A survey of 30,000+ workers by Microsoft revealed that 41% of workers were considering quitting or changing professions this year. Meanwhile, a study of UK and Irish workers by Personio found that 38% of those surveyed were planning to resign within the next six months to a year. It appears that the Great Resignation is not yet over, causing stress and lost profits for many employers around the globe. But what exactly is driving so many employees to change careers, or quit the workforce altogether? 

For some workers, the pandemic prompted a shift in priorities, encouraging them to become stay-at-home parents, start their own business, or pursue their dream careers. However, the latest report by Limeade shows that the vast majority of workers left because they were unhappy in their roles. 

Burnout

According to Limeade’s report, 40% of employees cited burnout as a top reason for leaving their job. Burnout appeared to be a particular problem for those working in healthcare and foodservice/ hospitality. 54% of healthcare workers and 52% of foodservice/ hospitality workers said that burnout was their key motivation for leaving their previous roles.

Burnout was recognised by the World Health Organisation (WHO) as an “occupational phenomenon” in 2019. Mental Health UK defines burnout as “a state of physical and emotional exhaustion”, that occurs when a person experiences long-term stress in a job, or when a person has worked in a physically or emotionally draining role for a long period. Common symptoms include:

• Feeling tired or drained most of the time
• Feeling helpless, trapped and/or defeated
• Feeling detached/ alone 
• Having a cynical/ negative outlook
• Self-doubt
• Procrastinating and taking longer to get things done
• Feeling overwhelmed

Burnout can have a hugely negative impact on an employee’s quality of work, commitment and loyalty to an employer, and can result in a ripple effect on the rest of the workforce through increased interpersonal conflict and workflow disruption. If an employer does not have the proper care in place to help employees who are dealing with chronic burnout, then the result can be resignation, with resigning employees even encouraging others to follow suit. 

Desire To Work Remotely

Prior to the pandemic, many workers had not experienced remote working. Then, at the peak of the pandemic, offices everywhere were forced to shut their doors and workers were told to work from home. While remote and hybrid working models were already beginning to gain popularity pre-pandemic, the pandemic certainly accelerated this new working trend, and many believe it’s a “trend” here to stay. According to Limeade, 40% of job changers surveyed said they were attracted to their new position because of the opportunity for remote working that it provided. This suggests that an increasing number of the global workplace now expects to work from home moving forward and enjoys the often better work-life balance that it provides.

Poor Treatment

According to the BBC, poor treatment at work is another major reason behind the Great Resignation, with the pandemic exacerbating already-toxic workplace cultures. The BBC cites a recent Stanford University study which shows that companies with a positive working culture tended to continue to treat employees kindly throughout the pandemic, while many companies with already-established poor working environments doubled down on decisions that didn’t support employees, such as layoffs. This drove many already-disgruntled employees to leave the company they were at altogether. According to Limeades report, some employees were so dissatisfied with the culture at their workplace that 28% of respondents said they left their jobs without having another lined up. 

Insufficient Compensation

With inflation and the cost of living on the rise, dissatisfaction with their pay packet was another major reason for employees handing in their notice. According to Limeade’s report, 37% of job changers were attracted to a new position by the better salary on offer. In fact, in the foodservice/ hospitality sector, better compensation was the number one reason that attracted respondents to their new roles. 

A Lasting Change?

While Moody’s analytics chief economist believes the Great Resignation could be over by 2023, many believe employees demanding more from their employers is a shift here to stay. The pandemic has changed the priorities of millions and it has now become almost compulsory for companies to make serious investments in their workers’ wages, well-being, work-life balance, and opportunities. 

“When there’s a lot of people moving, that costs companies in terms of turnover and lost productivity,” points out Ross Seychell, chief people officer at Personio. “It takes six to nine months to onboard someone to be fully effective. Companies that lose a lot of their workforce are going to struggle with this over the next 12 to 16 months, and maybe much longer. Companies that don’t invest in their people will fall behind.”

There’s also worries about Brexit, and the impact that will have on the world of FS, leading to job insecurities and further stress. Below, Vicki Field, HR Director at London Doctors Clinic, discusses the options for available for your team and their own struggles with mental health.

A recent survey conducted by Mental Health England identified that financial services jobs are 44 percent more likely to cause a stress-related illness than the average role in the UK.

