A sense of belonging and attachment to a group of co-workers is a better motivator for some employees than money, according to a new study by University of Iowa (UI) researchers.

“We found that self-managing teams exhibit increased performance when they are highly cohesive,” said Greg Stewart, Henry B. Tippie Research Professor of Management and Organizations in the UI Tippie College of Business. “Peer pressure is a strong motivating force, and workers’ willingness to please people who mean something to them is often a stronger motivating force than financial rewards.”

Stewart’s group studied how members of self-managed teams allotted pay raises for other members of their team. They studied 587 workers in 45 self-managing teams at three factories in Iowa. In each of the 45 teams, teammates were allowed varying degrees of input into how much their teammates should be compensated for their work, and the researchers studied those compensation decisions.

Using questionnaires, they asked the workers about their level of attraction to the team and their compensation, and asked their supervisors about the productivity of both individuals and teams.

“In high functioning teams the group takes over most of the management function themselves,” said Stephen Courtright, assistant professor at Texas A&M University who recently received his doctoral degree from UI and was a member of the research group. “They work with each other, they encourage and support each other, and they coordinate with outside teams. They collectively perform the role of a good manager.”

He says it makes sense that the team would make sound compensation decisions because they’re the ones who work with their team members, after all, and are in the best position to observe their performance.

Stewart says the study confirms what prior research has found, that pleasing other people is a powerful motivating factor. In other words, Courtright says peer pressure is an important social force beyond junior high school. In this case, workers don’t want to disappoint their team members, so appealing to team spirit is more effective even than money as a motivating tool.

“We all have a social need to be accepted, to identify with a group and be a part of it,” Stewart said. “So much so that peer pressure from team members is more effective than money in prompting strong performances from workers.”

However, this works only when team members get along. When they don’t, then self-managed teams perform worse than cohesive teams. When team members don’t much care for each other, Courtright says appealing to team spirit as a motivating factor won’t work because there is no team spirit to appeal to, so money becomes the primary motivating factor to improve productivity.

“Teams perform better when there is social pressure from peers to perform well than when peers wave a carrot and stick,” Courtright said. “However, the carrot and stick method works pretty well when team members just can't get along.”

(Story materials via the University of Iowa.)

So, you need a job. Or you want a new job. But the employment market stinks, right? That’s what the TV and the Web report almost hourly (so we won’t forget).

Well, the situation doesn’t stink everywhere. Richard Florida and Charlotta Mellander ranked the top U.S. cities as far as their relative attractiveness to recent college grads seeking gainful employment.

Before we get to the rankings, let’s mix this up and make the data, perhaps, a bit more interesting. From the list of the top 10 U.S. cities for new college grads, the following areas are also each home to one of the 10 largest MPI chapters (MPI size rank in parenthesis).

1. San Francisco—Oakland—Fremont, Calif. (MPI Northern California Chapter—No. 1, tied)

2. San Jose—Sunnyvale—Santa Clara, Calif. (MPI Northern California Chapter—No. 1, tied)

3. New York—Newark—Edison, N.Y., N.J., Penn. (MPI Greater New York Chapter—No. 5)

...

10. Boston—Cambridge—Quincy, Mass., N.H. (MPI New England Chapter—No. 9)

Extrapolate away. I look at those destinations and surmise they’re most likely to be home to the most new college grads anyway just based on proximity to many notable college soils. I’m, of course, also dismayed to see the southern U.S. fall behind in another category.

Additional destinations thriving for new college grads include Champaign-Urbana, Ill.; Durham, N.C.; Gainesville, Fla.; Ithaca, N.Y.; and Ann Arbor, Mich.

Narcissism, a trait considered obnoxious in most circumstances, actually pays off big-time in the short-term context of a job interview, according to a new study to be published in the Journal of Applied Social Psychology.

Narcissists scored much higher in simulated job interviews than non-narcissists, researchers found. They pointed to narcissists’ innate tendency to promote themselves, in part by engaging and speaking at length, which implied confidence and expertise even when they were held to account by expert interviewers.

“This is one setting where it’s OK to say nice things about yourself and there are no ramifications. In fact, it’s expected,” said Peter Harms, assistant professor of management at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln and a co-author of the study. “Simply put, those who are comfortable doing this tend to do much better than those who aren’t.”

