SOUTH AFRICA'S most widely distributed & read INDEPENDENT HUMAN RESOURCE PUBLICATION
|
|
| Equity-Skills
News & Views SOUTH AFRICA'S most widely distributed & read INDEPENDENT HUMAN RESOURCE PUBLICATION
|
|
|
| Equity Skills News & Views Volume 3, Issue 19, November 01, 2004 Registered as an electronic newspaper: ISSN 1684-5722 In This edition 1. The Challenges Of Paradigmatic Change Jeff Sacht: Publisher-editor 'A MUST TO PRINT & READ' 30,000+ AND STILL GROWING! ------------------------------------ LATEST RELEASE: MOVING HR INTO LINE e-TOOLKIT ------------------------------------ Stop talking about becoming a Line Partner. Start today, and master the practices required to reposition and transform your HR function with this tried and tested toolkit developed for the highly acclaimed workshop "Moving HR Into Line For The New Economy". The e-Toolkit is now available as an electronic download. The kit consists of a detailed 125 page manual, a project workbook, & 8 PowerPoint slide shows. Contact Jeff Sacht on jeffs@worldonline.co.za or call 082 4561049 for a preview pack and pricing details. Don't delay start today with your HR top team for the price of one download. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. The Challenges Of Paradigmatic Change* By Jonathan Byrnes who can be contactd at ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Introduction I recently received an e-mail from a former student who is working on changing the supply chain of a major company. She noted that, to her surprise, the "hard" issues are relatively easy to solve, but the "soft" issues are the hardest to overcome. What did she mean? My correspondent was involved in trying to reframe her company's basic business practices. She was finding that defining a new system for linking the company with its vendors was an intellectually challenging, but solvable, problem. The real difficulty lay in getting the managers involved to change their longstanding way of doing business, and accept the new system. Several years ago, General Electric completed an important internal study in which it analyzed a number of projects, and related return on investment to project size. It found that really large investments had much higher returns than smaller investments. It turned out the reason was that the larger projects created fundamental improvements in ways of doing business, producing paradigmatic change. On the other hand, the smaller projects yielded respectable but lower returns, as managers invested in "tuning up" their existing business processes, resulting in only incremental change. This led GE's top management to initiate a culture shift that challenged managers who asked for capital for particular projects to return in a few weeks with a proposal to spend twice as much to really change and improve their businesses. 2. Paradigmatic change Paradigmatic change is very important in business. It has the potential to create major new value and to renew a company, but it is very difficult to accomplish in the absence of a business crisis. Managing paradigmatic change is fundamentally different from managing incremental improvements to the existing business. When I am asked for material to read on managing paradigmatic change, I respond with a very unlikely source: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, by the late Thomas Kuhn. This book is a staple at the doctoral level in business schools, but it rarely appears on airport bookshelves, and it is not about business at all. This book grew out of Kuhn's research on the history of science. Before Kuhn's work, the prevailing view of knowledge building in science was that it was a linear process centered on the so-called "scientific method." According to the traditional view of this process, scientists posit hypotheses, test them, and in this way, build knowledge. However, when Kuhn looked closely at what actually happened, he found that this could not be further from the truth. What Kuhn found in science plays out in business every day. Instead, Kuhn found that knowledge building in science was a process that was marked by occasional great lurches forward. In fact, most science took place within the context of a broad, tacit, explanatory framework that he called a "paradigm." The Aristotelian system that theorized that the sun revolved around the earth is an example of a paradigm. Within a paradigm, science is determined in a way that is consistent with the paradigm. The experiments that count as useful are the ones that support the paradigm, and this typically involves refining and extending it. Kuhn calls this "normal science." The community of scientists forms a culture around the paradigm. They reject experiments and ostracize experimenters who are at odds with it. A prime example is Galileo, who bucked the existing paradigm and narrowly escaped with his life. After a period of time, experimental evidence begins to show that the prevailing paradigm is insufficient. Kuhn calls these "anomalies." What happens? The evidence is ignored, and the community of scientists goes along as if nothing had happened. Over time, more and more evidence accumulates, and still it is ignored. Finally, a scientist will propose a comprehensive new paradigm. This new theoretical framework will be accepted only if it fully explains both everything that the old paradigm explained as well as the anomalies. Moreover, the new paradigm must specify enough detail to be useful as a guide to normal science. Even then, the process of change is profoundly political, not logical, with more open-minded scientists gravitating toward the new paradigm, while others continue to cling to the old. This is what happened when Copernicus's paradigm supplanted Aristotle's, and when Einstein's supplanted Newton's. This is paradigmatic change. Kuhn relates the change process blow by blow. 3. Lessons from scientific revolutions What Kuhn found in science plays out in business every day. A manager seeking to create paradigmatic change, whether in market focus or vendor integration or manufacturing process, will hit a wall of "the way we do business," that is analogous to Kuhn's paradigm. As in Kuhn's process, simply showing evidence that a fundamentally different way of doing business would provide higher returns will not be sufficient to motivate paradigmatic change unless a dire crisis is clearly imminent. It will be ignored much as Kuhn's anomalies were ignored. Consider the origin of Dell's famous make-to-order system. (See my column, "Dell Manages Profitability, Not Inventory.") Dell's spectacularly successful new business system did not grow out of a whiteboard session showing such high prospective returns that the company was convinced to change its business. In fact, Dell had produced a very unsuccessful PC model and had lost so much money it was on the verge of running out of cash. The only way to raise money to keep the company alive was to liquidate all inventory as soon as possible. The operating officers were ordered to find a way to run the company without inventory. In the process of complying with this seemingly impossible task, they developed the now-famous make-to-order system. The key point is that in the absence of a life-threatening crisis, the management team surely would have rejected the new system out of hand. 4. Change before crisis How then can a manager create paradigmatic change before crisis? Kuhn's observations, coupled with the experience of many businesses, suggest three key points of leverage. First, make a comprehensive case for upcoming disaster if paradigmatic change does not take place. It is not sufficient to provide evidence that the old business practices are not working well, or that an alternative would produce better returns. There must be a strong case that there is no choice but to change, and that the clock is ticking. Second, develop a comprehensive, concrete specification of the new paradigm. People won't change current practices based on an abstraction. The new paradigm must be specific enough to guide the day-to-day actions that must take place within it, along with a feasible pathway of change. Here, showcase projects are particularly valuable. A showcase is a demonstration of a new way of doing business without a previous commitment to accept the change. For example, early in the development of the first vendor-managed inventory system in the hospital supply industry, a showcase system was set up in a small Canadian regional hospital. (See "Profit from Customer Operating Partnerships.") This concrete working example provided enormously powerful evidence that the new system was feasible. This small hospital became the most frequently-visited hospital in North America, as hospital CEOs from all over came up to "kick the tires." Similarly, a forward-thinking auto parts distributor maintains a policy of constant experimentation. The company's management always tries new ways of doing business on one or another of its hundreds of stores. When an experiment is successful, the practice is rapidly spread; when it is not, another experiment quickly takes its place. In all, not more than a tenth of a percent of the business is at risk at any one time, yet this process allows the company to innovate extremely rapidly and effectively. Third, be patient and wait until the time is right. Paradigmatic change requires a unique set of conditions. Sometimes, the organization will reject the change several times before a critical mass of managers finally recognizes the need for change and the utility of the new paradigm. Focus on winning the war and not every battle. 