By Stacy Edey, PHR/CLRL
Integrated Professional Services, LLC

Yesterday, Karen was sipping her morning cup of java. She glanced down at her watch and realized it was only 9:45am. A deep sigh of frustration escaped her as she began clicking her favorite ink pen. Karen began the same silent conversation with herself; the one she’s been having for the past 8 months, where she’s wondering, “What am I doing here?”

Karen had been with her present company for five years. She often wondered why her manager never inquired about her short and long term professional goals with the company. Karen recalled the last time she volunteered for a continuous improvement project; 1 ½ years ago. She stopped volunteering once she started realizing that her manager didn’t seem to take an interest with her involvement in company initiatives, nor were her efforts ever noted on her performance evaluations.

“No matter how great of a job I do, my manager never has anything positive or negative to say, no words of encouragement or constructive criticism”, she thought to herself. Karen couldn’t recall a single time in her career in which she felt so disengaged. Unfortunately, Karen has been having this same conversation with herself for the past 12 months. Today, she began her new employment search. She did not report to work, it’s the first time she’s missed a day of work in the past three years.

Conversations like Karen’s take place every day in the workforce. Once employees, especially top performers, illicit signs of disengagement, leadership must act fast. The action taken to retain and engage committed high performing employees is an imperative strategy that dramatically increases business performance and employee productivity.

Best practice research defines employee engagement as the extent to which an employee is committed to their job, their team, their manager and/or their company which affects their level of discretionary effort, intention to stay and also translates into increased performance in addition to retention for the organization overall.

Corporate Leadership Council’s Employee Engagement Study (2004), showed that:

Employees exhibiting high levels of engagement and commitment yield higher levels of discretionary effort an seek ways to improve the effectiveness of their work more so than do employees with lower levels
-Engaged employees provide 57% more discretionary effort and perform up to 20% percentile points better than employees with low engagement levels

Additionally, as engagement increases the employee’s probability of departure falls dramatically
- Moving from strong disengagement to strong engagement decreases the probability of departure by 87%

Encouraging open communication is an instrumental element in improving employee engagement. This is done by valuing employee input, suggestions and feedback.

Providing educational opportunities is paramount in improving productivity. Providing career development plans which include certifications, seminars and/or workshops provide career and personal growth and helps increase retention. It’s another strategy that results in increasing retention, provides new insights and enhances employees’ sense of accomplishment. By leveraging the existing talent pool and investing in their educational, organizations can effectively mine new talent sources and be well-positioned for market success.

Encouraging and supporting employee’s involvement in companywide initiatives reduces employee disconnection and job dissatisfaction. Encouraging and empowering employees’ involvement allows the workforce opportunities to provide input while simultaneously providing them with new challenges that keep their job interesting. It enhances their lens of perspective so that they are involved in decisions. Career development not only equips employees to perform, but also inspires them to perform.

Encouraging creativity, innovation and forward thinking employees fosters an environment where employees feel engaged. This type of organizational culture has proven to increase productivity.

Employee engagement is critical to performance and retention. The results of engaged employees for the organization are: new ideas, improved processes, enhanced products, employees going above and beyond, high performance teams emerge, increased cross functional knowledge and productivity—ultimately engaged employees are assets that provide a competitive advantage.

About the Author
Stacy Edey possesses 10+ years of Leadership, Professional Writing and Human Resources experience. She earned a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Management with a concentration in Human Resource Management from Capital University in Columbus, Ohio. She later matriculated at Antioch University McGregor in Yellow Springs, Ohio where she received a Master of Arts Degree in Management. Ms. Edey acquired a PHR (Professional in Human Resources) Certification from the Human Resources Certification Institute, a CLRL (Certified Labor Relations Leader) from The Michigan State University and is a professional member of SHRM (Society for Human Resource Management). To contact Stacey, e-mail her at stacy.edey@iprofessionalservices.com

Americans are placing a higher emphasis on the role of business and corporations to help solve societal issues, according to the 2010 goodpurpose Global Study, released last week. Due in part to the recession, 87 percent of Americans believe that corporations need to place at least equal weight on society’s interests as on those of business.

