Motivating Transferred Employees

Employees who work for companies with far-flung operations are sometimes faced with a perplexing decision--whether to accept or decline a transfer to another location. The difficulties of relocation don't fall entirely on the shoulders of affected employees. Management, too, assumes an additional challenge when it relocates a good person. Two critically important questions that need to be answered are

• What steps will be taken to ease the employee's transition to a new place and situation?
• How will that person continue to be motivated when he or she is far from corporate "home?"

Employees whose work at headquarters has been exemplary enough to warrant transfer to responsible positions elsewhere deserve to have their transfers handled well. Otherwise, employers risk losing good people. It isn't enough to pay all the expenses inherent in a move. That's a given, and should be considered only one of many motivating factors, just as salary and benefits in general are but two factors in the arsenal of motivational tools. It's the extra things that can make the difference between a happily transferred person and one who becomes disillusioned and discontented.

What a company is willing to do for a relocated employee is highly individual and depends on a variety of circumstances. If there is one concept that should be applied to every case, it's the need to be sensitive to the stress that is inherent in relocating, stress that touches everyone involved. Moving is disruptive and traumatic for employee and family alike. Anticipating this additional pressure and doing whatever possible to alleviate it helps ensure a successful relocation.



Relocating Transferred Employees

Before examining the intangible factors that go into building the morale of a transferred worker, let's take a look at the nuts and bolts of relocation, not in dollar figures but in the way it's handled.

Companies that routinely transfer employees usually have a formal structure through which to smooth the process. Issues addressed in these policies are:

• Helping transferred employees sell their homes. What help is the employer prepared to give in this regard? Policies vary from company to company. Many will assist in the sale of an employee's current home, or will make provisions to guarantee its fair market value should the employee be unable to sell it before leaving. Will real estate fees and administrative expenses associated with selling a house be covered? If an employee's home is sold, but that individual intends to rent in the new location, will the employer make provisions to help offset the impact of capital gains?
  
  
• Helping the transferred employee break a lease. If the employee is renting a home and must break a lease in order to relocate, some companies agree to cover the loss of security payments or other expenses resulting from such action.
  
  
• Helping transferred employees with temporary living expenses. To what extent will the employer pick up expenses during the transitional period between the employee leaving his or her current residence and finding a new home? Will a temporary living allowance be advanced to cover such expenses as hotel or short-term apartment rental, per diem allowances for meals, vehicle rental, and other costs the employee and family will incur?

Job transfers often involve a better title, salary, and enhanced career potential. However, if those positive factors are mitigated by losses pertaining to the employee's home, the bloom could come quickly off the rose for this otherwise motivated individual.

Some companies create a thoughtful and comprehensive system to ease the transfer of employees away from headquarters, but fail to plan for their eventual return. Every company that relocates employees should have a formalized "repatriation" policy that is adequately explained before employees relocate. Will the company cover all expenses related to returning to home base? Under what circumstances will the company not assume the expense of bringing back an employee?

To prepare, companies should establish a policy that covers the possibility of transferred employees choosing to resign while in their new location to take a job with another firm. Will they be expected to pay back a portion, or all, of the relocation expenses paid by the employer that sent them there? What about employees who are fired while in their new domain? Will the company pay to return them to their home cities?

Transferring Employees Overseas

I used the term repatriation, which is generally reserved for when an individual returns from a foreign land. This might be a good time to comment on the special challenge of relocating employees overseas. Any relocation, domestic or foreign, poses problems, but they're necessarily more complex when sending employees to foreign countries. Here are just a few potential difficulties:

• Language--The adjustment for employees and their families is compounded by different languages, cultures, and a variety of other factors.
  
  
• Taxes--There can be significant tax problems if employees must pay taxes to the host country. In some extreme cases, taxes can be greater than the employees' base salaries!
  
  
• Business etiquette--There is the need to acclimate to a different way of doing business, based on local protocol.
  
  
• Education--The right education for employees' children must be established to ensure they haven't "lost ground" on returning home.
  
  
• Spouse assimilation--The employees' spouses face the challenge of making new friends, assimilating into a foreign culture, and perhaps finding work.

Employees and their families face these problems no matter where they move, but overseas assignments intensify them for both employees and employers. Companies doing business abroad must hire men and women whose credentials include the ability and aptitude to function in a foreign environment. These are special people, often with special credentials. To lose even one because steps weren't taken to avoid it puts a severe crimp in a company's staffing and competitive position, especially if the employee goes to work for a competitor.

A final point: no matter what agreements concerning benefits and compensation are struck between employers and relocating employees, put them in writing. It doesn't have to be a formal contract, but a simple letter, understood and agreed to by both parties, can head off those sticky situations where employees and their families, already moved and settled in a new country, call and say, "But I thought you said you would give me.. . ."

Relocating Spouses or "Significant Others"

In this age of dual breadwinners, the relocation of an employee must take into consideration the spouse's job, not only because that person might be reluctant to abandon a fulfilling career, but because of financial requirements. A few years ago Personnel Administration projected that approximately 60 percent of all couples who relocated relied on two incomes to sustain their quality of life. I believe that it's much higher today.

Losing a second income, even if the relocation carries with it a raise, can seriously impact a family's financial stability. That's why many companies find it difficult to convince an employee to move unless the working needs of the spouse or partner are addressed.

The two-income family isn't the only societal change to which companies must adapt when transferring employees. The definition of "spouse" has expanded to include other than the traditional husband and wife. Because employees are "single" doesn't mean that significant people don't exist in their lives, perhaps significant enough to keep them from accepting a transfer to another location unless those persons accompany them at company expense. The debate whether to include these "significant others" in the package of benefits accompanying employee relocation is the same one many companies face concerning the inclusion of non-married individuals on benefit plans. It's a policy decision that must fit comfortably within each employer's philosophy of benefits. Either way, it's an issue that is with us and cannot be ignored when structuring relocation policies.