The two-part study examined the effectiveness of the types of behaviors that narcissists exhibit—which would be typically seen as maladjusted—in the narrow context of an interview. In the first part, 72 participants were videotaped in a simulated job-applicant setting. As expected, narcissists were more likely to self-promote. However, it was when expert interviewers challenged applicants that narcissists started behaving in unexpected ways, Harms says.

While normal individuals backed off of their self-promotion tactics when held accountable, narcissists actually increased their attempts to make themselves look better.

“When feeling challenged, they tend to double down,” Harms said. “It’s as if they say ‘Oh, you’re going to challenge me? Then I’m not just great, I’m fantastic.’ And in this setting, it tended to work.”

In the study’s second part, 222 raters evaluated videos of applicants with similar job skills and varying levels of narcissism. The raters consistently awarded chronic self-promoters—who spoke quickly and at length and who used ingratiation tactics such as smiling, gesturing and complimenting others—far more positive evaluations.

Meanwhile, equally qualified applicants who tended to rely on tactical modesty scored lower, according to the study.

“This shows that what is getting (narcissists) the win is the delivery,” Harms said. “These results show just how hard it is to effectively interview, and how fallible we can be when making interview judgments. We don’t necessarily want to hire narcissists, but might end up doing so because they come off as being self-confident and capable.”

For interviewers, the study’s findings mean they must become aware of the tactics used by narcissists, Harms says—and, if necessary, avoid selecting people who chronically use self-promotion and ingratiation, unless those behaviors are appropriate for the position.

“On the whole, we find very little evidence that narcissists are more or less effective workers. But what we do know is that they can be very disruptive and destructive when dealing with other people on a regular basis. If everything else is equal, it probably is best to avoid hiring them.”

(Story materials provided by the University of Nebraska-Lincoln/Steve Smith.)

I would say that I'm an ideas man. I have tons of them, and I'm not afraid to share my work-related ones with my boss. 

Apparently, I'm not alone, because  most employees claim they regularly propose ideas to their boss, according to a survey by Right Management. Half of the survey respondents claim to make 20 or more suggestions each year and another quarter between 10 and 20. 

The survey was conducted in January and February, and 497 North American workers responded to the question:

How often do you offer suggestions to your boss at work?

• 54 percent—More than 20 suggestions each year
• 24 percent—Between 10 and 20 each year
• 15 percent—Fewer than 10 each year
• 7 percent—I don’t offer suggestions at work

“Despite research that indicates workers are disengaged, on the whole they want to be helpful and have their say on issues or problems that arise in the workplace” said Monika Morrow, senior vice president of Career Management for Right Management, which provides talent, career and outplacement services to Fortune 500 companies. “We find again and again that employees want to contribute. By making suggestions they demonstrate that they’re thinking about getting the job done, and done well.”

Morrow advises employers to take advantage of workers’ ideas. 

“Of course, the boss has to judge which suggestions are worthwhile, but employee concern or enthusiasm should be encouraged and their willingness to participate in problem solving is the sign of a healthy workplace,” she said.

At a time when many employees feel stifled in their job, it is even more important that employers show that they are listening. 

“Make sure employees know they have a voice and a say in what happens at work," she said. "Be proactive in seeking their input and sharing ideas. It should be more than a gesture, but a genuine effort to reach out. Tap them for fresh ideas that could improve productivity or customer service.”

The best employers know how to unleash the potential in people, Morrow says. 

“This is a crucial management skill when talent so often is what provides a company with its competitive advantage,” she said.

What about you? Do you offer up lots of ideas throughout the year? Do you feel that your ideas are listened to and seriously considered? What's the best idea you have for our industry? Please let us know in the comments. Thank you.

Employees place such a high premium on workplace flexibility that 33 percent of them say they would seek employment elsewhere if it wasn't offered—57 percent would be less satisfied with their job, and 45 percent would feel less productive.

The latest Mobile Workforce Report, published by iPass Inc., showed some other interesting (though, not surprising) results. Of the 3,100 employees surveyed worldwide, 75 percent of employees work more hours due to workshifting (flexible work schedules that enable employees to work wherever and whenever they want). More than half (55 percent) work at least 10 or more additional hours each week as a result of their more flexible schedules, and 12 percent work 20 or more additional hours.

The report found that 38 percent of employees work before their commute, 25 percent work during their commute, 37 percent work during lunch and 37 percent work at night—each and every day.

Workers reported that workshifting allows them to be more productive and efficient, with 79 percent reporting increased productivity and 78 percent reporting increased efficiency. In fact, 64 percent of mobile workers also reported improved work-life balance and more than half (51 percent) felt more relaxed because of flexible work.

