• print
  • decrease text sizeincrease text size
    text

The Value of Intrinsic Motivation Within a Team

Share this post

Dakota Murphey

Motivation is essential to running a successful business, but it’s a topic that’s more complex than many people realize. There are two types of motivation: extrinsic and intrinsic. When most businesses think of motivation, they settle on extrinsic, which is focused on title, rewards, status and power. But, intrinsic motivation is related to meaning and purpose, learning and growth, and it’s this type of motivation that mid to top level leaders should be prioritizing for the best results within teams for the benefit of every employee. 

Here, we examine what intrinsic motivation is, how it differs from extrinsic motivation and why it offers true value when it comes to building an aligned and proactive team. 

What is Intrinsic Motivation?

Intrinsic motivation is the method of encouraging people to change their behavior or adopt new ways of working due to personal satisfaction or finding meaning in what they do every day. It’s the incentive to engage a team to complete tasks or give their all everyday to their work, without necessarily having a tangible reward at the end of it all, such as money or a similar perk. 

When someone is intrinsically motivated, they derive enjoyment or fulfillment from the task, rather than only doing it for the reward at the end, and that can be incredibly powerful for businesses as it offers long-term benefits. Intrinsic motivation is valuable for both individuals and wider teams, because when people engage in activities that provide them with inherent satisfaction, it enhances wellbeing and boosts morale, creating a culture of productivity.

Intrinsic Versus Extrinsic Motivation

There’s no denying that extrinsic motivation has its place and can be a great driver for people. These perks are certainly beneficial but extrinsic rewards are short-lived and after a while, they lose their appeal. In fact, workplaces today are finding that staff are less motivated by the likes of pay or perks – they want an inclusive work culture, more flexibility in their roles and appreciation for what they do every day. Someone who is intrinsically motivated may be eager to master more skills related to their role and build their learning, for example, rather than simply getting a bonus once a year. 

We know that pay and other fringe benefits are essential, but research has shown that the presence of these factors has no long-range motivational effects. However, those that do have long-term effects include a sense of achievement, participation, challenges, growth and recognition of a job well done. When employees identify with the goals and vision of the business, they feel more motivated to work hard because they understand where they fit into the bigger picture. Fostering a culture of intrinsic motivation builds trust within the team, because it shows they are being listened to and will be supported in the areas where they want to flourish. 

Putting it Into Practice

So, what does intrinsic motivation look like in practice? There are various ways that leaders can motivate teams to do more and do better. While leadership styles can vary, it’s important for all leaders and senior members of the team to remember that intrinsic motivators create a more positive and engaged working environment for the long run, rather than a temporary fix. 

Some ways that businesses can motivate their team include participating in team building games that are fun and foster better relationships at work, without them being seen as a reward that’s only given after a certain milestone is achieved. This also gives people the chance to collaborate with team members on projects because they want to, rather than it being a requirement of their role. 

Education and skill building can also be a highly effective form of intrinsic motivation, with leaders enabling staff to learn new skills, build their knowledge and earn certifications that will give them more job satisfaction and confidence. It keeps staff engaged and that’s a huge motivator in itself, and helps businesses to create a team of skilled, multifaceted employees who are passionate about building their skills. 

To encourage a team through intrinsic motivation, employees should be granted more autonomy and responsibility over their own work. Building trust offers benefits for all parties, because workers feel free to work in the ways that suit them best to achieve the best results, and leaders can feel confident that their team are being productive and hitting targets without needing to be micromanaged. 

Similarly, praising employees, motivating a team and letting them know that the work they’re doing is valuable and makes a difference, allows each employee greater pride in what they do. This shouldn’t just come from leaders though, as encouraging employees to highlight the work of their colleagues, helps to create a workplace culture that’s positive, encouraging and an enjoyable place to be part of. Employees often cite regular, genuine praise and recognition as being a valuable motivator, far more than physical rewards because it makes them feel valued and appreciated. 

