Employee engagement/ retention

During my first visit to one factory, I quickly noticed on a wall in the lobby a collection of cards with employee suggestions – normally a good sign of a facility’s commitment to continuous improvement and employee engagement. A closer look revealed the opposite – improvement ideas that were months and even quarters old without any response or follow up. While creating that program was a good idea, the lack of follow through likely discourages employees from contributing further suggestions. Unfortunately, that company is not alone. This all-too-common practice is highlighted in the article “Companies Often Solicit Employee Feedback but Seldom Act on It” (in the May-June 2024 issue of Harvard Business Review) which discusses a 2023 Gartner white paper “Employee Engagement: Close the Action Gap to Drive Business Outcomes” by Jen Priem. Employees want to help. In fact, “40% of survey respondents said they would rather have difficult processes fixed than receive more career development opportunities”. That interest is not always matched by a company’s efforts. Aside from the missed opportunities in quality, cost, efficiency, and safety improvements, this also negatively impacts employee engagement: “only 34% said they thought their companies would act on feedback they provide” so why would they take the time and effort to participate? Setting up an effective employee suggestion program is more than placing a box for suggestions or creating an internal software tool. To be successful, the company needs to dedicate management effort and commit to a timely, closed-loop initiative. A cross-functional management level team should be established to review the qualifying ideas. This does not need to be top management but should be leaders high enough such that they can approve and implement many ideas themselves and have ready access to higher level managers to discuss larger improvement suggestions.  A coordinator, perhaps someone from the quality department or in an administrative role, can be designated to facilitate the program – helping create the methods for employee suggestions, collecting the inputs, and maybe conducting a first level sort of ideas (the entire review team does not need to spend time on the suggestion to paint the bathroom a different color!) This team should meet frequently (perhaps monthly) to evaluate and prioritize the employee suggestions that were submitted since the last meeting. Plans to implement or investigate the most valuable ideas should be developed. Someone on the team should be designated as a sponsor of each such idea to obtain updates and ensure progress even if the responsibility for investigation or execution is handed over to a functional area leader. Often, a team of employees from the impacted area(s) will be created – this helps make use of their more detailed knowledge and improves buy-in to the solution. Whenever possible, the employee who suggested the improvement should be included on this implementation team. There are different ways to celebrate the improvement ideas that were selected for implementation – monetary and non-monetary awards, inclusion in the employee’s performance review, public recognition, plant competitions, etc. The choice will depend on the company’s and location’s culture. Communication is key to a successful employee suggestion program. Leadership should consistently share its enthusiasm for the improvement idea program and what type of ideas are desired (not that bathroom color suggestion!). Leaders can also show their support by attending events associated with this program. Regardless of whether a valid improvement suggestion was approved for further action or not, it is important that a member of the team (for example, the facilitator) always provides prompt feedback to the employee on the decision and why that was the determination. This closed loop aspect is essential if the firm wants to continue receiving, and benefit from, employee ideas. Are there other sources for great ideas beyond your employees? Stay tuned….   Steven Lustig is founder and CEO of Lustig Global Consulting and an experienced Supply Chain Executive.  He is a recognized thought leader in supply chain and risk mitigation, and serves on the Boards of Directors for Loh Medical and Atlanta Technology Angels.

“I should demote myself!” joked the head of sales. “It looks like I am better at selling than at managing a sales team.” We were looking at his team’s individual sales numbers. He was selling more when he was a regular salesperson than his whole team today. We too often promote the wrong person into a senior leadership position. The reason is: the promotion criteria we use are poor predictors of people’s leadership potential. How can you better identify potential senior leaders and avoid painful mistakes – so you can grow faster and with less pain? Why are we so bad at promoting the right people into leadership positions? We are all biased. We tend to overestimate specific traits we mistakenly believe indicate leadership potential. Common biases include: Past successes. Unfortunately prior performance is not a good predictor of leadership performance. 

Onboarding isn’t just about shaking hands on day one or drowning your new hires in an ocean of paperwork and procedural manuals. FIREPOWER Teams is here to help you find and grow the right team to fuel success and sustainable growth in your small business. Reach out to Maria Forbes and discover the potential of people-powered change in your organization.

