Can dogs lie?  No, I don’t mean hanging around on the sofa but actually communicate a falsehood?  Curiosity was killing the cat, so to speak, so I put the question to the Dali Lama of the Internet  to see what I could find out.

Well, I didn’t find much.  Not even my fav Cesar Millan really answered the question on his website.  (I did pose it to him via Twitter @cesarmillan, so we’ll see if he responds.)  What I did find though, were answers from various psychologists who posit that deception is a sign of intelligence, thus the more intelligent an animal is, the more the capability to lie – humans of course, being at top of the brain chain.  A couple of other psychologists explored the idea that a “true lie” is where the liar knows  what he is doing, versus a “behavioral lie,” where the liar is getting the target to behave in a certain way without knowing he (the liar) is doing it.  This point of view suggests that behavioral lying may not require strong cognitive ability.  We do it, but it is not a conscious thing.  Rather it’s something useful that we’ve learned from past experience that gets us what we want.  That’s probably what dogs do, I bet.

True or “real” lying then, may require an understanding that people see the world differently from each other and so have different desires, beliefs and intentions.  To intentionally lie, or manipulate another person’s beliefs, one needs to understand that they have a point of view that can be manipulated.  This is where intelligence comes in.  But behaviorists also tell us that even when a true lie is being verbally expressed, our bodies still give us away.  This is because our brain first has to stop itself from telling the truth, make up the lie and then handle the emotional stress of guilt and fear of getting caught.  Mouths can lie, but bodies can’t.

And thus, the popularity of television shows such as The Mentalist and Lie to Me.

I recently had the experience of observing a panel interview for a client who wanted to be sure the organization was bringing in the right person into its c-suite.  There had been a huge issue with the previous executive who not only demoralized the staff, but caused great stress (financial and otherwise) for the company as a whole.  They asked me to observe each of the five candidates during the interview process to determine any behavioral cues being given that could help indicate whether or not the person was the right person for the position.  The experience was exhausting, (it’s hard to stare at people all day), but one of the most interesting tasks I’ve had the pleasure of working on.

Well, things progressed and after the third interview I was getting pretty good at observation.  I began to notice several things the fourth candidate was doing that led me to believe she was lying through her teeth.  Here’s what I saw:

Hint #1.  Heightened stress response – the candidate sailed through the first set of questions, which were designed to help put candidates at ease.  It’s a similar strategy that police interrogators use with subjects; start with non-threatening questions first and then watch for changes in the nonverbals that indicate deception when the questions get harder.  In candidates who are telling the truth, I find they will start to settle down, rather than ramp up emotionally, as the interview progresses.  But, the longer this interview went on, the more this candidate became agitated and unable to sit still.

Hint #2.  Longer, more direct eye contact – it’s a myth that people avoid direct  eye contact when they are lying.  The opposite is true.  Some people will actually stare you right in the eye as if to dare you to confront them with the fact they are lying.  This was what the candidate was doing with the interview panel.  I was opposite her at the conference table and she picked one person to consistently make eye contact with; and it wasn’t me.  As a matter of fact, she picked the person probably with the least influence on the panel.  That didn’t bode well with the rest of the team.  It made them not like her.

Hint #3.  Shorter response time – when a lie is premeditated, the person will start to respond more quickly to a question than someone telling the truth.  But if caught off guard, the opposite will be true; the person will take longer to frame a response as creating a lie takes some brain time.  You guessed right; this candidate was taking a tad too long to respond, and coupled with the other cues I was getting, was leading me to believe she was not telling the truth.

Hint #4.  Different verbal cues – this one was easy to spot.  When lying, a person’s voice will change pitch and get higher.  Think of a little kid who shouts out, “But I didn’t do it, Mom!” with that little squeak at the  end.  The other verbal cues I was getting from this candidate included a lot of rambling (went all around the questions, but didn’t really answer many of them), stammering (uttering the phrase, “you know?” way too much), and qualifying (using phrases such as “well, to the best of my knowledge”) in answering questions.  I caught this one when responding to the questions regarding company operations, which made me believe she didn’t even read the candidate prep package.  She also kept swallowing and licking her lips.

