Culture Shock

How important is culture in organisational success? Recently I came across this report by the CIPD, which was a good and interesting read and which prompted this blog.

The report starts with Peter Cheese telling us that culture is integral to organisation success and to the well-being of our workforces, and acknowledging that changing or creating good workplace cultures is not an exact science, takes time, and is influenced by many variables. He goes on to say that create effective cultures we must consider our employees, their relationships with one another, the jobs that they do, and their connection to the organisation they work for.  He then sets out how and why Boards must consider employee contribution and overall culture if they are to understand overall success.

Hear, hear.

I've observed organisational culture a lot in recent years, looking particularly at how two organisations that join together can have, superficially, similar cultures and organisational values, but not when one digs beneath the surface, and observing organisational culture when I moved organisations earlier this year and discovering just how drastically different places can be, even if again in the face of it things are similar in terms of what is written down. 

So culture matters. 

Of course there's the famous quote from Peter Drucker that culture could eat strategy for breakfast, but it's one I agree with, even if it is a bit of a soundbite. As the report says, culture is hard to articulate and measure, but is nonetheless valuable. The report gives examples of both positive and negative impacts of culture, and it's difficult to argue with these as I've seen both in action. 

It's no wonder, as the report points out, that culture and governance is at the heart of some of the recent scandals in various sectors, and as I've mentioned before, culture is a very important thing to get right when assessing a potential merger or acquisition. I've seen this go wrong before, and even recently a housing group pulled out of a mega merger at the eleventh hour, citing differences in governance and culture that they felt would be difficult to get around. 

How prescient of that particular Board, who have done something that I haven't seen done much in other comings together and have analysed the cultural differences, reaching a conclusion that they were almost irreconcilable rather than ploughing on regardless. The CIPD report shares FRC guidance on culture and governance from a Board perspective, but it's interesting that this guidance is from the FRC and a governance angle, rather from within the HR profession. 

Of course, Boards do have a very important role to play, but not the pivotal one. There's more to establishing culture than a robust approach to corporate governance, important though that is. 

I once ran a culture and values programme that was bottom up, having had some clear and unequivocal feedback from the Board that a top down approach was not the way they wanted to go. They felt the employees, and the organisations leaders, set the culture, and I'm inclined to agree, and attempts by Boards to do so through corporate governance just lead to employees leaving because of the culture, and other employees joining because it's what they want. So Boards CAN set it, but what I'm saying is they shouldn't. 

And that cultural programme worked well too. It focused on leaders, employees and their behaviours, and in particular an aligned set of HR practices including pay and reward, recruitment, L&D, performance management, wellbeing and employee engagement. 

I covered many of these things in my Ignite poem at #cipdnap16 on Amazing Workplaces. Basically, this was a guide on how to create the best organisational culture. Towards the end, I offered my opinion that amazing workplaces are like a house of cards, and can come tumbling down at the slightest provocation. But I also said that within HR we create culture, through those aligned practices and by living the values, so we are both the architects and the guards of this culture - we recruit and train the builders, and we sort out the troublemakers. And more. 

Check it out here if you haven't seen it already. 

In HR, we have a specially developed skill set and a unique organisational position and perspective which most others in an organisation don't have, and it's us who should be providing the definitive advice on culture, not a financial body. 

And I finished by saying we have the power to create the best workplace and culture we've ever known.

But I also said that every workplace is amazing for someone. And that's because someone really loves working there, even if they're the only one. For them, it's great, even if large swathes of employees hate it. 

And this brings me to my often used analogy of likening the employment relationship to actual relationships, something I promise again I will do a full blog on soon. You can fall in love with an organisation because of its culture, and overlook it's faults. You can equally fall out of love with an organisation because of its culture if that changes, and overlook it's positives. 

In this sense, in HR, we are matchmakers. Trying to hook people up with a great culture. Swiping left, swiping right, Tinder-style. 

I was going to take this analogy further and suggest that by paying people to come and work in an organisation and fall in love with it, HR are effectively pimps, but that's going too far altogether. Let's settle on HR being architects of arranged marriages. 

Too many HR functions, though, don't realise the power and influence they have. Lynda Gratton once wrote that companies get the HR function they want, and advised HR leaders that if they don't have that place at the table, to leave - it's not a place they want to be in. 

