Unlocking the value of people

As a friend of mine recently started working for Automattic my attention has been refocused on the importance of people within organisations. Its more than the superficial discussions about whether we call people “human resources” or “people”.  What is required is a fundamental shift in thinking of how we view the people we need in our teams.

More and more I’m made aware of a sub-culture that is developing in companies; companies that really care about their people.  The primary method this can be measured by is how much (or more accurately how little) they try control their people.  The manifestations can be seen in a wide array of “policies” such as remote teams, open working hours, respecting of personal and family time, and the valuing of personal needs. And the result you may ask? Happy, hard-working employees that are uber-evangelists of their companies. Sounds like a win-win to me.

These companies are placing a high value on excellence and skills required to perform roles, as well as an extremely high value on cultural fit.  These companies are recruiting a person, not a role. They are consciously taking the time and effort to ensure that every person they hire is going to add a forward momentum to their existing ethos.  I guess the most appropriate metaphor here is that of making scrambled eggs, it simply takes 1 off egg to spoil the whole batch; so take your time adding each egg.

I love the way that Automattic re-name their roles to describe the core function they are looking to fulfil. I think that the guys at Method were spot on when the created a “complex” interview process to see who the person is that they are interviewing through a case-study approach.

A key resource I keep falling back on is the great talk/book by Dan Pink – Drive, where Dan proposes that one of the major people management areas we are failing in is that of outdated motivators. Typically these motivators are all about financial incentives, that Dan notes, do little for most of the knowledge work that is performed today. Our outlook and implementation of these motivators will give us a good evaluation of how we truly view our employees.

 

Strategic Project Success Rates – A road to nowhere?

Just over two years into an MBA you start to ask yourself questions, is this worth all the effort? Perhaps a masters in cooking would be easier and more lucrative.  Business management is difficult!  As I review the question “why are over 50% of all strategic projects failing?” I’ve hit a blank, are the strategic project success rates simply a road to nowhere? And endless pit of change with no mastery, no long-term success, no sustainable adding of value to organisation?

I encounter theory after theory, model after model and clever answers that could fill entire libraries. The challenge is; with all these clever answers around, why is the track record of strategic projects so poor? Success statistics from the invention of the modern day project (in the early 1960’s ) tell the same sad story, half of projects attempted fail (and are still failing).  What are we missing?

Today project and product education is at an all time time high, you find hundreds of books on expert strategic management and how to tame the proverbial project dragon, yet in the cold light of day, all this has affected the project success rate with exactly naught %. Do we continue along the same vein, introducing more and more processes, more and more education, more and more roles and responsibilities?

As we stand today, the primary method organisations deliver their strategies are through projects, perhaps its time to reconsider. We need to take a sober look at our project execution process and frameworks, not to try another ‘expert theory’ but rather to take onboard some of the knowledge and practical know-how that is being shared by our teams around the coffee pauses area’s and lunch rooms.

Finding courage in a position of strategic disadvantage

Strategically at a Disadvantage?

At the end of last year I read a fantastic book by Malcolm Gladwell – David and Goliath*. This book did a superb job of showing me how a perceived underdog in the market can use this position to out manoeuvre their opposition and in some cases steal the market from right in front of them (delivering the  David sucker punch).  Gladwell not only highlighted the strategic advantage that can be had from being the underdog but he goes on to prove how a pedigree (if I can extend the metaphor) of success at lesser praised institutions (such as top universities and corporations) can strategically and psychologically prepare and position a person to successfully displace Goliath’s in any market.

Coupling this with the recent launch of Bold ,by Peter Diamandis**, who literally challenges us to change the world, to dream of billion-person impacts. The call to action is to embrace the exponential, embrace the odds of cascading impacts. This involves the active re-engineering of our thinking to move away from linear problem-solving,  linear-risk taking and linear-returns.

What does this mean? Peter Diamandis says “within the next 10 years, 40% of the current Fortune 500 companies will no longer exist”.  This means that a massive opportunity exists for us today if we able to change from what he amply calls “exponential stress” to “exponential opportunity“! What does this mean? Perhaps the challenge you currently face is not as bad as you think, but an opportunity to positively turn a position of strategic disadvantage into one of disruption.

This means believing that 4 in 10 Goliath’s will be laying dead on the ground! How are you preparing yourself to be the next David?

  • A great summary talk on the key concepts of the book are delivered in a 50 minute discussion by Gladwell at Google offices can be found here
    ** Key concepts of this book and relating principles are discussed by Diamandis and Ferris at the Four Hour Work week podcast found  here

Strategic Human Resourcing: When is it time to stop calling in the substitutions?

Every organisation is trying to reduce their cost of production, regardless of their industry. One of the core contributors to this cost is that of their employees. Increasing market competition is forcing organisations to reconsider how they manage this cost to ensure they remain relevant to the market.  This places a high significance on the importance of strategic human resourcing. Together with this, employees are also changing their minds with regard to what type and form of employment they require as other socio-economic factors become more important than permanent employment. These 2 elements are the primary reasons that flexibility in the work place is becoming a key factor of Human Resource Management.

FLEXIBILITY IN THE WORKPLACE

Flexibly in the work place creates a mechanism for organisations to acquire the required skills at specific times to deal with abnormalities in their product or service demand. The idea of flexibility is that organisations do not carry the financial burden of skilled resource cost while the resource is not required or while the resource cannot be utilised for profitable gain. Thus the concept of flexibility is closely related to that of free markets and capitalism.

Although flexibility is most often referred too in the context of numerical flexibility, 2 additional forms of flexibility are also available to organisations and employees:
•       Numerical Flexibility: Matching organisational employee resource requirements with the required resources for the optimal period as to not waste any of the organisations funds on redundant or inactive employees.
•       Functional Flexibility: Dissolving of functional boundaries of a role as to allow excess capacity in a role the ability to assist in another area of need.
•       Pay Flexibility: The practice of offering varying degrees of financial compensation for the same or similar work based on geographical, social and economic differences.

