When Companies Should Invest in Training Their Employees — and When They Shouldn’t

A recent industry report revealed that U.S. companies spent over $90 billion on employee training and development activities in 2017. Read this blog post to learn more.


According to one industry report, U.S. companies spent over $90 billion dollars on training and development activities in 2017, a year-over-year increase of 32.5 %. While many experts emphasize the importance and benefits of employee development — a more competitive workforce, increased employee retention, and higher employee engagement — critics point to a painful lack of results from these investments. Ultimately, there is truth in both perspectives. Training is useful at times but often fails, especially when it is used to address problems that it can’t actually solve.

Many well-intended leaders view training as a panacea to obvious learning opportunities or behavioral problems. For example, several months ago, a global financial services company asked me to design a workshop to help their employees be less bureaucratic and more entrepreneurial. Their goal was to train people to stop waiting around for their bosses’ approval, and instead, feel empowered to make decisions on their own. They hoped, as an outcome, decisions would be made faster. Though the company seemed eager to invest, a training program was not the right way to introduce the new behavior they wanted their employees to learn.

Training can be a powerful medium when there is proof that the root cause of the learning need is an undeveloped skill or a knowledge deficit. For those situations, a well-designed program with customized content, relevant case material, skill-building practice, and a final measurement of skill acquisition works great. But, in the case of this organization, a lack of skills had very little to do with their problem. After asking leaders in the organization why they felt the need for training, we discovered the root causes of their problem had more to do with:

  • Ineffective decision-making processes that failed to clarify which leaders and groups owned which decisions
  • Narrowly distributed authority, concentrated at the top of the organization
  • No measurable expectations that employees make decisions
  • No technologies to quickly move information to those who needed it to make decisions

Given these systemic issues, it’s unlikely a training program would have had a productive, or sustainable outcome. Worse, it could have backfired, making management look out of touch.

Learning is a consequence of thinking, not teaching. It happens when people reflect on and choose a new behavior. But if the work environment doesn’t support that behavior, a well-trained employee won’t make a difference. Here are three conditions needed to ensure a training solution sticks.

1. Internal systems support the newly desired behavior. Spotting unwanted behavior is certainly a clue that something needs to change. But the origins of that unwanted behavior may not be a lack of skill. Individual behaviors in an organization are influenced by many factors, like: how clearly managers establish, communicate, and stick to priorities, what the culture values and reinforces, how performance is measured and rewarded, or how many levels of hierarchy there are. These all play a role in shaping employee behaviors. In the case above, people weren’t behaving in a disempowered way because they didn’t know better. The company’s decision-making processes forbid them from behaving any other way. Multiple levels of approval were required for even tactical decisions. Access to basic information was limited to high-ranking managers. The culture reinforced asking permission for everything. Unless those issues were addressed, a workshop would prove useless.

2. There is commitment to change. Any thorough organizational assessment will not only define the skills employees need to develop, it will also reveal the conditions required to reinforce and sustain those skills once a training solution is implemented. Just because an organization recognizes the factors driving unwanted behavior, doesn’t mean they’re open to changing them. When I raised the obvious concerns with the organization above, I got the classic response, “Yes, yes, of course we know those issues aren’t helping, but we think if we can get the workshop going, we’ll build momentum and then get to those later.” This is usually code for, “It’s never going to happen.” If an organization isn’t willing to address the causes of a problem, a training will not yield its intended benefit.

3. The training solution directly serves strategic priorities. When an organization deploys a new strategy — like launching a new market or product — training can play a critical role in equipping people with the skills and knowledge they need to help that strategy succeed. But when a training initiative has no discernible purpose or end goal, the risk of failure is raised. For example, one of my clients rolled out a company-wide mindfulness workshop. When I asked a few employees what they thought, they said, “It was interesting. At least it got me two hours away from my cubicle.” When I asked the sponsoring executive to explain her thought process behind the training, she said, “Our employee engagement data indicated our people are feeling stressed and overworked, so I thought it would be a nice perk to help them focus and reduce tension.” But when I asked her what was causing the stress, her answer was less definitive: “I don’t really know, but most of the negative data came from Millennials and they complain about being overworked. Plus, they like this kind of stuff.” She believed her training solution had strategic relevance because it linked to a vital employee metric. But evaluations indicated that, though employees found the training “interesting,” it didn’t actually reduce their stress. There are a myriad of reasons why the workload could have been causing employees stress. Therefore, this manager’s energy would have been better directed at trying to determine those reasons in her specific department and addressing them accordingly — despite her good intentions.

If you are going to invest millions of dollars into company training, be confident it is addressing a strategic learning need. Further, be sure your organization can and will sustain new skills and knowledge by addressing the broader factors that may threaten their success. If you aren’t confident in these conditions, don’t spend the money.

