Employee separation The role of supervisors.doc

261 chapter 6 separation chapter 6employee separation: the role of supervisors the chapter appear in janosik, s. m., creamer, d. g., hirt, j. b., winston, jr., r. b., saunders, s. a., & cooper, d. l. (2003). supervising new professionals in student affairs. new york, ny: brunner- routledge, inc. joan b. hirt & steven m. janosik joan hirt and steve janosik are associate professors in the higher education and student affairs program at virginia tech.the original model of staffing practices described by winston and creamer (1997) consisted of five stages: selection, orientation, supervision, professional development, and performance appraisal. conley (in press) pointed out that employee departure from an organization should be the final step in the cycle of staffing practices. other studies seem to support this notion. attrition rates for the profession range from an estimated 39% (burns, 1982) to 65% (richmond & sherman, 1991). winston and creamer considered this suggestion and determined that it was well founded and that their model should indeed be revised to include a component they call separation. it seemed appropriate, therefore, to include a discussion of the newest stage of the model in this book on supervising new professionals.to start, we turned to the literature to see how that might inform us on issues of separation. we begin this chapter with a summary of what that literature review reveals. then, we identify and describe three reasons behind voluntary employee separation and two reasons behind involuntary employee separation. next we talk about the role that supervisors play in each type of separation. finally, we draw some connections between the separation stage and the other stages in the model of staffing practices.the literature on employee separationresearch on the issue of employee departure mirrors the fluctuations in the economy over the past two decades. essentially, it can be conceptualized in four groups. first are manuscripts written from the organizations perspective that discuss how to terminate employees. a second group of studies also serve organizational purposes by focusing on how to manage outplacement services for employees who are terminated. next are works written for terminated employees that address how to cope with job loss and how to successfully find another position. all three of these clusters of literature come from the private sector. in the final part of this section, we explore the limited work on the issue of employee separation in higher education.employee terminationthe early 1980s ushered in an economic recession that affected staffing practices across many organizations, especially those in the private sector. as coulson (1981) noted “the rules of the workplace seem to be in flux. some employers are voluntarily adopting restraints upon their right to discharge. others continue to treat their employees as an expendable resource, discharging them whenever they decide to do so” (p. 215).it is not surprising that the downturn in the economy led to a spate of publications about the termination process (coulson, 1981; finnie & sniffin, 1984; morin & yorks, 1982). for the most part, these studies promote organizational interests and provide information to supervisors and management about termination processes that meet federal regulations while simultaneously limiting liability for the organization.in general, these experts talk about different reasons that lead to termination but focus their attention on involuntary termination (sweet, 1989). they urge managers to document performance, consult with legal counsel, and prepare for termination meetings (coulson, 1981; latack & dozier, 1986). employees should be told of their dismissal in a straightforward manner and should be informed of their severance package (if any), when they need to vacate their workplace, and any outplacement assistance that will be provided to them (ensman, 1998). some authors also discuss how to deal with different situations that may arise during the termination meeting (sweet, 1989). for the most part, however, this group of manuscripts aims to direct management in appropriate ways to terminate employees and protect employer interests.as the economy slowly turned around in the late 1980s and early 1990s, the literature shifted slightly from its focus on how to terminate employees to matters of assisting employees in finding alternative employment (brammer & humberger, 1984; pedersen, goldberg, & papalia, 1991; wynne, 1989).outplacement servicesmuch of the literature on outplacement is couched in humanistic terms but the focus of this topic remains on protecting the organization. remember that the early 1990 was an era devoted to increased productivity. brammer and humberger (1984, p. 5) summed it up nicely: terminating employees is a stressful task for managers and executive officers. it is difficult to inflict the pain and hardship of termination on fellow employees. yet, organizations are concerned about increasing productivity. outplacement counseling is a management tool for improving organizational effectiveness with a minimum of stress to executives and employees.outplacement is a process designed to assist employees cope with a job loss, understand the job market, and develop the necessary skills to market themselves to potential employers. at the heart of the concept is the notion that market globalization, the shift to a service economy and increased technology has generated a job market that is constantly changing and evolving. this means that people need to learn new job seeking skills (davies, 1996). in many instances, corporations contract outplacement services to national organizations that have offices in most major metropolitan areas, although some argue that locally managed providers are a better option (pedersen, goldberg, & papalia, 