Is “Better Marketing” the Solution to Employer’s Apathy Toward Worker Training?
by Dean Prigelmeier, President of Proactive Technologies, Inc.
Sometimes taking marketing efforts and spending up a notch is the answer to sagging sales. Sometimes it is just more money spent proving the customer doesn’t want what you are selling. This could be a temporary or protracted limbo. Either way, it is a good time to take an introspective look at the products/services being marketed, the message, and the state of the target customer.
In the last few decades, marketing platforms were created with the sole purpose of positioning themselves and their platform’s clients, deeper into the consumer’s psyche and life. It seems, in many cases, marketers bombard consumers with personalized content in the hope that they will be worn down and pushed to a buy decision. It must be successful, since most consumers feel personal privacy is no longer a thing and complaining about isn’t worth the time while consumption continues at a relatively strong pace – even if purchases are on credit.
However, marketing efforts can over-do it and erode a brand’s credibility. How many people have gazed at the “fun size” candy bar that looks smaller than the last one bought? Or the “party size” bag of potato chips – smaller bag and half filled with air? Or felt inundated with reward offers from even the liquor store, or credit card offers of reward points which seem difficult to use and paid for with 28% interest rates on purchases? While still effective as choices seem to be shrinking, this hyper-marketing could be driving a cynical society even more so.
click here to expandDo these types of marketing strategies work when it comes to workforce development services, worker training programs, continuous education courses and credentialling? Consumer marketing works on a principal of mass dissemination, relying on enough consumers who see their option is either between product or service providers if a choice is still available, or between the purchase and not and the possible “peer shaming” to follow. This can justify the enormous expenditures when a consumer’s choices are not good. Workforce development product/service decisions are more employer-specific and situational at a minimum, with buy/no-buy decision-making more complex and, often, random. Read More
Have Advances in Technology Distracted HR From the Fundamentals of Worker Selection and Development?
by Stacey Lett, Director of Operations – Eastern U.S. – Proactive Technologies, Inc.
Billions of investment dollars are driving the advancements in technology into every corner of our lives, including the selection and development of workers. Predictably, the emphasis often seems more on the technology and the money it can make for investors than the practicality for the end-user or those it effects.
It is not just the refrigerators that talk to your grocery store, or watches that talk to the phone in your pocket. Wall Street, with an accumulating mountain of cash, can drive any idea to fabricate a “trend” that often dissipates as quickly as it emerges, sometimes leaving disruption in the wake but yields a return for investors. For investors it is the means to an end. To many, it may negatively affect their life and their future.
In the 1990’s, investors started to look at the National Security Agency’s and Central Intelligence Agency’s “key-word search” capabilities used to scan millions of documents from around the world for specific words and phrases to expand their intelligence gathering reach. They saw applications of this technology in the civilian world, including scanning the mounds of resumes and employment applications employers had to filter in order to find a few new-hires. On the surface, this seemed to be a godsend.
click here to expandSoon employers and employment candidates saw what the developers of this technology did not. The technology first had to count on employers having accurately designed job descriptions in consistent formats, using standardized terms, words and phrases to describe pre-hire knowledge, experience, skills and abilities of interest. The fact was reality couldn’t have been farther from this, with job descriptions written 50 years prior, written precisely for someone the employer wanted to hire (not so reflective of the actual job requirements), or cut & pasted from a handy library resource. Read More
Employers: Maximize Worker Development by Better Utilizing Local Resources
by Frank Gibson, Workforce Development Advisor, retired from The Ohio State University – Alber Enterprise Center
Every year millions upon millions of state-provided worker development aid is either not utilized or not utilized efficiently and effectively. It represents a frustrating, protracted stalemate between employers who are not sure what skills they need in employees and what to do to maximize an employee’s core skills once employed, and educational institutions that lack the current, accurate and stable (i.e. targeted skills that won’t be changed in 6-months as the next Wall Street hype emerges) workforce needs data to design better products and services for employers.
The current state of workforce development is frustrating from everyone’s standpoint; employers who seem to go through workers like they are changing clothes, employees and potential employees who have given up turning to education for help in developing skills for a long-term career opportunity that pays for the education and can sustain a family, and who skip from job-to-job to find the best opportunity/compensation mix, and workforce development agencies that have the funding resources to support credible projects but are disappointed when employers bail in the middle of a project that seems to be working.
Short-term thinking has progressively eroded the effectiveness of worker development models around the country. Fundamental to any good worker development project is an accurate target upon which to build an accurate and effective worker development model. Someone has to take the lead to organize the uncertainty into clarity, so whatever is done feeds a purpose in a deliberate strategy. Drifting for decades is as toxic to a trainee’s or worker’s optimism and mental health, as it is an employer’s sustained success. Read More
Appreciating the Value of Labor
by Dean Prigelmeier, President of Proactive Technologies, Inc.
For businesses that have the capital for the investment in new equipment or processes to expand and improve operations, in an effort to become or remain competitive, the level of investment is not as important as the return on that investment. This consistent practice of determining where to best place capital for the highest return should apply to labor, as well. What is “paid” for labor is not as relevant as the value it adds to the operation and, ultimately, profit; the return on worker investment.
The lack of appreciation for the difference between a “training cost” and a “training investment” is understandable because it is rarely contrasted. The college textbook entitled Financial Accounting: An Introduction to Concepts, Methods and Uses, defines “direct labor cost” as the “Cost of labor (material) applied and assigned directly to a product; contrast this with indirect labor cost.” Indirect labor cost” is defined as, “An indirect cost of labor (material) such as supervisors (supplies).” There is no mention of an expected return on investment. Generations of cost accountants have been taught that there is no good that comes for higher labor costs, which to them is determined by the level of staffing and wage levels. There is no differentiation between strategic labor costs and uncontrolled labor costs.
The profit from, and value of, most worker’s labor comes from task-based work, so all inputs that drive workers to high-performance, high-capacity output are investments.
click here to expand
As discussed in many articles in past issues of the Proactive Technologies Report, although labor costs are considered direct costs from an accounting standpoint, they should be more importantly considered as an investment in the operation’s overall level of competitiveness. Operations may vary as to the level of return on investment from labor, but each worker’s cumulative expertise gained while employed becomes an asset to the operation akin to intellectual property and, therefore, wages and compensation paid to develop a worker are an investment. Read More
WELCOME CONTITECH!
Proactive Technologies, Inc. and its staff welcomes Contitech – a Continental company named, once again, as one of America’s Best Large Employers for 2023 by Forbes magazine. This is the seventh time Continental has been named to this esteemed list for its efforts in supporting the employee experience.
ContiTech develops, manufactures and markets products, systems and intelligent components made of rubber, plastic, metal and fabric. They are used in machine and plant engineering, mining, agriculture, the automotive industry and other important sectors of the future.
“To be recognized again among America’s best large employers reinforces our dedication to employees through career development opportunities, commitment to inclusion, and a flexible work-life balance,” said Grace Hu, U.S, Head of Human Relations, Continental. “Emphasis on an employee-centric culture has never been more paramount to business success. Continental is proud of the workplace culture they have fostered and the talented teams that have flourished as a result.
Steven Brinkman, Head of Human Resources – Sun Prairie, WI LDPC & Global Compliance Ambassador is bringing… Read More
Read the full August, 2023 Proactive Technologies Report newsletter, including linked industry articles and online presentation schedules.
Proactive Technologies, Inc.®; PROTECH; Human Resource Management for Tomorrow...Today!® and logo;