Companies revising their values

Last month the chief executive of my energy supplier invited me (to be fair, every customer) to join a web chat to explore their progress so far with an initiative to strengthen the level of trust they enjoy from customers.  Prompted by ofgem (2011), such companies need to transform their dealings with customers.  My supplier seems to be recalibrating its norms around four key headings: they include transparency and fairness.

More strikingly, we see that shareholders are mobilising to change, or criticise at least, the apparent norms around executive remuneration and rewards within the firms they own.  And, following an even a greater level of public drama, we must all assume that organisational values (norms) within News International are also being 'recalibrated'.

One wonders how these external changes play out for the staff within these and other organisations?  A datum point for any employee to consider is, "What are my organisation's values?  Are they written down?  Even if they're not written anywhere, in terms of organisational norms (or cultural perhaps) what exactly are they?"

In the past, firms just assumed that staff worked for status, job security and money alone.  Later, importance was placed upon 'challenging' and 'fulfilling' work, though tangible opportunities for growth and development had largely been the employee's problem.  Even where organisational values have been clearly communicated it's largely been a one size fits all approach. In other words, declaring universal values for all staff to marry with their external career.

Today's challenge for management is to reach employees... individually.  Engage them differentially by enabling a connection with their internal careers, too - a task requiring considerably more sophistication and expertise.  An internal career is a personal 'map' of career success defined by a combination of motives, values and talents (minus constraints).  Usefully, contemporary research from industry has yielded a robust and detailed empirical model to inform employees and managers alike.

When staff can offer up, for themselves, a more distinctive picture of their internal career against a clear and consistent definition of external, corporate expectations (norms) the gap can be closed and durable engagement strengthened.

Engagement, values, career development, career orientations, global novations

Changing the way we view the apparently obvious

Sometimes, things happen that we simply don’t understand. Here in the UK we are currently experiencing this phenomenon; much of the central and southern region of the UK is currently officially in drought, with hosepipe bans in place and water being ‘shipped’ to the south via rivers from the north, which has plenty of water. And yet... April has been the wettest April since records began 100 years ago, with England and Wales receiving over 150% of the monthly average rainfall. Anyone who’s been in the UK during April will not be surprised at this - torrential rain and high winds have caused flooding in many areas, and there has been some tragic loss of life as a direct result.

So the question is asked, how can we possibly be in drought when we have this much rain?
There is a simple explanation. We’ve had two very dry winters, so the deep level aquifers - which provide our water - are running dry. The torrential rain of April has saturated the soil , causing more rain to run straight into the rivers, not gradually soaking through into the deeper levels, which is what’s required to maintain our supply. So we get short-term floods, but no long-term topping up.

Here’s another thing that at first appears incomprehensible, but actually has a simple explanation: Longer tenure and promotion in an organisation does not automatically result in increased value to the organisation. One of the challenges in work is how to maintain value over time, and the answer to this is not in climbing the hierarchy, but in maximising contribution, regardless of position and title. The Four Stages of Contribution developed through Global Novations’ research show how important it is for most employees to transition from being a Dependent Contributor, through Independent Contributor to Contributing Through Others. For some, there is also the opportunity to become a Strategic Contributor, although that’s not for everyone.

Why do so many people miss the point that contribution is far more important than position? Because over the years, too many organisations have learned to reward people based on their position, without really understanding that position and performance don’t always go together.

So how can you make those transitions? Make sure you hold the right balance of your technical, relational and influential skills, for the type of contributor you need to be. Don’t try and rush this - that’s like the torrential rain that in the long term is ineffective. Taking your time, make transition through the stages and see how the value of your contribution increases. You can find more help with this here.

Just as we need the right type of rain to top up our water supplies for the long-term, so we need the right type of contribution to maximise organisations’ competitive advantage.
Is it time to change how your organisation views the future, and learn how every employee could maximise their contribution?

by Steve Short

A Climate for Change

Over the last 60 years or so carbon dioxide (CO²) levels have risen more sharply and consistently than at any time over the previous 650,000 years.  Whilst there are many reasons for the rise and fall of CO² levels, there is only one factor that can account for the current and unprecedented rise in CO² in the atmosphere – human activity.

