You Asked: About Celebrating Service Milestones

The Question: What is the best way to celebrate service anniversaries?

The Answer: Let’s begin with what not to do. The decades-old practice of holding formal service celebrations with speeches, certificates, plaques and gifts at five-year intervals has hung around long past its “best-before” date.

These celebrations require a great deal of preparation and are expensive (one study found that organizations were spending more than 50 per cent of their recognition budgets on annual service events). Even worse, they celebrate the wrong thing: survival rather than how staff members have made a difference.

Whether they did a good job or did just enough to avoid being fired over the last five years, everyone will be invited to the same service celebration and will receive the same awards after five years. And it will happen again five years later and in five years after that.

Five years is a long time to wait to be recognized—longer than the tenure most people have with one organization.

This doesn’t mean that service milestones should not be observed. They certainly should be, but more frequently and with less formality. Service anniversaries come around every year and like birthdays and wedding anniversaries they should be celebrated, as close as possible to the actual date on which the individual joined the organization.

These celebrations should be less focused on the time served and more on how the individual has contributed, particularly in the year since the last service milestone.

Retaining new staff

For new staff, who are at high risk of leaving during the first months, more service milestones should be celebrated. What did they achieve in their first month? During the first three, or by the half-year mark?

A key to retaining new staff is to reassure them that their decision to join the organization was the right one and to let them know that they are appreciated for what they have accomplished in the short time they have been on the team. Highlighting these short-term milestones should be part of your new staff retention strategy.

People stay where they feel valued and appreciated.

Related Article: Top 7 Ways to Build Commitment on a New Employee’s First Day

You may be part of an organization that clings to how service anniversaries have always been celebrated. Accept that and do more for staff in your workplace. Employ a low-key, more frequent approach to marking service milestones for those with whom you work most closely.

Create another opportunity to celebrate a year’s worth of contributions and achievement by doing more than just noting people are a year older on their birthdays. Highlight what they have accomplished since you celebrated their last birthday. 

With a focus on how staff have contributed over the past year, you will be recognizing staff members in ways that are Relevant, Explicit and Timely. This creates Genuine recognition that staff members will value and find meaningful. 

Suggestion for action: On a calendar, note staff members’ service anniversaries and birthdays and commit to highlighting their contributions and achievements of the last 12 months on those dates.

Hiring is “lots of work” but worth it to hire right people

It only took being asked a single question about two decades ago to shift the course of my career as a consultant, author and speaker.

At the end of an Interview Right to Hire Right workshop, a participant asked: “You told us how to hire the right people, but how do we keep them? It seems like a lot of work if they just turn around and leave and we have to find someone else.”

“Let them know they are appreciated,” I responded.  At the time, I really wasn’t sure what I meant by that. Luckily, no one asked.

Since then, I have spent much of my time discovering what I meant and how to show that staff members are valued as individuals and appreciated for what they do. Eventually, this question led me to write Thanks! GREAT Job!

But enough about that. This article is not about staff recognition. The focus is on the something else the questioner said: 

“It seems like a lot of work.”

That’s true. Interviewing right takes a lot of work, but that’s necessary if you want to make better hiring decisions. 

In the words of the legendary American auto executive, Lee Iacocca, “The most important thing a manager can do is to hire the right new people.”

To understand why hiring is so much work, let’s consider all that’s required before you can confidently decide who to hire: 

Be clear who you are looking for – Before you can hire the right new person, you must know who the right people currently on staff are or who they were among those you have worked in the past. In a previous article, I referred to these top performers as people who you would love to clone. What makes them successful? How do they respond in circumstances they frequently encounter? Begin your search with these competencies and attitudes in mind and you will be taking an important step toward hiring more people who will make your organization successful.

