Not all viral resignations are flame outs
Lately the public, viral, and virulent types of employee resignations have been getting seemingly more and more popular. Whether it is on Twitter, via a blog post, a letter published in the New York Times, or via a YouTube video - the 'epic resignation', usually accompanied by some choice bashing of the company, its leaders, co-workers, and/or customers is enjoying a little run of popularity.
And while I am certain many of the complaints and concerns raised by these public and attention seeking kinds of resignations have some merit, I generally don't look too favorably upon how they are executed. Perhaps it stems from seeing too many instances of people taking to whining on social media for the slightest inconvenience or perceived slight perpetrated by organizations in their personal lives, ('I can't believe Starbucks made a small mistake in my ridiculously complicated drink order. #FAIL.'), or maybe it was how I sort of recoiled at all the attention the 'United Breaks Guitars' guy received, when I kept thinking while sure, United handled that situation badly, the amount and sustained negative impact the company received was probably not fair.
So it was pretty neat to see a couple of weeks ago another kind of 'viral' resignation get reported, this one much more positive, (if kind of cheesy), from a Microsoft employee who took to YouTube to offer up a little resignation song, one that actually is equal parts respectful, thankful, and positive. Sure, this video and its message will never make it as big as the Goldman Sachs guy, or the United Breaks Guitars story, (face it, 'United successfully transported me and and my stuff' isn't a story), but I think it is worth a couple minutes of your time on a Friday, (email and RSS subscribers will need to click through).
What did you think? Nice for a change, right?
Have a great weekend!
Read MoreExecuting Integrated Talent Management (ITM) – Step 3: Science and Measurement
HRchitect has been involved in approximately 2000 HR technology related projects for hundreds of companies of all sizes and industries across the world. We have gained tremendous insight that we love to share with you so that you can benefit from the experience, and the lessons learned from others. With 15 years in business behind us in working with many of today’s leading companies, let us best position your company for a successful future with Talent Management Systems!
Successfully executing the ITM concept requires a holistic approach that includes embracing ITM as a philosophy, developing a strategy, applying science & measurement disciplines, breaking down process barriers, selecting and implementing enabling technology, and sustaining the new solution over time.
Three previous posts around this subject have given you an overview of our seven-step process for a successful approach to ITM and covered the first two steps – Philosophy & Strategy. Now we move on to step #3.
Step 3 – Science
& Measurement
Fundamental question: What tools and methodologies will enable us to best measure and predict outcomes?
Another critical element that is unfortunately often neglected or totally absent in ITM implementations is the application of the science of individual and organizational psychology to strategy, processes, and technologies. Note that it’s not just about the individual employee – their skills, competencies, performance, etc. – but also how organizational elements like culture, HR program effectiveness, and linkage to business outcomes can impact both individual and organizational performance.
One area where the application of science is extremely important is pre-hire assessment. Providers of scientifically validated assessments have partnered with many customers to demonstrate dramatic overall improvements in traditional HR measures. As an example, Kenexa (a leading provider of assessments) reports that one customer experienced 26% higher performance review scores and 40% fewer counterproductive incidents after an assessment was implemented for a key job category; another customer showed a direct improvement in customer satisfaction of 32% compared to the period before the pre-hire assessment was put in place. A retail customer of SHL (another leader in the assessment space) reports that associates that scored well on the pre-hire assessment sold on average $12 more per hour – a significant impact to the business when multiplied by the sales force of 6,000+ employees.
These examples show that the application of science to ITM processes can make a dramatic difference to workforce performance, and thus substantially improve business outcomes. Science can be applied in more than just the area of pre-hire assessments; it plays a key role in analyzing the impact of changes to process and technology and developing a ‘closed loop’ metrics feedback system, which leads us to the second component of this step – measurement.
It is not possible to overstate the importance of developing a strong foundation of measurement to support ITM. The HR function has historically been a laggard in this area, with a prevailing opinion that HR is “about people” and that “it’s just too hard to measure HR – it’s too soft.” We believe that this attitude is a cop-out, one that has its historical roots in the lack of analytical thinking skills resident in many early HR practitioners. Lack of understanding and expectations by senior business leaders has also been a contributing factor, and the dearth of user-friendly HR reporting and analysis tools has also had a part to play. Whatever the reasons for the lack of HR measurement in the past, it is clear that there is no excuse for this mindset moving forward. As one senior HR leader of an HRchitect client recently put it, “What gets measured gets done. We must continually strive to increase the measurement acumen of the HR function in order to increase the impact of HR program investments on business outcomes.”