Intrinsic motivation offers so many benefits for businesses and teams of all sizes. It keeps staff engaged, proud of their work and productive, which in turn helps businesses achieve their goals. Staff are no longer happy to settle for a bonus or additional perks. These features of a role are nice to have, but they’re not conducive to long-term motivation. Motivating a team with things they have a natural desire to do, whether to achieve more in their career, or simply for the intrinsic satisfaction of doing so, can be so beneficial in creating a culture of curiosity. This will positively result in employees being driven by their love of the job, rather than simply showing up for a paycheck. 

This blog is printed with permission.

About the Author: Dakota Murphey is a freelance writer based in the UK, specializing in Digital Trends in Business, Marketing, PR, Branding, Cybersecurity, Entrepreneurial Skills, and Company Growth. Having successfully contributed to a number of authoritative online resources, she has secured a platform to share her voice with like-minded professionals.


Share this post

The Role And Purpose of A PEO

Share this post

What Are Professional Employer Organizations & What That Means For You As An Employee?

Professional Employer Organizations (PEO) offer administrative support and management services. Simply put, a PEO acts on behalf of a client, similar to the employer of the workforce.
Services can include HR management, recruiting, onboarding, payroll, and managing benefits, to name but a few. A PEO provides all the infrastructure and services needed to run a business without the hassle.

How Is PEO Integrated Into The Business Processes?

The PEO is in charge of handling most of the employee-related admin and tasks. They hire new staff directly, and handle the payroll, benefits, and taxes of each employee.

The client, or main business, is still in charge of the day-to-day tasks performed by each employee. For tax and insurance purposes, the PEO is listed as the employer on record, but this only refers to admin and not work assignments—these will continue to come from the company. Some markets even refer to PEOs as co-employers.

Not A New Business Concept

Modern-day PEO came into existence in the 1980s, but the term â€employee leasing’ was first coined in the 1960s. While employee leasing is not the same as a PEO, there are distinct similarities, and it’s said to have been the reasoning behind the development of PEOs.

In the 1980s, people began to outsource payroll services to external companies. Shortly thereafter, employee compliance issues and labor disputes emerged, and new employee and HR laws were instituted. This made admin management a time-consuming task, especially when a company was looking to grow at the same time. This led to outsourcing of these tasks, something that PEOs have gladly added to their service list.

Research has found that the average business owner will spend 25% of their time doing employee-related paperwork. PEOs provide a cost-effective solution to this time-consuming task and have even been found to reduce employee turnover and assist businesses in remaining operational. It also means that all the legislative aspects of the business are covered and up to date, and this is not something employers need to concern themselves with.

PEO As A Co-Employer

While some markets refer to PEO as co-employment, it would be more accurate to have it listed as a form of PEO.

When you refer to co-employment, you refer to two different companies that both take on the roles and responsibilities of the employer. One is purely from an operational perspective, while the other is focused on the admin side of things. Both companies have roles and responsibilities related to the employee, and often, a tripartite agreement is set out to indicate the role each person plays within the company.

This means that all employee information is stored by one entity, making it easy to update whenever necessary, and creating a chain of custody for business admin. All data is in one convenient place, which works to both the employee’s and the employer’s advantage.

Alternative Forms Of Employer Assistance

A PEO provides administrative and compliance services to an employer that seeks out their services. In contrast, an employee leasing company will supply employees to their client. Once the job has been completed, the employee is leased to another company.

The employee leasing model led to the development of the PEO model, and as a result, people tend to confuse the two.

Another option is making use of a temporary staffing agency to supply staff to clients on a need to need basis. This is commonly used when a staff member needs extended time off, and needs someone to cover their position.

Of course, this can be completely outsourced to supplement your existing administrative workforce by using Administrative Services Outsourcing and Human Resources Outsourcing. In this case, the employer is still in full control of all aspects of the business.

International PEO

An international PEO allows businesses to hire and manage employees from any market, with the PEO becoming the global Employer of Record. This makes it easy for companies to hire new employees without needing to set up a business unit in an international market—it’s an easy way to establish yourself globally.

