ReportWire

Tag: workplace

  • Employee Holiday Wishes Include More Money and New Jobs. Here’s How to Handle It

    [ad_1]

    Though holiday season spirits are usually merry and bright, concerns about the economy and labor market are leaving many people feeling a lot gloomier. In addition to surveys reflecting how tough it has become to land a new job, a huge majority of employees questioned also said their current work doesn’t pay enough to keep up with the cost of living. Business owners should know their companies aren’t the only ones pulled by economic riptides.

    A recently released poll of 1,200 employees by job posting platform Monster found a whopping 95 percent of respondents reporting their “wage has not kept up with inflation,” and no longer covers their fixed living costs. Only 9 percent of those participants said they’d received a raise in recent months to help them keep pace with rising prices. That led 75 percent of workers questioned saying they’d cut out nonessential expenses — up from 64 percent this time last year — and 42 percent saying they’d taken on debt to finance spending they had made.

    In response to that financial pinch, 56 percent of poll participants said they’d begun looking for higher paying work to stay above water. Yet at the same time nearly 70 percent of respondents acknowledged it has gotten harder to find new opportunities — up from 57 percent last year. Meanwhile, another 50 percent said they worried about losing the jobs they have, as employers cut costs and reconfigure workforces. The reduced headcounts and increased workloads can amplify feelings of burnout and hurt productivity.

    Those concerns are backed up results of other surveys. For example, 49 percent of employees answering a poll by remote and hybrid work posting platform Flexjobs said they were worried being laid off. Moreover, 26 percent of those respondents said fears about losing their jobs were higher than they were just six months ago.

    But that doesn’t mean participants — many of whom complained of burnout, blocked career advancement, or pay levels outstripped by inflation — are enthusiastic about the jobs they have. Fully 93 percent of participants said they’d be eager to ditch current employers for more fulfilling opportunities or increased pay, but acknowledged under acute financial pressures made them stay put.

    A similar willingness to seek jobs paying above cost of living levels voiced in the Monster survey led authors of the report on its findings to warn employers that those attitudes may eventually affect staff stability if left unaddressed.

    “With nearly all workers reporting that their wages are not keeping pace with inflation, the cost-of-living crisis is redefining both financial stability and career choice,” the report noted, warning the survey’s results underlined a “disconnect between wages and economic reality” today.

    “Employees are increasingly open to leaving jobs for higher pay, while financial stress is contributing to lower productivity and higher burnout,” the report continued. “For employers, this signals an urgent need to revisit compensation strategies, benefits, and support systems — or risk losing talent to competitors.”

    There is a caveat in that, however — and it’s a big one for employers.

    Company hiring rates have been virtually flat since May. And despite the most recent data in August showing the unemployment rate was a relatively low 4.3 percent, anemic job creation has most employees hanging on tightly to keep work they have. Trading up for higher wages or better career opportunities is no longer an option for most people.

    Meanwhile, if the labor market looks grim for workers who already have jobs, it’s even more foreboding for people entering the labor market, especially recent college graduates and students preparing to pocket their diplomas.

    According to a recent survey by the National Association of Colleges and Employers, companies that have been slashing entry-level positions and using artificial intelligence tools to perform those work tasks iaren’t expecting to reverse course soon.

    The organization’s poll found “employers are projecting just a 1.6 percent increase in hiring for the Class of 2026 when compared to the Class of 2025,” a report on the results said. As a result, 51 percent of business respondents evaluated the current labor market for those younger job hunters as either poor or fair — the highest level since 2020 when 65 percent participants described it that way.

    As a result, a lot of people may be putting finding a new job, or hanging on to the one they have, at the very top of their holiday wish lists, but without being terribly confident they’ll get what they want.

    The final deadline for the 2026 Inc. Regionals Awards is Friday, December 12, at 11:59 p.m. PT. Apply now.

    [ad_2]

    Bruce Crumley

    Source link

  • The Neuroscience of Black Friday Can Help You Shop Smarter (or Sell More Stuff)

    [ad_1]

    I live 5,000 miles away from the U.S. in a country where Thanksgiving is definitely not a thing. But even here in tiny, turkey-free Cyprus, Black Friday is huge. Throughout November and early December just about every retailer on the island touts Black Friday deals to an enthusiastic population.   

    No one has Black Friday off work to go shopping. And most Cypriots have little to no understanding of the day’s original connection to Thanksgiving. There are no traditions or memories attached to the idea. So why are businesses here so keen to adopt the American shopping ritual? 

    The answer isn’t culture, it’s neuroscience. Understanding how our brains respond to Black Friday deals explains their global appeal. It can also help shoppers resist manipulation and save money and regret, and business owners move more merchandise year round. 

    This is your brain on Black Friday deals 

    European shopkeepers haven’t adopted the foreign custom of Black Friday because they love American culture. They do it because it helps them sell more stuff. And it works, apparently, even if customers have no emotional attachment to or even full understanding of the meaning of Black Friday. 

    In a recent piece on The Conversation, neuroscientist Tijl Grootswagers and psychologist Daniel Feurerriegel explain why that is. Normally we weigh purchases slowly and logically, they explain. Do I need this thing? Is it a good value? Would something else be a better buy? We check reviews and our budgets, give these questions a ponder, and then decide. 

    “But when we are put under pressure, that changes. The brain lowers the threshold for how much information it needs before deciding,” they explain. “Time pressure makes us decide faster and with less evidence.” 

    This instinct to make faster decisions under time pressure evolved to help us not spend so much contemplating what to do about the lion hiding behind the next bush that we end up as lunch. But Black Friday retailers have figured out how to hijack it to get you to buy stuff you don’t need or can’t afford.  

    They also lean into the logic-paralyzing power of scarcity. “While we’re browsing for a TV, the website says there are ‘only 8 left in stock,’ and ‘12 people have this item in their carts.’ Suddenly, it feels like a race. Even if you were not planning to buy right away, you might feel more compelled to ‘add to cart’ before it’s too late,” the neuroscientists continue. 

    Time is limited on Black Friday but so, often, are supplies. That further messes with our minds, they add: “When we believe something is in limited supply, we assign it more value.” 

    Under the influence of these various types of pressure, rationality tends to go out the window as we shift into making quick decisions with limited information. That can mean regrets for shoppers, but it counts as a huge success for retailers. 

    Arm yourself with psychological knowledge 

    Black Friday has spread around the world because it is, in the words of Grootswagers and Feurerriegel, a “masterclass in behavioral and brain science.” As I have personally experienced, its signature psychological tricks work far from their original context. 

    That means they can also work year round. Sellers should bear that in mind. Manufacturing urgency and scarcity with limited time offers, limited editions, and warnings that ‘only three remain’ works just as well in sunshine as snow flurries. 

    That’s an opportunity for caution but a warning for consumers. Black Friday, or any sale using similar psychological manipulation to create artificial scarcity and urgency, shortcircuits your brain’s ability to make sensible decisions. 

    If you know you’re being played in this way, however. You’re better placed to slow down, reflect on your true desires and financial position, and make smarter choices. 

    The opinions expressed here by Inc.com columnists are their own, not those of Inc.com.

    The final deadline for the 2026 Inc. Regionals Awards is Friday, December 12, at 11:59 p.m. PT. Apply now.

    [ad_2]

    Jessica Stillman

    Source link

  • How to Show Your Staff Gratitude This Season and Beyond

    [ad_1]

    Everybody, surely, loves a quick “Thanks, nice work!” comment from their boss, and few workers would balk at the promise of some kind of meaningful reward, like a bonus, for a job well done. But a new survey suggests that the vast majority of employers in the U.S. are failing to recognize their staff’s achievements properly, even though they know that it can be a big driver for success in the long term, as well as keeping employessvengaged and happy. 

    The data should, at the very least, prompt you to set aside that tedious financial report for five minutes, reach inside yourself to dredge up a bit of holiday season cheeriness, and go out and thank your staff.

    The data, from Utah-based staffing company Express Employment Professionals, along with Harris Poll, is profound. Fully 99 percent of U.S. hiring managers surveyed said that they know that recognizing workers is important, and 53 percent admit it’s “absolutely essential.” But 45 percent say that there are no resources available for them to actually effectively show this recognition to their staff. In other words, nearly half of the 1,000 hiring managers surveyed feel they can’t properly thank their workers.

    Employers think that a reputation for showing gratitude gives them a competitive advantage, as 93 percent say it boosts loyalty and 85 percent say it lowers staff turnover levels. And 82 percent of employers are willing to “invest in recognition for long-term success,” the report says. When they dole out gratitude and recognition, employers feel it makes workers feel valued, boosts morale, lifts productivity and engagement and strengthens loyalty. Many employers say that recognition is a frequent and ongoing situation (71 percent said this), with 70 percent saying they practice private praise, 65 percent praising workers in meetings, and 59 percent use company communications. 

    But among job seekers, only 54 percent say they’ve seen regular recognition by their employer, and 46 percent say praise and other rewards are often kept merely for “big wins.” Monthly recognition is very uncommon, the data show, with 27 percent experiencing private praise, 24 percent shoutouts, and 20 percent having been publicly praised. 

    From this you may conclude that many company leaders are paying lip service to the notion of expressing gratitude to their workers, but are coming up short on the actual delivery — either doling out infrequent or insubstantial rewards, only rewarding the highest achievers, or forgetting to thank their workforce altogether. 

    The report quotes a Forbes article that shows how meaningful rewards can boost worker morale, with recognition reportedly leading to a 366 percent increase in “fulfillment” among staff and a 208 percent increase in community. Though these big numbers imply that gratitude has positive benefits that extend beyond the holiday season, you might be wary of them: they quantify ephemeral feelings and emotions. 

    Nevertheless, it’s clear that U.S. employers could do better at expressing gratitude, from simple praise in private or public, to non-monetary perks and maybe even bonuses. 

