Aspirations, Conversations, and Options

What is a Career Management process for? How is it different from Succession Planning?

There is a need for an organization to have a ready pool of talent. There is also an individual’s need to have a satisfying and rewarding career. While Succession Planning caters to the former need, Career Management is supposed to cater to the later need.

As is obvious, Succession Planning and Career Management must be integrated processes -both go hand-in-hand.

Now let’s say a fellow HR professional tells you “We have good Career Management processes in place in our company. Aspirations of the individuals are captured in a template and we see how best to cater to those aspirations.”

How would you know whether Career Management process in his/her company really caters to individual aspirations or not?

I can think of a few possible areas that can be explored from an employee’s perspective:

• What career discussions/conversations happen with you and how frequently?
• What gets discussed in these career conversations? What opportunities do you have to express your career aspirations? Does the process involve exploration of reasons for your career preferences/aspirations too?
• What developmental support is provided to you to work towards your career aspirations?
• Are career opportunities presented to you as diktats (there is this opportunity-take it or leave it-we can only discuss how best can you fit in) or are options provided to you from which you can choose?

Career movements are tricky. Both the needs of the organization and the individuals need to be taken care of.

But a Career Management process where:

1. an individual doesn’t get a space to express his/her aspirations; and
2. where career opportunity discussions are not about ‘options’ but about ‘I feel this is the best for you and so take it.’

is most certainly flawed in addressing individual needs.

This can lead to a paradoxical situation in an organization - significant investment in talent and capability building but significant leakages and consequently inadequate strength of talent pipeline.

How would the organization respond in this case? Think of a situation where you put in significant efforts but derived insignificant benefits. How did you feel and respond?

-

Sourav

Ambassadors and Advocacy

A friend asked me yesterday ‘How do we ensure ex-employees or outgoing employees are Ambassadors for the Company? Can we create a league of ‘Company Advocates and Ambassadors’ from this group?’

I am aware of companies that create alumni programs – Mc Kinsey & P&G are 2 companies I know of. What message may these companies be giving by creating such programs? One message may be “If you have been associated with us for sometime, we value that association and we hope that we can stay in touch.”

But is creation of an alumni program enough? Advocacy or Non-Advocacy in exit situations is finally an individual behavior.

The basic question probably is ‘When does an ex-employee or outgoing employee become an ambassador for the company even though there may be no structured ‘Ambassadors for the Company’ program in place?’

A common question asked to out-going employees is “Would you reconsider joining the company at a future date ?”. I am not sure of the effectiveness of this question – given the chances that an outgoing employee rejoins is fairly low.

What can be more realistic questions?

I can think of two situations which an ex-employee would sooner or later encounter.

• Consider a friend, relative, family member has got an offer from your ex-company, or is considering employment in your ex-company. S/he calls you up for advice on whether to pursue the opportunity or not. What would your advocacy behaviour be? (Strongly advocate to join/ Neutral – ‘It’s your call’ types/ Steer clear from that company)
• Consider a friend, relative, family member is looking out for a job and calls you up for advice on 3/4 companies s/he must consider in employment search. What would those 3/4 companies be? Will your ‘advocated must consider for employment list’ also include your ex-company?

Answers to these two questions for each individual would give us a realistic sense of whether we are creating ‘Ambassadors for the Company’ or not.

-

Sourav

A Meaningful Life!

So what should our focus be: Work or Life? Do we live to work or do we work to live?

Maybe we need both. Work and Life are integral parts of our existence and hence probably the focus on ‘Work- Life balance’.

But then why do we separate work and life? Are we saying that work has no life and life has no work?

I disagree! Some year’s back I realized that work and life are intertwined and inseperable. Why do I say so? Well, I’ll probably talk about that in a different post.

Let me devote this post to a journey I have been living through over last year. A journey best described as ‘There is more to life than work and life’.

Life is not all about working hard and partying hard/enjoying to the fullest.

But that requires us to first relook at the definition of work and what we expect from it.

We have our own preferences, interests, and aspirations. We look at work as a platform which would provide us/allow us to completely express ourselves or be ourselves. Is that a reasonable expectation? We play a certain role at work and that role may not have the scope for us to do work which we find ‘complete meaning’ in.

