Tag Archives: employee relations

Attitude Gets You Attention, but Courtesy Wins You Respect

Posted on by • Posted in Work Related Posts • Tagged , , • Leave a comment

Originally published May 2012

I had the misfortune recently to catch an episode of “The Apprentice“. What’s particularly depressing about this reality TV show is that people see Lord Sugar and his bunch of social misfits undertaking work-related projects, and think that business success is gained by backstabbing colleagues, talking in business clichés and pursuit of personal gain at the expense of everything else (including basic competence).

This “economic” view of people as inherently selfish and untrustworthy has a long history – in management theory it goes all the way back to FW Taylor, and now has a new lease of life following the publication of the Beecroft report.  If, as Beecroft and his supporters do, you believe that labour is simply a commodity to be picked up and put down when required, then it is logical to call for a reduction in employment rights.  As I pointed out in earlier posts, it’s ironic that this view of labour ultimately derives from Karl Marx!

There is a different way, as many successful businesses and business people recognise. They take the view that employment is a relationship between people, and therefore requires trust, confidence and mutual respect. People aren’t just machines to be managed at the touch of a button, but have different interests and motivations, and respond best to being treated as human beings.  It’s no wonder that the current big issues for many businesses and HR professionals are around employee engagement, values and retaining good people.  Though sometimes all people want is a simple “thank you” to recognise their efforts or achievements.

As another wise economist recognised “How selfish … man may be supposed, there are evidently some principles in his nature, which interest him in the fortunes of others, and render their happiness necessary to him, though he derives nothing from it”  But businesses who display an interest in the fortunes of their staff will derive plenty from it, through greater commitment, reduced turnover and ultimately more profit.

 

Passion is No Ordinary Word

Posted on by • Posted in HR Thoughts • Tagged , , , , • Leave a comment

Originally posted January 2011

Everyone has their own most disliked management phrase. Mine is probably the use of the word passion in the world of work. I don’t know whether it arose from an over-active marketing executive or is part of a general trend to use words conveying strong emotions in a way where their meaning becomes debased. But when I see a sentence in a recent blog like “we need more love, courage and passion in our workplaces” I cringe (and not only at the potential sexual harassment cases coming my way).

Setting aside its sexual and religious meanings, the most common definitions of passion are “a powerful or compelling emotion” and “a strong or extravagant desire”.  Are either of these really the sort of behaviours we expect to see, let alone encourage, in the workplace? And do we want HR people to be “passionate” about our work, as I’ve read recently?

Let me give you an example using a different strong emotion. I’ve just redrafted a time off in lieu policy for a client, under which a small group of staff would be disadvantaged. In consultation, one affected member of staff told the Chief Executive that when she read the new policy she was “angry”. As a friend of mine commented “I get angry about children starving in Africa. I might get a bit annoyed if I didn’t like the way my company had changed one of its policies.”

So let’s be clear. I enjoy working in HR, I often find it fun or stimulating, and I can sometimes become very enthusiastic about aspects of it. But passionate about HR – no!

Wayne Rooney and Marxism

Posted on by • Posted in HR Thoughts, Work Related Posts • Tagged , , • 1 Comment

This post was originally published in October 2010, and was a tongue in cheek response to footballer Wayne Rooney’s attempts to negotiate a new contract with Manchester United.

News of Wayne Rooney’s new deal with Manchester United – a reported £160-200000 per week – caused a mixture of amusement at the very public negotiations, followed by tabloid anger that someone should be earning so much at a time of great economic uncertainty.
While I doubt Wayne has read much Karl Marx, it struck me that he is behaving exactly as Marx suggested a member of the “proletariat” would do:
•    He is attempting to sell his labour for the highest price possible, knowing that whatever he gets for it his employer will still get more (if he scores the winning goal in the Champions League, will all the profit Man Utd make go back to him?) – the concept of “surplus value”
•    He is “alienated” from his team mates (not just because he criticised them!) as his football skills have just been reduced to a commodity to be traded on the market. His apparent gain will be at the expense of other players who cannot sell their skill at such a high value.
•    He recognises that no-one is interested in him as a person, but for his ability to do a job to a particularly high standard and for his subsequent value as an image – what Marx termed “commodity fetishism”.
So there you have it – Wayne is an exploited, alienated member of the proletariat, just like the rest of us (and Karl Marx is quite a useful left-winger by all accounts).