    In several discussions on Reddit that touch on this topic, workers revealed many different ways companies either did or did not show praise properly. One commenter, with a particularly bad example of employer gratitude failure, noted that “The company I work for sent out a memo saying ‘it is a privilege to come to work’. Who the f*** do they think they are? Its my privilege to make them 1000’s of dollars every week? Okay, sure thing boss man.” Another user in the same thread pointed out that when it comes to showing gratitude “good employers do. Wish there were more of those, tho.” 

    A much more positive experience was related in a different thread by a user who noted “I’ve got birthday gifts from my current job, too. Boss and his sister give big hugs, kisses and even sing. This year I had mentioned needing new prescription glasses so they got me a ~ $200 voucher for the local optician.” This last quote has “family feeling,” and “small business employer” written all over it.

    The final word for your company and your staff? Say thanks, and say it more often — not just at this time of year.

    The final deadline for the 2026 Inc. Regionals Awards is Friday, December 12, at 11:59 p.m. PT. Apply now.

    [ad_2]

    Kit Eaton

    Source link

  • Why Many Business Owners Are Hesitating to Make Succession Plans

    [ad_1]

    Formally handing over control of a small private business is usually the moment when owners can step into retirement, assured that the financial future of their company is in capable hands. Yet new data shows nearly half of founders surveyed fear the next generation isn’t sufficiently prepared to take over, leading less than quarter to have established formal succession plans.

    Those were the top findings of an annual survey by private investment bank and financial advisory firm Brown Brothers Harriman (BBH), which sounded out nearly 500 family-owned and privately owned companies. With 76 percent of respondents saying they had no formal succession plan or were only in the process of working one up, the results reflected the strong hesitations of many founders and current owners about passing their businesses to the next generation. Nearly 50 percent of participants described the family cohort that’s first in line to take over their businesses as being only “somewhat prepared” to manage its finances and operations, with 40 percent saying the next generation isn’t at all ready to shoulder the responsibilities involved.

    As a result, only 38 percent of company owners said they’d been entirely open and transparent to next-generation family members about their plans for passing along their personal wealth and business holdings. In some cases their hesitancy — or aversion to prepare for succession at all — was simply because current leaders were too busy or lacked a sense of urgency to do so. But other reasons they cited offered insights into the sensitivities and worries frequently involved in handing over a business.

    Top concerns that prompted owners to remain somewhat or entirely vague about their succession plans included not wanting disrupt family dynamics, and an aversion to revealing their intentions before the right time.

    Others were based on fears that designated successors wouldn’t continue working as hard and earning their keep once they’d learned of transmission plans, as well as worries that inheriting too much money would undermine the new leader’s dedication to and industriousness in the business.

    “Some owners fear that talking about wealth too soon may spark entitlement or anxiety instead of instilling gratitude and responsibility,” said BBH principal Ali Hutchinson in comments accompanying the report. “Starting early and tailoring these conversations to the age and maturity level of each family member can make the eventual transition smoother and more natural. This ongoing dialogue helps instill values, trust, and confidence over time.”

    Despite those hesitations, nearly two-thirds of respondents said they intended to transition company ownership to the next generation — at some point, anyway. Another with another 8 percent of participants said planned to have managers or employees to take control. But if leaving the business to children, close relatives, or chosen subordinates was a foregone conclusion for a majority of owners, many still expressed reservations about formally establishing and announcing those plans.

    Resondents cited potential family strife or other anticipated negative reactions most frequently at 46 percent of the time, with the lack of seeing a clear, single successor as another top response. Others included leaders’ own emotional reluctance to step away, and probable tax consequences as explanations why current owners hesitated to establish and reveal a firm exit strategy.

    According to BBH partner Kathryn George, those concerns are often further reinforced by the doubts business owners have about their natural successors being up to the task. In some cases, they may even inspire leaders to skip a generation, and transfer their company to younger family members they see as better equipped to assume the responsibilities involved.

    “Succession planning remains one of the biggest vulnerabilities for private businesses, and a large part of that often stems from worries around successor readiness,” George said. “Owners may know who of the next generation they’d like to take over, but how can they know when the next generation is ready?”

    Awaiting their eventual exit, a large majority of owners said their main focus remains building their business further, and leaving it as strong as possible for successors when they do hand it off. Over 77 percent of respondents said growing their company was their top capital priority, surpassing expansion of equity stakes for leaders who shared ownership, or increasing dividends they benefit from in a multi-party proprietary structure.

    The final deadline for the 2026 Inc. Regionals Awards is Friday, December 12, at 11:59 p.m. PT. Apply now.

    [ad_2]

    Bruce Crumley

    Source link

  • AI Has Exposed the Illusion of Work

    [ad_1]

    There’s a scene in Office Space where Peter sits across from two consultants during a company downsizing. They ask him, “What would you say you do here?” He hesitates, smirks, and admits he only works about 15 minutes a week. The rest of the time, he’s pretending. It was comedy in 1999. It’s confession now.

    That question has come back to us.

    For years, we filled our calendars, stayed visible, and kept the machine moving. Our worth was measured in hours, output, and presence. It had to be. Humans were the system, and the system required us to keep it running. We didn’t question it because that was how things got done.

    AI has changed that.

    It can now do many of the things we once did to keep things moving: the summaries, the reports, the follow-ups, the updates, the spreadsheets. It can organize, calculate, write, and execute at a pace we can’t match.

    That realization feels strange at first, but it’s also freeing.

    Now we get to hand that part over. We can give the robotic work to the robots and return to the human work. The work of thinking, deciding, designing, and connecting.

    So what does that look like?

    For one, it means our conversations are changing. When the noise quiets, the meetings sound different. There’s more space to ask better questions. We can finally talk about what matters: What is the business really trying to accomplish? What’s next? What do we need to build the product, craft the strategy, organize the team, and align around purpose?

    It’s fantastic, really.

    Because when people stop being buried in repetitive work, they start showing up differently. They bring curiosity. They tell the truth. They collaborate in new ways. I’m hearing it everywhere—in companies that are deep into their AI transformation and in those that are just starting. The tone is changing. The conversations are more human.

    We’re still in the waiting room of this transition. Some are pacing the floor, some are seated patiently, some are already being called in. Wherever a company sits on that curve, the shift has begun.

    Deloitte’s 2024 Global Human Capital Trends report describes this moment as a “readiness gap.” Most leaders recognize that AI and technology will transform their organizations in the coming years, yet few say they feel prepared to lead their people through that change. The tools are ready. The humans are still catching up.

    For leaders, this is the moment to adjust the focus. The work still needs watching, but the focus of that attention is different. It’s no longer about overseeing tasks; It’s about overseeing direction. How we design. How we execute. How we build and with whom. Leadership now is about being intentional and accountable for how work is created, not just how it is completed.

    Many leaders are rebuilding, or at least redesigning, how they lead. The language is changing. The tone is shifting. It’s not a different language, but it has a new accent. And those who thrive in this era will be the ones who can translate it.

    They’ll know how to take complexity and turn it into clarity. They’ll bring forward a sharper vision, a stronger purpose, and a deeper ability to communicate the “why.” They’ll be what I call “full-stack leaders”: people who can support the front, the back, and the middle layer. They understand product, people, and process, and they move fluidly across them all.

    AI has taken the repetitive pieces off our plates and has given us back the chance to think, create, and build with intention. It gives us room to lead.

    By Lena McDearmid

    This article originally appeared in Inc.’s sister publication, Fast Company.

    Fast Company is the world’s leading business media brand, with an editorial focus on innovation in technology, leadership, world changing ideas, creativity, and design. Written for and about the most progressive business leaders, Fast Company inspires readers to think expansively, lead with purpose, embrace change, and shape the future of business.

    The final deadline for the 2026 Inc. Regionals Awards is Friday, December 12, at 11:59 p.m. PT. Apply now.

    [ad_2]

    Fast Company

    Source link

  • How Your Company Can Reduce Revenge Quitting

    [ad_1]

    The growing levels of stress and distrust in the workforce are starting to show up in the number of people who plan to vote with their feet and leave their jobs abruptly. New data shows a growing number of disgruntled employees now prefer to exact workplace payback sooner than later. A recent survey found large numbers of people saying they’d either abruptly quit their jobs to protest their own poor treatment, or that they approved of former colleagues they’d watched doing so.

    The revenge quitting phenomenon isn’t new, but survey data by job posting site Monster suggests it’s on the rise. Respondents noted an uptick in employees angered by one or more workplace factors unexpectedly resigning their positions and storming away, often loudly airing recriminations about their old jobs. Nearly half, or 47 percent, of the 3,600 people Monster polled this year said they’d up and quit in that way — intentionally leaving managers and colleagues both short-handed and flustered.

    That marked a considerable increase over the 17 percent of respondents to a January survey by tech advice platform Software Finder who admitted having walked off a job in that disgruntled fashion. Perhaps just as dangerous for business owners who value staff stability, even higher numbers of poll participants voiced support of revenge quitting.

    Fully 57 percent of Monster respondents said they’d observed at least one co-worker dramatically bolt from their job, with 34 percent saying they’d seen between two and six colleagues abruptly slam the door that way. Another 87 percent of participants said they considered the move justified in protesting poor workplace environments.

    Leading reasons cited for undertaking the resign, rant, and run approach were toxic work environments, poor management or leadership, feeling disrespected or undervalued, and unmet promises or expectations. Bad pay and benefits often intensified the other complaints.

    But Monster career expert Vicki Salemi tells Inc. that employers aren’t fated to suffer revenge quitting theatrics, or the disruptions that inflict on staff focus, unity, and productivity. In fact, she urges business leaders to take steps to defuse those situations before they explode.

    “There’s an opportunity for employers to get ahead of revenge quitting not only for the sake of reducing turnover, but in an effort to cultivate a workplace where workers feel highly satisfied, productive, valued, and engaged,” Salemi said in emailed comments about the survey. “If they wait until workers are beyond disgruntled and abruptly leave, it’s often too late.”

