today on the innotecture web blog, i came across an interesting article from the AFR, where KM/E-learning consultant, Matthew Moore gives his insight into the current practice of poor management in terms of executivies sacking employees without any real substance.
the article wrtitten by fiona smith states that executives aren’t putting much thought into the process of maintaining talented employees, she then used the analogy of executives who ‘don a blindfold’ when choosing who to sack.
matt moore, speaks on poor planning on behalf of executives which i agree on, purely because i see the process of maintaing talented employees a critical issue that organisations face today, one that needs to become an on-going process that should’ve taken place prior to the GFC.
emotional intelligence is also taking effect. “i know him, so we’ll keep him” is the sort of mentality that is going through the minds of upper management at the moment, with many resistant to sacking ‘popular’ employees, their best mates, or even their own family members. however at the end of the day shouldn’t it really be about keeping the employee that does their job the best?
to address the issues of skills gaps in organisations, there is no real monitoring of skills in the workplace on behalf of the organisation today. most companies are too caught up chasing big figures that are probably out of reach anyway, so why not spend some of that time investing in training, L&D and the upskilling of their workforce? this will be a better indicator on where that organisation is in terms of their competition, thus allowing for upper management to have some better criteria to work if it comes down to retrenching employees.
however one issue has not been addressed thouroughly, and that is organisational culture. like i mentioned earlier the role of emotional intelligence seems to play a huge role in the balancing act of deciding who to maintain and who to sack. managers need to increase their awareness in terms of who is doing their job to the best possible standard. yes, it helps to have employees who are sociable and who are able to communicate with others, but it doesn’t help if that’s all their good for, why not keep them as the ‘face’ of the organisation, while the quiet IT guy continues doing what he does best without the threat of getting fired purely on the basis that he is too quiet. it just makes more sense doesn’t it?
in time of difficulty, organisations need the best employees at work doing their job, and without the proper criteria when deciding who to maintain, organisations will continue to work in the dark, unaware of the consequences.
http://www.afr.com.au/home/viewer.aspx?EDP://20090505000031110499