250 years from its inception, the industrial revolution continues to spread across the globe and when you see the abject poverty that millions of people live in, who can deny them the opportunities that industrialisation creates?  But is an 18^th century business model, one that we should be still using today?  

We are becoming increasingly efficient by taking fewer resources out, but what are we giving back?

I am reminded of the book “The Man Who Planted Trees” by Jean Giono.  The story is about a shepherd named Elzéard Bouffier who commits his entire life to cultivating a forest to restore the natural beauty of a ruined landscape.  Over a 40-year period Elzéard achieves his goal through planting by hand thousand of acorns, beech and other nuts one by one.  He receives no reward or recognition other than the personal satisfaction of seeing the forest grow.

Organisational Leaders are constantly looking for greater outputs.  Leaders want more engagement, raised productivity. They want more out, but what are they giving back? 

At a recent networking event, the symbiotic relationship between trees and people was highlighted to me.  Trees absorb CO² and give out oxygen – the air that we breathe.  As we breathe, we give back CO² to the trees.  

The same is true for effective leadership.  It’s vital to give as well as to receive.  Seeking out a balance between giving and receiving brings harmony, increases your value and the worth of those people with whom you have a brief or a long-term relationship.

So, what can you do today to give something back? 

Delegation - the missing link in people development?

Twice this week I've been involved in conversations about people development and the same topic has come up; namely, 

'How do I delegate effectively?  I seem to either take over full control of someone's work, or I stand off and just watch them.  Neither works.  What should I do?

Those of you who know us here at Emenex, know that we believe passionately in the importance of effective on-the-job development through challenging job assignments.  Job assignments that place people in their zone of development, without leading to burn out or rust out.

But...if you view delegation as an on/off button, as did my fellow conversationalists, then you will find it very difficult to provide people with developmental assignments.

So here is an alternative...that works.

 When you delegate authority to a subordinate, you are giving him or her the power to control resources and make changes on your behalf in order to deliver on the assignment.

Giving the task to someone else without giving them the authority only means that the task will keep coming back to you.

Authority does not mean complete abdication at once; it is available at eight levels:

Level 8: Act, no reporting necessary

Level 7: Act, report if unsuccessful

Level 6: Act and report results

Level 5: Decide, act unless vetoed

Level 4: Decide, wait for approval

Level 3: Recommend, boss decides

Level 2: Suggest alternative, boss decides

Level 1: Get the facts, boss decides

You have to decide at which level you are delegating the authority. I see this a a combination of your level of trust in them to deliver and their confidence in their ability to deliver.

Early on and with new tasks or assignments, it makes sense to stick to the lower levels of delegation; as your trust in them grows and their confidence increases, so you can raise the level.

So the next time you have the opportunity to assign a developmental assignment to someone, consider the level of delegation you will give them.

Image: vorakorn / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

As managers, do we behave like this?

What do we recognise from the World Bank’s exercise to appoint a new President? By almost all accounts, it ended up the same way as all the earlier stitch-ups. What was looking to be an open, closely fought contest based not upon cronyism but merit did not materialise.

With six of the world’s fastest growing economies, Africa felt ready to make a defining nomination: Nigerian finance minister, Mrs Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala. Informed commentators around the globe recognised her extraordinary experience and abilities in the world of finance. Then the Bank’s largest shareholder, America, presented its nomination: Dr Jim Yong Kim, a notable American academic with a background in public health.

It seems the appointed Dr Kim was the personal nominee of Barack Obama. In fact, American presidents have managed remarkably to back the ‘winning’ candidate for some 60 years! But this month’s election was billed to be different.

Refreshingly the process started openly with three nominations and the chance of a real and public contest, but the competition itself switched back to type with the job being done behind closed doors.

What does this leadership behaviour do to the constructive engagement of countries, organisations and their peoples? And is global politics the last bastion for exhibiting these leadership values? Sadly, no.

