Improving Company Morale?

Undaar asks: "I work as a developer for a web development company. We were pretty hard hit (as were many companies that do what we do) by the "economic down-turn". The company went from over 500 people to under 200 in under two years. It's more stable now, but people are consistently laid-off. Consequently people feel like they always have to look over their shoulder to avoid getting fired. Most lunches are spent complaining about lack of enjoyment/challenge from the job and the fact that upper-management seems not to understand what we do. Employers: what have you done to improve employee morale in your company? As an employee, what can I do to improve the morale in the people I work with? How can I make my work environment more enjoyable? What kind of constructive suggestions can I take to management so that they can help improve the situation?"

Comments

Don't take away freedoms to "improve" productivity

[Anonymous Coward]

People that are happy at work tend to be better workers, so letting them use the internet and phone for some personal business during work can be a "good thing." That's not to say they should be allowed to surf for porn all day, but looking a few websites outside of business during 9-5 can help.

Also, be flexible with work hours. Not everyone needs to work the same 9-5. Let departments figure out their own policy and be flexible with workers.

Are you kidding?

[ddstreet]

The software (and hardware) market is full of so many highly-qualified people, most with years of experience, that employers have little to no incentive to care whether their current employees are happy or not. If they're not, they can either leave or get fired, and it will be easy to replace them, probably with someone more qualified and/or with more experience, who will work for as much or maybe less money.

It's gonna be like this, in our job market at least, for a while. Hopefully not too long...!

Re:Are you kidding?

[Tablizer]

that employers have little to no incentive to care whether their current employees are happy or not. If they're not, they can either leave or get fired, and it will be easy to replace them

Yes, but it still may help productivity if they are a bit happier. Whip-n-row motivational techniques rarely work in the longer run.

Re:Are you kidding?

[Skyshadow]

If they're not, they can either leave or get fired, and it will be easy to replace them, probably with someone more qualified and/or with more experience, who will work for as much or maybe less money.

I know there are some bosses who think that way, but it's a bad idea from a couple of aspects.

First, it takes at least six months to get someone really up to speed in the company, probably a little longer to get them fully effective.

Second, and more important IMO, there's no entity in business more effective than an honest-to-God *team*. People who know each other, who know how the people around them work and who feel like they owe something to their coworkers. This is a hard thing to pull together, but when you do they can accomplish some really special things. Making employees feel like a commodity is completely counter to this.

A good manager will understand this; the problem is, simply, there aren't enough "good" mangers out there -- most people who manage are woefully incompetent at actually managing. Beancounters.

Re:Are you kidding?

[n3k5]

The software (and hardware) market is full of so many highly-qualified people [...] If they're not [happy], they can either leave or get fired, and it will be easy to replace them [...]

Are you kidding? In software development that requires highly qualified people, it is never easy to replace them. It can take months to dive into a new codebase; every day spent on grokking a new project means less constructive work done on it. Sure, you can fire employees all the time and look for cheaper ones, which you treat as lowly development machines that are worth less than the computers they work on. But don't expect them to stay so long that they even get the chance to get any productive work done.

Re:Are you kidding?

[Anonymous Coward]

You are absolutely correct. A good team of competent people, who have (at least) some experience, can get almost anything done, and usually at a relatively fast pace.

Unfortunately, almost all management out there is completely clueless; they use unexperienced people to work on projects, either because they're cheap or to "broaden their skills". The project leader usually is the only one with some experience in whatever they're working on, but they are usually so bogged down with meetings they don't do any actual work. The result is crap, for everything that is produced. Once the workers get experience with whatever they were doing, they are either moved to something else that they have no experience with, or they move to management (where they stop doing actual work). It's a vicious cycle... all new development is utter garbage, and management simply refuses to improve it at all (it works! Why should we pay you to change it?) even though maintaining it is an absolute nightmare, especially as more and more fixes get tack-hammered on. Eventually someone (or multiple poeple, depending on how bad it is) is stuck with the awful job of maintaining the spaghetti code, and the company winds up spending 10x more money to maintain the crap than if they had fixed it in the first place...

I guess the essential points that management always fails to understand are:

• Keep experienced programmers working. When they are promoted, don't put them into management; they are much more valuable (and probably happier) as programmers. Promote (or 'move', programmers are more important and should make more than management) the bad programmers into management, that's probably where they want to be anyway.
• You need a prototype. I just can't stress this enough. No matter how good you think your design is, the first implementation (if constrained to any deadlines, which they always are) will be bad. It's unavoidable. A prototype, which can be either throw-away or the base for the real product, is just essential. It's funny that hardware people (including management) have known this for years, but software management (and some inexperienced or just inept programmers) won't accept it.
• Let inexperienced programmers work on the prototypes and/or programs that won't be maintained (for any extended period of time). It's not their fault, but when you're inexperienced you just don't produce good, maintainable code. You have to learn. But learning by writing code that's going to be sold and maintained is a real bad idea, that only management (who doesn't understand how programming works) would think of.
• Move bad programmers out, probably into management. The last person that anyone wants to work with is a bad programmer.
• Don't make experienced programmers spend all their time training inexperienced programmers. This is such a waste. Management thinks that somehow magically good programmers will transform inexperienced programmers into a new good programmer. But what happens is the good programmer never gets to do any work, and the inexperienced programmers are the only ones writing your programs.

Re:Are you kidding?

[Doomdark]

No, no and no. You are assuming that any person can be replaced with anyone about as qualified, and the resulting accomplishments are the same. Further, you assume happines and motivation have nothing to do with productivity, related to motivation, experience and skills (and in rougly that order of importance).

This may be true for simplest of assembly line jobs, although even there I'd doubt that. But for any developer job (or similar, jobs that need skilled professionals) there's huge differences in productivity.

