Linked In... nah.

There is a real good reason that while in school I am not on Linked in, it seems that everyone I worked with thinks its Facebook light. And posts pictures to their personal profile that belong on Instagram, not in a professional profile or environment. Then my special friends want to connect with me, but unfortunately linked in now works you are in a bind to use all the free services without a specific number of connections meaning that to use LinkedIn  I am forced to link up with these individuals.

Yes, they are friends but they do not understand the need for a professional image nor know that organizations frown upon such profiles, when associating with specific candidates I have tried to discuss these issues with a friend who was guilty of the professional futa poa their response was that they did not care what Organizations thought! But they also did not care how that decision impacted others as well. If employers frowned upon their profile then they will definitely assume (falsely) that I was unprofessional as well.

The proof was in the pudding during a job search last year I shut down the linked in account when searching for opportunities and that being the only change I made, I was not surprised when I received more emails and calls from prospective employers. Now, this not a scientific study but the evidence to us was plain to see. Without the linked in account, I was more professional and more of a mystery to organizations that did not want to chance to associate with someone who was in turn with people who were unprofessional themselves.

Although you do not want to hurt your coworkers or friend’s feelings nor do you really want to deal with an organization that looks past your resume and accomplishments but this is the real world and these Things actually occur reaffirming the old saying not to judge a book by its cover, but in reality organizations and people who hire still do that being the case that is why I shut off linked in so I do not give any organization a reason to judge me until that first live interaction and maybe you should too.

Looking to connect.... not so much

I received an email once from a prospective employer wanting to see if I knew someone interested in a job that they were offering in a suburb far away from me. Now, this may seem like the new way of doing things, and a way to network, however, it does stump me quite a bit and leaves me perplexed. Looking at the copy of the email you can see that the Recruiter, in this case, was confident that this methodology is effective. When in reality, it deterred me from answering his email and passing it on to others.

As part of my studies with Emotional Intelligence, we are to assess the feelings of others and adapt our actions to bring forth an understanding between two parties. One thing on a personal and professional level that I do not do is to send “job offerings” to people I know because unemployment can be a sensitive topic one in which can cause distress and conflict. The “Drama for your mama” as many would say, opening one up to all types of issues that the Recruiter if doing their job properly would take the time to search for possible candidates instead of trying to refer that responsibility on others.

Plus, this raises the question if this recruiter “noticed” my skills and to use their words “great minds think alike” why even mention anyone else? Another question is if he wanted me to recruit a candidate for him, where is the detailed information regarding the position? And I do mean details, within the email, not a hyperlink. Details in which catch the reader’s attention, the possible candidate’s attention or the next person who is interested. Many organizations can learn from something like this when reaching up to probable candidates, details are key to gaining interest and receiving the action or actions that they want.

Everyone, every organization knows the first contact, the first impression is everything, this email does not need an Organizational Development Perspective to tell one that there was something “off” and that is why it did not hit its mark.

Organizational Clarity: “How to Deal With a Boss Who Judges You By the Company You Keep” article

Although I usually do not prescribe to some of the issues brought up in this article some of these arguments are valid. It is very often that upper management does lump employees in together, the whole “guilty by association” assessment is done far often than we care to admit (Boinott, 2017). This article does have some good points in keeping it professional at work and keeping co-workers at a distance, mainly because some of them you need to. There are many individuals who you can trust, and there are others you simply just cannot.

Then adding alcohol to the mix can redefine a situation in the worse way, things that are usually kept to oneself just slips out into the open and probably shared with others who will simply, in turn, share with upper management. I have dealt with co-workers who were usually the “devil’s advocate” for upper management and other misshapen factors that made the workplace unbearable and although I gave them a chance to connect I simply knew after a while to drop them as “good” friends. Meaning I kept everything with these individuals professional and usually let them get burnt by their own devices, in the same professional settings, while dodging them or leaving them out of personal events. 

Keeping away from certain individuals because of fears that you may be lumped into a wave of retribution from upper management, is maybe one great reason to stay professional at work. However, realize that these same individuals may do irreparable damage even outside of the workplace, becoming distractions to us from developing ourselves professionally and personally. In the end, as the article states it is best to know who these “distractions” are and maintain the proper relationship (whatever that may be) with them, i.e., one with distinct boundaries.

