The study found overall, only about 1 in 5 (21%) study respondents have a broad and inclusive definition of diversity, while 17% admit they have no definition at all. Higher market-performing organizations are more likely to define diversity broadly, with 28% reporting they include all diversity groups in their definition, compared to only 15% of lower-performing companies that include them all. Roughly one in four (23%) lower-performer companies do not even have a diversity definition, and 12% of higher performers don’t either. Also, few organizations measure the bottom-line impact of diversity initiatives. In higher-performing organizations, 76% said they do not calculate a return on their diversity investments, while 80% of lower performers don’t measure ROI.

Higher-performing organizations have a more inclusive definition of diversity

Diversity strategy, however, is a widely recognized topic, particularly among larger companies. A full 78% of organizations with 10,000 or more employees report having a diversity strategy, compared to 44% of companies with 100 to 999 employees and 31% in companies with fewer than 100 workers.

The perceived importance of diversity is not lost on companies, either. Seventy-two percent of higher-performing organizations say that diversity issues are “important” or “very important” today, and 80% believe the issue will be important/very important in 10 years. That compares to 76% of lower performers who feel diversity is important or very important today, and 83% of them believe it will be so in 10 years.

“Defining ‘diversity and inclusion’ is a primary challenge for organizations to ‘move the needle.’ If you cannot agree on what diversity is, how do you create a strategy?” asks i4cp’s Mary Ann Downey. “How do you know when you have succeeded? Another challenge is measurement. If you define diversity narrowly to attributes that are measurable, such as race/ethnicity, gender, etc., are you addressing the business challenge?”

Regarding budget considerations for diversity programs, larger and higher-performing companies are more likely to set a specific budget. Fifty-nine percent of companies with more than 10,000 workers have specific budgets for diversity issues, compared to 19% of companies with 100-999 employees, and 11% of companies with fewer than 100 workers. Higher performers (48%) are also more apt to specifically fund such initiatives than are lower-performing firms, at 27%.

When it comes to measuring the success of their programs, organizations at all performance levels agree that retention and engagement top the list. Improvement in employee retention was cited by 69% of higher performers as the top diversity success measurement, followed by better employee engagement results at 54%. More than half (56%) of lower performers cited retention as the top measurement, and 54% (the same as higher performers) pointed to improved employee engagement. When reviewing diversity metrics, companies at all levels tend to rely on the previous year’s results for comparison purposes.

To support diversity strategies, the most common infrastructure in place is diversity training, favored by 53% of higher performers and 54% of lower-performing companies. Diversity recruiting is favored by 49% of higher performers, compared to 36% of lower performers.

The Diversity Practices Survey was conducted by i4cp in September of 2009. The full results of the survey are available exclusively for all i4cp corporate members.

Additionally, i4cp will be hosting a webinar titled, Global Diversity and Inclusion: A Johnson & Johnson Success Story, today, November 5, 2009 at 1pm EST. The webinar will be presented by Arisa Cunningham, Vice President of Global Diversity at Johnson & Johnson.
Read More…

In an economic downturn and subsequent recovery, change is inevitable for every organization. Effective Change Management is often a mix of the strategic and the practical. It can encompass everything from ensuring strategies are aligned, to making sure your weekly bulletin goes out on time, on message and to the right people. From a HR perspective, it is important to provide leadership and guidance by example and the following actions can help HR executives to lead the way during the change process.

1. Define and deliver your HR strategy

Make sure that HR strategy is consistent with the overall business strategy, and where necessary provide input and ideas into the overall business strategy. Make sure you achieve buy-in from key stakeholders. This can be achieved by clearly outlining your proposed improvements and delivering on project ideas early on. Part of aligning HR strategy with the overall business strategy will be achieved by sharpening your HR operating model and asking how each HR role will support your organization in the next 12 months. You will be better able to respond quickly to organizational changes with better HR systems, more effective processes and better aligned capabilities in place. This allows HR to deal with the next new change more effectively.

2. Understand HR cost drivers

It is vital to know what drives HR costs. If you know your key performance metrics and what has an effect on them, you can quickly demonstrate that you understand the cost, service and risk implications of any proposed organizational changes on your own department. A good grasp of the cost implications of strategic decisions and the analysis to back it up – really helps when it comes to making changes. By conducting an assessment of the HR department, you get a better understanding of your internal benchmarks. A key metric for HR to understand is the HR “Cost to Serve”of each employee, including staff, systems and third parties. This can vary widely between businesses and geographies and it is important to know why.

3. Take a lead on sourcing options

Take the outsourcing decision to your board – do not let the board take it to you. Be proactive and do the research into how outsourcing could benefit your department (see article Top 5 Benefits of HR Outsourcing)and bring about positive change, as well as cost-savings. Show that you have been actively looking at alternative ways to provide better and more cost-effective HR services in payroll, IT, recruitment, training, HR administration and benefits. Develop your own “build or buy” criteria to help gradually improve HR services. Demonstrate that your business case takes into account the benefits of moving from fixed cost to a more variable cost (that will help in the downturn and the subsequent upturn).

4. Lead by example

There is a balancing act that good HR directors need to master. Often, HR directors are so outwardly focused on supporting the organization that they can neglect the day-to-day workings of their own department. When aligning HR strategy to the wider business strategy, HR directors need to focus on the internal working of the HR department, and most importantly, the people within the HR department. Show leadership through developing your talented team members, and use this as your core team to lead change. Retention strategies start at home, so show the board what you are doing to keep and develop your most talented team members. Be innovative. The organization will look to the HR department to lead on this – secondments, project roles and recognizing excellent service are all initiatives that can inspire people within the organization.

5. Implement change decisively and calmly

All executives in the organization must demonstrate leadership by managing change in a calm and decisive way. HR can stop the organization making “knee-jerk” reactions – more than ever, this is the time to make the right decisions for your organization. Implement changes calmly, effectively and consistently.

Read More…

(3) HR Outsourcing market will restructure to deliver standardised services

The HR Vendor landscape is evolving all the time (slide 8), we have HR Technology vendors, HR Outsourcing (HRO) providers, single process vendors and HR consultants. HR vendors are also impacted by current economic changes, with cost pressures and streamlining. The market will look very different in two years time with more mergers & acquisitions, see for example Towers Perrin and Watson Wyatt merger.

