Tim Sackett and I were in Omaha on Tuesday to speak at HRAM, the Omaha area chapter of SHRM.  Topic - Raise Your HR Game By Thinking Like a Money-Hungry VP of Sales.

Slide show appears below, as does the session description for our talk at HRAM.  Good times.  Great SHRM chapter.  Thanks to all the good folks at HRAM for having us.

Want to be more like a VP of Sales as an HR Pro?  Check out the slides, then do like Tim did in Omaha and get a massive upgrade to the midsize rental we were counting on.  Picture appears below...

That's right - that's the "upgrade" from midsize he negotiated.  Classic.  

Email and RSS subscribers - click through if you can't see the presentation below...

True Story:  HR Pros Kris Dunn and Time Sackett don't dislike salespeople...They LOVE salespeople and think HR needs to be more like a high-octane sales organization to generate the best possible results.  In this session, Kris and Time identify the 5 hardcore sales tactics with the greatest upside to HR pros, then proceed to outline how you can put the tactics in play in your HR practice.  The result is a road-map of how to make your HR practice function more like a results-driven Sales organization, featuring a sales contest with the following prizes:  First prize: A new Cadillac Eldorado. Second Prize: A set of steak knives.  Third Prize: You're Fired.    
 
We kid.  But you get the idea.
 
Need more details?  In htis HRAM keynote, Kris and Tim will roll out some of the usual ways that HR pros get played as victims, including the following gems:

     Your Softness - Being a victim of someone else's unreasonable expectations;
     Being Poor/Position of Weakness - Having no Budget for new tools the HR team desperately needs;
     Handling Snakes - Dealing with slippery types who talk in elusive circles;
     No Status/Without Clout- Not having the influence necessary to create necessary change; and
     Nice Gals/Guys Finish Last - Having difficulty getting buy-in during difficult conversations.

Does that sound like your average week?  Are you tired of feeling like a victim repeatedly in these circumstances?  Good - because Kris and Tim will outline your pain, then tell you what a money-hungry VP of Sales would do in each of these circumstances since he's unconstrained by emotions like feelings, guilt or the expectation that he's there to make others feel good.
 
Translation - you don't want to be the VP of Sales, but you can learn from him.  

Yes, it's true:  Apple is now dealing with union organizing in its award-winning retail stores.  More from Yahoo News:

"Cory Moll, a part-time employee at an Apple store in San Francisco, is working to form a union to fight for better wages and benefits and to address what he says are unfair practices in the company's glass-and-steel retail showrooms.  "The core issues definitely involve compensation, pay, benefits," Moll said, adding that he decided to go public with the union to encourage other employees to come forward.

Moll, who has been working at Apple for four years, said he makes $14 an hour at the San Francisco Apple store. The minimum wage for 2011 in San Francisco, one of the most expensive cities in the United States, is $9.92 an hour.  The 30-year-old employee primarily communicates with other Apple store employees through Twitter, Facebook and the "Apple Retail Workers Union" website, which he created in May, without disclosing his name.

Moll has received little public support from employees so far, though he said he has emails expressing support. An Apple representative confirmed Moll is an employee, but declined to comment on the union effort.

"It's kind of a feeling of David versus Goliath," Moll said of trying to start a union movement in a $320 billion company run by its iconic co-founder, Steve Jobs.  The would-be Apple union's website is sparse, but states: "At Apple, our most important resource, our soul, is our people. Our Time Has Come."

Couple of things related to this story.  First up, some of you are surprised that an Apple retail store employee in one of the biggest markets in the world makes $14 per hour.  Don't be.  It's retail, and while those kids in the stores are super-sharp, the law of supply and demand would indicate that there are associates from Staples, OfficeMax and <gasp> - yes, even Best Buy - who would love to work at an Apple retail store.  For that money.

Next up, like my tipster (reader DJ) asked in his email to me with the link to the story: Can you imagine the reaction of Steve Jobs to this?  Here's my take on how that conversation went:

Messenger: "Steve, wanted you to know that Yahoo just wrote about some kid who's forming a union in our stores."