In this methodology, the definition of the measurement framework is best accomplished via dialogue with stakeholders throughout the organization. We recommend that project teams conduct a role-based analysis to determine critical metrics. This usually results in a very large pool of potential metrics. Although it is tempting to try to ‘boil the ocean’ and give all roles everything, it is much more realistic to prioritize the metrics list based on the number of roles needing a given metric, impact to the business, ease of delivery, and other criteria. The result will be an initial subset of metrics that satisfy the 80/20 rule, and a plan for delivering extensions in phases over time.
HRchitect finds it useful to categorize metrics according to the following taxonomy, which is based on metrics complexity versus impact:
Figure 1 – HCM Metrics Taxonomy
- Information Distribution – these HR metrics are simple, fairly easy to gather, and sent out to stakeholder roles periodically (e.g., standard reports)
- Metrics Delivery (Dashboards) – as we move up the complexity scale a bit, this category includes ratios and graphical depictions of data delivered to a role; more sophisticated capabilities include the option to drill down to the underlying details from summary metrics.
- Contextual Embedded Analytics – another step up in both complexity and impact, this category includes metrics and analysis that is embedded into the supporting technology in order to provide ‘just in time’ information needed by a role to make a decision.
- Correlated Analytics – this category of metric takes data out of the HR silo and links it with enterprise financial and operational information to understand the impact of HR program investments.
- Predictive Modeling – this “Holy Grail” of measurement is to use historical and current data to predict future results – this is the most complex of all measurement categories, but has the potential to deliver the greatest impact, once the organization is able to accumulate longitudinal data for robust trend analysis
To show how this taxonomy plays out in an ITM function, here is an example from Performance Management:
Figure 2 – Performance Management Metrics that Matter
Beginning at the bottom left are metrics commonly delivered via standard reports – useful, easy to gather, but more focused on the efficiency of this ITM process. Metrics in the middle of the chart are more commonly delivered via dashboards or embedded analytics, and move into the realm of effectiveness. Finally, those examples in the top right are related to correlation and prediction; complex to accumulate and analyze, but of great value in determining the impact on the business.
As an ITM project team works to identify the initial metrics subset and extensions, is it likely that the first delivery will have a higher ratio of efficiency metrics, as it will be important to deliver the standard data that roles are expecting. However, we recommend that at least some effectiveness and impact metrics be included (1 or 2 minimum per ITM function) in order to prove the value to HR and the business, and to build momentum for future delivery of the extensions to the measurement framework. In this way, the project team can team science with measurement to define critical organizational metrics for roles and stakeholders within the organization; this will ultimately drive improved linkage to business outcomes in subsequent phases.
We’ll address the next step in successful ITM execution, Process, in the next blog and please let us know how HRchitect can assist you to get maximum benefit that comes from Integrated Talent Management.
#HRHappyHour Show Update – Summer Hours
Quick update for listeners of the HR Happy Hour Show, the weekly internet radio show and podcast on Human Resources, talent management, recruiting, workplace technology, and the HR marketplace that I have been hosting for the last 3 years or so. The show, normally broadcasts live via BlogTalkRadio at 8:00PM ET every Thursday, and to date we have done 144 shows covering anything and everything related to the world of work and the practice of people management.
After 144 shows, and in light of an upcoming really busy personal, work, and travel schedule the rest of this month, and quite honestly for me to take some time to think about the show, and consider how I'd like to see it evolve in the future, I am putting the show on 'summer hours' until the Fall.
Specifically, I plan on doing new and live shows only on the first Thursday of each month for the summer months, (June, July, August), with the plan to re-launch the show again in September 2012, perhaps looking and feeling a little bit different than it has been up to this point. The next live show will take place on Thursday, June 7, 2012, and will feature a few long-time friends and former guests and will definitely be one to make sure you catch live.
I plan on using this little break from producing live shows every Thursday night to figuring out what I'd like to see happen with the show in the Fall, to sitting in airport lounges waiting to catch flights, and to spend the occasional couple of hours tending my barbecue. I will probably re-play some of the past shows in the Thursday 8PM time slot, in case anyone would like to get caught up on some shows they have missed during the show's run.
I still like doing the show, it is still fun and informative to get a chance to talk with and learn from our guests, callers, and listeners, and I do plan on coming back strong, (if in a slightly different format), in the Fall.
Many, many thanks to the long-time friends and fans of the show and I look forward to playing my small part in adding to the conversations around HR, talent, people, and the workplace in the months to come.
So to sum it up - catch the next live HR Happy Hour Show on Thursday, June 7, 2012, and then look for new live shows the first Thursday of the month for the balance of the Summer. As I sort out the ongoing plans and schedules, I will be sure to update this blog, Twitter, the HR Happy Hour Facebook page, and the HR Happy Hour LinkedIn group.