There have been less huge, multi-year HRO contracts such as Unilever/Accenture or Convergys and Johnson & Johnson. 10-year HRO contracts are more difficult in the current environment. It is difficult enough to predict the needs of your own organisation, yet alone where a supplier will be in 5-10 years time, so HR buyers are more cautious. However, single process outsourcing is booming – RPO, Learning & Development outsourcing or see recent examples of large “Payroll Plus” contracts. The ERP providers are now developing and providing SaaS models – see Wipro and Oracle example and if successful this will indeed ‘blow-up’ the HRO/BPO service model.

The HRO model will change to provide lower cost services to a broader range of organisations. For buyers to benefit from cost savings to achieve their strategic agenda, they will need to accept more standardisation of services. Industry consolidation, technology innovation, economic pressures and a drive to deliver HR strategy will all help to make this happen. Those vendors who provide tools and services that help address organisations key Talent Management issues will thrive.

(4) HR as a corporate function will be leaner, with Employees and Managers doing more

Organisations need to improve productivity in a competitive globalised environment and HR needs to demonstrate ‘value for money’ like every other function. This will encourage ‘leaner’ central HR functions, pushing out more “people management” to managers enabled with much better skills and tools.

Current HR operating models need to change (slide 10). The ‘Ulrich Model’ promoted ‘economies of scale’ and ‘economies of skill’ with the adoption of Business Partners . However, the implementation of the model has had mixed results, including adoption of Business Partner model, questions about whether HR Technology has been a barrier rather than an enabler, and gaps in HR skills required to implement the changes needed.

Business Partners – working within HR or the business with participation in strategic decision-making. This is currently a weak spot in many HR Operating Models, for different reasons including HR Generalists struggling to operate at an Executive level. A key challenge for HR will be to enable Managers to manage their staff more effectively, with less reliance on central HR support. There will be ‘Business Partners’ in future HR Operating Models, but fewer and operating in a different way.

Centres of Expertise – providing policy design and case support, responding to changes in external market or legislation. A big question is can COEs provide best practice at a competitive price?

(5) HR Skills will develop in Change Management, Project Management, Vendor Management and Technology

In allocating more time to delivering HR solutions, HR must review the skills it really requires. Delivering change requires different skills to managing day-to-day operations. Key skills gaps include Vendor Management, Change Management, Project Management and business transformation skills.

Vendor management is an increasingly important specialist skill in HR. (see this useful guide from CIO magazine Vendor Management Guide) With less end-to-end HR Outsourcing deals, and more single process contracts – managing vendors effectively is a fundamental. Building mutually beneficial relationships with effective Account Management, Service Level Agreement management, continuous improvement, negotiating and contracting adds real value.

Project Management – with so much change in mergers, acquisitions, restructuring and technology, HR needs to be in a position to lead large-scale change programmes. HR professionals bring great experience and understanding of the people aspects of change which is so crucial to delivering successful change. Simply put, organisations should be coming to HR when they require project and change management expertise.

And finally, after reflecting on what might be on the horizon, here are some steps to get started (in addition to slide 13) 10 steps before starting your HR Transformation project

This is the second of a two-part blog on Future Trends in HR Operating Models, click here for Part 1 Future Trends in HR Operating Models (Part 1 with Slides)

Read More…

The survey defines HR Transformation as – “any concerted effort to change and improve HR operations, whether through outsourcing, shared services, internal reengineering, or a combination of these strategies”.

We use a broader definition. Successful HR Transformation needs to align all the components in the HR operating model including Business Partners, Service Centres, Centres of Excellence, HR Strategy, Managers and Employees.  Sometimes there is too much emphasis on implementing Shared Services or HR Outsourcing at the expense of actually delivering the HR Strategy.
(see comments by Jason Geller “HRO does not equal HR Transformation”)

The survey points to some interesting trends in HR Transformation :-

“The biggest ‘chronic hurdle’ that impedes transformation is the skills of existing HR staff.”
This is cited by over 60% of respondents.  The skills needed to manage HR are very different to the skills needed to transform HR.  The survey doesn’t mention which skills, but experience is required in Change Management, Process Design, Organisation Design, Project Management, Business Case Management, and HR Technology.   So what can you do? Consider these steps before starting your HR Transformation project, utilise transformation experience in other areas of your organisation and use HR professionals as ‘content’ owners.

“Most organisations are meeting or exceeding their cost savings targets.”
Sounds impressive, but of course this depends on what the cost savings targets are.  Some projects aim to break even, but allocate a larger proportion of their cost to strategic objectives rather than administration.

“Past HR Transformation lessons don’t appear to filtering out.”
Each organisation will have different goals, a different workforce and different starting points. But there are themes and lessons learned – so why aren’t they being shared in this digital age of collaboration?  Joining networks such as the HROA help.   Conferences are dominated by vendor/sponsors rather than providing HR transformers with real ‘independent’ lessons learned.  With more sharing and online networking things should improve, see for example initiatives such as our own  HR Transformer Blog and DiscussHR.

“Only 48% engage consultants or sourcing advisors.”
Some organisations are getting external support which is an obvious solution to the skills gap. On business cases which involve large IT transformation and cost savings, a review from an experienced, independent consultant can be money well spent.  There are still objections to using consultants who are perceived to push ‘pyramids’ of junior consultants and lack independence.  Do advisors need to up their game or do they need to market their benefits more effectively?

“66% plan to outsource some HR processes.”
Payroll is outsourced in nearly 90% of cases. End-to-end HR Outsouricng contracts are being signed (see recent IBM Unilever deal) , and buyers do see the benefits of HR Outsourcing, however buyers are even more careful in this environment. With major economic change there is less appetite for 10 year contracts and more examples of tactical sourcing.

“Price is most significant in provider selection.”
It is interesting that Financial stability has risen up from 12th most important factor in 2006, to 6th in 2008.  This will be Top 5 next year with much more detailed financial checking of potential vendors.

The ADP/HROA survey has provided a useful barometer of HR Transformation, it will be interesting to see whether more progress has been made on the barriers next year.

Read More…

The list below are reasons why HR projects fail based on the number of sleepless nights they have caused HR Execs, and the more scientific approach of research and surveys. The good news is that they are all preventable – by following tried and tested methodologies such as Prince 2, brushing up on your Change Management skills and mixing all of this with a huge dose of common sense.

Typical HR projects can include change programmes, implementation of shared services, HR transformation projects, outsourcing and IT projects.

