Who is Helping Who?

Recently I read an article published by SHRM (Society for Human Resource Management). It is titled, Executive Brief: Differences in Employee Turnover Across Key Industries.

I was not so interested in the information about the key industries that can be found in the Bureau of Labor Statistics. What caught my attention was this excerpt:

“Loss of employee talent hinders the development of new products, disrupts client relationships and delays customer deliverables. These production delays, along with replacement costs of employee turnover, negatively affect overall business performance and success.”

“Vacant positions also cause a decline in overall productivity.4 Employees who remain with the organization are less productive and efficient while they assume the responsibilities of the vacant position in addition to their own job duties. Once a vacant position is filled with a new employee, those individuals are still contributing less to their primary job responsibilities—and, subsequently, to the organization overall—as a result of having to train the new hire.”

Wouldn’t this mean that a company in this situation is operating at a distinct disadvantage and they are putting their desired results of key objectives at risk?

I am sure that to many this is not news. What I found to be interesting is that while SHRM acknowledges this in this article, many HR professionals do not acknowledge this at all and in fact, will state they do not necessarily believe it. Many also will say it is not a problem for their organization even when company leaders have stated it is a problem.

The problem is further exacerbated when the same companies are not able to find the talent they need for these vacant positions that are causing these problems and additional ones they did not describe.

From experience I can tell you when this is a problem and you are responsible for results, it is of no comfort to feel there are no solutions being offered other than, “this is the way we have always done it”. The saddest part is that many companies continue to follow the same practices i.e., post jobs, use recruiters that do not consistently produce the results required, and yet expect better results.

As an example, I recently spoke to a VP, Engineering of a medium size company. As we talked, he quickly stated that they had been looking for a person to fill a critical position in his organization for one and a half years! I gently asked what steps had been taken to find this person and why did he believe the right person had not been found. He responded that they had posted the position and had used several contingent recruiting firms they have used over the years. They also had networked within their industry associations. He also felt one reason for the lack of success was they were located in an area of high employment and there was no one of that profession looking for a job.

I explained while he was on the right track, there was much more to his situation. I provided him with the facts of the hiring environment. He was amazed he had not heard that from anyone internal to their organization. He asked what solutions were available. Once he heard the solutions and he asked me to contact his HR director. I did and she said they were not having any problems and she was very satisfied with their practices.

Either the VP, Engineering is out of touch or their HR department is afraid that someone will notice the emperor has no clothes. What I do know is the VP, Engineering had a tone of desperation in his voice for he stated similar problems that are described in the SHRM excerpt.

The ending of the story is, when true help is offered by understanding the challenges faced and detailing a practical, effective, proven solution, not soliciting a transaction and it is declined, there is little hope for help. In this case there was little hope for helping a hurting organization.

Currently, there are still too many companies where company leaders are saying they are in need of solutions but the support staff is denying them solutions. It is ironic because by denying the best solutions it only creates more doubt about the effectiveness of the current practices. At the same time, implementing the best solutions would increase confidence in effective problem solving especially when there is much less risk and much greater returns for the investment in the solutions over the current practices.