HRExaminer Radio is a weekly show devoted to Recruiting and Recruiting Technology airing live on Friday’s at 11AM Pacific

HRExaminer Radio

Episode: 20
Air Date: May 24, 2013
Guest: Bryan Chaney

Bryan Chaney is an experienced global leader in recruitment and employment branding. He was most recently the manager of Global Social Media Strategy for Talent Acquisition at Aon. Bryan’s strategic global recruiting strategies have helped funnel talent for offices in the US, India, the UK, and Canada.

Before joining Aon, Bryan worked in recruitment, technology, and marketing, gaining insights into the marketing of hiring, the importance of technology, and the buying process candidates engage in when applying for jobs. Learn more at http://about.me/bryanchaney.

• Subscribe in iTunes
• Downloadable MP3 File HRExaminer Radio Bryan Chaney Episode 20

This Week's Articles

Feature: Depression and Work Depression accounts for an estimated $83 billion per year in lost productivity. Your company can’t afford to ignore or mismanage depressed employees. Read Now »

Big Data, Hip-hop and Zombies I bet you’re wondering how Big Data intersects with Hip Hop, Zombies and HR. Victorio Milian covers all the plot twists as he discusses how to avoid strategic blind spots when using Big Data. Read Now »

The Fair Market Value of Employees “Innovation and growth come from the discretionary effort of the workers – not the investment in capital on the production floor. The company’s real value is its employees.” – Paul Hebert Read Now »

HRExaminer Radio: Episode #19: Linda Brenner John interviews Linda Brenner, an expert on Talent Management and Acquisition. Linda ran talent management efforts for global companies before consulting for clients sporting household names at Designs on Talent. Read Now »

Getting to the Future: The Double Bind HR and Recruiting leaders are routinely subjected to the requirement to maintain the status quo while imagining some sort of future. The very existence of the function depends on succeeding at both. Sadly, it’s a double bind. Read Now »

Events and More

• HRExaminer Radio : Industry News and Commentary with guests. Fridays at 11am pacific (2pm EDT):
  • Today's Show May 24, 2013: Bryan Chaney
• iRecruit Expo (Amsterdam, June 20-21) The premier European Recruiting event. Sumser session on day two
• Social Recruiting Strategies Conference (Chicago, July 23-25) Sumser Keynote
• The HR Technology Conference (Las Vegas, Oct. 7-9, 2013) The HR Tech Industry’s town hall with Bill Kutik and cohost Steve Boese
• HRTech Europe (Amsterdam, Oct 24-25)

HR and Recruiting leaders are routinely subjected to the requirement to maintain the status quo while imagining some sort of future. The very existence of the function depends on succeeding at both. Sadly, it’s a double bind.

The way that we work is changing. It won’t happen all at once. It won’t apply to everyone. But, we’re in the transition from industrial age ideas to the next thing (whatever you want to call it.)

The change is coming towards us at an astonishing, geometric rate. Human beings have the demonstrated capacity to change with a culture that is growing at 10% or 20%. There is little evidence to suggest that we know how to handle change that comes this fast.

Essentially, we are in a time when the next new thing emerges before you’ve had time to learn the last one. In some cultures, like tech and biotech startups, people develop the skills to surf from one wave of change to the next. There are some bits of geography (LA, San Francisco, Austin, Seattle, New York) where the indigenous culture supports high rates of change.

Most of us live and work in places that prefer stability and slow change. The fast stuff is hard and mistake laden. The slow stuff is comfortable.

The question is what do you do as an individual, a company or an industry to grapple with the change.

HR is a conservative function. It focuses its work on the maintenance and incremental improvement of the status quo. That means that great HR leaders and professionals have a very difficult time thinking about the future. There is little effort expended on five or ten year planning anywhere in HR.

Unfortunately, we’re in the middle of a time that rewards agility and punishes the status quo.`

Gregory Bateson, the fabled systems thinker, psychologist and anthropologist first articulated the idea of the double bind in the 1950s. A double bind is a situation in which a person receives two conflicting messages. Succeeding at one negates the possibility of success at the other. A double bind produces crushing levels of stress when the individual is not allowed to make the decision to favor one over the other.

HR and Recruiting leaders are routinely subjected to the requirement to maintain the status quo while imagining some sort of future. The very existence of the function depends on succeeding at both. Sadly, it’s a double bind.

Sustained immersion in a double bind produces psychosis. Since getting the fires put out is a sure way to not get fired today, that’s where the energy gets channeled. The future (or the long term viability of the HR Function) remains untended.

Failing to imagine and plan for the inevitably rapid changes means that HR will become reactive to the point of extinction.