Maybe we as a profession should listen to Lynda. But maybe we should also look at what we can influence directly, the feeling of happiness and love (however that's manifested) at and for work and work on that. 

One employee at a time. 

One day at a time. 

Let's start a cultural revolution. 

Till next time. 

Gary

Ps in other news, less than a month to the wedding now. Hen party for Katie this weekend in Liverpool, and my stag party in Birmingham next week takes in both a Test Match and evening festivities. I just hope my eyebrows have long enough to grow back before the wedding...

Tail wagging the dog

This blog is on a subject that is uppermost in my thoughts at the moment – that of performance management, and in particular bringing a new approach into my current workplace.  It isn’t a straightforward prospect though and much as I’d like to wave a magic wand and do away with the annual appraisal, it isn’t as simple as that.

Here isn’t the place to discuss the current approach as I’m about to start what I’m calling a “big conversation” within the organisation so I’ll do that there, but here IS a good place to try to put some of my thoughts about performance management down, as much to organise my thinking as anything and prepare me for that big conversation.

I’d be very interested in carrying on this conversation and thinking with you, if you have time and some thoughts to share.  Let me know if so.

There’s obviously a general trend in organisations these days away from the annual appraisal and similar processes.  This article in Personnel Today highlights the oft-cited examples of Accenture and Deloitte moving away from annual appraisals and comments on their thinking.  And this article from the BBC builds on this by talking about building a coaching and performance culture.

So its not new as a concept, and yet many people struggle with letting go of the annual appraisal, despite almost everyone I have ever come into contact with in every organisation slating it.

From my own perspective, in my HR career I think I have designed 4 different, distinct processes that could be labelled as appraisals (but were called something else…something sexier).  Each one I put an awful lot of effort into, consulted people about, researched widely, designed carefully and launched thoroughly.  Each one I thought was a better iteration than the last and by the 4^th version I thought I had something approaching perfection in terms of the annual appraisal.

And all of them failed.

Every one, in the sense that line managers didn’t like them, staff didn’t like them, and the organisations saw them as a tick box exercise that they resented doing because it got in the way of actually doing the job.

So my views on the appraisal have evolved somewhat and I figure if organisations don’t like them and don’t value them, then why keep them?

Is it because we’ve always had them and someone somewhere sometime thought they were important?  Pete Estes, later to run General Motors, said in the 1960s (yes, really) that “if we’ve been doing something the right way for 15 years then in these changing times that’s a sign we are now doing it wrong.” Later he refined this to 5, and even 1 year – and never more is that true than today where the pace of change and technological advance is immense.

So my view is the annual appraisal may have been the right concept back then (I won’t define when “then” was), but the world has moved on.

Of course, organisations need to have a handle on employee performance.  But that isn’t a once a year conversation where both employee and line manager feel awkward.  The examples I’ve cited have brought in a more holistic, continuous process (often using the “check-in” technique) and are more focused on fuelling future performance than reviewing past performance.

But many organisations, despite not liking the “ticking the box” mentality of the annual appraisal, still use it as a comfort blanket and cling to the notion that there must be some good in the process, and push for 100% completion of appraisals as if that makes the system work and proves it is good.

Here, then, is the tail wagging the dog.  Measuring appraisal completion rates says nothing about the quality of the conversation and even if it does result in high completion rates and proves there is an efficient process, it doesn’t make it an effective process.

But I’m struggling to get my head around NOT recording the more continuous “check in” process – lots of organisations need to have some evidence of performance management, but as soon as you start recording it then no matter how good the process, doesn’t it become a differently-timed version of the annual appraisal?

In this article, Deb Siverson argues why changing demographics are at the heart of some of the growing trend towards more regular and continuous feedback, and whilst I don’t want this blog to become a “millennials are taking over” post there is a growing trend towards instantaneous feedback in lots of industries that we need to replicate in the employment relationship.

Here’s some examples:

·         Trip Advisor (and similar) style feedback is now commonplace in many organisations from a customer perspective.  I’m a regular on Trip Advisor, Rated People, Glassdoor, and read reviews on Argos, Amazon, Currys and other places I buy stuff from.  I like being able to see up to date feedback, good and bad, about something I’m about to buy or someone I’m about to do business with.  Why can’t that style of feedback make its way into the employment relationship, with every employee having a feedback rating and comments that builds over time?  Its not the ONLY performance measure, but its an interesting snapshot (even if backward looking) and a way of ensuring feedback is monitored, acted upon and used to measure performance.

