The impact of social media cannot be denied. The 2009 word of the year was “tweet,” and the word of the decade was “google,” according to the American Dialect Society. Social media such as Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, Flickr, and YouTube—which are defined by their user-generated content—have wiggled their way into most people’s working hours, and thus onto many workplace computers.

In the field of Human Resources, most talk of social media has to do with pre-employment: talent sourcing, advertising job openings, and performing background checks. But social media is now integrated with each stage of the employee lifecycle: before, during, and after. HR practitioners should study their proper use (and possible misuse), and learn what steps to take now to maximize their benefit while heading off potential legal problems.

An excellent article on this topic was just published in The National Law Journal. In “Social media permeate the employment life cycle: Employers must address their use and misuse before, during and after an employee’s tenure,” labor and employment attorney Renee M. Jackson writes about the simultaneous opportunities and risk presented by social media. Here are some of her top thoughts, as well as those of HR pros, on points you should consider at each stage of the employee lifecycle.

PRE-EMPLOYMENT

The networking power of social media is undeniably helping people find jobs, and helping companies find talent. If you’re ready to take full advantage of it, check out an article like Fistful of HR’s “5 Must-Use Social Media Tools For HR & Recruiting Professionals In 2009.”

Know this, though: because people now publicly disclose much more information than they did in the past, organizations must take care, writes Jackson in The National Law Journal:

… Applicants may reveal more information about themselves through social media than they normally would during the hiring process. In making hiring decisions, employers can lawfully use information relating to an applicant’s illegal drug use, poor work ethic, poor writing or communications skills, feelings about previous employers and racist or other discriminatory tendencies. Employers may also lawfully consider an applicant’s general poor judgment in maintenance of his or her public online persona.

Employers, however, may face liability under federal, state and local law for using any information learned from social media about an applicant’s protected class status — race, age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, etc. — in a hiring decision. It may be hard for the employer to prove in later litigation that it only viewed, but didn’t actually use, the information obtained in a social medium when making its hiring decision.

Your organization must seriously consider whether you want to use social media in your talent searches at all. If you do, Jackson recommends that you follow these guidelines:

• Conduct uniform searches that are just and consistent
• Use a non-biased third party to perform social media research
• Do not “friend” applicants to gain access to non-public information
• And other important points

DURING EMPLOYMENT

One of the biggest issues caused by social media during an employee tenure is the simple theft of working time. There are also matters of privacy, nondisclosure, taboo topics and hostile work environment, brand protection, and many more. The good news is, this is the stage when you have the most control over the situation. Most organizations would benefit from a well-researched, clear, and fairly applied social media policy. To research the matter, I recommend  beginning with “10 Must-Haves for Your Social Media Policy” by Sharlyn Lauby, who you may know as The HR Bartender, or “How to Develop a Social Media Policy” from About.com. There are a wide range of policies, but one thing all the experts agree on is that a successful policy is not arbitrary, but is a genuine expression of the needs of an organization which has considered both the risks and rewards of this new media.

Some of Jackson’s top recommendations for points to include in a policy are:

• A prohibition on disclosure of the employer’s confidential, trade secret or proprietary information
• A request that employees keep company logos or trademarks off their blogs and profiles and not mention the company in commentary, unless for business purposes
• An instruction that employees not post or blog during business hours, unless for business purposes
• A request that employees bring work-related complaints to human resources before blogging or posting about such complaints
• And others

AFTER EMPLOYMENT

Then, there are the former employees. Some will be nice, and some will be not-so-nice.

The best defense against nightmare scenarios like this and like this is a having had a good social media policy in the first place—one that lasts beyond employment, if at all possible. But if you are dealing with a situation that falls outside of that, you might want to read an article such as “Dealing with Disgruntled Ex-employees via Social Media.”

Another huge issue is recommendations. Increasingly, people are asking former colleagues to write them recommendations on social media such as LinkedIn. Is that the same as an official post-employment recommendation? Jackson says yes—although it’s difficult to define when people are speaking for themselves, and when they are speaking on behalf of the organization. It’s a good reason to have a solid policy in place.

