HR Lessons from Team Sports

Team Sports teaches us lot of HR lessons, one has to look at it with great deal of interest & prism to decipher the goods & deltas, I shall be writing about Indian Team starting with India's Tour of England, the series of writing will have good things as well as deltas analysed with my experience as Cricketer & a HR Person

HR Lessons from India's famous win at Lord's

POSITIVES: 

1. As a leader go for the kill with your best man, give him all the right tools do so, as was evident in field placings for Ishanth Sharma's bowling
2. Let the team know who is the LEADER during the crunch times like asking Sharma to bowl short right at the stroke of lunch when most batsmen tend to switch off & back them
3. Winning is a habit, great leaders have gambled small losses for big gains, so giving extra runs to buy wickets was a clever thought
4. Clever understanding of the rules of the game & Desi Jugaad which ensued he had 3 fielders behind legs by standing back to spinner was a new thing in cricket history, it clearly shows Leader's out the box thinking ability
5. Backing your known set of personnel will yield the desired results, ask Jadeja, Ishant & Vijay. This is what famous Steve Waugh did with all conquering OZ side
6. As a leader, one should learn from the past ( Jo'berg & Basin Reserves) & try to live in the present situation to not to make same mistakes, which resulted in a win
7. Having Plan B & executing it to perfection like Bouncing the Batsmen worked wonders in conditions known for Pitch it Up plan. As a leader to come up with that plan spontaneously was a masterstroke

DELTAS: 

1. When you pick a player, you have to give him the confidence, this is also so true when we hire a new employee in the team, Dhoni's whatever reason for not using Binny to full extent is inexplicable & defies the logic of picking him. 
2. Making a player unwanted can dent his confidence for long, how captain & think tank handles Binny fiasco will be keenly watched by me.
3. When you are producing results people may not see through your lack of personal contribution, but moment the results reverses, the Leader will be put under a microscope. Dhoni's glove work has never been a sight to behold, in the match today, he looked horrible for pacers, standing back to a spinner was the last thing
4. The innings by Jadeja in fact may do more harm to team & himself than good, the individual has come good after 13 innings with the bat & with ball he was efficient & not effective, the Leader should know when to let go the personnel for his as well as team's good. He is actually blocking the place for an effective wicket taking bowler as well consistent batsman in Ashwin
5. Couple of players like Kohli, Dhawan & Shami look jaded for whatever reasons, as a leader one has to spend time with such performers to bring a sense of purpose in them, the best man who did it with players is sitting the commentary box, The Prince of Calcutta can be tapped to know more of it 

How to reduce Subjective Rating in Performance Evaluations

Most companies use Feedback and Ratings from their employee performance appraisals to drive decisions around compensation, promotions and training, then ensuring consistency in their employee reviews is critical. Even if they’re not using performance evaluation data to make these decisions, employees need to perceive a sense of fairness in their reviews. A perceived lack of fairness quickly translates into employee dissatisfaction and disengagement.

Many companies use subjective performance appraisal systems due to lack of objective performance measures. In these cases, supervisors usually have to rate the performance of their subordinates, using such systems, it is a well established fact that many supervisors tend to assess the employees too good (leniency bias) and that the appraisals hardly vary across employees of a certain supervisor (centrality bias). We explain these two biases in a model with a supervisor, who has preferences for the utility of her inequality averse subordinates, and discuss determinants of the size of the biases. Extensions of the basic model include the role of supervisor’s favoritism of one particular agent and the endogenous effort choice of agents. Whether inequality averse agents exert higher efforts then purely self-oriented ones, depends on the size of effort costs and inequality aversion.

But how do you achieve fairness across the board, or even within a particular role, when so much of the evaluation is subjective?.

Since managers are individuals, and bring different experience and expectations to their role, it’s important to give them some guidance, and a framework to work within to eliminate some of their subjectivity from the equation. Here are some techniques we use with Clients, which has helped in reducing the Subjective Feedback from the PMS.

1.       Providing ongoing trainings to both Appraisee & Appraiser about the PMS

2.       Multi-rater feedback for if possible for all roles or at least critical roles in the company

3.       Secondary manager or third-party reviews

4.       Detailed behavioral descriptions of competency demonstration

5.       Creating a Dictionary of Subjective Ratings to choose from as part of the PMS tool

6.       Have Even Number Scale to reduce the Central Tendency Error

It’s also a great idea to have your HR team compare ratings between departments, especially for individuals performing the same function. It’s not hard to spot trends in ratings when you look at the bigger picture. In the same way you could tell how “tough” a teacher was by looking at their class average, you can get an idea of how consistent and fair your appraisals are by comparing scores between departments, and year over year. Your HR team can then intervene to ensure greater consistency and fairness.

Process Vs Results

Few days ago a cricketer who was worth a place in state junior team and hailed as one of the replacement for the Great Wall of Indian Cricket in Karnataka Cricket; was not able to make good scores off late came to me to talk about what’s going wrong with him.

The conversation is as follows.

Cricketer: While I am playing the way I have always done, but not being able to score more runs consistently. Do get to score 50s, 70s once in few months but not so much that I get to play 1^st class cricket for the state.

Me: Hmm.. Sounds so familiar, tell me more about it, when was the last time you scored big, what all you did right and what you did a day before and after that.

Cricketer: Last time it was a 75 against a team which had good first class cricketers. Coming to think of it, I had good 2 days of nets and just before the match, it was good mental frame I was in. Post the match I thought I should do the same more often.

Me: It set me thinking, which I always believe in, that it is more of process and process which will result in better quality results. I call this: ‘IF YOU HAVE THE “RIGHT” PROCESS, “DESIRED” RESULTS ARE JUST A MATTER OF TIME.’

The more we started speaking, I was convinced that the guy realized more of his mistakes and talents (which to be fair with him was the right thing to do) and insights  on “practice” and “smart work”.

This brings me to the topic ‘is result alone matters or the process also has a role to play in getting the desired results time after time’

Taking cricket analogy as discussed with my international cricketer friend, The difference between 1^st class cricketer to that of an average Joe on the road is the “repeatability of the process of shot making or bowling a line consistently over a period of time, of course coupled with talent and hard work..

If someone like Bret Lee is thundering at 150KMPH ball after ball and the batsmen is coming down the line and driving the ball towards “covers” or “extra covers” it’s not because of the talent alone but also because of the time spent at the nets making the whole process repeat ball after ball, day after day and year after year.

