HR spend to be slimmed down by going onlineOn 27 Feb 2001 in Personnel Today Comments are closed. Cable& Wireless will cut its HR costs by a third in three years as a result ofits e-HR programme, which has been rolled out in the US, the UK and Japan.MartinReddington, programme director of e-HR Transformation at the globaltelecommunications group, said by 2004 the business expects to pay £1,500 perhead for HR. The current cost is £2,300, including training and recruitment.Atthe HR Summit 2001 in Switzerland last week he said the 400-strong HRdepartment will be “slimmed down”. The company is in talks with staffrepresentatives about numbers.Reddingtonsaid, “If you have some e-HR function and retain the existing head count thereis something wrong in the equation.”Thee-HR programme – called Hrxpress – takes in personnel administration andtransactions like assessment and development, performance management and rewardmanagement. Areas specific to different countries like labour laws are stillcarried out by the back offices. “Wehave been working on this for eight months and it has been a massive learningcurve. Everyone in the team has been trying to secure the best process for thebusiness across the globe,” Reddington said.Inthe UK the take-up of Hrxpress was 35 per cent of the 9,000 staff in the firstfew days. In Japan, there was 100 per cent take-up in the first week. Previous Article Next Article Related posts:No related photos.
Data in doubt in CRB launch delayOn 19 Jun 2001 in Personnel Today Comments are closed. Concern about the reliability of the data in the Criminal Records Bureaumeans that employers will be unable to run staff checks until the autumn, sayHome Office sources. The launch of the CRB was originally scheduled for July 2001 but has beendelayed, according to Computer Weekly. The postponement will give the Government time to iron out difficulties inthe system, which relies on data from the Police National Computer to check outjob applicants. Earlier this year, a report from the Home Affairs Select Committee foundthat up to two-thirds of PNC data contained errors. Dianah Warman, the CIPD’s adviser on equal opportunities, said, “Thedelay will give employers the chance to get their acts together in terms ofrecruitment procedures, and they will be able to act responsibility.” www.crb.gov.uk Related posts:No related photos. Previous Article Next Article
Comments are closed. Previous Article Next Article The soft stuff is the hard stuffOn 23 Oct 2001 in Personnel Today The downturn in the economy may have produced some unlikelyM&A bedfellows but one thing remains constant, the need for HR to becomeinvolved in the process as early as possible, finds Jane Lewis Ask any investment banker whether 2001 has been a good year for mergers andacquisitions activity and brace yourself for a shower of expletives. If theCity has been feeling the pinch in recent months, much of its pain can beascribed to falling levels of activity in this area. “Nothing’s going on –the deals have all dried up,” says one Credit Suisse First Bostonemployee. “People in M&A are going to be laid off left right andcentre.” Given that the acquisition cycle typically follows that of the Stock Market,it is no surprise that the flow of deals has slowed to a trickle – particularlygiven the unprecedented bonanza at the height of the high-tech boom. If youwanted to hike your share price, as the sad example of Marconi demonstrates, itwas a simple enough affair. Start acquiring and keep on going until you havereplaced a £3bn cash mountain with a £4bn debt. It was this strategy that,briefly, made Marconi worth £34.5bn. And it was this strategy of carefree,almost indiscriminate buying that ultimately crippled it. “Many mergers are driven by the egos of CEOs,” says consultant andchief executive of Create, Amin Rajan. Certainly at the top level ofinternational business it is impossible to ignore the whiff of personalambition and intense sense of competition between individual executives. If onemoves, the other has to challenge. It was Mannesmann CEO Klaus Esser’sspectacular coup of acquiring Orange that ultimately provoked rival Chris Gentof Vodafone to launch a counter hostile bid on the German phone giant inDecember 1999. Similarly, GE’s recently retired chairman Jack Welch may never haveattempted to acquire Honeywell as his final swansong had not a smaller rivalalready expressed interest. At this level of corporate chess a lot of decisionsare made by gut feeling. The fact that the Honeywell deal – finally scupperedby the European competition authorities – would have been the largest everstruck must surely have impressed Welch, a man with an eye on posterity, as asuitably impressive bang to exit on. During the bouyant days, there seemed to be no limit to the imaginativeexpansionist activities that companies were prepared to contemplate. Only ayear ago the technical giant Hewlett-Packard was eyeing upPricewaterhouseCoopers’ consulting business – a major leap into the unknown byany reckoning. Now that the downturn has hit, however, the mood has switched toretrenchment and consolidation. HP’s defensive $87bn (£55bn) merger with fellowtechnical giant Compaq last month was a prime example of a likely new wave ofmergers – those born of necessity. “It’s a union of two desperados intremendous difficulties,” says Rajan. Now that the chips really are down for many companies, this is likely to bethe pattern of things to come. We are going to be hearing a lot more aboutfinding “structural solutions” to problems (for this, read,cost-cutting) via mergers. Old hands like Chris Matchan, currently HR directorat Korn-Ferry International (but with a track record that includes Pentland,Diageo and Citigroup) are unashamedly cynical. “Ninety per cent of mergersare purely because two management teams run out of strategic options,” hesays. The rationale for merging may change with the economic climate, but bothresearch studies and anecdotal evidence suggest that one depressing factremains as constant as ever: HR is still on the back foot when it comes toM&As. Leading management figures have long argued for the importance of includingHR in the early stages of any deal. Recent research from US HR consulting firmTowers Perrin (the latest in a steady stream of surveys on this subject)demonstrates the value of the argument. It found a direct correlation betweenthe extent of HR input and the likely outcome of a merger. “The earlier HRis involved in the process, the greater the likelihood of success,” itstates. And Jeffrey Schmidt, Towers Perrin managing director for innovation andresearch, reinforces the importance of HR’s role by saying, “The softstuff is the hard stuff”. In the short term, the future looks grim. “History suggests that veryfew executives have the skills (and luck) to pull off successful cost-cuttingmergers in the teeth of a downturn,” claims one commentator. Too oftentimetables slip, tough decisions are ducked and important issues fall throughthe planning cracks. No wonder the resident M&A expert of Roffey Park,Valerie Garrow, chose to entitle her book on merging successfully In Search ofthe Golden Fleece. “We called it that because you set out with high hopes,but can get lost on the way,” she says. Here’s our own four-stage our-stage guide to successful M&A navigationfor HR directors. Pre-deal: Selecting the target “In an ideal world HR should be consulted when a company board isdeciding to merge,” says Amin Rajan. But how realistic is this in a worldwhere price, market and legal issues are still deemed the decisiveconsiderations? “There’s an argument that HR will never be involved in thegenesis, because it starts in smoky rooms populated by chairmen andbankers,” claims HR director Chris Matchan “That’s how it happened atDiageo: George Bull [Grand Met chairman] and Tony Greener [Guinness chairman]just decided over dinner. The original thought is