My estimation is that difference between minimally adequate (below average but still nominally skilled and/or motivated, that is, able to work to some degree) and average ("normal" skills and motivation) worker is in the order of 3 - 5 times, and between average and excellent further 2 - 3 times. So, roughly speaking, best of employees get as much done as 10 or more "sucky" employees. And that's ignoring the fundamental limitations of "bunch of cheap incompetent idiots" approach, which is that there are some demanding tasks where you just can NOT get things done without skilled, talented, motivated individuals (not all tasks, but some key tasks).

So, if an employer follows tactics you outlined, here's the likely scenario:

• By treating employees badly, morale goes down, and productivity suffers significantly, easily to less than half of optimal sustainable productivity, in matter of weeks if not days.
• By making it known everyone considers everyone to be replaceable, most employees (of any level) start looking for new job. Best ones (that are most productive and skilled) find new job more easily, thus there's significant brain leakage. Below-average people try to hang in there and do not leave involuntarily.
• Replacing people lost to attrition and lay-offs is costly as well as risky; there's no reliable way to make sure person you hire is as good as you think. Only time will tell. Ones you had you had much better understanding of. So, chances are you won't be hiring better people than you had (assuming originally you very succesful in developing and keeping talent).
• Training people for specific duties they have takes time (few people get a new job that's _exactly_ like they old one). Even highly skilled professionals take a while to adapt.
• Newcomers have less reason to be loyal to begin with. Their morale is likely to be neutral, which depending on situation may be better or worse than average employee morale. But in case where it's higher, it _quickly_ lowers to average, as person learns what kind of a rathole job is. In case of existing employees having good morale, it takes longer for morale to raise... but it will happen if things stay good.

Another big mistake is misunderstanding the role of (monetary) compensation to motivation. Rewards are good, almost independent of size of reward (except of insulting small ones, like those Larry Ellison dolls given as annual bonus). But above and beyond that, money is not much of an incentive to otherwise content people. And for uncontent people, well, it's only temporary relief that soon is forgotten.

However, the opposite (ie. short-changing employees) does affect morale drastically and quickly. Whereas giving a raise helps a bit in short run, and stabilizes things in long run, salary reduction (or "too low" starting salary) is a quick and effective tool of demoralization. No matter what the situation, that's equivalent to middle finger salute.

Re:Are you kidding?

[len_harms]

the bad programmers into management, that's probably where they want to be anyway

I have never agreed with moving people into managment that are not TRAINED to do this. Managing things is WAY different than writing code. Writing code you just need to watch the flow of the code. Then if you wrote your code correctly just tweak it once and awhile. Managing people you need to have people skills. You need to know how to handle someone who works hard, who is lazy, who is sick, who is wasting everone elses time, someone who is a bully, someone who is harasing others... You need to know how to do these sorts of things. Last I checked they do not teach that in any comp sci classes.

Making a 'programmer' a mangager is almost always a bad idea. If he is a bad programmer he probably is not a good manager either. He did not have the motivation to become a decent programmer, which I have always belived is not that hard to do. Also sometimes the reason they are bad programmers is because they simply do not get along with people. Puting them in charge will only make this problem worse. I have witnessed this many times.

My father used to work for a large insurance company. Before he could even get promoted to be a manager, out of sales, he had to take MANY MANY MANY classes in how to manage people. He then had to prove he could do it. We in the tech industry seem to take almost the exact oposite aproach. We promote people who should never even breathed that pay grade, and then only because they did something cool.

All your other points I agree with. Just promoting people to get them out of something is usually a bad idea. Its better to put them somewhere where they do no harm, or (i know this is cold) fire them.

Re:Are you kidding?

[BeerSlurpy]

This isnt funny, but keep modding it up.

The software market is completely glutted with incompetant morons who are suitable for use as little more than semi-computer-literate go-fers. These are the guys are are having their lunch stolen by the indians and russians who can program as good or likely better for 10x less. A lot of them are finally being forced to leave the software field altogether because they dont have the enthusiasm to do it when it isnt easy money.

In case you werent aware of this, the current paradigm for making software in this country is to have maybe 3-4 architect/senior developer type guys who design the overall product, make all the hard design decisions. They also do protyping, make libraries and develop tools for the more junior programmers to use, etc. Working with these guys are a large group of more junior guys who do all the hard work of actually writing all the code, using the design and tools that the smart guys have done.

It has been determined that you dont have to employ americans for the junior level positions, because all that is really required is hardworkingness and an eagerness to learn. You can employ ukrainians, irish, indians or chinese who speak english and if they show true talent, you bring them over on visas so they can pick up english and later become the guru type guys.

This is bad for americans because it means that you have to eat a lot of crow when youre paying your dues as a junior level guy. Until you have about 5-7 years of experience, employers will not even begin to consider you as a valued asset- until then youre really cannon fodder. You really have to hustle when your compeition considers $100 a month to be a kingly salary. Its possible to succeed (Hey, I did without even a CS degree) but it takes a lot of work to get there.

It doesnt exactly help that there are all sorts of pitfalls in the industry like clueless employers, consulting firms etc who can take someone with plenty of potential and completely ruin them as a programmer.

I left

[Anonymous Coward]

what have you done to improve employee morale in your company? As an employee, what can I do to improve the morale in the people I work with? How can I make my work environment more enjoyable?

I left and went to another company with people that are happy. Much happier when I recognized that I couldn't steer a ship from the White Star Line with a paddle. Just not possible.

Honesty

[blastedtokyo]

Try extracting a little honesty. You won't improve morale by playing music as the titanic is going down. Find ways to tell people the truth. Blow the whistle on bad practices. Get to know management better so you can find out what is really going on so you can tell your people. Tell them what factors will lead to the success of your company. Tell them where you (mgmt or not) fucked up. Tell them where you plan to change things. Tell employees what role they play in the recovery.

