Roderick Lewis now blogs at http://voiceofthejobseeker.blogspot.com . Please subscribe to this address to receive the latest in career advice and employment value proposition strategies.
Best regards,
Roderick Lewis
Saturday, August 6, 2011
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Hello! The Voice Of The Job Seeker has a new home.
Welcome to Voice Of The Job Seeker blog! The link is now moved to the following address: http://voiceofthejobseeker.blogspot.com/
Please go to that link to find the latest news and information about career management and employer branding.
Best regards,
Roderick Lewis
Please go to that link to find the latest news and information about career management and employer branding.
Best regards,
Roderick Lewis
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Would Mark Zuckerberg Apply For A Job Online?
I think we all know the answer to that question. Can any of the top global companies state without any doubt that their formal recruitment processes would have selected Mark Zuckerberg back in 2004 before he launched Facebook?
For someone so talented, it is a shame that the average large company would have probably screened him out with their automated selection tools and standard recruitment methods. It could be the résume that doesn't contain enough buzz words or the interview that goes wrong or the less-than-ideal test results of the aptitude test. There are as many ways for companies to prevent talent from entering their organizations as there are to select talent. Oftentimes this is a blessing in disguise because most large companies destroy an individual's creativity and innovation. Of course, they don't intend to do this but one has to realize that a company hires people for specific tasks and duties in order to produce consistent and reliable results. More often than not, companies want to hire more "doers" than "thinkers".
Do you think any company that would have hired Mark Zuckerberg 7 years ago would have allowed him to be as creative and innovative as he is? Probably not. Most large companies are still stuck in the old "seniority rules" model. Meaning that young employees will rarely have a major voice within the company - let alone the confidence of the senior leaders who make the business decisions. They will expect new employees to "pay their dues" and then after 5-10 years (assuming the new employees have played the corporate game successfully) they might be in a position to show some creativity and innovation. The only problem is that after playing the corporate game for so many years, employees tend to become good at doing the wrong thing righter. Those once creative employees are usually transformed into the average employees who seek to continue their mobility within the company by following the rules of the existing game versus breaking the rules altogether.
Let's all be thankful that Mark Zuckerberg decided to break the rules and become an Entrepreneur - not an Employee!
Saturday, July 9, 2011
Are Employees Assets or Liabilities?
If you look at your company's Annual Report you'll find that the workforce is listed as a liability. That's the message that's sent to the company's largest shareholders. Of course internally, they tell you that all employees are an asset, and without you, the company could not go on. Sounds good in theory, but it's not true in practice. If you were a professional athlete or musician under contract then you could be viewed as an asset since a company can trade or sell you for the value of your services. But in the average company, employees are viewed as a cost to be managed versus an asset to be developed. You can be sure that someone at the top of the company is always looking for ways to reduce employee numbers while growing the business. Why do you think outsourcing, downsizing, and right-sizing are so popular? In truth, whether or not employees are viewed as assets or liabilities really depends on the philosophy of the Corporate Board and Executive Managers.
As an employee, should you be angry if you happen to be viewed as a liability? No!! You knew the deal when you took the job. And if you didn't, now you do. If your job is one that a company can put on the chopping block then it's up to you to take action to protect your professional livelihood. Don't blame the company - blame yourself! Since you didn't start the company, you really have no say in the high-level decisions that are made regarding your career. If the company's founders, board, management, and investors view employees as a cost, then you will be branded as a liability unless you get to the upper ranks of the company with a nice contract.
If your company views employees as an asset then you can expect to have great opportunities as long as you continue to bring value to the company. You'll get the necessary training, mentoring, and opportunities to do your job as well as advance your career if you so desire. The company will also use innovative and creative ways to ensure minimal job loss during tough economic times. So you rarely have to worry about unexpected unemployment. In the best case, the company will give you a great severance package and send you on your way. In the worse case, the company will temporarily freeze (or reduce) your salary for a specific time period until business conditions improve.
So which are you - asset or liability?
Friday, July 8, 2011
Do You Have A Lifetime Employment Contract? - Part 3 (The Finale)
The modern world is all about backup, contingency plans, and loss prevention. Without a backup (or parallel) income source you're basically at the mercy of your employer's unpredictable personnel decisions. It's one thing to be in the rat race, but entirely different to be a rat hanging on by a thread!
Yet you seem to believe that you can take on all the transactions of life with only one source of income. I guess your motto is, "one job, one employer". And that motto would be fine if you had a contract to support it. But since you probably don't, I believe you need to start planning for ways to minimize your risks of unexpected unemployment. In most of the developed world, the average employee lives beyond his means by debt-financing the lifestyle s/he desires to have. When there are shocks to the financial system followed by the inevitable disruptions in household incomes, the average employee who only has a single source of income will be the one to suffer the most. I continue to be amazed at how the average employee wades through life without any type of strategic safety net for their professional livelihood. Maybe being a trapeze artist isn't so risky after all.
