Previous Table of Contents Next


From the 1950s to the 1980s, it was common to assume that the corporation would always come to the rescue. Once people accepted a job with giants like IBM Corp. or Sears, they were guaranteed a job for life. Similarly, their career options were clearly mapped out. In the 1990s, however, the rapids have become far more treacherous, unleashed by global competition and intense pressure to produce goods better, cheaper, and faster. As a result, companies once complacent about double-digit growth are now struggling for survival. The corporation today is so busy trying to rescue itself that it may not have time to promote the individual career of each employee. Does this mean the corporation has no part in helping shape the employee’s future? Not at all. However, the roles that the corporation and the employee have in building a career are different, as shown in Exhibit 2.

Exhibit 2. Resource-Responsibility Chart
Corporation = Resource Employee = Responsibility

Provides big-picture view of the company direction. Networks within the organization to find newopportunities.
Sets expectations for employee performance, tied to corporate goals. Assesses individual skill level based on desired career path.
Helps employees understand how they affect the bottom line. Builds skills needed to perform new job.
OR
Seeks opportunities outside the corporation if there is no longer an appropriate fit.

The corporation, represented by management, should be a resource to its employees, clearly defining the company’s direction and its expectations for success on the job. Most employees could perform much better and would even take initiative for their own development if they clearly understood what was expected from them. Likewise, with the 1990s focus on profitability, the corporation must help the employee understand how they affect the bottom line. One chief financial officer of a Chicago-based consulting firm says that most workers have little understanding how they help a company make money or save money. They do not realize how their work equates to profit. The company can blame the employees or it can educate them.

The whitewater analogy holds an interesting parallel to the career of middle managers: they maintain a dual role when it comes to the idea of self-rescue. Managers are a resource to their employees but must also assume responsibility for their own careers, having to rescue themselves before they can attempt to help the others. Functioning as a resource to employees is a vital role for managers of departments. Granted, it is not always easy for middle managers to get information about corporate direction or financial implications, but managers will be much more valuable in their current jobs and beyond if they take the initiative. Managers should not blame senior management for a lack of focus; instead, they should strive to increase their network within the organization to get information.

If certain information proves impossible to reach, managers should focus on the valuable information that is available and make this readily available to their staff. For example, managers should ensure that the core and emerging competencies have been clearly defined for their staff. Core competencies are the performance expectations for people in their current job, while emerging competencies are skills needed for future job functions. The definition of these competencies should be a team project with managers and staff alike, thereby establishing ownership of the defined skills. Likewise, remembering the idea of self-rescue, middle managers need to identify those core and emerging competencies for their own positions as well.

A manager’s goal is to help employees take responsibility for their career viability, and that includes playing a key role in the planning process. It will benefit the employees tremendously to take the initiative to network within their own organization, discover what other groups are doing, and determine where an appropriate fit might exist. Likewise, once employees understand what is expected, they are responsible for assessing what skills may be lacking, either for their current job or for the future, and then for determining an action plan to develop these skills. In the fast-paced world of the 1990s, when most managers do the work of two people, assessment of skills and career planning are the employee’s responsibilities, not the manager’s, although the manager can certainly help.

The following is an example of how managers and employees can work together in terms of resource and responsibility. Many employees have a send-me-to-a-seminar mentality. They see a brochure about software application seminars or training conferences and forward it to their manager asking if there is enough money in the budget to cover it. At this point, managers should be prepared to set expectations for attending. One West Coast computer training firm requires all employees to submit a short business case before attending a seminar, outlining the benefits to the employee and the organization. The vice-president of training and product development says it makes the employees stop to think about the value of this event. Is it worth the money? This firm also requires the employee to provide a summary of the information learned during their monthly internal development day and adds the material to the company library.

Managers can be on the lookout for potential developmental opportunities for employees and should openly share this information with their staff. Managers can make a significant contribution to the careers of their employees, going one step beyond putting a brochure in the employee’s mailbox. Effective managers will help employees understand how this event may add value to their careers and long-term benefit to the entire organization.


Previous Table of Contents Next

Copyright © CRC Press LLC