"Looking back, the thing that's really impressive is that here were these leaders running the Civil War, and people...had time to meditate on the day's events...They weren't multi-tasking; they had time to reflect. It's a luxury many leaders just don't have today, and that's a real loss."
The above quote is by Doris Kearns Goodwin, author and historian, in the April 2009 edition of the Harvard Business Review. The entire article is great and this quote struck me in particular. I'm a knowledge worker. My job involves utilizing large amounts of information and making decisions that support the goals of the organization I work with. Some are straightforward while others requires a fair amount of analysis and consideration.
When it comes to strategic initiatives, it can be all too easy to go with what worked in the past, without considering how it may impact the present. This is where the danger lies. Considering the fast paced world most of us live in it's important that we take the time to reflect on what we do and did, both professionally as well as personally.
It's also important that these reflections be recorded. I know that sounds obvious but think about it--how much of your organizational member's unique knowledge is accessible--to other staff, vendors, and partners?
For example, in a former role I managed the annual update to the employee handbook. My partners and I made policy decisions that impacted thousands of employees. It was also my responsibility to communicate what changes had been made and why. Part of the strategy in accomplishing this was by saving the previous drafts of employee manuals that were created over the years, along with a supporting notes and communications generated. As a result, we became much better at determining which policies were effective and which weren't.
Having these reflections on record also help to preserve and perpetuate an organization's unique culture, which is often underrated and should not be taken lightly. I know that many people argue that a job's a job, but all things being equal, people tend to choose organizations that reflect their professional or personal values.
Another way to look at it is like this--if your top talent got killed tomorrow would their best practices, leadership decisions, etc., die along with them? It's morbid, I know, but I'm trying to make a point. This is why when Steve Jobs took a leave of absence in 2009 people started to wonder if it signaled an end of an era at Apple (as well as rattle shareholder confidence). When employees who represent the best of a company's values and vision leaves it can have an effect on morale and productivity. Preserving their output for others to access helps to minimize the loss of critical resources.
Here are a few suggestions on being better at self reflection:
Set aside (idle) time for yourself. Too often we use what little free time we have to do more stuff. Give yourself time and permission to do nothing, within reason. And stick to it the same way you stick to your other commitments.
Stay healthy. Numerous medical studies show that a good diet and regular exercise have a positive impact on brain functions. It also helps with stress management, making it easier to think more clearly.
Write it down! This is the one I struggle with the most. I'll have a great idea and by the time I'm ready to implement it I've forgotten the most crucial elements (Doh!). So now I carry around a pen and a notepad to jot things down in the moment. It damages my street cred but it preserves my thoughts.
Promote and utilize collaborative tools within your organization. Wikis, blogs, and intranets are some of the tools that may be used by organizations for capturing its members knowledge. It's important that they're easy to use and are supported by top management.
Share. Aside from colleagues, you should try to speak with those outside your normal comfort zone. Remember, you're responsible to all stakeholders. Being able to effectively explain yourself to them (and vice-versa) will only benefit you.
If you want to continue to make quality decisions then take the time to reflect and share this insight with others. Without it you could be missing important opportunities for yourself and your organization.
Do you remember trying to fit in? You might still be trying now! Our school years most often represent the times where this was a reality. We wanted so much to be liked, to be popular, to be wanted, to be so much more than we saw ourselves as. We desired people to seek out our presence. As we've aged (so hard to write that...), we still look to fit in. Often, however, it may not be as much about being popular as it is being relevant. We don't want to be our dads or moms of a generation ago. We don't want to go "gently into that good night" and we shouldn't. We should want to remain engaged and informed. We should maintain a voice within our organizations that still speaks to the pulse of the markets, the competition, the corporate philosophy. But I would be delinquent if I didn't mention priorities. In our quest to be relevant, we sometimes lose our way in keeping the priorities of our organizations first. Some of you are already shaking your heads in agreement (thanks!), but let's get some perspective on this, as it's not a new phenomenon. We know that sex sells. It has done so since time began. Men and women have both used it to be desirous and to achieve goals. Advertisers and marketing executives understand this and regularly use sex as relevant to the generation watching and listening. The philosophy for some major organizations has shifted due to the use of sex to sell product. GoDaddy has had some beautiful women in its advertising and this has been successful for them. Oh, and by the way, they sell website domains and services...very sexy, hence the relevant advertising.