Unless your strategy for sudden job loss is to have a fire-sale of all your household goods (and home if you're a buyer) and move back in with your parents, relatives, or friends; then I suggest you develop a sound contingency plan. If you want to escape the eventual fate of the masses without employment contracts, then you have three options:
If all of this is just too much for you to stomach, then consider the risks of inaction. At the very least you should pay for short-term and long-term disability insurance through your employer's benefits package (assuming your employer offers that!). While it's convenient to only think of losing your source of income, it is more important to protect your ability to earn any income at all. It won't matter if you have a second source of income if your ability to work becomes impaired due to a debilitating illness or accident.
Doing nothing is NOT a solution. Ignoring the problem is NOT a solution. Hoping to keep your single source of income is NOT a solution. Companies diversify their product and service offerings for a reason - to mitigate risks and maximize opportunities. How many grocery stores have you seen that only sale one item? Don't pay the high cost for being a well-trained, obedient employee who blindly relies on the patronage of his employer. I highly doubt that your employer was founded with the sole purpose of providing you with long-term employment.
Yet you seem to believe that you can take on all the transactions of life with only one source of income. I guess your motto is, "one job, one employer". And that motto would be fine if you had a contract to support it. But since you probably don't, I believe you need to start planning for ways to minimize your risks of unexpected unemployment. In most of the developed world, the average employee lives beyond his means by debt-financing the lifestyle s/he desires to have. When there are shocks to the financial system followed by the inevitable disruptions in household incomes, the average employee who only has a single source of income will be the one to suffer the most. I continue to be amazed at how the average employee wades through life without any type of strategic safety net for their professional livelihood. Maybe being a trapeze artist isn't so risky after all.
Unless your strategy for sudden job loss is to have a fire-sale of all your household goods (and home if you're a buyer) and move back in with your parents, relatives, or friends; then I suggest you develop a sound contingency plan. If you want to escape the eventual fate of the masses without employment contracts, then you have three options:
- Play the corporate game and get to the executive levels as quickly as possible.
- Stay at your same employee level and get a side job.
- Become a freelancer or consultant and get paid by the hour or by deliverable.
- One Single-Source Income Earner needs to find a second source of income. Say goodbye to your couch potato lifestyle and get a second job or create income from your hobbies. Whatever you decide to do, you'd better do it quickly. Be sure not to give in to the temptation of spending your extra money instead of saving it.
- Two Single-Source Income Earners need to become domestic partners or married. Two incomes are better than one and provide an in-house backup to one person's temporary income disruption. If one of you becomes unemployed, just be careful not to take too long in landing a new job because you were probably both living beyond your means. Nobody wants to pay your bills forever!
- Two Married (or Domestic Partners) Single-Source Income Earners need to have one spouse with a second source of income. Somebody has to have a normal day, so whoever draws the short stick can plan on working an extra 15-20 hours a week at the side gig. This scenario provides you the ability to save the vaunted "rainy day fund". The downside is that if your side gig is crap, you'll be more stressed out than the extra security is worth. So earn money from something you really enjoy!
- Two Married Single-Source Income Earners need to have both spouses with a second source of income. This is the maximum protection you can provide for yourself - though it comes at a high price due to the time you and your spouse have to spend working. Mitigate this by ensuring that both you and your partner take alternating breaks from your side gigs. Even though you'll have extra work on top of your primary job, it's far better to be a little stressed than unemployed without a backup. The peace of mind you'll have will more than compensate for missing your television shows now and then.
If all of this is just too much for you to stomach, then consider the risks of inaction. At the very least you should pay for short-term and long-term disability insurance through your employer's benefits package (assuming your employer offers that!). While it's convenient to only think of losing your source of income, it is more important to protect your ability to earn any income at all. It won't matter if you have a second source of income if your ability to work becomes impaired due to a debilitating illness or accident.
Doing nothing is NOT a solution. Ignoring the problem is NOT a solution. Hoping to keep your single source of income is NOT a solution. Companies diversify their product and service offerings for a reason - to mitigate risks and maximize opportunities. How many grocery stores have you seen that only sale one item? Don't pay the high cost for being a well-trained, obedient employee who blindly relies on the patronage of his employer. I highly doubt that your employer was founded with the sole purpose of providing you with long-term employment.