Boitnott, John (2017) “How to Deal With a Boss Who Judges You By the Company You Keep” February 21, 2017, Entrepreneur Media, Inc Retrieved from  https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/289367

Organizational Clarity: “Don’t Clap Throw Money Misadventures in Employee Engagement” article

As you see by my comment from February 10, 2017, had a definite opinion regarding Vince Cyboran’s article “Don’t Clap Throw Money Misadventures in Employee Engagement” on the Roosevelt University RU Training blog site.

“I have, at a past organization endure one of these “pep talks” experience mentioned in this blog and unfortunately, it only caused the morale of myself and my coworkers to go further south. The introduction of just the basic aspects from Frederick Herzberg’s Two-Factor–Model of Workplace Motivation could have changed, in my eyes, the entire organizational culture.

This post states that hygiene factors do not motivate employees but most of the organizations I have worked, believed that to motivate employees they had to offer free lunches or breakfast donuts, instead of offering raises or bonuses. The introductions of these initiatives were successful at first as most of the employees at the time thought that this was good as a reward they were going to get.

However, with a high turnover rate, there was a constant influx of new employees, plus there was a new hiring requirement in which employees needed a Bachelor’s degree to be hired. These new employees did not favor the idea of the hygiene factors being used as a substitution to monetary or professional motivation factors. Therefore, with these new employees these initiatives quickly failed, but every once in a while, management does fall back upon free lunches or breakfast donuts, as motivators.”

Unfortunately, this still occurs many times over in a lot of different organizations, what happens is that people lowered their expectations of what they desire and organizations go to the level to meet them. Usually because giving their employees with these lowered expectations is better for the organizational bottom line than anything else. Keeping an idea of your professional self-worth, keeping a positive point of view you may get more than what you deserve, and if you do not why should you accept what the organization deems is logical or worthy of you? Maybe that is not a place that you, at the end of the day, deserve to be.

Reference

Vince Cyboran (2015) “Don’t Clap Throw Money Misadventures in Employee Engagement” Roosevelt University February 16, 2015 Retrieved from:

https://rutraining.org/2015/02/16/dont-clap-throw-money-misadventures-in-employee-engagement/

Organization Clarity: when you choose your career path

When it comes to selecting your career path it, as this article states, is based off of us, as individuals comparing ourselves against the success of others (Sonenshein, 2017). Also, cultural influences play a part of the individual, as the article states, chasing goals that are not their own. We look at others in our peer groups or even outside as standards of success when we should actually look and identify with what we are comfortable with.

Most of the time psychologically we are not equipped to do the things that the individuals we consider a success have done in the process of being a success. Sometimes we are not even emotionally able to handle the amount of rejections, losses or even critique that come with these career paths. Some people can handle the 24/7/365 high-speed corporate world and looking from the outside this may seem like a standard of success due to the money made and respect garnered, however the daily grind to making this possible is not acceptable or possible.

Either due to the lack of emotional intelligence or even a lack of professional skills as you see I mention multiple variables that constantly rear its ugly head to determine if an individual is able to handle a particular career path. You may want to be the next president of the United States, when if you take into account all of your psychological needs, and capabilities you may be happier being as a blogger! 

In essence, when you choose your career path just take a really good look at yourself, not someone else, to determine if you are putting all your time and energies into the right field. Culture, friends, and family may tell you one thing but in the end, they are not paying your bills, dealing with the struggles in your professional life, nor are they the ones who live with this decision every moment of every day. Reflecting upon yourself will allow you to be happier in your occupation but also you will save yourself time, money and a whole lot of stress!

Sonenshein, Scott (2017) Why Do People Chase the Wrong Career Paths? February 15, 2017 TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc http://www.huffingtonpost.com/quora/why-do-people-chase-the-w_b_14749038.html

Organizational Clarity as a Blog is A+ material

Good news I started this blog as part of a final project for my Learning Technologies class at Roosevelt University, and when I created the proposal for the project I wanted something with wide berth and something that would amaze my fellow students and the Professor. Great news it worked! I got an A for the class!

I knew I mentioned tech issues, free downloads commentary about issues facing Organizational Development in my proposal so covering it all in one or two posts I knew was impossible. So writing 30 plus posts was a challenge but alas I got my A! and a successful blog.

I will still, will be posting and talking about OD related issues in the near future. I will hopefully have more designs, logo, for free downloading purposes in the near future so happy reading and thanks to all of you who helped make this blog great!

