Mental Health in the Workplace

Most of us take it for granted in the workplace today that our organization is responsible for ensuring our safety on the job. Systems like Worker’s Compensation programs are also taken as a given, and certainly here in Canada, there is no one in the workforce today who would remember a time before these programs were in place. In Canada, Ontario was the first province to enact Worker’s Compensation legislation, in 1915, with other provinces following suit shortly thereafter. Worker`s Comp remains a provincially legislated requirement today, and though the details differ province to province, the fundamental nature of the program is the same; workers who are injured on the job are eligible to apply for payment of wages for lost time, and compensation for outside medical costs. The employer pays the cost for the insurance, in exchange for the worker giving up the right to sue the employer over the injury. So far, so good.

In the past, worker`s compensation has been limited almost exclusively to the concept of physical injury or illness in the workplace. But that may be changing. I believe we are in the middle of a shift in thinking, one in which the psychological safety of the worker will come to be considered in the same way as physical safety. Last year, the Canadian government released a (voluntary) standard for psychological health and safety in the workplace, and recent developments in the law suggest that employers are increasingly being expected to ensure workers are not being exposed to excessive mental stress at work. There have also been a few recent Worker’s Compensation judgements that suggest the bulwark against mental stress claims being considered eligible for Worker’s Comp is crumbling, and will continue to do so.

A psychologically safe workplace is “one in which every practical effort is made to avoid reasonably foreseeable injury to the mental health of employees” (Schain 2009). Compensation for mental injury is an emerging area under the law, and mental suffering awards in constructive dismissal cases are increasingly common (and larger). Mental harm can be held as a consequence of overwork, especially poor working environments, abusive behaviour by management, etc… So there’s a pretty solid trend going on here. In Zorn-Smith vs. Bank of Montreal (2003), Ms. Zorn-Smith was awarded an increased notice entitlement and $15,000 for mental suffering, and given that damage awards have increased up to 700% between 2005-2010, I would certainly expect to see the numbers increase. Now, granted that Ms. Zorn-Smith was working in a position for which she was not qualified, putting in a crazy amount of hours, and dealing with an organization that didn’t seem particularly inclined to help her deal with any of these issues, and I would certainly hope that most organizations might have a more reasonable approach, but the trend is there- overwork and stress your people out, and expect to pay the price for that.

What this means for your workplace really depends on the organization. My personal feeling is that this trend makes sense, and good employers likely already have systems in place to deal with at least some of these issues. That said, there is still a tremendous stigma concerning mental health among many Canadians, and duty to accommodate, etc. is still a bit fuzzy. Believe me, even in the best and most supportive environments, there’s still lots of grey area to run into. However, for those of us in less-supportive environments, there’s a pretty strong argument to be made in favour of revising those aspects of your organizational culture, policies and procedures that are less than totally supportive, and it comes with dollar signs attached.

So where do you think you’re at, and where do you want to be?

Appraisals

Formal appraisals are an integral part of just about any organization’s performance management process. Dreaded by employees and managers alike, appraisals are generally touted by human capital management professionals as key in increasing productivity. There are a wide range of appraisal solutions out there, which are mostly designed to make managers and employees hate the process less, and make it a little more likely that the system will be used according to design.

Ultimately, the primary purpose of the performance appraisal process is to manage employee performance. So are there other ways to manage performance?

The key to managing performance is feedback. Feedback can be handled in any numbers of ways, and doesn't have to be a formal process at all. In an ideal world, where feedback is a constant occurrence, clearly communicated and reciprocated, perhaps you could do away with a formal performance management system, but the reality is that such systems serve more than one purpose. For one thing, they serve to demonstrate that conversations concerning performance have occurred, and to document the key points of the discussion. Should you ever need to terminate an employee for cause, this and other documentation will prove to be critical in determining whether or not proper cause exists (hint: it’s pretty rare outside of cases of serious misconduct) .

In an organization with a very high level of trust between colleagues, where open and honest communication and feedback is a part of everyday working life, perhaps a case can be made that formal appraisals aren't necessary from a feedback perspective, whether they are 360s, online, or otherwise. However, they will always be necessary for documentation, in the absence of a world where all employees are good ones, and thus, managers and employees alike better just resign themselves to the fact that they really aren't going anywhere. 

Performance Management

Performance management is one of the key areas in which a strong human capital function can bring value to the organization. Having an effective  PM system contributes directly to the bottom line of the organization through ensuring that desired outcomes and goals are clearly understood by all involved, and that everyone is working towards these common goals. The problem lies in ensuring that your organization’s performance management system is effective.

Purchasing a pre-made PM system is a convenient option, but pre-made systems are very rarely targeted specifically enough to the needs of your organization to ensure maximum effectiveness. Hiring a consultant to design a PM system can be much more tailored, but may be prohibitively expensive. Consequently, the project design may fall right into the laps of the HR department itself.

When that happens, it’s important to make sure you’re doing it right. One of the ways in which HR can fail the organization is by getting too caught up into what the perfect PM system looks like from HR’s perspective, and forgetting what it looks like to the rest of the stakeholders. If your managers and employees are not on board with the system you’ve designed, it won’t be effective. Have you ever complained that your managers “just don’t get it” and wondered why they can’t be bothered to use the fabulous system you’ve designed/implemented? If so, my guess is that you don’t have great buy-in from your managers- either they don’t understand why your system is important, or it doesn’t measure what’s important to them. In either case, you have some work to do.