always about the two balancesheets and the two P&Ls [profit and losses] – it’s always aboutnumbers.” “There are so many issues during an M&A that it’s easy to forgetabout HR,” adds legal M&A specialist David Beswick, a partner atEversheds. “Often other issues – how much the company plans to pay, howacquired brands will be structured, whether shareholders will accept the dealand so on – take precedence.” HR involvement is often seen in the City as an irritant, an unnecessarilycomplicatting factor that could wreck an otherwise “perfect” deal.Given the influence of the markets on the mindset the average public companychief executive, it is hardly surprising “senior executives have areluctance to get HR teams involved”, he says. But Beswick is convinced that somehow or other “HR has got to forceitself onto the agenda” even in the most preliminary stage of a deal.There is evidence this is beginning to happen in some companies –particticularly those at the sharp end of the knowledge economy, whose mainvalue lies in the skills and capabilities of their people. In these sectors, atleast, claims Rajan, many HR directors are now making their views felt at theoutset. He admits such involvement is still rare. HR directors are still regularlyhaving surprises sprung on them even in blue-chip companies. One reason is thevast disparity of talent in the profession. “There are some outstanding HRpeople, and there are some outstandingly mediocre HR people,” says Rajan.But in those companies where HR played a role in target selection, two commonfactors were evident. First, the HR director enjoyed high personal credibilityin the company and was “someone the CEO had enormous respect for”.Secondly, they had previously been involved in a routine basis in discussionsabout future strategy. The difficulty lies in winning this trust in the first place. Rajan’s adviceis to play a long game. “HR directors should push forward, but the onlyway to do this is to secure a series of small successes. You need a track-record– simply being assertive isn’t enough,” he says. But how should you act if it’s clear to you, if not to the rest of theboard, that the proposed merger is wrong, that it will never work in HR terms.”You need a very strong HR person to say ‘don’t do it’,” saysMatchan. “Someone right at the top of the table prepared to say theunsayable. I wonder how often that happens?” In most circumstances, hebelieves, HR directors usually duck the issue for fear of being labelled a”sales prevention person – the HR director just charges round doing whathe’s told”. Due diligence Rajan reports a much higher incidence of HR involvement in this, the secondstage of any M&A deal. This is unsurprising, after all due diligence is anHR responsibility says Beswick. There’s a whole list of chores to consider.”You’ve got consultation, Tupe issues, working councils, revising termsand conditions,” says Beswick. Indeed, it is precisely this kind ofgovernance issue that is often HR’s passport into the process, says GlaxoSmithKline’sglobal head of HR, Michael Moore. “Things like pension funds get into veryearly discussions.” But it’s the kind of due diligence that’s done that’s really important tothe eventual outcome of a deal says Rajan. And he has identified a criticalgap. “Much of this gets left to lawyers or strategy departments that don’treally understand cultures.” The reason why HR contribution is sonecessary at this stage is many CEOs don’t recognise the possible culturalclash between organisations and how to identify a mismatch. “They seetheir companies in terms of engineering mechanisms. Two companies may be idealpartners for a merger in product terms but they could have two entirelydifferent sets of behaviour. There is a behavioural side to organisations whichis very unpredictable and difficult to foresee.” A failure to tackle this could prove ruinous in the long run – and hasfrequently done so. It is often cited as the greatest cause of merger failure.Rajan quotes the example of one big banking sector merger where very littlethought was given to how behavioural aspects would be integrated. Two years on,the new entity still has big problems with synergy and hasn’t properlyintegrated. His solution is to insist upon a cultural audit. But how do you translatethis rather nebulous concept into action? Create’s Audit Toolkit provides auseful guide. Briefly summarised it advises: First, find out what your target’skey business values are. Second, look at its physical systems and processes: towhat extent do they incorporate the values? Finally, study individualbehaviours of senior managers: identify a number of behaviour characteristicsand see how they perform against them. Garrow at Roffey Park also stresses the importance of studying target employees’psychological contracts. Are they “relational” – implying a strongsense of reciprocal loyalty – or merely “transactional”? Yourfindings will offer strong clues about how to handle staff should the deal gothrough. People with relational contracts, for example, “are not going totake kindly to being asked to reapply for a job they’ve held down for 20years”, she says. An important role for HR at this stage of merger proceedings may be toeducate the “deal team” about people issues in M&A. But you shouldalso try to bring something to the party yourself. Could you, for example,contribute to the valuation of another company by putting a price on its peoplecapital? And don’t rule out more informal modes of due diligence, says Rajan”whether you do these overtly or by slightly subterranean means”. Areport examining the talents and outlook of a target’s board members would be awelcome addition to your company’s armoury at this time. But due diligence isn’t just about sussing out the other party. This is alsothe time to get your own house in order, says Garrow. You can save valuabletime in the critical post-merger period by making a full inventory of your ownpeople and processes now. Check your data is reliable. “Lists are oftenout of date, people have left or moved.” Finally assess your own HR function. “There is such a big differencebetween the capabilities of different HR functions that this is critical,”says Garrow. “Some are huge. some are still ‘Personnel’. Expecting thelatter kind of outfit to come up with something like a slick communicationsservice or counselling during the merger is asking too much.” So assessyour own capabilities and consider calling in third parties if necessary.”But never abdicate responsibility,” she says. Integration planning Successful integration planning has always been the lynch-pin of successfulmergers – particularly given the importance of acting quickly during the finalimplementation phase. The more work you can do now the better. “Those whodo better have planned,” says Beswick. “Companies that have plannedslip easily into implementation. Companies that haven’t, wake up.” The main areas to consider are: developing an employee communicationstrategy, designing programmes to retain key talent, planning and leadingintegration effort, and developing a strategy for the new entity. Some of thesofter HR skills are also important to consider at this stage. What actionneeds to be taken, for example, to help employees cope with change? It wouldalso be a good move to set up a mechanism of sorts to monitor employees’attitudes to the merger. Undoubtedly merger planning gets easier with experience. Michael Moore atGlaxoSmithKline claims one reason why the recent link up between the two giantpharmaceutical companies had been “pretty normal, if I can use that expression”is that both had been round the track several times. The fact that they’d beeneyeballing each other for years also helped. “There was a feeling in bothorganisations that one day it would happen,” says Moore. He estimates thatsince he joined what was then SmithKline & French in 1987 the company hasdone a deal that would