The Job “Perks” That Work
On Wednesday, the 2019 LinkedIn Top Companies list was published, revealing which employers are the most sought after among Americans today. Oracle ranked # 9, and George Anders’ insight into its “Class Of” training program reveals how Oracle earned this position. Spoiler alert, it wasn’t a sparkly snack room, communal ping pong table, or even the promise of a sabbatical in return for loyalty. Rather, Oracle attributes its high employee satisfaction to camaraderie.
While Anders focuses on the story of a student fresh out of Texas A&M and his peers in the undergraduate training program, his story got me thinking about the nuances among potential employers that have led my fellow first-year classmates at Columbia Business School to choose one summer internship over another. And based on both my anecdotal and survey findings, a company’s people and opportunities for professional development bear much greater weight than shiny perks.
First of all, I want to acknowledge that “shiny” and legitimate are not mutually exclusive — Google perks like laundry on premises, a gym with workout classes, and three meals per day, all provided for free, can save employees meaningful time and money. Salesforce gives employees six paid days off for volunteer work in addition to $1,000 to donate to a charity of their choice, and Airbnb provides a $2,000 annual travel stipend. These incentives are compelling, but even given their tangible byproducts, I would argue that the key to recruiting, incentivizing, and retaining talented employees lies in intangibles.
Over the past four months I’ve witnessed friends committing to summer internships (with the hopes of a full-time job offer at the end) in industries ranging from management consulting and banking to start-ups and product management. And in almost every instance, the decision comes down to where they’ll have enough ownership to contribute meaningfully and gain substantial learnings over the course of the summer, and who they’ll be working with. Recently, one of my friends was considering offers from two private equity funds — one with a big name, and one with people he knew he would love working with every day and who would be invested in his development. Another classmate received offers from two of the top consulting firms and was tempted by the brand of one and the people she’d met at the other. In both cases, they chose the company where they were excited to work with its people. I more often see students conduct due diligence on the person they’ll be reporting to than the company balance sheet (call us reckless, but many students come to business school in hopes of finding a job they ~*actually*~ enjoy!).
Furthermore, the importance of giving employees a sense of purpose within the company cannot be underestimated. In a survey conducted among my classmates, when asked their reasons for pursuing post-MBA jobs, “Learn” and “Path” ranked highest across all industries, except for Finance, where the top three reasons were “Learn” and “Compensation” followed by “Path.”
This brings me to my next point. Of course, I must acknowledge and affirm the importance of money in satisfying employees, especially students who are going into business and pay tuition expecting a certain ROI. I would venture to guess that the correlation between an industry’s earning potential and the number of students pursuing that industry is direct and positive. However, by and large, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs are competing for the same candidates as are Nike and Under Armour. Just as companies create a strategic competitive advantage to win among a certain set of customers, they must create a human resources advantage to win a certain set of talent — talent that is casting a narrow net in terms of industry when looking for a job. So while money is important, once a person has chosen an industry, the delta between two companies’ intangible offerings is often much more significant relative to the delta between compensation packages.
My findings are anecdotal and certainly do not represent an unbiased sample. However, they are consistent with Oracle’s strategy and validate companies’ increasing commitment to screening for “fit,” that all-encompassing and nebulous term that’s impossible to measure but surely indicated by one’s ability to get along with his or her co-workers and desire for longevity at a company. As idealistic as it sounds, I do believe loving (or even just liking!) the people you work with, and having a sense of purpose in what you spend the majority of your life doing, can enhance a job’s pros, ameliorate its cons, and significantly increase satisfaction overall.
