by Triangle Performance Staff | Aug 7, 2007 | Kevin Berchelmann, Organizational Effectiveness
Monster.com, the veritable cash-producing employment machine, is laying off about 15% of its workforce. Big deal, eh??
Actually, I believe there’s a teaching moment here…
That monster is laying off, in itself is little news; the part that drives me nuts:
1. Q2 sales increased 25%, almost $60M,
2. Share price is up almost 2%, and
3. Earnings are down almost 28%, caused by a 34% increase in operating costs, driven almost entirely by legal fees associated with their options-backdating investigation.
(more…)
by Triangle Performance Staff | Jul 5, 2007 | Kevin Berchelmann, Organizational Effectiveness
I received the following question from an HR Director in the midwest:
Contingency Fees: What’s the value? It seems that the fee percentage in permanent placement ranges from sometimes less than 20% to 30%+ of the candidate’s first years salary.
So, what’s the diff??
Where’s the value change between the 20% firms and the 30% firms?
Though I do not conduct contingency searches today, I spent many years in the Director/VP desk wondering much the same thing… (more…)
by Triangle Performance Staff | Jun 4, 2007 | Kevin Berchelmann, Organizational Effectiveness
I see HR 2.0 as a real phenomenon, but not necessarily an adjunct to Web 2.0; actually, it’s formative predecessor was likely closer to HR 1.0.
If we see HR 1.0 as an Ulrich-like emphasis on “seat at the table,” more business focus, competency-based development of HR talent, less ombudsman-centric, and creating meaningful, relevant HR strategy to match the business, then HR 2.0 must the next iteration or evolution. (more…)
by Triangle Performance Staff | May 30, 2007 | Kevin Berchelmann, Organizational Effectiveness
Well, after much ado, gnashing, angst, and so forth…
President Bush signed the legislation increase the federal minimum wage to $7.25 per hour. This will occur in three phases or steps over the next two years or so.
Obviously, this will have some impact on all employers, and some more so than others.
Here’s the time line: The federal minimum wage will increase from $5.15 per hour to:
$5.85 p/h on July 24, 2007,
$6.55 p/h on July 24, 2008, and
$7.25 p/h July 24, 2009
Some states have minimum wages set above the federal level already; I’m not going to try to tell you anything at all in that regard — I know when I’m not an expert on something! (more…)
by | May 28, 2007 | Brazen Leader, Human Resources, Organizational Effectiveness
Well, I had several people ask additional questions about real budgeting for Human Resources. I’ll try to expand a bit on my earlier post…
First, a microscopic finance lesson: Gross Profit is the total revenue or sales, less the cost of generating that revenue (COS or COGS). It tells you how much money a company would make if it didn’t have other costs, such as most salaries, taxes, interest, etc., normally referred to as Operating Expenses and typically including S, G, & A.
Operating Expenses are those incurred by the business that are not directly related to revenue production, such as most utilities, salaries, office supplies, etc. Operating Expenses do not typically change significantly when the organization’s level of production rises or falls — they aren’t usually “variable.” Sometimes referred to as “overhead,” “fixed,” or “indirect” costs.
Here endeth the finance lesson…
Though HR expenses are typically an Operating Expense, direct value-add from Human Resources comes from Gross Margin contribution — increasing revenue or decreasing the direct costs to produce that revenue. Cost-reduction strategies are usually outside of Gross-Profit, and can also have a significant influence on earnings. Assuming a company delivers 10% to the earnings or EBITDA line, it would take $10 of additional revenue to deliver earnings equal to your saving a dollar in Operating Expense, so don’t throw away those last few Post-It Notes.
The real “meat” of strategic Human Resources, however, comes from a significant contribution to the Gross-Profit line through various methods. We’ll discuss those in-depth in later posts.
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | May 28, 2007 | Brazen Leader, Executive Improvement, Kevin Berchelmann, Miscellaneous Business Topics, Organizational Effectiveness
As you probably know by now, Ken Lay (Enron Founder, Chairman) passed away early this morning. There are many who would cheer in the street. I’d like to offer this small group a counter-perspective…
I knew Ken Lay personally. Not intimately, but I met and sat with him a half-dozen times or so at board meetings (not Enron), and he and Linda were at the same table as Traci and I at a couple of not-for-profit gigs in Houston.
I knew him as a good man. He seemed kind, caring, and thoughtful. Personally brilliant, he managed loosely from the start — an employee autonomy that made Enron successful, and was also his undoing. I won’t opine on his guilt or innocence; he was tried and convicted with evidence I could not see. To give you pause for thought, however, just consider (religious or not, consider the meaning):
There, but for the grace of God, go I.
Just think about it for a minute. Can everything you’ve ever done in business withstand that sort of scrutiny? Not simply “doing the right thing,” but can it withstand harsh, hostile scrutiny from an entity with unlimited resources, hell-bent on destroying you??
What if that entity could coerce — threaten — tens of witnesses to either testify against you or spend many more years in jail? Would all your supporters hold up?
What if, those who weren’t convicted via plea deals, all your purported “business friends,” those who could present fact and testimony that could make a difference, were threatened as well. Called “unindicted co-conspirators,” and threatened with indictments if they testified? Would they still rally to your defense and support, knowing it won’t simply cost them their jobs, but their freedom??
What if “I discussed with my attorney” meant nothing to those attacking you?? How about “our auditors approved it,” or “my board voted on it with full knowledge??” What if NONE OF THOSE could stand as a defense… could your entire business life withstand that level of scrutiny and accountability??
I’m not sure… it sure does give one pause, though, doesn’t it?
It’s easy to say “we should be held to a higher standard.” Frankly, I agree. But to how high a standard do we manage?
Whatever level today, it needs to be higher tomorrow. This degree of scrutiny, oversight, and transparency isn’t simply “going away,” or temporary. It’s here to stay, and we should be prepared to manage accordingly. We must. It’s the right thing, and we have clear marching orders.
