April 04, 2005
How do you solve a problem like Miranda?
Do companies have any obligation to loyal employees? Here is the story of one such employee. Let us know what you think the company should have done.
Miranda was the second person hired by the company’s Hong Kong office in 1992. She was hired to be the office manager. By the time I got to know Miranda in 2000, she managed all of the administrative staff, suppliers, contracts, and finances for the business.
Over the years, Miranda demonstrated her loyalty to the business. When the company experienced one its “near death experiences” in 1993 and the Hong Kong office was going to be closed, Miranda volunteered to stay to the end rather than looking for a new job because she felt an obligation to the office she helped open. (The office stayed open due to the good graces of a global customer.) Whenever something difficult needed to be done or a problem had to be worked out with the U.S. headquarters, Miranda was the one to make it happen. Her efforts got her the nickname, “Momentie”, which is Cantonese for “no problem.”
After nearly a decade with the company, Miranda wanted to move from being a jack-of-all-trades to becoming a salesperson. As the first step in this process, we hired a business manager to relieve her of the contracts and financial management parts of the job. We then put her in charge of all global accounts requiring delivery support from the Hong Kong office. All was going well with the plan until the company’s 2002 “near death experience” led to the sale of the company and the SARS epidemic led to a severe contraction of the Asian business.
After the sale was completed, it was decided that a new sales position would be added in the Hong Kong office. Miranda seemed like a likely choice for it given her experience with the business and he role she was already playing with global accounts. It seemed natural that she would be given a shot at the job despite her lack of formal training as a salesperson.
Well as the circumstances would have it, Miranda did not get an opportunity to interview for the sales job. To make matters worse, she was taken out of the business when her position was eliminated due to cost issues. She was prevented from interviewing for the sales job and had her current position eliminated by the very same person to whom she had remained so loyal to in 1993!
While I am not questioning whether Miranda was the best qualified person for a sales job, I am curious as to what obligation a company has to give employees the opportunities to change careers internally. It would seem that if any employee had earned the right to try something new, Miranda would have been that employee. What do you think?
Poll Closed
Poll Closed
Posted by Greg Robinson at April 4, 2005 01:57 PM
View Printer Friendly VersionComments
Miranda may not have been the most qualified, but she should have been given the opportunity to at least apply for the position and have a discussion about how she could become qualified for a future sales position. It is also apparant that she is a proven go-getter with a great attitude. Isn't that what you would want in a salesperson? In this day and age employee loyalty is very hard to find, shame on the company for even giving her a chance to prove herself. After all, they could have trained her to be exactly the way they wanted.
Posted by: chris at April 18, 2005 09:03 AM
In this situation it's very difficult to try to do what is best for the company and what is morally right for the loyal employee.
The position of Sales is crucial for the prosperity of the company, and to give it to someone that is not experienced in Sales, can be detrimental to the success of the business. Then on the other hand, a loyal employee should be given an opportunity.
I believe the middle ground is to invest in Sales training for the loyal employee. A loyal employee who knows the company inside out can work wonders. It will be wise for the company to invest because the company will get great representation from this employee.
Posted by: at April 18, 2005 12:50 PM
Julie and Chris, thanks for your posts. In response to both of your comments about training, the irony of this situation is that one of the services the company provided was sales training!
Thanks
Posted by: at April 18, 2005 02:25 PM
Loyalty is such a rare quality in today's business world that a loyal employee should be retained if at all possible. Miranda would have taken very little training because of the knowledge she already possessed about the company. She not only would have been an asset to the sales side of the company she would have been a great example to other employees of what hard work and loyalty can achieve. Unfortunately, so many companies today do not look at that side of the equation.
Posted by: Nancy F. at April 19, 2005 07:44 AM
Isn't Miranda's case all about the social contract?
If an employee thinks promotions are due to them for tenure then the top management must agree to that plan.