Flexibility however comes with drawbacks. Putting any form of flexibility in place will require additional management and in some cases more intentional effort on the part of the employer.  Any grant of flexibility will fall outside of a normal practice. This by implication will require boundaries for this flexibility to be created and documented. The result is that catering for any form of flexibility needs to still occur within a defined structure, but this structure must allow for some movement/variation.  All employees that engage with an employee through a flexible agreement will also need to be informed so that they can adapt their way of working with this person.  A flexible working arrangement will also place a large responsibility on the individual to ensure that their required work is completed in the same quality and timeframe as if they were part of the standard.

This is why, according to a study completed in Ireland (Price, 2011: 157), working from home actually increased the pressure on work-life balance, as employees were forced to work while they were at home. Should one decide to follow the approach of Atkinson (1984) and only employ core staff in permanent posts then the organisation may find itself in a position where it does not own any of the skilled resources’ Intellectual Property or know-how. So although this model helps organisations to keep fixed costs low, it also creates an unhealthy dependency on skilled resources that are external to the organisation.

 

OBSERVATION AND RECOMMENDATION

The concept of flexibility is often spoken about during our prospective employee interviews. More and more candidates are asking question regarding working hour and geographic flexibility as one of their key considerations for considering the advertised post. Unfortunately the trend is for the hiring organisation cheerfully respond with a positive response, but rescind on  this once employment is underway.  Often this is because the hiring manager does not trust employees to perform their required duties when they cannot be directly observed.

Although the concept of flexibility is often discussed and theoretically agreed too, it has not been successfully executed in general. This excludes functional flexibly, where the writer has experienced the complete opposite; organisations are more than willing to remove the bounds of a role so that the work can be performed.  This is believed to be so because it has a direct benefit to the organisation; it does not have to procure additional resource capacity or additional skills.

CONCLUSION:

Flexibility is a key factor in todays labour market. However the impact on the management of the organisation is not always fully understood, which may lead to a contracting of flexibility as employers actively look to reduce management overhead in exchange for the additional resource cost for permanent employment.

SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER READING:
•       Drive, 2011 – Dan Pink.
•       Success built to last, 2007-  Jerry Porras, Stewart Emery, and Mark Thompson

REFERENCES:
Atkinson, J. (1984). ‘Manpower strategies for flexible organisations’, Personnel Management (August)
Price,A. (2011). Human Resource Management (3rd ed., p.587). Pearson Education.

A rising economic tide: It’s time to have a positive focus

Positive Focus is required to navigate a rising tide

Positive Focus is what we need in a time of economic challenge. All indications are that there is tremendous pressure on the global economy. This is true unless you live in the USA of course, where the economic spinsters are able to camouflage the frail situation.  The mood of the economic powerhouses in turn ripple down to the local organisations, who then logically start a process of contracting spending to protect their profits and minimise risk. This can often result in the adoption of a negative mindset towards growth, innovation and positive people management. Out come the old sticks and the old habits! It is easy to slip into controlling management, emotionless-engagement and to simply start counting our customers as numbers. What’s needed however is focus, not any focus, but positive focus.
In these tough times we have the opportunity to challenge the status quo of process, norms and what has ‘always been’. If the need (and it is a need) is to move into measures of austerity then lets take a “post-war” or “post-depression” view on our organisations.

How we can have a Positive Focus:

  • Eliminate waste. A ruthless focus towards waste within our organisations. The removal of waste in all aspects of resources, people (talent or time) and technology.
  • Identify our strengthsThis is a perfect time to reflect on what the organisation is good at, what it’s people are good at, and what our customers love about us the most.  This is the sweet-spot we should focus on. Cut the rest, mercilessly.
  • Invest. The greatest winners during tough economic times are those that invest with the future in mind. Protect your assets (again relating to people, process and technology), or simply put, the things that truly create value for your organisation.

These are simple steps but they are by no means easy; at best the are counter-intuitive; but the best companies never really follow the common actions of others.

Why are nearly 50% of all Strategic Projects Failing?

We need to address this challenge immediately and stop so many strategic projects failing by changing our project approach

Can you venture a guess as the number of Strategic Projects Failing? According to a recent PMI report* nearly 50% of all projects fail globally, across all sectors and all industries. This is a shocking statistic! What is not surprising is the huge sigh of relief we all feel when we look at our own basket of project driven initiatives and acknowledge that this global stats probably accurately reflects our status-quo.

The question that emerges is “Can industry continue to support this level of success? “. In a word, No.  In a world were innovation , renovation and transformation is required by the bucket-full we cannot be losing nearly 1 out of every 2 dollars (Rand) spent on  these projects. These arrays of quick-sand projects severely hamper the ability of the organisation to pivot to market demand, competitor activity or new opportunities. We need to address this challenge immediately and stop so many strategic projects failing.

How to prevent Strategic Projects Failing:

  1. Review the way projects are defined, measured and controlledHow much tolerance is acceptable to maintain scope and budget? At what point should a project be considered nonviable and be terminated.
  2. Define a list of “kill point” criteria applicable to the project at its definition.
  3. Hold stakeholders accountable to the results of their decisions which result in scope and cost deviations.
  4. Dramatically improve they way projects are planned; initially and continuously throughout the life cycle of the project.
  5. Ensure the project teams are sufficiently educated in the project approach which the organisation has chosen, and not their own definitions of what or how something needs to be done.

To implement these changes within established project organisations will require complete buy-in from senior management. But the number speak for themselves; the strategic projects failing are simply too high and require a drastically new approach to find success.

*PMI, 2014, The high cost of low performance.