Sunday, January 31, 2010

Doing "What Matters"

I had the opportunity to attend another brilliant presentation this last week by a man I admire a great deal, president emeritus of the University of Oregon, Dave Frohnmayer. Although President Frohnmayer may be best known for the 15 years he spent as university president he can also list Dean of the U of O school of law, Oregon Attorney General, state legislator, and Rhodes scholar. A true renaissance man.

He was speaking to a combined group of community leaders and "aspiring" leaders in the form of students from a local private university. Much of what he said resonated with me, but there were particular aspects of his presentation that really struck me.

One of the most interesting themes he discussed was our evolution as people, especially those of us who aspire to lead or manage others. He said that as we are young and we begin our careers we start with the question-
What do I want to do with my career?
We hear this question and discussion a lot from young people; how do I best manage my "career"?

The next evolution he describes is the place where we ask the question-
What do I find fulfilling or meaningful?
I know I have certainly spent some time pondering that question and I rather suspect that I am not alone.

The last question or stage was the challenge he put to those who lead-
What matters?
The point of this question is that we move beyond the "I" and begin to examine our contributions in the larger context of society and the world. It is an interesting point. Should we have people in leadership roles that haven't evolved to that place?

The other part of what he discussed particularly resonated with me; he encouraged everyone, but especially leaders to see themselves and others in terms of their whole personhood. Some of you know this is a familiar place for me.

He referred to people as diverse as Jung and Machiavelli as recognizing that we all carry a "shadow side" and that the most effective leaders recognize this in themselves and others. They don't try to deny it, they incorporate it in their leadership style and acknowledge it in others. They have people around them whom they trust and have the courage to point out to them when this "shadow" becomes a detriment rather than an asset or neutral. He also talked about how the recognition and "mastery" of your shadow elements is evolutionary and occurs over time.

When I first entered the work force like President Frohnmayer suggested I spent much of my time focusing on my "career". Now that I have had three or four "careers" I recognize that a career is a journey you to a certain extent look back on rather than plan.

I have found for me personally that the second and third questions have intertwined. I believe passionately that a different way of people relating to each other in organizational settings is better for the individual, the organization, and society in general. In my case that model is what we now call engagement or employment branding.

Those of you familiar with me also know about my fascination with "Whole People", my belief that this idea of partitioning people off in the "work self" and personal self is ineffective and kind of silly.

The last JFHF3HCJD6FE few years have been an interesting part of my personal journey so I found it somewhat validating to hear from someone I respect that perhaps I am not doing it "wrong" after all.

So what I would leave you with are two questions-
  • Have you determined what matters to you?
  • If you answer yes are you pursuing it, and if no do you have a plan to change that?

Look forward to hearing from you.....

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, January 23, 2010

From My Heart

I sit at my computer tonight with a pensive heart. It isn't just Haiti, although that gives it a focus.
I will freely admit to being a romantic. I love great stories and heroes. I love happy endings and noble causes and stories about people who displayed more integrity and courage than I have.
I'm not seeking solace or absolution, just thinking out loud.

We have an interesting set of choices before us. In many cases we are angry and disillusioned. We feel let down . Our economic security is at stake. People we trusted let us down. Where do we go?

I believe in people. I have been castigated about my focus on engagement and the power or relationships, but honestly I have have yet to see a more powerful force than a group of committed people in support of a common cause.

I have been and aspire again to be a "leader". Leadership is a a trust between those who "lead" and those who "follow".

For many years our philosophy was "Think Global, act local". Perhaps it is time for us to both think and act locally. Washington and "world leaders" can offer insight, but perhaps we need to embrace more solutions one person, one family, one community at a time?

From my heart. What do you think?

Labels: , , , , ,

Friday, January 22, 2010

A Different Perspective

I had an opportunity to visit with a friend today who shared with me he finds my blog most meaningful when I speak "from my heart". I don't disagree with him. I find it most meaningful too.

I spent a good part of my evening tonight watching Hope for Haiti. I found it tragic, beautiful, inspiring and a host of other things. I got to see some of the greatest musical and stage actors of our time perform. The music was nothing short of incredible. Some of the quotes were memorable. Some of the scenes were tragic.

Haiti is a tragedy of the highest order. It also appears to be a country of great beauty and spirit. I've not had an opportunity to visit although I have a client who is intensely invested in the country. It has an almost mystical presence. As my wife pointed out the poetry of the Creole that is spoken is in direct juxtaposition to the darkness of their reality. Poverty is rampant as is HIV, and a host of other conditions and that was pre earthquake.

