The recession of the ’80s drove many companies to downsize entire departments as a quick-fix response to the economic slump. Prior to this time, mass layoffs in general industry sectors were somewhat of a rarity — it was something one only read about in the automotive or natural resource sectors. As this phenomenon took hold across the country, tens of thousands of people from all levels of the general workforce found themselves searching for work.
While layoffs might temporarily boost a company’s bottom line and stock value, callous termination practices and bare-bones support often lead to more damage and higher costs in the longer term. In the benchmark case, Wallace v. TD Bank 1981, Ontario Justice Osborne set the bar for acceptable termination practices and expected support. Employers then turned to the consulting, recruiting and search firm industries for a solution and as a result “outplacement” was born.
Career firms, substitute infrastructure
Traditional outplacement provided recently released employees with the work-like environment they were accustomed to and couldn’t get while in a job search from home. Readily accessible facilities were quickly established by several firms providing this new market segment with plush group and private offices, extensive administrative support services, fax machines, telephones, word processors, and of course, workshops and coaching to help demystify the challenge of finding a new job.
Motivated by the fear of litigation and wanting to “do the right thing” for terminated employees, companies shelled out big bucks for outplacement programs that often extended from a few months to an entire year.
At the time, the process was brand new to almost everyone involved. In the aftermath, employers suddenly realized how much they had spent on outplacement fees and began to look for alternatives.
Employers recognized market downturns were appearing in regular 10-year cycles, and searched for less expensive ways to still treat laid off employees well, but at a lower cost. As the number of outplacement firms increased and some individuals were now experiencing layoffs for the second time in their careers, the process of searching for work lost some of its mystery. Program costs began to tumble as well and employers demanded a better sense of cost versus delivered value.
In-house support
Several large organizations, most notably the financial institutions and some energy providers, established in-house support programs administered by internal human resource departments. Although in-house efforts were well-intentioned and provided soon-to-be terminated employees with the basic fundamentals of job search, most were deemed as being successful only by those who ran and managed them, not by the employees who attended.
In-house programs suffer from a fundamental weaknesses — employee perceptions.
Even when there is ample warning of a pending layoff, many individuals still experience shock, anger and denial — emotions almost always run high. Most of the in-house programs failed to adequately deal with employees’ perception of accepting help from the same entity that took their jobs and security away. These programs also failed to build a relationship of trust with employees, and for the most part, were considered to be on the same level as regular, company-sponsored training.
For the energy providers, logistics played an even more crucial role. Laid-off employees were scattered across the province, often living in very remote locations. A centralized help centre was far from both the employees’ reach and from providing any significant help locally. It was expected that the regional community resources and Human Resources Development Canada would pick up the slack.
Banks made “people loans”
A very limited number of progressive firms tried yet another and perhaps more innovative approach to helping employees. Companies — where corporate culture was highly committed to employees — solicited replacement jobs with neighbouring firms that were less affected by business downturns. Employers would “loan out” key individuals under a contract arrangement until the company’s fortunes improved and the employees could be brought back. American ice-cream makers Ben & Jerry’s, organized one of the most notable programs of this kind. It was however, highly demanding for the company to run and in retrospect, appeared to be more of a community-based marketing success than an outplacement support model for others to follow.
Internet changed job search dynamics
Enter technology. The introduction of the Internet into the mainstream market has brought user-friendly technology and unlimited access to information into practically everyone’s home.
Work search, resume writing, company research, all these benefits are no longer offered only by outplacement firms. These are services available to anyone anywhere at the click of a mouse. The many job posting boards and services offered by sites such as Workopolis.com and Monster.ca have effectively cut out the middle-person from the work search equation, providing all the necessary tools, and personally empowering the job seeker.
While former executives still show a preference for a posh, downtown, surrogate office, middle management and front-line employees are powered by a different set of needs.
