to be such a popular comic.

The article discussed, in a rather glib tone, how interior designers are persuading executives “to do something—anything—with the space where employees used to be” after their downsizing efforts.

Now, I’m all for ensuring the remaining employees stay engaged and recognize the need for extra special care during this time. Heck, I’ve been there. And I’m all for recycling – whether it be paper, plastic bottles or office furniture. But seriously…recommending the newly empty space should be used for quiet rooms, massage chairs and plasma TVs seems a little insensitive. Would employees left behind really find it appropriate that their colleague of 15 years has been replaced by the new plasma screen in the hallway?

Perhaps it depends on what stage of coping the remaining employees might be in at the time these initiatives begin. Anyone familiar with the Kubler-Ross grief cycle understands there are seven stages a person goes through during any type of traumatic change, whether it be the loss of a loved one or the loss of a job. The stages are shock, denial, anger, bargaining, depression, testing and acceptance.

More power to the interior designers who can improve our work environments through creative uses of space, lighting and furniture. But timing is everything. Making these types of changes while employees are in the shock, anger, denial or bargaining stages would most definitely cause negative consequences.

But perhaps it might make sense if done during the accepting stage, especially if the employees are given a voice and participatory role in the reconfiguration of their workspace. This ownership would involve them in shaping a new future, and not in Dilbertizing their situation.