Loyalty, Shmoyalty:
The Unwritten Contract between Employer and Employee
Column which ran in the
Listening
to an old Bob Seger song, Night Moves, I started thinking about what the
workplace was like in 1976, the year the album came out. Strikes me that
employers had a tacit understanding with their staff back then: do a good job
and we’ll take care of you until retirement.
Things
have changed pretty drastically in the interim. Nearly three decades of downsizing,
re-engineering and bottom-line fixation have left the old social contract in
shreds.
Not that
I yearn to resurrect a flawed past. Fact is, the thought of being tied to one
employer for life gives me the willies. Kind of like a marriage of convenience
for a tenuous slice of security.
Then
again, the constant uncertainty of today’s workplace is hardly an acceptable
alternative. At its worst, it’s led to disillusionment, suspicion, fear and
survivalism—as well as stress that’s promoted illness and a decrease in workplace
civility. Employees from the mailroom up to the CEO’s office have been
affected.
Workin'
on mysteries without any clues, workin' on our night moves.
Is there
hope for a better way to emerge?
Perhaps,
according to Victor Apa, President of Victor Apa and Associates, a Canada-wide
career transition firm. He tells me that first we have to change our concept of
what a job is. “Work today can be seen today as a series of projects. The
employer provides you with the necessary tools and perks, while you deliver
targeted results.”
Apa sees
great opportunity in this paradigm. “It favours people who have drive,
confidence, urgency, and a high dominance factor.”
Does
this mean that social Darwinism rules? Will only the fittest companies survive,
and only the most capable, devoted employees get hired?
Not
necessarily, in Apa’s view. He sees a shift away from employer paternalism
toward employee self-management. In other words, we have to look after our own
careers from now on. Progressive organizations understand the effect this has
on people and are trying to use appropriate motivators.
“Enlightened
employers are saying ‘Let's make sure we have right people in the right job,
based on fit, which includes competence, personality, interest in the work, and
values.’ If issues exist, managers try to determine if training, coaching or
re-alignment will help,” says Apa.
I tend
to agree that this ethos of self-reliance has some upsides. For one thing, it
forces us to think about what we truly want from work, instead of just going
with the flow. Unfortunately, it also diminishes our concept of loyalty and
makes it harder to relax and enjoy the fruits of our labour.
Yet
employees are not the only ones affected. Charles Grossner, co-author of “Get
Back To Work!” (Fitzhenry & Whiteside, 2002), points out that all sides are
feeling the impact.
“With
technology, the transfer rate of information has increased exponentially,
especially over last 10 years. Employees have readier access to listings of
alternate positions and salary data, while employers can search resumes
electronically and choose from a wider pool of candidates.”
By
continually eliminating staff, and by having employees leave voluntarily more
frequently, the corporate memory becomes eroded, and companies must constantly
be recruiting and training.
Therefore
“companies don’t get the full payoff from their people, and people don’t get
the full benefit of rising through ranks, receiving cross training, and
maturing within an organization,” explains Grossner.
The
irony is that employers have taught us to look after ourselves instead of
pledging allegiance to them directly, so when the economy is hopping--just when
companies need people most--we’re more likely to jump ship for a better offer.
Ain't
it funny how the night moves, when you just don't seem to have as much to lose.
Grossner,
President of PeopleFind Inc., a recruitment and outplacement firm in Markham,
predicts more of the same in the future. “The pace of change will continue to
increase. Even if you want to stay with one employer, five years will be
considered to be a substantial period.” The
trend toward outsourcing and contracting is accelerating this situation.
Apa has
a more sanguine outlook. He believes that managers will, by necessity, be
transformed into leaders—essentially moving from the authoritarian mode to
being galvanizers who are part of a team effort. In turn, employees will
benefit from a performance-driven culture that encourages recognition,
empowerment, and self-actualization by means of achievement.
Grossner
concurs, but adds that this can only be accomplished if processes for
self-development to achieve realistic career aspirations are put in place.
What’s
the upshot? As I see it, mergers and acquisitions, economic volatility,
globalization and the focus on short term profits mean that the unwritten
contract between employer and employee will become progressively self-serving.
For
employers, it’s “we’ll purchase your services and give you what you need to do
the job—so long as we require what you provide.” The employee’s mantra is more
like “we’ll provide services for a reasonable fee and produce for you
satisfactorily—until something better comes along.”
As Seger
sang, “I used her, she used me, but neither one cared…we were getting our
share.” The question is, how long
before either side concludes that their share is insufficient?