Mental health is one of the fastest growing reasons for absence in the UK, having increased by a whopping 71.9% since 2011, which has cost the UK economy £18bn in lost productivity, according to analysis from Centre of Economic and Business Research 2017. The financial services sector has the highest percentage of employee absences due to mental ill health, according to research from HR consultancy AdviserPlus, which analysed 250k employees to identify that 34% of all absence was related to mental health.

However, the negative impact on the sufferer is hard to quantify in terms of cost or pounds. Mental health problems can eat away at happiness and have life changing impacts on people. So, what can we do at work to help?

While many employers acknowledge that mental health is a key employee concern, few have a specific well-being strategy in place. Probably unsurprisingly, half of the employees in the banking and financial services industries believe that businesses are not doing enough to support the physical and mental wellbeing of their employees, according to a study by Westfield Health.

While many employers acknowledge that mental health is a key employee concern, few have a specific well-being strategy in place.

Mental wellbeing used to be a topic that was actively avoided at work, with employees being worried about admitting that they had mental health issues. Whilst this is still true today, there are some high-profile campaigns which have given more focus to the prevalence of mental health issues and encouraged people to discuss and share their experiences. For example, Prince Harry established ‘Talking Heads’ with the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge to highlight mental wellbeing and has in turn been very honest about his own struggles following the death of his mother.

While companies do not carry responsibility for the general health of their employees, they do have a “duty of care” for their employees. In simple terms, this means that a company should take steps to avoid putting their employees in a position where they could be made ill by their work.

So, as the subject of mental health becomes more prevalent in the workplace, what can employers do if they think a member of the team may be struggling with their mental health?

Here are some points for team managers to consider.

1. Long or short term issue. There are two main types of mental ill health: a long-term ongoing mental health issue such as being bipolar or having clinical depression; and a probable short-term or temporary issue which is caused by life events or work such as anxiety, stress, or depression. Most people with ongoing mental health problems will meet the definition of disability in the Equality Act (2010) in England, Scotland and Wales and Disability Discrimination Act (1995, as amended) in Northern Ireland. This means the person must meet the criteria of having an impairment that has substantial, adverse, and long-term impact on their ability to carry out everyday tasks.
2. Put reasonable adjustments in place. A company has a legal responsibility to put “reasonable adjustments” in place to help the employee at work, if their condition constitutes a disability. However, even if it’s a short-term issue, putting adjustments in place can stop it turning into a longer-term problem. Just like a physical disability would require changes such as special chairs or computer screens, people experiencing mental health problems may require reasonable adjustments. This could take the form of introducing some form of flexible working (i.e. working from home more frequently or avoiding rush hour travel), for example. Each person is unique, so talk to them about what they need. Obtaining a doctor’s report with proposals is the best place to start.
3. Read their stress levels. Work can be a major stressor, when people start to feel overwhelmed or stressed by their work or by being at work. Everyone is different, and enjoyable pressure for one person can be hugely stressful for another. Most people need an element of pressure to enjoy work, but it’s when it turns into ‘stress’ that the issues start. As a manager, therefore, it’s really important to understand if any of your team are feeling stressed or anxious, and ensuring that you act to remove the stress for your employees if it is caused by work. Regular 121s to discuss workload will help you understand if there are any issues developing.
4. Measure and monitor absence patterns. This is a key way to understanding if there are any underlying conditions so tracking absence and having regular back to work interviews is important. Long-term conditions may present with a range of short-term or intermittent absence and it can be hard to identify if someone really does have a lot of dodgy tummies, or if they actually suffer from severe anxiety. Therefore, if you feel like an employee does have a lot of intermittent absence, offering confidential support through a private GP practise or an occupational health provider can have a significant impact on someone’s health, and their productivity and motivation at work.
5. Manage physical burnout. Additionally, if people are working hard and become ill, physical burnout can be frequently accompanied by mental burnout; or the start of mental health problems. If someone is feeling ill, and is still working, because they either feel forced to for fear of losing their job, or fear of failing to achieve objectives, it will start to impact their mental health. These negative feelings of stress and anxiety drive more symptoms of physical ill health, and it can become a vicious circle where the person never fully recovers and feels well. Talking to your team member is the best way to get to the bottom of how they are feeling, through 121s, back to work interviews or even just casual ‘chats’ in a social space.
6. Send them to the doctor. Whilst one of your team might not feel comfortable discussing their mental health with you, no matter how sympathetic you are, they may with a GP or occupational health professional. Doctors can support physical and mental ill health, identify any connections, and support the employee’s recovery, as well as help identify if work is one of the main issues for the depression, stress or anxiety. A GP will also aid with suggesting ‘reasonable adjustments’ at work. The old adage ‘prevention is better than cure’ is often the case when managing mental illness at work, with employees more likely to remain in work if there are early interventions.
7. Know your employees. On a personal level, there are also short-term issues which may affect the mental wellbeing of your employees: life events such as bereavements, divorces and family problems can cause significant emotional distress for people. We are all only human which means that there is an impact at work - people may be less focused, or show visible emptions, or even dress differently. There may be a few weeks or months where behaviour changes, or work drops off, and offering support to your team member during this time can have significant benefits for all parties in the long run.

