Lets get analytical

A week or so back I attended an HR analytics conference run by Symposium Events. I'd done this because of my growing interest in both predictive analytics and in making our existing static HR data more meaningful. 

Here's my thoughts on the topic. 

My interest has been growing for the last year or so, promoted partly by the creation of the Torus Group and the need for that organisation to realise some big efficiencies over the next few years in a changing and more challenging environment. I started wondering how much HR could contribute to this and began looking at what we did and what others did. 

I concluded that too much of HR data, both in and outside my organisation, was just sitting there and wasn't being actively sought by the business to drive better decision making and improve performance. It was static, retrospective and didn't go much beyond benchmarking in terms of analysis. 

In short, too many HR departments prided themselves on their ability to manipulate systems to extract mounds of data that was then published to people who didn't look at it, or just looked at it and nodded. 

That wasn't good enough then and as my thinking has developed, I know it's definitely not good enough for the future if HR is to justify its seat at the boardroom table. 

So where do we need to get to?

The conference underlined for me the importance of an MI Analyst role in HR, not just to own the data and its production, but to draw conclusions and offer insights. Particularly for organisations with over 1,000 staff. This role would help us to move towards modelling of data and root cause analysis to identify issues and offer solutions. From there we could move to scenario planning and predictive analysis, and link the data analysis to risk analysis and strategic planning. I don't think this person would have an HR background either, probably better that they don't.

I think, though, having a data analyst in the team is only half the solution. We need to understand what the problem is we are trying to solve with improved analytics. What are the most important things the organisation needs to focus on and which interventions would have the most impact on these things?

In the conference, questions were asked about what aspects of culture impede customer service, and what we can do to improve innovation. You'd also include things like an analysis of complaints or compliments data against specific groups of the workforce, maybe at an individual level, to look at what your best performers do to influence customer satisfaction, or what the worst do. You'd look at recruitment data and where you found your best performers, and whether certain recruitment sources provide better performers than others. You'd also want to explore the link between recruitment and performance data, and absence/performance and behavioural data. There's loads of possibilities. 

Basically, HR needs to find data correlations and use them to start a wider dialogue and build credibility. Don't rush in throwing statistics at the organisation without having some context and understanding the organisational problems first.

I tweeted at the conference that HR needs to focus on what will keep Executives awake in the NEXT few years, not what has been keeping them awake this year or last year. 

Of course there are obstacles, as the conference highlighted. The lack of analytical skills or investment in analytical systems is one, as is lack of support from management or hard to access or hard to correlate data. But that shouldn't stop you from having a go. 

To combat the lack of skills, look to develop them in house. Get HR BPs involved in brainstorming correlations in data, generating hypotheses and going looking for data to support or disprove them. HR BPs should be challenging the data, asking so what, and why, as often as possible.

I think it may be easier to start with a pilot of predictive analytics, in one small area, perhaps an easily benchmarkable one that is present in other organisations, like call centre staff. Do some data correlations there, perhaps using one of the data sets that is easy to identify and measure, for example diversity statistics. Although at the conference I tweeted some of the possible areas of difficulty this could lead one to, but at least it's a start.

Ultimately with predictive analytics we could get to Amazon-style customisation of jobs and work for employees, with work and work environments tailored to produce high performance based on how we know performance and engagement has been generated in the past. I might do a follow up blog on this. 

I'm looking to test predictive analytics soon to see what can be done and learn from it. If anyone has any lessons they can share, I'd be interested to hear them. 

Till next time...

Gary

Ps in other news, I turn 40 this week, a major milestone and a natural opportunity to stop and reflect on things. There's a few bits of celebrating to do first though. Or is that commiserating?

Defusing the timebomb

This week I attended The Future of People Management, a joint conference from Acas NW and CIPD Manchester branch. It contained a range of speakers on topics related to how the world of work will change in the next 10 years as a result of unalterable demographics and social changes. Here's my summary of and thoughts on the event. 

It's only a summary though of the main points that grabbed me, it's impossible to capture everything from everyone without making this post too long. However, should you want to read in depth about some of the research referred to by many of the speakers, check out THIS from CIPD. Even if you just read the Executive Summary it's enough. 