Although the majority of service providers are located in city centres, a score of outplacement candidates live in suburban areas. The cost of commuting is simply not offset by the provision of a group office and a computer terminal. Most people have a more comfortable setting and better facilities at home.
Several traditional and some new outplacement providers are currently tinkering with Internet delivered job search concepts. So, in theory, a company would sponsor a former employee who would work exclusively from home, logging on to his service provider and self-administering his own program. This alternative to traditional outplacement solves several problems, but most importantly it cuts costs for the employer.
Most programs miss “human factor”
There is a problem with the majority of these self-administered programs — they are missing the “human factor.” When someone loses a job, they hurt and are in a great deal of emotional pain. A computer is about as sensitive and sympathetic as a vacuum cleaner or refrigerator.
However, some outplacement specialists are using a new hybrid approach, combining the efficiencies of technology with face-to-face personal coaching.
For example, a professional outplacement counsellor can be in attendance at the termination to help the individual cope and will then meet again with the terminated employee to help design the program direction and set the benchmarks for the relationship.
“We often see people at local coffee shops as we have found it to be more productive to meet in a ‘neutral’ setting close to the client’s home. They feel comfortable and we can converse with each other in a more candid and informal manner,” says Michael Claener, a principal with eNRG, a Toronto-based consulting company.
The employee can have access to around-the-clock Web-based and telephone support, and is encouraged to at least start working on a resume within 48 hours. “The first 48 hours is the most crucial,” says Claener. That’s when panic and anger usually set in, and it’s the time when the terminated employee is most likely to hire a lawyer and challenge the company’s decision. We found by producing at least a starter resume, the individual is challenged to actively move forward.”
There should not be any limitation placed upon the length of the program. Rather, counsellors should support the job search until the person becomes re-employed, Claener says.
When a terminated individual regains employment quickly, litigation challenges drop significantly and the “survivor” employees (who probably still remain in close contact with the terminee) are much happier, more stable and productive.
Bob Delaney is the owner of CM Solutions, a consultancy offering CareerMap Outplacement Services. He is also a professor with the School of Management at Seneca College in Toronto. He may be contacted at (905) 473-4098, [email protected] or visit www.careermap.ca.
While layoffs might temporarily boost a company’s bottom line and stock value, callous termination practices and bare-bones support often lead to more damage and higher costs in the longer term. In the benchmark case, Wallace v. TD Bank 1981, Ontario Justice Osborne set the bar for acceptable termination practices and expected support. Employers then turned to the consulting, recruiting and search firm industries for a solution and as a result “outplacement” was born.
Career firms, substitute infrastructure
Traditional outplacement provided recently released employees with the work-like environment they were accustomed to and couldn’t get while in a job search from home. Readily accessible facilities were quickly established by several firms providing this new market segment with plush group and private offices, extensive administrative support services, fax machines, telephones, word processors, and of course, workshops and coaching to help demystify the challenge of finding a new job.
Motivated by the fear of litigation and wanting to “do the right thing” for terminated employees, companies shelled out big bucks for outplacement programs that often extended from a few months to an entire year.
At the time, the process was brand new to almost everyone involved. In the aftermath, employers suddenly realized how much they had spent on outplacement fees and began to look for alternatives.
Employers recognized market downturns were appearing in regular 10-year cycles, and searched for less expensive ways to still treat laid off employees well, but at a lower cost. As the number of outplacement firms increased and some individuals were now experiencing layoffs for the second time in their careers, the process of searching for work lost some of its mystery. Program costs began to tumble as well and employers demanded a better sense of cost versus delivered value.
In-house support
Several large organizations, most notably the financial institutions and some energy providers, established in-house support programs administered by internal human resource departments. Although in-house efforts were well-intentioned and provided soon-to-be terminated employees with the basic fundamentals of job search, most were deemed as being successful only by those who ran and managed them, not by the employees who attended.
In-house programs suffer from a fundamental weaknesses — employee perceptions.