Hint #5.  Self-comforting behaviors – when lying many people will try to calm themselves by various tics and twitches.  They’ll shuffle their feet, root around in their chair, and stretch to get rid of tension.  Some of the best cues regarding self-calming behaviors though, are when people start to touch their face.  This was the big red flag for me.  Our candidate was constantly rubbing her nose (did you know that when you lie you get a rush of adrenaline which opens the capillaries in your nose and makes it itch?).  She kept crossing and uncrossing her arms.  Playing with her hair.  Rubbing her knees.  Shrugging her shoulders.  Hunching over and then sitting up straight.  Covering her eyes of and on with her hands.  And the biggie:  not mirroring the behavior of the rest of the panel members.  Snag.  Caught her.

Of course there are pathological liars who can outsmart even the most experienced human lie detectors.  If the person truly believes the falsehood there pretty much is almost no way to detect the lie.

Needless to say, this candidate didn’t make the cut.  And I bet she knows the truth why.

Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire is a post from: The HR Whisperer

Scout at 12 Years

Another great article from my fav Cesar Millan inspired today’s blog.  He points out there are many things that factor into a person’s decision to get a dog.  People will look for certain traits associated with a particular breed or want a certain size of canine.  Some people may spend a lot of money with a breeder, but others might run down to the animal shelter and pick a little cutie in need of a new home.

When you think about it, a person’s choice of animal companion and how they go about making that choice can give you some insight into the person’s personality traits.  Asking candidates whether they prefer a dog or cat and what their favorite breed is and why could be a great question to ask in an interview to help determine whether or not that candidate is a “cultural fit” with the organization.

What would the candidate’s choice of canine or feline potentially say about him or her?  Here are some things to consider…

Choice of Dog

If candidates select a purebred dog, they may be indicating that they are thoughtful decision-makers.  Choosing a specific breed takes a lot of research and time.  People who gravitate to a certain type of breed are comfortable with the idea they know what they are getting in terms of appearance, behavior, size and temperament.  Owners of purebred dogs tend to be planners by nature and tend to have very distinct questions they want answers to before making a decision.

On the other hand, going to the pound to pick a pooch means the person doesn’t really know what he or she will get.  Size or appearance may not matter and so these people are very laidback and like to go with the flow.  Candidates who select mutts may tend to take more chances and make decisions on emotions, rather than facts.

Now, if a candidate selects a large dog, we may find this person enjoys outdoor sports and activities, as large dogs need more space and exercise than small ones.  Large dogs also make a large mess, so people with large dogs may be more tolerant of chaos.  Small dogs are easier to take care of and tend to be associated with people who would rather take a walk than take a mountain hike for exercise.  Small dogs also tend to be pampered and treated as children; this could be an indicator of a nurturing person.  People who sleep with their pooches tend to be affectionate and soft-hearted.  If the dog sleeps outside?  Well, that candidate may lack empathy.

How About a Cat?

Kiri at 10 Months

The University of Texas at Austin did a study in 2010 demonstrating there really is a difference between people who choose dogs for a pet and people who choose cats.  Psychologist and researcher Sam Gosling, a leading authority on human personality, stated:

“There is a widely held cultural belief that the pet species—dog or cat—with which a person has the strongest affinity says something about the individual’s personality.  My research suggests there are significant differences on major personality traits between dog people and cat people.  Given the tight psychological connections between people and their pets, it is likely that the differences between dogs and cats may be suited to different human personalities…”

Gosling interviewed 4,565 volunteers about whether they were dog or cat people and then administered an assessment based on the Big Five or Five Factor Model dimensions of personality.  A comprehensive, empirical, data-driven research finding, the Big Five factors are often called OCEAN:

Openness to experience – inventive/curious vs. consistent/cautious. Tendency to appreciate art, emotion, adventure, unusual ideas, curiosity, and variety of experience.
Conscientiousness – efficient/organized vs. easy-going/careless. Tendency to show self-discipline, act dutifully, and aim for achievement; planned rather than spontaneous behavior.
Extraversion – outgoing/energetic vs. solitary/reserved. Energy, positive emotions, and the tendency to seek stimulation in the company of others.
Agreeableness – friendly/compassionate vs. cold/unkind. Tendency to be compassionate and cooperative rather than suspicious and antagonistic towards others.
Neuroticism – sensitive/nervous vs. secure/confident. Tendency to experience unpleasant emotions easily, such as anger, anxiety, depression, or vulnerability.

