Tag Archives: Exceptional Business Results

Who is the First Person You Should Hire (Part Deux) – Lutts and Mipps?

Posted on by
2

A question that has been asked repeatedly after my last post is related to asking the right questions so I thought that instead of responding individually, I would use this week’s blog post to respond to it.

Those that have been through the Decision Making or Change Management training with The Mpower Group may well remember the experiential learning simulation called Lutts and Mipps. In essence, teams are handed lots of answers related to a classic time/distance/speed problem. The only challenge is dealing with Lutts and Mipps instead of miles and hours to put the participants in a different context. In addition, the teams are provided with way more information than they need. The challenge is in identifying that they were given two of the variables and they can easily solve for the third, in a total of about 45 seconds – IF THEY ASK THE RIGHT QUESTIONS! Invariably, there are many teams who never get to the answer in the allotted time(45 minutes) let alone the “solvable” time which is under a minute. And the ones that fail the most miserably? Glad you asked. It’s always the overly analytical types who start gathering the data and crunching it with all kinds of wild formulae. They are also the ones who insist that we must not have given them all the data that they needed! And this is after we have just finished a module on problem solving thinking!

We have been trained and trained and trained to gather as much data as possible and start crunching all kinds of analyses with that data – without determining the Key Questions we must address to arrive at the answer. And this rush to action is nothing but a fool’s errand. We would be far, far better served to make sure that we take the time at the beginning to make sure that we fully and deeply comprehend the question(s) we are trying to answer. Otherwise, how will you know that you are capturing the right data, the complete data, no extraneous data etc. etc.? Which is really what my two friends Pete (Drucker) and Al (Einstein) were essentially saying. And we have proven time and again to many of our clients that determining the right Key Question(s) is a critical and an absolute necessity. Unfortunately, we have all been conditioned to jump into action and time spent in reflection is often viewed as an unnecessary delay. Ironically, that reflection time and developing the right Key Questions and getting consensus on them is a powerful accelerator. And oh by the way, if you follow a structured methodology to develop the Key Questions, it is also a significant Change Management enabler as it builds tremendous credibility with your most reluctant stakeholders. In addition, it enables you to logically structure your argument and essentially serves as a blueprint for your presentation. Furthermore, you can also employ the technique of a reverse hypothesis to completely disarm your most stringent and die hard resistor(s)e.

I cannot begin to tell you the level of frustration that Lutts and Mipps generates in our workshops (which have included CEOs, EVPs, etc., etc.). This is clearly not an issue that distinguishes between seniority. Most people are pretty dumb founded when they realize that they wasted the entire allotted time when they could have had the answer in 45 seconds – if you invest the 3-4 minutes needed to develop the Key Questions. I wish I could show you some of the bizarre answers we have received from teams. How about your organization? How often does it take the time to make sure that it knows what the Key Questions are? And if not, do you think it should? If you would like to know more about any of the concepts mentioned in this post, give me a jingle.

Did you like this? Share it:

Who is the First Person You Should Hire?

Posted on by
Reply

If I had a dollar for every time I’ve been asked that question-well you know how that story goes?  At every single conference across the globe I’ve spoken at, that question has been asked in some way, shape or form.  Almost every single client has asked that question or some variation thereof.  And the ones that did not should have asked that question.  You can think about it in terms of what is a critical role that you must fill in your Sourcing/Supply Chain organization or any other internal “support” function (IT, Finance, legal) or shared service to confirm my contemporary bona fides.

Before I give you the answer, we need to make sure that we are asking the right questions.  And for those of you that have been through TMG’s decision making module, that refrain will sound very familiar.  Remember the New England Journal of Medicine exercise where physicians were asked to evaluate patients for toncillectomies and they were wrong 49% of the time ?  Otherwise, we can turn to what a couple of my friends said.  Pete says “The most common source of mistakes in management decisions is the emphasis on finding the right answer rather than the right question.” My friend Al goes on to say basically the same thing: “The formulation of a problem is far more essential than its solution, which may be merely a matter of mathematical or experimental skill.”

Typically, would you agree that in most cases (not including yours of course):

  • Organizations struggle with convincing their stakeholders of the value they create?
  • They face strong resistance in expanding their influence or footprint?
  • Budget wars are an annual and the quarterly norm?
  • Savings numbers are always questioned for validity?