impact people once every 17 months. “We’ve hadmergers, acquisitions, we’ve sold companies and we’ve made strategic alliances.As a result we’ve built up a capability,” he says. Those companies for whom merging is a way of life may very well have builtup an arsenal of useful templates. But, as Garrow points out, many first-timerswalk in with their eyes shut. “Companies who haven’t been through mergersdon’t realise the impact of wading through all the data – having to deal withthe implications of things like pensions and contracts. In a first merger theHR team can be overwhelmed. It’s a mammoth task.” Good planning, as well as morale, in the midst of a merger, relies on frankcommunication between both sides. But this is frequently hampered by theinvolvement of third parties who may restrict how much information either sidemay disclose. In the past, it was usually Stock Exchange rules onconfidentiality that got in the way. But a growing number of proposed mergersfind themselves under scrutiny from the competition authorities, whether US orEuropean, and this limbo period and waiting for regulatory approval, as Moorereports, can prove very frustrating to the process of implementation planning. But the more detailed a map you can sketch of the proposed new company – howits organisation will be defined, which key managers will be retained, whatwill be its main strategic goals, and so on – the better. Finally there’s your own position to consider. “There can be quite alot of individual competition when HR departments vie for control and competefor jobs,” says Garrow. Her advice is to be as scientific as possible.”Get a feel of the best practice in both organisations. One company may beparticularly strong on devising comp & bens, the other’s strength may lieelsewhere.” If your own job is on the line, it may be difficult to act objectively. Butyou must at least recognise that if you plan to stay you also have a vestedinterest, says Matchan. “You’re crazy if you think that’s not going to getin the way.” It’s equally important, he believes, to ensure that a measureof realism is brought to the way the deal is presented to the workforce –particularly with regard to the attitudes of senior management on both sides tothe deal. Honesty, within reason, is always the best policy. “You can’t just puttwo hardwired individuals together and presume they’re going to love eachother. But that’s what boards pretend is going to happen,” says Matchan.Prior to the AOL and Time Warner merger, for example, there was a strong senseof conflict between the two sides that belied the public handshakes and showsof outward bonhomie. “It doesn’t pass the bullshit test does it? You’reimmediately telling a great corporate lie which doesn’t bode well for thefuture.” Implementation Research shows that one of the most decisive factors influencing the successor other-wise of mergers is how quickly the new company can be integrated oncethe deal is done and dusted. On this point, says Matchan, your approach needsto be highly pragmatic. “If I’ve learnt one thing, it’s you have tosacrifice quality for speed in mergers. I wouldn’t normally say that – butyou’ve got to put people out of their misery,” says Matchan. This is a critical time, adds Garrow at Roffey Park “because everythinghappens so quickly. The post-merger period is a time when employees arethinking about themselves – about their CVs, their houses, their future –nobody’s doing much work”. Prolonged uncertainty is not only a recipe for greater internal upheaval, itcan also play havoc with the new operation’s performance. By focusing inwardfor too long, companies run the risk of taking their eye off the main game. Youshould see the emerging new company in its earliest phases as a malleableentity that can be shaped. “If you leave it six months, you’ve had it,” says Beswick atEversheds. “At the start people are scared – which makes it easier to getchange implemented.” Companies that dither at this stage, he adds, risklosing a large chunk of their prize asset. “You could have thrown away allyour money because the talent walks out of the door.” Effective communication, both in terms of individual positions and thecompany’s wider strategic aims, is clearly of paramount importance,particularly if the pace of change is fast and the ethos of an organisationcontinually changing. “Some building societies have gone from merging, tobecoming a plc, to becoming a bank in a very short timeframe,” says Garrow.”People have to feel they can cope with that.” Setting up forums in which staff can express their anxieties may be a usefulstep forward, but HR also needs to take a proactive role when it comes togiving reassurance, she adds. “You need to work hard to show people theydo have a future and are valued.” A good way of achieving this is to beginassessing training and development needs now. The process of creating a new culture – or conveying your own to a newlyacquired organisation – is clearly critical. But here again, it’s important notto mislead. “HR people can be guilty of a lot of hype about‘culture’,” says Matchan. “The brand new culture looks fantastic onpaper, but it’s completely impossible to implement. You don’t just form CultureNo. 3 from two different companies. It takes years.” That said, you can and must send out clear signals from the outset. One keyfinding of Valerie Garrow’s research was that “you can’t paint on aculture afterwards”. The way you handle restructuring, make appointmentsand decide reward strategies counts. “These are all issues that send outmessages on the new values,” she says. Handling third-party involvementAs the failure of several high-profile putative mergers demonstrates (BT andMCI, GE and Honeywell, to name but two), the role played by the competitionauthorities in determining the outcome of international M&A activity hasintensified in recent years. And this has only added to the uncertainty facingmany organisations mid-deal. Although companies have always had to abide by Stock Exchange rules when itcomes to issues like pre-deal disclosure, these have largely been predefinedand have rarely interfered with the timeframe of mergers. The problem raised bythe anti-trust authorities is that it can be very difficult to predict outcomes– particularly since the view taken by US authorities may contrast stronglywith what the Europeans have to say. You may get the go ahead from one set ofofficials, only to find yourself stymied by another.The worst thing about the process from the point of view of HR is thelengthy time it can take before regulatory approval is given. TheGlaxoSmithKline deal, for example, was in limbo for a full year while officialswrangled over details. This severely interfered with pre-deal planningarrangements.From the point of view of individual employees worried about the future,this state of “phoney war” is particularly wearing – and theprolonged uncertainty it causes can put HR in an invidious position. Head of HRMike Moore describes how it was necessary to tell certain individuals,”This is the job we want you to do in the new company. But we can’t gointo detailed aspects of the job, and we can’t talk about what we’re going topay you.” The longer the process draws on, the greater the fear that keystaff will simply act on their own initiative and leave.”It’s a weird scenario,” adds Matchan. “You have to act onthe assumption that the merger will go ahead, that there will be a thirdcompany emerging.” And all the conventional wisdom suggests you need tolet staff know as quickly as possible whether they will be retained. You could,for example, find yourself in the position of informing an individual that hisor her services are not required in the new company, only to find yourselfback-pedalling frantically if the merger is called off. “Pulling offstunts like that needs an exceptional HR person with brilliant skills.” Related posts:No related photos.
