HRM
February 12, 2016

Managerial Promotions Formula & The HRM Model

The article that is the basis for this assignment, provides a framework to analyze the different aspects that managers and other executives use to promote employees in an organization. From this author’s understanding, this article for this assignment was written to dispel “disconnects [that] occur in part due to differing view of why one was promoted and other were not.” (Service 2008). This article also proffered a revised formula consisting of 30 factors that, though not dispositive when taken individually, with a totality of the factors, can determine why someone is and is not hired. This article and its authors, also present the idea that the 30 factors, moderates, and other dependent variables can be used in conjunction with the HRM Model in order to produce the best work environment and promoting structure possible. Some of the 30 factors presented by this article are: hygiene factors, mindsets, past job performance, having an influential mentor or sponsor, etc., that are considered independent variables (IV) that are essential to a promotion. In addition to the 30 independent variables, they are moderated by things such as industry, timing, level of position, and location-culture-internal and external. When a manager or person in charge of considering a promotion, by applying the “promotions as a function of formula” principles, both the person being considered and the one considering can put themselves in a better position and understanding of the ability to be promoted by understanding these concepts. In addition, this author believes that the author of the article made an important note that there is no such thing as a magic bullet, or quick fix to being promoted or promoting an individual. Promotion takes understanding of the totality of the circumstances provided by this article and the subsequent research to truly understand the promotion process. Finally, because the author of the article states that the factors can be analyzed and applied to each of the HRM Model, the factors will be analyzed in conjunction with the HRM Model. The first overarching category that will be analyzed in light of the information provided in this reading is HMR Model #10 that provides in pertinent part: “[h]ave HR functions insure hiring, training, rewarding and promoting.” It stands to reason that when one is looking for employment, no matter the amount of degrees that one has amassed throughout their educational experience, one must be trained a certain way to understand the way the company operates. This training process also involves the idea that there will be uniformity in the product or service, which is generally a staple of larger companies. However, there has been a ‘recent’ article published in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) that states for one reason or another, companies are foregoing the initial training process because of costs. (Weber, 2014). From personal experience, working for different large corporations, this author can attest to the fact that employers are cutting this costs with the hopes and expectations that one already has a foundational knowledge that can be leveraged to learn on the job. With this understanding, it leads one to the conclusion that this duty then falls to the employee, at least the one who is seeking a promotion in the future, to take the initiative and begin to learn about the job during and after work hours. This goal can be effectuated in numerous ways. In applying some of the 30 IV set forth by Dr. Service, one can effectuate this goal by having a replacement for yourself, having an influential mentor or sponsor, and (maybe more obviously) continuing education. As proffered in the reading assignment, one of factors that effects whether someone is going to be promoted, hired, or even fired is the educational level one has achieved. In the modern era of employment, numerous factors are considered, but one seems to stand out amongst the rest: degrees and the achievements in ascertaining the degrees. In today society, due to a large number of factors, the college degree is the equivalent of the high school diploma from the 1970’s. (Farrington, 2014). During and after the Great Recession, hiring practices became more and more competitive. This is where the importance of having an advanced degree, tough not too advanced for the market, comes into play. For example, if two people were to apply for the same job, say a manager of some business, a person who excelled in an MBA program would outcompete the other candidate who just has a business degree. Earning these advanced degrees can tend to show a candidate’s dedication to a particular field and also a more thorough, though theoretical, understanding of the complex issues within a particular field. Yet, the issue of the cost benefit of the advanced degrees has come under scrutiny with the ever increasing rise in tuition prices. Though economists generally hold that people with an advanced degree could earn more than $3 million dollars over someone with just a bachelor’s degree, it begs the question of if the cost of incurring debt to achieve the advanced degree is worth it. This author is of the opinion that so long as you ascertain an advanced degree that does not make you over qualified for the market (e.g. having a Ph.D in accounting when most Big 4 firms only require a MAcc). As studies have shown, in the current employment climate of the post recession United States, 20 percent of the open job positions require an advanced degree, but only 11 percent of the American population actually hold advance degrees. Additionally, economists recognize substantial salary premiums and economic benefits of holding an advance degree in a person’s field of study. (Roy, 2014). Looking purely at supply and demand, there is clearly not only a demand and lacking supply, this could lead to one having greater initial leverage with a starting salary and bonus for ascertaining the advanced degree.
