Boomerangs and Prodigals

Whenever there is a high-profile termination in the news, the question that tends to arise is:   “Should an organization consider someone rehiring a terminated employee?”  Clearly, there can be both good and bad experiences rehiring someone has left the organization. 

If someone has left voluntarily, it may appear to be an easy decision.  Or is it?  Employees who have left the organization under good terms and were valued for their contributions clearly have an advantage.  Employees who were laid off because their jobs were eliminated are another example.  They know the company and more importantly, the employer knows them, their skills and their work ethics.  The Big Book of HR talks about companies that stay in touch with former employees.  Maintaining such a relationship is a great recruitment strategy. 

Corporate alumni networks can make it easier for former employees to become future employees.  Alumni networks and systems provide a vehicle to recruit former employees or get referrals for other talent, as former staffers can view job openings on the site and share links with contacts via social networking sites.  Former employees are attractive for several reasons:

·       they are more productive than completely new hires

·       they are easier to re-integrate into the firm 

·       they are cheaper to recruit and hire (no external recruiters nor extended resume reviews)

·       they tend to have better retention rates because they have seen other less-attractive options.

On the other hand, there will be employees who resigned yet may not have left on the best of terms or been highly valued.  There are also employees who have been asked to leave because of conduct or performance issues.  In these circumstances, an organization should proceed with care.

If you are trying to decide to rehire an employee from this second group, first consider what the circumstances were that led to the termination? Rehiring might make sense if the employee had personal issues that have been resolved, was fired for poor performance but since has acquired new skills, or is applying for a position that suits them better.

It’s not necessarily having that short [organizational] memory but looking at a new situation and the facts that exist now when the decision is being made and not the facts that led to a prior decision.  As with the employee who left in good standing, the advantage is that the employer is gaining someone who knows the organization and its culture.  The learning curve may not be as steep as bringing in someone who is brand new.

Other questions she says HR should consider:

• Was the termination challenged?

• Was there an equal employment opportunity charge?

• How would the rehire affect other employees?

• Did the behavior that prompted the termination, such as chronic lateness, hurt co-workers?

• Has the former employee maintained a good reputation within the community?  In other words, he or she has not been bad-mouthing the employer.

• Is the former employee returning to the same department or working in a different part of the company, where the employee’s history is unknown?

• What kind of message are you sending if you rehire a fired employee?  Could it be a morale booster because the employer is being perceived as fair, giving people an opportunity to recover from past mistakes?

Other considerations for the employer include:

·       Do you brief managers on how to respond to some of the employee questions that might arise about rehiring the fired employee so they do not say anything that breeches confidentiality or violates company policy?

·       Do you have some kind of communication guide so that everybody is saying the same thing if it is questioned, even if it’s to note that we’re not going to talk about an employee’s past history? 

You may want to get some legal advice before entertaining bringing the person back in certain situations. 

While the learning curve may be short, don’t attempt to shortcut the hiring process if there is some negative history.   Consider all qualified candidates.  Review these former employees as you would any new (unknown) hire.  If there was a pattern of poor behavior in the past, can you determine if the pattern has been broken?  If performance was the issue, is there evidence that the employee has gathered new skills or developed a better record with subsequent employers?  Check recent references and gather as much information as you can so you can make an informed decision.

Standing on the Sidelines

Inspiration comes from many places but I seem to get much of mine from observing beauty and talent that surrounds me when we go to the ballet or the symphony or the theatre!  I know I am extremely fortunate to live where I can take advantage of world-class performance but wherever you live, I hope you look for similar experiences –there’s nothing like having your breath taken away by watching a live performance!

I recently was inspired by a performance of Swan Lake by the American Ballet Theatre Company at the Kennedy Center in Washington, DC.  We were fortunate to attend a performance when the amazingly talented Misty Copland performed.  Her electrifying dancing is beyond words.  Her ability, grace, and strength have earned her a role as a Principal Dancer and her engaging personality, smile, and warmth come through from the stage to everyone lucky enough to see her perform.

But, amazing as it was to see Misty perform, I wanted to write about the other talented dancers who perform with her and the other stars on stage.  There are several scenes in Swan Lake where dancers stand on the side of the stage for long periods of time.  They are part of the scene as they wait and watch the principal dancers take center stage.   They stand still.  They hold their pose in perfect symmetry. They don’t call attention to themselves but their presence adds to the scene—it wouldn’t be right without them. 

This got me thinking about the different roles we play at work.  Not everyone can be the “star” player – the one in the center of the stage with the focus on them.  Most of us play supporting roles—roles that don’t get standing ovations but roles that are critical to the success of the organization none the less.

