A lot of us have heard about the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), and the establishment of the 94 Calls to Action. Based on my experiences, it appears organizations, and specifically corporations, across Manitoba have been grappling with the Call to Actions and how to implement them. This is almost always a tough subject, but we have to get comfortable being uncomfortable. Call to Action #92 specifically address corporation’s role in making a significant impact to eliminate some of the systemic suppression experienced by Indigenous peoples, and others who identify as BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and people of colour).

Systemic Suppression and Systemic Racism inherently exists in many of our organizational systems, public and private. This is not about the people within the systems, but the processes and procedures within the systems that cause this marginalization and inequality.

The TRC* was formed with the goal of “promoting healing, educating, listening, and the preparation of a report for all parties that includes recommendations for the Government of Canada regarding the IRS (Indian Residential Schools) system, experience and legacy.”

Personally, the term “residential school” didn’t even register for me until about 10 years ago. I stumbled across the CBC miniseries 8th Fire that took viewers through a history that I had never heard, or possibly was never presented to me in grade-school. After watching this series, I started understanding that my thoughts, perceptions, and biases were formed without any direct experience with Indigenous communities. What I came to realize was: 1) My ignorance; 2) That I cannot fear this ignorance; and 3) I was not alone.

The hardest thing for me about starting this journey towards reconciliation was having to discard almost everything I had heard, or thought I understood, about Indigenous cultures and peoples. I gravely misunderstood the history that came along with that. Like anything, the more you explore the more you understand, and that’s where I chose to focus my graduate degree.

Part of this degree included a research project that was initially tasked with creating case studies to be used at the University of Manitoba’s Asper School of Business. A standard business case study format would be followed, but specifically highlighting a dilemma within Indigenous organizations. What we found was before creating these case studies on complex business decisions with Indigenous stakeholders, there was a need to first provide basic information in the classroom regarding the history of the relationship between Indigenous people and settlers, including contemporary issues in Canada. These findings echoed in many of the conversations I’ve had since.

Looking at this through a Human Resource perspective, the TRC's Call to Action #92 specifically addresses what changes are needed in the corporate sector for achieving steps towards reconciliation with Indigenous Communities. When implementing CTA #92 strategies in any organization, it is imperative that change is accepted from the boardroom to the frontline, but I believe our HR professionals will be the ones leading the Charge for Change.

Two of the three main points for CTA#92 are HR focused:

• Ensure that Aboriginal peoples have equitable access to jobs, training, and education opportunities in the corporate sector, and that Aboriginal communities gain long-term sustainable benefits from economic development projects.
• Provide education for management and staff on the history of Aboriginal peoples, including the history and legacy of residential schools, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Treaties and Aboriginal rights, Indigenous law, and Aboriginal–Crown relations. This will require skills-based training in intercultural competency, conflict resolution, human rights, and anti-racism.

We are now in a position where our government commissioned a report so we can see how to start repairing this relationship, guidance was provided in the outcomes of the commission, and commitments were made. But many corporations appear to be waiting for First Nations, Inuit and Metis to keep this ball rolling. It’s important to start having these conversations in our organizations while remaining respectful and open minded.

This takes us. Professionals in Human Resources to start providing equality through equity.

References
*http://caid.ca/DTRC.html

About the Author: Adam N. Nepon is a Founder/Partner at MBA Consulting & Co./Realcare. He can be reached at adam@realcare.ca or 204-997-6147.

It’s no big secret that organizations depend on their employees, stakeholders, and their customers to ensure smooth running of their business and deliver results for the organization. While every business function has a role to play, it is important to note that a company’s growth relies heavily on its workforce. But what role does Human Resources play into this. Sometimes it’s tough to show the impact HR creates to the stakeholders inside and outside a firm. As they might not really understand the value HR brings into the organization or the exact role, they play in making the organization successful.

Since organizations cannot be successful without their people, the Human Resources function focuses on helping the organization achieve its objectives through their human capital. What should HR leaders do to create synergies between external and internal stake holders to enhance a firm’s performance? The key is to create a powerful line of sight between business strategy and actual performance. The value of HR lies with the stake holders. HR leaders must align practices with the requirements of internal and external stakeholders. If the people leader develops policies and HR practices that supports the employees and the company to deliver to the customers and investors, HR has succeeded. The performance of a company is tied to the performance of its people. The HR function empowers the company by hiring the right talent and developing them along the way to meet the organization’s needs by creating an environment where the employees contribute optimally to business success.

For a CHRO to create value for HR, it is important to note that their value does not come from the policies and people management, it comes from developing and maintaining a business mindset. Over the decades HR leaders have only aspired to have a seat at the table, aligning one’s work with the company’s business strategies. But now that the HR does have a seat at the table, how do they make it count? The key lies in our comprehension of what drives the business and how can we use that knowledge to maximize our ability to meet company goals. The head of people must be fully acclimated with the market to which his firm caters to. The deliverables and strategies often reflect the demand and supply and have very little to do with policy making.

A CHRO can truly support the executives at the firm and truly be a strategic partner when they are able to bring in a competitive advantage to the firm through their people influence. The HR Leaders are in a unique position to steer the leadership behavior, the employee behavior, and the customer behavior. They bring value by fostering a collective level of commitment in its workforce and helping them to work effectively and creatively to help their organization attain a competitive advantage in the market.

One way to evaluate if the HR strategies are working is to measure it in the form of the outcome of the business. The more there is alignment between the customer expectations and the employee’s performance, the more the firm can cut into the wallet share of the customer due to this competitive advantage because of its people strategy.

This brings us to an age-old debate of whether an HR leader should be a people person or one with the sense of driving the business. This is something every HR leader struggles with at some point in their career. Do you need people on your team who are acquainted with the employment laws, nuances of the various HR functions or should you go with a person who is more of an industry expert? While every business has its own DNA and a unique style of operation, HR leaders who come with excellent HR background but do not relate to the business of the firm they are in, struggle. Similarly, a business leader heading the people function might also not do justice to the role.

The interesting thing is both kinds of people can be equally successful. When you have someone, who doesn’t know the business, one needs to create a support system to get them in to the nuts and bolts of the business and surround them with business leaders who would equip them with necessary support and guidance. The same applies to the HR leaders who come with great business sense but might be less updated with the capabilities HR brings with experience – they need a dependable team of stellar HR professionals to support them.

When the CHRO is the key leader who can cogently discuss the world view on the firm’s ability to run and grow the business, familiarity with the greenfield and all other external realities – around digital capabilities, technology, regulatory nuances, compliances, economy and so much more – then one can really bring alive the HR value in a firm and become a true strategic partner to the Chief Executive Officer.

About the author: Ruchi Kulhari is Senior VP – Human Resources at Coforge Limited and can be reached at Ruchi.Kulhari@coforgetech.com or 980-428-1311.

COVID-19 has affected us all, but there is no denying the lasting effects of the pandemic on the younger generation. With many businesses experiencing an uncertain future as well as cashflow disruption, 2020 hiring for graduate co-ops and apprenticeship programs came to a screeching halt. Unfortunately, between reduced hiring and limited staff resources for training, the unemployment rate for 15 – 24-year-olds has more than quintupled since the start of the pandemic.

Fortunately, despite these troubling numbers there are now reasons to be more optimistic for the future. Businesses are currently stabilizing and adjusting based on the new normal, and various governments across the globe are creating incentives for businesses to help the younger generation join the workforce. Not only is this beneficial for younger Canadians trying to gain valuable experience, it has a positive and transformational impact on businesses as well.

Fresh minds equate to innovation

Beyond temporary governmental incentives, there are several reasons why hiring young people makes sense for businesses. New and young employees provide new energy and fresh perspectives while freeing up some of the bandwidth for more senior staff. Along with this fresh perspective, they also bring important skills such as technological capabilities and understandings.

As the younger generation is typically more skilled in technology, their presence also bodes well for championing new and emerging technologies within the organization. This generation is not just able to pick up technologies quickly but can also promote the importance of such tools within the organization. Globally, 88 percent of Gen Z employees believe that AI can improve their job, for example – an important factor in the shift to digitization in the new world after COVID.

The appeal of these latest technologies for younger generations can help businesses take advantage. With change consistently accelerating and changing client needs, these younger workers can help businesses stay ahead of the curve.

The introduction of new young minds also has a positive impact on workplace innovation. As these young employees’ champion and introduce new technologies, they in turn create an environment that is attractive to other young, future employees, putting the company in a position where innovation and generating new ideas is constantly top of mind.

Attracting top young talent

Attracting top young talent in the current job market can be difficult. Within the accounting industry, Canadian industry experts believe that young professionals are looking for more collaborative organizations that are open to continually advancing technology and analytics. To be more attractive than the competition, People departments need to take a pulse of what is important to these young generations and capture their interest accordingly.

Consider top companies such as Google and Apple, which have been successful in attracting the newest generation through perks like flexibility, remote working, and unlimited holiday time. Similarly, successful, forward-thinking firms also recognize that factors beyond pay are important incentives for young people. They typically look for “intrinsic motivators” such as an exciting, collaborative work environment or a day off to support a charity of importance.

Of course, intrinsic motivators aren’t “one size fits all”, and interests differ depending on the person, so it’s important for HR teams to offer multiple benefit packages and career plans that will attract diverse talent. While this is important to everyone, it is especially important to young employees that are just starting out in their careers.

To obtain this level of understanding, a joined-up approach to company data is required. As the employee data becomes plentiful on the cloud, relevant employee data becomes more easily accessible and can be translated into meaningful action

The solution for disruption

As the world is still in the midst of defining a new normal, it can be challenging for companies to predict the change in customer needs and operations. As such, companies will need to be flexible to best adapt to this environment. If companies only have vision for how things used to be, these challenges will persist. That’s why introducing young people to a company is so important – young employees are not only agile but also hold the key to unlocking new success through technical skills and innovation.

Despite the challenges faced by today’s small and medium businesses, a focus on hiring young people may be exactly what is needed to survive and thrive in the future.

About the author: Hannah Wright is Director of Product Marketing at Sage. Hannah began her career in talent acquisition, gaining first-hand insight into the opportunities and challenges HR and People teams face. Today, she’s responsible for Sage People product content, supporting HR leaders as they look to tech to solve some of the challenges of today’s world.

You have made the decision to investigate and chosen the appropriate investigator (see "Selecting a Workplace Investigator", HRmatters, Spring 2021 Issue). The investigation is complete. Now what? How do you use the report, how much of it do you disclose and to whom, and how and how long do you retain it

Using the Report

At the outset you will want to ensure that the investigation and report were reasonably done. This does not mean that you should interfere with the investigator's process or findings. Rather, you want to evaluate if the basic process was sound. An investigation report should set out the investigation process, the evidence gathered, the findings, and the reason for the findings including the evidentiary standard applied. Depending on the scope of the investigation, relevant workplace policies should be identified and considered. If there are clear problems with the report, such as a failure to interview important witnesses, obvious bias, or reaching conclusions without an evidentiary basis, you will want to carefully consider how much weight to give to the report, and whether it is feasible to have it rectified or redone.