5. Lessons for top managers Top managers have an extremely important role to play in creating paradigmatic change. They can take measures to make their companies' cultures much more change-friendly. By encouraging showcases and experimentation, rather than rigid adherence to standard practices, they can accelerate innovation. Organizational culture tends to reflect the actions and attitudes of the leaders. By being open-minded about the need to experiment with fundamentally new ways of doing business, and by viewing small setbacks as learning and not failure, top managers can condition their company's culture to respond positively to paradigmatic change. A company's most important asset is a management team inclined to learn quickly by thinking and doing, embedded in an open-minded culture. In the long run, this is the best way for insightful top managers to ensure their companies' success. * Reprinted under license agreement with Working Knowledge HBS ------------------------------------ PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT e-TOOLKIT ------------------------------------ The e-Toolkit takes the 'theory' and 'jargon' out of Performance Management. The kit contains all you need - a comprehensive set of line manager friendly policies, procedures, and paperwork. The e- manual has been developed in South Africa by South African Legal and HR professionals for companies to meet the requirements of the key labour Acts that stress the importance of fair & developmental people management practices. For a preview click on: http://www.workinfo.com/mall/pms.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. SAQA Accredits The SABPP For Skill Development Facilitator (SDF) Unit Standards By Huma van Rensburg, CEO SABPP who can be contacted at www.sabpp.co.za ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) hereby notifies the public that it intends to extend the accreditation of the South African Board for Personnel Practice (SABPP) to include the following unit standards, which are registered on the National Qualifications Framework. 1. Conduct skills development administration in an organization - level 4. 2. Advise on the establishment and implementation of a quality management system for skills development practices in an organization - level 5. 3. Coordinate planned skills development interventions in an organization - level 5. 4. Develop an organisational training and development plan - level 5. 5. Promote a learning culture in an organization - level 5. 6. Advise on the alignment of skills development objectives and practices with strategic objectives in an orgasnisation - level 6. 7. Conduct an analysis to determine outcomes of learning for skills development and other purposes - level 6. In granting the Extension of Accreditation to the South African Board of Personnel Practice (SABPP), specific attention is drawn to the NQF principle of Access, and accreditation is therefore subject to and dependent on the following: 1. The SABPP should not place any restrictions and/or pre-requisites, which inhibits access of learners to these unit standards. 2. The SABPP should not impose or embark on any form of Board of Personnel Practice registration for learners, successful candidates or accredited providers, as far as these unit standards are concerned. The accreditation will be effective for the duration of the Accreditation of the South African Board for Personnel Practice (SABPP) in terms of Section 2 (1) of the Education and Training Quality Assurance Regulations, number R1127 of 1998. Objections to the extension of accreditation must be lodged with the Executive Officer of SAQA by the 9th of December 2004. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. Managing the Human Aspects of Organizational Change: Installation vs. Realization* By Conner Partners who can be contacted at www.connerpartners.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Creating Competitive Advantage Companies that achieve long-term success are those that are able to develop and maintain competitive advantage. The challenge, of course, is that today's competitive advantage becomes tomorrow's minimum level of acceptable performance. Unique products, decreased time to market, high quality, and excellent customer service each, at various times, provided competitive advantage-and competitors quickly replicated each. In recent years, a new arena for competitive advantage has begun to emerge-the ability of organizations to deliver on their promises. There is a wide and growing gap that exists between the rhetoric of today's leaders and the results achieved from the many initiatives they announce. It's hard to keep up with the number of innovative business solutions, new technologies, and various other strategic endeavors that are postured as vital to organizational success. Yet few of these initiatives ever achieve anything close to what people were led to believe would happen. Let's explore what's behind this breach between "intent" and "results." Common Implementation Challenges Most organizations do a relatively good job of figuring out what must be done to solve their problems or exploit their opportunities. The difficulty is that the vast majority just doesn't implement these solutions very well. They plan the proper courses of action for the circumstances they face, but the reality of actually fulfilling their ambitions is a task that often proves beyond their reach. The problem is this: Most organizations unwittingly apply their resources toward installing new solutions rather than realizing the anticipated benefits. Installation occurs when a new solution (merger, reorganization, updated processes, etc.) is introduced to the organization. The sequence of events may include announcing the project, providing new equipment or software, training, or a host of other related activities. Realization, however, is achieved when the organization goes beyond just deploying the change and reaps the full business benefits that were anticipated when the resources were allocated to pursue the initiative. Realization has become a major differentiator because one of the crucial issues facing businesses today isn't what strategy or solution to put in place, but rather how to implement these endeavors in such a way that they have their intended impact. In volatile markets, leaders can't afford to risk their organization's future on important strategies and projects that are simply "installed." Today, success also depends on being able to ensure that the promised benefits are delivered. 2. Moments of Truth All too often, executives feel like they have determined the right thing to do, but then something happens after the decision is made... the intended outcome just never seems to happen. Regardless of what the initiative involves (opening new markets, realignment of strategy and structure, altering corporate culture, etc.), there are inevitably "moments of truth" that dictate whether or not an organization actually receives the value the decision makers hoped to achieve. Companies come to these crucial crossroads each time they must decide whether to pay the true price of change or face whatever consequences exist for maintaining the status quo. As change initiatives move through these critical decision points, there are four possible outcomes: early termination, meltdown, installation, or realization. 3. Early Termination Occasionally, approval is secured for a new initiative, but the project never really gets off the ground. Agreements are reached about what is to be done and budgets are set, but before any official announcements can take place, everything is discontinued. This is sometimes the result of an obvious financial or political crisis. Other times, the reasons behind these abrupt terminations are less clear. Regardless of the cause, when efforts to introduce change are blocked after being approved but before being officially launched, it clearly indicates that the organization was not ready to fulfill its aspirations. 