Influential HR Grows Talent Management, First and Foremost

Posted on April 12, 2007 by Toby Lucich

Measuring upI’m loving the thinking bouncing around, reading about value and influence at SystematicHR ” HR Versus Finance – Influence, Power, and a Seat at the Table Part 2” and ItzBigBlog “Want to increase ROI? Start investing in talent.” This is precisely what I love about blogs and blogging – seeing ideas spin in new and different ways and participating in the conversation.

A few quotes to put my thoughts into perspective:

At SystematicHR:

If we’re locked up in a knowledge economy, why are we still using industrial era production analysis when the real capital is talent? If business can make the shift to evaluating the return on talent rather than capital, would this make the executive teams more interested in what we’re doing?

And in a tangential, almost unrelated discussion at ItzBigBlog:

Among all the C-level players in a company, there needs to be a Talent Officer. Without someone representing talent in executive-level decisions, your talent probably isn’t giving you the highest return… The Chief Talent Officer would have responsibility for the organization’s acquisition, retention and development of talent.

I still think that there is a “miss” in the thinking about how an HR group becomes more valued, or more critical to driving business results. I don’t think it is for lack of metrics on headcount, or for a lack of representation in executive discussion I’ve seen reports, as well as participated in executive conversations with the regular attendance of the senior HR management. This emphasis just seems off.

I think the miss is this:

Influential HR (execs or departments) render insights on the progression of human capital development, not the processing of talent into-and-out-of the company.

Just as investors of capital seek the highest possible rate of return for a given level of risk, working professionals are much the same – seeking the highest level of fulfillment for a given combination of challenge, compensation and satisfaction. The challenge is effectively helping management manage more effectively.

Functional executives (and managers) are accountable for functional results, with moments of insight on service delivery and improved sharedholder value. Developing the people within the business falls to the wayside when the pressure is on.

No talent-driven organization can afford a culture that neglects development. No one is presently ensuring that organizational managers are managing their staff in a measurable way that impacts shareholder value, or performing the necessary analysis to see if this potential capital pool is in fact, developing.

Sales champions the needs of customers to operations. Finance champions the needs of shareholders. Human Resources must champion the developmental needs of talent, and the culture that reinforces that.

I think a very central understanding that is only implicitly understood is that, to be fully effective and gain influence, we must be capable of applying our unique expertise (by way of insight) in another’s world. We need to be able to cross functional lines, and help other departmental managers view old issues in new ways, demonstrating our valuable perspective.

Let me provide a few examples to make this idea a bit more concrete, using weak (but common) assumptions about roles and contribution. I think these stereotyped responsibilities represent the limited thinking that can prevent HR from being a more vital partner in business performance.

HR administers and process the annual review process – period. (If you’ve read much of More than a Living, you’ve seen us rant – and maybe shamelessly plug – the soon-to-be released Kumquat, where employees take ownership of feedback on their performance. This isn’t another Kumquat rant). Processing reviews has been the norm I’ve observed time and again, with a heavy emphasis on processing. This is a waste of effort if the entire activity is simply to figure out how to allocate 3-5% raises and 10% bonuses.

  • Analytics of personnel performance should identify high and low performers relative to their position. Quantitative scoring makes the rough cut rapid, and facilitated review of the qualitative feedback (with department management) should help business leaders identify how to manage today’s resources most effectively. HR can help hold managers accountable to their employees to ensure that “managing” occurs.
  • If the organization is hiring “with the end in mind”, there should be some very open conversation about where people are performing, in both their current role and in terms of where they can go. This should be a role that HR expertly facilitates, forcing managers and the managed alike to come to partner at the table and not shy away from honest talk. Facing hard realities head on gives us the courage to make dramatic changes.

HR is responsible for Human Capital Management, cradle to grave (or hire to separation). If the people doing the work can’t at least drum up a few possible candidates, is this a sign of broader issues?

  • A simple measure of a good hire is that former co-workers would choose to work with them again. HR should be driving this value into the cultural heart of the organization, that the best new hires are likely going to be found through the existing personal and professional networks of existing employees. Nothing is more poweful in the hiring process than a new hire that can impact one’s personal reputation, and people know this.
  • An HR consultant should operate like a Project Manager for Talent: ensure that goals are identified, the effort is scoped, and that progress is measured. Know that functional managers will be pulled into the meat of their business – and be there to bring them back to the business of managing the talent they have fought tooth and nail to be able to hire.