How can I identify if someone’s mental health is suffering?

• Has the person’s behaviour suddenly changed? Are they visibly upset at work (crying?) Are they suddenly angry, and shouting at colleagues? Are they withdrawn and quiet?
• Do they look different? Have they stopped washing / taking care of themselves?
• Has intermittent absence increased? Stress can have physical symptoms such as regular colds, or upset tummies.
• Has their conversation changed? Are they repeatedly self-critical, or talking about how stressed they feel?

What is the role of the employer or team manager?

Always ensure you measure absence and have back to work interviews after every period of absence so you can monitor any potential issues; measuring and monitoring absence is the only way to effectively manage it. Discuss their workload and stress levels as part of a normal 121, so it becomes part of ‘normal’ conversation and not an awkward or difficult topic.

Asking someone if they are ‘ok’ is an important part of any manager’s role, but you’re not a mental health expert, or a counsellor or a doctor. If you are able to talk to your team member, and they share that they are experiencing some issues, you can get support from your HR department, from a GP or OH practitioner, or a variety of charities such as MIND.

Sometimes just listening to them, possibly changing their workload, or giving them time off, will sort the problem. However, if it is a longer-term issue, it’s important to get professional help.

Look at what can be done in the workplace to support them, talk to them and if necessary get a medical report. There’s a lot of help out there, so do ask for it.

Earlier this month Z/Yen published their global financial centres index which stated that for the first time in 15 years, New York has overtaken London as the world’s top financial centre. The report focused on a number of factors including infrastructure and reputation and was combined with a survey to show the most attractive financial cities. To follow on from this, job search platform Joblift looked into the financial job markets in both London and New York to find out if these results matched or contradicted the Z/Yen conclusions. While New York may have become the most attractive worldwide financial centre, Joblift’s results show that the crown still lies with London when it comes to job availability and growth.

London has more than twice the number of vacancies and three times as much job growth

According to Joblift, 124,788 financial job vacancies have been posted in London in the last 12 months. In comparison, New York has been the location of 49,526 financial vacancies in the same time period, around 2.5 times less than in the UK’s capital. To further bolster London’s claim as the financial job market top spot, vacancies in the capital have increased at three times the rate of New York’s. While the US city’s financial job market increased by 1% each month on average in the last 12 months, London’s market saw a 3% average rise.

Both cities share the most in-demand professions and top employers but vacancies in new york were more secure

Despite the differences in number of vacancies and job growth, the financial job markets in the two cities have a lot in common. Accountants are the most in-demand professionals in both cities, making up 12% of the job market in London, and 9% in New York. They are followed by Finance Managers in London (11%) and Economists in New York (6%), with these professions switching in each location as the third most in-demand – Economists in London (4%), and Finance Managers in New York (6%). Additionally, while not in the same ranking order, JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley were the top employers in both New York and London. However, while the same professions are in demand, jobs in New York were more secure. In the last year, 87% of the finance vacancies advertised in New York were for permanent contracts, while postings offering the same contract type in London made up just 75% of the capital’s financial market.

(Source: Joblift)

Recent independent research of UK employees commissioned by expenses management software company Expend has highlighted that Generation Z and Generation Y employees are the most negatively impacted by facilitating their employers’ expenses. Over a quarter (27%) of Generation Z employees (18-24 year olds) have not been able to pay off credit card bills because they have outstanding company expenses due to them from their employer.

This appears to be making younger employees the least tolerant of existing processes for expenses - 82% of UK Generation Z employees find being out of pocket from expenses very unfair and 42% would move jobs because of a poor expense policy.

The average amount of debt for a University leaver is now £50,000, and yet the average starting salary for most graduates is £19,000 - 22,000. According to the ONS, wage growth slipped to 2.7% from 2.8% in the three months to May 2018. However, despite the slowdown in wage growth and increased cost of living, young employees are still expected to float expenses for the business. These factors combined mean that younger workers are more financially sensitive than ever before, and yet are still expected to pay their employer’s expenses and go out of pocket each month, which can have a significant impact on their personal finances.