An organization where I consult, have a very good business which is showing double digit growth year on year while the markets struggle to do it. By their own admission, the product sells itself with very little or no marketing effort. (For USD 400 Million turnover their marketing budget is USD 2, 00,000 per annum).

However the organization has no process or any repeatable work culture. Since we have started putting process in place, what we found was with the same resources and effort, they could go to next levels of sales (Projected for this year in USD 600 Million), with proper process in place.

While not dwelling much in to the details of the case, I would like to bring in to perspective the thought while what matters are “results”, equally important is “Process” which produces the results

Talent Management Trends in 2013

The two challenges Organizations are facing today are the combination of growing markets (a need to expand globally or into new products and services) coupled with a need to hold back costs. While the economy is expanding, business executives remain afraid of committing large sums of cash to growth - a problem well documented in the business press.  What this has done is create a talent squeeze. Organizations are finding skills gaps, headcount gaps, and leadership gaps in their workforce which they must fill to grow - yet they do not have the resources to dramatically increase salaries to compete for labor. As a result, we are seeing a tremendous focus on sourcing and recruiting strategies, internal career development, and leadership development.

These problems are very business and organization-specific. In some cases the challenges involve a shortage of critical skills which create shortages in particular job roles. This takes the form of shortages of production engineers in the oil and gas industry, regional managers in the retail industry, nurses in the healthcare and insurance industries , or mid-level managers in manufacturing and most industries.

Human Capital is becoming increasingly important for organizations of all sizes and shapes across the world. The workforce is made of Gen Y and Gen Millennium at the entry& mid levels, who are more adept at technology than any others, who will be more than happy to spend time on internet learning new things than spend time in class rooms. The learnability is attaining different and new meanings. The retention of high potentials, increasing engagement, gender balance and equality, and age diversity will continue to dominate the happenings as it has always been, I feel 2013 will be marked by this increased phenomenon of people management, where technology plays a vital role.

1.       Employee- Led & Manager- Supported Career Planning: Organizations can explore deploying organic (viral) strategies which assess both the employees’ “needs” & their personal “offer” (skills, abilities, intangibles) against the “offer” & “needs” from their organization. While this assessment allows for an evaluation of employee-organization alignment and/or gaps, it serves a few more purposes, including increased communication, enhanced development planning, assessment of cultural and performance fit for achieving shared success.

2.       Increased Engagement Initiatives: The initiation of mindfulness at work to let managers deal with stress and anxiety more effectively. In other words, more attention to well-being at work; The growing focus on intercultural awareness and leveraging diversity to achieve individual, team and organizational goals. Companies are starting to recognize and harness diverse leadership approaches and perspectives.

3.       Talent Acquisition: The ability to search companies’ career pages and apply through smart phone will be a one to look out for. I also think more companies will be investing in their employee value proposition for 2013, followed by making sure they are working through internal barriers for hiring top talent. Customer relationship management tools to build future talent pipelines will still remain hot. But I believe more companies will start to invest in SEO strategies to attract top talent.

4.       Talent Management is a Business Problem, not an HR Problem : I feel there is a critical need to understand that talent management is not an "HR process " but rather a "business process" which must be implemented through line of business executive leadership. Talent management strategies, should be developed in the context of your particular business strategy.

There won’t be any other honest cricketer like Rahul Dravid any more.. End of an Era

So aptly said on CRICINFO website by a fan “Indian bridge is falling down, falling down, falling down.. Indian bridge was falling down in olden days!! DRAVID-Build it up with iron and steel, Iron and steel, iron and steel, Build it up with iron and steel, THE WALL OF CRICKET!!

The last of the few gentleman left in cricket. I doubt if there'll ever be another like him. World cricket will be poorer with his exit, good luck to him and thanks for the memories. Game with its increasing penchant for entertainment and gimmickry will be hard pressed to produce cricketers of his immense quality.

RSD symbolized greatness with simplicity which is tough to see today. He is not just an idol for cricket fans but for anyone who wants to aspire higher things keeping firm feet on the ground . He epitomized Indian middleclass better than anybody in any profession. His work ethic showed us what it was like to be the consummate professional, his selfless choice to open or keep wickets just to help the team out, taught us about humility and sacrificial giving, his adaptability to the shorter forms showed how an old dog can indeed excel at new tricks and finally his tender portrayal of our great nation in delivering the Bradman oration revealed the depth of his love towards the country.

"There is no more comforting sight in test cricket than Rahul walking to the crease to take guard". When McGrath-Lee, Donald-Pollock, Akram-Akhtar were rewriting the bowler-batsman equation in cricket, many batsmen have played spin bowling better then Rahul, but the last 30 years has not seen a better batsman to the fast, swinging ball. In 1999, when India was summarized by Australia, a commentator saw the sweat on Dravid's brows when facing Mcgrath and quipped that 'it seems hotter out there for the batsmen'. That sight was testament to all that Dravid is about - mental concentration and visibly painful but breathtaking adherence to technique. It is easy to throw your bat and ride a lucky streak a la Hyden, Sehwag &  many others to become great by being aggressive. But that’s not test cricket. Kudos to the Dravid family for this colossus, this unique servant of the game who bows out serving as a master class in mental toughness

As a man himself many times in the past has said, he is OK to be the second best in an era when GOD played alongside. If he were to be born at any other time he could have been the best of that time (not that he is not now).

You deserved to retire at home to a standing ovation, but knowing you nothing matters more than Team’s cause. THANK YOU LEGEND

How can HR Lead Change

During my interactions with many HR Leaders, I found out that seldom they involve in major organization wide changes, the lack of participation can be attributed to varieties of reasons like inclination to change, business knowledge, being in the comfort and not willing to take things head on.

Though it's rare, here's an indicator of what is possible. One of the HR Leaders working in Health Care sector whom I spoke to : learned that the senior team was wanting to launch  "relationship-based care," a comprehensive cultural change program to focus doctors' and nurses' attention on patients and their families. He offered to have HR involved to address the people aspects. He showed them how HR could weave relationship-based care and continuous improvement into the fabric of this community hospital in central New York, for example by hiring and promoting the right people. He was at the table with them as they planned training and communications, and as they decided how to reward people who took on improvement projects.