Once you are satisfied that the report is proper, you will need to decide what to do with the findings. If the complaint was determined to be "unsubstantiated", the complainant should not suffer negative consequences unless it is specifically found that the complaint was malicious. This is very rare. You will also want to consider whether there are other remedial actions which should be taken. Sometimes a violation of policy is not established, but the investigation sheds light on other issues in the workplace. For example, an investigation into a complaint of harassment by a manager may uncover behaviour that falls short of harassment, but which indicates a poor management style. If the complaint is substantiated, you will need to consider what remedial and/or disciplinary actions are merited.

If the report indicates undesirable behaviour on the part of someone who was not treated as a respondent, you need to investigate that conduct separately, this time giving the person involved the appropriate cautions and opportunity to respond.

Disclosure

At a minimum, the complainant and respondent should be advised when the investigation is complete, and the results of the investigation (i.e. whether the complaint has been substantiated or not). Beyond that, workplace policies or collective agreements may provide guidelines for disclosure, and what information the parties are entitled to. Often parties are provided with an "Executive Summary" containing the findings, but not with other parts of the report such as witness statements or recommendations. Providing "too much" information, especially in the form of witness statements, can often create new conflicts, and should be avoided.

If the report was solicitor-client privileged, or prepared in contemplation of litigation, then legal counsel should be consulted prior to disclosing any part of the report. Privilege may be lost, sometimes accidentally, and care should be taken.

For federally regulated employers, the new Work Place Harassment and Violence Prevention Regulations require that an investigator’s report is provided to the principal party, responding party, the work place committee or health and safety representative and, in some circumstances, the designated recipient. It must include a general description of the occurrence, the investigator's conclusions, and recommendations to eliminate or minimize the risk of a similar occurrence. It must not reveal, directly or indirectly, the identity of persons involved in an occurrence or the resolution process.

When possible, a person not involved in the investigation should be the one to communicate the findings to the complainant and respondent. This should be done with sensitivity, as it is likely a difficult and emotional experience for the person involved. Both the complainant and respondent should be provided with information about any Employee Assistance Programs offered by the Employer. It is best to meet separately in a neutral, professional, and private space. It is often helpful to ask the parties if they have any questions. If you do have the answer on the spot or want to take time to consider the answer, indicate that you will respond to them later, and then ensure that you do respond.

Both the complainant and the respondent should be cautioned about retaliation.

Retention

Post investigation, you will want to consider what to do with the report itself.

Where a complaint is substantiated, you will want to retain the report in a confidential file until the time limitation for filing a wrongful/constructive dismissal claim has elapsed. In Manitoba, this is currently six years. It can be kept in the respondent's file in the same manner as other disciplinary material and referenced in the complainant's file in case the complainant claims a constructive dismissal in the future.

If the complaint is not substantiated, then neither the complaint nor the report should be referenced in the respondent's personnel file. It would be wise to retain the report in a separate file for six years in case the complainant subsequently alleges a constructive dismissal.

In a unionized environment, the report should be retained in the manner and for the time set out in the collective agreement. Unless it is contrary to the collective agreement, the report should be retained for at least three years, as current Manitoba Workplace Safety and Health legislation requires employers review/revise their policies every three years and this can be helpful in that process. This will also capture the filing timelines for Workplace Safety and Health prosecutions (2 years) and Human Rights complaints (1 year).

When dealing with the investigation material, it must be remembered that some of that information may be stored electronically and should be dealt with in the same manner as hard copies. Further, care should be taken to maintain confidentiality in the destruction of this material.

Workplace investigation reports can be very helpful tools but when handled incorrectly can introduce new problems. Care should be taken in determining the use, disclosure, retention, and destruction of such reports.

About the Author: Cynthia Lazar is a Lawyer and Workplace Investigator at Taylor McCaffrey LLP. She can be reached at clazar@tmlawyers.com or 204-988-0300.

Issue: 40% of employees are struggling with mental health, addiction amid the coronavirus pandemic and restrictions have left 54% feeling isolated. (Ipsos) The pandemic has kept people apart. What can HR Leaders do to help reduce the impact of loneliness as we go forward?

We were already forming fewer friendships than in the past. Previously, as life got busier, our social network got smaller and smaller. Then, COVID hit. Never has the entire world been subjected to such collective feelings of fear, uncertainty, anxiety, and sorrow. And Loneliness Became Pervasive.

Children and teenagers were suddenly cut off from their friends. Family members were often isolated from each other. Colleagues were no longer connecting at the water cooler. Physical distancing, working remotely, and lockdowns have impacted our relationships and our mental health, and it’s expected that the ripple out impact of this will be felt for years to come.

People Are Not Seeing The Light At The End Of The Tunnel

While the switch to a virtual office with meetings on ZOOM, TEAMS or other online platforms has allowed for greater flexibility, efficiency, convenience, as well as safety, experts say the lack of social interaction has taken a mental health toll on our teams and workers.

As we head into the possibility of an end to lockdowns and closures, many are feeling very fatigued and emotionally drained. The pandemic has made people more cynical compared to the early days of the crisis. And even with the rollout of vaccines across the country, it has done little to uplift the mood, according to an Ipsos poll. In fact, 43% of our employees are feeling pessimistic about a return to ‘normal’ life once the spread of COVID-19 is contained. The gradual reopening of society isn’t making social connection easier. Even deciding how to interact with others in our family, community and workplaces has created additional tension. We are in this dilemma where we are closer than we want to be to some people, and we are too distanced from others.

What Is Loneliness?

Loneliness is an emotion that brings about “social pain.” It’s the feeling you get when distressed or anxious due to a perceived lack of connection with others when you need it or want it. It is characterized by feeling unwanted, empty, and cut off from other human beings.

Relationships need to exist, fulfill an appropriate role, and be mostly positive, to keep loneliness at bay.
Everyone feels lonely sometimes. When loneliness happens often or becomes chronic, as it did during the lockdowns, it can have a negative impact on our physical, cognitive, and emotional health.

Loneliness and Working Remotely

A pre-pandemic survey as measured by the UCLA Loneliness Scale in 2019 by Cigna found that 61% of employees were lonely, up 7% from 2018.

In previous decades, work was a major source of friendships and connections. There were company sponsored picnics, sports teams and holiday dances, as well as impromptu ‘water cooler’ conversations.

For over a year, many have been working from home or in isolation from colleagues. Conversations have been focused on problem solving and meeting the challenges of the business disruption. Fewer meaningful relationships are being built. Our average number of close friends whom we can talk with about important issues (such as the coronavirus) has shrunk from three to two, with over 25 percent of respondents reporting they have no close friends whatsoever with whom to discuss what matters to them (Cigna 2019).

Research is showing that loneliness rates are increasing in the wake of the pandemic. Mayo Clinic investigators found a significant increase in loneliness and a decrease in feelings of friendship during the pandemic. According to a Statista 2021 global survey, about 33 percent of adults experienced feeling of loneliness worldwide, with Canada and the US just under the global average. However, 36% of Americans reported feeling “serious loneliness” post COVID, according to a Loneliness in America report by Harvard University.

This becomes cyclical, as we know that loneliness at work can increase absenteeism and presenteeism (lack of engagement) and impair productivity, performance, creativity, reasoning, and decision-making even further. Which can add to that sense of loneliness. When employers and employees work together to combat loneliness, everyone wins.

So What Can HR Leaders Do To Combat Loneliness Within Their Teams?

HR leaders play an important role in preventing loneliness among their team. One of the 10 Important Elements Of Organizational Culture is social support, however it is often one of the most neglected areas of workplace culture. It is seen as an ‘extra’, a social nicety, or something to focus on if you have time.” Now is the time.

Research shows that it is important for all leaders to increase the right type of communication needed for building social bonds. What is most important is that employees who work in virtual or in-person environments feel a stronger sense of liking and connectedness to their team members when there is a high degree of informal communication between them.

12 Ways for Leaders To Combat Loneliness:

• Encourage regular check-ins and ensure that everyone is connecting as a team.
• Use online tools to keep in touch with each other.
• Develop connection specific strategies for those in emptier worksites as well as those working remotely.
• Host regular team meetings, and don't make them all about work.
• Add some time for fun and socialization. Look at ice breakers, conversations openers, or gamified challenges.
• Eat lunch together. Exercise together.
• Create walking meetings.
• Be vulnerable. Share some of the challenges that you have faced.
• Reach out and provide emotional support when needed.
• Know how to start a supportive mental health conversation.
• Make yourself available for when employees need someone to lend a friendly ear.
• Promote the use of corporate and community resources, such as your HR department, EAP, or telehealth services for those who may be struggling.

Loneliness is an important issue that has taken on increased urgency in the face of a pandemic. Loneliness will have profound consequences for how individuals continue to weather the COVID-19 pandemic. As our teams find their way forward, it is important that HR leaders not overlook the strategies that can minimize the impact of loneliness on the mental health of those around them.

About the author: For over twenty years, Beverly has used her S-O-S Principle™ with people and organizations who want to control their reactions to stress, build resiliency against life’s challenges, and live healthy, successful lives. She launched her company, R ‘n B Consulting in 1995, and since then she has helped teams from a wide range of industries, including healthcare, education, government agencies, finance, and not-for-profit, to shift from stressed-out to resilient, enabling them to be more engaged, productive and healthy. Connect with Beverly if you are looking to have her share her expertise and experience with your audience by visiting https://worksmartlivesmart.com or emailing her at info@worksmartlivesmart.com.

Regardless of industry, size or location, all organizations benefit from a diverse workforce. Not only is it ethically right to mirror the communities served in the workforces that serve them; diversity can also make organizations more successful. The intersectional* nature of our experiences as members of many demographics at once gives each of us valuable, unique perspectives and knowledge of the world around us.

However, just because an organization is diverse doesn’t necessarily mean that those perspectives are being welcomed... and that’s where inclusion comes in. The Harvard Business Review** quotes inclusion strategist Vernā Myers as saying, “Diversity is being invited to the party. Inclusion is being asked to dance.” An inclusive environment is one where people of all ages, abilities, races, genders, sexual orientations and socioeconomic statuses are not only present but feel safe, respected and empowered.

So how can organizational leaders strive to become more inclusive? Here are five places to start:

1. Invest in inclusivity and make those investments known.

When establishing community support plans for the upcoming year, consider the needs of not-for-profit organizations serving a wide variety of populations. Provide opportunities to staff for both professional and personal development by hiring a range of diverse speakers and educators to share their knowledge and guidance. Be public about the values the organization stands for and what it’s doing to promote them.

And don’t forget to share these stories on social media – they’ll go a long way in encouraging the broadest range of potential candidates to feel welcome in applying for open positions, and current staff will feel proud to be part of the team!

2. Amplify voices that have traditionally been silenced.

Sit back and observe some upcoming team meetings, whether in-person or virtual. Is each individual provided an opportunity to speak, or are a few strong voices interrupting and drowning out the rest?

If there’s inequity, use words (“You were interrupted – what were you saying?”) and model goal behavior (active listening; “Yes, and…”) to start shifting workplace culture. Call on those who are traditionally quiet to share their opinion, whether in the group setting or one-on-one. You may be surprised by what you learn!

