News

26 Nov, 2020
Employers’ role in addressing Australia’s $220 billion mental health issue
SOURCE:
HRM
HRM

The Productivity Commission’ mental health inquiry report recommends stronger WHS guidelines and changes to workers compensation.

Warning: this article discusses mental illness and suicide. 

$220 billion. That is what mental illness and suicide costs the Australian economy every year according to the Productivity Commission’s recent mental health inquiry report.

To put some context around that, $220 billion is more than what the federal government pledged for COVID-19 recovery. It’s more than Bill Gates’ net worth. 

The report estimates the direct cost to the economy is between $43 and $70 billion with an additional $151 billion due to disability and premature death. However, the commission’s recommendations to tackle the issue would cost around $4.2 billion and are estimated to save the government $1.7 billion annually. 

Many of the Productivity Commission’s recommendations involve engaging those beyond the health sector, including employers. One recommendation is to “equip workplaces to be mentally healthy”. 

Mental health has been forced to the forefront for many workplaces this year as employees have struggled through the stress of the pandemic and subsequent lockdowns. Employment Assistance Programs (EAPs) have played a particularly important role, something which was recognised in the commission’s report. 

The report’s recommendations

The report estimates 2.8 million Australians have a mental illness, while a further 440,000 care for someone with a mental illness. This has a huge cost, with the resulting absenteeism costing workplaces an estimated $17 billion a year. Employees with mental illness take on average 10 to 12 days off a year due to psychological distress. 

When it comes to workplaces, the report’s priority recommendations place the onus back on governments and workers compensation schemes. The report suggests federal, state and territory governments promote psychological workplace health and safety as important as physical health and safety. It also recommends updating compensation schemes to fund clinical mental health treatment for all work claims for up to six months, regardless of liability.

The additional reforms are where workplaces will play a greater role.

The first asks WHS authorities to develop codes of practice to help employers identify, eliminate and manage psychological risks. Currently workplaces must provide psychologically safe work environments. According to Safework this means designing work, systems and workplaces to eliminate or minimise risks to their mental health.

However, many employers are still unclear on exactly what that means since identifying psychological risks is much harder than physical ones. The report suggests demystifying this for employers and providing clear guidance on eliminating workplace mental health risks, particularly now employers need to assess psychological risks to remote workers. 

This crosses over with another recommendation to provide flexible workers compensation for workplaces which implement initiatives to reduce psychological risks. The report suggests this would increase the number of employers implementing effective initiatives. Which initiatives are appropriate would be decided by WHS authorities.

One initiative most employers consider essential is EAP services. However, the report suggests greater regulation of EAPs since there is currently little external evaluation or benchmarking. The report recommends a minimum standard be developed to help organisations understand the value EAPs provide to employees and what level of service they require to suit their workforce. The report noted that EAPs are often the initial point of contact for employees with mental health problems so their importance in the long-term management of mental health cannot be understated. 

Good leadership can build a mentally healthy workplace

All of the report’s workplace recommendations boil down to creating mentally healthy workplaces. Mental health organisation Heads Up gives nine key attributes of a mentally healthy workplace. They include:

  1. Prioritise mental health – this includes having open discussions about mental health and educating staff about mental health issues.
  2. Create a trusting, fair and respectful culture – cultivate a culture of trust among employees and ensure everyone is treated fairly.
  3. Open and honest leadership – good culture comes from the top down.
  4. Good job design – ensure roles suit employees’ abilities and skills. Job crafting is a good example of this.
  5. Workload management – make sure employees’ tasks are achievable and that they have the resources to complete them.
  6. Employee development – regular development training and feedback can help employees feel more secure in their role.
  7. Inclusion and influence – encourage employee input in business decisions.
  8. Work/life balance – encourage employees to take breaks and offer opportunities to balance their personal life with work.
  9. Mental health support – ensure employees have access to EAPs or other mental health  services when needed.

Margo Lydon, CEO of mental health organisation SuperFriend, points to attribute number three – open and honest leadership – as vital to the success of any mentally healthy workplace.

Lydon and her team have just completed a study into workplace mental health and she says leadership comes up time and time again as the most important factor. 

“If we’re educated in the signs and symptoms of mental illness and have the tools and resources to support people early on in their struggles, we have a much better chance of improving their outcomes,” she says.

The productivity commission’s report also noted the importance of good leadership. The report’s authors noted that improving workplace mental health was intrinsically linked to how interested leadership was in mental wellbeing and their willingness to increase the visibility of mental illness in the workplace. 

Lydon agrees. 

“Any workplace that is committed to the mental health and wellbeing of its people should be ensuring its leaders have at least basic competencies in workplace mental health. We spend most of our waking hours at work, so workplaces have a huge part to play in keeping people mentally healthy,” she says.

If you or anyone you know needs mental health support you can contact Lifeline on 13 11 14 or Beyond Blue on 1300 224 636

 

26 Nov, 2020
Why Throwing Out the "Old Bananas" is Imperative to Your Success
Entrepreneur

You've likely walked past your kitchen counter and seen near-rotten bananas and thought to yourself, Oh, I'll make a smoothie tomorrow with those. Then the next day you see the same bananas and think, Guess it's time to make banana bread! On the third day, the bananas are collecting flies, and there's not a smoothie or banana bread in sight.

We do this exact same thing in our businesses, often without even noticing.

We set mile-high goals, to-do lists for days and have ideas that constantly sit at the back of our minds. I think of it like this: When you first think of an idea, it's green like an un-ripe banana. It's natural for an idea to mature for a few days — and ripen like a banana. But after awhile, if you don't act upon those ideas, they begin to rot and take up mental and physical space.

If we don't throw out the ideas that never came to be — or the rotten bananas — our business will start to attract flies, rot and slow down. 

Your business might have old bananas like unfinished courses, unpaid invoices and unwritten articles. I call these unclosed loops, but for the purpose of this article, we will continue to call them rotten bananas. Let's clean them up before we enter into the new year.

Identifying your old bananas

Ask yourself these four questions:

  1. How many unfinished projects do you currently have floating around? Of these projects, would you rate them a somewhat-rotten smoothie banana or a nearly unusable banana bread banana?
  2. Of these projects, which ones give you energy, and which ones are weighing you down? If you're not sure, imagine you didn't have to do one, and see how you feel. If you feel free, it might be OK to sell this idea to someone else or to send it to the graveyard. If you feel passionate, it's time to add time to the calendar to act on it.
  3. How many unpaid invoices do you have out for your business? Of these invoices, how past due are they? Smoothie or banana bread? Block time to address these today.
  4. How many other unclosed loops are floating around? Contractors to hire, websites to upgrade, office space to purchase, YouTube channel to start? Take about 10 minutes to rate each in order of importance and how long you've been sitting on the idea. Then get some time on your schedule with your team to finish these actions so they don't drag you down.

When that's done, give yourself some credit. Taking some of these items out to the trash is creating serious mental space and room for new (non-fly-like) clients to head your way.

Make a vow to the countertops

Before we move forward, let's make a vow to eat the bananas when they're ripe or give them away moving forward. Entrepreneurs are flooded with ideas daily, and some of them are right for us and should be acted on right away, while others are great ideas but not right for the moment. A mentor of mine had a mantra: "Good idea; stay on plan." It might be wise to hire a coach or an office manager who can keep you on track when these ideas pop up to see if they're worth adjusting the plan or if you need to stay on course. 

Moving forward for 2021

Now, take a look at your list and decide which items you'll actually move forward with and which items you'll toss. Make the smoothie and the banana bread. You'll want to come up with a detailed plan — including some outsourcing ― to complete these items now. I would suggest one project per quarter and tossing all the other ideas into 2022 land for now. 

You'll be amazed at how free you feel having chosen two to four big projects to actually focus on and complete next year. For example, next year I plan to launch an author mastermind, run a publishing firm and create journals and content. That's it! Ahhhh.

Chopping up your bananas

Now for our final step, let's chop up our banana for the rest of 2020. Yes, I'm serious about this metaphor.

You get three slices to dump into your business cereal bowl. Pick the three most important things that will move your business forward by January 1, 2021. No. 1 should be something relatively vital, no. 2 should trail close behind and no. 3 should be something that can be completed in 2021 if necessary.

My three slices include:

1. Processes for operations

2. Finishing my manifestation journal and mini course

3. Launching my my author mastermind in February 2021

When you're determining your three goals, think about who you'll need to become to move them forward. You will likely automatically become more responsible, more leadership-driven and be more patient as you eliminate the need for hundreds of micro goals. Resistance is natural here, but this process is essential to help your progress speed up — even if it requires slowing down for the moment. 

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to make a smoothie.

26 Nov, 2020
The downside of a generation of flexible workers
SOURCE:
HRM
HRM

Everyone says 2020 has seen the world’s largest work-from-home experiment. As is the case with all experiments, sometimes you win and sometimes you lose.

In the 1970s, the concept of working from home was novel. Back then, it was called ‘telecommuting’ and it was introduced as a means to alleviate traffic congestion and the associated environmental impacts. 

As the decade wore on, companies started turning to remote workers to swiftly fill skills gaps, and began touting the benefits remote work has for work-life balance. This coincided with an increase in dual-working families in the 1970s-80s.

As mobile technology advanced in the late 1980s and 1990s, along with an increase in knowledge workers, the practice became even more common. It was seen as a way to improve inclusive hiring efforts, allowing for employees living with a disability, for example, to increase their participation in the workforce.

By the 2000s, however, the concept started losing fans. Famously, in 2013 Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer banned remote working for all employees, believing it impeded the company’s collaboration and innovation efforts.

In 2017, tech giant IBM followed suit. These influential shifts away from remote work divided many organisations into two camps: those for and those against. 

Then 2020 happened and those who’d fallen out of love with the concept were forced to embrace it once again, resulting in a mix of experiences. Many organisations struggled to cobble together a virtual workplace while others were surprised with just how easy it turned out to be.

We’ve since seen a slew of media reports and research papers detailing how much employees love working from home. Productivity is booming. Rates of work-life balance have skyrocketed and employees are relishing their newfound sense of autonomy. If this is what they mean by ‘the new normal’ of work, we’re doing pretty well, right? 

Well, many would beg to differ. For starters, some managers aren’t equipped to make the transition to remote work because they don’t know how to effectively manage a team that’s either virtual or a hybrid of in-house and remote employees. 

On top of this, remote workers can easily feel sidelined, or as if their identities are shifting, as they struggle to delineate between their home and workplace identity.

Out of sight, out of mind

For every comment in praise of remote working, there’s a reason to be wary of its impending prevalence, says Dr Ruchi Sinha, a senior lecturer in the School of Management at the University of South Australia.

Cast your mind back to pre-COVID times – if you can – and think about the conference calls that were had around boardroom tables.

“People who were dialling into those meetings would join from a speakerphone in the middle of the table and everyone would forget they were there,” says Sinha. “That person was never able to jump into the conversation and contribute. Nothing has really changed – if there’s only one [virtual attendee] on a conference call, they’ll get ignored.

“We have a habit of exchanging non-verbal gestures with people in the room with us, but that doesn’t meet the inclusiveness criteria when some people aren’t physically there.” 

All employees should dial in remotely, she says, even if some are in-house. She also suggests creating a rotating work roster, for those who are comfortable, so everyone has the same opportunities to build and develop their connections with their colleagues.

“Exposure to members of other groups improves your collaboration and cohesion with them,” adds Sinha.

Being co-located with others has also been proven to increase creativity and innovation amongst team members.

Research from 1998 shows that teams that met in person performed better on work tasks, followed by groups who worked virtually but met face-to-face initially. Teams that worked entirely virtually reported the lowest performance of all groups.

“Subgroups form based on many characteristics, such as gender, age, tenure and race. However, they also form based on seeing each other more often.”

Preventing an earthquake

Without putting structure around who works in-house and who works remotely, your organisation could end up inadvertently fostering what are known as faultlines and subgroups, says Sinha.

“Subgroups form based on many characteristics, such as gender, age, tenure and race. However, they also form based on seeing each other more often.”

When employees scatter into smaller groups within a team, the number of interactions between those groups decreases, she says. Subcultures can breed intergroup biases, meaning certain groups might prefer each other’s company or not cooperate as well with other groups. This can hamper productivity or cause conflict to arise.

“They’re called faultlines because the metaphor is that of an earthquake. These are the undercutting faultlines between subgroups. It’s the leaders and HR managers’ job to identify on which dimensions the faultlines are forming,” she says.

Sinha says remote work can breed favouritism through a theory called leadership-member exchange whereby leaders have an affiliation towards an ‘in-group’, and the ‘out-group’ is often left out of receiving key information or responsibilities. 

This in-group/out-group dynamic becomes even more pronounced in a semi-virtual team, according to research published over a decade ago in The International Journal of Human Resource Management. 

The researchers, Jane Webster and Kenneth Wong, surveyed employees in the IT department of a global company. Employees were divided into one of three groups: in-house teams, virtual teams and a hybrid of the two. 

When assessing a variety of factors – such as communication frequency, trust and job satisfaction – the researchers found no significant difference in feelings of “group identity” between teams that were either entirely virtual or entirely in-house. 