The warmest and fuzziest scenario is positive relations through social media in the form of corporate alumni networks. In Computer World’s article, “The new word for tech’s ex-employees is ‘alum’” large, successful sites catering to groups of ex-employees are examined. Microsoft’s alumni network, for example, has 10,000 members—what an incredible opportunity for networking and goodwill!

THE TAKEAWAY

What HR should take away from this, writes Jackson, is that the risks of social media are too great to be ignored any longer.

First, employers must understand the myriad issues surrounding social media in the workplace in order to strike the appropriate balance in the eyes of their employees and the law. Then, employers must craft appropriate policies and procedures regarding social media that are consistent with their industry and firm culture, and apply such policies in a consistent, objective and nondiscriminatory way.

Workers are tweeting, googling, and friending, and they’re doing it at all stages of employment. We need to acknowledge this, and craft good policies in response.

If one of your business resolutions for 2010 is that your company should grow as a learning organization, developing a mentoring program should be high on your to-do list. Mentoring is useful and popular because it benefits the individual mentors and protégés alike, all while helping the larger organization. Whether you are focused on grooming existing talent or simply sharing organizational knowledge, mentoring can help your organization grow, thrive, and change.

A notable expert in the field of mentoring is Lois J. Zachary, Ed.D. Dr. Zachary is the author of the books The Mentor’s Guide: Facilitating Effective Learning Relationships, The Mentee’s Guide: Making Mentoring Work for You, and Creating a Mentoring Culture: The Organization’s Guide. She regularly blogs about mentoring at Lois Zachary’s Mentoring Expert Blog. She writes:

A mentoring culture is a vivid expression of an organization’s vitality. Its presence enables an organization to augment learning, maximize time and effort, and better utilize its resources. The relationship skills learned through mentoring benefit relationships throughout the organization. As these relationships deepen, people feel more connected to the organization. Ultimately, the learning that results creates value for the entire organization.

Her article on mentoring culture delves into the eight hallmarks of an organization that can support a successful mentoring program. The eight points are covered in depth here in Part 1 and Part 2 — and really deserve their own full reading, because they’re that good — but a quick look at what’s necessary is right here:

• Accountability — Determine goals, responsibilities, desired outcomes and accomplishments
• Alignment — Ensure a cultural fit within your organization
• Communication — Use consistency in your message, but express it using multiple modalities
• Value and Visibility — Employ branding, messaging, and rewards for your program
• Demand — Use buzz about your program to create a “multiplier effect”
• Multiple Mentoring Opportunities — Support multiple types of mentoring (both group and one-on-one, for instance) to appeal to a wide population
• Education and Training — Integrate the program with other training opportunities while remaining flexible and diverse
• Safety Nets — Anticipate challenges and provide pro-active support to participants to ensure success

This is just a short preview of Dr. Zachary’s wisdom; for elaboration on these themes, you’ll want to look into her books or her mentoring blog.

As you plan a program, you will undoubtedly find yourself asking: why do some mentoring programs thrive, while some fail? How can I ensure that I am doing what’s necessary for my fledgling mentoring program to thrive?

HR consultant and writer Judith Lindenberger tackled this question on Evan Carmichael’s blog in the thought-provoking post “Play ‘20 Questions’ to Develop a Successful Mentoring Program.” She recommends you ask yourself her 20 illuminating questions before you seriously embark on a mentoring program. Some of the questions are far-seeing and strategic, while others are extremely down-to-earth and practical. I guarantee that among the 20 questions, there are at least a few you haven’t considered yet. You’ll consider issues such as these:

• What are our business reasons for developing a mentoring program?
• How will we pair mentors and protégés?
• What are our criteria for success?
• How will we motivate our employees to participate?
• What should we do to support long-distance mentoring?

…and 15 more. Launching a mentoring program can bring great value to your organization, but because it affects so many individuals, you’ll want to thoroughly research the issue first, identifying resources, goals, mechanisms, measurements, and more. If you use the mentoring culture resources we have provided here, you’ll be much better prepared to meet the challenges of introducing mentoring to your team and furthering your collective journey into becoming a true learning organization.

Any experience launching a mentoring program? Share your best tips in the comments!

Human Resources has core functions around the beginning and end of each employee’s job, but no one should overlook all that HR has to offer during one’s tenure.