OK, in HR, we can't use sex (if you are, wow) to sell our relevance. So, what do we use? What is the latest and greatest product, series of lectures, technology? The first component is to remember what the mission of the organization is. All messaging should be tied to that, and if there are messages that don't fit, we should remove them, regardless of how "relevant" it is. Secondly, relevance does not equal appealing. These words have become overlapped in organizations. Think about school for a moment. There were days that school seemed boring, tough, annoying, overwhelming and stupid. The appeal of school was not always there, but it's relevance remained. Education is vital to the health and growth of people (we can argue about Algebra later). And finally, the method of achieving relevance may not be popular. In fact, sometimes it may be polarizing. When Miley Cyrus performed at this year's VMAs, she delivered what she believed to be a relevant performance. She was talked about for days after the performance, clips were shown over and over again, celebrities were interviewed, etc. The response was divided - some loved it, some hated it. Is she relevant because we were talking about it or is she relevant because her messaging is consistent with the goals of her organization?
The dictionary defines relevance as "closely connected or appropriate to the matter at hand." What does the messaging we deliver in our companies say about our relevance? Are we "flash in the pan" messengers? Meaning, we deliver the latest and greatest, and as such, we have employees who pay little mind to it. They know that if they just wait a bit, the message will change again, so why commit? Better use of our time is to remain consistent in the ways in which we deliver product and services to our customers and to relay that consistent message to employees with enthusiasm and openness. Relevance can be enhanced by better connecting it to the matter at hand.
If we are Brother and typewriters are not what people want any more, then what are we doing to continue to deliver products and services in keeping with our mission of providing office solutions? Understand what's going on in the markets and maintain relevance through offerings. Simple to say, I know, but necessary to unpack with the executive team. Brother, for example, still employs 1100 workers in the US. They care to know how the company plans on remaining consistent in mission in light of changes in technology, usage and competition.
Sometimes our problem in HR is that we like the shiny new toys. New programs, new tactics, new videos are great, but if they don't contribute to the overall mission of the organization, then they are not relevant, regardless of how much fun they are. To be taken seriously as a true business partner, we have to be able to show how what we do, suggest and implement is driving our company to its mission and related goals. Some of you are doing great work in this vein and should keep sharing your great ideas. And for those of you not doing so, cheer up! Listen to "She Bop" (with which I have forever scarred you), re-energize and review the mission. Relevance takes thought...just like Algebra.
What does talent really cost? That's a great conversation starter with a CEO or CFO. "Too much" may be the simple answer. But after the off-the-cuff response, how do we consider talent's worth? One of my favorite examples is Don LaFontaine. You know, Don. Well, you know his voice. He did movie trailers and some television voiceover work for years. He famously used the opening phrase, "In a world," many, many times. If you're not readily familiar with his work, please allow me to illuminate - http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/4781d17ca3/don-lafontaine-tribute-king-of-trailer-voiceover-from-trailermash - (I already see many of you nodding your heads, "Oh, that guy"). For the movie producers and television executives, Don was sought after as the premier talent for this type of work. He was paid handsomely and had the ability to pick and choose the work he would do. But don't think Don was a slacker. There were days where he would work on 35 assignments...yes, in one day.
