Another Episode of Corporate Survivor

[Cartoon courtesy of Grantland Cartoons]

Television network executives eager to launch the next hit reality series need look no further than the average American company composed of average, non-famous employees and average, non-famous bosses and executives. With the close of each quarter promising additional "reduction in force" cuts at many companies, guessing who the ax will fall on next can become a dark entertainment for those who appreciate gallows humor.

With your own private reality "survivor" series in full swing in the cubicles and offices around you, workforce managers have to decide how to create work plans that work for "survivors."  If your company is like many today, you've boxed yourself into a management hole because you've asked the remaining employees to take on the work of departing peers without offering additional compensation. Too often you've asked these workers—presumably your winners—to also go without the customary cost of living adjustment. The first step to creating a livable post-reduction in force work environment is asking your executives to reconsider. Is it really too much of a burden on the company to at least provide these survivors with an additional one to three thousand dollars spread out over the course of a year?  And, what about those who were promised promotions and raises as part of their development plan?  If you can't award them the promotion and the money, how about finding a way to at least provide them with the new title? 

If your company has internal regulations in place that stipulate a pay range for each position on your payroll, consider relaxing those rules as an emergency measure to cope with the recession. If you're worried about the promoted employees demanding back-pay once the economy turns around, guard against it beforehand with an agreement they could sign in which it is documented they agreed to the title without the pay until the company can afford to award it to them, and that, under no circumstances, are they entitled to back-pay. Would something like that be legally feasible?  Surely, your "high-potential" executives are smart enough to come up with some way to award the gratification of a higher title to an employee you've asked to do twice as much with no additional compensation. Come, on, it's the least you can do for them, right?

Also, think about who's left behind in each work group. Is there a work group for which there are two allocated employees, and the one who is ranked lower by title and pay is doing more, and with greater enthusiasm and competency, than the other?  Well, your bosses seemingly love cutting jobs, so how about getting rid of the lackluster producer and diverting the title and money to your budding star?  It's mean, but it also isn't kind to ask the employee working harder and better than her higher-titled and -salaried colleague to endure that situation.

If your bosses are still unconvinced, ask them if they've considered the cost of not finding a way to recognize or (gasp) compensate remaining employees who have taken on added responsibilities. Not only will a good many of them leave as soon as the economy turns around; what's worse, they may become demoralized and decide they'll do the minimum amount of work to get by, losing the enthusiasm and ingenuity your managers (and company executives) love about them. How much will your customers or clients enjoy receiving services or product from disengaged providers?  If they notice, and take their business elsewhere, you'll be in even worse shape than you're already in.

Next, see if your managers are all approaching management of your survivors the same way. Was one manager sharp enough to spot an empty office his high-performing survivor might enjoy, and award him with it?  Was another savvy enough to create her own flex-time for workers, letting them know it's OK if they want to work from home on Fridays or choose a couple days per week to leave at 4, and work the balance of the day from home?  Some of your managers may be more brave and adept than others at finding no-cost ways to reward survivors. As a workforce manager, it's your job to pave the way for all, not just the brave, independent-minded ones, to find creative, non-monetary ways to reward the hardy individuals pulling the weight your executives' lay-offs dropped on their shoulders. With all those reductions in force, there must be a lot of empty offices. Who among your survivors deserves one of them, since you can't award them with anything else?  Are you just going to let the offices remain empty?  Seems kind of a waste when enjoyable resources are so scarce.

Are all your managers good about encouraging survivors to think of no- or -low cost projects that pique their curiosity and passion?  Many of your survivors are still there because their engagement in their work sustains them. The worst thing you could do is squash that engagement with daily work plans composed of nothing but drudgery. The recession can be used as a way to spur innovation in survivors, encouraging them to think of news ways of pursuing what most interests them. You may be surprised at what some of the truly enthusiastic ones come up with—corporate partnerships or sponsorships to launch events or activities they've always wanted to lead or participate in, or maybe something as simple as your company's or brand's first Facebook group page. Encourage them to find something work-related to play with.

On the topic of engagement, it's also essential that managers tasked with finding people to cut look beyond pay grade to level of enthusiasm. On the surface, it makes sense, given the option of cutting two people, to cut the one who makes more money. But look deeper, and you'll see the smarter option is to keep the more engaged worker, and, if necessary, ask her to try her hand at a more promising project, or move staff around so she can switch places with another worker at another brand who lacks her guiding passion. Put the dis-engaged one referenced earlier, for instance, on the brand you're worried about, and see what happens. Give him three months (a new probationary period) to show you what he's got. Kicked into corporate survivor island mode, he may finally show signs of waking up. It's risky, but you'd be amazed what workers will do once they have a new challenge before them that their future employment depends on.

If absolutely necessary, ask the engaged, but maybe too-highly-paid-to-afford employee to take a temporary pay cut. One way or another, work it out so the most engaged, happiest workers don't slip through your company's twitching, sweaty fingers. Long-term corporate survival boils down to more than a mathematical calculation. For those of you in trouble, your company may be in the dire circumstances it finds itself in partly because workforce management decisions are being made on the basis of numbers alone. Success in a recession is more complicated than a simple math problem. If it were that easy, every company would be led by a college math professor.

Your survivors don't have to eat bugs to maintain their place on your payroll, but is what you're asking of them only slightly better than that?

What's your strategy for managing your company's "survivors?"  What non-monetary rewards are you using to maintain their engagement and commitment to your company beyond the recession?