We Belong

This is the second in a series of blogs discussing the concept of motivation and what its sources might be. Its prompted by a conversation I had with Bee Heller, from The Pioneers. Bee asserts that there are seven different sources of motivation, and is writing about each of them on The Pioneers website. 

We decided I'd write a commentary piece about each one on my own blog, and look at what's happened in organisations I've worked in and with - whether the source of motivation Bee's blog discussed has been used to good effect or been neglected; what's worked well in terms of creating an environment that enhances that motivation; and what's not worked so well or undermined that motivation for people? 

Here's Bee's blog post on the subject of belonging.  In it, she says that the desire to belong and fit in is a powerful motivator in both society and in particular in the workplace, and offers some thoughts based on anthropology and social neuroscience and her own experience. She says in the workplace, we need to push at the open door that is an employees desire to fit in and contribute to a group in order to unlock their motivation. 

I agree with the concept of belonging but have seen it manifest in different ways. In my Amazing Workplace rhyme I make a comment about someone wanting to fit in being influenced by the attitudes of the people around them, in that the feeling of belonging can be enhanced by things other people do. So thus far, this tallies with Bee's thoughts. As does the sense of danger I feel about groupthink and stifling diversity, which is echoed by Bee. 

In some of my other blogs I've written about things that help the concept of engagement, particularly for new employees when the need to fit in is at it's greatest. In The New Boy I talked about the specific practical things that heighten the sense of belonging in new starters. In The Spark I talked about how you can spot when an employee no longer has that feeling of fitting in. And in Swipe Left, Swipe Right I likened the employment relationship to actual relationships and I believe all humans have a desire to feel loved and needed, which manifests itself in both actual and working relationships alike. 

I have belonged to lots of sports clubs and teams over the years and have often felt both a sense of belonging and a sense of isolation. I've reflected on what made the difference between these two extremes, and it is most definitely the attitude of my team mates that had the greatest effect. When I've had a leadership role in these teams I've gone out of my way to ensure that new members of the teams feel like they are wanted, that their contributions are recognised and that they fit in with the team. And mostly, it's worked too. 

In the workplace, I've felt a strong sense of belonging in just two organisations I've worked for. These experiences were years apart and at different stages of my career. In both cases though it was linked to: a) working for a manager who I respected and got on with; b) having opportunities to socialise with colleagues and being encouraged to do so, whether I ended up doing so or not; and c) feeling like the organisation actually wanted me there and needed me to do something, and that they respected my skills to do so. 

Strangely in both cases I was the first person to do the particular role I was employed in. There was no history or culture to fight against. There was no expectation of me doing what my predecessor had done. And no perceptions of my role to work against me. 

I've seen other examples of employees who instantly belong in a new job. My wife moved organisations last summer and after three days in her new job said she felt like she fitted in and had been there years. Looking back at her experience last summer, it replicated my own thoughts above. She belonged. In a past organisation we took on a graduate employee who within hours of starting seemed like they had been there years, and when they left after about a year it felt like they left a huge hole in the organisation. 

And yet I've also seen examples of employees who, despite the best efforts of the organisation and its people, simply did not belong. I recruited a middle manager who had had a strong affinity to a previous employer and couldn't shake it. She started, like many new managers do, by comparing us to her previous employer and referring to us as "you" and her previous place as "we". In a first month, that's ok. But she was still doing it nearly 18 months later and she had had all the opportunities I mentioned in the above paragraph to encourage her to fit in. But she didn't. We were still "you" and her previous employer was still "we". In this case, nothing that our organisation did managed to get her to fit in. And yet something that her previous employer did had worked SO well that she still felt she belonged there after having left. 

And that, I suppose, is the point I am making. 

That there are things that make someone feel belong in an organisation and these can work very very well, but there comes a point where the employee becomes indoctrinated in that organisations way of doing things and has echoes of brainwashing, so much that it is difficult to undo and affects an employees ability to fit in with any subsequent organisation, despite any efforts made by that organisation. 

Strangely, I've had it myself. 

I've moved to organisations where I've not felt a sense of belonging and yet other employees who have started at the same time as me have clearly and visibly fitted in quicker and more noticeably. Whose fault is it that I haven't felt any belonging? It's hard to tell. 

So what can organisations do? 