“Even though mobile workers are putting in more hours, we are starting to see the pendulum swing back to the center on disconnecting, with 68 percent of mobile workers disengaging from technology occasionally to spend time with their families,” said Barbara Nelson, chief technology officer at iPass. “It appears that the mobile workforce is getting a better hold on their work-life balance.”

The report also found

• 47 percent of mobile employees work from home daily, 99 percent at least occasionally. 88 percent of mobile workers report working from the road, 84 percent from a coffee shop and 77 percent outside using a city-mesh Wi-Fi at least on an occasional basis.
• 40 percent would like a more flexible work environment—even with 95 percent of employees stating that their employers currently either encourage or tolerate workshifting.
• During vacation, 97 percent of mobile workers stay connected to technology (up from 93 percent in 2010). Nearly all (94 percent) did so at least partly for work.
• On vacation, 69 percent checked into work at least daily, while 93 percent checked in at least weekly. 41 percent checked in multiple times per day.
• 52 percent connected during vacation to make sure they didn’t fall behind on work, weren’t overwhelmed upon return to work or to ensure completion of a work project.

In a recent article by Amy Winter on creators.com, she notes that perks really do make a difference. Top incentives to keep top talent include: "performance bonuses, 401(k) with employer contribution, vacation/personal time, flexible schedules, health/wellness programs, tuition reimbursement, telecommuting or onsite child care/subsidized child care." These are important to not only current employees, but future ones. She gives tips on how to find out about a company and its benefits before the interview.

What are ways you find and keep top talent? 

With the economy slowly recovering, a new survey of human resources executives reveals that employers are increasingly concerned about losing their top talent to other companies. As a result, many employers are bringing back some of the perks that were cut during the recession, and others are introducing new ones to attract and retain the best workers. 

In the survey conducted by global outplacement and executive coaching consultancy Challenger, Gray & Christmas Inc., 42 percent of respondents say they were growing more concerned about other companies poaching top talent, as the economy improves. Meanwhile, nearly 49 percent of respondents say the poaching of talent is always a concern, even in a recession. 

“Even in a downturn with widespread layoffs, companies still need talent," said John A. Challenger, CEO of Challenger, Gray & Christmas. "In fact, this may be the most important time for employers to hold on tight to their highest skilled workers. However, as the economy improves, companies could be worried not only about other employers poaching their best workers, but also about their top talent actively seeking new opportunities.” 

Such an exodus may be just over the horizon. A recent survey by MetLife found that nearly 40 percent of all employees hope to work for a different employer in the next 12 months. Another study, this one from the Corporate Leadership Council, found that 25 percent of high-potential employees (a.k.a. top performers) intend to leave their current employer within the year. 

In order to hang on to their talent, more companies are reinstating perks that were cut or eliminated because of the economic downturn that began in late 2007. According to the Challenger survey, 39 percent of respondents say their companies were forced to reduce or eliminate perks during the recession. 

With the economy starting to spring back, about 18 percent of those polled say their companies have been able to restore all pre-recession perks. Another 41 percent have brought back some of the perks that were cut or eliminated. Nearly one quarter (23.5 percent) of those surveyed indicated that they have introduced some entirely new perks. 

“Whether it’s something simple, like free bagels in the lunch room every morning, or something more substantial, such as tuition reimbursement or flexible scheduling, these perks can be an essential part of worker morale and job satisfaction," Challenger said. "Companies that are frequently identified as ‘the best places to work’ typically offer a variety of unique and well-regarded perks. Nice perks alone are not enough to instill worker loyalty.

"In other words, a company can’t make up for mistreating employees with a free gym membership," he continued. "But in companies where perks are an extension of a corporate culture that views its workers as partners or team members and not cogs in the machinery, employees are more likely to feel valued, engaged and happy." 

The Challenger survey found that the perk most effective in retaining top talent is the performance-based bonus, selected by nearly 80 percent of respondents. About 70 percent of respondents said 401(k) with employer contributions was an effective perk. Other effective perks included vacation/personal time (49 percent), wellness-related benefits (43 percent), flexible schedules (40 percent) and tuition reimbursement (27 percent). 

“Cash is still king," Challenger said. "Bonuses are always going to be popular, because it conveys to employees that they are an integral part of the team and that their performance directly impacts the bottom line, so when the company does well because of their hard work, they are rewarded with extra money. But many companies are also finding success with low-cost and no-cost perks." 