If any of the above is true, then the answer to the title becomes self-evident.  A Marketing person!  I kid you not.  In the first Sourcing organization I set up in my career 16 years ago we had a full time marketing person (Peter).  His job was to constantly market our services and we took a marketing approach to it.  This wasn’t about creating some spreadsheets or graphs of generated savings.  He had to make sure that we continued to expand our footprint inside the company.  To sell our value to the stakeholders.  To keep in constant communication with them.  To make sure we were getting repeat business.  To ensure that we were getting referral to other stakeholders.

Now I’m sure that you are doing all of the above but I’m talking about most of the other organizations.  We have not seen  a true marketing focus being applied to this effort and I’m always surprised by that.  Especially given the tools available today.  It does not necessarily mean that you need to have a full time dedicated resource but you do need to fulfill that role.  So next time you are sitting in a budget meeting being asked one more time to take another haircut, you may want to think about your marketing effort.  Oh, Pete is Peter Drucker and Al is Albert Einstein.  Let me know if you would like more details.

Did you like this? Share it:

An Annual Necessary Evil – The Performance Evaluation

Posted on by
Reply

We all dread the annual performance evaluation process whether we are a Sourcing or Supply Chain employee or a manager. It seems like the same old process year in and year out, used simply to justify compensation increases or not. If the performance evaluation process is part of an integrated talent management program, it doesn’t feel that way. In most cases the measures are tactical in nature and measure activities as opposed to value added outcomes. The measures are seldom tied to the strategic objectives of the company and in many cases drive behavior that is detrimental to achieving those strategic objectives. Your development plan (if there is one) usually lists a variety of training classes you can take individually to improve your individual skill, often ignoring the required organizational competencies that help drive real value for the company. This process should be ongoing and not just annual, but at most companies it is not.

Performance evaluation can be one of the most powerful tools in Competency Based Talent Management (“CBTM”) but it must have a well-defined competency model at its core. It should also be integrated into the other four phases – recruiting, training / development, career management and succession planning. Here is how this should work:

  • Define the role of the Sourcing / Supply Chain organization and the individual job roles in a way that supports the strategic objectives of the company.
  • Determine the competencies (behaviors – both strategic and functional) necessary to be successful in the defined roles. This is your competency model.
  • Use the competency model to:
    • Determine the skills / competencies required when recruiting
    • Determine the skill / competency gaps to drive your training / development program AND the individual development plans as part of performance evaluation
    • Determine the metrics / measures that will be used to drive the performance evaluation process and career management
    • Drive your succession planning

When performance evaluation is supported by defined competencies the process takes on richness for the employees that helps them understand the behaviors (much broader than activities) that are required to be successful currently and those required to move forward in their careers. In addition, competency based performance evaluation helps managers / employees to identify gaps in strategic competencies (e.g. communication, collaboration, teamwork, change leadership) which are less “measureable” but are as, or more, important than functional competencies. If evaluating performance is focused solely on building functional expertise, as opposed to the critical business skills that make a successful business professional, then the organization will have a difficult time moving employees into future leadership roles (career management and succession planning).

Performance evaluation must also focus on demonstrated competency, since having competency that is not being utilized is of no value to the organization. As such, competency based performance evaluation should be structured such that employees are incented and rewarded (compensation $$) for acquiring and demonstrating new competencies and managers should be held accountable to ensure that employees do so. If you think about it, competency building clearly helps the employee build their individual skill set but also helps to build overall organizational competency. Competency based performance evaluation will make it easier to differentiate between high performers and everyone else since the evaluation process will be less about “what you know” and more about “what you do with what you know”.

Lastly, a critical outcome of performance evaluation must be an improvement plan. Here again, the focus should be on identifying gaps in demonstrated competencies and creating strategies to close those gaps. The improvement plan should be mutually agreed upon and managers should be measured on creating opportunities for their employees to acquire and demonstrate new skills.

In summary, a well-defined competency model is a powerful tool when used throughout the talent management lifecycle, particularly performance evaluation. If you don’t have one for your Sourcing / Supply Chain organization, it is a necessary investment in your most critical asset — your people.

If you are interested in getting involved or would like to follow this topic further, here are a series of critical activities coming up:

  • Major research project geared towards not just identifying the problem but to identifying Next Practices to solve the problems
  • White Paper to focus on Next Practices in Competency Based Talent Management
  • A webinar discussing our findings in detail

Please share your thoughts and challenges regarding Talent Management below. We would love to hear your insights.