    The consequences of letting that happen, she added, make efforts to prevent those explosions and preserve workplace atmosphere, stability, and productivity far less costly by comparison.

    “Workers have already quit, morale is low, and existing workers have an instantly increased workload,” she says of post-revenge quitting effects. “Then, externally word of mouth travels fast, and this creates challenges for the recruiting team to position the employer as an employer that’s best in class.”

    So what can employers do to reduce the odds of workers quitting while creating scenes that reach the histrionic heights of high drama.

    Among the primary measures survey respondents cited as ways employers can avoid vindictive, high-octane resignations include making sure staff feel work environments are safe and respectful, and training managers to lead with empathy and clarity. Other suggestions were to regularly recognize and reward staffers’ contributions, and provide competitive pay and clear career paths.

    “Considering 63 percent of workers in Monster’s research from earlier this year said better workplace culture could have prevented (revenge quitting), this is a silver lining,” Salemi said, urging employers to regularly question whether employees are as happy at work as they may appear. “Just because workers haven’t resigned, especially to the extreme of revenge quitting, doesn’t mean it’s a healthy workplace.”

    There’s no exact date or event that’s been identified as the advent of revenge quitting. But Salemi said it’s a now post-pandemic phenomenon that’s unlikely to go away on its own, along with other big changes in workplace attitudes since 2020.

    “Employees have become more focused on their mental health,” she said. “If a job and/or boss are toxic, anecdotally they seem more likely to quit now than in pre-pandemic times. Plus, the stigma of job hopping isn’t much of an issue anymore.”

    But since revenge quitting and the motivations driving it are now professional realities, Salemi advises employers to take a wider view toward addressing complaints of departing workers. By admitting things in the workplace aren’t all perfect, she says, business’s leaders can start the process of improving the environment for remaining employees, and themselves.

    “Since it all depends on a variety of factors, there may be nuggets of truth behind (all) revenge quit situation(s),” Salemi noted. “For instance, if there’s a lack of respect and workers feel undervalued, leaders should make sure they immediately start recognizing employees… and it won’t cost the company a dime! Here are some examples: say thank you, praise workers during meetings (make sure you treat everyone equally) by recognizing a recent accomplishment, ask them if they need anything because you have their back.”

    Those may seem like small things, but if pursued and broadened they’re likely to avert most revenge quitting, Salemi said. And that, in turn, will spare employers and remaining workers alike the emotional and professional destabilization of the divisive, spite-driven departures.

    The final deadline for the 2026 Inc. Regionals Awards is Friday, December 12, at 11:59 p.m. PT. Apply now.

    [ad_2]

    Bruce Crumley

    Source link

  • No-Fire Season Is Real—Here’s Why Smart Companies Observe It

    [ad_1]

    It’s officially no-fire season — that is, unless someone commits an egregious act— you don’t terminate employees from the week before Thanksgiving until January.

    That’s the rule from employment attorney Todd Stanton, and it’s a good one. (In the interest of full disclosure, I wrote the forward to Stanton’s book, The 95% Rule: A Field Guide to Not Losing Your Mind or Making Your Lawyer Rich.)

    What’s the reason behind this rule? You may think that it’s just to be nice —nobody wants to lose their job around the holidays. And this is true. It is nice not to terminate people around the holidays. But it’s also arm of protection for your company.

    Stanton wrote on LinkedIn:

    As we learn in The 95% Rule and Employment Law Axiom No. 22, “Surprised people get angry. Angry people sue.” So at Stanton Law, LLC, we treat the week before Thanksgiving through the end of December as No Fire Season. Absent critical safety violations or severe rule infractions, employers considering terminations in this six-week spot should really ask themselves if timing is right to show someone the door. If you’ve put up with poor performance for as long as you have, gritting your teeth for another few weeks to let people get through the holidays may help you avoid getting coal (or a demand letter) in your stocking.

    The cost of a lawsuit

    Most lawsuit threats go nowhere, but any time a lawyer accepts a case from your terminated employee (no matter how ridiculous), it will cost you to respond. You hear a lot about companies settling without admitting guilt. They do this because, even when innocent, it’s often far cheaper to settle. Attorney Matthew Joseph Novian writes:

    “On average, it costs employers around $75,000 to work with an employment lawyer to settle a claim before it reaches trial. However, if the case progresses to court, the expenses can skyrocket, with pre-trial defense costs easily exceeding $125,000.”

    Note, these costs don’t include the amount you have to pay out to the employee. And you’ll still be out the money if you go to court and win. You can see why companies will settle a claim for $50,000 rather than go to court.

    So, of course, you want to avoid lawsuits — even ones you’ll win.

    Why people sue

    Not everyone who is wronged will sue. In fact, the EEOC estimates that up to 90 percent of people whose rights have been violated at work will not sue. Most people will let it go and move on.

    So what makes the difference between someone who lets it go and someone who hires an attorney? Well, as Stanton said, they are angry.

    In medical malpractice cases, the power of the apology has been so profound that several states have “apology laws.” This prevents patients from using a physician’s apology for a mistake in a lawsuit. It encourages doctors to apologize, and it doesn’t increase lawsuits. It’s a win-win. People often just want to know.

    Likewise, people don’t want to be embarrassed. From Thanksgiving to New Year’s Day, people are often with friends and family, and questions about jobs will naturally come up. Having your mother-in-law ask how work is going at the job that just fired you forces you to either confess over the turkey that you got fired or lie. Neither is good.

    And not to mention the financial pressure. It’s not that things are magically affordable come January; it’s that people tend to have extra year-end expenses. And having to tell kids that Santa isn’t coming because Daddy lost his job just adds to the anger.

    Often, companies slow down hiring in the fourth quarter as well, so it’s even more difficult to find a job.

    The more frustrated and angry a terminated employee is, the more likely they are to pick up a phone and call an attorney. Your i’s may be dotted and your t’s crossed, but if they can make a convincing case to the lawyer, you’ll still be on the hook for a few thousand for your attorney to pull together the information and speak with the plaintiff’s attorney.

    What about people who really need to go?

    Of course, Stanton’s rule doesn’t mean you never fire during this time. If someone is embezzling, sending naughty pictures on the company email, or punches a customer, you will terminate them, even if it’s Christmas Eve. 

    But for your standard employee who is struggling with a performance improvement plan, you can continue to work with them. If your financial straits mean you have no option but to let them go between now and January, Stanton adds:

    “If you are going to hand out pink slips with holiday cards, make sure to keep the process as considerate and generous as you can. You’re not rewarding the person you’re letting go, you’re protecting the folks you’re keeping.”

    You want to treat everyone with dignity. The employees who stay behind will see how you’ve treated their colleagues who lost their jobs. Remember that.

    Also, if you let people go for any reason other than gross misconduct and then show up to the company holiday party in your new six-figure sports car, your remaining employees will relay that information to the person you just laid off for “unavoidable cost reasons.” And their lawyer sees you as a deep-pocketed target.

    Not terminating during the holiday season is the nice thing to do, but even if you’re not a nice person, it’s the financially prudent thing to do. Follow Stanton’s advice and put a moratorium on almost all terminations. 

    The opinions expressed here by Inc.com columnists are their own, not those of Inc.com.

    The final deadline for the 2026 Inc. Regionals Awards is Friday, December 12, at 11:59 p.m. PT. Apply now.

    [ad_2]

    Suzanne Lucas

    Source link

  • Gen-Z Seeks Career Advice From AI. Here’s How Your Company Should Handle It

    [ad_1]

    We know that Gen-Z thinks very differently about the world of work in a number of ways, from how they behave in the office to how much on-the-job training they expect, and now a new report shines a light on another surprising Gen-Z phenomenon that may impact these young workers’ future careers. According to a study from Arkansas State University, shared exclusively with Inc., when a Gen-Z student is seeking careers advice they’re turning away from human career experts and their college professors and are asking ChatGPT instead. This may have implications for your own company’s recruitment efforts, and it may help color your expectations for when Gen-Z workers join your staff.

    The headline statistics relating to this habit from the new study are that 60 percent of the students surveyed have used AI to help with “brainstorming major or career options,” and 32 percent said they’d feel confident in making a major academic decision based solely on AI advice. 

    This, you may think, is merely the next step for career advice, which has long relied on digital tools like personality tests to help youngsters find their place in the world of work. But a couple of other statistics from the study show the habit comes with big risks: 41 percent of Gen-Z students surveyed said they’d followed AI advice that later turned out to be incorrect, and fully 66 percent—that’s two in every three—say that an adult never corrected bad advice they’d been given by AI and then acted on. 

    Meanwhile, showing how AI is displacing experts, 22 percent of the respondents said they had skipped meetings with mentors or advisors because “AI already answered it.” As the university’s report points out, not all is lost for human experts (yet) because the way students use AI like this depends on context. While 19 percent said they actually trusted AI more than their own school’s official website if they needed academic or administrative help, the majority—62 percent—say they still rely on their own institution’s own sources. But 19 percent are still unsure on this issue, which may indicate an “ongoing shift” in trust that academic leaders should pay attention to.

    This data is, for the most part, related to academic systems that students are interacting with—but it sets a huge precedent in habits and expertise for these young people who will enter the workplace in just a few short months or years, and it should serve as a heads-up for their future employers. We know from reports that Gen-Z is almost completely using AI to “cheat” their way through college, which some experts say may damage their confidence in their own critical thinking skills, which are vital skills that employers look for. And we know that Gen-Z is turning to non-traditional information sources, like TikTok, when it comes to seeking advice on certain workplace benefits. 

    All of this adds up to a picture of a whole generation of people who are placing trust in AI systems above human experts and, in some cases, even over traditional online information sources like Google searches. 