Top five reasons why HR projects fail include:

1. Lack of clear executive leadership. Any HR project needs a sponsor to help ensure that it is set up to succeed with the right resources. Having executive leadership comes into its own when the project has to traverse choppy waters. HR projects that have business (non-HR) sponsorship tend do well. Lack of leadership can lead to a lack of vision and people quickly forget why they are working so hard in the first place.

2. Skills of staff. It sounds obvious, but the key skill that is usually lacking is project management. There are simply not enough skilled project managers in HR with experience in successfully delivering complex projects. Many project management problems stem from inexperience, a common example is not breaking up the project into manageable pieces. Another key skill that is required for HR Project Managers is Change Management and unfortunately Project Management methodologies and courses do not emphasise this enough.

3. Governance not set-up properly. If the governance hasn’t been agreed formally at the beginning, it is amazing how initial enthusiasm can disappear when the going gets tough. This comes from not agreeing up-front how decisions will be made during the project. It is well worth investing time early on to establishing project governance. This helps ensure that issues are resolved quickly when they arise.

4. Not managing stakeholders effectively. For most projects, you will need to persuade human beings to change how they do things. This is very difficult and will require diplomatic and sometimes innovative methods to succeed. Not managing stakeholders can lead directly to other classic PM problems like not gaining employee buy-in, dealing with resource cuts, other projects getting priority and not dealing with genuine cultural differences. The key is to identify your stakeholders up front, work out how the project impacts them and what they will need to make the project work. Then ensure that you prioritise your time so you can work through any issues they may have.

5. Project complexity across multiple businesses and geographies. Complexity can be caused by working across different business units and geographies, each with potentially different drivers and cultures. To overcome potential problems, set up the project to gather all requirements, take time to understand your stakeholders and design your Governance to help resolve those tricky issues. Finally, use your sponsor to provide you with guidance where appropriate and watch out for barriers that are perceived rather than real.

Read More…

Effective onboarding decreases the time it takes for a new hire to reach the minimum expected productivity level on the job. During these tight economic times, it has never been more important that companies work to ensure their new hires’ ability to thrive at an organization. When taking assessing or creating your employee onboarding program, avoid these common mistakes.

1. Onboarding is Treated Like Orientation. Unlike orientation programs, onboarding programs are not one-time events but long-term processes.  According to the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, a good onboarding process should take about a year – that’s about how long it takes for a new employee to experience an organization’s entire business cycle and become assimilated. And after all, you can’t possibly expect an employee to absorb everything he or she needs to know in a year in only the first few weeks.
2. The Process Starts Too Late. Onboarding new hires needs to begin with the interview process. Interviewing is vital to retaining employees as it both sets an employees expectations about the culture of the company and can lead to poor hiring decisions if improperly executed. According to a 2008 study by Leadership IQ, 82 percent of managers reported that, in reflection, the interview process could have been handled more effectively. They say they would’ve avoided certain mistakes had they taken the following steps: been more focused on the interview itself; listened more and talked less; spent more time on the actual interview; and had stronger interviewing abilities and experience.
3. There’s No Measurement for Success. Onboarding programs should operate like any other business process – with metrics that cover time to productivity, new hire retention/termination rates, new hire error rates, new-hire referrals, and program ROI, according ERE.net’s Dr. John Sullivan. You need to figure out a way to measure the success of your onboarding program and find ways to enhance it – otherwise, what’s the point? One of the best ways to measure success is to administer surveys to both employee and supervisor - to assess how well the employee is adjusting, strengths and areas for improvement – periodically throughout the first year.
4. Managers are M.I.A. One of the main reasons employees either leave or thrive in an organization is a direct result of their relationship with their manager. Research shows that 56 percent of Americans say their relationship with their boss as a direct impact on their work-life happiness.  Taking the time to greet new employees in person and show them the ropes makes a critical first impression and is not something that can be delegated, according to Karen Lawson, author of “New Employee Orientation Training.”
5. There’s No Onboarding Program to Speak Of. Onboarding programs communicate to new hires how important their personal success is to your organization, immediately fostering a sense of both confidence and loyalty. Furthermore, a strong investment in employee training and development may also have quantifiable value to the organization’s bottom line: A recent study from the American Productivity and Quality Center (APQC) provides evidence to suggest that organizations that invest more money and effort in employee training may produce greater revenue per employee than those that invest less in this endeavor.

What does your onboarding program look like?  Any ‘mistakes’ you’ve learned from at your organization that you’d like to share?

Read More…

HR Continues to be a valuable function within organizations, despite the fact that CEOs and other business leaders shrug HR off for a variety of reasons.  HR is continually battling against issues from all sides, but as someone who presumably works in HR or people-related departments, you know you provide value.  The trick is how do you show value to people outside of HR, and how do you prove it?

HR has a significant role to play in every organization.  Yes, it is true, that for the most part, our efforts are not valued at the appropriate level.  And…I’m not sure that it is our job to show our value or that we have to prove it.  It may be time to just shut-up, stop whining and go do our job with or without the support we would like to have.   At the same time, in the back room, we could start trying to understand the problem in more detail…

While part of the Total Quality Management movement, I learned to do effective problem-solving and before one even goes about solving a problem, a list of potential causes needs to be created.  If we were brainstorming causes (reasons from their point of view, not ours) for the problem described above, the list might look like this:

1. People inherently distrust the HR Function
2. Management does not trust us because they don’t think we know what they know and what they go through every day
3. We are perceived as overhead, a necessary evil, bureaucrats…
4. Our duties are too diversified for our clients – one day we are insurance policy interpreters and the next day we are management trainers – how can we be taken seriously?
5. HR departments which focus on event planning will not be treated seriously
6. Many times we act as their conscience (”You don’t have enough females in this job category”) and almost nobody wants to be guilted
7. We have to say “No” to them too many times
8. We are more an obstruction to them achieving their goals than helpers (perception, maybe)
9. Too many times we under-perform – referring them unqualified candidates, etc.
10. Managers have too much pride to admit they need us
11. Managers think they know how to manage people because they have been doing it a long time and they don’t need us to tell them how
12. Managers don’t have the patience to explain everything to us so that we can help them
13. We take up their time away from getting their jobs done – sexual harassment seminars,  benefits meetings and the like
14. We are not in their mainstream of doing their jobs everyday (outside the work process)
15. We won’t let them do what they want to do – fire non-performers easily, give out-of -policy salary increases, etc.
16. Many times we can’t tell employees what we know is the real problem, as in, we would love to say, “You are right, your boss is a jerk.”
17. Managers use us as the scapegoat – “HR won’t let me.”
18. We sometimes give the “wrong” advice (example: a good employee quits after a salary increase we recommend).
19. We have to deliver bad news – “Your insurance premiums are going up.”
20. We are given the role of the “grim reaper” (layoffs, discharges)

So, there are many reasons why we are “shrugged-off” by executives, managers and employees – so, where do we start fixing?  I’m tempted to tackle them one-by-one in this blog, but maybe I’ve already done that before.