Expend’s independent research, which was commissioned in conjunction with OnePoll, showed the scale of this impact on employees’ finances and willingness to circumvent expense policies. Out of all age groups, Generation Z workers are most likely to circumvent the expenses policies of their employer, with over a quarter (27%) stating they would spend more than they normally would to make a company expense worthwhile, if they could get away with it. Nearly 1 in 5 (18%) of Generation Z employees stated they would profit from business expenses if they could get away with it.

The picture for Generation Y/Millennials (25-34 year olds) isn’t much better. Research from independent think tank The Resolution Foundation has shown that UK millennials are now some of the worst off financially in the developed world, only behind Greece. The home ownership rate in their late 20s, at 33%, is half that for the baby boomers at the same age (60%). Our research showed this age group would be the least inclined out of all respondents to take a job if it had a poor expense policy, with 40.87% saying they wouldn’t.

On the other hand, the older age groups are disproportionately tolerant of the existing system of expense, with the 55+ age group is the least likely to circumvent expenses because of a poor expense policy, and only 4.90% saying they would expense items they shouldn’t if they could get away with it.

Johnny Vowles, CEO of Expend said, “younger employees have a hard deal at the moment with rising living costs, wage growth described as ‘anaemic’ by the ONS and higher than ever student debt. While the current expenses system is just the way things have always been done, for some employees this could be the straw that broke the camel’s back. Organisations need to look at how all processes are impacting on their younger workforce, to encourage recruitment of happy workers but also to minimise the business risk. Disenfranchised younger workers more open to circumvent expense policies and profit from them than even before, so employers also need to gain greater oversight over their company finances to protect themselves.”

(Source: Expend)

London Market insurers must be quick to react to technology developments – such as automation and increased cyber security risk – if they are to successfully navigate the future claims landscape, according to BLM and the Institute of Directors (IoD).

The assertion is amongst others released in volume two of BLM’s Macroeconomic Trends Series, a suite of research papers created with economists at the IoD. The papers look at macroeconomic forces and how they will shape the insurance claims landscape in the London Market. The second paper looks at technology risks through the lens of product liability, motor, employers’ liability and technology-specific claims.

Tim Smith, partner at BLM who co-led the writing and insights within this paper said: “We have a thriving technology sector in the UK, but given changes ahead we foresee significant knock-on effects on a number of traditional markets. The pace of technology advancement can leave entire industries playing catch-up, which is why it’s so important for the insurance market to understand the impact these will have and adapt accordingly.”

Jim Sherwood, partner at BLM and co-leader of the paper said: “From our work across the London Market with insurers, brokers and managing general agents, we know the importance of understanding how emerging risks will impact the volume and nature of claims. We hope this paper will provide the market with a better understanding of what’s on the horizon and how technology will continue to affect all aspects of insurance.”

The paper also argues that employers’ liability (EL) insurers must react to the growing use of automation and increased self-employment.

Malcolm Keen, associate at BLM said: “Whilst disputes continue as to the definition of an ‘employee’, changes in the nature of employment are affecting the pool of those who can potentially be compensated for an injury or illness by an EL insurer.

“We’ve seen significant rises in self-employment in the UK, with a million more workers since 2008 opting to ‘be their own boss’, and technology is playing a key role in enabling this. On top of that. the increased use of automation will likely to affect the profile of the UK labour market in the short, medium and long-term.

“Coupled together, we expect this may shrink the extent to which the financial burden of injuries or illness caused by work is borne by insurers.”

The Macroeconomic Trends Series will continue to cover other other key claims categories for the London Market in the coming months. This is the second series of papers from BLM and the IoD, with these volumes building on the trends and reflections last identified in 2016.

(Source: BLM)

Qualtrics recently announced that two-thirds of UK workers are currently satisfied in their jobs and 13% say they are ‘extremely satisfied’, according to the Qualtrics Pulse – a new 2017 benchmark of how engaged today’s employees feel within their work environments.

Workers in finance and travel love their jobs:

• Satisfaction levels are highest in the finance sector (74%) and travel & leisure industry (73%), compared to 68% in retail, 67% in manufacturing and 66% in the public sector.
• Meanwhile in the public sector, 32% of workers say they hardly ever, or never, look forward to going to work. In contrast, a quarter of retail workers almost always look forward to going to work.

