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

This is a reprint of a post I wrote in 2009.  I’m presently working with a client on a development program for its manufacturing team leads and it struck me once again just how critical EQ and social connectedness are to leadership excellence and effectiveness.  Just using those mirror neurons…

You know, as the HR Whisperer, I’m really enamored with the whole idea of creating top performing organizations through positive behavior change. One of my favorite mentors, Cesar Millan, says, “A dog that doesn’t trust its human to be a good pack leader becomes unbalanced and often exhibits unwanted or antisocial behaviors.” It struck me that the same is true for people in organizations. We need to have strong leadership because in many cases our very business survival depends on a stable, organized and motivated team. Business survival instinct is perhaps one of our greatest natural motivators in the workplace and if a person is not guided well, it can not only result in unwanted behavior but total chaos in the long run.

So, I’m digging this concept and working it through in my brain as to how this relates to human capital and wouldn’t you know, I web-stumbled across an article published by Harvard Business Review in 2008. Written by Daniel Goleman and Richard Boyatzis, “Social Intelligence and the Biology of Leadership” discusses new studies of the brain that show that business leaders can improve team performance by understanding not the psychology, but the biology of social intelligence. How cool. It struck me that scientists have discovered a biological underpinning to what makes a good leader great, which could toss more fuel on the fire in the “leaders are born, not made” camp. (Which I don’t subscribe to, by the way. I believe that anyone, given time and effort can change their behavior – even interpersonally. That’s why I’m in the business I’m in.)

More on the biology of leadership from Harvard Business Review:

“The salient discovery is that certain things leaders do—specifically, exhibit empathy and become attuned to others’ moods—literally affect both their own brain chemistry and that of their followers. Indeed, researchers have found that the leader-follower dynamic is not a case of two (or more) independent brains reacting consciously or unconsciously to each other. Rather, the individual minds become, in a sense, fused into a single system. We believe that great leaders are those whose behavior powerfully leverages the system of brain interconnectedness…If we are correct, it follows that a potent way of becoming a better leader is to find authentic contexts in which to learn the kinds of social behavior that reinforce the brain’s social circuitry. Leading effectively is, in other words, less about mastering situations or even social skill sets—than about developing a genuine interest in and talent for fostering positive feelings in the people whose cooperation and support you need.”

Wow. The idea that leaders need good interpersonal as well as functional skills has certainly been around for quite some time. As a matter of fact, Goleman coined the phrase, “social intelligence” to discuss this very thing. But what he and Boyatzis are talking about here is different – they’re saying that we have these things in our brains called mirror neurons that mimic what another person does. As social beings, when we “consciously or unconsciously detect someone else’s emotions through their actions, our brain’s mirror neurons reproduce those emotions and allow us to instantly share that experience.” Ever notice when two people are deep in discussion they tend to hold their arms the same way or cross their legs at the same time? That’s the mirror neurons in action.

So, how can leaders take advantage of this brain interconnectedness? If it stands to reason that followers will create a social connection with their leader, it also stands to reason that they will emotionally feel whatever it is the leader is feeling and behave accordingly. If leaders are emotionless, don’t smile or otherwise engage their followers, they will not activate the mirror neutrons in a positive way, leading to distressed and nonperforming followers, and thus the potential for business chaos. Body language plays a great part also. If a leader’s body language doesn’t jibe with what is being said, the follower will go with the body language. Bodies don’t tell lies, mouths do.

The bottom line is that when people feel good about what they are doing, when they have a social connection with their leaders, when they feel part of something that is bigger than them, those mirror neurons come in handy. Reinforce the brain’s social circuitry — if you want to motivate those around you, create a positive atmosphere. If you want higher performance or enhanced creativity, be in a good mood and show you care.

Biology of the Pack Leader is a post from: The HR Whisperer

IT’S A RECORD BREAKER.