Thanks for the indulgence!
Read MoreDisconnect: When what you offer is not what they want
(Editor’s Note: Today’s post is brought to you by Allied Van Lines, proud sponsor of the “2012 Workforce Mobility Survey”, designed to capture the voice of HR on topics related to workforce mobility. Allied has more than 75 years of experience in corporate, household and international relocation.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's kind of interesting, surprising, and often enlightening when instead of simply continuing to roll out the same workforce programs and practices year after year that organizations stop and actually ASK the constituencies that they are trying to serve and support what is important to them.
Whether it is an internal training program, the roll out of a new IT solution designed to help make their jobs easier, or even a more outwardly-facing recruiting program or campaign, often it can be very hard for organizations to one, accurately understand the needs and goals of their audiences, and two, take the time to inquire, survey, and assess these needs and goals in a thorough enough manner such that any corrective actions can be justified and taken. Often, we roll out programs and judge them by their outcomes only, and at times not at all aware or capable of understanding the real causes driving those outcomes. All which makes taking the time and putting in the up front effort to understand the market's needs more important.
I'll highlight one interesting example of this kind of disconnect, this one pulled from the data in the recently released Allied Workforce Mobility Survey 2012, namely the disconnect between what potential candidates looking at a relocation to take a new job opportunity say is important to them, and what organizations typically focus on in their development of relocation packages. I'll share two charts from the survey and then offer my take.
Figure 1 - Candidates Top Obstacles to Relocation
Figure 2 - Benefits Offered in Relocation Packages
Did the disconnect stand out to you as it did to me when I initially saw these results?
The number one obstacle to a potential job candidate's relocation and their ability to successfully join your organization is their spouse's job situation, yet surveyed organizations almost never directly address this obstacle in their current set of relocation package components. Seems crazy right? And while spousal relocation support is not an easy benefit to provide, since it is so important it seems to me that organizations, (as is typical in Higher Education environments), that can and do offer this service are likely to have much better long-term outcomes.
But it also illustrates a more broad set of issues and considerations with recruiting new staff, whether they need to be relocated or not. And that is that very often the decision to accept a new job, to make a career turn, and at times, to uproot a family from one place to another, is a group decision. Spouses, children, extended family, maybe even colleagues and friends all play a role in these big decisions, but typically an organization doesn't or simply can't address them. I don't have a magic secret or simple list of tips that can help organizations and leaders in this, except to say just as you have problems, issues, concerns outside of work, with your family and friends, so does everyone you recruit, hire, and employ.
People are complicated. And one thing is for sure, ignoring all these complications, and thinking about 'work' and career decisions like they exist in a separate box or compartment from the rest of life is a sure way to miss out on great candidates, and to fail in some respects in becoming a place where great, (and complicated), people will gravitate toward.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you would like to learn more about Allied Van Lines, please check out their website or blog. And if you would like to get more information from the Workforce Mobility Survey, you can click here. It’s definitely worth checking out
Read More10 years later, still talkin’ about practice
This week was the 10th Anniversary of NBA legend Allen Iverson's classic 'talkin' about practice' press conference, where the Philadelphia 76ers star, just a few days after seeing his Sixers team eliminated in the first round of the playoffs by the Boston Celtics addressed the media and was confronted with questions about his (allegedly poor) practice habits. Iverson had a tempestuous relationship with 76er coach Larry Brown, himself no stranger to controversy, and the 'practice' rant stemmed largely from Brown's comments to the media about Iverson's casual attitude towards practice and preparation.
Some video exists from the 2002 press conference, (embedded below, email and RSS subscribers will need to click through), that shows Iverson in full on 'practice' rant, mentioning about 20 times in two and a half minutes that he saw it as being ridiculous as a the franchise player, and league MVP just one season prior, and a legendary fierce and fearless competitor, that he had to spend time well, talking about practice.
Video below and some more comments from me after the jump...
A few things about Iverson's comments and the 'practice' issue overall.
One, the video, and most of what everyone remembers from the press conference was the two minutes of so of Iverson repeating, 'we're talking about practice, not a game' over and over, which makes it very easy to call into question Iverson's dedication and commitment. What is missing from the video, and can be found in the full transcript of the press conference here, is that before and after the 'practice' rant, Iverson talked openly about being hurt, confused, and disappointed in trade rumors that were floating around at that time. Iverson, rightly so, considered himself and was recognized by the league, as one of the very best players in the game. In 2002, he was in the middle of an 8 or 9 year run where he'd be named to the All-NBA 1st, 2nd, or 3rd team each year. In our workplace parlance, he was 'top talent' an 'A player' or a purple squirrel if you will. So naturally Iverson would have to be surprised and insulted that the team he had performed so well for, including dragging on his back to the NBA finals just one year prior, would even consider shopping him around the league.