Hybrid teams showed the greatest disparity. When measuring the sense of group identity, remote workers within hybrid teams were the least likely to feel attached to the team’s group identity. Interestingly, in-house workers within those same hybrid teams were the most likely to feel involved. This could be a by-product of leadership-member exchange – these employees might receive preferential treatment, for example, consciously or unconsciously.

The upshot of this is that remote workers often miss out on important development and relationship-building opportunities. In the long run, this could deem them as less desirable candidates for promotions or salary bumps. This isn’t just an assumption; there’s research showing this is exactly what happens.

Stanford economist Nicholas Bloom’s 2014 research on remote work, which studied 16,000 employees at a Chinese travel agency over nine months, suggests that when employees work remotely, their performance increases by 13 per cent. However, they are 50 per cent less likely to receive performance-related promotion opportunities at work.

“Management is used to observing what people are doing and their behaviours, but you can’t do that anymore. Now you have to manage based on output, and that requires a very different mindset.”

Psychological safety is key

Sandy Staples, a professor at Smith School of Business at Queen’s University, did his PhD thesis on remote working back in 1994, and the  issues he identified still ring true today. 

Companies in the 1990s were trying to figure out how to enable and encourage their employees from afar, how to ensure they felt part of the company culture and how to facilitate collaboration between teams.

While Staples points out that technology back then wasn’t as powerful as we experience today (a point beautifully illustrated by the fact that we were having a seamless conversation from our respective homes in Australia and Canada), the fact that many of the remote work glitches of the 1990s mirror the challenges of today could suggest the practice is – and perhaps always will be – flawed.

One reason for this could be that many leaders have no template to reference. They’ve had to adapt quickly, and some have done a better job of that than others.

“Management is used to observing what people are doing and their behaviours, but you can’t do that anymore. Now you have to manage based on output, and that requires a very different mindset,” he says.

To encourage this mindset shift, Staples suggests HR and managers stop looking for signals and instead ask what they’re not seeing. “They should think about what’s not being shared with the team, and why? And if there’s anything management can do about it.”

Libby Sander, assistant professor of organisational behaviour at Bond Business School in Queensland, says HR professionals and leaders who are used to having delicate or tough conversations in person need to learn how to create that same sense of psychological safety in the virtual world.

“It’s really difficult because our brain is naturally looking for those unconscious cues around body language. When we have a screen in between us, most of that is taken away and our brains have to work really hard to try and discern those signals. The conversation doesn’t flow as easily.”

Psychological safety is key to making remote work a success, says Staples. He points to Google’s Project Aristotle – the quest for the ‘perfect’ team – to demonstrate this.

“Their conclusion was that the distinguishing characteristic of the most effective teams, when everything else is equal in terms of skills, etcetera, is if that team displays psychological safety,” says Staples.

Staples says the key to creating psychological safety in a virtual setting is having high levels of social sensitivity.

“That’s not just for managers, but everyone on the team,” he says. “This links in with some research that was conducted on remote work around 25 or 30 years ago which used the term ‘common ground’. If you can understand what’s going on in each other’s environments, you’re more likely to empathise with that person and not make any attribution errors.”

Put simply, when there’s no trust or empathy built into the relationship, we start making assumptions about people. For example, if someone is late to a Zoom meeting, we might think of them as unreliable or lazy. 

However, if two colleagues have laid the groundwork to connect and understand each other, they might be more inclined to consider the surrounding context when a person is late. Maybe they’ve had trouble wrangling the kids that morning or they didn’t get much sleep the night before.

“You’re able to identify that this isn’t an internal characteristic of that individual [when trust is nurtured in the relationship],” says Staples. “Negative assumptions undermine our willingness to collaborate with each other. 

The more we work together and understand each other’s environment, the less likely we are to make attribution errors.”

Identity crises

Not only does working remotely have the potential to curtail career development and quash innovation, it could also cause people to fundamentally question who they are. 

Take a mother who works as an accountant, for example. The thing that might take her from feeling like a parent into a hard-working accountant could be the act of walking into the four walls of her office. In a remote work environment, that line is blurred, and so too are her various identities.

“We know that your personal identity, whether it’s at work or as a parent, child or partner, can affect your motivation,” says Sinha. “It can also affect how efficacious you feel and your confidence in your own skills.”

The key to regaining a sense of control over your identity, she says, is to understand if you’re a segmenter or an integrator.

“Work-life balance literature has found some people prefer to have integrated identities where they shift between things. Integrators mix the domains of their life and the different identities that come with them; they are all fluid with one another,” she says. “Segmenters, however, like to leave their parenting identity, for example, at the school drop-off in order to get into their worker identity.”

Managers should be having conversations about which category people fall into.

“This might be a conversation about how you prefer to structure your day to best align with being a segmenter or an integrator.”

Sinha also suggests managers help people to figure out where they sit by drawing a Venn diagram to understand and visualise any overlaps in their identities.

“Then they can say, ‘This is how much this currently overlaps, but this is how much I want it to overlap,’ so the employee and manager can talk about ways to solve any gaps,” says Sinha.

“We know that your personal identity, whether it’s at work or as a parent, child or partner, can affect your motivation.”

WFH: 2020 and beyond

We’re venturing into new territory and our old tools, processes and research might not hold up against the backdrop of a workforce that has been forced to operate in new environments and in new ways.

“People with different personalities in different types of work have different outcomes working from home,” says Sander. 

“It’s convenient to believe a one-size-fits-all approach will work – for example that everyone will be happy to hot-desk – but that is just not the reality. The thinking that there is one ideal way to do things is substandard.” 

She adds that a lot of studies about issues with working from home are now quite old and the technology platforms have advanced. 

“I think we need to start thinking about remote work differently.” 

Sinha says the way to do this is to wipe the slate clean and start afresh. 

“HR professionals have to stop working on past assumptions. [Employers] should create an evidence-based intervention model by collecting data on some of these hypotheses that are currently being discussed about remote working,” says Sinha.

“There’s been a lot of research about flexible work arrangements, but it’s always about location and time. Now we need to take into account social connection, homeschooling children while working, boundaries around hybrid teams, etcetera.”

A simple way to start doing this is to have remote employees keep a diary.

“Get a broad section of your workforce – different demographics, ages, living situations – so you can better understand their experiences,” says Sinha.

She’s currently trialling this approach with an organisation in the hopes of gaining a clear insight into its inner workings and pain points.

For example, who has aging parents? Who has young kids? And how do those peoples’ experiences of work differ? She’s also asking questions about how often they take breaks, if they’re able to achieve their tasks for the day and if they feel their personal life is interfering with work, or vice versa.

“This is how you create an inclusive remote work approach,” she says.

The key is to move away from a blanket approach to remote work policies and learn how to cater to individuals’ needs and circumstances.

HR professionals will play a critical role in making this happen, says Sander. They’ll be charged with helping leaders and employees alike to hone their emotional intelligence and shift their thinking and approach to work, ensuring that even our virtual workplaces put people first.

“At the end of the day, if employees aren’t physically and psychologically comfortable, and if they don’t feel valued, then nothing else is going to work.”

 

20 Nov, 2020
Generation Z: 6 Characteristics of Centennials
Entrepreneur Asia Pacific

Members of Generation Z or centennials born between 1995 and 2010, already constitute 20% of the workforce in the world even though most of them are still studying, thus being a fundamental part in the transformation of the current world as a result of the pandemic.

In a few years, this generation will have to practically take over the world, however, will they be prepared to face the challenges that this entails? Here are some features of Gen Z that will allow you to embrace their leadership in the near future.

1. Natives of the digital age

Centennials do not know the world without screens, digital social networks or smartphones, so they are always connected, they are multitask and multiscreen. A survey conducted by Dell Technologies of more than 12,000 young people from 17 countries reported that 80% of them aspire to work with cutting-edge technology, while 52% are sure of having the technological skills that employers require.

2. Social and environmental awareness

This makes them conscientious consumers who choose sustainable brands, in addition to actively participating (and even founding) environmental organizations or with a social cause, as well as being much more open and inclusive than their previous generations.

3. Pragmatic and realistic

In other words, the perfect mix between millennial dreamers and rational X Gen.

3. Adaptable and resilient

The “oldest” of the centennials are barely 25 years old, however, they have already experienced threats of terrorism, climate change, several economic recessions and even a pandemic, which has allowed them to boost their resilience capacity and adapt to environments adverse.

4. Creative and self-taught

For this reason, educators must find new tools to “cultivate” knowledge in young people, who are passionate about self-learning and who consider soft skills as an essential part of their training process.

5. They work on what they are passionate about.

This allows them to consciously choose which company to work or self-employ, adapt to various work contexts (such as the home-office or the hybrid schemes posed by the new normal) and live without prejudice with their previous generations.

4 Nov, 2020
‘Avocado leaders’: what are they? And why your organisation needs them
SOURCE:
HRM Online
HRM Online

Research from Macquarie University Business School unpacks the new, COVID-inspired workplace leader.

There are as many leadership styles as there are shades on the colour wheel. While some people like to rule with an iron fist, others prefer to take on the qualities of a transformational leader, for example. Each preference is dependent, of course, on the circumstances the leaders are operating in and the people they’re managing.

The pandemic has presented a common circumstance for all workplaces across the globe, meaning some leaders have changed tact. Many have been forced to up their game and hone their leadership style to zero in on employees’ needs and challenges.

When the pandemic is in the dust, some of them will slip back into their old ways – that’s inevitable. Others will look back and remember COVID-19 simply as “this thing we got through”. For others, however, this will be the catalyst that caused them to fundamentally rethink and reshape how they choose to lead.

New research from Macquarie Business School and consultancy firm We Are Unity delves into the emergence of a new type of pandemic-inspired leader – the avocado leader.

After interviewing leaders of ASX200 companies and 100 mid-to-senior level managers across Australia, they saw an important shift in leadership behaviours due to the pandemic. The big question is, is this shift here to stay?

What is an avocado leader?

“An avocado leader is someone with a soft, empathetic outer layer balanced with a harder, commercially-focused core,” says Nick Tucker, culture and performance lead at We Are Unity.

Over the last few decades, we’ve seen incremental shifts towards building leaders’ ‘soft skills’ but, in most cases, it hasn’t been considered a priority.

“We’ve never seen an executive have their bonus hinge upon their level of self awareness or empathy, right? It’s all about business results and achieving that through a commercial lens,” says Tucker.

The problem with this approach is that it misses the most crucial challenges that employees face in 2020.

“We need to show employees that we care about their wellbeing and if they’re spending 10 hours of the day staring into their Zoom calls.”

COVID-19 has upped that care factor in a massive way. Leaders, the report found, are now moving towards much more human-centric behaviours.

According to the report, leadership behaviours driving change at pace are empathy and demonstrating care (22 per cent), decisiveness (21 per cent) and connectedness through proactively nurturing relationships with employees (17 per cent). 

Making speedy decisions in tense times is leadership 101, so it’s no surprise that this came out as one of the key responses. More surprising, and promising, are the statistics around connectedness between leaders and their employees. Seventeen per cent may not be an overwhelming number, but it’s certainly not insignificant. 

“I think this is a great concept, particularly as we move away from the old-style management from ten years ago which focused on not asking about the personal issues,” says Denise Jepsen, associate professor at Macquarie Business School.

“Now the world has changed and we’re seeing managers start to realise that it is a whole person that they’ve employed,” she says.

“Many managers have always been hard on the inside. They’ve been asked to be commercially-minded. Now we’re asking them to be soft on the outside; to be human.”

It’s important to note that Tucker and Jepsen aren’t denying how necessary commercially-minded leaders are – that’s why they’ve put that at the centre of their concept. They’re simply encouraging leaders to take a more holistic view.

“There’s a lot of blood being split at the moment and fear circulating. You do need to have that tough core to manage those things. We need those businesses to stay in business. It’s tough out there,” says Jepsen.

Advocating for avocado leadership

If someone has been leading a certain way for, say, 30 years, asking them to ‘soften up’ is akin to the old cliche “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks”. 

To encourage a leadership mindset shift, Tucker says HR professionals should focus on three things: resetting expectations, building soft skill capabilities and holding them accountable.

Getting these three things right is your recipe for competitive advantage, he says.

Start by creating a common agenda that is understood by all and embedded into your company culture. Creating the right level of urgency – i.e. a burning platform for change – can enable organisations to “cut through red tape, empower decision-making and deliver results”, the report says. 

It notes that you need to strike the right balance when encouraging a sense of urgency – you don’t want to add undue stress onto people and exacerbate underlying wellbeing issues.

Taking the time to review your listening strategy and performance metrics, the report reads, is also an effective way to ensure you’re gathering the best data to inform the decisions the business is making – and to track employee sentiment about leadership.

Tucker adds that you need to offer measurable and observable outcomes that are data-backed.

“The biggest tool I use with executives in terms of getting them to shift their behaviours or mindsets is by proving the link to the commercials.”

“That’s where people analytics plays a key role. Build a framework that’s based in real science and predictive analytics so you know you’re focusing on the right thing.” 

For HR professionals, the key is helping organisations place the same value on soft behaviours as the commercial ones.

“What happens when sales go down? The company creates a tiger team and does all this extra work to figure out what’s going on,” says Tucker. 