The inspiring part for me was that while 2009 was a train wreck of the highest order, it happened on us gradually almost a numbing process. The earthquake happened suddenly and tragically. Sometimes incidents like this bring out something human in us.

I saw some of the greatest entertainers alive today perform amazing music. Music that in many cases they hadn't written or performed previously, but performed beautifully; maybe even inspirationally.

I'll admit it. I am a soft touch and a romantic. Seeing people come together in a spirit of humanity speaks to a place in me. I hope it speaks to a place in you too.

I left the show with impressions of great tragedy, incredible performances, and hope. Seeing these artists perform without introduction, without the accolades of an audience, and organized in a very short time said we still care and hope. The idea that the major networks provided it commercial free said we still care. The idea that Bill Clinton and George W Bush jointly traveled to Haiti and are sponsoring fundraising efforts says there is a dignity in ex- Presidents and our current administration in making the request that speaks to our place in the world.

If you didn't see the show I reccomend it to you. At the very least download the soundtack from Itunes, I found it moving. I hope you will too....

Labels: , , , , ,

Sunday, January 17, 2010

Opportunity from Chaos

The Conference Board announced that employee satisfaction is at an all time low and several other studies say that based on "dis-engagement" the U.S. economy is operating at about 30% efficiency. Yet another study says that the supply of "experienced" talent is going to decrease while demand increases. So where is the opportunity? Well call me Pollyanna, but I see several areas.

In a recent article Daniel Pink, author of Drive as well as several other great management books, states that loyalty isn't dead it has been redefined. He even provides a whole bunch of ways to build this redefined loyalty into your organization and redefined loyalty can translate to engagement which directly contributes to sustainability, profitability, and productivity.

Although 25% of the workforce will be over 50 by 2020 in North America and Europe and the over 45 customer demographic will be 40% larger than the 20-45 group by 2012 these folks have more money to spend and incidentally research shows that the over 50s have as good or better skills as their younger counterparts. By matching up the customer facing workforce with the demographic shift it represents opportunity rather than loss.

Building engagement requires a strategy, but it is not necessarily cost prohibitive or limited to large, complex organizations. In fact many of the elements of an engagement strategy are pretty simple in their foundations:

  • Hire the right people. Think about your organization and your values and the values of your customer base and build it into your hiring and selection processes.
  • Create great jobs. Great jobs are not necessarily about compensation. They give people an opportunity to contribute and work in an environment that fits them.
  • Participate in helping people build great careers. Loyalty should be based on contribution not tenure. Employees who give you 110% while they work for you are loyal. Employees who speak highly about you to customers and other potential employees are loyal.
  • Re-recruit constantly. Smart employers spend a lot of time ensuring that employees understand their personal contribution to the business and where they fit in. Do you really think this is easier in organizations with thousands of employees than it is in smaller organizations?
  • Take advantage of local resources. Most of the foundational element of successful engagement come down to relationship skills not technology. I am talking about things like setting expectations properly, giving feedback constructively, recognizing positive results and similar skills. Most of those skills are taught by your local Chamber of Commerce or community college. You don't need an expensive "top tier" consulting firm. Best practices and templates work great for the company who developed them and consulting firms who install them.
  • Think local, act local. To a great extent most of us operate in our local community. By engaging and investing in our community we build and reinforce relationships and it relationships that drive organizations not technology or systems by themselves.

In my mind we must decide whether or not we will use the "lessons" from this latest recession as a learning opportunity or concede defeat. I am hoping it will cause us to examine root causes and to redefine how we work with our employees, customers, and communities and they we will capitalize on the benefits of commitment rather than compliance. We have to decide.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Monday, January 11, 2010

What Happened to Us?