3. Establish an environment of trust.

None of the provided sharing opportunities will be meaningful unless those who are speaking believe that their words are welcomed and taken seriously. Leaders need to earn that trust by doing their own research into the biases, microaggressions and discriminatory behaviour that can impact their team members and putting Human Resources policies into place to help prevent them.

Don’t be defensive if a staff member brings forward an opportunity for change; rather, thank them for their honesty and perspective and outline how you’ll address the problem. Remember, it’s not up to impacted staff to figure out the solution; they shouldn’t have to deal with these issues at work in the first place.

4. Be mindful of and address unique barriers to career growth.

Ideally, once a staffer is entrenched in a supportive team, their opportunity for career growth should be limitless, right? Unfortunately, that’s not always the case. There are a myriad of factors that can impact an individual’s ability to move into a leadership role. For example, requirements for frequent travel can be all but impossible to meet for those with certain accessibility constraints or caregiving responsibilities.

If your goal is a diverse leadership team – which it should be – reexamine what it takes to get there and consider how some of these barriers can be addressed.

5. Hold yourself accountable.

No matter how much effort an organization puts into inclusion initiatives, mistakes will be made – and that’s OK! Mistakes are human, and a great opportunity to do better next time. With that said, they must be faced head-on.

Take a look at employee turnover – is a certain demographic overrepresented among those who’ve chosen to leave the organization? Are the same themes repeatedly emerging in exit interviews? If so, it’s time to research what can be done to better serve this group as an employer.

Establishing an inclusive environment is neither quick nor easy, but it’s the right thing to do for each of our teams, clients and communities. We encourage all employers to join Payworks on this journey towards building a better, more inclusive and more equitable Canada.

References
*https://www.cjr.org/language_corner/intersectionality.php
**https://hbr.org/2017/02/diversity-doesnt-stick-without-inclusion

About the Author: Nicole Stewart, CPHR, Vice President, Human Resources at Payworks. Nicole has over 20 years of management and HR experience and has spent much of her career cultivating Payworks’ award-winning, high-engagement, low-turnover culture as the leader of our talented team of HR professionals.

Deciding to Conduct an Investigation

Sometimes a workplace investigation is required by either statute or a collective agreement. In other cases, an investigation is not required by law, but is a prudent step to protect the Employer's interests. For example, where the Employer is considering dismissing a non-unionized employee for just cause and a wrongful dismissal action is likely, a good investigation can bolster a case for just cause and can also be used to rebut allegations of bad faith conduct. Similarly, where allegations point to a potential contravention of Human Rights legislation or a violation of respectful workplace or harassment provisions in a collective agreement that may give rise to a grievance, a workplace investigation should be considered.

Once it is determined that a workplace investigation should take place, how should an employer determine what kind of investigator to retain, and what type of investigation is desirable?

Internal or external investigator?

The first consideration in selecting a workplace investigator is determining whether the investigation should be done "in-house" by an internal person or whether an external investigator should be retained. There are advantages and disadvantages to each approach.

An internal investigator will be more familiar with the workplace and policies and will be less costly than an external investigator. However, an external investigator will almost always be perceived as being more objective. Employees are more likely to feel comfortable speaking with an external party. Whether justified or not, internal investigators may be viewed as threatening, untrustworthy, or motivated to protect the Employer's interests above maintaining the integrity of the investigation. Reports of disinterested external investigators may also be more persuasive to an ultimate decision-maker than those of internal investigators. External investigators can be expensive though, especially as the scope and complexity of an investigation may not be easy to predict. Issues and witnesses may only become relevant after the investigation begins. This makes creating a realistic budget challenging.

Investigations of minor disputes between peers where future litigation is unlikely may be suitable for investigation by internal human resource professionals with proper training in investigations. Where there is a power imbalance between the Complainant and Respondent, potential litigation, or where there may be the appearance of bias due to a real or perceived personal friendship or relationship between the internal human resource professional and an employee involved, an external investigator is recommended.

It is worth noting for federally regulated employers, new amendments to the Canada Labour Code and Regulations provide that the Employer may select an investigator from a list jointly agreed to in advance by the Employer and its health and safety representative, workplace committee or policy committee. This list may contain internal investigators, external investigators, or a combination of the two. Where there is no list, the Employer, Complainant and Respondent must all agree. Where an agreement cannot be reached within 60 days, the Employer may choose an investigator from a list of individuals approved by the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety.

Privileged or Non-privileged?

Another consideration in choosing an investigator is whether the Employer wants to be able to claim privilege over the resulting report so that it can be kept confidential. It is possible to claim privilege over a report written by a non-lawyer in anticipation of litigation, but that privilege is more difficult to establish. If privilege is important, it is best to use a lawyer who can assert both litigation privilege and solicitor-client privilege. In order to do this, the retainer agreement has to be carefully drafted, and it must be clear that the purpose of the lawyer conducting the investigation is to provide legal advice or to prepare for litigation, and not just to ascertain the facts.

Privilege may be desirable where serious or complex litigation is possible, where there is actual litigation ongoing on the same or a potentially related matter or involving one or more of the same individuals, if upper management is involved, if there is a potential of serious damage to the Employer's reputation, or if the workplace is unionized and the investigation touches on matters which may impact collective bargaining. The Employer may always choose to waive the privilege after receiving the investigation report, if it is deemed advantageous to do so.

There are some cautions though:

• Just because privilege is asserted, does not mean it will be upheld if challenged. This is determined on a case-by-case analysis of the facts.
• The facts themselves are not privileged. Opposing parties can interview witnesses, require production of documents, and conduct their own investigations. Keeping an investigation privileged does not mean the facts won't be discovered and presented by other means.
• Privilege can be lost, sometimes unintentionally.

Workplace investigations are becoming more frequent, and consideration as to the type of investigator selected and investigation conducted should be given from the first-time allegations or complaints are raised.

About the Author: Cynthia Lazar is a Lawyer and Workplace Investigator at Taylor McCaffrey LLP. She can be reached at clazar@tmlawyers.com or 204-988-0300.

Whether you’re looking to grow a team that’s rooted in a single location or collaborates from all across the country, finding a complementary candidate is critical. Effective interviewing not only allows leaders to assess whether or not a potential new team member has the knowledge, interpersonal skills and integrity to make a positive impact; it also empowers the candidate with a clear picture of the organization’s culture and values so they can make an informed decision for themselves.

Remote interviews (by phone or video chat) were once considered a pale comparison to in-person discussions for this mutual evaluation. But since the rise of pandemic-driven social distancing, they’ve not only become a necessity; they’ve forced HR professionals to get creative and have inspired more intentional communication on both sides.

Here are four ways to optimize remote interviews for your own team and your potential hires:

1.Be deliberate in establishing interview structure and tone within your own team before the interview process begins.

Gone are the days when a subtle eyebrow raise or pen tap could signal to your colleague that it’s time to switch gears. We don’t realize how dependent we are on body language for communication until we can’t rely on it anymore!

Instead, meet with the colleagues that will be participating in the interview beforehand to make a detailed plan. Who will be in charge of ice-breaking and tone-setting? Who will ask the candidate which questions? Who will signal that the conversation is transitioning to the next topic or ending altogether? Establishing these points upfront will ensure a more effective conversation for both your own team and the interviewee.

And once you’ve confirmed who will be in the (virtual) room, don’t forget to communicate that information to your candidate pre-interview so they can feel prepared as well!

2. Embrace the new insights that video conferencing can offer.

There’s an innate awkwardness to video conferencing. Audio and visual might not be fully in sync, leading to participants constantly cutting each other off (“oh, sorry, go ahead”). The setting can be unfocused – after all, how many in-person interviews feature a cameo by a preschooler wandering in and asking for a snack? And your go-to interview wear can feel semi-ridiculous at your kitchen table.

Rather than pretending these challenges don’t exist, see them as an opportunity to evaluate candidates in new ways. While body language is more difficult to glean when you’re not in the same room, you can get a sense of the interviewee’s flexibility and adaptability by their willingness to leverage the meeting’s potentially unfamiliar technology. There may be no traffic on which to blame a late start anymore, but does the candidate demonstrate good organizational skills by not only connecting on time but also showing that they’ve cleaned up their interview space, tested their audio, etc. before the meeting begins? And when inevitable snafus or interruptions happen, do they demonstrate problem-solving skills and a sense of humour, or do they get overwhelmed and flustered?

These “soft skills” are especially essential in circumstances where remote interviewing precedes remote work and remote team building. It’s important to evaluate how well a potential hire will likely adjust to virtual onboarding, how they independently manage priorities and how easily they might connect with the team already in place.

While there is admittedly information lost by not being in the same room, there are also new insights to be gained.

3. Find creative ways to describe and demonstrate corporate culture.

One of the best parts of an in-person interview from the candidate’s perspective is that it provides a sneak preview of what life might look like for them as a member of your organization. Everything from experiencing what would eventually be their daily commute and assessing nearby amenities, to observing staff interactions while they wait in the lobby before the interview begins, to glimpsing the space where they’d perform their duties makes a (hopefully positive) first impression and gives them a sense of whether or not they’d like to join the team. And without those clues, it can be a lot harder for a potential hire to feel confident in their decision.

In a remote interview setting, it’s up to employers to find new ways of directly communicating information about the culture of the organization. The first thing an applicant is likely going to do is take a look at your company’s website and social media accounts – do they give a robust and accurate look at what everyday life at your company would be like? How about the job posting – is the language and tone reflective of your organizational culture? Don’t hesitate to engage your Marketing team or a third-party brand consultant to ensure you’re telling the real story about yourselves.

And make sure to set aside time in the interview to not only chat about the job itself but also outline and demonstrate through your interactions the culture of the organization as a whole.

4. Focus on candidate engagement and experience.

Be intentional about making yourself available and maintaining ongoing, consistent communication with the candidate – building a connection and trust is key to creating engagement and should start from the first impression stage onwards! Recruitment isn’t just about hiring; it’s about understanding and encouraging the unique contributions each individual can make to make a stronger organization overall.

There are also several positives to remote interviews! They’re flexible and time-efficient; they require and ultimately foster stronger communication skills that can be applied across the board; and once their viability has been proven within your organization, they can save both travel time and money, as you may choose to lean on video interviews in the future rather than traveling to interview someone outside of your own region (in the case of a national organization).

With keen preparation and fresh expectations, remote interviews can be a highly effective way to grow your team.

About the Author: Millena Lazareti, Human Resources Specialist, Recruitment & Retention at Payworks. Millena joined Payworks’ HR team in 2019, bringing several years of recruitment-focused HR experience in both Canada and Brazil to her current role, where she provides both career and holistic wellness support to Payworks’ employees.

You can also run periodic Innovation Tournaments that connect employees from all levels. They spend a day or more contributing ideas, identifying priorities, learning how to present business cases well, and deciding which concepts to pursue.