Comments are closed. The enemy withinOn 14 May 2002 in Vexatious claims, Personnel Today Related posts:No related photos. Previous Article Next Article Watch your back – they’re all out to get you. Jane Lewisprofiles the enemies of HR and outlines their modus operandi. Be afraid, bevery afraid. And watch out for…Has it occurred to you more frequently of late that you are surrounded byenemies? You may think you are well liked at work; perhaps you actually are.But the growing power of HR within many companies – and the accompanying burstof self-esteem in the profession – have had the effect of bringing more baddiesout of the woodwork than ever before. And the more they hear organisations likethe CIPD banging on about the ‘measurable and provable’ links between effectivepeople management and the bottom line, the more vicious they seem to get. What began as a sniggering campaign – the pen-pushing petty-mindedness ofpersonnel managers, their tendency to ‘bleat’ and ‘moan’, their presumptuousrequest for boardroom recognition, etc – has now boiled into a full-scaleassault. In January, Adrian Furnham, professor of psychology at University CollegeLondon, published research that claimed to explode the myth of the personnelexpert. “Most people in HR have little knowledge about business,” hewrote. Indeed, “many don’t know much about HR either” and for manyPersonnel Today is the only source of knowledge, he added. Yet they have thetemerity to complain about their lack of recognition. Now it could be that, in sad HR fashion, I have been watching one too manycostume dramas, but it strikes me that HR’s current standing in the corporateworld is like that of the governess in a Victorian household: neither properlyabove stairs, nor yet below, and the subject of contempt from both sides. All good melodramas have their villains and here we attempt to list some ofthe dark forces attempting to deflect our plucky heroine from her rightfulpurpose. Some are openly malevolent, others lurk in dusty corners and seek tolure you in; all are downright dangerous if allowed to continue unchallenged. Jane Eyre eventually won her man (and her rightful position at the head ofthe dining table) by means of inherent virtue and steadfast self-sacrifice.Judging from this line-up of villains, you, dear reader, may have to playdirtier. But be of good cheer. The fact that you have got to them at all showsyou must have been doing something right. The wreckerVillain rating: 9 Why so villainous? Because these boardroom supremos are out to annihilate HR. They are thus theArch Enemy. How did they become so dangerous? Some have utopian ideas about creating a workers’ paradise free from therestrictive handcuffs of HR. Others have woken up to the fact that people meanprofits (and therefore more power within their organisation) and are determinedto add the department to their own mini-empire before someone else does. Athird group can legitimately argue they were forced into a coup by theineptitude of their existing HR department. Any examples? Yes, the list is beginning to get worryingly long. The most extreme exampleis Ricardo Semler who, having inherited his father’s Brazilian manufacturingcompany, fired every executive and abolished its entire management structure ata stroke. Under the new regime, workers set their own hours and manage thedaily running of the company. You may think scrapping formal management is arecipe for disaster, but it has certainly worked for Semler, who has restored aloss-making operation to profit. Closer to home, the most apocalyptic example is Microsoft UK, whose financedirector Steve Harvey scrapped the ‘unproductive island of HR’ after a lengthyperiod of frustration. He now incorporates all aspects of people managementwithin his own remit as ‘director of people, profits and loyalty’. How to fight back The key thing is to grab the CEO’s attention with mesmerising examples ofthe added value HR brings, as well as cautionary tales of companies that losttheir shirts when they tampered with the established management system. Youcould also warn darkly of your expertise in unfair dismissal tribunals (seeTribunal Menace, opposite). But the best defence is to abolish the HRdepartment yourself, substituting it for something suitably trendy, beforeanyone else gets the chance. The bodysnatcherVillain rating: 7 Why so villainous? The bodysnatcher (aka headhunter, or talent scout from a rival firm) is outto strip you of your best assets just when you need them most. They are also adanger to your mental health: you dissolve into paranoia every time the phonerings and come close to breaking point each time a valued employee requests aclosed door meeting. How did they become so dangerous? Bodysnatchers have always been an irritation, but they graduated to fullmenace status during the tech boom and – thanks to the prevailing skillsshortage in many sectors – haven’t looked back since. Like good generals, they make a point of studying the enemy. If you work fora public company you can be certain they will start circling like vultures theminute your share-price wobbles. Don’t forget that once they’ve achieved onesuccessful hit from your company, they gain a tactical edge from useful insideinformation. Thereafter, there’s no stopping them. You could be sucked dry. Any good examples? Loads. The main feature of new-style bodysnatching is the lengths thataggressors are prepared to go to in pursuit of your people. Professionalsnatchers offer a good deal more than a higher salary, stock options or thechance to wear shorts in the office. Their main secret is to make the hoped-forrecruit feel like they’re at the centre of the universe. And they strikewhenever they get the chance. Nortel Networks regularly sent recruiters tobaseball games, bike races and rock concerts. Its main telecomms rival Lucentspecialised in quick hire job fairs: candidates were interviewed, drug-testedand hired the same day. How to fight back At the height of the boom, old-style corporates tried to fight back byhiking salaries by up to 50 per cent (pretty effective) and introducing casualdress codes to induce a funky atmosphere (resoundingly ineffective). But themain reason so many companies were vulnerable was that they hadn’t framed aformal retention strategy. Here are some options to consider: Follow Disney’s example and give managers the authority to award salaryincreases on the spot. Encourage high-fliers to stay by allocating them personal career mentors,who could double-up as 24-hour bodyguards. Headhunt the bodysnatcher. The city suitVillain rating: 8 Why so villainous? Because they dismiss you as a whinging hanky-wringer whose holier-than-thouconcerns about the well-being of employees just get in the way of deals. Worse, they encourage your CEO and financial director to take the same lineby treating them to tickets for Twickenham, the opera or a bumper night out atSpearmint Rhino and generally dazzling them with City glamour. This means youget no say in negotiations for mergers and acquisitions (though inevitably itwill be up to you to clean up the ensuing mess) and your dreams of a seat onthe board go up in smoke. Perhaps the worst blow that the City Suits inflict is to transmit theirobsession with shareholder value, at the expense of everything else, to yourcompany’s senior management. The usual consequence is that you lose yourtreasure chest of talent in a vicious round of downsizing. How did they become so dangerous? Having spent the better part of the last century ignoring HR completely, thearrival of the service economy has forced the Suits to concede that people maybe important after all. Their fury about being proved wrong is what is fuellingtheir mighty antipathy. They loathe the idea that “personnel” haspretensions to grandeur. Any good examples? Sadly too numerous to list. But to quote one senior JP Morgan hand:”These people are a nightmare. I refuse to deal with them.” How to fight back A tricky one this: the Suits have already grown impervious to claims thatpeople management affects the bottom line