Read More…

I am really excited to be able to provide a guest post from one of m favorite writers in the Human Capital space — Jon Ingham from the United Kingdom.  John chides me mildly at the beginning of his post for imputing him with a “European” perspective on matters related to human resources.  He is correct.

A Global Perspective

Probably more than anyone else I know, Jon is capable of bringing a global perspective to his writing in the HR space.   While  creating this post (on his iPhone, no less), Jon was attending conferences in no less than 3 countries on tow different continents.  I can’t wait until my personal street cred is (and my credit card limits!) are high enough to let me do the same

And now, without further ado, let’s see what Jon has to say regarding:

Metrics, Trends, and the future of Human Resources

Michael suggests my HCM and Social Advantage blogs provide a European perspective for his largely US based readership.  I have to admit that this isn’t my intent.  I’m not even sure what a European perspective looks like, although I’ll agree that I’m sure to have one.

One of the problems is that HR issues often seem so different in each different country across the EU, and particularly if
stretching out across EMEA (Europe, Middle East and Africa).

I was in Greece last week, presenting on performance management.  And the common issue being discussed by delegates there seemed to
be how companies could breakthrough the bureaucracy and become more innovative by breaking the rules.

I’m in France as I write this and the HR managers I’ve met here are still concerned about the impact of the recession, and the
relatively unique French response to this with bossnappings (including of French HR managers) and suicides (although there has been even worse reactions elsewhere) – including on Gautam’s home turf in India.

In a couple of days I’m crossing over the Mediterranean to Egypt and I’m sure I will confront a different set of issues again.

However, the similarities across each of these countries are, I believe, greater than the differences between them – and this
applies looking across Europe and the US too (see my post on international trends and differences for more discussion on this).

Most HR managers, wherever they are based, confront the same sorts of difficulties in convincing their business colleagues of the
need to invest in people, to maintain a long-term focus whilst competing in the short-term, and to sponsor programmes without a
clear ROI.

And we all know that the way forward against these challenges is to get closer to the business, to speak the language of business,
to get a grip on measures and metrics – right?

Well, hold your (human race) horses!

If I do have a different perspective to share with you, it’s that this isn’t the way to go.  In my view, people benefits can rarely
be presented in financial terms, and the more important the benefit, the more difficult it becomes.

We also loose sight of one major potential benefit in trying to become more metrics-based – that of making work itself become more
people shaped.  Yes, we might win the occasional battle by presenting a business case including a ROI (even though both we and our
business colleagues understand the case is so riven with assumptions, that the final number could be anything we like), but the
longer war is about helping the rest of the business become more comfortable with complexity, ambiguity and squishy business cases.

And where we add most value is where we’re different not the same.  Our value comes from an understanding of psychology, sociology,
anthropology, and all the other human arts and sciences.  And from the ability this gives us to design development programmes that
really help people learn; reward schemes that truly motivate people and change their behaviours; employee relationships policies
that don’t just minimize tensions, but create dynamic and inspirational relationships; the list goes on…

As Jeffrey Pfeffer wrote 12 years ago: “If all Human Resources becomes is Finance with a different set of measures and topic
domains, then its future indeed is likely to be grim.”

But if HR develops as a function that is really able to influence peoples’ capability and engagement; to develop our workforces’
human and social capital; to make work somewhere that’s actually fit for people to spend their time, to succeed in capturing
strategic opportunities whether these be breaking the rules or managing change – then I think we’ve got a very special future in
store for us.

Share and Enjoy:

Read More…

The new publication examines the core problems organizations face with their talent management programs and presents actionable solutions based on a study commissioned by the American Society for Training & Development (ASTD) and conducted by i4cp. The resulting data has been combined with expert analysis, practitioner knowledge and company practices. With fewer than 20% of organizations ranking their ability to manage talent effectively to a high or very high extent, the Talent Management Playbook will serve as an instrumental tool to organizations looking to make an impact at the strategic level.

Darden (DRI), Capital One (COF), Pratt & Whitney, Just Born Inc., Harley Davidson (HOG), Grant Thornton and AT&T/Cingular (ATT) are some of the companies highlighted in the report, providing insight into what makes their integrated talent management platforms successful. The practices of these organizations, combined with i4cp’s research, offer insight into how high-performing organizations are driving business results through their human capital function.

The report explores and provides solutions to these five key challenges that many organizations face:

• There is no universal consensus on the definition of talent management (TM), and its meaning can vary even within organizations.
• Organizations that integrate talent management are more effective and successful, yet few organizations report they have successfully done so.
• Talent management may lack the support of senior leadership, and there may be failure to designate executive-level accountability for managing talent.
• Even in organizations that have designated accountability for TM leadership, line management may be lacking the expertise necessary to carry out TM effectively.
• An organization may lack the measurement tools needed to accurately track and assess TM processes.

The Talent Management Playbook is an important tool in any organization’s arsenal. It is currently available only to i4cp corporate members. For access to the report or the i4cp network of organizations, please contact us.
Read More…

A very different outcome befell not one, but two Indiana organizations following the sudden death of their top leader last year. Health savings account pioneer J. Patrick Rooney headed both a medical insurance company and a foundation that helped patients dispute medical bills. His unexpected passing during a time of great volatility in healthcare-related industries and with no designated successors prepared to step in signaled disaster for the two organizations he led. Within months of Rooney’s death, the foundation’s board declared an end to its operations. At the same time, the state of Indiana took over the health insurance firm, and liquidation was set to follow.

