Employee Development: Time for a Synergistic Approach

Performance management is the process of evaluating the effectiveness of each staff member in fulfilling the organization’s vision and mission to ensure continuous organizational improvement (Cascio & Aguinis, 2011, p. 345-346; Venne et al., 2018; Peng, 2022). Organizations evaluate employees in several ways. Two common ways that employees are managed are through performance plans and development plans. The purpose of a performance plan is to ensure that the organization achieves its goals and has meaningful metrics to evaluate its performance on an individual, team, and organizational level (Venne et al., 2018; Kushner, 2021; Yang & Basile, 2022).

?Performance training tools and resources come in the form of coaching and training on a specific skill or task and are used for the purpose of producing near-term or short-term results. Employee development tools and resources are future-term focused and tend to be more social and behavioral in their demonstration (Cascio & Aguinis, 2011, p.345-346).

Learning for the purpose of training or development occurs in many forms. Learning can be formal such as mandatory organizational learning that is compliance-focused or formal learning from supervisors, colleagues, training department, or a third-party vendor offering live or online learning or through higher education.

?Learning can also take place serendipitously through a newly discovered problem or issue to resolve or investigate and can be unplanned, informal, or formal (Armstrong & Landers, 2018; Gallagher, 2021). Learning can be received through a colleague, manager, leader, mentor, advocate, sponsor, or through sources outside of the organization (Li et al., 2021). However, in this digital age, learning can be self-paced using videos, learning management systems, virtual reality simulations, mobile learning, microlearning, and gamification (Faller et al., 2020; Paradiso, 2022; Agnes, 2022).

??Traditional Employee Performance and the Employee Development Plans

?Traditional employee performance plans are designed to evaluate employee performance within their present role. Performance plan elements include job objectives of job tasks, responsibilities, and relationships, action items, outcomes, and employee self-rated and manager-rated strengths, challenges, and opportunities, along with comments, recommended training, action planning, and goal dates (Society for Human Resources Management, 2017). Employee Development plans are designed to prepare an employee for job enlargement or job enrichment, stretch assignments, and promotions (Tims & Parker, 2020; Waples & Baskin, 2021). Employee development can take place within an employee’s current department, other internal business units, or outside of the organization. Whether employee development is internal or external, an emerging organizational challenge is employee autonomy within the scope of their work (Wan & Duffy, 2022).

?The Changing Employee-Employer Relationship

?Workplace relationships and structures have undergone a series of changes over the last several years. And then the unthinkable happened during the COVID-19 pandemic. So many lost lives and unexplained prolonged symptoms, reduced mental health due to extensive sheltering-in-place and lack of social interaction, and so much time to rethink life plans and reimagine the future. While the pandemic brought with it several variants and waves, the workforce experienced several waves in the form of the Great Resignation, the Great Reshuffle, Quiet Quitting, and the Great Renegotiation( McKinsey, 2022). Potential emerging waves include Soft Living and Lying Flat – both are cousins to Quiet Quitting (Davidovic, 2021; Bandurski, 2021; Williams, 2022). With each disruption comes challenges and opportunities for organizations to be agile in their thinking about employee training and development (Yoon et al., 2021).

?Historical data on employee data reflect a downward trend in employee tenure. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics Employee Tenure Summary, the median tenure for wage and salary workers for the years 2020 and 2022 was 4.1 years. In 2014, the median tenure was 4.6 and at one of its lowest, 3.7 in 2002 (Employee Tenure Report, 2014; Employee Tenure Report, 2002). In the 2022 report, the median employee tenure for workers 55 to 64 years of age was higher with a median tenure of 9.8 years while tenure for workers 25 to 34 years of age was 2.8.

?The Realities of Employee Development: Obstacles and Derailers

?Unethical Behavior

While employee development is an essential part of the employee experience and helps the organization fulfill its goals, studies show that there are myriad of instances where this process can present a challenge. For example, unethical behavior can negatively impact the employer-employee relationship (Cialdini et al., 2021). ?For instance, the PSS-UPSB study (Perceived Supervisor Support / Unethical Pro-Supervisor Behavior) comprised of 320 US-based professionals representing diverse industries such as IT and software, healthcare, education, and retail sales were presented with a scenario about a supervisor’s behavior (Li et al., 2022). The study consisted of 52% women and 48% men. The average age of participants was 40. Eighty percent of the participants possessed more than?5 years of experience. As part of the experiment, participants were presented with a hypothetical scenario description of a supervisor and their behavior.