    HR professionals hiring Gen-Z workers would be smart to remember that some of their candidates have sought career advice from an AI, which may influence their expectations and thinkings in subtly different ways to older generations.

    Managers stewarding these workers in the office spaces of tomorrow will, if they’re wise, be aware of these habits. They may choose to stress to these employees the importance of trusting colleagues and leaders over AI systems, highlighting to younger workers that AI is fallible and its outputs may frequently be misinformation. The other choice available is to take the lead from new Gen-Z workers and accept that AI has an informal “helper” role for staff as well as all the work task efficiencies that AI boosters say the technology can bring. Teamwork tasks may, for example, may include an AI “employee” taking part alongside human workers, simply because younger workers feel more comfortable having AI at their side. This chimes with recent words from Slack’s chief marketing office Ryan Gavin, who said earlier this year that he envisions a near future where workers chat more with AIs than they do with their human coworkers.

    The final deadline for the 2026 Inc. Regionals Awards is Friday, December 12, at 11:59 p.m. PT. Apply now.

    [ad_2]

    Kit Eaton

    Source link

  • 5 Toxic People Who Holding You Back at Work

    [ad_1]

    It doesn’t matter how nice or well-meaning you are—there’s always going to be that toxic person in your life who wants to vampire the energy right out of you. While toxic people can be anywhere you go, many of them end up in the workplace. According to one study, 80 percent of employees report that their workplace is toxic. 

    You probably already have a good sense of who the toxic people in your life are, but for clarity’s sake, there are five you should seriously consider cutting out of your life now and forever. These toxic people are only standing in the way of your success and well-being. 

    1. The person who never listens to you 

    This isn’t the person who disagrees with you or criticizes you—it is the person who never hears a word you say. You may be excited to hang out with them because they tell such entertaining stories or you just love the conversation, but they never remember the littlest fact about you despite having known you for years. It’s just the way they are and not because they have a problem with you or because you are a bad person. This person just doesn’t care, and that is a problem. 

    2. The person who always brings you down 

    This person could be your neighbor, colleague, or even your friend. They are constantly putting you down, usually just to make themselves feel better. It’s not that they complain all the time, or that they are a negative person in general, though they may well be. The issue is they need you to feel bad about yourself to make themselves feel better. This negative person must be cut out of your life because that kind of person eats away at your self-confidence. 

    3. The person who gets in the way of your taking risks 

    For growth and success, you have to take a few calculated risks every now and then. If you have someone in your life who is constantly trying to stop you from taking the necessary risks to reach success and is always putting the brakes on you trying something new, that person is getting in the way of your growth and, ultimately, your long-term success. 

    4. The person who always tries to defeat you 

    Shared interests are a great reason to keep people in your life. However, there has to be a line drawn between shared passion and constant unhealthy competition. Co-workers should support you, and you should support them. Friendships and work relationships that are all about competition and one-upping are exhausting and unproductive. 

    5. The person who always wants to hold you back 

    If you can’t change and grow with them, they will do everything they can to hold you back in the past, in both life and business. Cut them loose, as you should spend your present only with people you want to have a future with. Cleaning out your life of these toxic people will make room for the right people. 

    The opinions expressed here by Inc.com columnists are their own, not those of Inc.com.

    The final deadline for the 2026 Inc. Regionals Awards is Friday, December 12, at 11:59 p.m. PT. Apply now.

    [ad_2]

    Peter Economy

    Source link

  • Don’t Skimp on Your Holiday Office Party. Employees Want Them More Than Ever

    [ad_1]

    Pandemic-era social distancing requirements, ongoing remote working arrangements, and considerable employee lifestyle changes over the past five years have not been kind to traditional workplace celebrations. Consequently, many companies considerably scaled back, or entirely dropped the once inevitable office holiday party. Now, it may be staging a comeback. Surveys suggest 2025 may mark the return of year-end workplace fetes as an entrenched and beloved seasonal custom, as large majorities of both employers and workers are already planning for the festivities

    While after-work drinks, meals, and even offsite events remain important team-building activities, the office holiday party has struggled to regain former status as a red-letter date on the workplace calendar. But according to the self-described “food tech platform” ezCater, year-end company knees-ups are making a major comeback in 2025. Its survey of over 1,600 employees and business executives found 82 percent of workers said they plan on attending their business’s seasonal bash this year, well up from 70 percent in 2024.

    Business owners are also shaking off any pandemic era Scrooge-esque attitudes toward holiday office festivities. Fully 92 percent of responding employers said they plan to commit significant funds to those celebrations, with 51 percent saying they’ll spend more on them in 2025 than last year. The survey also found the average business budgets for office holiday party food and drinks will increase by 31 percent over 2024, rising to nearly $60 per participant.

    Why go to that expense and bother to organize year-end office merry-making that often elicited groans from pre-pandemic era holdouts, and was virtually eliminated from workplaces as Covid spread?

    On the practical side, both employers and staff benefit from the increased bonding that 83 percent of survey respondents said holiday office events encourage. Another 80 percent of participants said they believed year-end gatherings are even more effective in bringing coworkers and managers closer than before the pandemic — especially amid enduring remote and hybrid work arrangements.

    Indeed, nearly a third of all respondents working under hybrid rules conditions said they had wound up feeling they’d missed out on something good after deciding not to attend year-end workplace fetes in recent years. They may have had good reason for thinking so. Fully 55 percent of survey participants said they were looking forward to this year’s office party for the non-business, informal socializing and friendship-forging opportunities those present. In that way, personal enjoyment supports professional wellbeing and unity — and vice versa.

    “The workplace holiday party is critical for strengthening team connection and morale, especially for hybrid and remote teams,” said ezCater’s vice president of people Robert Kaskel in comments announcing the results. “In an increasingly disconnected world, companies should maximize these festive opportunities, because ultimately, stronger connections result in higher job satisfaction, productivity, and retention.”

    But not all people feel quite as enthusiastic for their impending annual office gatherings.

    Nearly half, or 45 percent of survey respondents admitted to getting stressed about attending the functions, with younger workers the most likely to feel that anxiety. Still, who among us hasn’t at some point also dreaded facing what 60 percent of Gen Zers cited as their most feared office party scenario — finding themselves standing alone with nobody to talk to?

    Other year-end work party situations that worried survey respondents included being stuck in unwanted conversations, saying something to a manager they’d regret, and navigating hot or divisive topics during exchanges with colleagues.

    To ensure maximum employee pleasure — and attendance — employers may want to tailor their holiday workplace party to participants’ stated preferences. Those included planning the gatherings on Fridays, in December rather than November, and scheduling them in the afternoon instead of evenings.

    Respondents also favored holding the festivities in events spaces rather than workplaces, using buffet-style food layouts, and allowing workers to bring a guest of their own choosing.

    Perhaps understanding that last desire, 77 percent of business executives who answered the survey said they’re making that “plus-one” allowance for 2025 holiday parties — up from 16 percent last year. Clearly, even bosses don’t like seeing people standing alone with nobody to talk to.

    The final deadline for the 2026 Inc. Regionals Awards is Friday, December 12, at 11:59 p.m. PT. Apply now.

    [ad_2]

    Bruce Crumley

    Source link

  • Should You Fire Employees Who Won’t Learn to Use AI Tools?

    [ad_1]

    One overarching narrative about the rise of AI technology is that it threatens millions of people’s jobs via advanced automation, and many reports show just how nervous workers are that they’ll suffer this fate. Another AI narrative suggests that company leadership is so eager to reap AI’s promises in terms of boosted productivity and lower costs, that they’re pressing new AI tools into use without properly training their workforce, and just expect results to happen. Now a new report stitches these two narratives into a disturbing new one: the majority of executives in a survey said that they’d prefer to fire a worker who refuses to learn and adopt AI tools.

    The data, from multinational U.S.-based office staffing company Kelly Services, shows that 59 percent of the senior executives surveyed would replace workers who “resist adopting” AI tools, news site HRDive notes. An even greater share of executives—fully 79 percent—think that pushing back against the AI revolution is a “greater threat to someone’s job than the technology itself.” 

    These managers, Kelly’s report says, think that AI should function the way AI boosters say it will: freeing up time for frontline workers to actually work on meaningful, higher-value tasks during their time in the office. Think of duties like collaborating with team members, mentoring junior workers and sharing their expertise and knowledge—all tasks that should, in theory, achieve workplace goals and tasks more quickly and smoothly.

    On the flip side, Kelly’s data shows that the workers who actually are expected to use AI are much more doubtful about its actual performance. Under half (47 percent) say they think it helps them save time. Around one in three says they’re just not seeing the benefits that AI promises. 

    The gap between management expectation and worker experience is stark here. Kelly’s report notes that despite this, “nearly all organizations are utilizing AI in some form,” even as they’re experiencing “technical challenges, security concerns, and slow user adoption.” And the vast majority of managers (80 percent) say that their company’s AI rollout is stuttering because their teams “lack the expertise” to use the tech properly.

    There are clear flaws in some of the thinking exhibited by managers here: AI is indeed a promising tech, but many experts warn that it’s not necessarily able to perform all the wonderful things that are promised. Some surveys even suggest that AI tools may be slowing certain workers down. AI technology is also not a panacea for all of a company’s ills—it’s not just something you can adopt and magically see the benefits. Report after report suggests that when you roll out AI to your workers you need to educate and then re-educate your workers on the benefits, best practices and risks of the tech you’re asking them to use simply because the cutting edge is advancing so very quickly (and the cybersecurity risks are advancing swiftly too). 

    You can also argue that Kelly’s data does neatly demonstrate that there’s a new ivory tower effect happening. Executives are simply expecting workers to use AI tools, even as they may be dismissing their workers’ concerns that they’re helping to hone the tech that one day may replace them: certain industries are already experiencing AI-related layoffs, for example. There’s a trust and leadership imbalance in place, and with such broad executive-level support for AI, this could create a toxic work environment. 

