talent management - Blogs - DPG Community
2024-03-28T20:19:11Z
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/blog/feed/tag/talent%2Bmanagement
Treat your employees like adults - you'll be rewarded
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/blog/treat-your-employees-like-adults-you-ll-be-rewarded
2017-03-02T12:05:42.000Z
2017-03-02T12:05:42.000Z
Mikael Nilsson
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/members/MikaelNilsson790
<div><img src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2217197?profile=RESIZE_400x&width=400"></div><div><p>My ambition at Smart Energy GB has been to create an environment where staff are supported and feel valued. Part of a family.</p>
<p>So I was delighted to learn we won gold in PR Week’s PR Best Places to Work awards.</p>
<p>The judges praised us for our ‘dynamic and progressive culture’ in their comments, and also expressed admiration for our induction process, annual leave and sabbatical policies.</p>
<p>For those of you that don’t know, we’re the voice of the smart meter rollout. We’re responsible for making sure every household and business knows that they can upgrade to a smart meter, and so monitor their energy usage in real time.</p>
<p>It’s a big job, because we have to reach an entire country, and so need a strong team.</p>
<p>Any team is only as good as its players, and fundamentally, at Smart Energy GB, we like to go the extra mile to support our staff to allow them to focus more on the important stuff.</p>
<p>For example when somebody joins us at Smart Energy GB, we trust them with their responsibilities, and take ours seriously. This means making sure that they’re truly welcomed into our team.</p>
<p>To help people to feel part of the family from day one, we don’t have probationary periods. We make sure our hiring process is as rigorous and fair as possible, and we understand that it’s up to us make someone feel welcome, and so structure our inductions with that in mind.</p>
<p>And we recognise that as adults, life sometimes gets in the way a bit. That’s why we have flexible working, family friendly policies and a decent holiday allowance.</p>
<p>Now, we go on about smart meters a lot – but the truth is, they make a difference to peoples’ lives. You can track in pounds and pence how much you’re spending and get accurate bills, meaning wages go further.</p>
<p>One easy thing employers can do to support staff is to make it easier for them to get their smart meter installed. There are lots of ways you can do this. You could simply make sure that staff have information about the benefits and understand how to get one installed (it’s simple, they just need to contact their energy supplier).</p>
<p>Or you could go a step further and allow staff to work flexibly, or have time off so that their energy supplier can come and install their meter.</p>
<p>Everyone will benefit from the upgrade to smart meters. For staff they can help get energy use under control. But, on a national level, they are an important part of the digitisation of our energy system. With the help of smart meters we will be able to use more renewable energy and manage the country’s demand for energy better, meaning that Britain, in future can have a much more sustainable and resilient energy system.</p>
<p>By supporting your staff in getting a smart meter it says you appreciate them and that you want to do your part in being a sustainable employer, supporting your staff in living more sustainably and reducing their carbon footprint.</p>
</div>
How do you view change?
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/blog/how-do-you-view-change
2017-02-02T14:38:15.000Z
2017-02-02T14:38:15.000Z
Bay Jordan
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/members/BayJordan
<div><img src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2217162?profile=RESIZE_400x&width=400"></div><div><p>Change is an integral part of life. So much so that we are often completely unaware of it. We simply wake up one day to the realization that something familiar isn’t quite the same as we thought it was.</p><p>We experienced a good example of this over the Christmas holidays, visiting our young grandchildren for almost a month. As you would expect, the children we met on the first day were very different from the young children we had last seen. More surprising, however, was how much they changed <em>during</em> our time with them. It wasn’t only that, even after a couple of weeks, they were so proficient at things they couldn’t do when we arrived. Nor was it just the delicious festive food that made them feel heavier. We were sure that they also grew physically!</p><p>The fact is change is continuous. In the 21<sup>st</sup> Century, however, we are perhaps more aware of it than ever, and the fact that – due to the massive technological advances – the pace seems to be faster and the demands on us more urgent. So much so, that ‘change management’ has not only become part of the lexicon, but a recognized skill and much sought after competency. But are we being misguided?</p><p><img class="mce-pagebreak"/>The term ‘change management’ suggests that change is specific and implies that it happens at a specific point in time and can therefore be manipulated. This doesn’t jell with the concept of change being ongoing. The ongoing nature of change makes it more evolutionary, and thus far more difficult to manage. It also reinforces the need to make your organisation more organic – as I described <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/business-leaders-step-up-your-role-pioneer-bay-jordan?trk=mp-author-card" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" title="Business Leaders as Pioneers">last week</a>. </p><p>In his book Sapiens, Yuval Noah Harari writes, <em>“Every point in history is a crossroad. A single travelled road leads from the past to the present, but myriad paths fork off into the future.” </em>In other words, history is actually the outcome of decisions made in the continuum that is time. This makes it less deterministic and more haphazard than you might think. After all, no one can control events for every moment of the day. And the same is true in business.</p><p>Substitute the word ‘business’ for ‘history’ and you can just as easily say “Every point in business is a crossroad.” This emphasises the point. Like history, business performance is an outcome. But it is the outcome of a myriad of possibilities. To be successful you need to be able to respond to any one of those. And managing change is more often than not a case of focussing on one in particular.</p><p>All too often, things only work until they don’t. By the time you realise that they are no longer working it is too late. You end up scrambling to identify a new solution and stuck on the change management treadmill trying to introduce it. Trying to manage change is a mug’s game, and success will always be less than you intended. You will do far better to create an organic culture that responds to change as it happens. You will be less likely to find yourself scrambling for a solution and trying to create and direct a change because it might have already evolved. </p><p>Recently popular management blogger Seth Godin wrote, <em>“Intentional action is the hallmark of a professional</em>.” The <a href="http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2017/02/but-when-will-you-abandon-it.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" title="Not if, but when">context</a> of this statement is the need to replace conventional systems that he implies are already obsolete, but which still prevail. As such it may seem like another call for more effective change management. Hopefully, you won’t fall into that trap.</p><p>Of course it goes without saying that you need to think before you act. But your business depends on the way your people act. Your people are the ones who create that myriad of possibilities. Therefore every individual matters and your intention needs to be on creating an organic environment and a culture where actions are shaped by a common purpose that makes people more adaptable and responsive to change. That is how you ensure that change evolves naturally rather than as a top down – and often too late – requirement.</p></div>
If “No Man is an Island”, then “Every Individual Matters!”