SOURCE: Carucci, R. (29 October 2018). "When Companies Should Invest in Training Their Employees – and When They Shouldn’t" (Web Blog Post). Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2018/10/when-companies-should-invest-in-training-their-employees-and-when-they-shouldnt


When is a Workers’ Compensation Claim Compensable?

Carefully evaluating workers’ compensation claims is crucial in helping your company save money and prevent fraud. Workers’ compensation is simply a form of insurance that offers employees medical coverage in the event they are injured during a work-related function. Depending on the state of residence, it may also give compensation for disabilities sustained or cover rehabilitation costs so the employee can return to the workplace quickly and smoothly.

Compensable workers’ compensation claims have specific characteristics that will help you determine if and when an injury is covered.

Workers’ compensation is crucial to protecting employees, but it is often a source of contention among employers because it comes with considerable gray areas. When is a claim compensable? How do we identify a fraudulent claim? How do we report a claim, and should we report all workplace injuries no matter how serious? This piece is designed to help you determine when—and if—an injury is covered by workers’ compensation.

Requirements

The claim must meet all five of these requirements in order to be compensable:

Happened to One of Your Employees

The first requirement is in place to ensure it is your employee filing the claim, not an independent contractor or vendor who works for themselves or a third party. Even if the incident occurs on your property, unless it is someone who works directly for you, the claim is not compensable.

Resulted in an Injury or Illness

Injury is not the only thing that can potentially be covered by workers’ compensation. Illnesses could also qualify as a compensable claim, but only if they are related directly to the job. The illness also must be caused directly by the working conditions to be covered in a workers’ compensation policy. For example, a miner’s contraction of black lung would be compensable in all states. However, an employee in an office with a co-worker who smokes would not be eligible for workers’ compensation for treatment of illness due to secondhand smoke.

Arose Out of Employment

This requirement means there must be a direct connection between the injury and the desire or attempt to further the employer’s business. If the employer benefits in some way, whether monetarily or otherwise, from the employee’s activity, then the claim meets this qualification.

Occurred in the Course and Scope of Employment

The employee must be at work when the injury occurs. This includes any place or location mandated or expected by the employer. So when an injury occurs at the employee’s physical everyday work site, that employee must prove he or she was injured while actively engaging in the furtherance of the employer’s business. There is a special provision called the “coming and going rule,” which maintains that benefits are denied for injuries received when traveling to or from work. Additionally, injuries arising out of transit from one work site to another, for instance when traveling to visit clients, are compensable. This provision also requires that the actions leading to the injury of the employee in question be prompted by the aspiration to further the employer’s business interests.

Resulted in Impairment and/or Lost Wages

The injury or illness in question must cause the employee to be impaired in some way and lose wages from not being able to complete his or her tasks completely. It is also a compensable incident if the injury or illness results in impairment but without lost wages, or vice versa.

Identifying a Fraudulent Claim

Studies commonly show that roughly 90 percent of all workers’ compensation claims filed are legitimate. However, it is still important as an employer to watch for these red flags that may indicate a fraudulent claim:

  • Filing multiple claims
  • Longer absences than anticipated by the employee, combined with an unwillingness to return to work
  • Unwillingness to be assigned to other, lighter jobs within the company or to complete partial duties
  • Constantly missing medical appointments
  • Employee will not provide date, time or location of the incident that caused injury
  • Employee has no recollection of services provided for related medical bills
  • Lack of witnesses to an accident or incident
  • Employee cannot produce specific information about the nature of the injury
  • Employee has a history of short-term employment

If any of these red flags occur, it by no means makes the claim automatically fraudulent. These are simply guidelines to keep employers proactively evaluating the legitimacy of a workers’ compensation claim.

Newsletter Provided by: Hierl's Property & Casualty Experts

Download the Newsletter


Employers Assess Risk Tolerance with Wellness Program Incentives

Are you currently designing your 2019 wellness programs? This year, employers must decide which approach to take on program incentives without EEOC guidance. Read this blog post to learn more.


Employers designing 2019 wellness programs must decide what approach to take on program incentives without Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) guidance on the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA).

The commission has a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking tentatively slated for January 2019. Last year, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia decided the commission's 2016 ADA and GINA wellness regulations were arbitrary and vacated them, effective Jan. 1, 2019.

Employers again are "in the uncomfortable position of not knowing with certainty whether and to what extent they can use incentives as part of a wellness program that involves medical examinations, disability-related inquiries and/or genetic information," wrote Lynne Wakefield and Emily Zimmer, attorneys with K&L Gates in Charlotte, N.C., in a joint statement.

