Once upon a time there was a company that had an assembly manufacturing plant in Malaysia. It had been there for 20+ years and some of the original employees still worked there. Overall, the average tenure was about 10 years.
As with most Asian manufacturing plants the assemblers were women. It was a widely held belief (still is) that women did assembly tasks better than men because they had tiny fingers and were better suited mentally to work on simple repetitive tasks. Hmmm. . . These women had established close friendships with their co-workers --- and many had worked side-by-side in the same group for years. Each group had a standing daily ritual of having morning and afternoon “tea breaks” with their supervisor.
One day the Managing Director (MD) of the operation called an all-employee meeting. It was a party affair with local “goodies” provided. He announced that part of the plant was going to be re-modeled. New equipment was going to be installed and some of the manufacturing processes would change.
These changes would require assemblers with higher level skills than currently existed. The big news? Drumroll! Current workers would have first “dibs” on the new jobs before outsiders and would receive necessary skills training. Another drumroll! Everyone taking a new job would receive higher pay! What a deal!
The MD was unprepared for and disappointed by the assemblers’ response. They had no desire to learn new skills. Many were in their mid-late 40’s and didn’t want to re-train close to their retirement (mandatory retirement age is 60 years in Malaysia but many women retire much earlier). Higher pay would be nice but it wasn’t a “showstopper.”
The real issue was that if they took the new jobs they wouldn't be working close together in groups anymore. They didn’t want that. Their work stations were their “home” and their co-workers were their “family.”
If management had foreseen the neutral/negative reaction they could have chosen a more appropriate way to communicate the change. Perhaps it would have been better to “low-key” it --- make it a simple announcement as part of a regular supervisor/employee meeting. The “hype” of an all-employee meeting was the wrong approach.
This is a classic example of management not knowing what motivates their employees. Motivation was not, as they had thought, the opportunity for learning new skills and more pay. Although the assemblers took pride in their work and performed well, it was long-time friendships that were the motivator. That’s what kept them at the company. That’s why turnover was so low.
Maybe a quarterly picnic or party would be a better way to recognize and reward these assemblers. Would it cost? Yes --- but think about the money the company had not had to spend due to years of low attrition and very little training expense.
In the end, the assemblers were happy to keep the status quo and management took comfort in having learned an important lesson.
And . . . everyone lived happily ever after.
The end.
Do you have a similar story to tell?
Jacque Vilet, President of Vilet International, has over 20 years’ experience in Global Human Resources with major multinationals such as Intel, National Semiconductor and Seagate Technology. She has managed both local/ in-country national and expatriate programs and has been an expat twice during her career. Her true love is working with local national issues. Jacque has the following certifications: CCP, GPHR, HCS and SWP as well as a B.S. and M.S in Psychology and an MBA. She belongs to SHRM, Human Capital Institute and World at Work. Jacque has been a speaker in the U.S., Asia and Europe, and is a regular contributor to various HR and talent management publications.
I probably do have a similar story (or stories) to tell, but regrettably very few of them end with, And . . . everyone lived happily ever after.
This was a great topic on the occasional (perhaps better characterized as 'frequent') instances when management is convinced they know what are the "interests" and therefore the motivation of their employees - when they may not really understand them very well (or at all). Good one Jacque.
Posted by: Chris Dobyns | 06/04/2014 at 11:47 AM
Thanks Chris. BTW he was an American expat ---- what can I say!!!
Posted by: Jacque Vilet | 06/04/2014 at 12:38 PM
I should qualify my comment. Some expats integrate themselves very well in their local operation ---- they listen, learn and adapt. Many, however, in my experience (and I have been one) do not take the time to know the operation much less the employees. Of course, that being said, they are the ones that likely do the same when in the U.S. So . . .
Posted by: Jacque Vilet | 06/04/2014 at 01:13 PM
Most of us probably have many similar stories. Some cases are unavoidable conflicts, however. Maybe I'll share an interesting one where the US domestic workforce was split between those who were admittedly money-motivated and those preferring social rewards.
Posted by: E. James (Jim) Brennan | 06/04/2014 at 03:27 PM
Pat Zingheim and I were working to develop a 'gainsharing' plan for a 'safety razor company' in a very small town in China. The company had been purchased by the China 'arm' of a large US company. The Plant Manager had a problem he wanted fixed before we implemented the new compensation plan. He had a serious problem . . . male workers were absent on odd number days and females were gone on even number days. He did not know how to "fix' the problem.
One of the benefits of the plant was a shower every second day. We noticed that females took showers on odd number days and males on even number days. We suggested splitting the showers so both males and females could shower every day. That fixed the problem and all were happy.
Perhaps that is the source of 'work-life' benefits???
Posted by: Jay Schuster | 06/04/2014 at 03:59 PM
That just proves that workers everywhere are ingenious. There's more than one way to skin a "rat"! (I can't bring myself to say "cat)
Posted by: Jacque Vilet | 06/04/2014 at 04:15 PM
Great story, Jacque, and a great point made that I hope more managers take to heart. Too many managers think of employees as either impersonal cells in a spreadsheet, or as automotons having the same opinions as the manager. If you don't know your employees, and don't watch and listen to them, then you're going to step in cow dung (so to speak) over and over again.
Posted by: Chuck Csizmar | 06/12/2014 at 09:50 AM
Thanks Chuck.
Posted by: Jacque Vilet | 06/12/2014 at 01:36 PM