Dealing with  COVID fatigue unites business owners. If that sounds strange to you, let me make my case. I’m not doing this to whine, but I want business owners who don’t have an existing support structure to know that they aren’t alone. I facilitate several peer groups of business owners. For decades, we’ve met monthly to discuss trends and issues in our businesses. It is typically a lively roundtable. Hiring, termination, customers, vendors, regulation, new initiatives, and finances present themselves at most, if not all meetings. The First Wave At the beginning of the pandemic, we increased our meeting frequency from monthly to weekly. It really helped with the news pummeling us every day. First, we had sanitation and control of infection. What should we do if an employee was diagnosed? What were the guidelines, or more accurately, the current guidelines regarding quarantine? How serious was this? Opinions ranged widely on the severity and need for action. Then came the lockdowns. Who decided that this was within the power of a mayor? Like so many regulations, it seemed to come without any discussion of the impact on small businesses. We never “blamed” the medical community. They were told to recommend the best way to slow the virus’ spread. They did. Our meetings became both strained and strange. We started living in two worlds. Some businesses were decimated, others were setting sales and profit records. The Light in the Tunnel Then came the relief bills. How did FFCRA work? Who has the poster? Will our employees all choose to go home at 2/3 pay? (Not very many did.) We traded policies and memos from HR advisors, CPAs, and law firms. Then the CARES act. BAM! $2 trillion flushed through the economy like a transfusion. We didn’t talk much about EIDL. The need to pay it back from PPP proceeds and running out of money early on focused us all on the Paycheck Protection Program. Of the 28 participants in the groups (myself included,) all 28 applied for and received PPP funds. We all shared application information and intelligence on which banks were handling it best. Again, we had concerns that the $600 unemployment bonus would dry up the recruiting market. It made things a bit more challenging, but not insurmountable. Most folks seem to prefer continuing employment. People who seek to milk the benefits to the last dollar aren’t the ones we wanted anyway. Of course, watching the collapse of the antiquated government infrastructure for unemployment may have influenced applicants as well. We traded information on remote working. How to keep employees engaged? Tips on contests, productivity tracking, and virtual technology. Those in essential industries never stopped working (see my post on 

Work from anywhere has been a necessity, an epithet, an obstacle, and an opportunity over the last 3 years. To paraphrase Aristotle’s axiom about Nature (“Horror Vacui”), business abhors a vacuum. Where one occurs, it is quickly filled. Work from anywhere started as a COVID-induced necessity. During the lockdowns of 2020-2021 (and longer in some places) we all had a crash course in video calling, VPNs, and virtual meetings. Employees quickly expanded the definition of anywhere. They tired of shunting the children off to a bedroom during conference calls, or using office-like backdrops to hide their kitchen cabinets. Soon they began changing their backgrounds to something more aspirational, like a mountain cabin or a scenic lake. From there it wasn’t much of a leap to make the mental shift from a make-believe environment to a physical one. Pretty soon employees were calling in from real mountain cabins. In many cases, they shifted to someplace where the cost of living was much lower than in their former metropolitan workspace. Work from Anywhere as an epithet and an obstacle As employees moved further afield from their office environment, bosses began to sound off. “We aren’t going to pay Los Angeles wages to someone who has a Boise cost of living,” was a commonly heard complaint.  Most put up with it because qualified help was getting harder to find. Hiring remotely was too hard a new skill to master. The complaints of employers grew louder as they began to ask employees to return to their former location of working activity. They made arguments about deteriorating corporate culture or a lack of mentoring opportunities. At the same time, stories surfaced about workers who were getting full-time paychecks from multiple employers, or who were “quiet quitting” by doing as little as possible. The “Great Resignation” forced many organizations to put up with it. If you wanted to keep employees, you needed to accommodate their demands. Then the work-from-anywhere poaching started. If an employee could do the job from a thousand miles away, why not just hire people from a thousand miles away? Now recruiters could dangle Los Angeles wages at candidates from Boise. Many employers saw work from anywhere as a curse costing them their best talent. Work from Anywhere as an Opportunity But as I said at the outset, business abhors a vacuum. Every action has a reaction. When the job can be done from anywhere, does that mean anywhere? If the higher cost of living centers can fill their needs by hiring people who are accustomed to earning less, why shouldn’t employers look at those candidates before the local talent? The Internet allows almost-instant communication across countries, what about across oceans? In the last few months, I’ve worked with employers who are hiring accountants in India, staffing recruiters in the Philippines, programmers in Argentina, support techs in Colombia, and screening nurses in Nicaragua.  None of these employers are multinationals. Each one fits the SBA’s definition of a small business. Their new employees are educated, English speaking, have the same hours as the employer, and are thrilled for the opportunity. Some are hired directly through a local placement agency. Others work for an organization in their home country that makes them exclusive to the client and promises to replace them if needed. Most of the wages appear to be about 50% more than the same job would pay in the country of residence, and roughly half of what the position in the U.S. would cost. Business has once again filled a vacuum. I wonder what is next?   This article was originally published by John F. Dini, CBEC, CExP, CEPA on