First up was Professor Steven Taylor giving a good visual run through of the key demographic trends and graphs. He summarised the main implications for HR were about our capacity to deal with a VUCA  world, how flexible we can be in responding to change, how we can overcome resource limitations to demonstrate added value and how we need to up our game in terms of talent attraction and management. I'd not argue with that, and indeed he said that skills shortages and tight labour markets are likely to push recruitment and retention to the top of the organisational agenda for the next ten years. This is in sharp contrast to the employee relations and downsizing agenda of the last ten years and I wonder how many HR professionals will be able to re skill accordingly?

Taylor also called for an updated version of the Leitch Report to take account of new employment and economic trends and realities, something which I would second. 

He also pointed out that if current rates of net population increase continue, the UK will reach 80m by the middle of the century and become the largest country in Europe.  Taylor was of the opinion that this should not be allowed to happen if we are to remain competitive, and I'm unsure if I agree with this, what do you think?

Next up was Peter Monaghan from ACAS NW talking about rebooting the psychological contract and what that means for HR as expectations of employees and employers change. There were a few generalisations in Peter's talk, which he acknowledged, such as older workers being culturally stuck, but in the main I agreed with what he said.

Peter tried to redefine the psychological contract, speculating on what employees and employers would expect from each other over the next ten years.  Below is his list, which attracted some criticism on Twitter for being outdated but in my opinion many employers have yet to wake up to this reality let alone consider it outdated.  Anyway. His list:

Employees should promise to:

- be productive

- be flexible in return for flexibility

- be loyal in return for loyalty

- give great customer service

- be innovative

- be collaborative

- commit to their own development, 

- be honest

- not to do daft things on social media

And employers should promise to:

- provide a pleasant and safe work environment

- listen and act on employee feedback, 

- provide opportunities to collaborate, 

- provide opportunities for flexible working

- provide opportunities for development

- recognise and praise great work

- provide their best in terms of pay and job security

As examples of companies who are doing this, Peter encouraged us to look at Virgin Group, Netflix and Zappos. Of these, I do struggle to get my head around the unique management culture in Zappos and think that's maybe too far too soon. 

Also worth a read on this subject is THIS recommended by Peter and quite relevant. 

After Peter came Professor Carol Atkinson on redefining wellbeing. She talked creating an environment which allows an employee to flourish and achieve their full potential for the benefit of themselves and their organisation, and how some organisations are doing this. 

Peter Cheese, unexpectedly delayed in the morning, opened up after lunch. I found his talk very interesting on the challenges facing the HR profession in the future, and he shared some eye opening statistics that illustrates the size of the challenge. For example, 65% of today's school children will end up doing jobs not yet invented, and most of the top 10% "in demand" roles today didn't exist ten years ago. 

That's scary. And yet most of the audience were in HR ten years ago and probably hoped to be in HR in ten years time (not me though, I still think there is time for me to become a professional wrestler). So I'm not convinced HR as a profession has evolved in quite the same way or at the same speed. What makes us think that HR is needed in ten years time and if it is, how will we come to understand the jobs our children will be doing?

The final two speakers had hard acts to follow after these.  Cathy Brown spoke about how engaging managers focus their people, treat them as individuals, coach and stretch them - and plugged the Engage 4 Success brand which is worth checking out.  Finally, Emma Swan from Taylors Law talked about how workplace flexibility is the biggest challenge for many of her clients, and how we need to ensure mutually beneficial outcomes.

And then I left.

The conference was in a wonderful building at MMU, easily accessible by public transport but not so easy for those of us in a car.

Overall I enjoyed the conference and left with a lot to think about, both in terms of how I apply the learning and knowledge in my current role but how I can develop my own thinking on future-proofing the workforce and defusing the demographic timebomb that approaches.

I've got some thoughts developing already and will share some of these in an upcoming blog post.

Did you attend this conference and, if so, what were your thoughts on it?  Even if you didn't, what are your thoughts on the future of work as outlined by some of the speakers?

Till next time...

Gary

PS in other news, my fiancee has gone back to work after maternity leave this week and our daughter has gone to nursery at the tender age of 8 months.  She has cried each morning and its been hard on us all.  So I've been a bit distracted this week.  Hopefully she will settle.

Walkabout

This month I relinquished my office and became a mobile worker...without a permanent base.  In this blog I'm reflecting on the experience and how I'm adapting to it. 

I'd also be interesting to hear others experiences of mobile working and whether it has worked for you and your organisations. 