When I talk with leaders of process improvement activities about the role of HR in change, however, I generally hear that HR is bureaucratic and a brake on innovation. Others say that HR is under-utilized. In most organizations talent management is left to direct supervisors.

Dave Ulrich, a professor at the University of Michigan, has identified three human resource processes that are critical for embedding a culture such as continuous improvement: (1) talent flow, (2) rewards, and (3) training and development. Changing any of these to support continuous improvement presents challenges to HR:

• Talent Flow: By recruiting & career advancing the people based on their fitment with the organizations vision of growth (mindset & behaviors)— and letting go those who don't —People see what is happening and adapt their behaviors accordingly. The problem for continuous improvement is that managers tend to hire for expertise, not for behaviors such as improvement. One of the HR Leader, told me, "We hire what the manager wants. We hire a Solutions Architect, who is great at working with Technology. We have seldom challenge managers to look more broadly. We introduced HR business partners twelve months ago and asked them to advocate HR policies. They struggled. They kept getting mired down in minute details, e.g., manpower request forms."
• Rewards: Reward systems can change and reinforce behavior. The aim of a reward system is to turn goals into measures of behavior and outcomes, then allocate rewards based how employees perform against the measures. Continuous improvement demands that people not only carry out their jobs, but improve their work too. HR people typically don't have the operational experience, expectation, or permission to engage line managers in changing rewards to encourage operational improvement. For example, One of the Leader tells me that his hospital needs to reward process improvement to accommodate healthcare reform, but that HR can't initiate the changes from its position; modifications to rewards have to be made by senior leaders.
• Training and Development: Training courses and development investments send messages about what matters. At the same time, they offer leaders skills and tools to act on those messages. To support continuous improvement, these investments have to focus on making work better. Few HR organizations will promote improvement training unless it's driven by senior leadership, even though they may recognize it as what the organization needs.

What are the root causes which one needs to overcome for HR leading change? I see three:

• Politics: To sustain improvement activities, HR should use its power and influence to help leaders focus on customers, long-term business results, and building capabilities in their people — not a personal or HR agenda. Yet if HR gets out in front of improvement activities.
• A Support Relationship: As described above HR should be at the table with senior leaders to weave HR into improvement programs. Before HR can offer advice to the organization, it needs to be a partner — not just support. The CEO and executive team often view HR as an expense with a transaction focus, rather than adding value with a strategic focus. HR has to operate as a partner that adds value to make the case for their role as a partner.

Look beyond ‘Being Inbred’: HR hires HR experience, and HR has historically been mainly engaged in personnel, compliance, and transactions. HR professionals without operational experience have less credibility and aren't comfortable giving operational advice. "HR doesn't think like the business. HR professionals don't know which knife, fork, or spoon to use when they're at the table."

Aligning Learning with Corporate Strategy

Business has experienced an evolution from the agricultural age to the Industrial Revolution to the information age. Now, the talent age has arrived. Companies realize that in a world where every other aspect of doing business has been commoditized, talent is the only real competitive advantage they have. Currently, the competitive battlefront is for the best people, the true creators of value

Some of the key challenges which if addressed by organizations will enable to align training program to corporate strategy. Best vehicle for sustainable organization development is to engage training participants in real work with live strategic issues. Today’s corporate training organizations must be highly aligned with their business’ immediate and urgent corporate priorities, while also building long term capabilities for the future.

By incorporating the “3way”hit formula will be like

1. Increase the participants understanding and commitment to corporate strategy

2. Help them produce innovative ideas and solutions and create a strategies to meet business needs

3. Help in development and achievement of goals

 

Adelsberg and Trolley in their book “Running Training like Business” talk about the following as challenges that needs to be changed in order to evolve ‘’training’’ as HR function

• Training has remained Tactical

• “Drivers’’ to the strategic goals are obvious but the challenge is how to move them

• Typically Organizations have Ad hoc or disjointed Training Functions

• Investment in Trainings needs better management

• The change towards making training business function is taking place, the rate at which it is happening may not be as per requirements

 

The key questions to be asked by L&D Professionals in order to get Training aligned to Corporate Strategy are

• Garnering Support and Sponsorship for Learning Solutions

• Training Delivery Check

• Innovative Training Solutions in L&D for Strategy Alignment

• Involvement of Line Managers in Training Development and Deployment

These don’t come as surprise to many of the L&D professionals who have been, since 2008 are driving trainings as mostly customized/canned programs; which has lead many a companies take the most beaten path of genuine and menu-driven trainings in nature.

Many industry leaders I have spoken to are of the opinion that this is a short sighted and knee jerk reaction.

 

The more “Central Built” model of leaders’ development and talent programs (like Global Model with local way with functional managers) are immediate and urgent need.

I am penning down some thoughts about how one can answer these questions with my experience

 

• Garnering Support

- While the most sought after position or respect L&D person seeks is a place on the Board, but what one don’t realize yet is- it is always the role of influencer than decision maker

- Instead of seeking executive sponsorship, strive towards ownership. Meaning make the Sr.Mgt team go thru the actual program in capsules, so that it gets their ownership and then take with rest of the participants

 In one of my previous assignments, by doing this we could penetrate the difficult closely held functional group of leaders and managers who were averse to the idea of trainings in first place (the country, the culture and the organizational dynamics were the greatest myth we did break thru this approach)

- Engaging the “Participating Leaders” in a dialogue with Sr. Mgt Team as part of the program progress

- Make Program Content directing into strategy alignment by asking CEO to select the most appropriate strategic value ideas into implementation.

 We did this in our Future Leaders’ Program at an organization, which not only ensured the program success but also created a new business avenue which has become a revenue stream in less than 20 months time.

 

• Check on L&D delivery is alignment with Business Strategy

- Use of Steering Groups for the learning delivery

 By creating group of line managers as a training facilitators, this can be achieved for better success as well as more business strategy relevant

- With the moving business targets, the L&D programs needs to be designed “Just in time” learning solutions

- Business Partnering like HR Business Partners in one such way

- Letting internal L&D professionals do bit of business consulting in order to let them gain perspective

 One of the India’s largest software exporters used this model to good effect where I was working. The L&D professionals were asked to do business consulting internally as well as externally. This again opened a revenue stream for the organization

• Methodologies of L&D

- To maximize 3 way approach of “action learning”, “interactive games”, “face to face trainings” is a way forward.