The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) "has long advocated for proposals that will ensure consistency between the wellness rules that the EEOC has jurisdiction over, the ADA and GINA, with those provided under the ACA [Affordable Care Act]," said Nancy Hammer, SHRM vice president, regulatory affairs and judicial counsel. "While EEOC's 2016 rulemaking effort adopted the ACA's 30 percent incentive, it added new requirements that would have discouraged employers from providing wellness options for employees. We are hopeful that the EEOC is able to revisit the rules to ensure both consistency with existing rules and flexibility to encourage employers to adopt innovative programs to improve employee health and reduce costs."

ADA and GINA Requirements

Employers have long sought guidance over whether and when wellness program incentives—rewards or penalties for participating in biometric screenings and health risk assessments connected with the programs—comply with the ADA and GINA.

The ADA prohibits employers from conducting medical examinations and collecting employee medical history as part of an employee health program unless the employee's participation is voluntary, noted Ann Caresani, an attorney with Tucker Ellis in Cleveland and Columbus, Ohio.

GINA prohibits employers from requesting, requiring or purchasing genetic information from employees or their family members, unless the information is provided voluntarily.

The EEOC in 2000 asserted that for a wellness program to be voluntary, employers could not condition the receipt of incentives on the employee's disclosure of ADA- or GINA-protected information.

However, in 2016, the commission issued regulations providing that the use of a penalty or incentive of up to 30 percent of the cost of self-only coverage would not render involuntary a wellness program that seeks the disclosure of ADA-protected information. The regulations also permitted employers to offer incentives of up to 30 percent of the cost of self-only coverage for disclosure of information, in accordance with a wellness program, about the manifestation of a spouse's diseases or disorder, Caresani said.

Wakefield and Zimmer noted that the EEOC's 2016 wellness regulations applied to wellness programs that provided incentives tied to:

  • Biometric screenings for employees and spouses.
  • Disability-related inquiries directed at employees, which might include some questions on health risk assessments.
  • Family medical history questions, such as risk-assessment questions that ask about the manifestation of disease or disorder in an employee's family member and/or such questions about the disease or disorder of an employee's spouse.
  • Any other factors that involve genetic information.

Court Actions

The AARP challenged the 2016 rule, arguing that the 30 percent incentives were inconsistent with the voluntary requirements of the ADA and GINA. Employees who cannot afford to pay a 30 percent increase in premiums would be forced to disclose their protected information when they otherwise would choose not to do so, Caresani explained.

While the 30 percent cap was consistent with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) as amended by the ACA, the AARP said this was inappropriate, as HIPAA and the ADA have different purposes, noted Erin Sweeney, an attorney with Miller & Chevalier in Washington, D.C..

In addition, the change from prohibiting any penalty to permitting one of 30 percent was not supported by any data, according to the AARP.

In the summer of 2017, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia held that the EEOC's rule was arbitrary. The court sent the regulations back to the EEOC for further revisions.

In December 2017, the court vacated the 2016 rule after the EEOC initially said that the new rule would not be ready until 2021.

Conservative to Aggressive Approaches

Wakefield and Zimmer observed that employers may take several different approaches as they design wellness programs for next year:

  • No incentives (most conservative approach). These types of wellness programs can still include biometric screening and health risk assessments that employees and spouses are encouraged to complete, but no rewards or penalties would be provided in connection with their completion.
  • Modest incentives (middle-ground approach). A modest incentive is likely significantly less than 30 percent of the cost of self-only coverage, given the court's finding that the EEOC did not provide adequate justification for an incentive level up to 30 percent.
  • Up to 30 percent incentives (more aggressive approach). Although the court did not rule that a 30 percent incentive level would definitely cause a wellness program to be considered involuntary, incentives at this level after 2018 likely will expose employers to lawsuits, they wrote.

Multiple-Point Program

One good way to demonstrate compliance, they noted, is a multiple-point program in which participants engage in different activities and earn an incentive by participating in enough activities apart from biometric screenings, risk assessments or providing their spouse's health information.

For example, an employer could let employees take health care literacy quizzes or offer a program that measures a worker's activity as opposed to fitness, Caresani noted. She said, "Programs that are participatory are probably less effective than outcome-based programs, but they are more popular with employees and are less likely to pose litigation risks."

SOURCE: Smith, A. (1 August 2018) "Employers Assess Risk Tolerance with Wellness Program Incentives" (Web Blog Post). Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/pages/risk-tolerance-wellness-program-incentives.aspx


How data science can help employers build better benefit plans

What is your definition of data? New approaches to data science allow companies to have many different definitions of data and have them all coded. Read on to learn more.


Is your data management system overdue for an overhaul? Benefit plan sponsors don’t need to feel stuck with old systems requiring hours of manual data entry, according to Marc Rind, chief data scientist for ADP.