HR professionals can assist individual workers and entire teams with training, benefits, job satisfaction, and more — and you have help to offer them in return. So let 2010 be the start of a more symbiotic relationship with HR!

As pointed out in the Work Awesome blog post “Using Human Resources as Your Resource,” HR is the only department that actually exists just to help you.

With current employment trends, there’s a good chance that downsizing or hiring freezes have left HR with less to do temporarily (do a little research to see how your HR department has been affected, of course). Naturally, allowing them to assist employees in transition is more time-sensitive and trumps your needs, but if they have time to help you develop your skills, teamwork, and satisfaction, take advantage of their expertise.

Here are Work Awesome’s top tips to utilize HR effectively:

• Ask for their expertise on benefits: learn about flexible spending, 401(k) accounts, and more
• Inquire about training: they may be able to help with core skills such as communication or time management, or college courses in your specialty
• Offer to help them with employee satisfaction: by volunteering to help on a committee that measures worker satisfaction, you can make your own voice heard while helping the organization

It’s not just factual info that you can get from HR, either. You can cultivate a real partnership with someone in that department:

Today’s HR pros are business-focused. They help engineer ways to make the business better, and to do that they have to understand the business — and all its components. That means that someone in HR can offer you a lot more than just accurate information about the vacation plan. She could help you redesign jobs, create an incentive plan to drive up profits, or find an assessment tool to improve your hiring success.

That’s what the ABC News article, “How Human Resources Can Help You Get the Most Out of Your Team,” says — and it lists specific, actionable tips for you to begin bonding with HR and start working toward your mutual benefit.

First, they advise, figure out the structure of your HR department: who are the specialists, and who are the generalists? Try to bond with the person in the most appropriate role, as defined by your needs.

Then, after building up some trust and interest, offer to take them out to lunch specifically to teach them something about your sector of the business (HR likes to learn about different parts of the organization as much as you do).

Eventually, shift the relationship by asking them to teach you something about your company’s HR function: how are policies arrived at? What are company-wide priorities? Who are the decision makers? As the relationship develops, keep them in the loop about your department’s progress. The goal is to be equally looped into their policies and culture.

Perhaps the best tip I read in this article was the suggestion to volunteer to pilot new programs that HR is considering. If they want to try out flex time, job rotation, job sharing, or any other unconventional arrangement, people who have previously partnered with HR and offered helpful feedback are a natural fit for experiments. This is a great way to stay cutting-edge within the company and make sure that your opinions are heard.

Human Resources has a lot more to offer employees than simple hiring functions and lists of holidays, but many people never invest the time to build a mutually supportive relationship with HR. Try to see that the department is a resource for you, and respectfully use it to better your career, your team, and your entire organization.

They say that time is the most precious gift you can give. And if that time is paid time off – and the recipient is truly in need – it is beyond precious.

This deeply meaningful gift is being given not by friends, not by family… but by co-workers. I’m talking about a trend in generosity that should be quite interesting to HR professionals: employees donating their Paid Time Off (PTO) to colleagues who need it to treat an illness or care for a family member who is chronically ill, or for employees who have gone through a major disaster.

I’ve known about catastrophic leave-sharing programs for some time, but I’ve come to appreciate this trend from reading a site called GivesMeHope which focuses on “life’s beautiful moments.” It’s a simple, text-based site, filled with short anecdotes submitted by users. Each story ends with a statement of what “gives me hope,” or, as they put it, “GMH.” Check out this story:

When my mom was dying of cancer, my dad had to keep working to keep his health insurance. His midsize company has a program by which employees can transfer paid time off to one another. A person in HR sent out an email explaining his situation. Within 3 hours, my father had 12 weeks of paid vacation. Strangers’ sacrifices GMH.

And this one:

A woman my mom works with has cancer and has been out of work for a long time. She recently found out she has to be out for longer but doesn’t have enough sick days left to cover it. Every nurse on my mom’s floor at the hospital is donating at least one of their paid sick days to her so she can finish her treatment – and get paid for it. GMH.

And finally, this one:

My girlfriend got the swine flu and was out of work for two weeks. Her paid time off wasn’t enough to cover the absence. When she got her first paycheck after returning, she found one of her coworkers had donated 8 hours of paid time off to her. Anonymously. She’s only been there 6 months. GMH.

