Motivating and Compensating Employees

Introduction

This unit is devoted to studies, assignment preparation, and discussion questions related to compensation, employee benefits, motivation, and succession planning in organizations. The nature of compensation systems, the value of job worth, the importance of motivation, and the principles of sound succession planning and promotion are considered.

Objectives

To successfully complete this learning unit, you will be expected to:

• 1. Explain the role that human resources and department managers have in matters of compensation.
  2. Explain the roles of human resources and department managers regarding benefits.
  3. Explain a strategy for effective succession planning.

• Assignment Preparation

  The assignment in the next unit asks you to pretend you are a human resource manager in a health care organization where it has come to your attention from a variety of sources that morale and employee satisfaction are on the decline in one of your company’s organizational units.Prepare for this assignment by conducting research on tactics and strategies for addressing low employee satisfaction. Use the information in the Health Administration (MHA) Research Guide to help you find quality, peer-reviewed resources in the Capella University Library as well as professional or academic resources on the Internet.

  Optional Readings

  You may choose to complete the following optional reading from the Capella University Library:

  • Jaksic and Jaksic’s 2013 article, “Performance Management and Employee Satisfaction,” from Montenegrin Journal of Economics, volume 9, issue 1, pages 85–92.
• Toggle Drawer
  

  Case Study: Structuring Benefits

  Read the case study on page 144 of your Human Resource Management in Health Care text.For your post, use content from the readings and address the following questions:

  • What steps should be taken to develop a plan?
  • What factors would you consider in the development of this plan?
  • Who should be consulted? Why?

  Initial Post Guidelines

  Your initial post must meet the requirements according to the Faculty Expectations Response Guidelines.

  Response Guidelines

  Respond to the posts of other learners according to the Faculty Expectations Response Guidelines. If possible, respond to one learner who has a perspective, background, or goals that are similar to yours and then to one learner whose perspective, background, or goals are different.Peer responses should be substantive. “I agree” and “Thanks for sharing your insights” are examples of unacceptable responses that do not contribute content for enhanced learning. The goal is quality, substantive feedback that demonstrates higher-order critical thinking and evaluation of peers’ initial posts.