and will certainly demand you showthem proof in figures (which you probably haven’t got). Somehow you must gain their respect in a language they understand. Take aleaf from the book of Logica’s HR director and insist on a £7.2m salary. The tribunal menaceVillain rating: 6 Why so villainous? Because even the most ethical, squeaky-clean operation can fall victim tothe serial tribunal plaintiff with the fanatical gleam in their eye. And whenthey target you, you can forget about doing any other work for months, such isthe legal and bureaucratic quagmire you’ll be in. And then there’s the issue of dirty laundry: it’s common practice forlitigants to air as much as possible. One minute they’re suing for unfairdismissal, the next they’re alleging that senior colleagues take coke in theloo. How did they become so dangerous? The easy answer is to blame the tribunal system/equal opportunities legislation/sexualharassment laws, but that would be a dangerous cop-out – we all need thoselaws. The simple truth about most vexatious litigants is they were born thatway. Any good examples? One of the most tenacious examples in recent years is Natasha Sivanandan, aformer race relations adviser at Brent, who has spent lengthy tranches of hercareer suing everyone from the BBC, through Enfield Council, to the HackneyAction for Racial Equality for race discrimination (the latter risks bankruptcyat her hands) and now works full-time on her back-log of cases. Even herfather, Ambalavner, a distinguished writer on racial affairs and director ofthe Institute of Racial Relations, has criticised her “constant”claims of victimisation. She says: “I am successful because I am a raceadvisor and I know the law.” How to fight back An extreme way would be to put an embargo on all firing and hiring (reallyvexatious litigants tend to sue every time they are rejected for a job), butthis is clearly a non-option. With the legal system apparently powerless tostop serial claimants, your only hope lies in not encountering one. The eurocratVillain rating: 5 Why so villainous? The chances are that many of you will disagree with this entry. And it’strue we could just as easily have chosen the opposite work/life system promotedby Uncle Sam (if only to highlight the nightmare of ‘rank and yank’, ‘hug acolleague’ and those piddling holiday entitlements Americans seem happy tosettle for). But even the most ardent Europhile has to concede that much ofwhat is coming out of Brussels is an HR nightmare. Even before you get onto thesubject of what it costs UK companies to comply with the mass of newdirectives, consider what they’re doing to your prospects. Just as you thoughtyou could come over all strategic, you get shoved back into admin hell. How did they become so dangerous? Because the EU replaced Louis XIV’s famous pronouncement ‘L’«état c’est moi’with a new slogan, ‘La bureaucratie c’est tout’. Any good examples? Where do you want to begin? Try the forthcoming directive on employeeconsultation, in which employees of all but the smallest companies will have tobe consulted in all major strategy decisions. It is as close to a nightmare asit gets. Essentially, you are being asked to incorporate legislation modelled onearly 20th century German work councils into the 21st century Anglo-Saxon modelwe know and love. For more examples consult the Daily Telegraph. How to fight back Turn the situation to your advantage by becoming expert in the loopholes ofEU social law (although there aren’t many). Alternatively, join Dixons’ founderStanley Kalms manning the barricades in Whitehall. Point out the poor state ofmost European economies compared to the thrusting UK lion. The charmerVillain rating: 2 Why so villainous? The company charmer usually takes the form of a charismatic line manager,renowned for an earthy sense of humour and the conviction that your aim oftransforming the organisation along more people-centric lines is a ludicrouswaste of time (and money). In fact, given that they tend to run their departments as private fiefdoms,they are against change of any sort. Typical ploys are to laugh at your efforts to inculcate values, go behindyour back in the recruitment process, make up rude words to the corporateanthem, and do everything possible to circumvent policy and good practice. Ifit suits them, they steal your good ideas. The worse thing is that they’re frequently unsackable: they make more moneythan anyone else, their staff adore them and they’re the CEO’s main soundingboard. How did they become so dangerous? Charmers are dangerous beasts when cornered and they see HR in general, andprogressive initiatives like knowledge management programmes in particular, aspersonal threats and inconveniences. Any good examples? Loads. In one US manufacturing company matters came to a head when a seniormanager, irritated by a new 360 degree management initiative, bellowedobscenities and threw his lunch-tray at the HR vice-president. How to fight back Fight them on their own terms by establishing your own charismaticpower-base. Alternatively, pretend to succumb to their charms: many are highlysusceptible to flattery. Send them on an anger management course or, better still, to the BreconBeacons for an impossible-to-survive management survival course.
Related posts:No related photos. A new law which would make it an offence for drivers to use hand-held mobilephones is likely to extend to employers who cause or permit the use of suchdevices by their employees while driving. The Department for Transport concluded its consultation on the proposed newoffence last month and is expected to bring legislation into effect early nextyear. Company car drivers have been shown to be among the worst culprits for usingmobiles phones while at the wheel and pressure is growing for employers to takeaction. “We want to see employers introducing clear policies to stop theirworkers using mobile phones at the wheel, whether hand-held orhands-free,” said Kevin Clinton, head of road safety at safety campaigngroup Rospa. “They should do this as part of their policies to manageoccupational road risk and under their responsibilities to keep their employeessafe.” The new law will also prohibit the use of hand-held phones used with anearphone and microphone, leaving employers to pick up the tab for fittingcompany cars with dashboard mountings for hands-free kits. Employers will drive home phone banOn 1 Dec 2002 in Personnel Today Previous Article Next Article Comments are closed.
The role of the nurse consultantOn 1 Dec 2002 in Personnel Today Previous Article Next Article Being a nurse consultant is a way for OH nurses to progress while remainingin clinical practiceMany people don’t yet understand the role of the nurse consultant, saidTammie Daly, who was appointed the first OH nurse consultant earlier this year.In her presentation to the conference on the role of nurse consultants, sheexplained how they play a vital part in improving service and quality of careand strengthening leadership. And, for OH nurses who want to progress without moving into management,taking the nurse consultant route is a valuable way of progressing whileremaining in clinical practice. Daly described the processes involved in creating a post, how to apply forfunding, the key requirements of the post and the challenges involved in performingthe role. Describing the four core functions of the role, she explained that nurseconsultants continue to perform expert clinical practice for 50 per cent oftheir time. The remainder is divided up between providing professional leadership andconsultancy, helping in the education, training and development of staff and”making a tangible difference to how clients are cared for” byresearch and evaluation. “Part of my role,” she said, “is to encourage other people tobecome nurse consultants.” However, in terms of remuneration, she was atpains to point out she is not drawing the optimum salary of £45,000 mentionedin the July Occupational Health news story on her appointment. Comments are closed. Related posts:No related photos.