If these stories warm your heart, consider starting a leave-sharing program for your employees. Most examples of leave-sharing come from universities – most notably the University of California system – but state and local governments also offer it, as well as some labor unions, non-profits, and private corporations. It may come with a bit of red tape, but leave-sharing programs are a low-cost, high-impact way to show thoughtful, flexible support to employees who fall upon tragic times. The show of altruism is wonderful for morale and can really bond a team.

Of course, transferring PTO between employees requires a solid policy – to describe what circumstances and family members qualify, and to determine how the program will be administered. It is best to address all this before a potentially emotional situation arises. Each situation must be researched carefully. There may be tax consequences, or state rules concerning what kind of hours can be donated (sick leave, holiday leave, or compensatory time may be treated differently.)

To explore this in more detail, we recommend An Employer’s Guide to Employee Leave-Sharing Programs as a start.

We’ve collected some examples of leave-sharing policies to get you started exploring the topic:

• Catastrophic Leave Sharing  Program from the University of California at Davis
• Catastrophic Leave Sharing Program for the City of Salem, Oregon
• Advocate Health Care PTO Sharing / Donation
• Catastrophic Leave Sharing Bank for Coast Federation of Classified Employees

Do these stories give you hope? Do you have a story of altruistic leave-sharing that you would like to share with our readers?

There are just 45 days left in 2009, and for many managers, it’s time for employee reviews. (Searching for “performance reviews” on Twitter at this time of year leads you to countless people who are either busy writing them, or nervously waiting to receive one.) It may have crossed your mind to skip or postpone performance reviews this year – as the business landscape keeps changing, the goals you made 12 months ago may seem unrealistic, or perhaps your organization has a freeze on salary increases. But no matter how bad the economy is, you cannot afford to miss giving feedback to your people.

Here are five compelling reasons why.

1. Simple legalities. You expect your employees to live by the handbook? Then so should management. If you have a written policy committing to an annual review, then provide the review. Skipping it means risking your reputation in court against a dismissed worker, who may portray the skipped review as a sign of poor management or bad communication.
2. Retain top talent. In tough times, you need your best people more than ever. Instead of avoiding their review because of economic turmoil, make a point of meeting with them and letting them know how much you appreciate them, even if the salary and bonus situation is not what it once was.
3. Put underperformers on warning. You can’t afford to have poor performers on board, so use the review as a chance to help them grow into a productive member of the team, or set the stage for their departure.
4. Re-align employees with the big-picture goals. Reviews aren’t just for the employees; they’re also a great time to revisit the company’s larger goals and make certain that the work being done reflects them.
5. Prepare for future difficulty or change. If the time should come in the future for a sale of the business, or a mass layoff, having recent, reliable documentation on hand will streamline the process. Same goes if new leadership is brought aboard.

No matter how rocky the economic outlook, your employees deserve to have a formal check-in on their progress. Plus, many aspects of the performance review directly benefit management (it’s not just handing out raises!). So don’t even consider skipping this important step, no matter how much you may be dreading performance review time in a bad economy. Evaluations can actually help you with your goals for the organization!

For more information:

• You can’t afford to skip reviews A well-argued case from Entrepreneur magazine.
• Should We Skip Performance Appraisals This Year? From 2008, but still very relevant to the issues we’re facing one year later.
• Don’t skip mid-year performance reviews Written about mid-year reviews, but this Wall St. Journal piece applies to year-end reviews equally well.
  

My worst interview ever, as a hiring manager in an editorial group, went perfectly… on the surface.

I didn’t know it had actually been a complete disaster until the candidate called me up two hours later. Was he calling to thank me, or had he possibly left something behind?

No. The candidate suavely asked me to dinner that evening. I stammered, “You do understand that I am the supervisor of the position you interviewed for, right?” “Oh, yes,” he replied, “but I had so much fun speaking with you that I thought you would like to go on a date with me as well as consider me for the job.”

His inappropriate actions did not win him the job — or the girl. And more importantly, it was an unmistakable wake-up call for me that I needed to adjust my interviewing skills into something more structured, and less like a friendly chat. I worked hard over the next two years to learn how to convey authority better.