The study found that 62 percent feel it is no longer enough for corporations to solely give money away to good causes. Instead, respondents claimed they want businesses to integrate charitable causes into their day-to-day operations. Almost half (47 percent) of respondents also said they feel that brands only support nonprofits to gain good publicity, which is up 10 points from 2008’s survey.

Carol Cone, managing director of brand and corporate citizenship at New York City-based Edelman, which commissioned the survey, said she was surprised at the emphasis placed on corporations overall to support good causes. The world is becoming more globalized, Cone said, which has eroded trust in institutions.

“Consumers have high expectations and millenials have huge expectations across the board,” she said. “They want to work for companies that share their values, and shop at companies that are aligned with their own values. This is embedded across the enterprise.”

The fact that this trend is on the rise in a poor economy is no coincidence. “Social needs are closer to consumers in this economy,” Cone said. “You have a rising class of consumers, and they are not just about consumption. They want a company to donate proceeds to global issues, and that bodes well for nonprofits.”

Consumer expectation of government to do the most good for charity has declined since last year’s study to 30 percent, and 23 percent of Americans responded that “people like me” should be doing the most good for charity. This is an increase of eight points from 2009.

Americans are not the only consumers looking out for charities when shopping. They are being outpaced by emerging markets in Brazil, China, India and Mexico, where consumers are more likely than Americans to purchase and promote brands that support good causes. According to the study, approximately eight in 10 respondents in those countries expect brands to do something to support a good cause, compared to 63 percent of Americans.

Emerging markets are outpacing their counterparts in the West for philanthropy because of their different value sets, Cone said, adding that these countries also ranked higher for volunteerism. “Family and community are very important in these markets,” she said. “When you start getting out of subsistent living, education is hugely important. So is healthcare, and the environment, and it becomes about the small things that individuals can do. When you buy a product, you buy into helping that cause.”

The study also found that 75 percent of Americans believe that projects that sustain and protect the environment can help grow the economy. Cone cited China as a prime example of a green building industry to spark growth in jobs and the economy.

“Their core natural resources are at tremendous risk, and the government realized they cannot sustain their growth if they are denigrating their water and air,” she said. “Clean technology has become a huge industry in China, and they are outpacing us. It’s not what we do in this country, slapping a green ribbon on it. It becomes a win-win (creating jobs for green technology).”

The survey consisted of 20-minute interviews with 7,259 adults in 13 different countries. The interviews were conducted online in Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Mexico, the Netherlands, United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.), the United Kingdom and the U.S. In-person interviews were held in China and India, and the study was representative of the country population in all of the countries with the exception of the U.A.E., where the study was representative of the online population.

The survey also found that:

• U.S. consumers rank purpose as significantly more important than design and innovation or brand loyalty as a purchase trigger, when quality and price are the same. Nearly 47 percent of Americans report social purpose is their number one deciding factor.


• Twenty-seven percent cite loyalty to the brand and 26 percent report design or innovation come first as deciding factors, when quality and price are the same.


• More than one-third of Americans would punish a company that doesn’t actively support a good cause by criticizing it to others (34 percent), refusing to buy its products and services (36 percent), or sharing negative opinions and experiences with others (37 percent).


• Nearly 47 percent would not invest in a company that doesn’t support good causes.


• Americans reported Pepsi, Newman’s Own and Nike as the top three brands that place as much, or more, importance on supporting a good cause as they place on profits.


• Eighty percent of U.S. consumers believe corporations are in a uniquely powerful position to make a positive impact on good causes, and 79 percent believe it is acceptable for brands to support good causes and make money at the same time.

Source: The Nonprofit Times

“Embedded giving” at major stores, through either checkout donations or small gifts built into prices, is holding steady as overall contributions to charity decline, The Bay Citizen reports via The New York Times.

While donations to the nation’s largest charities dropped 11 percent last year, according to a Chronicle of Philanthropy analysis, supermarket chain Safeway’s October 2009 breast-cancer campaign raised $18-million, matching the 2008 total. Proceeds this year declined to $16.1 million, but experts expect many campaigns will suffer steeper drops as the recession lingers.

