Crizele tind sa scoata la iveala din oameni tot ce este mai bun, dar si tot ce este mai rau… Pe de o parte, pandemia de COVID-19 ne-a impulsionat sa dam mai des o mana de ajutor, sa facem cumparaturi pentru vecinii mai in varsta, sa confectionam masti si sa trimitem dezinfectant catre cei care au nevoie. Pe de alta parte, unii dintre noi facem stocuri imense de hartie igienica, impartasim teorii ale conspiratiei pe retelele de socializare si nu urmam asa cum ar trebui indicatiile autoritatilor privind distantarea fizica.

Putini dintre noi mai avem parte de vechile rutine – de a ne trezi dimineata si a merge la birou, de a interactiona in pauza la o cafea cu colegii, de a ne intoarce acasa si de a petrece seara cu familia sau prietenii.

Multi dintre noi ne “luptam” cu a crea un echilibru intre a lucra de acasa, in timp ce trebuie sa ne ocupam si de copii sau de treburile gospodaresti.

Cei care lucreaza in domeniul medical, dar si in alte industrii, simt ca lucreaza mai multe ore ca niciodata, in timp ce altii din domenii precum cel al ospitalitatii, nu mai au activitate. O buna parte dintre angajatii la nivel global se intreaba daca organizatiile pentru care lucreaza vor mai functiona si anul urmator si daca ei vor mai avea un loc de munca.

Schimbarilor din viata de zi cu zi, nesigurantei cu privire la aspectele financiare, ingrijorarii de a nu fi infectati sau de a pierde pe cineva drag, se adauga sentimentul profund de izolare cu care ne confruntam, ducand, astfel, la un nivel fara precedent de stres. Nici unii dintre noi nu functionam optim in astfel de circumstante, iar aceasta criza a creat mediul perfect pentru ca “partea intunecata” a personalitatii sa iasa la iveala.

During the month of April, this year, during the beginning of Covid-19 crisis, our business psychologists and consultants created a short pulse survey to understand more about what measures are companies taking under this new context we all experience in order to keep the business running and their people safe.

Therefore, we have deployed the survey to 250 companies from different industries. 53% of respondent companies have more than 500 employees.

We have invited HR professionals to respond to our questions.

The responses indicated the following:

Odata cu declararea starii de urgenta si implementarea recomandarilor de distantare sociala, multi dintre noi resimtim acut izolarea sociala. Si este normal, deoarece oamenii sunt prin natura lor, fiinte sociale.

Psihologul Matthew Lieberman a declarat ca nevoia noastra de conexiune sociala este la fel de fundamentala ca nevoia de apa si mancare. In timpuri stravechi, a fi parte dintr-un grup sau trib era esential pentru supravietuire. Astfel, conform teoriilor psihologiei evolutioniste, nevoia de conectare sociala a fost transmisa genetic ca un mecanism fundamental de supravietuire.

Astfel, nu ne surprinde faptul ca reducerea conectarii sociale are un impact asupra echilibrului emotional si asupra sanatatii psihologice. Iar acestea, la randul lor, impacteaza semnificativ eficienta la locul de munca.

Even during the best of times, research shows that absentee leadership is quite common and destructive to teams and organizations. What’s an absentee leader? One who displays neither actively positive leadership nor actively negative leadership; an absentee leader seems uninvolved and uncommunicative. For leaders whose teams are all working remotely during the COVID-19 pandemic, the possibility of showing up as an absentee leader increases, even for leaders who typically are engaged with their teams in the office.

Employees whose leaders are absentee report less direction, delayed decisions, and a lack of feedback and involvement. Role ambiguity results, along with decreased job satisfaction, higher intentions to leave, and added conflicts with co-workers. Add to that the increased stress of the pandemic, and negative outcomes for organizations and employees could be exponentially increased.

Communication is key. There are many readily available tips for managers regarding the common pitfalls resulting from virtual distance between workers and leaders. There are also many useful aids for communicating more effectively with remote teams. A focus on communication undoubtedly is critical for managers at all times, especially now.