4. Meltdown Sometimes a project is announced and engaged, but at some point during implementation, it is discontinued with a complete withdrawal of resources and activity. Meltdowns are visible failures for all to see, and the economic and political price they incur are so costly they are generally avoided if at all possible. Because of the high visibility and vulnerability associated with such defeats, it is easy for decision makers and internal change agents (or external consultants) to informally (sometimes unconsciously) conspire to camouflage a meltdown as a project that was completed even though it never achieved the desired results. This will later be described as "dysfunctional installation." 5. Installation When change projects are first introduced into a work setting, they are deployed (i.e., announced, set up, or in some way inaugurated) but have not yet achieved their ultimate intent. Installation is about placement-managing the tangible aspects of inserting a new initiative into the work environment (logistics, plugging in hardware and software, training schedules, work sessions, etc.). Installation is an essential part of the overall implementation process, but it is a two-edged sword. With it comes the potential for either furthering the primary purpose of the intended change or actually preventing it from ever truly taking form. For this reason, we make a distinction between two forms of installation: beneficial and dysfunctional. >> Beneficial Installation: Installation is a phase all change endeavors go through where attention is focused primarily on physically inserting projects into an organization. Installation is an asset when decision makers: 1) see it as a critically important step in the overall implementation process, and 2) realize that much more work is involved to fulfill the true purpose of their investment. >> Dysfunctional Installation: Installation is dysfunctional when it becomes an end state, not a phase in the sequence of necessary action steps. When this happens, people within the organization engage in self-protective behavior that results in the appearance of change without the substance. Employees participate in the farce by saying all the right things, going through the motions of complying, disguising old habits with new rhetoric, and/or fabricating the intended outcomes. While all of this is taking place, the real goals of the effort are being diluted or completely bypassed. 6. Realization Realization takes place when the key purpose for an initiative (for example, confirmed cost savings, measurable increases in customer loyalty, and documented productivity gains) is actually achieved. Only when installation has taken place are the necessary elements there to ensure that the installed solution is fully used as intended. 7. Change Containers Executives and managers who have attempted to execute major initiatives with substantial change implications commonly report that the results of their efforts and investments were usually far more expensive, time-consuming, and less influential than they anticipated. Why is realization such a difficult challenge? Change is a powerful force that has a major influence on our lives, but we can't actually touch or directly see it. You can't hold change in your hand; you can only confirm its presence by observing the trail of influence it leaves behind as it passes through people and/or organizations. Because of its elusive nature, change requires tangible "containers" that allow it to be transported into an organization and be recognized. True transformation always enters our lives embedded within some type of recognizable package (i.e., a person, event, thing, or circumstance). But these packages actually only carry the seeds of change, not change itself. As an example, a well-crafted sales training program exposes participants to the elements needed to develop effective customer relationships, but the course may or may not foster the acquisition of the desired skills, attitudes, and behaviors that will actually lead to more productive relationships. New, enterprise-wide software may create the possibility of sharing information across departments, but it will not necessarily create the mental and cultural shifts needed to create the environment of trust, openness, and collaboration required to truly achieve the potential synergies. New initiatives are vessels of change, packages that carry the unrealized potential for the organization to achieve what it wants. One of the main implementation problems is that many leaders confuse the containers that hold the potential for change with the actual change that is desired. The seeds of change within a project can be planted, but the true purpose of the endeavor must then unfold. And this can happen only if the surrounding "human landscape" has been made ready to absorb the inherent disruption. 8. Human Landscapes What differentiates those organizations that simply install change containers from those that are able to fully realize the hoped-for benefits? The critical element is their ability to manage "human landscapes." At its most basic core, a work environment is composed of two types of building blocks-those that are "inert" (dealing with such things as structures, policies, technology, strategies, capital, and tools) and those that are "human" (dealing with such things as perceptions, assumptions, resistance, fears, aspirations, beliefs, and values). Each work environment has its own configuration of inert and human components that form a unique identity or landscape that distinguishes it from any other work setting. The inert aspects are isolated, independent features of the landscape that have no inherent connection to one another (i.e., a change in software does not by itself trigger a shift in the way budgets are managed). It is the human component of a landscape that provides all the links, bonds, and affiliations that exist within work settings. Without the human component, meaningful integration of the various inert components wouldn't exist. For example, a procedure could stand alone, unaffected by a report showing declining quality, which would be completely detached from employee performance ratings, which would be unrelated to the new IT system, which would be disconnected from the implications of the recent merger. People are the bridging agents between themselves and all inert features of a work environment; therefore, it is the human landscape that is most crucial to the success or failure of efforts to change the way an organization functions. When new initiatives are introduced into a work environment, they cause shock waves of disruption to emanate from their initial points of impact. These points of impact are the physical and political locations where new entities (advances in technology, new organizational structures, leadership changes, etc.) are introduced and potentially affect the people they touch. Around each point of impact is a human landscape that reacts to and dictates the success of the change being introduced. The degree to which a new initiative spreads throughout a work environment or dies an early death is directly dependent on the human dynamics reflected in these landscapes (how much commitment or resistance exists, how many other changes are competing for people's attention, etc.). Why are the human dynamics around change so problematic? Human landscapes are the breeding grounds for resistance because all initiatives designed to bring about change, by definition, interrupt the status quo. The greater the promise of change, the more disruption required. Despite wishful thinking to the contrary, most people are reluctant to disturb the routines that have formed in their lives. We are a species addicted to our established habits, and we often cling to them even when doing so is unproductive or, worse, self-destructive. This reluctance to depart from the familiar makes it difficult to bring about true organizational transformation. Who has not witnessed employees and mid-level managers hesitating to depart from familiar territory when something new was announced? Even executives who sanction what they say are important changes often hope to somehow accomplish their intentions without having to personally leave their comfort zones. Furthermore, even if leaders are attuned to the importance of human landscapes, they often lack the knowledge and tools to deal with these issues adequately. Whether done because of ignorance, avoidance, or ineptness, the human landscapes that surround important business solutions are all too often left unattended or poorly addressed. And when this happens, these landscapes become incredibly effective at undermining and preventing projects from achieving their full potential. Because of the powerful influence people and their reactions have on the success of change initiatives, it is vitally important for decision makers to ensure that the human landscapes encircling key business solutions are managed properly. Many leaders, however, choose instead to deal rather peripherally with or ignore altogether the people dynamics associated with the major changes they attempt to implement. Why? Much of the time, it's because executives have not fully grasped that leadership today involves more than making the right decisions about "what" should be done. In addition to correctly determining the proper course of action, senior officers must also know "how" to orchestrate the human infrastructure to ensure that there is enough support from the key people involved to actually achieve the true purpose of the endeavor. 