Good money or good management? For most of us, management takes the cake over salary or benefits.

“Leadership or lack thereof creates the work environment.

If there is confusion about what leadership expects, frustration sets in and morale sinks,” said John A Challenger, CEO of the US-based company Challenger, Gray and Christmas Inc, which conducted a survey among executives at the recent 58th Annual Conference and Exposition of the Society for Human Resource Management.

Seventy-three per cent surveyed put the blame for low morale on poor leadership. Only 11 per cent blamed issues over salary and benefits. A few more – 16 per cent – cited heavy workloads as the primary cause of low morale.

“Indicative of the leadership turmoil that can lead to low morale, chief executive officer turnover is on a record pace this year with a new CEO exiting his or her post every 90 minutes each business day,” Challenger said.

For the year, the number of CEO changes is up 11 per cent from 2005. With just over a month to go, the pace of turnover virtually guarantees that the year-end total will surpass last year’s record of 1,322.

And while human resource executives recognise poor leadership as the leading cause of low morale, a second survey by Challenger revealed that most do not consider it a pressing issue.

A mere 13 per cent said lack of leadership was their top priority. The most pressing issue, cited by 35 per cent of the respondents, was managing change while 28 per cent said recruiting was tops.

“Some may see this as a striking disconnect, but the fact is that leadership change is often very difficult to achieve, so organisations may put their priorities elsewhere and hope that the changes they make in recruiting lead to improved leadership,” said Challenger.

“Part of the problem with finding good leaders is the way organisations elevate people through the ranks. It is often based on years of service and work performance. However, a person may be a great worker, but a poor leader,” he noted.

In addition, he said that consideration has to be given to factors such as personality and work style.

“The other difficulty is meshing all of the various personalities, work styles and priorities that exist within a department. This is only going to become more challenging as organisations see their workforces become more multigenerational, multicultural and multinational,” he said.

Most consider age irrelevant

“For the first time in history, four generations of employees are in the workforce, from the ‘silent generation’ and ‘baby boomers’ to generations X and Y’,” said Diane Domeyer, executive director of OfficeTeam.

“Companies recognise the benefits of having diverse, well-rounded teams, and employees may be just as likely to report to a younger supervisor as an older one. In either case, the boss’ management abilities are more of a factor in employee job satisfaction than his or her age,” she added.

A new survey suggests age does not seem to matter in the workplace. When workers were asked how comfortable they would be reporting to a manager who is younger, they responded:

. very comfortable (51 per cent);

. somewhat comfortable (33 per cent);

. somewhat uncomfortable (11 per cent);

. very uncomfortable (three per cent); and

. Don’t know/no answer (two per cent).

When asked how comfortable they would be managing a worker who is older, they responded:

. very comfortable (70 per cent);

. somewhat comfortable (19 per cent);

. somewhat uncomfortable (nine per cent); and

. very uncomfortable (two per cent).

Domeyer said, meanwhile, that employees today are recognised more for performance than tenure.

“In an ideal office setting, managers and staff are focused on the skills and knowledge people bring to their roles, not what year they were born,” she said.

The survey was developed by OfficeTeam, a staffing service specialising in the placement of high-skilled administrative professionals. It included responses from 567 individuals, ages 18 and older and employed in office environments.

– Copley News Service