When Don started doing this work, I don't imagine that he thought he'd make millions doing it. He worked because he needed to earn a living. Those executives early in his career recognized his talent and were willing to pay more to have him voice their television openings and movie trailers. The price tag for Don grew over the years and he understood that what he could do with his voice had value. Don also recognized how he could use his talent for good in donating it to charitable endeavors until his death at 68 in 2008. Don is a great example of the cost of talent. Was Don worth the cost? Well, since I am writing about him, I am saying yes. He was someone who served consistently in his role and became sought after for his excellence. Don was guided by those who saw something more than he did initially. "Voiceover work is voiceover work" could have easily been Don's mantra, but he was able to see more by the way those around him responded, including the increase in pay. How are we encouraging growth and optimization of talent? One of our traps is that we fight hard to hire someone who we think will become invaluable to our organizations. We just know it and we push for it. When it happens, we're elated. What often happens afterwards is the issue. Where is the plan for growth and expectation? Who is holding the process accountable? How will success be determined and does everyone know that? Watching this prospect leave after one to two years, having never really hit the mark for the organization, is a waste of money and a poor use of time and resources. It will cause those to whom you pleaded at first to not look with favor upon your next fight for talent. Our job includes the initial recognition of what could be. Like our friend, Don LaFontaine, a path has to be drawn to communicate vision for what a person could bring to the company. Dream a bit and set the bar. Don't apologize but rather cause someone to feel as though he/she could rise to the occasion. And the stack of money isn't all that needs to be communicated. Dialogue about impact and reformation. Consider how many well-paid executives leave their jobs and why? Often, someone is whispering in their ear a better laid plan for how he/she will bring value to another organization. We need to offer insight into how we see someone's talents benefiting our company today. Create those plans. Work with management. Met expectations will show value, to the organization and to the employee. Even the "small" roles to the executive are pivotal to the overall success. Consider again, Don LaFontaine. What was it that he really brought of value? A nice voice? Good tone? Yes, but one greater thing. He could use those talents to bring anticipation. A movie executive wants people to come and pay to see a movie. Don could create the desire to want to see a movie. That is pivotal. Recognizing the worth that talent brings will require money to be spent. But the price tag for it all is worth it when you align need to expectation. When people work without a charted course, dissatisfaction sets in and a lack of motivation takes hold. And senior executives get frustrated. And HR people and recruiters have to back-peddle as to why this talent that they fought so hard for isn't working out. Redirect those energies by putting it into a healthy plan of expectation and recognition. Hear Don's voice in your head talking about you and your company. "In a world where talent is cheapened and left directionless, one company has the courage to take a stand." Chills, baby, and I can't wait to see that movie.
#culture is a hash tag trending topic on Twitter. I see some great thought leaders on this subject post idea after idea. I enjoy reading them and sometimes find myself drifting into "Thought World" and losing track of time. I have to pay the bills somehow so back to work! While at #shrm13 in Chicago last week, I couldn't help but be bombarded with some more ideas and considerations by the fleet of speakers on hand. So, as someone who looks to culture often to help with any organizational diagnosis I am asked to do, have my thoughts changed or expanded? Simply, no, but largely, yes (Uh oh, am I having a moment here?). Company's are to ask themselves a very simple question - What are we going to be about? That is the basic question that has to be asked and answered. Talent is interested in knowing the answer to this question. Interviewing is not just about the company finding out about the candidate, but the reverse as well. The candidate wants to see if you know what your company is all about. Failure happens quickly here. Organizations who do not know who they are fall apart. They don't know what initiatives to start and stick with rather than start and know an end to it (it's okay to do this, by the way). Some companies float aimlessly hoping that whatever they throw against the wall will leave a residue of something that works. Culture is now defined. People recognize that their intrinsic worth for the organization is only about "what can you do for me?"
Listen, I know that our employees are there to be productive and to increase the profitability of the company as a result. That's not a secret to an employee. However, when it's all that there is, then the culture is established as only being about that. Depth is lost. Knowledge investment and the capitalization of it is not a priority. Organizational attractiveness and vibrancy doesn't exist; the mechanic of the company is all that there is. So, again, what do you want to be about? Let me ask this: what difference would it make to your organization if you had employees who were emotionally bought in to the mission of the company? What if they understood that, while their skills are important to the success of the organization, they were to bring their creativity, passion and openness to work everyday? And, what if they knew that the company valued those aspects and would take action in light of them? You see, saying you want an honest dialogue with everyone means very little if nothing ever comes from those discussions. I have walked into organizations that encourage open discussion and sharing. After the meeting is held and heads nod in agreement, it's right back to the same old same old. Culture is then defined. The actions of the organization win out every time over pithy slogans in the lobby or a letterhead with the mission statement on it. If I tell my kids I love them but most of what I do sends a different message, then will they believe me? Learning new components as to how to deliver messaging around culture or how to consider culture in light of the competitive climate today is fun. I enjoy it. However, it builds upon the foundational question that companies need to ask themselves. When we ask talent to sign on the dotted line of the offer letter, we have to be prepared to honor that commitment in return. It's our duty to establish what we want to be about and to lead our talent accordingly. We are the ones who invisibly sign such a contract. The new employee should not be looked at to fix it for the company. "Well, if we hire Jennifer then she will get this all fixed" is not fair to Jennifer. It's a company with lots of people and decision-makers. We're not spectators. We, too, are signed and sealed to the health of the organization which includes culture definition. If organizations take the time to think deeply and act upon this commitment, I believe that there would be a strengthening of market share and global positioning. It's time to deliver on this commitment.