Meanwhile, the technology industry, which has precious few actual HR practitioners and execs in it, continues to produce new tools and objects that seem to do something. The hype accelerates while the functionality contains less and less innovation. Without a clear view of the actual value that HR can and should produce, new offering involve the deep automation of smaller and smaller things.

Both sides favor transactions in their technology because transactions can be measured and checked off. The deeper harder work involves thinking, reflection and an implicit condemnation of the status quo.

No one seems to be looking after than right now.

Paul Hebert | Founding Member, HRExaminer Editorial Advisory Board

From The Archives

by Paul Hebert

We continue to hear the C-Suite talk about employees as their most important asset.  Expensive placques line mahogany walls all over corporate America engraved with the company’s commitment to its associates, employees, team members, (insert buzz word for worker here).

Everyone talks the talk when it comes to the employees being the fuel that drives the engine of profit.

We are in a new business age right?  We’ve moved from the Industrial Age to the Knowledge Age.  We’re supposed be working in a new economic model where what’s between the ears of employees is more important than the machine in front of them.  Innovation and growth come from the discretionary effort of the workers – not the investment in capital on the production floor.  The company’s real value is its employees.

Except it still isn’t.

Stock prices can increase after layoffs. Investors see layoffs as the company getting more aggressive with costs  – making investors happy, and in many cases, the C-Suite rich.

Would investors think it’s a good idea if Ford suddenly announced it was removing the robots that make cars?  Would investors think it wise if google started shutting down its massive server farms?  Probably not.  Those assets drive the businesses.

Unfortunately for HR – employees are still viewed as a cost item – 0n the balance sheet, and in the minds of most managers and executives.

Costs are something you want less of – not more of.

What if you could put a value on the employees – a real value – one you could list on your balance sheet as an asset?  What if you could show some sort of positive relationship between those “expenses,” called employees, and the stock value everyone on Wall Street is so interested in?

It’s possible  if we treat employee value like brand value?

Brand Valuation – A Short History

Marketing departments spend a lot of money building and supporting a brand.  Brands are expensive – and they are valuable.  And they are intangible, just like employee value.

Valuing a Brand

According to BrandChannel.com the history of determining “brand value” sprung from a wave of acquisitions in the late 1980s. In the process of establishing a “selling price” for a company, finance folks were having a hard time valuing and accounting for the “goodwill” associated with the brands the company owned.  In some cases a buyer is really more interested in the brand than the hard assets such as machinery or property. But how do you determine the price of a brand?

In the early 80s accounting practices and financial reports had no way to put a number on what a branded company was worth over and above the traditional tangible assets and earnings,

But they found a way…

Once the challenge was set, many companies stepped up.  Rankings for brand financial value can now be had through Interbrand;Millward Brown BrandZ;Credit Suisse Great Brands.  One can estimate brand equity with Equitrend. And for those of us on the cutting edge of social marketing – you can measure brand word-of-mouth buzz/promoting through McKinsey or the Net Promoter Score.

Whenever money – big money – is at stake, the market finds a solution.  Brands are big money.  Brand values can make up a sizeable portion of a company’s stock value.

Ask yourself what McDonald’s be without its brand – or Coca-Cola?

For the Real Thing – 50% less valuable.  For McDonalds, about 70%.

The contribution the Coca-Cola “brand name” has to shareholder value is about 50%.  As of May 18 Coca-Cola is trading at roughly $75 a share – without the “brand” it would be trading at $37 a share.  The brand makes a big difference.

HR needs to find its Interbrand.

Brands – and the marketing expenses that create them have value.  And the smart people in the marketing and finance world have figured out how to put a real number (or a sorta real number) on brand value – the intangible value a brand has on a company’s stock price.

Why Can’t HR?

How did marketing (and their financial friends) find a way to link their expenditures to the balance sheet and the price of the stock?  They played ball with the folks that do the books and learned their language.  They told them that marketing is not a cost but an investment in branding.  And branding has value.

If McDonald’s came out tomorrow and said it was cutting marketing by 50% to reduce cost and be more strategic the markets would pummel the stock.  Investors know that 70% of their investment is related to marketing efforts.  Reducing marketing for McDonald’s would be the same as reducing manufacturing at Ford.  Those things drive business value.

HR Needs To Create Their Own Equity Model

This is not a new idea.  I’ve found discussions and white papers on the web discussing the how to value employees as assets on the books.  But unless someone finds a way to connect the dots, promote it – and show that it works – HR will be relegated to admin tasks and making sure HRSA forms are completed.

Who should take up this challenge?  Who should spend money to develop a model – or models – of Employee Equity that can finally be discussed side-by-side with brand equity?

SHRM of course.

They are uniquely positioned to provide the oversight and the money to give HR what it needs most:  Value on the balance sheet.