I'd had my own office for longer than I care to remember and had got used to sitting on my own. I'm an introvert and that suits me, I don't need interaction with others in order to do my best thinking or my best work. My favourite office was undoubtedly the last one I had...designed almost for me and with my personality stamped on it. 

But realistically I had a low occupancy rate, probably only being in the office at my desk for about 50% of the time over the last year and every likelihood that this would reduce further in the coming year. So there was no sense in me having an office. 

And so I gave up my office, and have spent a month hot desking at different locations, and working from both home, hotels and coffee shops. Oh, and the car. 

Before I did this I looked at what was happening from a mobile working perspective in the wider economy to try to see what challenges I'd face and what I might enjoy. One of the articles I read was THIS.  Another was THIS. Have a read yourself then come back and compare my experiences. 

So how's it been?

It's had its ups and downs. 

I should qualify what follows by saying that I'm in favour of mobile working and that on the whole I'm glad I made the switch, and it's helped me to understand the transition and feelings of many staff in organisations I've worked in who have gone through the transition too. 

But here's what I had to get used to and what was hard at first...

- no desk means no pedestal/drawers and therefore no storage. Now I hardly used paper anyway so it's not filing I'm talking about. But where do you put your phone, spare pens, charger, and anything else you need to put away somewhere?  

- no drawers means no storage full stop. When people give me paper I have to ask them for an electronic copy or get it scanned myself. Training courses and conferences are the worst for this, they assume you have a filing cabinet to put their laminated brochure in or the printed copy of the slides 

- it also means not carrying a pen with me or having easy access to one so having to beg, borrow and steal these items

- it makes printing difficult on the odd occasions I need to do it, and scanning too. I have to consciously go and log on to a desk somewhere and access the print in that way. But I might not be near a desk for a couple of days

- it means no landline desk phone. I still have an extension, but might only log on to that one day out of five. So I have to use my mobile, which is fine unless I am at home where the mobile signal is terrible. It also means that I'm using my mobile and iPad more in the office, draining its battery and not having access to chargers so I have to charge both in the car during my commute or make sure they are charged overnight

- it means no car park space at the office, which means longer walks from a further away space and which adds to the commute

- it means I don't know where I will sit when I get to one of the offices each day, or even which office to turn up at some days. That can be good (see later), but it means that as I'm hotdesking I can't guarantee there being a desk available at any given location on any day, or even if a desk is still available when I come back from lunch

- it means I can't swear when I put the phone down from a difficult call or when reading a tense email, as there are people around me who can hear! And believe me my solo office was privy to both these things

- finally, by far the worst thing, and if I'm honest the only thing that really bothers me (all the above are tongue in cheek) - I've nowhere to put up a photo of my kids, upon whose faces I would gaze multiple times a day and smile. 

But its been a good thing in general...

- its given me a lot of freedom in terms of where and when I work - I work across three or four offices, plus home, and am not necessarily tied to the times when those offices are open (although the majority of my work is in those times)

- it means traffic jams on the way to work in one office become opportunities to divert and work at another one, so I don't get annoyed at these any more

- its made me more flexible and adaptable to meet customer demands - I can turn up at any office almost at the drop of a hat and not feel like I am a stranger

- the time I get whilst spending more time in the car driving from office to office is actually quite productive, I get a lot of thinking time to plan stuff out and reflect, and I can make and receive plenty of phone calls using the bluetooth connection to the car, meaning I clear a few tasks also

- my use of (and reliance on) technology has gone up, and that's good because I'm constantly connected now to what's going on in my organisation and in my wider networks, and feel I'm only a couple of clicks away from an answer, or at least a question

- I get to see and work with a much wider range of people than before, sometimes different every day, and therefore building more relationships 

- I have access to photos of my kids on every device so they're always with me no matter where I go

- I get to work in the "coffice" (coffee shop / office) and have meetings there as I don't have a meeting table in an office any more, and notice how many other people do the same - its a genuinely nice environment

- And, to my surprise, despite not being tucked away in my own office and being exposed to chit-chat and gossip, I find I am more productive.  I find myself having to work in short bursts rather than one long day, and get more done, and use the extremes of the working day to good effect in this regard.

So has it been good?

Yes.

Would I go back?