    What’s your big takeaway from this for your company?

    Firstly, you need to be aware that despite your hopes that AI will immediately transform your business, the truth is it may not. Barriers like staff reluctance, training time, AI tool issues and more may be stifling the opportunity to benefit from AI.

    Kelly’s report suggests a couple of tricks to solve this, which may be easier to implement in a smaller, more hands-on company than a larger corporate enterprise. For example, the report suggests linking career development to a workers’ AI fluency—a maneuver easily achieved by linking bonuses and promotions to demonstrated skills with AI. Directly addressing workers’ fears by performing “hands-on demos that illustrate how AI helps talent succeed” may also be useful. And you should definitely talk to and listen to your workers after you roll out AI tech: they may be encountering real difficulties, indicating that you need to try better training programs or perhaps that you’ve chosen the wrong AI tools for the task at hand.

    The final deadline for the 2026 Inc. Regionals Awards is Friday, December 12, at 11:59 p.m. PT. Apply now.

    [ad_2]

    Kit Eaton

    Source link

  • Here’s How Corporate Social Responsibility Can Create a Great Workplace

    [ad_1]

    Talent doesn’t just follow the money—it responds to new opportunities and improved quality of life offered by new positions. In today’s competitive job market (despite recent softening), companies aren’t just promoting open roles; they’re also selling and promoting the communities where those roles exist. If housing is unaffordable, schools are under-resourced, or the communities feel unsafe, top candidates will look elsewhere—no matter how strong the salary or brand. Investing to ensure thriving communities is not just a social good strategy; it’s a strategic business strategy.

    Boston Consulting Group reported that 52 percent of job candidates would decline an attractive job offer if the location didn’t meet their expectations. And with Paychex reporting that 57 percent of business leaders list attracting and retaining talent as top priorities, sustaining healthy, livable communities and building a homegrown talent pool are imperatives.

    Despite recent news narratives and political rhetoric, this points to a greater understanding of the connections between corporate social impact programs and long-term success in strengthening employee recruitment and retention, brand loyalty, and profit margins.

    Companies no longer view investing in their communities as philanthropy.  Rather, it’s an investment in future business success.  Companies have significant opportunities to be bold and adapt to this new reality. And if they don’t, their competitors will.

    Successful corporate social responsibility (CSR) programs are aligned with business strategies, especially efforts to develop tomorrow’s workforce and strengthen communities. According to the latest CSR Insights Survey, conducted by the Association of Corporate Citizenship Professionals (ACCP) and Your Cause from Blackbaud, 51 percent of corporate social impact professionals report increased demand for linking their programs to business value. In the same survey, respondents noted the top issue areas for social impact investments are job training/workforce development, K-12 education, and food insecurity (each scoring at 43 percent of respondents ranking as a top priority issue area for their company), followed by community revitalization (up 2 points to 36 percent) and STEM education (up 3 points to 35 percent).

    What’s behind this concentration on education and workforce issues?

    Companies are recognizing that the pipeline of future talent is at risk without their own efforts. Success depends on hooking every minnow in the pool and preparing them for a job market that is continuing to be radically reshaped by disruptive technologies. The dwindling supply of future workers and the incredibly fluid work environment reflects several widespread trends:

    First, the population is aging. As people live longer, the overall demographic is shifting towards older age groups, with younger generations making up a smaller portion of the population. And a new Baby Boom isn’t on the horizon to balance this trend. National fertility rates are at an all-time low, far below the level needed to maintain a stable population. Many young people, facing financial insecurity and a pessimistic outlook on the future, are less inclined to have children.

    Second, even if elected officials manage to bring a significant number of manufacturing jobs back to the United States — which is by no means certain — young people are neither interested in nor prepared for these positions. Despite a broader interest in trade jobs, manufacturing remains an exception. Recent news articles have noted that surveys show Gen-Z respondents have little desire for industrial roles, citing concerns over poor pay and safety.

    Third, companies are rapidly turning to machine-learning-powered applications to automate many types of work, including a large swathe of entry-level jobs.  Entry-level candidates will need to possess higher-order skills that machine-learning applications cannot handle. Job training and upskilling programs need to prepare job candidates for this future.

    In a world where disruptive technologies are redefining the workplace at lightning speed, investing in education and workforce development is no longer optional—it’s a business imperative. Companies that fail to prepare their people for this new reality risk being left behind.

    Trane Technologies, an ACCP member company, shows what it looks like to lead. For decades, the company has embedded corporate social responsibility into its long-term strategy. Today, it is doubling down with a bold approach to prepare both the workforce of today and the talent of tomorrow with the skills needed to thrive.

    Through its Sustainable Futures initiative, Trane made a $100 million investment and committed 500,000 employee volunteer hours by 2030. The initiative empowers young people and communities by expanding access to STEM and sustainability education, with a particular focus on green careers. This isn’t charity—it’s foresight. By equipping students and young learners with the skills and pathways into high-demand careers, Trane is ensuring a more resilient workforce while addressing one of society’s greatest challenges: building a sustainable future.

    Corporate social impact works best when it is aligned with business goals and community needs. Trane’s example makes the case clearly: preparing people for the jobs of tomorrow is not just good for business—it’s good for everyone.

    At its core, corporate social impact work reflects the belief that a vital society and widespread prosperity are not only ends in themselves, but also important contributors to a healthy bottom line. With a shrinking population and skills gaps looming in the future, it makes perfect sense that firms will leverage social impact programs to not only address societal problems, but also business challenges. The smartest companies won’t just respond to these challenges—they’ll lead, using social impact as a strategic tool to build stronger communities, a future-ready workforce, and long-term business value.

    The final deadline for the 2026 Inc. Regionals Awards is Friday, December 12, at 11:59 p.m. PT. Apply now.

    [ad_2]

    Andrea Wood

    Source link

  • Your Employees’ Health Insurance is in Jeopardy. Here’s What to Do About It

    [ad_1]

    The longest government shutdown in U.S. history is finally over after President Donald Trump signed a stopgap spending bill narrowly approved by the House last week, but your employees’ healthcare is still in trouble.

    Tax credits that give entrepreneurs and their employees — and even solopreneurs — access to affordable healthcare through the ACA marketplace are set to expire at the end of this year. A study by the Kaiser Family Foundation estimates costs will soar by 26 percent — a combination of the projected loss of federal subsidies and the general increase of healthcare costs.

    Democrats, and even some Republicans, are working to extend the benefit before rates skyrocket in January, but the House won’t vote on it until mid-December. Open enrollment began on Nov. 1 and ends in mid- to late January, depending on the state. The timing is less than ideal, but states are reassuring consumers that the plans they choose now are not “final.” They’ll have the option to change plans once the House votes in December. Anyone who doesn’t want to pay higher rates or choose a plan with less coverage has the option to wait until January to sign up for a new plan, but that means their insurance won’t kick in until February, Politico reported.

    “We are hearing folks who simply cannot believe what they are looking at,” said Audrey Gasteier, executive director of the Massachusetts Health Connector, told the publication. “Folks who have surgery scheduled in the new year [say those plans are] in question now because they are not sure if they can stay covered.”

    If the subsidies are approved without changes, ACA plans will be updated with the new rates. However, things could get complicated if Republicans successfully impose income caps and “fraud guardrails” on people’s eligibility for the subsidy. President Donald Trump has also floated the idea of issuing the subsidies as a “direct payment” to consumers, bypassing the insurers — a move policy experts told Politico would “lead to the collapse of the exchanges.”

    Some state exchanges now require insurers to generate two rates — with and without the subsidies — to show consumers what they could be paying. These states say they’re working to get pricing information out to consumers as soon as possible.  

    “State marketplaces will all do whatever needs to be done to get those tax credits out to our consumers,” Michele Eberle, executive director of Maryland Health Benefit Exchange, told Politico. “We are ready to do it and poised to do it. We will make it happen.”

    [ad_2]

    Kayla Webster

    Source link

  • Why Employers Still Cover GLP-1 Drugs as Prices Skyrocket

    [ad_1]

    Among the workplace benefits employees say they appreciate most are flexible work arrangements, paid time off, 401(k) retirement accounts, career development programs, and of course company health insurance plans. But now, many businesses are scaling back or ending an increasingly popular benefit within their wider healthcare coverage – paying for workers’ use of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) medication for weight loss.

    Initially developed to treat diabetes by regulating blood sugar levels, GLP-1 medication has become increasingly popular for losing weight. Recent surveys found that 60 percent of people taking Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro, Saxenda, and other versions of the drug did so primarily for weight loss. But that surging demand has led pharmaceutical manufactures to repeatedly hike their prices for GPL-1s, which has spiked the costs of employer coverage of the drugs. As a result, many businesses are now having to rethink the terms of including those medications in their plans, or remove them entirely.

    Most businesses had already had to adjust to the average 6 percent rise in their employee health insurance premiums this year, with many facing double-digit rises in 2026. At the same time, a recent joint study by nonprofits Peterson Center on Healthcare and KFF determined employee use of GLP-1s has been far higher than anyone had anticipated — mostly due to the drug’s growing use for weight loss. Those factors are adding to the financial pinch for employer health plans and forcing them to respond.

    According to the Peterson-KFF survey, 19 percent of all employers with 200 employees or more cover GLP-1 use for losing weight in their health plans. But that rises to 30 percent among companies with 1,000-5,000 workers, and 43 percent for even bigger firms. Those latter figures represent a roughly 28 increase in coverage of the drug compared to 2024.

    Not surprisingly, nearly a quarter of all employers said staff use GLP-1 drugs for weight loss was higher than they expected, with that number rising to nearly 60 percent at larger businesses. That led nearly a third of respondents to report those medications had “significantly impacted their prescription drug spending,” rising to 66 percent at companies with 5,000 workers or more.