If the company intends to screw everyone after finishing a couple pieces to make a liquidation plausible, then it's pretty cold to try to improve morale if you know something horrible's about to go down.

not much hope...

[gralem]

#1 *ALWAYS LOOK FOR A BETTER JOB*.

That is, until you find a job where you don't feel you have to look over your shoulder and wonder why management doesn't get it. When management doesn't get it, there's usually no way to fix it. It becomes entrenched in the fabric of the company.

There is only one way for such a company to change--promote from within. This brings up the people who already understand the business PLUS understand the real-world problems faced by the little employees. But such companies rarely do this. They usually hire outside people who have no clue as to what goes on day-to-day. And they keep crapping on their own employees.

I really recommend looking for another job. If jobs in your area are scarce, then think about moving. Being flexible always provides better opportunities. I know the job market is tough right now, and I would not like to be looking for a job. But I've been in that situation many times. And there is not much hope for this type of a company. Unless they promote from within and start investing in their current employees, rather than try to find the next replacement manager who is going to solve all problems, there really is no hope.

Also, all employers should have incentive programs that are based on performance. If your employer does not offer such incentives--even something as little as free movie tickets for the top-performing departments based on measurable results (like lines of checked code, or # of support issues resolved and verified)--then it is another sign of problems with management.

---gralem

Get a purpose

[musicmaster]

You can't compensate for customers that don't buy anymore. But you can give the company some kind of purpose - so that people don't feel lost anymore.

A manager could redefine the company so that people see a future for it. It could specialize. People could get trained so that a department becomes better and better. Such a specialization could even help when the layoff go on, because it will improve the chances for a new job.

Even a low level employee could help building such a view. Try to find collegues gor exchanging ideas and build your own "center of excellence". With a sense of purpose and collaboration even mediocre employees can achieve good results - provided the motivation is there.

Small gestures and keeping them included

[Violet Null]

Assuming that such things as more money and raises are out, due to budget constraints, you tend to have two options:

1) Small gestures. If you're a project leader or some other type of manager, take the people who report to you out for lunch whenever a milestone is successfully passed. Or provide free soda. It won't cost that much, compared to, say, the cost of training a replacement. For some companies, it could also be being flexible on the hours slightly (so that people could come in an, and leave, an hour earlier or later). Or allowing them to play Unreal Tournament after business hours. (This may not be a good fit for all companies, though.)

2) Keeping them included. If something's happening, the employees are going to be hear about it. They can hear about it through the official means, or they can hear about it through rumors. It's better to hear it through official channels; otherwise, rumor-mongering just goes up. If people are going to get laid off, you're much better off being upfront about it -- there'll be uncertainty either way, but at least there won't be the idea that management is hiding something. If possible, present the news with alternatives (see if anyone is willing to work part time instead). The important thing is to let them feel like they have some small amount of control, as opposed to being subject to the whims of fate.

The Art of Management

[Verity_Crux]

There is an art to managing technical people that makes them feel like their brain is wanted, and their strong, peon-labor back is not the most important part.

Here are some helps:

If you assume you know the market better than your technical people, all you'll do is torque them off. Programmers usually know the software market pretty well. They at least can tell the difference from a quality product and a lame one -- something most business people can't seem to figure out.

If you have to do lame, per-hour contract jobs (ie, SBIR), make sure the people who actually put in the hours get a bit of hourly income in addition to their normal pay. In other words, the management doesn't deserve the Gov's money when I did all the labor for it. And again, nothing motivates people to peon labor like money.

Treat your people like professionals

[Skyshadow]

This is an easy one:

Treat your people like professionals, not children. Tell them what you need them to do by when (set reasonable expectations, not impossibilities), tell them what their assets and resources are, and then leave them the hell alone to work. Don't hold enless status meetings, don't hassle them about what hours they're working, etc. If someone's struggling or not doing their work, you'll have to deal with that, but don't treat that as the default situation.

My last "bad" company was constantly under deadline pressure. My development VP responded to this my having daily status meetings, wasting an hour a day restating what was happening and getting status info that he could have gotten automatically if he'd just learned to use the damned change tracking system. They'd also give you shit if you tried to go home before 9 PM (even if your work was done; you should be "testing or something"). What did I learn there? Treat people like irresponsible children and that's how they'll act.

So, basically, don't overmanage and don't be a dick. Treat your people with respect that you'll get it in return.

There's one more thing I'd suggest, but in my experience this is either something you're good at or something you're not: I'm a firm believer in team building, but in an informal way -- when you go to grab lunch, ask your people to come with you. If you're going to grab a beer after work, invite your people along. In my experience, this works great and has a lot better effect than going to Dave & Busters once a quarter or something.

Re:Treat your people like professionals

[n3k5]

Tell them what you need them to do by when (set reasonable expectations, not impossibilities), tell them what their assets and resources are, and then leave them the hell alone to work.

This can be horribly overdone. I once had a boss who didn't come into my office to see how things are going a single time in months. He didn't reply to e-mails most of the time, so I had to ambush him in the hallway if I needed a desicion from him, to which he usually replied 'do what you want, I'm sure you'll make it right'. The problem with that wasn't that I was unable to work on my own, but that I had the feeling that no one was interested in my output and that it didn't matter wheter I did anything right.

Coding contest

[srowen]

Our company's engineering department runs an annual "coding contest" with a nice prize or two. Last time, teams of two had two days to build the fastest-running solution to a series of problems.

It sounds kind of gimmicky, but there's apparently nothing like a little competition and a prize to get the software engineers' blood pumping. It was really all the discussion about the problems before and after that was so great... it did a lot to get different groups of people talking like they never had before.