It was nice having my own space, but I've needed to redefine what "my own space" actually means - its about relationships, whether virtual or IRL, and its about use of technology to stay connected.  Its about having several spaces and feeling comfortable wherever that is as long as you're connected.  And its about making better use of the time available to be productive.

So I'm all for mobile working.

But I wonder what the future holds if others start to feel the same way.  Already at GGHT over 50% of staff work in this way.  If that's a growing trend, maybe future offices will be more like shared spaces for meetings and collaboration.  Maybe the "coffice" will be a second home to some?

What do you think?

Till next time...

Gary

PS in other news, the holiday surrounding the wedding is booked, and a honeymoon destination chosen (a cruise to Norway).  And my fiancee goes back to work next week following the end of her maternity leave, meaning a) a change of jobs since she had to leave her previous one when she couldn't return there part-time, and b) Poppy goes to nursery at the tender age of 8 months!  All change!

Manifesto

At the moment I'm standing for election to the CIH North West Regional Board.  If you've had an invite to vote, then I'd be ever so grateful if you'd cast your vote for me.

Obviously you don't have to, and I've no way of knowing if you have or haven't, but I think you should, and in this Blog I'll try to explain why.

The CIH NW Regional Board sets out on its website its main purpose: "We believe that access to decent, affordable housing in safe, prosperous places that respect the environment really makes a difference to individuals, families and communities in the North West. We work to make this a reality in our region."

That's a really noble cause.  According to statistics, the population in the North West is set to grow by 3.6% by 2022, of which 20% will be people aged 65+.  Its estimated that almost 20,000 new homes will be needed across the region to meet this population growth, and there was already a shortfall to begin with.  House prices in the region are below the national average but there are significant affordability problems in some pockets of the region.  Whilst there's plenty of private rented accommodation available, it is estimated that an income of £30,000 is required to do this comfortably, and less than 40% of the region's population attain that salary level.

The NW Board have accurately summarised what they feel the region needs:

• Increased investment through grant funding to deliver greater numbers of new social homes, to improve affordability
• Increased investment in low cost home ownership/ shared ownership
• Raise the borrowing cap to allow local authorities to build more homes
• Review the right to buy to ensure that it delivers a 1 for 1 replacement of a social home
• Incentivise new players into development including small and medium enterprises – this will also support local economics and job opportunities
• Measures to unlock more land for housing development
• Incentivise landlords in the private rented sector to provide more stable/longer term lettings and to increase quality
• Ensure that we build not just numbers but homes that will meet the needs of current and future populations, including addressing the size of new homes, the ability to adapt for future needs (Lifetime homes standard) and specialist homes.

Again, this is easy to understand and is a cause I'd be happy to champion if elected.  I think my network of contacts both online and face to face would enable me to reach areas and sectors that have not been touched previously, and when combined with my CIPD Ambassador status I may be in a unique position to bring the HR and Housing sectors together and highlight the good work going on in each to the other.

Torus is uniquely placed as a new and powerful player in the region to influence and directly impact many of these aims, so I'll be able to bring some of that knowledge and influence to bear within Torus and within the CIH NW Regional Board.

I've been involved with the CIH for 11 years now since I entered the housing sector but my involvement has been limited to HR and people-type issues, so its about time I started widening my contributions as I think I've got a lot to offer.

Since 2005 I've been involved in the delivery of CIH qualifications, both in GGHT as an accredited centre and directly via CIH Distance Learning.  I've tutored over 150 students in learning about housing - most of these have been GGHT employees but many have gone on to other organisations - and some have been from other NW-based housing organisations.  The Distance Learning students have been nationally based.  So I've had exposure to lots of ideas about housing and how it can be improved both regionally and nationally, and could be in a position to influence that even more via the NW Regional Board, bringing an element of housing professional education into the mix and spreading ideas via learning aswell as other means.

As an HR professional I think I can also offer a different insight into housing, having worked outside housing for half of my career.  Like HR, housing tends to be low down on schoolchildrens' career choice - its not something anyone ever tends to mention when making GCSE or A-level choices, and I can't recall talking to anyone about going into HR or housing when I grew up.

In fact I still don't know what I want to do when I grow up.

When I was younger I wanted to be a professional wrestler for the WWE (then WWF), or perhaps a professional footballer but only for Manchester United.  As I turn 40 in a month, I think both of these may now be beyond me although I've not given up hope yet.