Despite the potential benefits on the front end of having an advanced degree, and even an advanced degree from one of the best universities, it is not only the degree that will get an employee the corner office. This is where on-the-job development becomes a factor. As presented by Dr. Service from a cited study, “Getting to the corner office has more to do with leadership talent and a drive for success than it does with having an undergraduate degree from a prestigious university. . . . What counts most . . . is a person’s capacity to seize opportunities.” (Hymowitz, 2006, p. B1). This requires an employee to further develop as an individual and an employee. This means more on-the-job training, furthering one’s relationships with co-workers, and continual education. Using the legal field as an example, the Alabama Bar Association requires that in order to maintain your license, an attorney must attend at minimum 12 hours of CLE (Continuing Legal Education). At these events, not only does one have the ability to learn about certain areas of the law in more depth and scope, but also develop relationships with other attorneys that can help further one’s career. However, as the reading presents to this author and other readers, this is only one of the parts that is required to being promoted. Another factor the coincides under the HRM Model is that it is important to “having an influential mentor or sponsor.” Drawing from personal experience, this author understands the importance of having someone, especially within the company and/or division you are in, that you can learn from and look up to. In the terms of employment, it is integral for someone who is a new hire to get to develop relationships with individuals in the workplace. From this author’s experience, it is prohibitive for someone to not form at least an acquaintance level relationship with those at work. This is because those reviewing that employee, will more than likely view this individual as not being dedicated to the work and does not care about the company or a promotion in general. However, a mentor or sponsor in your division is a great cure to all the problems faced by new employees in the modern era. The first cure that a mentor can provide to an individual is to help with the training and acclimation process of the new company. As stated earlier, companies in the modern era seem to be withdrawing from the standard training practices of previous eras. Yet, with being the new person and a mentor to someone, this can cure this problem by having someone ‘on your side’ with who you can ask questions and they can show you the intricacies of the job. An additional benefit from having a mentor when you are a new hire, or not even a new hire in this instance, is that the mentor or sponsor can help you develop relationships with your co-workers and others who may be reviewing you for a promotion. This is integral for promotion for many reasons. The primary reason is that if people don’t know you, you more than likely will not be promoted. Additionally, if someone does know of you and your work, you having a favorable relationship with that person could translate into a favorable review and a greater potential for a promotion. This is also assuming that you have good work product, etc. Another important of having a mentor, that most students in undergraduate work may not understand, is that jobs in corporate culture are not as ‘cut-and-dry’ as school may make them seem. Each company may use different software, have different methods of doing things, ect., that make it difficult to do a job without the assistance of someone. A mentor can be a potential cure to this problem. That is because they, with the understanding that there is an open line of communication, they can show you the intricacies that one could not figure out on their own. Yet, having a mentor may not be enough for you to progress up the ‘corporate ladder’ in any particular company. In addition to the importance to having an influential mentor and/or sponsor, it is also important for you to become a mentor or sponsor for another employee. This author is of the opinion that it is a well understood principle that one should “pay if forward” when it comes to being a mentor. From this author’s experience, employees or people in general will give the excuse that they do not have the right skills, accomplishments, etc. to be an appropriate mentor to another individual. However, as stated by H.L. Mencken, “[t]he best teacher is not the one who knows most but the one who is most capable of reducing knowledge to that simple compound of the obvious and wonderful.” (Lomenick, 2013). To further the words of H.L. Mencken, being a mentor does not always mean having the right answers or knowing what to do in a certain situation; it is about taking interest in the company and the person you are mentoring. Yet, this is not to undercut the time and energy it takes in becoming a mentor. From the very beginning, this author believes that it must be the right fit for both the mentor and mentee. This means the mentor must believe in the ability of the mentee and see potential in him, no matter how much of a “diamond in the rough” the mentee may be. On the converse, the mentee must be conformable with the mentor in the terms of being able to let his guard down to ask questions and further understand the roles of that the mentor and mentee play in the company. The issue of open lines of communication between the mentor and mentee should mirror the aforementioned illustration, where mentors can help show one the intricacies of the job. In addition, it