Workers seek support for employers, charity organisations

THE Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD), the professional body for Human Resources and people development, and the National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO), have launched new research into employer-supported volunteering (ESV).

The research found a lack of understanding between charities and companies about the costs and benefits involved in ESV, with some companies unwilling to contribute to the costs involved in hosting volunteers. Similarly, some of the businesses interviewed reported that charities often overlooked the additional benefits of a one-off placement, including the potential of sponsorship or support from the company in the future.

Another barrier revealed by the research was that many charities benefit from skilled volunteering, such as help writing strategies, but feel that people are less likely to volunteer in their professional capacity than for typically unskilled volunteering tasks such as painting or gardening.

The research highlights the significant gaps in employer knowledge about volunteering, and explores assumptions made by each sector that risk undermining the potential of volunteering initiatives.

The research, ‘On the brink of a game-changer?’, has been published to explore how better collaboration between business and the voluntary sector is key to achieving successful ESV placements.

The Conservative Party’s election manifesto pledged to require large businesses and public bodies to offer employees three days’ paid volunteering leave, which could result in much higher demand for volunteering opportunities.

The findings of the research are supplemented by a new survey of HR professionals by the CIPD, whose results highlight the business case for supporting ESV. The survey found that 81% of those who took part in volunteering reported increased community awareness, 65% had increased communication skills, and 59% reported an increase in confidence.

There was evidence of unmet demand for volunteering opportunities; although 65% of respondents would be more likely to work for an employer that encourages and promotes volunteering, 39% said their employer did not support it.

Head of Policy Campaigns – Community Investment at the CIPD, Katerina Rüdiger, said: “Volunteering has been an important part of the political agenda in recent years. Staff at large organisations should have the chance to take time off to volunteer – clearly placed responsibility with employers. But what we’re unfortunately seeing from this research is a lack of understanding from many employers about why volunteering is important, and a lack of communication between charities and business about how they can work together.

“Simply put, corporate volunteering can deliver big business benefits, not only through helping organisations build relationships within their local communities, but also by giving employees the chance to build new skills and capabilities that they can then transfer back to their day jobs. We therefore, hope to see those responsible for ESV programmes using the recommendations from today’s research, working closely with the voluntary sector and helping employees to make a difference.”

Executive Director of volunteering at NCVO, Justin Davis Smith, said: “Employer-supported volunteering could potentially offer huge benefits for the voluntary sector and businesses alike – however, this research shows that without clear communication around expectations and the resources involved, many of those benefits could be lost. We need to recognise that volunteering isn’t free – there is a cost to the charity in terms of staff time, resources and supervision – yet the right kind of volunteering could outweigh those costs tenfold.

“The government’s commitment to introducing three days’ volunteering leave offers a game-changing opportunity, but we will need to get the systems and processes in place to make the most of it. Resources will be required to create meaningful opportunities and to ensure that volunteers are properly managed and supported, so that placements are beneficial to everybody involved.”

Meanwhile, a new report put together by United Kingdom-based Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD), recently blamed growing gap between boardroom and workforce as major factor responsible for the demotivation of staff.

According to CIPD, the upward “momentum of chief executive pay” and reward in the UK’s largest organisations has reached a crisis point.
CIPD explained that the development “does not clearly correlate to personal performance or business outcomes and this is having a significant impact on the motivation levels of the wider workforce”.

The research, which includes a survey of employee attitudes on Chief Executive Officer (CEO) pay, an in-depth literature review and focus groups and interviews with members of the finance, Human Resource (HR) and investor communities, explores the behavioural factors that are causing executive pay to spiral and the impact that this is having on the workforce.

The employee survey, highlights that seven in ten (71%) employees believe CEO pay in the UK is ‘too’ or ‘far too’ high,
Six in ten (59%) employees say the high level of CEO pay in the UK demotivates them at work, more than half (55%) of employees claim the high level of CEO pay in the UK is bad for firms’ reputations,
45% believe their own CEO’s pay is too high, with a further 30% saying they don’t know and just 4% say their CEO’s pay is too low.

The report revealed that only a third (32%) of employees agree their CEO is rewarded in line with their organisation’s performance, with two-thirds saying they disagree (38%) or don’t know (29%).

CIPD reward adviser, Charles Cotton, said: “The growing disparity between pay at the high and lower ends of the pay scale for today’s workforce is leading to a real sense of unfairness which is impacting on employees’ motivation at work. The message from employees to CEOs is clear: ‘the more you take, the less we’ll give’. At a time when the average employee has seen their salary increase by just a few percentage points over the last several years, we need to take a serious look at the issue of top executive reward.

“It’s crucial that chief executive reward packages are simpler and more clearly aligned to both financial and non-financial performance measures. These should include how their leadership impacts on critical outcomes such as employee wellbeing and engagement, accountability for culture and behaviour, and workforce development, all of which are vital underpinnings of the long-term health of both people and business.”

The report highlighted the challenges and how they can be addressed, noting that CIPD recommends that the Government requires all publicly-listed companies to publish the pay ratio between the CEO and the pay of average full-time employees.

The report said: “This will help encourage accountability and prompt a greater focus on this issue among key stakeholder groups such as investors who can help to drive change and hold businesses and senior individuals to account.

“Overly complex performance measures: The report suggests that significant changes need to be made to how bonuses and long-term incentives are structured and why they are paid out. Both of these forms of variable reward tend to be overly complex, and disproportionately focused on financial goals rather than being linked to other outcomes and stakeholders interests, including those of the employees.

“In addition, existing long-term incentives may not motivate because they are predominantly linked to financial measures, which are often affected by factors outside the control of CEOs, such as the economic cycle”.

Making reference tp powerful personalities, the report said: “ The CIPD recommends that organisations increase their focus on ensuring CEOs bring a balanced leadership style, appropriate to the culture and context of the organisation. The report also highlights that top leaders will tend towards more overly confident and assertive behaviour profiles, which also makes them adept at negotiating a higher pay and reward package.

“However, it’s also noted that the real driver in these cases is more about status and recognition than it is about the need for absolute amounts of money. Reward packages should therefore encourage individuals to strive for industry recognition or impact on wider societal goals, for example, rather than simply having the biggest pay packet amongst their industry peers.

“Too much focus on the top: The research suggests there should be less focus on disproportionately rewarding the performance of key individuals given that, where CEOs promote shared or distributed leadership, there is likely to be better overall team performance”.