Newsletter for April, 2003 (Q2)

The Baby and the Bathwater
By Linda Chaff

The traditional role of a job-related mentor is rapidly disappearing. This is due largely to America's rush to embrace corporate concepts; from the Z Theory to corporate reengineering to downsizing as effective, innovative ways to increase profits. It looks good on the short-term P&L statement, but the actual long-term cost is now surfacing and being addressed. Some of these management or restructuring concepts are backfiring, resulting in frantic efforts to put Humpty-Dumpty back together again.

Cutbacks and layoffs are generally unilateral. Downsizing, however, usually targets a specific aspect of a business or segment of its personnel. Advertising and PR used to be the first departments to be cut loose during difficult times. Over recent years, it's the seasoned employee who is being let go. Mature workers have usually been with the company longer, and therefore earn more than a new-hire replacement.

Depending upon their age, long-term employees are occasionally offered the benefits of an early retirement package. Sometimes they are caught up in a corporate restructuring that shuts down an entire department. From upper management's perspective, it's trimming overhead for greater profits. The cost of health insurance, pension funds, paid vacations, workers' compensation insurance (along with payments to unemployment insurance and social security) are just a few areas where employers can lower outlay.

The obverse effects are only now being felt. Employers are realizing the loss-years of hands-on experience that employees bring to their work, the maturity, and the comprehension of a company's structure and goals can't be replaced so readily. There is no shortcut to real-time experience.

But there was a way to reduce trial-and-error losses. New-hires were assigned to a seasoned veteran within a department. This mentor took the time to patiently explain procedures and, when indicated, why things were done a certain way. It was a time-honored form of one-on-one training. New-hires were eager to learn on at least two levels: for job advancement and out of a need to please.

Many larger companies offer in-house training programs. To be cost effective, these are usually conducted with groups of trainees. Even if successfully completed, the employees will encounter new situations that weren't discussed during training. If there is no mentor present to offer task-specific guidance or solutions, the employees are on their own.

In today's workplace, the thrust is to get more work done with fewer employees. If the mature employees are no longer there, the responsibility goes to younger, less experienced personnel. Yet if there are any snags or problems with how a task is to be accomplished, newer employees may not know how to handle it.

Mergers also contribute to the need to eliminate job duplications or overlapping. The decision may involve deciding between one employee, who is 35 years old with ten years' experience, or another employee, who is 45 with 20 years' experience. Both employees are experienced, both are qualified. The likelihood, though, is that the older worker will be let go.

What is not being considered is the value of the overall performance of the older employee. Not just the daily responsibilities, but the nurturing of coworkers, the broader insights into problem resolutions, and a work ethic that recognizes the interdependence of the employee/employer relationship.
Job stability and advancement are great motivators at the workplace. When employees see company downsizing and restructuring, they perceive it as a "cutoff" date for voluntary retirement with that company. These activities may account for why so many younger workers today do not commit themselves to a job or an employer.

If new-hires see that a company fosters people-growth, and not just profits, they are more likely to want to be a part of the team. And part of a good team has a coach-a mentor. Logic dictates that there is no substitute for experience.

TOP