Steve Jobs: "Big deal - fire him."

Messenger: "Steve, we'd love to fire him but we can't.  His right to form a union is protected under Federal Law.  We'd be risking taking an unfair labor practice charge."

Steve Jobs: "You won't fire him?  You're fired.  <now yelling to his personal assistant>.  Get the next human capital messenger in here, STAT"

It just goes to show you, total employee happiness is impossible.  The beatings will continue until morale improves.  Your argument that Apple is the perfect place where the rules of humanity don't apply is INVALID.

-sent from my iPhone

Rule #1 in life, business and Human Resources is pretty simple:  Don't tempt fate by talking smack.  You stay humble because you know how tough life is.

Here's what I mean.  You're living your life, and things are going pretty well.  You don't tempt fate and put a target on your back by talking smack and judging the performance of others, the life circumstances of others and basically taking a "holier than thou" attitude.  You don't do that in business or Human Resources, and if you believe what I'm talking about, you don't do that in life either.

The Miami Heat and Lebron James talked smack.  Lebron dismissed the whole city of Cleveland in an ill-advised televised special saying he was leaving Cleveland and going to Miami.  When he arrived in Miami, the Heat held a celebration reserved for championships (this one was held before the season started), rose their 3 stars up on a smoke-filled stage on a rock-concert lift flexing and posing, then the three stars proceeded to say that 7 championships was the goal and expectation. (Their contracts said they would be together for 7 seasons).

Translation: Tempting fate.  Putting the target on your back.  Refusing to stay humble.

The focus on staying humble manifests itself in three ways in my life.  When I catch myself judging people and feeling good as a result in my thoughts, I'm quick to note that it could all turn around on me as well.  When I catch myself saying or almost saying something self-serving regarding my performance or state in life, I cringe.  And god help me if I put something self-serving in print to be forwarded at the will of those who received a wayward email of questionable intent.

You and I are far from perfect.  But most of us have at least some self-awareness.

Talking smack is never in your best interest.  You don't tug on Superman's cape.  You don't spit in the wind.  Fate and paybacks are a bitch.

Lebron James and the Miami Heat talked smack.  Then they lost the championship on Sunday night.  Does this quote from the post-game news conference sound like someone who has learned that tempting fate is never a good idea?

"Moments later, however, he (Lebron James) trash talked those that were happy to see the Heat lose, ignoring that they brought all that on themselves. 'At the end of the day, all the people that was rooting on me to fail, at the end of the day they have to wake up tomorrow and have the same life that they had before they woke up today,' James said. 'They have the same personal problems they had today. I’m going to continue to live the way I want to live and continue to do the things that I want to do with me and my family and be happy with that. They can get a few days or a few months or whatever the case may be on being happy about not only myself, but the Miami Heat not accomplishing their goal, but they have to get back to the real world at some point."

It's not you, it's them - right Lebron?  Haters. 

And so fate remains out there for the Heat.  Will they win six championships now?  Or will the reluctance to understand Rule #1 prevent them from winning a championship forever?

Dallas is your NBA World Champion.  Even if you don't like sports, you have to admit two things as it relates to Rule #1.

Justice is served.  Fate is a bitch.

Remember - I'm a SHRM member and don't see that changing anytime soon.

But, I haven't been to the site for awhile.  You know what I'd like to go there for?  I'd like to go there for a great understanding of where I stand with Employee Turnover related to my industry peers and other sectors as well.  I'd like to do the same with other metrics.

I know SHRM can do this.  Wait - it's available!  

Wait - apparently I need to fork up $395 to get the data - data that was likely collected directly from members.  

I got an email pitching me on the quality of Turnover Data and related metrics (140 of them) yesterday.  I went to the website and here's what they're pitching:

"Our customized benchmarking reports tackle more than 140 metrics in three critical areas (click for samples): human capital, health care, and retirement and welfare. And if you need granularity, we’ve got it. Customize your data by workforce size, industry, geography, profit level, or any number of key criteria.

