Agata, over the last year you have introduced a very interesting benefit program for your employees related to health on the market. It seems to be the beginning of a long-term trend in HR. How did you come to this?
From the perspective of the HR department, the pandemic had a very positive impact on jump-starting the serious discussion about the mental health of employees. Until the pandemic, mental health was a taboo, which led to negative consequences for incumbents and businesses. For example, it had often led to stigma against the affected. Today we are talking about providing mental care as much as we are talking about healthcare. It is simply another very important benefit for employees.
During the pandemic it turned out that many people suffered in isolation. Our reaction as companies was only: "manager, your job is to take care of your people." In fact, we have shifted this burden onto them. This was a big challenge for many leaders, who did not know how to help their employees; they didn't even want to ask questions to employees about their well-being, because they lacked the knowledge on how to react to these answers.
It turned out that organizations are not completely prepared for this and the level of education in these areas is very low.
Have you found a way to help them?
Yes, maybe not solve the issues but relieve them.
We have created an educational program for managers - Mental Health First Aiders, which trains and prepares for psychological first aid. It is a global program.
We entered into cooperation with several organizations but we were primarily looking for a systemic support. Our partners in this project made selections and out of 100 people (of 800 employees in the company) who applied for the program, 20 were selected, trained, and certified.
These people are in the first line of help. They do not so much solve problems, but rather show our people where/how to find professional help.
How did your employees react to this?
Very well indeed. Though, as might be expected, not everyone utilizes the program to the same extent. However, the representation is so large that it also gives an insight into general and cultural problems within the company. We have an additional benefit in the form of identifying watchouts. We have also introduced 3 additional days off for psychological well-being.
Surely you are at the forefront of this change in the market, aren’t you?
Fortunately, our global CEO Wendy Clark attaches great importance to well-being, hence we have her support in this matter. Companies are beginning to expand the range of options for taking care of mental health. When it comes to the availability of psychological or psychiatric care, the statistics, especially in our part of Europe, are alarming. That is why such help must be developed. This is obviously an additional burden for companies, yet the trend is right and there is probably no turning back.
You say the topic was caused by a pandemic, but could it also have anything to do with other aspects of our lives?
Of course, with the whole geopolitical situation and lack of stability and predictability, etc. Additionally, the "snowflakes" generation is growing. They are extremely sensitive, emotional people who are not prepared for what they are about to find in the outside world. Then, what is a strong point may turn out to be a weakness and vice versa. Disagreeing on certain things in the company’s space is young people’s forte, however, the pandemic seems to have hit them very hard.
You say that the issue of employee benefits is changing. What other trends are you following?
Taking care of one’s career and competences of the future. Still few organizations deal with career counselling and re-skilling. This will be a very important change due to the rapid development of AI and digitization. We know that some professions will disappear, although, we cannot predict when it will happen. We are not yet faced with this challenge, but it may surprise us very quickly. It is necessary to do an in-depth analysis of what will disappear, what will appear, whether we have education in specific areas, or whether we can search for talents in other countries. Thus, it will certainly be another challenge that companies, especially HR departments, will face.
Marta, for over a year you have been preparing your organisation for an objectively very difficult process, namely the acquisition of your company – UPC (Polish subsidiary of Liberty Global) by another market player. What was the biggest challenge?
Indeed, it has been a very challenging time for the organisation and surely, it is not over yet. From a CPO’s point of view, it is an extremely interesting and enriching period. Whilst preparing for the merger, we were well aware that this would be a highly emotional time for all our staff. And we knew that the only way to defuse this “emotional bomb” is to adopt transparent, clear communication with all the employees. As the Board, we could not take care of every single person – this was the role of line managers - but we wanted everybody to be fully informed about what was going on. At the same time, we wanted to understand our employees’ problems and doubts rather than to make assumptions, or to take a guess.
So what did you do?
We proposed several communication platforms, points of contact, with our employees and different programmes. But in focus groups, where people could voice their opinions, it became clear they feared that they would struggle to adapt to the new reality - they did not know what they were fit for or whether they could do something different...
And not that they will lose their job following the merge? This would have seem like the most obvious concern.