You know, I am going to see Kelly Clarkson next week. She is awesome. I don't know if you're a fan of American Idol. I used to be, especially that first year. Kelly was the perfect choice and embodied the hopes and dreams of other undiscovered talent. She gave others a vision for what could be. She set the stage, literally, for others to shoot for the moon. And in that finale, when she gets choked up singing her first hit, A Moment Like This, I join her in being teary-eyed and overwhelmed at what had just happened. I am very excited to be going to SHRM13 to see her and, hopefully, to sing with her. She doesn't know it yet, but security ought to know that I am planning on singing backup for one song. Please don't escort me back to my seat, Mr. Big Bouncer...it's cool. Right, Kelly? Pretty please? I don't think it much matters as to whether it's singing or dancing or typing or preparing reports or selling or litigating, when you find the right fit, it's exhilarating. Finding someplace where you belong is everyone's ideal; we're wired for it. We want to be a part of a community. Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs 3rd Stage is Love/Belonging. We need this engagement level to be met for holistic living and healthy growth. If you are looking for a job, don't settle on this point. I know it's easy to say, but I would want to encourage you to find that role that excites, empowers and challenges you. Be vigilant in finding that role. Study companies and look for what they offer employees, not just in compensation or health benefits, but in team-building and in knowledge enrichment. Where can you grow? With whom would you want to grow?
We would do well to remember that the candidates we're meeting with are trying to find a role. It's been tough for some of them. Some may feel like they've been waiting a lifetime for that one special job. They often try to put their best foot forward and make a great impression. In my career, I have a friend, Matt, who has worked for me twice. I am a couple of years older than Matt (stop laughing, Matt) and we were friends prior to him coming to work for me. He wanted to work for a company that would invest in him and encourage him to greatness. Tall order for any company, I know. What Matt decided was based upon the relationship we had. He already felt invested into and knew that he had grown as I had coached him a bit. I knew that he was a hard worker and coachable. When he secured a job at a company I was working for, he was elated. And he did this again when I moved to a different company. We don't work together now, but we still maintain our friendship. He has used those times when he was invested into as a basis for discerning future opportunities. Why isn't that the way it is more often? Why can't we encourage that type of desire within our teams? One area of typical failure is onboarding. We don't do a good job, classically. We spend so much time sourcing, screening, interviewing, testing, etc., that by the time we find the right candidate, we are exhausted. "Yay, we are so glad you are here!" is our first day gush to a new hire. And very quickly, that same day, we check out and hope the person stays in the cubicle for the entire day. That's what we now call a win? Honestly, it should be more like Kelly Clarkson's win. We should be enthusiastic about his/her future. We should decide how to market this person to the others he/she will be working with regularly. We should consider the deposits of culture seriously; decide on what we want messaging to be. Leading them on a brisk office tour (just to get it done) is not effective onboarding. Where is the excitement? We, too, as a company should be thrilled to have found the right person! I know that we don't always find the right person. I know that as a result, our recruitment has become less fun and more task-oriented. We have relegated the process to filling a role rather than finding the ideal candidate. I know we talk about strategy and culture, but at the end of the day, we often fall back into a "get 'er done" mentality. Let's put the brakes on and turn the car around! Listen, it's not just about the enthusiasm or emotionality of the onboarding, it's about the stability of the company, the suite of training for the new hires and the organizational commitment language observed and heard. These facets take work and take time, but they will produce a substantial return on investment. Be long-term in your view! So, consider how we welcome and introduce new hires. What should they know about the company after being there for one day? One week? One month? Look at that list and decide on how those objectives of learning will be met. And celebrate all the way through those learning opportunities. Make the culture more vibrant and healthier. I am not saying to have fireworks fall from the ceiling like they did for Kelly when she won Idol, but maybe a sparkler wouldn't hurt.
