Thomas A. Kochan, professor of management at MIT Sloan School of Management states that “The business case rhetoric for diversity is simply naïve and overdone. There are no strong positive or negative effects of gender or racial diversity on business performance” (2). The research outcomes are mixed. There is some research that would support that statement; however there are few studies that would challenge it.

I strongly believe though that if managed effectively, diversity programs can bring many benefits not only to employees, but also to the business bottom line. The people and organizational profits are intertwined. When we speak about diversity programs’ benefits to employees, we must acknowledge the correlation to the business’s success, even though that relationship is not always direct and observable. Here are some specific positive outcomes to organizations and their employees:

Improved recruitment and selection. When an organization expands a job candidate pool, that organization has more opportunities to find competent employees. The organization must first exert effort in attracting minority candidates. Minority candidates are more likely to apply for jobs at companies that have an equal opportunity policy, do not have a record of failing to implement that policy, and have a good reputation for staff welfare.

Increased retention. When an employee leaves a job, it costs to the company between 30% to 200% of the former employee’s salary, taking into consideration advertising, recruitment, training, and lost productivity costs. Thus, it’s much more cost effective to put resources in place to retain current employees. Women and minority employees tend to stay with the companies that offer flexible work scheduling, opportunities for advancement, development programs, and equal pay reviews. Most importantly, employees tend to stay where organizational culture truly integrates and appreciates diversity.

Increased commitment. Employees who feel valued and appreciated are more commitment to their companies. Commitment employees are more productive, less absent, and exercise beneficial job behaviors more often, going “beyond and above” their job description.

Fewer discrimination lawsuits. A discrimination lawsuit can cost organizations millions of dollars. Implementing diversity programs and promoting conflict resolution skills among diverse employees minimizes a likelihood of such lawsuits.

Increased marketplace knowledge. Diverse employees bring marketplace knowledge of their specific groups. Companies can use that knowledge while developing products, expanding to additional geographical territories, and developing effective customer relations. This strategy supports the “business case”, and at the same time it integrates diverse employees in organizational goals.

Improved brand reputation. Customers and clients tend to buy from and be served by companies that have a sound brand reputation. Client perception of company’s reputation relates to how well a company treats its own employees. A scandalous discrimination lawsuits can lose in moments customers that took years to gain.

Increased creativity and problem solving. Diverse teams tend to be more creative while making decisions and solving business challenges. Diverse teams have more perspectives on the issue and exercise more critical thinking. However, if a diverse team is not managed effectively, such groups experience more conflict than a more homogenous team.

Thus, if diversity programs are managed competently and effectively, they bring good feelings, creativity, a greater talent pool, and can positively impact a business bottom line. On the larger scale, even when we question the business case, the cultivation of diversity at all organizational levels is simply a right thing to do.

Canas, K. A., & Sondak, H. (2008). Opportunities and Challenges of Workplace Diversity. Pearson Prentice Hall.
Kochan, T. (2003). The effects of diversity on business performance: Report of the diversity research network. Human Resource Management, 42, p. 3-21.

In the last forty years management and leadership practices have gone through radical changes. Autocratic decision making and vertical organizational structures have been molded into participatory management, joint decision making, and teamwork – not always successful in practice, but at least observable in an intent. While several “monkey feeding rules” outlined in this classic article are not very relevant in today’s life of fast communications and high technologies, the fundamentals of delegation apply to us today.

Delegation is more the art than the science. The fear of losing control, the concern that employees are not fulfilling responsibility the way “I would have done it”, and the fact that the manager still carries the ultimate responsibility for tasks performed by employees – it all makes delegation a challenging process for many modern managers. Delegation and distribution of tasks may not be an overnight transformational process as so playfully pictured by Oncken and Wass; successful delegation depends on competency and confidence of the employees and it may require some time to develop. However, the benefits that effective delegation brings to the employee, manager, and organization significantly outweigh the potential risks. Delegation helps to professionally develop the employee, coach her to reach the next career step, increase ownership over organizational goals, and may improve employee morale. Initially, the manager needs to invest time to coach and train the employee; however in the long run delegating tasks and responsibilities saves the manager’s time and allows her to focus on the big picture rather than the daily feeding of monkeys. From an organizational perspective, delegation creates a positive culture of trust and engagement.