While embedded giving grows in popularity, with other major retailers like Petco, Whole Foods, and Target on board, critics raise concerns that overzealous employees are pestering customers to donate. “It makes it so easy to give,” Lucy Bernholz of philanthropy consultants Blueprint Research & Design said of the practice. “But it has become so pervasive, there is a chance of donor fatigue.”

A British charity is working to build up such checkout giving in that country, pushing technology that would offer shoppers paying by card an option to round up their purchase price and donate the difference, The Telegraph says.

The Pennies Foundation is urging retailers to adopt the technology for their card-reading machines and online sales sites. Dominos Pizza, Britain’s biggest pizza chain, is the first major firm to sign up.

Source: The Chronicle of Philanthropy

By Carol Gee

Many people are sabotaging their career and professional relationships without seemingly realizing it. While these individuals appear to have been successful to a certain degree despite these behavioral tics, it’s often these same behaviors that may be holding them back in their careers, in their professional relationships, even in life.

Everyone has some bad habits many say. While this may be true, failure to recognize them or worst, the tendency to rationalize them can be detrimental to success on the job or in employees’ professional lives. Individuals who recognize themselves in the scenarios below and adjust their behaviors accordingly may discover they enjoy more rewarding careers.

Always trying to “one-up” the other person.
Quite often this is done both on the job as well in other relationships. A one-upmanship mentality or hyper-competitiveness is what feeds seemingly rational folks’ desire to always win regardless of the circumstances

We see this behavior in traffic where daily a driver rides the bumper of the car in front. Why, it is anyone’s guess. Perhaps it’s to keep others from cutting in? Constantly changing lanes without seemingly regard for their own safety, never mind other drivers’ in their race to be the first to get to “goodness knows where” is another.

We see it on those so-called ‘reality’ shows like The Apprentice and others that multiply like bunnies every season. If we have learned anything from these shows, it is “what not to do” if we want to be successful. More often than not, these shows demonstrate what really keeps extremely talented folks from getting ahead, and that is that they’ve either never learned, or have forgotten how to ‘play nice’ or work together as a team in their quest to be the winner. Show after show, episode after episode, we watch contestants fail miserably because they are so full of themselves that they fail to listen to others, fail to share, or even remember the most rudimentary courtesies. In situations such as this, one person gets what he or she wants, often resulting in feeling smug, or like they have won some highly valued prize, while leaving the other person feeling battered, stressed, or even angry. In extreme cases this one-upmanship mentality can be highly destructive.

Criticizing another’s ideas or making negative, even destructive comments.
Many of us still remember our mothers’ mandate, ‘that if you can’t say anything nice, to not say anything at all.” While this was true when it came to siblings and others, it is also true in business. Ridiculing others’ ideas or feelings that are different from the norm leads to barriers to creativity and communication.

Claiming credit for others’ work or contributions.
While routinely done in business, is it right? Is it ethical? Does it foster relationships? If you are the one whose ideas your supervisor, department head or another co-worker consistently accepts credit for, gets recognized for, or even worst, gets rewarded for them some way, then the answer is clear. Having this continually happening demoralizes the affected employee. Likewise, it reduces the individual’s commitment to the perpetrator, the job and frequently even to the organization.

Makes excuses or makes light of negative behaviors. How many times have you heard someone make light of their tendency to procrastinate, or have an excuse for always being late? They’ll say, “That’s just the way I am” in response to these or other behaviors. Albeit, while the childish ‘like or lump it’ is missing from the above statement, dismissing these flaws makes positive long-term changes to these behaviors essentially slim to none. Why is this? It’s because the person dismisses this as a problem.

Not listening to others.
Not listening when a person is speaking is tantamount to saying, “You are an idiot,” “You don’t have a clue.” Not listening is not only disrespectful, but poses challenges for correcting this behavior.

So, what can an individual about correcting the behaviors above? The first step is recognizing that they exist, then doing something about them. Not only will this bring individuals one step closer to realizing their full potential, it may enhance their careers and improve professional relationships.


About the Author
Carol Gee, M.A. has worked in education for 28 years in positions ranging from teaching to administration. Currently she is an editor and business writer at Goizueta Business School at Emory University. She is also the author of books, The Venus Chronicles and Diary of a ‘Flygirl’ Wannabe (Life Lessons of a Cool Girl in Training)
www.venuschronicles.net

Over the last few years, as corporations fired workers en masse, some of the newly unemployed began sending their résumés to nonprofits. But often the job picture there was just as bleak — even as the need for services became greater.