Prepare to learn how candidates have performed in previous jobs – 

Most decisions are based on what we learn about products or services we are considering buying. What are friends’ experience with this appliance? What is the repair record and fuel consumption of this vehicle? How do others feel about the food and service at this restaurant? How has the value of this mutual fund changed over the last one, five or 10 years? Intuitively, we understand that, “Past performance is the best predictor of future performance.” This same principle applies when hiring. Write questions to learn what candidates did when they encountered situations similar to those that your staff commonly experience. The better the match between the behaviour candidates describe and what your top performers do, the more likely it is that you have found the right person to hire.

Probe to learn more about candidates’ past performance – From reading mystery novels and watching crime dramas you know that detectives and trial lawyers are seldom satisfied by what they first hear from witnesses and suspects. They probe for more information. They ask followup questions to learn more. To hire the right people you should do the same. Candidates will seldom tell you everything about what they did. For every initial inquiry you make, be prepared to ask followup questions to get the full story. 

Assess what candidates tell you – Before asking, think about how candidates might respond to your questions. What answers would you consider unsatisfactory (not at all as your top performers would do it)? What would be an outstanding (top performer-like) response to the situation? Create a rubric for assessing the candidates’ answers. 

Use reference checks to confirm what candidates said and your assessment of what you heard – The lists of references candidates provide include people you don’t know, who were carefully selected to portray the candidate in the best light. In their opinion, the candidate is the best person for your job, whatever it is. Rather than asking references their opinion of the candidate, require them to describe what the candidate did in specific situations. How did they respond to situations similar to those your current staff deals with?

Not knowing what they are looking for, asking the wrong interview questions, failing to probe for additional information, having no criteria to assess candidates, and wasting reference checks are among 13 reasons managers are “unlucky” when making hiring decisions—all mistakes that can be avoided.

Planning, interviewing and checking reference takes a lot of time and effort, but the work is worth it if it results in you hiring the right people.

==

I can help you improve your chances of hiring the right people to make your organization a success. Contact nmscott@telus.net to request one-on-one coaching sessions or to schedule an Interview Right to Hire Right workshop for your leadership team. 

http://www.greatstaffrecognition.com/presentations/interview.htm

You Asked: About staff surveys

Question: How can I use surveys to determine if staff members feel appreciated and if they feel they are receiving enough recognition?

Answer: Let’s begin with some key elements of successful surveys:

If you can’t “fix it,” don’t ask. Surveys come with an implied promise that you will act on what you hear. If there are aspects of the organization’s operation that are beyond your control or your ability to change, don’t ask about them. You will be frustrated that you can’t do anything and staff members will be disappointed, and even angry, if after completing the survey they don’t see any action.

Ask questions that will produce easy to interpret results. Guessing what the data means is never a good idea. The potential of misunderstanding what staff is saying is too great.

Avoid burying yourself in data. Asking too many questions will produce so much data that it will take a long time to interpret and will produce an unmanageable number of potential actions. The longer they wait to see results, the more cynical staff members will become about the value of surveys.

Prevent “survey fatigue.” Some employers attempt to use surveys to ask about everything. When surveys are too long, staff is less likely to complete them and if they do, they will put less thought into their responses. The quality of the information coming from these surveys will be less than you hoped for.

All these are problems associated with once-a-year omnibus surveys that are administered in many workplaces, which attempt  to assess how staff feels about all aspects of the organization’s operation. 

There is a better way to use surveys to gain insight into what staff is thinking—pulse surveys.

These are shorter, consisting of a few questions and, at times, just one. Pulse surveys are quick to create, more focused and require less time to complete, which reduces the potential for survey fatigue and improves response rates.

The more frequently you conduct pulse surveys, the shorter the survey should be.

With fewer questions, pulse survey results can be interpreted quickly. Staff will see the results of their input sooner. Seeing the organization’s leadership acting on their input, staff members will become less cynical about surveys and more likely to respond to future surveys.

As pulse surveys can be conducted more frequently, you don’t have to wait a year to assess the impact of changes that you made as result of a previous survey. 

