Comments on: List Mania http://blog.momentor.com/list-mania Increasing Career Momentum Sat, 08 Jan 2011 08:17:37 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Matt Grawitch http://blog.momentor.com/list-mania/comment-page-1#comment-9260 Matt Grawitch Wed, 09 Dec 2009 15:56:00 +0000 http://blog.momentor.com/?p=343#comment-9260 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. 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.

]]> By: Anne Perschel http://blog.momentor.com/list-mania/comment-page-1#comment-9256 Anne Perschel Wed, 09 Dec 2009 14:54:05 +0000 http://blog.momentor.com/?p=343#comment-9256 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 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

]]> By: David Ballard http://blog.momentor.com/list-mania/comment-page-1#comment-9230 David Ballard Tue, 08 Dec 2009 23:27:41 +0000 http://blog.momentor.com/?p=343#comment-9230 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. 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.

]]>