I'd recommend asking each employee what would help them settle in and feel that sense of belonging. It might be a daft question at first, and it might take a few attempts to get a useful answer, but what harm can it do? 

It might help that employee to reach optimum performance level and optimum engagement level quicker, and avoids the chance that these levels won't be reached at all. 

So, what would make you feel a sense of belonging? 

Till next time… 

Gary 

PS in other news, we've now got a quote for all our home improvements and need to decide whether to do them, which will be cheaper than the alternative, which is moving to a new home that has everything already done, but that has some attractions too…

The Professionals

In recent months the CIPD has been developing its new Principles. Considering these has made me wonder about the whole concept of professionalism in the HR community.  In this blog I'll discuss some of this, perhaps somewhat controversially.

I was first alerted to the principles during #CIPDACE16 where there were some focus groups going on. Engaging with some of these on social media, I retweeted something about professionalism in HR by saying that I thought that the CIPD qualification ought to be a criteria for entry into the profession, and that the CIPD should regulate the profession in a similar way to how the legal and accountancy (amongst others) professions and professional bodies operate.

I got no reaction until some hours later when Doug Shaw retweeted my views, asking for comments.

And we got a lot of comments then. Almost all of them disagreed with my view, stating that it was narrow minded and restrictive to think that the CIPD qualification was the definition of professional status, and that many good people and ideas are operating in HR without having joined the CIPD or done its qualification and so restricting entry to the profession would prevent many talented people being part of the HR community.

I was taken aback by the strength of the views, and realised my own views were not the conclusion of my own thinking but perhaps an opening salvo, and needed to be developed through discussion and research.

I immediately followed all the people who had disagreed with me, and there were more than a few. Only one followed me back though.

I've not finished developing my views, either, and this blog is part of that development process so I'm hoping your reactions will help me.

I do still believe that there ought to be a professional entry requirement in order to practice in HR. But the reactions of people the other month, I thought, said more about their views of the current CIPD professional qualification rather than the general point of having a professional entry requirement and regulation. It's clear that a great many people don't view the CIPD professional qualification as effective in instilling professionalism or assessing professionalism amongst the HR community.

A fair point. But that doesn't mean it couldn't in future.

So should it? And if we ripped it all up and started again, would we end up with the same CIPD qualification we have today?

After all, I don't think we can really call ourselves a profession if we don't have some kind of entry requirement and, especially, no widely agreed definition of professionalism?

So how would YOU define professionalism?

I think it has to be assessed as a standard, and upheld throughout ones career. It has to embody more than just knowledge and skills, but a set of values or principles. It is about ascribing to a set of behaviours that represent a way of life for the said professional.

That's how it is for those in the legal profession. And chartered accountants (my wife is one and I supported her through her qualification). And other professions too.

And yet in some professions, the concept of a professional means nothing more than someone who is paid for their work, to distinguish them from amateurs.

So we can't agree what professionalism means. Is this why the CIPD have launched their principles?

I think they come close to establishing something like professionalism for our HR community. Amongst the principles are the following points on professionalism:

• An ethical duty to use the profession’s unique knowledge of people and organisations to champion better work and working lives; 
• Striving to create situations where work benefits everyone – whether workers, organisations or the societies they are part of; 
• Being an ambassador for the profession and an advocate of good HR, acting with integrity, and using expertise responsibly, for the public good 

And I think this is spot on. It captures everything I think professionalism means.

But does the current CIPD qualification assess this? I'm not sure it does, so I can understand people's anger when I suggest using that qualification to bar entry to our profession.

But could it? Yes, it could. But it needs rebooting perhaps.

Plenty of people become CIPD members via different routes and that's fine by me as long as their professionalism is assessed somehow, and that professionalism is regularly (?) revisited to ensure their practice remains professional.

But what about those people who choose, for lots of valid reasons, not to take the CIPD qualification and become CIPD members? Should they be allowed to call themselves HR professionals.

No.

They shouldn't.

That's not to say they shouldn't work in HR, or that the HR community is not enriched by their presence and ideas. It is, and we should embrace all ideas and people. But the notion of professional status should be restricted, in my view, to those who have been assessed as reaching a certain set of standards.

I don't think the current CIPD qualification is completely fit for purpose. But it could be, and right now it's as good a starting point as any. And the new CIPD Principles are an excellent step forward too.

