Tag Archives: compensation

More on Nice Guys in the Workplace

Posted on by jill

Last week, we looked at a newly released study indicating that “disagreeable men” earned more than their more likeable counterparts.  Women, it seems, earn even less than agreeable men.  The theory behind this earnings pecking order seems to be that the first group of men is more inclined to negotiate and ask for more money.   Even when women do so, it is not viewed as a positive, gender-appropriate trait and so they are rewarded less than men who negotiate.

The study, conducted by professors at the University of Notre Dame, Cornell University and the University of Western Ontario, looked at 20 years worth of data related to 10,000 individuals of various walks of life and age categories.  While we shouldn’t peg everything on one study, there do seem to be a preponderance of related study findings.  So these results are worth our consideration with regard to what we, as HR professionals, need to be aware of.

It makes sense to take a look at your compensation program, formal or otherwise, in light of what’s actually happening among employees’ pay differentials.  Are there gender differences?  What behaviors are rewarded and who are the decision makers?  Do you communicate to employees through your performance management system which expectations and behaviors are encouraged and rewarded?  Is the communication honest so as to encourage the behaviors your organization seeks to elicit?  Or do the numbers tell a different story in that rewards don’t align with your values?

It might make perfect sense that more aggressive employees, for instance, the top salesperson, exhibiting tenacious sales closing behavior, earns more than a less aggressive counterpart.  And that may be just fine.  But there may be a flip side to evaluate;  for instance, is that high earner hurting morale and figuratively stomping upon subordinates so that you are replacing them frequently, costing the organization both in terms of  dollars and employee morale in the process?  Not all situations will be this blatant; some will be more subtle, but there can be unaccounted for costs that may come into play if rewards are out of sync with values.

I’m suggesting that we as HR folks should seek to align the reward process with the organizational mission and values and make a course correction if that’s not what’s actually happening.  Take a look at employees’ gender, credentials, experience and performance in light of your compensation program to make sure the organization is meeting its own expectations.

And, if you are a woman yourself, remember it pays to nicely but firmly ask for what you deserve.

 

Do Nice Guys Finish Last in the Workplace?

Posted on by jill

Do nice guys finish last and does it pay to be a jerk?

According to a recently released study the answers are not quite and yes.  According to the study by researchers Beth A. Livingston of Cornell University, Timothy A. Judge of the University of Notre Dame, and Charlice Hurst of the University of Western Ontario, disagreeable guys earn 18% more than their agreeable counterparts.  For women, being disagreeable nets just 5% more than their nicer female colleagues but even these women earn less than the guys, nice or not; therefore women, especially the nicer ones, are finishing last, at least in terms of salary.  The study of 10,000 workers encompassed 20 years of data.

“Agreeableness” is considered one of the five major dimensions used to describe human personality. It generally refers to someone who is warm, sympathetic, kind and cooperative.  When people are asked to identify with whom they want to spend time, agreeableness is the most valued characteristic.   A disagreeable person is more likely to behave disagreeably in certain situations by, for instance, aggressively advocating for their position during conflicts.

According to Notre Dame News, Professor Judge says:
“If you’re a disagreeable man, you’re considered a tough negotiator.  But, the perception is that if a woman is agreeable, she gets taken advantage of, and if she is disagreeable, she’s considered a control freak or ‘the B-word.’  Think about Martha Stewart and Donald Trump.  They’re both tough people and, yet, I think Martha Stewart has gotten much more negative press and taken more grief because she’s a disagreeable woman.”

So, what’s a woman to do?

“There’s a difference between disagreeing and being disagreeable,” Judge says. “So, I think women should not compromise and, in fact, it’s even more important for them to be aggressive in what they ask for. I tell negotiation students they need to ask for what they want to the point of ridiculousness. People think there are long-term consequences to asking for too much at work, and I don’t think there’s any evidence of that.”

“Now, the unfairness of it,” Judge continues, “is that when women ask for more, they are more likely to have their motives questioned, which can neutralize some of the advantages. So, I think women must present their requests in a non-threatening, gentle but firm sort of way.  In essence, the way women communicate their demands matters more than it does for men.”

Wow!  That’s a tough balancing act for half the population.  What are the lessons from this study for HR?  Stay tuned.