Now that may be changing.

“Jobs are back,” said Ami Dar, executive director of Idealist.org, an online clearinghouse for nonprofits. In the fall of the 2008, when the economic crisis hit, job postings on the site fell by 40 percent. Now they are nearly back to precrisis levels, he said.

At The Chronicle of Philanthropy, employment ads have been sluggish all year, but in the Nov. 4 issue job postings suddenly doubled, said Stacy Palmer, the publication’s editor — perhaps reflecting a newfound confidence in the economy and people’s willingness to give. Longer term, the hiring outlook is also good, because just as in the corporate world, the baby boomers in nonprofits are starting to retire, she said.

Nonprofits are still seeking the tried and true skills in programming, fund-raising, customer service and administration, but a new type of position has crept into the mix — reflected in job titles like digital marketing manager, social media director and new-media director.

Whether to organize a text donation effort, respond to a request for help on Twitter, or use G.P.S. technology to mobilize volunteers, nonprofits increasingly need to communicate through technology to achieve their goals. And their hiring reflects that.

Take Danielle Brigida, 26, of the National Wildlife Federation. This year she was promoted from social media outreach coordinator to a new position, digital marketing manager.

In college, Ms. Brigida majored in English with a concentration in technical writing, and she double minored in biology and communications. As part of her job, she monitors the federation’s main Facebook and Twitter pages, contributes to its blog, keeps tabs on when it is mentioned on Web sites and other social media, and coaches other employees on the use of social media. She also set up Yammer, an internal communications system, so that the staff can communicate via instant messaging.

During the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, Ms. Brigida used Facebook, Twitter and other sites as a way to solicit and channel volunteers and donations. As the gulf spill showed, social media is now an important bridge between those who need help and those who want to offer it, she said.

The Red Cross certainly found that to be true after the earthquake in Haiti last January. Wendy Harman, director of social media at the Red Cross, was involved in handling requests for information and help. These are increasingly occurring over the Internet, she said, and people expect a fast response; that means having a technology team in place, she said.

With the help of the State Department and mGive, a mobile donation provider service, Ms. Harman also helped publicize the “Text Haiti to 90999” program, which raised $32 million. Developed on the fly, the mobile text donation structure is now in place for future needs, she said.

Certainly, people with strong mobile technology and application skills will be in demand at nonprofits. For example, the Humane Society of the United States recently put an ad on Idealist.org for a mobile communications manager. And the Salvation Army of Greater New York recently advertised for a new-media director as it starts “a massive text giving program this holiday season as a complement to its tradition kettle campaign.”

Who will be applying for jobs like these? Chances are a good many of them will be coming from corporations. Certainly that is a result of recent layoffs, but during hard times, more people also want to “use their skills to do good and give back,” said Laura Reeves, chief talent officer for the American Cancer Society.

In its fiscal year 2010, the American Cancer Society received 120,000 outside résumés, a 520 percent increase over the year before, and a high proportion of those came from people in corporate jobs, she said.

New vocabulary words have emerged in just the last few years to describe the migration from the corporate to the nonprofit world — words like “sector switchers” and “bridgers, ” said Pratichi Shah, president and chief executive of Flourish Talent Management Solutions, which recruits for nonprofits.

Little hard data exists on nonprofit salary levels, but suffice it to say that corporate “switchers” are generally going to make less than they did before. Nonprofits know that they “need to pay fair salaries to attract the top talent, but they also have to be good stewards of the finances they’re given. They’re trying to hit that balance,” Ms. Shah said.

But she maintains that lower salaries will not keep nonprofits from hiring the best people. “Increasingly people want to find meaning in their work,” and they want to reduce “values dissonance” if they are experiencing that in the corporate sector, Ms. Shah said. “They want to be connected to their communities and part of a larger movement.”

