Recently we shared some of our own efforts to increase the diversity of our workforce, especially with respect to gender balance. Like most software development firms, we typically receive many more resumes and inquiries from male candidates, especially for software engineers and other technical roles. Recently, we’ve had some great success sourcing qualified female candidates through a local job fair, although we’re still not sure what caused the unusual skew in that instance.
In addition to being a software development company, we’re also an HR company, by virtue of the fact that we develop HRM software. This means that we’re always striving to implement best practices in our own organization, while at the same time developing new best practices based on the evolution of technology in the HR realm.
Mimi & Eunice, Freedom or Fairness?, Wikimedia Commons
In our ongoing efforts to build a more gender-balanced workforce we’ve become increasingly aware of the issue of gender-based pay inequity. Not that it’s an issue for team, but that it affects so many women, even after years of advocacy. Although wage disparity appears to be less of an issue in technical fields, when comparing men and women in the same roles; women are still more likely to fill positions that pay less while higher paying positions are more often filled by men.
There are a lot of theories around why women are more likely to be in lower paying roles including these: less focus on career development, educational disparity and taking time off for child-rearing.
This video by John Oliver offers biting commentary on the gender pay gap in the US and accepts no explanations or excuses for its continued existence. (Note: video starts automatically.)
With his usual sharp satire, Oliver hilariously highlights much of the hypocrisy around this issue; including the disparity between President Obama’s personal stand on the subject and the existing gap between male and female salaries among federal government employees.
Putting aside the complexities that contribute to which jobs are filled by whom and whether certain fields are dominated by men or women; there is no question that unbiased hiring and compensation equity will continue to be significant issues for employers in an increasingly pluralistic society.
As employers, if we believe in creating an inclusive and diverse workforce and we are committed to fair and equitable compensation policies, we need to
critically examine the makeup of our existing workforce,
Your people and how you treat them are a direct reflection of your organization and what it stands for. Today’s talent wants to work for socially responsible companies with a strong employer brand with employee values and concerns—which invariably include fair pay.
Contribute to a culture of inclusion and fairness with NetSuite TribeHR’s social HR platform. Sign up for yourfree trial today.
There are a lot of traditions surrounding the distribution of bonuses ranging from timing to eligibility, from merit to patronage, from celebration to stomach ulcers. The less pleasant traditions are usually a result of poorly defined structure or “bias bonuses” that reward people based on favoritism and politics rather than contribution.
Photo by Frédéric Bisson, Flickr
To ensure that bonus time creates a positive tradition in your organization, here are two vastly different approaches that strive to address common bonus time inequities.
The Standard Approach
The annual bonus is a common approach used by
Photo Credit: Nicholas A. Tonelli, Flikr
Research shows that one of the most important attractors in a job search (and one of the strongest incentives for existing employees to stay with an organization), is the availability of growth opportunities.
At the same time, company structures are becoming flatter, with fewer levels of management and less hierarchy. These increasingly horizontal organizational structures have resulted in more lateral movement and “cross training” to support career development aspirations.
Some people find scaling the “career lattice” more satisfying than the traditional approach to climbing the corporate ladder. But there
If we’ve learned one thing in HR during the past decade, it’s that change is upon us. And there is no reason to expect things to move at a slower pace going forward. Even as we grapple with the reality of an increasingly global workforce, a number of recent news items are triggering an even more fantastical train of thought—what happens when the workforce goes galactic?
Mars Orbit Undocking by SpaceGuy5, Wikimedia Commons
Who cares, you say? That’s so far in the future it can’t possibly impact us.
World Cup 2014 by Thomas, Wikimedia Commons
Whether you call it soccer, football or the beautiful game, it has unquestionably united the sentiments of millions of people around the globe. In fact, the FIFA World Cup is the biggest single-event sporting competition in the world and the most watched sporting event on the planet. So much so, that one week into the competition, advertisers had already benefited from over 1.2 billion minutes of TV and online ad viewing by a voracious global fan-base.
The patriotism and passion the sport evokes is legendary. For the people of participating nations, the World Cup represents
Overworked, underpaid and under-appreciated is the current mood of many workers across the country. According to a survey conducted by employment site, Glassdoor.com, 39 percent of people do not feel they are being compensated fairly in their current jobs. Women still bear the brunt of this, with 42% of women who responded feeling they’re unfairly paid, compared to one third of the men who answered the survey.
Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain
The disparity between CEO’s compensation and that of front-line workers is also a constant source of tension, especially in larger corporations. According to the AFL-CIO,
The Internet is arguably the greatest communications and technological achievement society has so far attained. If technology were to fail us, as it does in the post-apocalyptic future J. J. Abrams creates in the NBC series, Revolution, we would look back on the first two decades of the 21st-century and marvel at the incredible power each of us had at our disposal.
Earth by Azcolvin429, Wikimedia Commons
Thanks to the Internet, we are perpetually connected and no one is constrained by geography anymore.
When it comes to sourcing staff, this creates an enormous opportunity—one we have never been
Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain
Most of us are familiar with the annual performance review process (whether we like it or not!). In addition to annual performance reviews, some companies also implement an annual compensation review process. Sometimes the compensation review is linked to the performance review process, and sometimes it’s not. But regardless of how it’s positioned, the annual compensation review is one potentially destructive practice.
What Drives Annual Compensation Reviews?
When a company chooses to review compensation on an annual basis, the decision is generally driven by a Finance process rather than an HR process.
Arriving at fair compensation is not always easy. Aside from the fact that each position has a unique value to an organization and not all jobs are created equal, employers also face the challenge of recognizing and rewarding exemplary performance in a given role. Add to that the fact that people seldom agree on what’s fair and compensation design becomes that much more complicated.
Freedom or Fairness by Nina Paley, Wikimedia Commons, Creative Commons
Employees consider two things when assessing whether their own compensation is fair.
How their compensation compares to their co-workers.
How their compensation compares to
US Treasury, Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain
We spend a lot of time thinking about (and writing about) employee motivation,engagement and what it takes to create an awesome work environment with a high performance culture. But, before we can turn our sights to creating that awesome environment, there are some basics that must be addressed.
As Maslow discovered, people are motivated by different things depending on their current state. This means that people’s foundational (physiological) needs must be met before more complex needs even hit their radar. In the context of the workplace, foundational needs typically relate to