- Moving away from classical model of case studies/ simulations/ theories and arcane models, it should be towards current and actual business strategy for better “skills building”, “Knowledge Inputs” and “Personal Development”.

 In our Leadership Development Program for Mid Level Managers at a major distributors of automobiles, we used the technique of “Fly on the wall”” to create Case studies, examples which ensured when the trainers used them in the session, the content was more relevant and had a future strategy alignment to it

- Custom designed line leadership challenge to Sr. Leadership Team about the next few days will be one of the good idea

 As shared earlier, this method was used as one of the means for programs during a Leadership Program which helped in solving a problem which existed for some years in the organization.

- A new or emerging market case scenario can be discussed in such leadership programs or live business challenges to be discussed to ensure the strategy is linked to trainings

- Peer Coaching

 

• Involving line managers in Pre/Post L&D Delivery, the key success factor is L&D programs are the involvement of line managers

- Making senior leaders performance criteria as support to L&D Initiatives

 As a L&D Professional, I have been insisting on this in all my assignments at organizations to ensure success.

- Making participants to identify development goals with line managers and coaches and derive strategy based learning

- Making participants “debrief” to their managers and teams as a mandatory part of the program learning

Conclusions

Leveraging the business strategy as the framework for people development – in terms of program objectives, solution design and content – organizations will deliver powerful and practical development of their leaders and key talent that is directly aligned with key business goals and imperatives. A strategy-based program design delivered via engaging experiential learning methodologies, such as live, interactive leadership simulations and action learning business projects involving real business issues, enables participants to readily connect the dots between ‘training’ and their real lives at work.

Value Based Leadership- My Thoughts

Should Leadership be defined solely by the success achieved by the individual in his chosen field? …Most of the leadership literature makes that assumption. Leaders get things done. They win wars, championships, fortune, and fame. They cure sick teams, organizations and whole countries. Not by themselves, of course – we followers have a limited role, as foot soldiers, employees, and voters. Charismatic individual is someone, who somehow is able to motivate or drive or carry his/her team to achieve an (often) unlikely goal. Conversely, the absence of significant achievement generally signifies a leadership-free environment.
As luck would have it, many of the leaders whose achievements capture the popular imagination are pretty tough cookies, so focused on winning that they are often willing to bend the social and organizational rules that bind us lesser mortals. Nevertheless, in a results-focused world, their achievements qualify them as leadership role models. Their successes explain the staying power of anti-social leadership mantras like “nice guys finish last” and “winning isn’t everything, it’s the only thing.”
“Just-the-results” leadership may achieve goals, but it has limited transformational power. It produces more and more of the same old stuff, and that’s fine, if the same old stuff is what the organization needs. The problematic outcome of this brand of leadership is often an admirably efficient vehicle with steering problems; the defects are rarely visible, but are liable to produce with distressing frequency an Enron, a General Motors, or a Satyam. When such disasters occur, we are always amazed in hindsight at the damage wrought by once-respected “leaders.”

The values-based leadership insists on examining the messy details implied by “how?” and “why?” It may be less efficient than the “no questions asked” variety, and it takes time to reach critical mass; but the need of the hour is to develop hundreds of leaders with the ability not only to get things done, but to go beyond the numbers to change lives for the better, it has a unique competitive advantage with limitless potential. It is not enough to win a leader job security, let alone praise and honor. A result that is achieved the wrong way – in a way that violates the letter or spirit of the Dynamic Organization – does not count. Leaders would do better to fall short of a goal than to reach it unethically, or by taking advantage of a customer, or by treating peers, employees, vendors, or even competitors with disrespect.

Take a bow Sachin Tendulkar- Tribute from an unabashed fan

For those of you who have not read “Jonathan Livingston the Sea Gull” by Richard Bach, its a story of a Sea Gull who always wanted excellence in what he does best- “ flying” , always wanting to scale a new peak when rest of the flock thought it cannot be done, always at competition with himself to achieve the greatness ,ever so obedient student of flying and always at hand to teach a protégé a thing or two. As I saw Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar bat today against Sri Lanka on a marble floor of pitch at Colombo, I felt if Richard Bach were to witness his remarkable career would rename the book as “Sachin Tendulkar the Sea Gull”. What a player, what a maverick. 94 hundreds (48 Test and 46 ODIs) in an International Cricket, 21yrs of play and he still carries the charm of 20yr old out of an academy side.

What’s more striking was the fact that he made Suresh Raina, playing his 1st test match concentrate hard and score runs at the same time. I am sure Suresh would be thanking his stars tonight when he goes to bed that he has an University of Cricket with him at the other end of the crease. Sachin today wasn’t battling the bowlers, he wasn’t bothered by the scores, he had another battle to be won that of saving the match for the country and a small matter of fact record to be set right (hasn’t scored a test 100 in Sri Lanka for 11yrs, that’s quite an absurd stat). The relief was all to be seen when he scored that 4 behind the square of Suraj Randhiv (another debutant, probably thinking what makes him so special when the shot was completed)

For all the joy you have given to millions and millions of fans and connoisseurs of the game of cricket and making us feel proud Indian, Take a bow Mr. Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar, perhaps the greatest batsman and a true sportsman of this century…

Conversation on Managerial Effectiveness

One of my friend recently sent me a mail asking my thoughts on "how to calcuate Managerial Effectiveness", I have tried summerising my conversation with him thru this post.

Hi Madhu
Needed your help in one of the initiatives that we intend to launch - basically a mechanism to measure people orientation of managers. While it is a very subjective area, we are trying to create some tangible measures to create an Index that can be measured and tracked. Easiest would have been a 360 degree feedback, but that is not feasible given the culture right now.

A few measures that come up immediately could cover

- Number of training programs nominated / attended by team members
- Attrition (but how to discount factors beyond manager's control)
- Emp Satisfaction Index
- Succession planning for key positions
- Performance evaluation as per plan - Completion % of KRA setting, Perf Evalaution compliance etc
- Number of suggestions by team into Employee Suggestion Scheme

But the trouble is that these are all "input" measures and the initiative could just end up driving compliance.

What I am looking for are some "output" measure like say Team Feedback Score for a Manager etc.