I would argue that loyalty is something a boss earns everyday. A company cannot provide loyalty or security. Only their customers can do that. A boss can based on her treatment of her subordinates each day.
By setting clear expectations around career management Miranda could have been retained as a valued employee.
Secondly, and just as importantly the perception by the employees who remain is now forever tainted.
Posted by: at April 19, 2005 09:26 AM
Paul, your comments about the impact on the other employees is profound. The message that not retaining Miranda sends is that loyalty will not be rewarded so why go above and beyond the call of duty.
Posted by: at April 19, 2005 09:48 AM
"Instant Gratification" is the word of business today. It would seem that 60 - 70% of businesses out there are looking at the bottomline today and not of their future down the road. Yes they may have a goal structure of where they want to be in 10 - 15 years from now but the realization that businesses come and go because of such major changes gives them a narrow vision and therefore they see the paperclip infront of them while stepping over the elephant and being completely oblivious of it.
Employee's who are loyal to the company are more than just workers, they are gold mines and they should be counted by the company as an investment and not just an employee. The employee has learned their job and maybe the jobs of other employees and those that seek information and understanding of how the business works should be rewarded not by getting passed by with opportunities but should be made examples of by the business and used to train others to be like them. This gives the company less spending on outside consulting groups to train their employees and keeps the training internal. Miranda is a great asset and should be seen by the company as that.
Yes companies today cut their noses off to spite their face, by doing this. They can stay competitive if they just see the wealth of knowledge that is the loyal person. Other employees sees how she is treated, promotions, rewards, lavished in things of the business and they want to succeed. Then it is the companies/businesses part to fulfill in succeeding in that business and making changes to stay around and be ahead of the pack so that they can keep such goldmines. Most employers see that they can replace someone quickly because there are a lot of resumes floating that could take that job, but they don't remember all the time and energy and money they have put into this person and they become an asset not just an employee. Business has forgotten the "Gold Rule" treat others as you would have them treat you. This would make businesses more valued in the eyes of the customer in the open way they reward their employees. Create a vaccuum by moving this person onward and upward for others to see that being loyal and wanting the company to succeed is worth it. Then when the company goes through rough times these employees step up and take care of the business and make sure it succeeds. Look at Lee Iacoca (sp?) he pulled his employees together and said that they were having a rough year and were going to close the plant unless they did something...The employees pulled together what money they had and made the business survive. Loyalty is under-valued.
Posted by: at April 19, 2005 10:17 AM
I do not believe that long term employees should automatically be given a chance at job openings. I've seen too many long term employees that are slackers just because they know they can get by with it. They seem to think their seniority entitles them to sit back and take it easy.
Define the word "qualified". Miranda has demonstrated that she is more than capable of growing with a job as reflected by her track record. I would give her the new job because she's proven herself - which makes her qualified in my book.
Posted by: Anonymous at April 19, 2005 01:51 PM
After 25 years with a company I was recently given an employee reprimand, written up for doing what I thought was my job, an action for which I was given security clearance. Our perception of what is "right" and the reality of the business world are no longer in cinq. I think that being politically correct and minding the rules has become far more the norm than taking integrity, honesty, and longevity into account. It is a new world and each day is an employee's first in the eyes of his employer. The sooner an employee understands this, the safer he/she will be.
Posted by: at May 5, 2005 09:14 AM
Miranda may not have been the most qualified, but she should have been given the opportunity to at least apply for the position and have a discussion about how she could become qualified for a future sales position. It is also apparant that she is a proven go-getter with a great attitude. Isn't that what you would want in a salesperson? In this day and age employee loyalty is very hard to find, shame on the company for even giving her a chance to prove herself. After all, they could have trained her to be exactly the way they wanted.
In this situation it's very difficult to try to do what is best for the company and what is morally right for the loyal employee.
The position of Sales is crucial for the prosperity of the company, and to give it to someone that is not experienced in Sales, can be detrimental to the success of the business. Then on the other hand, a loyal employee should be given an opportunity.
