The Generation Game
| Published date | 01 September 2007 |
| Date | 01 September 2007 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/14754390780001002 |
| Pages | 3-3 |
| Author | David Conroy |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour |
3
Volume 6 Issue 6 September/October 2007
STRATEGIC COMMENTARY
,
Thought leaders share their views on the HR profession and
its direction for the future
DEPARTMENTS AT A GLANCE
STRATEGIC COMMENTARY
,
METRICS
,
HOW TO…
,
PRACTITIONER PROFILE
Q&A
HR AT WORK
REWARDS
,
RESEARCH AND RESULTS
,
,
,
,
C
ompanies and their employees have
been playing the generation game
for many years – for generations, in
fact. However,while employees are now
playing an entirely different game, many
employers areunfortunately still
bumbling along playing the old one.
The younger generation previously
entered the job market looking for a
good employer offering a decent salary,
solid pension and long-termcareer
prospects. Now that generation wants a
portfolio career spanning many
employers and is much moreinterested
in the highly competitive cash elements
of the package and less in the notion of
“benefit value,” particularly as pension
values seem to be plummeting.
Previously, middle-aged middle
managers werecontent to be hunkered
down in the organization doing the
unsung heavy lifting tasks essential to all
organizations, while stoically hanging on
and trying to avoid their careers being
dashed on the rocks of “de-layering” and
“right-sizing”. As a result, their loyalty
and dedication has been eroded, with
half of these managers now thinking of
leaving their employers. As for the oldest
generation, many arenow fully
committed “roadies” (retired on active
duty) completely switched off from their
jobs and desperate to cash in on their
final salary pension plans.
1
How to play the new game
Not all employers seem to have caught on
to these changes in the generation game.
Those that have aregenerally behind and
are working frantically to catch up. The
rules of the old game stated that one size
fits all, reward strategies were the main
focus, and base salary was king. Benefits
were patronizingly bestowed upon the
grateful workforce like gifts and
administered assiduously.
The rules of the new game mean that
employers have to understand the
different characteristics of their workforce
–not just by generation but also by key
employee segments associated with and
aligned to the business strategy. Some
employers have made progress in this
direction but have focused their analysis
on generic concepts such as job families,
skill sets or geographies. This is a start,
but moresuccess will come from
understanding how groups of employees
contribute to and impact on the business.
For example, it would be of enormous
benefit if companies could identify the
employee segments that areperformance
drivers – that is, those that:
• create competitive advantage;
• support and leverage
competitive advantage; and
• have created competitive advantage in
the past, but whose skills are still
needed to maintain the legacy parts of
the business.
Targeted people strategies could then be
developed for these employee segments
that recognize and address their needs. In
particular,differentiated reward initiatives
could be designed and introduced to
ensure close alignment between value to
the business and rewardand recognition.
Increasingly, there is a need for employers
to think like employees and manage the
reward package as a whole proposition.
This means focusing on total cash
compensation rather than just base, and
promoting the concept of total
remuneration linking benefits with cash.
Effective communication of the whole
deal is necessaryto engage the individual,
including showing commitment to career
and work/life balance issues.
In the new game, the rules of
work/life balance areparticularly hard
for employers to grasp. Employees are
now looking for moreflexible
approaches to whereand when they
work, such as the results only work
environment (ROWE) programs in North
America that enable employees to work
wherever and whenever they wish as
long as the work gets done. Most
employers still prefer to see their
employees chained to their desks for 50
to 70 hours per week, however.
So what should companies do to start
catching up with their employees in this
new game? The first step is to understand
the world from the employees’
perspective. Employers have always been
very good at seeing things from their
own point of view and have, for some
time, accepted the need to take cost into
account, particularly where change is
involved. What really needs to be done is
for all three perspectives of employer,
employee and cost to be considered.
2
This way,companies can at least begin to
see the new playing field and be better
prepared to compete. Game on.
References
1.“Managing the Middle,”Mercer Survey, September 2007
2.“Striking the Right Balance – Total Rewards That Work:The Three
Perspectives,”Mercer Point of View Paper,2004
The generation game
David Conroy of Mercer discusses the expectations of today’s workforce. David Conroy
is a principal at Mercer
Human Resource Consulting
and leads its Reward Group
in the UK. He also
coordinates the Mercer consulting capability
across Europe.
© Melcrum publishing 2007.For more information visit our website www.melcrum.com or e-mail info@melcrum.com
To continue reading
Request your trial