I'd like to work in a future profession that encompasses all aspects of good people work, not just traditional HR, and where telling people you're an HR professional garners the same glance of recognition that telling someone you're a solicitor or a doctor does.  I'm keen for HR and the CIPD to champion the future of work and to create amazing workplaces, driven by talented professionals.

Am I wrong?

I'm still thinking about it. I'm prepared to accept that I am wrong, and I'm particularly keen to hear from you if you have views on this.

How does HR move forward as a profession?

Do the CIPD Principles help and do they mean anything to you?

Should professional status be both assessed and regulated, and thus controlled completely, by our professional body?

Let me know what you think, your views are very welcome.

Till next time…

Gary

PS in other news, I passed my Level 2 Fitness Instructing qualification and found out a couple of weeks ago. I'm now moving onto the Level 3 Personal Trainer qualification and hope to complete this by summer. It looks hard but I'm looking forward to it and may need people to help with case studies!

Flow

This is the first in a series of blogs discussing the concept of motivation and what its sources might be. Its prompted by a conversation I had with Bee Heller, from The Pioneers.  Bee asserts that there are seven different sources of motivation, and is writing about each of them on The Pioneers website.

We decided I'd write a commentary piece about each one on my own blog, and look at what's happened in organisations I've worked in and with - whether the source of motivation Bee's blog discussed has been used to good effect or been neglected; what's worked well in terms of creating an environment that enhances that motivation; and what's not worked so well or undermined that motivation for people?

Here's the first of Bee's blogs - on the subject of FLOW.  Flow is described as "the mental state of being completely absorbed in a task or activity, otherwise known as being 'in the zone'".  Bee suggests that most workplaces do a poor job of creating an environment that encourages flow, and suggests there are five things organisations can do to ensure flow happens:

1. Make sure goals are clear.
2. Give people access to immediate feedback
3. Balance people's strengths with the challenge of their activities
4. Create an environment that allows for deep concentration
5. Support people to be in the present and in control

I recognise the concept of Flow very well. In my sporting endeavours I've experienced Flow many many times. When you're in the zone, you tend to have no concept of the passing of time, and pretty much everything you try comes off. Although I have had it in my triathlons, I experience it more in my crown green bowls career - and that's not such a mental leap because the need for concentration and coordination of physical and mental activities is greater in that sport than any other I've taken part in.  But when I am in the zone in bowls, I am a different person. I feel alive, like I could win my game with my eyes shut and standing on my head, and in fact when I become conscious that I am in the zone I find it amusing and baffling in equal measure. I can't figure out how it started or what caused it, and there's no prompt for it finishing either (even, surprisingly, the act of becoming consciously in Flow doesn't make it suddenly stop). 

But this echoes my experience of Flow in the workplace. I've experienced it. I've seen others experience it. But can anyone pinpoint a cause for it or say how long Flow will last? I'm not so sure. 

I know Bee has said the five things help. And I can see that they would help anyone to feel more motivated, but would they create Flow?

Again, I'm not so sure. 

The best example of Flow I have experienced in the workplace is on my final day before a significant period of annual leave. On that day, because I know I'm not around for a week or more, I'm at my most productive. Work comes easy. I do some of my best work too. I waste no time, I am assertive, completely in control, and able to perform to the very best of my abilities without much effort. 

But, at the end of the day, I am tired and often I get a cold when I go on annual leave. Always did when the school holidays came around too. 

So what does that say about Flow?

That Flow must involve considerable adrenaline. The ultimate fight or flight reaction. 

That Flow, containing adrenaline, can only be sustained for short bursts but that in those short bursts it produces extraordinary results. 

That Flow, in short bursts, must end and when it does, the individual is vulnerable to a range of things that may stretch to illness but most commonly will be no more serious (?) than underperformance. 

So to return to Bee's questions to me - I think Flow is neglected as a source of motivation, but not necessarily because organisations don't want to, more because many don't know how to, and many don't want the consequences. 

But - have I seen instances where the five criteria Bee outlines have been present?

Yes. But I wouldn't call that Flow in the way Flow was earlier described. 

Would those things help performance though?

Yes. And I have worked in places where they've been present, but not for everyone. And not all the time. 

