by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Oct 2, 2016 | Human Resources, Kevin Berchelmann, Miscellaneous Business Topics
First, the fiasco in Chicago was averted — we should all stand and cheer.
For those living on Pluto (the new “non’-planet), Chicago attempted to vote in a “big box” minimum wage, a wage higher than what all other employers must pay, as a penalty for simply “being” a big box retailer.
Mayor Dailey vetoed the bill — his first such veto in his million years in office. Smart man.
Having said that, and against my personal beliefs and desires, minimum wage is going to change from its paltry $5.15 per hour. 10 states have enacted minimum wage laws in 2006 alone, making their state’s minimum wage some level above the Fed’s. That brings to 23 the total number of states with such legislation, and another 6 states have pending legislation awaiting November voting.
You can bet that all, or most, will pass.
Make sure you prepare accordingly, as minimum wage adjustments — particularly significant adjustments — impact more than just your unskilled entry workers. Minimum wage tends to be the benchmark by which other positions base their rates. In other words, you’ll likely face the need to adjust the rate ranges for multiple low and semi-skilled positions within your organziation.
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Sep 14, 2016 | Brazen Leader, Executive Improvement, Human Resources, Organizational Effectiveness
I hate to call anyone a crook. It sounds unseemly and judgmental, and just a tad juvenile…
Ah, to hell with that. Wells Fargo, you guys are a bunch of crooks. Specifically, the leadership involved in the fraudulent account processing debacle. 
Yes, the leadership, not the schmucks that
leadership whacked in the process.
The numbers, for you analytical types:
- 565,443 — The number of unauthorized credit card applications filed by Wells Fargo’s community banking division
- 1,534,280 — The number of unauthorized deposit accounts opened by Wells Fargo’s community banking division
- 5,300+ — The number of schmucks (mentioned above) fired for actually opening these fraudulent accounts
- $185,000,000 — The amount of the fine levied on Wells Fargo for this fraudulent activity
- $200,000,000 — The amount of stock held by John Stumpf (just “Stumpy” from here on)
- $19,000,000 — The amount of money Stumpy hauled in last year.
- $125,000,000 — The amount to be paid to Carrie Tolstedt, the executive in charge of these fraudulent activities
- $20,000,000,000 — The approximate dollars in annual profit made by Wells Fargo
- 0 — The number of senior leaders held accountable for this travesty
Here’s the deal… there’s simply no way that 5,300 people–all doing the same job for the same division–can be fired for fraudulent (potentially criminal) acts, and no one in real leadership was aware of the problem. Just no way. Think about it–that many people whacked, same division, same job, all for fraudulent activities in a bank. And no one noticed? That’s your story? Seriously?
I call bullshit.
If you hold a gun to someone’s head and say, slap Bill over there or I’ll pull the trigger, well, Bill’s about to get slapped. It doesn’t matter that you aren’t the violent type, that you’ve never hit anyone in your life, or that Bill is a helluva good guy. None of that matters. What matters is you have a gun to your head. The schmucks fired at Wells Fargo, all likely justified for doing something way wrong, had guns to their heads.
Over aggressive daily sales quotas; hourly (yes, you read that right)–hourly–conference calls to make sure your quotas are on track; after-school detention overtime and forced marches on Saturdays for anyone coming up short. And if you came up short after two months, you got whacked. I’d say that feels like a gun to the head. Held there by senior leadership at Wells Fargo.
The push was relentless, and making these arguably unreasonable quotas was not simply an issue of performance–some personal bankers had as much as 20% of their total compensation tied up in sales commissions from these extra accounts. In other words, another gun. I’m not excusing criminal or unethical behavior by those doing it; the firings were likely justified, and behavior like that is deplorable no matter the incentive. But to just punish over 5,000 workers while senior leadership is not just held unaccountable, but rewarded with mucho dinero?