One is the consequence of the other. If “I can’t do it, I don’t know it, I might not be fit for it” then “I will probably lose my job”. We knew we had excellent people in our organisation, so we decided to concentrate on solving this problem and introduced a multi-stage, multi-module programme called “Energy For a New Beginning”. We wanted to build our employees’ confidence in their own abilities, knowledge and experience. As you know, one of the components of this programme, was a project named “Brand Yourself” which for the senior management group was executed in partnership with Friisberg Poland. Conversations with independent Executive Search consultants helped our employees to see and appreciate what they represented and what they could do with their career in the new organisation. Obviously we gave similar opportunities to all employees via internal coaching, measuring certain skills, special development days and dedicated workshops – that part was lead by HR Team.
Yes, it was a very interesting project. In a sincere, non-judgemental conversations people were able to open up, reflect and think through different issues related to their previous experiences. What else did you focus on?
At all times up until zero hour we had average market attrition and we delivered the business result with a surplus. It was due to the fact that our corporate culture has built commitment, motivation and a high level of employee satisfaction. These are always important factors in organisation management, but at times of incertitude and high emotions they become an essential protective shield.
A merger like this is always a culture shock. It is important to realise that the culture of the other organisation is usually different. It should not be discredited without exploring and getting to know it. In our case the processes, the procedures, the language – all of them were different, therefore the buyer had decided to give us three months following the merge to get to know each other, without introducing any substantial changes. This, however, made people fill uncertain, not knowing what was to happen, as if in a fog.
I think every solution has its pros and cons, just like the strategy of drawing a line under the past and taking quick decisions without exploring the essence of the matter. But regardless of the merger strategy, it is paramount to show people respect in the process.
The other thing is to redirect emotions towards constructive actions, to something one can have a say in. It is imperative – and this is the role of line managers – not to allow employees to split hairs about matters beyond their control. We play the cards we have, there is no other way round. But for the game to make sense, it requires commitment at all levels.
Taking care of people’s emotions at an individual level is a must, but it cannot only be done by the Board, this is untenable. It is the responsibility of each team leader at their own level.
If you were to give some advice to those facing a similar process, what would you say?
In one way this is good – I mean seeing people face to face is wonderful after so long being trapped behind a computer screen. However, it hasn’t taken me long to be reminded just how important it is to pay particular attention to those who don’t say much.
Increasingly I find myself eager to know what they would say: they just watch, and often with every meeting they get smarter, by saying nothing at all. They listen.
I have seen many leaders hurl words around the room like arrows. Those hoping for their next promotion do the same.
Ego can make you talk too much, but the person who is the loudest and talks the most in the meeting is not necessarily the smartest.
Of course, how we talk and listen are deeply influenced by our own personalities, cultural experiences and gender. It is sad but true that many men still talk over women. Women often feel they tread a thin line by making a point without coming across as too loud or aggressive. A woman who tells others what to do is often called bossy whereas to some men, giving orders can be one way of getting and keeping the high-status role. As a result, many women opt to stay silent rather than risk saying something wrong or being through of negatively.
Perhaps using as few words as possible to make your point, then knowing when to be quiet, is actually the skill we should all practise.
Those who listen should be encouraged to talk.
Those who tend to talk too much should be encouraged to listen.
Lorri Lowe
Partner, UK
Workplace flexibility, better benefits and higher pay are not the only causes of the current so-called 'Great Resignation'. While employee turnover is nothing new, the regularity with which people are moving roles is increasing, because their motivations are changing.
It wasn’t that long ago that jobs were a simple transaction – do the work and get paid. Motivations have been of a ‘carrot & stick’ nature for many generations. However, it has been reported recently that almost two-thirds of people would prefer to work for a company with effective environmental policies, and many millennials would actually accept a pay cut to do so. Quitting because of a mismatch between personal values and an employer’s was relatively rare but now it is not that unusual.
Employees don’t just want higher salaries, although they will of course demand them, they also want investment in their and society’s future. They want a collaborative endeavour, a shared sense of identity, and common purpose towards a greater good. It’s important to them that they have a genuine, though not necessarily an in-person ‘connection’, with their co-workers and their employer.
A strong ‘green’ ethos within an organisation is a key factor for many candidates when choosing where to work. Recent studies by Deloitte and McKinsey have highlighted the climate as the single biggest issue younger workers care about and this is consistent with the underlying trends we see in the media. Sustainability really is important if your company is to win the best talent out there. The current experience of many employers might not yet reflect this because a large proportion of management are Generation X, of whom only 17% feel the same way. As soon as 2025, Millennials will account for 75% of the global workforce, so understanding their mindset is an immediate issue, demanding attention and action right now.
The ‘greenwash’ of discursive prolix position statements (all abstract aspirations and woolly goal-setting) are easily dismissed and are increasingly being mocked. Consider too that the millennial candidate is, thanks to the convergence of many other factors, now in a relatively strong position to be the interviewer – that is, to determine if your company is worthy of their time.