Some are brought about by good leaders. I worked for a fantastic Chief Executive who encouraged all of those five things for me, and I did some of my best work as a result. The whole organisation had some element of Flow as described by Bee, but without the adrenaline I'd associate with it. But when that Chief Executive departed, so did the sense of Flow for me and I suppose for much of the organisation. But even then not everyone performed, as there were some individuals for whom even the presence of the five factors made no difference. 

I call such people wrongens.

I've also worked for an organisation where, from looking at the five factors Bee mentions, I know I had 4 out of 5 regularly and on some occasions all 5 but not once did I feel in the zone in that organisation, not once did I feel motivated and in fact I felt completely demotivated.  Was I a wrongen?  Maybe I was.  My demotivation stemmed from some past event where I felt completely devalued having given my all for the organisation and had it thrown back in my face.  So no amount of the 5 factors would change that for me.

So Flow is not dependent on the 5 factors being present, but its doubtful it could be present unless the 5 factors were there.  I think what I'm saying is that there is probably a 6th factor, that differs for individuals, and is the key to unlocking motivation.

I guess all organisations can do is as Bee says - ensure the five factors are present, for as much as possible and for as many people as possible. 

Basically, as I've said before, create the conditions where people want to, and can, go the extra mile. 

Is that Flow? 

You tell me. 

Till next time...

Gary

PS in other news, Xmas was fantastic and I had a fortnight off work completely, something I've not done even for paternity leave, wedding or honeymoon or any holiday. I enjoyed the rest, and, much like in Julie Drybrough's recent post, I didn't actually rest at all, just took a complete break from professional life and threw myself into other things at home and in my training. Really really enjoyable and highly recommended. 

HR lessons from...The Tiger Who Came To Tea

Recently I've been reading The Tiger Who Came To Tea every evening before bed to my youngest daughter. It strikes me that this tome may masquerade as a childrens book but, beneath the childish facade, there lies many serious messages for HR and our role in making organisations better places to work.

Here's my analysis.

This book is a searing commentary on cultural deficiencies, process inefficiencies and gender inequality in the workplace, and also the dangers on getting the wrong person into your organisation via a recruitment process gone awry.

It starts with Sophie and her Mummy receiving an unexpected guest at their house, and wondering who it could be.  This is teaching us to be ready for the unexpected and basically the importance of business continuity planning, as you never know what challenges your business might face, especially when Daddy isn't at home.

It then describes how they invite this random stranger into their house with little regard for their own personal safety, or hygiene in the workplace - its telling us how organisations often onboard people without really doing background checks and assessing suitability, so its a lesson to get these things right first.

 Then, to Sophie and her Mummy's horror, the tiger proceeds to eat them out of house and home, basically taking the piss out of their whole approach to inducting new staff and running roughshod over their attempts to slowly integrate this new starter into their culture.

Here, then, is an important lesson on assessing cultural fit during the selection process and making sure expectations and behaviours are made clear during the important induction process.

Its also a lesson on how to handle addictions in the workplace, because the tiger is seen to be addicted to alcohol and other drinks, and this behaviour is encouraged by Sophie stroking him when he does this - does your organisation subtly encourage and reinforce drinking alcohol in the workplace at Xmas time?  Is this considered gross misconduct?  Do you help people to manage any addictive behaviour they display?

 And then the tiger leaves, effectively resigning his position in the workplace, and leaves without serving his notice period and leaving a trail of disruption and destruction in his wake. When YOUR employees leave, how is that exit process managed?  Its important to get it right.

Finally, the boss returns (and the boss here is male, wrongly reinforcing gender stereotypes in the workplace, as it is assumed the females are incapable of resolving the situation and require the male to give them instructions on how to problem solve) and helpfully suggests that the answer to their problem is to outsource food production to a local cafe.  Have you explored outsourcing as a way of managing your flexible workforce?

The book ends by showing Sophie and her Mummy learning their lesson about not planning ahead, and beginning to work on their business continuity plan and have things in place for if the tiger should come to tea again.  This is very good advice.

But he never did.

And there ends the lesson.

Basically, get the basics of HR right and you can't go wrong.

Till next time...

Gary

PS Merry Xmas and a Happy New Year!

Independence Day

I've been reflecting on a decent number of my connections leaving the corporate world and setting up as self employed, and I've been wondering whether there's some pattern emerging.

So this blog is me trying to make sense of this, and "thinking/working out loud".

I've noticed a good number of my connections going independent. Very recently, at least three or four have all made this leap, for their own different and very valid reasons. Earlier this year one or two did the same, and so did a couple of colleagues who left my last employer around the same time I did.