Recognition outweighs pay, flexible working and frills:

• Key driver analysis shows that engagement with business leaders, better recognition and career progression have the greatest positive impact on job satisfaction. In comparison, added benefits such as flexible working and even remuneration are generally considered less important on a day-to-day basis.

Ages 25-34 are the “golden years” for workplace satisfaction:

• Job satisfaction peaks for UK workers between 25-34 years old, with 69% of people in this age group saying they are satisfied. Beyond age 34, job satisfaction declines.

Job satisfaction wanes after 12 months, but loyalty is built in the long term:

• Workers are most satisfied in their first year of employment, with 56% of people claiming they are either moderately or extremely satisfied during year one. This drops to 46% once people have been in their jobs for a year or more.
• While satisfaction begins to drop off after the first year, once employees have worked at a company for more than four years, their satisfaction levels once again start to increase.

Job satisfaction is highest in the North East of England:

• Around one in five (18%) employees from the North East are “extremely satisfied” in their job, compared to 11% in Scotland and Wales and 10% of workers in London and the Midlands.
• Young people in London are not as happy as their peers in other parts of the country--24% of under 25s said they were ‘slightly dissatisfied’ or worse in their current jobs, compared to just 18% of under 25s in the rest of the UK.
• Workers in Wales were the most vocal about their discontent, with nearly one in 10 saying they are “extremely dissatisfied” with their job.

Churn is highest in media and advertising:

• While the public sector has most dissatisfied workers, it’s most likely to hold onto its staff with 68% expecting to be working at the same organisation in two years’ time.
• Media and advertising companies are likely to have the hardest job in preventing staff churn. Just 54% of employees in this sector say they can see themselves working at their current organisation in two years’ time, compared to 67% in the IT & tech sector and 66% in manufacturing.

The Qualtrics Pulse surveyed 2,300 UK workers using the Qualtrics Employee ExperienceTM management platform, which enables human resource and business leaders to monitor and improve the experience across the employee journey and prioritise the key drivers of engagement to reduce attrition and improve employee performance.

The Qualtrics Pulse, which is carried out on a quarterly basis, measures levels of employee engagement and job satisfaction according to gender, age, location, income and industry sector. The top insights can help businesses understand the experience gap between what their employees expect and what they actually deliver.

Commenting on the launch of Qualtrics Pulse, Sarah Marrs, Employee Experience Specialist, Qualtrics, said: “In recent years we’ve seen organisations place more emphasis on their employee experience as a critical lever to help shape their customer, brand and product experiences.  We’ve also seen the techniques available to measure the employee experience evolve. Our Qualtrics Pulse provides a layer of data that many companies simply don’t have access to-- uncovering the real-life factors that really influence the behaviour, loyalty and performance of an employee.”

(Source: Qualtrics)

Corporate hiring plans for 2017 point to robust employment opportunities for graduates of MBA and business master's programs, according to a new employer survey report from the Graduate Management Admission Council (GMAC). Globally, 86% of companies plan to hire recent MBA graduates this year, up from 79% that hired them in 2016. Demand for these MBA graduates is strongest in the United States and Asia-Pacific, where 9 in 10 companies plan to hire these candidates.

"Despite the political uncertainty about the status of immigration and work visas in the United States and other parts of the world, companies are keen to hire graduates from this year's MBA and business master's programs, including international candidates," said Sangeet Chowfla, GMAC president and CEO. "This signifies the value these programs create for students and the vital role their skillsets bring employers."

At the time GMAC conducted the Corporate Recruiters Survey in early 2017, respondents in Asia-Pacific, Europe, Latin America and the United States declared their companies are staying the course with plans to hire international graduate business candidates. Overall, 59% of the survey respondents plan to hire or are willing to hire MBA and business master's graduates requiring legal documentation - a gain of seven%age points from 2016.

Most US companies (55%) either plan to hire (28%) or are open to hiring (27%) an international candidate in 2017 - up from 49% that had such plans last year. The technology industry in the U.S. is the most likely to hire international business graduates this year. Half of U.S. tech firms (50%) plan to hire such candidates in 2017 - up from 27% that planned to hire them last year.

GMAC conducted the 16th annual Corporate Recruiters Survey in February and March 2017 together with survey partners EFMD and MBA Career Services & Employer Alliance (MBA CSEA), in association with 97 participating graduate business schools. Survey findings are based on responses from 959 employers representing more than 628 companies in 51 countries worldwide. Two additional organizations, CEMS and RelishMBA, assisted with recruitment of survey participants.