My Reply to him:

Dear Nandish

Good to hear from you.. it’s not always dirty out there in Behavioral Science, its more than challenging and fun to be in this quandary than applied science

a. As you rightly said, most of the below mentioned measurements (if I may call so) are inputs measurements and can be used as a compliance measurements, however if you go beyond the normal, you can look at the bottom line additions thru them. For example: you can see the obvious as “how many ideas a “A” manager’s team has given”, the abnormal stuff is to see “how many of these ideas have contributed to real time impact on the team or the organisation” (Engagement, Innovation Culture, Out of the box thinking, Team Work are the measurable competencies)


b. Since it’s a knowledge driven industry, I guess having ES Survey, with specific questions around Output from the Managers, will help in measuring, this is the most sought after and easiest way to do it.

c. Also look at TEAM TRUST INDEX, this not only measures Trust Levels in the team, but also helps in knowing what is the kind of trust reposed in the managers by team.

d. You can also look at BELBIN TEAM EFFECTIVENESS (you need to be certified to conduct this)

e. You will also have to decide on the focus of your Index, will it be “Team Centric”, “Individual Centric” or “Organizational Centric”, based on which you can use different tools like (a) Team Trust Index or Belbin for Team (b) 360* Feedback or simple NMA (if people are ok to give feedback) or (c) Employee Satisfaction Survey with specific thrust on Output

Summary of my work around the same I am giving you, it might help you…

If you are measuring “Team Leadership” then look at

a. Measurement of Change in Team Effectiveness

b. Measurement of Change in Team Outputs- if you can correlate these two and measure the effectiveness it will be a good Team Measurement

If you are measuring “Individual Leadership" then look at

a. Measurement of Change in Competencies thru 360*

b. Measurement of Change in Individual Results- If you can correlate these two and measure the effectiveness it will be a good “Individual Measurement” as well as “Program Effectiveness Measurement”

If you are measuring “Organizational Leadership” then look at

a. Measurement of Change in Team Outputs

b. Measurement of Change in Individual Results- these can give organizational level measurement.

Topographical Model

Freud believed that the majority of what we experience in our lives, the underlying emotions, beliefs, feelings, and impulses are not available to us at a conscious level. He believed that most of what drives us is buried in our unconscious. While buried there, however, they continue to impact us dramatically according to Freud.

The role of the unconscious is only one part of the model. Freud also believed that everything we are aware of is stored in our conscious. Our conscious makes up a very small part of who we are. In other words, at any given time, we are only aware of a very small part of what makes up our personality; most of what we are is buried and inaccessible.

The final part is the preconscious or subconscious. This is the part of us that we can access if prompted, but is not in our active conscious. Its right below the surface, but still buried somewhat unless we search for it. Information such as our telephone number, some childhood memories, or the name of your best childhood friend is stored in the preconscious.

Because the unconscious is so large, and because we are only aware of the very small conscious at any given time, this theory has been likened to an iceberg, where the vast majority is buried beneath the water's surface. The water, by the way, would represent everything that we are not aware of, have not experienced, and that has not been integrated into our personalities, referred to as the nonconscious.

My Take on the Model:

The above description of Human Psyche according to Segmud Freud opens up a Pandora Box of doubts in my mind with respect to psychoanalysis or use of psychometric tools in knowing one’s personality, if the Conscious is so little and lot remains in Preconscious or Nonconscious minds, how and what is the best way to increase the Conscious self of human beings. I assume if one were to know even 20% more about ‘self’ than what he or she already knows, it will not only help in self development but also help the organisations in many aspects of human development.

Leadership Dissecting……???

Anyone given the task of dissecting leadership is at a serious disadvantage before they even start. The word itself defies any attempt at accurate or precise definition. It also comes with other complications - it is not a constant; can only really be judged within a unique, historical context; and this usually means we have to judge leadership with the benefit of hindsight. Mahatma Gandhi’s leadership being one of the most obvious examples. His potential only really found its outlet during the Train Journey in South Africa and even then he had plenty of critics and detractors. Nevertheless, we all still tend to believe we can recognise true leadership when we see it even if we realise that, as with beauty, any assessment of leadership remains firmly in the eye of the beholder. Yet the fact that there is no universal measure of leadership does not stop us trying to search out, nurture and develop leadership. The potential rewards for getting it right and the risk of getting it wrong are both just too huge to ignore.

So if we do manage to put leadership under the ‘microscope’ would even the most powerful magnification be able to identify the defining and distinguishing features and characteristics behind the leadership abilities of a Lal Bahadhur Shastri (Freedom Fighter from India) or a Nelson Mandela? More worryingly, would a detailed look at their DNA only conclude that there is not much difference between the famous and the infamous? Perhaps there is only an infinitesimal, biological quirk that distinguishes them from a Hitler or a Stalin. Leaders come in all shapes, sizes and hues so do we just hope that we get the ones who share our own views? Do we ever know what value they might bring to society or can we actually do something to make that happen? Maybe this whole subject needs a really different perspective if we are to gain any fresh insights.

The value of leadership


The purpose of leadership is to realise the maximum value of human potential

This is quite a handy definition. It rules out Hitler and Stalin straight away and fits very nicely with Swami Vivekananda’s call “Arise, Awake and Stop Not till the Goal is Reached”. It is a very tough standard. Why would we want anything less from our leaders? It is also a ‘societal value’ view of leadership. It subscribes to the game theory concept of win-win.

‘Leadership’ that can only produce gains for some at the expense of others is of no interest to society as a whole. The only problem with this definition is that the key word in it, ‘value’, is itself notoriously difficult to define. So what exactly does value mean?
As the Leadership Trust version refers to “business performance” let us start by asking what value means in a business context. Should we look at market value as a gauge of leadership? On that measure Jack Welch would score very highly on the leadership scale because GE has a huge market value ($382 billion in April 2005) although he earned his nickname of ‘neutron Jack’ because of his obsession of getting rid of people and leaving the buildings standing. Bill Gates could be another candidate, not only in view of the enormous market value of Microsoft ($272 billion) but also because of his philanthropic foundation which gives billions of dollars to good causes and his clear aim of trying to eradicate diseases such as malaria.