Thus, the classic article with the monkey feeding rules still carries a great significance for a contemporary manager. The more thought and energy the manager puts into crafting and carrying through an effective delegation process, the more tangible and intangible rewards he receives in return.

Oncken, W. Jr & Wass, D. L. (1974). Management time: Who’s got the monkey? Harvard Business Review, Nov-Dec; p 75-80

First, let’s look at the pros.
- The team based employee evaluation is effective in increasing employee performance. Teams with face-to-face employee evaluations display higher levels of performance (Muniute-Cobb & Alfred, 2010), cooperation, and member satisfaction (Erez et al, 2002).
- Team based employee evaluation keeps employees accountable not only to supervisors, but also to peers (Muniute-Cobb & Alfred, 2010).
- This form of employee evaluation facilitates organizational culture of openness and ownership.
- By participating in an evaluation of their peers, and listening to feedback about their strengths and challenges, employees also get an opportunity to reflect on their own strengths and challenges and learn about what’s expected in an organization (Garner, 1988).
- Because face-to-face team evaluation requires more vulnerability and openness by an employee, in return it also facilitates greater professional growth and development.

On the other hand:
- Face-to-face employee evaluation may fail if not supported by an organizational culture. Such evaluation requires leadership support and organizational culture where openness and communication are highly promoted.
- Teams would need to be ”molded” and developed before introducing such type of employee evaluation. A level of cohesiveness and trust need to be reached between team members so that everyone feels safe in providing and receiving critical feedback, which may be both positive and negative.
- Employees need to be trained on evaluation process, the expectations, and the effective ways of delivering feedback on employee’s areas of development. For instance, instead of saying “you have a problem with tardiness”, one can provide a descriptive feedback saying “I noticed that several times you were late coming to a team meeting”
- Team based employee evaluation works best with incorporating a “one-on-one” component. Namely, before a scheduled evaluation in a team, a member who is being evaluated meets with all other members individually. During this one-one-one meeting a team member shares his or her perceptions on evaluated employees strengths and challenges. That way, any perceptions between the two members can be clarified before the team meeting and there are no surprises in feedback that is delivered with others being present (Muniute-Cobb & Alfred, 2010). This component also minimizes a potential conflict in a team caused by a surprising negative feedback from a peer employee.

Thus, face-to-face employee evaluation can be an effective way in improving employee performance, increasing accountability, and facilitating employee’s professional development. However some considerations should be taken before such form of employee evaluation is applied. First, a culture of open communication should be cultivated in an organization. Also, teams would need to reach a level of cohesiveness where employees are safe providing each other with positive and negative feedback. Employees would benefit from training about the process and expectations regarding such evaluation. Finally, this form of employee evaluation works best with incorporating “one-on-one” component before delivering feedback in an open team setting.

Erez, A., Lepine, J. A., & Elms, H. (2002). Effects of rotated leadership and peer evaluation on the functioning and effectiveness of self-managed teams: a quasi experiment. Personnel Psychology, 55(4), 929-949.

Garner, H. G. (1988). Helping others through teamwork: A handbook for professionals. Washington, DC: Child welfare League of America, Inc.

Muniute-Cobb, E. & Alfred, V. M. (2010). Learning from evaluation by peer team: a case study of a family counseling organization. International Journal of Training and Development, 14(2), 95-111.

Wellins, R. S., Byham, W. C., & Wilson, J. M. (1991). Empowered teams: Creating self-directed work groups that improve quality, productivity and participation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Often we focus on project components that we can readily see and measure – the objectives, deliverables, time, and cost – downplaying the human side in project management. In fact, team collaboration, communication, and dynamics are critical in project success. The team can “make or break” a project, and plays a direct (though sometimes not readily measurable) role in all phases of project as well as quality and risk management.