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/blog/if-no-man-is-an-island-then-every-individual-matters
2016-11-24T10:17:18.000Z
2016-11-24T10:17:18.000Z
Bay Jordan
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/members/BayJordan
<div><img src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2217112?profile=RESIZE_400x&width=400"></div><div><p>As a human being you cannot survive on your own. It doesn’t matter how capable or self-sufficient you consider yourself to be, it is practically impossible. Interdependence is an inescapable fact of life. If you are a manager or leader, you definitely depend on other people to achieve results. And, even if you aren’t, you are still likely to rely on other people to be able to get your job done. This makes managing relationships an essential life-skill.</p><p>John Donne encapsulated this when he said, <em>“No man is an island, entire of itself: every man is a piece of the continent.”</em> For most of us, this “continent” is the organisation where we work. This is significant because, if you are a “piece” of the organisation, it makes the organisation itself the ‘framework of relationships.’ This begs the question, “To what extent do you recognise this and regard your organisation as a ‘framework of relationships.’?</p><p><img class="mce-pagebreak"/>This is perhaps a more profound question than you may think. Why? It makes your people paramount. After all, looking at relationships inevitably means beginning with your people. And that is a complete inversion of the traditional management approach. Yet it isn’t perhaps as radical as it may first seem.</p><p>You can best appreciate the idea if you think about your organisation as a water pipe. The quality of the water the pipe delivers and the pressure of the flow, ultimately depends on the quality of both the process and the pipe.</p><p><a rel="nofollow" class="asset-img-link" href="http://blog.zealise.com/.a/6a00e54ee26aa1883301b7c8b34e89970b-pi"><img alt="Waste _ 50408274_s" class="asset asset-image at-xid-6a00e54ee26aa1883301b7c8b34e89970b img-responsive align-center" src="http://blog.zealise.com/.a/6a00e54ee26aa1883301b7c8b34e89970b-320wi" title="Waste _ 50408274_s"/></a></p><p>A pipe full of holes means that you are faced with considerable leakage and considerably reduced pressure. Plus, any break in the flow could allow impurities or other undesirable elements to infiltrate the water. Lack of employee engagement has a similar effect. You may not consider this to be a problem if your customer is satisfied with the end result and your other stakeholders are not aware of, or concerned about, the waste. But just think how much better your performance and the results would be if your pipe didn’t have all those holes.</p><p><a rel="nofollow" class="asset-img-link" href="http://blog.zealise.com/.a/6a00e54ee26aa1883301b7c8b34e9c970b-pi"><img alt="Trickle 7441848_s" class="asset asset-image at-xid-6a00e54ee26aa1883301b7c8b34e9c970b img-responsive align-center" src="http://blog.zealise.com/.a/6a00e54ee26aa1883301b7c8b34e9c970b-320wi" title="Trickle 7441848_s"/></a>Looking only at the trickle at the end, you have no idea whether the flow is normal or not, or whether it is even the best you can expect. Well, you are in a pretty similar situation when you do not start with your people. You have no means of identifying whether there are holes in your pipe or of gauging the potential loss; which is likely to be significant.</p><p>Thus all I am asking is that you continue to accept the more familiar piece of John Donne’s quote that “No man is an island” and revise it as “No man is an island, therefore every individual matters.” For, if you recognise your organisation as a “framework of relationships”, you will understand the addendum not just as a corollary but also as an imperative for the well-being of your organisation. </p><p>After all, it is true: ‘Every Individual Matters.’ </p></div>
No Mas! It’s Time to Make an End!
