In the past three years, the number of US employees willing to go above and beyond their employers’ expectations at work has fallen by 10 percent, from 27 percent in the second quarter of 2015 to 17.8 percent in Q2 of 2018, the latest data from Gartner’s Global Talent Monitor shows. Globally, employees’ confidence in business conditions has fallen for the first time since Q1 of 2016.
One possible driver of employees’ declining levels of discretionary effort is a lack of satisfaction with opportunities to grow and develop in their careers. Nearly 40 percent of employees in the US and globally ranked a lack of future career opportunities as their main source of dissatisfaction in a previous job, displacing compensation as the number-one driver of attrition both in the US and around the world. Over the past few years, we have seen development opportunity grow to be an increasingly critical element of the employee value proposition, both as a driver of attraction for new employees and, in its absence, as a reason for quitting.
“With recent U.S. reports showing little growth year over year in real earnings, workers hope to achieve more satisfaction in their jobs through better titles and opportunities to advance and grow in their current careers,” Brian Kropp, group vice president of Gartner’s HR practice, said in a statement. “To prevent further reduction in workplace effort and to retain top talent, employers should pay closer attention to employee dissatisfaction about the lack of career opportunities, particularly if wage growth remains stagnant.”
“Leading organizations are able to use their employment brand to illustrate why their career opportunities are better than their competitors,” he added. “A company’s EVP directly correlates to employee engagement levels, as workers are more likely to work harder and stay in their current positions if they are highly satisfied with their company’s EVP offerings. Gartner data shows that organizations with high levels of employee engagement report financial outcomes three times higher than firms with lower engagement levels.”
In a recent Harvard Business Review article, Sujin Jang presented the concept of “cultural brokerage” as a way of facilitating interactions across employees from different cultural backgrounds to supporting team creativity. Her research shows that “cultural brokers” (team members with multicultural experience) can act as a link between team members whose experience is mainly limited to only one culture. This research has significant implications for an increasingly global workforce and for HR leaders working to support diversity and inclusion goals.
One key message for HR leaders is that while having diverse teams can foster innovative thinking, all of the members of those teams must also feel included in order to achieve maximum benefit to innovation and productivity. Our research at Gartner on D&I leadership also finds that an inclusive culture can have a major impact on team performance, particularly for diverse teams. (Gartner Diversity & Inclusion Leadership Council clients can read our Creating Inclusive Leaders study here to learn more.)
But facilitating an inclusive environment where employees from different cultural backgrounds feel equally valued and included is not an easy task; even with cultural brokers on their team, leaders must be proactive about inclusion and should not depend on these brokers to foster constructive collaboration alone. We recommend four approaches to building inclusive team environments:
- Ensure leader behaviors match inclusive values: Our research shows that interpersonal integrity and productive conflict management are two leadership behaviors that effectively drive inclusive environments for employees.
The 2018 FIFA World Cup in Russia has been consuming the attention of football/soccer fans around the world over the past two weeks and will continue to do so until the final match on July 15. The world’s most-watched sporting event, the World Cup has viewers tuning into matches from every country and at all hours of the day—including during work hours. Just as the Super Bowl and the National College Athletic Association’s Division I basketball tournaments have been demonstrated to cause a dip in productivity in the US, this quadrennial international event is bound to have an economic impact in many countries.
New research attempts to calculate just how big that impact is likely to be. Maude Lavanchy, a research associate at IMD Business School, and Willem Smit, an assistant professor of marketing at the Asia School of Business and an international faculty fellow at MIT’s Sloan School of Management, built a model to predict the productivity cost of the 2018 World Cup in a number of major countries based on how many matches were scheduled to take place during work hours in that time zone and how the expected outcome of each match (based on betting odds from UK bookmakers) would affect workers’ happiness—positively if their team wins, and negatively if they lose. The researchers outlined their findings in an article at Bloomberg earlier this month:
In all, we found that half of the 48 group-stage games could have economic consequences. Although such calculations are inherently speculative, they can nonetheless tell a useful economic story. And in this case, it doesn’t look good.
