Sizing the emerging global labor market

The topic of offshoring generates extreme differences of opinion among policy makers, business executives, and thought leaders. Some have argued that nearly all service jobs will eventually move from developed economies to low-wage ones. Others say that rising wages in cities such as Bangalore and Prague indicate that the supply of offshore talent is already running thin.

To a large extent, these disagreements reflect the confusion surrounding the newly integrating and still inefficient global labor market. Much as technology change is making it possible to integrate global capital markets into a single market for savings and investment, so digital communications are giving rise to what is, in effect, a single global market for those jobs that can now, thanks to IT, be performed remotely from customers and colleagues.

Complete article at : McKinseyQuarterly

Creating a Positive Professional Image

n today’s diverse workplace, your actions and motives are constantly under scrutiny. Time to manage your own professional image before others do it for you. An interview with professor Laura Morgan Roberts.

by Mallory Stark

As HBS professor Laura Morgan Roberts sees it, if you aren't managing your own professional image, others are.

"People are constantly observing your behavior and forming theories about your competence, character, and commitment, which are rapidly disseminated throughout your workplace," she says. "It is only wise to add your voice in framing others' theories about who you are and what you can accomplish."

There are plenty of books telling you how to "dress for success" and control your body language. But keeping on top of your personal traits is only part of the story of managing your professional image, says Roberts. You also belong to a social identity group—African American male, working mother—that brings its own stereotyping from the people you work with, especially in today's diverse workplaces. You can put on a suit and cut your hair to improve your appearance, but how do you manage something like skin color?

Roberts will present her research, called "Changing Faces: Professional Image Construction in Diverse Organizational Settings," in the October issue of the Academy of Management Review.

Read the interview at : HBS

Designing Better Employee Benefits

Health care costs are rising so quickly that they threaten to eclipse profits in many Fortune 500 companies.
Given the impact of benefits costs, you might think that senior executives would be doing everything possible to control them and make the most of this investment in the workforce.
But in fact, most companies have failed to approach benefits with the same rigor they bring to other major investments, such as research and development.
Benefits plan managers should view employees as internal consumers and conduct research to learn how to deliver the most value at an affordable price.

Complete article at McKinsey Quarterly

A dearth of HR talent

All is not well with human resources. Many European companies don't have enough HR professionals who understand business issues—a necessity for recruiting and retaining talent. At the same time, companies complain that HR fails to provide basic services efficiently. The gulf between the goals of this critical corporate function and the organization's needs has implications for recruitment, training, and development.
The take-away

The HR function is at a crossroads. Companies may need to adopt a two-tiered approach that distinguishes between generalists with broad business experience and specialists with a deep knowledge of HR issues.

Complete article at :McKinsey Quarterly

Why do organizations want "previous work experience"?