I wish the very very best to all who do this, and part of me is slightly jealous as I almost went self employed this time last year, getting as far as setting up my own business and beginning to build my portfolio of activities over a long lead in period before reversing course when I got an unexpected job offer. But I was within a couple of months of doing it. I don't know if I will in the future, at the moment I'm still happily employed and with things I want to achieve in employment too. 

I've mentioned a few Twitter-based connections who have gone self employed, but it's not a new phenomenon. In fact I belong to a networking group of L&D practitioners who have met informally for at least 15 years (how long I've been in the group, but it probably started much earlier than that) - and I remember how back in 2001/2002 most, almost all in fact, of the group were in employed positions but now, as we enter 2017, I'll be one of only two who are in employed positions. The rest have, one by one, gone self employed. Maybe that was an influence on me. 

Of course, I've had a little bit of self employment for over ten years, working occasional/regular evenings delivering CIPD (and other) qualifications for a variety of providers, but now and again fitting in freelance work on a range of HR issues or training on behalf of organisations. But this is only part time work although I do get a lot of enjoyment from it.

I do wonder though whether these things could be enough to sustain a full time equivalent income, and this was part of my reasoning for doing my 180 last year, although I was doing well in building up these income streams and adding more.

I also had an insightful but brief chat with one self employed person who really challenged me about whether I was ready to go self employed last year. They said that there are plenty of people who seem like they're having really successful self employed careers and really promote themselves well, but in reality they're struggling and it was a crowded market.

And this does seem to ring true with some people I've seen now winding up their self employed businesses and going back into employment. I've seen three or maybe four people do this in the last year, almost as many as I've seen go the other way.

But I wondered as well whether there's something about life stage and career stage that prompts some of this. For example I'd just turned 40 when I had my self employed vision clearly, and many years ago I remember two well known L&D consultants telling me they had a similar view at that age and went self employed. And many of the networking group I mentioned were of a similar age when they went self employed.

I'm not sure. But maybe it is career experience related. I've heard some people say they've had enough corporate experience (some called this corporate BS) and want to work for themselves. 

I think this says a few things. One, that there comes a point when your employed experience is optimised enough to get enough momentum behind your "run" that you can "fly". Two, that there also comes a point where one tires of being in an organisation - in HR, we often know instinctively what makes a great workplace and, if we can't work as an employee in one and shape it, we may get frustrated and go and set up our own. And Three, there comes a point where you realise what you're really great at, and want to do more of that and less of other things, and going self employed is the best way to achieve it.

And maybe Four, when you're around the age of 40, your financial situation makes it an easier thing to contemplate. Although in my case when I was contemplating it I had just moved house and took out a new mortgage, got engaged and had a third child so I was perhaps stacking the deck against myself there.

So it's no wonder I'm not contemplating self employment any more. Based on those four things, I'm not there. On one, I've got a lot more to offer my current and any potential future employer and there's things I want to achieve whilst employed there yet. On two, I was definitely there last year, frustrated at not having a voice or influence any more and needing to shape things again, but I've got those back now at my current place so it's different again. On three, I'm halfway there maybe, as I know I'd STILL make a really awesome WWE wrestler just as much and maybe more than anything else I could do, but I'm also pretty good at my HR stuff too and getting better so if it ain't broke, why fix it? And on four, nothing's changed for me.

So what does this mean for the people who have gone self employed, either this year or previously?  Well, they've been able to satisfy themselves with answers to each point and they're making a go of it. And all power to them. I hope they all make it work.

And maybe those who've gone back the other way found not that they'd failed in any way, but that their answers to the points had changed and they needed to return to employment to achieve something different. And again, all power to them and I hope they make it work too.

I say find something you're awesome at, and do it. If that's self employment, or employment, it doesn't matter. Only the awesomeness matters. 

Till next time.

Gary

PS in other news, our holiday saga is over. We gave in and compromised on a regular family holiday, again possibly our last one as a complete family. We've booked a week in Turkey in August but hope to supplement this with a couple of short breaks here and there. My favourite place to look at for a short break at the moment is Switzerland or Austria, can anyone recommend either place?

#cipdace16 - Reflections...

This time last week I was at #cipdACE16 covering the event as part of the Blogsquad. And my, how quickly a week has gone.

