The news is full of stories of companies in difficulty in which managerial and social crises are triggered. But contrary to the collective imagination, the question of the internal climate and its optimization is not the preserve of bankrupt large groups.

Certainly, conflicts are stronger in large companies, especially in industry (DARES survey) and in particular via strikes. However, other types of protests such as absenteeism or the refusal to work overtime can have a strong impact on SMEs.

Understanding the challenges of the social climate

Social dialogue is often reduced to forced negotiations with institutional actors. But seen more widely, it constitutes the set of exchanges between management, management, staff representatives and employees.

It is this dialogue that makes the company's social climate a breeding ground for change, receptive to performance requirements, and constructive.

Walter Patanella, VISCONTI partner, recalls:” What employees often fear is change. However, we live in a context of innovation in which rapid adaptation is crucial. Faced with this, when information is lacking, when the meaning of decisions is poorly transmitted, fear sets in and resistance is created. An effective social dialogue makes it possible to avoid these resistances. There should be no taboo topics.”

The consequences of a failed social dialogue can be multiple, and combined with aggravating external factors, can lead to a vicious circle that is dangerous for the company:

The manager must therefore learn to communicate effectively. And contrary to what we sometimes believe, this action is not only a question of internal communication (in general responsibility of the marketing team) or employee management (responsibility of the HR team).

Working on the multiple facets of social dialogue

How to manage institutional dialogue with IRPs (Staff Representation Institutions)?

How to manage non-institutional dialogue (excluding IRP)?

In addition to the mandatory and institutional aspects of social dialogue, the internal climate of the company depends a lot on dialogue that can be described as non-institutional, i.e. not linked to Staff Representative Institutions.

This can be formed via various channels:

These channels should be carefully considered because they can crystallize social conflicts or, on the contrary, be generators of social harmony and therefore of performance.

Making the social climate a performance indicator

Because the social climate is a major challenge for managers, who must treat it as an internal performance indicator, based on a dashboard.

It is up to the manager and the HR Department to determine the social monitoring indicators, by mixing what is measurable and what is observable, for example:

• Net Promoter Score (NPS)
• Measures of motivation at any time using ad hoc software (e.g. Zest)
• Turnover
• Absenteeism rate
• Formation of clans; groups that are silent when the manager arrives
• Taking early leave
• Number of strikes and participation rate
• Refusal of overtime

The establishment of a monitoring organization based on staff representatives and various internal relays will be a way for the manager to prevent conflicts, to resolve them as best as possible if they arise or even to make social dialogue a driver of performance.