9. The Promise When decision makers formally approve important change efforts, a promise is made to the shareholders that the value being pursued will emerge as intended. Of course, such promises extend to employees and customers as well. But for purposes of this discussion, our focus will be on the promise made to shareholders. Regardless of the nature of the initiative, introducing change into an organization is always a resource-consuming activity (capital, time, energy, attention, etc.). These resources are corporate assets that ultimately fall under the ownership of shareholders. As such, a decision to engage change, in effect, is a decision to borrow owner equity and apply it toward funding the endeavor. As is true with any investment of someone else's assets, there is an implied, if not explicit, commitment made that the resources being allocated will result in an appropriate return for the shareholders. When initiatives are positioned at strategic levels, and shareholders are made aware of (or, through the Board of Directors, actually participate in) the decision to move forward, the return on investment (ROI) obligation is directly expressed. But even when the initiative is more tactical in nature (below the level where a board would be involved or even informed), the same obligation still exists to do everything possible to create the expected return. The fact that the promise of change is entered into through a tacit understanding makes the accountability of decision makers to their shareholders no less valid. The problem is that all too often the promises made about impending change fail to actually translate into the intended results. Usually this is due to decision makers being dangerously naive about what is required on the organization's part for a major initiative to succeed. What's usually missing is either: 1) an awareness that impeccable decisions about what to do can still fall flat when not supported by the people being affected or 2) access to the tools and techniques needed to successfully direct the human aspects of the project's execution. A third issue inhibiting decision makers from fulfilling their change-related promises is the assumption that the burden of accountability for achieving their goals can fall on staff or consultants. Although internal staff can play key supporting roles and external consultants can deliver sound recommendations, the decision makers carry the greatest obligation for success. They are the ones who must ultimately ensure that the surrounding human landscape is ready to support whatever needs to happen. Regardless of how leaders may contribute to the problem, dysfunctional installation takes place when correct business solutions are inserted into human landscapes that have not been properly prepared to provide the necessary support. When this happens, initiatives offer little more than temporary, superficial relief from whatever symptoms the organization was trying to resolve. Under such circumstances, the promised ROI cannot be fulfilled. Maximum return on the shareholder's investment and full realization of expected value can only be accomplished by delivering on the promises made. Fulfilling these promises is unlikely unless the corresponding "human landscapes" have been properly addressed. 10. Two Aspects of the Same Journey For important initiatives to reach their "realization" potential, it is usually necessary to call into play two disciplines: project management and change management. Project management deals with the logistics of implementation (functional milestones, scheduling, training, cost control, etc.). Change management uses behavioral science research and techniques to deal with the dynamics that unfold within the surrounding human landscapes (developing commitment, minimizing resistance, fostering resilience, etc.). It is best when these two disciplines are integrated into a single implementation methodology. This allows the logistic and human components to be seen, as they truly are-as two equally important and interdependent requisites to successful change investments. The vast majority of rollout strategies, however, fail to incorporate both aspects, as they should. Many efforts to transform organizations are actually "spray and pray" operations that lack the discipline offered by project management. Of those strategies that do apply project management tools and techniques, most ignore or treat superficially the concerns change management seeks to address. When deployment strategies do attempt to include change management issues, many end up reflecting more rhetoric and good intent than the level of structure and discipline needed for sound results. Whether change management is ignored or simply applied in a shallow manner, the results are the same: Project management that fails to adequately address the human dynamics of change usually has little chance of going beyond installation-type outcomes. 11. What Leaders Need to Know Leaders don't need a deep expertise in the psychology of change to deal with human landscape issues, but a solid, working understanding of the dynamics involved is essential. The problem is that many executives are not predisposed to focus on the "people" aspects of their work environments at all, and those who are interested often lack the knowledge of how human landscapes operate and/or how to influence them. For change promises to be realized rather than installed, leaders need to know enough about how key transitions unfold to provide the proper guidance to their organization. For example, they need to know how to assess their organization's readiness to adapt and what actions to take if sufficient readiness is lacking. Human landscape readiness involves four critical elements. The status of these elements reflects people's predisposition toward realization success: >> Sponsors: The management structure responsible for ensuring that initiatives are applied appropriately. >> Capacity: The availability of the resources people need to adapt to the desired change. >> Culture: The formal and informal ground rules for how things are really done on a day-to-day basis. >> Targets: The people whom the initiatives are intended to influence. Creating the proper readiness around important initiatives requires that the following four questions be asked and the necessary actions taken to ensure the key people are adequately prepared to absorb the changes being introduced. The critical questions are: >> Sponsorship: To what extent are the appropriate leaders, managers, and supervisors unwilling or unable to provide the level of commitment needed to sustain the project? >> Capacity: To what extent do users lack the intellectual, emotional, and physical resources needed to adjust to the changes required by the initiative? >> Culture: To what extent do the behaviors, beliefs, and assumptions necessary to achieve the goals of the change differ from those that are currently shared throughout the organization? >> Resistance: To what extent are various stakeholders exhibiting overt and/or covert reluctance to support the effort? 