?The purpose of the Li et al. (2022) study was to measure either a high Perceived Supervisor Support (PSS) condition or low Perceived Supervisor Support (PSS) condition. The study found that there was a relationship between Perceived Supervisor Support and Unethical Pro-Supervisor Behavior. What this means for workplace relationships is that there are instances where perceived supervisor support could act as an antecedent to unethical behavior (Kish-Gephart et al., 2010; Li et al., 2022; Muir – Zapata et al., 2022).

?Workplace Competition

Employee development can be awkward if there is competition within the superior-subordinate relationship. Rather than viewing the subordinate as part of the team and key to the organization’s success, the subordinate is seen as an opponent. An antecedent to competition is envy. Envy can originate from several places. For example, envy can originate from individual unique characteristics. Envy can be the result of work environment or structure. Envy can also originate from one’s relationship or connection to the organization (Boone, 2005).

?In 2000, the Vecchio study was conducted on the negative emotions of jealousy and envy in the workplace (Boone, 2005). One hundred and sixty-seven employed graduate students participated in the survey using a Workplace Envy Scale to investigate factors such as manipulation, self-esteem, autonomy, competitive reward, supervisory considerateness, sense of control, and propensity to quit. The Vecchio study findings showed an “association between the tendencies to feel envy and

Machiavellianism” (manipulation). One of the hypotheses was that those who experienced frequent feelings of envy also experienced low self-esteem and were more at risk to feeling as if their self-worth was being threatened (Boone, 2005; Rapp, 2016). Other competitive behaviors a subordinate may experience with their boss include the boss’s insecurity and preoccupation with the subordinate being able to match their level, tiptoeing around the subordinate, and refusing to acknowledge the subordinate’s achievements (Arshad, 2021)

?Rivalry Among Women in the Workplace

Another obstacle to employee development is workplace rivalry between women. To explore and understand the phenomenon of rivalry among women in the workplace, an investigation into this phenomenon was conducted using the Giorgi Descriptive Phenomenological Model (Tichenor, 2011). The purpose of the study was to understand what was at the core of rivalry between women in the workplace. Nine women participated in the study which gathered data about their lived workplace experience with factors such as direct and indirect aggression, control, demeaning behaviors, humiliation, organizational culture, emotional burdens, impacts on personal lives, and coping mechanisms (Tichenor, 2011; Gallagher, 2013; Rapp, 2016). The nine study participants were women over the age of 21, possessed over 10 years of professional work experience, and had experienced rivalry with another woman in the workplace.

Tichenor's (2011) study findings consisted of four key themes: 1) aggressive acts of behavior from the other woman, 2) organizational culture, 3) emotional encumbrance, and 4) utilization of coping mechanisms. Tichenor (2011) also found that the aggression was more indirect and that the aggressor was able to harm the target without being identified.

?A Time for Synergy

?There are several ways that organizations can improve their employee development process. First, employers need to be clear on how they view their employees – from their leadership and management philosophies to their talent philosophies (Meyers et al., 2020). ?Organizations must embrace that when their staff comes to work, the whole person shows up for work. The whole person approach means recognizing that an employee is not just an ID number but lives full, multifaceted, and diverse lives outside of the organization and that employee is just one of their roles. A simple way to better understand an employee and their needs is during a developmental meeting. This meeting is an opportunity to allow the employee to storyboard using a Whole Person Approach (Highlands Whole Person Technology, 1992). For example, a supervisor could ask the following questions:

?·????????Describe where you believe you are in your career development cycle.

·????????What do you see as your abilities?

·????????What new skills have you learned or what new skills would you like to learn?

·????????What new experiences are you interested in obtaining?

·????????What are your interests?

·????????How would you describe your unique personal style or approach to work?

·????????What do you value?

·????????What are your goals?

·????????What are your needs?

·????????How can I support you?

