Best Employer Survey - A Prospective Employees' Take

 

When the business today February 7, 2010 issue came out with the ninth ‘The Best Companies To Work For’ survey, amongst celebrated Déjà-vu’s, hushed tones and several internet jokes what followed was an overwhelming cheer for Infosys, denial and acceptance of the fact that from year 2006, it’s taken 3 years to get back on the top slot. It’s taken good amount of hard work for an Indian multinational to be at that coveted rank and Mr. Narayan Murthy is a very proud person today! This years BT survey underwent a vast shift in the methodology by bypassing the companies and going straight to the employees and ask them to rate their choice by certain factors. The resultant was a unanimous phenomenal outcome. [Rank 1 – Infosys Technologies, 2 - Google India, 3 – Tata Consultancy Services, 4 – IBM (incl. Daksh), 5 – Microsoft India]

One such survey was conducted in the year 2007, where the methodology adopted was beyond all existing techniques and which bypassed the companies, heading straight to the prospective employees – the engineering students awaiting placements. Here too Infosys Technologies emerged as one of the top 5 dream companies, anybody in India wanted to be in.

WHAT is the background:

The information technology industry has emerged as most promising business proposition in India among the new generation business ventures. The speed with which globalization of business and advancement of technology are moving is significant. India in general and Bangalore city in particular are emerging as the most sought after destination for information technology business not only in Asia but also in rest of the world. These projections create lot of positive expectations from business organizations in terms of availability of trained manpower to meet the needs. Therefore organizations are redefining their talent management strategies by hiring more and more of freshers to curtail the cost. But unfortunately most of these organizations do not have validated HR strategies to attract the freshers into the corporate world. Therefore any effort to build a consensus on strategies for hiring freshers from the campus should be based on the research conducted by collecting data from engineering college students rather than existing employees of the organization.

STARTLING facts:

1. As per studies - in India every third person is a Software Engineer no matter which branch he/she chooses in engineering
2. YET, only 30% of them are employable
3. The rest 70% have the following drawbacks which contributes in HIGH ATTRITION: -
               - Lack of clarity about their future.
               - Attraction towards salary
               - Peer pressure
               - Lack of soft skills
               - Lack of domain knowledge
4. But students have more than 1 offer in hand - Where do they fail in choosing the right job?

WHY talk of it now:

Amidst the economic slow down that has had global effects of downturns and large scale layoff’s, now when the market seems to be growing again and altogether grappling to attain its previous positions and brand value; times ahead look challenging for the HR Department and the Company as a whole. They have vacant positions to be filled, pink slipped employees tugging at the elbow and an ocean of talent knocking their gates every hour. If at these times, caution is not exercised in getting the right person for the right job; losses seem imminent and just when the world around may be enjoying the bounce back, there may still be someone who missed the bus! Talent management is a process everybody has had turns of glorious days and burnt fingers. The swinging between states keeps happening, but these 1-2 years is just not the time, when companies may have to go through the bad days! A large chunk of new entrants have always been the graduating engineers from India’s brightest technical schools, but are we able to retain them for longer periods than a year or two? If not have we ever wondered, what makes them job hop so soon? Or how is it that from the top technical school we fail to attract the top most talented students?

WHO conducted the survey:

In this direction this was the first study of its kind perhaps in the entire country surveyed in the year March – May 2007 by a team of students pursuing their 1^st year of MBA at PES Institute of Technology – MBA Dept., Bangalore. The survey was presented in the NHRD Event ‘Triads’ 2007, Bangalore too. The objectives of which were:

1.      Finding the Dream Companies as perceived by engineering students

2.      Identify the criteria that enables to exercise the decision of joining a Co. or not

3.      Help IT Co.’s device appropriate strategies for attracting freshers

The members of the team constituted of Ms. Deepa S and Ms. Akanksha Yadav (Me). Also Ms. Sonam Chirania and Ms. Poornima Rajapur contributed to the survey in data collection and entry. Throughout the survey the team was guided by Dr. G. Pandu Naik, Head of Learning & Development, Karle Group of Companies, Bangalore (then a professor of Human Resource Management in PESIT, Bangalore).