Top heavy UK fails to improve productivityOn 10 Dec 2002 in Personnel Today Theproportion of managers in the UK workforce is now the second largest in theworld, but staff still lack motivation and productivity is still poor.Newresearch from the Economic and Social Research Council’s Future of Workprogramme, shows that one in eight people supervise others, while a fifth ofcompanies have increased the number of managers.Despitethis, productivity in the UK still lags behind the US, which has the largestproportion of managers, as well as trailing most companies in Europe.ProfessorPeter Nolan, a lecturer at Leeds University, said the growing number ofmanagers was failing to have an impact on productivity because basic HRmeasures were not being implemented.”Weneed more HR in the UK and more training,” he said. “HR practiceshave a positive impact on business performance, but there are too few companiesfollowing that idea.” Nolansaid more resources should be put into training so employees could build skillsand learn to manage themselves.”Wehave a problem in this country with too much supervision. We talk aboutempowering people and teams, but not enough organisations in Britain are doingthat,” he said.Accordingto the research, most staff lack any effective voice or representation at workand only 26 per cent of managers consulted employee representatives.Nolansaid the vast majority of companies were ignoring even the most basic HRmeasures and as a result had workforces with low job satisfaction and poormotivation. Theresearch into 2,000 organisations shows that family- friendly policies havefailed to take off and the majority of managers have not harnessed technologyto help in their job.”It’sbeen proved that HR does make a huge difference where companies align peoplemanagement policies with business strategy,” Nolan added.ByRoss Wighamwww.esrc.ac.uk Related posts:No related photos. Comments are closed. Previous Article Next Article
Comments are closed. Previous Article Next Article Related posts:No related photos. Training roundupOn 10 Dec 2002 in Personnel Today Thisweek’s training roundupSafetydrive for Pfizer Pharmaceuticalcompany Pfizer is undertaking a risk assessment and driver training programmefor its entire sales fleet. Initially, more than 2,000 company car drivers,including 1,200 high-mileage sales staff, will undertake the specially designedtraining scheme. The programme, designed by Drivetech, includes a CD-Romtraining aid and targeted training solution for drivers deemed to be at risk. www.pfizer.co.ukThirstfor knowledgeDrinksbusiness Diageo has rolled out a new e-learning system for its 25,000employees. It aims to improve the speed and efficiency of training provision inover 180 countries. The TopClass e-learning suite also has mobile capabilitiesso staff can train while on the move. www.wbtsystems.comBuildingon investmentShepherdConstruction has been awarded the Contract Journal 2002 Training Award afterinvesting more than £2,336 in every employee. The firm has spent more than£1.8m on training over the last 18 months. The initiative included newsletters,a company intranet and series of interactive road-shows to encourage staffbuy-in. www.shepherd-construction.co.ukCareeroptions onlineTheNational Training Partnership Group has launched an online database to helpyoung people choose suitable work experience placements. It will be used inschools enabling youngsters to access information on career and work experienceoptions, including virtual visits to companies. The scheme will be furtherdeveloped to provide customised career advice. www.dfes.gov.ukFreightinitiativeTheFreight Transport Association and supply chain firm TDG are working together topromote an industry-based initiative for drivers of commercial vehicles. AllFTA members will have access to a national training programme, the 5 StarDriver Development scheme, which is designed to meet a range of challengesfaced when operating commercial vehicles. www.fta.co.uk
Related posts:No related photos. Employees give full support to stress legislationOn 2 Jan 2003 in Personnel Today More than three-quarters of staff would support legislation to help reducestress. In a poll of 1,000 employees by the Chartered Institute of Personnel andDevelopment (CIPD), 25 per cent said their jobs are very stressful, and stresslevels are significantly higher in the public sector, with the highest stresslevels in the NHS (38 per cent) and local government (30 per cent) The privatesector average is 21 per cent. Mike Emmott, CIPD adviser on employee relations, said: “Many peoplefeel they are under constant scrutiny and these people are much more likely tofeel dissatisfied and under stress.” www.cipd.org.uk Previous Article Next Article Comments are closed.
The big fightOn 21 Jan 2003 in Personnel Today Comments are closed. Related posts:No related photos. Previous Article Next Article LuciaGraves takes a look at bullying in a global context, and asks what is it, howdoes it impact on your business, and what policy decisions can you take toavoid it?Bullying in the workplace costs businesses hundreds of billions of pounds ayear with at least one in 10 employees reporting being bullied at some timeduring their working life. In recent surveys carried out in the UK, the US,Australia, and European Union, the percentage of people who had been bullied inthe workforce ranged from 8 to 20 per cent – and this is without looking atparts of the world where employee protection and health and safety regulationsare much less developed. A study of 3,500 UK workers by Mercer Human Resource Consulting found morethan one in five had been bullied at work at least once during the past year.Almost one in 10 reported bullying on more than one occasion, with 2 per centsaying they have been bullied five or six times. The TUC reported last year that the most recent figures available showedthat 1.3 million people had been attacked at work in the UK during one year. Inthe US workplace, there are two million violent victimisations a year, includingassaults, rapes and robberies; and an average of 1,000 workplace murders ayear, according to The National Crime Victimisation Survey in the early 1990s,the most recent figures available. In Australia estimates on ‘harassment’ in the workplace range from 400,000to two million workers affected each year, affecting between up to five millionworkers at some point during their working lives (Beyond Bullying Association2001). There are similar figures for Europe – about 8 per cent of EU workers(or 12 million workers) have been bullied, according to a European Union surveyin 1996. Bullying is a more common problem, then, than illegal discrimination such asracist or sexist behaviour and affects both sexes. The US Campaign AgainstWorkplace Bullying (CAWB) survey in 2000 found both men and women guilty ofbullying, with women making up three-quarters of the targets. More than 80 percent of bullies are bosses. It is a matter of concern because of the severe effects it has on employees.The CAWB found 41 per cent of bullying victims were diagnosed with depression.And one in five men and one in three women suffered from post-traumatic stressdisorder. Quite apart from the personal human misery implied from these figures, italso costs businesses money. More than 80 per cent of respondents to the CAWBreported effects preventing them being productive at work through anxiety andsleeplessness. And 80 per cent left their jobs – half through choice. So theresult of bullying for employers is underperforming staff or losing staff –both expensive options. In the worst cases, the business may end up being sued. One of the highestcompensation payouts for bullying at work in the UK reached £230,000. Thehighest