1991). in either case, outplacement programs are designed to build (or re-build) the self-confidence and self-esteem of employees who have been terminated by enhancing their understanding of this changing job market and providing them the skills to cope with that market immediately after termination and in the future (wynne, 1989). such services not only responded to the needs of terminated employees in a humanistic manner but also tended to reduce the potential for disgruntled employees to sue for wrongful discharge and helped bolster the companys public image in difficult economic times.this focus on the future turned out to be somewhat prophetic. between 1985 and 1996, fortune 500 companies alone eliminated more than 3.5 million jobs (ambrose, 1996). termination seemed to permeate every employment sector, including the catholic church, which laid off priests (ambrose, 1996, p. 4). statistics like these led to publications written to promote employee interests.the role of employees in job survivalthe work on the role of employees in job survival denotes something or a paradigm shift in the literature. to recap, the issue of termination was initially addressed purely from a corporate perspective: how could managers fire employees with the least amount of difficulty while simultaneously protecting the organizations interests. over time, this led to corporate sponsored outplacement programs. by the mid-1990s, however, the experts recognized that the changes in the economy had rendered the old paradigm on job security moot. the new paradigm shifted a great deal of the responsibility for job security to the employee: for all practical purposes, outplacement is dead. the stark fact is that employees are ever more likely to be blasted out into the ranks of the unemployed with no safety net, and it could happen over and over again. todays new college graduates will, on average, have 8 to 10 jobs and as many a 3 careers in their lifetimes. job seekers should look for employers willing to help them continuously develop and maintain skills that will make them more valuable. they offer employees training not just in skills specific to the job at hand, but also in those that can enhance careers over the long haul. (morin, 1996, p.222)some scholars attempted to relate the need for continuous improvement in the job arena to the need for continuous development as an individual. they argued that the distinctions between personal life and work life had blurred and that one way to respond to this blurring of roles was to develop skills that would serve one well in either arena (e.g., problem solving skills, using feedback in positive ways) (lee, guthrie, & young, 1995).others took a self-help approach. these experts addressed the emotional turmoil that can accompany a job loss and provided guidance on how to deal with the resultant stress (morin & cabrera, 1991; quittel, 1994). they provided those whose jobs had been terminated with checklists and worksheets to assist them in seeking new positions (wolfer, & wong, 1988). in general, these experts tried to empower employees and encourage them to take greater command of their professional future.the effects of termination were examined empirically in these works and differences among groups of employees were investigated. some studies explored differences in the effects of job loss on blue- versus white-collar workers. not surprisingly, the latter group was more optimistic about future employment opportunities (leana & feldman, 1990). differences by sex were the focus of other studies that reported that different factors led to career growth for men and women after job termination (eby & buch, 1992) but that women and men approach the outplacement process differently (phelps & mason, 1991).given this attention to empowering employees, it may not be surprising that the most recent twist in the literature returns focus to the organization. specifically, since some literature has informed terminated employees of their rights, there has been an increase in employment-related litigation. in response, some of the most recent studies focus on how corporations can protect themselves from termination-related lawsuits (lyncheski, 1996; 1997).this abridged summary provides an overview of the literature on employee termination in the private sector. but this book focuses on supervision in higher education so it was important to review what has been written about employee termination in the academy.employee separation in higher educationthe work on employee separation in higher education is very limited. it mirrors the work in the private sector in some interesting ways but departs from the corporate literature in other areas. like the literature from the private sector, the earliest work was precipitated by the threat of significant downsizing in higher education. one hundred forty four (144) institutions of higher learning closed during the 1970s. this led to predictions that up to 50, 000 faculty (and a proportionate number of administrators) would lose their jobs in the 1980s (arbell, 1981).the early work in higher education departed from that in the private sector in one important way, however. while articles were written primarily to protect institutions, there was a humanistic tone from the start. as arbell (1981, p. 31) noted, “if we value our human resources and respect each person with whom we work, higher education must do all that it can to use compassion and concern in dismissing people.”like the work in the corporate sector, by the mid-1980s attention had turned to the issue of outplacement services. indeed, arbell (1985, p 248) holds the corporate approach up as a model: “while dismissing employees is still an imperfect art in industry and business, education would do well to consider the practice of outplacement counseling currently being used in the non-academic world.” the early