This post is triggered by Heather's post here.
I also think there's a comfort level taking risks on new grads because they are less opinionated about what *works* in the business world (oh come on, I know I have an opinion on "how things work"...otherwise this blog would be b-o-r-i-n-g). But on the flip side, career changers bring so much maturity and different perspective to the table. Are hiring authorities worried that their next desired role is just an experiment? That they are trying something new because they failed at what they did before? Or do we embrace the risk taker?My response (not that I necessarily that I agree with it) tries to reason out why an organization might not look at somebody with "non-relevant" work experience for an experienced level opening.It is easier to get a transition with your current employer than to ask for a change with a new employer.Look at it this way, every hiring decision is a risk that the organization takes, and asking for previous experience is a way to mitigate that risk...that is because there are lots of factors that can be behind a successful talented person...like great organizational processes, a great team, top management support...you don't know if in your organization he/she will be as successful...but you still take a chance as the person has done this thing before...On the other hand hiring someone new without any previous experience in that kind of role actually means taking the most risk...sure it might pay off handsomely , but typically management is about reducing risks in most organizations.
This post is triggered by Heather's post here.
I also think there's a comfort level taking risks on new grads because they are less opinionated about what *works* in the business world (oh come on, I know I have an opinion on "how things work"...otherwise this blog would be b-o-r-i-n-g). But on the flip side, career changers bring so much maturity and different perspective to the table. Are hiring authorities worried that their next desired role is just an experiment? That they are trying something new because they failed at what they did before? Or do we embrace the risk taker?My response (not that I necessarily that I agree with it) tries to reason out why an organization might not look at somebody with "non-relevant" work experience for an experienced level opening.It is easier to get a transition with your current employer than to ask for a change with a new employer.Look at it this way, every hiring decision is a risk that the organization takes, and asking for previous experience is a way to mitigate that risk...that is because there are lots of factors that can be behind a successful talented person...like great organizational processes, a great team, top management support...you don't know if in your organization he/she will be as successful...but you still take a chance as the person has done this thing before...On the other hand hiring someone new without any previous experience in that kind of role actually means taking the most risk...sure it might pay off handsomely , but typically management is about reducing risks in most organizations. This post is triggered by Heather's post here.
I also think there's a comfort level taking risks on new grads because they are less opinionated about what *works* in the business world (oh come on, I know I have an opinion on "how things work"...otherwise this blog would be b-o-r-i-n-g). But on the flip side, career changers bring so much maturity and different perspective to the table. Are hiring authorities worried that their next desired role is just an experiment? That they are trying something new because they failed at what they did before? Or do we embrace the risk taker?My response (not that I necessarily that I agree with it) tries to reason out why an organization might not look at somebody with "non-relevant" work experience for an experienced level opening.It is easier to get a transition with your current employer than to ask for a change with a new employer.Look at it this way, every hiring decision is a risk that the organization takes, and asking for previous experience is a way to mitigate that risk...that is because there are lots of factors that can be behind a successful talented person...like great organizational processes, a great team, top management support...you don't know if in your organization he/she will be as successful...but you still take a chance as the person has done this thing before...On the other hand hiring someone new without any previous experience in that kind of role actually means taking the most risk...sure it might pay off handsomely , but typically management is about reducing risks in most organizations.
This post is triggered by Heather's post here.
I also think there's a comfort level taking risks on new grads because they are less opinionated about what *works* in the business world (oh come on, I know I have an opinion on "how things work"...otherwise this blog would be b-o-r-i-n-g). But on the flip side, career changers bring so much maturity and different perspective to the table. Are hiring authorities worried that their next desired role is just an experiment? That they are trying something new because they failed at what they did before? Or do we embrace the risk taker?My response (not that I necessarily that I agree with it) tries to reason out why an organization might not look at somebody with "non-relevant" work experience for an experienced level opening.It is easier to get a transition with your current employer than to ask for a change with a new employer.Look at it this way, every hiring decision is a risk that the organization takes, and asking for previous experience is a way to mitigate that risk...that is because there are lots of factors that can be behind a successful talented person...like great organizational processes, a great team, top management support...you don't know if in your organization he/she will be as successful...but you still take a chance as the person has done this thing before...On the other hand hiring someone new without any previous experience in that kind of role actually means taking the most risk...sure it might pay off handsomely , but typically management is about reducing risks in most organizations.

Written by Gautam Ghosh on his blog

KM reads click here

Executive Comp: Pay Without Performance

Out-of-control executive compensation schemes are “widespread, persistent, and systemic,” and new reforms won’t clean up the mess, argue law professors Lucian Bebchuk and Jesse Fried. Q&A and book excerpt.

by Mallory Stark

In the new book Pay Without Performance: The Unfulfilled Promise of Executive Compensation, Lucian Bebchuk and Jesse Fried make the case that the executive compensation system in the U.S. is fundamentally broken. We like to think that executive pay is the product of arm's-length negotiation, that the executive bargains in his or her own best interest, while the board of directors bargains for the best interests of the shareholders. Bebchuk and Fried argue that, in fact, soaring executive pay is the result of management power.

Complete article at HBR

For latest on KM click here

The Overlooked Highest Performers: Workforce

Ironically, the most important workers sometimes don’t receive adequate training. Herman Miller is looking to change that.
By Joe Mullich

The people who are most important to running a company today--and would most immediately be missed--often receive the least amount of leadership training, says Linda Milanowski, director of learning and development for Herman Miller, the 82-year-old-furniture maker.

Complete article at :Workforce