Posted on 09/07/2007 12:34:26 PM PDT by qam1
High-risk employees in the American workplace outnumber those who are truly loyal, according to Walker Information’s most recent national study of employee loyalty. Although the percentage of truly loyal employees – 34 percent – is unchanged from two years ago, the percentage of employees categorized as high risk now exceeds those who are loyal, creating a widening gap for employers struggling to improve retention. The Walker Loyalty Report for Loyalty in the Workplace, examining trends in both employee loyalty and business ethics, reveals 36 percent of employees are high risk – a spike of five percentage points from 2005. Based on Walker’s proprietary loyalty model, high-risk employees, unlike their truly loyal counterparts, are not committed to the organization and are likely to leave within two years.
“Employers are faced with a situation where the number of employees causing a negative drain on the organization outweighs those who are working to positively support it,” said Chris Woolard, senior consultant for Walker Information. “With more than a third of employees classified as high risk, the results of our study signal concern as to how the negative attitudes often characteristic of this group will affect organizations – and their ability to compete successfully – down the road.”
Loyalty affects employee behavior
This year’s study results indicate loyalty has significant impact on how employees behave and perform on the job day-to-day. For example, 81 percent of employees deemed loyal (those in the truly loyal and accessible categories) are likely to execute the company’s strategy in their daily work, while just 38 percent of those who are not loyal (high-risk and trapped categories) say they will do the same. Similarly, 92 percent of loyal employees indicate they work to make the company successful, compared to just 49 percent of disloyal employees. When it comes to helping colleagues with heavy workloads, 89 percent of loyal employees say they are willing to provide assistance, while just 60 percent of their counterparts will agree to pitch in when needed.
Harder to win loyalty with new employees According to the study, employee loyalty during the first 10 years on the job generally increases as employee tenure rises, but a large number are high risk. Employees with a company for less than one year were the least loyal at just 26 percent, while loyalty was highest (45 percent) for those with six to nine years on the job. After a decade on the job, however, loyalty diminishes. Just more than a third (36 percent) of workers with between 10-19 years of tenure are categorized as truly loyal with the percentage dropping to a mere 30 percent for employees with 20 or more years under their belts. Interestingly, the most-tenured categories (10-19 years and 20 years or more) register the highest percentages of trapped employees with 33 percent and 36 percent, respectively.
Employers show some improvement in factors driving loyalty
The news, however, isn’t all bad for employers, who made some strides, according to the study’s findings, in the experience areas most predominantly tied to loyalty. Fifty-eight percent of those surveyed said their employers show care and concern for them – one of the leading drivers of loyalty – compared to just 54 percent in 2005. Within this category, 55 percent agreed their employers were working to develop employees for the long term, up from 50 percent two years ago. In all, the top experience-based drivers of loyalty in ranking order are fairness at work, care and concern, trust in employees – emerging for the first time as a loyalty driver – feelings of accomplishment, and satisfaction day-to-day.
Loyalty among Generation Y workers shows dichotomous trend.
While Walker’s study reveals workers in their 20s – commonly referred to as “Generation Y” – as most loyal with 38 percent, as a group they are more dichotomous with 78 percent classified as either truly loyal or high risk. As the generation closest to retirement, “Baby Boomers” ranked lower in loyalty – with just 32 percent truly loyal – and followed Gen Y in the number of high-risk employees with 37 percent.
“With the lowest number of trapped employees and the highest percentage of those deemed high risk, the implication is Generation Y workers are confident better opportunities exist,” Woolard said. “Although there are any number of social and economic reasons for the loyalty dichotomy we see in this generation’s results, one possible explanation is their view that the imminent exit of the Baby Boomers will spell better positions for them, ultimately making employee loyalty less relevant.”
Employees want to have a role in company strategy
A series of questions in the 2007 employee loyalty survey points to employees’ overall willingness to be involved in company strategy. Having employees involved in strategy development is a key factor in employees embracing it, but only 44 percent indicated they were involved in the strategy. More than 60 percent (62 percent) agreed they are important to the company’s strategy which reinforces the need for employee’s opinions to be heard regarding the strategy. Senior leaders play a key role in the success of the strategy but only 50 percent of the employees felt senior leaders communicated the strategy well and make good decisions. Only four out of ten of the employees felt the senior leaders inspired them.
Employees’ view of company ethics levels off
While Walker’s past studies of business ethics have noted an upward trend in employee perception of company ethics, this year’s results remain virtually unchanged from 2005. Sixty-three percent of employees agree their company is highly ethical, and 57 percent believe their senior leaders are ethical. The study also shows a clear link between employees’ perceptions of company ethics and employee loyalty. Ninety-one percent of truly loyal employees believe their organization is highly ethical, compared to just 35 percent of employees in the high-risk category. Similarly, 89 percent of loyal employees feel their senior leaders have personal integrity, while just 31 percent of high-risk employees feel the same.