Other Resources:

Value Drivers Intangible Assets: Do We Need a New Approach to Financial and Management Accounting? (http://www.juergendaum.com/articles/IA_Controlling__e.pdf )

Are Employees Intangible Assets? (http://smallbusiness.chron.com/employees-intangible-assets-44349.html )

Employee Value: An Accounting Paradox (http://www.newwork.com/Pages/Opinion/Raynor/Employee%20Value.html )

Putting the People Component of the Business Entity on the Balance Sheet (http://donaldhtaylor.files.wordpress.com/2007/03/puttinghumanassetsonthebalancesheet.pdf )

Exploring the HRM/Accounting interface on human assets:  The case for artefact-based asset recognition criteria ( http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1852536&show=html )

Valuing Brands and Brand Equity:  Methods and Processes (http://www.huizenga.nova.edu/Jame/articles/brand-equity.cfm)

Brand Valuation:  The financial value of brands. (http://www.brandchannel.com/papers_review.asp?sp_id=357 )

Victorio Milian, HRExaminer.com Editorial Advisory Board Contributor

BIG DATA

Big Data is (broadly) the concept of organizations harnessing massive data sets to achieve competitive advantage in the marketplace. Due to a number of interrelated factors (computing power becoming cheaper, more items gathering and transmitting data,  companies looking to exploit this potential service), it’s a subject of interest for many. Proponents discuss the possibility of data being used to identify candidates for hard to fill roles, to quantify and optimize the Human Resources profession, and to provide consumers with goods and services more in-line with their needs. (Here is a Big Data overview from an earlier HR Examiner post that’s worth reading.)

All of these objectives make sense. For businesses, any tool or practice that allows people to work smarter (and earn a profit) is welcome. For many organizations, large repositories of potentially useful data already exist. Any system of record that a company utilizes (such as its payroll system or HRIS) contains data that may be mined. The capacity and disciplinary processes needed to implement Big Data concepts (such as data collecting, quality control, reporting, and analysis) may also already exist. This means that an organization may just need a shift in strategy and tactics (as opposed to investments in resources, human and otherwise) in order to put Big Data practices in play.

But instead of providing an explicit roadmap by which you can exploit Big Data concepts, I want to discuss strategic blind spots to avoid. With that, I want to talk first about hip-hop.

HIP-HOP

Hip-hop is a popular American music genre, with many artists and companies consistently earning significant profits off of the music. What many may not know is that in its early years, hip-hop was unpopular amongst mainstream listeners. In addition, most major labels didn’t have artists on their rosters, believing them to be unmarketable. This includes acts such as (Rock and Roll Hall of Fame inductees) Run-D.M.C., now recognized as one of the greatest musical acts in American history, as well as the first hip-hop artists to have their video played on MTV.

A story tells of Russell Simmons, co-founder of the pioneering hip-hop record label Def Jam, trying to convince an executive team from Adidas to sign Run-D.M.C. to a sneaker contract. He brought them to a club where they were performing. Run then told the crowd to “take their Adidas off and wave them in the air!” The vast majority of the kids in attendance did so, as the group were well known to wear them. They got the contract and Run-D.M.C. became the first non-athletes to sign an exclusive sneaker deal, valued at $1.5 million.

Now on to zombies…

ZOMBIES

World War Z is a book written by Max Brooks. It’s fashioned in the style of a United Nations report, where the protagonist interviews key figures as zombies are eliminating humanity. While the subject can be dismissed as unrealistic, if you substitute the word “avian flu” (or any number of other potential epidemics) for “zombie,” then you’ll see why this book is a fun, yet anxiety causing, read.

During one interview, the protagonist talks to an Israeli intelligence officer named Jurgen Warmbrunn. Jurgen discusses how the state of Israel avoided being overrun by zombies, where others (including the United States) did not.

He states:

“In October of 1973, when the Arab sneak attack almost drove us into the Mediterranean, we had all the intelligence in front of us, all the warning signs, and we had simply “dropped the ball.” From 1973 onward, if nine intelligence analysts came to the same conclusion, it was the duty of the tenth to disagree (emphasis mine).”

In essence, the Israeli intelligence community emphasized the need for skepticism in the face of consensus. Even when the data seems to unanimously point to a certain conclusion, you must dig deeper to confirm that it’s valid. In the case of World War Z, this skepticism allows the Israeli government to take appropriate steps to save its citizens.

BLIND SPOTS

In my hip-hop example, having vast organizational resources and capabilities did nothing for record executives when it came to identifying hip-hop’s marketability. The art form’s perception at the time (urban youth music) hid the opportunity for labels to get their foot in the door early, allowing companies like Def Jam (and pioneers such as Russell Simmons and Rick Rubin) to claim early market share. In World War Z, zombies are a metaphor for how groups can be incapable of recognizing and adjusting to threats, in spite of the vast wealth of intelligence available.