The national trend to protect temporary Laborers continues. This past August, Illinois passed legislation that expanded its Day and Temporary Labor Services Act. The amendment became effective on August 4, 2023 (immediately upon its signing). The Trend New Jersey, California, and Illinois have all passed laws that provide protections to temporary Laborers. Among the varied purported goals of these statutes, all the laws have one thing in common: they disincentivize temporary work arrangements in favor of long-term employment options. The Illinois Day and Temporary Labor Services Act The Illinois Day and Temporary Labor Services Act (the “Act”), which applies to all temporary laborers except for those in clerical or professional roles (“Laborers”), originally passed over twenty years ago. Since then, the Act has undergone a series of amendments that have slowly expanded the Act’s reach. This most recent amendment takes another large step towards removing the pay advantage of using temps. The Act grants “Day or Temporary Laborer[s]” a series of rights that limit the pay advantages of using temps and increase the administrative burden of using temps. Some of those rights are new and some are old. Here are the key provisions:   Employment Notices (eff. 6/1/18) When a day and temporary labor service agency (the “Agency”) sends Laborers to jobs, they must give each Laborer a statement with specific information. This includes the Laborer’s name, details about the job (such as their function and what equipment is needed), the wages offered, the job location, transportation terms, and whether meals or equipment are provided. If a Laborer is on the same job for more than one day, the Agency only needs to provide this information on the first day or if there are changes. If a Laborer is not assigned a job for the day, upon request the Agency must provide a confirmation, signed by the Agency, stating that the Laborer sought work.   Right to Refuse Assignment to a Labor Dispute (eff. 7/1/2023) An Agency cannot send a Laborer to a place where there is a strike, lockout, or other labor dispute unless they give the Laborer written notice in a language the Laborer understands. This statement must inform the Laborer about the labor dispute and let them know they have the right to refuse the job placement without any negative consequences. If the Agency fails to provide this information, it is considered a violation, and each missing piece of information at each required time is a separate violation. This means violations (and the penalties they carry) can quickly rack up. If the Agency claims to have provided the notice electronically, they must prove it if there is a dispute.   Recordkeeping Requirements (eff. 1/1/2006) This statute requires Agencies to keep certain records when they send Laborers to jobs. Here is a breakdown: Client Information – the Agency must keep details of the third-party clients (companies where Laborers are sent) including names, addresses, phone numbers, and transaction dates. Laborer Information – for each Laborer, the Agency needs to record their name, address, work location, type of work, hours worked, hourly pay rate, and the date they were sent. The third-party client must provide this information to the Agency within 7 days after the work week ends. Transaction Details – the Agency should document the names and titles of individuals at the client’s place of business responsible for the transaction. Qualifications and Contracts – any specific qualifications requested by the client for Laborers, along with copies of contracts and invoices, should be kept on record. Employment Notices and Deductions – copies of employment notices provided to Laborers, and details of deductions from a Laborer’s pay for transportation, food, equipment, taxes, and other expenses must be maintained. Equipment and Meal Costs – the actual cost of equipment or meals charged to a Laborer must be verified and recorded. Demographic Information – the Agency needs to record the race and gender of each Laborer, as provided by the Laborer. Additional Requirements – any other information required by the Department of Labor’s (“Department”) rules should also be documented. The Agency must keep these records for 3 years and allow the Department to inspect them during business hours. Certain records must be available for review or copying by Laborers within 5 days of a written request.   Meals (eff. 8/14/1999) An Agency and a third-party client can only charge for meals if the following conditions are met: The Laborer ate the meal; The charge of the meal is capped at the actual cost of the meal; and The purchase of the meal is not a condition of employment. In other words, the Laborer must be able to freely turn down the meal.   Transportation (eff. 1/1/2006) An Agency that provides transportation for Laborers must meet the following requirements. These requirements do NOT apply if the Laborers transport themselves to the work location, whether they take their own car, public transportation, or any other self-arranged transportation. No Fees for Transportation – the Agency, client, or anyone involved cannot charge Laborers for transportation to or from the work site. Responsibility for Transportation – the Agency is responsible for the behavior of anyone transporting a Laborer, except in specific cases like public transportation, personal vehicles, or if the Laborer chooses the transport. Safe Vehicles – if the Agency provides transportation, the vehicles must be safe and meet legal requirements. Unsafe vehicles cannot be used unless they belong to public transportation, a common carrier, the Laborer, or a Laborer’s carpool vehicle. Referrals for Transportation – the Agency can only refer Laborers to transportation if the transportation is public transportation or free transportation services. An Agency can recommend carpooling, but if the Agency also discusses costs of carpooling, it is considered an illegal referral. Driver Requirements – drivers must have a valid license, and the vehicle must have proper insurance as per state rules. Violations are reported to law enforcement. Seat and Safety Belt Requirement – vehicles used for transporting Laborers must have a seat and safety belt for each passenger. Violations are reported to authorities. Return Transportation – if the Agency provides transportation to the worksite, they must also provide a way back to the starting point, unless the Laborer agrees to an alternative location in advance.   