Published October 3, 2010
Leadership , Performance , Thinking , Trust
Tags: air new zealand, credibility, human resources, people capability, reliability, Thinking, trust
Enjoyed the recent HRINZ conference in Wellington. The ‘Restoring the Trust’ theme was right on from the current economic environment Well run with a provocative series of speakers especially Roger Steare (Ethicability) , Vanessa Stoddart (Air New Zealand) and Fermin Diaz (Mercer). The conference ran like clock-work. Well done to Beverley Main and the HRINZ team.
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.
Published August 11, 2009
Coaching , Future , Innovation , Leadership , Performance , Public Sector
Tags: achievement, Change, Future, HR, human resources, people capability, Thinking
I spoke yesterday at HRINZ on change and HR. It was version 1.o of some thinking I’ve started on these two topics. It was a start. One of upsides of the current economic turmoil is that its forcing individuals and organisations to think again about ‘value’.
I often encounter unflattering comments about HR’s value from senior and line managers in organisations. I wonder if HR has become overly preoccupied with process, systems, tools, technologies and frameworks. It reminded me of the IT industry. And led me to thinking about how pervasively we use the web today. It’s a long way from the IT industry I knew in the late 80’s.
The internet has transformed itself from simply a transport mechanism into something that delivers real value to people. The current term being used is Web2.0.
Web2.0 is about technology:
- as a platform for it’s users to create individual value (eg Flickr)
- as an architecture of participation (eg blogging)
- as a means of harnessing collective intelligence (eg Wikipedia)
- providing users with a rich user experience (eg RSS)
- letting users pull information to meet their immediate demands (eg Google)
WEb2.0 has lead to an exponential rise in the use and creativity of the web. No change management plan here!
What would HR2.0 look like?
As a starter I’d suggest that HR 2.0 could:
- insist managers are responsible for achievement of goals aligned with the overall strategic intent of the organisation.
- let individual managers decide what they need (from HR and others) to achieve those goals. And who, when and how those needs are met.
- focus at least 70% of their effort and resources (budget) on meeting the individual in-action needs of managers striving to achieve clear goals.
- work within an organisational framework of clear values, culture and shared sense of accountability.
- offer a suite of useful tools, frameworks and resources without advocating any.
- inspire people to be bolder in their sense of possibility and potential.
Interested in talking with anyone interested in further developing this thinking.