重建雇主與員工的信任關係

Rebuilding Trust in the Employer-Employee Relationship
瀏覽人數:1486


影片載入中...
《聯盟世代》(The Alliance)的共同作者班.卡斯諾查(Ben Casnocha),說明為什麼員工應該對主管誠實說出自己的職涯目標。

莎拉.葛林:嗨,我是莎拉.葛林,今天的來賓是班.卡斯諾查,我們要談的是他的新書《聯盟世代》,與他合著的是里德.霍夫曼。班,非常感謝你來上節目。

班.卡斯諾查:不客氣,莎拉。

莎拉.葛林:在書中你一開頭就說,目前雇主與員工的契約已被打破。你為什麼這麼說?

班.卡斯諾查:我們認為聘僱關係破裂,是因為長期以來公司一直提供終身雇用。他們對待員工就像家人。在當今全球化和技術變化的時代,已無力再維持這種關係。與此同時,很多公司的回應做法,是把所有員工視為自由工作者,並盡量減少雇主/員工關係,而這削弱了信任和忠誠。我們認為還有第三條路可走,公司應停止把員工視為家人或自由工作者,改為把員工視為盟友。

莎拉.葛林:你談到雇主與員工的聯盟,這實際上是什麼樣子?

班.卡斯諾查:聯盟的雙方會彼此投資對方。公司投資於員工,員工投資於公司。員工告訴公司,如果你讓我的職涯更有調適力,如果你投資推動我的職涯轉型,我就會投資心力在公司,讓公司在所屬產業裡更具調適力。公司反過來告訴員工,如果你讓我們公司更具調適力,如果你完成了在這家公司的工作任期,協助我們調整以適應未來,我們就會投資促進你的職涯。我們會改變你的職涯軌跡。我們會讓你在領英網站(LinkedIn)上的個人資料更亮麗,即使你有一天會離開我們公司。

莎拉.葛林:我想多談一下「工作任期」這個詞,因為你在《哈佛商業評論》的文章裡常提到這一點。你談到這類有關如何建構職涯的概念時,真正的意思是什麼?

班.卡斯諾查:在終生雇用制已結束的時代,你必須用新的模式來安排雇用條件。為了重建工作上的信任,我們認為最有效的方法是逐步建立信任。員工不再承諾終身忠誠地在這家公司工作,而是簽署明確的工作任期,說明具體的任務目標。我簽約完成特定的專案。我簽約出貨這個產品。我簽約建立這個團隊。我預計這個專案要花二至三年,或四至五年。

主管說,好的。如果你完成個任務目標,我們會確保在任期結束後,你會培養出以下職業技能。你會建立以下經驗。你會以某種方式擴展你的人脈。在那段任期結束時,當任務目標完成時,雙方再次聚在一起,也就是主管和員工一起討論,是否應該讓這名員工在公司進行另一次工作任期,完成新的任務目標,而且這個目標可讓雙方都受惠。這段任期對員工的職涯有益,對公司及其目標也有好處。因此,公開而明確地討論出對雙方有利的、務實的時間範圍,以及務實的目標,雙方就會願意簽約合作,在一段有意義的時間內投資彼此。

莎拉.葛林:你談的這些內容,前提似乎是雇主和員工之間有一定程度的誠實和透明,有些人可能會認為這很少見。主管實際上該怎麼做,才能與他團隊的成員像這樣坦誠地談話?

班.卡斯諾查:領英的工程部資深副總裁,每次面談可能的求職候選人時,一開始都會說,在領英工作之後,你想找什麼樣的工作?雖然我希望你來領英工作,我希望你在這裡工作一段時期,但我知道你不會在這裡度過餘生。我知道你很可能會在這裡待一段工作任期,希望是多個任期,但接下來你會轉到另一家公司。因此請告訴我,你在領英之後的理想工作是什麼。

面談一開始就這麼說,確實是很驚人的誠實表現。因為這不同於雇主常見的說法:歡迎來到公司這個大家庭,我們知道你會一輩子在這裡工作,餘生都待在這裡。領英認清現實,有才華的員工不可能會想一輩子都待在一家公司,無論你的公司有多優秀。所以請誠實面對終身雇用是不可能的,認清這個事實會很有助於建立信任。

莎拉.葛林:我想問一個更宏觀的問題。有很多的討論,尤其是在美國,但很多經濟體也有討論到,那就是雇主需要的技能、潛在員工擁有的技能與尋找工作的人,這些之間並不匹配。你是否認為,如果有足夠多的公司採用這種方法,我們也許就可以看到經濟發生轉變,有更多的人擁有就業能力而且找到工作?

班.卡斯諾查:是的,我認為有可能。我認為聯盟對話的核心,是主管與員工一起了解他們擁有什麼技能、他們需要什麼技能、他們想要什麼技能。很多工作場所目前之所以沒有進行這種對話,是因為員工想要培養的技能,有時可能其實與自己目前的工作不特別相關,而是與某些長期職涯理想有關。而他們不能坦誠說出來。

例如,如果我是出版社的編輯,但我也有興趣學習Ruby on Rails語言,這是個熱門的新程式設計架構,因為我其實想轉行成為程式設計師,到時我勢必要離開目前的工作。我是否要坦白告訴主管,我想要培養這項技能,即使這項技能對我目前的工作沒有幫助?也許不該說出來。如果我不信任我的主管,如果我不認為主管會站在我的立場,思考我的長期職涯,我可能就不會說出來。不說出來,就表示我不能得到主管有關如何培養這項技能的建議。

但這也表示,我不能在現有雇主這裡,建立可讓我長期培養出那項技能的工作任期。因此在最微觀的層次上,我確實認為,針對職涯發展進行更坦誠的對話,並承認職涯發展有時意味離開公司、離開你的主管,這種做法會有助於達到員工所需的宏觀解決方法,也就是培養所需的技能。這不僅會令人感到快樂和很有成就感,也能在這個全球經濟中取得最大的經濟競爭力。

莎拉.葛林:這些真是帶來希望的訊息。很感謝你今天和我們分享這些看法。

班.卡斯諾查:不客氣,莎拉。

(劉純佑譯)


Sarah Green: Hi, I'm Sarah Green. I am talking today with Ben Casnocha about The Alliance, his new book with Reid Hoffman. Ben, thanks so much for coming in.

