« The Seven Step Compensation Diet: Step # 5 - The Budget | Main | The Truth about Competency-Based Pay? »

04/02/2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Very insightful post. It will be a while before most employees get the messaage. Employers will come along once they realize that they need to do so in order to keep top talent.

I read a great book about ten years ago (I can't remember the name) that said forget about job security, which is a myth, and focus on 'employment security.' That means, making sure you have the skills to stay employed, regardless of your current job. I wish I could remember the author. One other piece of advice that stuck with me: Treat every day on the job as the day before you're leaving on vacation.

Anne, great post. I like working girl's "employment security" which goes along with Free Agent Nation and You, Inc. concepts. But employers do need to realize that to keep the employee most capable of thinking this way, and acting on it, there must be a balance between fostering this and retaining the employee. If employers do not help work on the "active job security" by making employees realize their role, then the employees may work on "passive job security" by getting unions involved in contracts that promise job security. A fine balance is needed in the former to prevent the latter.

Jan:

Thanks!! And you're right, some will come along slowly, some only when the proverbial gun is to their heads ... and some may never figure it out!

WG:

That's a good message - hopefully employees (and that's all of us) will hear it and heed it!

Mike:

Good points - and I agree that it is a delicate balance for employers, but one worth striving for.

Thanks - all - for the comments!

The Watson Towers survey is so important, I’d suggest, because it highlights the distrust most American now place in concepts such as “free agent nation” and “employment security” which locates the responsibility for personal survival in the modern economy almost completely in the hands of employees. The flipside of that, of course, is that it tends to absolve employers from any sense of long-term responsibility for their employees’ survival in the market. And we know how well that has worked out, don’t we?
I do agree with Ann’s parallel track approach which requires employers to “provide the programs and support necessary for employees” to feel confident about taking risks and pushing the envelope of creativity while requiring employees to “recognize and actively embrace responsibility for their own job security.”
I confess I am writing this as the author of a brand new book, SPARK, about an American mutilnational manufacturing company, Lincoln Electric, which has embraced this dual-track approach for nearly a century – including an unbroken promise of guaranteed employment.
The result has been that for employees, this Forbes 400/Fortune 1000 firm has not laid off a single permanent American employee for economic reasons since 1948, at least, while for the firm, it has remained the largest manufacturer and exporter of arc welding technology in the world since the 1930s and kept Wall Street exceedingly happy with a steady stream of profits.
Security is a concept which has, sadly, seen its reputation tarnished. It needs to be polished once more.

The comments to this entry are closed.