|
|
|
How Human Factors Factor In
HR pro Pellerin promotes people power
|
Business New Haven
1/19/2004
By: BNH
|
Susan Pellerin of Milford has been director of human resources for the Shelton-based architecture and design firm Fletcher-Thompson Inc., and its 150-some employees, for five years. She spoke with BNH on January 7 about her rapidly evolving field of endeavor.
You don't come from a 'traditional' HR background. How did you get into the field?
In 1988 I joined two other people who were developing a medical-device manufacturing company called Bio-Plexus in Vernon. Since there was just the president the CEO and myself, we did everything. [Pellerin has a science background as well as a master's in education.] So I handled all the administrative functions associated with the firm while the president was developing the product and the CEO was developing the financing. When the company finally began growing, it was clear that human resources would become an integral part of that growth, so I took over that function. In 1993 I joined an organization called the Society of Human Resources Management and became a program chair for the greater Hartford chapter. There I really developed an understanding of human resources from the ground up. In 1998 Bio-Plexus got sold. I was running my own HR consulting and career-development company when I got recruited to Fletcher-Thompson.
How does Fletcher-Thompson approach the interviewing and selection process?
Our approach to recruitment, hiring and retention of employees is to recognize that we at all times are looking for the best and the brightest in any opening - whether for an architect or administrative support or an engineer. The position is not the issue; the issue is our need for that person to excel in whatever occupation they have chosen. We have an extensive application process and we interview a minimum of two times. We want [prospective] employees to see that our interviewing process is a two-way street, where they are attempting to sell themselves to us, and in turn Fletcher-Thompson is creating an ideal location for them.
Many organizations do a fair job of identifying good people to hire, but blow it by not having a formal 'launching' mechanism, thereby souring the relationship from Day One. How do you approach this?
We have a orientation process that is pretty formalized. Their first day here employees will of course spend time doing all of the necessary HR paperwork, as well as [having explained to them] benefits and getting a card-key to open the door. They then spend a good portion of the day with our IT department making sure they are integrated [and that] communications can flow to and from them. That's one of our most critical areas: to make sure their computer systems are working, their phones are working, they're part of the e-mail group. Then we take them around and introduce them to each person. And we make an announcement that we have a new employee. They're then given to someone in their department who takes them to lunch that day so they begin to be integrated on a personal level as well. Beyond that, each department has its own orientation [process] to integrate them into whatever team is working on a particular project. Then we check back frequently to assess how and what they are doing.
In an increasingly bottom line-oriented economy, many organizations increasingly treat their workers as commodities, and the idea of 'job security' today seems quaint and old-fashioned. Is this a swing of the pendulum, or a permanent change in the employment landscape?
I don't think it's a permanent evolution because I believe it's a changing environment. Technology and globalization have created opportunities for companies to integrate the use of their intellectual capital. It's certainly true that workers aren't going to work for companies for 40 years any more. But I'm not sure it's going to mean that as you job-hop, that your position doesn't evolve as well. Companies are beginning to expect that the [useful] life of an employee is probably going to be ten years or less. The future will be an integrated office, if you will, and an integrated career-development program. Here's an example: We have intern-architects who might work here for three or four or five years as interns, go out and become registered [architects] and then feel as though they need to work at another firm to see what it's like out there. We often say to them, 'Your seat is warm; when you're ready, come on back.' For us it's a wonderful process, because often that's exactly what happens. This year alone we have had four people return.
What do you see as overall trends in employment levels and salaries, which have been trending down?
I don't think salaries are trending down; I think they are holding steady. They are always market-driven. Certainly in a technical environment such as architecture and engineering, they clearly are geographically benchmarked.
A major HR issue is rising benefit costs, especially health insurance. How can companies begin to reclaim some control over those costs?
Fletcher-Thompson has hit upon what I believe is a cornerstone of getting a handle on health-care costs, and that is with Health Reimbursement Accounts [HRAs], with consumer-driven health care. I firmly believe that no one should come between you and your physician. When we allowed those services to be paid for by someone else is when we lost ground and lost control. Fletcher-Thompson has saved a significant amount of money this year on our health care by instituting HRAs, and we gave control of health care back to our employees.
How do those work?
An HRA is set up by the employer, who sets aside a specific amount of money for each employee to pay for specific items - pharmacy co-pays, or deductibles or co-pays on the medical side. So the employer [makes available] a fixed amount of money until [the employee's] insurance kicks in to pay those co-pays. If you use it all up, then you begin to pay those [costs] out of pocket. So far it is working very well at our company.
Outsourcing all kinds of job functions seems a well-established trend. Is it fulfilling its promising of lowering overhead and headaches, or has it inflicted its own set of problems on organizations?
There has been a trend to outsource certain functions, the most common of which is payroll to places like ADP or Paycheck. Another common area is benefits administration. One of the things companies need to [do] when considering outsourcing is a full cost-benefit analysis as well as [determining] what kind of control you need over that process. There are companies that outsource and then discover they have issues so they bring the [functions] back in-house. But most companies that outsource payroll or benefits administration do so wisely because those are core processes that really require expertise, and you don't often have that expertise in-house, especially in smaller companies - say, less than 500 employees. You're better off probably letting experts deal with those issues. But you do need to do a cost-benefit analysis - and it should [take into account] more than just dollars. It should include the need for expertise and the need for control. I think HR professionals are moving in the direction of being able to do those kinds of analyses. Five years from now the majority of HR professionals will have a handle on what Return on Investment [ROI] means, and how to conduct an analysis to determine the best [HR] processes for their companies.
|
Go FirstGo PreviousGo
NextGo LastGo
to Index
|
|