It worked brilliantly as a team-building exercise for engineers. Heh, and maybe it helped the management spot the engineers crazy enough to spend the time on the contest, and win.

been there

[jhagler]

I worked for a company that dot-comed in a blaze of glory, but even through the layoffs we managed to keep morale relatively high by simply showing the employees that we valued them.

I was a low level manager in the NOC and found that by keeping the employees up on what was going on in the big picture, allowing them to have input in some of the decisions which directly impacted them, and not being afraid to roll up my sleves and work side-by-side with them they respected me more and were always willing to go the extra mile for me. The most detrimental thing to their morale were the company meetings where the C*O's tried to rah-rah the troops with buzzwords and press releases. People like to feel as though they have some controll over thir future and they know that upper management is the proverbial irresistable force, so keep them away from that and help them focus on the things they can change for the better.

In short the best thing for morale is the respect of your direct manager and as little of the corporate crap as possible.

The exceptions... (and they DO exist!)

[mekkab]

First, I agree with you totally. However, beoynd the web development/+5 years java experience/visual basic etc. etc. market, there exists a seedy underbelly to the IT world. That is the land of Legacy Systems.

There exist systems so large and arcane, that it takes a developer the better part of a calendar year just to understand some basics of how the system works (and I've seen others struggle for longer). There is ADA. There may be FORTRAN. And there is a whole lot of assembler.

These are systems that have their own operating systems written on top of the operating system. These have components that average 100,000 lines of code each- with another 100,000 lines of code for the test harness. Now multiply that by 12 support components. And we haven't even gotten to the actual APPLICATIONS that run on top!

For projects like these, management does have to watch their back. They don't have lots of money to keep useless developers on, but once a new project ramps up they say 'oh, we need developers who have a lot of experience with our system' hahaha! Hire back those guys you fired!

It is companies like these (think: big ol' gov't contracts) that have to play this dancing game of shelling out some money for pizza every now and then to keep people happy because if they let go of everyone now (or piss them off enough so they leave), they won't be able to staff up in time when the new projects come, and they won't be able to complete the new projects (because they are aggressively scheduled) and they never make a dime on new projects again.

Things to do, and not to

[deanj]

First off, if the company continues to lay off people in round after round, don't keep your head in the sand because you could be next. Be sure and have some feelers out for a new place to go NOW if it all possible...who knows, you could end up with a better job.

I've worked at places like you described. Unless the company, or at the very least, your immediate management itself commits to making it a better place to work, it's not going to happen.

Things the company can do (not in any order here):

1) Free drinks
2) Flex time
3) Comp-time for overtime work
4) Food brought in
5) Lighten up on the dress code
6) Flexibility on web access
7) Promotions.... even if it's just in title
8) Explain what the hell the plan is.
9) Increased vacation time

Things the company should NOT do:

1) Organized pot-luck (how depressing)
2) Hand out company-logoed crap

I'm sure there are more for each list. I just can't think of any at the moment.

You and the rest of the folks you work with can do things outside the company (go out to movies, play sports after work, lan-parties...whatever you're all into...you get the idea), and that'll help the moral with the folks you work with, but it's not going to help with the place you work.

Again, the downside of all this, if moral is great, and the company continues to lay people off, getting ripped out of there at some point for a layoff will hit you like a ton of bricks. And one hell of a lot more because you liked to work there.

Re:Workplace democracy

[The AtomicPunk]

Yeah, nothing says democracy like being forced to join a union.

Re:Don't take away freedoms to "improve" productiv

[WickedClean]

And don't take away the casual dress policy (if you have one). Nobody wants to have to wear a damn tie just to sit behind a desk all day. It makes no sense.

I was in a healthcare-related tech company that went under and in the last couple of months, you could see it coming. The bosses had no clue what they were doing and wanted all of us smaller people to come up with AND execute the big ideas.

Maybe the business should offer some info on how to make a great looking resume.

Stop trickle layoffs

[XNormal]

There is almost nothing worse for morale.

Management may make one last round of layoffs, if really necessary, and then set a challenging goal and declare that there will be no more layoffs for one year (unless someone is really not getting any work done, of course).

Turning around the company...from the small side

[Spooker]

My own experience is with a company that started with 4 developers and 3 management types...we got up to a whopping 18 people at our highest (only 8 of those webheads) and now we have 3...morale in my company was the lowest that people quit in batches...all thanks to a management that didn't pay attention to what the developers had to say...we were just slaves that cost too much :)

In a way, thankfully, the owners woke up and ripped the company to shreds after finding out what was happening...now we are three developers...and yes we went from 40 hour weeks to 70 hour weeks along with our salaries dropping by as much as 60%...but we are loving it...we went from being developers with absolutely no control of what we did to developers ready to conquer the world...

It's not about team-building, it's not about pats on the back, it's not about high salaries (but high salaries don't hurt )...it's about making a difference in a world that is regaining some of the idealism we thought was lost...open-source projects lets everyone be the king of software...watching a feature you dreamed up make it into the site or the software is better any day than having your boss give you a peptalk about doing a good job...

For those who read this and are not sure where I was going or where I went, you're not alone...I'm not sure either ;) but I think I outlined the points I wanted to share that make me the work-a-holic that I am...one who enjoys giving tech support just as much as getting that new delphi component to work exactly the way I dreamed last night at 3am and then decided to code at 4am...

Let them work from home from time to time

[ubeans]

My boss allows me to work from home on Mondays and Fridays. I avoid a long, stressful commute to work, and I save 40% on gasoline. Overall my productivity has increased, and I feel better.

Nothing

[Anonymous Coward]

I work for a very large computer and printer manufacturer (can't say which one, but the initials are HP), and it's so far been my experience that the company isn't at all interested in morale. Why? They don't have to be. With so many people unemployed, they can get away with neglecting or even mistreating the employees and hide behind "you're just lucky to have a job". Anyone who gets fed up and quits is a bonus for the company, because they don't have to worry about paying any severance package as they would for a layoff.