?In addition to gaining background information on the employee, the supervisor needs to incorporate empathy by actively listening for understanding and valuing (Forbes Human Resources Council, 2022). This is where it is helpful for the supervisor to be knowledgeable about the key needs of today’s workforce and consider them when working with an employee on their individual development plans or IDPs (Gurchiek, 2022). For instance, ?the Forbes Human Resources Council suggests:

?·????????Be empathetic

·????????Actively listen

·????????Expand your knowledgebase

·????????Be aware of mental health issues and resources

·????????Obtain training and certification in diversity, equity, and inclusion

·????????Demonstrate diversity, equity, and inclusion in the workplace

·????????Be trauma-informed

·????????Use emotional intelligence

·????????Be mindful of current local, national, and global workforce issues and how they could impact your workforce.

?Dramatic shifts in US workforce demographics will continue because of a growing multigenerational, multiethnic, and gender identity-diverse workforce (Khuntia, 2022; Ellis, 2022; Summers?et al., 2022). Additional shifts were the result of the pandemic, the Great Resignation, the Great Reshuffle, Quiet Quitting, and now Soft Living and Lying Flat (Bandurski, 2021; Williams, 2022). A supervisor will want to engage their staff to gain insight and proactively plan for their business by considering the following questions:

?·????????Define or redefine the working relationship as changes to roles, responsibilities, relationships, and organizational structures may have changed since the beginning of the pandemic.

·????????Find out how the employee is doing in their current role and how they are feeling about their present role.

·????????Inquire if the employee has completed any type of self-assessment and knows their strengths, challenges, opportunities, and where they are interested in making contributions within the organization.

·????????Ask the employee if they feel that the role is still a good fit for them.

·????????Take into consideration the employee’s background, education, experience, key competencies, and organizational current and future needs.

·????????Ensure that the employee is aware of other resources and networking opportunities such as mentoring, advocacy, and sponsorship.

·????????Consider the timeline for promotion, time in current position, and expectations for promotion.

·????????Reflect and learn from post-COVID and endemic experiences to strategically plan and manage future talent.

?Studies show employees want more and continue to reassess, reinvent, reshuffle, and renegotiate their employment terms (McKinsey, 2022; De Smet et al., 2022). Workers are communicating how they feel through?ghosting, resignation, presenteeism, quiet quitting, and soft living (Vera-Calzaretta & Juarez-Garcia, 2014; Deichler, 2021; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2022; Zenger & Folkman,?2022; ?Williams, 2022). It’s time for businesses to reassess their vision, mission, and values along with how long they plan to be in business. Technology along with emerging business models, empowered customers, and employees with ever-shifting needs and little loyalty, future businesses should plan for shorter life cycles (O’Sullivan, 2022). Translation – value people and time. Engage, develop, partner, build, and achieve with them while you can!

?References

??gnes, J. S. (2022). Gaining and Training a Digital Colleague: Employee Responses to Robotization. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 58(1), 29–64. DOI:10.1177/00218863211043596.

Armstrong, M. B., & Landers, R. N. (2018). Gamification of employee training and development.?International Journal of Training and Development,?22(2), 162-169. DOI: /10.1111/ijtd.12124.

Arshad, S. (2021). 9 Clear signs your boss is competing with you – 4 Tips. Retrieved from ?https://thebalancework.com/signs-your-boss-is-competing-with-you/.

?Bandurski, D. (2021). The ‘lying flat’ movement standing in the way of China’s innovation drive. https://www.brookings.edu/techstream/the-lying-flat-movement-standing-in-the-way-of-chinas-innovation-drive/.

Boone, A. L. (2005).?The green-eyed monster at work: An investigation of how envy relates to behavior in the workplace?(Ph.D.). Available from Psychology Database. (305365452).?https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/green-eyed-monster-at-work-investigation-how-envy/docview/305365452/se-2?accountid=36783.

Bradley, A.J. and McDonald, M.P. (2011). All organizations are social, but few are social organizations. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2011/10/all-organizations-are-social-b.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2022). Employee tenure summary. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/tenure.pdf.

?Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2014). Employee tenure summary. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/tenure.pdf.

?Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2002). Employee tenure summary. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/tenure.pdf.

?Cascio, W., Aguinis, H. (2011). Applied Psychology in Human Resource Management. Prentice Hall.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2022, August 29). Absenteeism in the workplace. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/absences/default.html.