Since a project team is often comprised of people who do not usually work together, team members benefit from knowing each other better during or before the project initiation phase. A project leader can facilitate team building activities or organize a team retreat to help team members get to know and connect with each other. Brian Cole Miller (2004) in his book “Quick Team-Building Activities for Busy Managers” provides brief and effective activities to build trust and increase communication among members.

During project initiation phase, setting the structure and expectations for clear and consistent communication among team members is a critical step. Similarly, it is important that a project leader sets the tone and models consistent communication to the team by updating them on the “big picture” of project progress, risks, problems, and corrective action plans. The project leader also defines roles, responsibilities, and expectations for each team member. Using the strength- based perspective and defining roles based on members’ individual strengths contributes to project effectiveness.

Conflict resolution skills are essential for the project leader and the entire team. It is not a question of “if,” it is a question of “when” a conflict in a team will occur. When acknowledged and resolved effectively, a conflict is not only a natural, it is a desirable event in team development that allows team members to settle in their roles and create positive dynamic.

Team performance is driven in a positive direction when each team member receives individual feedback for their performance. Feedback is more effective when it is provided right after performance observation – either negative or positive – and provided consistently, not only on the scheduled appraisal date. Feedback also needs to be measurable and unbiased.

While often a project leader is the most competent member to answer technical and process questions, for the sake of team and individual team members development it is healthy to defer some questions back to the team. This enables team members to struggle themselves in finding answers and solutions. That self-gained knowledge and experience will benefit team members much more than a concrete direction and quick answers. A project leader can also coach team members to rely on each other’s expertise in solving problems rather than always relying on leadership.

A project leader can help team with maintaining energy and motivation by acknowledging, recognizing, and celebrating milestones of the project. Simply thanking team members for a work well done will go a long way in making team members feel appreciated.

The effective management of all project elements brings out a successful project outcome; however the “people’s element” is critical in ultimate project success. The team collaboration, communication, trust and conflict resolution are the driving forces behind such success.

● Creating a vision
● Setting strategic goals
● Redeveloping organizational systems
● Managing people and their reactions
● Enhancing one’s leadership skills

While all of these components are very important in leading through organizational change, managing people is the most critical component that can make or break an organization.

When a change is not managed effectively, it increases employee anxiety. According to Catastrophe Theory, while anxiety increases to a certain point, employee performance increases as well. When some anxiety is experienced, we feel excited, energetic, and motivated to perform well. However, when anxiety reaches “catastrophic point” (which may be at different level for different people depending on their coping skills), performance starts decreasing. At that point cognitive anxiety starts dominating over somatic anxiety and one’ performance starts decreasing. People are less productive and may feel unmotivated and deflated. High anxiety also causes safety dangers, and may be a cause of “infection” of negative attitude in organization.

Leaders in organizations can apply several strategies to keep employee anxiety at”workable” level and employee performance at optimal level. Let’s consider at case of HCL Technologies, India based company. During 2008-2009 because of economic hardship a number of technology companies closed their doors or significantly downsized. In the meanwhile, HCL Technologies grew by 21%, was rated #1 in employee satisfaction, and their customer satisfaction went up by 43%. So, how did they do it? HCL Technologies focused on employee satisfaction before customer satisfaction. “Satisfied employees increased revenues from the existing customers through the passion and value that they demonstrated” (Vineet Nayar, CEO of HCL Technologies). Also, management asked employees for ideas on how to reduce the costs, and implemented these ideas. Many times front line employees have the best insights on cost reduction. More so, by being included into a decision making process, employees felt more empowered and motivated.

CEO of SRC Holdings Jack Stack advises creating and maintaining “an open book culture” during organizational change. When employees know that they can come to management and seek answers to the unknown, their anxiety level naturally decreases. Avoiding repetitions about information that is anxiety producing is also important in increasing certainty at workplace. Organizational change is less challenging when executives and higher management coach, develop, and support middle management. With coaching and development middle management will be better equipped on how to approach front line employees and how to reduce their anxiety or resistance.