A lot of hiring managers interview poorly, truth be told. For one thing, “hiring manager” isn’t a job title, it’s a role all managers have to play from time to time. They’re usually not trained to do it, and it’s a drain on what they consider their primary responsibilities.

Their interviewing offenses range from asking illegal questions about protected status, to stretching the decision out interminably, to being notoriously unstructured in their interviewing style.  Recruiting blogger Kiran Gali offers some hands-on advice on this last point in “Interview Tips for the Hiring Manager.” He writes:

Often Hiring Managers do not have a structure around their interviews. When I say structure I don’t mean the sequence of questions, but I am referring to more about the logic. For instance, not many hiring managers know about the concept of using CAR (context, action, result) or STAR (Situation, Task, Action, Result ) models which are really helpful. If the candidate says that he has been able to hit a revenue of X Rs (or $) in the very first quarter of his last job, asking context related questions such as what was the target, how well established the product is, what was the most sales done by anybody in team.

Action related questions would be something like, what did the individual do get that sales, was it any different from anyone else, what specific actions he has taken to cross sell or up sell the product. Questions related to Results center around, what percentage of total sales he contribute, was there any dip in costs related to their sales or did it cost more, did he end up exhausting the sales pipeline, has success allowed good references and hence a perennial pipeline. To put it simply, what was the context, which actions the individual took that made the difference, and how did it impact the top or bottom line.

This seems to me like a very helpful methodology that many hiring managers may not be familiar with. The same post also gives advice on hiring managers’ tendency to keep candidates on hold, the need for hiring managers to take notes throughout the interview, and on training your hiring managers to engage in company branding. Recommended reading!

“Hiring Managers Don’t Know Interview Questions,” from the Cube Rules blog, focuses on reassuring candidates that their impressions are correct: many hiring managers really don’t know what they’re doing. Don’t worry too much  about the occasional weird question, awkward silence, or meandering conversation, they say. The key, they stress, is that there are really only 3 basic interview questions that you have to answer. They all boil down to: Can you do the job? Will you love the job? And, what people do you like to work with? If you can bring anything the hiring manager asks back to this, they say, you’ll be golden. (Still, it couldn’t hurt to start training hiring managers to be more talented as interviewers!)

To help your people move toward success, check out this amazing article from CIO magazine. It’s called “The Hiring Manager Interviews,” and it is a collection of 16 interviews with high-ranking tech execs from such well-known organizations as the American Diabetes Association, Pacific Gas & Electric, Northern Trust, US Airways, Kohl’s, and many more. Highlights: exactly how Facebook’s head of technology grills applicants; how the CIO of Harvard Business School gets team buy-in by involving his whole staff; and how the CIO of Jack in the Box learned from her own hiring mistakes. It’s high-quality material that is sure to enrich the interviewing practices of anyone who takes the time to read it.

With a bit of effort and training of your management team, you can help them become great interviewers who make wise choices. As a plus to you, you’ll soon have a team of excellent interviewers available to help you make the right decisions for your organization’s staffing.

Even in good times, some employers use fear tactics against their employees, but a recent study shows that the problem is growing significantly as the economy continues to falter. This is discouraging and hurtful to individual employees, of course, but it is also detrimental to the overall health of an organization. In short, no good can come of using fear-based management, and yet it persists.

The recent press release “National Study Finds Employee Trust Sacrificed in the Financial Crisis” really opened my eyes. It covers a national study of leadership funded by the University of Phoenix, where researchers realized earlier this year that the financial crisis created a unique opportunity to test out managerial “fear theories” in near real time. They did the research over this summer, and published this autumn.

The results are dismaying, but not surprising. Belligerent behavior and eroding employee trust are two of the top leadership trends in the financial crisis, according to researchers Dr. Ruby Rouse and Dr. Richard Schuttler. Employees repeatedly described threatening communications such as:

• “Be thankful you have a job.”
• “You can be replaced.”
• “There are lots of qualified people on the street who would love your job.”

In good times or bad, fear is a lazy approach to managing people — and a counterproductive one. It makes employees feel disposable and intimidated rather than valued. It also hurts an organization’s effectiveness even more than it hurts employee feelings.

