Home » Our Blog » How to Break Down Silos: A U.S. Military Formula for Today’s Business Execs
back to the top
Break Down Silos

How to Break Down Silos: A U.S. Military Formula for Today’s Business Execs

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on LinkedIn Share on Google Plus Share through email Print it More share options

Some business leaders find that “silos” develop within their organization, where departments do not communicate effectively with one another, hindering efficiency (particularly in interdepartmental goals and projects). Implementing interdisciplinary task forces when appropriate can give your organization the agility necessary to innovate and respond to external challenges.

In Deloitte’s 2017 Global Human Capital Trends survey, just 11% of survey respondents stated that they understood how to build “the organization of the future.” Deloitte notes that one key element of a forward-facing organization is an emphasis on successfully implemented interdisciplinary teams.

A focus on this interdisciplinary teamwork doesn’t require moving away from a traditional business model, but it does allow increased agility and efficiency by encouraging interdepartmental cooperation, no matter the size of your organization

Deloitte refers to the United States Department of Defense (DOD) as one organization that makes excellent use of its teams. With over 7 million personnel in total, the U.S. military has developed agile teams based on thorough information about employee skills and experience – no small feat for an organization of that size!

Whether you have 70 employees or 7 million, you can prevent the silo effect and improve your organization’s efficiency and agility by taking a cue from the U.S. military’s successful team-based structure.

Tracking Employee Skills and Experience

The U.S. DOD keeps detailed record of the skills and specialties of each member, including a history of their service and any relevant non-DOD skills. Levels of experience, responsibility and authority are recorded in a way that everyone in the organization recognizes.

Because of this, the DOD is able to coordinate agile teams based on a particular assignment or project. These teams achieve highly targeted goals. Once a deployment or another project is completed, these teams can be re-formed or new teams can be developed relatively easily because of the detailed data.

Creating Agile Teams for Specific Goals

It’s important to know what skill sets and experience are available within your employee pool in order to make and break teams quickly. And because the teams the DOD creates are based on experience and expertise, they can work to accomplish very specific goals.

One key element of the DOD’s creating, disbanding and re-creating of teams is job security. Military personnel know that if they are assigned to a team or project, they will not lose their jobs once that project is over. Instead, they will be added to another team where their insight and experience can make an impact.

This creates an agility to the DOD organizational structure that rarely is paralleled in the business world.

Applying This to Your Business

What does this mean for your business? For starters, the success of the DOD’s team-based organization demonstrates that interdisciplinary teams can be used effectively, even in a very large organization.

Their teamwork is enabled by up-to-date, robust information on employee skills and experience to allow the creation of the right teams to solve specific problems. Often these are project-based teams that may reform or disband after the completion of the project while maintaining job security.

Having a reliable record of the skills and experience of your employees gives you the flexibility to put the right people to work solving a problem, even if they don’t typically work together. In a quickly changing business world, looking to the U.S. Department of Defense as an example of successful interdepartmental teamwork can help your organization find more agile and effective solutions to the challenges you face.



Author Bio: Jason Bodin has been the communications pulse for a number of organizations, including Paycom, where he serves as director of public relations and corporate communications. He helped launch Paycom’s blog, webinar platform and social media channels. He aided in the development of Paycom’s tool to assist organizations in complying with the Affordable Care Act, one of the largest changes in health care the country has seen. A graduate of the University of Oklahoma, Bodin previously worked for ESPN and FoxSports. In his free time, he enjoys adventuring with his family, reading and strengthen his business acumen.

How to Seriously Drive Employee Engagement

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on LinkedIn Share on Google Plus Share through email Print it More share options

If you won the lottery tomorrow, would you stop working? Chances are you’ve mulled it over before, even if you don’t buy a ticket often. When jackpot amounts grow to rival pro athletes’ salaries, the subject inevitably creeps into everyday conversation. At that point, it’s hard not to think and talk about what we would do as the recipient of a massive windfall.

So how do you think others responded? The answer may surprise you.

According to a study by Gallup, two-thirds of American workers would keep their nose to the grindstone, even after winning $10 million. A CareerBuilder survey reported that half of U.S. workers would continue working after winning the lottery, even “if they didn’t need a job financially.”

That’s right: If over half the working population’s biggest financial hurdles disappeared tomorrow, they would come to work the day after. But why?

What exactly is the employee experience, and how does it impact your bottom line? Find your answers in this podcast interview with Jacob Morgan.

In addition to the desire to maintain relationships with co-workers, 77% of respondents told CareerBuilder they would be bored without a job, and 76% said their work gives them a sense of purpose and accomplishment.