Let me say that again: IT’S A RECORD BREAKER! I don’t know about you, but I’m getting ready to join over 1,700 people at the 2011 HR Florida State Conference & Expo in Orlando, which starts Monday, August 29th. If you want to join the fun, head over to www.hrflorida.org to register. State conference director Dana Chatelain (@DanaChatel) has worked hard to ensure a stupendous, crowd pleasing event.

Here’s just a snippet of what to expect. There’s going to be:

An At-Large Member Reception for SHRM members who are interested in joining a local chapter. Learn more about the benefits of chapter membership in a low-key, casual atmosphere, led by immediate past president Kitty Fields, SPHR and membersip director Kay Wilson, SPHR.

“The VOICE of HR” Student Reception for students majoring in HR. Join veteran networkers and long-time members of the HR community in a fun, social networking event based on the TV show, The Voice, led by college relations director Jim Gallo, SPHR and president Joan Ciferri, SPHR, CPC of David Wood Personnel.

Keynotes from Zappos CEO Tony Hsieh, noted author and TV newswoman Lisa Ling and the author of the bestseller on motivation, Drive, Daniel Pink.

Over 100 concurrent sessions to choose from, including five Master’s Series sessions.

Social media coverage by a noted panel of bloggers, including:

• Mike VanDervort (@MikeVandervort) from the Human Race Horses
• Ben Eubanks (@beneubanks) from UpstartHR
• Franny Oxford (@Frannyo from Do the Work: Memos to the Universe
• Victorio Milian (@Victorio_M) from Victorio Milian – My Thoughts on Trying to Live a Life of Quality
• Bryan Wempen (@bryanwempen) from DriveThruHR
• Joni Thomas Doolin (@luckypenny) from People Report Blog, and
• Kris Dunn (@kris_dunn) from the HR Capitalist

These professionals will not only share their unique perspectives on conference sessions and events, but will also be discussing social media and its global impact.

And, there is so much more happening that I can’t even begin to list here.

Yes, this is a SHAMELESS plug for HR Florida and it’s outstanding annual conference, but I want you to attend and when you do, make the most of your experience there.  This is an unprecedented opportunity to be at the leading edge of HR. So…

Engage in the dialogue that will be taking place throughout the conference. Listen to what HR practitioners of all functions, levels, specialties, etc. have to say about what’s happening now and what needs to happen in the future. Push back when something said doesn’t seem right. Ask questions; seek answers. Get some new ideas and bring them back.

Be a true HR hero – join us in becoming energetic, educated and engaged HR pros who have an influence on our field and the organizations we serve. That’s what I plan to do.

See you at the conference!

Florida Style HR – State Conferencing At Its Best! is a post from: The HR Whisperer

I received this gem of a poem from one of my clients.  We’ve been working together on an intervention to help his department and collective organization get employees more engaged.  Tough thing to do, given folks don’t get recognition or even raises, really and job satisfaction is very high.  Just the fact that he sent this to me though, screams volumes in where his head is at, what he’s all about, and what he wants to do.  I’m proud and excited to be helping this fine organization; they’ve got leaders, positional and personal, who want to do the right thing.  Bravo.

I’ve since found out that these “rules to lead by” are called The Paradoxical Commandments.   Written by Kent Keith in 1968 when he was a sophomore at Harvard College, the commandments were part of The Silent Revolution: Dynamic Leadership in the Student Council, his first booklet for high school student leaders.

Kent was 19 when he wrote this.  A babe.  What a great way to think – and act – when living a life.  I’m inspired and I hope you are, too.

So, here they are in the spirit of our forefathers who also wanted to do the right thing – and succeeded.  My best to you and Happy 4th of July, everyone!

The Commandments of Leadership

If you do good, people will accuse you of ulterior motives.
Do good anyway.

If you are successful, you win false friends and true enemies.
Succeed anyway.

Honesty will make you vulnerable.
Be honest anyway.

The biggest people with the biggest ideas can be shot down
by the smallest people with the smallest minds.
Think big anyway.

