MY IRRIGATOR IS INTERVIEWING WITH A COMPETITOR

Steven Cesare, Ph.D.

An imaginative business owner from the free state of Florida called me the other day to share an interesting story. During his drive to a meeting, the business owner received a call from an unfamiliar phone number. Piqued with curiosity, the owner answered the phone call to discover it was from a rival business owner. The business owner had mild acquaintance with the rival, as the two entrepreneurs had met at several local landscape meetings over the years. You never know when or how networking pays off do you?

Upon exchanging cordial telephone foreplay, the rival then directly informed the business owner that he had just interviewed one of the business owner’s irrigators, and was inquiring if the business owner knew of this process, and if so, was the irrigator worthy of further pursuit by the rival.

As an aside, don’t pretend that a meaningful portion of your high-quality employees are not thinking, let alone actively investigating a change in employment. In these crushing economic times, in which ravaging inflation is making all of us poorer every day, highly-skilled employees are constantly considering moving to a different company for a greater wage, benefits, or opportunity, or are being deliberately solicited (i.e., “poached”) by competitors. The lure of an increased hourly pay rate of $2.00-$3.00 and a couple of more days of PTO can get most talented non-exempt employees to entertain any lucrative offer.

Returning to the land of sun, sand, and surf, the business owner told the rival he did not know of the irrigator’s intent to leave, thanked the rival for the advance notice, and then called me shortly thereafter, with the sincere “What do you think we should do, Steve?”

Before offering an answer, I asked the most basic question: “Is the irrigator worth keeping?” As you well know, most irrigators are worth keeping, some more so than others, and as such, the business owner told me the irrigator was a good employee, nothing special, an okay guy, with room for improvement. Doesn’t that sound like what most landscape business owners would say about most of their employees?

Becoming more proactively responsive, I told the business owner to meet with the irrigator and conduct a basic assessment of what the irrigator thought of the company, his job, supervisory communication, recommendations for improvement (i.e., the same menu of questions every owner should have during one-on-one meetings with employees). Upon hearing the irrigator’s answers, I told the business owner to come clean and be truthful by informing the irrigator that he had been informed that the irrigator was contemplating departure, and if so, what were the drivers of seeking employment elsewhere. Let’s see where the chips fall: denial, request for more money, transparent feedback, deceit, open-minded discussion, pertinent complaints, restatement of performance expectations, respect, misunderstanding, career ladder, etc.

As I explained to the business owner, the entire decision-making context is three-fold: First, if the employee is not worthy of being kept, terminate the employee immediately. In my professional opinion, it does not make sense to pay a lame-duck employee for simply going through the motions, while not adding purposeful value to the company or its future. Upon his departure, upgrade the position, its responsibilities and pay grade, and hire an elevated successor. Second, if the employee is worthy of retention, begin the heartfelt dialogue with the employee to identify the lists of demands, desires, and disqualifiers. Leverage collaboration, seek a “win-win” outcome where both parties give-and-take on the key elements, and always consider your position as a role model in the company.

Third, as a capitalist, every company should always be recruiting for various positions, even if the company is fully staffed. This contingent recruitment serves to assess the current labor market, potentially find an upgraded employee, and minimizes the prevailing mindset of most business owners who only conduct recruiting out of desperation to fill a sudden vacancy.

While the complacent business owner will view that third option as more work and additional cost, the clairvoyant business owner readily acknowledges that option as increasing his/her eventual decision-making leverage to be utilized when needed, just in case one of his/her high-quality employees is not only thinking, but actively investigating a change in employment.

Because, you know they are; don’t rely on your network to be the first to tell you about it.

If you have any questions or comments about this topic or anything else related to human resources, Sign Up for Steve’s HR Helpdesk!