From June, 2016

5 Ways Fatherhood Brings Professional Success.

Men often enjoy higher wages than women for doing the same work but research shows that fathers make more than non-fathers and, no surprise, more than mothers.  Here are five reasons why dads are more Bourne and I - Christmas paradesuccessful.

1.       Research by Cornell found that employers favored fathers over non-fathers and over mothers in the hiring process.  Participants in the study considered fathers as more competent than mothers and childless men.  Additionally, study participants were more lenient with fathers late to work.

2.       Men with children earn six percent more while women earn four percent less for every child.

3.       While it may seem logical that men with multiple children are more focused on family and are potentially less productive at work than their peers without children, extensive research shows that fathers of at least two children are more productive than fathers of one child and men without any.

4.       Raising a family, according to studies, also prepares you for management.  “If You’ve Raised Kids, You Can Manage Anything,” author Ann Crittenden writes. “Anyone who has learned how to comfort a troublesome toddler, soothe the feelings of a sullen teenager, or manage the complex challenges of a fractious household can just as readily smooth the boss’s ruffled feathers, handle crises, juggle several urgent matters at once, motivate the team, and survive the most Byzantine office intrigues.”

5.       Fathers with children are more likely to accept promotions. 

To summarize, fathers are more desirable to employers, earn more money, they are at least as equally productive as their childless counterparts, they have received management training at home and are more willing to take on promotions and the accompanying added responsibilities.

Mothers on the other hand are significantly disadvantaged when compared to their childless counterparts.  While fathers typically make more money than men without children, the reverse is true for women.  Mothers make less money than non-mothers.  In fact according to research from 2001, the pay gap between mothers and non-mothers for women under 35 was larger than it was between women and men.  Today, mothers are paid only 73 cents for every dollar fathers are paid.  Also, as stated above, a mother’s salary decreases with each additional child while a man’s increases.  Furthermore, managers who were visibly pregnant were viewed as less committed to their jobs, less competent, more irrational and less authoritative.  

To summarize, mothers are less desirable to employers, more often viewed as incompetent and must work five extra months to be paid what working fathers are paid in one year.

Father’s day has just passed but for most working dads, every day is a father’s day!

Should You Hire A Superstar Who is Toxic?

Every organization wants superstar employees and some will even delay the hiring process weeks or even months until that perfect candidate blips on the smoke-1192648_640radar.  What happens though if once you find your purple squirrel, they have mange or rabies?  Do you cut them lose or keep them around for their quota busting, nut gathering ability?

Economist Dylan Minor and Cornerstone OnDemand’s chief analytics officer, Michael Housman, examined nearly 60,000 workers to determine the cost of retaining toxic workers.  In their study, they define “toxic” as conduct harmful to an organization’s people or property.  They found that retaining toxic workers, even those residing in the top 1% for productivity, cost far more than the rewards reaped from a toxic employee’s high production.

Their study revealed that a top one percent worker could produce over $5,000 in annual cost savings however a company could avoid $12,000 in costs by not hiring a toxic worker.  In short a toxic worker, even if they are super productive, is far more costly to an organization than an average, non-toxic worker.  Take a look at the chart below provided in their study!

Toxic - cost savings

 

 

 

Even though a worker in only the top 25% of productivity saves a company far less than one in the top 1%, the study shows that replacing a superstar toxic worker with a less than stellar non-toxic worker, to still be the more cost effective choice.

Why are toxic workers so much more expensive?  The most apparent answer is turnover.  Toxic workers drive other employees away and the cost of replacing those employees is high not to mention that morale and productivity often drop until a replacement is found.  Additionally toxic workers produce other toxic workers.  Negativity spreads like wildfire.

Interestingly enough, toxic workers are more productive in terms of their output and one 2013 study found that unethical workers remain longer at organizations.  This explains why toxic workers are so often selected and even retained for long timespans.

In summary, avoid hiring a toxic worker if you can but should you find yourself burdened with one or many, remove them despite their high production.  As former GE CEO Jack Welch put it, “People are removed for having the wrong values…we don’t even talk about the numbers.”