3. Build risk tolerance into leadership training
Pharmaceutical giant Merck once engaged in an exercise called Kill the Company (Bodell, 2012). Leaders spent several hours pretending to be from competitors, generating ideas that would put Merck out of business. Several more hours were devoted to devising strategies to overcome those threats. When the leaders realized how their competitors could beat them, they knew it was a risk not to innovate (Grant, 2016).

The understanding that status quo can actually be a threat needs to be a key part of any leadership training. Regardless of your sector, the rapid pace of change requires equally rapid response – the kind of response that intrapreneurs thrive on. Whether you’re contending with government cutbacks, restrictive grant rules, or an upstart competitor, time is not your friend if leaders insist on doing things the same way they always have.

HR professionals are uniquely positioned to spearhead intrapreneur engagement, innovation, and leadership development initiatives that support and help them feel valued. Leveraging the talents of intrapreneurs also shows leaders that HR truly can and does play a strategic role in organizational success.

About the author: Shona Welsh, MCEd, CHRL used to be an intrapreneur but she’s okay now. She and her partner at Ovation: Experts in Speaker Training travel the world helping leaders discover their unique voice as well as transform their organizations through Innovation Tournaments. Shona is an award-winning speaker and trainer and the author of numerous books. She cannot be left alone in the house with chocolate. Contact her at shona@OvationSpeakerTraining.com.

References:
Grant, A. (2016). Originals: How Non-Conformists Move the World. New York: Viking.
Bodell, L. (2012). Kill the Company: End the Status Quo, Start an Innovation Revolution. New York: Bibliomotion).

Leave the details (including the benefits of mediation and what to expect) to the pros to explain firsthand. All you need to do, as the manager/HR, is seek their commitment to speak with the mediator to explore options. Then, let the mediator help the parties walk through the pros and cons of their participation.

This is often the most effective way of building trust in the process and begins developing rapport between the parties and the mediator. It sets the tone for the whole process.

Also, mediator approaches can vary, sometimes significantly. You don’t want to unintentionally set up expectations with your staff that will have to be renegotiated with the mediator.

Tip #3: Don’t suggest that their participation is “totally voluntary”.
(Granted, not all mediators will agree on this point.)

From my perspective, the volitional quality of mediation exists on a continuum. And sometimes leaders need to provide a little bit of incentive as a reality check.

If a person is resistant, it may be helpful to stress that, from your perspective as the manager, “resolution” is not optional; that, one way or another, things needed to change.

If parties are not willing to participate in a supported conversation (with the help of a third-party), other options that edge toward the more formal/disciplinary in nature may need to be explored. This, of course, starts to make the idea of mediation feel significantly less “voluntary”.

It is important for the parties to understand that what the resolution process looks like is largely up to them. This is the choice aspect.

Mediation is one of the most collaborative, least punitive forms of intervention on the performance management/progressive discipline spectrum. AND it is also typically the most effective at resolving the root concerns of the primary parties involved.

Tip #4: Don’t see mediation as an opportunity to wash your hands of the situation.
While it’s understandable for you to breathe a sigh of relief after you hire independent professionals to help with a particularly thorny personnel challenge, resist the urge to totally back off and “leave it to the mediators to fix”.

First off, it’s not the mediator’s role to “fix things”. We are there to host a structured conversation that offers the opportunity for parties to address their problems themselves.

Also, your employees need to know – and experience directly – that you are supporting them and the mediation process actively! And that you are willing to look at your part and the role you played in managing (or not) the dynamics. Most of the time, in my experience, leaders recognize or have at least an embryonic awareness that they have some level of contribution to the dynamics even if that contribution is simply avoidance.

Again (this can’t really be overstated): The active engagement of leadership is absolutely fundamental to achieving sustainable resolution.

At the conclusion of the mediation process, we leave your organization and leave you, the leader, to pick up where we left off in supporting the parties to move forward in their relationship. Your capacity to do this, in most cases, is the single, most important determining factor in successful, long-term outcomes.

As a mediator, I always seek to work with the “one level up” leaders responsible for the direct parties, partly for this reason. Also, because it is a key objective to support the whole system, not just the primary parties involved. Essentially, I’m seeking to work myself out of a role with that client. Perhaps not a very good business model so good thing there’s no shortage of conflict around!

Working closely with leaders throughout the process, as a team, is when we do our best work in mediation.

About the author: Sandy Koop Harder has been a leader at Facilitated Solutions since 2006 and has over 20 years of experience in mediation, coaching and management. Sandy is also the President of the ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) Institute of Manitoba. She holds a Masters of Business Administration (Leadership) and Chartered Mediator credentials with the ADR Institute of Canada. She loves what she does. And she doesn't do it alone... together with her colleagues at FS, she helps people prevent, manage and resolve conflict - at work and at home.

The buzzwords “employee engagement” are used often, but in varying contexts. As you examine the concept within your own organization, it’s important to decode the concept: what does employee engagement mean to us?  Is a happy employee an engaged employee?  How do we know whether or not we’re getting it right?

At various stages of our careers, both of us have witnessed the impact that a disengaged workforce can have on turnover, attendance, performance and client satisfaction. And we’ve also seen how engaged workforces – such as Payworks’, which reported 89% engagement in our 2019 employee survey – can thrive. Gallup’s 2017 State of the Global Workplace report cites 41% lower absenteeism, 17% higher productivity and 21% greater profitability among business units in the top quartile of engagement when compared against those in the bottom quartile.

In our experience, engaged employees are those who are fully absorbed by and enthusiastic about their work, take positive action to further the organization’s reputation and interests, and demonstrate positive attitudes towards the organization and its values. Each of these facets has a common foundation: the relationship, commitment and trust that exists between an employee and an organization, which in turn influences behaviours.

While it’s easy to conflate this emotional connection with employee happiness, engaged employees are often happy but happy employees aren’t always engaged. Happy employees generally like where they work and the perks that come along with it (like ping pong tables, beer kegs, and other trappings of a hip 21^st century workplace) but aren’t particularly inspired to contribute beyond the basic scope of their own role.

Compensation is another factor that you should be cautious not to confuse with engagement. Herzberg’s Motivation-Hygiene Theory considers compensation a “hygiene factor” – that is to say, a maintenance feature of a job that can prevent employee dissatisfaction but doesn’t necessarily create employee satisfaction itself. Ultimately, getting compensation right means it won’t get in the way of employee engagement, but you won’t find that it builds it either.

So, if not happiness or satisfaction, not ping pong tables or compensation… how do we develop employee engagement?

1.     Create a workplace where employees can be themselves and are trusted to get the job done.

Chances are, you’ve felt the stress of being micromanaged, and you likely didn’t stick around – those environments generate higher turnover and diminish performance among the staff that stay. When staff feel empowered to manage their own objectives and time, they typically outperform their industry peers.

An employee also needs to feel like they can participate as their authentic self within their team. We should aim to build our teams around complement, not fit, and celebrate the benefits of diverse perspectives that inspire us all to be better and deliver upon our organizational purpose. It’s less about the ping pong table and more about building a group that would want to play a game together in the first place.

2.     Create a workplace where employees have flexibility and are encouraged to grow.

Empowering employees to manage their own career evolution within your organization improves morale, retention and performance. If employees are encouraged to tap into latent skill sets or budding interests to contribute to their organization in new ways, their roles are going to feel fresher, longer. 

Consistent forward motion along the continuum of responsibility and reward demonstrates the employer trust that’s key to retention.

3.     Create a workplace where employees know their organization genuinely cares about their wellbeing.

The most positive and productive work cultures recognize the dual influences of work and home on each other and support bringing those spheres together as opposed to pitting them against each other in a likely impossible quest for zero sum balance.

In his podcast "The Human Assignment", Matt Johnston speaks to the fact that “what happens at work is what people bring home and what happens at home comes with them to work.” Empowering employees to embrace this integration and enjoy flexibility in both environments will create a less stressed, more productive workforce.

4.     Create a workplace where employees understand and connect with the company’s purpose and that the work they’re doing makes a difference.

Employees feel most gratified and engaged when they can see firsthand the impact of their work on their colleagues, clients and communities. And as our workforces continue to skew younger, organizations’ commitment to their communities should increase accordingly; this will keep them in alignment with the values younger workers cite as being most important to them.

Even if your organization isn’t a not-for-profit with a clear philanthropic agenda, there are still a myriad of ways to demonstrate real community support: sponsorships, fundraising initiatives, paid time off for volunteering, top-down cultural messaging from your leadership team and more.

Now that you know what engagement looks like, you should have a sense of how to assess the engagement levels of your own employees. 

Engagement surveys can provide valuable knowledge, metrics and insight into strengths and opportunities, but you first need to ensure you’re ready for the feedback you’ll receive – not only to absorb the positive (or negative!) results, but also to enact real change based upon them. For results to simply start collecting dust can damage long-term engagement, as being asked for an opinion and then having it ignored makes employees feel as if their voices don’t matter after all.

If you’re not ready to delve deep into survey results, start by establishing open and transparent dialogue, building relationships and strengthening communication within your organization – all of these methods will give you a good feel for how you’ve set the stage for engaging employees.

As leaders, it’s our responsibility to create an environment that cultivates engagement. To quote Maryanne Spatola, “Leadership behavior shapes your culture; culture shapes your results.” If we offer challenging goals and projects that clearly reflect organizational objectives, contribute to and encourage the development of our employees and trust that we’re hired collaborative professionals who can manage their own deliverables, we’re sure to see engagement flourish.

About the authors:
Nicole Stewart, CPHR, SHRM-SCP is the Director of Human Resources at Payworks. Nicole has almost 20 years of management and HR experience, and has spent much of her career cultivating Payworks’ unique, high-engagement, low-turnover culture as the leader of our talented team of HR professionals.

Candace Synchyshyn, CPHR Candidate, is the Manager of Human Resources at Payworks. Candace has spent the last five years partnering with employees to support and guide them as they realize success.  She fosters trust through transparency, leveraging employees’ strengths and identifying opportunities for growth.

Disclaimer: This article was prepared for general information and discussion only and should not be used in substitution for legal advice.

Human Resources professionals are trained to plan for any crisis; when a crisis hits, HR staff are key members of a business’ command centre. COVID-19 has been the crisis that no amount of planning could anticipate. With virtually no warning, COVID-19 dramatically impacted workplaces, and HR professionals have had to hit the ground running to support their businesses and institutions.

Staff that can work from home have been encouraged - in some cases ordered - to do so. Staff working from home are juggling childcare responsibilities - including home schooling - while working to a deadline. Essential services workers are given the dual messages that they expected to carry on but not to come to work if they feel sick. Most people now know about “Zoom meetings.” Layoffs are occurring and businesses are eyeing their bottom line, wondering when they can start bringing back the staff they worked so hard to recruit “in the old days” – back in February 2020.

In the midst of so many dramatic changes, HR professionals have had to adapt quickly to a “new normal” set of employee expectations, and a new set of expectations in HR work. 

Here are some examples of scenarios you may have already addressed in your work, or may soon be addressing:

“We thought that with most of our staff working remotely, we would be seeing fewer harassment complaints. Instead we are seeing a huge amount of bullying content in email.”

“Our workforce experienced so much stress during COVID-19. We suspect that our employee Code of Conduct seems to have fallen to the bottom of the priority list. How do we find out what’s going on?”