In an article titled “Fear is the organization killer,” Sam Smith wisely comments:

The truth is that way too many American companies today act as though their employees are some combination of robot and peasant foot soldier… For all the talk we’ve heard over the last generation about flattened org charts and mining employees for wisdom and cross-functional, empowered teams and cultivating learning organizations, many people still work in places where orders flow from top to bottom, where there’s precious little communication flow up the ladder, and where the value of an idea is judged by the title of the originator. One of the artifacts of this kind of organization is that it’s very good at fostering fear.

Many managers attempt to use fear as a motivational tool, Smith points out. And as the economy worsens, external factors can drive fear, no matter how good the workplace and the managers might be. He continues:

Regardless of the cause, though, fear is the enemy of engagement. Workers driven by fear may be good at toeing the line and obeying the company’s list of Thou Shalt Nots (in fact, this is probably what they’re best at), but humans instinctively seek to escape the causes of fear, and if you’re tense and seeking release, you aren’t putting your heart and soul into your work. Fear dampens creativity and it motivates a variety of behaviors that are antithetical to the company’s best interests.

In addition, fearful workers instinctively seek to bend any source of power to a personal advantage instead of investing it in the good of the organization. They use their ability, their influence, their leverage and their knowledge of the organization to weave for themselves a cocoon that will hopefully shield them from the source of their fear.

Have you seen examples of management, in these stressful times, falling back on fear-based tactics? What is the best way to keep the focus on engagement, rather than fear, in the current economy? We would love to hear your feedback from the front lines.

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about the future of Human Resources. HR, as you all know, is an organizational function with one foot in the past (administration, paperwork, systems, and rules) and the other stepping into the future (strategy, technology, and talent). And while we know it has value — and have in fact staked our entire careers on that value —it can be difficult to communicate that value to individuals in charge of cost-cutting. Where is the profession going, and how do we get there?

My thoughts came into focus as I read “Beyond administrivia: in savvy companies, HR sets the agenda for growth” by Joe McKendrick. He writes:

The side of human resources departments most managers and employees see is the administrative side — the folks who manage the payroll and benefits paperwork, keep salaries aligned, prepare new employee orientation packages, prepare severance packages, and make sure the enterprise is meeting the letter of all labor laws and regulations. But administrivia is just one small segment of HR’s mission. As a strategic partner, HR can help make or break business growth. Technology and supply chains help a business survive, but it is leadership and an innovative corporate culture that make a business thrive.

McKendrick goes on to recount some interesting case studies of CEOs who have involved HR in a forward-looking way. This all resonated with another blog post I read this week that fascinated me: Lance Haun’s “Is Human Resources fatally flawed?” Haun has been debating the question in his mind since April, he says. There are three main things that he has identified as possibly turning the tide on the profession:

1. Most of HR’s (traditional) value could be (and often already is) outsourced: Talent recruitment and selection, employee relations, and benefit administration are already subject to outsourcing.
2. Unclear goals and ROI: Smaller companies cannot afford large departments that are not revenue-producing, and HR may become a luxury department of large companies.
3. No input on business direction: You don’t get a seat at the table without having business savvy, Haun says, and adds that many HR practitioners have “a true lack of business courage outside of the talent world.”

But just as Haun has identified three major HR problems, he has also dreamt up three new specialty roles for HR professionals to move into in the future — roles that take all of the above into account. You’ll have to visit his blog to read all the excellent details, but as a quick peek, he advises three new specialty functions: a workplace process and productivity expert, an internal ombudsman for employee relations, and an employee life cycle manager. Says Haun, “Those would be the functions I would choose to continue if I had to cut it down to the bare minimum with functions I could track ROI and clear cut goals on. Everything else I could outsource effectively if needed.”

This brought my mind to a slightly older, but still very relevant, article: “The new roles of the Human Resources professional” by Susan M. Heathfield of About.com. Heathfield also advocates a change in the HR function:

The role of the HR manager must parallel the needs of his or her changing organization. Successful organizations are becoming more adaptive, resilient, quick to change direction and customer-centered. Within this environment, the HR professional, who is considered necessary by line managers, is a strategic partner, an employee sponsor or advocate, and a change mentor.

The strategic partner is there to support attainment of business goals. The employee sponsor or advocate is there to protect the employees and enable them to do their best work for the organization. And the change mentor or change champion that she envisions is put in charge of change both in HR and across the organization.