Another strategy is talking to employees one-on-one after announcing an upcoming organizational change. That way, employees can express their concerns, ask questions, and participate in organizational change management rather than feeling that a change is “happening to them”. When announcing an upcoming organizational change, leaders should discuss with employees – individually or in groups – “what’s in it for me”. Employees’ resistance and anxiety will be reduced if they know how they would benefit from a change.

Appreciation and recognition during organizational change help employees stay motivated and focused. Performance certificates, plaques, gift cards, length of service awards, and a surprise day off are not expensive recognition strategies, and they go long way in keeping employees motivated. Among appreciation strategies are smiley faces (one would be surprised how this “daycare” tool works wonders in a workplace); thank you letters and e-mails; and celebrating employee successes.

According to Ken Blanchard, “Everything rises and falls on leadership”. When leading through organizational change, a leader herself has to demonstrate certainty and keep her own anxiety “in check”. The calmer, more collected and supportive a leader is, the calmer and more collected his employees and followers will be. A stressed leader creates a stressed workplace. Thus, taking care of oneself should be a leader’s starting point.

Leading people through organizational change is a challenging, yet very rewarding process. Managing people and their reactions is a critical organizational change management component. Leaders can partner with employees and include them in the process by creating “an open book” culture, allowing employees to ask questions and express concerns, coaching middle management, and recognizing and appreciating employees.

Blanchard, K. & Miller, M. (2004). The secret: What great leaders know – and do. San Francisko, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publisher, Inc

India Knowledge @ Wharton. (2010,July 15). HCL’s Vineet Nayarwinning more business in a recession means putting employees first. Retrieved from http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/india/article.cfm?articleid=4497

Stack, J. (2010, February 11). How the recession made us stronger. The New York Times: Business Day. Retrieved from http://boss.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/11/how-the-recession-made-us-stronger/

Consider change in an organization. Even when a change is generally welcome, many people resist the change – some openly, others passively; some consciously, others subconsciously. Resistance, fears, and anxiety is even more prevalent when a change is not welcome and is negative, whether in perception or reality. The recent years’ economy has been a powerful external driving force behind organizational change in many business, agencies, and governmental units. December 2007 through August 2010, US employment market experienced 6,213,880 layoffs. Such a change affects not only people who are forced out of their jobs, but it also affects morale, productivity, and engagement of workforce who remain employed. Organizations also have been applying swift management decisions focused on short term survival, which have been decreasing employee focus, productivity, and even had a negative effect on employee mental health (Adecco Group, 2009). Leaders and managers can chose the scope and timing of internally driven organizational change such as performance improvement initiatives; however they can not control, and sometimes not even predict externally driven organizational change. Nevertheless, leaders are yet responsible for managing an unwelcome organizational change.

In order to manage an organizational change over which we have no initial control and to “make lemonade from lemons”, it is essential to adhere to the main organizational change management components. We will also discuss all these components in detail in subsequent articles.

Creating a vision. A leader leads well only when he knows what direction he is leading his followers. Though it may be challenging to create a vision to manage an externally driven organizational change, such as downsizing, it is a very important component to start “on the right foot”. A leader’s vision would start from fully understanding organization’s current situation and the implications for future. For instance, a vision after downsizing may be securing jobs of current workforce for the next year, and rebuilding by 20% in the next two years. In crafting our vision, we need to be positive, but realistic. Employee involvement in creating a vision is critical to employees’ future ownership of the vision.

Setting strategic goals. Organizational change management requires setting strategic goals. Again, employee involvement in crafting the goals is very important. Goals would be backed up by short term objectives (2-8 weeks). These goals would differ from strategic goals developed during stable organizational times as they would be shorter termed. From leadership perspective, we would refer to these goals and objectives on daily basis, and would update our employees on progress on at least a weekly basis. First, it allows us to better measure the progress of change.Secondly, it involves our employees and provides them with a better sense of control when they know “where they are”.

Redeveloping organizational systems. This component would involve revamping organizational systems such as organizational structure (positions, roles, and reporting), financial systems and budgets, management and monitoring systems, and policies and procedures. Many organizations find in helpful to assign a role of “change agent” to a person or a group. Such an entity is charged not only with responsibility of leading systems’ redevelopment, but also is responsible of introducing and training others on system changes.