Now that a week HAS passed though, its given me time to reflect on what was a superb event and learning experience.

The event, as mentioned, was superb. Each year the Annual Conference and Exhibition seems to surpass itself and deliver something unique and special, and this year was no exception.

The choice of keynote speakers and the choice of conference session speakers was very good, with my only complaint being that it was genuinely very difficult to choose which session to go to as often, with four options, at least three were things I really wanted to go to. I don’t know if its possible to do anything about this but I had a feeling that I missed out on as much as I got to.

The exhibition was lively this year and the use of space continues to improve. I like the informal networking area at the end which works very well. The free sessions all seemed well-attended but because I was in the Conference itself it made it impossible to get to any of these, and I did want to. Again I’m not sure what can be done but perhaps the sequencing and overlaps could be looked at.

I was disappointed by the lack of engagement by many of the exhibitors, who had presumably paid a lot of money to exhibit. As already pointed-out in THIS POST by Inji Duducu and in the comments on that post by Gemma Dale, most of the exhibitors were not active on social media and missed a trick in terms of sales and overall engagement with attendees. Hardly any really tried to sell me anything (not that that’s easy) and many had no interest in me once they saw my Blogsquad/Press badge, which was a shame because I could have done stuff for/with them.

And the swag haul was a bit same-y too – pens, chocolates, stress toys. Where were the standout offerings to get people to come along? Its more than just a box of Celebrations surely?

There were a LOT more fringe and social activities this year and that was a very good thing, and some took place the night before avoiding EVERYTHING happening on the Wednesday night, but even then there were far too many things happening at the same time on the Wednesday evening and it was impossible to get to more than 1 or 2 of them. Again, sequencing and overlap could be looked at to enable people to make the most of the social aspect of the Conference. Those that I did go to, and those that other people told me about, really seemed to go down well.

To be honest though I’ve lost track of the number of conferences where delegates have told me they get as much from the breaks as they do from the conference sessions, and this was also true at #cipdACE16. A slight criticism is that there weren’t enough long breaks to really get around the exhibition inbetween conference sessions, attend some of the free learning sessions, grab a drink, nip to the toilet, check your phone and do all of those things before heading back into the conference. Not to mention actually talking to people you want to talk to (and exhibitors). From a timings perspective I wonder whether its worth looking at the conference going back to THREE days again like it used to – that way things could be more spread out and you’d not feel like you were sacrificing one thing to get to another all the time. If that’s not possible, I’d look to extend the two days – no reason why the Exhibition couldn’t open at 08.30 and close at 17.30 both days, giving a clear hour either side of the conference to get stuff done.

Manchester itself remains a top location, and the event is really starting to grow into Manchester after 7 years there. This year it felt like we had almost taken over the city in the same way we used to pretty much rule Harrogate back in the day. It gave the whole experience a really nice feel (helped by the Xmas markets starting too).

I enjoyed being part of the Blogsquad again and feel lucky to have been asked. It gives me a very different perspective on the event that few get to experience, and enables me to share my own learning to a wider audience aswell as promote the event.

I enjoy blogging (yes, really) and particularly live blogging from events because it’s the best way for me to ensure the learning is recorded and sinks in.

I also managed to put out 120 tweets of my own across the 2 days along with numerous retweets, and this year added Instagram into my social media output. I ALMOST got Periscope up and running but a medical emergency in one session as I was about to go live distracted me, and I never got chance again.

But, by crikey, being part of the Blogsquad is tiring – with very long days and constantly being “on” even late into the evening. I am not sure I’ve recovered since, although my 2 year old daughter is not one to let me rest or recuperate.

From a personal perspective I learnt loads, as you can see from my blogs, which to be honest only capture perhaps half of what I will take away from the event:

Blog 1 – covering Peter Cheese’s introduction and Margaret Heffernans’ keynote KN1 speech

Blog 2 – covering Steve Head and Matt King’s motivation speeches A1

Blog 3 – covering Neil Morrison, Sukh Pabial and Claire Thomas on recruitment rebooting B2 and a Panel Debate on the Future of Work C4

Blog 4 – covering Lynne Weedall and Valerie Hughes-D’Aeths’ speeches on organisational transformation D3

Blog 5 – covering CJ Green and Amanda Oates’ speeches on rethinking performance management E3

Blog 6 – covering Gianluca Petriglieri’s keynote KN2 speech (partly)

I met so many nice people, many of whom I’d met before, and many of whom I hadn’t seen for ages or was meeting for the first time. In particular it was nice to put a face to the name that is Mark Hendy, to finally meet my mentee Lisa Snell in person, and to spend time chatting with Rachel White, who I’ve known on a personal level for many years but never bumped into at an HR event before. All the rest of the Blogsquad were superb company and did a great job throughout the two days, and the staff at CIPD events/comms were both hard working and very friendly too – thanks to them for getting me involved.