This may save them a few pennies in the short term, but once economic prospects improve, they're going to lose a lot of good employees who have long memories.

Re:Don't take away freedoms to "improve" productiv

[Gortbusters.org]

This is soooo true. I have flex hours, I can work 6am-2pm, 2pm-10pm, or 9-5. I can work at home, or my office, thanks to things like a VPN and Avaya IP Softphone.

When your work load starts to be equal to that of 2 or 3 (or more!) head count, and you know that if you push yourself that you can do it... there are a few things that happen: 1) you realize that doing this work will save your job for the months to come so you do it, and 2) you realize that your boss doesn't really care if you sit in an office or the recliner in your home... as long as the work gets done the boss will be as happy as pig in shit.

Good companies stick to principles--always

[Karl Cocknozzle]

The software (and hardware) market is full of so many highly-qualified people, most with years of experience, that employers have little to no incentive to care whether their current employees are happy or not. If they're not, they can either leave or get fired, and it will be easy to replace them, probably with someone more qualified and/or with more experience, who will work for as much or maybe less money.

It costs approximately $10-15k (before you spend dime one in salary) to hire your average full-time employee in America. (This is an average, not a locked-in-cement dollar amount... It includes advertising, agency efforts, the manager's time, the HR manager's time, how much time it takes to sift through 2,000 resumes for a $22k per year helpdesk job, any training they may need to provide to get the new guy up to speed, drug test, background check, reference check, etc...)

Given this fact, in the long run, it costs MORE to have high turnover in a company than you could ever spend on treating your staff like human beings... I'm not talking about pool tables and six-figure salaries, either. I'm referring to simple things like flex-time so people can actually see their kids and have interests in their lives besides work.

It seems to me that any company operating under this "Who gives a shit about you?" theory should be avoided... Sadly, in this employment market, the talent (that's us) doesn't have the option of voting "nay" to shitty employers by walking off to other jobs.

I am quite fortunate that my new employer is a private (profitable) corporation that doesn't have to whack $1,000,000 out of the budget every five minutes to meet short-term proft forecasts and prevent stock price fluctuations. My former employer made $36 billion in PROFIT the year they laid us off. Sorry, but if you have to fire 5,000 people one quarter, then need to have a "massive hiring drive" the next, that is short-sigthed mismanagement by drones in suits who put their 401k balances ahead of the company's long-term stability and reputation.

It is easy to say "We can cut 30% out of tech support and still field the same number of calls" but "# of calls" is not the same figure as "# of calls handled satisfactorily." As the quality drops, long-term sales prospects of the company's newer products slowly evaporate as CIOs and IT Managers say "Why the hell should we deal with those slow/incompetent jerks, when XYZ Corporation still offers good service?"

(Ever spend big money with a vendor after their "support staff budget cuts" led to lousy service? Me neither...)

It's gonna be like this, in our job market at least, for a while. Hopefully not too long...!

Sadly, I'm afraid you're correct that we're going to have to deal with this sort of idiocy for a while longer... It is amazing to me that in strong economic times, managers complain endlessly about their "free agent" employees, louldy wondering where "loyalty" went?

Then, in the down times, selfsame managers do their best to shit all over said employees... Perhaps if employers didn't (ab)use their power over their employees in a lousy employment market they wouldn't be so eager to jump ship at the first opportunity.

Disagree.

[Skyshadow]

Just fire all the troublemakers as an example to others. Morale will skyrocket.

I know you're probably just being sarcastic, but this is a management tactic and one I firmly disagree with.

Here's something that every university-level management program ought to stress on the first day of class: The real leaders in your organization are not just in the management chain, and all those in the management chain are not real leaders. Effective "troublemakers" are really the natural leaders in your organization who are alienated or dissatisfied for some reason. The smart thing to do it listen to them and recruit them to your side.

I'm not talking about the know-it-all engineer who runs his mouth constantly (we all know this guy, don't we?) because nobody really listens to him, anyhow. No, I mean the person who seems like they're friends with 90% of the company, who people like and respect. Think about it -- you know the sort of person I mean.

A good manager will figure out who these natural leaders are and understand that they're the key to guiding whatever organization they manage. These people can either destoy morale or make your team a team. As a manager, it's your choice.

Re:Disagree.

[jafiwam]

Wanker may not be posting sarcasm. Firing is not always bad, there ARE people who deserve it. The trick for management is to figure out who/when to make it effective. I admit though, mine is the only company that I know of where the firings were good and imediately positive.

My company pulled itself out of a big financial hole, turned around in 8 months, became profitable again and remains so. The beginning was the firing. From there, morale improved and more work got done and more money was made.

The remains of this can be seen in my journal if you want to take a peek at some of the negative attitude that is now gone due to firings.

Firings improved morale, a lot. They just gotta hit the right targets.

As an employer, I'd say...

[Loundry]

Granted, I own a retail shop with only a few employees, but I have worked as a programmer and have seen both the best and the worst of management. It has helped me know how to treat (and how not to treat) my employees:

What to do:

• Make it very clear to each individual employee what she/he needs to do to be promoted. Do this openly, consistently, and frequently.
  
• Your employees' families are much more important than your job your you are to them. If you respect and show concern for and interest in their families, then they will like working for you. If you do the opposite, you will get the opposite result.
  
• Always be ready to take a few for the team. My business for a while was making money, but not that much. After I took my draw, I realized that I was paying my part-time hourly employee more than I was paying myself. Your employees are more likely to make sacrifices for your company if you make sacrifices for your company.
  
• Be positive even in the face of disaster.
  
• Praise your employees for specific behaviors. Focus on their strengths.
  
