Roberta Rumors

1. HRI's approach to this policy change is a little too abrupt, in my opinion. This policy change seems to have been thought up and implemented on a whim, rather than after a long, thought out discussion with middle management throughout the company. From a fiscal perspective, implementing the policy change is a good idea because it will lessen the burden on the company (HRI) to employ its work force without laying them off. This kind of policy, though, to be fair, should be implemented with a grandfather clause, so that employees who have worked more than 5 years but less than 12 can still enjoy the protection they have already qualified for under the old policy. To take away this privilege from employees who have already qualified for it under the old system is a travesty.

In terms of communicating this policy change with employees, HRI did a very poor job. HRI should have discussed the potential policy change with managers first, and then, assuming an agreement had been reached to enact the new policy, managers should have been allowed to verbally inform employees of the change. When HRI executives decided to send out an e-mail, they severely demotivated employees, negated the positive effects of any performance-based pay plans, and created an environment full of doubt, confusion, and low morale. Now, Dolores, amongst other employees, is frightened about losing her job, and Roberta, who as a manager didn't even know about the change, is forced to investigate the matter and attempt to explain.

2. What HRI should have done is gotten all employees together for a large meeting, or for a large number of smaller meetings with both top executives at the company and middle-level managers. At these meetings, the managers could explain first-hand how and why the company is enacting the change. Additionally, the company should have grandfathered employees into the new policy who already had qualified for protection previously. Further, the jump by 7 years (5 years to 12 years) in the policy could have been much lower. Even a few years lower would have been sufficient to eliminate several important, more senior employees from being affected by the policy change. If a different kind of incentive could be enacted--something more positive--at the same time that this negative policy change is being put into place, then the staff might maintain more trust in HRI's executives and not be as resentful.

4. Roberta should approach Bob in a calm and collective manner, despite being angry at him. She should try to get an understanding from him as to why the policy change was enacted, and why the middle management of the company was not consulted on this matter. Even if HRI executives didn't want to consult middle-management on this change beforehand, it would have been best for the executives to brief the managers on the change ahead of time. Roberta could ask why this step was not taken, and she can also ask what steps she is allowed to take in trying to make-up with her employees. It is important for Roberta to re-motivate her workers, and executives should be able to give her some ways of adding incentive to her workers' jobs.

5. I would suggest that Roberta avoid e-mail for the process of explaining this policy to her workers. It was the initial e-mail that partly angered her employees. The seeming disregard for employees' feelings hurt Roberta's rapport with her employees because she is part of management, even though she had no say in the policy change matter. Roberta should have a one-on-one sit-down with her staff (assuming they are small in number) and explain to each of them that their job security is still relatively high. She needs to communicate with them that HRI is still a safe place to work. I think personal talks are the best way that she can assure her staff of their importance to the company, and keep them motivated in their job roles.