Even as Canada is working to make itself a hub for cutting-edge technologies and attract investment from global tech companies, much of its own homegrown tech talent is looking for work abroad, a new study finds. Led by the University of Toronto’s Zachary Spicer, the study found that one in four recent Canadian STEM graduates from the country’s top universities were working in other countries, mostly the US, the Globe and Mail reported earlier this month. Figures like these, Spicer warns, are enough to raise concerns about brain drain:
The numbers were higher for graduates of computer engineering and computer science (30 per cent), engineering science (27 per cent) and software engineering, where two out three graduates were working outside Canada, mostly in the United States. Nearly 44 per cent of those working abroad were employed as software engineers, with Microsoft, Google, Facebook and Amazon listed as top employers. …
“I think policy makers should look at this as a bit of a wake-up call,” said Mr. Spicer, who said the study was the first scholarly effort to map out Canada’s tech brain drain. “When we see certain fields where upward of 65 per cent of a graduating class are leaving for the U.S., I think there should be concerns there that our homegrown companies aren’t even going to be able to access some of that talent. If we found in the 1960s that 60 per cent of our auto workers were leaving to work in other countries … we probably would have held a royal commission.”
This study’s findings may comes as a surprise, considering that Canada’s tech sector is by all accounts on an upward trend.
In what looks like the Trump administration’s latest effort to tighten the US border by subjecting entrants to greater scrutiny, the State Department announced in the Federal Register on Friday that it was proposing to require that people seeking both immigrant and non-immigrant visas provide consular officials with additional information, including their social media accounts from the past five years, Ana Campoy reports at Quartz:
“This is an indirect way that the Trump administration is trying to limit immigration to the US that does not require for them to go to Congress,” said Stephen Yale-Loehr, an immigration law professor at Cornell University, of the proposed rules.
The US had already been requesting social-media information from people suspected to represent a national security threat. That policy targeted a sliver of travelers to the US—about 65,000. The new measures would cover nearly 15 million people. Along with the handles, the State Department is also asking for a five-year history of email addresses, telephone numbers, and international trips.
The proposals must be approved by the Office of Management and Budget after a 60-day public comment period, so these new requirements will not come into effect until this summer at the earliest, but if they do, Campoy surmises, it may make some people think twice about traveling to the US. The American Civil Liberties Union issued a statement condemning the proposals as “ineffective and deeply problematic”:
Starbucks in Taipei (Richie Chan/Shutterstock.com)
At its annual shareholder meeting on Wednesday, Starbucks announced that it “has achieved 100 percent pay equity for women and men, and for people of all races, performing similar work in the United States” and expressed a commitment to closing its gender pay gap worldwide as well:
Announced today, Starbucks has committed to achieving and maintaining 100 percent gender pay equity for partners in all company-operated markets globally, setting a new bar for multinational companies. This is an effort supported by equal rights champion Billie Jean King and her Leadership Initiative (BJKLI) and leading national women’s organizations, the National Partnership for Women & Families and the American Association of University Women. …
Starbucks has also formulated Pay Equity Principles that led to the successful closure of the pay gap at Starbucks in the United States. Recognizing the importance of this issue for women all around the world, Starbucks is sharing these principles so other companies can follow suit, and address known systemic barriers to global pay equity.
A number of major US companies with multinational reach, including large financial institutions and tech companies, have recently released pay equity audits demonstrating gender and racial pay gaps of 1 percent or less in the US and committing to closing the small gaps that exist. These audits have come in response to pressure from the activist investor Arjuna Capital, which filed shareholder resolutions at a number of large companies requesting them. Arjuna had submitted such a proposal at Starbucks as well, but withdrew it last year after the coffee chain issued a report showing 99.7 percent pay equity between male and female employees performing similar work.
Quartz’s Maria Thomas highlights new data from the Monster Salary Index, released by the online employment portal Monster India, showing that the longer Indian women work, the more their pay lags behind that of their male peers:
Data for 2017 show Indian women with three to five years of experience earn marginally higher median wages (1.09%) than men at the same level. But the tide begins to turn once employees have six to 10 years of experience, with men earning 15.3% more than women. And at over 11 years of experience, the gender pay gap becomes a startling 25%. …
These figures are particularly frustrating given all the obstacles women must typically overcome in the first place to make it to the top of their fields. To begin with, India’s conservative society still identifies bearing and caring for children as a woman’s primary role. That makes it incredibly difficult to juggle household responsibilities alongside professional ones. All the more so after childbirth—that is if at all new mothers are allowed to return to the workplace. Among those who are, only a lucky few can expect a reliable support system, including childcare facilities and flexible timings.
These challenges are by no means specific to India. Studies in the US and UK have also found that the gender pay gap starts small and grows over the course of people’s careers, with marriage and children playing a role in holding back the growth of women’s earnings as they either make sacrifices in their own career to accommodate their spouse’s, take career breaks to raise children, or find themselves shut out of promotions and stretch assignments due to family obligations (if not outright gender bias).
Because the gender role expectations placed on Indian women are even more restrictive than those of their peers in Western countries, the obstacle is that much greater, but not qualitatively different.