International PEO is often utilized when a company is looking to expand into a foreign market but has limited resources, time, and bandwidth to do so. All the employee-related admin, and the legal aspects of the business, are managed exclusively by the international PEO, giving employers the freedom to focus on daily tasks and business objectives.

The global expansion comes with its own set of risks and uncertainties. Finding qualified, reliable employees shouldn’t be one of them. That is where the PEO steps in. PEO simplifies the process, reduces business costs, absorbs most of the risk, manages multicounty operations, and provides accelerated market entry. By finding the right PEO for the state or region a company is expanding into, they can grow their reach without having to navigate local red tape.

An Opportunity To Grow

Domestic PEO and international PEO both provide very similar functions, with the distinct difference being that the international PEO allows businesses to enter international markets.

From a more local perspective, PEO handles all the groundwork for businesses to operate, and ensures compliance across the board. This has the potential to grow to international PEO, where the framework is amplified, and upgraded to accommodate international standards and laws wherever the business is seeking to operate.

As the Employer of Record, the PEO can manage all administrative employee processes from start to finish. It takes all the grunt work away from the employer, giving them a chance to focus on business operations and managing the workflow.

PEO can benefit businesses of all sizes, and the services they offer can facilitate growth, reduce expenses, and accelerate productivity. They take outsourcing to the next level and provide a professional service that allows companies to focus on operations without getting entangled in admin issues best left to those with experience in the field.

About the author: Lorie is a full-time writer and editor with a background in logistics management and freight forwarding, covering a variety of topics and news within the industry.


Share this post

Business groups fear Trump’s extended curb on foreign workers will backfire

Share this post

Business, trade and free market groups say the restrictions will stymie job creation, decrease competitiveness, and perhaps slow economic recovery.

Business leaders fear that President Donald Trump’s extension of restrictions on foreign worker visas could backfire on the limping economy.

Business, trade and free market groups contend the restrictions — which took effect Wednesday — will stymie job creation, decrease competitiveness and potentially slow the recovery, despite the administration’s predictions that they would free up 525,000 jobs for Americans over the remainder of the year.

“It’s going to be very disruptive to a whole lot of companies. … This is going to be bad for job growth, it’s going to be bad for economic growth,” said Jon Baselice, executive director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Visa recipients help drive growth and create jobs, he said, “and that’s going to help get us out of the economic situation that we find ourselves in.”

Trump on Monday announced he was extending restrictions that bar most categories of foreign workers through the end of the year, citing “expanding unemployment and the number of Americans who are out of work.”

Critics say the move is shortsighted.

“This order will have catastrophic negative economic consequences on the United States … and generally slow the economic recovery,” Alex Nowrasteh, director of immigration studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, told POLITICO, specifically citing H-1B visas for skilled workers.

“H-1Bs are much more likely to patent, and to innovate,” he said, which creates “new businesses, new productivity, [and] new job opportunities for Americans.”

But in the other corner, anti-immigration groups, like the Federation for American Immigration Reform, have hailed the move as Trump putting American workers “first.”

The executive order applies to H-1B visas, a program frequently used by the tech industry that allows U.S. employers to temporarily hire non-immigrant workers in high-skilled specialty occupations, as well as H-4 visas for spouses of H-1B workers. It also applies to L visas, which allow companies to transfer a manager or specialized worker from a foreign office to a U.S. office; most J visas for work- and study-exchange programs; and most H-2B visas for temporary non-agricultural workers.

Attorneys say the administration’s targeting of the H-1B and L visa categories is creating anxiety within the business community as it struggles to climb out of the pandemic-induced recession.

“These are the people who ultimately create jobs, entrepreneurial people,” said Mark Koestler, an immigration attorney at Kramer Levin. “In a time when our economy needs to recover and needs a boost, we’re cutting out an important part of the workforce that will really help the recovery,”

“These are C suite people and to keep out a president of a company that employs hundreds if not thousands of U.S. citizens makes zero sense,” he added.