• If your employee has a problem, be a grown-up about it and help them problem solve. Do not criticize. If they can't fix the problem even with your help, then you should probably be looking to replace them. Your talented and hard-working employees won't tolerate your coddling a poor performer.
  
• Be honest and honorable with your customers. Your employees will know it if you are not, and they will think, "If he will do that to his customer, then what will he do to me?"
  

What NOT to do:

• Do not lie.
  
• Do not accuse, berate, criticize, condemn, complain, or condescend to an employee, coworker, customer, hell, anyone. Those are childish, unprofessional choices, and you will never have good morale if you are unprofessional.
  
• Do not express worry, even if you are (of course, worrying is violating the "be positive" rule ).
  
• Do not tolerate employees who behave unprofessionally. Problem-solve or fire them.
  

Just a few thoughts. I'm still a newbie. If you're an employee, and you want to increase your company morale, forget it. I suggest finding a new employer.

Re:Don't take away freedoms to "improve" productiv

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree with the internet and phone use for personal business. Most of the time I have to take a vacation day to compelete such tasks and no work gets done. On the flex hours, I would agree to a degree. In the past I have had a question for someone only to realize the that person would not be at work for another two hours (or has already left for the day). But I do not have a problem with 30 minutes to maybe an hour. 30 minutes can drastically affect commute time because you are no longer in sync with everyone else.

Management Doesnt Care

[nurb432]

Why should they care about your morale?

The market is different, they have the upper hand currently with the high unemployment rates.

If you are not productive, or a trouble maker, they can find a replacement for you.

A few years ago it was different, and they had to keep people at any cost. But that is not the case now. Be happy you are even employed.

Re:Don't take away freedoms to "improve" productiv

[sisukapalli1]

Flexible hours... Some companies have flexible hours. However, there are so many related issues it is not even funny.

The notion of flexible hours in startups has become "come late, leave late". If someone wants to start the work day at 7am in the hopes of getting out by 4 or 5 and get a life, there is almost palpable tension from the glares of coworkers who amble into work sometime at 10am or 10:30am. More so, if the bosses themselves are late comers.

The flexible hours thing is almost abused in some places. It is much less pressure, if people are asked to be in at certain time, get out at a certain time (unless there are deadlines and other situations).

Imagine having no work to do and still having to sit till 7pm because the dudes that come at 11am will stare you into submission...

S

Be Thankful and Patient

[Alethes]

Those are the two things everyone has to do to be happy.

1) Be thankful that you have a job at all. There are a lot of guys that would kill for your job right now -- even if it's not exactly fun.

2) Be patient and wait for the economy to pick up. It HAS to pick up at some point.

Being thankful and patient are a choice. They are contagious, and when you, as an individual, apply them to your own job, your co-workers will eventually pick up on it as well. Conversely, if you choose to complain and make that the norm, your co-workers will also pick up on that and morale will suffer accordingly.

Promote internally

[fleener]

Recognize the quality veteran employees you have by promoting them.

Nothing distresses the rank and file more than to have a new manager every one or two years who appears, changes the direction of a project (or kills it outright), and then leaves and is replaced by another manager who shakes things up.

You need people who know the company's history, its people and abilities, and have a vested interest in the company's future.

11 things developers can do...

[javabandit]

11 things developers can do

(not in any particular order)

1) Read "Code Complete" and "Design Patterns". Others will be thankful... trust me.

2) Have pride in what you do. Programming IS an art. It requires talent, practice, motiviation, inspiration, creativity, and experience to write good code. Know your craft.

3) Eliminate the KINGDOMS on your team. That is, one person should not solely own one part of the system... hence a "king". Make sure at least two people are knowledgeable about one part of a system.

4) Utilitize tried-and-true design patterns. These are your brushes and your paints.

5) Be politically aware in code reviews. Take constructive criticism constructively and remove your ego. If a reviewer is suggesting that you make a minor change, and the change doesn't harm anything... DO IT. Being inclusive of others' ideas in your code will make everyone happy.

6) When reviewing other people's code, don't be superficially critical. Programmers have different styles. A car, on the outside, may not appeal to you, but it doesn't mean that it isn't a well built/designed vehicle.

7) When designing (or refactoring) portions of code, have design reviews (informal or formal) with at least one other developer. Bounce all your ideas and thoughts. Get ideas and thoughts in return. Use your whiteboard for goodness sakes. That's what it is there for.

8) Praise other developers when they do well. Programmers need to know when they're doing good as well as bad. Programmers appreciate praise from other programmers more than they do from anyone else.

9) When you have to be critical of someone else's code, be constructive. Apply honesty with a feather... not with a sledge hammer. Instead of saying, "What the fuck??? You're not threadsafe and possibly creating multi-tons."... say... "Do you think that synchronizing this singleton might work here better... so we're threadsafe?"... for example.

10) Be consistent in your code. It makes your code more easily maintained by others.

11) Document. Please write comments. Don't be so egotistical to think that your code is self-documenting. Even in COBOL and Eiffel... the two most verbose languages on the planet... this isn't the case.

Ounce of prevention worth a pound of cure

[ddt]

Before you hire on to a company, please, for the love of Pete, find out how it's funded.

If they started from nothing, got three rounds totalling $100Mish from VC over the past 2-3ish years and don't have a shipping product to show for it, absolutely don't work there. VC money means that the company needs to be on the fast track to acquisition or IPO, which means that layoffs that cut burn rate will make the company more attractive to investors while the product is busy slipping.

If it's funded by an angel investor or angel pool, then find out everything you can about their personalities, their investment portfolios, how much they're worth and how much this venture, based on its burn rate, is likely to be straining them.

If it's funded by the people managing it, these, in my experience, are usually the best companies to work for. It's their daily routine on the line, in addition to their cash.