I also enjoyed catching up with, separately, no less than five people who have worked for me in a previous organisation. It was genuinely nice to see them still progressing their HR careers and to see how they are doing now that we no longer work together.

I’ll end by telling you about my most bizarre experience of #cipdACE16, which still doesn’t rival being chatted up by a CIPD Researcher on their stand about 5 years ago, but is still bizarre.

I was in one of the conference sessions and sat on a table with a group of 7-8 others. The woman next to me glanced at my badge partway through, and I later noticed her tapping away on her iPad. I figured at the time that she noticed I was part of the Blogsquad and was looking up my Twitter feed, so I was pleased.

At the end of the session she turned to me and apologised for staring at my badge but explained that she recognised my name and thought she knew me. She further went on to say that she did indeed know a Gary Cookson, and was friends with said person on Facebook, but having looked at their profile during the session and then looked back at me, she realised we looked COMPLETELY different (eg he had hair) and therefore I was not the person she knew.

And not once did she say she knew me from Twitter, or this blog.

I wasn’t sure what to say and said as much. At that, she smiled and left.

Till next time…

Gary

PS in other news, we’re approaching a point in our house where we’ve been there just over 2 years and it needs a fair bit of work doing to it. We have a choice whether to do this and commit to staying there for the long-term, or move. It’s a tough choice!

#cipdace16 blog 6 - KN2

And here we are in the final keynote speech. I shamelessly ducked out of the penultimate session so that I could spend enough time giving attention to the Exhibition, both talking to suppliers and filling my swag bag. I also spent time talking to old and new contacts and had a blast. 

But boy am I tired now. 

And no one was giving neck and shoulder massages. Time was when you could get 3/4 in one afternoon at this conference. Now there's none. 

Bad times. 

In general though the Exhibition had a good vibe about it this year. There was a lot of variety in providers and not so many pushy ones as last year, with many being happy to chat in general terms without necessarily trying to sell. The breakout spaces around the hall were well used and there was a nice, relaxed atmosphere. 

I wonder though when suppliers will start to realise that pens are not a good, modern gift. I hardly use one nowadays. And when they'll find a more modern way of entering their prize draws than leaving a business card? I've not had a business card for six or seven years as social media and other electronic media have passed them by. 

So I'm in the keynote from Gianluca Petriglieri who came with a huge reputation and didn't disappoint. 

His talk was about competence not being enough, and that's something that has been a bit of a theme in sessions I've attended. He also mirrored some themes explored by Peter Cheese in the opening speech yesterday about a lack of trust in the workplace too. 

He asked us to discuss a time when we were well led. Both Ian Pettigrew and I, when discussing this, talked about people we used to work for who were good leaders but who we only came to fully appreciate after they or we had moved on, when someone less good took over and we experienced poorer leadership styles. 

Gianpiero asked us all how we knew we were being well led and some of the audience struggled to answer this. I know I did. I suppose I didn't know at the time what a good leader they were, but having experienced others since I now know how good that person was. And I do struggle to really define what he did that was different. 

His point was that we struggle to really know whether leadership exists, in the same way we can't say for certain that love exists. 

Someone pointed out that they do exist in how they make us feel and act, even though they are not tangible things. Gianpiero agreed with that, and added that you see it (both leadership and love) when someone does something to benefit you without any obvious gain for themselves. 

He said that leadership is a cocktail of skills that get another person to do something that they wouldn't do of their own volition. Therefore leadership is the exercise of influence. 

At this point I needed to run for a train but I was enjoying this speech and would encourage you to catch up with the rest of it via Ian Pettigrew's blog and storify. 

I'll do a summary blog post on #cipdace16 in a few days time when I've had chance to reflect properly, but right now I'm shattered and missing my family. 

Till next time...

Gary