Introduction
Companies are increasingly identifying creative, innovative, and cost-effective ways to motivate employees, increase their morale and improve the overall workforce productivity. Notably, identifying such approaches and policies can be a difficult task, especially when working with a diverse workforce. From the case assignment, Donald Rubendall is convinced that creating a pet-friendly policy is an efficient approach that can promote the productivity of the Company XYZ. Research has shown that pets promote a positive and conducive working environment for the employees (Skelton, 2006).
In this paper, we analyze why Donald Rubendall should implement the policy, first by hiring Ms. Gibson. Next, the paper assesses some of the approaches he can consider to counter resistance from some of the employees. Also, the paper outlines some of the guidelines that would guide the implementation of the policy to prevent confusion and resistance. Moreover, the paper determines some of the best ways to assess the views and options of the employees regarding the pet-friendly policy. The paper winds up by assessing some of the plausible compromises in case the CEO opposes the new policy.
How Donald Rubendall should approach the situation and whether it is worth for Ms. Gibson to be hired
The analysis of the case study clearly shows that the policy had not been introduced before in the company. Therefore, hiring Ms. Gibson would be an efficient way to experiment the pet-friendly policy and assess its impacts on the productivity of the organization. For employees who suffer from high blood pressure, this approach will improve their health since pets would lower their blood pressure levels and even improve their immunity (Wood et al., 2005). From the study, pets have a stress-reducing effect and enhances relaxation of mind; thus, it would allow employee manage their work stress and improve their well being (Travers, 2002).
Besides, the policy would contribute to creating a work-friendly environment. Since pets alleviate stress, the employees would be able to concentrate more on their work. Studies have shown that approximately 46 million employees would work for long hours in a pet-friendly environment since pets make work more comfortable (Trend-watching, 2012). As pets trigger a friendly environment, it would create a working interaction among employees which would also enhance a more positive impression of the firm. Basing from these arguments, the policy might not be as controversial as it may sound. In fact, it may be among the best policies that would improve the productivity of the firm.
What if 5% of the employees do not support a pet-friendly workplace? Would you still consider the policy? Justify why
It is possible to experience instances of resistance to the policy. Many employees may complain that pets make the work place environment look unprofessional, unsafe and unclean while some may claim that pets cause distraction and disturbance (Perrine & Wells, 2006). Though these guidelines created meant to resolve the concerns of all the employees, some employees may still be dissatisfied. To address this concern, employees will have an open chance to express their dissatisfaction with the policy. Similarly, additional guidelines can be created or adjusted to address their concerns. Every employee input and concern will be taken into consideration, and the management will consider any suggestion. Some of the approaches to minimize their resistance would include involving all staffs in formulating the guidelines, allowing the employees to express their objections, and encouraging negotiation to clarify on areas of dissatisfaction. Mainly, the management will provide education on the benefits of the policy to the entire company as well as their personal lives. It is also important to note that just like any other policy, the initiative on implementing the pet-friendly policy is dynamic and factors will arise that will change the employees reactions and perceptions eventually, especially when they begin to notice its positive impact.
What if 2% of the employees are allergic to pets or are scared of pets? Would you still consider the policy?
At times, pets may cause a potential health problems in the workplace. In particular, studies have shown that pets may aggravate the allergic reactions especially for employees who are allergic to pets’ fur (Perrine & Wells, 2006). Nevertheless, since this concern affects only a small portion of the employees, it cannot be a major hindrance in the policy implementation. Ideally, the issues can be addressed amicably by implementing the pets-free zones where these employees will be allowed to work. The guideline on daily grooming of pets will be strictly upheld to reduce cases of surface allergens. Also, allergic employees will be allowed to work in clearly ventilated rooms with fitted exhaust fan to enhance air exchange and reduce airborne allergens. The management would also provide non-sedating anti-histamines to these employees to prevent cases of allergic related temporary breathlessness or severe respiratory disorders.
4. What should the policy be for a pet-friendly workplace? Where should the administration draw the line?
Working to create a suitable, well structured, and precise policies and guidelines is essential for the policy to benefit all employees and to minimize the chances of disagreements and dissatisfaction. Employees will need to be open about the readiness to contribute and willing to specify some of the rules and guidelines that need to be included in the policy. Following such guidelines will help ensure efficient interactions between pets and workers as well as ensuring the safety and protection of the workers and the pets.
Some of the guidelines in the policy would include:
Pets must be kept and maintained on a leash at all working hours. When you are working at your desk, the leash must be held such that the pets can or cannot wander.
Pets should not be taken to pets free areas; they can only be allowed only in pet-friendly pee zones. A map will be provided to create directions.
Pets’ bags will be provided such that they are picked up after at all times.
Pets such as dogs must not be allowed to bark repeatedly. (Barking should be maintained to a minimum).
All pets must be neatly groomed. Most importantly, they must be well vaccinated and treated for free infections.
Any scenario of aggressive and disruptive pet behavior will immediately lead to permanent expulsion of the pet.
The policy allows only cats and dogs in the workplace.
5. As an HR Manager, what is the best way to gauge how your employees feel about a pet-friendly policy?
It is undeniable that with the implementation of any new policy, there may be diverse views and opinions that arise. Assessing the reactions of the employees is an effective way to handle their views on this policy. Primarily, conducting a one on one meeting with the employees would be a wise approach; the employees get to express their ideas, views and options before the implementation of the policy. Gauging their suggestions, it would help assess whether or not to start implementing the policy.
Besides, an employee attitude survey would be a crucial approach; the survey may involve conducting an interview or fielding online questionnaires where the employees note their views and options. The survey would be conducted regularly to measure their morale as the new pet-friendly policy takes effects. Also, it would allow identifying new problems that may need resolutions.
6. If the CEO opposes the new policy but is willing to hear some “options”, what would be some plausible compromises?
While it is possible to overcome and manage employees’ resistance to the implementation of the policy, it may be inevitable when the CEO is against its implementation. The CEO may resist a policy especially when they are unsure of its potential impact on the productivity of the organization. Resistance may also manifest where the CEO does not have a clear understanding of the policy. Thus, it would be essential to create a reasonable cooperation that will encourage the CEO to support the policy
Applying a structured policy approach that specifies the benefits of the policy would help reassure the CEO that the policy is still a wise option. Also, it would be good to involve the CEO in the learning, planning, and implementation of the policy. This approach would significantly encourage their commitment and apparently reduce opposition. A fundamental option would be to encourage the boss to allow for the initial implementation of the policy where it can be assessed as it progresses to determine its effectiveness in promoting organization productivity.
References
Perrine, R. M., & Wells, M. (2006). Labradors to Persians: Perceptions of pets in the workplace. Anthrozoos: A Multidisciplinary Journal of The Interactions of People & Animals, 19(1), 65–78.
Skelton, C. (2006). Pets in workplace boost productivity. Leader Post.
Travers, K. (2002). Pets in workplace great icebreaker. Prince George Citizen.
Trend-watching - workplace pets. (2012, Nov 07). Canada NewsWire
Wood, L., Giles-Corti, B., & Bulsara, M. (2005). The pet connection: pets as a conduit for social capital?. Social science & medicine, 61(6), 1159-1173.