The other perspective that might aid our thinking is the world of sport. What better environment to discuss leadership and human endeavor: pushing people to the absolute limit of their potential in the pursuit of excellence? So who is a better leader Mahendra Singh Dhoni (Captain- Chennai Super Kings), Adam Gilchrist (Deccan Chargers) or Anil Kumble (Bangalore Royal Challengers)? Or is that just another trick question played on us by this elusive thing we call leadership? Are Cricket Captains just that - managers? Surely leaders have to unite people who may have interests that are not that easy to reconcile. Cricket boards do not seem to involve any real debate anymore about what its board, its players and its supporters’ value. No one seems to be too interested in cricketers becoming role models of teamsmanship or sportsmanship. Their goal is as clear as a goal is ever going to be - to win the Championships. The supporters of these teams must be willing ‘followers’ and self-selecting. There is no sense here of the real, fundamental challenge of leadership, which is actually to try and get maximum value out of people when some of them do not really want to play ball.

It looks like every attempt to answer a leadership question results in just another more complicated question being posed. So, in a determined effort to produce a better way forward let us take a step back and begin right back at the beginning. What is the purpose of leadership and, more importantly from a practical perspective, what is the basic proposition that drives our interest in leadership development? Then we can ask how better definition and measurement might help.

Changing world order in Talent Management- 2010

Kaizen, Six Sigma, PCMM, CMMi, COPC, LEAN Management what next? Post the recession, what will be the value differentiator in the new world order? Will it be the same old certificates in quality which will differentiate the good companies to not so good ones, or will there be new Economic Monopolies be defined. I feel the new world order will be more on who has the best talent and who has the maximum return customers will be the leader.

To substantiate this further, I think if we look at the recession history, the companies with more robust people processes, development and continued patronage from customers are the ones who thrived and survived.

Jim Clifton’s (CEO and Chairman of Gallup Organisation) recently at a MBA Degree Ceremony in my company said, “The world post economic downturn will be ruled by the country with maximum return customers or Economic Monopolies” I think this is true even to the corporate world.

What one has to do to keep the house in order for any further eventualities will be governed by the TALENT MANAGEMENT principles of the organization as well as retaining the CUSTOMER BASE which has been created. We will see war for Customers intensify more than war for religion, land or water in years to come.

What HR Can Do

The forces of the war for talent add up to a fundamental shift in the business environment, requiring companies to radically adjust the way they manage people.

1. HR can be in the forefront of instilling a talent mindset at all levels of the organization beginning with senior management – A talent mindset is the deeply held belief that building a strong management talent pool is critical to achieving the aspirations of the company. Leaders with a talent mindset roll up their sleeves and make talent their job; they continuously create, champion, and drive new ways to bolster talent. They ensure that the link between business strategy and talent requirements is forged.

2. Create a winning Value Proposition that brings scarce talent through the doors, and keeps them there – Just as a company carefully shapes its value proposition to customers, it should also deliberately craft the value proposition to its people. They should ask questions like, “Why would a talented person want to work here?” (Perhaps for a Great Company, Wealth and Individual Value Creation and Growth and Development).

3. Grow great leaders – Most companies leave a tremendous amount of human potential unrealized because their people are inadequately developed. Talented people crave the opportunity to grow, and without it they’ll leave. Growing great leaders means deliberately giving them job challenges that push the bounds of what they thought themselves capable of. At the same time, it means providing the life preservers for succeeding at “stretch” opportunities. It means giving people the candid feedback they need to grow, without the sweaty palms that often characterize these infrequent exchanges. It means weaving mentoring into the fabric of the organization – so that it is in the institution, not an appendage.

4. Differentiate and affirm – HR too often give in to the temptation to treat all their people the same. The leading companies conduct clear-eyed assessments of their talent; they differentiate in how they invest in their top performers and low performers. They shower top performers with job opportunities that excite and challenge them, and pay them for the value they create.

Finally, HR can build employer brand and reputation by embodying the identity of the company as an employer of choice. Communicate overarching goals, connect people and share expertise. In essence, the HR function now must have the ability to make a company spin in a new direction quicker.

The whys of life….

* Why don’t we feel excited when we learn something new?

* Why don’t we admit in front of colleagues, friends, family that we don’t know something and wish to learn it?

* Why have we stopped asking questions, remember when we were young, we had so many questions to ask, as we grew older and older, we tend to ask fewer and fewer questions. Are we ashamed of being ridiculed or just that we know too much?

* Why don’t we appreciate others for their good and celebrate with them in their joy more often.

* Why don’t we go to friends’ house, without calling beforehand?

* Why do we send text messages to our spouses telling “I LOVE YOU”, when we can say it in as many words.

* Why don’t we appreciate our kids’ low marks as a sign of learning rather than being left out of the competition?

* Why do we wear mask in front of others, when we know that they know it’s a mask (a mask interacting to a mask).

Leadership development is going nowhere fast

It has not been hard over the past few weeks to pick out the negative or critical of the HR function, especially when it comes to leadership development. The 2008/9 DDI Global Leadership Forecast1, which surveyed over 13,000 HR professionals and business leaders throughout the world, found that “leadership development is going nowhere fast.” This is compounded by further observations that include decreasing confidence in senior leaders who lack basic skills from 47% in 99 to 35% in 07 for senior leaders and from 42% to 25% for front line leaders.

The survey also finds that organizations are poor at leadership selection, have ineffective talent identification programmes and poor succession planning. A further alarming tendency highlighted in this survey is that HR and managers are locked in a spiraling circle of blame as each blames the other for failures in leadership development. Where development programmes do exist there is a lack of effective measurement of their impact.

This focus on quantifying the HR impact is a common theme these days; however the difficulty in linking or measuring the impact of strategy on performance is highlighted by Kim Warren 2, who hits the nail on the head by stating that this will not be possible until the influence of intangibles on performance is fully understood.

Reflections 08-09

I am completing one year in Saudi Arabia next month, thought I shall share my thoughts and my success with all my friends and family members who have made this transition possible. More importantly, how did I fare on my Intellectual Capital, Financial Capital & Happiness Capital is described below.

Intellectual Capital (IC): One the biggest gain for me this year has been going thru Strengths’ Finder test from Gallup series. This has enlightened me about my strengths (while I knew of some of them) and how do I put them in real use (thanks to Naveen, for being my coach). Working on Managers’ Development Process (designing, developing and implementing the competency based leadership development initiatives, development centers etc.,) has been a fulfilling effort for me. Also meeting people from different parts of the world in ALJ has opened my mind to different cultures and styles of working.