Kato at 10 Months

Forty-six percent of the respondents described themselves as “dog people” and only 12 percent identified as “cat people.”  Interestingly, 28 percent said they were both and 15 percent said they were neither.  Gosling found that those who see themselves as dog people are more extraverted, more agreeable and more conscientious than cat people.  This is some of the same things Milan was talking about. Gosling also found that people who choose cats tend to be more sensitive, but also more open to experience.

So, what can we tell about a candidate who picks a dog or a cat?  Actually, some things about his or her personality after all.  We do make judgments about personality based on behavior – and picking a dog or a cat is indeed, behavior.

I’m going to add, “which do you prefer, a dog or a cat, and why?” to my arsenal of interview questions.  Based on the above, what do you think you could tell about my personality if you were interviewing me?

Canine or Feline? What You Can Tell About a Potential Employee is a post from: The HR Whisperer

Every so often I come across articles on the web that spark some kind of interest but I don’t have time to read them, so I bookmark them for later.  I had this particular article bookmarked for a while (okay, since February), and when I finally got the chance to read it, it struck me that healthcare companies are moving in the right direction and I hope more organizations follow their lead.  What am I talking about?  Shifting the ban from smoking in the workplace to banning smokers, period.

I know sounds harsh, doesn’t it.

The article in question is from the New York Times.  Author A. G. Sulzberger reports that…

“More hospitals and medical businesses in many states are adopting strict policies that make smoking a reason to turn away job applicants, saying they want to increase worker productivity, reduce health care costs and encourage healthier living.  The policies reflect a frustration that softer efforts — like banning smoking on company grounds, offering cessation programs and increasing health care premiums for smokers — have not been powerful-enough incentives to quit…the new rules essentially treat cigarettes like an illegal narcotic.”

If you want to get a job in one of these organizations, you have to submit to a drug test.  And if you get caught smoking, just as with a Drug Free Workplace, you can face termination.

There are a lot of states that have laws that prevent bans on smokers (not Florida).  Here, with the Florida Clean Air Act passed in 2003, smoking is prohibited at most places of employment, but smokers can smoke in designated areas determined by the employer.  Smokers can also smoke in bars, private establishments or other public places where smoking is not banned, such as a tobacco shop.

I’m sure one of the main reasons employers are banning smoking is economic, evidenced by the skyrocketing medical costs associated with smoking and the sick leave or unproductive time that comes along with it.  But as the article states, there are other good reasons to do so, such as encouraging a healthier way of life.  Healthcare providers also want to ensure that their employment policies and practices are congruent with their mission to promote overall health and well-being.  It’s in their best interests to do so, from an economic, consumer and employee perspective.

Steven Bjelich, chief executive of St. Francis Medical Center in Missouri said that his organization “felt it was unfair for employees who maintained a healthy lifestyle to have to subsidize those who do not.”

I can’t help but agree with that sentiment.

Let me say that I’m not a smoker – but was one in my early 20s, when I was really stupid – so I guess I’m one of those rabid anti-smoking people that smokers love to hate.  Especially after having two children who had asthma, losing a mom to smoking-related lung cancer, and now dealing with an aging dad with smoking-related COPD.  Smokers aren’t going to get any sympathy from me.

But where do we draw the line?

One thing we must consider, is what health or other related behaviors are we going to ban next in our workplaces and is it right that we do so.  Are we going to ban employees from engaging in high-risk sports, such as hang gliding, motorcross, or even snow skiing?  Are we going to ban employees from drinking alcohol in the privacy of  their own homes?  Are we going to ban employees who have a BMI over 25?

As HR pros, we need to understand the hows and whys of developing health or behavior-related policies and ensure that those policies not only meet the needs of our organizations, but truly take into account the rights of the individual outside of the workplace.