If Apple’s close call didn’t bring home the point that succession planning is important, then the circumstances in Indiana certainly do. Organizations would do well to take a page from the planning playbook of Britain’s royal family – “an heir and a spare” is an oft-cited quip associated with expansions of the House of Windsor. But today’s business firms also must busy themselves with expanding the work of preparing leaders for the future – enough to address forecasted needs … and maybe one or two to spare.

The umbrella of talent management encompasses many disciplines: recruiting, engagement, retention, development, workforce planning and succession planning, to name just some of the most common components. As the economic downturn has wrought changes in the ways companies approach the elements of talent management, it also has served to highlight the benefits of looking ahead, projecting the variety of circumstances an organization might encounter and planning to meet those scenarios effectively. It’s no longer enough to get through today relatively unscathed. We must be on our toes and not only watching our backs, but doing our best to peer into the future. i4cp’s Knowledge Centers in Talent Management, Succession Planning and Workforce Planning help you do that.

Soon, too, we’ll have new results from surveys in Workforce Planning and Succession Planning to help you benchmark and to provide more insights into these compelling business challenges. Because members like you respond to our surveys, we’re able to offer glimpses into the best practices of some of the top firms in today’s business world. Aren’t you curious to find out who’s prepared for the future? Don’t you hope it’ll be you?
Read More…

Last month, Netflix awarded its one-million-dollar Netflix Prize to the first team who could improve the company’s movie recommendation service by 10% or more. It may sound like a lot of money, but when you add up the work hours that some of the most talented developers, engineers and mathematicians from more than 100 countries put into the project, and the marketing buzz that accompanied it, it appears to have been well worth it. So much so that Netflix has already announced round two of the initiative, aimed at improving movie recommendations based on demographic data.

This type of crowd-sourcing contest is not new, but the fact that the goal was an algorithm that would belong solely to Netflix and benefit the company in terms of revenue and customer loyalty makes the Netflix Prize kind of unusual. There was no “for the greater good” motive here. Netflix simply realized that it had maxed out its own brainpower to create its current recommendation system and needed help to make it better. To illustrate the type of brainpower that exists outside of a company’s walls, the first team to beat Netflix’s own system, which was five years in the making, did it in about three weeks.

The other key is the prize. There are plenty of crowd-sourcing options out there where people solve problems just for the satisfaction of finding answers. But the million-dollar prize attracted some of the most talented people, while keeping participants focused on the task and what others were doing. In many cases, teams realized they weren’t getting any further on their own, so they joined forces with other groups. The winning team was actually a combination of two smaller teams.

There are companies out there whose business is facilitating this kind of crowd-sourcing. InnoCentive is sort of a marketplace for challenges, and NineSigma specializes in finding the right crowds for specific tasks. i4cp is also here to crowd-source your HR challenges. Is there a problem you’re dealing with that could use some outside brainpower to solve? Post a question on our website and call on the combined wisdom of our network of member companies and internal analysts. And while we might not have $1 million to give away or the capability to launch a spacecraft, it’s quite likely someone else has already dealt with issues similar to yours and has some good solutions that could end up saving your day.
Read More…

While most organizations don’t have a program in place to directly share expertise, i4cp will be sharing the results of the study with i4cp members this Thursday, October 29 in a first-look webinar – register today.

The study found that while 27% of all study respondents currently have a peer coaching initiative, 50% do not have one, nor do they envision the implementation of such a program. The findings are fairly evenly split when company size is taken into consideration. In large firms (10,000 or more employees), 29% have a program in place, but 45% said they don’t and have no plans to add one. That compares to 25% of small organizations (fewer than 1,000 workers) that have a program, and 51% that do not and don’t plan to.

For the majority of companies that do not have a peer coaching element in place, almost 60% said other initiatives are seen as a higher priority, and 32% cited a lack of knowledge about the concept and its benefits.

“Since less than one-third of organizations have a peer coaching program in place, and just a small fraction of that group uses any metrics at all to assess the effectiveness of their programs, it’s not a big surprise that most companies are unclear about peer coaching and its benefits,” said i4cp Senior Research Analyst Holly Tompson, who will be co-presenting tomorrow’s webinar with Dr. Mary Key. “However, companies that use peer coaching report more engaged employees and higher productivity in general. Many organizations got interested in peer coaching this past year as a cheaper alternative to bringing in outsiders from coaching firms. As the economy starts to rebound, it will be interesting to see how many stay with it, not just because it’s cheaper, but because it works.”

In a nod to the perceived importance of peer coaching, however, companies that do have programs in place are generally happy with them. Overall, 42% of organizations say they’ve seen positive results from their peer coaching initiatives from a high to very high degree. And, when offered, the programs appear to be popular. Of those companies that have programs, 78% said they are voluntary (91% in large companies), and nearly half (46%) said their employees take advantage of the offer.

Regarding peer coaching program training, 51% of polled organizations said the training is “an overview that gets people started,” while 31% said their training is extensive and detailed. Eleven percent of all companies reported that their peer coaching training is minimal.

Overall, the areas peer coaching is used in is headed by use of peer coaching to improve employee engagement, cited by 56% of respondents, followed by the need to address specific workplace problems or issues (54%) and 53% said such programs are utilized to improve development opportunities.

The Peer Coaching Pulse Survey was conducted by i4cp in October of 2009. The full results of the survey are available exclusively for i4cp corporate members.
Read More…

These questions and potential answers will be bandied about on Steve Boese’s radio program on October 29th at 5pm (west coast time).  My mentor, Employee Communications expert, Frank Roche is a guest.

I’ve touched on these issues many times right here in this blog.  To sum up my position:

Human Resources should not ride into the sunset as long as Line Managers don’t get “it.”  

I would love to pose this question in a survey of HR professionals – Do we in Human Resources feel that CEOs, Vice Presidents, Managers and Supervisors have absorbed the human resource/management/leadership principles that most of us are dedicated to?  In other words, are they, on their own…

• hiring the best people?
• promoting the people that deserve it?
• leading, managing, developing and motivating their employees to their maximum potential?
• arriving at compensation decisions objectively?
• successfully staying within legal constraints?

