^{PILLAR 1}
Workforce
agility

PILLAR 1

Workforce agility

Agility is the first pillar of our model for workforce resilience. Is your organization able to scale and align its workforce in response to new opportunities?

Our executive survey shows that many firms are still struggling to build agile workforces:

54% say poor workforce planning is a major barrier to business growth.
47% say they are missing business opportunities due to a lack of suitable talent.
42% admit they are failing to unlock the full potential of their workforce.

More effective oversight of the talent pipeline is essential: 53% of employers are already using technology to give executives better visibility of their contingent and permanent talent requirements. This year’s research also shows that training is a core focus: 59% say they are effectively using training to support workforce agility, while 56% say they are using AI to enable talent to perform more effectively.

52% of executives say an effective approach to recruiting contingent talent is supporting workforce agility

Executives have been prioritizing training and technology to enhance workforce agility

Balancing economic challenges with talent requirements to build agility

“The economic complexities of recent years have led ExxonMobil to assert adaptability (like others), ensuring its people strategy is able to flex as work demands adjust and work ways change,” says Dahlia Mughrabi, Senior Labor Category Manager.

“In developing our global strategy, we maintain a focus on a healthy supply base that isn’t over served, and of course, a strong procurement focus that enables value (in the form of savings among other things). It’s this blend of ensuring we have access to the talent suited to purpose and ensuring we’re aligned with the true market. It’s always been our position to arrive at cost savings that aren’t at a detriment of any of the various and critical factors pertaining to labor.”

“Procurement and HR when aligned are able to transform, innovate, and balance the total workforce and further drive a holistic view of contingent talent, which is the ultimate goal in a well performing labor program.”

Dahlia Mughrabi
Senior Labor Category Manager (AMER), Exxon Mobil

Insights from the Index:
Leaders prioritize employee development

Resilience Leaders’ commitment to improve training and development stands out: 69% say they are effectively increasing agility via training, compared to 31% of Laggards. Resilience Leaders also put a stronger emphasis on equitable compensation for talent (73% vs. 29%). Additionally, they are more likely to work with external partners or consultants to improve their understanding of the labor market (71% vs. 35%).

Signs of alignment on addressing talent’s frustrations

In our executive survey, business leaders identify a lack of career progression and poor skills-development opportunities as the two biggest reasons why employees quit, followed by poor work-life balance, outdated tools and technologies, and uncompetitive pay and benefits.

The top two factors match what talent reports to be their biggest frustrations, both featuring in their top five concerns. Signs that executives and talent see things the same way is good news for organizations that hope to collaborate with their talent to find ways out of the current crisis.

Employee frustrations and reasons for leaving

Yet, despite recognition from employers of their development shortcomings, warning signs remain when it comes to training opportunities. According to employees, just one third of organizations are effective at knowledge sharing, and only around one in four workers (28%) say they receive face-to-face training.

Employees point to a major shortfall in training opportunities

Training and career development: Building ownership and empowerment

“I firmly believe the employee has every right to own their career, and they should be expected to – but they also need to be empowered.” Amy Bouque, Chief People Officer at Kelly, knows that employees’ hunger for personal development and progression opportunities has changed the balance of power in the relationship with their organizations.

But workers should not expect their leaders to make decisions for them, Bouque emphasizes. “A person might be comfortable with their current role. They might prefer not to take on new challenges, maybe owing to personal needs or caregiving duties. Conversely, they might be itching for a new opportunity.

“Leaders should open up doors, networks, and learning paths. But it comes down to the employee to walk through those doors.”

Amy Bouque
Chief People Officer at Kelly

Progress on talent metrics

Our talent survey suggests that most organizations have made progress across a number of metrics of talent engagement compared with 2023. We found the biggest improvements to be in employees’ enjoyment of work (46% agree, up from 35%); manageability of workloads (46%, up from 37%); satisfactory work-life balance (45%, up from 37%); and agreement that they work in a psychologically safe environment (45%, up from 38%).

However, one-third of talent say their organizations have gone backwards. Their most substantial concerns are a reduced sense of job security (32%), reduced physical wellbeing (32%), and declining happiness and mental wellbeing (31%).

Tensions over flexibility

While signs of alignment on skills and progression are positive, there are perception gaps between executives and talent on other dimensions of work. In particular, talent highlights a lack of autonomy over how they work and a lack of flexibility over where or when they work among their top frustrations.

Executives rank these factors as much less important, and not all employers are convinced that greater workforce flexibility is the answer. While 63% of executives say they offer or plan to offer greater flexibility in the workday, 48% have mandated that employees work on-site for a specified number of days each week; and while employers report strong benefits to office attendance, employees remain frustrated with the return to office.

That disconnect will be felt acutely in organizations that have mandated a return to on-site work. Many workers have become accustomed to remote and hybrid work patterns since the pandemic began and won’t give up that freedom willingly.

But there are good reasons for mandating on-site attendance, executives say: 66% have seen customer satisfaction increase as a result, and 64% have seen an increase in productivity. Yet organizations need to do more to win talent’s hearts and minds when changing working practices.

Employers report huge benefits from on-site work

Insights from the Index: Leaders see benefits from on-site work

Resilience Leaders are more likely to agree that returning to on-site work for a number of days each week carries a range of benefits: 74% agree company culture has improved as a result, compared with 55% of Laggards, while 76% of Resilience Leaders (vs. 58% of Laggards) agree that it supports recruitment. However, a comparatively low 58% of Resilience Leaders say this shift has been good for retention, suggesting that mandatory on-site work may be incompatible with the circumstances or preferences of some employees.

On-site work: Adapting the hybrid model

Mandatory on-site work can create division between organizations and talent. But the right balance can be a competitive differentiator, Dahlia Mughrabi at ExxonMobil says.

“ExxonMobil has a ‘Flex your Day’ program, providing ad-hoc flexibility around when and where you work. When I joined the company, I found this a surprising benefit for the Oil and Gas industry. Several of my peers in O&G were in pre-set hybrid arrangements with accompanying rules, which limited their flexibility. ExxonMobil’s approach displays a practical awareness of what will attract potential candidates and retain existing workers by adapting to the way people want to work. The result is an often bustling office environment with people that want to be there and openness to when they need to be elsewhere.”

Dahlia Mughrabi
Senior Labor Category Manager (AMER), Exxon Mobil

Engaging contingent talent

Historically, many employers have maintained a rigid distinction between full-time employees and contingent workers. But as more people intentionally join the contingent workforce (gig work) is that approach still viable?

“Kelly takes a progressive view. We treat our contingent work teams and teammates much like we treat our full-time teammates,” Amy Bouque says.

The old distinction was partly based on outdated employment law. “We’ve worked with our legal teams to get this right,” Bouque confirms. “There are bright lines around evaluations, but for the most part, we treat them very much as an integral part of what we do.”

As the gig economy grows at pace, harnessing the power of contingent talent will only become more important to business. The U.S. gig economy is already worth an estimated $455.2 billion—and forecasts say as many as half of U.S. workers could be contingent workers by 2027.

Amy Bouque
Chief People Officer at Kelly