work, though, merely spelled out the benefits to institutions that employed humane techniques when terminating employees. for example, benefits included stress reduction for both the terminated employee and the person doing the firing and reduced threat of litigation.by the early 1990s, however, the literature reflected a clearly organizational perspective:due to continued declining enrollments, loss of public funding, and budget cuts, more and more university and college faculty and staff will be told that their positions are being eliminated. as one university administrator states, the smart executives in colleges and universities are already making the tough decision to reorganize and downsize. these are the colleges and universities that will survive. (logan, 1991, p. 17)the approach in these works was prescriptive. the steps the institution needed to take to terminate employees and provide outplacement services were described. ways to protect the institution from lawsuits were identified (butterfield & wolfe, 1994; logan, 1991).in summary, the work on employee termination in the private sector over the past two decades has employed both an organization and an employee perspective. the literature on termination in higher education, on the other hand, has adopted an organizational perspective exclusively. it would seem that there is a need to examine the issue of employee separation in the academy from a more individual perspective. while we do not claim to thoroughly address this perspective, we attempt in this chapter to look at the reasons behind employee separation and the role of the supervisor in each of those scenarios.reasons for voluntary separationconley (2001) identified five reasons that employees might separate from their institution of higher learning. while we agree with her assessment, we believe these reasons can be further grouped into reasons related to voluntary separation and those associated with involuntary separation and we have modified the conley model accordingly. there are three reasons that staff members might voluntarily leave an institution: professional reasons, personal reasons, or issues related to retirement.professional reasons the first, and perhaps most obvious, reason for employee departure involves professional issues. employees, particularly outstanding employees, will seek to expand their professional realms and develop their skills by seeking positions that offer them upward mobility and broader responsibilities. this type of advancement is more achievable in some functional areas than in others. for example, entry-level positions for nps in housing and residential life operations are plentiful. in fact jobs in residence life represent up to 39% of all entry-level jobs (janasiewicz & wright, 1993). positions one step above entry level are significantly less numerous, though still available to top notch candidates. beyond that, however, opportunities for advancement are very restricted and even the most qualified of candidates may find further promotion limited. indeed, of all the student affairs jobs posted in the chronicle of higher education in 1990, only 28% were for mid-level jobs and only 4% were for executive positions (janasiewicz & wright, 1993). those who pursue careers in other functional areas may find advancement through a different path. in the area of new student orientation, for instance, the number of entry-level jobs for nps is much more limited. this suggests that only the most qualified candidates will be successful in breaking the initial barrier to gain access to the career ladder in orientation. upward mobility, however, may be more achievable as there are fewer experienced staff members seeking mid-level jobs in orientation programs. regardless of functional area, though, upward mobility is a concern for student affairs practitioners who report they are underemployed and their mobility at their home institutions is limited (cox & ivy, 1984)these variations in promotional possibilities among functional areas lead to another professional reason for separation: changing functional areas. some nps pursue entry-level jobs in functional units that are accessible to them, like residence life. they may aspire, however, to work in other areas where initial access is more limited (judicial affairs or greek life, for example) and they believe that the skills they can hone in residence life will prepare them, even make them more competitive, for those jobs. when opportunities arise in the functional area in which they aspire to work, these nps will elect to terminate with one unit to move to another unit, either at the same institution or at another institution.on a related note, another professional reason for separation is to leave the field of higher education entirely. consider the situation of will described in chapter 4 of this volume. will had originally intended to go to law school upon completing his undergraduate degree but elected to pursue a masters in student affairs instead. he is working in the profession and is engaged to a woman who lives two hours away. while he excels in his job, he is concerned about the demands the profession places on his time. he is also worried that the low salaries in the field will prevent him from supporting his family in the future. will is a np who may elect to leave the field of higher education administration to pursue the benefits available in the private sector.if will were to leave the profession to pursue his original professional aspirations and attend law school, he would exemplify yet another professional reason for separation: pursuing further education or job training. those who work in higher education and student affairs administration are frequently individuals who are convinced of the merits of education and who are committed to the notion of life-long learning. it is not uncommon, therefore, for employees