12. Summary of Common Implementation Challenges A key challenge facing leaders today is delivering on the commitments they make when announcing critical changes. "Installation" of change is seldom in jeopardy; it is the "realization" of the promise to shareholders that is typically at risk. Fulfillment of these promises is possible only if leaders are careful to limit their initiatives to those they are serious about implementing. For each of these business imperatives, they must require proper preparation of the human landscape as a non-negotiable part of the rollout strategies being formulated. *Reprinted by permission of Conner Partners ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ADVERTISEMENT: EES-SIYAKHA WORKSHOPS AND CONFERENCES ON BEST SA BUSINESS TRANSFORMATION PRACTICES ------------------------------------ # IMPROVING YOUR SUPERVISORY SKILLS Date: 22 - 23 November 2004 Venue: Holiday Inn, Maude St, Sandton Registration fee: 4800-00 (excl. VAT) To register click on: http://www.workinfo.com/workshops/work1.htm # IMPLEMENTING MENTORSHIP WITHIN YOUR ORGANISATION Date: 22 - 23 November 2004 Venue: Holiday Inn, Maude St, Sandton Registration fee: 4800-00 (excl. VAT) To register click on: http://www.workinfo.com/workshops/work1.htm # RECRUITMENT & SELECTION EFFECTIVENESS WITHIN YOUR ORGANISATION Date: 23 - 24 November 2004 Venue: Houghton Boardroom, Houghton Registration fee: 4800-00 (excl. VAT) To register click on: http://www.workinfo.com/workshops/work1.htm # INTEGRATION OF PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES INTO THE WORKPLACE Date: 24 - 25 November 2004 Venue: Gordon Institute of Business (GIBS), Illovo Registration fee: 4800-00 (excl. VAT) To register click on: http://www.workinfo.com/workshops/work1.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4. Who Makes For The "Best" Hire? By Allan Schweyer who can be contacted at ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Choosing a new employee can be dicey. Here's how to avoid making the wrong choice. As recruiters and HR professionals, we're often immersed in employment equity and affirmative action initiatives and challenges. The strides that have been made in reducing gender pay differences and in building diverse workforces have made our organizations and countries stronger, better places. We've also learned that in customer-facing industries, a workforce that reflects the makeup of the population is often very good for business. Most would agree that it's acceptable for organizations in some industries, in some cases, to proactively build a customer-facing workforce that reflects the racial, gender and ethnic/cultural makeup of its customers. But in considering candidates' broader range of attributes in this manner, we open the door to some of the usually unspoken facets of selection. Consider some recent examples that have made headlines or been challenged in courts. 1. If large numbers of female patients feel more comfortable consulting a female obstetrician or gynaecologist, does this justify the hospital's giving preference to female obstetricians when hiring? The courts say yes. 2. If female waiters sell more food and beverage in a restaurant, where 70% of the patrons are men, is it acceptable for the owner to discriminate against men for these positions? Congress says yes. 3. If the audience for an NBA franchise is 85% white, is it acceptable to proactively recruit a team that more fully reflects this racial makeup? Former superstar Larry Bird says yes. In June 2004, Bird made headlines by proclaiming, in an ESPN roundtable discussion with Magic Johnson, that more white, high-profile NBA stars would be "good for a fan base because as we all know, the majority of the fans are white America", and the NBA lacks "enough" white superstars. Few would have trouble with the first example. Where a person's most delicate and private health issues are concerned, their comfort is critical. Many will be offended by the second example. Why should a person's gender and attractiveness affect their eligibility for a restaurant position and why should I sympathize with someone who wants to ogle the person who brings them their beer? Ironically, the third example is sure to cause the most outrage, even though it most closely resembles the initiatives described in the first and second paragraphs. We view our professional sports leagues as examples of pure merit, the best succeed regardless of superficial attributes. No one wants to pay to see second-rate professional athletes. In attempting to expand its appeal worldwide, however, is it wrong for the Houston Rockets to fully leverage the attributes of their 7'-5" Chinese superstar Yao Ming? Ming is undoubtedly talented; he started in the 2003 NBA all-star game. But it would be naive to assume his appeal to the Rockets and the NBA ends there. The fact that he has sparked enormous interest in a market of a billion people in China cannot be lost on the NBA front office. Steve Sailer, the controversial founder of the Human Biodiversity Institute says Ming's popularity "translates into all sorts of NBA-licensed [merchandise] they can sell to the China market." A U.S. restaurant chain famous for hiring attractive wait staff says criticisms against it are as ridiculous as saying the NFL exploits men who are big and fast. It contends that its wait staff has the same right to use their natural female sex appeal to earn a living as do super models Cindy Crawford and Naomi Campbell. Again, Congress and the courts seem to agree. In the business world, most of us understand that the competition is so tough that hiring the best possible person for each position is imperative. Nepotism, racism, sexism and the rest are barriers to success not only because they're offensive and detrimental to an employer's brand, but because they severely limit the range of candidates for positions. Still, the deciding factor between two equally skilled people is often determined by attributes we don't always explicitly acknowledge. As we've seen, in retail, an employer might proactively select sales associates and cashiers that reflect his or her customer profile and this could be based on age, gender or race. If I'm starting an operation in a country with an activist government and I have a choice between an industry guru and acknowledged top-flight manager versus a competent but less-skilled and experienced candidate who happens to be the industry minister's nephew, who do I choose? If I'm a pharmaceutical company that depends on its sales reps' ability to reach physicians, I'll hire knowledgeable reps that have relevant education and experience. But because the physician population has traditionally been 80%+ male in North America, the stereotype of the attractive female pharmaceutical sales rep persists. Is this wrong? Perhaps, but rather than interfere with employers' rights to choose (and make mistakes) in this regard, the courts tend to protect them, which, considering the alternative, is probably the right approach. Checks and balances exist. Society moves on and makes corrections. It is much more common today to see a senior product manager staffing a trade show booth than an attractive twenty-something; and when was the last time an airline promoted itself based on the sex appeal of its "stewardesses"? As organizations, we shouldn't always follow the herd, short-term thinking might lead us to hire the nephew of the industry minister (and sometimes that's the right choice). Long-term thinking gauges the trends in consumer and societal attitudes, giving the drug company that breaks the mold, for example, an early advantage over its competitors. *Reprinted by permission of the author ------------------------------------ DOES YOUR EMPLOYMENT EQUITY COMMITTEE DELIVER RESULTS? ------------------------------------ The Department Of Labour is still on the warpath for non-compliance! Train an entire committee for the price of 1 electronic manual with full reproduction rights. http://www.workinfo.com/mall/escmt.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 5. Labour Department Shooting Itself In The Foot By By Alide Dasnois: Business Report 20 October 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- EDITORS NOTE: This article appeared in the online version of Business Report 20 October 2004 and hints at changes in the pipeline about reporting on income differentials as part of your company's annual EE report. Question: Which is more important: promoting black people and women to top jobs in companies, or narrowing the wage gap? Answer: Neither. Both are required by the legislation. But the focus on employment equity has diverted attention from the far less fashionable obligation employers have to reduce the income differentials within their companies. The Employment Equity Act requires employers to provide information on income differentials, on a confidential basis, to the employment conditions commission. Where the differentials are "disproportionate" the act requires employers to take action in terms of guidelines to be provided by the minister of labour. But the likelihood of any of this actually happening is probably about the same as that of George W Bush admitting it was a mistake to invade Iraq. The department of labour is already stretched to breaking point chasing employers who fail to disclose information on employment by race and gender - never mind on income differentials - and in any case the way the questionnaire to employers in the act is formulated pretty much guarantees