Equipment (eff. 8/14/1999) For any safety equipment, clothing, accessories, or any other items required for working, either by law, custom, or as a requirement of the third-party client, the Agency or the third-party client may charge the Laborer the market value of the item if the Laborer fails to return such items to the third party client or the Agency.   Wage Payment and Notice (eff. 1/1/2006) This statute has several requirements for wage payment to Laborers. Those requirements are highlighted below. Detailed Pay Statements – when Laborers are paid, the Agency must give a detailed statement on the paycheck stub or an approved form. It should include the client’s name, work hours, pay rate, total earnings, deductions (for such things as transportation or food), and any additional information required by the Department. Annual Earnings Summary – agencies must provide Laborers with an annual summary of earnings by February 1 of each year, and they need to inform Laborers about this at each payment or post a notice. Flexible Payment Schedule – Laborers can direct the Agency to hold daily wages and pay them weekly, bi-weekly, or semi-monthly. Payments must be in a negotiable form, and Laborers must be notified of their payment options. No Fees for Cashing Checks – the Agency can’t charge Laborers for cashing their paychecks. No Charges for Checks or Background Checks – the Agency or client cannot charge Laborers for checks or any background checks, including criminal background checks or drug tests. Minimum Wage and Deductions – Laborers must be paid at least the stated wage rate, and deductions for meals, equipment, and transportation should not make their hourly wage fall below the state or federal minimum wage. Payment for Unutilized Time – if a Laborer is contracted but not used by the client, the Agency must pay for a minimum of 4 hours of work. If the Laborer is assigned to another location during the same shift, they must be paid for a minimum of two extra hours of pay. Client Payment Responsibilities – clients must pay wages and related taxes to the Agency according to the agreed terms. Failure to comply results in penalties. The Department reviews complaints and checks records to ensure proper payment to the Agency and the Laborer.   Permanent Placement Restrictions (eff. 6/1/2018) Agencies have an affirmative duty to help place Laborers in permanent positions with a client when the client informs the Agency of its desire to hire a permanent employee if the permanent employee is being hired for the job the Laborer performs. Additionally, Agencies cannot restrict the rights of Laborers to accept permanent position with clients. Agencies may charge a placement fee, which is limited to: the equivalent of the total daily commission rate the Agency would have received over a 60-day period, reduced by the equivalent of the daily commission rate the Agency would have received for each day the Laborer has performed work for the Agency in the preceding 12 months.   Public Access Area (eff. 8/14/1999) The Agency must have a public access area of its office that has ample seating, restrooms, and water. All mandated postings must be posted in the public access area.   Equal Pay (eff. 7/1/2023) Most controversially, the most recent amendments require Agencies to pay Laborers assigned to a client for more than 90 days to be paid at least as much as the lowest-paid full time employee doing similar work and with similar seniority at the Client’s company. If there is no direct comparison at the company, then the comparison is made with the lowest-paid employee at the Client company who has similar seniority. Additionally, Laborers assigned for more than 90 days must receive the same benefits as the full-time employee counterparts. The staffing Agency has the option to pay the equivalent of benefits in cash instead of providing actual benefits. If the temporary Laborer has been with a company for more than 90 days, the company must provide necessary information about job duties, pay, and benefits of their regular employees when asked by the staffing Agency. If the company fails to provide this information, it is considered a violation.   Registration Requirements (1/1/2006) Agencies must register with the Department. In addition, third-party clients must verify that any Agency they use is registered. The Department will maintain a website accessible to the public that will state whether an Agency is registered.   Conclusion There is nationwide push to turn temporary Laborers into full-time employees. There is also a push to remove the pay advantages of hiring temps rather than regular employees. As a result, laws like this one are likely to continue popping up across the country. Providers and utilizers of temporary Laborers should keep their eyes peeled. If you are in Illinois and utilize temporary Laborers, you should seek competent counsel to help you navigate the new amendments to this law. Brody and Associates regularly advises management on complying with the latest local, state, and federal employment laws. If we can be of assistance in this area, please contact us at info@brodyandassociates.com or 203.454.0560

Since the pandemic, many companies have negotiated new rhythms for workplace productivity. While a number of companies are fully “back at the office,” there are many others that remain committed to remote work, or to allowing their employees some flexibility via a hybrid work option. Remote work certainly offers many perks, and studies have shown that many employees prefer the flexibility that it provides. However, when you have employees who don’t work in the same physical space together, goals related to team building or company culture can be more challenging to achieve. Here are a few tips to keep in mind as you seek to engage remote employees in your company culture. Keeping Remote Employees Engaged with Your Culture Have your CEO or primary leader host a regular “coffee hour.” This is an approach that many companies have found incredibly effective. Schedule a regular, virtual “coffee hour” once every week or two, for maybe 30-minute blocks. Your CEO or primary leader should host this event, taking the time to introduce new employees, to share big-picture strategic updates, and to take questions from team members. This can be a great way to ensure that remote employees feel like they are in the loop. Ensure that company leaders are highly visible. It’s important for managers, supervisors, and other primary decision-makers to lead by example, even in a remote or hybrid environment. That means turning cameras on during Zoom meetings, promptly responding to instant messaging, and being intentional about reaching out to check in on employees. Provide ways for remote employees to receive ongoing professional development. Here’s where HR can play a direct and active role in engaging remote employees. Develop online learning opportunities that can allow all employees to cultivate new skills, without the need to travel to a workshop or seminar. Also ensure protocols are in place to recognize employees who complete these programs, or who have other notable workplace achievements. Allow remote employees to take the lead. Here’s a tactic that’s simple yet incredibly effective. Nothing helps employees feel invested in an institution or a culture like placing them in charge of a project or a team. Engage remote employees by providing them with opportunities for leadership and autonomy. Prioritize one-on-ones. As we’ve noted before, 

I have a highly intelligent and successful ‘left brained’ colleague and friend who ‘gets it’ when it comes to understanding that data and fact sheets do not communicate meaning. This software developer, entrepreneur, certified project management professional, author, award-winning speaker and CIO of a medical practice knows that all the data in the world will not convey key messages, prompt engagement, nor influence behavior. I’m sharing his words and hope you find them of value, as do I. I’d love to hear your thoughts! “What is the value of collecting and analyzing data if it doesn’t change thinking or behavior? Too often we settle for data dumps that give the “illusion of understanding.” Why? Because that is how we were taught. And the results can be very costly, and in the case of the Challenger Disaster, even deadly. For the first time in human history we can lift the veil of illusion and see into a working brain. Leverage new insights offered by neuroscience and cognitive psychology to make your presentations more effective, efficient and reliable. It’s not the data that convinces us, it’s how we feel about the data that convinces us.”

I’m having a lot of client dialogue on Cash Balance Plans (CBPs).  A CBP is the third sleeve of a Retirement Plan – following the standard 401k and Profit Sharing sleeves of traditional plans.  The contribution limits are substantial allowing participants the ability to contribute significant $s pretax and to grow those contributions tax deferred. The plan is particularly attractive to organizations that are top heavy with highly-compensated employees or partners, but can also be relevant for sole proprietors.  Contact me if you would like to learn more.  michael.schodrof@ubs.com    

You’ve probably heard the phrase “quiet quitting,” which has been one of the most-discussed topics in business and HR circles this year. Just in case you haven’t, quiet quitting refers to a phenomenon in which employees stop making any effort to go above and beyond their job description, instead coasting by on the bare minimum of effort. The phrase was initially used on social media, but over the past few months has found widespread acceptance among team leaders and managers, who recognize that this trend is very real and likely rampant. But what does the data show us about quiet quitting? How common is it? Is it likely to improve? And most importantly, what can employers and HR leaders do in response? Let’s dig into some numbers to find helpful answers. How Common is Quiet Quitting? A 

Popular

What's Trending

As an advisor, your role is to help clients prepare to exit their business, yet many people resist thinking about the future because it involves so many unknowns, decisions, and choices.  And emotions typically complicate matters further, sometimes derailing the process altogether.  Here are some questions that can help you establish rapport with your clients, learn more about their concerns, and move the conversation forward. How are you feeling about your work/profession/business these days? Which aspects of work are you still enjoying, and which are you ready to leave behind? Do you envision retiring from work at some point, or are you contemplating an encore career? What part of planning for your future feels most challenging? How do you imagine your life in retirement will be different from how it is now? What process are you using to figure out what you’ll do next after you retire? What would you like to see happen with your business long term? What options have you considered for the transfer of your business? What steps have you taken to make your business more attractive to a potential buyer? What are your concerns about transitioning your firm to new ownership? What would be your ideal scenario for transitioning out of your company? What topic(s) have we touched on today that we should put on our agenda to revisit? So, what happens after you pose a few of these questions and your clients open up about emotional matters?  Remember, the most helpful thing you can do is to listen attentively.  You’ve created a valuable opportunity for them to talk about things they may not share with other advisors.   Here are some tips for managing the conversation when clients raise emotionally loaded topics: Don’t try to “fix things” by immediately offering suggestions. Doing so sends the message that you’re uncomfortable hearing their concern.  You can offer suggestions but do so later. Don’t say anything that conveys the message that their feeling or concern is unwarranted. “There’s really no need to feel that way” or “I’m sure it will be just fine” may sound reassuring to you but could be experienced as dismissive by your client. Don’t immediately offer a logical counterpoint to your client’s emotion. Remember, feelings don’t have to make sense; they’re “as is”.  Put another way, if feelings made sense, they would be thoughts. People report concerns and characterize their feelings differently from one another, so it’s in your best interest to seek amplification and clarification by inquiring as follows . . . “I want to make sure that I understand exactly what you mean by ___.  Can you tell me more?” “People sometimes mean slightly different things when they talk about ___.  What does ___ mean for you?” “Before I suggest anything, I’d like to learn more about it from your perspective.” It’s possible that during early conversations your client may hint at mixed feelings about exiting their business.  That’s perfectly normal, but you need to bring it out into the open.  You want to foster an atmosphere such that your client keeps you apprised about where they’re at.  If they keep their ambivalence to themselves, it has greater potential to blindside you and complicate the sale.  You can say: “In my experience, it’s normal to have some mixed emotions about selling.  Those thoughts may not always be top of mind, but when they do pop up let’s be sure to talk about them.  Believe it or not, they can help inform our process and alert us to aspects of the sale that are important to you.” You may also find that your client is overly risk averse.  If so, consider saying the following: “Our work together won’t be comprehensive if we only plan for what could go wrong.  That’s just half the equation.  It’s fine to be conservative and err on the side of caution, but to be truly realistic we should also consider a range of possibilities both good and bad.”   Author’s Note:  The concepts in this article are derived from Robert Leahy’s book, Overcoming Resistance in Cognitive Therapy.  New York:  Guilford