Financial Capital (FC): Well generally I tend to ignore the FC whenever I take up a new role for the meat of the role. I ended up clearing all my backlogs with the job in hand and that made my mind lighter and pocket heavier. I will be saving for my son’s education and our winter days this year onwards (my wife and parents will be happy to know that).

Happiness Capital (HC): I have always been happy in each and every job assignment that I have done. The joy of seeing work being appreciated by one and all after all the hard work is something I cherish during my Managers’ Development Process Development Centers execution. I have seen my son grow older and naughtier by 1year.

While I miss my Bangalore, my family, friends I am happy to have spent more time with my Wife and Son, being here, than back home where I would have had to spend time in office and trainings.

What about things not gone right? Well when I landed in this country, the initial 3 months were very crucial for me get settled down fast. While I didn’t get to do what I was hired far, but the work I am doing so far has been like a blessing in disguise.

I also had plans of setting up some sort of charitable institution to build guest houses for poor in a Ganesha Temple near Mangalore, couldn’t progress much in that direction.

On a concluding note, I have grown as a matured individual, as a doting father, as a loving husband and a dutiful son in this last one year. I will cherish this and will have to be really thankful to all the support, guidance, wishes I have received by one and all in this journey.

HR TRADITIONALLY FOCUSES ON COSTS BUT INCREASING REVENUE IS MORE STRATEGIC

One area that is important to address when defining the strategic role of HR is HR’s historic emphasis on cutting costs. While cutting costs are important there are several reasons why it is essential that HR shift its focus away from cost cutting and towards increasing output and revenues.

Every major corporation strives to increase its profits; however in striving to meet that goal it is important to realize that there are two distinct parts of any profit loss equation, revenue and costs. A business can increase profits into basic ways: first, by reducing costs and second, by increasing revenue (either by charging more or selling more). HR has traditionally focused almost exclusively on the cost cutting portion of the equation, quite possibly because cutting people cost is relatively easy.

Unfortunately, cutting people costs can have some disastrous consequences. HR’s long-standing practice of “undercounting costs” is one of the prime reasons that HR fails to increase worker productivity. “Undercounting” is the process of omitting the additional costs caused by a bad practice or process because these “unintended consequences” are not directly connected to the initial action by HR. Some obvious examples of dubious cost cutting and the “undercounting” might include:

1. Hiring workers with fewer skills in critical positions is certainly cheaper than hiring individuals with superior skills but it may negatively impact product quality and innovation
2. When top performing workers demand more money, they can be replaced with cheaper, albeit less effective workers that in the long run creates the need to hire significantly more workers just to maintain the same level of production
3. Ignoring market compensation rates and underpaying in salary and benefits that ultimately hinders the ability to hire and retain top people
4. The substitution of low cost training for average cost training that results in increases in error and safety rates

As you can see, there are some potential negative consequences of arbitrarily cutting costs without simultaneously looking at the impact of cost cutting on revenues and productivity. In fact, any accountant can blindly cut costs but it takes a true productivity expert to understand that cutting costs and “undercounting” can actually have a significant negative impact on the firm.

The strategic target for HR should be to increase revenues and productivity while simultaneously maintaining or reducing your relative labor costs. If you give any CEO a choice as to whether they would prefer increasing revenues or cutting costs, they invariably pick the option to increase revenues. This is because whenever you increase revenue in a competitive marketplace it's obvious that you are improving your products and services, which are long-term competitive advantages. Short-term cost cutting might actually improve short-term profits but in the long-term, profits may go down and careless cost cutting may permanently harm our competitive position and image among customers.

CONCLUSION
Strategic HR presents a new challenge that few HR departments universally accept today, the challenge of managing workforce productivity. For some the reluctance to accept accountability for managing productivity is an issue of control, while for others it is the lack of a clearly defined customer the muddles their existing efforts. Regardless, becoming strategic requires that all HR efforts become coordinated and united under a uniform set of goals and objectives.

Leadership - What is it?

A great deal of work has been done by many authors and researchers in trying to identify and define "leadership". The vast body of research has focused on leadership traits, habits, competencies, behaviors, styles, values, skills and characteristics. Dave Ulrich (Ulrich, D et al, Results Based Leadership, Harvard Business Press, Boston, 1999) categorized much of the research into:

· Who leaders are - values, motives, personal traits
· What leaders know - knowledge, skills and abilities
· What leaders do - behaviors, habits, styles and competencies?

However, when one looks at the vast body of research into leadership, it is mostly concerned with the inputs of leadership and leaders, not the outputs - i.e. What leaders achieve.
A further point that has led to a great deal of confusion around the issue of "leadership" is the definition of leadership itself. Many authors use "leadership" and "management" interchangeably and a great deal of the research into leadership has been with people who are in formal organizational positions (e.g. supervisors, managers, senior executives) - the inference being that leadership is an integral part of the formal management role (Parry, K.W., Leadership Research: Themes, Implications, and a new Leadership Challenge, Leadership Research and Practice, Warriewood 1996).

Let me give my perspective as I understand the differences between the two often interchanged or linked terms

LEADERSHIP Vs MANAGEMENT
Leading:
Leadership occurs at all levels of the organisation. The essence of leadership is concerned with creating the conditions that encourage others to follow. Specifically:
· A shared understanding of the environment
· A shared vision of where we are going
· A shared set of organizational values
· A shared feeling of power

Managing:
While the leadership function is "big picture" the management function has a narrower focus. Leavitt described leadership, as "path finding" while management was path minding". Management is situational and involves:
· Getting things done (task focus)
· Through people (relationship focus)
Best practice in Leadership involves many things, all finely tuned to both the organisation and the environment in which the organisation operates.

Leadership is contextual and is concerned with outputs
The Leadership focuses purely on the four outputs achieved in any particular organizational context by the leader as discussed earlier

Values Provide Strong Foundations for Training

The values an organisation holds and shares with its people can be instilled and reinforced through its management educations and development efforts.

I once worked for an organisation that seemed to embody the epitome of the ideal. If fact, everything the management gurus suggest should be evident in the "excellent" organisation, was there. Employees who were dedicated, management who cared about the staff (and who knew the business!), and customers who were loyal. The organisation even had a marketing department that involved the staff in the latest advertising and promotional schemes before going public!.