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/blog/no-mas-it-s-time-to-make-an-end
2016-10-27T11:37:07.000Z
2016-10-27T11:37:07.000Z
Bay Jordan
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/members/BayJordan
<div><img src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2217068?profile=RESIZE_400x&width=400"></div><div><p>You could count all the words of Spanish I know on one hand, but “No Mas!” is a phrase I remember well (thanks to an historical boxing match last century.) But it took on a new relevance this past week.</p><p>This stemmed from a TED talk, “<a rel="nofollow" href="https://youtu.be/F6Qo8IDsVNg" target="_blank" title="Salvation from bad meetings">How to Save the World (or at Least Yourself) from Bad Meetings</a>” in which David Grady coins the phrase “Mindless Acceptance Syndrome” or “MAS.” As you might expect from the talk title, he is referring here to an unthinking acceptance of attendance at meetings, something he definitely sees as needing to stop. If, like most people, your life is plagued by meetings, you will find it worth the less than 7 minutes investment of your time. For me, though, it had a deeper significance than just meetings.</p><p>There were two primary, ultimately inextricably linked, reasons for this.</p><ol><li>MAS seems a clever synonym for conventional wisdom, and the blind deference we all too often give it.</li><li>The statement “<em>I wish I had those two hours back</em>” and the recognition that this unproductive time is actually “<em>stealing.</em>” </li></ol><p>Attendance at meetings is just one of any number of examples of both. Even if you have ever considered the organisational value of the time your people spend in meetings, you are unlikely to have ever considered the personal value of that time. That’s because the oversight is rooted in a classic MAS: that of seeing your people as just a resource. You can hardly be blamed for that, for management and accounting tradition compel you to treat your people as costs. Yet, ultimately this is innately counter-productive.</p><p>You need only consider the extent to which investment decisions are justified by reducing employee numbers, to see this. How dehumanising is that? People are the life-blood of your organisation: what keeps it functioning. Your employee engagement, continuous improvement and enhanced productivity initiatives all confirm you know this. They entail recognising and respecting the contribution of your people. So any actions which send a different message undermine those efforts and everything else you are striving for. Thus, while it’s undoubtedly true to say you cannot you expect your people to be more productive if you fail to recognise the negative personal impact that meetings can have, there is much more to it than that.</p><p>That is why it is time to pause and consider what this and other MAS are costing your organisation, and, like Roberto Duran, to say “No MAS!” But, for you, the consequences will be far more positive. You might start, as Grady suggests, by reviewing the nature of meetings in your organisation, but that is diving into the detail. I suggest, rather, that you start by recognising that your people are investing their lives in working for you.</p><p>When you do, you will understand that ‘Every Individual Matters.’ Perhaps then, you will be ready to explore how my ‘Every Individual Matters ‘ Model will help. </p></div>
Valuing Your Talent - New Website
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/blog/valuing-your-talent-new-website
2016-07-19T12:38:54.000Z
2016-07-19T12:38:54.000Z
Mike Collins
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/members/MikeCollins
<div><img src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2216952?profile=RESIZE_400x&width=400"></div><div><p>The CIPD and other key organisations have joined forces and released this brand new website and collection of resources.</p>
<p>Valuing your Talent (VYT) is a collaborative, industry-led movement to build a greater understanding and appreciation of how people create and drive value in business.</p>
<p>VYT is for everyone in business.  VYT are working with employers, investors and other stakeholders from finance, management and HR to better understand and demonstrate the benefits of human capital reporting and people measures.</p>
<p>VYT believe that the term 'talent' should not be reserved for ‘high flyers’ but instead that all people have a role to play in contributing to the success of their organisations, whatever their size or sector. VYT are helping organisations to realise the full potential of their workforce through the use of key people measures, by improving insight and decision making and encouraging more strategic investment in people to achieve sustainable business performance.</p>
<p>Above all, VYT are seeking a fundamental shift in the mind-set of businesses and investors alike, driving a shared interest in transforming how we value our people.</p>
<p>You can access the website here for a range of resources and support materials </p>
<p><a href="http://www.valuingyourtalent.com/index" target="_blank">http://www.valuingyourtalent.com/index</a></p>
<p>You can watch the video below that explains the Value Your Talent framework in more detail</p>
<p></p>
<div class="SP_Video_Container"><iframe width="479" height="511" style="border: 1px solid #CCC; border-width: 1px; margin-bottom: 5px; max-width: 100%;" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/WPM-HzNuKYk" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0"></iframe></div>
<p>If you take a look around let us know what you like and if you find any useful resources then please share them with us</p>