That means that the very first part of designing a performance management system is identifying your stakeholders, and getting them involved. Identify the goals- what do you want your PM system to manage? And why? If your system covers the things your managers need it to cover, you’ll have a much higher acceptance level and therefore much higher effectiveness.

This is also the time to have a conversation about areas your PM system needs to cover- and now is the time to talk about competencies. Chances are really good that between the managers and the employees doing the work, they have a much better idea of the competencies required to do the job than you do. It’s also an opportunity to make sure that the staff see your PM system as fair. If the employees don’t think your PM system is fair, they won’t engage, and your effectiveness will be much reduced. Keep bringing those competencies back to your identified goals, too- your system will only be valid if it’s actually measuring the elements required to meet the goals you’ve already identified.

Once you have your list of competencies, then you need to decide how the PM system should be set up. Is an annual review really going to be as effective as you need it to be? How about quarterly coaching? Weekly coaching with quarterly reviews? How formal does your system need to be? What works best with your organizational culture? And how much paperwork is too much?

The closer you can keep your Performance Management System to the needs outlined above, the higher the effectiveness of the system will be. Designing a system with the input of your SMEs and stakeholders is the best way to ensure that you get a system that serves the needs of the organization and helps contribute positively to the bottom line through increased productivity and clarity of purpose.

You may not ever be able to keep everybody happy with your performance management system. But if it is effective, and measures the things it’s supposed to measure, you will see positive results.Performance management is one of the key areas in which a strong human capital function can bring value to the organization. Having an effective  PM system contributes directly to the bottom line of the organization through ensuring that desired outcomes and goals are clearly understood by all involved, and that everyone is working towards these common goals. The problem lies in ensuring that your organization’s performance management system is effective.

Purchasing a pre-made PM system is a convenient option, but pre-made systems are very rarely targeted specifically enough to the needs of your organization to ensure maximum effectiveness. Hiring a consultant to design a PM system can be much more tailored, but may be prohibitively expensive. Consequently, the project design may fall right into the laps of the HR department itself.

When that happens, it’s important to make sure you’re doing it right. One of the ways in which HR can fail the organization is by getting too caught up into what the perfect PM system looks like from HR’s perspective, and forgetting what it looks like to the rest of the stakeholders. If your managers and employees are not on board with the system you’ve designed, it won’t be effective. Have you ever complained that your managers “just don’t get it” and wondered why they can’t be bothered to use the fabulous system you’ve designed/implemented? If so, my guess is that you don’t have great buy-in from your managers- either they don’t understand why your system is important, or it doesn’t measure what’s important to them. In either case, you have some work to do.

That means that the very first part of designing a performance management system is identifying your stakeholders, and getting them involved. Identify the goals- what do you want your PM system to manage? And why? If your system covers the things your managers need it to cover, you’ll have a much higher acceptance level and therefore much higher effectiveness.

This is also the time to have a conversation about areas your PM system needs to cover- and now is the time to talk about competencies. Chances are really good that between the managers and the employees doing the work, they have a much better idea of the competencies required to do the job than you do. It’s also an opportunity to make sure that the staff see your PM system as fair. If the employees don’t think your PM system is fair, they won’t engage, and your effectiveness will be much reduced. Keep bringing those competencies back to your identified goals, too- your system will only be valid if it’s actually measuring the elements required to meet the goals you’ve already identified.

Once you have your list of competencies, then you need to decide how the PM system should be set up. Is an annual review really going to be as effective as you need it to be? How about quarterly coaching? Weekly coaching with quarterly reviews? How formal does your system need to be? What works best with your organizational culture? And how much paperwork is too much?

The closer you can keep your Performance Management System to the needs outlined above, the higher the effectiveness of the system will be. Designing a system with the input of your SMEs and stakeholders is the best way to ensure that you get a system that serves the needs of the organization and helps contribute positively to the bottom line through increased productivity and clarity of purpose.

You may not ever be able to keep everybody happy with your performance management system. But if it is effective, and measures the things it’s supposed to measure, you will see positive results. 

Critical Skills

I recently completed a survey from an HR association asking what I thought was the most critical skill in professional practice in HR. Now, I think it’s very difficult in just about any profession to pick just one critical skill, and I spent quite a bit of time thinking about it.

Part of the problem is that HR really is a very broad function. As someone who has experience as the entire HR department for a small function, I can certainly attest to the many different hats an HR Generalist can wear. That’s a job title that doesn’t lie, folks. And because HR encompasses so many different areas, it’s hard to pick one key skill that covers them all.

After I’d thought about it for a while, I decided that the absolutely most critical skill in HR is paying attention. I thought about saying “listening”, but decided that that’s a bit too narrow for what I actually mean. Certainly the ability to listen actively and empathetically is very important to practice in HR, but often it’s as much about what people don’t say as it is about what they do. It’s also very much about body language and facial expression, too- so it goes way beyond just listening. It’s also about picking up on unvoiced cues, and analyzing the information that you’re getting. Sometimes it’s about putting together a conversation you’re having now with other bits and pieces of information that you’ve collected along the way.

If you can pay attention to everything, you may find that the casual lunchroom conversation you overheard can take on a whole new meaning during the manager’s meeting. You can never have too much information, and I can think of several times in my career where a seemingly unrelated tidbit has turned out to hold some very useful information that’s helped to clarify other issues.

If you can listen, carefully, and pay attention, and then think critically about that information, you will find that you have a leg up in making key decisions.

What do you think are key skills in HR?