that any information which actually did get collected would be useless. The questionnaire is not user-friendly either to employers or to researchers trying to evaluate trends. Employers are expected to provide "average equivalent yearly remuneration and benefits" of the five highest-paid employees and the five lowest-paid employees in up to nine occupational categories (managers, professionals, technicians, clerks, skilled workers, plant operators and so on) and up to six occupational levels (top management, senior management, middle management, skilled, semiskilled and unskilled) and then somehow to offer a "total income differential" (whatever that is) for "all occupations and levels" Click here A further weakness is that the questionnaire does not ask for information on race and gender, making it impossible to correlate the results with the demographic information provided by the same employers. For some reason this part of the act is administered by the employment conditions commission while the rest - the reporting on employment by race and gender - is administered by the employment equity commission. Debbie Budlender, a member of the employment conditions commission, says that a commission has submitted to the employment equity commission some suggestions on how the act could be changed to make the information more useful. Making the information available to the public - or at least to the employees concerned, as Cosatu's Zwelinzima Vavi has suggested, will be another matter. Employers are likely to oppose this, citing concerns about disclosing information to competitors or, in small companies, about violating employees' privacy. But we live in a world where the market is supposed to set salaries and wages (an argument commonly used to justify the size of directors' packages). Differentials between the highest-paid director and the lowest-paid worker can be calculated from wage settlements and information on directors' packages which listed firms are obliged to supply. The Labour Research Service in Cape Town has done this and has come up with an average figure of 111 to 1 - a differential described by the minister of finance as "a threat to our democracy". But it is arguably more urgent to tackle differentials between workers and managers - estimated by Cosatu at 15 or 20 to 1, on average - if only because there are far more managers than company directors. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 6. Across The Board: Official Communication From The SA Board For Personnel Practice (SABPP): A New Law Is Only A Milestone By Huma van Rensburg CEO SABPP who can be contacted at ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # Beyond Legislation: A new law is only a milestone along a more ambitious journey! By Ivan Lätti who can be contacted at ivan@koptoe.co.za ; Past Chairman of the Board Professions are born and survive to serve the needs of society and of the economy, not to perpetuate vested interests of traditionally entrenched service providers. The HR profession is particularly involved with the science and technology of the world of work. It deals with issues of problem solving for working people, improving the outcomes of people's work, the conditions under which the work is performed and the sustainability and continual improvement of everything of importance in this field. Human resources in South Africa is today characterized by a diversified and vibrant set of governance structures aimed consciously at continual improvement through self criticism and serving effectively in changing times and specialized niches. We are facing turbulent times as to the transformation of how work will be delivered, more work coming from people never to be fully employed by companies and more independence and continual innovation by workers who compete as well as cooperate. The standards body, the SABPP which forms part of this governance, keeps itself in order by adhering only to standards aspects, but also responding to the ever increasing domain of new areas requiring standards and the maintenance of these. It diligently passes on to other governance structures in human resources all those other activities beyond the standards domain, such as member services, education, negotiations on behalf of the profession and so on. The "long view" regarding governance focus and style must allow for phenomena like centralization and decentralization of management and power to follow each other in a cyclic fashion. Too much of the one gives rise to the opposite and brings about the next phase of the cycle; a process common to self-sustaining biological systems. In this way periods of high pre-occupation with legislation and increased orderliness will be followed by others more characterized by creative innovation and freedom to the members of the profession to work at this. Both these activity focus phases are necessary but the one should not suffocate the other. We have come through a phase of increased accountability, orderliness and scrutiny on behalf of the public, (if not by the public) of what we do. This serves as an audit and stocktaking. After every stocktaking and introduction of new structures, an increased level of activity in development of new solutions, taking the profession forward in what it really should be delivering should occur. This lies in the hands of other players than the profession's "auditors and legislators". If we therefore look beyond the emerging Act that will hopefully do much to regulate key activities without stifling the economically important aspects of creative people management, we should see the process and service innovators "trying out the new clothes" to play a winning game rather than strutting around as if the new rights and privileges for practitioners constitute success and output in itself. # HR Cross Roads Conference & SABPP AGM WHERE: Gallagher Estate Johannesburg, CT International Convention Centre Cape Town WHEN: Johannesburg , 4 November 2004; Cape Town, 16 November 2004 WHAT: >> HR Governance >> The Act >> The HR Charter (as proposed by BMF) >> The Business Point Of View >> Skills Development Facilitation As a registered professional with the SABPP you are cordially invited to participate in the 2004 one day conference hosted by HRCOSA, the SABPP, IPM and Business. We are also hosting the SABPP AGM/HR Review on the day. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 7. Life Is A Risky Business!* By Ken Keis who can be contacted at ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Risk is the exposure to POSSIBLE loss or injury. Some people don't enjoy their lives because they are not taking enough risks or are taking too many! (I'll explain the second one later.) When life's many opportunities present themselves, some individuals look only at the exposure to the risk and the possible loss. They don't consider the possible gains. This approach completely freezes them emotionally, thus they don't engage the opportunity or risk. They let the possibility of loss or injury stop them from acting. Every day when you leave your home, you take risks ? the risk of being hit by a car, catching the flu, getting food poisoning, for example. If a friend constantly verbalized these concerns, you would dismiss them as a worrier or maybe even mentally unstable! What about you!? What has not taking risks cost you? Yes, you! Are you merely living half your potential, because the comfort of the known seems more important than the unknown? I am a risk-taker but I have been a risk-avoider, as well. About 24 months ago, I started investing in real estate. In our area, homes had not increased in price for almost 10 years; there were many potential deals to be had. Well, I bought a property. At least four others made perfect investment sense - but I focused on the RISK . . . the potential of overexposing myself to debt. Guess what! All these investment properties have increased at least 20% to 25% in value in the past 24 months. Of course, hindsight is easy. I could have bought them all and what equity I would have today! But I got my just desserts ? NOTHING - because I risked nothing. As I mentioned in the previous e-zine, "Are You Dying To Live?" life has value because it is perishable. The same applies to risk. The value of your decision is proportionate to the level of the risk. If, in your life choices, there is NO POTENTIAL loss or injury, you have not taken a risk. If your life (outside of the mundane) has no risk, you are not living your life at 100%. This position is COSTING YOU in your life - how much, only you can decide! One of my family members has been miserable in his job. He has great talents and options but will not take the risk to change. Not making a decision to risk has drained his energy, his