Essentially, the efficacy of your answers to sustainability questions will boil down to whether your company can be trusted to keep to its promises. Some corporate soul-searching might be tough and corrective measures painful, but hard-earned credibility will serve you well over the longer term; and ‘employer branding’ has never been more important.
To achieve any meaningful change, companies must accurately measure and honestly report their carbon footprint. This isn’t just essential for the planet, it is an opportunity to relaunch and remarket your business, not just to its customers, but to the talent it will need along the way.
Having a published strategy on sustainability is no longer a competitive advantage, it’s a fundamental requirement – a pre-qualifier. The good news is, it’s never too late to get one, but it should be refreshed regularly to keep pace with the science and public sentiment. Get this right, and the best talent will be drawn to you. It assuredly will.
The really hard part is not the strategizing, nor the recruiting of such talent (both are challenging, no question) but it is the leadership of the business that is vitally important to get right. The skillsets and mindsets required of managers, executives, directors – and especially the CEOs – at the top of every company are very different now in this incredibly competitive recruitment market. If a company has the right leadership in place to respect and recognise the values of its people, as well as reward them for their efforts, it will have a fighting chance.
Lorri Lowe
Partner, UK
First published by the Confederation of British Industry on 6 June 2022 here.
I had the good fortune of attending the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade as a child and to this day still flash back to those memorable moments.
On Thanksgiving morning we still have the parade on the TV, but I have to admit, it’s more on in the background and we glance at it from time to time. It’s not as prominent as it used to be, but still present. Same is true for the football game - it's on in the background.
I think in these days, we find time is precious, so parking ourselves in front of the TV for a day doesn’t fit our lifestyle.
We have scaled back in recent years - perhaps because of COVID, but also because as our children get a little older we tend to spend time with them. It used to be a big extended family gathering, but less so in recent years.
We like to find a family in our community that is less fortunate than we are and bring them dinner for their family.
We spend the balance of the day in our kitchen - turkey is optional, but good food is a must.
Breakfast. We start with something fresh baked - it makes the house smell good and sets the tone for the day. My wife makes killer cinnamon rolls!
For example, in 1947, the tradition known as the National Thanksgiving Turkey Presentation was founded under the Truman administration. Ronald Reagan was actually the first present to formally "pardon" one of the turkeys given to him whereas Truman, Eisenhower, and several other presidents actually ate the turkeys presented to them! It wasn't until 1988, that George H.W. Bush instituted the turkey pardon as a national tradition while he was in office.
Ironically yes - it was a good year. I spent an inordinate amount of time with our kids which was great, but also a challenge. Think back about home schooling, juggling Zoom calls between two working parents, masks, InstaCart and home food delivery...it was a mess for a while, but all-in-all, it’s hard to complain. We were fortunate to have been able to stitch things together.
Health. As long as we’re all healthy, we can make anything work.
Neil Greco
Partner, Boston MA
Last week, global leaders met in Glasgow, Scotland to discuss action required to curtail climate change (COP26).
Many have differing views on the effectiveness of UN directives how best to combat climate change – from carbon sequestration to energy efficiency measures to the accelerated growth of renewable energy sources and an increasing interest in EVs.
This is not a new phenomenon.
In 1992, the United Nations established their Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Largely driven by Green House Gas (GHG) emission of industrialized nations, this initiative was reinforced by the Accord de Paris in 2015 (COP21). For years, coal fired (electric) generation has been the culprit followed closely by the refinement of oil and the harvesting of natural gas. Certainly, the mining and automotive industries have their fair share as well. Then of course there’s...the cows!
In 2019, investment heavyweight Goldman-Sachs made a statement by pledging $750B US for investment in sustainable finance. This not only increased visibility for “sustainability”, but it also accelerated the need to attract talented individuals to lead this charge – whether a Chief Sustainability Officer for a global industrial or a Chief Executive Officer for an early-stage disruptive technology provider or a Chief Technology Officer needed to spearhead a new automotive platform that (over time) will completely pivot an industry – leadership is required.
While many believe Green House Gas is the focal point, our experience suggests emission curtailment comes in many ways and extends well beyond (direct) carbon management.
For over a decade, we have been working on both sides of the emissions challenge – along-side of major industrials and Utilities helping them recruit “corporate sustainability” executives to navigate new business models and sustainability measures:
For those organizations responsible for ensuring there is power, we have been working to implement new ways of doing business – from carbon capture to modifying their generation fleets.