Additional Key Findings

As the outlook for MBA hiring continues to look bright, so do projected hiring trends for 2017 business master's graduates, especially those with Master in Management and Master of Accounting degrees.

The largest increase in hiring demand compared with 2016 is seen in the share of companies that plan to hire Master in Management graduates; globally, 59% plan to hire recent Master in Management graduates, up nine%age points from last year.
Notably, 70% of manufacturing companies plan to hire Master in Management graduates in 2017, up from 50% of companies that hired them in 2016.
Data analytics expertise continues to be in high demand. Sixty-nine% of employers plan to place recent graduate business school hires into data analytics roles in 2017, just trailing marketing, business development, and finance roles - each with 71%.

For the first time, this year's survey report breaks out the responses specifically among start-up companies, revealing a promising 2017 hiring outlook for business school graduates. Three in 4 start-ups plan to hire recent MBA graduates in 2017, up from the 52% that hired them in 2016. More start-ups also plan to make 2017 hires from graduates of Master in Management (37%), Master of Accounting (23%), and Master of Finance (25%) programs.

Globally, more than half of survey respondents (52%) report that MBA base salaries will increase at (34%) or above (18%) the rate of inflation in 2017. Latin America (74% of respondents) and Asia-Pacific (59%) have the greatest share of companies that plan to increase MBA salaries either at or above the rate of inflation this year.

A majority of European and U.S. companies (57% and 51%, respectively) will maintain 2016 salary rates for new MBA hires in 2017. The projected median base starting salary for recent MBA graduates in the U.S. in 2017 is US$110,000, up from a median of US$105,000 in 2016. This represents an 83% premium over recent bachelor's-degree holders in the U.S., who can expect to receive a median starting salary of US$60,000 in 2017.

"Once again, this year's report brings to light the continued value of the MBA degree to the marketplace," said Megan Hendricks, executive director of MBA CSEA. "The increased interest in specialty master's talent provides further indication of the relevance of these programs at our member

(Source: GMAC)

Heidrick & Struggles China recently conducted a survey of 151 senior executives at director level or above in mainland China to understand how extensively employer branding affects corporate success, and the factors that attract them to and retain them at an organization.

"Leaders of multinational corporations in China are finding it even more challenging to attract the leaders they need to thrive in today's operating environment – the 'new normal' which has been shaped by slower economic growth, higher costs, stricter regulations, the disruptive pressures of e-commerce and China's changing demographics," said Linda Zhang, Partner-in-charge of Heidrick & Struggles' Shanghai office. "Due to the shortage of skilled workers and high attrition rates, companies continue to cite talent as a top concern."

When asked to pick the three most crucial factors that make an organization a good place to work, respondents name 'high quality of senior leadership' (57%) and 'attractive corporate culture' (52%) higher than 'a competitive employment offer in terms of salary and benefits' (49%). Yet, good company brand and reputation, clear personal development and promotion path are seen as less important factors when it comes to the pull factors.

When asked what attracts them to a company, over 90% of the executives in the survey say that having senior leaders who are charismatic, inspiring, credible spokespeople is very important to their decision in joining a company. This aligns with the trend of 'CEOs as celebrities', with high-profile, charismatic executives such as Alibaba's Jack Ma and Baidu's Robin Li becoming synonymous with their company's image, and inspiring employees and customers alike.

"Our experience shows that the turnover rate of senior executives in China is roughly 12-15%. As the competition for talent heats up, companies cannot rely on remuneration as the only weapon for attracting and retaining best-in-class senior leaders," said George Huang, Head of China at Heidrick & Struggles. "Most senior level employees in China would like to follow an inspiring leader with a strategic vision, whether it is to achieve certain business or financial goals, or to disrupt an industry with an emerging technology. The satisfaction that comes from working with inspirational leaders that cultivate a strong company culture is increasingly influencing senior-level executives' employer decision."

When it comes to retention, the most important leadership qualities that encourage employees to stay are that senior leaders trust their staff, have a high level of transparency, and foster two-way communication between management and employees.

According to the study, when asked to pick the three most important factors for a company's structure and business model, recognition of high achievers (99%), a friendly and collaborative working environment (93%), and respect and encouragement for diverse thinking and new ideas (91%) are the key building blocks constituting a compelling corporate culture. These results are similar to those in the Asia Pacific Consumer Markets Report 2015 – a previous Heidrick & Struggles employer branding survey of senior executives across the Asia Pacific region – where 98% of respondents said that diversity of thinking in the workplace is the most important characteristic, while recognition of high achievers was in second place at 97%.