HR produces metrics (largely regulatory) that are of little interest to the business. It’s not that the metrics are wrong, but that they aren’t designed for the business audience. Talk to business in their language, applying expertise to non-HR issues.

  • Be prepared to help functional managers support their need for additional staff with industry statistics. It’s not always easy to backfill a departure, and is becoming nearly impossible in many organizations to justify a new hire.
  • Report on and acknowledge where bad things are not happening. We always hear about turnover metrics and talk in budget squeezes of delayed hiring; collaborate to articulate the marginal value of the next hire – in the value-oriented language of the department seeking to hire them. All managers even in “overhead” departments – should be able to describe the value of an incremental FTE in services impacting customers and shareholders. If they can’t, then that is truly overhead. HR can and should play a powerful role in putting new talent in the hands of the most able talent developers, as well as identifying high-performing managers to mentor and grow potential leaders.

If some of these points are standard practice at your company, I’d love to hear about it. The bullets above are employee-centric in my mind, driving first a higher quality worklife for people that are passionate about their work, but also increasing the overall delivery of the organization at large.

Posted in Corporate Culture, Execution, Growth, Insight | 3 Comments

This American Dream Job

Posted on April 12, 2007 by Toby Lucich

Walking into a dream jobI’m a big fan of This American Life, the NPR radio show (and now TV show) which is consistently great week to week. The most recent episode, called “Nice Work If You Can Get It,” showcases stories of people with dream jobs that aren’t always so dreamy.

It was the kind of show that made me stay in my car while it was on, driving around the city so I could listen to the whole thing. The show featured stories on:

  • Astronauts who spend more time in meetings and conference rooms than in space. Best fact? They get reimbursed for their mileage to and from Earth.
  • John Hodgman (the “PC” in the Mac ads and Daily Show commentator) talks about the awkwardness of becoming a minor celebrity later in life.
  • A man whose job is to convince lottery winners to take their winnings in bulk rather than monthly payments (and the sadness involved in working with these people)
  • The famed cartographer for the Oregon Trail expedition in the early 19th century who was secretly miserable most of the time, and very bummed out about the “food on the road.”
  • A bright UCLA college student who can’t pursue her dream job of becoming a doctor because of her status as an illegal immigrant.

Funny, engaging and heartbreaking in parts, it’s definitely worth a listen for anyone with a job, dreamy or otherwise (listen to it free from the This American Life Website or as a podcast on iTunes).

Posted in Employment | 2 Comments

Dissatisfaction makes the world go round

Posted on April 12, 2007 by Rick Turoczy

Dissatisfaction, what whatWe here at More than a living tend to bemoan the state of the workplace in the United States. It’s what we know, so it’s where we focus our critique.

A while back, Toby highlighted the level of dissatisfaction in the workplace.

Well, I thought I’d pile on–expanding the realm of dissatisfaction, as it were–with a recent article out the UK, “A third of employees are unhappy at work.”

Some of the highlights from the survey of 1000 UK workers:

  • Fewer than half are satisfied with the training opportunities they are given
  • More than a quarter say their potential is withering on the vine because their skills are underused
  • Human resources managers, lawyers and secretaries were least satisfied
  • Less than five per cent of workers in the £40,000 to £45,000 income bracket gave their workplace a ten.
  • [Which brings them to this not-so-startling conclusion:] This indicates, and it may come as a surprise to some, that financial reward doesn’t always mean a happier working environment or employee.

Bloody hell! It’s as broken over on that side of the pond as it is over here.

The advice on how to fix it? Probably spot-on for us, as well:

Think about how you engage with your employees – how much control do they have over the job they do? How involved can they be in establishing work practices or in helping assess changes to their roles? How in control do they feel in terms of their ability to do the job? How relevant is the training they receive? Employers who aim to keep staff happy just by giving them unsuitable training are doomed to spend lots of money without getting any return for their investment.

