You’ve hear this one before: “The grass is greener on the other side of the fence.” And if you’ve ever been out in the country, you’ve probably seen one or two cows or sheep with their heads between the slats in the fence eating grass that’s just the other side of the fence.

The Australian government is hoping to play on those sentiments. They’re hoping that the bored workers in Britain will emigrate to Oz. What they don’t do, however, is comment on whether their workers are any more disgruntled than those in the UK. Chances are quite good that they are.

It’s true that workers, in general, are bored. In fact, I often wonder how some of them can stay awake! The reason is that the level of skill and education that people have has grown more quickly than the level of skill and education that’s actually required to do the jobs.

For example, many companies want candidates to have a Bachelor’s Degree before they apply; yet, few of those jobs actually require the skills that a graduate would have to do the work. Contact Centers (formally known as Call Centers) are a perfect example.

This problem of over-qualification also contributes to high turnover. Many of those who get the jobs they thought they wanted soon discover that very few of the “little grey cells” are required to actually do them. Boredom sets in quickly.

Employers for whom retaining talent is a priority need to do whatever is necessary to help people grow in the jobs they’re given; that is, to help the become more employable. The failure to do so will make the problem of retaining talent even worse.

Bruce Hoag, PhD, CPsychol
Work Psychologist

Today marks the 42nd anniversary of the Pope’s famous Humanae Vitae, in which all forms of artificial birth control were prohibited by the Roman Catholic Church. I, for one, believe that because only God can create life from non-life, that only he has the right to terminate it.

And when does life begin? At conception, of course. This is obvious because only when two lives come together can another be created, and even that’s a miracle. That said, not all forms of artificial birth control terminate life. Instead, they only prevent a new life from being started in the first place.

There’s a certain hypocrisy, however, about the Pope’s remarks. This was captured beautifully by the then Secretary of Agriculture, Earl Butz, who, incidentally, had to resign for his comments. (So much for the 1st Amendment.) He said, “He-a no play-a the game, make-a no the rules.” I still chuckle when I think of that, and now that I live in Italy, I’m amused even more because I hear so many English words pronounced as if they ended in “a.”

We all  know that doctors are more likely to listen to doctors, teachers to teachers, and mechanics to mechanics. But when a celibate tries to tell us how we should conduct ourselves behind the bedroom door, that’s taking matters a bit too far. Truth, whatever it is, ought to come from a credible source. In matters pertaining to procreation, it should be promulgated, at the very least, by someone who is married; not by a person who doesn’t even approve of it among his peers.

Organizations are full of hypocrites, too. How often have you been obligated to work a shift schedule that was written by someone who only ever worked Monday to Friday, from 8 to 5 and took an hour for lunch? When was the last time you saw the division manager assembling something in your shop after telling you that greater productivity was needed? And why is it that when cost-cutting becomes a necessity, those at the bottom of the food chain are laid off first while the CEO and the Board still fly first class?

Talk is cheap. Anyone can say what he or she thinks ought to be done, as long as someone else has to do it. I’ve said this before, but it’s worth repeating: You get the behavior you reinforce, and that goes for what others are allowed to do, too. If you want people in your organization to work shifts, then at least have a shift-worker write the schedule. If you want greater productivity, then by jove, go down to the shop or assembly line and show people how they can improve. And if the company needs to cut costs, then start by paring the fat from the top and put everyone in economy class.

The way to combat hypocrisy is to demand of yourself those things that you demand of others. You can’t have one without the other.

Bruce Hoag, PhD, CPsychol
Work Psychologist

To read this article, visit http://ezinearticles.com/?Retaining-Talent-After-the-Recession&id=4337899

Bruce Hoag, PhD, CPsychol
Work Psychologist

http://www.p-advantage.com

Do you remember the days when companies used to overtly claim that people were there most important asset? Somehow, a little temporary amnesia has set in during the past 18 months or so. Don’t worry. The skill shortage is still there, lurking beneath the surface. As world economies improve, it will become more acute; and then many organizations will be facing music they never dreamed would come their way.

Why do you suppose that is? I’ll tell you. It’s because retaining talent has never really been that important to managers; certainly not as important as attracting it. It may seem self-evident to the likes of you and me, but most companies work harder at obtaining new talent than retaining the talent they already have.

Don’t believe me? Let’s consider just one of the many policies that support my assertion. Bonuses. When recruitment bonuses are offered, who gets the money? I’m not asking a stupid question. I really want you to think about this.

What would an organization do if it was only interested in attracting new talent? . . . Time’s up. What would an organization do? It would only pay the bonus to the new talent. Have you got it? Isn’t that exactly what they already do?

If organizations were really interested in holding onto the talent that they had, then they would also give the same bonus to those talented people they claim that they want to retain. But, I’ve yet to hear of a company that does that. They only pay bonuses to those they’re trying to entice to jump ship. And that means that if existing employees want the bonus, then they have to go somewhere else first so that as “new” employees they are eligible for the bonus on offer. Can you think of a more expensive way to hire people?

If you hear of anyone who actually awards bonuses to the people who stay that’s equivalent to what they offer those who have been recruited, I’d be interested to hear about it. It would be unprecedented.

Bruce Hoag, PhD, CPsychol

http://www.p-advantage.com