Military Experience As Job Experience

I was reading an interview from National Review yesterday about how the Israeli military has helped their economy grow by leaps and bounds over many much bigger countries, especially in the technology sector. As the interviewed author, Dan Senor, states:

Israel represents the highest concentration of innovationand entrepreneurship in the world today: the most start-ups per capita; the highest percentage of GDP invested in civilian R&D; more companies on NASDAQ than all of Europe, Korea, Japan, India, and China combined; and the biggest destination for global venture capital per capita. Israel raises 2.5 times as much global venture capital as the U.S., 30 times more than Europe, 80 times more than India, and 350 times more than China.

So why Israel? Why would a country so small and so often under attack be seen as a positive place to do business for people throughout the world? And why would Israel having a military matter? Senor explains:

The military is where many Israelis learn to lead and manage people, improvise, become mission-oriented, work in teams, and contribute to their country. They tend to come out of their years of service (three for men, two for women) more mature and directed than their peers in other countries. They learn “the value of five minutes,” as one general told us. They even learn something more uniquely Israeli: to speak up — regardless of ranks and hierarchy — if they think things can be done better.

And how does the United States treat military "experience"?

U.S. military career adviser Al Chase told us that a number of the vets he’s worked with have walked a business interviewer through all their leadership experiences from the battlefield, including case studies in high-stakes decisionmaking and management of large numbers of people and equipment in a war zone, and at the end of it the interviewer has said something along the lines of, “That’s very interesting, but have you ever had a real job?”

This is one place the United States may be missing out. The United States is now employing an entire workforce in Iraq, Afghanistan and around the world. Those people are getting experiences beyond the type of stress anyone would see in a workplace. They are being asked to work together in teams and/or given leadership positions. Yet when they come back from the war we need to see actual work experience? True the lack certain of the technical competencies needed for certain jobs, but more often than not, I fear that we ignore the example set by Israel and dismiss our military veterans on the job force when they could be one of our greatest assets.

Don't Report Your Time Off?

WorldAtWork recently posted a blog entry titled: "Vacation time: Is It Time to Stop Tracking?" It's an interesting question and one which has a lot of different answers depending on who you ask. From WorldAtWork:

Many companies over the years have migrated from siloed leave policies that designate a specific number of days for vacation, sick leave and personal time off to paid time off (PTO) banks programs that provide a total set number of days off that employees can use for any reason. Newer, even more flexible, programs now provide employees with more informal personal time and vacation arrangements with their managers when it suits them, guided mainly by their ability to perform their jobs successfully.

Now this is much like an honor system, and like any honor system, you have the chance of abuse or free riders. But the idea makes sense. With people permanently tethered to Blackberries and the internet, the job doesn't have to stop when you leave the office. If people don't abuse the system, they'll get their job done and be happy, which should increase productivity even more. I once interviewed for a job that was run like this, though they expected you to make up for the time you missed...but you could miss as much as you wanted.

Some companies allow you to trade time off credits, work a Saturday/Sunday to get another day off, or other similar ways to make time off more flexible for the employees.

The problem here is this is not for every job. You still need to know when people are going to not be at their desks--especially in service-oriented companies--and reporting time off (or at least letting their managers know ahead of time) is one way to accomplish that. This also can only occur at companies where the management and the employees feel secure with one another. Employees have to feel comfortable enough with taking the time off (since there are issues with them feeling that way as it is) and employers need to feel comfortable enough in the fact the job will get done and the person will not abuse it.

But in the world of increasing attachment to the office, allowing an employee to have the ultimate "flex" time off doesn't mean they'll truly be away from the job and could be another "benefit" that separates your company from the rest when recruiting new employees.

Question to the audience: do any of your companies do this? what are your opinions on the subject?

ESPN an HR Nightmare

It has happened before at ESPN. Harold Reynolds and other on-air personalities had been fired for inappropriate relationships with subordinates. It has happened with other staffers as well. Yesterday, it reached a boiling point after former New York Mets General Manager and ESPN personality, Steve Phillips, took a leave of absence after a bizarre story involving a relationship with a 22-year-old production assistant, detailed in yesterday's New York Post.

According to sports blog Awful Announcing, in 2007, ESPN hired a new Senior Vice President, Human Resources, in part to help with the rash of sexual harassment complaints. It didn't seem to help. And the problem is, as Deadspin reports, that everyone seems to know and care except for the higher-ups at ESPN.

Deadspin relayed a story about another male on-air personality that has been rumored to take place in the same inappropriate activities. Deadspin also tells the story of an ESPN staffer who may have been promoted for the wrong reasons.

So why does this happen? Yet another Deadspin expose told of the culture that existed at ESPN and described it very much as a Human Resource nightmare. This is a culture that existed for a long time and was reinforced by the executives who were taking part as well.

As a New York Magazine poll last week showed after the David Letterman scandal, people have very differing opinions of what is OK to do in the office. A positive culture has to come from the top down. When executives and other people in power are taking part in inappropriate relationships and human resources is unable to curtail the behavior, chaos, like what seems to be occurring at ESPN happens and opens up the company to a litany of lawsuits. Let's hope your company does not look like this.