If the answers are a resounding “Yes!” then let’s wrap it up and go home.  My sense is that – in general – management has become a little bit more sophisticated over the years, but still has a long, long way to go.  They still need our help, but they resist our help for one or more of the following reasons:

• They think they know how to manage people
• They don’t want to admit that they need help
• They don’t think we have the answers
• They don’t think we understand their issues
• They have a negative view of the HR function and don’t want to use us
• We don’t give them the impression that we know the answers
• We act like bureaucrats, not business people
• We scare them with legal stuff
• We are only associated with event planning and benefits administration functions

Finally, I believe this -

In rare cases, the CEO gets “it.”  He or she knows the value of HR, is a good leader and manager and makes it clear to the organization that Human Resources is a valued business partner and an equal player at the table.  Without the CEO’s support, it is always an uphill battle for the HR function and many employees wish that we would disappear.

So, in Ron’s world, the only person we need in our corner is the CEO – everyone else will fall in line.

Read More…

1. They’re not afraid to relinquish a little control. Despite reports that over half of employers still ban social networking at work, companies who’ve embraced it have found tremendous reward in enabling employees to use social media. Zappos was one of the first companies to embrace social media, giving employees the freedom to use Twitter.  The strategy has worked well for the online shoe retailer: By enabling employees to talk freely about their jobs, new products, or other interesting aspects of company life, they’ve effectively made their employees into brand advocates, and created buzz about being a great place to work. More recently, Whole Foods has taken a similar approach to social media, believing that letting individual employees’ personalities shine through is essential to for social media to work well and engage people.
2. They embrace new media as a recruiting tool. Staffing firm Kelly Services, a 2008 Best Place to Work in Western Pa., created a virtual community in Second Life to provide job seekers with an interactive experience to see what it’s like to work for Kelly. It has also helped to create buzz about Kelly and differentiate the firm from its competitors. For much the same reason, staffing firm Spherion decided to leverage the current popularity of viral video when it created its Web series, “The Temp Life.” Seems to be working: the 17-episode series is clearly resonating with audiences, with over 1 million views to date.
3. They embrace new media as an engagement tool. IBM did it with Beehive. Best Buy did it with Blue Shirt Nation.  Now, companies of every size are utilizing online social communities for internal purposes - engaging employees and keeping them informed of important company news, events and projects. Over 50,000 companies worldwide, including Fox and Adobe use microblogging site Yammer, while companies like Starbucks and Pepsico have found success with cfactor’s “enterprise social networking” solution.
4. They think outside the Facebooks. Overwhelmed by the sheer volume of users on Facebook, Twitter and other social media giants? Think “niche.” That’s what Seattle-based Tableau Software did recently when it needed a Web developer with extensive knowledge of Drupal:  the company’s recruiters began surfing social networking sites that catered to Drupal enthusiasts, where they eventually found their new hire.
5. They ask for employee feedback (and actually listen to it). Feedback from Aetna’s employee surveys – administered regularly to enable employees to voice their thoughts about how the company is doing and where there is room for improvement – led to the establishment of Aetna’s current recognition program, The Aetna Way Excellence Awards, according to CEO Ronald Williams in an interview for our Leadership Series. Leadership recognized that employees wanted more company-wide recognition events, so they delivered. “That whole program came about as a result of employees’ suggestions that came through the survey,” Williams said.
6. They work in partnership with Human Resources. “People decisions are some of the most important decisions I make, so I make those decisions in collaboration with my HR partners,” says Stryker CEO Steve MacMillan in a recent interview with CareerBuilder. “Responsibility for our people may be a human resources function, but we all manage it together.” It’s no accident that Stryker is a three-time winner of the “Gallup Great Place to Work Award,” in addition to other best place to work honors.
7. They actively encourage learning and development. Smart companies know the power of providing opportunities for professional development and personal growth in helping to retain top talent.  Spectrum Health does both: The company’s relationship with University of Michigan provides opportunities for leadership members to gain experience in project-based work. And its EXCEL Professional Development Model program recognizes and provides monetary awards for nursing staff for academic and professional accomplishments, as well as community service.

What about you? What particular practices make your organization a best place to work?

Read More…

This is on my mind as I prepare to lead a session at the upcoming HRevolution. My enviable topic? Just a little something called, “The Future of HR”. No biggie. You know me….  I’ll just dust off the ‘ole crystal ball and help facilitate a discussion prognosticating the fate of the industry. No problem. We’ve got this one covered.

There has been an incredible amount of chatter lately regarding HR’s future/fate and it makes for a very good read. In the past few weeks alone HR was declared dead and then rose from the ashes. Maren Hogan wrote a nice post with the catchy title, “Slow dancing in a burning room“. And don’t forget when the smart folks at Harvard Business tackled an age-old missive by asking, “Do HR managers have the skills they need?“

The underlying assumption by each and every writer is the premise that HR must fundamentally change. That may be true, but my sense is that “do nothing” is not only an option, it’s a likely outcome. Here’s my logic:

1. The Drivers For Transformation

HR is not being pressured to evolve from within, and when it does “transform”, it tends to be largely tactical in nature. Take Deloitte’s HR Transformation Survey as an example. They interviewed C-level executives from 150 of the world’s largest corporations. The findings that concerned them (and me) were this – “HR transformation is still about systems and processes. The business driver are still cost savings and effectiveness. These are not “bad” or unimportant drivers; they are merely solutions in a vacuum.”

The other item of note was that when a trigger was pulled for improving HR, it was largely due to external factors imposing themselves on the function. These include:

• A New Executive: 24.6%
• Corporate Restructuring: 22.3%
• Mergers & Acquisitions: 9.2%

2. Plenty Of Work To Do Already

Don’t get me wrong, HR has a lot on it’s plate these days. Dealing with the recession, layoffs, employee dissatisfaction, changes in benefits programs, social media, outsourcing, talent management, branding and a globalized workforce is enough to keep any HR exec on her toes. This is, of course, in addition to risk mitigation, compliance, labor relations, compensation planning, learning, development, performance management and 50,000 other things that keep HR running to stand still. And don’t forget all the technology and systems that need to be constantly updated to make the transactions run smoother.

So who has time to think about what HR should be, could be or will be?

3. “Don’t Fix It If It Ain’t Broken”

It has been the rare occasion to find a senior HR executive who feels the function is off the rails and decides to do something about it. A lot of the chest beating and cry for evolution comes not from the senior most, but instead from those who are service providers, consultants, analysts, bloggers or pundits.

But do take note. I’m also seeing entry level or middle management HR pros starting to wonder where their career path will lead, and my bet is that if HR does fundamentally change, it will have to come from the bottom up. Like any change, there are some early adopters who “see the light” and want to preemptively strike and change the largely negative and parodied image of HR. But the mass of HR executives who drive the daily agendas do not appear to be leading the charge beyond the much-belabored “seat at the table” discussion.

