I did take issue with David Thompson (Beyond the Dots) who talked about Talent Management. I think I may be in a minority of people who object to the idea of identifying the few talented ones in an organisation! I don’t think I’m being a socialist here. The whole approach is based on the wrong question – ‘how do we identify and support our talent?’. If you ask the wrong question, you will come up with the wrong answer. Focusing on a relatively few high performance individuals is dumb.

Here’s one of the reasons why. Lets say your talent program identifies 10% of your organisation as talent. If your program raises their performance by 50% (which is hard as they already are high performers) the net organisational gain is a mere 5%.

I think a better question is – ‘how do we unlock the talent throughout the organisation?’ Because if you can raise the performance of the rest of your organisation (the 90%) by just 10% (which is easy as they are low performers) the net organisational gain is 9%. An 80% improvement on focusing on the talented few (ie. 9% instead of 5%).

I’m not an HR professional, but I think …

The problem is that talent management sounds like a good idea. But if HR is to build trust with business, it needs to stop advocating strategies that are fundamentally flawed and will not deliver value to their business. Eventually the results will speak for themselves and Talent Management will fail to meet it’s expectations. That will damage HR’s credibility and reliability which in turn will damage trust.

My second point here is about the art of questioning. Such a powerful and under-utilised skill. Our individual credibility is communicated as much though the questions we ask as though the stories and experiences we share. But take care not to ask the wrong question. Give the right question some consideration.

Of course, I could be quite wrong. Happy to heard alternate points of view.

http://www.ted.com/talks/chris_anderson_how_web_video_powers_global_innovation.html

Value and trust evolves, it emerges. But the chemistry has to be right.

It emerges in unexpected places, at unexpected times, in unexpected ways.

So get involved, have an opinion and be aware of the impact you’re having on those around you.

http://www.ted.com/talks/elif_shafak_the_politics_of_fiction.html

So many ideas here for Trusted Advisors.

1. The dangers of surrounding ourselves with like-minded individuals. Beware cultural ghettos! I think building diverse networks of relationships improves our thinking, creativity and perspectives. That leads to adding greater value to our clients.
2. See how compelling someone is when she is talking passionately about something she believes. That’s living purposefully.
3. I like to think that my little TA workshop somehow helps provide knowledge that takes participants beyond themselves. Any comments?
4. The more we step outside the world we know, the more we discover about ourselves. That’s living consciously.
5. Personal stories resonant and in my experience are a massively under-used resource for building trust and influencing others. My experience in coaching others to use personal stories in interviews, suggests that are very powerful. Have the courage to use them.

TED is a great site if you haven’t visited before.

Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation) there is one elementary truth, the ignorance of which kills countless ideas and splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then providence moves too. All sorts of things occur to help one that would not otherwise have occurred. A whole stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one’s favour all manner of unforeseen incidents and meetings and material assistance which no man would have dreamed would come his way. I have learned a deep respect for one of Goethe’s couplets: “Whatever you can do, or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, magic, and power in it. Begin it now.”

W.H. Murray

The Scottish Himalayan Expedition

Amen.

an actor without an opinion is like an athlete without a game plan!

It’s a powerful idea. Actors who have strong opinions have presence. You can’t take your eyes off them! Their scenes are compelling.

Is it a powerful idea in business? An opinion could be a vision, mission, strategy or a value. But opinions sound like they are more personal, less corporate. Personal opinions have a stronger influence on behaviour – in acting, in business and in life.

Should leaders have stronger personal opinions?  Is this what makes them so effective? I often wonder if we are developing  a cohort of senior managers in leadership competency, only to find they don’t have a personal opinion on what leadership means to them. Their leadership understanding and knowledge doesn’t translate into compelling action. I think leadership should start with a strong personal opinion on life.

Perhaps also, it is easier to trust people with strong opinions?  You may not agree with their opinion.  But strong opinions make people more purposeful, have a stronger presence and more predictable in their behaviour.

Strong opinions may be powerful, but they may also be dangerous. It obviously depends on what the opinion is. But more dangerously, opinions start to define how you see and experience the world in ways that reinforce themselves. Always dangerous in a rapidly changing world.

Perhaps we can all have strong opinions that are loosely held? Is that possible?

Enjoy

“You know you have achieved perfection in design, not when you have nothing more to add,

but when you have nothing more to take away”

Nice!

Made me think of the reality and usefulness of control.

Perhaps control is an illusion that doesn’t help in a rapidly changing environment. Reminded me of Patricia Ryan Madsen’s improvisation manifesto (see earlier post).

Think what may be more important is awareness and the courage to respond to whatever comes along. Being in the moment, as it were.

If you’re Wellington based, I recommend Barbara Woods Meisner acting class. She teaches actors to be believable and compelling in any given imaginary situation. You may not want to act, but as a leader it sure helps to be believable and compelling. You’ll learn both with Barbara.

Barbara is contactable at msbarbarella@hotmail.com

The number one motivator (by a long way) for motivating people is Progress. (ie. the feeling of making progress in one’s work). That’s based on the Amabile/Kramer multi-year study of hundreds knowledge workers. I’m calling it Achievement.  I think we’re on the same page.

What I’m arguing is that the best investment an organisation can make is in supporting it’s people to achieve something that aligns with the strategic direction of the organisation. There are no silver bullets, only fundamental questions.

Everyone should ask themselves:

1. Given the current situation, what specific achievement should I be focused on? What specifically constitutes progress?
2. How would this be meaningful to me?
3. How do I enroll the people I need to support this specific achievement/progress?
4. How do I create a sense of momentum that motivates myself and the team?
5. What does reality look like? Am I making progress?

Worth thinking about!

Because you know. The greatest opportunities for leadership development, learning, motivation, change, engagement, value, etc – lie in front of us in the work that we do.  It is just a matter of how we think about it.

ps I’m back after a summer recess! You’ll be hearing more from me.

In 2002 experiements the found that ingrained in our brains is an association between the act of pulling and positive feelings. While the act of pushing is associated with negative feelings.

I think it’s fascinating how interconnected the mind and body are!

Also it’s fascinating that the current business trend to greater consumer pull (rather than organisational push) has a foundation in neuro-physiology! Is this why pull works better in business and organisations?

Applied to communication ‘pull’ is less about pre-designed messages and channels and more about listening, empathisising, provoking, and engaging in the moment. It’s more about letting meaning emerge. It’s less about leading and more about meeting.

Well sometimes anyway.