In both cases, blind spots were at work.

Organizational strategies regarding the application of Big Data can allow for better decision making. However, it cannot substitute for the ability to see opportunities beyond itself. Big Data is not a substitute for quality analysis.

On its own, Big Data won’t sell your product or service. And it won’t save you from zombies.

The important thing to understand is that HR is not in a position to make the determination as to whether someone is depressed, or whether the depression is potentially protected as a disability.

One in four adults in the US suffers from some form of mental illness, mostly depression and anxiety disorders. 11% of Americans take an antidepressant. Chances are, someone you work with is depressed.

The cost of depression in lost productivity and health care has been estimated at $83 billion per year. Depression is the primary cause of suicide. More people kill themselves in the US than die in car wrecks.

Yet, depression often is not diagnosed or treated. Men are especially hesitant to get treatment because they perceive it as a sign of weakness.

Employees would rather quit than have the stigma of taking leave for mental illness. (David Mowry has written an excellent essay on attorneys and mental illness in House Rules: A Time Out.)

Many self-medicate with alcohol and other drugs, which just compounds the problem.

So it’s likely that you are dealing with depressed employees at work. It may even be the boss.

Is Depression Covered Under the ADA?

Depression can be a disability covered by the ADA that requries reasonable accommodation, but not always. It must be a mental impairment that substantially limits a major life activity.

Short term or situational depression probably does not rise to the level of a disability. But a long-term or major depressive disorder will. For more information on when depression becomes a disability, see the EEOC Enforcement Guidance on the ADA and Psychiatric Disabilities.

If the person is also addicted to drugs or alcohol, the ADA can be triggered as well. Addiction to illegal drugs is not protected because, well, you can’t have a law that protects illegal behavior. But addiction to prescription drugs and alcohol can be covered. But even if the form of addiction is covered, the only “reasonable accommodation” an employer can make is time off for treatment. The employer doesn’t have to allow someone to drink at work, or come in late because she’s hungover.

Similarly, an accommodation for depression usually involves time off for treatment. It can also involve reduced hours, or responsibilities, or a change of position.

But it is very difficult to know when you are dealing with a depressed employee who needs help, instead of someone who doesn’t want to work there, or is just going through a rough couple weeks.

Is Depression Covered by FMLA?

Depression is a serious health condition that can qualify for Family Medical Leave. Again, it depends on the severity and the need for time off for therapy, medical appointments, or to adjust to medication.

Work with an employee’s physician or therapist to figure out what the employee needs. Then allow time off or intermittent leave.

The rules and procedures for ADA, FMLA, and the corresponding state versions differ. So always check all the procedures and requirements when dealing with leave related to a disability or serious medical condition.

What Does Depression Look Like?

Often someone who is depressed doesn’t even know it. Instead, they think they are coming down with something, or just can’t focus. Not everyone who is depressed goes to bed and doesn’t get out. Often depression shows up as anxiety or panic. Some of the symptoms listed by the Mayo Clinic include:

• Feelings of sadness or unhappiness
• Irritability or frustration, even over small matters
• Insomnia or excessive sleeping
• Changes in appetite — depression often causes decreased appetite and weight loss, but in some people it causes increased cravings for food and weight gain
• Indecisiveness, distractibility and decreased concentration
• Fatigue, tiredness and loss of energy — even small tasks may seem to require a lot of effort
• Feelings of worthlessness or guilt, fixating on past failures or blaming yourself when things aren’t going right
• Trouble thinking, concentrating, making decisions and remembering things
• Unexplained physical problems, such as back pain or headaches

Who doesn’t feel like that sometimes?

So basically, you are dealing with a problem that may require medical help and legal protection, but the symptoms are often confusing and contradictory, and the person may not even know she is depressed.

What to Do.

Look for changes in behavior and performance. When a good employee is suddenly missing deadlines or absent more, look further.

Ask the person if she is depressed. Suggest she see her doctor or a therapist to explore why she’s not feeling or doing well.

Give depressed employees time to get treatment.

Monitor their performance and hold employees accountable for their work within the recommendations of their doctor or therapist.

Maintain the employees’ confidentiality, and ask only for the information you need to comply with the leave policies or law.

The important thing to understand is that HR is not in a position to make the determination as to whether someone is depressed, or whether the depression is potentially protected as a disability. The employee and his therapist or physician are the ones who determine whether the condition is severe enough to require leave. Then HR and the legal department can make sure that the laws get followed.

But next time an employee is having problems at work, consider whether they need help for depression. You may save an employee. You may even save a life.