Cialdini, R., Li Yexin Jessica, Samper Adriana, & Wellman, N. (2021). How Bad Apples Promote Bad Barrels: Unethical Leader Behavior and the Selective Attrition Effect: JBE.?Journal of Business Ethics,?168(4), 861-880.?https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04252-2

Congressional Research Service. (2022). Introduction to US economy: the business cycle and growth. Retrieved from ?https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/IF10411.pdf.

Davidovic, I. (2021). 'Lying flat': Why some Chinese are putting work second. British Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/business-60353916.

Deichler, A. (2021). Why Employers Ghost Job Seekers, and How to Respond. Retrieved from Society of Human Resources Management. Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/talent-acquisition/pages/why-employers-ghost-job-seekers-and-how-to-respond.aspx.

De Smet, A., Dowling, B., Hancock, B., Schaninger, B.(2022). The Great Attrition is making hiring harder. Are you searching the right talent pools? McKinsey Quarterly. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insights/the-great-attrition-is-making-hiring-harder-are-you-searching-the-right-talent-pools.

?Ellis, J. (2022). ROOT OUT GENDER AND ETHNICITY BIAS IN PERFORMANCE REVIEWS.?Talent Development,?76(10), 30-35.?https://www.proquest.com/trade-journals/root-out-gender-ethnicity-bias-performance/docview/2720479181/se-2?accountid=36783.

?Faller, P., Marsick, V., & Russell, C. (2020). Adapting Action Learning Strategies to Operationalize Reflection in the Workplace. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 22(3), 291–307. DOI: 10.1177/1523422320927298.

Forbes Human Resources Council. (2022). 10 Essentials for HR professionals in a changing workplace. Forbes Leadership. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeshumanresourcescouncil/2022/09/29/10-essentials-for-hr-professionals-in-a-changing-workplace/?sh=7d1e3e4b6423.

?Gallagher, E. C. (2013).?Constructive and Destructive Employee Responses to Envy at Work: The Role of (In)justice and Core Self Evaluations?(Ph.D.). Available from Psychology Database. (1475225647).?https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/constructive-destructive-employee-responses-envy/docview/1475225647/se-2?accountid=36783.

?Gallagher, S. (2021). It’s Time to Reboot Our Thinking About Adult Learners in a Digitally Transformed World. Edsurge. Retrieved from https://www.edsurge.com/news/2021-08-11-it-s-time-to-reboot-our-thinking-about-adult-learners-in-a-digitally-transformed-world.

Gurchiek, K. (2022). Career Conversations: A Customized Approach to Developing Employees' Careers. Society for Human Resources Management. Retrieved from?https://www.shrm.org/ResourcesAndTools/hr-topics/organizational-and-employee-development/Pages/Career-Conversations-A-Customized-Approach-to-Developing-Employees-Careers.aspx.

Highlands Whole Person Model. (1992). The Highlands Whole Person Model. The Highlands Company. Retrieved from https://www.highlandsco.com/the-highlands-whole-person-model/.

?Kish-Gephart, Jennifer & Harrison, David & Trevi?o, Linda. (2010). Bad Apples, Bad Cases, and Bad Barrels: Meta-Analytic Evidence About Sources of Unethical Decisions at Work. The Journal of applied psychology. 95. 1-31. 10.1037/a0017103. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/41087509_Bad_Apples_Bad_Cases_and_Bad_Barrels_Meta- Analytic_Evidence_About_Sources_of_Unethical_Decisions_at_Work/link/550459210cf24cee39ff1a44/download.

?Khuntia, J., Xue Ning, Cascio, W., & Rulon Stacey. (2022). Valuing Diversity and Inclusion in Health Care to Equip the Workforce: Survey Study and Pathway Analysis.?JMIR Formative Research,?6(5), e34808.?https://doi.org/10.2196/34808.

?Kushner, M. (2021).?Performance Appraisals: Understanding What Makes Feedback Meaningful for the Recipient?(Ed.D.). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (2640064648).?https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/performance-appraisals-understanding-what-makes/docview/2640064648/se-2?accountid=36783.

?Li, S., Jain, K., & Tzini, K. (2022). When Supervisor Support Backfires: The Link Between Perceived Supervisor Support and Unethical Pro-supervisor Behavior: JBE.?Journal of Business Ethics,?179(1), 133-151.?https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04797-1.