“But if you start seeing a leadership capability drop, people think, ‘It’s just COVID. That’s a confounding factor that I’ll just rationalise away.’ But if a leader isn’t delivering on [softer business metrics], that’s the same as the leader not delivering on one of those harder business metrics.”

How do we sustain this mindset?

Is all this a flash in the pan? Or could it signal a new era of workplace leaders? Jepsen believes it’s the latter.

“This will fundamentally change how people lead. It has to, from a health perspective. We need managers to understand that if their employees are able to work from home, you need to know where they live. What conditions are they working in? Do they have the internet? For those in vulnerable groups, who do they live with? And where do those other people in the household work?”

Employers have to care not only about their employees, but also the context encompassing their lives. Adding more complexity to the matter, of course, is the fact that each individual person will have their own context. Leaders can’t have all the answers and no one should expect them to, but starting from a place of empathy and connection will help.

It makes no sense to ditch this new management approach, says Jepsen, because all it will take is for rumblings of another outbreak to occur and people will be flocking back to their homes. So leaders need to maintain that genuine care and concern in order to keep the wheels turning (also, because it’s just the right thing to do).

“If you start seeing a leadership capability drop, people think, ‘It’s just COVID. That’s a confounding factor that I’ll just rationalise away.’ But if a leader isn’t delivering on [softer business metrics], that’s the same as the leader not delivering on one of those harder business metrics.” – Nick Tucker

This is an opportunity for leaders to reset in a more thoughtful way, says Jepsen.

Prior to COVID-19, thinking about planning for the future of work felt like a mammoth task. The concept of what work will look and feel like felt difficult to grasp – like trying to imagine a new colour from scratch. Despite this, we felt we had time to research, trial and slowly transition into new ways of working and leading.

COVID-19 blew that time out of the water by adding a layer of urgency. The future of work isn’t a fluffy, far-reaching topic that we can ponder upon anymore. It’s here and workplace leaders are having to quickly sort the wheat from the chaff in terms of how they choose to proceed.

While it feels like an overwhelming task, we’re not going to reinvent our workplaces overnight. And it’s important to take bite-sized chunks. In this case, it’s about how to strengthen workplaces for the future by having capable leaders at the helm – leaders who can cope with tough business challenges while simultaneously catering to the vulnerabilities of their workforce.

The researchers are currently conducting interviews with the participants again to follow up and see how sentiment has shifted over the last few months.

“The first set of results was quite positive,” says Jepsen. “I think that’s the difference between corporate Australia and other parts of the business world. We’re expecting to see some interesting things in the next round, but there are probably going to be some tough realities to come out of those interviews too.

“HR has got a tough job ahead of them to help leaders keep the heart in the business without letting the softer issues go brown. Keep that skin on.”

26 Oct, 2020
3 Questions Jeff Bezos Asks Before Hiring Someone for Amazon That Everyone Should Consider
Entrepreneur

Would you like to work at Amazon or learn about the human resources of its founder? This will interest you. One of the company's first employees said in a 1999 interview that Jeff Bezos was in charge of interviewing candidates and that this person should raise the hiring standards for the next applicant.

However, Bezos's schedule became heavier with the growth of his company and of course he is no longer in charge of the human resources of the company, but through a letter written in 1998, he made clear the high standards of hiring that Amazon must have and three key questions for applicants.

According to Tom Popomaronis , in an article for CNBC , although these questions were written 22 years ago, they are timeless and should be taken into account by everyone, recruiters and candidates alike.

In his hiring meetings, Bezos would ask employees to answer these three questions before making a decision:

1. Will you admire this person?

“If you think about the people your life has admired, they are probably from whom you have been able to learn or take an example. For my part, I have always strived to only work with people I admire, and I encourage people here to be just as demanding. Life is definitely short to do otherwise, ”Bezos says in his letter .

2. Will this person increase the average level of effectiveness of the group they join?

“We want to fight against entropy. The bar has to go up continuously. I ask people to visualize the company 5 years from now. At that point, each of us should look around and say, "The standards are so high now, boy, I'm glad I walked in when I did!"

In this section, the founder of Amazon refers to the fact that they must always raise the hiring standards.

3. In what area could this person be a superstar?

“Many people have unique skills, interests and perspectives that enrich the work environment for all of us. Often it is something that is not even related to their jobs ”. This must be taken into account by employers to improve the quality of the work environment.

5 Aug, 2020
Victoria's deep business freeze to hit 250,000 workers
Financial Review

Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews' lockdown will lead to another 250,000 workers being stood down under unprecedented restrictions that will close all professional services offices, most retail shops and drastically limit manufacturing, construction and building sites for six weeks.

Chief executives and small businesses warned they might not survive the deep freeze on business, as they slammed a lack of consultation and deep confusion over the draconian measures.

 

The Premier admitted that "whenever you draw a line or whenever you write a list" there will "always be anomalies of people on any side of the line that you draw".

"Bunnings – you will no longer be able to go into a Bunnings store but you will be able to collect goods without making contact with anybody," Mr Andrews said.

Rob Scott, chief executive of Wesfarmers – one of the state's largest employers with 30,000 people across Bunnings, Officeworks, Kmart and Target – questioned why "you can still buy a slab of beer", and horse racing and greyhounds continued, but buying supplies for your children's study could not, as he urged further refinement of the rules.

"These are very severe and dramatic restrictions," Mr Scott told The Australian Financial Review. "There will be a very significant reduction in not only employment but in hours worked," he said, as the group sought clarification over several of the new rules.

Victoria recorded 429 new cases of the coronavirus on Monday and 13 new deaths, with eight of those deaths linked to aged-care facilities.

 

Banks, travel stocks and shopping centre owners suffered after the announcement, with the banks down between 1.8 per cent and 4.1 per cent, Flight Centre fell 6.6 per cent and Scentre Group dropped 5.6 per cent.

Under the changes, published online by the Financial Review ahead of the announcement, supermarkets and grocery stores including the local fruit, butcher and baker shops will remain open, as will bottle shops, pharmacies, petrol stations, banks, news agencies, post offices and "of course, everybody involved in our frontline response".

The national economic impact of today’s draconian measures in Victoria will devastate the livelihoods of millions in the state.

— Innes Willox, Ai Group chief executive

Businesses will have to close from midnight on Wednesday, while those allowed to continue under tough new rules will have to "enact a COVID-safe plan focused on safety, prevention and response in the event that coronavirus is linked to the workplace".

Mr Andrews said the government would unveil a permit system this week that would allow essential workers to explain to police why they were further than 5 kilometres from their home, required under stage-four restrictions, or were out during an unprecedented 8pm curfew that began on Sunday night.

However, the shutdown went much further than many were expecting, including that large commercial building sites of more than three storeys will not be able to have more than 25 per cent of their workforce.

For residential construction, it will be unlawful to have more than five people on site at any time in what Premier Andrews described as "moving to a pilot-light phase".

Residential construction already under way and construction of critical infrastructure or that connected to essential services can continue, as can essential services generally, such as electricity, gas, water, waste and telecommunications.

The essential list also includes bank branches and critical banking services to support the provision of services, credit and payments. However, the banking industry is seeking further clarification of the changes amid significant uncertainty.

 

Bendigo and Adelaide Bank chief executive Marnie Baker said the changes might lead to "branch closures or a reduction in hours in some circumstances, if this is considered an appropriate precaution”.

Melbourne's public transport will continue during the lockdown, but services will be dramatically reduced.

Meatworks are also being put into a pilot-light phase, which means "whether it be lamb, poultry or beef, they will move to two-thirds production, so they will reduce their production by one-third. And those workplaces will look very different," Mr Andrews said.

'Heartbreaking decisions'

Prime Minister Scott Morrison also described the Victorian decision as "heartbreaking" and a "devastating blow", as he announced a $1500 a fortnight pandemic leave payment and Mr Andrews admitted it would "take years" for the Victorian economy to recover.

"These are heartbreaking decisions but there simply was no choice," Mr Andrews said dramatically at press conference just after 3pm on Monday, which sent business scrambling for information about the changes.

The Premier said about 1 million Victorians would not be going to their place of work under the new restrictions.

The state government estimated around 250,000 people have already been stood down and are not going to work.

About 500,000 are working from home, and another 250,000 workers will be forced to stay home under Monday's announced changes.

However, the changes are expected to have a devastating impact on the retail sector, where restaurants, cafes, beauty parlours, gyms, hairdressers and car dealerships are among businesses that will be forced to close.

Retailing billionaire Solomon Lew, chairman of ASX-listed Premier Investment whose stores include Just Jeans, Jay Jays, Portmans, Dotti, Smiggle and Peter Alexander, said Mr Andrews had waited too long.

"In my view the Andrews government should have moved faster to tighten restrictions. Delaying has only placed further pressure on the rest of the country and the national economy," he said.

"We expect significant consequences from the inaction, in particular, vast amounts of cost in federal government stimulus that is going to be required to support the Victorian community through this challenging period."

Mr Andrews announced Melbourne metro businesses would receive a further $5000 grant, on top of an initial $5000 grant when lockdown 2.0 was announced, and an earlier $10,000 grant from the initial lockdown.

"It will finish up being in aggregate terms, first and second wave payments, in the order of $20,000, together with a number of other waivers of taxes and charges, and for some businesses, many businesses, all of those really significant payroll tax refunds," he said.

However, business groups, including the Ai Group, warned the restrictions would be devastating for employers and their staff.

“The national economic impact of today’s draconian measures in Victoria will devastate the livelihoods of millions in the state,” Ai Group chief executive Innes Willox said.

“Closing or restricting large swaths of manufacturing and construction as well as their supply chains brings the hammer down on sectors that have been responsible for relatively little transmission, which have followed strict COVID-safe plans and are vital to the community and the country’s economic well-being.

“Many Victorian businesses operate and supply goods and services across borders and the restrictions on well over 20 per cent of Australia’s economic activity will have massive flow-on implications across the nation,' he said.

"Many businesses will struggle to reopen after the minimum six weeks of these restrictions and closures. The future of their employees is now uncertain."

The head of Ai Group in Victoria, Tim Piper, said: “The total Victorian supply chain has not been fully considered in the structure of these restrictions. Companies such as metal fabricators which support the food sector, health and related activities have been told to close.

"While there are some narrow exceptions there has been no recognition of how interconnected these businesses are.

“The gaps in the supply chain created by these closures and restrictions will inevitably be met by interstate companies. This may numb some of the national implications but will be cold comfort for businesses and their Victorian employees if customers are lost permanently.”

27 Jul, 2020
The list of 50 best places to work in Australia in 2020 is out now
Financial Review

 

The 50 Best Places to Work Australia list has been released, which includes companies such as Canva and Salesforce.

The list was chosen by global workplace research and consulting firm Great Place to Work. It was done between September 2019 and June 2020 – including when COVID-19 hit – and took into account more than 39,000 Aussie based workers across 124 companies.

 

Melanie Perkins, co-founder of design giant Canva, which created a "Keeping the Vibe Alive" website amid the pandemic. Peter Braig

 

Each company in the study for the best places to work list earns a score based on two main factors. The majority (two-thirds) is based on employee responses to a survey and the remaining one-third comes from Great Place to Work’s evaluation of company procedures and policies.

The list looked at companies with more than 1000 workers, between 100 and 999 workers and fewer than 100 workers.

“Through the 2020 Best Places to Work study process, we have had the opportunity to observe how businesses inspire, invent, and innovate as they introduced new initiatives whilst navigating through this changing landscape,” the report said.

“The 2020 Best Places to Work sprang into action early on by leading and demonstrating care for their employees by being supportive, communicative, and flexible through this time of uncertainty with clarity and confidence.”

Here are 20 companies that made it onto the list and what they did during the coronavirus pandemic:

More than 1000 workers:

  • Cisco Systems Australia

During the pandemic, the company unveiled a "Your Response to COVID-19" campaign asking employees to suggest ways they could take action to help their teams, customers and community.

  • Salesforce

The company launched a B-Well Together half-hour series with tips and resources from wellbeing experts that employees and their families could use. It became so popular, Salesforce decided to make it available to customers and communities as well.

  • SAP Australia

SAP released a remote "pulse check" for employees to share how they were feeling and what management could do to support them. The company also launched health and wellbeing resources such as mindfulness sessions and virtual yoga.

  • Mars Australia

The consumer goods company launched a "Be Well" program to help workers become emotionally resilient, mentally focused and physically energised.

  • DHL Express

Transport and logistics company DHL held virtual team building events and even sent out care packs to those working from home.

Between 100 and 999 workers:

  • Interactive

IT services provider Interactive implemented new ways to connect with workers during the pandemic by using social channels and collaboration tools.

  • AbbVie

Biotechnology company AbbVie reviewed its internal communication plan during the pandemic and launched a daily bulletin that kept workers informed about any updates.

  • Canva

Design giant Canva created a "Keeping the Vibe Alive" website with resources that helped reinforce staff camaraderie while they work remotely. The company also launched more Slack channels with work-from-home tips and tricks and how-tos.

  • SafetyCulture

During the pandemic, SafetyCulture launched measures to keep workers mentally and physically healthy, such as access to online fitness videos and launching a mental fitness app.