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Do You Have A Lifetime Employment Contract? - Part 2
We can all agree that having a single source of income (a.k.a. "one employer", "one client", or "one anything" for that matter!) is probably not the best way to mitigate the risk of unexpected unemployment. Furthermore, I highly doubt that anyone has a written lifetime employment contract. And if they do, how enforceable and reliable is it if the company goes bankrupt or gets bought out altogether? The same holds true for the self-employed who solely rely on a single client for their income. I doubt that any client will sign a contract to be the lifetime purchaser of your goods and services.
If you've followed my blogs then you know I am a proponent of the "do as the leading companies do" model. That means you need to manage your career like a company manages its business. Virtually all major companies have signed and legally enforceable contracts with their suppliers, vendors, and distributors. Can you imagine a grocery store owner having to lose sleep each night worrying whether the supplier of milk and eggs will deliver the goods the next day? Can you imagine an automobile manufacturer not having defined-length contracts with its parts suppliers? Companies are keen on having contracts with all the entities that affect their ability to generate income. If they won't risk their sources of income on the whims of those upon which they rely, then why do you?
In America, if you are an "at-will employee", then your source of income is at risk each and everyday. Are you comfortable living like that? You may say to yourself that you've been served well by this model of employment and have suffered no adverse effects thus far. But that's like a race car driver saying he's never crashed out of a race. Or a homeowner saying he's never been burglarized. The fact that it hasn't happened yet is no excuse for you not to be worried or take precautions. According to the legal definitions of at-will employment you'll see that the only employees who have protection from unexpected job loss are union members and company executives. If you're not one of them, you're one of the masses who goes to work each day like an automated drone blindly believing that your office space is actually yours.
A. At-Will Defined
At-will means that an employer can terminate an employee at any time for any reason, except an illegal one, or for no reason without incurring legal liability. Likewise, an employee is free to leave a job at any time for any or no reason with no adverse legal consequences.
At-will also means that an employer can change the terms of the employment relationship with no notice and no consequences. For example, an employer can alter wages, terminate benefits, or reduce paid time off. In its unadulterated form, the U.S. at-will rule leaves employees vulnerable to arbitrary and sudden dismissal, a limited or on-call work schedule depending on the employer’s needs, and unannounced cuts in pay and benefits.
B. Modification by Contract
The at-will presumption is a default rule that can be modified by contract. For example, a contract may provide for a specific term of employment or allow termination for cause only. Typically, U.S. companies negotiate individual employment agreements only with high-level employees. Collective bargaining agreements usually provide that represented employees may only be terminated for cause.
Cause generally includes reasons such as poor employee performance, employee misconduct, or economic necessity. An employment contract may specifically outline the situations or employee actions that would lead to termination for cause.
If you've followed my blogs then you know I am a proponent of the "do as the leading companies do" model. That means you need to manage your career like a company manages its business. Virtually all major companies have signed and legally enforceable contracts with their suppliers, vendors, and distributors. Can you imagine a grocery store owner having to lose sleep each night worrying whether the supplier of milk and eggs will deliver the goods the next day? Can you imagine an automobile manufacturer not having defined-length contracts with its parts suppliers? Companies are keen on having contracts with all the entities that affect their ability to generate income. If they won't risk their sources of income on the whims of those upon which they rely, then why do you?
In America, if you are an "at-will employee", then your source of income is at risk each and everyday. Are you comfortable living like that? You may say to yourself that you've been served well by this model of employment and have suffered no adverse effects thus far. But that's like a race car driver saying he's never crashed out of a race. Or a homeowner saying he's never been burglarized. The fact that it hasn't happened yet is no excuse for you not to be worried or take precautions. According to the legal definitions of at-will employment you'll see that the only employees who have protection from unexpected job loss are union members and company executives. If you're not one of them, you're one of the masses who goes to work each day like an automated drone blindly believing that your office space is actually yours.
A. At-Will Defined
At-will means that an employer can terminate an employee at any time for any reason, except an illegal one, or for no reason without incurring legal liability. Likewise, an employee is free to leave a job at any time for any or no reason with no adverse legal consequences.
At-will also means that an employer can change the terms of the employment relationship with no notice and no consequences. For example, an employer can alter wages, terminate benefits, or reduce paid time off. In its unadulterated form, the U.S. at-will rule leaves employees vulnerable to arbitrary and sudden dismissal, a limited or on-call work schedule depending on the employer’s needs, and unannounced cuts in pay and benefits.
B. Modification by Contract
The at-will presumption is a default rule that can be modified by contract. For example, a contract may provide for a specific term of employment or allow termination for cause only. Typically, U.S. companies negotiate individual employment agreements only with high-level employees. Collective bargaining agreements usually provide that represented employees may only be terminated for cause.
Cause generally includes reasons such as poor employee performance, employee misconduct, or economic necessity. An employment contract may specifically outline the situations or employee actions that would lead to termination for cause.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)