motivation-and has cost him dearly. But the really sad part of this situation is that he has been playing it safe for over 20 years - yes, 20 years of dissatisfaction, not risking, and slowly dying from the lack of risk in his life. Yes, I mean dying, literally. Why? Risk affects your body biophysically. It generates endorphins in your bloodstream, which enhances your immune system and your overall health. The lack of risk in your life might be slowly killing you. Right now, think of the scariest or riskiest thing that has ever happened to you. Can you recall your whole body vibrating? Remember the energy that came from that event? Was it invigorating? Every cell in your body was fully alive because you were in a risky situation. What if everyone chose to live his or her life fully engaged? Could we create better communities and impact our world in a more positive way? Of course, we could! But there is one small caveat. For some, risk in itself has become the objective, not the outcome. A percentage of the population, albeit small, is addicted to risk and the high it gives them. They are no longer in control. Their decisions are made based on the risk factor, not the outcome factor. In this case, risk it is being used for the wrong purposes and can become detrimental to the individual. Only you can know if that is true for you. If it is, only 100% commitment to the recovery process will lead to successfully taming this addiction to risk. Some people reading this e-zine have no interest in addressing their condition, but the great thing is that we all have a choice. True risk should and must have a purpose for you. True risk has a friend called rewards. Rewards are what you receive by successfully taking a risk. What rewards have you given up because you avoided risk? Lost jobs, investments, opportunities, relationships, impact, and success of any kind? The true risk-taker understands the balance between risks and rewards and focuses equally on both. He or she has the ability to balance emotions and analysis. Risk without personal or potential reward is called foolishness. The rewards and benefits from taking a risk are not clear-cut and are extremely personal. Some individuals might call you a fool and feel your risk-taking has no apparent value or reward - but that is not their decision to make. Only you can be in touch with your self and all the factors necessary to score the risk/reward scale. Others might judge that what you did was not risky ? meaning they don't see your actions as a risk at all. Again, whose opinion needs to count here? Yours. Finally, I want you to think back over the past 12 months. Did you have an intentional/proactive decision or choice - a risk that just scared the . . . out of you? If you did, great! If not, it's time to start risking more. One of the research items CRG undertook 25 years ago was how your biophysical makeup affects your risk-taking level. We determined that part of your risk-taking level is influenced by your RAS (Reticular Activating System). In simple terms, the nervous system at the base of your brain has wired you for your level of natural risk-taking tendencies. CRG has established that your risk tendencies are influenced by your introversion and extroversion levels. This is not introversion/extroversion as defined by most others as people-related. CRG's definition establishes how willing you are to engage and interact with the environment which, by the way, contains risks. If you are interested in benchmarking your inherent risk-taking levels, we have a couple of assessment choices that will help you in this journey. Understanding yourself in this area will assist you to be proactive and in control of your risk-taking process. Remember: life without any risk is a boring and mediocre adventure. ACTION STEPS: RISKING TO LIVE 1. Risk is defined as the exposure to possible loss or injury. 2. What has not taking risks cost you? Take a moment to review the past couple of years; list all the risks you avoided or did not take that now ? looking back ? cost you. 3. From those risk-avoidance experiences, list your actual losses for not taking those risks - in money, personal fulfillment, relationships, and success. 4. Envision your life RIGHT now if you had taken every one of those risks and if the outcome was successful. Mentally and emotionally, enjoy the feelings of your rewards or success. Do you feel different about your life? 5. To fully understand your risks/rewards decision-making process, go back and reflect on why you did or did not avoid certain risks. In my situation with my real estate, I only envisioned the property staying the same or going down in price. I was only looking at the risks column, not balancing it equally with the rewards column. 6. Based on this review, what did you find? Are you embracing risks and rewards equally or are you biasing the process? 7. Establish your inherent risk-taking levels with one or more of the CRG assessments: Entrepreneurial Style and Success Indicator, Sales Style Indicator, Personal Style Indicator, or Instructional Style Indicator. 8. What can you do to improve your ability to take more risks? 9. Link up with a mentor who has experience and success in the area in which you are about to take a risk. He or she can help you better understand the benefits and the rewards. Warning: don't look for support from someone who has not been successful taking your specific risks. He or she may not have the biophysical signature or mental experience to help you cross the risk/reward barrier. 10. If you are beating yourself up for past risk-avoidance decisions - stop that right now. Unless you are into time travel, there is no benefit to it. Learn from your past and move on. 11. Finally, here is a challenge to every Living on Purpose subscriber. In the next three to six months - sooner if possible - I want to encourage everyone reading this e-zine to pull out The Big One (or two) . . . yes, the couple of risks or decisions you have avoided. The ones that scare the wits out of you. Take the process and own it. I want you to cross the line and take the risk. If your new-found analysis says the risk does not justify the reward, then ditch it, but replace it with a risk that does. 12. When you do this, pay attention to how alive you feel at that moment. Then, finally, share your success stories with me so we can encourage each other. *Reprinted with the permission of the author ------------------------------------ MANAGING FOR DIVERSITY WORKSHOP ------------------------------------ New and improved version of this workshop for supervisors & managers now available! Comprehensive facilitator's guide and participant workbook is now available as a download. Train as many groups as you like for the price of 1 download! http://www.workinfo.com/mall/diversity.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 8. Complimentary HR Tools/Downloads: Readiness For Change Diagnosis ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Some organisational changes go smoothly, while others feel as though they are doomed from the start. While there is always unforeseen events and unavoidable situations that affect how a particular transition unfolds, there are also some general factors that make a transition go more or less smoothly. There are things that encourage people to let go of the old way of doing things; and other things that help people get through the uncertainties between the letting go and the beginning anew; and, finally, other things that make it easier for people to embrace the new way readily. This assessment tool can be used in many different ways. An individual who wants a quick take on the organization's readiness can fill it out and get either reassurance or deeper concern from the results. But that is only one person's view; so consider giving it to a cross-section of people. How many? It depends on your purpose. If you are really trying to measure the climate in an organization before anything is done--and then comparing it to the results after transition-management actions have been taken--you'll probably want as many raters as you can get. But if your concern is just to demonstrate that people are showing some significant wear and tear from the transition that they are going through, then a carefully chosen cross-section dozen or two subjects may suffice. Download the assessment at www.workinfo.com/free/downloads/180.