  • BPAY Group

Amid the pandemic, BPAY’s CEO Blog rolled out weekly instead of fortnightly to keep workers updated on the business, how he is feeling personally and share his thoughts on a range of topics. It’s also a way for workers to connect and speak with him.

  • Insight

IT company Insight worked with its employees during the pandemic to make sure they had the right tools and systems when working from home. It also provided workers with chairs and monitors where needed.

  • OMD Australia

Media and Communications agency OMD created a weekly newsletter during COVID which was about promoting health and wellbeing while in isolation.

  • Nintex

Software business Nintex rolled out a range of initiatives during the pandemic, including a COVID Committee, company updates though Slack, virtual meetings and a webpage with local information about the coronavirus.

  • Mantel Group

Mantel introduced a weekly Q&A live forum where the company discussed business updates, health and safety and accepted questions from employees.

  • Stryker

During the pandemic, medical technology company Stryker rolled out a redeployment plan, which included internal and external secondments (temporarily transferring a worker to another position) and developing a "Stryk-tasker" role for one-off projects.

  • Intuit Australia

When the pandemic struck, Intuit decided to close its Sydney office and allow remote work. Information about working from home was put up on an internal microsite to guide employees.

  • Kronos

Kronos rolled out a "Working Virtually" microsite to support staff as they work through the pandemic.

  • Adobe

During the pandemic, Adobe offered a flexible schedule to workers. It also released a “Time Off” benefit, which provides up to 20 working days off for the rest of the year for employees who can’t work because of a COVID-19-related issue.

  • Envato

During the pandemic, Envato provided two weeks extra paid leave for workers who were unwell or caring for an immediate member of the family.

  • Service Now

The company developed a virtual "global village" to help parents with home-schooling. This included virtual story reading sessions and access to high school maths tutorials.

  • Starlight Children’s Foundation

The organisation created a program that enabled workers to donate their annual leave towards a "hardship fund". The fund would in turn be used by Starlight to pay casual workers who had reduced or no shifts.

Other companies that made it onto the list include digital bank UBank, comparison site Finder, eBay Australia and the Green Building Council of Australia. You can request a copy here.

22 Jul, 2020
Transformational leaders make work better, but what exactly are they?
SOURCE:
HRM Online
HRM Online

They make work more meaningful for employees and improve their performance. But they aren’t so easy to come by.

When the alarms are tripped and the sirens wail, before we panic, we look to see what everyone else is doing. The person we turn towards first is the one we perceive to be in charge. Do they understand what’s going on? Do they have a plan to get us out?

This human instinct played out in organisations all across the world this year. We all looked to our managers and company leaders to guide us through the ever changing nature of the pandemic. For a few people, they turned to someone they believed in, someone who was already making their lives better. But perhaps not in the way they think.

What makes a leader ‘transformational’?

Transformational leadership is the subject of quite a bit of scholarship. And no, we’re not just talking about super famous people – it’s not Abraham Lincoln or bust. Supervisors of varying levels of fame and anonymity qualify. 

In a much cited paper published in the Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Kara Arnold, Nick Turner and Julian Barling describe two studies they conducted into how transformational leaders impacted the psychological wellbeing of employees. In it, they outline a theory that breaks down a transformational leader into four dimensions:

  • Idealised influence – essentially leader’s ethical qualities, admirable behaviours and confidence which causes people to trust them. Also called charisma, this is what might come to mind  when you think of a role model.
  • Inspirational motivation – the level to which the leader holds high expectations of their team and encourages them to achieve more than they thought possible. Someone with “vision”.
  • Intellectual stimulation – the ability to get people to think outside the box and figure things out for themselves.
  • Individualised consideration – the level to which a leader treats each follower as their own person, coaches them and appreciates their work.

A transformational leader should have all of these qualities, but we shouldn’t imagine they have them in equal proportions. For example, from all reports, Steve Jobs displayed high levels of inspirational motivation and intellectual stimulation, but was lacking in both consistently ethical behaviour (he apparently parked in places reserved for those living with a disability) and individualised consideration (search the web for “Steve Jobs Cruel” – I’ll wait).

This raises the interesting question of whether someone who had an abundance of one or two transformational dimensions but had zilch of the others should be considered transformational. At what point does someone crossover from a brilliant leader with less than desirable qualities into a tyrant with some redeeming qualities? There’s a reason so many companies now have policies against hiring ‘brilliant jerks’.

For HR professionals who specialise in leadership coaching and learning and development, it is worth considering the extent to which they are fostering the above four dimensions. Some of it can be trained – you can teach active listening techniques, for example – but courses focused on improving behaviour (mindfulness, resilience, etc) should also be considered. 

But before figuring out what that would look like, it’s worth understanding how transformational leaders help organisations.

Meaningful work

In the paper mentioned above, the researchers hypothesised that “the positive relationship between transformational leadership and psychological wellbeing is mediated by perceptions of meaningful work”. 

As HRM wrote recently, meaningful work is not the same as engagement or job satisfaction, but it can be a driver of both. Meaningful work is about being able to answer positively to a question such as: “Does what I do contribute to something larger than myself, and is that thing worthwhile?”. 

So transformational leaders aren’t necessarily making people happy directly, they are shaping peoples’ jobs so the work itself contributes to each individual’s wellbeing. 

In a practical sense, this means they are helping employees connect their day-to-day tasks to a larger narrative; giving them a role both they and others respect; making sure employees have relationships with management, colleagues and customers; and selling them on the organisation’s vision (see this article for how each of these contributes to meaningfulness).

Organisational identification and job performance

More recent research published in the International Journal of Hospitality Management found an even more complex relational structure between transformational leadership and organisational outcomes.

The following diagram is a bit academic, but it’s quite revealing.

Most of these terms are pretty self-explanatory, except perhaps for organisational citizenship behaviours. What that refers to is acts that aren’t directly performance managed or rewarded, but that nevertheless have an impact on profitability, productivity and customer satisfaction. For example, think of the colleague who proactively lets people know they won’t be available at certain times or offers to do a coffee run, or the worker who goes above and beyond to help a distressed customer.

What the diagram shows is that transformational leadership has a huge direct impact on organisational identification (which backs up the research on meaningful work) and a significant impact on work engagement. There are then flow-on effects to both job performance and organisational citizenship behaviours. 

The advantage of understanding all this for HR professionals is in enriching their evaluation of management, and their ability to improve upon it. Rather than simply asking staff to give their manager a rating, you can ask more specific questions about whether the manager helps people connect with their organisation’s mission. Rather than trying to make a one-to-one connection between team productivity and managers, you can try and see how it’s mediated by engagement.

Because the truth is there is a huge difference between a manager who people like and a manager who helps your organisation thrive. ‘Transformational’ isn’t a popularity contest, it’s a specific set of behaviours and qualities that can be measured.

15 Jul, 2020
5 Reasons Why Emotional Intelligence Is the Future of Work
Entrepreneur

Human emotion is one of the most powerful forces on the planet. Emotions start wars and create peace; spark love and force divorce. While unavoidable, emotions are also indispensable sources of orientation and propel us to take action. But unbridled emotion can make us and those around us to act irrationally. 

Emotional intelligence is a relatively new construct, but its impact on how we work will be significant moving forward. The first academic article on emotional intelligence appeared in 1990, but the topic didn’t become mainstream until Daniel Goleman’s 1995 book, Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ.

Emotional intelligence is the ability to identify and manage one’s personal emotions and the emotions of others. Knowing how you'd feel in a certain situation helps you to gauge how others will feel in a similar environment thus enabling favorable social interactions and evoking favorable reactions from others.

Emotional intelligent people gain social aptitudes such as the ability to resolve conflict, teach others or manage teams. 

The business case for emotional intelligence

Rising rates of loneliness, depression, and mental health concerns represent an opportunity for companies and leaders to embrace emotional intelligence in order to reengage people at work and life. 

According to Google’s famous Project Aristotle initiative, a high-performing team needs three things: 1) a strong awareness of the importance of social connections or “social sensitivity,” 2) an environment where each person speaks equally, and 3) psychological safety where everyone feels safe to show and employ themselves without fear of negative consequences. To harness these three elements of a successful team, it takes an emotionally intelligent leader.

People feel cared for when these three items are present among a team or organization. People that feel cared for are more loyal, engaged, and productive.

In fact, employees who feel cared for by their organization are…

  • 10 times more likely to recommend their company as a great place to work.
  • 9 times more likely to stay at their company for three or more years.
  • 7 times more likely to feel included at work.
  • 4 times less likely to suffer from stress and burnout.
  • 2 times as likely to be engaged at work.

1. Deep human needs

The three core human needs of work (and life) are to survive, belong and become. Much like Maslov’s Hierarchy of Needs, once humans fulfill the need of food, water and shelter they will then seek to be accepted for who they are, and then finally to learn and grow to become their best selves.

As the world advances, more and more survival needs are being consistently met causing the workforce to turn their attention to the next tier of needs, most immediately being belonging. Emotionally intelligent leaders are capable of extending belonging to their teams.

2. Technology will enhance humanity

The Industrial Revolution required strong workers. The Information Age required knowledgeable workers. The future age of work will require emotionally intelligent workers. 

As the world fills with more sophisticated technology such as artificial intelligence and 5G, human skills like compassion and empathy will define the competitive edge of workers and entire organizations.

In addition, as the world becomes more high-tech, there will be a desire and opportunity for more high-touch. As technology advances, it will take on a lot of the work that humans aren’t good at, don’t like, or too dangerous. This will leave us with more time and capacity to show up emotionally for each other.

For example, if artificial intelligence can diagnose diseases with greater accuracy than a doctor, doctors will have more margin to deliver the much needed human elements of empathy and compassion to patients. Or if robots can assemble a customer’s meal more accurately and efficiently than a human, that creates an opportunity for a human to get out from behind the counter to hold the door for a customer or meet them at their car during a rainstorm.

3. Work and life blending

Not only are emotions finding their way into work, but workers want it more. A pervasive myth exists that emotions don’t belong at work, and this often leads us to mistakenly equate professionalism with being stoic or cold.

The boundaries between work and life continue to blur. People are bringing more work home, and more personal life is spilling into work. Try as we might, we cannot flip a switch and leave our pain, joy, sorrow and excitement at the office door. Emotions travel with us.

According to Liz Fossien, co-author of the Wall Street Journal best-seller, No Hard Feelings: The Secret Power of Embracing Emotions at Work, “in the moments when our colleagues drop their glossy professional presentation, we are much more likely to believe what they are telling us. We feel connected to the people around us. We try harder. Perform better. And we are just generally kinder. So it’s about time we learn how to embrace emotion at work."

4. Evolving employer-employee relationship

In the past, the employer-employee relationship was very transactional. Punch in, punch out and collect a check. But in today’s always-on work culture, the boundaries of the employee-employer relationship are expanding. And considering work is the activity people spend the most time engaged with after sleep, employees are expecting more from the workplace.

More and more employers are leaning into the highly emotional aspects of their employees’ lives. For example, Hilton offers an adoption assistance program that will reimburse team members for qualified adoption expense up to $10,000 per child, with no limit to the number of adoptions. Facebook offers employees up to 20 days of bereavement leave in the event of a family member’s death. 

As employees seek more from their employers, moving from employing to empowering will serve employers well. 

5. Generation Z demands it

Companies are struggling to adapt to the evolving emotional needs of their workforce. This is especially true among the emerging generations as 18-to-25-year-olds have the highest prevalence of serious mental illness compared to other age groups, according to the National Institute of Mental Health. Additionally, Gen Z is the loneliest generation in the workplace with 73 percent reporting sometimes or always feeling alone.

It’s not surprising then that more than any other generation, Gen Z wants their managers to be empathetic, according to The Center for Generational Kinetics' 2020 study, Solving the Remote Work Challenge Across Generations.

If the youth is the future, and Gen Z are lonely and psychologically stressed then the future of work must be emotional intelligence.

13 Jul, 2020
Work and pandemics: lessons from the past
SOURCE:
HRM
HRM

The history of pandemics offers lessons for how workplaces can respond to what’s happening during COVID-19.

In March, media outlets around the world saw Singapore as an example of how the spread of a deadly infection could be suppressed by a diligent government. On 18 March it recorded 47 new infections. Two weeks later, on 31 March, it recorded 47 again. The city-state seemed to have adeptly curbed exponential growth.

But then the curve arced upwards. Eighteen days later the country recorded 942 new cases. Two days after that daily cases peaked at 1,426. Singapore quickly went from role model to cautionary tale. Its failure was rooted in class distinctions. The new wave mostly affected Singapore’s community of one million migrant workers. According to reports, they are poorly paid and sleep in bunk beds in tiny rooms which can contain upwards of 20 people.

You could argue that a similar oversight, if nowhere near as severe, has happened during the recent surge of COVID-19 cases in Melbourne. Vulnerable communities in public housing have been particularly affected.

In hindsight it seems obvious countries should have paid special attention to these communities. But hindsight of a different sort – a knowledge of the history of epidemics – might have offered them foresight. 

During the 1918 flu pandemic, in countries all over the world it was the poorer and more marginalised who suffered the most. Neglecting them ensured the virus lives longer in the population and increases the suffering of all. 