But housing does offer a lot to those looking for a prospective career.  Its progressive, reasonably high profile, offers a great deal of individual satisfaction and empowerment, and seems to be grasping the opportunities that new technology provides to interact with customers and colleagues.  Housing probably offers everything except really good pay, and that's something that won't change overnight but in all my dealings with housing students, none of them have been too bothered about pay either - think Herzberg's theory of motivation (Motivators and Hygiene Factors), something I use with students often to explain why they chose housing as a career.  But I don't think housing sells itself and its plus points enough, and that's something I'm keen to develop on the regional board.

Beyond HR though I think I could bring a fair bit of experience to the regional board, if elected.  I've been a key part of the teams that led GGHT to 3 stars excellent prospects from the Audit Commission, and one of the more successful stock transfers in the North West.  I've been part of the teams that saw GGHT gain G1/V1 ratings from the HCA and deliver 95% of offer document promises.  I also oversaw the creation of GGHT's initial involvement in worklessness and employment initiatives, and was part of the team that saw GGHT being the first to achieve the HDN SHEF framework.

But I digress.

I've a lot of thoughts on how housing (and employers in general) need to rethink their approach to workforce management and talent attraction in the future, and will cover this in a future blog post.

Right now I'm hoping the election, which closes on 19 June, goes my way and I'm able to enhance and promote the good work the CIH NW Regional Board are already doing.

Fingers crossed.

Till next time...

Gary

PS in other news, the holiday/flights/honeymoon that surround the wedding are ALMOST booked and we've paid the deposit on the wedding - its getting closer!

Mentor me, mentor you

I've been to the Housing Diversity Network (HDN) annual mentoring conference today and it's prompted this blog reflecting on the experiences I've had of mentoring on this and other programmes, and of being mentored myself. 

What role has mentoring played in my and others professional lives? How high up the list of development methods does it lie?

This week is Volunteers Week  - and so the conference was well timed. Mentors usually give their time for free and volunteer their lessons, experience and advice to those they mentor. 

The conference itself was at the superb Fazeley Studios venue in Birmingham and was well attended. It's an annual celebration of the year long HDN Mentoring Programme. GGHT usually has five staff on the programme as mentees, attending a mix of classes, activities and having a senior manager mentor from another organisation to meet with them half a dozen times in the year. My own involvement, aside from co ordinating the programme from a GGHT perspective, has been to act as a mentor myself to other organisations staff on the programme, and to deliver some of the workshop sessions to groups of mentees. 

I find it's a good programme and one where the mentees gain a great deal of skills, knowledge and experience that serves them well in the future. At GGHT I was proud of the 40% success rate of people moving into new roles having been on the programme. 

So the conference celebrates what has happened the previous year and showcases some good practice examples of mentoring in action. Last year I was asked to speak at the conference and enjoyed every minute, but this year I've enjoyed just sitting in the audience and watching. 

I've mentored in the programme for three years now and each mentee I've had has been very different, with different reasons for wanting a mentor and wanting to talk about different things too. It's been a fantastic experience for me and I'm genuinely sad that a change in job roles means I'm unable to continue with mentoring on the programme and delivering workshops next year. The workshops I delivered were around goal setting, personal effectiveness, handling conflict, time management and personal development planning so I hope they were helpful for the mentees who attended. 

HDN as an organisation has its roots in, surprise surprise, diversity, and most of its activities are in that sphere. As I commented in my speech at the conference last year though, the mentoring programme has gone far beyond that and is mainly about talent management now and less about diversity. 

I've enjoyed being a mentor. I started off thinking how I could possibly be of benefit to any mentee given where I am in my own career, as well as my many weaknesses and foibles. But then I realised that a mentor doesn't have to be a superstar senior manager, just someone who can act as a critical friend and sounding board, and someone who has more experience than the mentee and can therefore share those experiences and particularly lessons learned. So I always now approach mentoring from a position of total honesty - I've learned a lot in my career, often through making mistakes, and if I can help a mentee to understand what NOT to do, that's as good as sharing with them some of my successes. 

Not that any of them have shown any interest in following me in doing the Argentine Tango, but you never know. 

I can also be honest with them about things they are doing and give an unbiased opinion on their activities, strengths and areas for development. So it's good. And it's so good to see the mentees developing through the year and trying out new things in their career. Tom McGuire from Riverside Housing spoke at length this afternoon, in a very entertaining and passionate way, about what mentees can develop and how they can do good work as a result. 