Sometimes it’s not easy to stand and wait but I think it depends on your attitude about what you’re waiting for. If you role is, like the dancers in Swan Lake, to support your manager, your CEO, or your executive director, then the only way to play your part is to do whatever is requested of you (of course, as long as it is ethical and moral) so that it’s a win for your organization.  If, however, you’re not the star yet but think you should be and you spend your time second guessing or sabotaging the person in the center of the stage, then you’re probably not doing yourself much good in your quest to get ahead.

Difficult as it is sometimes to stand on the sidelines, use those times to learn and to observe the people or person who is center stage.  Take what you learn on the sidelines so when your chance comes, if ever, you’re prepared and can do your absolute best to shine.  Even Misty Copeland doesn’t always have the starring role—we saw her last year dance a supporting part and in doing so, she told the world she’s a member of the troupe and can support whomever has the lead role.

Can you say the same for how you work in your organization?  I hope so!

A Wooden Bowl & Dignity

Early on a Saturday evening last fall I answered a knock on the door. Standing there in his Cub Scout leader’s uniform, holding his infant son in one arm was our neighbor, Zeeshan. His 4-year old daughter was gleefully by his side. In his other hand he held out a wooden bowl. “Do you recognize this?” he asked, indicating the bowl. I didn’t. “It came from your tree,” he said.

He had crafted the bowl from a piece of wood from a dead tree we had removed this summer. "Now you can always remember your tree," he said. I was so touched by his loving gesture of kindness!

What did I know about him? He practices a religion different than mine, he was born in a different county (as were my paternal grandparents and my husband’s father), his hobby is wood crafting and carpentry (he made the cabinets when they remodeled their kitchen), he’s a loving father involved in his children’s activities, and he’s a good neighbor who cares about the community in which we all live. Our differences are not problems, they are strengths.

The forces that battled discrimination for decades won a major battle in 1964 with the signing of the Civil Rights Act. That law had eleven sections and prohibited discrimination in voting, public accommodations, public facilities, public education, federally-funded programs, and employment – the section with which I’m most familiar and engaged in the workplace. The Act was the culmination of efforts to gain protection for the basic citizenship rights of African American. In employment it prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex and national origin. Subsequent legislation was enacted to protect older Americans and people with disabilities.

While the Act outlawed discrimination, it didn’t eliminate it. Discrimination must be eliminated because it’s an affront to our differences and our dignity.  On January 21, 2017, both Barbara and I marched in Washington DC. The next day I found myself reflecting on one question, “Why did I march?”

Why did I march? There are many reasons why I felt it was important to be there, but most importantly I marched to defend and preserve decency and dignity which I've witnessed eroding in our society recently.

-       The dignity of women

-       The dignity of individuals with disabilities

-       The dignity of people of all religions

-       The dignity of people who immigrated to this country to seek a better way of life

-       The dignity of journalists and scientists who work in noble professions and seek the truth

-       The dignity of all human beings regardless of their various dimensions of diversity

I marched because defending our human rights and dignity is the moral thing to do. 

Dignity.  It was symbolized in that wooden bowl.

Dignity.  It’s about making people matter in our workplaces and throughout the world today.

Respectful Curiosity

As a society, do we have the ability to suspend judgment, even for a moment, and listen to and consider an opposing point of view? This is not a commentary on the current state of political affairs. I wrote this back in 2012. In fact, much of this post is adapted from something I wrote that fall.

When I conduct diversity training, one of my objectives is to have people challenge their ability to temporarily suspend their beliefs and world views in order to entertain the beliefs and world views of others in a non-judgmental way.  Most participants get it, or at least pretend to.  Some, however, can't break away from the mental models that have shaped their thinking.

Consider the following excerpt from a playbill for the show The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas. The play premiered on Broadway in 1978 and I saw it in September, 2012, in a local theatre.

“The story is not about sex, but about hypocrisy and how one person can generate a national controversy.  Suddenly one person becomes a group who feels they have the right to tell you what to do and how to do it.  They push agendas, opinions and mantras and make judgments.  Assumptions are made without facts and opinions are broadcast in hopes of catching others attention.  They don't want to start a conversation; they want to start a fire.” (Emphasis added.)  (Eric Schaeffer, Artistic Director of the Signature Theatre in Arlington, Virginia)

To borrow a phrase from Sly and the Family Stone, we’re all everyday people with a vast array of differences and similarities along with hopes, dreams and problems. Learning about each other – being genuinely curious – is key to living and working together. Our differences make us unique and interesting. We’ve got to be respectfully curious and learn about each other. We’ve got to be more comfortable starting genuine conversations than setting fires.

Blinders remain on today regarding a vast number of social issues.  These issues are the basis of our current national discourse and that discourse has grown worse.  We have to be capable of taking a moment to pause, suspend judgment, and have dialogue and discussion about these issues in a calm and rational manner.