In a 2013 interview, Wells Fargo CFO Timothy Sloan said “I’m not aware of any overbearing sales culture.” Where’s that bullshit flag again…? I’m throwing it. Of course, Timmy had good reason for–and was rewarded for–his ignorance; he’s been promoted twice since that interview, and is now heir apparent to Stumpy himself. Things that make you go hmmm. I’m certain it’s just a coincidence…
Stumpy doubled-down on his perception of executive innocence in a Sep 13 WSJ article, stating “There was no incentive to do bad things,” and that “…some employees didn’t honor the bank’s culture.” And what, exactly, might that culture be, bigshot? My favorite Stumpy quote: “I feel accountable.” Not “I am accountable.” Tweeeeet! Throwing my flag again…
Leadership matters. Ethics, integrity, even simple honesty, are all driven from the top. That which you condone, allow or permit, through action, inaction or positive consequence, is what you get. Culture really is that simple. Honest leaders get honest employees (for the most part). Ethical senior leadership promotes ethics and integrity throughout. Conversely, fast-and-loose behavior at the top creates a culture of shady corner-cutting throughout the organization. Plausible deniability is a good movie line, but it sucks when used by senior leaders to allow bad behaviors to boost profits.
This is Stumpy.
Stumpy likes money
Stumpy doesn’t question where it comes from
Stumpy’s people get him money
Stumpy makes lots of money
Don’t be like Stumpy
Be Brazen…
by | May 10, 2016 | Brazen Leader, Human Resources, Kevin Berchelmann, Miscellaneous Business Topics, Organizational Effectiveness
So, let’s talk about references. Recently, I heard an HR generalist ask about references. They wanted to know:
a) If they were limited to the references provided by a candidate,
b) What to do if they could not contact someone because the candidate wouldn’t give permission…, and
c) What good were references anyway since past managers and HR shops can’t give out any info??
Hang on to your seats, my answers may get rough… I’m just doing some free-wheeling here, so stay with me.
Managers/HR won’t give out information? Sure they can, and from my experience, usually do. I sometimes have great conversations, and make long-term acquaintances through these calls. I have friends today whom I met as I was speaking to them about a reference. Can’t shut them up sometimes.
I do, however, ask candidates for references for 2 reasons:
1) To make my life easier in finding telephone numbers, and
2) To get an idea of whom they would prefer I call, versus not.
Neither of those reasons is to get permission. I will always talk to immediate supervisors for at least 5 years back. Always, whether listed as reference or not.
Did you get that part?? Whether they list as references or not.
I will honor a request — it IS a request — to not call a currently-employed candidate’s current employer, as long as they realize I must do so either before an offer is made, or after a “contingent” offer is made. 100% of the time. No matter what the impact may be — no current reference, no job.
Now, some opinionated rambling…
There is no legal requirement, per se, for giving/not giving references or even employment verification (for future employment).
Further, though I realize many in HR choose — on their own — to limit their reference responses, I believe that practice is both limiting and detrimental to both employers.
This whole “name, rank and serial number” thing began as HR managers became afraid (unjustifiably, in my mind) of saying something malicious that they could be held to later.
In playing this self-inflicted “don’t tell” game, we encourage people to circumvent HR in the reference process, making operational/functional managers the go-to for adequate references.
And make no mistake — regardless of policies, most managers WILL give references, good and bad.
I believe our organizations would be better served if we controlled the real reference information, instead of simply sticking our collective heads in the sand.
But then, that’s just me…
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Apr 2, 2016 | Brazen Leader, Human Resources, Kevin Berchelmann, Miscellaneous Business Topics, Organizational Effectiveness
First, my bias — I “grew up” in Human Resources, finishing my coprorate stint with successive roles at the VP/SVP HR level. So, I somewhat “know from which I speak…”
The skills required of senior HR leadership of today and the future are so incredibly different than those required in the past, that the job almost seems to be a different profession.
Gone are the days of employee advocacy, pseudo-ombudsman, and feel-good party-planners.
Present & future HR leaders must have consummate business skills, including sound, educated, financial acumen. Additionally, HR specialist managers must maintain that specialty expertise (compensation, benefits,recruiting) while learning and leading with those same skills listed above.
Organizations must be able to look to their HR leaders for financial information on the human capital efforts, emphasis, and directions. Simply determing “cost” isn’t enough — we’ll need to show, demonstrate and explain real “VALUE.” In other words, why the hell should a company give you money and resources instead of putting those same resources to work in marketing, product development, or R&D??
We cannot stress enough that future HR leaders must know — KNOW — the business. I don’t mean the HR business or profession, but the “business.” They have to get their hands dirty; be willing to take on a multitude of non-HR responsibilities and accountabilities — HR is merely a specific background for a top executive, it doesn’t define their over-arching role and deliverables.
The best example I can give is that the largest private employer in free world — Wal-Mart — selected someone with NO human resources background to lead their human resources function. They clearly needed a “leader” first, an “HR expert” second. I believe this is the future we are going to realize, and their will be many incapable of getting on that bus.