“We have a couple of staff who have been suggesting a connection between an employee’s ethnic background and the COVID-19 cases within our workplace.”

“We suspect there has been an increase in sexual content in employee emails. How can we investigate this?”

“Within our production facility, a couple of our staff were off sick with COVID-19. Thankfully they recovered, but now that they’re back, some of our staff have been making mean spirited jokes about them and excluding them from work events.”

Employers have the same obligations, as before the pandemic, to provide a safe and harassment free workplace. This means that to be legally compliant – as well as to be able to continue to position themselves to attract a talented workforce - employers should continue their commitment to conducting fair and robust workplace investigations.

Adaptations to investigation methodology – particularly witness interviews – have been inevitable. Internal and external investigators have had to be nimble to try to ensure “business as usual” in HR investigations during the pandemic.

Whether internal or external, investigators need to focus on a number of criteria to make sure that investigations during COVID-19 and post-COVID-19 continue to be procedurally fair and robust: thoroughness, fairness, trauma-informed, confidentiality and timeliness.

We focus below on the last three.

Trauma Informed

A lot of investigation work involves contact with parties and witnesses that may already be undergoing some degree of previous trauma, or trauma relating to the events under investigation. This is particularly true at a time when parties and witnesses may be other minded with how they can better support healthy practices in their jobs and families. At this sensitive time, investigators need to be mindful not to create further discomfort relating to interview processes and the collection of evidence.

Confidentiality

In-person interviews have generally been considered crucial to fact-finding and assessing credibility. With social distancing, in-person interviews may no longer be an option.

The good news is that COVID-19 has taught investigators a lot about how to interview – and how to assess credibility – by videoconferencing. Multiple platforms are available to conduct remote workplace investigations, including Zoom, Microsoft Teams, GoToMeeting and Webex.

Remote interviews raise new confidentiality considerations. Interviewing by videoconferencing also runs the risk of losing some control over the environment. Interviewers likely won’t know who else is “in the room,” there may be additional distractions, and it may be less obvious whether an interviewee is recording the interview (something we do not permit). 

It is more important than ever to gently but firmly reinforce expectations at the beginning, during and at the end of a video interview:

• Make it clear that confidentially and privacy are paramount.
• Stress that no one should be in the room, or be able to listen in. Ask for a commitment that if someone enters the room where they are, they disclose this.
• If the interviewee’s support person, lawyer, or union representative is attending the meeting by video, explain that these expectations apply to them as well.

Timeliness

COVID-19 presented HR professionals and investigators with two imperfect options: conduct a video or telephone interview or postpone the interview to some unspecified future date.

During the period that public health officials require social distancing, we strongly recommend pressing ahead, while transitioning to “video mode.” We have several reasons for this. Overarching it all is the employer’s continuing duty to provide a safe and respectful workplace and to take seriously all cases of harassment, bullying and other employment-related breaches. Other reasons include:

• Memories fade. It is well-recognized that memories, and therefore evidence, deteriorates over time. Adjourning an investigation can jeopardize the quality of the evidence available to investigator; potentially to the degree that a reliable investigation becomes no longer possible.
• We don’t have a crystal ball on this one. Scientists tell us there will be a treatment, and there will be a vaccine. Predicting when COVID-19 will be stabilized and when workplaces will get back to fully normal is like trying to predict the future, an imperfect exercise. While we are all craving stability, delaying interviews indefinitely doesn’t reckon with the uncertainty of the situation.
• The availability of reliable technology. As already noted, in many cases, video interviews will be highly satisfactory for gathering evidence. As never before, technology can facilitate highly effective fact-finding.

HR professionals and investigators should use their best judgment to assess whether the benefits of adapting their methodology outweigh the costs of waiting out the pandemic. By being adaptable and sensitive, workplace investigations can be approached from as close to a business as usual perspective as we can expect at this challenging time. 

About the authors: Rachlis Neville LLP (https://rachlisneville.com/) is a boutique law firm focusing on conducting independent workplace, regulatory and institutional investigations.

As the old saying goes, “If you fail to plan, you’re planning to fail.”

For years, businesses have weighed the benefits and disadvantages of employees working from home. While these discussions were taking place, circumstances such as longer commute drives, natural disasters and now, COVID-19, pushed the idea of remote working to the forefront. Although many businesses discussed workplace flexibility, not many put an actual plan in place to ensure a smooth transition.

There are many benefits to having a remote-work plan; the main one is that it minimizes business workflow when it becomes necessary for employees to work from home, and – as we’re well aware – these times don’t necessarily announce themselves in advance. Although the COVID-19 spread is a rare situation, it’s forced many organizations to quickly get their employees up and running at home for everyone’s health and safety.

The impact on your employees is another story. Besides trying to cope with social isolation, kids, and changes in routines, your staff now faces some important decisions: how to set up their home office, selecting the right hardware and software, accessing files, communicating with team members, management’s expectations, and knowing who to contact for what information.

The COVID-19 situation is a lot for anyone to deal with and formulating a remote-work plan can help ease some of the anxiety and stress your employees may encounter during this time.

Setting up your remote-work plan

The first step is to involve the right people in creating the plan, including your internal or external IT department, management, HR department, and office administrator.

In the plan:

1. Map out jobs and tasks that could take place outside of the office.
2. Audit your IT hardware and software, asking yourself the questions below.
3. Create a communication protocol.
4. Don’t forget about the human component; don’t discount your staff’s stress and anxiety around the situation itself and the move to working from home, which will have challenges of its own. “Staff support” must be part of every plan.  

Here are some IT questions to ask yourself to ensure your employees have the right hardware, software, and communication equipment to work from home:

1. How will your employees access their work remotely?

• Do they have laptops or mobile devices that they can take home to access their work?
• Can they use their home computers for work purposes? Do these computers have the right software and hardware to access the required work?
• Are your organization’s documents stored in the Cloud (such as Microsoft OneDrive or SharePoint)?
• Does your organization use web-based applications? Are these applications installed on your employees’ hardware? Do your employees know how to access your web-based applications, including email, from home?

2. Do you have the right communication equipment?

• How will you deal with incoming calls to the office?
• How will team members communicate with each other (for instance, by using software, like Microsoft Teams)?
• Will employees use their personal phones, or will you use web-based software? Do you have an employee remote-contact information list readily available to distribute?

3. How will meetings take place? 

• Do you need web-based meeting software (such as Microsoft Teams)?
• Do you require cameras on your employees’ devices for meetings?

4. Who will they contact with specific questions? 

• Who is the contact for hardware or software questions?
• Who is the contact for setting up communication devices and systems?
• Who is the contact to request hardware or software purchases?
• Who is the contact to arrange emotional-support services?

Checks and balances

You’ll want to constantly evaluate whether your remote-work plan is working to ensure productivity, health and safety, and security, and make amendments as appropriate. Some strategies you can implement:

• Create and distribute your at-home work policies.
• Microsoft offers MyAnalytics, which helps discover and track work habits by providing an in-depth look at work patterns, including focus, wellbeing, collaboration, communication habits, and tips. It helps employees and their managers optimize tasks and make them more efficient.
• Use communication software that shows when employees are available, at home or in the office, or offline (such as Microsoft Teams or a cloud-based phone system).
• Follow-up with employees to ensure compliance (ask them to take a photo of their home office) and if they’ve experienced any difficulties working remotely. You can use this information to update your plan, processes and employee wellbeing.
• Ensure your employees have the right insurance and security for hardware damage or liability.
• Ensure the organization has the right insurance for any contingencies.
• Ensure security issues are monitored and that employees have safety protocols installed on their hardware.

Every businesses’ remote workplan requirements are going to be a little different. The important thing is that your business has a well thought-out, flexible plan in place, so when – not if – the next time you need one, you’ll be well prepared.

About the author: Scott Park is the Accounting & Office Administrator at 365 Technologies Inc. – delivering Worry-Free IT™ support and services in Winnipeg, Manitoba. Scott is pursuing a Bachelor of Commerce from Athabasca University. He can be reached at 204-488-3655, scott@365tech.ca or www.365tech.ca.

In February 2020, CPHR Manitoba was pleased to announce Nish Verma as the newest Fellow CPHR.

Nish started his career as a computer engineer with Hewlett Packard in South East Asia where he quickly realized the importance of human resources in organizational success. After several years of international experience in South East Asia, Europe and the Middle East, he moved to Canada with his family in 2003.

Nish began studying Human Resources and Management at the University of Winnipeg shortly after moving to Canada. He received top marks in both programs and following graduation, he received the top score in Canada on the National Knowledge Exam. He became a Certified Human Resources Professional in 2006 and also received his Project Management Professional Designation in 2007.

“I achieved the CPHR designation to demonstrate my commitment and passion for the human resources profession,” says Nish. “As a CPHR, my network, knowledge, and confidence grew monumentally.”

Nish began his career in Canada on the frontlines with a job as HR Specialist in Brandon. He quickly moved through the ranks within the provincial government to be the first Assistant Deputy Minister of all Provincial Government HR Operations, a newly created position. He was responsible for realigning all HR sectors into one seamless progressive and efficient entity. He moved on to become the Vice President HR in the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority for a year, where he completed similar work. In 2013, Nish decided to move back to private sector to join a growing Winnipeg organization called Mondetta Clothing Company and has been part of their transformation team as Vice President HR and Chief Operations Officer.

“I am a team player with a belief in organizational success through continuous improvement, client service, life-long learning, collaboration and open transparent communication,” he says. “These principles have served me across my experience in strategic planning, business reorganization, project management, continuous improvement, change management and workforce development.”

Nish is passionate about Human Resources and its importance in any organization and has committed the last several years of his career to be an active advocate of the profession. When Nish joined the CPHR Manitoba board (then known as HRMAM) in 2014, the association was at a critical point in its evolvement and also a turning point in its vision. The Association was coming out of financial crisis and a new strategic plan was drawn. Nish was a key partner to the Chair and CEO in the development of the strategic plan and took on a leadership role by chairing some committees. He served as Chair of the Board from 2016 – 2018. In addition, Nish has chaired the Membership, Nomination, and Governance Committees for CPHR Manitoba. He has also represented Manitoba at the national level as a member of CPHR Canada’s Board of Directors since 2015, where he’s been a strong voice in determining the one designation one profession philosophy that guides CPHR Canada.

“I believe in giving forward and have mentored and coached many fellow HR practitioners throughout my career,” says Nish. “I’ve also given back to my community by serving on the board of the Indian Association for four years and as a Folklorama Ambassador for two years and was the Ambassador General for Folklorama in 2014.”

Nish is a strong advocate and brand ambassador advocating for the HR profession and promoting the CPHR designation. He taught in the HR Diploma Program at The University of Winnipeg for several years and continues to promote the skills and knowledge of HR professionals through workshops and speaking engagements with various professional and educational institutions and associations. He has also served as a mentor to proteges at all points in his career.