·         On almost every social media site there’s the ability to Like, Share, Comment etc on posts you see and read.  That’s another way to look at feedback and it’s a way of life now for those entering the workforce.  And social media is now prevalent in many workplaces, but not necessarily used for performance management purposes.

·         Professional sports all use data and continuous feedback to drive improved performance.  Look at Wayne Rooney – he has access to oodles of data about every game he plays in and probably for all his training sessions too.  He can compare his performance with any other player in his own team or any other team.  He can get feedback from team mates instantly on the pitch in the middle of a game, and can hear supporters likewise.  If he ventures onto social media after a match he’ll see comments from those who watched him.  In this blog I talked about listening to Sir Clive Woodward speak about the use of data and performance analytics in the England Rugby Team, and this still holds true.

I guess what I’m saying is that there are enough examples out there of performance management being done in an instantaneous and continuous way and working very well.  But not enough workplaces are embracing it to manage their staff in a new way and to ditch the annual appraisal. For this to happen, the organisation needs to be clear on what performance actually is.

If they can recognise it, and measure it, then organisations can figure out how to acknowledge it, reward it, or penalise its absence potentially. But that line of sight is critical as its feedback on what is going on. Feedback that ensures that continual focus on performance. 

I often compare the employment relationship to actual relationships and will do so again here.  In a good, effective relationship there is constant feedback from both sides, good and bad.  Holding onto feedback to deliver it at some later stage is never, NEVER, a good thing (trust me, I’ve been divorced) and can create problems and a lack of trust an openness in that relationship.  The same is true in the employment relationship.

But whilst I’ve got the dissatisfaction with the current reality, I haven’t yet got a clear vision of what I want in place of this reality – although I have got a sense of which direction I want to go in.

I am convinced the annual appraisal has had its day, but simply to remove it might mean organisations have no way of managing performance, and no way of evidencing this – so a fine line has to be walked. But how, if you replace the annual appraisal, do you keep some evidence of performance management to show an industry regulator? And how, no matter what format and frequency you install in its place, do you avoid merely substituting one bureaucratic process for another?

I’d be interested in hearing from anyone who’s done any thinking on this or achieved success with this route.

Will the tail always wag the dog?

Till next time…

Gary

PS in other news, Brexit pushed up the cost of our foreign wedding considerably! But we are just over 50 days away now and I've got to start thinking of a wedding speech. Maybe I should do it as a poem like my recent Ignite?

Rhyme Time - updated to include video

On Friday I delivered an Ignite talk at the CIPD Northern Area Partnership conference (#cipdnap16) - something I mentioned in my previous blog post. I did something unusual and delivered my Ignite as a poem.

A 10 minute poem on the subject of Amazing Workplaces.

In this blog I'll talk about why, and will try to answer some of the questions I've been asked since. If you're interested in the video recreation of the Ignite talk, skillfully done by Ady Howes, here it is.

As soon as @HR_Gem asked me to do the talk back in mid January I was keen to do it, and immediately thought of doing it in rhyme. I'm not entirely sure why.

Surprisingly writing the poem wasn't that hard. I had four months, and wrote a couple of lines or so each day. I've written poetry before but only for loved ones on Valentine's Day and birthdays and so on. This was my first poem on a professional issue and certainly my first public performance of one.

The hardest thing was trusting my own judgement. I felt it would be well received but I also knew it could go very wrong, and I wanted to check it out with the organisers but thought they'd either laugh at me or talk me out of it. I was conscious that there were some big name speakers and many with a strong academic pedigree, and I didn't think my whimsical poetry would fit with these heavyweights.

So it was hard to trust my instincts on this, and also very hard to keep my own secret. I wanted the element of surprise so didn't tell anyone other than my fiancé what I was doing (and she quickly bored of hearing the poem too). I really wanted to tell a few key people but couldn't risk it.

In the weeks beforehand I cracked a little. Phil Willcox was putting together a OneDirection parody and asked fellow speakers for lyrics. Of course my entire Ignite speech was in rhyme and lent itself very well to song, so I sent him a few and asked if he would keep my secret as a result. He did, and I'm grateful to him for that as well as for the opportunity to appear in the video, something I loved doing.