What you spend years building may be destroyed overnight.      
Build anyway.

People really need help, but may attack you if you help them.    
Help them anyway.

Give the world the best you’ve got, knowing you may get kicked in the teeth.        
Give the world the best you have anyway.

Leadership Commandments…Personal or Otherwise is a post from: The HR Whisperer

Why are Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees required for jobs?  That was the question I was asked the other night by one of the students in my graduate class on human resources management.  At first blush I thought it had to do with cognitive ability (and I was right), but when I don’t know something to be empirically true, my nerd hat comes on and I have to go look it up.

You’d think it would be easy to find – nope.  I spent over an hour on the web searching for any kind of information regarding the relationship between holding a college degree and job performance.  I must tell you that the Internet and I are great friends and have been since forever.  The firm I worked for at the time was a tech company and supported all employees in becoming early adopters of any kind of technology – and I thank them for that to this day.

But I digress.

Anyway, I ended up at the Department of Labor website.  In its Uniform Guidelines for Selection, the DOL says:

The degree of relationship between selection procedure scores and criterion measures should be examined and computed, using professionally acceptable statistical procedures. Generally, a selection procedure is considered related to the criterion, for the purposes of these guidelines, when the relationship between performance on the procedure and performance on the criterion measure is statistically significant at the 0.05 level of significance, which means that it is sufficiently high as to have a probability of no more than one (1) in twenty (20) to have occurred by chance….

In plain terms, what the DOL is stating is that if you want to use any kind of criteria, such as need for a college degree to determine whether or not a person is qualified for a job, that criteria must have some statistically significant positive relationship between it and successful performance on the job. 

This really didn’t tell me why a college degree is required, but it was a start.  So, I did more research and ended up finding two articles that provided my answer.

The first article from The American Economic Review  entitled, “Academic Achievement and Job Performance,” reports research conducted in the early 1970s by Harvard University assistant professor David Wise on whether or not students who get good grades in college increase their earning potential over the course of their career.  They do.  But he also stated that:

The relation[ship] between college quality and grades on the one hand and job performance on the other is not only statistically significant, but is quantitatively important…it appears that the criteria used for selection [into college] is positively associated with an individual’s ability to perform job-related tasks.  The findings of the study suggest that this relationship is not simply due to non-cognitive attributes such as motivation or IQ, which may underlie academic success, but that academic achievement is an important determinant of job performance.

But, Wise also goes on to say that nonacademic attributes are just as important as academic achievement in determining job performance.

The other article I found was from 2009, published in Applied Psychology and entitled,  “Ability and Trait Complex Predictors of Academic and Job Performance: A Person–Situation Approach.”  Kanfer, Wolf and company from Georgia Institute of Technology did a study of 105 college students enrolled in a cooperative school-work program, using a bunch of different cognitive ability, knowledge, and non-ability (personality, motivation, thinking styles, decision making strategies, etc.) tests.

They found that:

Both ability and non-ability trait composites were significant predictors of academic performance, but only the non-ability trait composites predicted job performance…Specifically, non-ability trait composite measures provided incremental predictive validities for all measures of job performance, beyond that of cognitive abilities, knowledge, and grade point average.

The end result is that Wise as well as Kanfer and company say that nonacademic is just as important as academic in determining job performance.  You shouldn’t use the one without the other.

So my friends, requiring a Bachelor’s or Master’s degree for a job is only half of the picture – it demonstrates that the job needs a high level of ability in cognition – thinking, learning and processing information.

Now, what would you use to determine the other half?  Yep, you guessed it.  Once again, it’s all about behavior.

Bachelors – And No, Not The Reality Show 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

Just read a delightful Sunday post from our favorite HR Capitalist, and I can’t agree more with his assertion that we all should hire people who honestly never seem to have a bad day and bring so much more to our organization than just their skill set.  I believe I’m one of those hiring managers myself — especially when it comes to those rather furry hires, the young ones where you’re not sure what you’re getting in the beginning, but are willing to take a risk on a hire that you believe has potential.

