‘You can take a horse to the
water- you can tell horse drinking water
is good for its health -but choice to drink or not to drink water lies
with the horse'. This is a statement that I had formed early in my career when
I was working on learning and development space.
Over last few months I have
realized that this statement is applicable to situations/processes where the
efforts and results are not linearly related in space and time and area spread
out across time. Career Planning & Execution, and Development are 2 such
processes – you make efforts today but results may not come in the same year.
My new tagline on careers is – ‘Performance
is ensured over a year while a career direction is built at least over 2-3
years’.
We harp on relevance- we learn or we
work towards a career goal if it is relevant for us. We say that the challenge
for the resource provider or the manager is to create a space/opportunity for employee
to find relevance for him/her.
Let’s say that as a resource
provide you have done work on both fronts mentioned above-you and employee have
figure out relevant aspects and you have provided required resources.
And then - employee resists
turning up to utilize the resource! You are left perplexed! What happened?
Maybe it is relevant but other priorities are at play.
I had been working on creating for
last few months a program – working along with intended audience to ensure
relevance of resources. On day of session, we clocked around 50% attendance. I wondered
whether we could have had at least 60% attendance – that’s what I had expected.
But maybe that’s the wrong way to look at this situation. Those who attended
seemed vested and involved in day and shared that they found session very
valuable.
I saw them taking notes and
thinking of how they will make use of learning's back at work.
Leaves me thinking – should we
work on participation?
Sometimes we need to drive
participation - to ensure people prioritize A over B where both are relevant
and where they may not have realized importance/power of A. This is especially
the case when A is career/development and B is performance.
Low participation undermines power
of an initiative. High participation does not guarantee effectiveness.
Relevance is critical.
Hence both relevance and
participation are necessary but not sufficient resources by themselves. They go
hand in hand to ensure success.
If required participation can be
driven. If people choose to stay on as day progresses, that's a possible
indication that efforts were worth it.
-
Sourav
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.