I'm towards the end. See if you can spot that I filmed it in my pyjamas. All I did was wear a different hat a few times to spice it up. I enjoyed this very much though!

So NAP came along. I was attending the Friday only, and had brought my fiancé and youngest child with me - they had a day in York whilst I was at the conference and gala dinner, and we had Saturday as a family round York. This gave the whole event a different feel but to be honest I loved this conference even without having my family there. It had a real family and very friendly feel and I lost count of the number of people who commented that they got as much value from the networking and catching up with people as they did the workshops.

It was all very well organised and ran exceptionally well.

And then it was my turn.

On stage as we were getting prepared I decided I couldn't keep my own secret any more and told David D'Souza and Tim Scott my plan. They looked mildly amused but a bit nonplussed and I don't think they knew I was for real.

Probably they thought I was mad.

And in fact so did I.

I had prepared two versions of my Ignite, in case I chickened out. The slides were the same but the spoken versions were different. One was the poem obviously but the other was more traditional presentation style, and I'd practiced both. It was only partway through the afternoon when I realised I was on last, the very last thing of the day in fact, that I decided to do the poem version as I figured if people hated it at least I'd not be embarrassed for long.

So off I went.

I'd practiced loads beforehand as I usually do, and knew my timings down to the second almost.

It was amazing to watch people's reactions from the stage as, one by one, they gradually realised that my rhyme wasn't accidental, and went beyond a couple of lines, and that I was really doing the whole thing as a poem.

My phone was in front of me on the lectern as I had the stopwatch active to manage my time, but this was bad as Twitter notifications kept flashing up as people tweeted about what I was doing, and with that and the nearby Tweetbeam on screens it was easy to see that I was having a strong reaction from the audience and VERY tempting to read these to see whether people loved or hated it, but I had to keep going and hope for the best.

Peoples facial expressions were priceless and were the encouragement I needed. These told me I was doing the right thing!

And then it was over and I vaguely remember everyone clapping and have a hazy recollection of answering two questions in the closing Q&A, but I can not remember what the questions were or my answers.

People seemed to like it very much. More than I'd hoped they might.

Talking to people immediately afterwards and then at the gala dinner afterwards people seemed to appreciate the different style of delivery, but more than a few people said that rhyme reminded them of being children and listening to nursery rhymes, with the intonation and musical quality to the words aiding retention and impact.

Perhaps.

But as long as people enjoyed it that's the main thing.  I made some people smile, laugh, and some might remember a few things.

I was asked to record it and have, so others can see it.

I've been asked to repeat it at other conferences and may, as long as there's demand for it. And in the future I may do other poetry. But this one was special to me. It drew on a lot of personal experience and was making the point that, in HR, we have the tools to create the best workplace we've ever known, but I'm somewhat ashamed that I didn't use my powers when they were needed most, and stood by whilst others blew down my house of cards. This is a theme I'll return to in a later blog. 

Like all the best songs, there was a lot of me in there.

Am I the HR Poet now instead of the HR Triathlete?  Maybe there's room for both.

I was genuinely taken aback by, and humbled by, the reactions people had and the lovely things they said afterwards.

But back with my family, my fiancé was already bored to tears by it even before NAP and didn't want to listen to me go on about how well it had gone, she wanted her partner back as she'd had to cart our youngest round York all day solo. My youngest child was too young to understand and just wanted to play and cuddle. My older two children weren't bothered in the slightest. It's been Fathers Day and they are only bothered about my ability as a father. I've even seen my own parents today and they didn't mention it (although they did ask if we had a nice time in York). None of my friends or sporting connections had a clue and weren't bothered either. And no one from work is active enough on social media to even know I was speaking let alone that it went well. I suspect no one will mention it to me at work this week.

Am I in the echo chamber of which Simon Heath speaks?

Back to the day job.

So I had a blast. It was a great conference. And I was right to trust my instincts and attempt something different.

To quote a line from the poem, "I've done it before and I'll do it again".

Till next time…

Gary

Ignite!