As Laura Spinney writes in Pale Rider: The Spanish Flu of 1918 and How It Changed the World, “[I]t was bad diet, crowded living conditions and poor access to healthcare that weakened the constitution, rendering the poor, immigrants and ethnic minorities more susceptible to disease.” 

In Korea this meant ethnic Koreans were twice as likely to die as Japanese occupiers, even though their infection rates were similar. In France, it was servants, collected into cramped, poorly ventilated and unclean shared sleeping spaces, who suffered the most. A quarter of the women who died from the influenza in France were maids.

As long as humankind has walked the earth we have been dealing with disease. While so much is novel about this novel coronavirus, we can still look to the last 100 years for lessons on how epidemics affect work and workplaces.

Transparency

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the governments of both China and the USA initially downplayed the virus to disastrous results. We have seen few workplace outbreaks in Australia, but wherever they happen all over the world, you can usually guess it was caused by some combination of ignorance, wilful ignorance and censorship. The desire to achieve some human goal – profits, morale, etc. – can blind people to the emotionless spread of the virus.

In workplaces, the need for transparency extends to job security. Some company leaders, in an effort to maintain employee mood, prefer to not give even a hint that restructuring is being considered. But this can backfire.

In an article for HRM, HR consultant and AHRI South Australia state president Susan Sadler CPHR said it’s detrimental to censor such issues.

“Because the next day the situation might change. And the solution to keeping everyone employed is getting their agreement to reduce their hours by 25 per cent. And you can only do that with agreement from the workforce,” she said.

“You want to flag it [job insecurity], while not worrying people. You want to keep them involved in and contributing to the solution if you can. Because you will get a better result.”

History backs her up. In John Barry’s The Great Influenza: The Story of the Deadliest Pandemic in History, he writes that one of the most dangerous responses to the virus was censorship. In language similar to that which we heard from some parts of the world earlier this year, governments in 1918 were keen to downplay the deadliness of the virus. 

In the US, writes Barry, no national official “ever publicly acknowledged the danger”. The man overseeing health in the nation’s shipyards, Colonel Philip Doane, went so far as to tell the Associated Press, “The so-called Spanish influenza is nothing more or less than old fashioned grippe.” 

But it wasn’t ‘only the flu’, it infected a third of the world and killed somewhere between 17-100 million people (one reason we don’t know the number of deaths more accurately was the censorship itself). 

With World War One still being fought, the press held the state line on propaganda. The feeling was that ‘public morale’ must be maintained at any cost. So, Barry writes, just as the death of half an army unit would be described as ‘brisk fighting’ and a period of food and resource rationing was described as ‘a time of abundance’, the media either downplayed the seriousness of the virus or didn’t mention it at all.

It backfired. You cannot message a virus out of existence. Words can either add to trust and goodwill or they detract from it. Barry vividly describes how Philadelphia became a nightmare to live in as all sense of public mindedness was replaced by individuals’ need to survive. It might be the worst example of it, but the pattern was replicated worldwide.

As Barry writes: “Fear drove the people, and the government and the press could not control it. They could not control it because every true report had been diluted with lies. And the more the officials and newspapers reassured, the more they said, There is no cause for alarm if proper precautions are taken, or Influenza is nothing more or less than old-fashioned grippe, the more people believed themselves cast adrift, adrift with no one to trust, adrift on an ocean of death.”

The effects of sickness

Australia has been lucky to avoid too many total infections. But if the infection rate rises again, we would do well to remember that life or death are not the only outcomes of catching COVID-19.

In 1919, at the Versailles Peace Conference, then US president Woodrow Wilson caught influenza. Coughing so much he could barely catch a breath and experiencing a 39.4 degree fever and diarrhoea, he was incapacitated in bed for three days. Eventually, feeling somewhat better, he rejoined the negotiations from that bed.

Staffers and confidantes saw a changed man. And it wasn’t just that he seemed physically diminished. In Barry’s recounting, future US president Herbert Hoover, who was in France at the time, said Wilson had gone from “incisive” and “quick” to hesitant, stubborn and dulled. He said Wilson’s mind had lost “resiliency”. 

A lot of world history turned on what happened at the conference. Before his illness Wilson was playing hard ball. He was seeking a peace without victory – one that would let the world rebuild in a way that would prevent future conflict. He also wanted to establish democracy throughout Europe. “The only principle I recognize is that of the consent of the governed,” he said. He had made a serious threat to leave the conference unless this was achieved.

After the illness, he essentially caved to the demands of France and Britain. Even people that were there predicted its final outcome as being disastrous for long-term prospects of peace. The wide historical consensus is that they were right, it was a dominant cause of World War Two. It’s impossible to say what Wilson would have done if he hadn’t caught the illness, but Barry makes a persuasive argument that the epidemic wounded the world beyond the death count. 

We are lucky enough in the modern age that when we think about something with ‘flu-like symptoms’ we surmise that, if we’re young and otherwise healthy, we’ll be recovered from an illness within a couple of weeks. But a virus to which you have no natural protection can be far more damaging.

“Fear drove the people, and the government and the press could not control it.” – John Barry

In an opinion piece for the New York Times, member of its editorial board Mara Gay wrote about what it was like to catch COVID-19. The day before she had symptoms she ran three miles and walked 10 more. 

“Nearly a month later,” she writes, “I’m still sleeping on my stomach and still can’t go for a run.” Sleeping on her stomach was necessary to get enough oxygen flow while she’s in bed. She is 30 years old. 

The lessons we should be taking from these stories today is that if someone gets the virus, you should not presume they will return to work after their quarantine period is over. Nor should you expect that once they do return they will be able to operate at full strength. In many cases it would be appropriate to treat the virus as a serious injury and implement comprehensive return-to-work procedures.

If a leader gets the virus, it’s also important to remember that the ability to make sound decisions is tied to health. Illnesses are emotionally as well as physically exhausting. Letting people who’ve come back from COVID-19 know that it’s okay to not be okay, and consulting with them if their behaviour seems troubling, are appropriate courses of action.

Epidemics and diversity

Humans have a tendency to attach shame to sickness. It might even be instinctual, a primal way of ensuring social distancing happens. In March, when the news was getting worse by the day, we all experienced the fear of this instinct whenever we coughed and furtively glanced around to see how people would react. This instinct can be seen in the online shaming of people who are outdoors in groups. It’s not concern that is being expressed, it’s a form of disgust. 

Organisations should be aware of this human tendency, because it has real ramifications. It could lead to bullying or discrimination claims. In March and April, there were reports of racism where people were vilified or ostracised because they were believed to be Chinese. 

You can imagine other scenarios where workplace behaviour might step over a line. For example, someone might be directed to work from home or to take leave, without consultation, because they are immuno-compromised. While well intentioned, it could amount to adverse action, because physical disabilities are a protected attribute under Australian law.

The AIDS epidemic is the most vivid example of how this human drive to shame others because of a disease can manifest in ugly ways. 

In 1987, analytics and advisory company Gallup conducted a poll in the US. It found 51 per cent of Americans felt  it was people’s own fault if they contracted AIDS, and 46 per cent felt AIDS victims only had themselves to blame. Even more troubling was that 33 per cent felt employers should be allowed to fire staff with AIDS and 60 per cent felt people with AIDS should be forced to carry a card identifying them as carriers.

While its peak cultural impact in Australia and other developed countries was in the eighties, this epidemic isn’t just historical. Seventy-five million people have been infected with HIV since the epidemic began, according to the World Health Organisation. It’s an ongoing issue. As of the end of 2018, approximately 37.9 million people are living with HIV. 

Research from UK HIV awareness not-for-profit Avert examined the stigma still attached to a diagnosis. In Estonia eight per cent of people living with HIV have lost their job or source of income because of it, as did 45 per cent of people in Nigeria. Five per cent of people living with HIV in Mexico have been refused a job opportunity and in Malaysia 54 per cent reported being discriminated against by employers.

In 1984, Chris Smith became the first UK member of parliament to come out as gay. He did so at a rally against a potential ban against homosexaul employees in a town council. It was a brave, heroic decision in a time when hatred of homosexuality was very much a cultural norm. In 1987, Smith was diagnosed as HIV-positive. He did not reveal this fact until 2005.

There are two lessons in Smith’s story. The shame people attach to an illness is different from (and can be more piercing) than the shame attached to other differences. Secondly, that the shame attached to an illness is even harder to confront when you are already different.

If there is an underlying theme to these lessons it is that a desire to learn, honesty and empathy are needed to overcome the fear that epidemics place in our hearts. As long as COVID-19 is active and widespread the world will face ongoing uncertainty. To navigate it, it wouldn’t hurt to let history be our guide.

13 Jul, 2020
Schedule X extensions and other Award changes you should know about
SOURCE:
HRM
HRM

The FWC decided to extend several important award variations at the last minute.

In June the Fair Work Commission (FWC) announced it would not be extending the Schedule X changes made to 99 COVID-19 impacted awards, or the variations made to the Clerks, Restaurant and Hospitality awards. However, in the final weeks of June, applications were received from various industries urging the FWC to extend the variations past the June 30 cut off. 

The FWC agreed to extend some of the variations, however, this was not a blanket extension. For Clerks, Restaurant and Hospitality awards the extension was applied but with some new guidelines on when the variations can be used. As for Schedule X, the FWC decided not to apply the extensions uniformly to account for the varying impact COVID-19 has had on different industries. 

Here’s HRM’s breakdown of the recent decisions.

Schedule X extension

Earlier this year the FWC introduced two key features into some modern awards: pandemic leave and double annual leave at half pay. These variations were called Schedule X.

For most of the awards (you can see the full list here) the Schedule X variations have been extended until September 30, 2020. This will align with the proposed end of JobKeeper. 

The Electrical Power Industry Award 2010, an award not included in the original variation decision, also had the Schedule X variations applied with the September 30 end date.

For the Fast Food Industry Award 2010, General Retail Industry Award 2010, Hair and Beauty Industry Award 2010, Storage Services and Wholesale Award 2020 – collectively referred to as the Retail Awards – the extension has only been increased only until July 31, 2020.

Two specific awards were singled out for the harsh impact COIVD-19 has had on their respective industries. The Air Pilots Award 2020 had the Schedule X variation extended until December 30, 2020, and the Live Performance Award 2010 was given a 12 month extension to June 30, 2021. 

A selection of nine awards, collectively referred to as the Health Sector Awards (full list here), have had the extension applied “until further order of the Commission,” according to the decision handed down by the FWC. 

The decision noted that many employees would need to continue accessing unpaid pandemic leave, especially considering the recent spike in COVID-19 cases in Victoria. Pandemic leave was the biggest announcement to come from the Schedule X changes and was the one variation that was not similar to the Fair Work changes introduced under JobKeeper. 

Along with unpaid pandemic leave, there are two types of sick leave alternatives for people working in Victoria and Queensland.

In Victoria, the state government introduced a hardship fund for certain employees. If employees are diagnosed with COVID-19 or forced to self-isolate workers can receive a payment of $1,500 if they are a casual employee or have exhausted all their sick leave entitlements. Queenslanders have access to a similar payment but only if they have tested positive for COVID-19. 

In both states the employees must not be receiving any other benefits or salary supplements, such as JobKeeper, in order to be eligible for hardship fund payments. 

Other Award Changes

As HRM previously reported, in April there were three major changes made to the Clerks, Restaurant and Hospitality awards, all designed to give employers and employees more flexibility during the pandemic. These included:

  1. Greater flexibility in job roles and duties
  2. Greater flexibility in arranging work hours
  3. Increased flexibility when it comes to leave

The changes were implemented to give employers breathing room in an extremely uncertain environment. When restaurants didn’t know if they’d be able to open their doors, the variations allowed employers to reduce staff hours, even if they were full time employees. They also gave employers the power to ask workers under those awards to take leave when there was no work available. 

The FWC agreed to extend the variations in the clerks award until September 30. The Restaurant and Hospitality award provisions will extend until September 27, however, the variations only apply in certain circumstances, so cannot be used by all employers. The stand out caveat is that the variations do not apply if the business is receiving JobKeeper payments or is eligible for JobKeeper. 

New variations have also been implemented into the Vehicle Repair, Services and Retail Award 2020. Unlike the other awards, the FWC did not extend the employer powers of roles and duties in this award, however it did extend the variations in relation to work hours and annual leave, so employers in the vehicle sector can now reduce the hours of full-time and part-time employees.They can also direct employees to take annual leave. 

The FWC noted that the combination of bushfires, the pandemic and an economic downturn had greatly impacted the motor vehicle industry and the variations aim to keep people employed during this tough time. 

With the end of award variations planned to occur at the same time as JobKeeper payments come to an end, September is likely to be a tough month for Australian employers and employees alike. 

Some experts believe hundreds of organisations are existing in a “zombie” state, meaning they’re able to pay their employees through JobKeeper but don’t have a high chance of sustaining this practice in the long-term.e. Even the Reserve Bank of Australia has backed calls to continue financial stimulus beyond the September cut off period to avoid further damage to the economy.

Federal Treasurer Josh Frydenberg is due to provide an update on a possible JobKeeper extension on July 23.

29 Jun, 2020
No human is an island: unlearning isolation
SOURCE:
HRM
HRM

For most of this year we’ve been learning how to lead our lives in isolation. How do we get through that from a psychological perspective? And how do we unlearn it?