I believe the middle ground is to invest in Sales training for the loyal employee. A loyal employee who knows the company inside out can work wonders. It will be wise for the company to invest because the company will get great representation from this employee.
Julie and Chris, thanks for your posts. In response to both of your comments about training, the irony of this situation is that one of the services the company provided was sales training!
Thanks
Loyalty is such a rare quality in today's business world that a loyal employee should be retained if at all possible. Miranda would have taken very little training because of the knowledge she already possessed about the company. She not only would have been an asset to the sales side of the company she would have been a great example to other employees of what hard work and loyalty can achieve. Unfortunately, so many companies today do not look at that side of the equation.
Isn't Miranda's case all about the social contract?
If an employee thinks promotions are due to them for tenure then the top management must agree to that plan.
I would argue that loyalty is something a boss earns everyday. A company cannot provide loyalty or security. Only their customers can do that. A boss can based on her treatment of her subordinates each day.
By setting clear expectations around career management Miranda could have been retained as a valued employee.
Secondly, and just as importantly the perception by the employees who remain is now forever tainted.
Paul, your comments about the impact on the other employees is profound. The message that not retaining Miranda sends is that loyalty will not be rewarded so why go above and beyond the call of duty.
"Instant Gratification" is the word of business today. It would seem that 60 - 70% of businesses out there are looking at the bottomline today and not of their future down the road. Yes they may have a goal structure of where they want to be in 10 - 15 years from now but the realization that businesses come and go because of such major changes gives them a narrow vision and therefore they see the paperclip infront of them while stepping over the elephant and being completely oblivious of it.
Employee's who are loyal to the company are more than just workers, they are gold mines and they should be counted by the company as an investment and not just an employee. The employee has learned their job and maybe the jobs of other employees and those that seek information and understanding of how the business works should be rewarded not by getting passed by with opportunities but should be made examples of by the business and used to train others to be like them. This gives the company less spending on outside consulting groups to train their employees and keeps the training internal. Miranda is a great asset and should be seen by the company as that.
Yes companies today cut their noses off to spite their face, by doing this. They can stay competitive if they just see the wealth of knowledge that is the loyal person. Other employees sees how she is treated, promotions, rewards, lavished in things of the business and they want to succeed. Then it is the companies/businesses part to fulfill in succeeding in that business and making changes to stay around and be ahead of the pack so that they can keep such goldmines. Most employers see that they can replace someone quickly because there are a lot of resumes floating that could take that job, but they don't remember all the time and energy and money they have put into this person and they become an asset not just an employee. Business has forgotten the "Gold Rule" treat others as you would have them treat you. This would make businesses more valued in the eyes of the customer in the open way they reward their employees. Create a vaccuum by moving this person onward and upward for others to see that being loyal and wanting the company to succeed is worth it. Then when the company goes through rough times these employees step up and take care of the business and make sure it succeeds. Look at Lee Iacoca (sp?) he pulled his employees together and said that they were having a rough year and were going to close the plant unless they did something...The employees pulled together what money they had and made the business survive. Loyalty is under-valued.
I do not believe that long term employees should automatically be given a chance at job openings. I've seen too many long term employees that are slackers just because they know they can get by with it. They seem to think their seniority entitles them to sit back and take it easy.
Define the word "qualified". Miranda has demonstrated that she is more than capable of growing with a job as reflected by her track record. I would give her the new job because she's proven herself - which makes her qualified in my book.
After 25 years with a company I was recently given an employee reprimand, written up for doing what I thought was my job, an action for which I was given security clearance. Our perception of what is "right" and the reality of the business world are no longer in cinq. I think that being politically correct and minding the rules has become far more the norm than taking integrity, honesty, and longevity into account. It is a new world and each day is an employee's first in the eyes of his employer. The sooner an employee understands this, the safer he/she will be.