When it comes to crucial decisions involving cost-per-hire, turnover rates, employer health-care contributions, 401K participation and more — you can’t afford to make uninformed guesses. Fortunately, you can afford the reliable and timely data provided by SHRM Benchmarking.

Unlike other services that charge literally thousands for their data, our reports start at a budget-friendly member price of only $395. As an added value, you can earn up to 20 PHR/SPHR recertification credits by incorporating SHRM data into your job duties."

I'm all for capitalism - thus the name of my blog site.  However, SHRM doesn't exist to be solely capitalist - they exist to serve the membership.

So, let me get this straight:  SHRM Members obviously provide most of the data.  SHRM trades on its name and position as the HR organization of choice to get free participation from others.  

Then they charge members for the database (2-3 times the cost of a membership), and also tweak you by providing free recert credits to anyone who buys.

I love that type of play for any "for-profit" organization.  I like it less for a non-profit organization where I haven't signed in to the website in.... I can't tell you when.

Thanks for the offer SHRM.  I think I'll pass.  But it's a good reminder of what I get for my money.

You watch the trailer and tell me, Sparky...

(Email Subscribers click through for video)

What I like:

-Jason Bateman, Charlie Day (It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia) and Jason Sudeikis as the likable losers...

-Jennifer Aniston as the harassing, man-eating boss who harasses Day...

-Kevin Spacey and Colin Farrell as the additional terrible bosses...

-Jamie Foxx as the "murder consultant"... (name in the movie:  Mother[you know what] Jones)...

What I don't like:

-Trailer didn't blow me away... Aren't they supposed to give you the best stuff in the trailer?

To be fair, if you go back and look at the Office Space trailer, I'm not sure we would have picked up on the subtleties that made it the classic that it is.  The hope here is that Bateman and Day do tons of subtle, understated stuff that couldn't possibly be reflected in a trailer and it's a classic.

Opens July 8, 2011....

Ever recruited for a position before the incumbent that's currently in the position knows there's a problem?  Welcome to the big boy/big girl world of workforce planning, executive search and being a talent pool recruiter.

Most of us have been asked to do this.  It seems wrong.  It came to mind when I heard that the AP was calling around to refresh their pre-prepared quotes for a Steve Jobs obituary.  More from the New York Post:

"Sources said Apple chiefs were furious to find out AP reporters had been calling top Hollywood studio and record-label executives, seeking quotes to refresh their obit on Jobs, who has been out on medical leave for several months but will join the keynote at the WWDC event in San Francisco.

Calls are believed to have been placed in the last two weeks to honchos at Universal Studios, Warner Pictures and record labels Sony, EMI and Warner Music.  

A source told Page Six, "Apple found out about it and asked everyone involved not to give any quotes, although most of those called had already refused."  One person the AP approached told us, "I understand they have a job to do, but it seemed a little ill-timed and macabre."

Of course, when someone finds out you're recruiting for a position that's not yet vacant, it also seems a little macabre.  Especially to those you're recruiting to replace.  

There are two lines of thought to help you feel better when you have to recruit for a position that's not yet vacant.  Also known as "rationalizations", this is how you sleep at night and also look in the mirror in the morning and not hate yourself:

1. The higher the position, the more full contact rules apply.  If they don't know there's a performance problem, execs certainly expect there to be some daggers out if things aren't going well.  They're also probably going to get paid at the time of exit.  You're just the assassin being asked to climb up on the building to do the shooting.

2. For mid-level positions and below, you're just building a talent pool.  Tell candidates that.  You might have multiple positions available, which means the low performing incumbent turned her performance around and can now stay.  You're a hero because you sourced ahead of the curve, which makes total sense now since the company wants to keep the incumbent and ADD a position.  

Of course, the AP reporters seeking quotes on the death of Jobs had their own rationalizations as well.  Do what it takes to look in the mirror and feel good if you're asked to recruit to replace an incumbent after you've seen her whistling in the hallways - on the same day.