Is it discrimination?  You decide.

Are You Willing to Smoke Out Your Job? is a post from: The HR Whisperer

Photo courtesy of Carol McDaniel

I had the distinct pleasure of attending the Daytona 500 NASCAR race on Sunday courtesy of OrlandoJobs.com. It truly was a lifetime, bucket list experience that I’ll never forget. OMG, it was fun – and LOUD.

Being ever the Whisperer though, I couldn’t help but watch everything that was happening around me and how people behaved. The audience, I guess was pretty typical. Never having been to a car race of this type before, I rather expected that fans would be mostly young men. Not true. Yes, a ton of guys (which made the lines incredibly long for the restroom, which I thought was hilarious, BTW, as it’s usually the other way around!), but really most of the audience were middle-aged couples who were out for the day. Lots of what I call trick-or-treating too, at all of the booths in the exhibit area leading to the track. I was amazed at how long the line was to get free snack-size boxes of cereal. Who knew?

But what really struck me was during the race itself. I don’t know if you follow NASCAR or watched the race, but the cars are traveling in excess of 220 miles per hour and literally stack up one against the other for drafting purposes. Well, this strategy often ends up in one car losing control and crashing either into another car or the wall. That’s a lot of what makes NASCAR so exciting. Fortunately, most of the time no one gets hurt, but the car gets trashed. These cars then limp off to the pit where miraculously they are put back together in mere seconds and then tossed back into the race.

Know what the team uses to put the car panels and bumpers back together?

You guessed it. Duct tape.

Which got me thinking about how HR is really the duct tape of an organization.

Consider. We are the essential element in making the organization “stick” together. Yes, pun intended.

More and more we see HR moving from the transactional, compliance-focused function to a strategic partner with expertise in people and human behavior. Without a good understanding of people and how they behave, especially in situations of constant change, NO organization will be successful.

Good HR is about observation and analysis behind the scenes, compiling data and then creating the processes to create or maintain organizational integrity, coherence and congruence. We use processes to inform, influence and define behavior and culture.

Essentially, any other organizational resource depends on the human resource.

So, HR keeps things together. Just like duct tape.

HR and Duct Tape is a post from: The HR Whisperer

I’ve been following with great interest all of the news reports regarding the assignation attempt on Rep.  Gabrielle Giffords.  My heart goes out to her, her family, and to all people who were affected by this senseless act of insanity.

In case you haven’t been following the news, Jared Loughner  is accused of engaging in a shooting rampage at a “Congress on the Corner” a town hall-style event in Tucson, AZ on Saturday that left six dead, including a judge, and severely wounded Rep. Giffords, who apparently was the target of the attack.

I read Loughner used a Glock semiautomatic pistol.  Jeez.  Only 22 and he was able to purchase a gun.  Gun-control proponents once again are calling for stricter laws regarding guns and access to them.  Gun-rights advocates once again purport that more regulation would not have stopped the tragedy.

Don’t know a damn thing about guns and really don’t want to.  I honestly don’t believe that guns really have a place in our society now.  But that’s me – and that’s not what I want to blog about today. 

 What I do want to talk about is what I see as one of the biggest issues in the case which, aside from the obvious need for stricter gun permitting and background checks, is the necessity for stronger  mental health policies and practices.

 All I kept thinking over the weekend and into today was the fact that this young man had to have been mentally ill to do what he did.   And it appears that Loughner does indeed have a history of mental illness. 

 Which it also appears was not attended to.

 What President Obama said in his speech on Wednesday in Arizona really struck a chord with me:

 “When a tragedy like this strikes, it is part of our nature to demand explanations – to try to impose some order on the chaos, and make sense out of that which seems senseless…already we’ve seen a national conversation commence, not only about the motivations behind these killings, but about everything from the merits of gun safety laws to the adequacy of our mental health systems. Much of this process, of debating what might be done to prevent such tragedies in the future, is an essential ingredient in our exercise of self-government.”

Let’s exercise our self-government and debate the issue by looking at the fact pattern. 

