The HR Whisperer

I was reading about the fed’s Car Allowance Rebate System and started wondering about its applicability to human capital in organizations.

The “cash for clunkers” program in a nutshell: it’s a $1 billion program that provides a voucher of up to $4,500 to help offset the cost of a new fuel-efficient car purchase or lease.  You can only trade in drivable vehicles made in the last 25 years that have been continuously insured by the same owner for at least one year leading up to the trade in, so no junkyard finds or used cars can be bought to be “flipped.”

With all of the layoffs, right sizings, competitive build-downs, reengineering, release of resources, negative hiring, de-recruiting going on (we have lots of terms for “dirty” words, don’t we) , it occurred to me that organizations have their own cash for clunkers program.  Except many of the folks who are being traded in today are not clunkers – even if they were “insured” by the same business owner for the past 10 or more years.

What I’m talking about here are the people who, for one reason or another, are being let go by their organizations because of the perception that they are paid too much, cost too much, are too old, etc.  At the beginning of the year, CNNMoney.com reported that at the end of 2008, 2.6 million jobs were lost; the highest level in more than six decades.  And 2009 ain’t looking so pretty either.  The Washington Post reports that,

“The number of job losses had decreased every month since January before spiking again in June, and economists think it is highly likely that the jobless rate will hit double-digits later this year. A broader measure of unemployment, which includes people working part time who want full-time work and those who have given up looking for a job, has already risen to 16.5 percent. The nation now has the same number of jobs it did in 2000, meaning that nine years of employment gains have disappeared.”

We know that organizations downsize to reduce costs, generate positive shareholder reaction, increase productivity, or to better decision-making – or so they say.  Estimates are that each laid-off employee will cost the company 50% of the person’s compensation and benefits for each week the position is vacant, even if other people are performing those duties.  So, short term, save some cash.  Long term, cost savings are obliterated, especially when new folks (no matter how old or young they are)  are brought back into the job.

More importantly though, what is the cost of this “cash for clunkers’ to our society, nevermind our economy?  I read this statistic – pretty scary – that for every 1% rise in the unemployment rate, the U.S. suffers  36,887 additional deaths, 20,240 heart attacks, 495 alcohol-related deaths, 920 suicides, 648 homicides, 4,227 admissions to mental hospitals, and 3,340 state prison admissions. 

So, who are we helping here folks? 

Our challenge as HR pros is to help our organizations react to outside threats and strategically manage people to help prevent talent flight and the deterioration of morale.  But I believe we have a much larger role to play – shouldn’t we be coaching our business leaders to look at the bigger picture and rather than use a “cash for clunkers” program, employ “cash for care” instead?  You decide.

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 recently published by Harvard Business Review (September 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. Oh, I feel another blog topic coming on! <huge grin>)

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 mastering 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.

If you truly want the best from your followers, kick those mirror neutrons into high gear and create an environment where sincere respect, fun, laughter and performance are a serious part of your business operations.