“Communities, organizations and workplace are changing at ever increasing pace and HR leadership is key to help in managing change” he says. “HR Professionals are not compliance administrators and bookkeepers. They are strategic leaders that impact the versatility of the organization and are key partners for success. COVID-19 has only re-emphasized the importance of Human Resource Leadership in the organizations. Innovation, change management, strategic thinking, communication and project management are now important skills for a good HR professional.”

Featured in the Spring 2019 Edition of HRmatters

On April 4, 2019, we had the honour of recognizing and celebrating our newest Fellow CPHR, Roma Thorlakson, at the HR Excellence Awards 2019.

Upon being presented with the certificate recognizing her as an FCPHR, Thorlakson took a moment to thank key individuals in the room for their supportive role in her journey and the collective efforts of CPHR Manitoba members, HR professionals and advocates in supporting the advancement of the HR profession in Manitoba.

Thorlakson’s journey began in 2011, when she became a board member with the Human Resources Management Association of Manitoba Inc. (HRMAM), which was re-branded as CPHR Manitoba in 2017. When she joined, the Association was at a critical point in its life cycle, facing a financial crisis and a critical turning point in its vision.

“At my second meeting, the Board had to face the fact that the Association was in financial strain and had a six-month window to turn things around,” says Thorlakson. “Ron Gauthier [CEO of CPHR Manitoba] presented us with a deficit reduction plan that focused on reducing expenses and increasing revenue in key areas. With a plan in place, the Board decided to meet every week during this turbulent time. Once things were stabilized, we turned our attention to reviewing the Governance model and as Chair Elect, I was tasked with moving this project forward. This involved developing clearer roles for the board, officers and CEO to establish the governance model that is still used to this day.

Thorlakson, along with Gauthier and then Chair Yvonne Thompson, worked with the Board to ensure that each person’s diverse views could be shared, each person felt supported and that the Board collectively worked together under one voice.

After the Association moved past the financial crisis and good governance had been established, the Board went to work on a new five-year strategic plan that focused on elevating the profile of the HR profession and Association.

Then on a cold, Sunday afternoon, in amongst stacks of unread reports, Thorlakson came across a professional practice analysis document that outlined the HR profession and what makes the industry and an industry-specific designation credible.

“This report ignited passion around what our designation (now CPHR) means – it’s all here and I could see what we needed to do to elevate our HR profession - we just needed a champion to reinforce credibility and build on the importance of self-regulation.”

As Chair of CPHR Manitoba, Thorlakson championed the Association’s goal to become self-regulated. She developed the Terms of Reference for the self-regulation steering committee; led the committee, Board and staff away from any uncertainties; and guided them harmoniously onto a path that was committed to the strategic goals.

Meanwhile, at the national level, the Canadian Council of Human Resources Association (CCHRA) - re-branded as CPHR Canada in 2017 - was also at a crossroads. In 2014, Ontario left the national body and launched a three-tiered designation model; the other provinces had to decide to either follow suit or stay with CCHRA. As the Board Chair of HRMAM and Board Member of CCHRA, Thorlakson played a key role in helping other board members decide on a direction by outlining the opportunities and threats that would come with staying or leaving and empowered each board member to embrace their decision to support the national body and be the voice for HR in Canada. And it worked.

With all remaining provinces agreeing on a new direction and philosophy for CCHRA, Thorlakson was elected as the Board Chair. She stepped into the role without fear, worked well with the CEO, Anthony Ariganello, and focused on supporting the provinces.

During her time on the CCHRA board, Thorlakson played a critical role in the development and implementation of new standards such as the nationally-recognized Code of Ethics & Rules of Professional Conduct and adding additional pathways to become designated. Changes meant to elevate the designation to a Tier 1, level four designation similar to the engineering and accounting professions.

The biggest change occurred in late 2016 when CCHRA, and its provincial member associations, announced the designation name change to Chartered Professionals in Human Resources (CPHR) and the national body’s name change to CPHR Canada. This spurred a new national marketing campaign along with renewed federal advocacy efforts.

 “It was an absolute privilege to be in a leadership role during one of the most transitional times in the history of the national and provincial associations,” says Thorlakson. “It was scary, exciting and in the end led me on my journey of making strategic decisions for lasting impacts.”

Diana Wiesenthal, FCPHR, President and C.E.O of Corporate People Responsibility (CPR) Ltd., who has been an active member of the Association since 1993, a Fellow CPHR since 2012 and a dedicated advocate for the HR profession, was honoured to celebrate Thorlakson and her granting of the Fellow CPHR at the HR Excellence Awards.

“Roma is an exemplary ambassador of the Fellow designation. She assumed a very difficult role in an uncertain and highly challenging landscape. Her contribution to the profession has lasting benefits for all of us as members. Her patience and collaborative approach ensured that she was able to navigate turbulent times, and the result of her efforts delivered a stronger, more relevant and credible professional designation that will undoubtedly withstand the test of time. I understand completely the environment in which she had to work, and despite those challenges and difficulties, she always maintained her professional composure and grace. Roma is an excellent role model for perseverance and dedication, consistently demonstrating a passion for the doing the right thing for our profession. This is an honour well earned.”

To learn more about the HR Excellence Awards 2019 and the FCPHR designation, visit cphrmb.ca.

Featured in our Spring 2019 Edition of HRmatters

Truth before Reconciliation

“Life-changing…powerful…so impactful and important” – this is a sampling of responses from business leaders after a half-day learning session with Kevin Lamoureux, past National Education Lead at the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation (NCTR), located at the University of Manitoba.

Kevin told the story of Residential Schools and the trauma inflicted on Indigenous people through seven generations, and continuing up to today. He often referred to his daughter who, in a not-so-distant past, would almost certainly have been among the thousands forced into Residential School to suffer the loss of culture and the many other indignities that entailed. Instead, she is a typical seven-year old who loves traditional dancing.

For business leaders attending the NCTR session, these were difficult but critical truths to learn about. MaryAnn Kempe, Chief Human Resources Officer at Birchwood Automotive Group, put it this way:

“I left the session feeling quite emotional – a raw reminder of my privilege and as (Kevin) stated, deep anger of broken promises…I cannot fathom the scars that have been created for seven generations as a result of our ancestors. But, I also left hopeful for the future, that the time is now and that we all need to step up and make it our business to set the future right and repair this partnership. I commit to spending reflective time considering the TRC Call to Action and what next steps might look like.”

Since 2017…

In spring 2017 HR Matters published an article describing the new initiative being undertaken by the Winnipeg Poverty Reduction Council (WPRC), a program of United Way Winnipeg.  Named after and guided by the 92^nd Call to Action in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission Report (2015), the TRC92: Youth Employment initiative seeks to increase employment opportunities for Indigenous youth by building connections between Indigenous job-seekers and private-sector employers in Winnipeg. As directed by Call to Action #92, the initiative incorporates learning for management and staff about Indigenous history, anti-racism and inter-cultural safety, before jumping ahead toward creating employment opportunities.  

Since 2017 a lot has happened.

Dave Angus (former CEO of the Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce and current President of Johnston Group) stepped forward to champion the initiative. He proposed using an Employer Consortium model, whose purpose would be “a journey toward truth and reconciliation, incorporating business-to-business learning”.  Dave’s vision is to gradually scale up the impact of the initiative by establishing sector-based employer consortiums in Winnipeg, all committed to working together to respond to Call to Action #92.

But would businesses be interested in participating in TRC92: Youth Employment? Would it be a priority? It turns out that there is a compelling business case to be made for adopting Indigenous-focused employment strategies, considering the rapidly growing and very young Indigenous population throughout Canada, and particularly in Winnipeg. But more than that, many businesses recognize the urgent need to redress past wrongs with Indigenous peoples, and want to be part of the solution.

Since the fall of 2017, a consortium representing nine committed Winnipeg corporations has been meeting to engage in educational activities and share experiences for mutual learning, as each grapples with how Call to Action #92 can best be implemented in their particular workplace. Just recently, a second Employer Consortium for construction companies has come together.

WPRC also reached out to ten community organizations that train Indigenous youth for jobs. These organizations, which include The Momentum Centre and Urban Circle Training Centre, are working hard each day to provide youth with necessary job and life skills, in a culturally-appropriate and supportive environment. They are anxious to engage with employers who can provide opportunities for the participants once they finish training.

 Building Relationships

An important principle for TRC92: Youth Employment is ‘building relationships’ – relationships between employers in the consortium, between employers and the community organizations, and between employers and Indigenous job-seekers. With relationships comes trust and increased understanding for everyone involved.

As part of relationship-building, WPRC has organized several opportunities for Employer Consortium participants to meet with Indigenous job-seekers on-site, at the community training organizations. They sit in circles of about ten people, with employers and job-seekers participating equally, asking each other questions like ‘What is important to you in a work environment? What can employers do to make you feel welcome? How does your company respond to racism in the workplace?’ These conversations go a long way towards building relationships and changing perceptions. Job-seekers respond with surprise and appreciation that employers care about what they think. Employers gain a new understanding for the strong desire that youth have, to succeed in the employment world.

 But what about jobs?

As relationships grow and employers figure out what the possibilities are in their workplaces, some have moved toward developing Indigenous employment strategies. As of January 2019, four companies have engaged Indigenous job-seekers.

Other employers recognize that there is still work to be done within their workforces to build awareness and understanding, before launching a dedicated Indigenous employment strategy. 

The “…journey toward truth and reconciliation…” that Dave Angus envisioned, is different for each company. They learn from each other while also implementing their own strategies in their own timeframe toward the ultimate goal of employment for Indigenous job-seekers.  

“The TRC Report is a gift to Canadians…It is now our responsibility to respond to the report in a demonstrated way to create new relationships with Indigenous peoples based on respect and understanding” – Dave Angus

Written by Melissa Beaumont, Partner, Thompson Dorfman Sweatman

Featured in our Spring 2019 Edition of HRmatters

The Accessibility for Manitobans Act (AMA) strives to achieve an accessible society for all Manitobans disabled by a barrier. Over time, a number of accessibility standards will be enacted under the AMA to address accessibility in the following areas: customer service; employment; information and communications; the built environment; and transportation.

The Accessibility Standard for Customer Service is the first standard to be enacted as a Regulation under the AMA. It requires that governments, municipalities, and public and private organizations provide accessible customer service. The Regulation has been phased in over several years, starting with governments and large public institutions. The final phase-in now applies to private organizations, including businesses, non-profit organizations and small municipalities. “Customer” means more than retail customers but includes anyone who receives goods or services from an organization, such as clients, members, patients, constituents and the like.

As of November 1, 2018 the Customer Service Accessibility Standard requires that private organizations who provide goods or services in Manitoba and who have at least one employee in Manitoba provide accessible customer service, implement a Customer Service Accessibility Policy, and provide related training to employees and volunteers.

A Customer Service Accessibility Policy must touch upon the following points: how the organization will communicate with customers disabled by a barrier; how it will support customers who use assistive devices, support persons and service animals; how the organization will notify customers if their premises are temporarily inaccessible and what alternatives may be available; how it will train staff; and how the organization will collect and consider feedback related to the accessibility of its goods and services.