Roughly 31% of executives surveyed say they are currently looking for new job opportunities and hope to leave within 12 to 18 months; an additional 29% say they may leave within the next two years if better opportunities are available. This finding suggests that employees in China may have less patience with a suboptimal status quo at work than employees elsewhere in Asia. In the previous Asia Pacific survey, just 30% said they were considering leaving their employers, and only just over half of this group hoped to make a move within 18 months.

The survey included senior executives from a wide range of industries at multinational companies in China, including industrial (42%), consumer (19%), healthcare (16%), technology (10%), financial services (5%), professional services (3%), marketing services (2%), education/not-for-profit (1%), and conglomerate (2%). All respondents came from companies with more than 5,000 employees globally, and 79% have more than 1,000 employees in China. For a majority, China accounts for more than 10% of their company's global revenue.

(Source: Heidrick & Struggles)

With GDPR just around the corner (May 2018), the new EU rules are probably something you want to start thinking about, and companies could risk serious vulnerability in the face of data protection. But do the rules require you to hire a data protection officer? Richard Henderson, global security strategist at Absolute, provides Finance Monthly with the expert tips you’ve been looking for.

In just over a year the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) comes into effect, with part of it stipulating that some organisations will need a data protection officer (DPO). Impacted companies that haven’t already assessed their data protection technology, policies and processes against the regulation’s mandates, need to take action now to address any shortcomings.

The regulation may have been four years in the making, and amended throughout the process, but what has been clear from the start is that it intends to define an era where lax data management is not tolerated. The letter and spirit of the regulation reflects an expectation that data protection should be a priority, not an afterthought. Individuals’ rights around their data will be strongly upheld and companies found wanting will face tough punishment.

In this, the financial services sector has some experience. Despite being responsible for a relatively small percentage of the total security breaches reported to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) in 2015-16, it attracted a third of the financial penalties the ICO pursued. With fines for data protection non-compliance set to rise significantly under GDPR (up to four per cent of annual global turnover), the industry cannot afford not to take note and to prepare.

The overall aim of GDPR is to make EU privacy laws fit for the 21st century. While there is a major emphasis on enforcement it also introduces mandatory data breach reporting requirements, in some cases within a challenging timeframe of 72 hours.

The role of the data protection officer

The requirement to appoint a data protection officer (DPO) is summarised as being in the case of “public authorities,” “organizations that engage in large scale systematic monitoring” and “organizations that engage in large scale processing of sensitive personal data”.

Organisations meeting these requirements will need to make someone responsible for data protection. It will be extremely important to have the right person for the job so legal advice should be considered when hiring.

The DPO must have expertise on data protection law and practices, is expected to keep their knowledge up to date and to report directly to the highest level of management. In short, this is not a responsibility to be taken lightly or to be tagged onto an existing role where the necessary level of expertise, knowledge and responsibility does not already exist. ​It is a professional role, expected to be accorded a sufficient level of seniority, with standing in the firm and the resources to maintain and build on knowledge.

DPOs will need to be supported by a thorough assessment and (where necessary) overhaul of policies, processes and procedures to ensure GDPR-readiness. A big part of their job will be ensuring the right technology is in place to prevent data breaches, while maintaining and reporting on security.

Enough is not good enough

The cyber-attack threat landscape continually changes, forcing businesses to evolve their security strategies and policies to keep up. The risk of non-compliance with GDPR is simply too high, not just in terms of potential financial impact but also corporate reputational damage from compromised data. A DPO will be central to safeguarding the organisation’s reputation, maintaining the right technology and ultimately, preventing a large-scale data breach.

GDPR recognises that situations have changed immeasurably since its preceding 1995 Data Protection Directive when the internet was still in its relative infancy. Today, larger volumes of data are not only created and stored but also widely transferred and held on mobile devices.

GDPR had to bring data protection enforcement up to date for the modern day. By setting the fines level for infringements at the level it has, it is sending out a clear message that ‘enough’ is not good enough. Companies need to make data protection part of the fabric of their organisation or pay the price for not doing so.

The price could be hefty indeed for UK business. If cybersecurity breaches stay at the level reported in 2015, fines could rise from £1.4 billion to £122 billion, according to the Payment Card Industry Security Standards Council.