The Approach:

Not having a benchmark to base the study upon, the questionnaire was such designed that it followed the descriptive research technique and contributed to being a census survey. This was done so that one could understand the entire demographics behind the choices an engineering student makes while selecting upon placements. To ensure data authenticity, the survey was conducted on 6^th semester engineering students in the specializations: Computer Science, Information Science and Electronics & Communication; in all accounting to a total of 994 respondents. Participation was optional but most of the students who were present on the day of data collection participated in the survey, in the presence of the researchers. Five Engineering Colleges in Bangalore city (India) were selected for this study, out of which three were rated among the 100 best Engineering Colleges in the Dataquest survey 2006. (PES Institute of Technology, BMS College of Engineering, RV College of Engineering, Dayanand Sagar Institute of Technology & BNM Institute of Technology) The criteria for selecting the said colleges were geographical proximity to researchers and the willingness of the colleges to provide access for data collection.

Data Analysis:

The survey questionnaire had two parts, the main survey and the demographic part. Basic statistical tools like percentages and averages were used for analysis. The key analysis (that of importance of 10 parameters) involved converting importance rating to relative scales (using Likert 5 pointer).

WHAT We Asked:

Respondents were asked the following distinct set of questions:

Rate the parameters you would like to consider for selecting your prospective employer using a one to five point scale:

The 5 pointer Likert scale was classified as:

[1 – Not at all, 2 – To some extent, 3 – To a large extent, 4 – To a great extent, 5 – To a very great extent]

1. Company – Brand Value
2. Salary and allowances
3. Locational Preference
4. Nature of Work
5. Career Growth Opportunities
6. Learning & Development Opportunities
7. Opportunity to Work Abroad
8. Welfare Measures (canteen, compliments, etc)
9. Job Security
10. Transportation

Dream company:

Respondents were asked an open ended question to fill as per their choice.

Nature of company:

Respondents were provided with 3 categories of different sets of nature to select from, where they would prefer to work:

1.      Indian/MNC/Joint Venture

2.      Established/Newly Started

3.      Product/Service

Initial Salary Expected:

Respondents were asked to mention their expected initial salary on a per month basis

Suggestions to prospective employer for attracting talented candidates:

Respondents were asked to list 3 suggestions they would want prospective employers to introduce in their policies.

WHAT We Got:

A total of 994 respondents participated from 5 top engineering colleges of Bangalore.

DEMOGRAPHIC COMPOSITION

32% from Computer Science & Information Science

71% Male

54% plan to Work, 38% want to pursue Higher Studies

60% hail from Urban areas, 19% from Rural

47% belong to Service class, 28% from Business class

26% 2 L < 4 L, 23% 1 L < 2 L,

22% parental income (p.a.) upto 1 L, 10% 4 L < 6 L, 8% parental income (p.a.) > 6 L

55.4% prefer to work with MNC’s, 21.33% Indian

55.23% prefer Established Organizations, 26% Newly Started

43.16% prefer a Product base Company, 22.54% Service

59% expected initial salary between 3 L – 6 L (p.a.), 18% upto 3 L (p.a.), 11% between 6 L – 12 L (p.a.)

INTERPRETATION:

TOP 5 DREAM COMPANIES RESPONDENTS PREFER TO WORK IN

Top Five Dream Companies	No. of Respondents
Microsoft	151
Google	117
IBM	91
Infosys	48
Intel	44
Not Responded	167
Others	376
Total	994

TOP 5 PARAMETERS RESPONDENTS CONSIDER WHILE SELECTING THEIR PROSPECTIVE EMPLOYERS

Top Five Parameters	% Of Respondents
Career Growth	52
Learning and Development	44
Nature of Work (Job Profile)	34
Job Security	32
Opportunities to go Abroad	28

TOP 5 SUGGESTIONS GIVEN TO EMPLOYER BY RESPONDENTS FOR ATTRACTING TALENTED CANDIDATES

Top Five Suggestions	Number Of Respondents
Good Salary	106
No Consideration of Marks	90
Good Working Environment	79
Planned Career Growth	65
Job Based on Talent	36

RECOMMENDATIONS & IMPLEMENTATION:

If we glance the Top 5 Dream Companies students aspired to work with, surprisingly Infosys was the only Indian multinational that figured there. From our database that Companies that made it among the Top 15, including Infosys, there were just Wipro and TCS to make it a count of 3. So how do we explain that aura foreign MNC’s have that keep attracting employees their end? How should a company survive the economic slowdown and even when not staggered by global environment, yet minimize their soaring attrition levels? As emphasized earlier large scale recruitments always deal with new entrants fresh from engineering colleges and retaining and engaging them is no child’s play. So some of the recommendations from our end that surely everybody is aware of, however a constant reminder is required every passing season to be mulled over and be implemented:

1. Existence of a structured induction policy is absolute essential. Further fool proofing the process by introducing psychometric tests
2. The recruitment panel / team that represents the company should be highly competent
3. Insist on an interactive pre placement talk and present a detailed power point on the company’s products, services, facilities, et al.
4. Introduce schemes for educational assistance and opportunities for enhancing qualification and skills
5. A structured induction programme for not less than 6 months
6. Introducing and following up the ‘Mentorship Programme’ with diligence
7. Evolving a high potential development programme
8. To possess a communication strategy nothing short of brilliance
9. Provide a job profile commensurate to individual capability, than trying and testing him/her on varied grounds before final allotment to an unrelated field of low interest
10. Plan the career map of a newly hired employee before going for selection rounds
11. Relax a bit on grades and scores, which doesn’t mean hire somebody not eligible by what the policy says. However give them a chance to sit for the placements by lowering the cut off bar. Who knows, there may be somebody really good in subject, but a bad writer. Or maybe somebody topped semesters, but last year fell ill or something quirky happened with him.

Succession Planning at low rung levels of the pyramid

A discussion with a friend ended up with a question, “When Bill Gates moved up the ladder, do you think he had a successor all ready and groomed for the position and responsibility?” Or when a chairman of group of organizations retires, does he have a successor waiting in line?

Strangely theory suggests that succession planning is the most important function in the organization and our Organization Behaviour, Organization Development and Organization Structure books back at college all talk about its significance. A relatively large chunk of strategic HR deals with useful succession planning tactics every HR Manager aspires to carry out as a part of his KRA. Yet are we really able to create a line of distinction of those people who would occupy critical spaces?

The FIFO principle (First In First Out) definitely gives way to positions going vacant and the scurrying HR Department on a lookout of a suitable tenant. Many times, change of orders take place from within the organization and still at times new entrants from a competitor industry are sought after. If both fail, some organizations prefer keeping the position vacant. Higher up the management some consideration on succession planning is still planned out, however at the lowest level or mid level are we planned on our needs? Do we have any such model being worked upon?

There are many organizations where the fear of attrition prevents fresh blood from being trained for processes and activities. They constantly face the dilemma - whether they should train and make new employees fit enough for new roles and they quit within 2 months. Or whether they should continue extracting work however not tune them for future needs and even if they quit the problem can be dealt with then and there. Or they believe very frequent job rotations can solve the problem and provide an exposure to all activities in a short span. However this leads to a frustrated employee who doesn’t understand where he fits and what process is calling his skill. Plus frequent readjustments make a sure shot make up of mind that the first best opportunity and he is out of his current workplace. But aren’t majority of employees similar, waiting for the next best opportunity and salary hike from previous? Would this mean that they never get proper training and grooming for the roles that may come up across the desk?

With the continuing tiff between high paying and extremely rewarding IT industry and not really matching levels manufacturing sector, recruitment is an easy step. But retaining fresh blood as in employees from fresher levels to below 5 years of experience is always a tough call. People keep looking across green valleys and in the process neglect assigned responsibilities. Or even if they so wish to fulfil them dutifully they are bound by a sea of non related work they get to do. Though grunt work is necessary and is a part of the learning process, however longer stances of dry runs disappoint them and assure quicker resignations.

One option is harnessing the training cell in all its strength along with delegation of authority. The other can be promoting and entertaining the freshers as well as people coming in for internships. At several organizations a proper internship is denied let alone being allowed to work on things. The Tier-I T-Schools and B-Schools do not have to worry, however Tier-II and below have some grave issues in their kitty. Instead of providing a certificate just to waive off the responsibility or lack of projects, one can instead think upon building competence and manpower through this resource found in abundance. They seem to be the most excited lot who would want to be a part of the organization force and seem very eager to learn. Besides training and development has always been seen as a mode to develop competitive advantage by the organization, so when operation flow is in stake why not give serious thought to the same. Why not be prepared for hard times that may come and situations that may require fresh ideas and brains! Why not have someone lined up and ready to take on the initiative without wasting much of organization’s capital and time!