On the other side of the equation, we have been actively recruiting for companies delivering “new” forms of energy technology – from digital energy networks to solar and wind to battery energy storage to electric vehicle infrastructure – some of which has been instrumental in electrifying parts of the world where electricity is a luxury.
One thing remains constant, as industry continues to pivot and address climate change, organizations need a fresh perspective: new leadership. Whether evaluating supply chains to ensure they are “climate conscious” or attracting expertise from adjacent industries to propel advancements in technology, we have been at the forefront of this change. Why does this matter?
The difficulty in attracting A-Players to your business has increased exponentially. Knowing where to look and how to recruit talent has become increasingly important.
Leveraging years of experience, understanding the industry shift and being able to not only attract - but also assess- top talent is a key differentiator for Friisberg & Partners.
Neil Greco
Partner, Boston MA
The role of medical consultants is evolving, and many organizations focus on and develop digital methods of reaching doctors and patients. How will the role of field workers change in the coming years? Is F2F contact still important and necessary?
I joined Stada at the most difficult moment – during the pandemic. The organization was not growing and my goal was to achieve growth. We needed to appreciate that the market was changing in terms of therapeutic areas that are growing and those that aren't. Also, we needed to increase the role of pharmacies and the evolving competences of representatives and managers to determine our approach to promotion which was strongly focused on solution.
We also redefined the approach to market segmentation and who expected what. Importantly, the organization and our people had to change. When I joined the firm, I initiated a mental shift among employees towards, “I would like to develop myself and grow with our organization and proactively change to generate double digit growth.”
Stada specialises in pain management, prescription medications as well as OTCs and supplements. Due to the pandemic and changing demographic, there are more and more young doctors, and this forced us to revise our strategy. We also started to revisit our specialists. We were so determined and motivated that the business started to grow. Even now, after the pandemic, the team wants to be in the field where possible. Also, the beginning of this year marked a launch of the program aimed at re-establishing relations with our clients – we started to organise F2F meetings with them.
Following the acquisition of Wallmark, Stada now reaches the consumer through Amazon, online pharmacies, e-commerce, conferences, webinars and in the mass market through advertising and direct communication with the patient.
Coming back to the topic, we shouldn’t generalize and say that the world is only digital now and you do not have to visit doctors F2F - in my opinion the middle ground is the best solution. The key to this is the product that is sold and the segmentation of doctors into those who want visits and those who do not. A lot depends on the therapeutic area and the age of the patients. In the specialist field, without f2f meetings, we will not be as recognisable as we would like.
Both pharmacy and chain markets grow and the role of the chain sector increases. Certainly, professionals connect digitally, but representatives still visit their partners. It's a myth that there are no direct visits.
Do the communication expectations shift along with the generational change in the medical community? What trends do you currently notice and which are you happy about?
The generational change is very beneficial for the community. It encourages young doctors to learn, to develop. They are focused on cooperation, through applications and webinars. They are patient- and new technology-oriented much more than the older doctors, who mostly see value in direct visits. Young people are “in the same team” as pharmaceutical company. They are a generation that wants to learn medicine - they are not only guided by routine.
To meet this need, we have built the Stada med portal. Through webinars we share knowledge about new aspects of pain treatment. Stada.med creates a space where doctors discuss patients and their needs. Young doctors are eager to learn how to help the patient and go off the beaten track.
My observation is that this is also happening in the pharmacists' community where they are closer to the patient. Mass market, on the other hand, is guided by acting on the emotions of the consumer through advertising, based on certain atavisms of people and their reflexes.
How will the patient benefit from digital communication?
The patient has already gained and will gain even more. We have two groups of patients:
How can advisory partners such as Friisberg help and what, in your opinion, should be their role in supporting the digital transformation?
I can see two areas here. The first one is the marketing, market research, patient / consumer research. How do patients feel about the digital age? Is it a good direction, is it helping or bothering them? What is good, what is irritating? Those partners can substantively contribute to this discussion.
The second is, of course, recruitment. During the process to focus on the analysis of the "digital" generation of candidates - the world is changing. We have a variety of people in the organization and we try to choose those who are open to new technologies and are eager to learn. If we want to keep up with trends and work in a pharmaceutical company, we have to learn all the time. The second thing is reliable feedback and making the candidates aware of their shortcomings in order to help them develop. Even though it is often difficult information, it is worth building candidate experience in this way.