Why Purpose Is a Must

As those survey results show, in order to lead a fulfilling life, people need more than money. They need a reason to get out of bed in the morning. They need to know their actions matter in the grand scheme of things. They need to feel part of something bigger than themselves.

Work can help meet those needs, and when it does, employees feel purposeful, connected and intrinsically motivated: the winning trifecta of long-term engagement. Passion for helping achieve the company’s mission will sustain them when you’re unable to reward them extrinsically with cash or perks. Purpose will keep them going for the long haul.

Without purpose, employee engagement strategy becomes little more than a series of rewards that prod employees forward, but never inspire them to greatness. Not only is a piecemeal strategy ineffectual, it’s unsustainable. The pressure to constantly invent and implement ideas to motivate them quickly can exhaust resources and even the most zealous HR pro.

Your employee engagement strategy should include both extrinsic, short-term rewards and high-level purpose.

Building a Purpose-Driven Strategy

If you currently give employees annual or short-term goals and financial incentives, you’re on the right track toward building a purpose-driven strategy. If not, consider incorporating those aspects into your performance management plan. Then share your business’s ultimate purpose – its reason for being – with your people.

“A reason for being is a non-typical mission statement that has four criteria,” writes Jacob Morgan, futurist and author of The Employee Experience Advantage. “It rallies employees, is not centered on financial gain, is unattainable and talks about the impact the organization has on communities and the world.”

According to Morgan, major companies like Starbucks and Airbnb already have established their “reasons for being” and are seeing positive results. If you’re interested in doing the same, listen to this week’s episode of Paycom’s HR Break Room podcast. In it, Morgan will share steps companies take to define their reason for being, and tips on how you can, too. Click here to subscribe.

Once you’ve defined your business’s ultimate purpose, share it with employees. Doing so will make it easy for them to understand how their contributions count toward reaching the larger, common goal. That combined with other efforts – like pulse surveys, financial incentives, goal setting and professional development opportunities – will increase your odds of building a winning strategy and engaging employees for years to come.

 

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Blog, Employee Engagement, Employee Experience, Featured

Amy Double

by Amy Double


Author Bio: Amy, a tenured professional in sales and marketing with over 10 years of experience, is dedicated to creating content focused on helping organizations achieve their business goals. As an experienced writer, Amy is committed to researching and blogging about topics that affect businesses across multiple industries, including manufacturing, hospitality and more. Outside of work, Amy enjoys reading, entertaining and spending time with family.

DOL's Request for Information

Back to the Drawing Board: The DOL’s Overtime Overhaul Request for Information

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on LinkedIn Share on Google Plus Share through email Print it More share options

The U. S. Department of Labor is taking comments on how it should move forward with overtime overhaul

Since the newest regulations to the overtime law were found invalid, employers are subject to the previous version of Fair Labor Standards Act. However, the roller coaster has not ended.

On July 26, 2017, the DOL published a Request for Information in the Federal Register, indicating it intends to attempt an overtime overhaul. Comments to the Request may be submitted until September 25, 2017. The request asks the public for a response to 11 specific questions.

We can use the questions proposed to help uncover some of the possible changes the DOL is considering. Below are five of the more telling questions and what we can infer from them.

1. Should we just update the 2004 salary level based on inflation?

The Court suggested it would be permissible if the DOL adjusted the 2004 salary level for inflation during questioning at the preliminary injunction hearing. In fact, the Court stated, “[I]f [the salary level] had been just adjusted for inflation – the 2004 figure – we wouldn’t be here today … because [the salary level] would still be operating more the way it has … as more of a floor.” This question indicates the DOL may be referencing inflation because they believe it would be acceptable with the courts

2. Should the regulations contain multiple standard salary levels? If so, how should these levels be set: by size of employer, census region, census division, state, metropolitan statistical area or some other method?

The DOL attempts to make a more malleable test here, which, of course, would serve to be more sensitive to changing demographics. However, a change like this would clearly make compliance tough for employers.

3. Should the DOL set different standard salary levels for the executive, administrative and professional exemptions as it did prior to 2004 and, if so, should there be a lower salary for executive and administrative employees as was done from 1963 until the 2004 rulemaking?

Much like the question above about multiple salary levels, this question would likely provide a more effective test. However, would it come at the cost of convoluting the analysis for employers?

4. Would a test for exemption that relies solely on the duties performed by the employee without regard to the amount of salary paid by the employer be preferable to the current standard test?

This question suggests the DOL seems to be accepting the court’s analysis that duties are more important than salary.