About The Walker Loyalty Report in the Workplace Data for The Walker Loyalty Report for Loyalty in the Workplace was received in July, 2007 from 2,950 people, 18 years and older, working in companies with at least 50 employees. Completing an on-line survey, the respondents were full- and part-time employees representing business, non-profit, and government organizations. The loyalty report results were weighted according to the June 2007 release from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
You remind me of a guy who held a meeting to impress upon the employees that they needed to be more conciencious and productive.
During the meeting he asked seven people to stay over for some more focused comments. He said it wasn’t serious, he just wanted to focus on a few additional issues.
There were two sessions where he did this. The first session went just fine.
During the second session, one of the people from the evening shift that was asked to remain after the meeting, had a panic attack. She actually had to go to the hospital.
The manager was let go the next day.
The guy was a pretty tough cookie, but to let him go for this was silly IMO. Still, it was somewhat humorous.
This is a world-class company, it's in a very slow death spiral, and management has no idea. It'll still hang on for another 10 years or so, then will be acquired by another player that had the sense not to get rid of all its internal talent. Or, at least that's my prediction.
Large Corporations as employers have been disloyal to their workforce for more than a generation, why is it news that the employee base has returned the favor?
I don’t see that at all.
Yep. My husband got a new job not too long ago. A few months into it they told him that although he was (because of being a new hire) being paid as a “junior consultant”, they were charging the client the “senior consultant” fee. That was just the first of many such incidents.
I suppose they will be “shocked” when my husband announces he is leaving.
My husband is an extremely hard worker, and is always improving his skills. I keep telling him that SOMEWHERE there is an employer who will appreciate him.
I didn't get paid a whole lot, but it was workable and pleasant, and I would have gladly put in thirty years there and retired. I was there only a few years when they shut down the location, let 150+ people go, and sold off the property.
I didn't forget the lesson.
Anyone here still believe in that two week notice nonsense?
I do, there's such a thing as professional courtesy. Just because some Employers have low regard for their workers (me), doesn't mean that I need to wallow in the mud with them.
Besides, in my line of work, it might take 2 weeks just to put together my job description....never mind do any kind of handoff. However, if I gave a company 6 months notice....that wouldn't be enough for them either! lol
“But if an employee gets a better offer, and his departure leaves the company in a lurch, he will get the sad puppy-dog look, and hand-wringing bs about the burden he’s leaving the company with. Or worse yet, the “I thought we were a family” lecture.
Okay, Dad. If we’re a family, let me use the credit card.”
Makes you think of that Olive Garden commercial where they say, “When you’re here, you’re family”. OK, so why do I get a bill at the end of the meal then? ;-)
BTW, I should have said you reminded me. You don’t remind me of him. No similarities implied...
3. Setting a departure date
The article says that if you are “in a professional or clerical position, two weeks are appropriate. If you are in a managerial position, three to four weeks is appropriate.” That’s a joke. You could give four week’s notice. There is no guarantee of a good reference.
There are critical situations today where the day you announce your resignation is the day you leave. This may not be up to you. The company may not want you at its offices as you are a potential threat to its systems and security.
As head of security, I would not want anyone around who has access to company networks and application systems.
You may want to give two week’s notice, but from a security standpoint, you are out the door that day. Locks are changed. Passwords and IDs are terminated so you should have no access to files or other confidential information. That is the reality of today’s workplace.
Did you know that many denial-of-service (DoS) attacks are initiated by disgruntled employees? If the company you’re working at doesn’t have that stringent of a policy, they are leaving themselves open for attack. That’s definitely not adhering to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act or any compliance policy that focuses on secure environments.
4. Tying up loose ends
Making sure you turn in all IDs, keys and corporate credit cards is standard.
You don’t want the liability of being blamed for anything that happens after you give notice. Clear out your desk and office of all personal effects a day or two before you announce your departure. You just may be escorted to the door as soon as you tell your boss of your intentions. There is no going back to your desk.
Many companies are so paranoid today. They don’t want any employees hanging around after they submit their resignation.
Leaving contact information depends on the individual situation. You may not want to be contacted after you depart, or in most cases, companies will not give out your contact information. No one is going to forward leads or loyal customers to you for fear that they are losing potential business.
New best practice: immediate departure
Here is a true story that just happened where someone was leaving for a better opportunity and was debating this exact issue of “giving notice.”
My advice to her was to clear out her office the day before, give a clear resignation letter and have everything ready to turn over and leave the day of her resignation. She was in charge of critical information and computer systems. There were many legitimate reasons why she left (pay, workload, lack of recognition and the company’s loss of business).