recent settlement in the US was $3m (£1.9m) – although this was laterreduced to $300,000 (£187,000) by a federal court. The total cost can be huge. A survey carried out by the Australiangovernment estimates the cost of bullying to be $Aus 6-7bn (£2.2bn to 2.5bn) ayear or 0.9 per cent to 2 per cent of GDP. A serious case over six monthsbetween Aus$17,000 and Aus$24,000, (£6,000-£9,000) or anything up toAus$175,000 (£64,000) a case (including everything from legal and settlementcosts and estimated costs of operating in the meantime minus that worker). Inthe UK the estimated cost is £2bn a year, according to a report by the LondonChamber of Commerce. The movement against bullying in the workplace is now gathering momentum.One of the countries at the forefront is Sweden, which has had anti-bullying legislationsince 1993 – the ordinance of the Swedish National Board of Occupational Safetyand Health contained provisions for measures against Victimisation at Work. AndAustralia completed a huge study of workplace violence in March 2002, theQueensland Government Workplace Bullying Taskforce Report. All over the world Bills are being drafted against bullying: the Dignity atWork Bill in the UK, which failed to pass through parliament before the summerbreak in 2002, but could be revived; the US Campaign against Bullying isplanning to lobby for state legislation in California then Colorado and otherUS states; and the European Union commissioned research into violence in theworkplace which was completed in 2001 – a first step towards legislation. There are vocal pressure groups in most countries, too, such the CAWB run byGary Namie in the US. “We need to make it legally actionable,” hesays. “At the moment in the US, for example, a woman can’t sue anotherwoman for bullying. She can only sue if it is sexual harassment.” What is bullying in the workplace? Headache number one for HR departments is that bullying is defineddifferently in different parts of the world. Where there is no legislationspecifically about bullying, anti-discrimination legislation or human rightslegislation can be used to bring legal cases against an employer. The problem with not defining it is that one man’s bully can be another’s‘robust’ manager, with a tough style that could, even unintentionally, distressemployees. A general definition is that bullying is a form of psychological orphysical harassment. In Australia, the Queensland Government Workplace Bullying Taskforceredefined bullying as ‘workplace harassment’ in its report published in March2002, because harassment had already been recognised as ‘prohibited conduct’.The definition runs: “Workplace harassment is repeated behaviour other than behaviour thatis sexual harassment, that: – Is directed at an individual worker or group of workers, and – Is offensive, intimidating, humiliating or threatening, and – Is unwelcome and unsolicited, and – A reasonable person would consider to be offensive, intimidating orthreatening for the individual worker or group of workers.” Has bullying increased? Bullying is a growing problem because of new workplace stresses. JaneCarrington, managing director of Right CoreCare, a company that runs EmployeeAssistance Programmes in the UK, (see p20) suggests: “There may be moreemphasis now on performance, with the personnel department which [previously]dealt with employee welfare and supporting the employee, looking at theirwellbeing, becoming human resources which looks at recruitment, retention andperformance. But you have a lot of people frightened of change.” The cultural factor Not all cultures recognise bullying as a problem, although problems canarise when two cultures clash. Zareen Karani Araoz, president of the US-basedconsultancy Managing Across Cultures, has studied workers in countries asdiverse as Japan and India, and their working relationship with Westernemployees. “Cross-cultural training needs to be compulsory for any multinationalexecutive dealing with other cultures, and also for workers moving into newcultures,” she says. “Indians in the US, for example, sometimes allowthemselves to be bullied.” She explained that this is because salaries arelower, and they are working in some marginalised part of the company and feelthey can’t say anything. “They can’t be productive in these circumstances.They can be very timid, and need to be taught how to be more culturallyappropriate.” India has a different concept of bullying according to Araoz.”Behaviour such as raising your voice is not interpreted in the same wayas in America. In many family-run businesses the head is seen as a benevolentdictator who tells you what you should be doing – although this would have beentolerated more in the past than today.” As a result of this and othersocio-economic factors, bullying litigation is non-existent. In Japan, where there is a strong corporate hierarchy similar to India’s,complications can arise when dealing with Westerners. The Japanese have a greatsense of saving face and pride, are unable to express their feelings and areultra sensitive to domination, but they don’t show it in a way Westernersunderstand. “There are nine ways of saying ‘yes’ in Japanese, and seven of saying‘no’. When they perceive they are being bullied they may seem to say yes and donothing,” explains Araoz. “The Japanese mindset is attuned tocourtesy and sensibility, so the way Americans speak can be perceived asdominating, ordering, or bullying.” What policy decisions to make “Many companies don’t want to know about the problem. They are toofrightened,” says anti-bullying writer Tim Field, author of UK website www.successunlimited.co.uk.”They have to recognise signs of dysfunction. It is a serial offence inthe majority of cases I process, and the bully is often very convincing.” Bullying is particularly difficult for HR departments to deal with becauseit is an issue between employees and requires care so as not to assume guilt oneither side – as well as avoiding being more sympathetic to the ‘victim’because the complaint is not always justified. Ann Coles, consultant at employment law specialist Fox Williams, says:”It is very difficult for HR departments to deal with because it is as ifboth sides are on trial. The ‘victim’ may be suffering from stress but theperson who is accused will also find it a harrowing experience. There ispotential for an employer to lose both sets of employees. You have to be fair,neutral and independent.” She adds: “It has an enormous cost to the reputation of both victim andperpetrator – people may lose their jobs. I’ve seen instances where the personaccused was not guilty, the accusation was a means of getting rid of someonewho was a threat. In ambitious companies accusing people of bullying may be atactic.” There are two main strategies a company can follow to pre-empt bullying inthe workplace: draw up a bullying policy and train their employees inappropriate action and in teambuilding, or hire a company to start up anEmployer Assistance Programme. “A written policy is essential, it makes clear what acceptablestandards are,” says Field. “It gives the employer the aegis to dealwith the issue in the absence of a legal statement. It has to be more thanwords on paper, with a willingness to carry it through.” Ann Bevitt, partner and employment law specialist at Morrison &Foerster, agrees. “It is essential to have a policy in place so employeesknow what they should and should not be doing. If companies have someprecautions, and have taken all reasonable steps to stop something, they can’tbe found liable in the UK” Namie’s campaign against workplace bullying in the US emphasises the need toinvolve all stakeholders in policy drafting – from employees to HR department,union reps and management. Training