And I must say that from the hiring perspective, VVI has done pretty well in that department.  So much so, that I’ve recently been lobbying the other half of Vogel & Vogel, Inc. to support a staff increase in our Wellness Department.  Sadly, we did recently lose one of the staffers Sam Vogel, to an unexpected departure, but we do have the budget for a replacement hire.

The problem is convincing the Chief Operating Officer that we NEED to hire a replacement.  He doesn’t want to spend the $$ as he doesn’t believe an additional staff member is warranted.  Says it will cost too much in the long run.  He’s looking for the ROI. 

Granted, the current three staffers, Scout Vogel, Saki Vogel and Sushi Vogel, tend to sleep on the job – a lot.  But, they’ve been with VVI for over 12 and 15 years respectively, have won numerous awards for their outstanding dedication and commitment, and provide some much needed diversity in the organization.   

So,  how am I going to convince the COO that an additional staff member is needed in the Wellness Department?  Show him the data.  I’m planning on doing an indepth analysis of wellness program costs relative to associated reductions in health benefit costs.

Sometimes, More Staff Can Be A Good Thing. is a post from: The HR Whisperer

I don’t know about you, but the past year has brought about a rash of harassment cases to my attention and subsequent action.  I’m frequently asked by clients to do an intervention for an individual or group that requires education regarding what is acceptable – and what’s not acceptable – behavior in the workplace.

In fact, the EEOC received 99,920 individual charges in 2010; a 7% increase over 2009 and close to a 33% increase in the last five years.  Of those 2010 charges, 29% were for sex (16% of which were males, a figure that has been steadily increasing over the past 13 years).

Total outlay of money for all resolutions in 2010?  Over $319.4 million, which doesn’t include monetary benefits obtained through litigation.

Since I’m having fun with numbers, that calculates out to $2.28 for each of the current 139,854,000  employees in the U.S. labor force.

That’s a lot of moola to spend on something that can be preventable.

Harassment is prohibited through Title VII of the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 and includes all behavior that has the effect of humiliating, intimidating, or coercing another person.  We define behavior in this case as anything one person says or does to another person that is unwelcome and causes embarrassment, discomfort and emotional distress.  It’s not important  if the first person thinks she’s just being funny; all that really matters is the impact of that behavior on the other person or the work environment.

Harassment is not going leave the workplace.  My contention is that if you have two or more people in a room (or a person and a computer), regardless of gender, race, etc., there is an opportunity for harassment.  Based on my experience, I also believe a lot of it has to do with cultural differences and just plain ignorance.

Which leads me to this question:  where are you in your harassment prevention initiative?

Savvy HR pros know that if they want to protect their employers and employees alike, they should:

• Have a no tolerance policy prohibiting harassment, sexual or otherwise, and instruct employees on what harassment is and is not.
• Communicate the policy continuously through new hire orientations, annual refreshers, and other educational opportunities.
• Train supervisors in their particular responsibilities and obligations as an agent of the employer.
• Employ a robust complaint procedure, one that is investigative, objective, and thorough.
• Take prompt, effective action, once harassment has been reported.

I don’t know about you, but if I could protect my employees and save my organization $2.28 a person, I would have a very happy employer, indeed.

And that makes good sense, business and otherwise, doesn’t it.

Once Again, It’s All About Behavior is a post from: The HR Whisperer

Fear of public speaking is a social phobia. Scientists and behaviorists call it social anxiety disorder.  The medical  term is glossophobia; from the Greek words glossa (tongue) and phobos (fear).  Believe it or not, the fear of speaking in front of other people is #1 on the top ten list of social phobias, higher than death even.  Which means that most people would rather die than do a presentation.