Posted in Corporate Culture, Criticism, Happiness | 2 Comments

Safe is anything but safe

Posted on April 12, 2007 by Rick Turoczy

Playing it too safe?There’s a great post over on Seth Godin’s blog, today, (shocker, I know) entitled, “Do you have to be anti-change to be pro-business?” In it, Seth talks about how companies tend to resist change, even though change is the one thing that tends to propel the business forward.

A strange dichotomy to be sure. Almost a schizophrenia, of sorts.

And here’s what it has me thinking: We all fight to retain safe, to retain status quo. It’s not just business. It’s human nature manifesting itself within the business.

But, safe is anything but safe.

And that applies to individuals as much as it does a business.

How many times have you heard these statements?

  • “I’m going to get a job with a company, because I need the stability.”
  • “I can’t do that; that’s outside my area of expertise.”
  • “I’ve worked too hard to get where I am to try that.”
  • “Better to stick with what we know then explore that tangent.”

Wrong, wrong, wrong, and wrong. The fear is completely misplaced.

What you should fear is not changing. What you should fear is monotony. And safety.

Because “safe” is a fool’s paradise. It’s anything but safe.

Change to stay safe. Fail to succeed.

Posted in Change, Fear | Leave a comment

Trusted Advisors Deliver Insight beyond Execution

Posted on April 11, 2007 by Toby Lucich

Shuffling paperAfter a read at SystematicHR titled “HR Versus Finance – Influence, Power, and a Seat at the Table Part 1“, here’s the question that has me puzzling this morning,

“Is human capital more or less valuable than financial capital?”

In bobble head fashion, I start my nodding while thinking “Yes, people are more valuable than wheelbarrows full of cash.” Bobble, bobble. Then I hit the thesis statement (as it were)

I completely agree [with Jeff Hunter of Talentism] that with today’s shift to a knowledge economy, the value of human capital (talent) versus the value of other capital is clearly higher. Finance is currently a more analytical center that happens to provide great insight into the performance of the organization to the executive team. However, if the real power exists in execution, then HR should have a stronger partnership with the business than it currently does.

And here is where my mind went – “Execution” is Not Enough. To be a valued advisor to leadership, you must not only fulfill your stated responsibilities, but you must also demonstrate how your activities drive the organization to become critical to the leadership of an organization. Insight is what makes a valued contributor, be it an individual, a department, or a consulting organization.

I would argue that no one spends as much time reflecting and analyzing the company’s performance as does Finance or Marketing. (Full disclosure: – I am deeply rooted in the analytical and monitoring functions, and earn my living working with leaders seeking to propel or refine their businesses through improvements in their process and practices. This rant will have a bias – heads up.) A function (or individual) is repositioned when they offer new insight beyond stating the statistics of their tasks being recorded. The rub is that for divisions, this has to be a visible/palpable passion of the senior division manager, or these powerful insights will never garner the attention they deserve.

When Finance simply reports the numbers (execution), they get marginalized. It is in the analytics that measure execution of the organization at large against the strategy (and the fiscal equivalent, the budget and forecast) that Finance brings insight to the conversation. To do this successfully requires that Finance develop an understanding of the functions driving revenue growth, expense, and capital consumption. Effectively, learn about the business that drives the results. When this happens, we see the Finance organization play a significant role in guiding senior management toward achievement of strategy.

Operations often suffers from the same logic as HR – “we are at the core of our business delivery, we should be the right hand of the business.” Proper execution in either of these functions means status quo, be it keeping the seats filled or machines humming. This is the stated scope (read “minimum”) accountability that a manager has been hired to fulfill. The lights are on, the business is servicing customers. And?

We’ve seen operations embrace TQM, 6 Sigma and LEAN initiatives in a way that creates insight (and improved profitability). By developing a clearer understanding of their underlying processes, Operations not only demonstrates that they have a sound handle on their business, but that they can incorporate information from other disciplines to improve their contribution to the organization as a whole. This can come in the form of new-found capacity, quicker throughput, or reduced costs in production. All have a measurable bearing on the organization, well beyond simply keeping the machines humming at yesterday’s levels.