The previews for the movie, The Internship, already have me laughing. I mean, getting in with Google's intern program is awesome, but to do so as Owen Wilson and Vince Vaughn means hilarity will ensue. They say too much, share too much and expose too much. So, it's a reality movie. In the recent interviewing I have been doing for a variety of roles, I have found a few elements bubbling throughout which are very much from the movie. Some candidates are sharing too much. I don't mean as far as work-related or skill-related sharing. I mean, telling me about a child's soccer team drama, a parent's goiter issue or a previous employer's unknown legal issues that could be brought to light. Why are you telling me this? I have kids, parents and previous employers, and I guarantee you that I will not be joining you on that path. An employer wants to know what you can do, not the issues you swim in.
Too harsh? I know there are some reading and thinking, "Well, I have to use those vignettes to show my personality so cultural fit can be known." OK, let's say I give you that. Where is the culture where town-league sports politics, parental health abnormalities and threatened extortionistic testimony is upheld? If you find that place, please tell me so I can avoid it at all costs. Candidates, be just as planned with the "personality" sharing as you are with the skill set sharing. Put thought into what you will share and what you won't share. The passing introductory mention of a love of the Phillies, for example, is fine as you and the interviewer take a seat if the initial conversation allows for it. But don't throw it into the mix between aptitude and knowledge-related questioning. I know that it's public knowledge that I am a Phillies fan. Trying to bring it up forcefully so I can know that while you are floundering in the main questioning won't work with me. And yet, I know that there are employers conducting interviews that spend too much time talking about the unrelated rather than the core competencies. We like the "buddy" that can fit personality-wise and forget that there is actually a job to do. Again, too harsh? Consider the amount of complaints, lawsuits, and online write-ups from former employees concerning bad conditions, poorly explained job requirements and terrible management. Who hired these people? Someone interviewed them and hired them. Regardless of whether every former employee is right in their post-employment view, initially he/she was hired for a reason. There was something in the candidate that made someone hiring said, "yes, a fit." The challenge is to be mindful of the talk. What is it that you're talking about in an interview? Why are you talking about it? If you are the employer in the interview, consider this progression:
Ask questions related to the job description and based on the candidate's experience
Explain how the role works in the organization
Use some behavioral or situational questioning to get a sense of application
Allow for questions from the candidate
I am not trying to be overly-simplified in approach, but this short list might be enough to get an employer started on a right path of interviewing. I would suggest a deeper dive once this progression is more comfortable and used. There are some other techniques and tools to accompany this basic outline. I have no doubts that the movie, The Internship, will be hilarious or at least have funny parts (let's be realistic), but in our organizations, we aren't hiring funny necessarily. We're hiring for skill, for knowledge, for abilities, for fit - all of it. The candidate ought to be looked at through the lens of growth - Can this individual make a positive difference in the advancement of our mission and vision? How will he/she do that? How has he/she demonstrated that previously? It's a good flow and perspective to write down and keep in front of you as you interview. Hold onto those questions that aren't job-related for another day down the road. Like the company barbecue. Nothing like chowing down on some ribs while asking an employee how his mom's goiter is doing.