    “Before we knew it, we spent half a million dollars and were projected to go up to $1.2 million the following year,” a benefits manager with a retailing company said in anonymous comments to the Peterson-KFF survey about GLP-1 costs.

    Many employers are responding to both rising premiums and higher medication costs by passing on some of the increases to employees, and inching up co-pays workers have to finance. But that probably won’t be enough to offset the surging costs of GLP-1s. As a result, most companies are revising the way their plans cover the medication.

    Many businesses are limiting GLP-1 exclusively for diabetes treatment — with some requiring company health officials to approve that use beforehand. But because taking the medication has become so popular for weight loss, other employers don’t feel they can cut employees off from it.

    On the one hand, by covering the drug under company health plans, some employers have found GLP-1s have become a de facto benefit capable of attracting new recruits, while also helping to retain existing workers. Meantime, a lot of businesses have calculated that as expensive as the medication is, its effectiveness in helping weight loss has led to reduced costs related to employee cardiovascular diseases and other conditions attributed to obesity.

    Still, employers facing rising prices of the drug are having to stem its spreading use. In some cases, companies have decided to continue covering GLP-1s for weight loss, but only by employees above new body mass index (BMI) thresholds. Others additional measures include creating lifestyle and nutrition programs to make sure workers using the medication stay slimmer once they stop taking the medication.

    “(W)e put in the requirement that you have type 2 diabetes for certain GLP-1s, and then we put in a BMI of 35 or higher for the weight loss GLP-1s,” a HR official with a manufacturing company said in survey comments, noting some employees had been “grandfathered in” for continued use while others will need to qualify for it in the future. “We are trying to decide how to manage this crazy cost of the GLP-1s.”

    What’s behind that determination to keep covering GLP-1s?

    It comes partly from employers’ desire to safeguard employees’ health while sparing them much of the costs of doing that. At the same time, a lot of managers already recognize GLP-1 medications are likely to become ever bigger factors in healthcare coverage. That’s growing increasingly likely with the number of diseases the drug has been shown to improve continuing to multiply over time.

    As a result, even health insurance companies providing employee health coverage to business owners have warned that GLP-1 isn’t going away any time soon — whether the drugs are used for treating diabetes, losing weight, or addressing other conditions.

    “Our insurance provider, Cigna told us that within the next nine to 12 months, there’s really not going to be a choice,” said a health manager with a manufacturing company in the survey comments. “(A)ll insurance companies are probably going to be covering GLP-1s for weight loss.” 

    And as a result, many employers are resolving themselves to do likewise — though they’re starting so set some limits.

    [ad_2]

    Bruce Crumley

    Source link

  • Apple’s CEO Tim Cook May Retire Soon. How’s Your Succession Planning Going?

    [ad_1]

    When legendary Apple co-founder and CEO Steve Jobs died in 2011, long-time Apple supply chain executive Tim Cook had already been appointed to take his place. That was 14 years ago. Cook, now 65 and Apple’s longest-serving CEO, steered the company through successful product releases and the benchmark feat of becoming the first $1 trillion valued company in 2018, but strong rumors suggest that he’ll be retiring next year. The company is certainly deep in succession planning, and this may prompt you to ponder long-term leadership plans for your own company. It’s an especially timely issue in a moment where the pressures of being a CEO keep increasing in a complex business environment.

    The Financial Times reported this weekend that preparations for Cook to step down were accelerating, per company insiders who said both board and senior executives are involved with the effort. Apple is now a roughly $4 trillion company with a global presence, so this is no ordinary job. The FT says that John Ternus, currently acting as senior vice-president of hardware engineering is “widely” seen as the most likely executive to replace Cook. Though no final decisions have apparently been made, Ternus has deep knowledge of the tech giant’s operations and has appeared many times on stage during high-profile Apple hardware releases. 

    Cook’s stepping aside is not related to Apple’s performance, the FT notes, with the company widely expected to see hugely successful sales of its just-released iPhone 17 range. Cook is known to have strong preferences for an internal candidate, remarking as much when speaking with musical artist Dua Lipa on her November 2023 podcast. 

    Covering the news, Axios argues that Cook’s departure may be symbolic of the end of the “star” CEO. Although Cook isn’t as high-profile as his predecessor, his tenure as chief executive saw Apple become a global tech leader. Other boldface-name CEOs are also set to depart soon, with Disney’s CEO Bob Iger and Walmart’s CEO Doug McMillon all “preparing to leave the stage,” as Axios notes. The news outlet points out there are now an “unusual number of globally iconic brands” seeking new leadership. It’s possible that the complex legal, societal, political and technological winds swirling around the U.S., particularly with fast-evolving AI technology in mind, are playing a part in this CEO switcheroo.

    A new report at Fortune may underline this theory. In surveying the world’s top 200 corporate chiefs from the Fortune 500 for a book, senior partners at global management consulting outfit McKinsey uncovered the thinking and methodology of these company leaders, finding that 68 percent said they felt “ill prepared” to become CEO even as they stepped into the role and that 30 percent of CEOs don’t stay past the first three years. The role of CEO may also be becoming more important, and also perhaps more tenuous—more at the whim of influences like activist investors—than before. 

    Fortune notes that this means chief execs are typically juggling “roughly twice as many issues” as they would have had to just five to seven years ago. That time period is well within Cook’s tenure as Apple CEO, for example, and in that time Apple has faced numerous high-profile challenges including the covid pandemic, billion dollar-scale lawsuits and a high-profile miss in the multitrillion race for AI market share.

    What’s the big takeaway for your company?

    While you may be comfortable with your leadership team right now, maintaining a rigorous medium-term succession plan may be a good idea. Unexpected illnesses, aging executive team members and other occurrences both planned and unplanned may mean you need to look for new C-suite members without much of a warning. Deciding whether you want to promote someone from inside the company, someone steeped in its culture and way of working, or whether you want to hire a “new broom” external candidate is probably a good start. Having long-term discussions with possible candidates earlier rather than later also shows that you have the stability of the company in mind in ways that will reassure your workforce and investors.

    [ad_2]

    Kit Eaton

    Source link

  • My New Employee Is Someone I Fired at My Last Company

    [ad_1]

    Inc.com columnist Alison Green answers questions about workplace and management issues—everything from how to deal with a micromanaging boss to how to talk to someone on your team about body odor.

    Here’s a roundup of answers to three questions from readers.

    1. I’ve fired my new employee before

    I recently took a new job in my same industry and city. In my new role, I’ll have a team of eight reporting to me in various capacities and functions. During the interview process, I got a brief read-out on the team and a high-level talent assessment. Nothing stood out as an issue. On my first day, I met the team reporting to me. One of the people on the team is someone that worked for me before and who I terminated for cause due to performance at my previous company.

    What do I communicate to my management team and/or HR about this situation? It feels weird to say nothing because ultimately, this could be a management issue — I’m sure this employee doesn’t feel great about the situation. On the other hand, I don’t want to risk harming this person’s reputation at this company if they are doing a good job so far. This person is pretty new here, too, and my impression is they are either doing a better job in this role or management has not yet identified an issue with their performance.

    Green responds:

    Have you talked to the employee yet? That’s important because they are undoubtedly really uncomfortable, if not outright panicking. Ideally you’d tell them that you’re happy to be working with them again, you’ve heard good things about the work they’ve been doing (if that’s true), and while you know your last time working together didn’t go the way either of you wanted, this is a different situation and, as far you’re concerned, both of you are starting fresh.

    I do think you’re right that you need to mention it to your management team or HR. It’s unfortunate because this person is entitled to a fresh start without the firing following them to a different job, but it’s relevant not as a predictor of the person’s work now but because it could affect the dynamic between the two of you, and either of you could struggle not to interpret things through that old lens. You can keep it very brief — “I managed Jane at a previous company and unfortunately the fit wasn’t right and we ended up parting ways. I’m very willing to start fresh with her and I’m hopeful the role she’s in could be a great match, but I wanted to flag the prior work relationship.” Also, if it’s been a while since you worked together, stress that too.

    2. Why do people respond to emails with a phone call?

    What’s the etiquette on responding to people who you have emailed and they respond with a phone call? I understand there are times when a phone call is necessary. I’ve been getting dozens of phone calls (after sending out a ton of emails on a certain work issue) and they all ask me to call them back. I’m just frustrated because if I email someone, it’s because I don’t want to talk on the phone. And the question is usually easily answered via email. What’s the best way to respond?

    Green responds:

    I get being annoyed, but it’s not always up to you — and sometimes it makes sense.

    Sometimes people will call you back because they think — often rightly — that it’ll be faster. They might not be sure about the meaning of your email and they want to clarify before responding, and figure they’ll just jump on the phone rather than going back and forth. Or their answer might take a long time to write out but be easier to deliver over the phone. Or they just prefer the phone, just as you prefer email. And not everyone feels they communicate as well in writing as they do out loud.

    As an email fan, this can be annoying! When you like email, it feels efficient and convenient and respectful of everyone’s time. Plus, sometimes it’s helpful to have a written record of what was discussed as a reference you can look back at later if needed. And if you’re having an especially busy day or suspect a call will be 30 minutes when it should be five, it might be fine to let the call go to voicemail, then email later with, “Got your voicemail. I’m in back-to-back meetings and will be hard to reach today — any chance email will work?” Maybe it will, and they’ll tell you if it won’t. But save that for when I really need it — because while you get to have your preferences, they get to have theirs too.

    3. Setting boundaries on requests for help from a significant other’s network

    I am engaged to a wonderful person. We both work in the same field, though for different organizations. We are working to create healthy boundaries between our personal and professional lives and it is important to both of us that we are able to pursue careers independently.

    My organization is bigger and engages in some grant-making activities. A coworker of his recently reached out to me for more information on how their organization could acquire funding. I directed her to publicly available resources but she responded seeking a personal introduction to our grant officer. This made me uncomfortable; I’m happy to connect anyone who asks to public information, but it felt like she was leveraging my personal relationship to gain access. I know the importance of networking and personal connections, but I have no professional relationship with this person and we’ve only met once in passing.