The critics say the types of workers who will be frozen out by the order — those with specialized skills, foreign executives and seasonal workers who work in industries such as landscaping, housekeeping and construction — are in jobs that won’t be easily filled by American workers.

Andrew Greenfield, a partner at the immigration law firm Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen & Loewy, said his clients, which include large tech companies, are still struggling to find university-educated professionals to fill jobs, despite the 13.3 percent unemployment rate notched in May.

“Notwithstanding some of the economic devastation that we’re facing with high unemployment,” Greenfield said, “they’re not seeing the technical professional-level workforce impacted the same way.”

The unemployment rate in parts of the tech industry is far below the national jobless rate, according to some statistics, indicating a tight job market.

An analysis by the nonpartisan National Foundation for American Policy found that the share of some unemployed tech workers has actually declined during the pandemic.

Workers in computer occupations saw a 2.5 percent unemployment rate last month, a decline from 3 percent in January, NFAP’s analysis of data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics found.

But in total, the BLS estimates 21 million Americans were unemployed in May, a figure the Trump administration and its anti-immigration allies have seized on to justify the additional restrictions.

One such group, NumbersUSA, contends American employers could use the executive order to “broaden their recruitment efforts into historically underserved communities and prove that Americans will do those jobs.”

Business groups fear ramifications beyond just filling jobs. They say the freeze could decrease America’s competitiveness, because the restrictions on L visas mean foreign-based companies will no longer be able to easily send their executives to the U.S. when those companies invest here.

“American companies, American executives are all over the world, and we would not want to see reciprocal action that would prevent an American executive from running the division in a foreign country,” said Robyn Boerstling of the National Association of Manufacturers.

“From our vantage point, it is really tying the hands of employers and those of those who support job creation,” she said of the order. “We want talented individuals to come to our country, and we want to have a competitive advantage in the United States.”

The order only applies to those seeking visas from outside the United States. So applicants who were still waiting for approval when the order went into effect Wednesday morning will be out of luck unless they are already in the United States, attorneys say.

“If you weren’t in the United States as of June 24 or already had a visa as of June 24, you’re banned from getting that visa and coming into the United States by the end of the year,” Greenfield explained.

However, Daniel Costa, director of immigration law and policy research at the Economic Policy Institute, notes that a high rate of H-1B visas were issued to individuals already in the U.S. in 2019. He suggests that program may see less of a reduction under the order, because of that trend.

This blog originally appeared at Politico on June 25, 2020. Reprinted with permission.

About the Author: Rebecca Rainey is an employment and immigration reporter with POLITICO Pro and the author of the Morning Shift newsletter. Prior to joining POLITICO in August 2018, Rainey covered the Occupational Safety and Health administration and regulatory reform on Capitol Hill. Her work has been published by The Washington Post and the Associated Press, among other outlets.


Share this post

The Country’s Job Creators Are Increasingly Women Of Color

Share this post

Bryce CovertShelly Kapoor Collins had spent more than 10 decades in technology, but she felt that something was still missing from her career. “I knew that I loved tech, but I never quite understood the concept of working for someone else,” she said.

And eventually, the mother of a 10-month-old daughter who was pregnant with a son got sick of waiting for the right time to branch out on her own. So she decided to go ahead and launch her company, Enscient Corporation. And she couldn’t be happier.

“The lesson I learned is that you can’t wait for the right time, you have to be the one to pick the right time,” she said. Now she’s taken her experience in the tech world — first at MCI, then at Oracle — and put it to work serving clients in government. “It was chaotic, but I thrived on the chaos,” she said of her experience launching a company while parenting young children with her husband. “I felt like I had found what I was looking for and I could sink my teeth into it.”

It seems that a lot of American women have decided that it is their time to take the same dive. According to an analysis of new data on business creation from the Census Bureau conducted by the National Women’s Business Council, woman-owned businesses increased 27.5 percent between 2007 and 2012, adding 2.1 million to the total, outpacing the growth the 20 percent growth they saw in the five years before that. Women now run more than 36 percent of all businesses (that aren’t farms), up from just under 30 percent in 2007.