Of the two models, I must say that Haun’s breakdown of specialities seems a little more useful and grounded to me, although both are good visions of the future of the profession. I believe that there will always be room for the HR generalist, because there will always be companies where a sole HR practitioner is the right size. But I also believe that people who expect to be in the field for 20-30 more years need to begin thinking of the road ahead for them and for their careers. It may well be time to begin specializing in process management or change mentoring! Have any readers out there been taking their HR career in this direction? We would love to hear about it.

Image by CarbonNYC

Succession planning is tough; we all know that. Creating a concrete plan for an inherently unpredictable situation is a slippery business.

What’s more, it’s easy to neglect the process while the economy is in a recession. Your retention rates of existing employees are most likely up, and new candidates are beating down the door just to be considered.

Despite this embarrassment of riches on the resource side, succession planning is a critical process that must not be overlooked. Here’s why:

• It’s crucial to the fate of the company in moments of change.
• In a recession, it’s more important than ever to make your investments in human capital pay off.
• The workforce is aging, and disproportionate numbers will be retiring in the coming years of your career.
• Employees are more loyal and motivated when they know there is a culture of succession.
• The very exercise of planning can reveal important truths about your organization.

The loss of a key leader puts your business at risk in a number of ways, and the days after a major change can make or break a company. When it happens –- and it will -– will your organization be confused, gossiping, and rudderless? Or will you have a smart, adaptable plan in place to keep confidence high as you guide the organization through change?

Here are what top HR execs advise to make your succession planning more relevant and realistic:

• Last week, Dan at Great Leadership by Dan blogged about an article by Marshall Goldsmith in the most recent Harvard Business Online, “Four Tips for Efficient Succession Planning.” All four areas covered are strong, but our favorite pointers involve the realism (or lack of it) in succession planning. One example:
  

  The head of engineering is a high performing leader who has the potential to be COO. She has always been in an engineering role. If she had sales experience, she would be even more ready to be the COO so her development plan is written to include a job move to be head of sales. However, this company would never take the risk of putting someone without sales experience in the top sales job — so her development plan perpetually says, ‘move to a sales job’ even though that will never happen.

  Goldsmith really zeroes in on the gap between “the best-laid plans” and cold, hard reality — and you should, too.

• In February, Dennis Carey, a recruiter specializing in CEO- and Director-level candidates, launched CEOSuccession.com. His key practices are not to be missed. Some of the best tips are getting the board of directors active and involved, and regularly exposing up-and-coming managers to the board. He also recommends getting top candidates exposed to the outside media and the financial community to see how they will handle the challenge. Finally, Carey recommends tying some of a CEO’s compensation to successful succession planning, so they are quite literally invested in the plan.
• In her post Leadership Pipeline vs. Succession Planning, HR blogger Meg Bear observes that the best companies are not just thinking about mere succession planning –- they’re creating an entire “leadership pipeline” focused on identifying and investing in future leaders. Succession planning seems more relevant and less theoretical when under this paradigm. Meg’s been reading The Leadership Pipeline: How to Build the Leadership Powered Company and recommends it. She closes by asking,
  

  Do you really believe you can hire your way to all the talent you will need to compete in the marketplace today? What about in ten years’ time? Can you afford to under-utilize your talent?”

  For most of us, the answer is no, no, and no, and then a slightly unsettled notion that we should be looking into our own leadership pipeline.

What about you? Are you actively involved in a succession plan? What are your best tips to get top management invested? Do you have a success story of how your plan worked when you were faced with the loss of a key employee?

Do you set your goals annually, monthly, weekly, or not at all? Goal-setting is an oft-discussed key of leadership and effective management, but can you have too much of a good thing? Last week, goal-setting was a hot topic on the blogosphere, and the following are some highlights:

Leadership Styles Blog discussed “backwards planning,” one strategy for achieving goals. Nina Simosko discussed another strategy for achieving goals - “picking your preferences.” Reminding us that not all goal-setting is perfect, Learn This discussed potential pitfalls of the exercise. Will at Work presents research regarding unintended consequences of goal-setting, as well as how goals can help measure workplace performance. It’s fine Monday material to mull over as you start your week.