<p></p>
</div>
Human Capital Reporting: Breaking the Impasse
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/blog/human-capital-reporting-breaking-the-impasse
2016-05-26T14:15:41.000Z
2016-05-26T14:15:41.000Z
Bay Jordan
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/members/BayJordan
<div><img src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2216897?profile=RESIZE_400x&width=400"></div><div><p><strong><em>A third of FTSE 100 companies</em></strong><em> are withholding vital workforce related information from their annual reports, including skills challenges and employee turnover. <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.valuingyourtalent.com/research-insight/vyt-research/reporting-human-capital/index" target="_blank"><strong>New research from the Valuing your Talent partnership</strong></a> finds that this failure to adequately communicate the value of people to business is creating a clear risk to users of these company reports, such as investors.</em></p>
<p>That was the opening paragraph to a broadcast email I received from the CIPD this morning. Feeling a flicker of hope, I downloaded the <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.valuingyourtalent.com/media/Reporting-Human-Capital-Exec-summary_tcm1044-7503.pdf" target="_blank">executive summary</a> immediately. Alas, the phrase, “Including skills challenges and employee turnover” should have warned me of the kind of narrow constraints that would dash my hopes. I cannot help feel the report avoids the real issues.</p>
<p><img class="mce-pagebreak" alt="">More than two years ago I completed a comprehensive analysis of the annual reports of one of the world’s largest companies for my book <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.bayjordan.com/books/the-democracy-delusion/" target="_blank" title="The Democracy Delusion How to Restore True Democracy and Stop Being Duped">“The Democracy Delusion.”</a> This analysis showed that over the ten year period:</p>
<ul>
<li>Employee numbers had reduced by more than 110,000 people. (39%)</li>
<li>Savings in employee costs (2.014 billion) were nearly 136% of profit growth (1.487 billion)</li>
</ul>
<p>For me there is no clearer proof of what I call “<a rel="nofollow" href="http://blog.zealise.com/zealise_blog/2016/01/the-paradox-of-management-and-how-to-remedy-it.html" target="_blank" title="The Great Management Paradox">The Great Management Paradox</a>” than this. The practice of managing people exclusively as costs rather than as assets is so pervasive that it may even threaten the ultimate viability of the market. After all, who will be able to buy the goods if large numbers of people are unable to find work security and/or face little prospect of real income growth? There was nothing indicated in the report to suggest these issues had even been looked at, which I find disturbing at a time when there is great debate about the “living wage.”</p>
<p>The research was apparently broken into five distinct areas.</p>
<ul>
<li>Knowledge, skills and abilities (KSA)</li>
<li>Human Resource Development (HRD)</li>
<li>Employee welfare</li>
<li>Employee equity</li>
<li>Workforce risk</li>
</ul>
<p>Unfortunately these were not defined and the reader is left to deduce what each one means from the content of the report. And what is included in each is not necessarily self-evident. So while KSA includes innovation, entrepreneurship and flexibility which you may expect (or not); employee welfare included ethics along with well-being and employee engagement; and employee equity, which you might envisage covering employee ownership, in fact included equality, diversity and human rights. Workforce risk apparently comprised key terms from the other categories and included talent management, succession planning and ethics. </p>
<p>Equally unfortunately the report seemed to focus on the extent to which reporting on these issues had increased or decreased over the comparative period, rather than identifying the method of reporting and its relative quality.</p>
<p>This inevitably makes the report disappointing. In fact, despite the study showing an increase in HC reporting, the finding that, “<em>It is debatable whether investors or other stakeholders will be able to make informed decisions</em>” it is downright depressing. Apart from anything else, it certainly suggests that our current direction of travel is inappropriate and the pace too slow.</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1357789?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1357789?profile=original" width="347" class="align-right"></a>If you don’t also think that, just consider this. The report itself states, “<em>People are the only part of a business that can improve itself and they are fundamental in increasing value in it.</em>” It continues later, “<em>Hiring difficulties are becoming more commonplace and what are termed as ‘hard-to-fill’ vacancies are also on the rise in most economic sectors.</em>” The need is clearly urgent. And it cannot be addressed from a mind set that persists in regarding people solely as costs.</p>
<p>It is thus extremely ironic that a body called Valuing Your Talent can imply this – as it does in the title of the report – without recognising, or effectively addressing it. Fortunately the ‘Every Individual Matters’ model does so. It offers you the way to both speed up your efforts and to create new standards for accounting for, managing and treating your people and building a more effective, humane working environment.</p>
<p>________________________________________________</p></div>
Leadership: Do Our Leaders Really Know What It Is?