The kid had issues – he had trouble with the law, got rejected by the military, and college officials canned him because they considered him a threat to other students and faculty.  Apparently the college police were called in five timesto deal with Loughner’s library and classroom disruptions.

The college did right in removing him from the campus.  And they did right in wanting him to undergo a mental health exam to prove he was not a danger to others before they would readmit him.

Michael J. Fitzpatrick, executive director of the National Alliance on Mental Illness said that “the reality is most people with mental illness are not violent.  The issue, frankly, is getting people into treatment. It’s not about guns.”

We may not be able to control the public space, but as HR business professionals we can – and must – control the work space.

There’s nothing wrong with mental illness.  It is what it is.  If it’s in the work space though, we need to make sure it’s diagnosed and there are tools in place to help manage it and any resulting behavior. If you think about it, all health, physical or mental, is behavioral management really.

So, make sure your organization has mental health as a part of its benefits package.  Make sure your organization has some type of employee assistance program (EAP).  Hold stress management seminars for employees; give them a quiet space where they can decompress after a particularly frustrating encounter.  Support work-life balance – and put your organization’s money where it’s mouth is by enacting policies and practices that help employees do just that. 

Also make sure your supervisors document BEHAVIOR, not opinions or personality quirks.  Educate supervisors on the signs of substance abuse, which often will make a person behave differently than he or she normally would.  Teach them how to differentiate between a disgruntled employee and one who is suffering from mental issues.  Even the most even keeled person in the world can experience a mental problem when confronted with a person or event that takes away their control or power. 

Finally, start fostering a work environment of empowerment.  Give employees a level of choice, influence and control they can exercise over the events in their work lives.

After all, it really is about control, self and otherwise.

It’s Not Mental, but Behavioral Management Really is a post from: The HR Whisperer

Just finished reading Ben Eubanks’ blog on men in HR for his “National Geographic Exclusive” and it struck me enough to stop what I was doing and start writing.  Not that I don’t LIKE writing a session description for a total rewards seminar, but…

Good question to explore – why is it that men have traditionally shied away from human resources?  Is it because back in the day “personnel” was purely administrative and considered a short step away from being a secretary, which was typically a woman due to the organizational power structures in the ‘50s?  Is it because, as Ben said, that the compliance part of the job tends to attract more females than males?

Now, I know that Ben is not trying to stereotype and he states that in his remarks.

But, it gets me thinking. 

Personally, I think a lot of women gravitate to HR because of the “friend factor,” meaning that HR folks have to do a lot of listening and dispensing of advice, which is some of what friends do for each other.  Friends also take the good with the bad and roll with the punches and will put up with most things, just as HR does.  Could possibly be a girl thing….could possibly be not; research has found that women’s focus on relationships is what leadership truly needs today to get ahead.

Ben says,

“I don’t want to lay any blanket statements on the ladies out there, but my little experience seems to point to most of them focusing on compliance and how to keep things “safe.” More of the males, however, seem to be focused on how to keep the goals moving forward and holding onto the strategic focus…”

Rather than this being a “men are from Mars, women are from Venus” issue, could the fact that women dominate the HR landscape be because of:

(a) the lasting legacy of administrative work in HR, which has chased away a lot of men,

(b) because women like the relationship part and so gravitate towards HR as it fulfills a need, or

(c) because the work itself has evolved into a compliance-centric model and needs a burning platform.

I’m kinda of going with (a), (b) and (c) here. 

Think about how HR has changed–or not changed–in the past 20 or 30 years.  Big, big focus on compliance.  Big, big, focus on protecting the organization from employee litigation.  Big, big focus on cost control.  Lots of administration. Lots of paperwork.  Lots of women in mid-level roles looking for balance.

To me, it really has to do with society’s view of women and their roles.  It’s not necessarily because HR tends to be compliance-bound.  A great article I found on www.referenceforbusiness.com regarding gender and leadership says,

“Other reasons women ascend to leadership positions less frequently than men are that women most frequently inhabit managerial positions with little power , little advancement opportunity, or where other women are so rare that their presence is attributed to their sexuality or affirmative action…outside their paid jobs, women usually have significant responsibility for the care of their families and home, thereby depleting the energy they might otherwise devote to the pursuit of leadership positions of consequence…”

Now, granted this article is several years old, but I don’t believe a whole lot has changed in society quite yet, athough I do believe the sea change will be hitting hard come 2018-2020 when over 50% of the workforce will be women.  