Lukasz Dominiak
Poland
Gerd Gigerenzer
First of all, we should identify what kind of environment we are in. If we know all the possible alternatives, their probabilities and possible consequences, we are in the world of risk and can determine the optimal strategy.
If individual components are unknown, we are in the world of uncertainty (i.e., 90% of the time). Calculating the best strategy is impossible. We must find individual solutions to the problem.
In doing so, let us be guided by this trinity of steps to take in uncertain situations:
Marvin Siebert
Partner, Germany
With so many diversity and inclusion activities underway it is easy to assume that progress is being made. Then why are there so few women in executive positions?
The new McKinsey report “Win-win: How empowering women can benefit Central and Eastern Europe” examines the potential benefits of greater gender equality for businesses and society, identifies barriers to progress, and suggests actions that could unlock as much as €146 billion in annual GDP by 2030—an 8 % increase over a business-as-usual scenario.
In the seven CEE countries analysed (Croatia, Czechia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Ukraine):
To find out why there are so few women in executive positions in CEE, the survey of approximately 3,000 employees in the region uncovered the following insights:
Ambition is not a challenge: Women are as ambitious as men, but they perceive more barriers to promotion. Men and women showed almost the same level of interest in getting promoted (57 % of women versus 56 % of men). However, 28 % of women said that their gender made it harder for them to secure a raise or a promotion.
Women blame themselves; men blame others: Women who thought they were unlikely to make it to the top said that it was because they lacked the necessary skills (43 %) or the right leadership style (38 %), or that promotions to top executive positions were not based on merit (33 %). A far smaller proportion of men said that they lacked the necessary skills for the job (8 % less than for women), and a much larger share said that it was because promotions were not based on merit (10 % more than for women). In other words, women are more likely to blame their own shortcomings for their failure to become executives, while men are more likely to blame the shortcomings of their company.
Unpaid work is a major barrier: Nearly 40% women provide daily unpaid care work (looking after children, the elderly, or people with disabilities). This is twice as many as men. Essentially, female employees are still working a “double shift”.
The COVID-19 crisis has created additional burdens on women: The increased burden has fallen disproportionately on women. 54% of women with children under the age of ten said the pandemic has made them more likely to consider scaling back on their paid work, compared to only 25 % of men.
Correcting this imbalance would tremendously benefit not only women in their careers and personal lives, it could have a potentially transformative effect on the economies of CEE.
Despite abundant evidence that gender equality in leadership is good for business, for an overwhelming majority of organizations advancing women into leadership roles is not a formal business priority.
One of the major and most complex challenges is to shift the underlying cultural factors. The McKinsey research highlights the need of the leaders of companies and public institutions to be visibly engaged in efforts to reduce the gender imbalance, rather than delegating this work to Diversity Officers.
But including men (holding 98% of CEO positions in CEE) in diversity efforts is not as simple as inviting them to a gender-equity event. Worldwide data from BCG shows that 96 % of companies with men actively involved in gender diversity initiatives report progress at all levels, compared to only 30 % of companies without men engaged. It seems intuitive that involving men would lead to greater results. Yet part of the challenge of getting men to join the efforts, according to BCG data, is that they tend to overestimate how well their company is doing in terms of gender issues.
To remove the barriers that hold women back at work, we have to acknowledge that the barriers exist. We need to realise that gender equality is not a “women issue”, it is a “leadership issue”.
The last thing that women need is men “rescuing” them or assuming the role of the workplace knight in shining armor.
Because men are in so many leadership roles, they have an enormous opportunity to accelerate progress. Men's voices are critical because of, not in spite of, their gender. When men speak up against gender disparities, they not only become visible as allies, they also raise awareness and acceptance about gender inequity as a shared problem, not a special interest.
Sources:
In the future, board members with four or more members will have to have at least one woman.
In addition, in certain life situations, such as maternity leave, parental leave, caring for family members, etc., members of the Board of Management can take liability-free time off.
In order for this strong signal for more equality and for a cultural change in Germany to be implemented quickly, the law has to be passed by the Bundestag before the summer break.
I look forward to when companies discover that more diversity is not a chore, but an essential key to growth!
Meltem Ay, Principal
Frankfurt
You need to load content from hCaptcha to submit the form. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
More InformationYou need to load content from reCAPTCHA to submit the form. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
More InformationYou need to load content from reCAPTCHA to submit the form. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
More InformationYou need to load content from reCAPTCHA to submit the form. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
More InformationYou need to load content from Turnstile to submit the form. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
More Information