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/blog/leadership-do-our-leaders-really-know-what-it-is
2016-03-31T09:31:25.000Z
2016-03-31T09:31:25.000Z
Bay Jordan
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/members/BayJordan
<div><img src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2216823?profile=RESIZE_400x&width=400"></div><div><p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1357759?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1357759?profile=original" width="450" class="align-right"></a>You would think most people recognise the difference between management and leadership. After all they are two entirely separate things. Yet I find myself questioning whether they do. Even worse, I wonder if it is our organisational leaders themselves who are most guilty of confusing the two.</p>
<p>This line of thinking was precipitated by reading the results of the <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.borderless.net/the-results-are-in-borderless-leadership-development-survey-2016/">Borderless “2016 Survey on Leadership Development.”</a> As I did I found myself substituting “leadership” for “liberty” in Madame Roland’s lament for liberty en-route to the guillotine; <i>“Oh Liberty! What crimes are committed in your name?”</i> And the link is perhaps not as far-fetched as it may seem.</p>
<p><b>The paramount quality of a leader is that they care.</b> While their initial motivation may be for a particular purpose or objective, leaders are distinguished by the way they:-</p>
<ul>
<li>Inspire other people to pursue the same purpose; and</li>
<li>Include, acknowledge and appreciate those people</li>
</ul>
<p>This goes beyond merely involving them, or even recognising them as being essential to making that purpose a reality. It entails giving them the autonomy and tools and skills they need to perform. That is <i>empowerment</i>. And <b>true empowerment is the manifestation of genuine care.</b></p>
<p>Now, if genuine care is the paramount quality of leadership, it logically follows that <b>empowerment is the embodiment of leadership</b>. Furthermore, if, as just indicated, autonomy, mastery and purpose equate with empowerment and – as commonly agreed – they are the intrinsic drivers of employee engagement, then it is also logical that <b>leadership drives employee engagement</b>. Thus the fact that only around 30% of the workforce is engaged is already evidence of the fact that organisational leaders don’t care and hence of the lack of organisational leadership.</p>
<p>I would posit that this lack of leadership is the direct result of the over-emphasis of performance measures which is itself the consequence of the focus on management rather than leadership. And <b>management regulates while leadership liberates</b>. This survey underscores this. You just have to look at the nature of the challenges identified in the key findings to see this.</p>
<ul>
<li>Being able to adapt to changes and having enough leaders to do so.</li>
<li>Leadership development is the main driver of business results.</li>
<li>Managing change and innovation; ensuring personal accountability, and breaking down silo thinking.</li>
<li>Lack of leadership development investment.</li>
<li>Poor and ineffective leadership development.</li>
<li>Unawareness of any kind of leadership coaching or mentoring program.</li>
<li>Top management support as a critical success factor in effective leadership development.</li>
</ul>
<p>When you take into account that 35% of survey respondents were in corporate strategy, general management and HR and that 68% were in organisations larger than 1,000 people, and you remember this is a survey about <i>leadership development,</i> you cannot help reaching the same conclusion and thinking this is a sad indictment of their own lack of leadership. Actually, the identification of the need for top management support alone implies this, while implicitly corroborating my definition of leaders as people who care. </p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1357780?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1357780?profile=original" width="450" class="align-left"></a>All of which reinforces what I said previously about the need for <a rel="nofollow" href="http://blog.zealise.com/zealise_blog/2016/03/love-at-work-a-practical-recipe-.html">love at work</a>. If leaders are people who care, they will inevitably generate loyal followers who also care. And this is more than just a nice to have. In today’s rapidly changing world it is an imperative, as the survey results clearly show. Organisational leaders are too far removed from the day-to-day operations to be able to make the quick decisions necessary to respond to change. In fact they are too far removed to even identify the changes as they happen. In such a workplace even strategy can quickly become inappropriate or outdated. This make leadership vital at every level.</p>
<p>Consequently true leadership isn’t about antiquated ideas of traditional leadership or leadership development, but about ensuring that you create a culture and environment in which everyone cares: in which everyone is a leader. That is why every individual matters and why my ‘Every Individual Matters’ Model provides the catalyst that will help you create an environment where everyone cares – where <i>the</i> business becomes <i>our</i> business. </p></div>
Good versus Bad Bosses – Why Retention is the Wrong Measure
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/blog/good-versus-bad-bosses-why-retention-is-the-wrong-measure
2016-03-17T13:40:36.000Z
2016-03-17T13:40:36.000Z
Bay Jordan
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/members/BayJordan
<div><img src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2216801?profile=RESIZE_400x&width=400"></div><div><p>You might be surprised. I was. I had come to accept the idea that people quit their jobs primarily because of bad bosses. Yet, according to a <a rel="nofollow" href="https://hbr.org/2016/03/employees-leave-good-bosses-nearly-as-often-as-bad-ones" target="_blank" title="Employees leave good bosses too">recent report</a> in Harvard Business Review, this appears questionable. As a result I found myself wondering why I had been lulled into such lazy conformity.  </p>
<p>We all intuitively know that there are any number of reasons why people switch jobs, varying from such things as more money or a promotion (better status), to a new location or simply an easier commute offering more family time. This is simply evidence of that. That is why I am not sure I agree with my friend <a rel="nofollow" href="http://positivesharing.com/2016/03/employees-leave-bad-bosses-but-they-also-leave-good-ones/" target="_blank" title="Employees also leave good bosses">Alex Kjerulf</a> when he says it is too soon to draw the conclusion that “leadership does not get retention.”</p>
