Astrigo is in trouble. The home improvement chain has missed its earnings forecast badly and sales are falling. A 10% reduction in staff looks like the only choice. Layoffs, however, would undermine the retailer's longtime commitment to employees and the ability to provide its famed customer service. But tapping cash reserved for strategic acquisitions goes against the firm's values, too. What should the CEO do? Four experts comment on this fictional case study in R0903A and R0903Z. Board advisers Laurence J. Stybel and Maryanne Peabody, of Stybel Peabody Lincolnshire, suggest that the company borrow a page from McDonald's and declare Astrigo's intention to focus on the interests of long-term shareholders. This move would establish a framework that would help management make tactical decisions with more clarity and flexibility. The company could then use its cash to buy a little time to study the options. If Astrigo can't avoid layoffs, a last-in, first-out approach would be the least costly. Former CEO Jurgen Dormann understands the challenge Astrigo faces. When he took over ABB, the company was in deep distress. After shaking up his executive committee, Dormann personally reached out to all 180,000 employees to enlist their help. They came back with ideas that saved $1.6 billion - and rescued the company. Management professor Robert I. Sutton thinks too many executives assume that layoffs are the best way to reduce costs. They don't factor in how long it takes to realize the savings from job cuts, the costs to hire and train people once business picks up, or the damage to morale and productivity. Astrigo's executives should consider alternatives such as pay cuts, reduced benefits, unpaid time off, and incentives for departure. If layoffs are in-evitable, Astrigo should do them quickly, and firing the bottom 10% of employees would be the worst approach.
Astrigo is in trouble. The home improvement chain has missed its earnings forecast badly and sales are falling. A 10% reduction in staff looks like the only choice. Layoffs, however, would undermine the retailer's longtime commitment to employees and the ability to provide its famed customer service. But tapping cash reserved for strategic acquisitions goes against the firm's values, too. What should the CEO do? Four experts comment on this fictional case study in R0903A and R0903Z. Board advisers Laurence J. Stybel and Maryanne Peabody, of Stybel Peabody Lincolnshire, suggest that the company borrow a page from McDonald's and declare Astrigo's intention to focus on the interests of long-term shareholders. This move would establish a framework that would help management make tactical decisions with more clarity and flexibility. The company could then use its cash to buy a little time to study the options. If Astrigo can't avoid layoffs, a last-in, first-out approach would be the least costly. Former CEO Jurgen Dormann understands the challenge Astrigo faces. When he took over ABB, the company was in deep distress. After shaking up his executive committee, Dormann personally reached out to all 180,000 employees to enlist their help. They came back with ideas that saved $1.6 billion - and rescued the company. Management professor Robert I. Sutton thinks too many executives assume that layoffs are the best way to reduce costs. They don't factor in how long it takes to realize the savings from job cuts, the costs to hire and train people once business picks up, or the damage to morale and productivity. Astrigo's executives should consider alternatives such as pay cuts, reduced benefits, unpaid time off, and incentives for departure. If layoffs are in-evitable, Astrigo should do them quickly, and firing the bottom 10% of employees would be the worst approach.
This is an MIT Sloan Management Review article. In a recent survey, 72% of board directors indicated that their performance ought to be evaluated. Yet only 21% of the boards of public companies actually conduct such assessments. Part of the problem is that organizations often don't know how best to implement a board self-evaluation procedure, so many simply avoid the practice. Others have implemented the process only to become frustrated because it took so much time and produced so few results. To investigate the different self-evaluation practices used, the authors studied eight boards that have engaged in the process for at least two annual cycles. They found two high-level variables in the protocol for self-evaluations: the structure of the data collection methodology (low vs. high) and the confidentiality of data (unimportant vs. important). These dimensions define quadrants of four different approaches to self-evaluation: informal, legalistic, trusting, and systematic. Each approach has important implications for a company's board rating, directors, and officers insurance and various other issues.
Nearly all of us will lose our jobs sometime, but is there a right way to be terminated? What differentiates fired employees who make the best of their situations from those who do not? One answer is mind-set. Many workers unconsciously hold a "tenure mind-set," believing in the promise of employment security. By contrast, other workers hold an "assignment mentality," seeing each job as one in a series of impermanent, career-building stepping-stones. Most corporate board members and CEOs have this latter mind-set and consider their executives to be filling terminal assignments. People who possess this mentality usually rebound swiftly when fired. But when employees who hold a tenure mind-set are suddenly fired or laid off, the authors say, they can fall into three common traps: the "lost identity" trap, the "lost family" trap, and the "lost ego" trap. To prepare for the eventuality of termination, the authors suggest that executives adopt the assignment mind-set at all times. They should keep their social networks alive, include a termination clause in employment contracts, and consider hiring an agent. If warning signs warrant, they might even volunteer to be terminated. By assuming control over the way they are fired, people can gain control over their careers.