page 144

THE INTERVIEWER’S BEHAVIOR: A SECOND POSSIBLE DIRECTION Occasionally the process of an employee selection interview becomes reversed and the applicant takes the lead and interviews the interviewer, effectively interviewing an entire department or organization. Some applicants seem to do so naturally, whereas a smaller number of sharp applicants deliberately turn the focus of an interview around. This process requires the interviewer to be able to recognize such a situation and then reclaim control of the interview to end the reversal. More Silence Than Talk Some interviewers tend to dominate the conversation and speak at length about the organization, their departments, and themselves. The object of an employment interview is to get applicants to talk about themselves and to discuss appropriate job-related topics. An interviewer must control the interview with proper questions and must concentrate on what an applicant is saying. Nonstop talking by an interviewer limits the information that can be gained from an applicant. It sends an inappropriate message about the organization to an applicant. The proper role of an interviewer involves more silence than speech. From the perspective of an interviewer, the most productive parts of an interview occur with one’s mouth shut and ears open. More Points to Keep in Mind Effective interview technique includes being in complete control of an interview situation without obviously appearing to do so. Successful and experienced interviewers resist the temptation to make a hasty judgment concerning a job candidate. Research has demonstrated that a majority of interviewers make up their minds about candidates during the first few minutes of contact. The remainder of the interview does little to change that mind set. Always keep in mind that even though first impressions are sometimes proven to be correct, they are just as often proven to be incorrect. Never encourage an applicant to criticize a present or past employer. Be wary of an applicant who voluntarily does so. Conversely, one indicator of a promising applicant is how diplomatically an individual describes an apparently unpleasant employment experience. Remain aware of the nonverbal clues that may be exhibited during the course of an interview. Remember, too, to recognize the need of applicants to compensate for normal nervousness. This is especially true for applicants who have little or no interviewing experience. Be conscious of the halo effect when interviewing. This occurs when interviewers allow one or two obviously positive traits to bias their judgment favorably when assessing unrelated characteristics. In every interview, try to convey an overall positive picture of the organization offering the employment opportunity. By espousing the belief that an organization is a good place to work, some of the positive viewpoints will be communicated to an applicant. Be honest about the negatives of the job, if any. Most jobs include duties that are boring or repetitive. Some jobs include decidedly unappealing tasks or situations that may be physically or emotionally discomforting. Remain upbeat overall, but do not overlook the negatives during an employment interview. Applicants who accept a position only to discover the unpleasant parts after starting work are likely to feel that they have not been treated honestly. References To reiterate, a department manager should never become directly involved in checking references. This is stressed because often department managers have been told, even in some of the management literature, to check references themselves. They are advised to go directly to applicants’ former supervisors and bypass the HR departments of an applicant’s former employer and of their own organization. Some of the same sources will pointedly advise them to avoid their organization’s HR department. A common rationale for these recommendations is that HR is usually too frightened of legal repercussions to request any usable information. Following this advice can easily place them at the center of a legal action. As long as an organization has an HR department, HR should be making the reference checks. RÉSUMÉ FRAUD: LIES AND EMBELLISHMENTS At times it seems that writing an employment résumé involves putting nearly as much fiction as fact on paper. Experts have estimated that up to 40% of résumés include exaggerations or outright untruths. As many as 75% include some degree of fluff designed to make facts appear more significant than they actually are. This is accomplished by putting a favorable spin on information. Deception on employment résumés can take a number of different forms. These involve positive spin, embellishment, exaggeration, lying, or a combination of these devices. Many variations exist. A résumé may be deliberately ambiguous. One of the most frequently encountered examples of ambiguity has to do with education. An individual will claim to have “attended Prestige University in the BS Program in Chemistry.” The hope is that readers of this résumé will assume that the applicant received a BS degree in Chemistry. In truth, the length of attendance is not known, no major was completed, and the person was not awarded a degree. Another deception is to shift dates of education or experience deliberately to conceal periods of unemployment or, occasionally, a period of imprisonment. An honest résumé may well include one or more gaps. Applicants know that they are likely to be questioned about these gaps. A variation on date shifting is using years to create the impression of having worked longer in a place than was actually the case. For example, a résumé may report working for “Ajax Hospital, 2000–2001.” The hope is that readers of this résumé will assume that employment extended from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2001. In truth, the length of employment may have been from November 2000 through January 2001. The same approach is used to conceal gaps in employment. Another common strategy is to exaggerate job responsibilities, report inflated job titles, and provide inflated salaries. In truth, this is a dangerous practice because basic employment information such as titles and position responsibilities is easily verifiable through reference checks. Salary data are relatively easy to verify. These actions are intended to make applicants seem more appealing than might otherwise be the case. Interviewers