And I get something out of it too. I get to connect with younger housing and HR professionals, and expand my network, and learn from what they are doing just as much as they learn from me, if not more so. Terrie Alafat, new CEO of the Chartered Institute of Housing, kicked off today's conference and made some similar points, as well as highlighting how housing as a profession faces significant challenges attracting younger workers (watch out for a blog on this subject soon). 

I've also been involved in a joint CIH/HDN Middle Managers mentoring programme for the last year and found it a similar experience, very positive all round. I find helping new managers very rewarding and given that I deliver training on such subjects, working one on one with individuals becomes more coaching than mentoring sometimes but often achieves the same goals. 

I think every new manager or manager who wishes to develop themselves should have access to a mentor, someone who can be honest and truthful with them and to whom they can unload their frustrations, and discuss their hopes and fears. When I first started managing I didn't have that - I had a few people who mentored me on HR stuff and some who still do, but I didn't have anyone who could help me understand the intricacies of people management from anything other than a procedural perspective, so I learned through bitter experience and feel I'm still learning too. So again if I can share my experiences, I'm happy to do so. 

I've also mentored aspiring HR professionals both formally through CIPD and NHF mentoring programmes, but more often informally - I used to deliver CIPD programmes at Mid Cheshire College and as students left the programme and continued studies elsewhere and developed their career, many kept in touch and still do, meaning I can learn from their experiences and offer ad hoc advice on HR issues or assignments etc.

So professional mentoring has been a very positive thing for me. 

Last year the CIPD launched their Steps Ahead Mentoring scheme, a partnership with some government agencies to get senior HR leaders Involved in mentoring young unemployed people and helping them to find work. It's a really noble cause and one I was very happy to get involved in, but it's not been a fantastic experience I have to say despite its good intentions. Many of the young people I've been paired with have not really known why they are on the programme and seem to have been referred onto it by someone who has not explained it to them. So some of them haven't been keen, whereas others have been keen initially but by the time the pairing process has matched us and we have made contact and agreed to meet up, they have found work and have opted out of the programme altogether. That, to me, defeats the object of mentoring on Steps Ahead. It's not just to get someone into work, it's about keeping them in work afterwards and ensuring they learn key employability skills. Senior HR professionals are well placed to give this support, but I'm not sure the Steps Ahead programme has been sold to young people, or the government agencies, in such a way, as both seem to opt out once a job has been started. It's a shame. 

And in GGHT we've had an internal mentoring programme for some years where I've co ordinated the matching of talented staff with senior managers and mentored actively on that programme. Internal mentoring is quite different as you can often talk about issues that affect both of you and it can become more like joint problem solving, although that's not a bad thing in itself. 

But it's not been easy to convince people to take on mentoring roles, and I wonder whether that's because the advantages aren't as clear as they could be?

So here I am, an experienced mentor facing my first year in many without any formal mentoring to do. All my current mentoring relationships, from the HDN, Steps Ahead, and GGHT internal programmes have all come to a (natural) conclusion and my changed job duties mean I'm not able to devote the time to it in the next year, which is a real shame. 

But I'll be back. Someone needs to learn from my mistakes. 

But it doesn't mean that I'm done with mentoring completely. Conscious of my own development needs, I've sought a mentor myself and am due to meet with them next week. Someone who can help me to improve things I need to improve and who I can use as an impartial sounding board and critical friend. 

I think I'll have a lot to tell them. 

And it's about time I sat on the other side of the mentoring relationship. It might help me to become a better mentor in future too. 

How have you used mentoring in your career? Has it helped you to develop? How important is it that senior leaders take on mentoring roles?

Till next time...

Gary

Ps in other news, bridesmaids dresses have come, and all bridesmaids and best man etc have been appointed. Wedding stationery is next...

The masks we wear

Can you be different in work than outside work?

And what role do personal values play in successful relationships?

I've been on an Emotional Intelligence course recently and have been reflecting on discussions I've had there. In particular I've got some musings on working relationships, personal relationships and organisational vs personal values.

It's my belief that you CAN be different in work than outside work, but that it's not necessarily a good thing. 

And I speak from personal experience. As always. 