For five decades, the southern United States has been an attractive location for automakers to open plants thanks to generous tax breaks and cheaper, non-union labor. However, after decades of failing to unionize automakers in the South, the United Auto Workers dealt a serious blow to that model by winning a landslide union victory at Volkswagen. In an effort to fight back, three southern states have gotten creative: they passed laws barring companies from receiving state grants, loans and tax incentives if the company voluntarily recognizes a union or voluntarily provides unions with employee information. The laws also allow the government to claw back incentive payments after they were made. While these laws are very similar, each law has unique nuances. If you are in an impacted state, you should seek local counsel. In 2023, Tennessee was the first state to pass such a law. This year, Georgia and Alabama followed suit. So why this push? In 2023, the American Legislative Exchange Council (“ALEC”), a nonprofit organization of conservative state legislators and private sector representatives who draft and share model legislation for distribution among state governments, adopted Tennessee’s law as model legislation. In fact, the primary sponsor of Tennessee’s bill was recognized as an ALEC Policy Champion in March 2023. ALEC’s push comes as voluntary recognition of unions gains popularity as an alternative to fighting unions. We recently saw this with the high-profile Ben & Jerry’s voluntary recognition. Will this Southern strategy work to push back against growing union successes? Time will tell. Brody and Associates regularly advises its clients on all labor management issues, including union-related matters, and provides union-free training.  If we can be of assistance in this area, please contact us at info@brodyandassociates.com or 203.454.0560.  

I once had the thrill of interviewing Jerry West on management. He was “The Logo” for the NBA, although back then they didn’t advertise him as such. Only the Laker followers knew for sure. In 1989 the “Showtime” Lakers were coming off back-to-back championships.  Pat Riley was a year away from his first of three Coach of the Year awards. 

Can you Offer Too Many SKUs to Your Customers? The short answer is YES! A SKU, or Stock Keeping Unit, defines each different product version that you sell and keep inventory of.  There may be different SKUs of the same overall item based on size, color, capacity (think computer or cellphone memory), features, and many other parameters.  For build to forecast businesses, that number of variations can quickly explode and become difficult to manage. Your customers are busy and want ordering simplified. Of course, they may need (or want) more than one variation of a product. That is reasonable and a common aspect of business – one size does not fit all! But there is a point where too offering too many SKUs is not value added either for your customer or your business.  In his April 30, 2013 article “Successful Retailers Learn That Fewer Choices Trigger More Sales” in Forbes, Carmine Gallo discusses his experience and a study about “choice overload” by other authors. He writes about a retailer that “has discovered that giving a customer more than three choices at one time actually overwhelms customers and makes them frustrated…when the customer is faced with too many choices at once, it leaves the customer confused and less likely to buy from any of the choices!” Choice overload is well-documented in consumer studies but can apply in B2B as well. While customer satisfaction is important, another key concern is the often-hidden costs associated with a business offering and managing a large number of SKUs for a given product type. These costs include holding inventory, S&OP (Sales and Operations Planning) team time, small production runs, and scrapping inventory. Holding inventory takes up space, which may come with a cost or utilize racks that could be used for other products. Scheduled inventory counts take up employee time and may result in blackout periods when the warehouse is not shipping product.  The more SKUs there are, including extra SKUS, the greater the potential impact. The Sales team’s forecasting and the Operations team’s purchasing reviews that are part of the S&OP process can occupy more of their valuable time if they need to consider these times. If small orders or forecasts require a new production run, this could be costly and create excess inventory. Whether from this new production or past builds, eventually it will make sense to write off and scrap old inventory, another cost impact to the company. How do you know which SKUs to focus on if you wish to look at reducing your total number of SKUs? Start by examining SKUs that have: Low historic sales over a period of time Small variations between SKUs that customers do not value Older technology or model when newer option SKUs are available This requires a true partnership between Sales and Operations. It starts with educating both teams on the costs involved – neither group may be aware of the money and time impact to the company. Periodic (such as quarterly) reviews of SKUs that meet the above descriptions should become a fixed part of the calendar. A review of the data and other available for sale options should result in the identification of SKUs which may not be needed. At that point, it is helpful to have a customer friendly EOL (End of Life) Notice process by which you inform customers of last time buy requirements for this SKU and alternates available. It is usually best to provide some time for the last time buy in the interest of customer satisfaction, although that may not always be necessary. At a company that designed and sold electronics, a robust SKU rationalization process was implemented to help address these issues. A representative from the Operations team analyzed SKUs that met a version of the above criteria and suggested candidates for the EOL process. Next, a member of the Sales team reviewed them and, where appropriate, issued product change or EOL notices to customers, providing them time for last time buy orders when needed. These steps helped reduce the work involved in maintaining these SKUs while not leading to any customer complaints. A final note – sometimes it makes sense to continue offering low selling SKUs – to support customers buying other items (hopefully in larger quantities). It may be worthwhile to encourage them to keep coming back to you for all of their product needs and this may be a way to accomplish that. But it helps to understand that this is truly the case and not assume that this customer would not be equally happy with another, more popular, SKU.   Steven Lustig is founder and CEO of Lustig Global Consulting and an experienced Supply Chain Executive.  He is a recognized thought leader in supply chain and risk mitigation, and serves on the Boards of Directors for Loh Medical and Atlanta Technology Angels.