would benefit the mentor/mentee relationship if the mentee was also open-minded to the ideas of the mentor and different ways of accomplishing the same goal and also compassionate about the work they are doing. Finally, this author is of the opinion that both the mentor and mentee must care about the relationship they are forming in order to better effectuate the goals of each. (Smith, 2013). To clarify, this author does not define the word “care” in the context of something that arises to or exceeds a platonic relationship. In this definition, the word “care” should be construed in the context of caring about the mutualistic work-relationship and that this mutualistic relationship will help both parties ascend the corporate ladder. These goals should be for the mentor to teach and for the mentee to learn, in order to help the mentor get promoted and the mentee take the mentor’s place. Coinciding with having an influential mentor, it is also integral to promotion that one have a replacement ready. One of the factors, as eluded to in the previous section, that can lead to a promotion is to have someone ready to take your place. It would also be more beneficial to you, as the mentor, to ensure that the person who would replace you is very versed in the duties of your position. However, for most individuals, mentoring someone or training someone to take their place seems counterintuitive. This mode of thought is very prohibitive not only to the person who is a mentor, but also the company. That is because, for the mentor, it is restricting the time frame for which they can be promoted. For the company, it can have a back logging effect on their hiring and firing processes. The problem that most people have with training a successor, more than likely in a mentor capacity, is that they fear if they train this person, the trainee will outperform the trainer and then the trainer will be out of a job. The fault with this mode of thought is that if a person desires to move up the corporate ladder, there must be someone to take their place. And if there is no one on had to take their place and there must be another hiring process from outside, they can be held back or passed over because they are the only person who can adequately perform their current job. (Diamond, 2006). This essentially, whether directly or indirectly, adopts the “ready replacement” policy. The overarching benefit to this is that if someone can immediately step into the shoes of someone who has been promoted, will save the company time and money on hiring and will not lose money on slow services or production. As such, this author has recently experienced in the process of legal hiring, succession planning is an integral part of this “replacement ready” policy. Succession planning is commonly defined as a process for identifying and developing internal people (employees) with the potential to fill key business leadership roles in a given company. On a more fundamental level, this author is of the belief that this can help a business because of the rapid availability of qualified employees to fulfill a need within the company. In addition, research has found that not having someone in place when a CEO or any employee “decides or is forced” to leave reduces the productivity and morale of the employees. (Plank, 2014). According to a scholar, effective succession planning involves building a series of feeder groups that can be pulled from in order to effectuate the smoothest transition. (Hannigan, 2006). This is commonly referred to as the leadership pipeline process, that was “developed to address an individual’s performance and potential in navigating through specific roles in the organization.” (Hannigan, 2006). In its essence, the leadership pipeline creates a cycle where employees take on different roles until they have mastered them, which prepares them for the next step in the corporate hierarchical structure. (Hannigan, 2006). Despite this author’s experience with succession planning that meant that a job was unavailable, this is still a model that needs to be instituted in every corporation to ensure a smoot transition between successors.
The final issue that could fit under #10 of the HRM Model is the factor that you are “easy to manage”, and by this, the employee is “mak[ing] your boss look good; not bad!” There are two logical fallacies that this author believes people fall into: either it is the employee or boss that gets the credit, or that the employee just does the work and nothing more. The problem with both of these mindsets is that they fail to recognize that the employee and boss (in a ideal world) are both working in tandem to climb the corporate ladder. As proffered by some industry insiders, “It can be productive to make your boss look good. It can earn you some ‘good points,’ a bit of trust, and maybe give you a leg up for when the next big project comes up that everyone wants. But making your boss look good should always be mutually beneficial.” (Smith, 2013). The problem that this author has noticed in the work place, particularly with the millennial generation, is that these young professionals attempt to be too creative and deviate from the core task at hand. Essentially reinventing the wheel their way. This often comes at the expense of the manager taking more time to correct your work, thereby making that employee difficult to manage.. However, particularly as a young professional, your first job is to perform the task presented to you to the best of your ability. Showing off one’s creativity and cognitive ability to act more efficiently should come at a time when you have gained credibility by fulfilling your supervisor’s requests and have a proven track record of doing what needs to be done in the best way possible.