With all of the talk of the Yahoo flexible staffing changes, much conversation has been had about measuring productivity. Some have argued that working from home means that there is no supervision and therefore less work is really being done. Some have said quite the opposite - freedom in flexibility drives people to work harder. Both sides have presented stats to support their position. So how do you decide? In some ways, I'm a bit old school. I believe in hard work for great results. I believe in an honest day's wages for an honest day's work. I believe no one owes you anything. Most of this perspective comes from my family. I was raised with a work ethic that was without excuse. My dad was out of work for over a year in the mid to late 70's and he tried to find a job in his field while he was remodeling kitchens and hanging Sheetrock/drywall on the side. He worked weekends and evenings. He knew he had a family to provide for and that was his mission. He wasn't too proud to lift a phone, a frying pan, a hammer. Now, I understand that nostalgia is just that. It's a sentimental remembrance of a time gone by. Time moves on and things change. I know that there are numerous people in an unemployment line today that feel that same passion to provide. I am heartbroken for the families that are struggling today and searching diligently for work. What I, also, know is that each week, I hear from a different person who brings up the feel of the workplace today and the air of entitlement that is pervasive throughout. Nostalgia aside, somewhere we've lost drive. Where did it go? Are we lazier? More tired? Stretched too thin? Burned out? Disenfranchised? No longer hungry? You tell me. I have read the "experts"; I have read books by some smart people. I have read countless blogs telling me what's wrong. So what do we do? I am practical in my business sense. In human resources, I don't believe in programs for programs-sake. Everything that HR does should point to the business bottom line. If it doesn't, then stop it. Time and resources are too precious. We've got to create an action plan to get motivated and get working again. As some of you have learned, you can only control what you can control. I didn't learn that from a fortune cookie (although, I should look into starting a business making them...side note!). I learned this from experience. When I was in my 20's, I was going to change the world. In my 30's, the world crapped on me. And now in my 40's (man, that's still hard to write), I have become laser-focused in the ways I can make change happen. I do have control over behaviors and actions; I don't have control over the world or all of life. The action plan we can create to conquer should be based on behavioral and attitudinal change along with clarity in mission. We should be on a mission to get back to hard work. The turn-around is not going to be easy. We are living in a country that is falling down the list as measured against other countries. We're 12th in GDP, 6th in innovation and technology and 7th in overall global competitiveness http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GlobalCompetitivenessReport_2012-13.pdf. (And if you're in HR and you don't know what some of these measurements or terms are, then you had better get an education quickly.) It was not that long ago that the US was 1st in everything. To lose this much ground is unsettling and it should cause us to want to roll up our sleeves and work hard. We're in a war for talent. Yahoo is implementing the changes to flexible staffing and schedules because they want to know that the talent they are investing in is returning a profit for the company. Measurement is telling them otherwise, hence the changes. I would argue, though, that we're not in a war for talent...we're in a war for GREAT talent. The pool of people who really fit the bill for what an employer is looking for has shrunk. Companies wind up settling in hiring because they just cannot find the superstars needed.
Some of this can be remedied by expectation from the employer. Not everyone can be the verbose sales manager that wins over a room with his/her personality and charisma. Not having those traits does not make someone a less desirable candidate. Can you imagine an office full of Michael Scotts or Chris Varicks or Joe Isuzus? (Google them if you don't know). It would be way too much. Superstars run the gamut of personality and approach, but can still produce results. Dig deeper in interviews; be situational and behavioral in questioning. This is where the work should happen in bringing the right people on board. Another part of this can be remedied by each and everyone of us. We've got to work harder. I'm serious. There are millions of us who've been infected with the entitlement bug. Take some antibiotics and move on. We deserve what we really work for. One of my favorite business biographies is about Hershey's. Milton Hershey failed seven times in business creation and went bankrupt a couple of times. And yet, he awoke each day determined to make what he knew would work. He refined candy making processes, he sought out better ingredients and he went door to door and in every venue he could to showcase his results. He worked hard for his success. I know that there are some of you reading this who are already traveling this road and have this perspective. I see the work you do and I know the results are measurable and real. Allow me to say "Bravo" for not only your work, but for your example to others. You are most appreciated and very much needed in our businesses. For those who will take the time to reflect on this, perhaps it will inspire you to take some action steps. Have you gotten a bit lazy in your work ethic? Is there an entitlement issue at the core? Identify, create a remedy process and seek out accountability in a trusted business friend. Hold yourself to the highest standard you can; forget about what everyone else is doing or isn't doing. I believe in working hard. We work hard to earn a decent living. We work hard to set an example for future generations so they'll know what it takes to maintain and surpass. We work hard to influence societal greatness. We have done it and we can work to do it again.
