You're not the only one who's concerned about the state of the economy. In a global survey of CEOs by PricewaterhouseCoopers, only 21 percent of CEOs are very confident about the growth prospects for their companies in 2009.
In response to the weakening economy, look for CEOs to hunker down by attempting to maximize returns from existing markets, rather than expanding into new ones. In the short-term, CEOs are working to maintain sources of credit, preserve revenue, use working capital more effectively, and manage costs. Translation: Expect more layoffs to roll through the economy.
On a separate note, a survey of public opinion by PR firm, Edelman, shows that statements by corporate chiefs concerning their businesses are considered to be extremely or very credible by only 17 percent of respondents, a six-year low. It was hard to believe that anyone would spend more than $87,000 on an office area rug, as the former CEO of Merrill Lynch reportedly did.
At some time or another, you've probably been through a performance review at work. Hopefully, you got a well-deserved salary bump based on that assessment.
For decades, employers have sorted employees into various segments to recognize different levels of performance and to hand out "merit" pay increases. If they're honest about it, most managers will admit that they would rather clean the office refrigerator than conduct another performance review. And that aversion isn't always because they dislike the task, but because the process is broken in most companies.
Some academicians are now suggesting that merit-based pay programs don't improve employee or organizational performance. My reaction to this finding can be summed up in one word: Duh! You'd have to be living in a cave not to know that the paltry merit increases many organizations mete out won't sustain a person's motivation to go all out for any job.
Plus, in organizations that rely on pure merit increases, some people inevitably exhibit behavior that's beneficial to them, but detrimental to the team. What is interesting, though, are the ideas floating around to deal with the issue.
Jeffrey Pfeffer, a professor of organizational behavior at Stanford's Graduate School of Business, suggests that group bonuses, profit sharing plans, and other gain-sharing arrangements are more effective than the traditional merit pay strategy.
The stakes in how organizations handle merit pay are huge. Human resources executives help manage the $4.5 trillion that US companies spent on wages and salaries in 2008. And, they'll also have a say in how to divide up the $200 billion increase in wage and salary spending for 2009.
For most people, gain-sharing approaches to compensation seems obvious, but many organizations are stuck firmly in the past. Consultants have an opportunity to help clients see the benefits of alternative compensation approaches and the potential productivity gains that can result.
According to a report by the Anita Borg Institute for Women and Technology at Stanford University, almost one-third of women in high-tech careers plan to leave their current positions and look for other options because of frustration about barriers to their advancement.
The report also said that men are nearly three times more likely than women to attain high-level technical positions. Also, women make up an "increasingly smaller proportion of the workforce at every level" in technology firms.
It's not like women haven't been trying to make their marks in IT organizations. More than two-thirds of the women surveyed reported that they deliberately put off having children to pursue their careers. The result: Women in IT are skeptical that employers fairly reward work based on merit, and they believe that employers view them as "less technically competent" than their male counterparts.
You'd think IT executives would get a clue that they need to do a better job of keeping good people, especially women. Women make up 46 percent of the US workforce, and that number is growing. If you have IT clients with a talent shortage--or one looming on the horizon--take a look at how your clients help their professionals manage their careers.
And don't just stop once you learn about the "extensive retention" program most organizations claim to have. Those programs may look good on paper, but this problem is likely rooted in corporate culture and subtle behaviors that an HR mentoring program can't change. Organizations that address this issue will find themselves with one less strategic problem on their hands. But hard work lies ahead to get it done.
For most clients, finding the right consultant is a three-step process: Identify potential firms, assess the choices, and decide who to hire. An online survey of 220 professional services buyers conducted by the Economist Intelligence Unit reveals how clients are using a combination of referrals, online resources, and one-on-one interactions to help decide which provider they want.
The top three ways clients find service providers are: Peer and colleague recommendations (65 percent); existing contacts at professional firms (43 percent); and search engine inquiries (38 percent).
When clients need help, 67 percent of them consider the providers they've worked with in the past, but they also conduct research on others who may have the services and skills they need. As clients conduct that research, their opinions on providers are most influenced by one-on-one meetings (74 percent), provider web sites (41 percent), and case studies and white papers (39 percent).
For the majority of buyers, once they've narrowed their list to the finalists, the decision comes down to competence and expertise. For professional services providers, the news is good. Clients are actively engaging with online content and using search engines to find appropriate firms.
Keep your practice well-placed in the search rankings to give you the visibility you need to grab the attention of potential clients. But if you do attract them to your site, be sure your content supports your claims to competence or you'll lose those potential clients before you even have a chance to talk to them. Download the complete report for no charge.
Once you have a sales lead, it's easy to get swept up in the thrill of the moment. Even the most veteran consultants get excited when the chance for a new project or a new client presents itself.
As you proceed through the sales process, you'll find that one simple question, asked at just the right time, can open up your sales conversations and lead to new insights on the issue the client is facing.
That one question is the topic of this month's newsletter.
Enjoy the article, and let me know what you think.
As HR executives look at their options for outsourcing, many are opting for a selective or piecemeal approach, according to a study by Watson Wyatt.
The study of 182 US companies found that retirement plan administration tops the list of outsourced systems, while only 22 percent of companies outsource payroll.
In the years ahead, look for more organizations to evaluate their options for outsourcing health and welfare benefits administration. Expect less emphasis on the outsourcing of recruiting and performance management, which are considered more strategic processes for the growth of a business.
HR executives are continuing to push for more influential roles in their organizations. And selective outsourcing of the biggest administrative processes and systems can offer executives an opportunity to remake the role of HR.
What will be helpful for these executives is objective advice for managing large-scale outsourcing projects, and for transforming the HR services delivery model.
In July 2008, Spanish cyclist, Carlos Sastre, cruised to victory in the grueling, 23-day Tour de France race. Sastre won the 2,200 mile race in 87 hours, 52 minutes, and 52 seconds. The second place finisher, Cadel Evans of Australia, rode in 58 seconds behind the leader.
It's common for athletes to win events by razor-thin margins, and we're used to hearing and reading about such dramatic finishes. But the fact that many consulting sales are also won by a hair is not so well known.
If you ask consultants how they win the most competitive sales, often they will point to the small stuff like doing that extra client interview, verifying the facts two or even three times, and anticipating every possible client question. Sure, the overall project strategy must be solid, but what often makes the difference in a win is how you manage both the big and small stuff.
So when you're in the middle of a competitive sales process, ask yourself three simple questions:
Your answers to these questions will help uncover big and small issues. If you want to win consistently, ignore the common advice that tells us not to sweat the small stuff. Those details could just be your own 58-second lead.