4. No Push From Associations

Associations are intended to serve as the representative and collective voice of their membership. However, in this instance, it’s my belief that reacting to the professed needs of the current constituency will only serve to hamster-wheel this needed evolution. Organizations like SHRM must continue to serve the current needs of it’s population while simultaneously forcing a difficult conversation surrounding what’s next for our industry. And when I say “force”, I mean it. The catalyst for an overhaul of our function must be driven by those with the resources, clout and certifying entities to make people stop long enough to self-reflect, agree to change and get into motion.

So Now What?

In my opinion, HR can and will continue to serve an important role, but this evolution must gain mindshare and begin now. Many people will likely take issue with what I’ve stated above and I’m sure I’ll catch an earful in the comments section. I’m not an HR basher and hold no hatred for the function. Moreover, I admire those who have put themselves ahead of the languishing pack.

However, like many, I want to see a “new HR”. Whether that requires a name change (such as the move from personnel many years ago) and a new face or brand may be up for debate. Some of my colleagues have had very interesting discussions about the face of HR lately. And truth be told, there isn’t a strong spokeswoman/spokesman who represents the aspirational nature of what HR could be. Maybe you’re that face. If so, welcome aboard! We’ve been waiting for you.

I look forward to spending time on this issue next month at HRevolution. In the meantime, what do you think? Is “do nothing” an option? Please share your thoughts and let’s keep the conversation going.

Read More…

Change isn’t easy, but if you do it right, you can minimize the long-term pain your team will go through as a result of the change.

1) Explain why you’re making the change – Why are you making the change? Your team probably thought everything was going well. Take time to explain the WHY behind the change as completely as possible, leaving very little to the imagination. The better job you do of this now, the better things will be long term.

2) Explain the impact of the change – Does the change mean a schedule change? More work? Different work? Less work your team hates doing? A new manager or leader? Explain as much as you can so folks know the nuances of the change and can better handle what comes their way.

3) Explain how the change plays into the mission of the individual/team/department/company – As a manager, it’s critical you help your team connect the dots, ESPECIALLY in times of change.

4) Explain how your team will play into the change (and if it’s a very positive change for everyone, explain this) – In the absence of truth, folks will tell their own story. Show them how they personally will perform better because of this change. Many are pessimistic by nature, so take time to explain how they will be able to leverage their strengths even more in this new environment.

5) Take questions – Answer as many as you can, as honestly as you can. Take notes for the rest and get back to the team with answers. Don’t BS the answers. You don’t have to know everything, but you do need to field EVERY question, even if it’s uncomfortable, and then get the answers back to your WHOLE team.

6) Give them your commitment to making the change work – Even if you don’t like the change yourself, it’s important to be committed to making the change work for your team.

After the meeting is done, during your one-on-ones:

7) Ask for your associate’s individual commitment to making the change work – You want folks to commit to making the change work, not merely comply with it and then rebel against it later. Get commitment to at least trying to make things work.

How can YOU help your team deal with change?

Photo credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/spursfan_ace/2328879637/

Post from: Slacker Manager

Read More…

Two minutes into listening to the tape, I found myself reflecting on the common lament of some of my frequently traveling friends: “People really don’t like us. Why do they (anyone not from the U.S.) dislike us so much?”

The1974 tape turned out to be a tiny cultural time capsule of sorts, offering some insight and suggesting – to me, at least – that maybe we have been cultivating the “ugly American” image for quite some time. The tape starts with an introduction by someone who sounds suspiciously like the man who narrated the old Scholastic filmstrips of my black-and-white elementary school memories. His deep, booming voice is confident, assertive and self-possessed.

The conversational lessons began innocuously (albeit dated) enough: “Do you have a cigarette?” and “Do you have an air-conditioned room?”

But I started to feel a tad uncomfortable when phrases like “I want a better room,” “I want a larger room,” “Bring me my bill,” and “I want to speak to the manager” were introduced with a marked absence of niceties such as “if you please,” “excuse me,” or “thank you.” And the phrases were delivered in a terse, rapid-fire manner by Mr. Filmstrip in a tone that bordered on haughty, even disdainful. And I visualized the words I heard on the tape like this: “Bigger,” “Better,” “I WANT!”

Oh, no, I thought. Have we always come off sounding this obnoxious, this rude, this – well – ugly? Is this how we Americans sound to the rest of the world?

The effect was reminiscent of a similar realization I experienced in high school and was accompanied by the same creeping feeling of unease that evolved into disbelief. It happened as I sat in my ninth-grade American History class reading accounts of atrocities visited on Native Americans that began in the 16th century. This was not at all what I had learned in elementary or even junior high school about the harmonious origins of Thanksgiving. This didn’t sound anything like what the Americans I knew or the American I believed myself to be could possibly be capable of. And yet, there it was in my textbook. I remember feeling ashamed and rattled for weeks after having that first fairly unedited glimpse of our history and collective American identity and imagining how we might be perceived by others.

I returned the cassette tape to the library and relied on a French-to-English translation handbook that promised to coach me phonetically though grabbing a taxi, ordering in a restaurant and finding a post office.

As pleasant as my recent trip was, it also left me feeling strangely ill at ease because I was oddly conscious of my American-ness as I traveled. And I was also aware of how distinctly different American culture truly is from much of the rest of Western culture.

Some of my friends who live and work abroad tell me they feel a deep sense of detachment that is difficult to articulate when they return to the U.S. for a visit or repatriate after an overseas assignment. One described it as a feeling of standing alone on a platform as a train pulls away, but feeling little emotion attached to the scene. “You know everyone else is on the train and that it’s leaving the station, but you don’t want to join them. You’re okay with letting the train leave without you because their direction is not the same as yours and probably never will be again.”

They tell me that living and working abroad changes you; it changes how you feel about your identity as an employee of a certain company and, more importantly, as a citizen of one nation or another. It broadens the sense that we are, for lack of a better word, global.

One of the things I noticed during my time in Europe was that most of my friends and the acquaintances I made seem to think of themselves as citizens of the world rather than as American, French, Russian or Czech. They are deeply concerned with and well informed about the issues and challenges facing other nations. Their concept of identity seems noticeably different from what I was accustomed to; there is an assumption that we are all world citizens rather than individuals concerned only with the goings-on in one particular parcel of geography.

