I get asked a lot by my clients to help them plan for the future. As an HR Business Partner at Helios HR, my job is to work with senior management teams to plan for the unexpected. To help them continuously move their human capital forward successfully. Sometimes, these organizations that want to plan for the future just want to mitigate their risk of an employee leaving the organization. So this got me thinking, what is the true difference between succession planning versus replacement planning?

At Helios, we are often asked to recommend how to best structure an organization’s HR Department. You may have heard the rule of thumb is 1 HR professional for every 100 employees. Unfortunately, it is not that simple and there is no “one size fits all” solution. There are a lot of factors that go into determining the right solution for your organization.

Last month at the McDonald’s annual meeting there were thousands of protesters who gathered at the company’s headquarters to fight for higher wages. They were calling for minimum wage to be raised to $15 per hour. The protesters argued that at their current rate of pay (they receive on average $8 or $ 9 per hour), they cannot pay their bills.

The job market is slowly but surely recovering from the 2007-2009 recession. As hiring increases across the United States, more and more people are leaving their jobs voluntarily. In fact, according to the Federal Bureau of Labor Statistics, since the recession, the number of voluntary separations has increased by 49 percent. So, how can you as an employer stop or reduce this significantly increasing voluntary turnover? One answer is by analyzing the reasons that employees are leaving. This can be done through an exit interview, ensuring that there is a conversation and not just an automated questionnaire. The difficult part once you have found out why employees are leaving, is to address the issues and come up with long-term solutions.

I recently worked with a client to conduct an employee engagement survey. The results of the survey indicated that employees felt they were not paid competitively and that the bonus opportunities available to them were not incentivizing. The leadership did not really understand why employees feel this way because they felt they had done all the right things.

When used properly, ICs (Independent Contractors) can be an excellent way to augment business services and operations. Classification continues to be hot button issue with the IRS. Misclassifying a position as an IC (also referred to as a 1099) when the position should be classified as an employee can create significant liability for a business, small or large. One of the more well known cases in recent memory involved a suit that Microsoft settled with a group of Independent Contractors for nearly $100M. At issue in the Microsoft suit was participation in various benefit programs, including employee stock options. But even small companies may find themselves targets of litigation. To help you understand exactly what is at stake, here are some areas of risk to keep in mind: