AN OPEN LETTER TO THE EDITOR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Rex,

Not so long ago, you penned a Chicago Tribune column about the issue with corporate wellness programs, the fact that fewer than 50 percent of employers formally evaluated the results.  [Courtesy of a Kaiser Family Foundation report.]

You then admonished businesses to communicate, to spell out the whys and wherefores.  And you also noted (and we quote):  “[Companies] love to take pragmatic programs like this and dress them up in peppy buzzwords and then market them to employees.”

So, Rex:  You’re wrong.  Big time.

What your opinion fails to consider:

  • There’s something called ‘cognitive dissonance,” when people deliberately go out of their way to avoid information about behaviors that need to be corrected, or subjects we just don’t wanna read about/listen to.
  • Factor in the phenomenon called the ADHD syndrome; each of us spends about eight seconds perusing info before we get distracted.  [And that’s the latest statistic!]
  • Few of us communicators ‘market’ plans and programs and initiatives to employees.  We know better.  Usually, we look at behaviors and attitudes and the role of change within the company – and then develop a compelling, consistent, and clear plan to achieve the results needed.  Which could include training, change agents, executive consensus and sponsorship, and all the smart channels you failed to mention.

So, please Rex, do us a favor:  Check out what we do before you dismiss it as ‘peppy buzzwords.’

A WORLD WITHOUT ...

A tucked-away article at the bottom of a Wall Street Journal mid-section raised our hair (or is it hackles?).

Quite simply, reporters investigated companies who’d either done away with or never had a human resources function.  Obviously, the article came in with mixed reviews, either citing CEOs who wanted to force personnel (argh!) issues to the middle or those who were mandated, legally and otherwise, to establish a bona fide HR department, with a credentialed executive.

Why the freak-out?  Because if it happens to this type of staff position, it could occur to any non-line function.  At any time.  For any reason. 

Specifically, our objections to the “out with HR” policy:

  • Leadership is asking middle managers to do way too much.  Imagine juggling 401(K) education with a fire drill for retaining a client.
  • Between listening to customers and listening to employees, there’s a whole universe of technical information to master.  Software can’t always handle it.  Nor can the general manager.
  • Mediating among conflicting viewpoints takes some real training – and practice.  Name us the managers in your cadre who can do it well.  [Not just do it.]
  • Ever get 100 percent compliance in the performance management cycle?  We thought not …

We heard you (and point taken):  It’s difficult to merchandise a ‘soft’ skill, a ‘soft’ capability like people management and communications and graphic design.  Everybody fancies him/herself a people manager, an editor or advertiser or communicator. 

On the other hand, it’s imperative that we as the sitting professionals master the art of showing tangible results and how we add value to the enterprise – no matter where we sit and what we do.  Without that, we’re toast.