Almost 250 years ago the United States was founded in large part on the basis of two principles:
· The right of personal property; the ability through your own efforts and sweat to own property and build your own future.
· The right of personal competency; the right and responsibility for each person to develop their skill sets and to plan and execute their own future.
These concepts were radical in view of the feudalism that had ruled most of even the “civilized” world. Your destiny was defined not on who and where you were born, but rather what you chose to do with it.
In my white paper, A Social Contract for the New Millennium, I talked about how I feel that concepts like scientific management, pure capitalism, a move from an agrarian to an industrial society and other factors contributed to the degradation of these principles, but what I see lately troubles me even more.
In the 1940’s people like Deming talked about new approaches to total quality management, which interestingly enough began being referred to as Japanese management techniques. Immediately following World War Two the United States was the undisputed industrial power in the world. I will even go further and say that it was our industrial capacity that played a huge role in the defeat of the Axis as well as our military successes. We were the place that everyone came to study business and the home on entrepreneurialism. The productivity of American workers was some of the highest in the world.
I have heard the arguments that it was the unions and government socialism starting with FDR and followed up with other Democratic administrations that gutted it, but I don’t buy it.
Let’s look at some pretty unpleasant realities facing us right now:
· A study in the Journal of Business Strategy estimated employee turnover costs the U.S. economy $5 trillion annually.
· Another study by the American Health association says we lose $200 billion to “presenteeism, a phenomenon where people “show up”, but contribute at a marginal level because of their own or family health care issues, economic insecurity, or just plain dissatisfaction with their job.
· A 2008 Gallup Consulting study estimates the U.S economy as operating at a 30% rate of efficiency because of lack of employee “engagement”.
· A Conference Board study on employee satisfaction released last week reflects that 55% of Americans are dissatisfied at work and if you look at the under 25 demographic it grows to 64%!
· We have a second class health care delivery system.
I realize that the stock market is moving back up and that Wall Street is about to announce record bonuses, but these numbers scare the hell out of me. We are talking about things like a “jobless recovery” and while Wall Street has profited they aren’t sharing the wealth. What happened to the ingenuity and tenacity that put us at the top of the world’s economies?
There are a number of factors that contribute to where we are including:
· Globalization, if you haven’t gotten the email it is here to stay.
· A lack of solid leadership. Leadership is still defined in most organizations as a “nice to have” or an HR initiative rather than a strategic focus. In my opinion what is being taught in our top graduate schools is management, not leadership. They are related, but they are different.
· A lack of alignment. We are not aligning people’s contributions with business goals and objectives. That’s why we are at a 30% efficiency rate.
· Lack of a cogent customer service model. Most organizations have old fashioned customer service models; they aren’t engaging their customers anymore than they are engaging their employees. Anybody who experienced air travel recently can give me an amen to that.
· Changing expectations. In this regard I mean customers, employees, communities, etc.
The interesting thing is that if you look at the factors I have posited is how many of them come down to relationships and trust. A survey by Punk Rock HR gives a brief summary for the biggest reasons for the “newer generations” dissatisfaction:
· We read about 8 figure bonuses for executives and you want us to accept 3% salary increases as “market”.
· You told us (and our parents) that you would provide us with employer sponsored quality health care.
· You changed our retirement plans and tied them to the stock market so we could do “better”.
· You told us that moving the manufacturing base to Southeast Asia, China, and India was good for “business” and that we would create a “knowledge based” economy.
· Your response to the recession and 10% unemployment is that those of us who remain employed should be “grateful”.
I don’t know about you, but I can kind of see their point.
Maybe I am being overly simplistic, but doesn’t it seem like much of these issues are directly correlated to the relationship between employer and employed? I have thought so for thirty years! That is why I developed my model Moving from Compliance to Commitment. I have spent years refining and testing it. My premise is that when you give employees a chance to “join up” with you they will contribute at a higher level.
Turns out I was right. A Gallup Consulting study from 2008 showed that among other positive results companies with high engagement demonstrate:
· A turnover rate 51% lower than peer groups
· 27% lower absenteeism
· A per capita productivity rate 18% higher and
· 12% higher profitability
A different study from Rhoads and Whitlark and BlessingWhite drew the same conclusions. In fact they showed shareholder returns 13% higher and the productivity and profitability impacts of increasing engagement in environments like retail is nothing short of astounding.
Global research organization ISR’s research director, Patrick Kulesa, put it even more clearly-
“Our research continues to show that a well substantiated relationship exists between employee engagement- the extent to which employees are committed, believe in the value of the company, feel pride in working for their employer, and are motivated to go the extra mile- and business results”.
Now let me tell you what really bothers me. Less than 30% of U.S. businesses have any kind of a strategy for addressing these issues. To the best of my knowledge there is not a single government led initiative exploring it either. I read about a government initiative recently- in the U.K.!
It kind of reminds me of the early days of the total quality movement. Even though it was pioneered in the U.S. we largely ignored it because we didn’t find the need compelling. It was only when our products like automobiles, electronics, and others began to suffer did we look at root causes. We just gave big banking a trillion dollars and the average American isn’t seeing much benefit. Are we seeing a trend here?
The other issue for me is that this is not a “technical issue”. While I have a lot of respect for my colleagues who have black belts in Six Sigma issues like trust and respect are not going to be solved by “process improvements”. For those of us who see ourselves in leadership and management and the fields of organizational development and human resources management this represents a crisis and an opportunity to provide real leadership.
So let’s do a quick review. We have 10% unemployment, historically high employee dissatisfaction, and an underfunded second class health care system. We lose $5 trillion to turnover and another $200 billion to “presenteeism”. Maybe I am just confused, but am I the only person seeing some opportunities here? So what is it exactly we are waiting for…?

