November 28, 2024

You’re the Boss Blog: Why Some Companies Promote From Within

Building the Team

Hiring, firing, and training in a new era.

As I’ve written in my last two posts, we were fortunate to meet with Andy Taylor and members of his leadership team at Enterprise Holdings in the fall of 2011. Since then, I’ve looked for opportunities to stay in touch. I send periodic updates on how H.Bloom has grown and call or e-mail on occasion to ask questions of Enterprise’s experts in talent development. Recently, I spent time on the phone with two of their executives: Steven McCarty, a vice president in human resources, and Pam Webster, an assistant vice president in talent acquisition. What follows are some excerpts from our conversations.

Pam Webster: We Promote From Within

Q: Can you tell me about your approach to recruiting?

A: We hire 1,500 to 1,800 interns every year, mostly pre-junior and pre-senior students in college. For these students, this is not just a summer job but the on-ramp for a full-time position after college. We hire over 8,000 college graduates per year who enter our management-training program. Forty to 50 percent of these hires are from employee referrals. Over 60 percent of them make it successfully through the program and continue on in their career at Enterprise. For those that leave before the end of their training, we hope that they have developed new skills that they can take to another company.

Q: Why do you hire so many recent college graduates?

A: It is a fundamental part of the Enterprise culture that we promote from within. We aren’t necessarily looking for a specific school that someone goes to or the degree that they received. We look for people who have the ability to learn, who can set goals and achieve those goals, and who want to be in a business where they can grow their careers. We believe that there are talented people on college campuses around the country, so we go to many of them – approximately 800 colleges per year.

Steven McCarty: The People Pipeline Is Like the Capital Pipeline

Q: Where did Enterprises emphasis on training come from?

A: At Enterprise, it starts with the C.E.O. It isn’t a training strategy or a people strategy; it is the way Mr. Taylor and his father before him wanted to build the business. They knew they couldn’t be on the ground everywhere all the time. But if they focused on hiring and training, they would get real leverage in the organization. Mr. Taylor has a mantra: “Take care of employees and customers first, and growth and profits will follow.” Everything we do is derived from this philosophy.

Q: How do you measure the success of your training?

A: If you scale a business with multiple entities and multiple locations, you can’t control it all. If you try to do so, you will be a bottleneck. The only way it will work is if you train people and empower them. Here’s what we do: Hire the player, not the position. Always have a farm team and rely on your own bench. Don’t hire anyone over the folks in the management-training program. Promote from within instead, and always have people ready to take on a new role.

The people pipeline is a lot like the capital pipeline. If you don’t have money, you’ll go out of business. Well, if you’re out of good people, the same thing will happen. It is so much harder to evaluate people from the outside during an interview process than it is having everyone start at the bottom of the organization and continuously promote from within. Nearly all of our management positions are promoted from within. The only exceptions are specialty positions – software engineers, attorneys, etc.”

As I said before, we focus on employees and customers first, and expect that profits and growth will follow. Therefore, profits and growth suggest that the training of our employees has worked. We track and measure four areas: one, customer service; two, growth; three, profit; and four, employee development and retention. These are measured and ranked monthly, and we have seen a direct correlation between employee development and the other metrics. Markets that score high on employee development are almost always on top for service, growth and profit.

Q: How do you conduct regular training?

A: The branch manager is the sunrise and sunset for every employee on the team. The manager is responsible for a new employee’s training after the formal new-hire training. The manager has a general guideline provided by headquarters but is otherwise responsible for that employee’s growth. Centralized training only occurs at critical inflection points: new-hire, promotion, etc. The rest of talent development happens between manager and employee. Managers know that they will be evaluated by the scorecard each month, and they have incentive compensation hanging in the balance.”

Q: How do you make sure that your employees retain the lessons learned in training?

A: It’s interesting. We get a lot of questions like, “What training do you do?” or “How do you make sure that it sticks?” I’d rather start with this question: “What behavioral change do you want to see?” Once you ask the question of the behavior you are trying to achieve – extraordinary customer satisfaction, or more sales – you can develop solutions: training, stack ranking, holding the manager accountable, incentives, etc. Once you develop the strategy, you have to measure everything regularly.

Q: If you were going to give advice to a company on how to start a training program, what would it be?

A: H.R. is one of the last department heads that I would hire. You should do it only after the culture of talent development is established. You want the H.R. team to be the guardian, not the owner. The C.E.O. should own this.

One final thought: our success at Enterprise is a true blessing. We know that we are really fortunate. There is a danger, though, that when you get this large, you stop asking questions and learning new things. A conversation like this with a start-up like H.Bloom provides a fresh perspective. You’re calling me to learn from Enterprise, but we’re learning from you as well.”

Bryan Burkhart is a founder of H.Bloom. You can follow him on Twitter.

Article source: http://boss.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/27/why-some-companies-promote-from-within/?partner=rss&emc=rss

Economix Blog: Want a Job? Go to College, and Don’t Major in Architecture

Say it with me, readers: College is worth it.

For all the bellyaching about wasted degrees and the many indebted grads stuck on their parents’ couches, recent college graduates are still doing a lot better than their less-educated counterparts. Unemployment for new graduates is around 8.9 percent; the rate for workers with only a high school degree is nearly three times as high, at 22.9 percent.

That’s according to a new report [PDF] from Georgetown’s Center on Education and the Workforce. The report also had some fascinating statistics on earnings and jobless rates by college major, something we’ve written about before.

The chart below shows unemployment rates sorted by major, based on 2009-10 census data. You can also see jobless rates for graduates of a given undergraduate major who went on to receive further education (not necessarily related to their college major). In the chart, “recent college graduate” refers to workers who are 22 to 26 years old; “experienced college graduate” covers those 30 to 54; and “graduate degree holder” is limited to workers 30 to 54 years old.

DESCRIPTIONGeorgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce American Community Survey, 2009-10, pooled sample. Recent college graduates are those 22 to 26 years old, and experienced college graduates are 30 to 54. Graduate degree holders are also limited to those 30 to 54. The percentage unemployed is based on total employed and unemployed. Earnings are based on full-time, full-year workers.

Some majors even produced college graduates who, at mid-career, earned more than workers from other fields who went on to received a tertiary degree. For example, experienced workers whose highest degree was a bachelor’s in health care are more likely to be employed than people with graduate degrees who majored in most other fields.

Those who majored in less technical subjects, like humanities, arts and social science, had higher unemployment rates.

The unemployment rate for recent graduates was highest in architecture, at 13.9 percent, probably at least partly because of the housing market collapse. Even architecture majors who went on to receive graduate degrees, which usually safeguard workers from unemployment, are doing poorly in the job market. With a jobless rate of 7.7 percent, architecture majors who hold graduate degrees are still more likely to be unemployed than newly minted college grads who studied journalism (!).

Those lucky architecture majors with postgraduate degrees who do have jobs are doing O.K., though. Among full-time, full-year workers in this group, median earnings are $71,000:

DESCRIPTIONGeorgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce American Community Survey, 2009-10, pooled sample. Recent college graduates are those 22 to 26 years old, and experienced college graduates are 30 to 54. Graduate degree holders are also limited to those 30 to 54. The percentage unemployed is based on total employed and unemployed. Earnings are based on full-time, full-year workers.

As you can see in this second chart, many of the majors that produced low unemployment rates also pay pretty well. That makes sense, when you consider that graduates of some fields are in high demand, which forces employers to offer them higher salaries.

That’s not true across the board, however.

People who majored in education, psychology and social work, for example, have low unemployment rates, but don’t make much money. Their earnings also don’t improve a lot when they gain more experience or postgraduate schooling.

“Some majors offer both high security and high earnings, while other majors trade off earnings for job security,” the report says.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=1445e477ec303b3446f24542020acfe2

Recent College Graduates Wait for Their Real Careers to Begin

But is Ms. Kelly stressed out about the lack of a career path she spent four years preparing for? Not at all. Instead, she has come to appreciate her life. “I can cook and write at my own pace,” she said. “I kind of like that about my life.”

Likewise, Amy Klein, who graduated from Harvard in 2007 with a degree in English literature, couldn’t find a job in publishing. At one point, she had applied for an editorial-assistant job at Gourmet magazine. Less than two weeks later, Condé Nast shut down that 68- year-old magazine. “So much for that job application,” said Ms. Klein, now 26.

One night she bumped into a friend, who asked her to join a punk rock band, Titus Andronicus, as a guitarist. Once, that might have been considered professional suicide. But weighed against a dreary day job, music suddenly held considerable appeal. So last spring, she sublet her room in the Fort Greene section of Brooklyn and toured the country in an old Chevy minivan.

“I’m fulfilling my artistic goals,” Ms. Klein said.

Meet the members of what might be called Generation Limbo: highly educated 20-somethings, whose careers are stuck in neutral, coping with dead-end jobs and listless prospects.

And so they wait: for the economy to turn, for good jobs to materialize, for their lucky break. Some do so bitterly, frustrated that their well-mapped careers have gone astray. Others do so anxiously, wondering how they are going to pay their rent, their school loans, their living expenses — sometimes resorting to once-unthinkable government handouts.