More than 200 years ago in the United States, Quakers championed solitary confinement as the humane alternative to corporal punishments such as flogging. The thought was that instead of being beaten, criminals would sit with themselves and reconnect with God. These days, solitary confinement is widely regarded as one of the worst punishments for prisoners. It’s psychological torture and is supposed to be reserved for those committing the most heinous of offences.

“We are born to be social,” says Dan Auerbach, an organisational psychology consultant at EmployeeAssistance.com.au. “We live in care for longer than any other species. We spend a good 18 years in the care of other adults, and we learn to rely on those social interactions. That need for connectedness lasts throughout our life.”

There is a vast difference between the isolation everyone has experienced due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the isolation imposed on prisoners. We’ve been able to enjoy some of the creature comforts of life – the view from a window, short trips outdoors and video calls with loved ones. And those of us with families or roommates weren’t so much as isolated but confined. 

The conditions we’ve been living in are less than desirable, but (for most of us) are in no way dire. But even this form of confinement and isolation has changed us because it’s so far removed from what human beings are used to.

Life is almost back to normal in Australia now. We can have groups of people in our homes, we can head to the pub with friends and most of the services we enjoy are back up and running. While this will make the world of difference, we’re not out of the woods yet. A second wave of infections could be just around the corner, infected people will continue to be quarantined and vulnerable people will choose to remain in self-isolation. So how should organisations be dealing with a workforce experiencing the short-term and long-term psychological impacts of isolation?

Lonely brains

Feeling isolated affects the human brain in many different ways. It can cause negative shifts in our mood, it affects how we sleep, and it has even been linked with death and increased exposure to disease.

Expert in social neuroscience, the late John Cacioppo, formerly a director at University of Chicago’s Center for Cognitive and Social Neuroscience, studied the effects of isolation for decades. Much of his work was dedicated to differentiating between objective isolation and perceived isolation (loneliness). He found both to have significant impacts on physical and mental health, but the latter is far more damaging.

In a 2009 research paper, Cacioppo and co-author Louise Hawkley found that, when compared with the objective experience of isolation, the subjective experience of loneliness is a stronger predictor of changes in things such as life satisfaction, elevated blood pressure and peoples’ perception of their environment.

They point to other research which suggests loneliness is linked with a negative “lifetime change in IQ” and depressive symptoms, and it can even change gene expression.

In one experiment, Cacioppo and his team placed  participants under hypnosis and made them feel lonely.

He talked through the results in a video for No Isolation, a Norwegian startup that creates communication tools to help combat loneliness and isolation. He said they proved that when you make someone feel lonely, they can become more depressed, shyer and hostile. They can also develop poorer social skills and a greater fear of negative evaluation.

“The effect of isolation on mortality is four times larger than obesity and it’s more prevalent,” says Cacioppo. “So when you think about obesity as a major health problem, think about felt isolation having four times the impact on your health.”

While this research suggests those feeling lonely are worse off than those of us who are simply frustrated from being confined indoors, what happens when there’s crossover? It’s very likely that many cases of objective isolation will lead to loneliness.

“Perhaps during isolation you feel you didn’t have the level of contact or support that you needed,” says Auerbach. “Or perhaps you lost the skills or confidence to connect with the people around you. Going back into the social environment could lead us to develop that sense of perceived isolation.”

He says it’s interesting to look at the reactions of infants and young people to isolation to better understand the adult experience.

“When they lose connection with somebody who’s caring for them, they become very distressed. There’s an outcry and eventually despondency and a collapse into a catatonic depression. Adults have other ways of coping and of masking what’s going on inside. But we often go through similar stages of feeling very, very frightened when we feel isolated – we’re clamoring for connection. And if we don’t get it for too long, we also become anxious and potentially depressed.

“When you think about obesity as a major health problem, think about felt isolation having four times the impact on your health.” –John Cacioppo

“Our primary motive in life is to seek a good, functional relationship. Quality connectedness with others is essential for good mental health.”

Expert isolator

Isolation experiences vary. Those who are more introverted are perhaps relishing the alone time. But for those who are struggling, what makes for a better isolation experience? There could be plenty of answers to a question like this – a strong Wi-Fi signal, living with others, easy access to essential services – but what stands out as particularly important is meaningful work. This is the opinion of Canadian Chris Hadfield, a former International Space Station astronaut.

There’s isolation, and there’s being locked inside a tube and hurtling through the emptiness of space for months at a time. Astronauts (and a selection of animals) are the only ones to know this feeling. 

Hadfield says it’s a matter of perspective. From one point of view, our lives are much narrower than we care to believe. While being in isolation feels restrictive – and let’s be clear, it is – we already operate in a very limited portion of the world.

“You’ve not seen everything; you’ve not met everybody; you haven’t done everything. Even if you’ve travelled a lot, you have still only seen a tiny fraction of the huge variety of the world,” he says.

Hadfield has circled the planet from space about 2,600 times. When returning from his longest mission, his perspective was expanded both figuratively and literally.

“I got to be as far away from the little room I was born in as nearly anyone ever has. I was able to truly see the world for what it is. In that time, you get to see a perspective that becomes a part of you.”

Cultural and religious differences, which are often magnified on earth, fade away in space, he says. He returned to earth with an optimism about the “proven resilience” of both the planet and its inhabitants. He’s viewing the COVID-19 pandemic through this lens.

Things are abnormal right now, he says. “There’s this weird danger – a virus that no-one is immune to. It doesn’t matter if you’re Australian or an Intuit living in northern Canada, we’re all vulnerable to [the same thing] and that’s a weird position to be in. Everybody’s life is threatened… it’s like a creeping fog in a bad movie. That’s very unsettling.

“The beauty of it is, for one of those rare moments in history, the entire world has a common enemy. That means we can have a common purpose. That’s an immensely unifying thing,” he says.

Hadfield says he also returned from space with a new sense of time. That’s probably because he wasn’t up there laying around watching Netflix. He was engaging in rigorous scientific work. Doing that, he says, helped the hours, days and weeks to flow by seamlessly.

Of course, not everyone is lucky enough to have such meaningful work to do right now. Many Australians have been made redundant or their roles have shifted. 

Hadfield’s advice to those people is to make your own work.

“Keep busy with a million things to do, but make a bunch of those things fun or voluntary, so you look forward to each day. When we did that right on the spaceship, one of us remarked after a couple of months that it’s always Monday or Friday. That’s because we bought into the level of busyness and we balanced the huge workload with a necessary amount of ‘me time’ and sleep.”

Auerbach says that while work might play a role in helping some people get through periods of isolation, in Hadfield’s case, isolation was in the job description.

“If you’re an astronaut, part of your role expectation is to cope well in that environment. That’s part of your sense of meaning. In this pandemic, we’ve been thrust into isolation without choice and without it being part of our core identity,” says Auerbach.

For those of us who haven’t trained for decades to survive long periods of isolation, like Hadfield has, Auerbach says it’s important we ease ourselves back in slowly.

“In a crisis, people rally and become quite focused on trying to cope.” – Dan Auerbach

Unlearning isolation

Speaking generally, the clients Auerbach has seen tended to follow a similar pattern in their response to the restrictions. There was an initial sense of fear and panic in the thought of having to prepare for isolation, followed by a brief feeling of novelty in getting to slow down and try a new way of living. When the shine wore off, it was followed by a few weeks of frustration, despondency and hopelessness.

Now, he says, many people are emerging out the other end with a sense of acceptance for this new normal. But what happens when the ‘old normal’ reasserts itself? When workplaces reopen, employees will have to readjust and perhaps unlearn the behaviours they’ve developed over the last few months.

People might come back to work feeling less motivated, anxious or perhaps even depressed. They might struggle to work with others around them. Managers might notice a drop in the quality of their work. They might be more irritable than usual or have trouble meeting their deadlines. Workplaces need to ease staff back in, because isolation can cause aftershocks.

“When we’re depressed or socially anxious, we find it hard to reach out and be with other people,” says Auerbach. “That can deepen this sense of perceived isolation. This can spiral unless we slowly reconnect ourselves and practice getting reconnected with others.”

Even though we’ve been working in the comfort of our own homes, we may come back quite burnt out. Not just because of the impacts of living and working through a crisis, but also because of how we’ve learned to communicate with each other.

“Ironically, because of all the communication we’re having on Zoom and Skype, we’re getting very close to [our co-workers] on a face-to-face level, which isn’t very normal in a social interaction,” says Auerbach. 

“We don’t stare at each other constantly when we are in a group of four people. People are feeling a little burnt out from the hyper-stimulating interactions.”

People are saying we’re dealing with two crises at the moment: the physical health impacts of the virus and the economic fallout. However, some experts suggest there’s a third tier that we should be equally concerned about – the mental health impacts.

“In a crisis, people rally and become quite focused on trying to cope,” says Auerbach. 

“It’s not until the immediate threat is gone that we start to see the most profound mental health effects. We know that from looking at situations like SARS, siege scenarios and war zones. When our mind is vigilant, it’s operating on a very narrow focus around how to survive. When comfort returns to life, we see other emotions come forward for processing.”

This is a completely normal response, he says.

“We might see some people being less social, or having a change in mood. Managers, friends and peers need to be prepared for how to manage mental health concerns that won’t raise their heads until people emerge from isolation.”

Many workplaces have seen a positive shift in dialogue around mental health during the pandemic, and HR managers should keep an eye on whether or not this changes as we go back to work.

Employers also need to expand their bubble of care as staff trickle back into the workplace. While an employee’s wages might not have been cut, perhaps their partner’s have been, says Auerbach. Their individual mental health might appear to be okay, but their children could be struggling. These external factors will affect staff, employers need to be prepared for that.

Returning to Hadfield’s experience, if we think of ourselves as astronauts, and our family and co-workers as crew mates, what are we doing to make sure our mission runs smoothly? What are we doing to ensure we emerge from this situation changed for the better?

Hadfield says we’re operating in unprecedented times, and people need a plan. “On landing day, you want to be able to stand up next to your ship and say, ‘That was an amazing experience. We survived. We thrived. I learned a bunch of things and I saw stuff I’d never seen before.’” 

22 Jun, 2020
Minimum wage increase to hit retail in February 2021
Inside Retail

The Fair Work Commission has said it will raise the minimum wage in Australia from July 1 to $753.80 a week, or $19.84 an hour – a $13 a week increase.

The General Retail Industry Award 2010 will not be affected by the increase until 1 February 2021, due to the inordinate impact the COVID-19 crisis has had on the retail industry. 

FWC president Iain Ross said the panel had noted the polarised proposals from industry groups, and had been given little direction by the Government barring that it be cautious and prioritise keeping Australians in jobs. 

“The Australian economy is going through a significant downturn and is almost certain to enter a recession,” Ross said.

“The shock to the labour market has been unprecedented… and the form and shape of the pathway to recovery is uncertain.”

Ross said the approaching cliff drop of Government wage subsidy JobKeeper, as well as the risk of a second wave of COVID-19 cases as the economy slowly opens up, helped to push the majority of panel members to come to the decision. 

ACTU Secretary Sally McManus said that it was a modest increase, and that the union was disappointed some awards wouldn’t see increases until November or February next year.

“However it is clear in the decision that this panel of experts recognise that cutting wages in the middle of this crisis would be a disaster for working people and the economy and they have rejected the arguments put by some employers to effectively cut wages by freezing the minimum wage,” McManus said. 

“Just about every cent a worker on minimum wages receives, they spend. This is money circulating to local businesses. It is the fastest and most effective form of stimulus we can have.”

According to the ACTU, almost 60 per cent of the economy relies on domestic spending – which is likely to go up as international borders remain closed.

“This is why we must not have wage cuts. Wage cuts are confidence killers which hurts business and job creation,” McManus said. 

National Retail Association chief executive Dominique Lamb said the decision was like Groundhog Day – retailers would wake up in February to find their concerns have once again been ignored, and that they are in a “continuing nightmare”.

“They will wake up to the recurring problem of widespread failure of retail businesses, which will be compounded by wage increases that many simply cannot afford,” Lamb said. 

“The bottom line is that businesses cannot pay money that they do not have and will likely be hit with two wage increases in February and July 2021.

“It is hard to reconcile this verdict with the events of the past six months and the current economic climate,” Lamb said. 

18 Jun, 2020
Five tips for a successful virtual coffee catch-up
Financial Review

Ask Stef Bradley about her secrets to a successful virtual coffee and the KPMG partner channels the advice her father would give her before a date.

Always have three conversation starters just in case there's an awkward silence.

"I used to have to think about these conversation starters and they would be tested with my dad," Bradley says.

"I always think about that more and more in the virtual world."

In the shift to remote work during COVID-19, professionals have to had to adapt their communication skills as meetings have moved to video platforms such as Zoom and Microsoft Teams.

The office that workers once knew is unlikely to make a comeback any time soon and the same can be said for in-person meetings.

While the shift to online meetings has been a game-changer for some, experts say there is a craft to mastering the art of virtual communication – and that goes for the humble coffee catch-up too.

Although video meetings have been touted as far more efficient, they have their limitations. One of the biggest challenges is that it is much harder to read non-verbal cues such as body language over video.