On Friday this week I'm attending the CIPD Northern Area Partnership Conference, more usually referred to as #CIPDNAP16.  I'm delivering an Ignite presentation on the theme of "Amazing Workplaces" which the conference is structured around.

It will be my first Ignite presentation although not my first speech of any sort obviously.  I'm really pleased to be contributing to #CIPDNAP16 and have enjoyed putting together my Ignite speech.

Withouth spoiling too much of it, its obviously on the subject of Amazing Workplaces and is a kind of Ignite-Max formula, lasting 10 minutes with slides advancing every 30 seconds.  My brief is to take any angle on this I choose, with only the words "Amazing Workplaces" to go on.

I didn't need to look too far for inspiration on this, as my time at GGHT gave me a tremendous insight into what an amazing workplace is supposed to be - so I'm drawing heavily on my experiences there, and adding to it with some lessons from other workplaces too and some things I'm doing in my current workplace too to make that amazing.

The Ignite format means that I have to pace myself well and means that I have to practice as much as possible to get my speech to sync with the progression of the slides and to finish exactly on time.

This works well for me.  My MBTI type is ISFJ, which for normal presentations and speeches is not necessarily a good combination.  I'm highly introverted which means I usually need to feel exceptionally comfortable before speaking to anyone, and need to do a lot of preparation and invest a lot of energy before opening my mouth.  I'm also highly structured which means that I struggle to deal with unanticipated situations and prefer to work within known environments that I can plan for myself.

And yet I'm alright at public speaking, although people are usually surprised - if their first interaction with me is seeing me on stage, they often can't equate that with the very quiet and shy person they see afterwards. And if people's first interaction with me is with the very quiet and shy person, they don't understand how I can stand up and talk to hundreds of people.

And yet speeches do play into structured introverts hands.  If they can prepare thoroughly, and familiarise themselves totally with their material, and if they can structure it in a way that makes sense to them - they can do it.

This is also why I often struggle in interview situations but excel in the presentations that often accompany them.  The presentation I can prepare for, structure myself and practice until its almost perfect.  I'm in control of that.  But the interview, unless I've been lucky enough to get the questions in advance which one interviewer I know always provides, I can struggle with.  I get asked questions that throw me because I'm not always expecting them, and am expected to give an instant answer.  If I could take five minutes to think about it and THEN give an answer, I'd get every job I was ever interviewed for.

Is five minutes thinking time such a bad thing in an interview?

Maybe.  Maybe not.

But in a presentation, on stage, you get no thinking time.  You have to do your thinking before you get up.

So that's just what I've done.

On Friday, I'm going to do something different at Ignite.  I've had five months to think about this, and I've used the time well.  I've structured, practiced and done all the things an ISFJ is supposed to do.

In hindsight, maybe the organisers of #CIPDNAP16 shouldn't have given me this much time to get ready.  I might have let myself get carried away.

But then, if we're talking about Amazing Workplaces, and if there's an Ignite presentation to be done, maybe it deserves something unusual.  Something different.

Let's see.  It might blow up in my face, and no-one might like it, and I'll just look silly.

Till next time...

Gary

PS after this Ignite speech, the next speech I have to write is my wedding speech.  There'll be no slides, no auto-advancement, and only a very small audience, but I'll probably be more nervous delivering that than any other speech I've done!

The Spark

A few days ago I came across this picture on LinkedIn, and shared it along with a comment that it holds true in my opinion and is equally, if not more, true on social media also.

It had a lot of Likes and Shares and a few comments, far more so than any other photo or link I've shared, so I thought I'd reflect and comment more on this.

It strikes me that often, but not always, passionate people can be both seen and heard. That doesn't mean they're extroverts, it just means you can easily identify them. They get their job done but, more than that, they're engaged with the organisation and you can hear and see it.

There is plenty of published work on employee engagement and how and why employees become engaged, and how you can spot it. To me, it's the same as love. If someone is in love with another person, you can tell. If they've fallen out of love with someone else, you can usually tell too.

And whilst I've promised I will blog more on the subject of falling out of love with an organisation, and I intend to, I'll touch on some themes here particularly as they relate to social media activity.