Additionally, there are more aspects to being easy to manage, that may be simple in theory, but are not effectuated to their full potential in practice. The first concept is that one should attempt to go beyond their job description. This may include asking your boss for more work, that though may not be listed in job description, but would alleviate some stress and workload for you boss. This also has the benefit of showing the workplace you have initiative and are a ‘go-getter.’ Next, an employee should let their boss know about their mistakes before the boss finds out. For example, if a supervisor gets questioned about something that they was not aware of ahead of time, it makes it appear that they were not prepared. When your boss looks bad, it reflects back to on the employee as well. If you make your boss aware of a mistake, it will potentially look like you took an extra step of due diligence to check your work over again. The final solution to offer about being easy to manage is about bringing solutions and not problems to one’s boss. Though bringing a problem is not inherently bad, especially if seeking advice. However, it would reflect more positively on the employee if you not only brought a problem, but also a solution to said problem. The second part of the HRM Model that the second reading reflected upon was #2 of the model. This sates, “Fit HRM with resources, purposes, objectives, strategies, and people.” As Dr. Service has stated in this article and other readings, the HRM Models is not mutually exclusive of one another, but rather work in conjunction to create a harmonious model. As such, the second point of the HRM Model really draws from all aspects of the roles of HR to create this rule. One of those factors includes the type of candidates that are selected for an interview and subsequently, selected for the position. In addition to the importance of hiring from outside the company, this author is of the understanding that most of the larger corporations have something in place called “successive planning.” Successive planning is characterized as the managers in the company already have a preconceived notion of the type of employee they are looking to promote. The managers looking to promote an employee will use the factors laid out by Dr. Service to determine the certain type of employee. On the converse, if a company is lacking the institutionalized practice of successive planning, then they will still use the aforementioned factors to determine the type of candidate they are looking for. Not only is important for the promoting manager to understand the factors that are considered under the “promotions as a function of formula” factors, but it is also important for the person attempting to be promoted to understand them as well. Some of these factors will include, you (image and substance from many perspectives), the candidate’s EQ, and the candidate’s personality. Under the second part of the HRM Model, the factor presented in the second reading, “image from many perspectives – how you and others view you”, is an integral factor. From a young age, this author has been lectured that image is everything and that first impressions matter more than one may think. Though that is true in some respects, in the managerial realm, it is what employees see and hear other employees do and say that shape one’s perception of others. The idea of perceived perception at the work place reminds me of a quote from C.S. Lewis, “What you see and what you hear depends a great deal on where you are standing.” This author believes that this quote accurately sums up an employee’s perception of others at the workplace, you are what you do at the workplace. Nothing more. Nothing less. This is an important factor to comprehend when entering a new work environment because that is all people will know of you. What other people see and hear of someone from their interactions with one another from that point on will manipulate their assumptions for the rest their tenure. However, in understanding this factor of promotion, one is not to go around manipulating other’s perception of themselves because eventually, one will revert to their usual ways and only further harm their image. The goal in understanding this factor is to to present a consistent and congruent image across all platforms of their lives.
In this author’s research on the issue of image and perception of other image, people generally tend to over estimate what those around them know. The problem associated with this is that people often make the assumption that other people are smarter than themselves, thereby undervaluing their own self-worth and perception. This self-deprecation can also have an impact of other perceptions of you. In the realm of psychology, which translated into the management realm, this is commonly referred to as the “imposter phenomenon.” (Vergauwe, 2014). Imposter phenomenon refers to “the intense feelings of intellectual fraudulence, often experienced by high-achieving individuals.” (Vergauwe, 2014). Others have expanded on this definition and stated that it refers to “people are unable to see their own accomplishments, dismissing them as luck, timing, or as a result of deceiving others into thinking they are more intelligent and competent than they believe themselves to be.” (Román, 2014). Studies have shown that worldwide, approximately 70 percent of individuals are effected by this phenomenon, most without even knowing it. The one study has found that according to education level, individuals holding a masters or advanced masters have the highest levels of this effect respectively, where as people holding a Ph.D did not suffer from this phenomenon. (Vergauwe, 2014). As previously stated, people’s perception is something of their own creation and it can be mastered, in a non-manipulative manner.