For an HR organization to play the role of trusted advisor, they must begin thinking about their work from a n analytical perspective (and I don’t mean regulatory reporting or compensation management). Moving beyond execution means understanding the drivers and constraints surrounding the organizations’ strategy, and working with leadership to reduce those human capital related risks that threaten the realization of these goals. Much of this comes under the heading of “talent management”, but HR must be able to demonstrate the ability to offer insight to begin a trusted consultant relationship with peer functions before aspiring to the highest levels of influence.

A few examples to make this point:

  • Talent Management begins by looking like a Customer Service function. More time should be spent working to retain and develop internal candidates than is spent seeking external professionals. HR Managers should have regular dialogue with functional managers about existing staff, turnover trends, growth potential, and opportunities to increase employees awareness of the business through exposure to different areas and competencies within the business.
  • HR must track internal talent like an Increasingly Valuable Commodity. Functional managers don’t do enough to manage personnel from a development perspective, and can really use some assistance. Begin capturing the data and analyzing the reports that identify how the recruited talent is being used. Ensure they have training opportunities necessary to grow professionally (and increase their contribution). Helping managers grow and develop their staff goes a long way toward cultivating trusted relationships, and also creates the networks necessary to move superstars around move quickly to address mission-critical issues.
  • Ensure management understands that they are Recruiting Future Leaders, not hiring for the current Opening. This is the only way you develop a deep bench – by thinking two moves ahead of a candidate’s entry point. If you aren’t helping managers look down the road (like Finance does with dollars-and-cents capital), HR remains a fire-fighting exercise of recruitment and orientation.
Posted in Execution, Insight, Perception, Purpose | 9 Comments

Getting honest feedback is crucial

Posted on April 11, 2007 by Rick Turoczy

FeedbackOn the plane, I was reading an article in Motto by Jim Deupree of DBM’s International Center for Executive Options (ICEO).

I made a note to link to the article once I got back to an internet connection, but guess what? Motto doesn’t publish their articles online. Or, I can’t find them. One of the two.

Hmm. Anyway.

Let me do my best to quote and summarize.

Jim’s piece, “Building a Personal Brand,” focused on the activities in which you could engage to help you along your career path while improving your personal brand.

But it was the subhead that really caught my Kumquat-obsessed attention, “Getting honest feedback is not only useful, it’s crucial.”

His tips?

  • Feedback must come from people who see you in action
  • It is very hard to get people to tell the truth even when asked
  • Feedback must happen on a regular basis–not just a one-time reading

Yep, yep, yep. Fully agree.

But here’s the part that floored me:

[Third-party assessors who will gather this feedback] can be a great value–costs are typically $3000 to $5000 for summarized feedback that compares how you rate yourself with how others rate you.

Whoof.

I like the idea, but I don’t have that kind of flow laying around every time I want some critical feedback from my peers.

Still, I find it quite interesting to see that facilitating that kind of feedback is valued in the thousands of dollars. And that getting that feedback is worthwhile.

I’d recommend picking up a copy of Motto to read the entire article, if it’s available near you. I think Jim makes some great points. I just think there needs to be a more efficient, and less costly, way of getting to that valuable feedback.

Posted in Branding, Career, Feedback, Kumquat | 1 Comment

Thank you, you anonymous readers, you

Posted on April 6, 2007 by Rick Turoczy

I ran into a colleague, yesterday. We hadn’t worked together in a long time.

“You probably don’t know this because I subscribe via RSS,” he said. “But I read your blogs.”

So, now I know that both he and my mom read this.

But to all of you who continue to remain anonymous–from Amy, Toby, and me–our deepest thanks. We’re really glad that you’re here. And we’re flattered and honored that you take the time to read.

We have tried to thank the people who comment, but we haven’t expressly thanked those of you in the silent majority.

And, if you’re a first-time reader, or someone just happened to send you a link, or you stop by every once in a while, or whatever, we like you, too. Feel free to join the rest of our friends by subscribing to the More than a living RSS feed.

Or just throw your email address into that little box over there on the right.

There’s a very high likelihood that you’ll be glad that you did. More often than not. Maybe. Probably. Okay, maybe.

And we’ll only make you mad every once in a while.

Like when we leave the dishes in the sink.

Posted in More than a living, Thanks | Leave a comment

Making mistakes

Posted on April 6, 2007 by Rick Turoczy

Making mistakesI am really good at making mistakes.