Businesses owned by men, meanwhile, just puttered along. They grew less than 6 percent between 2002 and 2007 and less than 8 percent between 2007 and 2012.

And companies run by women now employ 8.9 million people. In fact, the number of people working for a woman-owned business increased 19.5 percent, while it only increased 11.5 percent for those run by men.

The increases are even more dramatic for businesses started by women of color like Kapoor Collins, who is Indian American. Businesses owned by black women increased 67.5 percent between 2007 and 2012, versus less than 19 percent growth for those started by black men. Nearly 60 percent of all businesses run by a black person are now run by women. Hispanic women saw an even bigger gain, as their businesses increased more than 87 percent in the same time period compared to about 39 percent growth for Hispanic men. And those run by Asian American women grew 44 percent, compared to 25 percent for Asian American men.

Of course there are still far more companies run by men. The total came to nearly 15 million as of 2012, compared to 9.9 million owned by women.

And money can be a concern. Kapoor Collins has experienced funding hurdles firsthand. When she decided to launch a new product that helps politicians and nonprofits fundraise, she needed funding herself to get it up and running. Two things got in her way, though: one is the time demand of fundraising for someone with young children, and the other was plain sexism. “Men give to men, they raise from each other and give to each other,” she said. “It’s an old boys’ network. As a woman, it’s hard to tap into that.” In the end she decided to have her company fund the project itself.

It’s a well-known problem that women struggle to raise money. They only net 13 percent of of venture capital funding and get less than 5 percent of government contracts. Business school students are four times more likely to recommend investing in a company led by a man, something that holds true even with the exact same pitch.

And once they get up and running, women’s businesses can struggle to bring in the big bucks. The vast majority of companies they own bring in less than $25,000 in receipts and companies that size saw the highest rate of growth. Just 1.8 percent make it past the $1 million revenue mark, compared to 6.3 percent owned by men.

Still, Kapoor Collins thinks the trend of women starting companies will only continue thanks to the visibility of female businesswomen like Facebook’s Sheryl Sandberg and Yahoo’s Marissa Mayer. “Women can’t be what we can’t see,” she said. But things have changed. “Mentorship is on the rise, contributing to more women doing and starting businesses.”

And her message to any woman who might be considering making that move herself: jump in. “The worst thing you can do is to not do it,” she said.

This blog originally appeared at ThinkProgress.org on August 20, 2015. Reprinted with permission.

About the Author: Bryce Covert is the Economic Policy Editor for ThinkProgress. She was previously editor of the Roosevelt Institute’s Next New Deal blog and a senior communications officer. She is also a contributor for The Nation and was previously a contributor for ForbesWoman. Her writing has appeared on The New York Times, The New York Daily News, The Nation, The Atlantic, The American Prospect, and others. She is also a board member of WAM!NYC, the New York Chapter of Women, Action & the Media.


Share this post

Obama Admin Blocks Two Workplace Safety Regulations, Pleasing Big Business

Share this post

Mike ElkLast month, President Obama wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal calling for “a government-wide review of the rules already on the books to remove outdated regulations that stifle job creation and make our economy less competitive.”

The announcement by Obama to eliminate burdensome regulation was seen as dramatic tilt to the right for the White House, which is increasingly pro-business. Others, though, dismissed the move as mere posturing that would not seriously affect workers. But since calling for the regulatory review, the Obama Administration has done away with  several proposed workplace safety regulations that have upset worker safety advocates.

Earlier this week, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration  announced it was delaying (or stopping, as many advocates claimed) implementation of a set of proposed regulations on ergonomics. Work-related musculoskeletal disorders remain the leading cause of workplace injury and illness in this country,” stated OSHA Chief Dr. David Michaels in a press release. “However, it is clear that the proposal has raised concern among small businesses, so OSHA is facilitating an active dialogue between the agency and the small business community.”