“I’ve been in data for a long time,” he says. “For generations, the traditional data management approach has been people having to standardize data.”

But people in different companies — even different departments of the same company – could have different definitions and means of data. An organization’s governance team would have to come up with one definition for everyone to adhere to.

With new approaches to data science, Rind says, “you’re able to have many different definitions of your data and have them all coded. It’s not about governing the definition of data but more about enhancing and publishing that data.”

With data science, employers and those in HR can see trends much more easily using automated mapping and search capabilities. This will allow them to see trends over time, like what people are choosing for their benefit plans and how benefits impact employee productivity and engagement.

“It builds context around the data,” Rind says. “For employers, they have to not only understand which benefit offerings they have to offer to employees but the effect on retention. They can also see what similar employers are offering and if they are getting higher retention rates.”

Employees can use the data to see what benefits others with similar backgrounds have chosen to get, helping them decide what their perfect healthcare plan looks like. However, they cannot yet see how satisfied people similar to them were with these benefits. Rind says that this feedback loop is important, and will become more prominent for the next generation of data science systems.

SOURCE: Spiezio, C. (16 June 2016) "How data science can help employers build better benefit plans" (Web Blog Post). Retrieved from https://www.benefitnews.com/news/how-data-science-can-help-employers-build-better-benefit-plans


How to Handle Employee Requests for Time Off to Vote

Did you know how to handle employee requests for time off to go and vote last Tuesday? Laws related to voting leave varies between states, leaving some employers questioning how they should address employee requests. Read on to learn more.


Many employees will be eligible to cast their ballot on Nov. 6, but will they have time to vote? Some states require employers to give workers time off to vote, and even in states that don't, some businesses are finding other ways to get employees to the polls.

With Election Day around the corner, employers should be mindful that, while no federal law provides employees leave to vote, many states have enacted laws in this area, said Marilyn Clark, an attorney with Dorsey & Whitney in Minneapolis. Depending on the state, employers may have to give workers notice about their voting rights and provide paid or unpaid time off to vote.

Even in states where there is no voting leave law, it is good practice to let employees take up to two hours of paid time off to vote if there isn't enough time for the employee to vote outside of working hours. "Encouraging and not discouraging employees should be the general rule," said Robert Nobile, an attorney with Seyfarth Shaw in New York City.

Encourage Employees

"Here in the United States, too many people don't vote because they don't have time due to jobs, child care and other responsibilities," said Donna Norton, executive vice president of MomsRising, an organization of more than 1 million mothers and their families. "Getting to the polls can be especially challenging for people in rural communities [or] single-parent households, and those who are juggling multiple jobs."

About 4 in 10 eligible voters did not vote in the 2016 presidential election, according to research conducted by Nonprofit VOTE and the U.S. Elections Project. And voter turnout has been historically lower for midterm elections, such as this year's, which are held near the midpoint of a president's four-year term, according to Pew Research Center.

"Businesses can help solve this problem by making sure that all employees have paid time off to vote," Norton said.

Some employers are offering solutions by making Election Day a corporate holiday, offering a few hours of paid time off for employees to vote and giving employees information about early and absentee voting, according to TheWashington Post.

Giving employees time off to participate in civic or community activities tends to improve worker performance, said Katina Sawyer, Ph.D., an assistant professor of management at George Washington University. Employers who are offering paid time off to vote will likely reap the benefits through improved employee attitudes and performance.

Know the Law

Employers in states with voting-leave laws should be familiar with the specific requirements, as some state laws have a lot of details. Even in states without such laws on the books, employers should check to see if there are any local voting leave ordinances in their cities.

Employers required to give workers time off to vote should plan for adequate work coverage to ensure that all employees can take time off, Clark said.

In many states, the employer may ask workers to give advance notice if they need time off and may require that workers take that leave at a specific time of the workday. In some states where leave is paid, employers might have the right to ask employees to prove they actually voted. Most states prohibit employers from disciplining or firing an employee who takes time off from work to vote.

"Ultimately, fostering an environment that generally encourages employees to exercise this important right is a good practice to mitigate the risk of a potential retaliation claim," Clark said.

Although state laws vary, "the general theme across the U.S. with respect to voting laws is that employees will be given time off to vote if there is insufficient time between the time the polls open and close within the state and the time employees start and finish work," Nobile said. "Typically, two to three consecutive nonworking hours between the opening and closing of the polls is deemed sufficient."

Some state laws provide unpaid leave to vote or do not address whether the leave must be paid. Oregon and Washington no longer have voting leave laws because they are "vote-by-mail" states.

voting leave laws.jpg

In some states, such as California and New York, employers must post notices in the workplace before Election Day to inform employees of their rights. Employers might have to pay penalties if they don't comply.