Passionate, engaged people can be seen all over social media. Often they're engaged with their subject matter, or with connecting to other people. Often, too, they are engaged with their employer - and if they are, you'll see a combination of these things:

- The company name in their username / handle
- The company name and/or their position in their bio / description
- Regular mentions and tagging of the company by them in their posts, and often vice versa
- Regular promotion of the company's activities by them, even as passively as liking or retweeting the official company Twitter account (and the same on other SoMe channels)

And then sometimes it can all stop, as the photo alludes to. These passionate, engaged people overnight stop doing some of the things they have been doing and don't start actively trashing the company or being openly negative about stuff, but their silence speaks volumes and the absence of positive brand promotion is noticeable.

Something, somewhere, has gone badly wrong in the psychological contract between employee and employer.

And what really surprises me is how few employers and leaders in those organisations seem to spot the engaged people going quiet.

How it takes them leaving to really get it to sink in that there's a problem in the organisation.

How frequently those employees are explained away as sulking or trouble, and no attempts made to work with them to recapture the passion and engagement they once had.

There are plenty of employees who are ALWAYS quiet. There's nothing wrong with that although if it's all the organisation that can be problematic. But when people who've previously been fantastic brand ambassadors suddenly begin distancing themselves from the organisation and its brand, not noticeably at first but soon noticeable by the lack of activity, its a sign of wider issues.

I can relate to all of this and I'm sure you can too.

How employees relate to the organisation in public, and nowadays this mainly means via social media, is important, and managing the employee experience and engagement via social media can be as important as the customer experience and engagement, and just as damaging to brand image and reputation if ignored or poorly handled.

What causes these previously passionate people to go quiet? To disappear into the organisational shuffle and blend into the background?

It can be many things. A change in job duties or job role, a perception of unfair treatment that goes unresolved, a new manager, a change in senior leadership or Chief Exec with a different style , an office move, a new policy they have fallen foul of, or anything else.

And then you'll see them change. They've fallen out of love with the organisation and they just don't feel like retweeting the corporate account, or sharing and liking the company Facebook and LinkedIn posts. You might find it difficult to spot any mention of the organisation in their profile. You won't really know they work for that organisation any more.

Yes, they'll turn up. But their fire has gone out.

Sooner or later, they'll leave. But in their hearts, they left some time ago.

A question for you is do you care enough to do something about it?

Is trying to reignite the spark in the relationship worth the effort, or is it better to cut your losses and move on?

But here's the thing. If you can do it with one person, they'll do it with others. They'll pass it on. Though it sounds cheesy, the love will spread virally, and all of a sudden, those people who lost their passion for the organisation have once again become the on-brand ambassadors they used to be.

What better way to spend your marketing budget?

Till next time…

Gary

Ps in other news, the wedding is now all paid for and is just three months away. Everything is finalised and there's very little for us to do now, except turn up… I'd best get writing my speech…

#socialhrmcr

Today I attended the CIPD Manchester Branch AGM and unConference, #socialhrmcr - it was my first time at an unConference and I was interested to find out how they work and whether I could adapt for use in my own work. 

The venue was hard to find but once inside was a good space. There were students doing exams in the building which made it feel different. 

The session kicked off with some Ignite presentations, good for me to listen to as I am making my Ignite debut next month at #CIPDNAP16

The Ignite presentations were delivered by George Whalley, Gemma Reucroft, Tim Scott and Ian Pettigrew, all of whom did very well. There wasn't much of an overarching theme to the presentations although all were excellent, and I am thinking this was as much about throwing out some ideas that might help shape the unConference themes later - and if this was the intention, it was a useful one. 

This also gave me a lot of insight into what makes a good Ignite speech and gave me a bit more confidence that my own Ignite speech next month is going to be a good one as I can build on what I've seen. 

I'm looking forward to it. 

Ian Pettigrew then explained the concept and format of an unConference. Despite lots of coverage of such things on social media, I was surprised that very few people had been to one before (it was my debut too) and hardly anyone knew what one was. This had led to some interesting conversations on my table. 

I like the idea of an unConference and can see how I can use this in my current organisation. 

The conversation on my table took some time to get going, and I wonder how we can encourage the development and sharing of ideas at unConferences to make this a little less forced? But gradually we got there and the agenda began to take shape. 

I liked the ability to vote with my feet and attend whichever sessions I wanted, and even to change horses mid race. I liked the ability to be a bumblebee and cross pollinate between groups too. As a naturally high introvert the ability to choose the level at which I wanted to interact, and with whom, was good. 