Some facts regarding public speaking:

• Three out of four people suffer from anxiety about public speaking.
• Doesn’t matter if you’re male or female, although some stats shows that women tend to be more afraid of public speaking than men.
• The fear often begins with shyness in childhood and progresses from there.
• People develop specific phobias as a result of learning.  This has been studied in psychology as fear conditioning.  But fears can also be unlearned as well.

Let me tell you; I was that shy kid.  It took me YEARS before I was comfortable in front of an audience.  I had to suffer through several public speaking courses, a tour through Dale Carnegie sales training courtesy of a previous employer (which I detested, BTW – the training, not the employer), and lots of practice.  I  knew my career would go nowhere unless I could deliver effective presentations.  Now, I’m at the point where I don’t even lose sleep, never mind my lunch, anymore.

If I can get this way, so can you.

The first thing to remember is that the presentation is about your audience, not YOU.  The easiest way to undermine your presentation is to communicate your nervousness to the audience.  They’re going to spend so much time feeling bad for you they won’t be able to focus on what you’ve got to say.  Just because you feel nervous doesn’t mean you have to look nervous.  Here’s some tips to help you get through the phobia.

Have something to say.

Think about the goal of your communication.  What is the main purpose of the presentation?  What do you hope to achieve with this audience?  Focusing on what you’re going to do and say, rather than what you are feeling is a great distraction.  Plan what you are going to say and then practice it – and practice out loud.  This way your mouth will know what to do when you’re nervous.  Take deep breaths to slow your heart and help you calm down.

Know your stuff, but don’t memorize.

Knowing your material will help you decide what information is important and what can be left out.  You don’t want to memorize it  though, as reciting by rote will sap the energy out of the presentation and you.  And you’ll lose your audience to boredom, which will make it more stressful for you.

Focus on making everyone else comfortable. 

Your job is to focus on the needs of the audience and facilitate their experience.  Remember, it’s not about you.  If you focus on making the audience feel comfortable, you’ll worry less about yourself.  Think about this question: How can I phrase my presentation so that it is focused on my audience needs, not mine?

Wear the right clothes.

Yes, wear the right clothes.  You don’t want people wondering if your belly ring is going to hook on your pants.  You don’t want people staring at your cleavage.  You don’t want people wondering where you got that I’d Rather Be Fishing t-shirt and why you chose to wear it today.  No matter what your age or gender, conservative clothes are best. Remember, you want the focus on your presentation, not on you. 

Use the appropriate tools.

There are a lot of different tools you can use to help the audience.  Pick things that will help you keep the presentation moving along.  PowerPoint is always a biggie and we talked in my last blog about how you need to make sure that the PP is crisp, clean, and not loaded with words.  Handouts are good as they help the audience move with you through the presentation and keep them focused on the content.  I also like to use other “show and tells,” such as books or other things to pass through the audience.  When people answer a question I’ve asked, I sometimes will walk over and give that person a small prize.  It encourages participation and the more participation you have, the less you have to do the speaking.  I also like to use a remote, so that I don’t have to keep hanging by the computer to click “next” when I’m using PowerPoint.

Keep your face to the audience.

Nobody wants to see the back of the presenter.  It also can give the appearance that you don’t care and would just rather read the PowerPoint than deal with the audience.  You need the eye contact and it’s easier for people to hear you when you are facing them.  Use notes to help you stay forward facing.  I like to hold my notes so that I can glance down when I need to, to help keep me on track.  I also walk around when I make a presentation.  Some people may find this distracting, but I do it to get rid of excess nervous energy and to get down into the audience for that personal touch.  You don’t have to do it though, if it makes you feel uncomfortable.  It’s a personal choice.

Practice – and then practice some more.

The old saying practice makes perfect is true.  Not only does practice ensure you know your material (and thus are not reading off your PP), but it also will help you not be so nervous because you know your stuff.

Now, go get ‘em, tiger!

Deal with the Fear, or You Won’t Progress in Your Career is a post from: The HR Whisperer