Two, the rant, and the 'practice' context raise really interesting and ongoing questions about talent and more specifically how hard it can be to 'manage' the best talent. Iverson was a former league MVP, the league's leading scorer, and had an unquestionably ferocious style of play, notable for a guy just 6 feet tall and thin-framed. No one who watched Iverson play consistently ever came away from recognizing his commitment and intensity to winning basketball games. At the time of the 'practice' press conference, he was 26, had just completed his 6th year in the league, and won his third league scoring title. Was he a perfect player? No. But he was one of the very best in the game and it can be argued he knew how to best prepare himself and his body to stand up to the rigors of a long season and playoffs.
Should Iverson have been more attentive and subservient to the wishes of the coach, and tried to be a more dedicated 'practice' player?
Probably.
Did Brown know the right way how to get the best out of Iverson, his star player?
Probably not.
I guess I am coming off as a bit of an Iverson apologist here, especially when most of the people that have seen or heard about the 'practice' rant come to the quick conclusion that Iverson was selfish, pampered, and in the wrong. I guess all I will say to that is as a manager or leader you eventually sink or swim largely by your ability to get the best performance out of your star performers.
Iverson has some blame here for sure, but definitely not all of it.
Probably too much of it.
Read MoreExecuting Integrated Talent Management (ITM) – Step 2: Strategy
Two previous posts around this subject have given you an overview of our seven-step process for a successful approach to ITM and covered the first step – Philosophy. Now we move on to step #2.
Step 2 – Strategy
Fundamental question: What are the high level focus areas and desired outcomes?
Once an organization’s leadership has made the commitment to ITM at the philosophical level, the next step is to develop a coherent strategy to get from the current state (often a disconnected result of a haphazard, reactive evolution of processes and technologies) to the desired state (a comprehensive, seamless flow of interconnected information, processes and technologies). HRchitect believes that there are four critical elements to an ITM strategy:
- Business linkage – the strategy must link to business outcomes and organizational goals in order to be successful. The time has long since passed where HR can afford to have its ITM strategy disconnected from the organization. To do so risks the HR function in that firm becoming irrelevant to the business and its leaders. The best way to ensure linkage is for the project team to work collaboratively with a broad set of roles (“from the washroom to the boardroom”) to understand and document their critical issues, pain points, and “what if” dreams for the future. Once gathered, this information can be validated and prioritized to drive strategy development.
- Demographic/cultural differences – organizations that operate across multiple geographies stand a good chance of having different (sometimes profoundly different) approaches to ITM, not to mention divergent processes and technologies. There may also be significant differences by location within geography if the business has grown via acquisition or merger. Understanding these variations will be critical to developing and refining the new ITM strategy, processes and downstream communication programs to best meet the needs of workers in all locations.
- Key job categories – another critical component of developing a sound ITM strategy is to determine which job categories (aka “job families” or “key talent segments”) in the organization disproportionately affect business results. Not all jobs are created equal, and HR thought leaders are coming to the realization that the HR investment can no longer be spread equally like “peanut butter” across all job categories. Understanding the key jobs enables senior leaders to target the investment of HR dollars towards those jobs that most impact the business.
For example, a recent HRchitect in the oil & gas industry identified engineers, geophysicists, land surveyors, and land negotiators as their key job categories; due to a combination of aging current incumbents and a shrinking pool of entrants from college, competition was becoming fierce between this organization and rival firms. These jobs became a special area of focus and investment for HR – not only recruitment, but retention as well.
- Characteristics of top performers – finally, a good ITM strategy must understand the characteristics (e.g., skills, competencies, abilities, knowledge, experience, motivation, preferences, aspirations) of the top performers in key jobs – this will enable the organization to ultimately target recruiting and performance management activities to find more employees that fit the mold of the top performers, and therefore drive improved business results.
Based on the organization’s ITM philosophy and these essential inputs, the project team now must develop an ITM strategy that articulates the programs that will be put in place, how the various HR functional areas will work together, and the timelines for implementing the supporting solutions. The Strategy phase should also include prioritization of software selection Decision Drivers.
We’ll address the next step in successful ITM execution, Science and Measurement, in the next blog and please let us know how HRchitect can assist you to get maximum benefit that comes from Integrated Talent Management.