Another factor that plays a part under the second part of the HRM Model is “your emotional intelligence – ability to control your emotions and read others.” The standard definition for emotional intelligence is “the ability of individuals to recognize their own and other people's emotions, to discriminate between different feelings and label them appropriately, and to use emotional information to guide thinking and behavior.” It stands to reason then, that individuals with high emotional intelligence have a greater understanding of themselves and other’s emotions and emotional ques. Companies today, when hiring or promoting executives, like to review a candidate emotional intelligence. This is because companies and research have come to the conclusion that emotional intelligence has a serious effect on productivity. Greater emotional intelligence (i.e. a greater understanding of ones emotions) helps ones ability to understand, manage stress, enhances cooperation and teamwork, and helps learn in relationships. A leading researcher has found that roughly 67 percent of all competencies deemed essential for high performance were related to emotional intelligence. Furthermore, one’s emotional intelligence mattered twice as much as one’s technical knowledge or IQ for this high performance. The five main elements of emotional intelligence are: (1) self-awareness; (2) self-recognition; (3) motivation; (4) empathy; and (5) social skills.
Emotional Intelligence is something that one can work on. One way to improve it is to practice observing how you feel. This can be effectuated by taking a step back when transitioning tasks and evaluating your ‘emotions’. Another way to improve you EQ is to take responsibility for you behavior and feelings. This means not making excuses and owning up to what you feel and why you feel it. Though this may be the most challenging step, it is integral to effectuating growth. Next, some say that you should practice ‘responding’ rather than ‘reacting’. The difference drawn between the two is that reacting is an unconscious process where we experience an emotional trigger, and behave in an unconscious way that expresses or relieves that emotion, where as responding is a conscious process that involves noticing how you feel, then deciding how you want to behave. Finally, one can simply practice empathizing with yourself and others. Emotional intelligence is a critical factor in promotion decisions because it directly relates to an individual’s ability to relate to and manage others. However, if these are not fixed, there could be some trouble in the workplace. Some common problems of lacking emotional intelligence are: blaming others; victim statements such as “if he/she would . . .”; an inability to hear critical feedback; diverse opinions that are not welcomed or valued; passive, aggressive or passive aggressive communication; and leaders who do not listen and become out of touch with those they lead. Finally, the last factor, though not dispositive, that this author believes fits under the second rule of the HRM Model is, “personality: openness, conscientiousness, extroversion, agreeableness, [and] neuroticism.” The question of what types of personalities are best to succeed in the workplace has been a question plaguing the business world for some time. Scientists in the psychological field have been conducting studies on this topic for over 20 years to determine what types of personalities are best suited for the higher levels of management and why they are better suited. In their research, scientists have come to primarily the same conclusions across the board. Research has determined that, in the workplace, those of a neurotic behavior are consistently earning less across the board. The research indicated that neuroticism correlated with lower income and lower positions in the workplace. (Sutin, 2009). However, conscientiousness, categorized as competence, dutifulness, achievement striving, and self-discipline, correlated with the highest amount of incomes. The study also found that extraversion also had a negligible effect on income, mostly at the beginning of the hiring stage because of the broader range of networks that extraverts generally had amassed over the years. The findings also stated that openness really did not have much correlation with the with the effect of income or promotions. The study, though making little mention of the final category, agreeableness, did note that generally it is associated with lower career success and lower income, but not all studies have found this. (Sutin, 2009). In applying this to the business world, it appears that the studies on the effect of personality types hold that conscientiousness is the best personality to have for success in the work place. Even if one does not have this personality trait, it does not mean that one cannot succeed. One variable that theses studies cannot control is the personal preference for what other individuals prefer as a compliment to their own personality style. Though it may be safe to assume that one does not want to work with a neurotic individual, it is important to understand the importance of complimentary personalities in the workplace to spur greater creativity and productivity. Overall, managerial promotions are vastly important to the objectives of the class. What the article for the reading requirement has taught us is that there are more factors that go into someone being hired than just being a good candidate on paper. The level of not only intra and interpersonal skills, but the little things such as washing your hands all play a vital role in whether or not you are promoted. This is why the independent variables, in conjunction with the modifiers, are so important to understanding the role of managerial promotions and the interposed role they place with the HRM Model.