When it comes to careers, business owners are a minority of the population. In conversations this week, I mentioned the statistics several times, and each owner I was discussing it with was surprised that they had so few peers. According to the Small Business Administration (SBA), there are over 33,000,000 businesses in the US. Let’s discount those with zero employees. Many are shell companies or real estate holding entities. Also, those with fewer than 5 employees, true “Mom and Pop” businesses, are hard to distinguish from a job. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Association, lists businesses with 5 to 99 employees at about 3,300,000, and 123,000 have 100 to 500 employees (the SBA’s largest “small business” classification.) Overall, that means about 1% of the country are private employers. Owners are a small minority, a very small minority, of the population. Even if we only count working adults (161,000,000) business owners represent only a little more than 2% of that population. So What? Where am I going with this, and how does it relate to our recent discussions of purpose in business exit planning? It’s an important issue to consider when discussing an owner’s identity after transition. Whether or not individual owners know the statistics of their “rare species” status in society, they instinctively understand that they are different. They are identified with their owner status in every aspect of their business and personal life. At a social event, when asked “What do you do?” they will often respond “I own a business.” It’s an immediate differentiator from describing a job. “I am a carpenter.” or “I work in systems engineering,” describes a function. “I am a business owner” describes a life role. When asked for further information, the owner frequently replies in the Imperial first person plural. “We build multi-family housing,” is never mistaken for a personal role in the company. No one takes that answer to mean that the speaker swings a hammer all day. Owners are a Minority We process much of our information subconsciously. If a man enters a business gathering, for example, and the others in the room are 75% female, he will know instinctively, without consciously counting, that this business meeting or organization is different from others he attends. Similarly, business owners accept their minority status without thinking about it. They expect that the vast majority of the people they meet socially, who attend their church, or who have kids that play sports with theirs, work for someone else. There are places where owners congregate, but otherwise, they don’t expect to meet many other owners in the normal course of daily activity. This can be an issue after they exit the business. You see, telling people “I’m retired” has no distinction. Roughly 98% of the other people who say that never built an organization. They didn’t take the same risks. Others didn’t deal with the same broad variety of issues and challenges. Most didn’t have to personally live with the impact of every daily decision they made, or watch others suffer the consequences of their bad calls. That is why so many former owners suffer from a lack of identity after they leave. Subconsciously, they expect to stand out from the other 98%. “I’m retired” carries no such distinction.       This article was originally published by John F. Dini, CBEC, CExP, CEPA on

Previous
Next

Explore the Knowledge Exchange

Search