Do Reunions have a connection to employees quitting?

As an Organization Development professional, we must take all possible factors into account when dealing with the various causes of an organization’s turnover rate. Whether that turnover rate has increased or decreased we must take all factors or reasons into account to either replicate those factors if the turnover rate has decreased or eliminate those factors if there is an increase in employee turnover.

In a recent article, “This Is When You’ll Quit Your Job” it is mentioned that people will “quit” their job after attended a reunion or other such milestones in a person’s life. Now I have heard of someone reaching 50 or 60 and questioning their career choices, and possibly quitting their job to move into their “dream” career that they have wanted to try out for years. Even with that reason the actual attempt or percentage of such attempts do to this reason is so low it is really a non-factor. Furthermore, I have never heard of a high or college reunion having the same effect upon a person deciding to change careers.

To isolate this as a factor alone I did the poor man’s research method and googled it and poof ….nothing! Nor have I heard this as one of the many employment urban legends, meaning it is not a story that I have ever heard before unlike the employee hitting an age milestone and moving into a new career. Now that I do not have to research at all, I have about three family and friends who are stating they are moving to an entirely new career at a certain age.

My point regarding this article as an Organization Development professional are these factors that we should take seriously when calculating an employee’s risk of turnover? Or would taking in factors of one’s age or the time of their high school reunion simply discrimination? If a determination of one’s high school reunion becomes a factor in a formula to determine an employee’s turnover chances, highly unlikely, but IF it does, how does NOT attending the reunion factor into that percentage?

Tracking the chance as the article states your willingness to change careers after you have been with an organization for a certain amount of time, is possible and totally legal, but tracking employees or collecting data for such career changes due to age or one’s high school reunion (which could be tied to age) could be damaging for the organization or the employee, As I aforementioned this could mean legal consequences for the organization if they use this factor in determining future turnover rates, what other issues you think may arise from using this type of outliers as data for turnover predictions? Personally, from an OD standpoint, I think clearly this should be left alone.

Money.com (2016) “This Is When You’ll Quit Your Job” http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ll­quit­job­120017492.htm

Post a Detailed job description.. Please

One of the many problems with employee recruitment presently lies with the description of the position that the organization is in dire need to be filled. Usually, the author has an idea of what the position entails, however, it is usually the case that the what is not listed in the description is conveniently listed as “other duties” or “additional duties may be added”. This is a commonplace practice that occurs the majority of the time, however, that does not make it right, efficient nor does it make it a productive usage of time or effort.

The less details added to a posting on a job site whether it is the organization’s own employment site, external business site or even when the organization uses an employment agency, a specific detailed job description of the position is required. This is because descriptions can be misinterpreted by the either the interviewer, the agency representative and even the person applying for the position.   

In a world where there is an increasing emphasis on getting the job right the first time, being efficient as possible and getting the candidate for the job on the first attempt, incorrectly written job descriptions counteract the aforementioned desires of organizations that are trying to watch their bottom line.

When I look at a job description that has less than a paragraph and has those famous words: “and other duties” I know that the author cares as little about the process, or about getting the right candidate for the job. To the author, this is their job and if it is done incorrectly, or done very well, it does not matter to them at the end of the day, it is just their “job” and possibly the individual that the organization does not want interviewing future candidates nor writing job listings in the near future.

Which then falls upon the organization for not getting the person to do this task/job as well, basically becoming its own vicious circle which wastes the time of everyone involved. Time, a precious commodity if you are in a hurry to fill the position because it is either a very crucial position to an organizational department “time is money” as the old saying goes.

Or it could be that the tasks needed to be completed by the person in this position are now being divided up amongst different members of the department which now is driving down the productivity of the entire department. This extra work that other members in the department has to do to cover for this missing individual is in turn, overtasking and taking its toll upon its members.

Leading to overuse of sick days, higher turnover rates, etc., just because one poorly written job description is holding back the hiring process. I have seen this many times before and have been one of those people in the department overworked because of it, and it is not a pretty situation. And usually members of the overworked department are then on external job search sites looking for a new job, sounds familiar?

Which gets me back to the original point that if a job description is done right, detailed enough an organization can get the right applicants for the jobs so that this ripple effect does not occur. If an organization wants the best, then take the time to write what you are expecting from the best, it does not have to be Hemingway, just something that does not waste the time of everyone involved. Plain and simple.