5. The 2016 Final Rule, for the first time, permitted non-discretionary bonuses and incentive payments (including commissions) to satisfy up to 10% of the standard salary level. Is this an appropriate limit or should the regulations feature a different percentage cap? Is the amount of the standard salary level relevant in determining whether and to what extent such bonus payments should be credited?

This question indicates the DOL may propose a version of regulations that still allows for bonuses to apply to the salary level.

Given the nature of the questions found in the Request for Information it’s clear the DOL has gone back to the drawing board and may propose something completely different from both the recent failed regulations as well as the 2004 revisions.

Disclaimer: This blog includes general information about legal issues and developments in the law. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and must not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances. You need to contact a lawyer licensed in your jurisdiction for advice on specific legal problems.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Blog, Compliance, Featured, FLSA, Overtime Expansion

Zachary Gregory

by Zachary Gregory


Author Bio: As a compliance attorney for Paycom, Zach Gregory monitors legal and regulatory changes at the state and federal levels, focusing on payroll and garnishment laws, to ensure the Paycom system is updated accordingly. He previously worked at a law firm as a tax attorney. He holds a bachelor’s degree from Oklahoma Christian University and a J.D. from Oklahoma City University. Outside of work, Gregory enjoys playing in the backyard with his two boys, and finding new restaurants with his wife and high school sweetheart, Kellyn.

FLSA Overtime Regulations

Court: DOL’s FLSA Overtime Regulations Invalid

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on LinkedIn Share on Google Plus Share through email Print it More share options

In case you missed it, on August 31, 2017, Judge Amos Mazzant of the Eastern District of Texas determined that the 2016 Final Rule issued by the U.S. Department of Labor, which increased the minimum salary threshold to $47,476, was not a valid action by the agency.

After finding that the case was ready for judicial decision and the parties at hand could be injured if the court did not intervene, Mazzant addressed all three of the plaintiff’s arguments.

First, the court addressed the state plaintiff’s argument that the Fair Labor Standards Act’s (FLSA) overtime requirements violate the Constitution by regulating the states and coercing them to adopt wage policy choices that adversely affect state budgets. The court held the Supreme Court precedent of Garcia v. Metropolitan Transit Authority established that Congress has the authority under the Commerce Clause to impose FLSA’s minimum wage and overtime requirements on state and local employees.

Next, the court declined to accept the plaintiff’s argument that based on the clear statement rule, the FLSA does not apply to the states. Under that rule, “if Congress intended to alter the ‘usual constitutional balance between the states and the federal government,’ it must make its intention to do so ‘unmistakably clear in the language of the statute.”

The court discarded this argument simply by pointing out the law is applicable to any “enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce,” and this phrase, by statutory definition, includes the activity of any public agency. Therefore, the court held that the Congress was clear enough in its intention to impact the states.

 Failing the Test

Finally, and most importantly, the court agreed with the plaintiffs in finding that the Department of Labor acted outside of the scope of its delegated authority by implementing a salary-level test that effectively eliminated the duties test.

The court adhered to the test established in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., which requires courts to determine whether Congress has spoken directly to the precise question at issue. If Congress has, then the court and agency must follow the intent of Congress.

After interpreting the plain meanings of “executive, administrative and professional,” Mazzant found Congress intended the exemption to apply to employees who perform those duties, rather than those who simply are paid a certain amount. Furthermore, because the new regulations focused more on the salary level than Congress intended, they were found invalid, and the court held the agency acted outside of its delegated authority.

What’s Next?

The Department of Labor published a Request for Information in the July 26 Federal Register, which indicates the agency intends to continue its attempt at overhauling overtime.

Disclaimer: This blog includes general information about legal issues and developments in the law. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and must not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances. You need to contact a lawyer licensed in your jurisdiction for advice on specific legal problems.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Blog, Compliance, Employment Law, Featured, FLSA, Overtime Expansion

Zachary Gregory

by Zachary Gregory


Author Bio: As a compliance attorney for Paycom, Zach Gregory monitors legal and regulatory changes at the state and federal levels, focusing on payroll and garnishment laws, to ensure the Paycom system is updated accordingly. He previously worked at a law firm as a tax attorney. He holds a bachelor’s degree from Oklahoma Christian University and a J.D. from Oklahoma City University. Outside of work, Gregory enjoys playing in the backyard with his two boys, and finding new restaurants with his wife and high school sweetheart, Kellyn.

X

Learn more about Paycom

  • Are you a current Paycom Client?

    Yes

    No

    • Talent Acquisition

    • Time & Labor Management

    • Payroll

    • Talent Management

    • HR Management

  • Subscribe me to Paycom's newsletter.

*Required

We promise never to sell, rent or share your personal information with a third party unless required by law. By submitting this form, you accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.