I used to make damn sure I was different inside work than outside it. But it wasn't always that way. I remember in my first few jobs, admittedly in very junior positions, where I didn't take work seriously enough and as a result struggled to get to grips with the restrictions and expectations that a professional working life imposes. 

As I climbed the HR ladder I felt more and more responsible for upholding what I thought was professional behaviour in the workplace, and withdrew a little. I've also spoken about my early social media mistakes and the effect that had on my behaviour at work, but there was one other big lesson for me. 

Several years ago I was accused of bullying someone in the workplace. I'd considered this person a friend and had shared a lot of personal stuff with them particularly around the time I was getting divorced, and felt we had a strong relationship and could be open, direct and honest with each other. That backfired spectacularly in this case, and whilst the bullying allegation was unfounded and nothing happened, it was enough to convince me to withdraw into my shell and wear a totally professional and dispassionate mask at work. 

It got to the stage where a few years ago at the Xmas Party I more or less refused to relax and enjoy myself around staff, and because it was a big event I gate crashed another organisations table and stayed with them having fun and letting my "hair" down before returning to my own organisations table some hours later to resume being Mr Serious HR Person. 

I even used to tell my Chief Executive when he would comment on my cool, distant demeanour at work that I was very different outside work. I'm not sure he believed me. 

And why would he? Why would anyone choose to be so different in work than outside work?

So we have discussed that on the course and no one could really fathom it either, and to be honest I didn't defend myself. 

It was a case of Emotional Intelligence gone wrong and it's done me no favours really in my working relationships. 

What recent experience has taught me, and what the course has reinforced, is that individuals should be congruent, whether at work or at home. Be true to yourself and balance all aspects of yourself no matter where you are. 

I'm trying to be more balanced myself in the hope that I can harness my Emotional Intelligence better, and don't see much value in keeping things separate any more.

What's your view? Can you be different? Should you be different?

We also discussed mixing professional and personal relationships. In particular we discussed what happens when your friends come and work for you and whether that makes it difficult to maintain a professional boundary. 

I've had friends come and work in my team but never directly managed any, but I can see how it would be difficult. I have once ended up in a full blown relationship with someone from work but in hindsight that was not a good thing at all, and again I can see how that would, now, make things quite difficult professionally. 

Other people on the course had positive experiences though and commented that in their experience it made for a great culture and working environment, and a fantastic team spirit particularly in small organisations where one person had more or less employed all their friends. 

What's your view on mixing personal and professional relationships? Can it work? Should there be boundaries?

The course discussions also touched on personal value systems and how these can relate to other people's value systems and organisational values.

We noticed that as we described our closest relationships with our partners, we (without noticing) described how they shared our values and that was what attracted us to them, despite in some cases big social background differences, age differences or language barriers. 

I concluded that it's all very well having an amazing personality, being stunningly attractive and having an unexplainable sexual magnetism - accusations all regularly levelled at me - but unless the other person has a similar value system, the relationship is ultimately doomed. And some of those other things can go by the wayside but your values hardly ever change and aren't something you can really hide away either. 

Now in my single days I used various dating sites, but very few if any focused on providing you with information about someone's values.

Maybe there's a gap in the market?

I think the same is true of organisations and the relationship and bond we form as employees with them, as I discussed today. You'll stay with an organisation long term when you share its values. Over time you can evolve to share them if you don't at the outset I guess, but the relationship is doomed if you don't. 

However, and as someone who has done a lot of work on establishing and embedding organisational values, it's one thing to list these on a recruitment site (or even a dating site) but it's quite another to get beneath the surface and find out if they are real and get to understand them. 

For that, there's no substitute for actual experience. 

In short, you have to date someone for a while, or work for an organisation for a while, before you really know for certain if they are "the one". And getting out of that situation if they are not, well, that can sometimes end badly. 

On the course we talked about whether anyone would compromise their own values to fit in, and we concluded that people often do. 

But is that healthy? I wouldn't have thought so. 

What do you think?

Till next time...

Gary

PS in other news, wedding invites are imminent! Naturally we would love you all to come, but there's only so much room on the beach.  I'll still send you the Gift List though. 

Don't hate the player, hate the game

I came across gamification as a concept fairly recently, and have been giving it a lot of thought. This post will explore my interest and hopefully generate some discussion, even if privately, about its potential use in both housing and HR. 