Missed the November 1, 2018 deadline? There is no need to panic – there is still time to comply with the AMA, but it should be done as soon as possible. We would be pleased to help you prepare a Customer Service Accessibility Policy or to answer any questions you may have about complying with the Customer Service Standard Regulation.

This article is presented for informational purposes only. The content does not constitute legal advice or solicitation and does not create a solicitor-client relationship. The views expressed are solely the author’s and should not be attributed to any other party, including Thompson Dorfman Sweatman LLP (TDS), its affiliate companies or its clients.

The author makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy or adequacy of the information contained herein or linked to via this article. The author is not able to provide free legal advice. If you are seeking advice on specific matters, please contact Keith LaBossiere, CEO & Managing Partner at kdl@tdslaw.com, or 204-934-2587. Please be aware that any unsolicited information sent to the author cannot be considered to be solicitor-client privileged.

While care is taken to ensure the accuracy for the purposes stated, before relying upon these articles, you should seek and be guided by legal advice based on your specific circumstances. We would be pleased to provide you with our assistance on any of the issues raised in these articles.

Featured in the Spring 2019 Edition of HRmatters

Employers can have legitimate reasons for wanting to install surveillance cameras. They might be trying to limit theft, or prevent vandalism or property damage. But, before any cameras are installed, it’s important to understand the legal restrictions regarding the use of camera surveillance in the workplace.

In Manitoba, an employer’s right to use surveillance cameras in the workplace is limited by privacy legislation.

The province’s Privacy Act (the “Act”) provides that a person who substantially, unreasonably and without a claim of right violates the privacy of another person commits a tort against that person. Section 3 of the Act says that video surveillance may constitute an invasion of privacy. However, according to subsection 5 (c), video surveillance is acceptable where it is reasonable, necessary for and incidental to exercising or protecting a lawful right of defence of person, property or other interest.

Unionized workplaces are subject to further legal requirements, which balance an employer’s right to protect its property and manage its business with its employees’ right to privacy. In Manitoba, these requirements were recently reviewed in the decision of Carte International Inc. v United Steelworkers, Local 9355, 2018 CanLII 37195 (MB LA), which upheld the employer’s camera surveillance system as reasonable.

Carte International Inc. v United Steelworkers, Local 9355

In this case, the employer had implemented a camera surveillance system in 2000 following a strike. The employer added more cameras in 2014 and 2016. The union then filed a policy grievance in 2016 challenging the employer’s ability to use the surveillance cameras.

The surveillance camera system was only accessible by a select group of senior managers. Video footage was not continuously monitored, was accessible through a password-protected computer and was only accessed where a “triggering” event occurred, such as an accident or damage to property.

Moreover, the cameras were clearly visible. While the employer had installed more than 30 interior cameras, the plant was very large, with only a small number of managers monitoring employees at any one time. The employer’s justification for the system was to deter and detect theft and vandalism, protect property and review accidents and unsafe work.

In finding the employer’s use of the surveillance cameras to be reasonable and permissible, the arbitrator noted that the method of implementing camera surveillance minimally intruded on employees’ privacy interests by limiting review of footage to occurrences of triggering events.

Key Takeaways

There are several key takeaways from this decision for Manitoba employers:

1. Employers do not have an unfettered right to use surveillance cameras in their workplaces. Surveillance systems must be reasonable and balance the employer’s interests with the employees’ right to privacy.
2. Employers must have a reasonable justification for installing and using surveillance cameras. Protection of property, deterring and detecting theft and vandalism, and reviewing accidents or altercations have all been found to be permissible reasons for using camera surveillance.
3. Employers should limit access to footage from surveillance cameras and implement a system for accessing footage where necessary.
4. Employers should not use surveillance cameras to monitor employee productivity or performance, or watch footage to “catch” employees breaking rules.
5. Real-time monitoring of camera footage will be more difficult to justify. The employer must have legitimate and pressing reasons for needing to watch the footage in real time.
6. The locations of cameras should be clear. Hidden cameras are far more difficult to justify, and any footage obtained from them may not be acceptable in court or arbitration proceedings.
7. Each camera should serve a legitimate purpose, such as monitoring an exit or a valuable piece of equipment.

It is worth noting that employers who fall under federal jurisdiction are also subject to the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, S.C. 2000, C.5 (“PIPEDA”), which applies to all personal information, including camera surveillance, that is collected, used or disclosed in the course of employment. PIPEDA places additional requirements on employers, which should be reviewed with legal counsel.

Prior to implementing a camera surveillance system in the workplace, management and human resources professionals should be aware of and consider these obligations and seek legal advice where appropriate.

Featured in the Spring 2019 Edition of HRmatters

There is often a very real need for parties to repair the damage in their relationship and find a way forward into a more productive working dynamic now that the investigation has concluded.

While I certainly will never argue with this, I can say that these are some of the most difficult cases to mediate. This is particularly true when both parties have made some contribution to the problematic dynamics that exist between them. And, in my experience, this is nearly always the case – that both parties own some (though not necessarily equal) contribution for the challenges in their relationship.

Mediating post-investigation cases are particularly difficult for several reasons:

Positional re-entrenchment
A workplace investigation is typically a fact-finding process – its purpose is to determine the objective “what happened” in a situation and to ascertain whether a specific complaint is founded in truth. Part of the challenge is that human relationships are complicated and, especially in the case of a long-standing history, have layers of “truth” to them. Well-meaning investigation processes can unintentionally reinforce parties' fixed ideas about themselves and the other person and thereby fail to bridge the chasm between them.

In the case of a determination of breach of policy, I have seen how a vindicating outcome can entrench feelings of self-righteousness and zero personal contribution for the complainant (“See, it’s true: it’s all the other person’s fault!”) while placing blame on the respondent can underscore feelings of his/her defensiveness, victimization and/or shame (“I don’t deserve all the blame here! No one cares about the context of what happened!”).

I’ve also seen this dynamic mirrored in the case of a determination of no breach of policy: exoneration of the respondent can cement feelings of self-righteousness and zero personal contribution (“See? This is evidence that I did nothing wrong!”) and the dismissal of the complainant’s concerns can reinforce feelings of defensiveness, victimization and/or isolation (“No one believes me. My concerns are not being taken seriously! There is no accountability here!”).

Helping parties have a dialogue about their relationship tensions when either of these scenarios is their starting place is difficult because they will often struggle to engage from an open/listening/learning posture. Often, because of the official determination, that door isn’t even open a crack; it’s tight-shut and locked down. A small opening is often all that’s needed to start a productive dialogue. Without it, the conversation may not get very far.

Process injury
Sometimes, the processes that are intended to protect people can unintentionally inflict further harm. In my experience, the investigation process can be dissatisfying for at least one, and sometimes both, parties. They can be left with feelings that their concerns have been dismissed or that they have been unjustly accused. Or both. Investigations often require extensive fact-finding interviews with close colleagues of the primary parties. This often leaves people feeling like their friends and coworkers are taking sides and drawing lines in the sand. And then there’s the chatter.

In cases that come to mediation after an investigation finding, parties often have a need to not only recover from the “incident”/negative history they share but also from the investigation process itself. This creates an additional layer of complexity when, quite frankly, the conflict between the parties is plenty complex enough.

Policy rigidity
Labour/employment laws and respectful workplace policies exist for good reason. They aim to create and support healthy, dynamic and thriving environments and to protect people from bullying, harassment and disrespectful behaviours at work. Many managers and HR professionals feel the need to follow policy in a prescribed and by-the-book kind of way in order to protect the vulnerable. However, building in an appropriate amount of flexibility into your policies can allow for wisdom to enter the process. Dogged implementation of policy at the expense of exploring viable, more collaborative options can get in the way of productive and positive outcomes. Policy rigidity can leave parties feeling powerless to affect their situation and remove the incentives to meaningfully engage in a collaborative process.

I recently mediated a case where the HR policy prescribed a “letter on the file” for the person found in breach of policy. In this situation, both parties agreed that the matter was resolved through mediation and that punitive measures were no longer necessary or meaningful. The complainant asked to withdraw the complaint and the subsequent consequences of the formal investigation. The HR manager, however, felt bound by the policy and was unable to flex the rules. The discipline letter remained on file. This certainly soured the whole process including the relationship progress for these parties, especially for the respondent. 

Consider the following:

1. Revise your policies to include the expectation of exploring mediation early in the process, ideally before a formal investigation process is initiated. Build some flexibility into your policies to allow for the possibility of interpersonal resolution in lieu of punitive consequences. On a very practical level, mediation can save you money (especially when it is engaged proactively/early in the conflict) including mitigating the costs of stress and sick leaves and/or disruptive and lengthy investigation processes.
   
   
2. Pause the investigation process and wait for the outcome of a mediated conversation. Ofttimes, the outcome of a facilitated process changes things for the parties and a formal investigation or additional discipline may no longer be meaningful or appropriate. You can always reinitiate a formal investigation if the parties are unable to find a way forward through a collaborative process.
   
   
3. Remember the team’s needs following a formal investigation process. Relationships don’t exist in a vacuum. The whole department is often affected when a respectful workplace complaint is filed. In my experience, too often when an investigation process has been completed, HR leaders and managers feel compelled to close the door on it and “move forward”, failing to take into account broader impacts including what the group, as a whole, needs in order to recover and resume productive teamwork.
   
   
4. Mediation is not always appropriate – but it often is. Sometimes managers and HR leaders believe (or their policies dictate) that some types of behaviours or dynamics (or the severity of certain behaviours or dynamics) deem the situation inappropriate for mediation. In extreme cases, this can certainly be true. However, you may be surprised how helpful mediation can be even in the most difficult of scenarios. Trust the mediators to help you assess whether the situation is “mediate-able” or not. Don’t discount it as an option before you even properly explore it. 

Featured in the Spring 2019 Edition of HRmatters

Human Resource Professionals already have to manage an incredibly complex array of issues.  And in many organizations, if an issue comes up and there’s no clear department to address it, the solution just might be, “Let’s give that to HR.”  So the last thing I want to do is make life even more complicated for my friends in HR.  Just consider this article food for thought rather than an immediate call to action.

Diversity is an important issue with many organizations trying to recruit, retain and grow employees with different ethnicities, ages, and genders.  We work hard not to discriminate against people who look different than we do.  But there’s another way we are diverse that has nothing to do with exterior appearances.   We are diverse in our behavioral patterns.

I’m thinking of DiSC styles, but any assessment that is scientifically valid could be used as an example.  A team that looks quite different – a mix of genders, ages, and so forth might meet your current definition of diversity.  But if they all have the same behavioral pattern, the group isn’t as diverse as you think.

Let’s say they all are the D style – a behavioral style that tends to push for results.  Their lack of diversity might mean they neglect details or overlook the needs of employees.  They will have blind spots a more behaviorally diverse team might not. 

These blind spots can cause us to hire people that are the same style as we are (they have the same preferences as we do – yay!) and to manage people as if they were us.  I have a dear friend who is a C style (he’s a deep thinker, an analyzer of details).  His immediate supervisor is an I style (very enthusiastic, enjoys people and gatherings).   She came to him one day and said “Hey, it’s time for the holiday luncheon; let’s go!”  He responded, “Can I just stay here and work?”  She later wrote him up for not being a team player. 