Ask anyone.

They infuriate me. But I make them. Quite a bit.

But often, I’m not really supposed to talk about those mistakes. Because my employer might find it embarrassing. Or because shareholders may lose faith. Or because it may make me look bad.

There are a variety of reasons. And I can understand the fear.

With Kumquat, we’ve already made a bunch of mistakes.

But guess what? There’s no one telling me not to talk about those mistakes. And the one person who could is actually adding fuel to the fire.

So we’re going to spend a little time, from time-to-time, talking about the mistakes we have made, are making, and will make, as we’re building Kumquat.

The good stuff we do is fairly obvious. But we’re only able to do the good stuff by learning from our mistakes.

Besides, mistakes make for much better copy. Over on hypocritical, I spend a great deal of time and effort complaining about others’ mistakes.

Time to turn the lens on me and my work.

Hopefully, you’ll enjoy the reading. If not, then this series can be added to the list of my mistakes.

Posted in Kumquat, Mistakes | 2 Comments

Pencil or Swiss Army® knife?

Posted on April 6, 2007 by Rick Turoczy

GadgetRuminating on Toby’s “Are you a tool?” caused me to start lollygagging down a different path of thought. Because, in many regards, we’re all tools. In some fashion or another. In some applications. And I’m not just saying that because I want to call Toby a “tool.” Although in the interest of full disclosure, I must admit that likely has something to do with it.

Still, to get back to my point, we’re all tools. And, as such, I think it’s important to remember what tool you’re trying to become.

On each end of the tool spectrum, there sit the pencil and the Swiss Army® knife, respectively.

The Swiss Army knife. Jack-of-all-trades. Ready to do anything. Hundreds, perhaps thousands, of applications.

But how often do the majority of those applications get used?

That’s right. Never.

The Swiss Army knife seems like it should be valuable, because it claims to do so many different things. And people like having them around.

But they rarely use them. Instead they’re relegated to the dark, dust-gathering recesses of the First Aid Kit or the jockey box.

Now, think of the lowly pencil.

No registered trademark. No multi-use functionality. A pencil pretty much does what a pencil does. It does one thing, and it does it exceptionally well. Without frills.

And it gets to do that all of the time. Much, no doubt, to the ultimate Zen-like pleasure of the pencil.

We’re always picking up pencils. We want them laying around our desk, just in case. We need them in our lives.

The Swiss Army knife seems useful. The pencil has a use. The Swiss Army knife could do practically anything well. The pencil does one solitary thing exceptionally well–better, in fact, than anyone else.

Interesting distinctions. Worth considering.

(And, for you Good to Great types, feel free to use my handy dandy Good-to-Great decoder ring. Swiss Army knife = Fox. Pencil = Hedgehog.)

Posted in Can vs. Should, Career, Perspective | Leave a comment

When you're sick, it's hard to remember well

Posted on April 4, 2007 by Rick Turoczy

Feeling illI’ve been a tad under the proverbial weather, as of late. I do thank Amy and Toby for doing such a brilliant job of keeping the conversation moving right along during my absence.

But as I lay convalescing in my delusional state, I remembered one of those things that I always ignore until I’m sick. “What’s that?” you ask, with a more apathetic than sympathetic curiosity.

It’s this:

When you’re sick, it’s hard to remember well. When you’re well, it’s hard to remember sick.

I know. Not exactly earth shattering.

But here’s the new twist:

Jobs are no different.

When you’re in a bad job or the wrong role, it’s really hard to remember what it was like to be in the right role. You lose sight of what it was that you even liked about this silly career choice in the first place. You start to find fault with yourself.

When you’re sick, you know you want to get well.

Even if you wallow a bit. Even if you tell yourself, “This is my body’s way of telling me to take it easy.” Even if you want your friends to wait on you hand and foot for a while. Doesn’t matter. At some point, you simply get tired of being sick. And you will yourself to be well.

Sometimes, in work, we fail to recognize this desire to pursue wellness.

So the next time you’re feeling down about your job or sick of work, remember: it’s like any other illness. Start trying to remember what it feels like to be well. And then shoot for that.

Posted in Motivation | 1 Comment