On April 17, 2017, Southwest flight 1380 from New York to Dallas was in serious danger. A failed fan blade had struck the plane, creating a window-sized hole on the left side of the plane. Oxygen masks were deployed and, unsurprisingly, the passengers began to panic. Captain Tammie Jo Shults remained calm, took command of the situation, adapted to the circumstances, and safely landed the plane in Philadelphia, saving hundreds of lives. Her audio call is worth a listen.

More recently, the Diamond Princess cruise ship was quarantined with more than 700 passengers testing positive for COVID-19. Captain Gennaro Arma was credited for preventing panic with his calm and reassuring leadership style. There are many examples of extraordinary leaders rising to the occasion in crisis situations. Because many organizations are currently facing the crisis caused by COVID-19, we thought it would be a good time to review what we know about organizational crisis and what makes a leader most effective during such times.

With concern about the spread of COVID-19, more companies are choosing to allow workers to office remotely; Remote work isn’t a new concept. Over the past couple of years, with the increase in demand for a flexible workplace and the development of more advanced AI technology, many companies are choosing to offer employees the option to work virtually. VR conferencing; communication platforms such as WeChat, Slack, and Skype for Business; and apps for managing remote work and workers make remote work feasible and just as easy to manage as working in an office.

“Femeile sunt mai empatice si de aceea mai bune in a conduce oameni”. „Barbatii sunt mai dominanti, mai carismatici, au mai multa forta si de aceea ei ar trebui sa se afle in varful ierarhiilor”. „Femeile trebuie sa isi asume mai mult rolul traditional de mama si sotie”. „Barbatii trebuie sa aduca bani, sa aiba un statut social mai inalt si sa ofere stabilitate in familie”.

De cate ori se iveste ocazia de a discuta despre subiectul femei versus barbati in business si mai ales despre femei si barbati aflati la conducere, am auzit asumptiile de mai sus, dar si multe altele in plus. Brusc, pare ca toata lumea devine experta si are o opinie ferma cu privire la cine ar trebui sa se afle la conducere, cu privire la rolul femeii si al barbatului in societate.

Performanta unei organizatii depinde, in mare masura, de performanta contributorilor individuali. De aceea, este crucial sa angajam oamenii potriviti. Dar cum ne putem da seama daca procesul nostru de selectie identifica cu adevarat persoanele potrivite?  

We’re excited to announce that Dr. Robert Hogan was given the 2020 RHR International Award for Excellence in Consulting Psychology at the Society of Consulting Psychology (SCP) annual conference on February 8 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

The award is granted to individuals who epitomize the standards of excellence that RHR and the SCP seek to perpetuate. Dr. Hogan received the award in recognition of his distinguished career and his significant contributions to the practice of consulting psychology.

The English philosopher Gilbert Ryle famously distinguished between two forms of knowing. The first involves knowing that something is the case and concerns factual knowledge; the second involves knowing how to do something and concerns procedural knowledge.

Organizational psychologists know that there is a right way and a wrong way to choose people who can perform well in specific jobs. Moreover, there is no difference, in principle, between the method for choosing good CEOs and the method for choosing good janitors—although the consequences of choosing a bad CEO are much more severe than the consequences of choosing a bad janitor. However, tested knowledge and proven methods for making good selection decisions are all but ignored when it comes to how CEOs are hired.

A friend of ours, an expert in employee selection, consulted with a franchise in the National Basketball Association. To his dismay they hired player after player based on technical ability, and each of these players was subsequently released—at great cost—for reasons of bad conduct. We asked our friend why the franchise owners ignored his hiring advice, and he said, “There is so much money and ego involved in these decisions that no one cares what I think.” Much the same sentiment seems to apply in the process of selecting CEOs. CCL’s research on executive selection confirms that little rigor is used when appointing top leaders.

CEO selection is prone to three recurring problems.