1. Before you even meet ...

It can be useful to establish why you're meeting and provide a topic of discussion in your meeting invitation, says Jane Gunn, partner in charge of People and Change at KPMG Australia.

If it's more formal, it can be helpful to provide a short agenda to guide the discussion.

Fiona Roberston, leadership specialist and author, suggests going one step further and sending a 30-second introductory video before the meeting, especially if you haven't met before.

"Just to say 'hey, I'm me, really looking forward to seeing you'," she says. "That way people know what they're in for. That saves the sniff test at the beginning."

Just because you're catching up from the comfort of your bedroom or living room, doesn't mean you should treat it any less professionally than an in-person meeting, says leading body language and speech expert Michael Kelly.

He says ensure you have the basics down-pat before the meeting. These include dressing professionally, using a non-distracting background, directing extra light on your face, ensuring the camera is at eye level and putting a "do not disturb" sign on the door.

2. Make a connection

Regardless of whether the meeting is for business purposes or a social catch-up, Gunn advises starting the conversation by making a human connection to help engage everyone.

"Engage in small talk," she says. "What is your cat's name? How are your kids? Allow it to become a human connection rather a transitional, leadership interaction."

Robertson concurs.

"Always seek to connect before you convince," she says. "Particularly at this point in time when we've all got kids and pets and real lives that we haven't been able to hide. I think people really appreciate being able to meet the real human a little bit more than might have once been the case."

3. Follow the leader

If you've ever been in a virtual meeting with lots of participants, you have probably experienced the frustration of people interrupting or talking over one another.

Gunn recommends being clear on who is facilitating the discussion.

"It’s even more important in a virtual meeting because everyone is effectively at a distance," she says.

"Leadership is vital especially if it’s a ‘social connection only’ purpose meeting. Who is responsible for making sure everyone contributes?"

Gunn says it is important to know who is on the call and ensure everyone is involved. If you need to, write down everyone's names.

Put a tick next to their name when they make a contribution.

Gunn suggests making use of commentary tools – or even just the "group chat" functionality – where people can contribute.

"They can also record a comment or insight without having to actually speak," she says. "The main aim is to ensure everyone has a ‘voice’ – including more introverted participants."

4. Don't be anywhere else

Distractions are abundantly obvious during virtual communication, say experts.

"DBAE - don't be anywhere else," says Kelly. "It's so basic but it [works] because we all daydream, so you can even put a post-it note on your monitor and that seems to [help you] focus in the moment."

5. K.I.S.S (Keep it short and slow)

Robertson recommends keeping a lid on the length of a coffee meeting, especially in the virtual world.

"Human brains are not designed for interacting over screens, we're designed for face-to-face, so there's a whole lot of stuff that your brain does when you're in physically in proximity to another person," she says.

"It does all this stuff without us even being aware of it and when you're on the other side of a screen, brains get very confused because they see a person there but they can't do what they normally do and that's one of the reasons why Zoom meetings are so exhausting.

"It's like your brain is sending out a Bluetooth signal and hitting a brick wall. It's all much more stressful than if you were face-to-face."

Kelly says: "Being succinct is the currency of video meetings and that extends to coffee meetings."

Robertson says it's also important to slow down – especially when communicating virtually.

"Ask more than tell and allow silence to do more of the work because people need time to think and the social cues of who can talk when are much less obvious. Just slow the whole thing down."

Bonus tip: Keep smiling

"Smiling releases endorphins and makes everyone feel better connected," says Gunn.

Kelly agrees energy is a vital component to a successful – and memorable – coffee meeting.

"Energy is the secret sauce of virtual communication. Your energy is more memorable than your words."

18 Jun, 2020
It's no wonder we're all tired and irritable a lot of the time
The Sydney Morning Herald

If you didn't get COVID-19 and you didn't lose your job because of it, the worst part for most Australians has been the hugely increased cognitive load resulting from it.

On the surface it's been a time of diminished choice. You couldn't leave your house. You couldn't find toilet paper. You couldn't sit in the park.

But you still had to figure out what you would do, and that required conscious thought.

There were still 24 hours in the day, after all. And absent our usual routines, we had to make it up on the fly. Still have to.

In reality, we've all seen a dramatic increase in the number of decision points in the day requiring conscious thought. Things we once did on autopilot, like giving a hug or touching your face, have now become critical decision points.

And if behavioural economics has taught us anything, it's that humans generally suck at decision making.

Two concepts from the field - that of "decision fatigue" and "asymmetric loss function" – hold particular explanatory power to understanding the current sense of unease felt by so many.

The idea of decision fatigue is pretty much as it sounds and was coined by the American social psychologist Roy F. Baumeister.

His, and other numerous studies, have proved that decision makers make different decisions depending on how many decisions they have already made. Parole judges, for instance, are more likely to grant parole first thing in the morning, or shortly after a break. Doctors order more tests in the morning and fewer in the afternoon.

Decision making can alter in different ways. In some situations, decision makers delay making a decision, such as the parole judge effectively putting off the decision whether to release someone back into the community.

In other situations, decision makers become more impulsive, which explains all those chocolate bars at the checkout counter – retailers know you're more likely to cave in to a poor health choice after an exhaustive search of the grocery aisles.

Explanations vary as to why we're so bad at consecutive decision making. Psychologists have compared the concept of self-control – the ability to make optimal decisions for oneself – to a muscle, which fatigues with use.

While actual energy use by the brain fluctuates very little, different parts of the brain that require conscious choice require more energy.

Interestingly, studies have shown that small amounts of glucose, like fruit, can restore – at least temporarily – the ability to make good decisions. So that 3pm sugar craving might not be so irrational after all.

Overall, strategies to overcome decision fatigue include reducing the number of decision points in the day. Wearing the same outfit or eating the same meals each day are ways to reduce the cognitive load.

That new uniform of tracksuit pants and Ugg boots you've adopted while working from home during the pandemic is not so irrational after all – but a highly strategic coping mechanism.

But it's the second insight from behavioural economics of "asymmetric loss aversion" that really goes to the heart of the current malaise.

Not only are we making more decisions, but the consequences of those decisions are more dire than ever before.

One of my local bus shelters has an ad reading: "Save lives in your community, stay at home unless absolutely essential."

Every tiny decision we make these days, from catching a bus to ringing a doorbell to how far to stand apart in the coffee queue now comes with the potential to bring death to you, your loved ones, or those in our community with compromised health.

At times, there have also been severe financial penalties for breaking the rules.

And perhaps worst of all for a social animal, has been the sense that one might incur social shame or stigma if the decisions we make should spread the virus.

For many people who got COVID-19, the worst part was not the illness itself but the social shaming of friends or acquaintances who they may have exposed to the virus.

Each decision made in a time of COVID has been subject to an asymmetric loss function.

That is, the potential loss that could be suffered from any course of action was more extreme – that of death, loss and isolation.

Many decisions carry such an asymmetry of risks. Being 30 minutes late for a flight is way worse than being 30 minutes early. That's why we all spend so long waiting around in airports (well, we used to).

Getting caught in the rain without an umbrella is so much worse than the inconvenience of carrying around an umbrella unnecessarily. The greater the potential loss, the greater level of discomfort we are willing to experience to avoid it.

And even as the threat of the virus recedes, life is far from back to normal.

For every rule change, for every relaxation – or potential reimposition – of restrictions, we are forced to make a new set of decisions.

It will be some time before life is back to normal – if ever.

On the upside, the new way of life offers the potential – for some, at least – to eke out more optimal ways of living, such as continuing to work from home or spending more time with family. But the cognitive load imposed by having to re-imagine the minutiae of life remains.

You're only human, after all. But you're far from alone in that.

15 Jun, 2020
A new survey of Australian office workers has found we like working from home – but distractions and maintaining team culture are big concerns
Business Insider Australia

The remote work revolution has been promised for years now, and it only took a global pandemic for Australia to find out if it was actually ready to make the leap.

As coronavirus restrictions sent the majority of white-collar workers in Australia to their home offices – and kitchen tables – many have wondered whether this new arrangement might constitute a new normal. It’s clear many workers are capable of doing most (if not all) of their jobs out of the office with little disruption, giving executives some daring ideas on slashing costly real estate expenses within their enterprises.

A new report from productivity consultancy Building20, based on a survey of 423 Australian office workers between May 12 and May 22, has found most workers believe they are either more productive working from home or have maintained similar levels of productivity to when they were in the office.

According to the report, 45% of respondents think they’re more productive working remotely, while 32% think their productivity is about the same, and only 22% think their productivity has dropped. Overall, 51% of respondents said they preferred remote working, as compared to 23% who prefer working in the office and 26% with no preference between the two.

Most respondents wanted to at least spend more time working remotely after the coronavirus pandemic than they did previously. On average, those surveyed wanted to work remotely about half of the time, indicating that increased flexibility in working arrangements could be the norm rather than a truly radical change.

Interestingly, it is managers who are most eager to continue remote work arrangements, with 57% showing a preference for working from home, as compared to 45% among general employees. This rift suggests remote management may be slightly more preferable for those who are actually doing the managing.

The most popular reason for enjoying remote work was getting rid of the commute, followed by flexibility and saving money. Around a third of respondents also said it enhanced work-life balance for them, or allowed them to spend more time with family.

The challenges of remote work going forward

The discussion about how vigorously Australians can commit to remote work after COVID-19 is obviously a complex one which is not entirely in the hands of individual companies.

As John L.Swinburne from the Swinburne University of Technology writes in The Conversation, there are broader questions of urban planning at play – including, for example, how capable our internet infrastructure is.

For the average worker, the concerns are more immediate. 32% of respondents to the Building20 survey said distractions were a major challenge while working from home, with kids, noise and phone calls being tipped as particularly bothersome. Of course, as restriction on schools and daycares are further lifted, some of these concerns will be less severe.

But some problems are more pernicious. As many organisations are finding, work drinks over Zoom are not a full substitute for a robust team culture. About half of respondents to the survey said it was the biggest concern about remote work – ahead of technology, the second-biggest concern.

“Without face-to-face interactions, employees worry that workplace culture will slip,” the report reads.

The office as a space for in-person collaboration is one of the few areas remote work struggles to replace. Unispace global design director Simon Pole told Business Insider Australia the social, collaborative quality of offices would ensure workplaces never go entirely remote.

“Many clients have reported that the social isolation is having its toll on their teams,” Poole said. “Having Friday drinks on a chat is not the same, the office banter has stopped, the cultural reinforcement is left to fortnightly emails from the CEO, and the ad hoc knowledge sharing and problem-solving is not happening,” he said.

But the survey reinforces something which seems increasingly obvious as we navigate COVID-19 restrictions: workers don’t want to go back to the inflexible working arrangements of before.

11 Jun, 2020
A new survey of Australian office workers has found we like working from home – but distractions and maintaining team culture are big concerns
Business Insider Australia

The remote work revolution has been promised for years now, and it only took a global pandemic for Australia to find out if it was actually ready to make the leap.

As coronavirus restrictions sent the majority of white-collar workers in Australia to their home offices – and kitchen tables – many have wondered whether this new arrangement might constitute a new normal. It’s clear many workers are capable of doing most (if not all) of their jobs out of the office with little disruption, giving executives some daring ideas on slashing costly real estate expenses within their enterprises.

A new report from productivity consultancy Building20, based on a survey of 423 Australian office workers between May 12 and May 22, has found most workers believe they are either more productive working from home or have maintained similar levels of productivity to when they were in the office.

According to the report, 45% of respondents think they’re more productive working remotely, while 32% think their productivity is about the same, and only 22% think their productivity has dropped. Overall, 51% of respondents said they preferred remote working, as compared to 23% who prefer working in the office and 26% with no preference between the two.

Most respondents wanted to at least spend more time working remotely after the coronavirus pandemic than they did previously. On average, those surveyed wanted to work remotely about half of the time, indicating that increased flexibility in working arrangements could be the norm rather than a truly radical change.

Interestingly, it is managers who are most eager to continue remote work arrangements, with 57% showing a preference for working from home, as compared to 45% among general employees. This rift suggests remote management may be slightly more preferable for those who are actually doing the managing.

The most popular reason for enjoying remote work was getting rid of the commute, followed by flexibility and saving money. Around a third of respondents also said it enhanced work-life balance for them, or allowed them to spend more time with family.

The challenges of remote work going forward

The discussion about how vigorously Australians can commit to remote work after COVID-19 is obviously a complex one which is not entirely in the hands of individual companies.

As John L.Swinburne from the Swinburne University of Technology writes in The Conversation, there are broader questions of urban planning at play – including, for example, how capable our internet infrastructure is.

For the average worker, the concerns are more immediate. 32% of respondents to the Building20 survey said distractions were a major challenge while working from home, with kids, noise and phone calls being tipped as particularly bothersome. Of course, as restriction on schools and daycares are further lifted, some of these concerns will be less severe.

But some problems are more pernicious. As many organisations are finding, work drinks over Zoom are not a full substitute for a robust team culture. About half of respondents to the survey said it was the biggest concern about remote work – ahead of technology, the second-biggest concern.

“Without face-to-face interactions, employees worry that workplace culture will slip,” the report reads.

The office as a space for in-person collaboration is one of the few areas remote work struggles to replace. Unispace global design director Simon Pole told Business Insider Australia the social, collaborative quality of offices would ensure workplaces never go entirely remote.