Motivating Transferred Employees

Assuming all the tangibles of relocating employees have been satisfactorily resolved, the need to motivate them in their new assignments takes centerstage. Many techniques apply, whether employees work at the home office or are thousands of miles away; distance only amplifies the difficulties.

The psyche of employees working far from the company's core of operations can change, especially if the company's fortunes have slipped. When that happens, there is increased apprehension about the future, fueled by a grapevine that often fails to get things right. A feeling of isolation sets in which, if allowed to fester, can turn into paranoia that gets in the way of job performance.

Employees should be given a clear understanding of their career path opportunities within the company before being asked to make the decision to accept new assignments. That understanding should be reinforced throughout the employee's tour of duty. Consistent and frequent contact and communication is the key to accomplishing this.

Let Employees know Company's Future Business Plans

Because relocated employees no longer enjoy the same level and frequency of contact with departments in the home corporate offices, nor the frequency of personal contact with superiors in their chain of command, keeping them informed of corporate planning provides them with a benchmark for how their progress will be evaluated. In addition, it makes them feel part of the team and its goals, an important morale builder.

To further this goal, there's another step to take. In addition to informing relocated employees of corporate planning, invite their in-put, even though they no longer routinely attend meetings at headquar-ters. Distance should not diminish an employee's worth when it comes to new ideas. After all, they will be the ones called on to translate future plans into action. Failing to seek their views potentially sends a signal that they don't count anymore. Even if their ideas are not put into play, they've at least received the message that they still matter and are as important as those closest to the corporate center.

Keep Transferred Employees Informed of Their Career Opportunities within the Company

Employees working in distant locations often suffer the fear that when promotion and assignment opportunities open up, those closest to the seat of power will have the inside track by virtue of their being able to nurture useful intracompany relationships at higher echelons. "Out of sight, out of mind" looms large.

Such fears and apprehensions are exacerbated when headquarters issues missives announcing new directions or projects that seem to come out of the blue. Seeking the views of employees in satellite offices at the earliest stages goes a long way toward heading off this apprehension. Naturally, many corporate plans cannot be shared with the rank and file until the time is right. However, too often, the right time passes simply because those doing the planning aren't factoring in the potential impact on employee morale, especially for those whose faces are no longer seen on a regular basis.

How to Communicate with Offsite Employees

Communicating with employees in distant operations can utilize already existing employee channels, including company publications. Those at headquarters know what's going on by virtue of being close to the action; not so with men and women working out in the field. For them, employee publications can be a lifeline to home. These publica-tions provide:

• Information about what others are doing at headquarters
• A format through which to highlight, for the rest of the com-pany, how branch offices and facilities are faring
• A sense of corporate strategy, goals, and activities that have bearing on their lives and careers

It's always difficult to maintain a proper balance, using, for example, an eight-page monthly employee newsletter, between corporate news and the activities of employees in satellite locations. (The better publications accomplish this, however.) Even when there is that proper balance in well-crafted employee publications, there usually isn't suf-ficient room to detail all the important corporate news that employees in the field want and need to know.

Faced with this, a number of companies have launched management newsletters as adjuncts to monthly employee newspapers. Information contained in them is reserved for topics of high-level corporate activities, information that is important for all employees, especially those not privy to word-of-mouth channels that carry such news through the halls of headquarters, often before it's announced.

The extent to which an employer will go to satisfy the distant employees' natural craving for corporate news depends on philosophy, priorities, and, of course, budget. Some go to great lengths to keep the "troops" informed, including the use of audio and video reports, regularly scheduled satellite telecommunications conferences, and daily management "newswires." Others do considerably less and hope for the best.

No matter how extensive the network of communications tools utilized by management to keep in touch, nothing has greater impact than personal contact. That's easy when employees are down the hall or on the other side of the building. It's significantly more complex when they're in a different city or country.

For the most part, top levels of management seem to maintain closer personal contact with employees in the field than do managers lower on the chain of command. This is due primarily to the role top executives are expected to play. Frequent visits to all company operations allow them not only to take the pulse of outlying offices and factories, but also to boost morale by their arrival at those facilities. We look up to our leaders, wanting them to be slightly larger than life. When they take the time to shake our hands, we're flattered and buoyed.

More frequent contact between employees in distant locations and their immediate superiors can have even greater meaning, and produce more immediate results. Obviously, budgets play a role in how often line managers can travel, but the more visits to subordinates in faraway places, the better. Visiting line managers have more time to spend with their subordinates, time in which to expound new company developments, operating changes, and the activities of colleagues in other offices.

For managers who hit the road with frequency, they develop a better feel for how things are going outside their offices at headquarters. All of the questions their subordinates have about the company's goals, and their fit into achieving them, can be answered directly, something no publication can accomplish.

No matter the mix of communications approaches-employee newsletters, management newsletters, daily dispatches, and personal visits-the goal is to head off a sense of corporate isolation in non-headquarters personnel. It may take time and effort to achieve this, but retaining these people and keeping them motivated seems to be worth every cent and minute.

Many people hang favorite sayings above their desks to remind them of important concepts: "The buck stops here;" "Think;" "Smile;" and countless others. I propose that every employer hang a sign that reads: "Remember the workers." If that slogan were heeded by more employers when making decisions, morale automatically would be-come less of a problem for everyone, whether nearby or far away.