I started in the session looking at what is a modern HR function. This appeared at first glance to be something that someone was doing an assignment on, but I wondered whether it probably needed a bit more structure than its initial question provided. However it's a question that I've been asking myself in my new role and wondering about in terms of what role I want my new HR team to play in the organisation. 

The conversation went off in various different directions and highlighted how different HR functions are in organisations currently, and of course whilst there is no one size fits all approach, the myriad approaches to HR make it difficult for the profession to reach a shared understanding of what HR could be in the modern world. 

It was interesting to hear just HOW different HR functions are though, and the different levels of maturity in some organisations. A provocative thought was put forward by one attendee that the modern HR function should not exist at all, and should manage organisational maturity to a level where HR is not required, being wholly devolved to and managed by the line - leaving just a rump OD function to support senior managers. 

I can see how this would work, but doubt many organisations are as mature as they would need to be to achieve it. 

A nice thing happened during this. I was scanning Twitter and noticed a question posed by another group, and answered their question via Twitter. I heard them mention it and it obviously helped them to discuss the point further, so I wandered over to see whether I could help. 

That's the beauty of an unConference and one I could immediately appreciate. 

After a carb loading lunch I went to the next session on how to make flexible working work. I've blogged on this topic more than once, and it was of interest to me as I regularly champion flexible working. 

This was another good session, mainly because the differing views even amongst HR professionals about what constitutes flexible working, and it became clear that organisational culture is the barrier and that even HR staff are subject to the restrictions that culture in some places exert. 

The discussion then went off at a bit of a tangent to focus on HR policies and the role they have in shaping organisational culture. It's clear that there are still big challenges here in most organisations, but improving the flexibility and the brevity of the policy can have a great impact on organisational culture and employee engagement. 

My third and final session was on using technology to deliver and aid learning, something that is highly relevant to my current work as my organisation seeks to increase the amount of learning delivered via a blended approach. 

Some great and very relevant examples were given of just in time learning using technology and how that is used to great effect in different scenarios - delivering learning at the point of need. We also got on to the subject of using technology in conferences, with all the social media usage that comes with that. 

We also covered the accuracy of the 70:20:10 model, something I may cover in a separate blog in the future. I do believe in the accuracy of the model and have a few examples from my own CPD that back this up, and this seemed to be the prevailing view of the group also. 

Like all the other sessions though this one went off at a tangent. I am unsure how to prevent this. Could we reduce the amount of time per session from 60 to 45 minutes to avoid that last 15 minutes of "what shall we discuss now?" - or do we ask for the idea originator to spend the first five minutes of each session really exploring the angles the group could take in discussing it, or posing some questions that need answering per session?

We followed this with some one minute summaries of each session. Whilst this as a concept was definitely useful, it might have been helpful to do that at the end of each group of sessions rather than the end of the day. 

As a concept I really like the unConference and it worked well today. I can see lots of application in the workplace and I think I will plan one. 

Till next time. 

Gary

PS in other news, the wedding and honeymoon are all now paid for and we have made all the decisions regarding flowers, decorations, colours, favours and all associated stuff. Less than 100 days now!

Gimme some credit

I have a concept in my head of imaginary credit accounts that regulate the employment relationship.  Initially I thought that each employee had an account with their employer, which they could draw on when required - but the more I think about it it goes two ways, and the employer has an account with each employee which they too can draw upon.

Let's explore this.

Today it has been Flexible Working Awareness Day.  I blogged HERE on this subject last month and started thinking why FW needed an awareness day, realising that there were still barriers to it being widespread.

And then I noticed THIS ARTICLE in the Independent quoting a CIPD survey on job satisfaction - and there were lots of statistics quoted in the article and survey that suggest job satisfaction is falling, as is employee engagement.  This was interesting to note on FW Awareness Day.

So I thought about the links between the two ideas and returned to an old concept I've had and have explained to leaders in several organisations along with HR staff - mental credit accounts.

Here's how they work.

I'm Joe Bloggs, and I work for Company X.  I've been troublesome for a while - minor performance issues, sickness absence now and again, and some behavioural issues as well.  My credit account with my employer is in fact NOT in credit, its in debit.  I have taken far more from the employment relationship account than my employer initially deposited into the account.