The proposed regulation would have forced firms to count ergonomic injuries—also known as musculoskeletal disorder injuries (MSDs)—in statistics provided to OSHA . The push to merely count ergonomic injuries as part of workplace injury statistics was considered to be the compromise over regulating ergonomic injuries more broadly. Advocates had tried to bring tougher Clinton-era workplace safety laws, but settled on counting the MSD injuries as the compromise.

Workplace advocates hoped that being able to point to companies where a high amount of workers were suffering from ergonomic injuries would allow them to hold companies accountable. Now they will lack even the ability to shame corporations using government-published statistics.

Ergonomic injuries such as carpal tunnel syndrome and strained backs are agrowing problem, as more Americans wind up working in offices. Federal data shows that MSDs injuries “accounted for 28 percent of all workplace injuries and illnesses” that forced workers to miss time from the job.

Previously, there had been regulations on the books during the Clinton Administration to at least monitor and to offer minor protections to workers from such injuries. However, in 2001, a Republican-led Congress eliminated most ergonomic regulations. This was followed by eliminating the counting of ergonomic injuries by the Bush-era OSHA in 2003.

Many labor observers say OSHA’s decision not to regulate MSD workplace injuries shows that the Obama administration is slowly shifting away from its focus on tougher regulation of workplace safety. The decision to delay implementation of rules to regulate MSD workplace injuries follows a decision in mid-January by OSHA to write a rule regulating extreme noise on the job, which affects the hearing of many who work in the construction and manufacturing industries.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the National Association of Manufacturers had advocated against the proposal and in a letter to the new chairman of the House oversight committee, Rep. Darrell Issa (R., Calif.), called for celebrating its demise. As chairman of the House Oversight Committee, Issa has threatened to investigate such regulations, which has scared many administration officials who do not want to get caught in bureaucratic wrangling.

Those in the business community saw the defeat of these two regulations as a sign of their growing influence with the Department of Labor and OSHA. “We hope that these first two steps are a signal to the business community, and employers in general, that OSHA will â€stop, look and listen,’” Joe Trauger, vice president of human resources policy for the National Association of Manufacturers told the Hill newspaper.

People in organized labor are upset about the proposed regulation being withdrawn. “All of these actions are coming because of the November elections and the fierce business opposition to anything,” said Peg Seminario, the AFL-CIO’s director of health and safety. “Just because the Chamber of Commerce and other business groups scream doesn’t mean there is a legitimate reason to retreat. There are real negative impacts here that can harm workers.”

The ability of corporate forces to stop the implementation of these rules may signal the ability of big business to block or water down other rules protecting workers. One has to wonder: Will the elimination of such regulations actually save any jobs, as the president seems to believe? Or will their elimination hurt workers’ lives?

*This post originally appeared in Working In These Times on Feb 3, 2010. Reprinted with permission.

About the Author: Mike Elk is a third-generation union organizer who has worked for the United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers, the Campaign for America’s Future, and the Obama-Biden campaign. He has appeared as a commentator on CNN, Fox News, and NPR, and writes frequently for In These Times, Huffington Post, Alternet, and Truthout.


Share this post

The Consultants Have No Clothes

Share this post

Image: Bob RosnerThis week’s blog should get me in a lot of trouble. But I think it’s time that someone points out that many of the biggest business consultants, authors and speakers run really crappy businesses of their own.

Okay, I’ve heard all the jokes about consultants. All go basically down the same path—a consultant is someone who borrows your watch and then tells you what time it is. But this is someone much worse. I’ve discovered that many of the biggest advisors to business run shops that are much more poorly managed than many of the corporations that pay them such lofty fees.

Ironic isn’t it?

Take consultant number one—I’ve confided the real names to my editor, but dear reader you’ll have to give me some slack here, because these guys are my colleagues, and in some cases my friends.

Consultant number one has had a series of best selling books, he commands top dollar on the speakers circuit and chances are that you’ve heard or seen him at one time during your career. He is so volatile that he is barely able to hold on to staff for more than a year. He says he’s a great listener, but his staff says to me that he yells far too much to ever hear a word they say. His office might as well have a revolving door on it.