Ben Casnocha: Thank you, Sarah.

Sarah Green: So in the book, you begin by saying that the current employer-employee compact is broken. Why do you make that argument?

Ben Casnocha: Yeah. We argue the employment relationship is broken because for so long companies offered lifetime employment. They treated their employees like family. That's no longer affordable in this era of globalization and technological change. And at the same time, what a lot of companies have done in response is treat all of their employees like free agents and minimized the employer/employee relationship which erodes trust and loyalty. So we think there's a third way forward -- that a company should stop treating their employees like family or like free agents and start thinking of their employees as allies.

Sarah Green: So when you talk about an employer-employee alliance, what does that actually look like?

Ben Casnocha: Sure. An alliance, both sides, are invested in each other. The company is invested in the employee, and the employee is invested in the company. The employee tells the company, if you make my career more adaptable -- if you invest in my career transformation, I will invest in making the company more adaptable in its industry. And the company in turn tells the employee, if you make our company more adaptable – if you complete a tour of duty at this company and help us adapt to the future, we will invest in your career. We will transform your career trajectory. We will make your LinkedIn profile more impressive, even if you someday leave our company.

Sarah Green: So I'd like to pause for a moment on the phrase “tour of duty,” because that's a phrase that you've talked a lot about in HBR. When you're talking about that kind of concept in terms of how to structure a career, what do you really mean by that?

Ben Casnocha: In an era where lifetime employment's over, you have to have a new model for organizing the term of employment. And in order to rebuild trust at work, we think it's most effective to build trust incrementally. As opposed to saying, I'm going to pledge lifelong loyalty to working at this company, the employee says, I'll sign up for a specific tour of duty with a specific mission objective. I'll sign up to complete a given project. I'll sign up to ship this product. I'll sign up to build this team. And I expect this project to take two to three to four to five years.

And the manager says, OK. If you complete that mission objective, we will make sure that at the end of that tour of duty, you will have built the following career skills. You will have built the following experiences. You will have grown your network in a certain kind of way. And at the end of that tour, when that mission objective has been accomplished, both sides come together again -- the manager and employee -- and talk about whether it makes sense for the employee to do another tour of duty at the company with a new mission objective that's also mutually beneficial. A tour that benefits the employee in their career and benefits the company and whatever its goals are. And so by talking openly and explicitly with realistic time horizons and realistic goals that benefit both sides, both sides are willing to sign up and invest in each other over a meaningful period of time.

Sarah Green: Well, it seems as you're talking about this, there's a level of honesty and transparency here between the employer and the employee that might strike some people as kind of rare. So how could a manager actually go about having some of these really honest conversations with the people on his or her team?

Ben Casnocha: The Senior Vice President of Engineering at LinkedIn begins every job interview with a potential candidate by saying, what job do you want to have after you work at LinkedIn? So I want you to come work at LinkedIn. I want you to do a tour of duty here, but I know you're not going to spend the rest of your life here. I know most likely, you're going to do a tour of duty here, hopefully multiple tours of duty, but then you'll move on to another company. So tell me about your dream job after LinkedIn.

By beginning the interview in that way, it's really a remarkable demonstration of honesty. Because as opposed to the employer saying, welcome to the company family. And we know you're going to be a lifer. You're going to be here for life. The company's being realistic about the fact that a talented employee's not likely going to want to spend the rest of their life at a single company, no matter how great your company may be. So just being honest about that fact, that lifetime employment 's unlikely, goes a long way to establishing trust.

Sarah Green: I 'd like to ask a question about the really big picture, if I can. With so much discussion -- in the United States especially, but in lots of economies -- about the mismatch between the skills employers need and the skills potential employees have and people looking for work. Do you think that if enough companies adopted this approach, that we might actually see an economic shift and sort of more people being employable and employed?

Ben Casnocha: Yeah, I think potentially. I think at the heart of the alliance conversations is a manager working with the employee to understand what skills they have, what skills they need, what skills they want. And the reason why this conversation doesn't happen in a lot of workplaces today is because the employee sometimes wants to develop skills that actually may not be particularly relevant at their current job but instead be relevant to some long-term career aspiration. And they can't be open about that.

For example, if I'm an editor at publisher, say, but I'm also interested in learning Ruby on Rails -- you know, a hot new programming framework -- because I actually want to do a career shift to become a programmer, which would require me leaving my current job. Am I going to be open with my manager about wanting to develop that skill, even though that skill would not help me in my current job? Maybe not. If I don't trust my manager. If I don't think my manager's going to be a great collaborator in terms of thinking about my long-term career, I may not bring that up. And by not bringing it up, it means that I can't -- first of all -- get advice from my manager on how to develop that skill.

But it means I also can't build a tour of duty at my current employer that might help prepare me to develop that skill over the long run. So at the most micro level, I do think more honest conversations at work around career development, with the acknowledgement that career development sometimes means leaving the company and leaving your manager, that will contribute to the macro solution of employees developing the skills they need. Not only to be happy and most fulfilled, but also to be most economically competitive in this global economy.

Sarah Green: A really hopeful message. Thank you so much for talking about it with us today

Ben Casnocha: Thank you, Sarah



本篇文章主題聘僱