Even when there is ample warning of a pending layoff, many individuals still experience shock, anger and denial — emotions almost always run high. Most of the in-house programs failed to adequately deal with employees’ perception of accepting help from the same entity that took their jobs and security away. These programs also failed to build a relationship of trust with employees, and for the most part, were considered to be on the same level as regular, company-sponsored training.
For the energy providers, logistics played an even more crucial role. Laid-off employees were scattered across the province, often living in very remote locations. A centralized help centre was far from both the employees’ reach and from providing any significant help locally. It was expected that the regional community resources and Human Resources Development Canada would pick up the slack.
Banks made “people loans”
A very limited number of progressive firms tried yet another and perhaps more innovative approach to helping employees. Companies — where corporate culture was highly committed to employees — solicited replacement jobs with neighbouring firms that were less affected by business downturns. Employers would “loan out” key individuals under a contract arrangement until the company’s fortunes improved and the employees could be brought back. American ice-cream makers Ben & Jerry’s, organized one of the most notable programs of this kind. It was however, highly demanding for the company to run and in retrospect, appeared to be more of a community-based marketing success than an outplacement support model for others to follow.
Internet changed job search dynamics
Enter technology. The introduction of the Internet into the mainstream market has brought user-friendly technology and unlimited access to information into practically everyone’s home.
Work search, resume writing, company research, all these benefits are no longer offered only by outplacement firms. These are services available to anyone anywhere at the click of a mouse. The many job posting boards and services offered by sites such as Workopolis.com and Monster.ca have effectively cut out the middle-person from the work search equation, providing all the necessary tools, and personally empowering the job seeker.
While former executives still show a preference for a posh, downtown, surrogate office, middle management and front-line employees are powered by a different set of needs.
Although the majority of service providers are located in city centres, a score of outplacement candidates live in suburban areas. The cost of commuting is simply not offset by the provision of a group office and a computer terminal. Most people have a more comfortable setting and better facilities at home.
Several traditional and some new outplacement providers are currently tinkering with Internet delivered job search concepts. So, in theory, a company would sponsor a former employee who would work exclusively from home, logging on to his service provider and self-administering his own program. This alternative to traditional outplacement solves several problems, but most importantly it cuts costs for the employer.
Most programs miss “human factor”
There is a problem with the majority of these self-administered programs — they are missing the “human factor.” When someone loses a job, they hurt and are in a great deal of emotional pain. A computer is about as sensitive and sympathetic as a vacuum cleaner or refrigerator.
However, some outplacement specialists are using a new hybrid approach, combining the efficiencies of technology with face-to-face personal coaching.
For example, a professional outplacement counsellor can be in attendance at the termination to help the individual cope and will then meet again with the terminated employee to help design the program direction and set the benchmarks for the relationship.
“We often see people at local coffee shops as we have found it to be more productive to meet in a ‘neutral’ setting close to the client’s home. They feel comfortable and we can converse with each other in a more candid and informal manner,” says Michael Claener, a principal with eNRG, a Toronto-based consulting company.
The employee can have access to around-the-clock Web-based and telephone support, and is encouraged to at least start working on a resume within 48 hours. “The first 48 hours is the most crucial,” says Claener. That’s when panic and anger usually set in, and it’s the time when the terminated employee is most likely to hire a lawyer and challenge the company’s decision. We found by producing at least a starter resume, the individual is challenged to actively move forward.”
There should not be any limitation placed upon the length of the program. Rather, counsellors should support the job search until the person becomes re-employed, Claener says.
When a terminated individual regains employment quickly, litigation challenges drop significantly and the “survivor” employees (who probably still remain in close contact with the terminee) are much happier, more stable and productive.
Bob Delaney is the owner of CM Solutions, a consultancy offering CareerMap Outplacement Services. He is also a professor with the School of Management at Seneca College in Toronto. He may be contacted at (905) 473-4098, [email protected] or visit www.careermap.ca.