Consultant number two is one of the nicest guys you’ll ever meet. But his company is remarkably dysfunctional. Its top leadership seems to change with the seasons. More than any other, this company almost seems to be dedicated to violating every principal that it espouses in its publications and presentations with its own people. It is a rudderless, often contradictory and cruel place that talks about sharing the credit but seldom does.

Consultant number three has built a company with some of the lowest morale anywhere. It’s hard to sort out where the battle lines are worse, in the executive suites or in the trenches. At one point I actually got to see some of the company’s internal survey results and couldn’t imagine that any of this company’s customers own results were that pathetic. Employees felt that management was more likely to knife them in the back then pat them on it. Although there was a lot of talk about values, the organization seems to only hold one value dear, and that is making the sale.

Woody Allen once said that those who can, do. And those who can’t, teach. Clearly those who really can’t do something become top-priced consultants.

So what can we do about this? I’m not suggesting that anyone throw out the baby with the bathwater. Each of these three people I referred to above has an important message and strategies to share. I just believe that corporations need to do a better job of due diligence with the messengers it picks before it starts ramming the fad of the week down its own people’s throats.

Look at each possible vendor as a little laboratory for their own principals. Ask for proof that they eat their own dog food and practice the very principals that they are foisting on you, and the rest of the business world.

Many of you are probably saying to yourself that this doesn’t really matter. It all goes back to the “Hawthorne Effect”, remember, that’s where a company turned up its lights and found that productive increased. Then when productivity stabilized they tried turning the lights down and found—like magic—that productivity magically increased again. The lesson, is that over the short haul almost anything you do can potentially increase productivity.

So Corporate America do your homework. Just because someone is a brand name, don’t assume that their principles work in the real world. That’s the bad news. The good news, is that the due diligence isn’t that hard to do. You just have to take the pulse of the employees who work for the company you are thinking about hiring. Ask to see recently survey results and staff turnover rates. I can guarantee that often you’ll be surprised by what you find.

About the Author: Bob Rosner is a best-selling author and award-winning journalist. For free job and work advice, check out the award-winning workplace911.com. Check the revised edition of his Wall Street Journal best seller, “The Boss’s Survival Guide.” If you have a question for Bob, contact him via bob@workplace911.com.


Share this post

Why Today’s Workplace Readers Should Think About Attending The ROI of Great Workplaces Conference

Share this post

You found this blog, or return to it, because you’re interested in workplace rights and employers that follow the law to a tee, right?  Well, you’ll find the latest, best information on both and meet some dynamic business contacts to boot at Winning Workplaces’ 2009 annual event that will be held in Chicago on October 1-2.  We’re calling it the ROI of Great Workplaces Conference.

Click here to:

  • View event summary
  • Add event to your calendar
  • Watch a short highlights reel from our 2008 conference
  • View fees and agenda (note that the agenda is still coming together)
  • Learn about the location
  • Book your room at the event hotel at the special Winning Workplaces rate

Besides the short video of last year’s conference at the above link, you can get a sense of what attendees experienced by checking out my photo recaps on our blog here and here.

Here’s more incentive to attend: Be one of the first 100 people to register and get $100 off your registration.  Just click here and enter coupon code FRSTHUND when prompted.

Some of my favorite moments at this event happen when I meet new business people in between sessions.  This was the case last year when I was finally able to meet and sit down with your host on this blog, Paula Brantner.  I hope I’ll be able to do the same with you this year.

Register now for this event.

About the Author: Mark Harbeke ensures that content on Winning Workplaces’ website is up-to-date, accurate and engaging. He also writes and edits their monthly e-newsletter, Ideas, and provides graphic design and marketing support. His experience includes serving as editorial assistant for Meredith Corporation’s Midwest Living magazine title, publications editor for Visionation, Ltd., and proofreader for the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy. Mark holds a bachelor’s degree in journalism from Drake University. Winning Workplaces is a not-for-profit providing consulting, training and information to help small and midsize organizations create great workplaces. Too often, the information and resources needed to create a high-performance workplace are out of reach for all but the largest organizations. Winning Workplaces is changing that by offering employers affordable consulting, training and information.