Bibliography
Diamond, M. (2006). Train Two Behind You, Reeves Journal: Business Strategies, 86(12): 126-127.

Farrington, Robert (2014). A College Degree is The New High School Diploma. February 9, 2016, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertfarrington/2014/09/29/a-college-degree-is-the-new-high-school-diploma/#2715e4857a0b6cf2a36a4cbe.

Hannigan, Rann (2006). Building Organizational Leadership Through Succession Planning: Can A Standardized Management & Employee Model Assess and Develop Line Level Employee Leadership? Retrieved February 9, 2016, from http://www.uri.edu/research/lrc/research/papers/Hannigan_Leadership.pdf

Hymowitz, Carol (2006). Any College Will Do. The Wall Street Journal, September 18: p. B1. Retrieved February 9, 2016, from http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB115853818747665842

Lomenick, Brad (2013). The Catalyst Leader: 8 Essentials For Becoming A Change Maker. Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson

Plank, Willa (2014, April 28). The Do’s and Don’ts of CEO Succession Planning. Retrieved February 12, 2016, from http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303987004579479680859042214

Román, M.S. (2014, September 23). 8 Practical Steps To Getting Over Your Impostor Syndrome. Retrieved February 9, 2016, from http://www.fastcompany.com/3036006/ hit-the-ground-running/8-practical-steps-to-getting-over-your-impostor-syndrome? utm_source=mailchimp&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=fast-company-daily-newsletter-featured&position=1&partner=newsletter.

Roy, A. (Ed.). (2014, April 4). In Defense Of The Master's Degree. Retrieved February 9, 2016, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/04/04/in-defense-of-the-masters-degree

Service, R.W. (2008). Managerial promotions formulas and a human resource management model", Management Research News, 31(4): 245–257.

Smith, J. (2013, May 14). How To Make Your Boss Look Good Without Compromising Your Principles. Retrieved February 9, 2016, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacquelynsmith/2013/05/17/how-to-become-a-great-mentor/

Smith, J. (2013, May 17). How To Be A Great Mentor. Retrieved February 9, 2016, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacquelynsmith/2013/05/17/how-to-become-a-great-mentor/

Sutin, A. R., Costa, P. J., Miech, R., & Eaton, W. W. (2009). Personality and career success: Concurrent and longitudinal relations. European Journal Of Personality, 23(2), 71-84. doi:10.1002/per.704

Vergauwe, J., Willie, B., Feys, M., De Fruyt, F., & Angel, F. (2014). Fear of Being Exposed: The Trait-Relatedness of the Impostor Phenomenon and its Relevance in the Work Context. Journal of Business and Psychology, 30(3), 565-581. Retrieved February 5, 2016.

Weber, L. (2014, July 16). Just Whose Job is it to Train Workers? Wall Street Journal. Retrieved February 9, 2016, from http://online.wsj.com/articles/just-whose-job-is-it-to-train-workers-1405554382.