Managing people and their reactions. Although all discussed components are important, this component is critical in managing organizational change successfully. Organizational change management iceberg theory (Wilfred Kruger) explains that we can observe, measure and manage time, cost, and quality quite easily. However these variables are only the tip of the iceberg. The greater part of the iceberg – beliefs, perceptions, acceptance, power and politics – is “under water”, and can not be observed and measured easily. Nevertheless, managing the underwater part is essential in navigating organizational change around “the iceberg”. We can use several proven strategies in managing employees. Having an “open door” policy during a change, allows employees to air their concerns and reduce their anxiety. Acknowledging employees for their performance in a challenging environment would also help a leader in gaining her supporters. Keeping honest and frequent communication is also a needed approach by organization’s leadership.

Enhancing leadership skills. Developing and enhancing leadership skills is an ongoing process. Organizational change management often pushes a demand for such skills “above and beyond”. As leaders, we often find ourselves “outside of our comfort zone” when we need to deal with multiple organizational demands and huge resistance by our people. In an effort to reduce anxiety and resistant by our employees, first we would want to reduce our own anxiety and embrace a vision for an organization. Practicing decisiveness may also be beneficial in managing organizational change. Finally, as leaders we need to care for ourselves as much as we care for our employees and an organization.

Organizational change that is driven externally often can not be controlled or predicted. Yet as leaders we have duty and responsibility to manage. The more we adhere to the structure of organizational management components, the more success we will have, as measured by employee productivity, employee morale, organizational culture, and customer loyalty and satisfaction.

Genograms have been widely utilized in social work, family counseling, genealogy, medicine, and education for the last thirty years. Genograms not only visually present delineation of family members’ relationships, but they also go beyond a traditional family tree. Genograms allow the user to identify repetitive patterns of behavior, recognize hereditary tendencies, and capitalize on family’s strengths.

Orgenograms have not been widely utilized in business world so far, however utilization of Orgenogram™ have much potential in organizational and business development fields. While genogram focuses on family patterns, Orgenogram™ identifies organizational development patterns since the inception of business or organization. Differently than genograms that depict generational levels and relationships between family members, Orgenogram™ is created in historic blocks that includes decision makers, products, events, organizational culture, and strengths and weaknesses during a particular time period. Participants have an opportunity to reflect on lessons learned, identify how organization capitalized on strengths and opportunities, and how it overcame threats and weaknesses. Development of Orgenogram™ allows participants to reflect on organization’s historic relationship patterns with its external environment. Creation of Orgenogram™ also prompts participants to reflect on how organization has capitalized on its talents, and identify future direction. Orgenogram™ serves as high impact team development activity that increases participants’ ownership to the mission and their loyalty to organization. Finally, Orgenogram™ is used as a cornerstone to strategic planning.

The best way is start developing your leadership capabilities is from within yourself. With all the before mentioned leadership tools, it’s very easy to lose the focus, and invest your energies in learning new leadership skills and models rather than investing your energies in building you. Ken Blanchard and Mark Miller (2004) compares leadership to an iceberg – 20% of leadership is what we see – skills or “doing”, and 80% is what we cannot see – leader’s character or “being”. Thus, “starting from within” and developing one’s character is a fundamental basis of effective leadership.

Great leaders know themselves very well. Know your strengths and your challenges, and embrace your challenges. Once one embraces and acknowledges them, one’s challenges become a cornerstone for professional and personal development. It’s almost paradoxical; the more ownership we take over our challenges, the less a challenge and more a strength they become. The process of working through our challenges takes humility, and many times it means asking for help from others who have gone through a similar process. Thus, always ask for help from someone whose leadership skills you respect.

Always know where you are going and where you would like to get to. One cannot lead people not knowing their own direction. In simple terms, stick to the mission and assess the “big picture”. Whether you are leading 600 people or 2 people, it is important to step away mentally (and sometimes physically) from daily operations, place daily problems in a perspective, assess and focus on the ultimate goal of you and your followers.