Charles Handy talks of an inverse doughnut. We have an inner circle which is our work, but we also have a series of outer circles which represent the other things that we want to do. I like the way he verbalizes it ‘What work would you be willing to do at ‘zero’ cost/salary?”. These ‘zero costed’ set of work would constitute the outer circles of the doughnut and provides significant opportunities for us to do meaningful work and grow.

So there are two questions which we need to ask ourselves:

• At work, what work do I want to do a) beyond my KPI’s?, b)that doesn’t necessarily furthers my career growth?
• Beyond work, what work do I want to do even though I may get zero money for it or maybe to have pay some money out of my pocket to do that work?

We can be nostalgic our past, build for our future, but we can create only in the present. Are we creating enough in the present to feel that we are leading meaningful lives?

As a manager, what we can do is probably sensitize our team members to the question “What all would you want to do for zero salary or non-monetary benefit?”. We may not get an answer straight off but atleast we have got our team members to start thinking about what gives meaning to them.

-

Sourav

E-learning and Context!

‘Context’ is an interesting term. For most things we do we want to know the ‘context’. May be it is a result of being ‘adults’ – of being able to think independently.

‘My needs need to be met. Whatever you offer must be customized to my needs!’-is an oft heard term.

Some days back I was having a conversation with a colleague on how we could make e-learning efforts more effective. She asked ‘What can we do to ensure more acceptance and usage of e-learning?’.

I reflected on how I had felt when I had taken e-learning modules and what I had heard from others who had taken these modules.

‘Content is standard. It is not customized to our workplace requirements.’

‘Content is good. But how do I use it on my job? I am not sure. I felt great when I took the modules. But here I am 5 months down the line and I am not sure what has changed.’

‘It is boring to study alone. Classroom learning is much better. You can talk with people and share your experiences.’

‘Customization’ and ‘Context’ seem to be the 2 lacks in e-learning modules.

What can be done about these?

Should we revert to only classroom and on-job learning efforts?

Or should we see ‘how to build context into e-learning and customize e-learning to our needs?’

Do the solutions only lie in design of e-learning modules? Should we focus on creating more customized e-learning modules? But that always comes at a cost and you always run the risk of quick redundancy.

For that matter even in case of classroom training (ILT as I heard someone say J), program contents/design can be customized only to a certain extent.

I feel the answers lie in looking at what supporting structures can we use along with e-learning to build context and customize content for each individual learner.

A few things that can be done:

• Use a ‘blended learning approach’- Blend e-learning along with classroom learning efforts. So e-learning is one part of the learning process and there is a ‘classroom like’ forum which is instructor led and where you have peers who are struggling with same/similar problems. ‘Classroom’ like can mean a proper in-person classroom session, a virtual classroom, a conference call where everyone dials in, etc.
• Necessity for learning discussions between the boss and subordinate as primary driver of learning effectiveness still exists. These discussions have to be pre-program (on what you want to take out from the sessions), post-program (what have you derived from the sessions and how you want to implement them), and review sessions (how is the progress). E-learning can only support this primary driver.
• Come out with other formats in which you create two elements of classroom learning that learners most relate to: 1) presence of an instructor; 2) peer discussions we learn from. What can be these formats? I am still searching for answers! Can you suggest some?

-

Sourav

So how have you felt working with us?

So here I was with this group of around 30 people asking them ‘How have you felt working with us in the year gone by?’.

Soon I was wondering whether I was in a field full of minefields. Whatever I said or did evoked negative reactions. The experiences recounted were of ‘My boss is unsupportive’, ‘the policies are not conducive to certain circumstances/situations we have faced’, ‘a showdown between two team members’, etc.

I wondered ‘Do these guys work for the same company as I do? Where is so much negativity coming from?’.

I soon realized something different needed to happen within the room. I decided to experiment and see if people could recount positive experiences they have had at work.

I asked them ‘Can you recount positive working experiences from the year gone by? Share some of them; tell us what happened; who all were involved; and how you felt.’

Soon a feeble voice emerged from somewhere ‘Thank you for bringing this question up. The experiences some people here have shared don’t resonate with me. I only have positive experiences to talk about especially when it comes to my boss.’ She subsequently narrated an experience at work which had made her feel good. Slowly but surely the section of the group that had till then been silent started sharing their experiences – and these were positive experiences.

A wave of positive energy seemed to spread through the room. But something completely unexpected happened soon. Employees’ who had shared their negative experiences initially, started sharing their positive experiences. Amazingly many of these positive experiences were with the same people with whom they had negative experiences.

