List Mania
If he were still alive, I’m betting Ray Charles would have another hit with this little ditty, sung to the tune of “Crying Time.”
Oh it’s survey time again, we’re gonna learn who
Is the best leadership company of all.
But I can tell by the lists I see before me
That this one’s different from the one last fall.
That’s the theme song for this post.
Fortune magazine, human resources consultants Hewitt Associates and the RBLGroup have just published their list of “The World’s Best Companies for Leaders.” Less than a year ago, the Hay Group and Chief Executive magazine came out with their list of the “Best Companies for Leaders.”
Now I’m just a simple preacher’s boy, but it seems to me that two surveys by prestigious firms of the same subject ought to come up with similar lists. But they do not.
In fact there are only three companies, IBM, Proctor and Gamble, and General Electric, who make the top ten on both lists. And that illustrates why taking these lists as some kind of scientific finding could get you in trouble.
There are all kinds of “Best Company” lists with more coming out all the time. They can provide you with some ideas about where you may want to make a career, but only if you do a little analysis.
Find out how the list was put together. Some of the lists only include companies who apply. Others use different method. The method used makes a difference in the final list.
Check to see if the list rates things that matter to you. If you want to pursue a Managerial career path, then a list of great companies for leaders may give you lots of information. But if you’re an engineer who wants to pursue a Specialist career path, you may want to look at a different list.
Use the list to spark questions, not give answers. Enterprise Rent-a-Car has appeared for years on lists for “Best Places to Launch a Career,” but their entrepreneurial, start-at-the-bottom culture isn’t for everyone.
Lists like the Fortune list and the Chief Executive list are great to spark discussions. They’re great as a starting point. Use them to determine where you want to do more research.
December 8th, 2009 at 4:27 pm
Great points, Wally. These lists vary, in part, because they look at different aspects of the organizations. Some emphasize employee experience, while some consider only organizational outcomes, not to mention that recognition programs tend to focus on one or more of a variety of workplace practices: work-life initiatives; health promotion or wellness programs; or compensation and benefits, just to name a few.
Additionally, some lists are based solely on what the organization itself submits (where there’s an incentive for the firm to present itself in a favorable light). Readers are well advised to take a close look at what the list purports to represent and the process used to assess the relevant organizational characteristics. For example, in addition to asking the company for a written statement expounding upon its virtues, does the evaluating entity look at objective outcomes for both employees and the organization, do they survey employees for their opinions and perspectives and do they actually visit the organization to meet with employees at a variety of levels and observe the organization and its culture firsthand.
In sum, while award programs and lists can provide some good examples of the variety of ways employers can create a positive work environment, what that means to a particular organization and its employees is highly idiosyncratic. By all means, look at the lists and learn from their examples, but the most valuable lesson of all is how an organization identifies the actual needs unique to its workforce and creates a work environment that fosters the best possible outcomes for all parties involved.
December 9th, 2009 at 7:54 am
Wally,
You’ve thoughtfully challenged the concepts behind the “best” of lists while highlighting what we can “best” get from such lists. David Ballard also shares a good point – many of these lists are based on what the company submits about itself, which means it is a marketing tool for them and they probably have a good PR budget. I am very familiar with two companies that often appear on best places for women to work…NOT. They have great PR and programs with good titles and little real substance.
Always enjoy reading your posts.
Anne Perschel, Psy.D.
Leadership & Business Psychologist
President, Germane Consulting
http://germaneconsulting.com
December 9th, 2009 at 8:56 am
Wally, wonderful writing as always! I, too, think that this notion of lists has gotten way out of hand. We now seem to have lists for everything: Great Places to Work, Great Places to Work for Leaders, Great Places to Work For Mothers, and the “list” goes on and on. the problem is that there is absolutely no effort to explain really how the lists were created and what organizations should be taking away from some of the top performers. The way these lists are communicated, organizations not on the list should simply adopt the practices of the organizations on the list and POOF – you are now a great place to work for (fill in the blank with your chosen interest group). Instead, more focus should be placed on what organizations can learn by taking a look at some of these companies. And, to mention Anne and David from above, it needs to be made clear how these lists were developed. If companies simply present their own stuff, then making the list may be nothing more than impression management, even if it means that the company really isn’t a great place to work.