Be truthful about your motivation and intentions. Ask yourself “Why am I leading, and do I believe in the course and the mission of my organization?” The people whom you are leading will be loyal to the organization and believe in the mission only to the degree that you do. “Everything rises and falls on leadership” (Blanchard & Miller, 2004).

Never lead out of fear. In dealing with daily challenges, it is sometimes easy to lose the focus, and base our decisions on our fears: a possible loss of a contract, client, or an employee. It’s important to take into consideration all factors and possible consequences while making leadership and business decisions; however the best decisions are those that serve the ultimate organizational goals rather than serving single interests or situations.

Leadership is never a task, and always a process. Thus, while you are embracing this wonderful and very challenging process, always keep You in focus.

Blanchard, K. & Miller, M. (2004). The secret: What great leaders know – and do. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publisher, Inc

First, let’s look at the pros.
- The team based employee evaluation is effective in increasing employee performance. Teams with face-to-face employee evaluations display higher levels of performance (Muniute-Cobb & Alfred, 2010), cooperation, and member satisfaction (Erez et al, 2002).
- Team based employee evaluation keeps employees accountable not only to supervisors, but also to peers (Muniute-Cobb & Alfred, 2010).
- This form of employee evaluation facilitates organizational culture of openness and ownership.
- By participating in an evaluation of their peers, and listening to feedback about their strengths and challenges, employees also get an opportunity to reflect on their own strengths and challenges and learn about what’s expected in an organization (Garner, 1988).
- Because face-to-face team evaluation requires more vulnerability and openness by an employee, in return it also facilitates greater professional growth and development.

On the other hand:
- Face-to-face employee evaluation may fail if not supported by an organizational culture. Such evaluation requires leadership support and organizational culture where openness and communication are highly promoted.
- Teams would need to be ”molded” and developed before introducing such type of employee evaluation. A level of cohesiveness and trust need to be reached between team members so that everyone feels safe in providing and receiving critical feedback, which may be both positive and negative.
- Employees need to be trained on evaluation process, the expectations, and the effective ways of delivering feedback on employee’s areas of development. For instance, instead of saying “you have a problem with tardiness”, one can provide a descriptive feedback saying “I noticed that several times you were late coming to a team meeting”
- Team based employee evaluation works best with incorporating a “one-on-one” component. Namely, before a scheduled evaluation in a team, a member who is being evaluated meets with all other members individually. During this one-one-one meeting a team member shares his or her perceptions on evaluated employees strengths and challenges. That way, any perceptions between the two members can be clarified before the team meeting and there are no surprises in feedback that is delivered with others being present (Muniute-Cobb & Alfred, 2010). This component also minimizes a potential conflict in a team caused by a surprising negative feedback from a peer employee.

Thus, face-to-face employee evaluation can be an effective way in improving employee performance, increasing accountability, and facilitating employee’s professional development. However some considerations should be taken before such form of employee evaluation is applied. First, a culture of open communication should be cultivated in an organization. Also, teams would need to reach a level of cohesiveness where employees are safe providing each other with positive and negative feedback. Employees would benefit from training about the process and expectations regarding such evaluation. Finally, this form of employee evaluation works best with incorporating “one-on-one” component before delivering feedback in an open team setting.

Erez, A., Lepine, J. A., & Elms, H. (2002). Effects of rotated leadership and peer evaluation on the functioning and effectiveness of self-managed teams: a quasi experiment. Personnel Psychology, 55(4), 929-949.

Garner, H. G. (1988). Helping others through teamwork: A handbook for professionals. Washington, DC: Child welfare League of America, Inc.

Muniute-Cobb, E. & Alfred, V. M. (2010). Learning from evaluation by peer team: a case study of a family counseling organization. International Journal of Training and Development, 14(2), 95-111.

Wellins, R. S., Byham, W. C., & Wilson, J. M. (1991). Empowered teams: Creating self-directed work groups that improve quality, productivity and participation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.