The consequences for denying employees their voting rights can be harsh, with some states even imposing criminal penalties, Clark noted.

Create a Policy

At a minimum, employers should adopt a policy spelling out the voting rights available to employees under applicable laws, Clark said. For businesses that operate in states that don't have a voting-leave law, employers may still wish to adopt a policy outlining their expectations about time off for voting.

Multistate employers may elect to adopt a single policy that includes the most employee-friendly provisions of the state and local laws that cover them. "By taking this approach, employers avoid the administrative burden of adopting and promulgating multiple policies for employees working in different locales," Clark said. All voting-leave policies should be sure to include strong anti-retaliation provisions, which make clear that the employer will not take any adverse action against employees for exercising their voting rights.

"It's important to remember that the law sets the floor," said Bryan Stillwagon, an attorney with Sherman & Howard in Atlanta. "Companies with the happiest and most-engaged employees recognize that positive morale comes from doing more than what is required."

Nagele-Piazza, L. (29 October 2018) "How to Handle Employee Request for Time Off to Vote" (Web Blog Post). Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/ResourcesAndTools/legal-and-compliance/state-and-local-updates/Pages/How-to-Handle-Employee-Requests-for-Time-Off-to-Vote.aspx

Dana Wilkie contributed to this article. 


Culture is key to attracting younger talent, but you can make it mutually beneficial

Did you know: Millennials are more likely to look for another job than any other generation in the workforce. This creates a golden opportunity for employers to recruit those employees. Read on to learn more.


Millennials with jobs are more likely to be looking for a new job than any other generation in the workplace, according to a Harvard Business Review article by Brandon Rigoni and Amy Adkins. They report that six in ten millennials are ready to jump ship at any given time.

This is a challenge for keeping workers, but it’s also a golden opportunity for recruitment. For the most part, these are bright workers who are deconstructing the great American job search.

Firms can seize this opportunity by honing their HR brand to appeal to younger generations and balancing this with assessments that assure a good match with most new hires.

Compensation is still important, but millennials are looking for jobs that are in sync with their values and can help define who they are. Getting hired has become a matter of personal identity.

As an employer, you are being evaluated more than the candidates. How will your firm make the cut? And if you do, will you hire the right people?

Major corporations have overhauled their approach in the scramble for talent.

  • General Mills began using virtual reality headsets to allow candidates to see themselves working inside General Mills, including using the company’s gym.
  • Two Volvo engineers recently built a Baja racer for collegiate competitions to attract young engineers to the legacy truck builder.
  • General Electric’s humorous “What’s the Matter with Owen” television campaign said bupkis about GE products. Instead, Owen touted the company’s geek chic HR brand as a bespectacled new employee being effusive about his job of programming life-changing technology to help people.
  • McDonald’s eschews traditional media to engage 16 to 24-year-old candidates via Snapchat, offering “Snaplications” and video clips of young McDonald’s employees talking about their jobs.

Not everyone can serve up cold brew coffee in a corporate cafeteria. Still, there are practical steps most firms can take to enhance their HR brand for millennial and Gen Z values.

Does your organization operate with a high degree of transparency? Is it socially responsible? Do employees have paid leave for volunteer work? Are young team members valued and encouraged to contribute to relevant and visible projects and products?

Are there ways to present your products and services to be more relevant and important to society? For example, a textile manufacturer might not actually make exciting products anyone can buy, but its fabrics are used in the space program or to save lives in emergency rooms. Maybe a law firm has a pro bono clinic for low-income families.

Yes. HR needs to make your employer brand attractive to these talented but fickle job seekers, but this doesn’t mean that everyone who’s attracted to your organizational hipness is going to be cool for your company.

There are two tools to make sure both parties get what they want. The first is assessments.

Talent acquisition assessments greatly improve your odds of hiring an individual who is well matched to your company’s needs. The best are scientifically valid and EEOC compliant, focusing on the candidate’s motivation and likely work traits as compared to the job description. You’ll save a lot of money in not having to re-hire for a position.

The second tool is the “Shared Success Model,” which is a process hiring managers can establish that aligns individual development plans with organizational strategies to identify where overlap exists and where there may be gaps.

It has five components:

  1. Individual needs—What is important to the candidate, both professionally and personally? What aligns with their values and interests?
  2. Individual offer—What value does the organization bring to the candidate?
  3. Company needs—What does your organization require for success now and in the future? What do you need from your leaders and employees?
  4. Company offer—What is your corporate value proposition to the candidate? What opportunities do you provide? What culture do you provide?
  5. Plan—Analyze the gaps and overlap between each quadrant. Develop and implement a plan that balances your grid for shared success.