What to ask

There are two ways in which you can ask questions on surveys. The more common approach requires staff to respond to statements using a five-point Likert scale (Strongly disagree, Disagree, Neither agree nor disagree, Agree, Strongly agree) to statements similar to these:

• I receive meaningful recognition for doing my job well.
• The recognition I received is aligned with the goals and values of the organization.
• The recognition I receive is focused on what I must do to do my job well.
• Recognition is given to individuals and groups when it is deserved.

The advantage of asking questions in this way is that they can be answered quickly, which means that you can ask about several aspects of workplace life. On the other hand, this approach may produce results that are challenging to interpret, making it difficult to take action without seeking more input.

For example, what does it mean if 40 per cent disagree and 40 per cent agree that they “receive meaningful recognition?” What are you to do?

An alternative approach is “gap research,” which enables respondents to state how they perceive the workplace and how it could be improved. Four questions are asked about a topic.

Here’s how the topic of receiving meaningful recognition could be explored using gap research:

1. On a nine-point scale, with nine high, how satisfied are you that you receive meaningful recognition for doing your job well?

2. Why did you give this rating?

3. Knowing us as you do, if we really put our hearts into improving how we recognize staff, how satisfied could you be (using the same nine-point scale)?

4. What would we have to do to get there?

The first and third questions establish the gap between how staff members perceive the current situation and how they feel it could be. Question 2 invites respondent to explain why they rated the current situation as they did.

How staff answer Question 4 is most important. By telling you in their own words what needs to change, staff members are contributing to a plan for improvement. Their words may become your action plan.

==

Participants in Retaining Staff without Spending Buckets of Money have the opportunity to develop their own gap research survey questions.

Perfunctory praise will not soften the pain of a layoff

A Briefly Noted reader’s comment made after reading a staff recognition tip in the most recent edition of this newsletter reminded me why it’s important to be Explicit when describing what staff members did when recognizing them.

Explicit is one of the five ingredients of GREAT staff recognition—recognition that recipients will value.

Here is the staff recognition tip that prompted reader Jess’s comment:

In responses to letters of resignation, express your appreciation to staff members for their service. Be specific about how the organization benefited from their contributions (Emphasis added by Jess).

“I think it could be expended to when downsizing occurs, too,” she wrote.

She continued by sharing a very personal experience of being the victim of a budget-related layoff.

“I felt quite hollow and needlessly slighted when, while telling me that I was being laid off because of budget cuts beyond their control, my two bosses said, ‘We want you to know we appreciate all the hard work you’ve contributed to make this department a success.’ 

“Yet they said absolutely nothing that indicated they had any idea what I did. A tiny, tiny comment on something they noticed that I did for them would have made the moment so much less awful (for them, too, I suspect.)”

This is an example of how some managers attempt to use praise to buffer bad news. They erroneously believe that empty praise will make being told you don’t have a job easier to take. 

Of course, that’s not how recipients of “recognition” used for this purpose feel.  

“It felt perfunctory, not genuine,” Jess wrote.

Being motived by a Genuine sense of appreciation is the essential ingredient of meaningful staff recognition.

During the program based on my book Thanks! GREAT Job!I share the image of a thank-you card that no one has ever purchased, sent or received. Its message: “Thanks for nothing in particular!”

A thank-you card that no one has ever purchased, sent or received, but you can find cards with a similar message: “Thank you for everything you do.”

“You won’t find this at Hallmark,” I say. “But you will find cards with a similar message: ‘Thank you for everything you do.’” 

Receiving this message—or what Jess heard from her bosses—must leave recipients wanting to scream, “If I do everything well, I must do a good job of something. What is it?”

Avoid leaving staff members feeling “hollow and needlessly slighted” when recognizing them, when responding to letters of resignation and especially when laying them off “because of budget cuts beyond their control.” 

Jess’s advice is valid. The original tip should be extended to include what is said when staff members are being laid off, and that matter, to people who are retiring.