Offering employees opportunities to telecommute is one example of a no-cost perk that is popular among workers. About one in four human resource executives surveyed by Challenger say telecommuting is effective in boosting retention. And many companies find that it is not only no-cost; it actually results in cost savings, as employers are able to reduce their need for physical space. 

“Other amenities, such as casual work attire, early dismissal on Fridays during the summer and pet-friendly offices are just a few more examples of perks that are extremely popular among workers and, because they add no costs to the bottom line, companies are not forced to cut them in rough times,” Challenger said. 

These types of fringe benefits seem to be in line with what employees want. A 2008 survey by Salary.com found the most popular benefits outside of monetary compensation are professional development, the ability to work from home, an additional week of vacation and a flexible work schedule. 

It appears that companies are listening. A January survey of chief financial officers by Robert Half found that 33 percent of companies plan to offer or already offer subsidized training and education. More than one quarter (27 percent) will offer flexible work hours/telecommuting. Another 25 percent will provide mentoring programs. 

Flexible scheduling is another example of a low-cost perk that could end up benefitting a company’s bottom line. Big box retailer Best Buy recently implemented a results-only-work-environment (ROWE) at its corporate headquarters. The program gives employees much more control over their work schedules by basically saying, “We don’t care when, where or how your work gets done, as long as it gets done and the quality of the work meets expectations.” 

An independent study of the program conducted by a pair of sociology professors found that implementation of ROWE reduced turnover by 45 percent—after controlling for multiple factors like job level, organizational tenure, job satisfaction, income adequacy, job security and other turnover intentions.

Women who return to work after giving birth are more likely to stay on the job if they have greater control over their work schedules, according to a Baylor University study. Researchers also found that job security and the ability to make use of a variety of their job skills leads to greater retention of working moms, while the impact of work-related stress on their physical and mental health causes greater turnover.

"Having a flexible schedule is an important element necessary to decrease working mom turnover, because it can be used when work demands arise," said Dawn S. Carlson, Ph.D., study author, professor of management and H. R. Gibson Chair of Organizational Development at the Hankamer School of Business at Baylor University in Waco, Texas. "When confronted by one or more job demands, a flexible schedule provides working moms with alternatives for meeting those demands while caring for their newborns. When working moms are better able to control their work environment and adapt, work-related stress is less likely to become a family issue."

According to 2008 data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 71 percent of women with children under the age of 18 were working or looking for work, and nearly 60 percent of women with young children were employed. Yet, a large number of mothers who return to work after childbirth subsequently leave the labor force. Very little is known about the factors that play a role in women's work decisions after childbirth.

The transition back to work is pivotal for a new mother, and this study offers important insight into the understanding of how a job can either contribute to or detract from the mother's decision to stay with her employer after she returns to work, Carlson says.

The researchers surveyed 179 full-time working mothers in North Carolina with an average age of 31 years. Of the group, 72 percent was white, 27 percent was black and one percent was Asian. The majority, 79 percent, was married. They worked an average of 39.7 hours per week and planned on returning to work 30 or more hours by four months postpartum. The duration of maternity leave was six weeks, but only 48.1 percent reported having paid maternity leave. Among the new mothers, 40 percent reported that the recent birth was their first child. For the study, they completed an interview survey at four months postpartum, eight months postpartum and 12 months postpartum.

Job security also plays an important role in decision-making. When job security is high, workers are not distracted by worry or exhausted by strain. Instead, they are able to engage more fully in responsibilities inside and outside the workplace.

"Job security heightens motivation and energy, particularly for mothers who are sensitive to the security of their jobs after returning from maternity leave. When working mothers believe that their tenure with an organization is not at risk, they will have more energy and other resources with which to fully engage and perform both at work and at home," said Merideth J. Ferguson, Ph.D., assistant professor of management and entrepreneurship at Baylor and a co-author of the study.

Results suggest that employers may be able to promote beneficial outcomes through systematic attempts to increase the use of a working mom's skills by cross-training her for multiple functions. Mental and physical health play an important role in retaining working mothers and deserve attention, such as through employee assistance programs, support systems or more integrative work-life initiatives, Carlson says.

"Although further research is needed, the results of this study indicate the impact of job characteristics on work-family relations that play a role in the mental and physical health and retention of working mothers as they make the pivotal transition back to work after childbirth," she said.

The study is published online in the Journal of Applied Psychology.

(Story materials provided by Baylor University.)

