On-boarding is real and though cost reductions have been made in many key HR areas, many organizations are finding it necessary to either implement or improve its existing on-boarding processes.  You have two arguably equal goals in the on-boarding process.

• Reduce the time to productivity
• Increase retention

That’s it.  It’s that simple and everything else either supports the two aforementioned goals or is background music (this includes the theoretical engagement and talent management arguments) .

With the aforementioned goals in mind, I wanted to provide you, my fellow HR professional, with my real-world experience on how you can bring your on-boarding program to life.  Prior to going into these tips, let me offer a piece of advice:  Many of you will try to emulate and design your program around “best-in-class” on-boarding programs.  Although this may be feasible and even necessary to gain your “organizational bearings,” it is important for you to take into consideration the unique needs and goals of your organization – just what is the end-game and supporting goals within the larger context of the goals mentioned earlier.  This is done by listening to your line-managers and asking for feedback.  An equally important source of information, when designing or improving your on-boarding program, will come from recent new hires and seasoned employees.

When I took over the on-boarding process for my organizational unit, I poured over exit data as well as new hire feedback that was offered via questionnaires, focus groups, and follow-up interviews.  Upon review of all the data there were common themes that reoccurred, forming the basic thesis and providing the foundation of what needed to be accomplished within our on-boarding process.  In my specific case, respondents felt that the on-boarding process was a “check-in-the-box” program offering little value in the long-run.  Second, respondents felt that the information that they were exposed to had little direct influence on their jobs-careers.  Third (and perhaps most interesting of note), respondents and recent new hires, on average, did not feel a strong sense of engagement after having completed the on-boarding process, and/or the program committed very little in the area of company loyalty – which again impacts the obtainment of the goals mentioned above.  And finally, respondents saw no correlation between the on-boarding program/process in reducing turnover and/or increasing their productivity and/or their willingness to contribute to the organizational mission and divisional-departmental goals and objectives.  Based upon the data reviews and evaluation, we had a huge challenge and the underlying conclusion was quite simply this: Our on-boarding program missed the mark.  Its very reason for existence was non-existent.  What follows below are the specific steps we took to improve our on-boarding program/process:

(1) Pushed Information to New Hire Upon Notification of Selection.: The on-boarding process traditionally starts once the new hire reports to your organization.  However, we pushed the envelope on this issue by starting orientation immediately upon notification of new hire date/report date (in the case of existing-transferring employees).  Access was given to Intranet resources and tasks were assigned/designed to be completed prior to “showing-up” for work.  This allowed the new hire to internalize valuable information, contribute in a tangible sense to the organization, and provide a glimpse into organizational culture.

(2) Mentor Assignments:  As soon as the new-hire is notified of their selection, he/she was also assigned a mentor.  This mentor communicated at defined intervals that matched and sometimes was included within organizational communications.  However, the mentor was also encouraged (read required) to communicate outside of traditional organizational channels.  This communication was not reduced to the writing of e-mails and letters, but also included the use of Web 2.0 tools and person-to-person meets.  Perhaps most important, the mentor had to meet a set of predefined standards.  Previously, mentors were thought to be last resort or light-duty candidates that line managers sought to make productive or more bluntly, push to the side.  However, mentors under the revised on-boarding process were the very best the division-departments had to offer.  Each mentor, prior to being assigned, was required to meet with the organizational head, myself (as HR Head), and Director of Operations if this was his/her initial assignment.  Performance appraisals-reviews were poured over and in short, this was viewed as a key ingredient of our success.

(3) Included Key Training Events.   Key technical and non-technical training events were include within the on-boarding process to a considerable level of depth and detail.  Training normally conducted once new hires reported to parent division-departments was incorporated in addition to the normal training received on topics such as mission, culture, values, ethics, and overviews of key organizational-human resources information.  The training topics covered were based upon feedback received from line-managers that were concerned about organizational specific training not provided in previous learning environments – thus having a direct impact on productivity.  The development of the training is beyond the scope of this blog, but did include elements of “train-the-trainer” as well as sign-offs of key tasks by mentors and observation by mentor’s supervisors.  In addition, linkage was established within our Knowledge Management process and in between schools and outside entities so that connections could be made and drill-downs conducted based upon previous learning-development experience and training events.

(4) Extended Orientation Period.  Next, because of the aggressive scope of our revised on-boarding process, we found it necessary to extend the length of the process.  Thus, our two-week program was extended by four weeks for a total of six weeks.  During those six weeks, the prospective division-department was a key allay; however, the prospective division-department did not assume “reporting responsibility” of the new employee.  Instead, the new-hires were considered temporary assignees of HR.  This allowed a clean relationship and strict accountability of the new hire, yet provided the necessary motivation for key line managers to participate in the on-boarding process.  With a shared commitment from HR and prospective line managers, new-hires were infused with a sense of urgency to complete yet another milestone: Successful completion of the on-boarding program and assignment to their new division-department.  In addition, the new-hire, mentor, and line-manager(s) received a predetermined amount of hours in which they could test drive their new skills and knowledge in the prospective department.

(5) Defined Follow-Up Periods:  In partnership with the organizational head, line-managers, and HR, defined follow-up periods were identified at specific intervals for the new-hires first 12 months of being attached to the organization.  These follow-up periods escalated in level of transparency and involvement. As an example, at the three month point, the new-hire was interviewed by his departmental supervisors and mentor.  At the six month point, the new hire received interviews by the division head, department supervisor, and mentor.  This process continued until the new-hire received an interview with the organizational head, mentor, division line manager, and departmental supervisor.  If at any point, the new-hire had a concern and/or perceived weakness that was included within the on-boarding process, he/she had the option (or at the direction of the supervisor-manager) to receive additional or repeat training for specific events.  This “stop-gap” had an additional benefit of ensuring that line managers, supervisors, mentors, and the new hire herself were committed to the engagement process.

(6) Senior Leadership Involvement:  Perhaps the most important element of the on-boarding process was the involvement of senior organizational leadership and key staff employees.  This included the organizational head, his assistant, and key staff departments that included our legal team, key departmental personnel that worked in non-line positions, and several HR subject-matter-experts. By including all these key leaders and organizational unit staff members, the new-hire could make a connection of how their technical and day-to-day tasks contributed to the larger strategic effort.  Just as important, the new hire felt a connection to the organization in a holistic sense – making for a well-rounded professional in the end.

In conclusion, it is important to note that this is an overview of how I, as the HR Head, built upon an existing, albeit weak, on-boarding process.  Your steps and/or insight into the process will be unique; however, you may see elements within this post that you can apply within a reasonable time frame (this assumes you have an input, formal or informal, to the on-boarding process).  In addition, normal assumptions should be included.  For instance, enabling technology was utilized, automation was employed, training targets and ROI metrics were developed.  What’s included above are “meat-and-potato” steps that were taking on the ground floor.  In other words, it was my goal to provide you information in a practical context and not with the normal consultative language often provided with no tangible example or methodology of how to get there from here.

In the end your obligation to your new employee does not end with hiring or even the completion of the on-boarding process.  Instead, the socialization, integration, productivity, engagement, and retention goals make this one of many critical steps in the human resource and professional development process.  The on-boarding process, in my view, is a continuum of processes that takes your employee from selection-recruitment all the way to the time the employee leaves the organization – and maybe beyond if you have an on-ramp/off-ramp – rehire culture.

How did my story end?!  Turnover was reduced by 30% during the first 12 months after formal incorporation.  Productivity increased by a similar percentage; morale as measured through the various feedback avenues and annual organizational assessment-climate survey significantly improved.  In other words: We got it right, but still had room for growth and improvement – as it should be.

Properly on-boarding employees is a strategic business necessity.  On-boarding should be viewed with the key goals that we mentioned above – increased productivity and increased retention – that lend themselves to your organization obtaining a strategic (competitive) advantage.

The rest my friends is background music.