As younger candidates seek more of a cultural match, the Shared Success Model is a good way to make sure the culture you promise is a culture that supports your mission and business model.

SOURCE: Warrick, D. (8 October 2018) "Culture is key to attracting younger talent, but you can make it mutually beneficial" (Web Blog Post). Retrieved from https://www.benefitspro.com/2018/10/08/culture-is-key-to-attracting-younger-talent-but-yo/


6 Books on the Future of Work That Every HR Professional Should Read

What are you doing to prepare strategically for the future of work? Organizations have seen tremendous changes in the global economy and technological innovation in the past 50 years. Read on for six books on the future of work that every HR professional should read.


As HR professionals and organizational leaders, it seems we are increasingly bombarded with messages about disruptive innovations and the changing nature of work. While calls to prepare strategically for the "future of work" might sometimes seem over-the-top, it doesn't change the fact that we've seen tremendous shifts in the global economy (including the labor economy) and technological innovation over the past 50 years that have had significant implications for the nature of work.

So what do the next 50 years have in store for organizations and workers? How will disruptive technologies like robotics, artificial intelligence/machine learning, pharmacogenetics, quantum entanglement, virtual presence/augmented reality, 3-D printing, and blockchain (among many others) influence future labor markets?

Here are six books I believe every HR professional and organizational leader should read to better understand these trends and the drivers influencing the shifting trajectories in the future of work.

1.  The Future of the Professions: How Technology Will Transform the Work of Human Experts(Oxford University Press, 2017) by Richard Susskind and Daniel Susskind

The Future of the Professions closely examines the intersection of rapidly advancing innovative technologies and the shifting nature and transformation of work and the professions, providing theoretically grounding and ample examples of emerging technologies, organizations and work arrangements. It is intended for organizational leaders and policy practitioners of all stripes who are interested in the effects of disruptive technologies on the future of work.

2. The Future of Work: Robots, AI, and Automation (Brookings Institution Press, 2018) by Darrell M. West

In The Future of Work, West sees the U.S. and the world at a "major inflection point" where we have to grapple with the likely impact of an increasingly automated and technologically advanced society on work, education and public policy. The insights provided will be useful to those who manage others and to those who are managed in the workplace of the future.

3. Rise of the Robots: Technology and the Threat of a Jobless Future (Basic Books, 2016) by Martin Ford

Rise of the Robots is a somewhat unsettling vision of a future world dominated by artificial intelligence, machine learning and highly automated industries, where most members of the current workforce find themselves replaced by technology and machines; in other words, a jobless future. Based on recent economic and innovation trends, Ford argues that the rapid technological advancement will ultimately result in a fundamental restructuring of corporations, governments and even entire societies as middle-class jobs gradually disappear, economic mobility evaporates and wealth is increasingly concentrated among the elite super-rich.

4. Gigged: The End of the Job and the Future of Work (St. Martin's Press, 2018) by Sarah Kessler

Gigged examines the shifting psychological contract between organizations and workers, discusses trends in the organization of work, and documents the movement in recent decades away from traditional employment models and toward part-time work and contingent employment arrangements such as independent contracting and project-based "gig" work. While such work has always been a part of informal economies around the world, the trend is increasingly common in traditional organizations as well, bolstered by the success of companies like Uber and Airbnb.

5. The Future of Work: Attract New Talent, Build Better Leaders, and Create a Competitive Organization (Wiley, 2014) by Jacob Morgan

In The Future of Work, Morgan continues the argument that the world is changing at an accelerated pace. He demonstrates that the way we work today is fundamentally different from how previous generations worked (due to globalization, technological innovation and shifts in the composition of national economies) and suggests that the future of work will be drastically different from what we experience today (a shift from knowledge workers to learning workers), where employees can work anytime and anywhere and can use any devices.

6. Shaping the Future of Work: A Handbook for Action and a New Social Contract (MITxPress, 2017) by Thomas A. Kochan

Probably the most academic book on this list, Shaping the Future of Work acknowledges an increasingly digitized economy and examines the resulting shift in social contract with regard to work and the professions. Kochan provides a road map for what leaders across contexts need to do to create high-quality jobs and develop strong and successful businesses.

What Does All This Mean?

In the next 50 years, we will likely see:

  • A continually shifting geopolitical landscape.

  • Continued movement from linear organizations to a more latticed/connected framework.

  • The displacement of jobs and the hunt for talent in a more automated economy.

  • An increasingly mobile and flexible labor force, and a push toward a reskilling agenda within organizations to continually leverage human capital value.

  • Technological advancements that continue to disrupt traditional organizational models and shift the very nature of work and professions.