Whenever staff members leave the organization, whether it’s due to a resignation, retirement or layoff, express your appreciation to them for their service. Be specific about howthe organization benefited from their contributions.

Being Explicit when acknowledging the contributions of an individual who is being laid off is even more important than doing so in response to resignations. People who resign decide to leave, but those who are laid off  had no choice. They are forced to leave due to circumstances beyond their control.

Recognition must be motivated by a Genuine sense of appreciation and the message can be strengthened by including an Explicit description of what the recipient did.

If you can’t do that, it would better to just tell the individual she is being laid off “because of budget cuts beyond their control” and leave it at that.

A cautious approach when talking to strangers can lead to better hiring decisions

When you were a child, your mother may have cautioned you about talking to strangers. That was good advice then, and it’s good advice today when you have a vacancy to fill.

Almost everyone you interview will be a stranger, as those you contact when checking references will be, too. When making your hiring decisions, be careful about believing everything these strangers tell you.

All may not be as it seems.

In his 2019 book Talking to Strangers Canadian writer Malcolm Gladwell identifies two reasons we are so often wrong about the people we encounter: defaulting to the truth and transparency.

We default to the truth by tending to take at face value what people tell us, even if we should know better.

He cites several examples of people believing what they wanted to believe, rather than proceeding with caution. One of the most notable examples occurred in 1939 when British prime minister Neville Chamberlain returned from a meeting with Adolf Hitler with a document signed by both leaders that Chamberlain believed guaranteed “peace in our time.”

As the world would soon learn, Chamberlain had been deceived by the German leader. 

Like Chamberlain who wanted to believe Hitler, we want to believe what candidates tell us during interviews and what we hear from strangers when checking references.

We would make better hiring decisions if we exercised a bit more skepticism. 

Books, films and television portray police as skeptical by nature about what they hear during investigations, as illustrated by this dialogue from the British TV series Midsomer Murders:

DS Jamie Winter: You think it was the killer?

DCI John Barnaby: Maybe, or maybe Lena made up the whole story to throw us off the scent.

Winter: You think she’s lying?

Barnaby: I think she is holding back.

Winter: Why would she do that?

Barnaby: To protect herself or someone else.

(Season 19, Episode 2: “Crime and Punishment”)

We would do well to follow Barnaby’s cautious approach when we are gathering evidence on which to base hiring decisions.

Gladwell uses the TV show Friends to illustrate the concept of transparency, which refers to our tendency to judge people against what we consider to be “acceptable norms” in terms of both appearance and behaviour, which we believe provides insight into their beliefs and values. 

The actors on the show were very demonstrative in showing their feelings. He writes, “I think you can probably follow along even if you turn off the sound.”

Gladwell also cites examples of judges deciding whether to grant prisoners bail based on their demeanors. The accused who appears remorseful is more likely to be granted bail.

Continuing within the context of criminal trials, it is common to hear and read about defendants who “show no emotion” when convicted and sentenced, as if reporters can tune into their thoughts from across a courtroom.

What the judges in Gladwell’s book and journalists covering trials are doing is judging strangers against what they consider would be acceptable behaviour under the circumstances.

The problem with this approach to understanding people is that individuals react differently to situations. Not everyone wears their heart on their sleeve. Few of us are as demonstrative as the characters on Friends.

“There is no perfect mechanism … for any of the rest of us to peer, clairvoyantly, inside the minds of those we don’t know,” Gladwell writes. “What is required of us is restraint and humility. We can put up barriers on bridges to make it more difficult for the momentary impulse to become permanent.”

When hiring, it’s important to avoid making hiring decisions based on first impressions, which is one of the 13 reasons managers are “unlucky” when making hiring decisions. 

“There are clues to making sense of a stranger. But attending to them requires care and attention,” Gladwell writes. “The right way to talk to strangers is with caution and humility.”

Doing so will improve the odds of hiring the right person to fill vacant positions.