Source: The New York Times

By: Mauri Schwartz


In today’s job market, hundreds, sometimes thousands, of job seekers submit resumes for every job posted…whether or not they are fully qualified for the position. Perhaps you have done this yourself thinking “it can’t hurt.” But think again, it can hurt. If you submit your resume for a number of “wrong” jobs at the same organization, you will gain a reputation as someone who is unfocused – and a pest.

But here’s where it really hurts. With such a high volume of resumes, it becomes an onerous task for the hiring manager to sort through them and find the few who most closely match the job requirements, thus severely slowing down the decision making process. Very few nonprofit organizations have a recruiting staff who can handle this well. Even if you are qualified, you become a victim whose resume may never gain the attention of the hiring manager. So, please don’t contribute to this flooding of the market.

In the meantime, as a qualified candidate, you still need to know how to navigate the situation as it exists. Consider this scenario – 600 people are trying to push through the front door of the organization’s office, all at exactly the same time. Who squeezes through first will most likely have nothing to do with his/her qualifications. What you need to do is to find another portal which is less crowded, perhaps a side door which is situated near the hiring manager’s desk.

Please recognize that this is just a metaphor, and I’m not suggesting you physically go knocking on the back door of your target organization’s office. To extend the metaphor, you don’t want to break any windows to get in. By this I mean that you need to conduct reconnaissance and formulate a strategy for gaining entry with a positive reception, one that is courteous and professional.

In my previous article LinkedIn as a Job Search Tool, I described how to use LinkedIn to research your target organization, identify the decision maker, and find connections who can provide introductions, enabling you to make a “warm call.” I also mentioned that even if you can’t identify anyone in your network who can introduce you, you should still make a “cold call” by contacting the hiring manager directly. While not ideal, this will still allow you to avoid the crowd at the front door.

There are additional ways to identify the name of a decision maker. Visit the organization’s web site and look for information about the management team. Based on the job you are pursuing, look for the executive who heads up that function. But also look at the names and bios of the other officers as you may know one of them. Reading their bios may provide additional networking advantages.

For example, Fred wants to apply for a job as a Benefits Specialist at the MKS Foundation for Music. In looking at the foundation’s web site, he is able to identify the VP of Human Resources but doesn’t recognize her name and sees nothing in common in her bio. However, in reading the Executive Director’s bio, Fred notices that she is an alumna of Harvard’s School for Social Enterprise. And so is Fred. Fred’s next move is to email the ED, pointing out this connection in a friendly way. The message will also describe his interest in the position and include his resume as an attachment. The subject of Fred’s email will be something like this: Harvard SE Connection or Fellow Harvard SE.

There is no reason that Fred can’t email the VP of HR at the same time. He should also apply according to the job posting’s instructions. It is rare, but sometimes your resume will get selected this way.

Yet another way to identify the decision maker is to Google search the job title and organization’s name. The person may appear in publications other than those on the web site. If you’ve already identified the manager, Google search by name to gather additional useful information.

Basic Job Search Strategy:
- Apply according to the instructions (but don’t hold your breath)
- Research the organization using LinkedIn

Identify the likely decision maker

Identify who may be able to provide an introduction

Identify something that you have in common

Introduce yourself by email, not via LinkedIn’s message function
- Research the organization’s web site

Identify the likely decision maker

Identify who may be able to provide an introduction

Identify something that you have in common

Introduce yourself by email
- Follow up after a week by email or phone – remember that people are busy doing their jobs and may not be able to respond as quickly as you would like
- Follow up once more in a few days or a week, then let it rest; don’t be a pest

The most important advice I can provide is to put yourself into the other person’s shoes. What type of message would prompt you to respond positively? Negatively? Keep in mind that employers hire people who can do the job…and whom they like. Be likeable.

About the Author
Mauri Schwartz, President of Career Insiders, is a leading figure in the San Francisco Bay Area career management community. Career Insiders consults with companies and nonprofit organizations in the form of outplacement and hiring assistance, as well as with individual job seekers. In addition to her outstanding success rate in helping clients achieve their career goals, Mauri is a frequent speaker at conferences, job fairs, and career panels. She serves as Adjunct Advisor of Career Services at the Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley. Mauri’s motivational style uses techniques that combine old fashioned interpersonal relationship building skills with the latest technological tools.