Although I thoroughly enjoyed working there (and like all the others, would have shed blood, too), I thought the halcyon environment was merely a fluke and it was my good fortune to strike it lucky. With hindsight, I can now see the logic of why this organisation worked so well: it was the solid foundations on which this idyllic structure was built.

Those foundations were the corporate values. However, they were not mentioned overtly. Nor were they written up on any brass plaques. But evident they were. How did this organisation succeed in having "everyone singing from the same hymn book"? The answer lies in the nature and extent of the training that all staff experienced. For example, everyone joining the company attended two weeks of induction training before commencing in his or her role. This even applied to senior managers, who might be responsible for managing some of their fellow trainees.

It has taken me some years and the study of hundreds of organizations to realize that cementing organisation values into the training fabric of an organisation can have a dramatic impact on collective performance.

The Americans have coined a phrase that has become quite faddish in India - "walking the talk". It is intended to mean that management (and particularly top management) must model the behavior they expect of others. But how often does it happen and, more importantly, does it work? "

The only thing that really changes behavior is when the proclaimed values are practiced at every level including at the top". The inference can be drawn that not only must managers "do what they say", but there also must be a collective understanding of "what precisely it is that we should all do".

Management education and development can be the vehicle that drives the collective understanding and turns the corporate values into practical, day-to-day behavior. My experience suggests that few Indian organizations take the time and effort to base their management training on such solid foundations as corporate values.

A senior manager of a very successful Korean organisation put it "Corporate values work in mysterious ways - they can spur performance and satisfaction while instilling a sense of pride in belonging to a unique organisation". All organizations have values, whether they are publicly evident or not.

Before deciding to base the organization’s training on the values, it is important to have some understanding of what these values are. Lebow suggests there are two types of values: business values and people values. Business values are directed at the outside world, for example, "high product quality" and "superior customer service".

People values are directed to the inside world, for example, "trusting people" and "giving credit where it is due". When the business values and the people values are in harmony, the organisation is healthy. When the two are not in sync, training and education (while being well meaning) will not be effective in the long term.

It is the leaders of the organisation who must convert the corporate values into day-to-day behavior at all levels. In their studies of Indian leaders, Evans and Afors (Leaders in India, 1996) found that leaders who are committed and stick to their principles are those who have a personal alignment between their own welfare, the common good, and the organization’s values.

To help leaders develop the necessary leadership skills, training should be planned in four phases.

1. Identify each leader's personal values. This requires individuals to consider when (in their career to date) they have been most satisfied, motivated, and valued at work. What values did this role satisfy? This enables the leader to enunciate, perhaps for the first time, the values they inherently hold and often use as their basis for decision making.
2. Using their personal values as a base, leaders develop a scenario of their ideal organisation. Phase two requires managers, first as individuals and then in teams, to describe the ideal organisation. What does it look like? How does it function? What does it value?
3. Assess the leader's organisation against their ideal. In phase three, managers compare their own organisation to their ideal. What is inhibiting my organisation from being more like my ideal? What enables my organisation to be similar to my ideal? Compiling a list of inhibitors and enablers helps managers see how personal values can relate to their organization’s values.
4. Develop strategies for moving both personally and organizationally towards the ideal. The final phase involves developing strategies for translating the shared values into day-to-day actions.

One of the most effective ways of doing this is to repeat the four-phase leadership training
approach with managers and staff throughout the organisation. Each manager leads his/her team to assess the core values and how they can translate them into their field of operation.

Leadership is about Influencing

Leadership is about Influence, not authority. All the more relevant now, when leaders need to be Inspiring role-models. on how Leaders can acquire charisma to Inspire
To make people feel good, feel happy and feel hopeful is an important Leadership responsibility. This power to make people feel positively charged needs to be developed for effective leadership. Please share your thoughts on how this "Positive-energy-movement" can be created by Leaders.
A Leader who wishes to lead the people needs to have the following,
· Charismatic Power
· Referral Power
· Assertiveness in Communication
· Should use Listening as a power
Influencing for leader has 3 different types, a. Retribution b. Reciprocity and c. Reasoning, the most popular method is to use Reasoning as a source of influencing.
power is the capacity to produce affects on others, influence is the measurable change in attitudes, values, beliefs, or behaviors that result from the agent’s application of influence tactics. The nine common influence tactics are separated into two categories: soft tactics and hard tactics
Soft tactics are those considered friendly or non-coercive and are perceived to be fair. They include:
• Rational Persuasion. Trying to convince others with reason, logical arguments, or factual evidence.
• Inspirational Appeal. A request or proposal that attempts to build enthusiasm by appealing to others’ emotions, ideals, or values.
• Consultation. Inviting others to participate in planning, making decisions, and changes to obtain buy-in with the leader’s initiatives.
• Ingratiation. The practice of getting others in a good mood before attempting to influence them, often taking the form of flattery.
• Personal Appeal. Referring to friendship and loyalty when making a request.
Hard tactics involve more overt pressure, generate resistance, and are perceived as being unfair. They include:
• Exchange. Making express or implied promises and trading favors to gain compliance from the target.
• Coalition tactics. The agent enlists the aid of others as a way to influence the target to do something.
• Legitimating tactics. Basing a request on one’s authority or right, organizational rules or polices, or express or implied support from superiors
• Pressure. Using demands, threats, frequent checking, or persistent reminders to influence the target to do something.
The success of an influence tactic can be distinguished by the target’s commitment, compliance, or resistance to the desired result. Leaders with a relatively large amount of power may successfully employ a wider variety of influence tactics than those with little power. For example, leaders who use referent power have the widest range of influence tactics from which to choose (e.g. consultation, ingratiation, exchanges, inspirational appeals, personal appeals, and coalition tactics) while those who have legitimate power are limited to using only coalition, legitimizing, or pressure tactics.
The challenge is in properly assessing the situational environment, the intended outcome, and the appropriate influence tactics to employ based on the leader’s source and magnitude of power.
Integrating leadership with power and influence
Deck plate leadership is critical to the success of any organization. A firm understanding of the interconnectedness between power, influence tactics, and leadership is instrumental in building and maintaining an effective unit. The best mix of power and influence tactics for optimal leadership is dependent on the leader, the target, the situation, and the intended outcome. Leaders at the deck plate level should make it a priority to appropriately use all sources of power and influence.