?Li, Y., Zhang, G., & Liu, L. (2021). Platform Corporate Social Responsibility and Employee Innovation Performance: A Cross-Layer Study Mediated by Employee Intrapreneurship. SAGE Open, 11(2). DOI: 10.1177/21582440211021406.

Muir (Zapata), C. P., Sherf, E. N., & Liu, J. T. (2022). It's not only what you do, but why you do it: How managerial motives influence employees' fairness judgments.?Journal of Applied Psychology,?107(4), 581.?https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000898.

?Meyers, M.C., van Woerkom, M., Paauwe, J. & Dries, N.?(2020).?HR managers’ talent philosophies: prevalence and relationships with perceived talent management practices,?The International Journal of Human Resource Management,?31:4,?562-588. Retrieved from?https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09585192.2019.1579747?scroll=top&needAccess=true.

?O’Sullivan, M. (2022). Are Shorter Business Cycles The Next Big Change In Economies? Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeosullivan/2022/05/28/are-shorter-business-cycles-the-next-big-change-in-economies/?sh=686feccf68a9.

Paradiso. (2022). Learning and Development Trends in 2022. Retrieved from https://www.paradisosolutions.com/blog/learning-development-trends-to-watch-in-2022/#.

Peng, J. (2022). Performance appraisal system and its optimization method for enterprise management employees based on the KPI index.?Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society,?2022?DOI: 10.1155/2022/1937083.

Rapp, F. (2016).?The Relationships Between Negative Emotions, Incivility and Outcomes of Interpersonal Stress and Job Satisfaction as Experienced in the Workplace?(D.Mgt.). Available from Psychology Database. (1772412336).?https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/relationships-between-negative-emotions/docview/1772412336/se-2?accountid=36783.

?Society for Human Resources Management. (2017). Performance Appraisal form. Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/hr-forms/pages/performanceappraisal_completedappraisalform.aspx.

Summers, L. M., Davis, T., & Kosovac, B. (2022). Hair we grow again: Upward mobility, career compromise, and natural hair bias in the workplace.?The Career Development Quarterly,?70(3), 202-214.?https://doi.org/10.1002/cdq.12302.

?Tims, M., & Parker, S. K. (2020). How coworkers attribute, react to, and shape job crafting. Organizational Psychology Review, 10(1), 29–54. DOI: https://doi-org.library.capella.edu/10.1177/2041386619896087.

Venne, R. A., & Hannay, M. (2018). Generational Change, the Modern Workplace and Performance Appraisal: Why Changing Workplaces Need a Developmental Approach to Performance Appraisal.?American Journal of Management,?18(5), 88-102. https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/generational-change-modern-workplace-performance/docview/2206006321/se-2

Vera-Calzaretta, A., Juarez-Garcia, A. (2014). Presenteeism. In: Michalos, A.C. (eds) Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_2254.

Wan, W., & Duffy, R. D. (2022). Decent Work and Turnover Intention Among New Generation Employees: The Mediating Role of Job Satisfaction and the Moderating Role of Job Autonomy. SAGE Open, 12(2). DOI: 10.1177/21582440221094591.

Waples, E. P., & Brock Baskin, M. E. (2021). Not Your Parents’ Organization? Human Resource Development Practices for Sustainable Flex Work Environments. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 23(2), 153–170. DOI: 10.1177/1523422320982933.

Williams, T. (2022). Millennials want to live a ‘soft life,’ and it’s changing how they work. Yahoo Finance. Retrieved from https://finance.yahoo.com/news/millennials-want-live-soft-life-110000435.html.

Yang, J., & Basile, K. (2022). Communicating Corporate Social Responsibility: External Stakeholder Involvement, Productivity and Firm Performance: JBE.?Journal of Business Ethics,?178(2), 501-517. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04812-5.

Yoon, H. J., Chang, Y.-L., Sadique, F., & Al Balushi, I. (2021). Mechanisms for Hopeful Employee Career Development in COVID-19: A Hope-Action Theory Perspective. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 23(3), 203–221. DOI: 10.1177/15234223211017848.

Zenger, J. and Folkman, J. (2022) Viewpoint: Quiet quitting Is about bad bosses, not bad employees. Society for Human Resources Management. Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/employee-relations/pages/viewpoint-quiet-quitting-is-about-bad-bosses-not-bad-employees.aspx.