Find out if management has worked at companies where they've conducted layoffs before. They will likely do it again.

Find out if the company has ever missed payroll. If they have, do not assume this is a bad thing. Particularly if everyone stayed on board, this can be a positive thing, and it means management doesn't fire people at the first sign of cashflow problems. If missed payrolls happen all the time, then figure out, based on how often it happens, what your actual salary would be, counting the missed paychecks. It's really no different from saying that you are going to be paid a lower salary. As long as you are planning for missed payrolls, they won't really be missed.

Find out how you are going to split profits on the product. If it's just an ephemeral hand-waving promise that profits will be split, don't take the job. If it's just stock options, don't take the job. If it's going to be a subjective percentage of a pool based on performance, consider taking it if the deciding personalities strike you as fair, well-balanced people. If it's going to be a fixed percentage base with subjective bonuses, then absolutely take the job. None of this is real unless you get it on paper. So make sure you have that piece of paper the day you show up for work.

Most employees believe in the myth of salaries, and their precious, surprised little faces when they learn that there is no Santa Claus never cease to amaze me. Income comes into most companies in large, unwieldy piles of cash, not perfectly metered little bundies of biweekly love. So understand that salaries are a fiction, that exist to create the illusion of stability while lowering the employee's compensation for work over the long haul. We have come to depend on them because we, as individuals, have lost the discipline to save and manage money.

Always, always, always ask how much cash is in the bank right now. Always, always, always ask what the company burn rate is. Do the simple math, and plan to start looking for a job 2-3 months before that money runs out, assuming that they won't make a single penny in the interim or enjoy any further loans or investment.

Watch company growth. Ask every month or two what the new burn rate is. Do curve-fitting to get a more accurate idea of when the bank account goes empty.

Most people take salaried jobs because they don't want to sweat over the company bank account. Sweat it. You're just burying your head in the sand if you don't. Let the fear of that going zero motivate you. And let the excitement of seeing a percentage of those proceeds motivate you.

Morale is usually a function of how well the product is coming together. If it's making exciting progress, catching up, or God forbid, surpassing the competition, investors will usually continue to jump on until the product ships. This is always the first-order response for morale. People love working on good product.

Odds are, if you're in a web development company, your demand has dried up, you're competing with several other development companies also desperate for wo

IT Employee Burnout at Critical Levels

[Sounder40]

According to this article in E-Commerce Times the Meta Group has just published a paper saying that IT employee burnout is reaching critical levels:

A majority of IT managers say IT employee burnout is now a serious issue in their organizations, according to a recent study by research firm Meta Group. Among the many areas of high concern to IT departments this year, few are as evident as employee morale, the report states.

Before I lost my job to a layoff, (my job was outsourced oversees) I was doing the work of several, and constantly worried that layoffs and outsourcing were coming.

I'm now considering a whole new career in a completely unrelated field...

Re:Don't take away freedoms to "improve" productiv

[Anonymous Coward]

It is much less pressure, if people are asked to be in at certain time, get out at a certain time (unless there are deadlines and other situations).

Two points:

1) There may be less work pressure, but some of us have lives outside of work. Where I work right now, my ay typically runs from 10-6 or so, with a couple of extra hours work in the evening. So I'm putting in more than 40 hours a week - but I get to avoid the morning and evning traffic, and spend more time with my family. It's a heck of a benefit to me, and has cost my company little or nothing.

2) In today's economy, there are always deadlines and "other situations". If you haven't read it already, go find a copy of Yourdon's "Death March". It's an easy read, and the final chapter - "Death March as a Way of Life" - it pretty much on-target, in my experience. Whatever you're working on is always absolutely, vitally, critical anymore... because if you won't treat it that way, there's someone else who will.

Re:Don't take away freedoms to "improve" productiv

[weeboo0104]

The key to flex time is to notify your co-workers when you will be arriving. I have co-workers who arrive at 6am and leave at 2 or 3 and other co-workers (boss included) who arrive at 10am and leave at 6 or 7pm. As long as everybody knows when people will be around, everybody seems to be very understanding.

Icing does nothing without cake

[wdr1]

It's more stable now, but people are consistently laid-off.

This is the problem. You have to lump the bad news and spread out the good. Employees are willing to understand layoffs. People are surprisingly understanding of how a buisness needs to adapt, and how that adapation can, unfortunetly, lead to layoffs. As long as you take care of those being laid off (e.g., solid serverence pay, extension of health benifits, assistance finding a new job, etc.), both those let go and those staying behind will show suprising resiliance.

However, if your consistently laying off people, that means upper management does not have a clue of what is going on, and will undercut any confidence in the company. People need to be able to focus on their day to day responsiblities and get their job done; not worry if they're going to have a job in 48 hours.

All the other suggestions, flex-time, etc. are great, but you have to fix the fundamental problem before you can get to those. If you have a bad transmission, you don't try to fix it by getting a pair of fuzzy dice.

-Bill

Generally easy for techno people

[IanBevan]

A couple of simple rules have always helped me with the morale of my team. If morale is poor, I nearly always point at one of these things and realise that I/my company is not doing it: 1. Clear, achievable deadlines
2. The best tools and equipment for the job (within reason obviously)
3. Insulation from the most insideous company politics and hopeless project managers.
4. Wages in the upper bracket of the industry for each role

Re:Don't take away freedoms to "improve" productiv

[cmacb]

"The notion of flexible hours in startups has become "come late, leave late". If someone wants to start the work day at 7am in the hopes of getting out by 4 or 5 and get a life, there is almost palpable tension from the glares of coworkers who amble into work sometime at 10am or 10:30am. More so, if the bosses themselves are late comers."

More often, in my experience, it is the other way around. I've always been a night owl. My last job had an equal number of late comers and early birds. I was almost always the last one out of the office at night, sometimes including the night guard who locked up everything around 10PM.