So what does this all mean for HR professionals and organizational leaders? What are the core competencies of organizations that are prepared for these technological disruptions? How does the shifting nature of work influence needed HR competencies?

Regardless of what the future holds, these are questions we need to be asking and discussions we need to be having so that we are prepared for the future of work.

SOURCE: Westover, J. (5 September 2018) "6 Books on the Future of Work That Every HR Professional Should Read" (Web Blog Post). Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/news/hr-magazine/book-blog/pages/6-books-on-the-future-of-work-that-every-hr-professional-should-read.aspx/


Why You Should Be Benchmarking (and How Hierl Can Help)

As an employer, you have more than likely heard the term ‘benchmarking’ thrown around. It is becoming a critical tool in the development of competitive benefits programs, often helping drive down costs. At Hierl, we are strong advocates for benchmarking. Why? We believe good business decisions can only be made with accurate, meaningful information. Benchmarking is a fantastic way for us – and you – to measure where you stand in all aspects of your benefits against your industry’s standards and competitors. That’s why, in this installment of CenterStage, we interviewed our Executive Vice President, Scott Smeaton.

From an Employer's Eyes - The 3 Scenarios

“When we meet with a business that has not done benchmarking, we are sure to complete that process for them, showing them where they stand in their marketplace,” explained Scott. He emphasized that there are three scenarios that can happen once great advisors, such as those at Hierl, step in and get those results for the employer:

(1)The employer sees that everything around them has changed, they haven’t kept up with the times, and they’ve left money on the table.

(2)The employer is having a difficult time attracting and retaining key employees. With benchmarking, they can view where they should enhance their benefits to be more competitive in their marketplace.

With unemployment as low as it is, many businesses we meet with come from a third, different mindset:

(3) They want to look at their benefits from a total reward or total compensation strategy, where the benefits and the costs of providing benefits become part of a larger picture – time off, vacation, wages, etc.

These three approaches to benefits strategy are why, at Hierl, we strive to blend any and all concerns into a benefits plan strategically designed to get our clients where they need to be to compete for labor. “With a recent client of ours, they were specific about wanting their plans to be in the top 25% of all the plans out there – from a plan design perspective and from a premium cost-share perspective. Using benchmark, we were able to illustrate to this client what they needed to do to accomplish that goal specific to their industry and geographic location,” Scott explained. Benchmark is a powerful tool that can be in any employer’s toolbox, if only you partner with someone like Hierl.

He continued, “When we do our clients’ benchmarks, we take the results further than simply a generic comparison against their competitors. We look at our clients’ specific plan designs, analyzing their deductibles, their coinsurance, their out-of-pocket maximums, their prescription drug copays, and other specifics, as well as how much of the premium the employees must pay out of their paycheck to have coverage. We break down each into five competitive areas: national, regional, state, industry, and employers of similar size.”

Addressing Employers’ Fear of Cost

Some employers may not want to see the results because their current offering isn’t competitive, and it would cost money to adjust their programs to be closer to market. If getting closer to market to compete for labor is their goal, we work with them to create a three- to five-year plan to get there, making incremental adjustments each year. Another common finding is that employers are paying more of the premium than their competitors. Some acknowledge that’s what they want to be doing; others appreciate the information and adjust their cost share so they can reallocate those premium dollars to other benefits, wages, or expenses. This can be an eye-opener, and they likely would not have realized the difference without doing a benchmark test.

Another benefit of benchmarking is how we use the information to educate and engage employees, helping them understand the effort their employer is making to be competitive in the market and how fortunate they are to have the benefits they do compared to others. We use the data during employee meetings to drive the point home. The response is often amazing. We’ve had employees go to their employers and thank them after the employee meetings admitting that they didn’t realize how competitive their benefits are. This also highlights that their employer cares about its employees’ needs and wishes with their benefits, helping the employer retain their key talent.

Partner with Advisors that Listen

If your benefits program isn’t up-to-par – or you’re not even sure where it stands against others in your marketplace – then benchmarking is something you should seriously consider. Even more so, partner with advisors that will want to improve employee perception of your benefits as much as you do. Everyone at Hierl is extremely passionate about helping employers – large or small – identify what it takes to build a successful employee benefits program. To do that, we use the data and listen to the direction the employer wants to go, while also keeping in mind what the employees are looking for. Something we offer to our clients is to survey not only their company through benchmark but to also survey their employees, regarding how they feel and engage with their benefits. Every other year, we go in and do this test with our clients’ employees to ensure the benefits plans we design for our clients are fully comprehensive and hitting every mark. We’re not your traditional broker. We bring tools and resources to the conversation that make a difference. We’re driven to educate and improve both the employer and employee experience, driving down the overall cost of benefits at the same time.