This point of view is not all that common among my peers in the U.S. Our relative continental isolation makes it easy to lose sight of the global perspective. But what’s required of living and working well in an increasingly global reality is that we do give more thought to our identity and the messages we send as individuals, as members of teams, as representatives of a company and of a nation. Because now more than ever before, what we do in our offices on one side of the globe can and does have an effect on others working in an office a continent and several time zones away. We need to break out of our continental-ism and do what we can in our own ways to address and improve the perception of who we are on a global scale. This begins, I think, with reevaluating the meaning of concepts such as citizenship, collaboration and accountability.
Read More…

Technically, you could say it’s both. The today part of the equation involves making informed decisions now in order to maximize the opportunities on which your organization can act … tomorrow. I guess you could say that workforce planning is business-speak for “you reap what you sow.” What we do now makes future returns (or lack thereof) possible. What makes it tricky is that we have to plan for people needs. Anyone who’s set up a major event or even just hosted a small gathering of friends knows how hard it can be to accurately plan anything involving more than him- or herself. I still suspect that RSVP actually stands for Risky Suspiciously Variable Proposition.

But isn’t that the very reason we must master workforce planning? Jay’s workshops were immensely popular and well attended by insightful businesspeople who understand that the process isn’t easy. It is risky and suspiciously variable. Could we have predicted five years ago how today’s workplaces would change? Well … maybe we could have. If we learn only one thing from this dark-night-of-the-economy, it should be that we need to create scenarios about our future and imagine the days ahead for which we – and our organizations – need to be prepared.

So here’s your personal invitation to use the insights and the tools that are i4cp hallmarks. We have webcasts, workshops, Knowledge Centers, accessible experts, surveys, peer communities and scenario how-tos. As an i4cp member, you can access the help you need today to plan for a better and more productive tomorrow. You will RSVP, won’t you? Research … Share … Value-Add … and Plan.
Read More…

As in 2008’s most unusual sick excuses, this year’s list is spotted with strange animal injuries, other bouts with nature or pedestrians, and questionable friendships, as well many head-shakers, like “I accidentally hit a nun with my motorcycle.” In a new twist, however, this year’s survey results are reflective of the effect of our tough economic climate, as 28 percent of employers think more employees have been absent with fake excuses due to increased stress and burnout due to the recession.

Here are 2009’s Most Unusual Excuses for Missing Work:

1. No shoes, no shirt, no work:   I got sunburned at a nude beach and can’t wear clothes.
   
2. We’re not in Kansas anymore:  I woke up in Canada.
3. Scaly situation:  I got caught selling an alligator.
4. With friends like these… : My buddies locked me in the trunk of an abandoned car after a weekend of drinking.
5. Mom knows best:  My mom said I was not allowed to go to work today.
6. Stinging conclusion: A bee flew in my mouth.
7. Meh: I’m just not into it today.
8. Not hot: I have a headache from eating hot peppers.
9. Plant rage: A random person threw poison ivy in my face and now I have a rash.
10. Domestic bliss: I’m convinced my spouse is having an affair and I’m staying home to catch them.
11. Beach fun:  I was injured chasing a seagull.
    

“Longer hours and heavier workloads are common in the current economic climate and employers are becoming more flexible with their time off policies,” said Rosemary Haefner, vice president of human resources at CareerBuilder. “Sixty-three percent of companies we surveyed said they let their team members use sick days for mental health days.  If you need time to recharge, your best bet is to be honest with your manager.”

Manager (Over)Reactions?

Managers, however, don’t always give employees the benefit of the doubt, which doesn’t exactly cultivate a culture of honesty and trust. But would you do the same?

• 29 percent of employers have checked up on an employee who called in sick
• Of those employers: 70 percent required a doctor’s note, 52 percent called the employee at home, 18 percent had another worker call the employee, and 17 percent drove by the employee’s place of residence
• 15 percent have fired a worker for missing work without a legitimate excuse
  

So… what are the real reasons workers missed work? (Hint: they have nothing to do with alligators or angry poison ivy-throwing):

• 31 percent needed to get to a doctor’s appointment
• 28 percent needed to relax
• 16 percent wanted to catch up on sleep
• 13 percent wanted to run personal errands
• 12 percent said it was work-related (they wanted to miss a meeting, give themselves some more time to work on a project or avoid the wrath of a boss, colleague or client)
• 10 percent wanted to catch up on housework, and another 10 percent wanted to spend time with family and friends
• But the biggest reason for missing work? About a third of workers (32 percent) just didn’t feel like going to work that day.

What are the most unusual excuses you’ve gotten via phone, text, e-mail, sky message, or carrier pigeon (or, as is the trend above, seagulls)?

Read More…

Since the economy took a nose dive, however, many executives are now finding themselves looking up at a big fat zero when it comes to their stock awards. In a study of the 100 largest public tech companies, executive compensation consultants Steven Hall & Partners found that as of July 31, 2009, 90 of the firms had stock options that were underwater. When all the outstanding options held by the top five executives at each company were averaged out across the 100 companies, 57% were underwater. The average underwater option was down 42% from its exercise price.

For the most part, these companies are not responsible for their plummeting stock prices. They got dragged down with everyone else when the financial sector imploded. So this pay that was supposed to reward performance is actually punishing the executives for the performance of the market as a whole, something they have no control over. And it’s not just executives being punished. Many companies reward employees with stock options, and these people have even less control over the market price of the shares.

What can a company do? It could issue more options at a new, lower exercise price, but you can bet the rest of the company’s shareholders (who are maybe not swimming as deeply as the executives) are not going to get the same deal. Plus, option grants are charged against earnings and dilute the existing stock pool. Re-pricing can be difficult because that requires shareholder approval. But something has to be done before executives and other key talent tire of treading water and swim off to another firm offering a fresh set of dry stock options. How much incentive to stay can there be in this situation, especially when there are newer managers and executives at the firm with much lower exercise prices?

Instead of simply re-pricing options on a one-to-one basis, many companies have instituted value-to-value exchanges, where option holders can cancel their underwater options and be issued fewer options that are priced at the current market price. This averts the dilution problem and does not count as an additional compensation charge. Intel recently underwent such an exchange, although it excluded its named executives and directors from the program.

Does your company have underwater options? If so, are there any plans on how to handle them?
Read More…