I envy the person who can work at home whenever they feel like it. I had this luxury for about 2 years. The trick of course is that both you and your manager (or customer) must have a good idea of what the job is that you are doing so that you can agree on when it is 10 percent done, 50 percent done, or finished. These days, there are way too many manager that have never done any of the technical work that they manage. They don't have a clue what you are doing or how you do it. They don't know good quality from bad quality until the end user complains. I would rather work as a greeter at Walmart than work in one of these organizations again. I have no respect for the managers involved, and if you sign on to one of their projects you are doomed to fail even if your own work is beyond comparison.

At some point, and maybe we have already reached it, production of good software must be it's own reward, since the captains of industry don't seem to know good from bad. Results are slowly comming in from projects farmed out to cheap labor overseas and it ain't pretty. This has nothing to do with intelligence or talent of those workers who do work over there for a fraction of what we are used to getting paid. It has instead to do with the total inability of management to conceptualize (much less document) the products that they are trying to turn out.

It is unfortunate but true, these failures will not result in the perpetrators getting fired for incompetence. Rather they will be so monumental that they will cause businesses or at least divisions to be closed down entirely. As poor as mid management is at evaluating the quality of our work as programmers and technicians, top management is even *worse* at evaluating the results of mid-level managers. In almost every case the solutions will be too-little too-late.

there's no cure to your companies problems

[mcguyver]

How to improve your companies morale:
Step 1: Be part of a successful company.
Step 2: Do not lay people off.
Step 3: See Step 1.

Although you already answered your question, people feel like they always have to look over their shoulder to avoid getting fired. Bottom line - your company is the problem. No amount of booze, yoga, flex hours, massages or magic pixie dust are going to increase morale. Odds are the stigmatism from laying off 300 people is still in the air. My suggestion is do one of two things - find a new job or be content with your situation.

suggestions...

[john_uy]

i have things in my mind, though i am not a programmer, i do technical and management at the same time :) (and we are a team)

1. treat people with respect. they'll treat you and your company with respect back.
2. don't overwork the employees. though at times, they will really need to do a lot of things for days and days, treat them to a small out of town trip even for one night. makes everyone relax and forget work.
3. managers should mingle with the employees more. see their status and talk to them. avoid asking techies to make paper work (i'm sure a lot of you don't want to spend a day typing a report.)
4. as a team member, try to delegate tasks. this will avoid conflicts.
5. there should be a "war room" where everyone can put in their ideas and be seen or listened.
6. try to put an incentive program to the employees. it doesn't need to be expensive. a simple recognition award will do.
7. management should be a little flexible with time. they should try to understand if people will be needing an 8-5 shift (like secretaries) or a flexible shift (like programmers.) allow breaks during work. if the time shifts for different employees are different, everyone should be required to keep their mobile phones on.
8. employees should be set up as team based and not on a hierarchical manner. each member of the mean is responsible for the success of all. whether it is a manager, secretary, programmer, technician, they will be treated almost equally.
9. teams should be allowed to set their own goals. for example, a technical group decides that there is an increased number of support calls for a particular problem. they will find ways to solve it. (they do things on their own without having someone to tell them too - you don't want people to order you around do you?)
10. your team should go out from time to time, after office for some recreational activities.
11. don't order around other people (see related item # 9.) although there may times when a particular task needs to be done. these may be exceptions, but for basic stuff, try to ask.
12. find ways of making people do things at work not because of money but because they are challenged with what they are doing. for example, try to challenge your employees from time to time to do a difficult task. remember that they should find ways to grow. work should not be monotonous day in and out.

there are more. basically try to think that the employees are the company similarly the church is to the people and not the physical structure. employees are people - they are not robots to which management orders them around (see item # 1.)

johnlaw :)

p.s. read my signature. i hope you have that job.

Part of the growing class division in the US

[swb]

The phenomena you describe I think is part of a larger (and growing!) class division in America. People who do real work (ie, that can point to a product and show their specific contribution, whether design, programming, manufacturing, etc) are being seperated from people whose real work consists solely of "managing".

People who "manage" have set themselves up as a self-ruling class that sets the rules and rewards for not only the the people they manage but for themselves as well. The important thing to note is the self-ruling aspect -- the management class very nearly always gets bonuses when workers get paycuts, for example.

The other aspects of the management class that trouble me is the way that the work done my managers is structured in such a way that many expenses are subsidized for the "managers". Many managers travel extensively and during this time have all of their expenses recouped, they dine out extensively and many often private expenses are paid for by the company (home office setups, club memberships).

It's not that any of the justifications for paying for these things (ie, meals on company trips) are illogical or wrong, but that the work is structured in such a way that an entire class of workers spends much of their working time in situations where logic dictates that their otherwise personal expenses are paid for by their employers, which is not an insignificant decrease in their overall financial burden, in spite of often exponentially larger salaries justified by the demands of "travel" and "evening dinner meetings."

Meanwhile the "do-ers" are forced to dine at the company cafeteria (short lunch periods) or brown bag it, pay for their own parking and justify office supply purchases for trivial items. Essentially they are required to bear the full costs associated with going to work, while the management class has them heavily subsidized.

What also concerns me about this is the social aspect of this; people spend so much time at work that they transfer the implied power and priviledge of their work places to the rest of their lives, presuming that a seperate set of rules applies to them vis-a-vis taxes, schools, residences, and even law enforcement and access to government decision making.

People who belong to the management classes tend to cluster in McMansions in the same wealthy suburbs and make effective use of their affluence to influence the political process to ensure their continued viability (undermining worker protections, tax cuts only they seem to benefit from, public works projects that they derive a preponderance of benefit from such as new highways to their suburbs).

I believe its just the further Brazilification of our economy and way of life.