    My fiancé and I discussed the need for a policy on how to deal with these kinds of inquiries as we see this being a recurring issue as we move forward in our careers. I would love advice on how to navigate these kinds of requests.

    Green responds:

    The way you handled it sounds just fine! When she asked for an introduction to the grant officer, you could have said, “Oh, we get such a high volume of interest in funding that we ask all grant applicants to follow the process listed on our website.” And if she still pushed: “I’m sorry I can’t help. We’re really rigorous about asking everyone to use the process on our website so that everyone is treated the same. Thanks for understanding!”

    In other words, not so different from how you’d probably handle it if your fiancé weren’t in the picture. Explain what the person should do, and then reiterate that if necessary. Be warm and friendly, but hold firm on what you are and aren’t willing or able to do.

    My answer would be different if the person had been requesting something different. If she were asking for something like an informal chat about moving into your field — as opposed to this kind of special treatment — I’d encourage you to consider that, like you presumably would consider other similar requests that came through a mutual contact.

    Want to submit a question of your own? Send it to alison@askamanager.org.

    The opinions expressed here by Inc.com columnists are their own, not those of Inc.com.

    [ad_2]

    Alison Green

    Source link

  • 3 Cognitive Habits of People Who Get Things Done

    [ad_1]

    Marcus leads a team of eight direct reports, and Jennifer is his star employee. While the other seven team members struggle to complete tasks on time or in the way Marcus asks for them, Jennifer seems to ace any task she’s given. She asks questions when she’s unclear and owns up to her mistakes. Any time the other employees mess up, Marcus wishes he could clone Jennifer seven times and save himself the hassle.

    Sound familiar?

    You may not be able to clone your star employees, but you can help your team replicate the cognitive habits of people like Jennifer to build the skill of accountability across your team. At the NeuroLeadership Institute, we’ve spent the past year reverse-engineering what accountable people do from a cognitive perspective. Quite literally, we’ve asked, what are the cognitive habits—the habits of mind—of people who do this well? Three have come into focus: syncing expectations, driving with purpose, and owning one’s impact.  

    In short, accountable people get clarity in what they’re supposed to do, execute tasks deliberately and intentionally, and learn from the outcomes they produce, whether good or bad. 

    3 habits of accountability

    When people attend to these habits in the course of their work, we call it proactive accountability. That is, they see accountability as a way to grow, develop, and innovate. They take ownership of their responsibilities and learn from their mistakes. Proactive accountability stands in contrast  to punitive accountability, a practice in which leaders create environments of fear, blame, or punishment that hinder learning and growth, as well as permissive accountability, in which leaders assume performance issues will simply work themselves out. 

    Sync expectations 

    A major factor in cultures with low accountability is a mismatch in expectations. The manager thinks the team member will do one thing, but the team member thinks they’re supposed to do something else. Disappointment and broken trust follow.

    In the brain, unmet expectations are processed as error signals. Levels of the neurotransmitter dopamine drop, sapping motivation and causing us to feel frustrated or angry, which forces us to adjust our expectations. When expectations are met, however, there is no error signal, dopamine levels hold steady, and trust and satisfaction remain strong.

    The first habit of proactive accountability, Sync expectations, involves the employee getting clear about what’s expected of them. This is an important first step because shared understanding is the foundation of being effective. In the brain this is represented by a temporary synchronization of neural activity, known as neural synchrony. 

    During neural synchrony, neurons in both people’s brains are firing in the same patterns because their minds are processing information in nearly identical ways. For this to happen, both people need to discuss and eliminate any potential misunderstandings before moving forward.

    Syncing expectations also has benefits for relationships at the end of the project because fulfilled expectations breed trust, while unmet expectations erode trust. When two teammates sync expectations up front, they make an investment in sustaining the relationship long-term.

    Tactic: Encourage your team to sync expectations by communicating in a way that’s succinct, specific, and generous (SSG). SSG communication uses a narrow focus to support working memory (succinct); it uses visual, explicit language to enhance processing (specific); and it’s tailored to create ease of understanding (generous). It’s not “Get me this report by 5 p.m.”—rather, it’s “Email me this report by 5 p.m. Eastern Time, and please attach the report as a PDF.”

    SSG communication creates clarity, which promotes synchrony and aligns expectations.

    Drive with purpose

    Once the leader and employee have synced expectations, the employee must own the responsibility to execute the task at the highest level. Highly effective people often do this by connecting the goal at hand to a higher purpose, and then working to create the right outcomes with that purpose in mind.

    Purpose ignites motivation. When we know why we’re asked to do something, and we can see how the work creates a meaningful impact, we’re more intrinsically motivated to act. Compared to extrinsic motivators, such as money and status, intrinsic rewards, like a sense of accomplishment or mastery over a task, are much more powerful. Consciously or not, effective people find deeper meaning in their work to summon the energy to keep pushing.

    They also act deliberately, rather than hastily, investigating as many possibilities as they can and assuming almost nothing. In addition, they check their biases to avoid making rash judgments. Since cognitive biases act as mental shortcuts, they pose risks for an employee completing a task effectively. Someone who acts with an expedience bias, for instance, might move too quickly and miss a crucial part of the work.

    Tactic: Help your employees identify the impact this work will have on them. Perhaps the project is an opportunity for them to build a new skill or to contribute to an important organizational goal. Asking questions that elicit a clear “why” will help the employee form a stronger sense of purpose and ownership over their work. 

    Own the impact

    Accountability doesn’t just involve getting things done as expected; it means seeing how those actions play out going forward. Even the best laid plans can produce unexpected results. Accountable leaders own their team’s impact, regardless of people’s positive intentions, and then they devise new plans to keep pushing toward success.

    Proactive accountability requires us to maintain a growth mindset, or the belief that mistakes are chances to improve rather than signs of incompetence. When people always seem to get things done, it’s because they’re not getting mired in failure or basking in success. They may pause to experience their emotions, but ultimately they’re focused on achieving the next set of goals in front of them. 

    Tactic: The most important time for leaders and team members to own their impact is when things don’t go as planned. Help your team apologize well by following (and modeling) a three-step approach: taking responsibility, saying how you’ll fix things, and asking for others’ input. Choosing to learn from our mistakes preserves trust and promotes growth: two outcomes that sit at the heart of proactive accountability.

    With these three habits, Marcus feels more empowered to help his team build the skill of accountability. Jennifer may have a natural talent for getting things done at a high level, but there’s no “secret” to her efficacy. When a new project comes her way, she merely goes through the prescribed steps that neuroscience shows will naturally produce accountability. 

    It will take time to develop the behaviors of proactive accountability and make them habits. But with the right focus, you can help everyone on your team, including yourself, become the kind of person who meets or exceeds expectations in whatever they do. What seems like magic will really just be brain science at work.

    By David Rock and Chris Weller

    This article originally appeared in Inc.’s sister publication, Fast Company.

    Fast Company is the world’s leading business media brand, with an editorial focus on innovation in technology, leadership, world changing ideas, creativity, and design. Written for and about the most progressive business leaders, Fast Company inspires readers to think expansively, lead with purpose, embrace change, and shape the future of business.

    [ad_2]

    Fast Company

    Source link

  • 2025 Graduates Are Facing the Toughest Job Market in Decades

    [ad_1]

    The entire job market is in turmoil, we know, but a new report highlights that it’s worse for this year’s graduating class than for people starting their working lives. Most job seekers say the entire process of finding and then applying for work took much more effort. If your company is looking for fresh, young talent, this news could inspire you to change your own recruiting efforts.

    The new study, from the National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE) and Texas-based recruitment service Indeed, found that on average Class of 2025 graduates sent out 10 job applications for every six that the Class of 2024 sent, HRDive reports. They were also sending out applications earlier, beginning around 6.5 months before graduating, compared to an average of 6 months in 2024. This might suggest they’re conscious of the worsening state of the employment market, but NACE said it thinks the opposite is true.

    In a press release accompanying the report, the group noted that the mean number of job offers this year’s graduates received after sending out applications was 0.78, a significantly low figure, and lower than last year’s 0.83 and seriously down from the average 1.13 and 1.14 offers the Classes of 2023 and 2022 landed during the same phase of their life. But compared to last year, graduates were keener to accept these offers: 86.7 percent of seniors who received an offer accepted it, compared to 81.2 percent last year and 85.1 percent in 2023. The differences here are more subtle, but still point to a graduating year that’s slightly keener to secure a job sooner rather than later.

    Graduates were, compared to earlier classes, “more likely to say they were unsure about their plans, and more were planning to enter the military, suggesting they were unsure about private-sector employment,” NACE noted. Meanwhile many of this year’s graduating class understand the value of experiential education, and 84 percent of the cohort took part in an “internship, co-op, or other experiential learning program” the report said, also noting that students “overwhelmingly” said internships were the top way to develop their skills. 

    Curiously, despite other reports suggesting that AI use during the job application process is soaring to the point that recruiters are overwhelmed, fewer than one in three students in the NACE survey said they’d used the controversial tech during the application process, and the report says only 22 percent of employers used the tech themselves during recruiting. 

    The big lesson for your company here is that the changes in the job market affecting new graduates may impact the business of finding and recruiting new talent. The pool of available candidates may be bigger than expected, and the number of applications you receive for open posts may be up compared to what your HR team has seen in recent years — affecting the time and effort they need to put in to downselect to the final choice. 

    Meanwhile, a separate report again highlights that the kind of perks you may have to offer to attract Gen-Z workers may be different from those that appealed to older generations of worker. Professional services company KMPG’s new U.S. CEO Timothy Walsh is trying to lure Gen-Z workers to the firm by offering up a new office suite that’s “outfitted with moody lounges and a barista bar,” according to a report at Fortune. Having joined the firm as an intern over 30 years ago, Walsh has seen many aspects of the business change—including the new push for entry-level workers to manage entire teams of AI agents. Refurbished headquarters are an effort to try to attract workers to work in the office more per week, as opposed to strict RTO mandates like those from companies like Amazon and JPMorgan, but they also are designed to facilitate hybrid work setups, since these remain popular. 