Contemporary research from companies around the world continues to show that staff engagement is significantly compromised by leadership behaviour. When employees step up their contribution and demonstrate a willingness to engage with their work they need managers and leaders to reciprocate accordingly: for starters, communicate clear expectations, build trust and a culture of development open to all. Yet no matter how positive such actions may be, staff engagement – arguably more challenging today than ever - remains undermined by opaque processes, disparities around inclusion and inconsistent behaviour – to list just three.

When more is less!

I read with interest a recent HBR Blog by Ndubuisi Ekekwe entitled "Is Your Smartphone Making You Less Productive?" In the article he stated "There's an assumption that using smart devices boosts productivity, since they allow us to work constantly. But, we're also jeopardizing long-term productivity by eliminating predictable time off that ensures balance in our lives." he then went on to ask "Is the obsession of regularly checking email really helping anyone's bottom line?" and "Are the unrealistic expectations these devices facilitate not setting staff up for burnout?"

In the research that Brooklyn Derr conducted on Career Orientations he identified 5 "Orientations" that differ considerable in what they value and how their work can best be designed in order to maximise engagement and contribution. Having a dominant 'Balance' orientation for me means that my time is my most precious asset. I find myself running from one activity to the next as I try to juggle the pressures of work, family, church, football coaching and the occassional tranch of personal time. Sleep gets the squeeze as my sense of committment to deliver drives me from one activity to the next.

I totally agree with Ndubuisi that smart devices can be intrusive; however, for some they are the life (and time) saving answer to achieving the things that matter to us most.

Of course "one man's meat is another man's poison" and so what might help one employee to achieve what they value most might be just the thing destroys another. Freedom Orientated individuals are most likely to be the ones that cast aside their smart devices; seeing them as an intrusion into their world where autonomy and control over their work is paramount.

Understanding your own, and the career orientations profile of individuals within your organisation, can help enormously in tailoring rewards and conditions that result in much higher levels of motivation and loyalty. Blanket approaches to work related conditions and approaches can have just the opposite effect.

So the next time that you assume that the provision of a smart device for your employees should be welcomed with open arms ... think again ... you may just have caused a huge issue!

Engage with Change (What can we learn about embracing change from Frank Skinner?)

Did you view the recent Sports Relief evening and the part where Frank Skinner overcomes his terror of water and learns to swim?

If you want to see it, here are the links to the Youtube videos;

for the early stages of his programme, showing him learning to swim and then showing him tackling his 25M challenge

It’s well worth watching both videos as an example of change and how to engage with it. Here are some lessons I picked up;

• The fear of change is more terrifying than the change itself – Watch how utterly petrified Frank Skinner is before he even gets into the water
• When people have a purpose, they are prepared to face and overcome their fears – Would Frank have countenanced this if it wasn’t for his desire to do something of value for disadvantaged people?
• When you want to see change, offer support, support and more support – Frank couldn’t have done this alone. His support comes from the coach and mentor, the BBC presenters, camera and production staff, the people poolside offering encouragement and of course us the viewers. All of us involved in willing, supporting and helping him to achieve his goal
• Overcoming fear leads to pride in our performance –notice just how delighted Frank is to receive his 25M badge and presentation on the night. Recognition and appreciation for what we achieve is a great motivator
• This is just the start – now Frank has learned to swim, where might this take him?
  

Looking at this using the Four Stages of Contribution Model; We see that Frank has just got through Stage 1 – Contributing Dependently.

Now Frank can progress through Stage 2- Contributing Independently; by firstly gaining confidence to swim without external support and then working to improve his front crawl skills, increase his swimming distance and grow in confidence by swimming in different pools, outdoors and in the sea.

To be an effective performer at Stage 3 - Contributing Through Others we could see Frank begin to coach others to overcome their fear of water and use his experience to motivate others.

Performing in Stage 4 - Contributing Strategically, could see Frank leading a campaign to get all adults access to swimming lessons as an antidote to obesity and so they can enjoy the water with their children.

If you really want to see change in your organisation and your staff, then consider the lessons from Frank and see what an application of the Four Stages could do for you...Engage with Change.

Congratulations Frank and I hope that this is just the start. Be great to see where you get to by the next Sports Relief!