I can't recall precisely where I came across the concept but immediately I liked gamification. I've dabbled in game playing myself as opposed to being a dedicated gamer, but I have an ultra competitive streak and a bit of an addictive personality so I can see how and why gamification appeals, it's just that I know I could get in over my head on some games and spend more time on them than I need to, so I'm wary. 

But my kids are addicted to things like Candy Crush, Angry Birds and Minecraft, and collaborate online with their friends on more involved games like Call of Duty, FIFA and so on. And even my mum is addicted to Candy Crush and any number of Facebook-hosted games you can mention. It's clear to me that gaming and gamification has wide ranging appeal. 

I've also got quite addicted to the Global Corporate Challenge (GCC) in recent years which combines my love of fitness and exercise with a gamification led approach. 

Indeed, the generations who will make up the majority of our future workforce have grown up with online gaming and the concepts of being rewarded for achievements in games whether solo or team based. 

But they are entering organisations, many of whom who are run by people who haven't heard of gamification much less want to embrace it. Even I'm a recent convert in the last 18 months or so. 

Gamification has huge potential benefits to organisations, so it surprised me in my initial research that most examples were based around learning and development. 

I think it has much wider potential than that. Although that's not to decry how good some of the training based gamification is. 

I've seen it myself in GGHT with the GCC. Building in gamification into an activity creates an element of competition, of teamwork and collaboration, of innovation and creativity, helps to embed organisational values and solve problems, engage the staff and build the organisational employer brand, and in this specific case too encourage physical and mental wellness (see About Me for why I'd like this).

So why wouldn't organisations want more of this?

I think it's because the generations who would most readily grasp the idea and implement it aren't sufficiently advanced enough up organisations in sufficient numbers to make a difference. 

Yet. 

But we are growing in number and in influence. 

So far in my research I've seen some good examples of gamification in learning and training. I have seen how some organisations have transformed their induction processes, and other elements of mandatory training like Health and Safety, to make them much more interactive and to engage their staff more.

But training and learning is, for me, only the tip of the iceberg.  Admittedly though I'd only researched its use in housing, but since then I've done more.  Here's a good list of the Top 25 examples of gamification in business.  I like most of these, particularly how the US Army has used gamification in recruitment.  Also notable is no.19 (Bluewolf) using it for employee engagement and brand development.  These though were in a minority - with most examples relating to customers or individual users, and not to employees.

This article discusses more on how organisations can use gamification for their employees, and is a useful read.  And its this that got me thinking of some wider possibilities.

I think organisations can use gamification in a few different ways:

• Reward and recognition.  If employees can collect trophies and points for doing things (see below) then we can translate these trophies and points into a cash or near cash value which employees can use.  Senior managers could award points and trophies to reward good work.
• Performance management.    A set amount of points could lead to a pay rise perhaps, and an individuals' score and trophy haul could be discussed in a performance management discussion and provide the base data for that discussion.
• Collaboration.   Organisations already use Yammer and other internal social networks, but attempts at collaboration on key projects or duties, or just getting involved with other staff by liking or commenting on things could generate points and trophies.  Organisations could link someone's Klout score (if they use it) to Yammer and use that to encourage sharing and collaboration.
• Delivery of services / job duties.  This does happen in some places, eg look at McDonalds where all their employees have those name badges with the different coloured stars.  I used to sneer at that, but look at the reputation McDonalds have as an employer and a developer of staff.  Its gamification in a pure form and an old one.  But it could be adapted.  What about in customer service or call centres, awarding points or trophies for dealing particularly well with a customer or a call.  Or in a sales role for hitting targets.  And hence the link then to reward and performance management.
• Recruitment - see US Army example, but think of how that can be translated into effective selection processes in any organisation - testing an individuals' creativity by asking them to build a Minecraft world, or their problem solving or resilience by tackling a tough Candy Crush level, or even insisting on a certain Klout score before being able to apply for a role.  Or testing their teamwork by getting them to play a multiplayer Fifa game.

These are all pipe dreams at the moment, I think, but I'm excited about the possibilities of seeing some of them come to fruition and I am convinced within 10 years we will see all of them.

How have you seen organisations use gamification?  Have you seen some of my examples being done?

What do you think the future holds for gamification?

Till next time...

Gary

PS In other news, wedding date now set for Friday 26 August 2016 in Paphos, Cyprus!