It was a wise move to leave. She left on a Monday.
Two days later, the servers crashed and the company got a subpoena for a lawsuit. If she would have stayed, she could have been blamed for the crash and potentially held up to be a witness in the lawsuit. It could have jeopardized her new opportunity if she went the “old school” route. She was really thankful she resigned the way she did.
So much for giving two weeks’ notice. The potential liabilities aren’t worth it.
• Follow-up: Employees debate ethics of giving two weeks’ notice
Carlinism: A person leaves the day they resign. Otherwise, they leave the door open for lots of liabilities.
More at this link: http://wistechnology.com/article.php?id=1757
I would give two weeks notice if the place I was working for was decent, and if co-workers were also decent. It is a rare thing nowadays.
No loyalty to employees => No employee loyalty.
>>it’s just another service to be outsourced like janitorial and gardening. They only find out once it’s too late, after they’ve already done something stupid
No matter how skilled or well trained an employee is, this is the case, regardless of the job performed. Corporations will rarely if ever acknowledge making a mistake with one or many employees. They’ll just make do with lesser ones.
You read my mind. How can these employers who regularly practice layoffs to ensure dividends to the stockholders expect any loyalty from the employees? Loyalty works both ways.
We read in the paper about the big bonuses and perks our CEO gets (with him reining in about $2,000,000 extra dollars a year). Then when the company makes U.S. World & News list of best hospitals, the employees get a thermal coffee cup. And it leaks.
To show employee appreciation, they have what I call "Happy Days". 2-3 free food parties during the day and employees get a free gift. A t-shirt, or sweatshirt - things of that order.
I guess they think that these things will make us forget raises and bonuses.
It's an insult to most employees.
“To show employee appreciation, they have what I call “Happy Days”. 2-3 free food parties during the day and employees get a free gift. A t-shirt, or sweatshirt - things of that order.
I guess they think that these things will make us forget raises and bonuses.
It’s an insult to most employees.”
Don’t forget the mandatory monthly birthday parties!
Prove your solidarity and eat cake or you will be shot!
I was really worried there.
About the only way that will happen is if he starts working for himself.
I never pay attention to that Corporate CEO stuff. It’ll drive you to distraction. I did work for a hospital that reminded me so much of your comments related to yours.
Due to the pressures of having to give away services to illegal aliens, our hospital cut many corners. Employee wages were frozen for over seven years. Of course that was for the underlings. Nurses got raises every year. Nice ones too...
I finally got sick of it and took an offer I couldn’t refuse.
My wife was a person who would bust her arse to be a ‘great’ employee. She didn’t do it for the institution. She did it because she got self-fulfillment out of it.
She helped plan and conduct fundraisers. She sat on several employee committees to help with employee moral and policy review services. When employee recognition days came around, she and I were the ones who stayed around until 1:00 a.m. to hand out goodies.
Then a consulting firm came through and cleaned house. It was actually fairly clever how they worked it. They involved the employees and let them make recommendations. Yep you guessed it, my wife’s name came up.
We’re talking ten years ago, and my wife’s name still comes up constantly at this hospital in top level managerial meetings as a person ‘who used to do that’, when it’s asked why certain things don’t get done anymore.
She also happened to be a member of a service club in our town, and was known by just about everyone who is anyone, and those people have constantly reminded the hospital what fools they were to let her get away. She used to get these people to contribute to the hospital. When she left many of them were so angry they quit contributing.
The administrator of the hospital came and appologized to her months later. They realized they’d made a very foolish decision.
The surveyers who came into our hospital didn’t know my wife. They didn’t know all that she did. They didn’t try very hard to find out either. And so it made sense to them to eliminate her position. She directed a program that saw over 600 people come into the hospital for free, and donate their time.
Within two months, that programs was destroyed. All but about 100 quit. At seven years later, that program only had about 200 people in it.
All that free labor and all the plusses my wife meant to the organization, gained her no reverse loyalty whatsoever.
Within a year she was making 25% more. Today she makes almost double what she made there.
Corporate driven management can be a very self-defeatist thing. Those who think it’s the greatest thing since sliced bread generally don’t know what they are talking about. Corporations are just too big to operate efficiently.
I do think corporations are necessary for certain large projects. Small businesses couldn’t raise the capital to get some massive things done. But I do think corporations have expanded to the point that it isn’t good for them or ultimately our nation.
I worked 10 years for a major telecom outfit - got laid off with zero notice. I did get offered a 90 day severance package, all I had to do was agree not to work in the field for a year.
The CEO did get a million $ bonus that year - dumping 20% of your workforce will make the profits look good - for a while.
I do project work now and ask for/get very good money. No office politics or anything else - come to work, work and then leave. Allows for some nice vacations as well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.