I'm going to stick with my theme today and give you more news about employee engagement. According to Mercer’s new "What’s Working" survey—conducted over the past two quarters among nearly 30,000 workers in 17 countries,including 2,400 U.S. workers—employees are super unhappy. 

Nearly one in three (32 percent) U.S. workers is seriously considering leaving his or her organization at the present time, up sharply from 23 percent in 2005. Meanwhile, another 21 percent are not looking to leave but view their employers unfavorably and have rock-bottom scores on key measures of engagement, a term that describes a combination of an employee’s loyalty, commitment and motivation.

“The business consequences of this erosion in employee sentiment are significant, and clearly the issue goes far beyond retention,” said Mindy Fox, a senior partner at Mercer and the firm’s U.S. region leader. “Diminished loyalty and widespread apathy can undermine business performance, particularly as companies increasingly look to their workforces to drive productivity gains and spur innovation.” 

Employee concerns about work are pervasive, reflecting an evolving employment deal that they have seen as a series of takeaways, plus further cuts made during economic tough times:

• Only 43 percent of U.S. employees believe they are doing enough to financially prepare for retirement—down from 47 percent in 2005, and just 41 percent believe their employers are doing enough to help them prepare, up slightly from 38 percent.
• Sixty-eight percent of employees rate their overall benefits program as good or very good, down from 76 percent in 2005, while 59 percent say they are satisfied with their health care benefits, down from 66 percent.
• Base pay is the most important element of the employment deal, by a wide margin, but U.S. workers show lower satisfaction with base pay (53 percent satisfied, down from 58 percent in 2005).
• Despite improvements, scores for career development and performance management remain low. Just 42 percent of employees today agree that promotions go to the most qualified employees in their organization, up from 29 percent in 2005, and 46 percent agree that their organization does an adequate job of matching pay to performance, up from 33 percent.

As a result, overall scores are down consistently across key engagement measures while intention to leave is up across all employee segments, with the youngest workers most likely to be eyeing a departure—40 percent of employees age 25–34 and 44 percent of employees 24 and younger.

According to Fox, an effective employment deal includes both how the deal is defined and how it is delivered.

“Employees see a ‘disconnect’ between what employers are promising and what they are delivering,” she said. “Organizations should re-examine their deals—both the traditional and non-traditional elements—then support them with effective administration and consistent, authentic communication that fosters a sense of belonging and helps employees make better rewards choices and career decisions.”

Mercer’s survey also drives home the importance of knowing what is going on inside employees minds, which changes over time. 

“Often, a change in mood or sentiment is not spotted until it becomes a full-blown issue,” said Pete Foley, Ph.D., a principal at Mercer and employee research consultant. “Employers must periodically take the pulse of their own employees to identify their specific areas of concern and link employee opinion to outcomes such as productivity and retention.”

With the economy recovering, the quest for (and to retain) talent is growing more robust. One aspect of this topic is succession planning. We recently reported on a CareerBuilder survey that showed nearly one-third of companies with more than 1,000 employees don’t currently have a succession planning program at their organizations. 

And according to a new poll from the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), the number of U.S. organizations with a formal succession plan in place decreased during the past five years from 29 percent in 2006 to 23 percent in 2011.

While less than a quarter of businesses have a formal plan in place, the numbers improve when informal plans are considered. More than one-third, or 38 percent, of HR professionals say their organization currently has an informal succession plan or process in place (up from 29 percent in 2006).

The number who say their organization has no intentions to develop a plan remained roughly unchanged from 16 percent in 2006 to 17 percent in 2011.

Sixteen percent say their organization’s staff size is too small to create a formal succession plan.

“The No. 1 reason organizations are not developing formal succession planning is because more immediate projects are taking precedence—not surprising given that organizations are focusing their energies on dealing with an uncertain economic outlook,” said Evren Esen, manager, Survey Research Center at SHRM. “Still, succession planning has significant strategic implications for organizations and should not be put on the back burner, especially during times of economic volatility.”

While roughly 40 percent of HR departments lead the organization’s succession plan initiatives, 21 percent of efforts are lead by the organization’s president or CEO. Thirteen percent of efforts are lead by executives, such as the chief financial officer or the chief operating officer. Only four percent are lead by middle managers and three percent by the board of directors.

“This is an area that HR should lead in organizations,” Esen said. “Maybe planning would increase if HR ran the programs.”

Well, if you don't set time aside to do succession planning, then it doesn't matter who runs it.

How important is succession planning for your company? Is it a priority? If not, why?