And the converse...

I'm Jane Smith, and I work for Company X too.  I've been a happy employee for a while - no performance issues, no notable sickness absence (or none at all), and no behavioural issues.  My credit account with my employer IS in credit, and I have deposited more into the account than my employer initially put in.

So imagine how it works in practice:

- Joe and Jane both have to take time off to recuperate from a planned operation.  They are likely to be off 8 - 10 weeks.  Given Joe's history you'll likely see this as a continuation of his bad behaviour (rightly or wrongly, because he's in debit), whereas for Jane you'll likely wish to support her as much as possible - because she's in credit.
- Joe and Jane both have caring responsibilities, and both tell you they need to take occasional time off with a sickly child, often at short notice.  Again, you'll view Joe's notification in a different light than Jane's
- Joe and Jane put in a request to do an MA in Feng Shui, fully funded by you (and Feng Shui is nothing to do with your business).  You'd likely laugh Joe's out of court, but you might give serious consideration to Jane's.

And it works in reverse too.

I'm John Smith and I work for Company G.  The company has always treated me fairly, given me flexibility, empowerment, involved me, supported me and developed me - I'm going to run through a minefield for this employer if they need me to, as they're in credit with me.

And the flipside.

I'm still John Smith and my Company G merges with Company H to form a new entity.  The leadership changes and in essence its a new company.  I don't think I'm being treated fairly, I'm not empowered any more and I don't feel supported or involved in the new organisation.  I'd just as soon see the company go into liquidation than help it out, as they're in debit with me.

Its a similar concept to falling in and out of love with someone, and the idea of falling out of love with an organisation is something I'm going to blog on separately in the future.

Why is this of relevance today?

Well, the reason why FW has an Awareness Day and the low levels of job satisfaction is because there is too much debit out there.  Employers are in debit with employees so job satisfaction is low, and employees are in debit with employers so the ability to work flexibly isn't as prevalent as it could be.

So seeing both things publicised reminded me of my oft-used concept.  I've mentioned it to leaders in a few different organisations to help them deal with tricky people issues.  I've mentioned it to HR teams I've led to help them understand why consistency is important, but not always achievable or desirable, and its because of the different amounts people hold in their accounts with the employer.

One of the best examples I can give of drawing on one's credit balance is my own.  

I had worked for a particular organisation for 4 years, working hard, being there and not off sick, helping the organisation to develop and driving it forward with new ideas.  I made mistakes, lots of them, but I owned up to them and learnt from them and developed good relationships with the Chief Executive and Directors who knew that I was developing and enthusiastic, and was committed to the success of the organisation.

And then my (first) marriage fell apart and I went through a very painful split and divorce process.

I turned up at work one day and decided to tell the Chief Executive.  I had made up my mind that this organisation was in credit with me and I owed it to them to keep turning up for work and not go off sick with stress (plus, home was the last place I wanted to be).  I needed to tell the Chief what was going on though as I knew my performance was already suffering, and my behaviour was unpredictable.

He was fine with it.  In fact, more than fine.  He told me to just keep turning up and he would support me and cover for me, and no matter how long my "dip" lasted he didn't mind.

I had told him years before of my concept of credit accounts and to my surprise, he quoted it back at me.

He told me I had built up considerable credit in my account and it was time I drew on that.  He didn't even mind if I went into debit as he told me he was confident I would recover in time and put my account back into credit.

In short, he had total and utter confidence in me.

In that one conversation, he earned my loyalty for life and the organisation went into perpetual credit with me.

And I did draw on the credit in my account, and probably went overdrawn, but I repaid the organisation considerably once I'd recovered, just as he knew I would.

And yet I wonder how he would have reacted had a "debit" employee come to talk to him.  I wonder if the "debit" employee would even have been in work, as the employer would probably have been in debit with them too and they would have gone off sick already.

So this is why I think its a powerful concept.

It can help to explain why flexible working isn't working for everyone.

It can help to explain why job satisfaction might not be as high as expected.

And I still offer the concept to people I work with as evidence of why employee engagement matters, right down to individual level.

Its about credit.

Are you in credit?

Is your organisation in credit with you?

Till next time...

Gary

PS my wedding outfit is purchased and, having tried it on, I think I look absolutely sensational