The supervisor viewed the luncheon as a reward and a team building activity.  My friend viewed it as a punishment and a waste of time.  He wanted to stay and work – perhaps helping the team more in the long run.  But the I style felt being together as a group was more important.  (We could dig deeper and suggest that our I style could have better communicated her expectations, but that’s another article.)

I have heard dozens of examples of people feeling left out or misunderstood or frustrated because of these behavioral patterns.  The direct communicators think if people have a question or concern, they will state it.  The indirect communicators often feel unheard or steamrolled.  What is an HR professional to do?

1.)    Consider how your organization defines diversity and be aware of other ways a lack of it might negatively impact your mission.  Another example might be – if you are a group that needs cooperation from members of all political parties, but all your employees are members of the same party, would this negatively impact you?  A Chamber of Commerce that has only large corporations represented on the board but serves thousands of small businesses might not be as strategically diverse as it should be. 

2.)   Be open to the use of DiSC (or another assessment) to examine a different aspect of diversity.  DiSC scores don’t correlate to gender or race – the results are gender and color-blind.

3.)   Be careful of diversity for diversity’s sake.  Let’s say the Chamber in the above example puts a small business person on its board.  If they haven’t told this person they are expected to represent the voice of small business, they may just feel intimated by all the big companies and not participate.  Or they may just represent their own views.  Or the others may not understand why they are even at the table.  You can’t just dump someone different in a homogeneous group and “voila!” have peace, love and diversity.

4.)   Too much diversity will drive you insane.  In my Chamber example, things could get crazy.  We might add a small business, then decide that restaurants need to be represented.  Then ice cream shops, then food trucks…you see where I’m going with this.  Have a method behind your diversity.  Maybe you want to mirror the population.  Maybe you want to represent your customers.  Maybe you realize you have way too many I-styles, and someone needs to balance the books!

If diversity is an important topic (which we all agree it is), it merits strategic and expanded thinking.  It shouldn’t just be a tally of external characteristics.  Our vital human resources deserve better than that. 

One scholar that is well known in the Academy of Management, one of the largest leadership and management organizations in the world by the name of Senge highlights the importance of knowledge for organizations. Senge says that successful organizations enhance their competitiveness by focusing on learning. Another scholar with over 40 books by the name of Drucker, comments that “the productivity of knowledge and knowledge workers will not be the only competitive factor in the world economy. It is, however, likely to become the decisive factor, at least for most industries in the developed countries.” (p.17). Executives read Drucker’s work because it is directly applied to managerial decision making.

The fact remains that executives around the globe are beginning to be aware that knowledge management is a multidisciplinary area drawing on various disciplines such as information systems, organizational behavior, strategic management and psychology, and aims to create and sustain competitive performance.

Developing an Effective Corporate Strategy

Executives are familiar with Chandler, one of the prominent strategic management scholars along with Henry Mintzberg. Chandler perceives corporate strategy as determining a firm’s long-term goals, and then allocating capabilities and adapting actions and activities in a fashion that can achieve them in both an effective and efficient way. Another scholar, Andrew, describes strategy as a pattern of decisions made by organizations to determine goals and develop plans and policies necessary for accomplishing them. So, strategy is a pattern of decisions and plans, which are directed at interacting with the external and internal environment and effectively and efficiently allocating capabilities to achieve organizational objectives and increase profitability. Chandler started a mindset that encouraged executives to investigate scholarly work to improve profitability, enhance customer service, increase employee satisfaction, and improve shareholder value.

A firm’s strategy primarily aims to develop goals and plans to restructure unclear and vague situations into a set of organizationally resolvable problems. As a result, corporate strategies are formed to efficiently deploy capabilities and interact with environments----both internal and external. Thus, the knowledge based view provides organizations a social community to enhance competitive advantage by utilizing and creating new ideas and storing knowledge that can be tapped into at the right place and time. Many large companies have plans going well into the future. Long term goals spanning five to fifteen years. While short-term goals are more tactical and are just as important.

Competitive advantage is sought by many executives, for instance, Grant concentrates on knowledge application, and argues that firms are entities that must apply knowledge in order to enhance competitive advantage. An example of this is when Jamie Diamond left Citigroup to head up J.P. Morgan in the 2013, he was paid 20 million dollars to not take any people with him to J. P. Morgan for three years. Thus, knowledge creation and application manifest themselves in people, organizations, systems, and processes and should be guarded like gold in the Federal Reserve Bank.

Executives view corporate strategy is a sum of objectives, plans, and procedures designed to efficiently and effectively upgrade organizational capabilities and interact with their environment more effectively. In particular, strategy defines a pattern to deploy organizational capabilities and interact with both the internal and the external environment. Executives, therefore, manage their knowledge assets to create new ideas and knowledge aimed at achieving organizational objectives. First and foremost, just as one organization is holding knowledge back from competitors they are following suit. Knowledge could be the most important component of success in this ever changing technological environment of today. Thus, corporate strategy is an internal resource affecting knowledge and in most cases, knowledge is the most strategic factor of competitive advantage.

Executives can take a look at six aspects of strategic formulation based upon a prominent scholar by the name of Venkatraman: analysis, proactiveness, defensiveness, futurity, riskiness and aggressiveness. Executives are aware that two strategic dimensions----aggressiveness and riskiness were separate and did not fall under the same strategic dimension as the other four. Corporate strategy, therefore, mainly encompasses four aspects: analysis, proactiveness, defensiveness, and futurity. Thus, riskiness and aggressiveness, or what I would prefer to call assertiveness, fall under the operational risk category and must be managed but also monitored due to fluctuations in the dynamic  economic environment of today.

So how can you as an executive used these four dimensions? Venkatraman provides a blueprint to follow:

• Analysis refers to the degree to which the roots of problems are analyzed to provide the best solutions, which ultimately results in a more efficient allocation of resources to solve problems and also achieve organizational goals.
• Futurity is reflected in the degree to which the strategic decision-making process takes a two way approach----an emphasis on both long-term effectiveness and shorter-term efficiency concurrently. 
• Defensiveness, which recommends undertaking defensive behaviours that manifest themselves in enhancing efficiency and in cutting costs while maintaining continuous budget-analysis and break-even points.
• Proactiveness is defined as the extent to which a firm continuously searches for emerging opportunities in its business environment, and then actively participates in these opportunities by responding to changing trends.

Executives Can Now Use an Effective Corporate Strategy

When executives use analysis strategy, they aim to create more knowledge. They, in fact, find the best solution using a problematic search of various options. Strategic analysis actually stimulates organizations to apply information systems in their decision-making processes in order to investigate various alternatives and options.  Engaging in analysis strategy provides executives with a high degree of freedom for subordinates to explore their own new ideas and solutions to organizational opportunities while solving problems. For instance, executives analyse strategic milestones to meet the goals of the employee intellectual stimulation and personal development. This provides new and more innovative solutions for organizational problems as they arise. Furthermore, executives inculcate human capital into social capital to exert change at the organizational level.

Executives also develop futurity strategy to implement a series of basic research aimed at developing a more comprehensive vision for the future by incorporating upcoming trends in the business environment. Executives use analysis and futurity to expand the growth opportunities available to organizations that may be challenging but important to close the gap between success and failure. Executives must also take an offensive approach at times and in this case they employ a defensive strategy. A defensive strategy utilizes modifications in order to efficiently and effectively use organizational resources, decrease costs, and control operational risk.

Finally, proactiveness is a strategy element used by executives who take a proactive approach to search for better positions in the business environment. In this case, executives use proactiveness strategy to find new opportunities and proactively responding to current challenges in external environments, they are also enhancing their span of control. Therefore, a proactiveness strategy can provide a higher degree of knowledge through developing interactions with external environments.

In Conclusion

Standing on the shoulders of scholars before us, I indicate that corporate strategy is a major factor for knowledge management success and support the positive impact of corporate strategy on knowledge management. This article suggests that corporate strategy constitutes the foundation of a supportive workplace to improve knowledge management and reduce operational risk. In fact, I suggest that by channeling knowledge management efforts into organizational constructs, employing a supportive strategic platform within organizations, that executives will continue to prosper. 

Over the last few years, online or Distance Learning, has come a long way. According to a recent report, 68 of 73 or 93% of participating Canadian universities offer online courses and programmes. A total of 12,728 courses are associated with over 809 programmes offered through Canadian universities. DL offerings constitute 8.32% of total course offerings, with 361,000 students having taken at least one online course in 2014-2015. With 1,100 to 1,400 new DL courses being added yearly, online learning is on the rise in Canada (Bates, 2016).

DL makes use of modern day technologies, personal computers, mobile networks, such as smart phones and laptops. In general, DL is proven to be just as effective as traditional classroom or face-to-face learning, provided that learning is based upon sound instructional design. Learning Management Systems (LMS) are used by colleges and universities to effectively manage, administer, and monitor training, education, and learning support services. Examples of modern LMS include Moodle, Blackboard, and Desire to learn. When it comes to DL technology, it is not about the newness, or complexity of technology that drives the learning experience. It is the quality and investment placed in instructional design that counts (Fenton, 2018). Once familiar with an institution LMS, completing assignments, participating in group discussions, taking exams, and submitting assignments online in well-designed online courses and programmes can become second nature. 

DL continues to improve in terms of both quality and options. Specifically, the number and types of courses and programmes offered by DL continues to grow. Websites, such as University Study www.university.ca, and the Canadian Virtual University, www.cvu-uvc.ca  offer a variety of DL courses and programmes delivered through accredited Canadian and international learning institutions. Furthermore, it is possible to complete academic programmes through a combination of traditional classroom and DL, or hybrid instruction. This creates more options for the busy professional to take classes online or in a classroom to complete a programme.

One of the four fundamental requirements of the Chartered Professional in Human Resources (CPHR) is ‘Knowledge’. Information on the CPHR designation process, requirements and accredited programmes are presented on the CPHR Manitoba website (http://www.cphrmb.ca/?page=Become_a_CPHR_). Acquired through formal, recognized, and accredited education, learning is key to personal development and career advancement. While some students and professionals may prefer traditional classroom setting, there are many options to complete a HR certificate, bachelors, or master’s degree by DL. Many courses and programmes can be applied towards qualifying for the academic or knowledge requirements associated with the CPHR designation.  Online learning offers the organized and motivated student the ability to learn, any time and any place. Furthermore, DL offers the opportunity to study while you work. Courses can be taken part-time.

DL offers the means to assist the student and professional with work, education, and life balance. With existing and new HR courses and programmes offered online, there is an opportunity to work towards courses that contribute towards the CPHR designation. While studying and working may seem challenging for some, DL offers flexibility if management accordingly. By exercising effective time management skills, it is possible to acquire new skills and knowledge, needed to remain current in the fast changing field of HR. From this perspective, learning can become a rewarding experience for the both the professional student, as well as employers who benefit from well-informed and educated employees.  When it comes to advancing your career and education, consider taking a DL course, before taking that bus or your car to your local college or university to sit in a classroom for three hours. With DL, you can study HR anywhere, any time.