occasionally encounter claims of a more prestigious institution awarding an individual’s degree. For example, an applicant may list “Stanford MBA” on a résumé. In truth, the person has been awarded a master of business administration (MBA) degree from Obscure University. This practice is openly fraudulent. Official copies of educational transcripts are often required as a condition of employment. Presenting fraudulent documentation is usually a reason for immediate discharge from a position. Candidates may claim to have degrees and other credentials they do not possess. Honors and awards may be invented. Numbers of publications and conference presentations may be inflated or openly invented. Such claims are easily verified. Résumé fraud increases during periods of job scarcity. However, it is present to some extent on a continuing basis, so employment recruiters and other interviewers should be alert to the possibility of fraud in every résumé that they review. Spotting Embellishments and Inconsistencies There is no reliable way to uncover every instance of fraud, exaggeration, or untruth that may appear in the résumés an organization receives. The task of verifying every fact on every line would be very time consuming and costly. However, interviewers who remain alert to subtle signs and signals are likely to know when closer examination is warranted. Look for gaps in a person’s record. It is common for someone who wants to cover something up simply to omit it. Be alert for overlapping dates and inconsistent details. An occasional untruth can upset the chronology of one’s experience, and the person manipulating the facts often fails to adjust other information as necessary. Ask questions about the prestigious school an applicant claims to have attended or the city in which the applicant claims to have worked. Many people who have put themselves in the position of making things up as they go along will fumble, stumble, or hesitate in coming up with responses. Always consider an applicant’s reason for leaving a particular position and ask for clarification, especially if the job being sought represents a downward or lateral career move. The majority of people that have been terminated from a job for cause, not laid off, will use wording that characterizes their departures as voluntary. During an interview, question the applicant about specific details that appear in the résumé. People who have lied or exaggerated will often find it more difficult to remember everything that they have written. Try to decide whether a job candidate’s answers seem memorized or rehearsed. Someone with nothing to conceal does not need to have pat answers prepared in advance. Always be conscious of nonverbal clues. Excessive nervousness, failure to look an interviewer in the eyes, or physical fidgeting in a chair can be an indicator of fraud. However, be careful not to confuse simple nervousness with fraud. Ask an applicant for permission to have specific information verified. This will usually be done by HR. An applicant who has faked something significant will often withdraw from the process right after the interview. Upon request, HR will frequently become involved in verifying résumé information. This is done when work references are checked. However, verification must sometimes go beyond ordinary reference checks. When confirming information by telephone, an HR representative will go through a company’s operator or HR department rather than using a telephone number that the applicant may have provided. Some people who fake their experience have friends or relatives pose as former employers. If there is any doubt about as to whether a reference’s address is genuine, HR will test the address by mailing something there. AN ACQUIRED SKILL Many who are new to recruiting responsibilities are initially uneasy about interviewing prospective employees. Because of this uneasiness, and because of being too careful and worrying excessively about the process, interviewing becomes more difficult for them than it has to be. Individuals who take interviewing seriously and conscientiously, try to do it effectively, and endeavor to learn from each interview experience will find that their skills improve with practice. Being too casual or disorganized when interviewing can result in the loss of a potentially good employee and can leave that person with a poor impression of an organization. In contrast, being overly careful, dragging out the recruitment process by interviewing too many candidates, and delaying a decision also can lead to the loss of a potentially good employee. It is useful to remember that when selecting employees, there is no guaranteed perfect choice. Some risk of error is always present. Experts remark that while a personal interview is a problematic and marginally reliable means of filling a job vacancy, no better means are available. CONCLUSION The parameters of a recruitment interview are proscribed by legal statutes. Preparation for an interview begins before an applicant arrives. Interviewers should review the relevant position description, review the applications and résumés of all candidates, arrange for a room or area suitable for interviewing, and prepare opening questions. Interviews should begin on time, with initial questions designed to help candidates to relax. The language used should be appropriate for the candidate. Leading questions and inquiries that result in excessively long or very short responses should be avoided. Writing during an interview should be kept to an absolute minimum if not completely avoided. Closure and follow-up should be promised and promptly delivered. Guidelines concerning legal and forbidden topics must be closely followed. Interviewers must be alert for irregularities in documents or the intent of applicants. Interviewers must remember that others have the responsibility to extend job offers and check references. Guidelines for appropriate behavior at all points in the interviewing process must be followed. Interviewing is an acquired skill that usually improves with practice. Case Study Resolution Returning to the initial case study involving interviewer Carrie Taylor and applicant Lynn Taylor, Carrie has placed the organization at risk by the manner in which she allowed herself to be influenced by Lynn’s “frail build, small stature, and apparent age.” Lynn revealed enough personal information for Carrie to conclude that Lynn