<p>That is not to say that leadership is not a factor in retention. Certainly the fact that you do not like or get on with your boss will make a decision to leave more likely, but whether it is a primary motivator or not is debatable. Let me explain.  </p>
<p><img class="mce-pagebreak" alt="" />The desire for any change comes largely from discontent or dissatisfaction with the status quo. In a work situation this will <strong><em>primarily</em></strong> come from the nature of the work you are doing. This is never a constant and as you become more familiar with what you are doing so you will, inevitably, start to look for new challenges. This is just human nature. It is described as “The Doom Loop” in a book of that name by Dr Dory Hollander and is depicted by the following illustration in my book, <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.bayjordan.com/books/lean-organisations-need-fat-people/" target="_blank" title="Lean Organisations Need FAT People">“Lean Organisations Need FAT People”</a>.</p>
<p><a rel="nofollow" class="asset-img-link" href="http://blog.zealise.com/.a/6a00e54ee26aa1883301b7c825aeba970b-pi"><img class="asset asset-image at-xid-6a00e54ee26aa1883301b7c825aeba970b image-full img-responsive" title="Personal development 3" src="http://blog.zealise.com/.a/6a00e54ee26aa1883301b7c825aeba970b-800wi" alt="Personal development 3" border="0" /></a></p>
<p>As you go back around the loop from the satisfied quadrant so you will find more and more reasons to look for a new job. Things that you could normally tolerate, or even endure almost unquestioningly, will come into relief like the princess’ pea and start to bug you. Unless you are ambitious to the point of being an adrenaline junkie, you will not normally consider moving until they start to crowd your consciousness. Naturally a hateful boss will be an extreme factor and be more likely to precipitate a switch, but normally only if and when you have achieved enough to secure a comfortable move.   </p>
<p>In fact a good leader, as someone who helps to further the careers of their employees, is just as likely to have a high staff turnover as a bad manager. The only difference is that they are more likely to have a replacement already lined up and thus be less likely to have to fight fires in the event of a surprise.</p>
<p>This does not reduce the argument for good managers over bad; it simply suggests that retention is the wrong measure to distinguish the two. The correct measure would be the extent to which there is a smooth transition when an employee leaves. This is something that can be readily achieved with my ‘Every Individual Matters’ Model, and the partnership it creates between manager and employee and its focus on personal development and growth, rather that the hierarchical emphasis on performance with its underlying command and control bias.      </p>
<p><span>_____________________________________________________________________________  </span></p>
<p><em>Bay Jordan is the founder and director of </em><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.zealise.com/">Zealise</a><em>, and the creator of the ‘Every Individual Matters’ organisational culture model that helps transform organisational performance and bottom-line results. Bay is also the author of several books, including </em><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.bayjordan.com/books/lean-organisations-need-fat-people/" target="_blank" title="Lean Organisations Need FAT People">“Lean Organisations Need FAT People”</a><em> and </em><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.bayjordan.com/books/the-7-deadly-toxins-of-employee-engagement/" target="_blank" title="The 7 Deadly Sins of Employee Engagement">“The 7 Deadly Toxins of Employee Engagement”</a><em> and, more recently, </em><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.bayjordan.com/books/the-democracy-delusion/" target="_blank" title="The Democracy Delusion: How to Restore True Democracy and Stop Being Duped">The Democracy Delusion: How to Restore True Democracy and Stop Being Duped.</a></p>
</div>
Love at Work
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/blog/love-at-work
2016-03-10T11:13:33.000Z
2016-03-10T11:13:33.000Z
Bay Jordan
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/members/BayJordan
<div><img src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2216804?profile=RESIZE_400x&width=400"></div><div><p>You might see the unpunctuated phrase love at work as a simple statement. Or as a question. Or you might perhaps see it as an exclamation or even a headline in a salacious newspaper or magazine. I cannot predict how you will interpret it, but I hope that, whatever your reaction, it intrigued you enough to keep reading.</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1357750?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1357750?profile=original" width="450" class="align-right"></a>In actual fact it is an answer! The answer not so much to a question as to a challenge. It arose from a catch-up conversation with Traci Fenton at <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.worldblu.com/" target="_blank" title="Worldblu">Worldblu</a>. After I had explained my ‘Every Individual Matters Model to her, she responded, “I get it but others might not. You need to find a way to explain it more simply: in only a few words that will give them something they can understand, remember and share with others.” I was stunned but it certainly gave me plenty to think about.</p>
<p>Afterwards, as I struggled, I thought about Traci’s own proposition “Freedom at Work,” and our mutual friend, Alex Kjerulf’s, <a rel="nofollow" href="http://woohooinc.com/happiness-at-work/" target="_blank" title="Happiness at Work">“Happiness at Work”</a> and came up with “Love at Work.” After some initial concerns that it might be ‘too abstract’ or ‘too much’ or ‘too unbusiness-like’ and a complete failure to come up with anything else, I remembered Kahlil Gibran’s inspired and inspiring statement <em>“Work is love made visible”</em> and I became far more comfortable with it. Even better, it fits perfectly with my vision.</p>
<p>As I realised this, I also recognised that the time had come for me to publish my vision and stop seeing it as a personal purpose statement for my own eyes only, to help me shape my own path. So here goes.</p>
<p><strong>I have a vision!</strong></p>