It’s interesting that men are in the minority in HR, but yet may be perceived as the go-getters and strategic focusers.  It’s probably because of the unconscious bias of society toward working women.  Or, it could be the function of HR.  Or, it could be simply one thing…

We women are tired from all that multitasking.  Coffee, anyone?

Is It Really A Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus Thing? is a post from: The HR Whisperer

I’ll tell you, I’m a list person.  Can cover a lot of ground with a bulleted list.  Found a great list the other day posted on the fridge at Webster University where I serve as an academic advisor and associate professor entitled, A Passport for Life by Regina Brett.  Thought the idea of it was really cool and of course, went to check it out on web.  Found out that Regina is not 90 years old as the printed article states and her passport has 50 things on it (for turning 50), not 45.

That’s okay.  Still liked the list and thought it would be great to convert it to a passport list for employees.  Employees could use a little direction now and then, don’t cha think?

So here goes for the top 10:

1. Working here isn’t always fair, but it’s still pretty good.
2. Save for your retirement – the 401k won’t do it for you.
3. No one is in charge of your happiness – you are.
4. Everything can change in the blink of an eye; think merger. Have resume ready.
5. If a work relationship has to be secret, you shouldn’t be in it.
6. What other people think of you IS your business; get feedback.
7. Make a friend.
8. When it comes to going after the right things, don’t take no for an answer, but…
9. You don’t have to win every argument; just pick the ones worth fighting for.
10. Show up and make the most of your job!

A Passport for Employees is a post from: The HR Whisperer

 Toyota’s recent woes with automobile manufacturing defects and the dragging of their feet in responding to the resulting safety and customer issues has left a lot of people feeling cold right now.  This, combined with the record brisk temps we’ve been having anyway  is wreaking havoc on the car buying public and our collective psyche. 

Well, maybe I’m the only one who’s collective psyche is cold.  

 John Rosevear of the The Motley Fool points out that the problem really isn’t so much the safety issues, which are bad and need fixing, but more with the “company’s longtime pattern of responding to problems with a mix of denial and foot shuffling.”

 And apparently it is going to get worse. 

John goes on to say that,

 “Officials in high places in the U.S. are getting cranky…on Tuesday [February 16^th], the Department of Transportation ordered Toyota to turn over documents related to various safety issues.  That may not sound like a big deal, but it is — the DOT is aggressively looking for evidence that Toyota knew of safety defects but didn’t take appropriate action. And if they find that evidence? Oh boy.”

Suddenly, it’s getting hot in here.

Many companies have faced recalls – I distinctly remember Johnson & Johnson’s recall of its Tylenol product  as I worked for The Southland Corporation (parent company of  7-ELEVEN food stores) at the time and in the absence of our area manager had to tell our franchise owners to remove the analgesic from the shelves.  Bad situation.  Good decision.

But the product recall itself is not the entire issue; the more important issue is how the company deals with the recall. 

Which really is trust, isn’t it  – customer trust in whether or not it is safe to purchase the company’s products, and employee trust in whether or not leadership is upfront in walking the talk.

J&J’s doing a great job.  Toyota’s not.

The president of Toyota’s Georgetown, KY plant says company workers are taking the series of recalls personally.

Of course they are.

It seems that Toyota built its reputation on excellence, reliability, customer service and value.  But the company values listed on its website say:  “We believe…in hard work…that good neighbors make good company and vice versa…that the world is getting bigger, but resources aren’t…in the value of diversity – it’s what makes life interesting.”

I don’t about you, but I don’t take away anything about integrity and trust from those values.  Maybe they are implied, but if company leadership refuses to accept responsibility for its mistakes and doesn’t even acknowledge that trust and integrity are important components of doing business, then what can employees believe in?