“Many clients have reported that the social isolation is having its toll on their teams,” Poole said. “Having Friday drinks on a chat is not the same, the office banter has stopped, the cultural reinforcement is left to fortnightly emails from the CEO, and the ad hoc knowledge sharing and problem-solving is not happening,” he said.

But the survey reinforces something which seems increasingly obvious as we navigate COVID-19 restrictions: workers don’t want to go back to the inflexible working arrangements of before.

10 Jun, 2020
Is the biggest return-to-work challenge that people love working remotely?
SOURCE:
HRM Online
HRM Online

This Flexible Working Day (10 June), it’s time to recognise that a lot of people – perhaps a majority – prefer working remotely. How should organisations manage this?

A Sydney-based professional services firm with 1000 employees had enacted its return-to-work strategy. The office was prepared. It was cleaned and rigorous social-distancing measures were put in place to ensure staff confidence. The company wanted to stagger days in the office so split its workforce into ‘A’ and ‘B’ streams. Due to ongoing social-distancing rules, going into the office wasn’t compulsory. On the first Monday back – the A stream day – less than 150 people turned up. The remaining 350-400 opted to work remotely.

This story comes from Paul Flanagan, founder of Life Street (who works with the above firm). But the company is not alone. All over the world employers are finding that the forced ‘global experiment’ in working from home has been very successful – perhaps too successful. Most organisations were up to the challenge of facilitating working from home, but many are now discovering a lot of employees are intransigent about coming back. 

Why is this the case and what should leaders do about it?

This is not just a health issue

It would be reasonable to surmise that a big reason the professional services firm had so few people returning was because many were still worried about the risk of infection. But survey after survey suggests that, setting aside health concerns, employees want remote working options. And, while the data is not conclusive, it seems like the majority prefer it over office work.

In the US, a Gallup poll of workers found 59 per cent wanted to “work remotely as much as possible”. In Australia, an NBN co survey found 67 per cent of workers “expect” to work remotely more frequently.

Data from before the pandemic has consistently shown that long commutes align with less job satisfaction. One study even found that adding 20 minutes to the commute had the same negative effect as a 19 per cent pay cut. So it makes sense getting rid of the commute entirely has made people happier about remote work.

Buffer and AngelList surveyed 3,500 workers from around the world (including Australia) and found 98 per cent want to work remotely at least some of the time “for the rest of their careers”. 

Of those surveyed: 

  • 57 per cent are currently working remotely 100 per cent of the time
  • 16.5 per cent are working remotely 76-99 per cent of the time 
  • 10 per cent were remote working less than 26 per cent of the time

Given this breakdown, it’s impressive that 70 per cent were happy with the amount of time they’re working remotely and 19 per cent wanted to work remotely more often. Only 11 per cent wanted to work remotely less often. It’s particularly astounding if you remember at the start of this year it was normal for companies to limit remote working opportunities. The convention in a lot of places was to prevent people from working from home as much as possible.

Now, there is a caveat to this data. A third of respondents either worked freelance (3 per cent) or worked for a company that had a fully remote workforce (30 per cent). So while two thirds were part of a blended workforce, those who have crafted careers around remote work are possibly over-represented in the sample. 

However, the survey also found data that doesn’t need any caveats. Ninety-seven per cent of respondents said they would recommend remote work to others. This is proof of a very simple truth that all organisations should never forget: people really like working remotely. 

Returning to the professional services firm, this was a group of people who had been working remotely for over two months. Knowing that remote work was still an option for the foreseeable future they had every reason to return to work, even if just to break up the routine. So it’s quite possible that COVID-19 was the secondary cause, and the main reason most didn’t return was because they didn’t want to.

Rethinking the challenge

As HRM has previously written, research broadly shows that individuals are more productive when working remotely, while teams are more efficient working in-office. Given this, for most organisations the future should likely involve a blend of both types of work.

This means there will be times where employees want to work remotely but the organisation would benefit the most from them being in the office (and vice versa). While each job demands what it demands, there are ways you can strike the right balance between employee wishes and organisational needs.

A good place to start is by figuring out why employees prefer remote work, and seeing if they can be satisfied in other ways. While different surveys produce different results, all answers to the question of why people prefer remote work can be broken down into two main reasons: autonomy and work-life balance.

If someone says they like remote working because it means they have schedule flexibility and the ability to work from anywhere (the top two benefits in the Buffer and AngelList survey), they are effectively saying they like the ability to have control over how they work. 

If someone says they like remote working because of the lack of a commute, meaning they get to spend more time with family (the third and fourth ranked benefits), they are saying they want a better work-life balance.

For those in the first group, there are ways to offer more autonomy while still having people in the office. The most obvious is giving them control over their hours – letting them choose, with their team members, what times will be most conducive to both lifestyle and productivity.

You can also collaborate with staff on job crafting, which has also shown to help organisations thrive in difficult times.

Lastly, new ideas in office design were already catering for different kinds of work that are emerging. Creating spaces for each is useful as it gives employees the ability to choose the right space for them within the office..

It’s a little more difficult to satisfy the needs of those in the work-life balance group. In the past, organisations have tended to view work-life balance as the only benefit of remote working (hence why it was seen as a privilege and not a right), and so haven’t worried about employees being upset about the lack of it. But now that so many people have gotten a taste for it, this approach may no longer be as sustainable.

Again, offering flexible hours is a good option. Another idea might be to reward staff who need to come into the office for longer periods with things that will encourage them to spend quality time out of work later – whether that’s extra leave or something as simple as a restaurant voucher for their family. For working parents, approaching them to collaborate on a schedule that fits with their childcare demands can be advantageous.

It is still too early to say conclusively that remote work is the ‘new normal’, but it certainly is front of mind for everyone right now. So, for the moment, an organisational policy that insists on mostly working from the office is a policy designed to deprive employees of something  they really like and that makes them individually more productive. As more and more organisations transition to the next phase after lockdown, they would do well to keep that in mind.

5 Jun, 2020
5 things keeping HR professionals up at night
SOURCE:
HRM
HRM

AHRI’s latest pulse survey shows HR professionals are burning the candle at both ends and struggling to keep staff connected.

In Australia, COVID-19 is under enough control that lockdowns are continuously easing, but that doesn’t mean HR professionals’ jobs are getting any easier. In fact it means the opposite. Just as the huge move to remote work was unprecedented, so too will be the return to the workplace. For many organisations, this will be the hardest part of the pandemic.

AHRI’s first HR pulse survey – conducted in the first week of April – showed redundancies were a key concern for many HR professionals in Australia. In the second survey, which looks at HR’s sentiments during the first week of May, reintroducing staff into the workforce was respondents’ main concern (66 per cent), followed by loss of revenue (48 per cent) and a downturn in business (47 per cent).  

Looking more deeply into the results, it’s clear there are consistent challenges HR professionals are facing right now. Here are the five most important.

1. Workloads have increased but hours don’t reflect this

Nearly 85 per cent of respondents were working from home at the time they took this survey, as were many of their colleagues. So while getting back to the physical workforce might not be a reality just yet, it’s certainly a key item on HR’s agenda.

Formulating a return-to-work plan is time consuming. You have to factor in extra hygiene and cleaning practices, the psychological safety of employees who’ve struggled in isolation and the new legal obligations around social distancing and workplace signage.

So it’s not surprising that 30 per cent of respondents say they’re experiencing a 50 per cent increase in their workload right now, and only 17 per cent say their paid hours are reflective of this.

As one respondent explained it, “[There is] a greater demand on my time to connect with my team and others daily. Balancing home [schooling] of our three kids with a senior role is difficult. I tend to work longer hours and across the weekend to compensate.”

One person said they’ve started having to “play catch up at night” due to their increased workload. They worry that, as a society, we won’t be able to maintain this intense momentum.

“Cracks are going to show. I am working with my managers to [encourage] flexibility and understanding with their people, including me!”

 

2. Maintaining connectedness

Keeping employees connected with the organisation has been a challenge for 42 per cent of respondents.

While many people felt a greater sense of community and closeness during the initial stages of the pandemic – when we were all adjusting to a new reality – it seems that feeling is now waning. Forty-four per cent said that cultivating connectedness is harder now than it was pre-COVID-19.

It could be that the exhaustion from working through a pandemic and communicating in new ways is finally catching up with people.

HRM previously examined video call fatigue and the cognitive dissonance of a hyper-connected environment. This could be causing more people to shut off their video cameras during a call or opt out of virtual social events, therefore weakening the sense of togetherness they felt in the early days of lockdown.

But this isn’t true for everyone. Such social events are a lifeline for a lot of people.

“Some [staff] have openly discussed their surprise at their need for social connection through work – and the surprise factor for them is that pre-COVID they would have said they didn’t need work to provide connectedness,” said one respondent.

This tension between the need for connection and the pitfalls of social technology will be a long-term struggle for workplaces. We know the lines between home and work are easily blurred in a virtual workplace and it’s looking as if many organisations will continue remote working long after the pandemic is over.

3. Returning to work struggles

Understanding how to best reintegrate staff back into the office was a key concern for 66 per cent of respondents, and 39 per cent feel either ‘somewhat pressured’ or ‘pressured’ by their executive team to make this happen. 

Nearly 70 per cent feel their staff are somewhat or moderately concerned about the health and safety issues related to the return to the workplace.

As HRM reported earlier this week, a recent survey from the Australian Council of Trade Unions shows that this feeling is widespread. Less than 5 per cent of respondents in that survey said their workplaces had implemented extra cleaning initiatives and less than 10 per cent have been given access to extra personal hygiene products, such as hand sanitizer.

The main metrics which respondents to the AHRI Survey said they were implementing in response to the pandemic were health and safety tracking, pulse surveys and assessing staff preferences on flexible work and return to work plans.

4. JobKeeper struggles

Over a third of respondents say their organisations have signed up for JobKeeper payments. They report that the majority of staff paid under the scheme are likely to keep working their usual hours. 

Seventeen per cent of respondents are currently being paid on the wage subsidy themselves.

JobKeeper is proving to be quite helpful in retaining staff, as the graph below demonstrates.

However, HR professionals have some mixed feelings about the government program. A few respondents felt disappointed that they couldn’t support casual staff whose tenure didn’t quite reach the 12 month mark and expatriates.  

Others expressed concern about the lifespan of the subsidy, saying they forecast the financial impacts of COVID-19 to go way beyond September (when JobKeeper payments are set to end).

The recent news about the $60 billion JobKeeper miscalculation and nationwide confusion about the application process was also reflected in some of the comments left by respondents. 

One person said the administrative and legal aspects of the scheme were an issue for them. Another shared concerns about casual staff not working as many hours as the company needs as they recieve $1,500 each fortnight regardless of hours worked.

5. COVID-19 has shifted HR’s role

There’s both positive and negative reactions to how the pandemic has shifted HR’s role. 

Many professionals report feeling overwhelmed with the new set of responsibilities they have to quickly deliver on.

One participant said: “I am under extreme pressure 24/7. Working an average of 70 hour weeks to design, lead and implement changes such as redundancies and contract variations. In addition, I am responsible for formulating communications in these and other areas relating to coronavirus (i.e. leave, and how and when to use it).”

Another person said they’re feeling “lots of pressure to provide the full legal picture with all the issues/responsibilities in a rapidly changing landscape with no time to research. [And we’re] not allowed to utilise external legal advice due to the cost”.

Respondents said they’ve had to re-adjust plans to introduce new HR software. Like the respondent above, others are struggling to balance their normal daily tasks with keeping on top of new employment legislation and updates from Fair Work.

“It has meant my ‘day job’ has almost moved to the side,” said one respondent. “Initially, mobilising our workforce became a full-time role [involving the consideration of] government restrictions, employee health and safety, client experience and business performance. Now the focus is shifting to [managing] how and when to return our staff to the office and what the ‘new normal’ will look like for us.” 

One person said the pandemic has resulted in them “reverting back to a more transactional HR” and another said they’re learning how to “manage up” in ways they didn’t have to before.

This is happening in a fraught situation. As one respondent notes, the vulnerability of the job market right now can make it harder to challenge management as there’s a perception that “it’s easier for them to avoid or cut you”.

But it’s not all doom and gloom. Many people have valued the raised profile the pandemic has afforded them. As HRM has said before, this has been a great opportunity for HR professionals to shine and show an organisation exactly what they can do. 

As one respondent said, “On the bright side, [COVID-19] has raised the profile of HR, which is a battle I have been trying to address for a number of years. Situation aside, it has been positive for my team to show what we can do to support the organisation.”

Moving forward, the sentiment of respondents was that a successful COVID-19 plan should aim to ensure minimal impacts on productivity and mental health while motivating and engaging employees.

“[I hope] that managers in the business use this time to step up and show leadership, support the business to be resilient and bounce back from where we were/are in a better place,” said a respondent. Organisations, they say, need to be innovative, flexible and responsive to change.

APPLY NOW

Upload Resume/Portfolio

Upload requirements
Upload requirements
* Required Fields. † For Designers, Design Assistants and Product Developers please attach your Portfolio including sketches, illustrations, trend boards, finished products etc... Please send through in pdf or jpg format. File uploads maximum size 5MB.