programmes Training programmes that encourage teambuilding could offer a way ofavoiding bullying. Rhoda Frindell Green, a New York City-based organisationalpsychologist and consultant to companies on HR issues, uses the Myers BriggsType Indicator questionnaire, which measures personal preferences and differentwork styles. She then gets team members to discuss the results, and uses it toshow why people who have different ways of working can be equally effective. “It shows there is another way to work. This person can make acontribution,” explains Green. Namie, who has also worked on anti-bullying policies and training, believesthis is essential – “otherwise employers tend to make the target solve hisor her own problem” he says. “In domestic violence it is considered illegal and immoral so weoutlawed it, but with bullying this has not happened.” But, he adds, thecompany’s willingness to stamp out the bully is limited. “It says: ‘do youmean our regional manager Bob would be affected if he was a repeat offender?’It doesn’t want to let go of its right to veto whatever the company has decidedis best.” Employee Assistance Programmes Designed to create a lifeline for distressed employees, the EmployeeAssistance Programmes offer access to an impartial third party for anonymouscounselling and assistance. Companies which run EAPs should be fully informedabout any policy the particular company has taken towards bullying andoccupational health. Jane Carrington, managing director of Right CoreCare whichruns EAPs for several companies in the UK, points out that bullying can be aquestion of perception, esteem, or the way the company is being run or changed.She says an important aspect of the work is that it preserves employeeanonymity. “Only if the individual agrees can we reveal their identity. We workwith them to rebuild strategies to go back into work.” The advantage of having an outsider is that they do not have the sameloyalties as someone within a company, and the employee is more likely to discussproblems when confidentiality is guaranteed before getting to crisis point. “It is also advantageous to the company as the procedures will thenseem fairer to all sides, and it has an informed monitor on its personnel.Carrington says: “If you get a lot of calls for the same problems to dowith the same manager we would highlight that to the personnel manager. Againwe have to make sure it is a trend.” Another good reason to set up an EAP is that in the UK ~Judge Lady JusticeHale recently ruled that an EAP might constitute a legal defence for a companyaccused of allowing bullying. Not everyone is sure that an EAP is enough, however. Anti-bullying authorField says: “In theory it is a good idea, but it depends on the attitudesof employers. Some use it as a cover and do it for good PR. It needs to comefrom a genuine desire to produce a healthy, happy employee.” Beyond the EAP Coles says that a company may need to go beyond written policy and EAPs tochange the company culture. “It needs to be proactive and have management training dealing withmacho management culture, to be firm on this and make it clear this is notacceptable. It must also give illustrations of what this culture looks like.This way it can get in before their managers turn into ‘bullies’.” Carrington stresses that any anti-bullying policy needs to go to the heartof the organisation’s culture. “The culture is important, it should bepeople-centred and ethical, and people want opportunities to be creative,”she says. Bullying: the steps employees should take– The first stage in any bullyingproblem should be the ‘victim’ trying to sort the problem out with theperpetrator, before taking it to a complaint stage, says Dr Rhoda FrindellGreen, a New York City-based organisational psychologist and consultant tocompanies on HR issues. She has often given advice to employees about how todeal with problems, and she divides bullying issues into three categories –when the bully is:1) Boss/clientIf you are the target you need to go to the other person andask for some time to talk – say, half an hour. You call the meeting and youropening statement should be something such as “Here is what I need, to dothe best possible job for you. I could do a better job for you if I get ‘X’from you. I need to get to do this or that in a meeting, and need you not tosent me those biting e-mails, or I need you to call me and give me thisinformation because I feel isolated”. This is a way of getting thingsstraightened out. Let’s assume the boss says “Yes, fine, I didn’t realiseI was doing this, I apologise”. If a week later the boss is still doingthe same thing, you go back in and say in a more light-hearted way, “Uhoh, its happening again”, giving them another chance to change it. Thissometimes changes the relationship and the bullying stops.The employee has choices. He or she can discuss it the problemwith management, but first should try to negotiate. In the worst case they canrequest a transfer or resign. 2) Staff member who reports to you/outside vendorYou call them in and say: “This is not acceptablebehaviour, this is a warning.” If it is a staff member you say: “Ifthis continues you risk losing your job”, witha vendor “If thiscontinues you risk losing a client”.3) A colleague on an equal footingGo to lunch with them and say: “We sometimes interact welland sometimes don’t. What you did is not beneficial to our relationship. Whatprompted it?” Suffering in silence is not what I am recommending at anylevel. It takes some courage to address bullying.Anti-bullying: nine-point actionplanThe Campaign against WorkplaceBullying provides a comprehensive nine-point guide on the website www.bullybusters.org, This is anadapted, shortened version. It:– Needs to state what bullying is with concrete examples. Thisshould include verbal assaults as well as other misconduct. Anne Coles says:”A good policy needs to give some illustrations of what might amount tobullying – undermining, for example. It needs to be made clear that this is notacceptable.”– Must show what would give rise to an investigation– Will state how the investigation should be carried out. Thisshould be in a way that employees consider fair, probably using an outsideagency– Should allow for the immediate separation of plaintiff anddefendant in a way that does not punish either– Should require documentation of damages to the claimantincluding any impact on health or purse– Must state the time within which a response should be made tothe claimant– Must state what will happen if bullying is found – dependingon the gravity of the offence, from public apology right through to severancepackages– Should be followed up with training so that people are awareof the policy– May need an anti-retaliation clause so that any subsequentbullying is seen as a separate caseFurther reading The International Labour Organisation’s anti-bullying report www.ilo.org/public/english/protection/safework/violence/violwk/violwk.pdfAustralian Workplace Bullying Taskforce report, March 2002 http://www.whs.qld.gov.au/taskforces/bullying/bullyingreport.pdfUK-based anti-bullying website www.successunlimited.co.ukUS-based anti-bullying website www.bullybusters.orgBullying and Harassment in the Workplace by the London Chamber of Commerce www.londonchamber.co.uk – lookfor link to report May 2000 Cultural awareness consultancy run by Zareen Karani Araoz www.managingcultures.comThe EU’s next four-year plan for health and safety at work http://europa.eu.int/comm/employment_social/news/2002/apr/081_en.htmlThe Irish Health and Safety Authority’s code of practice on the preventionof bullying in the workplace www.hsa.ie/pub/publications/bullyingcop.pdfSouth African anti-bullying website www.worktrauma.org/