Now, I’m not saying that if it’s not written down, it doesn’t exist.  But we do know that mutual trust is a critical factor in the employer-employee relationship.  If trust exists, employees have a pretty good idea of what company life they can expect and how the company will behave.  When that trust has been breached, as it has been with Toyota, that relationship changes dramatically.

Or maybe the relationship really wasn’t there to begin with.

The best way to maintain trust is to keep from breaking it in the first place.  Leadership integrity, as demonstrated by behavior, is crucial.  That’s Leadership 101.

So, it really is not just Toyota’s products that need to be recalled; I think it’s also time to recall its leadership.

The Eroded Trust of Toyota is a post from: The HR Whisperer

I was listening to the radio the other day on my way home from the ever-present swim team car pool drive (an hour and a half round trip, ugh) and heard the radio jockeys talking about Valentine’s Day and an article on they found on the Internet related to “64  Ways to Say I Love You.” 

Of course, I went to check it out and thought it was great fun – and something that would be worth translating into showing the love for employees or volunteers.

You see, we don’t do that enough.  And its been worse lately as folks are stressing over the lack of jobs and the lack of a decent economy.  Recognizing employees (and each other’s) contributions takes work – strengthening the relationship takes work – and retaining employees takes work.

So, in honor of Valentine’s day, here’s my list of 64 ways to let employees know you care. 

64 Ways to Show Employee Love

1. Be courteous.
2. Encourage physical and mental health.
3. Have fun. 
4. Don’t compare employees to each other.
5. Give your full attention. 
6. Trust. 
7. Truly listen to what the employee is saying (no multi-tasking!).
8. Be respectful.
9. Share some humor.
10. Be interested in the employee’s interests.
11. Be a cheerleader. 
12. Highlight the employee’s accomplishments.
13. Bring in pizza.
14. Ask for input.
15. Let bygones be bygones; embrace the present – and the future. 
16. Accept the fact that nobody’s perfect. 
17. Play hooky together. 
18. Show interest in the whole person, not  just the at-work person.
19. Catch more flies with honey than vinegar – be nice.
20. Apologize. 
21. Live by the Golden Rule.
22. Better yet, the Platinum Rule-do unto others as they like…unto them.
23. Tell the employee you appreciate him or her. 
24. Take a group picture and post it in your office.
25. Encourage risk-taking and from that, learning.
26. Talk about the day.
27. Laugh.  Best de-stressor outside of prescription drugs.
28. Pick your battles.
29. Have a vision and share it with inspiration.
30. Don’t be competitive; it’s a team effort.
31. Forget about labels – everyone is unique and special.
32. Don’t forget about the commonalities, though.
33. Have an ice cream sundae contest.
34. Watch a great teambuilding movie together like Remember the Titans.
35. Write a “you did an outstanding job” note once a week and mean it.
36. Share company war stories or historical (hysterical) tales.
37. Keep your word.
38. Have them plan the work and then work the plan.
39. Go to a seminar together.
40. Encourage them to join a professional association.
41. Bake cookies in the microwave and share.
42. Be a good idea-bouncer-offer.
43. Show your gratitude; you really can’t do the job without them.
44. Consider employees’ perspectives.
45. Respect personal lives and personal time.
46. Praise publically.
47. Correct privately.
48. Be a person that others want to be around.
49. Take pride in the employee’s large accomplishments.
50. Take pride in the employee’s small accomplishments, too.
51. Share a sincere compliment about the employee in front of other people.
52. Make time for the employee.
53. Recognize that everyone makes mistakes.
54. Give $1 lottery ticket, because they are a winner no matter what.
55. Give space when they need it.
56. Communicate a lot.
57. Be honest.
58. Ask for feedback on your leadership style.
59. Do something constructive with that feedback once you get it.
60. Teach tolerance.
61. Reconnect – do a fun team building exercise.
62. Give the benefit of the doubt.
63. Tell them how important they are to the success of the team and of the business.
64. Be a servant leader.

 True leadership does not dominate – it cultivates.
– HR Whisperer

64 Ways to Show Employee Love is a post from: The HR Whisperer

Yes, this is really me in Steamboat, CO!