Companies with limited IT knowledge and expertise may feel that punishments meted out after the event should be balanced by guidance and instruction on breach prevention, so that they can prevent falling foul of the regulation. While it is rightly incumbent on companies to adequately secure data, the options available to them to do this are matched only in their number and variety by the methods hackers have for getting in.

EU GDPR is incontrovertibly punitive but companies looking at it in full must see the opportunity the regulation gives to them to avoid incurring penalties.

Taking stock

By interpreting what the measures require companies to do, they can take action to keep data safe and thereby avoid non-compliance. This includes putting in place processes to provide data to subjects if they ask for it and to remove records if requested when it’s no longer necessary to hold them. It includes potentially putting in place the data protection officer and - perhaps above all - mandates ‘privacy by design’, meaning that data protection has to be built in to systems when they are designed rather than afterwards as an add-on.

This last measure is – if any were needed – the clearest indication of the regulator’s intention to instil into all companies a culture of data protection, one that drives systems and processes rather than the other way round.

A designated DPO dedicates a level of time and expertise that is required now for robust data protection. After all, 72 hours to report a breach is a short space of time and staying on top of policies and processes around data retrieval, access and removal is a big job. Organisations need the capabilities in place to manage data across their entire device estate. A single point of contact with specified responsibilities stands to help the company at the same time as helping the regulator.

Above all else, a dedicated data protection role will help companies prevent data issues, safeguard their reputation and avoid potential non-compliance.

For one particular part of the financial services sector, GDPR presents a specific opportunity. Strict new rules should mean the cyber insurance market will grow. With breaches set to be more widely reported under the new regulations, more data will be available to insurers to set premiums so we are likely to see an increase in the number and range of cyber insurance offerings.

Companies concerned by the length and breadth of the EU GDPR should step back and consider that, in simple terms it obliges organisations to put in place security measures appropriate to the risks. If a data breach occurs it will be hard for that organisation to argue that it had done this. Therefore, the goal will be then what it is now – to have in place the resource, policies, processes and technology to prevent breaches.

Companies should reassess how they detect suspicious activity on their network and consider options for persistent connectivity and encryption for systems, devices and data. The threat of higher fines certainly focuses attention on data protection but in reality, it must always be a top priority for the financial services sector.

No one wants to have their good company name smeared in the headlines because of a breach or incident that could have been avoided. It’s up to all of us in the security space to ensure that we are doing everything we can to keep the data entrusted to our protection safe from harm. We owe it to ourselves, our shareholders, and the public who trust us to steward their most sensitive of data.

As rail and tube strikes have affected thousands of UK commuters during recent months and the nation is set for more walk-outs in 2017, a recent survey found that over half (53%) of employed adults arrive to work stressed due to problems with their commute. Alongside this, road works and infrastructure changes have disrupted many of the UK’s roads and motorways.

Further research has revealed that only 6.2% of business vacancy adverts mention flexible working, despite the fact that 46% of employees want to work more flexibly to fit their jobs in with their modern lifestyles.

Flexible working is available to almost all employees with at least 26 weeks' service, working both full-time and part-time. They have the right to ask for flexible working, including flexitime or a change in the location of the workplace e.g. working from home. Yet the figures show that few are requesting flexible working hours and workplaces are yet to encourage the scheme.

According to a survey, 82% of employed adults felt that they were more productive when they worked from home, with 44% stating that having no distractions made them carry out more work effectively. It also found that 40% felt having flexible working hours meant they could avoid traffic by setting off to work at a different time.

Nearly a fifth (18%) of working mums in the UK have had to leave their jobs after having a request for flexible working denied by their bosses. However, academics at Lancaster University predict that around half of UK businesses will input flexible working by the end of 2017, with this predicted to rise to 70% by 2020.

Jon Tracey is the Director of Services at Star Leaf, he says: “We’ve seen recently, with all of the rail strikes and the congestion on our roads, people are starting to turn up to work absolutely stressed. Over half of the adults surveyed said they’re turning up to work feeling stressed at 9 o’clock in the morning and don’t feel they are able to give their best to their work until they’ve calmed down. We really need to do something about this. People shouldn’t be turning up to work in that state.

“Just because you’re not in the office, it shouldn’t mean you’re not connected. There are many products out there and many collaboration platforms that allow you to stay connected with you colleagues, to exchange information and actually see and talk to other people, as if you’re in the office.”

(Source: IMN)