The most significant skills — bar none — that these future HR leaders must have include:
1. Real business understanding — get their hands dirty enough to understand HOW and WHY we make money,
2. Financial acumen, and
3. Talent management: identification, development and recruitment.
This train is leaving; get on, get off, or get run over. Organizations have a right to these expectations, and I believe they will insist on receiving them in the not-too-distant future.
See you around campus…
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Mar 28, 2016 | Brazen Leader, Human Resources, Kevin Berchelmann, Miscellaneous Business Topics, Organizational Effectiveness
Here it is… the definitive guide…
My thoughts on succeeding in HR and adding real value to both the organization you work for and your professional career:
1. First, you cannot effectively manage human resources from a book, a website, or some online forum. You can’t. You can pick up tips and tidbits, some compliance knowledge, and a few very generic processes. Most of the rest — the other 98% — takes individual thought, planning, experience and creativity.
Compliance is simple — a CD-ROM could do it. Effective application of employment laws in a successful business… THAT takes work.
2. Quit searching online and asking others for templates. Sit down, learn a bit from those plethora of books you should have, talk to a few people who may have some insight, THEN CREATE YOUR OWN. Using someone else’s, even customized, isn’t yours. And it usually won’t work, since someone developed it SPECIFICALLY for their organization. And no, you don’t really just want to “see what one looks like.”
3. Rating categories and forms will not, under any circumstances, make an effective performance management system. Just one more pain in the rear for line managers to deal with. It’s bigger than the forms, folks. Forms may have a role, but they are not the core of performance management.
4. Learn to recruit. REALLY recruit. It is the SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT THING WE DO. Second to none. Those who feel they have “outgrown” recruiting — rethink that. Maybe you’ve outgrown hourly recruiting, but you still better be an effective talent manager, and that includes sourcing and recruiting.
5. Never train because someone asks for training. In all likelihood, training isn’t the answer. Except in matters of compliance (usually education, not training) or technical skills, training is really only effective for development, seldom for corrective action.
6. Google is your friend. Research. A lot. Of everything… asking in some online forum INSTEAD of researching isn’t just lazy (though yes, it is), you are harming your learning experience. You need more than pointed answers, clouded by someone else’s experience. Find out WHY things work that way, HOW we got where we are, and WHAT you can do to impact meaningful change.
7. Speaking of training, learn it. If recruiting is #1, employee/managerial development is a close second. Knowing how to develop managers — coaching and training, is a skill ALWAYS in demand. Go to Toastmasters. Offer to teach at some affiliate or association group. Learn with green “wannabe” supervisors. But learn to train and develop.
8. Don’t ask anyone “How can I justify XXX” until you can JUSTIFY IT TO YOURSELF. Attending conferences, implementing a new program, allocating resources… if YOU don’t know why, how the heck can you convince someone else???
This field is no longer for those with good “people skills;” it’s for those who understand that human capital is an adjustable, malleable resource that we are responsible for developing. Time to step it up a notch…
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Aug 12, 2015 | Brazen Leader, Executive Improvement, Human Resources, Miscellaneous Business Topics
I was recently asked that question by a client. Now, in all fairness, I didn’t actually say it was a stupid question.
But it is. Of course they work.
The premise of the question is the problem. Of course Balanced Scorecards “work.” They display a particular set of organization-specific metrics to use within the context of coaching and performance management/improvement. They don’t do–nor are they supposed to do–any more than that.
Therein lies the problem, and the basis for my “stupid” comment. Too many think that scorecards, incentive plans, spiffs, et al, should actually DO something. Like somehow substitute for leadership. Like motivate so a leader doesn’t have to. Like provide the impetus for discretionary effort and productivity without any leadership heavy-lifting.
Balanced Scorecards work just fine. Incentives (if done properly) work just fine.
When you watch baseball, what do you expect the scorecard to do? Make hits? Score runs? Catch balls? It’s a scorecard–it tracks your score.
When you play golf, what do you expect the scorecard to do? Hit drives? Make putts? Whistle at the cart girl? It’s a scorecard–it tracks your score.
If related leadership would just remove their heads from their collective butts, maybe the added benefit of those scorecards could be realized. Brazen Leaders don’t have their heads up their butts. That’s practically a definition.
But then, I’m just a consultant.