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, January 9, 2010

Reinventing Human Resources Departments

Like many of us today I spend my share of time on social media sites like LinkedIn, Digg, Facebook and others.

LinkedIn particularly I find to be a great forum for exchanging ideas, asking and answering questions and just "chatting" with colleagues. One of the things I find disappointing is that I still see frequently on LinkedIn are questions like:
  • What sucks the most about your HR department?
  • Does your HR department bring any value added to your organization
  • How as an HR professional do I generate respect and credibility?

I have been in and around the HR profession for over thirty years and even though I have "progressed" to C level roles both in human resources and operating departments it pains me to hear discussion I heard when I was graduating from college and my advisor pleaded with me not to "waste" my talent in Personnel.

As recently as yesterday I was with a colleague in a related field who lamented that when he attends local SHRM meetings the discussion is mostly defensive or compliance oriented rather than discussing solutions or being proactive.

Human Resources needs to re-define itself and the timing is no more critical than today.

A recent article I read made a statement I agree with whole heartedly and have been preaching for the last 36 months or more:

Employee engagement and retention are emerging as two of the biggest challenges facing business in the next decade!

Because of the economic downturn many C level executives are doing what they have always done during times of economic uncertainty; focusing on the numbers. They assume because of high unemployment that employees are just grateful to be employed or replacement talent is readily available. This is both horribly wrong and short term thinking for a number of reasons:

  • Recent studies find employee satisfaction is at one of its lowest points in 50 years!
  • The U.S. economy is estimated to be operating at a 30% rate of efficiency with further erosion occurring because of loss of trust stemming from layoffs and economic insecurity.
  • Employee turnover is estimated to cost the U.S. economy $5 trillion annually
  • The costs of "presenteeism"; employees who are employed, but largely un-engaged is estimated at another $200 billion annually.

That's right, those numbers are trillion with a "t" and billion with a "b". One could conjecture that fixing these issues could fund a national health care initiative and probably go along way to solve funding issues in education, poverty and other areas.

So what can HR professionals and departments do to help address these issues and increase their stature and contribution, I would submit several things:

Change your role

I expected my HR teams to provide three primary services to our internal clients: technical expertise, facilitation, and project management. Our role is to provide the right tools to management to select, motivate, and retain the right staff. They are responsible to learn and use those tools. I don't expect managers to be experts in ERISA or COBRA, but basic competencies like setting expectations, giving feedback, taking corrective action, and linking individual goals to organizational goals are management competencies, not HR competencies.

Develop and implement an employment brand

Engagement starts with the hiring and selection process. Organizations that achieve excellence are clear about their brand internally and externally. Candidates and employees know what the organization stands for in terms of values and vision. They may be flexible about process, but they are ruthless about adherence to those values and principles.

Create a pipeline

Great HR organizations are constantly monitoring their "pipeline" of talent. They are proactive not reactive. If turnover or growth occurs they have strategies in place to quickly identify and deploy the right talent. They don't scramble.

Integrate your systems

I am old enough to remember when the total quality movement was "new". You didn't inspect quality in, you built it in. So many times I see organizations approach their HR initiatives serially; we will work on our recruiting system this year, compensation next year, performance management next year, etc. It doesn't work. These systems must be integrated and more importantly they must link clearly and directly to your business strategy.

Foster and cultivate a culture of innovation

You are either moving forward or you are regressing. Great companies don't follow best practices, they create them. They don't wait for the competition to come up with the next idea, they constantly challenge their own thinking and reinvent themselves. I personally ascribe to that model by doing some of the following:

  • Hiring the "right" people
  • Creating an optimal environment
  • Managing "whole" people
  • Moving from compliance to "commitment"

If you want to know why I encourage you to do these things right now, here are my reasons:

  • Demand for talent- over the next 15 years the demand for “experienced” talent will increase by 25% and the supply is expected to decrease by 15%!
  • Less than 30% of organizations worldwide have an engagement strategy today. Do you want to lead or follow?
  • Engaged employees have a turnover rate 51% lower than un-engaged employees and a per capita productivity rate 18% higher.
  • I guess my last reason would be that if you are an HR professional aren't you tired of sitting in the cheap seats? This is our time, it is up to us to take it.

Labels: , , , , , ,