Back in the day, I worked as an office temp during my college summer breaks. It was a great gig for a student: answer some phones, do some filing, sit in air-conditioned comfort, and never work nights or weekends.
I earned some decent money, learned how to troubleshoot even the fussiest photocopiers, and mastered the art of the PBX system. What I didn’t do: build lasting relationships or get fully engaged in the culture of the workplace.
I knew it was a short-term assignment, and so did my coworkers. Why bother investing the time or effort, from either side? I’d be history in a month or two and we’d probably never cross paths again.
I can’t help thinking about that when people sing the praises of temporary executives. For example, Workforce Management just wrote about how temp execs are gaining favor in a troubled economy, and the Wall Street Journal identified a trend in which stay-at-home moms formed temporary teams of seasoned pros to handle crash projects.
The theme with articles like these seems to be, “What a brilliant idea!” You can tap mercenary experts to come into your business, take charge of projects, make big changes and business decisions — all without hiring them on a long-term basis or even paying benefits. When they’re done, they’re gone. Brilliant, right?
Well…I wonder. One of the things I write about frequently is employee engagement. And it’s really hard for a team to connect with a manager who they know will be out the door in a few months. How do workers build rapport and trust with someone who’s got no personal stake in the business — or in them?
This is one of those business decisions that might make short-term sense for the bottom line, but it doesn’t work in the long run. Especially with this precarious economy, you need all your employees engaged, productive, and pulling together. That’s tough to do if the executive suite has a revolving door.
Paul Hebert, writing on Fistful of Talent, agrees with me. He notes that temp execs can lead to temp employees:
“I don’t think a company benefits from hiring mercenary executives in the long run. Sure, in the short run their laser focus and lack of emotional connection allow them to see opportunities that employed executives might not, and be able to act on them. But the long-term damage to the entire employee base isn’t worth it.
In a time when most HR consultants are telling companies that employee engagement is key to future success - and most surveys show that engagement is at best holding it’s own — hiring temporary executives seems like the most backward play I can imagine.”
When I last touched on this topic, asking you if a temporary team leader is the right answer, fewer than 10 percent of you said yes. The rest were split almost evenly between “no” and “maybe.”
Have your thoughts changed now that the economy has worsened? Is there a place for temporary executives, or will they kill whatever morale remains in your team? Share your thoughts in the comments section.