There are two specific takeaways from this session which have stayed with me:

• Our mind seems to be attuned to remembering hurts, setbacks, and other negative experiences. The same is not necessarily true for positive experiences – we seem to take them for granted and forget them. That’s why we probably say ‘I learn from my mistakes’. But I have hardly ever heard anyone say ‘I learn from my successes.’
• When a certain group and kind of feeling takes centre-stage, it is difficult for group/s with contradictory views or an opposite kind of feeling to express themselves. So if the predominant feelings that are being shared are negative, positive feelings/experiences would get crowded out. Those who have had positive experiences would find it difficult to speak up. Those who have had both negative and positive experiences, would only talk of negative experiences.

The challenge for a facilitator is to create a space where individuals can delve into and express both negative and positive feelings. There is a chance that a neutral question like ‘How have you felt over the last year?’ would cause only negative feelings to emerge.

A possible solution might be to structure the discussion in three parts. The first question would be ‘How have you felt working over the last year?’. This is a neutral question. If it ensures positive experiences are shared, a facilitator’s job becomes easier. In case the neutral question results in an overdose of negative experiences being expressed, it would make sense to explore with the group ‘Times when they have felt good and happy working here’. Using positive emotions expressed, a facilitator can subsequently lead the group towards taking ownership for creating a workplace they feel more engaged to and energized by.

-

Sourav

Away from Money...

For the past many years I have been reading many articles how money seems to be waning as a motivator. I recently read an article as to why money does not get the required results and also why money will get important as you go up in the organisation.http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-09-09/news/30135782_1_rats-shock-bonuses/1However, I would tend to disagree with this tournament theory and the fact that money becomes important by default as nothing else is available.I have seen many seniors in whom there is a drive to influence, to change, to leave an impact, to leave a legacy. As you go higher up you are in positions where the cars, suits or houses no longer differentiate (relatively). Why do people talk about a Kamath or a Indra Nooyi. Do people discuss their houses or what they have achieved? More importantly did they do it because there was large amounts of money involved?I would hypothesise that there are inflection points for the various motivators in life...from growth to security to legacy. If the the inflection point of leaving a legacy does not occur then money does become important and stays important.This next article seems to support this point. The survey says "making progress in meaningful work" is what engages people.http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/04/opinion/sunday/do-happier-people-work-harder.html?_r=1And therefore choices we make as we grow in the organisations will reflect a lot on how engaged and motivated we are with the work...and more importantly how engaged we are with LIFE!

White Spaces and Industry Veterans

A few months back I was in the middle of a discussion with an industry veteran. He had spent 24 years in the same company –his first company. He made an interesting observation during our conversation- his observation has stayed with me.

He said, and I quote “There was a time when I found it difficult to keep myself motivated at work. I had donned most of the roles an employee in this company could don. I could not see new challenges for me in the horizon. It was through these struggles that I came with up a solution that has withstood the test of times. Every year, thenceforth, I venture out into the unknown. I take up something which I know would challenge me/I am not comfortable about. I usually would not have a clue on how to go about it at the beginning. But then I manage to find my way through. This ensures both that I stay engaged on the job and my team has enough space to work (I don’t overstep onto their feet).”

Industry veterans can be an asset or a liability depending on the situation or the way they approach their work. When they use institutional knowledge to thwart creativity and refuse to give up their old responsibilities/power, they are a liability. But when they consciously venture out into the unknown and use their institutional knowledge as a reserve pool (to be used for references) they can be assets -a positive driving force for change.

I had read somewhere about ‘White Spaces’ in the context of new projects. These are about going into previously unchartered landscapes. ‘White Spaces’ can be of two types: doing something completely different from what you are doing today; doing something which is an extension of what you are doing today. The essence of ‘White Spaces’ is that it is an ‘Unknown space’. You would not know what might emerge there. People who are high on learnability are probably more likely to succeed in these white spaces.

We usually talk of importance of a Learning organization. But I also see a subtle difference between an organization which decides to learn reactively (in response to the environment) or pro-actively (by venturing out into white spaces).

To pro-actively shape our destiny in the future, a question we need to ask ourselves, our teams, and our organization is ‘What are the white spaces we would want to work on this year?’. These white spaces need to be defined and worked on, every year, at all 3 units of performance – individual, teams, and organization.

-

Sourav