With the new year beginning, I started thinking about what the year might hold for the workplace and employees.  Well, I’ll be honest; I was really thinking about snow and skiing.  Those two are at least fun —  I know,  I know.  Unless you have to get on the roof with the hairdryer to de-ice the gutters before the second storm hits and the snow wrecks the house (true story).   Been there, done that.  Sunny Florida beckoned.  I went.  Still miss snow, though.

But it did get me thinking about employees and their needs.  There’s this old adage that says, red sky at night, sailors’ delight; red sky at morning sailors take warning.  Meteorologists and sailors alike know that a red dawn means high water content from an approaching low pressure system.  Simply put, a [snow] storm is brewing.

Well, we have a red dawn coming.  Employers have enjoyed loyalty from their workforce, especially with the down economy.  While 2010 may still be a downer, things seem to be looking up job-wise, which means that employees will soon be on the move again.  There’s a tempest coming and with it new work ethics, attitudes and priorities.  It’s the perfect storm.

But, in spite of record unemployment, a dismal economy, and Gen Y entering the workforce, employees still have the same expectations they always did.  Spherion points out in its 2009 Emerging Workforce Study that despite the significant change workers have witnessed over the past few years, there is surprisingly little change in how they perceive the employment relationship.  While people may stay at an organization because the current economy demands they do so, holding a job and being motivated in that position are two vastly different things. 

So, how can organizations prepare for the stormy employer-employee relationship in 2010?  Three things: 1) concentrate on the social-emotional connection, 2) offer developmental opportunities that link to the organizational mission, and 3) take advantage of social media.

          Focus on the social-emotional connection.  One of the greatest causes of misery for employees is the feeling that the organization they work for isn’t interested in who they are and what goes on in their lives.  Combat this by training supervisors in social-emotional intelligence.  No matter what the business climate, the generation of the worker, or the technology available, all people want to feel important.  The Hawthorne Studies of 1924 found that if managers paid more attention and cared about employees, it raised morale and increased productivity.  That still holds true today: a recent worldwide engagement study that found that organizations with the highest percent of motivated employees increased income 19% and earnings per share 28%.  Creating the social-emotional connection also means that basic HR programs have to be in place to meet employee needs.  This includes having a decent compensation and benefits package, providing accommodations for the disabled; offering flexible work arrangements, establishing special-interest networks, and presenting good career prospects.

          Provide developmental opportunities that link to the organization’s mission and vision.  The “perfect storm” of the emerging employment contract implies that there will never be job security, that employment will be contingent on added value, and that workers have the right to demand the freedom and resources to do their jobs well.  So, if workers are to add value, help them by providing ample opportunity to improve skills and capabilities.  There are many ways to do this such as through education and training, job enrichment or enlargement, coaching and feedback.

          Take advantage of social media.  Social media is the new way of connecting and tech-savvy workers are using it to keep in touch with friends and family, share information, surf for a new job, and provide opinions on their work and their workplace.  Social media is a virtual conversation and because of this, business is now a virtual conversation.  With the advent of social media, an organization’s brand or reputation can be literally one comment away from disaster – from a Twitter blurb, Facebook post or Epinions review.  Someone out there is talking about the organization and they can say whatever it is they want.  What you can do though, is help manage the conversation.

Managing the conversation however, does not mean telling employees what to say.  It means creating an authentic atmosphere where people can initiate a conversation.  In the era of business transparency, empowering people to tell the truth can be risky, but also rewarding.  Think about how your organization can use social media to its advantage.  Introduce rules of engagement for employees and encourage them participate with an understanding of those rules.  Use social connections to share information about the company – create organization Facebook pages, Twitter accounts, or company wikis and blogs where people can share information, celebrate accomplishments, trade opinions. If something bad pops up, have a person in the organization accountable for responding to it appropriately.  Just keep the conversation going.

While workers may be staying in their respective jobs due to the economy, if the relationship is not a strong one – or is abused – when the storm is over, employees will leave for greener pastures.  Whether it’s today or tomorrow, organizations that invest in their people will find that their people will invest in them.

Employee Snow Storms is a post from: The HR Whisperer