<p><em>I see a day when all people of all nations will rise up and live their life to their fullest potential.</em></p>
<p><em>I see a time when people will no longer allow work to be a four-letter word, something to balance with life, but instead will value it as a vital, integral part of their life.</em></p>
<p><em>I see a world where work is not a bind but an opportunity for every person to celebrate the uniqueness of their being and the means to express who they are.</em></p>
<p><em>I see each and every person recognising their work as their contribution to humankind; making it a focal point of their lives, striving to maximise what they give and, in the process, optimising who they are.</em></p>
<p><em>I see that, as they recognise work as part of life and not an adjunct to it, people will regard their work as their business and do everything in their power to make it a successful business that blesses all it serves, as well as themselves.</em></p>
<p><em>I see people treating work as part and parcel of what they have to do, not out of compulsion, but deep desire to be the best they can possibly be; in order that, when their time is up, they can look back with pride.</em></p>
<p><em>And I envisage workplaces that recognise people for who they are; that sustain, nurture, encourage and enable them to be their best.</em></p>
<p><em>I see workplaces that cease to manage people as a resource and instead improve efficiency by encouraging, enabling and endorsing self-management. I see workplaces that acknowledge people for the assets they are; that give people back their independence and pride; and that bask in the better results this brings.</em></p>
<p><em>I see workplaces where command is dead and control is a collective responsibility rather than an imposition: where organisations pursue purpose rather than profits at any price.</em></p>
<p><em>I see workplaces operating as teams, where people do not compete, but support one another for the common good; of individual, of organisation and of the wider world. </em></p>
<p><em>I see this new outlook bringing a new enthusiasm and creating a zeal that makes all a joy. I see reduced conflict and greater co-operation that makes the world a better place and that enhances its chances of survival.</em></p>
<p><em>I see you helping to make it happen!</em></p>
<p style="text-align: right;">(© Bay Jordan with acknowledgement to Martin Luther King)</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1357852?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1357852?profile=RESIZE_480x480" width="320" class="align-left"></a></p>
<p>There you have it. Perhaps not such an unbusiness-like proposition but rather an extremely business-like one. What do you think? </p>
<p></p></div>
Mindfulness,Well-being and Wellness: The Implications
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/blog/mindfulness-well-being-and-wellness-the-implications
2016-03-03T13:39:55.000Z
2016-03-03T13:39:55.000Z
Bay Jordan
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/members/BayJordan
<div><img src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2216856?profile=RESIZE_400x&width=400"></div><div><p><span>Wellness, well-being and mindfulness are all becoming hot topics in the HR and business fraternity. It seems that there is a growing awareness of the fact that people perform better when they are healthy and happy. This is certainly progress and cause for celebration.</span></p>
<p><span>Yet, while it is unquestionably good news, it is also something you need to approach cautiously, for it implies the need for greater awareness of the employee as a person. Ideally you should have this already. Yet the pervasive lack of employee engagement revealed by surveys, indicates that such awareness is rare. This suggests that formalising this aspect of the relationship between manager or supervisor and employee presents a massive challenge.</span></p>
<p><span>For starters there is a danger that the lack of trust between employees and their supervisors, implicit in the lack of employee engagement, means that employees will perceive such initiatives as encroaching on their personal lives. Thus they may not welcome them at all. Even worse, there is a strong possibility that this new approach could lead employers down a path of “increasing interference” in employees’ lives. Any hint of that is likely to meet strong resistance by employees, which will make them extremely difficult, if not impossible, to implement these changes effectively.</span></p>
<p><span>You may think this is unduly pessimistic. Yet this <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.mckinsey.com/global-themes/leadership/the-art-and-science-of-well-being-at-work?cid=other-eml-nsl-mip-mck-oth-1603" target="_blank">McKinsey article</a> hints at some of the difficulties you face as an employer. For instance, the research into sleep deprivation that shows your ability to function effectively is impacted when you don’t sleep properly and that missing a night’s sleep is equivalent to being legally drunk for you are basically at 0.1 percent blood-alcohol level, which is double the legal limit for driving in many countries.</span></p>
<p><span>So, “How many people do you have working in your organisation who are effectively working as if they were drunk?” And that’s only the beginning. Now ask yourself, “How are we going to identify such occurrences and what are we going to do to prevent it?” You can begin to see what a potentially tricky road this is.</span></p>
<p><span><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1357744?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1357744?profile=original" width="450" class="align-right"></a>Naturally, this is a road you will want to avoid. In order to do so, you have to approach it as a cultural challenge. You have to create a culture of mutual respect. You have to create an environment in which people recognise their obligations to the entity and themselves, take responsibility for their actions and are able to do so without fear of consequences. Only then will you create the mindfulness and well-being we are talking about, and reduce the stress that otherwise sabotages all your efforts, and undermines health and thus personal and organisational wellness. </span></p></div>
Avoid the Dangers of WIIFM
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/blog/avoid-the-dangers-of-wiifm
2016-02-18T12:08:21.000Z
2016-02-18T12:08:21.000Z
Bay Jordan
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/members/BayJordan