Remember being the "captain" of your lunchtime team? You know, choosing sides for kickball. I know the focus of this type of memory usually revolves around the kid that was picked last, but let's instead look at the first one chosen. You know, that kid that was just the best at everything; he/she could kick a ball farther, run quicker and look cool while doing it. The two captains would guess a number between 1 and 10 or draw straws or punch each other until someone cried "mercy" (yeah, it was tough being a kid in Philly) in order to determine who chose first. And then, that miracle kid was chosen and the game was all but over before it began. While I was not that kid, I was a captain at times. When I could pick Richie (that kid), I knew we would win. Nothing like a bunch of boys in Catholic school uniforms playing handball in the schoolyard or stickball on the street. Nostalgic, yes, but a lesson in fighting for talent. Workforce planning is a wonderful exercise and one that can help an organization chart out its future needs. Being strategic in cost management and production output helps greatly in an organization's competitive advantage. That company can operate leaner and meaner. Perhaps you've gone through the exercise of developing a workforce plan for one of your business units or departments. Deciding on a strategy to meet those future needs leads to a few conclusions. My colleagues at DoubleStar do a nice job with outlining strategies. Perhaps it's time to GROW internal staff through training and/or development to close the gap that future needs will certainly show. Perhaps, instead, it might make more sense to BORROW workers through contractors or outsourced means. Maybe it's abundantly evident that the future needs for the workforce can only be met by EMPLOYING external candidates to bring much needed competencies into the organization. Rarely done, but still an option, is to PARTNER with other companies in sharing talent resources. And the least popular strategy, but one that sometimes needs to happen, is to REDUCE the workforce in light of a business reduction or process improvement that will cause fewer workers to be needed.
These strategies will prove effective. However, they will only prove to be when a thorough analysis of the business and its current workforce is done. Throwing these terms around with your executive is not a great idea if you cannot deliver what they mean. Be mindful of your approach. Lest you think I have forgotten about "Richie," I have not. What does your organization do with a "Richie" that lands on your doorstep? Do you take a look at his/her credentials, KSA's, work history and then say, "Sorry, we don't have anything open right now, but I will keep your resume on file"? If he/she is a superstar, will your organization really let him/her walk out the door? Sadly, for many companies, the answer is yes. Workforce planning is just that. It's planning. It's being responsible with the talent you have in front of you and with what you reasonably think will be needed over the next three years or so (maybe five years). What you cannot plan for is the ace who walks in your front door. This one person can change the course that some of the workforce plans were based upon. So the question is not "do we have an opening?" but rather "where can I put this person today?" This person may just be the one that's needed to open up new doors of business, to develop a new process for improvement, or to invent a new product/service for deployment into the markets. Think of it this way, I am a huge Phillies fan. Kyle Lohse is not a Phillie, but if for some reason he showed up on Ruben Amaro's doorstep looking for a job, the Phillies would be foolish not to make it work. I know there are salary issues that would have to addressed, rotation schedules to be changed and plans to be revamped. So what? The Phillies organization, like any other organization, would have to evolve and re-calibrate to chart the course to win. Isn't that what we are supposed to encourage in our companies? Don't hold onto those workforce plans like they are infallible and unchangeable. They are a chart based upon information from today. If tomorrow, a "Richie" curve ball is thrown into the mix, then adjust. Don't deny this talent a place in your organization. Many years ago, I worked for a company that told me, "John, if you interview someone that you think is amazing and brings strength to our team, then let's find a place for that person." That's a superb order. We should fight to bring that kind of talent in when we can. As I shared, when Richie was picked first, it was a guarantee that the team he was on would win. The opposing team would just grit their teeth and play through their frustration. They made plans for new ways to attack the situation and moved people around until the best use of talent was happening. The other team adjusted to the situation. And because of that, they were more open. So when a new kid, Dave, came to the school, that team was more willing to have him join them. They were open and eager to see how he could fit in to help them win. And on that day, they did. Dave was as good as Richie.