Share this post

Michael Steele and the Demise of Working America

Share this post

Back in April 2009, GOP chairman Michael Steele appeared as a guest on a republican-oriented talk radio show. A caller to the program voiced his opinion and stated he did not believe the U.S. is in a state of economic crisis. Steele laughed in agreement and claimed that “[t]he malls are just as packed on Saturday.”

San Rafael, California is located 20 minutes north of the Golden Gate Bridge along U.S. Highway 101. With a population of approximately 50,000, it retains the flavor of a small town without sacrificing any of the amenities you’ll find in the most sophisticated of communities.

Nearly every week for the last six months, as I drive along “Mainstreet” on my way to work, I’ve noticed a new storefront that has gone vacant. These are not the vacant addresses that once housed “Old Navy” or “The House of Knives;” and 4th Avenue is not a strip mall. These were shops and boutiques that operated and prospered for the last 20 or more years by catering to the desires and whims of what had been one of the most prosperous communities in the nation. But ever since the mask was removed from Bush’s depression last summer, many of these privileged professionals are finding themselves squeezed financially in the same wringer as the rest of America’s middle class has been for quite some time. As a result, one by one, these shops are falling by the wayside.

The American economy we see today is the end-result of political policies that have been transforming American society for the past 30 years. Based on slogans such as privatization, de-regulation, free trade, out-sourcing, “conservatism,” tax reform, and right to work, legislators have been giving American business what it wants since the days of President Regan. They have turned this country into a place that no longer resembles the country it was when I grew up in the 1950’s and 1960’s.

San Rafael, CA is a long way from Flint, Michigan, the town where I grew up.

Flint was never a place that you would mistake as being a center of sophisticated culture. It had always been a blue-collar town. But in its own way, it had once been a pretty prosperous place. Flint was probably the first urban center in America to feel the crunch created by those economic and business policies that destroyed industrial America. You could say that Flint had been America’s canary in a cage, because that town began dying in the 1970’s.

Type the words “Flint Michigan” into your browser or into the search bar over at You Tube. Take a look at what conservatism has done to America. Flint residents living next door to an abandoned property are now able to purchase that property for $1.00. The city will come in, demolish and remove any existing building on that property and fill in the holes. Thereafter, the new owner only needs to keep the property looking presentable. Another strategy being used is to provide incentives for residents in out-lying areas of the city to move in closer to the city center, so that city services can be discontinued to the abandoned areas.

In the wake of the policies listed above, community after community across America have been pushed over the brink of the same slippery slope as Flint, Michigan was abandoned to years ago when business (General Motors) moved out. Michael Steele’s words prove he remains as ignorant of where America stands today as John McCain was during his failed presidential bid, and Steele’s words are just as irrelevant as is the Republican party. The trouble is, that leaves America with only one other political party. From the looks of it, the Democrats have been cowed for so long by their minority status that following their return to a leadership position, they immediately bowed the knee to the masters of corporate Amerika. That being the case, I can’t see how we’ll ever emerge from the wreckage that’s been left behind.


Share this post

Subscribe For Updates

Sign Up:

* indicates required

Recent Posts

Forbes Best of the Web, Summer 2004
A Forbes "Best of the Web" Blog

Archives

  • Tracking image for JustAnswer widget
  • Find an Employment Lawyer

  • Support Workplace Fairness

 
 

Find an Employment Attorney

The Workplace Fairness Attorney Directory features lawyers from across the United States who primarily represent workers in employment cases. Please note that Workplace Fairness does not operate a lawyer referral service and does not provide legal advice, and that Workplace Fairness is not responsible for any advice that you receive from anyone, attorney or non-attorney, you may contact from this site.