Workplace Incident Report

Posted on by admin

Every year the United States Department of Labor releases a report on workplace safety that includes injury and illness rates. Knowing what your industries injury rate is and what tools can be used to reduce your risk can save thousands of unnecessary dollars in fines and lawsuits.

Industry 2006 annual average employment(in thousands)/Incidence Rate2005/2006

Nonclay refractory manufacturing 6.3 / – / 16.9
Motor home manufacturing 21.1 / – / 16.8
Iron foundries 58.4/ 17.1 / 15.1
Light truck and utility vehicle manufacturing 69.3 / 17.8 / 14.6
Prefabricated wood building manufacturing 27.2 / 14.3 / 14.3
Truck trailer manufacturing 38.5 / 16.8 / 13.9
Manufactured home (mobile home) manufacturing 49.1 / 12.9 / 13.2
Skiing facilities 34.0 / – / 13.2
Travel trailer and camper manufacturing 48.7 / 14.1 / 13.1
Sports teams and clubs 63.2 / – / 12.8
Animal (except poultry) slaughtering 146.3 / 12.6 / 12.5
Steel foundries (except investment) 20.9 / 10.7 / 12.1
Aluminum foundries (except die-casting) 22.5 / 13.3 / 12.1
Metal tank (heavy gauge) manufacturing 27.1 / – / 11.9
Motor vehicle body manufacturing 66.9 / 8.3 / 11.8
Beet sugar manufacturing 6.1 / 18.3 / 11.7
Amusement and theme parks 137.0 / – / 11.7
Couriers 528.0 / 12.4 / 11.0
Ambulance services 127.3 / – 11.0
Iron and steel forging 27.0 / 13.3 / 10.9
Heavy duty truck manufacturing 37.6 / 13.1 / 10.9
Scheduled passenger air transportation 426.8 / – / 10.8
Ship building and repairing 91.7 / 10.9 / 10.7
Soft drink manufacturing 79.7 10.4 10.6
Household furniture (except wood/metal) manufacturing 6.5 / – / 10.6
Private industry 111,273.1 / 4.6 / 4.4

Visit the Department of Labor homepage to see more stats on workplace incidents reports. For more information on risk management solutions, visit the HRSentry Homepage.

Insurance meets Academia

Posted on by admin

No where is the struggle between the insurance and academic world more apparent than at colleges and universities where student coverage plans dictate the type of campus activities and events allowed. Academics support the growth of the future through pushing boundaries and open minds, while the insurance world attempts to categorize and put price on everything with a focus on risk management. These very different schools of thought are forced together to create the complicated world of student and employee health and compensation plans.

Most colleges and universities offer a health plan on some level to its students. The trick is to evaluate the plan and decide whether it really is cost effective and comparable to industry norms. According to Business Week, six out of 10 universities recommend a plan for students and three out of 10 require students to enroll in specific plans. Some colleges negotiate a standard student plan and some then automatically bill students for the plan unless they or their families opt out of the coverage. Mark Rukavina, executive director of the Access Project, said that college administrators are often unfamiliar with the insurance industry and do not negotiate the best deals. Over half of these plans recommended by colleges include payout limits of $30,000 or less. Providing student coverage can be extremely lucrative for insurance companies as on average large insurers spend about 80% of premiums on care and keep the remaining 20% for administrative costs and profit, whereas a Business Week analysis found that several college-recommended plans spend “well below” 70% of premiums on care (Elgin/Silver-Greenberg, Business Week, 5/8). This has to do mainly with the good health most college aged students enjoy.

Over the past decade many of the countries colleges and universities have been forced to switch to new health and compensation plans in order to compete with rising costs. Many of the new plans, such as the one recently outlined at the University of Virginia, stress compensation in relation to performance and market rates as opposed to the traditional structured leveled compensation plan. This change has left many of the employees at these academic institutions concerned for their future. Many employees at these institutions are concerned that once workers are locked into the new plan, the colleges and universities will begin to slowly roll back benefits, leave and possibly pay. The new UVA restructuring plan can be viewed at their human resources website. Two of the biggest points of concern with many of these plans is where funding is coming from and who it applies to. Most plans, including the UVA restructuring, specify a date that if you were hired after you are automatically enlisted in the new plan, while older employees have the option to switch or be bought out.

For more information on basic student health coverage visit University Health Plans or for information on college or university salary comparisons visit Salary Expert