had received surgery for breast cancer. Carrie allowed this personal information to influence her thinking about Lynn’s capabilities. Carrie’s motives may have been honest and her concern for Lynn genuine, but her actions were illegal. Carrie did not have the right to conclude that Lynn was “bound to fail.” She was not legally entitled to base an employment decision on that subjective conclusion. As long as the specifications of the nursing position in the transitional care unit did not delineate specific physical requirements that Lynn could not meet, Carrie had no basis for rejecting Lynn as a viable candidate. Lynn could be legitimately rejected for the position on physical grounds, but doing so is not within Carrie’s scope of authority. Such rejection must come from the organization’s employee health physician and would ordinarily occur when an applicant who has a tentative offer of employment does not pass a pre-employment physical examination. In response to the human rights complaint, the organization should attempt to negotiate a settlement that includes an examination of Lynn by employee health to determine whether she is physically capable of handling the transitional care position. Using an occupational physician from an outside agency would minimize bias. When an individual is turned down for employment on the basis of a personal observation or forbidden information, the final determination appropriately involves an assessment of the individual’s ability to perform the job. ……………………… SPOTLIGHT ON CUSTOMER SERVICE How Customer Service Contributes to a Successful and Legal Selection Interview Full disclosure: we are not aware of any statute that mandates customer service. Although privately, we feel such a concept (requiring good customer service) has merit, we shall defer any discussion of it for now. Contributing to a successful selection interview is a different matter. An organization that has a reputation for providing good customer service is likely to have a good reputation in the minds of the public. That fact is likely to attract individuals who want to work in such an environment. This is likely not only to increase the number of applicants for a given position but also to improve the quality of the applicant pool. This assertion can be supported. The Walt Disney Company (entertainment) and L.L.Bean (clothing and household products) have both had reputations for providing good customer service. Both companies routinely attract large numbers of applicants when they have positions to be filled. Because this has been the case for many years, applicant pool size cannot be attributed solely to recent problems with the economy and unemployment. A reputation for good customer service does provide unexpected consequences. Discussion Points 1. In interviewing a prospective employee, why should you consider it important to inquire about the presence of information gaps or time periods that are not accounted for in the applicant’s work record? 2. Why should an interviewing manager review all available information about an applicant before beginning an interview? Managers are busy people. Is arriving for an interview with an application in hand and then beginning an interview on time not sufficient? 3. If an interviewer wants the applicant to do most of the talking, what is wrong with opening an employment interview with the question, “Tell me all about yourself”? 4. Provide three examples of interview questions that are legal but which provide an interviewing manager with little or no useful information. 5. Why do you believe it is no longer appropriate to ask whether a job applicant has ever been arrested? Is it not in an employer’s best interests to avoid taking on workers who have criminal records? 6. Can you make use of personal information in rendering an employment decision if the information was voluntarily provided to you? Why or why not? 7. An interviewing manager should be prepared to respond in considerable detail to any unsuccessful job candidate who calls asking why he or she was not offered employment. Do you agree or disagree with this statement? Why? 8. Why do experts recommend that the proper role of an interviewer involves more silence than speech? 9. Develop a brief procedure or protocol (a simple list of points to be covered) for reviewing an employment application or résumé for possible inaccuracies or embellishments. 10. Write (or quote from the chapter) a concise statement that, if conscientiously applied in interviewing, will ensure that only legal questions will be asked. 11. Why should an interviewing manager attempt to assess an applicant’s intangible factors that are not directly reflected in the record of education or experience? 12. Why is it advisable to keep writing to a minimum while interviewing an applicant? Is it not helpful to capture as much information as possible about the person? Resources Books Bunting, S. (2005). Interviewer’s handbook: Successful techniques for every work situation. London: Kogan Page. Cook, M. (2004). Personnel selection: Adding value through people (4th ed.). New York: John Wiley. Phillips, J. J. (2005). (Human) capital. Chicago, IL: American Management Association. Schell, M. (2004). Human resource approved job interviews and résumés. Vancouver, BC: Approved Publications. Taylor, P., & O’Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Structured employment interviewing. London: Ashgate. Periodicals Blackman, M. C. (2002). Personality judgment and the utility of the unstructured employment interview. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 24, 241–250. Borman, W. C., Hanson, M. A., & Hedge, J. W. (1997). Personnel selection. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 299–337. Cook, K. W., Vance, C. A., & Spector, P. E. (2000). The relation of candidate personality with selection-interview outcomes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 867–885. Paunonen, S. V., Rothstein, M. G., & Jackson, D. N. (1999). Narrow reasoning about the use of broad personality measures for personnel selection. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 389–405. Ryan, A. M., & Ployhart, R. E. (2000). Applicants’ perceptions of selection procedures and decisions: A critical review and agenda for the future. Journal of Management, 26, 565–606. Smith, D. B., Hanges, P. J., & Dickson, M. W. (2001). Personnel selection and the five-factor model: Reexamining