“We did everything we were supposed to,” said Stephanie Morales, 23, who graduated from Dartmouth College in 2009 with hopes of working in the arts. Instead she ended up waiting tables at a Chart House restaurant in Weehawken, N.J., earning $2.17 an hour plus tips, to pay off her student loans. “What was the point of working so hard for 22 years if there was nothing out there?” said Ms. Morales, who is now a paralegal and plans on attending law school.

Some of Ms. Morales’s classmates have found themselves on welfare. “You don’t expect someone who just spent four years in Ivy League schools to be on food stamps,” said Ms. Morales, who estimates that a half-dozen of her friends are on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. A few are even helping younger graduates figure out how to apply. “We are passing on these traditions on how to work in the adult world as working poor,” Ms. Morales said.

But then there are people like Ms. Kelly and Ms. Klein, who are more laissez-faire. With the job market still bleak, their motto might as well be: “No career? No prospects? No worries!” (Well, at least for the time being.)

After all, much of the situation is out of their control, as victims of bad timing. Ms. Klein contrasted her Harvard classmates with the ones of her older sister, Lauren, who graduated from Harvard seven years earlier. Those graduates, she said, were career-obsessed and, helped along by a strong economy, aggressively pursued high-powered jobs right after graduation. (Lauren is a professor at Georgia Tech University.)

By comparison, Ms. Kelly said her classmates seemed resigned to waiting for the economic tides to turn. “Plenty of people work in bookstores and work in low-end administrative jobs, even though they have a Harvard degree,” she said. “They are thinking more in terms of creating their own kinds of life that interests them, rather than following a conventional idea of success and job security.”

The numbers are not encouraging. About 14 percent of those who graduated from college between 2006 and 2010 are looking for full-time jobs, either because they are unemployed or have only part-time jobs, according to a survey of 571 recent college graduates released in May by the Heldrich Center at Rutgers.

And then there is the slice of graduates effectively underemployed, using a college degree for positions that don’t require one or barely scraping by, working in call centers, bars or art-supply stores.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: September 1, 2011

An earlier version of this article transposed the last names of two of its subjects in one instance. It was Amy Klein who had classmates at Harvard, not Stephanie Kelly. Additionally, the university at which Ms. Klein’s sister is a professor was identified incorrectly. It is Georgia Tech University, not Georgia State.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=3da909942516032ce62f10ed303ebd65

Economix: Are College Grads Too Lazy to Work?

I’ve received a lot of passionate (and angry) e-mails in response to my article today on the employment fate of recent college graduates. While the messages from young people almost uniformly expressed frustration at the job market they’d been thrust into, some of the e-mails from older readers argued that today’s college graduates were having trouble finding jobs because they hadn’t worked hard enough. For example, a reader named Norman Berger asks why graduates wonder why they prove worthless to a potential employer when they follow this approach:

Take ’soft’ subjects, be lulled into complacency by grade inflation, have teachers who are tenured and don’t care how rigorously you think, start partying on Wednesdays, take 3-4 courses per semester/quarter and spend 5-6 years to graduate, study six hours per week (at best), believe in all of the liberal causes which produce soft qualative rather than quantative thinking, learn to hate the capitalistic system, don’t care when you get out of school that you’ll still be living at home, etc …

As we’ve written before, today’s college students do indeed spend less time studying, and get higher grades, than their counterparts from a generation ago did. And most young graduates are leaning heavily on their family for financial support. More than one in five are living with their parents or other relatives, and many are getting help from family members for other expenses, as shown in the chart below.

DESCRIPTION “Unfulfilled Expectations: Recent College Graduates Struggle in a Troubled Economy,” Heldrich Center for Workforce Development, Rutgers University. Answer to prompt: “Please check off any of the following things that your parents or other family members help you with financially.”

But today’s college students also have spent a lot of time working, well before graduation.

Sixty percent of the graduates of the college classes of 2006 through 2010 said they held a part-time job while enrolled in school, not including jobs held during the summer or between semesters. Another 23 percent said they were working full time or both full and part time during school, according to a new study released by Rutgers.

For 44 percent of students, work or personal savings helped finance their schooling.

“Based on the finding that young people overwhelmingly were working in college, I don’t think this is a generation of slackers,” said Carl Van Horn, a labor economist at Rutgers and co-author of the study. “This image of the kid who goes off and skis in Colorado, I don’t think that’s the correct image. Today’s young people are very focused on trying to work hard and to get ahead.”

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=44b3ee6ef48bb162a6ee8ae772b79152