To learn more about Hierl’s services or to begin your benchmark process, please contact our Executive Vice President, Scott Smeaton, at 920.921.5921 or ssmeaton@hierl.com.


Target on Safety: Driver Fatigue

Fatigue is the result of physical or mental exertion that impairs performance. Driver fatigue may be due to a lack of adequate sleep, extended work hours, strenuous work or non-work activities, or a combination of other factors. The Large Truck Crash Causation Study (LTCCS) reported that 13 percent of Commercial Motor Vehicle (CMV) drivers were considered to have been fatigued at the time of their crash.

Below are some tips that will help you stay healthy and feel well rested during your time on the road.

Tip #1: Get Enough Sleep

Be sure to get an adequate amount of sleep each night. If possible, do not drive while your body is naturally drowsy, between the hours of 12 a.m. to 6 a.m. and 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. Driver drowsiness may impair a driver’s response time to potential hazards, increasing the chances of being in a crash. If you do become drowsy while driving, choose a safe place to pull over and rest.

The circadian rhythm refers to the wake/sleep cycle that our body goes through each day and night. The cycle involves our internal clock and controls the daily pattern of alertness in a human body. With inadequate sleep, the drowsiness experienced during natural “lulls” can be even stronger and may have a greater adverse effect on a driver’s performance and alertness.

A study by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) found that driver alertness was related to “time-of-day” more so than “time-on-task.” Most people are less alert at night, especially after midnight. This drowsiness may be enhanced if you have been on the road for an extended period of time.

A recent study conducted to determine the risk of having a safety-critical event as a function of driving-hour suggests that incidents are highest during the first hour of driving. The authors hypothesize that drivers may be affected by sleep inertia shortly after waking from sleep. This may be especially true for drivers who sleep in the sleeper berth. Sleep inertia refers to impairment in a variety of performance tasks, including short-term memory, vigilance, cognitive functioning, reaction time and ability to resist sleep.

Tip #2: Maintain a Healthy Diet

Skipping meals or eating at irregular times may lead to fatigue and/or food cravings. Also, going to bed with an empty stomach or immediately after a heavy meal can interfere with sleep. A light snack before bed may help you achieve more restful sleep. Remember that if you are not well-rested, induced fatigue may cause slow reaction time, reduced attention, memory lapses, lack of awareness, mood changes, and reduced judgment ability.

A recent study conducted on the sleeping and driving habits of CMV drivers concluded that an unhealthy lifestyle, long working hours, and sleeping problems were the main causes of drivers falling asleep while driving.

Tip #3: Take a Nap

If possible, you should take a nap when feeling drowsy or less alert. Naps should last a minimum of 10 minutes, but ideally a nap should last up to 45 minutes. Allow at least 15 minutes after waking to fully recover before starting to drive.

Short naps are more effective at restoring energy levels than coffee. Naps aimed at preventing drowsiness are generally more effective in maintaining a driver’s performance than naps taken when a person is already drowsy.

Tip #4: Avoid Medication That May Induce Drowsiness

Avoid medications that may make you drowsy if you plan to get behind the wheel. Most drowsiness-inducing medications include a warning label indicating that you should not operate vehicles or machinery during use. Some of the most common medicines that may make you drowsy are: tranquilizers, sleeping pills, allergy medicines and cold medicines.

In a recent study, 17 percent of CMV drivers were reported as having “over-the-counter drug use” at the time of a crash. Cold pills are one of the most common medicines that may make you drowsy. If you must drive with a cold, it is safer to suffer from the cold than drive under the effects of the medicine.

Tip #5: Recognize the Signals and Dangers of Drowsiness

Pay attention. Indicators of drowsiness include frequent yawning, heavy eyes and blurred vision.

Research has indicated that being awake for 18 hours is comparable to having a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.08 percent, which is legally intoxicated and leaves you at equal risk for a crash. A 2005 study suggests that three out of every four CMV drivers report having experienced at least one type of driving error as a result of drowsiness.

Tip #6: Do Not Rely on “Alertness Tricks” to Keep You Awake

Behaviors such as smoking, turning up the radio, drinking coffee, opening the window and other “alertness tricks” are not real cures for drowsiness and may give you a false sense of security.

Excessive intake of caffeine can cause insomnia, headaches, irritability and nervousness.  It takes several minutes for caffeine to get into your system and deliver the energy boost you need, so if you are already tired when you first drink a caffeinated drink, it may not take effect as quickly as you might expect. In addition, if you are a regular caffeine user, the effect may be much smaller. Rolling the window down or turning the radio up may help you feel more alert for an instant, but these are not effective ways to maintain an acceptable level of alertness.

Source: DOT/FMCSA CMV Driving Tips: Driver Fatigue