    Walsh is clearly aware of this fact, and also that Gen-Z staff are tending to look for more meaningful job perks than appeal to older age cohorts, as well as employers that facilitate their desire for better work-life balance. All of this could feed into the way you try to appeal to the Class of 2025.

    [ad_2]

    Kit Eaton

    Source link

  • How Daily Micro-Recognitions Boost Retention

    [ad_1]

    When we think about employee recognition, most leaders picture promotions, bonuses, or annual performance reviews. But here’s the truth: retention isn’t built on once-a-year gestures. It’s built in the everyday moments.

    A growing body of research shows just how powerful recognition can be. According to Gallup, employees who feel recognised are five times more likely to be engaged and four times more likely to feel connected to company culture. And yet, many organizations are still overlooking the simple, everyday acknowledgments that truly move the needle.

    That’s where the micro-recognition movement comes in. By celebrating small wins consistently and authentically, leaders can boost engagement, strengthen culture, and keep top talent committed for the long haul.

    Here’s why it works and how to make it part of your culture.

    1. Recognition Builds Retention, Not Just Morale

    People don’t usually leave because of the absence of a promotion. More often, they leave because they don’t feel valued. When recognition is only tied to major milestones, employees can go months or even years without hearing a genuine ‘thank you’.

    Micro-recognition changes that. By acknowledging progress in real time, you reinforce that their work matters now, not just at year-end. This is especially powerful in today’s workplace, where replacing an employee can cost up to twice their salary when you factor in recruitment, onboarding, and lost productivity.

    A simple Slack shoutout, a manager’s acknowledgement in a meeting, or even a quick handwritten note can keep someone engaged enough to think twice before answering a recruiter’s call.

    2. Small Wins Spark Big Motivation

    It’s human nature: recognition fuels motivation. When someone feels seen, they are far more likely to bring that same energy to their next project.

    Micro-recognition is not just about making people feel good. It reinforces the behaviours that drive your business forward. Did a team member handle a client issue with empathy and speed? Call it out. Did someone create a new process that saves the team hours each week? Recognise it publicly.

    By being specific, you not only validate the effort, but you also send a clear signal to the rest of the team: “This is what good looks like here.” Over time, that shapes culture more effectively than any handbook or mission statement.

    3. Recognition Strengthens Culture, Even Remotely

    Culture doesn’t only live in the office anymore. Hybrid and remote work have made recognition even more critical because employees can easily feel invisible when working from home.

    Micro-recognition bridges that gap. Leaders who intentionally build in rituals, like ‘Win Wednesdays’ where everyone shares one success, create a rhythm of appreciation that connects people across screens and time zones.

    Peer-to-peer recognition is just as important. When recognition only comes top-down, it can feel performative or inconsistent. But when you empower employees to uplift one another, recognition becomes embedded into the culture, not just a management exercise.

    4. It’s Cost-Effective and More Impactful Than You Think

    Budgets are tight. Many leaders assume that improving retention requires expensive raises, lavish perks, or costly benefits. Micro-recognition proves otherwise.

    The cost of a handwritten note? Pennies. A team-wide Slack shout-out? Free. The impact? Significant. Employees who feel consistently appreciated are less likely to burn out, less likely to disengage, and less likely to leave.

    Compared to the cost of turnover, which can drain budgets and morale, the ROI on recognition is undeniable. Recognition is one of the most cost-effective strategies available to leaders who want to protect their talent.

    5. How to Embed Micro-Recognition Into Your Culture

    The most effective recognition isn’t complicated, but it does require consistency. Here are a few ways to make it part of your leadership toolkit:

    • Train managers on the art of recognition. Teach them to be timely, authentic, and specific.
    • Create rituals. Whether it’s weekly team wins or monthly peer shoutouts, build recognition into the routine.
    • Encourage peer-to-peer. Recognition should not just flow downward. Empower your team to celebrate each other’s successes.
    • Tie recognition to values. Highlight not just what was achieved, but how it was achieved in line with company culture.

    The Retention Strategy You Can’t Ignore

    At the end of the day, micro-recognition is more than a feel-good practice. It is a strategic retention tool. In a labour market where top talent has options, the leaders who win won’t necessarily be the ones offering the biggest salaries or flashiest perks. They will be the ones who create cultures where employees feel consistently valued and seen.

    The small, daily acknowledgments are what add up to long-term loyalty. If you want to stop chasing new talent and start protecting the talent you already have, start small. Celebrate the daily wins. Recognise the effort, not just the outcome.

    Because in today’s workplace, retention is built in the little moments.

    The opinions expressed here by Inc.com columnists are their own, not those of Inc.com.

    [ad_2]

    Mandy Gilbert

    Source link

  • These CEOs Scaled Up While Strengthening Company Culture During Big Pivots

    [ad_1]

    Leaders who have scaled up their businesses know that protecting company culture is a key to successful change. At the Inc. 5000 conference, held last month in Phoenix, three leaders who have recently gone through big growth spurts shared their tips. Shuman Ghosemajumder, co-founder and CEO of the AI-powered cybersecurity firm Reken joined Kelly Johnson, founder of the advertising agency ANOVA Digital, and Ian Yang, the founder and CEO of the custom lighting design firm Gantri spoke about how they anchored their companies’ core values amid big shifts and rapid growth.

    Take Stock of Your Company Culture

    For Yang, the growth of his company Gantri was a long time coming, but it has made great leaps in a relatively short span since the pandemic. The Bay Area business, which clocks about $14.1 million in annual revenue, started out as a sustainable lighting and design firm in 2016, and this year launched a platform for designers to use Gantri’s manufacturing capabilities — including 3D printing — to bring their own products to market.

    “The process of mass-producing designs is very costly and very time-consuming, and so a lot of great designs don’t get to be brought to market and a lot of really creative, really amazing designers don’t get a chance to share their own ideas and build businesses,” Yang explained.

    As the company was growing, he consulted talent coaches, who asked the founder, “‘What do you want? What company culture do you want the company to exhibit?’ And I described all these things, and they’re like, ‘Those things are not present in your current company.’ And that realization I think was huge.”

    But with the company’s growth and diversification, “there was a difference between what the company culture was and what I wanted to be,” Yang said. “What I wanted was to empower my team was the idea of ownership, accountability, but most importantly the safety to take risks. I think with any startup, if you’re not taking risks, if you are not feeling a bit stressed about the decision you’re making, then you are not going to succeed because you’re status quo.”

    Make Hiring Decisions That Support the Culture You Want

    When Ghosemajumder, a veteran of Google’s trust and safety group, founded Reken in 2024, his aim was “building a platform to protect against scams and fraud that are enabled by AI that allows cyber criminals to be far more sophisticated than they’ve ever been before,” he said.

    Ghosemajumder said he took lessons from his long career and kept them in mind when building out Reken. “You’ve probably heard the quote from management theorist Peter Drucker, that ‘culture eats strategy for breakfast,’ so whoever you hire in your organization, they’re going to dictate what your culture actually is regardless of what you tell them to do,“ he said. “You can’t hire a group of people who operate a certain way and then tell them, ‘We want you to operate in a completely different way, our culture.’ And so from the very beginning, one of the things that we did was we wrote down what we believe in as a company.”

    You want demonstrate that you’re an organization that wants to learn as much as possible, he said, because that is a conscious break from some of the know-it-all aspects of tech culture. “It actually takes a higher level of both competence and humility to say, ‘I’m open to new ideas and open to being challenged, and I want to be able to learn what’s required in this particular role,’ because that’s actually the thing that is most important in a startup.”

    Look for Employees With Entrepreneurial Spirit

    As ANOVA, an agency that specializes in lead generation for professional services clients such as law firms and financial advisers, hit an inflection point, Kelly Johnson suffered severe health problems in 2022. She realized that the company needed a full-time team, and also that it had to shed some smaller clients that took a disproportionate amount of time and effort, because they were holding back growth. Her days as a one-woman powerhouse were over, and that realization made all the difference as the agency took off.

    “It was at that moment that I realized I can’t do this anymore. I need to hire, I need to grow this. I’ve got a great opportunity,” that required focusing on growth clients, she said. “We just basically pivoted and focus on where we had the most experience and making the most income.”

    But building a high-growth oriented team required a certain amount of balance in the workplace and outside it, she said. “I want people to feel authentic at work,” she said. “We brought on an HR consultant that does all the pre-screening, she makes sure everyone fits together. We wanted people that have an entrepreneurial spirit and they feel like they can really own what they’re doing. [Now,] we have a great team.”

    Set the Right Tone for Your Business

    While each CEO’s path to scaling progressed differently, a common thread emerged in the discussion. When it’s time to pursue scale and growth, leaders need to take a thoughtful, hands-on approach to hiring people who can produce in a hands-off environment.

    “Organizations that are highly decentralized that are able to make decisions at the lowest possible level that are able to then reorganize themselves in order to be able to constantly shift their strategy as opposed to having to make every decision in a top down monolithic fashion,” Ghosemajumder said.

    The mix of control and autonomy creates the ideal blend for growth culture, which the Google vet pointed out is never a one-size-fits all template.

    “We have an infinite amount of LinkedIn, fortune cookie wisdom that we get on how to create culture and how to manage effectively,” he said. “And when you look at the most successful companies ever, the one thing that they have in common is that they weren’t blindly applying somebody else’s methodology to their organization.”

    The early-rate deadline for the 2026 Inc. Regionals Awards is Friday, November 14, at 11:59 p.m. PT. Apply now.

    [ad_2]

    Will Swarts

    Source link