I can recall sitting in my freshman year psychology class at St. Joseph's University ("The Hawk Will Never Die") in Philadelphia and realizing that I may have chosen the wrong major. It wasn't that I couldn't do the work (although, my professor had a different aesthetic than I when it came to writing), but rather I didn't really want to do the work. What I thought I'd be passionate about turned out to not be the case. And then I was left with that mild panic of: "Oh no, now what will I do when I get out of here?" When you don't know where you are going, a few key responses kick in. Sometimes you'll get all of them or perhaps just one or two. For starters, fear grips. Fear of mockery by peers who seem to have their lives together and have a path to travel. Fear of another bad move when considering what's next. If judgement displayed didn't send you down a right path, how do you know if you'll decide better next time? Fear of failing in life. The lack of direction is unsettling and causes all sorts of possibilities, usually not good, to travel through your mind. And then, get ready for some anger, frustration or numbness to settle in. There will be a reaction. Now, think of it collectively. What if your organization has to change direction? What if the path that everyone thought they were to travel down has now been detoured elsewhere? What if employees think that the company's destination is unknown? Over the past five years, many companies did not know where they were going or could be going in light of the economy. Many workers found themselves without direction after some of those companies closed or had a major RIF. Employees who put 15-25 years in an organization left with nothing except fear, panic and guilt. Let's think of this as HR professionals (I know, some of us have to put on some major thinking caps for this one). What can we do to display clarity of direction even when, at times, that may be difficult to do? First, know the mission. Trite, perhaps. Crucial, always. I still walk into companies and ask the executive team what the corporate mission is, and the times that multiple answers are returned from multiple people is mind-blowing. If the C-suite doesn't show solidarity and consistency in what the goals are or purpose is, then it should come as no shock that employees would be concerned about direction. Be the cheerleader for why everyone is there. If it's to make the best widgets in the world, then get to shouting it from the rooftops. No doubt should live in the mission. Secondly, design processes and programs consistent with a message concerning direction. Look back at the training done, the performance reviews completed and the succession plans in place. How much of that dealt with the core mission of the organization? If you find yourself saying, "well, sort of" a lot, then that is a problem. There ought to be clearly drawn lines to the main direction of the company. Having great health insurance plans for employees, for example, is great; however, the reason for those plans is not to be nice (sorry to burst bubbles here). The goal is to attract and retain talent that can perform the tasks and functions that need to happen in order for the company to be successful...bottom line. When HR makes it too much about the peripheral and not about the core, we invalidate our business sense and reduce our voice within leadership. Third, be bold in advertising the destination points. "Where are we going? Well, right here!" And then point to where we're going. We hang legally compliant posters at our work locations so we know how to post something for the masses. Why not make some laminated or framed directional and motivational signage? Everyday when employees walk in, they can know why they are there. But, let me be clear, hanging a poster does not drive direction; it should compliment the steps already mentioned. Consistency and repetition is crucial.
The success of kids' shows is connected to repetition. When my youngest daughter wanted to watch "Dora the Explorer," I would say, "Sure, Honey!" but inside I was thinking, "Oh, dear Lord, no, not again, please." Why? Because they repeat the same stuff over and over again. I mean, just jump over alligator swamp already...stop telling me ten times that you have to do it, just do it! However, the mental exercise for my child developed her sense of organized thought, understanding plans and belief in the mission at hand. All this and driving her dad nuts (don't even let me get started about "Elmo's World"). I have often heard it said that some workplaces are just like being in high school except everyone has some money. Well, let's work from that concept to start. Consistent delivery (repetition) of message will yield results beneficial to the growth and success of your company. Everyone will know what's expected of them and how it will benefit the entire organization in meeting its goals. They will know the destination. When I had to switch majors in college, I didn't have all of the answers. What I did know was that I wanted to make a difference in the world and I wanted to know that my efforts would matter. As I sit with over 20 years of professional experience, I can see the path clearly. I see the impact made and I can see the destination ahead of what's left to be traveled to meet more goals and successes. Start small if you need to. Work with your executive team to outline that consistent message of mission and direction. Challenge the notion that everyone knows it so why bother...you might be surprised at how many aren't working towards it, even if they do know it. I mean, Dora's Map doesn't just tell her where she has to go so that she knows, but rather so that she'll travel that path (see, I learned something, too).