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 9. Case Law & Legislation Review: Constructive Dismissal By Gary Watkins who can be contacted at www.caselaw.co.za or www.workinfo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # ISSUE: grievance/ (residual) unfair labour practices - constructive dismissal - employee resigned after all staff were given option of resigning or repaying money due to poor performance - employee resigned - cannot be said that events leading up to the resignation meet the test of a constructive dismissal - procedural fairness - disciplinary procedures - employee had not followed any internal procedures to deal with the matter # SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE: The employee was a branch manager for a retail store. The regional manager visited the store and spoke very strongly about the collection rate. The regional manager had told the concerned staff including the employee, that they were to choose between paying the money lost due to the poor collection rate or resigning. The employee decided to resign and wrote a short note stating simply that: "I ---- hereby give my resignation on ---, my last working day will be ---." Although denied by the employee, two witnesses testified that they had tried to persuade the employee to withdraw his resignation. The employee testified that he had resigned without raising any complaint or grievance to anybody and that he was confused at the time of resigning. # SUMMARY OF JUDGEMENT: The law on these issues flows from the statute (LRA) and from case law. In terms of the LRA, a constructive dismissal is established when in terms of section 191(5)(a)(ii) of the LRA, the employer allegedly made the continued employment of the employee, intolerable. One of the central issues to this matter had been the allegation by the employee in his referral to the CCMA in which he alleged that he had followed all internal procedures before referring the matter to the CCMA. It transpired in corroborated evidence and, in his own admission, under cross-examination that actually he had not followed any internal procedures to deal with the matter. The commissioner was not convinced that the employee was not aware of the grievance procedures, after having worked for the company (in his own admission and assertions) for more than 5 years. 5 years of continuous employment by the same employer and he was a manager at the time of his alleged dismissal. The tough talk by the regional manager was a mere wake up call to the people responsible for the collection rate in the shop, and was never carried out as the other affected employees remained in their jobs without having to repay the money or to resign. This point was corroborated by witnesses of both parties. They testified that they were equally shocked by the tough talk, but that they did not resign or pay the money, because they had known that it was not company procedure to deal with performance issues in that manner. The regional Manager himself also testified that his talk was a mere wakeup call as he never really invoked any procedure to discipline the affected employees including the employee, even about a year after that talk. While one witness admitted that there were very serious problems of work dedication at the branch about 12 month earlier. She also testified that the performance of the shop had improved since the resignation of the employee. The regional manger even testified that he would re-employ the employee but perhaps in a lower capacity such as Assistant Branch Manager, to enable him to study the market. In the result, the commissioner was persuaded by the ample corroborated evidence that the company did not dismiss the employee. The employee resigned from the job held because as, he testified, he might have been confused at the time. It cannot be said that the events that led up to the employee's resignation would meet the test of a constructive dismissal. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 10. Book Reviews ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # Her Place at the Table: A Woman's Guide To Negotiating Five Key Challenges To Leadership Success To purchase this book click on By Deborah Kolb, Judith Williams and Carol Frohlinger, Jossey Bass, 2004 # While 50 percent of middle managers in America are women, they are practically nonexistent when it comes to top leadership positions, occupying less than 1 percent of the highest levels on most organizational charts. And you've probably heard many of the common explanations for this gap: women put family first, women aren't competitive, women don't want power, and so on. In Her Place at the Table, the authors, all management consultants specializing in negotiation, argue that the above explanations ignore critical obstacles faced by many women today. They contend that women lack a presumption of credibility and competence when occupying leadership roles, and that their male colleagues receive this credibility automatically, so women must prove themselves worthy in different ways. Based on a variety of interviews with female executives, this book offers a model for women leaders to use to achieve success in their organizations. For example, the authors recommend that women should capitalize on the superior relationship-building skills for which they are recognized. Finally, Her Place at the Table outlines five steps that women can use to negotiate their way to success: gathering intelligence to make informed decisions, mobilizing backers, garnering resources, bringing people on board, and ultimately making a difference. # Dismissal: Principles, Checklists and Forms Siberink, 2004 To purchase this book click on www.workinfo.com/mall/siber28.htm By Barney Jordaan and Ulrich Stander ABOUT THE BOOK: A guidebook for the practising manager and supervisor. Explains concisely the law of unfair dismissal, and the principles and processes underlying the management of misconduct and incapacity. Contains flowcharts, checklists, evaluation lists and other procedural guidelines. An accompanying CD contains checklists, forms and disciplinary hearing notices, in downloadable form, as well as the full text of Codes of Good Practice. This publication is concise, authoritative and comprehensive, and simple to follow and use. It focuses on the neglected but critical role of the employer's representative at the disciplinary hearing. It assists employee representatives in their preparation. It helps chairpersons in their decision-making and representatives at arbitration with their case preparation. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 11. Unsubscribe & Moving Soon ---------------------------------------------------------------------- UNSUBSCRIBE: Scroll to the end of the newsletter where you will find a code directly linked to your name. Click on the unsubscribe link. PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO THIS NEWSLETTER TO UNSUBSCRIBE. MOVING SOON: If you are changing your email address soon and would still like to continue receiving this newsletter, please email us your new or temporary email address to ensure that you do not miss out on the next edition. ------------------------------------ About the e-Journal/e-Newspaper ------------------------------------ Equity-Skills News & Views is a free bi-monthly newsletter for business owners, Line Managers, and Human Resource Practitioners (who support Line Managers) with the implementation of fair and developmental people management systems and practices. The style of this e-Newspaper fits between the traditional email newsletters and printed professional trade journals & magazines. Subscribers will be kept up to date with the latest developments in the world of people management, receive handy people management tips, and feedback about labour court rulings that relate to the implementation of the key Labour Acts. Please add equity skills news & views to your list of approved senders if your Internet provider, or server administrator filters incoming e-mail, to make sure you receive periodic e-mail alerts and this newsletters to which you are subscribed. ------------------------------------ Opinions expressed by contributors DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT the standpoint of the publisher-editor of Equity-Skills News & Views. Information published here is for general information, and is not intended as legal advice. The authors, editors, and publishers do not accept responsibility for any act, omission, loss, or damage occasioned by any reliance upon the contents hereof. This message is sent in compliance with ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS AND TRANSACTIONS ACT. 2002, Act No. 25, 2002 [South Africa] passed on 20 May 2003. Sender: Jeff Sacht URL: www.equityskillsweb.com E-mail: jeffs@worldonline.co.za Telephone: +27 011 485 4943 Facsimile +27 011 485 4943 Publisher-Editor: Equity-Skills News & Views 'A MUST TO PRINT & READ' ------------------------------------ Copyright (c) 2003 Registered electronic newspaper: 1SSN 1684-5714 |
| © 2002 Equity Skills New & Views. All Rights Reserved. ISSN 1684-5714 |