You've got a job to do. These days, that's not a bad thing.

You read enough about jerks in the workplace and "no-jerk rules", and you've probably come to the conclusion that the ranter and/or the screamer are the most destructive teammates you can have in the workplace.

Not me.  I think the folks who don't give you all the information are the most dangerous.  That's the person who will smile at you, then fail to give you the information needed for you or the team to thrive.  They're more dangerous because you can't tell who they are in the workplace unless you really pay attention...

I'll call them the "Information Hoarder".  Some folks call them non-collaborative, and they exist everywhere...

From Steve Roesler at All Things Workplace:

"I just spent 3 hours coaching a client who is now forced to deal with a highly intelligent, high-performing manager who isn't viewed as collaborative. By anyone. No one at any of their worldwide locations gave him decent feedback on teamwork and collaboration. And this has been happening for a few years. (He continues to achieve all of the goals set out for him--and no one dislikes him personally.)

I sat down and spoke with the manager some months ago about these perceptions and what that might mean to his career. He understood that people didn't see him as collaborative. His take on it is that they are universally wrong. He communicates when he believes it's necessary. I told him that he had to simply initiate more, share more information--even if it didn't make sense to him--and mend some strained relationships with those who thought he was actually hiding something. He listened, gave intellectual rebuttals for why that didn't make sense, and chose not to do anything differently.

His management career is finished...at least with his current employer. He'll probably have a shot at being an individual contributor in a specific discipline; but upward mobility is no longer a possibility."

The Information Hoarder holds a lot of data, but likes to keep it to themselves for the sake of power.  The managers at your company will often avoid confrontation with this flavor of jerk so they can make it through the next month or quarter.

I once knew an information hoarder so focused on controlling access to information that he/she refused to share an existing customer list with new sales reps.  The solution if the new sales reps needed to contact an existing customer?  The hoarder farmed out the necessary name and number, one contact at a time as needed.  They also gave it verbally, refusing to email or write it down.

That's control and hoarding at its best.  Trying to get info out of the information hoarder?  Bring a lot of questions, because their logic tells them that if you didn't ask, they aren't lying - even if they're thinking of questions you should be asking while you're talking to them.

Nice....

It's one idea for the topic of turnover in human captial, human resources and workforce planning, but it's a good one if it applies.  

I was sitting with a client on Thursday talking about employee turnover.  I mentioned that if they have a traditional budget process, one way he could guarantee that line executives really pay attention to employee turnover was to investigate what's known as the "Turnover Factor" in the budget model used by his company.

What's a "Turnover Factor' when it comes to budgets?  A turnover factor projects the amount of turnover a company/division/department is going to have during the budget year, then automatically reduces payroll by the appropriate amount.  The logic used when putting a turnover factor in the budget is that those funds should be unavailable in the budget since there won't actually be PEOPLE in those jobs (for that time period).

The effect of the Turnover Factor?  Your compensation budget gets a lot tighter, and you'll have a lot more variances to explain month to month.  And that kind of stinks... But it's actually the right way to do it from a business perspective...

Additionally, the Turnover Factor puts a LOT of pressure on the pay-for-performance system.  Have a lot of managers who have a hard time telling low-performing employees they're not doing that hot with no raise or a limited increase?  A turnover factor means you are dealing with a truly zero-sum game.  For every dollar your manager gives to a low performer, he won't be able to give that dollar to the star. 

Especially if you have a Turnover Factor - because there's no built in slush fund.  Budget 4% for increases?  With a Turnover Factor in play, that's exactly what you have - with your active employees.  Without the TF in play, you've got some wiggle room from a budget perspective.

No turnover factor means less attention to turnover - it might actually be welcomed because of the wiggle room it allows for the operator if they're missing revenue targets.

However - put a turnover factor in place each year and only allow it to be adjusted based on annual results - and I bet you'd see a lot more attention to turnover from your operators.