Writing Boots

On communication, professional and otherwise.

A good employee communication company is hiring

by // 1 Comment

I don't usually do job posts here, but …

We all know that as far as employee communication jobs go, the company makes all the difference. Walgreen, a company with a tradition of good employee communications, is looking for three communicators—a manager and two specialists, to work in its Operations division, in Deerfield, Ill.

"The work entails supporting the tactical and leadership communication for Operations—all 6,700 stores," says internal communications manager Brodie Bertrand.

Qualified applicants should apply here.

New-employee disorientation

by // 2 Comments

Bookcover Alexander Heron's 1942 book Sharing Information with Employees is the first ever written on employee communication, and I'm arguing it's also the best. But it's not perfect. As I tried to imagine this scene, I had to laugh. —DM

"One of the best jobs I ever knew of making 'company investment' take on a life meaning is done by a manager of a small plant employing about five hundred," Heron says. "This manager systematically plans to see each new employee soon after he joins the organization. He plans the conversation so that he can ask the new employee why he prefers to work for wages rather than to work for himself. Of course, the answer is almost always, 'I have no capital. You gotta have capital to work for yourself.'"

And here is where the trouble begins:

Wisely and slowly this manager leads to recognition of the fact that capital is no less necessary if the man is to work for wages. He points out that the visible, physical things which had to be provided before he, or anyone else, could work for wages in that plant—the purchase of the land, the buildings, spur tracks, the heavy equipment, machines, and tools. He casually jots down the figures as he goes along, mentions the total dollars, the number of workers; and he and the employee together discover that the physical plant represents $22,000 per worker!

We can see the new employee wiping the sweat off the back of his neck and trying to appear befuddled: "Gee, boss, I never thought of it that way!" And meanwhile wishing fondly to quickly get to work digging clinkers out of the furnace. But the boss isn't finished.

They follow through, together, the steps of deciding that this investment, this capital, must be paid some rent or wages; they agree that 6 percent is fair. They also agree that the part of the investment which wears out must be paid off or replaced; so they get acquainted with depreciation. They reach a point where they decide that each new employee must produce gross earnings of some $2,000 a year, just to pay for the investment he uses, before he can earn any wages for himself!

Do you think that figures on a company investment are going to be merely dry and factual to an employee who has been introduced to them in this way?

No, Heron: An employee who has been condescended to in this way—and at the very moment he is most powerless to argue with the chief, perhaps by pointing out that if he's to "pay for the investment he uses" maybe he ought to receive some of the fruits of that investment—will be forever hostile to everything management ever tries to get him to understand about company finances.

And readers,  you'll be even more gobsmacked at Heron's foolishness here when you read the next installment of this series, which explains with sensitivity and insight when and under what circumstances an organization can get employees to receive information about economic "reality."

We interrupt this communication blog to weigh in on the law

by // 9 Comments

If, as expected, President Obama names me as the next raging liberal activist judge on the U.S. Supreme Court, I will immediately push for a new "Mulligan Law," which would give every first-time fuck-up a second chance.

What's got me thinking about this is the story about an April 29 incident where a Russian-born British art-world socialite named Galina Rusanova became "incoherent and disruptive" on a United Airlines flight from L.A. to London. According to the Chicago Tribune, she was "apparently woozy from a
combination of pills, alcohol and lavatory hand soap, allegedly tried
to bite a flight attendant in the leg."

Who among us, at one time or another, hasn't overdone it with the hand soap?

And look at the picture of the woman! You're going to give her 20 years?

"What wasn't disclosed through the affidavit is that Ms. Rusanova is a
very intelligent, charming woman," said her attorney, Matthew Erickson.
"This comes as a shock to her. … Her mistake was to mix prescription drugs with alcohol. After that, all bets were off."

Isn't it punishment enough to poor Galina that for the foreseeable eternity, any booze, pill, soap-induced ankle biting incident will be referred to as "doing the Rusanova"?

I say, let her off. (Even if you have to pry her.)