<div><img src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2216780?profile=RESIZE_400x&width=400"></div><div><p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1357733?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1357733?profile=original" width="299" class="align-left"></a>Virtually unheard of ten years ago, WIIFM – the acronym for What’s In It For Me – has become a surprisingly popular term in business. Originally coined to focus marketing efforts on customer needs, it has become a key concept in change management and HR. Here, however, it is a double-edged sword and needs to be invoked with care.</p>
<p>On the positive side, WIIFM recognises the individual and looks to address personal needs and expectations. A shift away from traditional command and control thinking, with its philosophy that the employee is simply a resource required to do what they are told, this is clearly progress. </p>
<p>Unfortunately, it also has three inherent dangers that are not widely recognised.</p>
<ol>
<li>WIIFM fails to recognise “The Human Paradox.” It only addresses the “selfish” drivers taking no account whatsoever of the “selfless,” or altruistic, drivers stemming from a sense of belonging and/or a common purpose; the things that give us the most satisfaction.</li>
<li>A tendency to consider WIIFM as a means to motivate. This, more often than not, leads down the traditional path of looking at extrinsic, rather than intrinsic, motivators. In turn this, almost inevitably, results in focusing on incentives, which invariably end up as financial incentives or initiatives to improve working conditions. While these may work initially, they ultimately act as little more than a bribe and, as you well know, have very little long-term effect.</li>
<li>Despite its name, WIIFM is all too often a universal approach that fails to address the individual’s needs. This is almost unavoidable and is simply the result of the macro-management of employees and hence the abstraction that I described previously.</li>
</ol>
<p>Even without recognising these, WIIFM is, at best, only a partial solution. While it appears to address the individual’s interests, the intention (and certainly the perceived intention) behind it remains either or both to:</p>
<ul>
<li>Get the person to do what you want/need them to do;</li>
<li>Improve productivity.</li>
</ul>
<p>Thus the “me” is always coloured by what is best for you or the organisation. Consequently it isn’t quite the shift away from the traditional approach that it first seems. Until it achieves that it will never deliver the full benefits that you expect.</p>
<p>True WIIFM actually needs to go much deeper. It lies in recognising that the individual is actually investing their life, or a significant portion of it, in your organisation. When you recognise this you move beyond seeing people as resources “filling a role” and you lay the foundation for a reciprocal perception of a role as more than a “job.” You are now both working from a standpoint of career development; something that creates a more effective, mutually beneficial partnership.</p>
<p>Only when you achieve this will you be able to avoid the incipient dangers of current WIIFM approaches and begin to meet the intrinsic motivators of each and every employee. You will create a greater sense of belonging and common purpose that will also help you to address the currently missing ‘selfless’ motivators. And you can further strengthen this with my ‘Every Individual Matters Model’ which specifically addresses the ‘selfless’ drivers and provides a catalyst for achieving something way beyond what current WIIFM efforts offer. </p></div>
Why we may have the wrong approach to Employee Engagement
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/blog/why-we-may-have-the-wrong-approach-to-employee-engagement
2016-01-18T10:36:36.000Z
2016-01-18T10:36:36.000Z
Bay Jordan
https://community.dpgplc.co.uk/members/BayJordan
<div><img src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2216731?profile=RESIZE_400x&width=400"></div><div><p><span>Have we got it wrong? </span></p>
<p><span>I am currently reading Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi‘s 2002 book “Flow”. While reading the chapter about making work enjoyable I was particularly struck by the section on “the paradox of work.”</span></p>
<p><span>This paradox stems from his own research findings that enjoying their work and experiencing “flow” did not result in people being more motivated at work. Very briefly, this research found that, despite the fact that people generally get more enjoyment from their work than they do from their leisure activities, they keep wishing for more leisure. </span></p>
<p><span>Csikszentmihalyi thus concludes that this “apathy” lies more in the worker’s <b><i>relation</i></b> to their job.</span></p>
<p><span>You and I may see this apathy as “lack of employee engagement” or “employee disengagement.” We recognise it as a problem, but could be missing its significance. If we are, we may be barking up the wrong tree, and all our employee engagement efforts will be misguided, misdirected and likely to be futile.</span></p>
<p><span>This is certainly the case if Csikszentmihalyi is correct. And his point that, <i>“the time spent making someone else’s goals come true rather than our own is perceived as time subtracted from our own”</i> makes this seem likely. It goes right to the heart of employment itself and may well explain why employee engagement statistics have remained largely unchanged over the past few years, despite the efforts and resources invested in trying to improve it. Ultimately, this means that we are simply going through the motions.</span></p>
<p><span><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1357713?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1357713?profile=RESIZE_320x320" width="250" class="align-right"></a>If you want to change this and turn things around to fully engage employees and optimise their effectiveness you have to find a way of changing the employee’s relation to their work. This essentially means that you have to create an environment where your employee is not working to “make someone else’s goals come true.” The only way you can do that is to create an environment of shared goals, where your goals and the employee’s correspond. That is the necessity. You have to ‘make your business their business’ – there simply is no other way to resolve this fundamental problem.</span></p>
<p><span>The good news is that you don’t have to invent a solution. It already exists in the form of my ‘Every Individual Matters’ model. With its integrated employee ownership element it provides the ideal way of ensuring that ‘your business is their business.’ It really is only a matter of selection. </span></p></div>