Regards,

Anne

Reposted on Sourcing Innovation.

Did you like this? Share it:

Fighting the War for Talent – Focus on Career Management!

Posted on by
Reply

We’ve been hearing about the “War for Talent” in the Sourcing / Supply Chain space for quite some time and it does not seem to be improving. In our previous posts, we explored how the lack of a holistic approach to Competency Based Talent Management (“CBTM”) is the root cause of the problem. In addition, we have advocated that to be sustainable, CBTM must cover ALL five phases of an employee’s journey through a company — recruiting, performance evaluation, training / development, career management and succession planning.

Let’s focus here on one element – Career management. According to Wikipedia, Career Management is the combination of structured planning and the active management choice of one’s own professional career. While career management should ideally be the responsibility of the individual, it MUST be driven by the organization. To start, employees need to know which skills / competencies are required to be successful today and how those skills /competencies need to grow and develop in order to progress within the company. These can only be defined by the organization and are the foundation for CBTM. A well-defined competency model, which is critical here, can also be used and integrated into the other four phases of CBTM. In addition, individuals need to see the career options (career path) and the expectations associated with moving through the path. How many Sourcing / Supply Chain organizations have actually taken the time to not only define the competencies but also lay out a career path for their employees? Not many. By the way, the first people to leave because of the absence of career management are the people you most want to hold on to — your high potentials. They are off listening to other companies who seem to be able to articulate a career path – can’t all companies do this during the recruiting phase even if it is all smoke and mirrors?

Without a Career Management process in place, you will:

  • lose your best people
  • constantly be recruiting (this is an expensive proposition)
  • never realize the full ROI of your asset (your people) base
  • lose the opportunity to infiltrate (love that word) the rest of the organization with Sourcing / Supply Chain thinking
  • never get beyond tactical contribution (real value comes thru competency growth)

The consequences of ignoring Career Management as part of your talent management program (if you have one) can be devastating to an organization. While the official definition of Career Management places the responsibility with the individual, the organization needs to put the infrastructure (process tools, metrics, mentors, etc.) in place AND drive the adoption and execution of the process. If we look at Career Management as benefiting both the employee and the organization then we MUST ensure that it is happening — tools are of no use unless they are being utilized.

What do you need to do to fix the career management void? Here are a few Next Practice tips:

  • Develop a competency model which allows employees to see their path for success
  • Tie career progression to competency growth
  • Ensure that competency growth is NOT about “what you know” but more about “what you DO with what you know”
  • Link career paths across functions by competency
  • Ensure career management is integrated into ALL phases of CBTM
  • Create a “success culture”, providing organizational mobility and access to new opportunities
  • Provide employees with “stretch” assignments to further competency growth
  • Ensure your organization is the “place to be” to ensure professional growth
  • Provide ongoing feedback and coaching so that employees can grow and take advantage of new opportunities

If you are interested in getting involved or would like to follow this topic further, here are a series of critical activities coming up:

  • Release of the results of the Executive Forum we just facilitated at the IACCM Global Forum for Contracting & Commercial Excellence on Talent Management.
  • A major research project to not identify the problem one more time but to identify Next Practices to solve the problems.
  • A webinar with IACCM on CBTM.
  • A White Paper to focus on Next Practices in CBTM.

Regards,

Crystal

Reposted on Sourcing Innovation.

Did you like this? Share it:

Mind the Gap – Training vs Competencies

Posted on by
1

In our previous posts we talked about designing your talent management program and implementing a recruiting plan. However, these are only parts of a larger Competency Based Talent Management (CBTM) program. You have hired the people you needed. So what? How can you make sure they are integrated into your organization and are able to hit the ground running, creating the optimum amount of impact? Not only do you need to look at training your existing team, you need to create a training program for new recruits as well.

This sounds well and good (and perhaps a bit easy). However, it is not as easy as it sounds. We have heard from many of our Sourcing / Supply Chain peers, particularly at our last NPX, that they are struggling with their training efforts. Training is completed, but the learning is never adopted. So what can they do to change the results?

Adoption brings us back to our vowels (AEIOU). In the past we have talked about the importance of Adoption, Execution, Implementation, Optimization and Utilization in any organizational effort. However, training is just not about the act of learning (a consonant); it is about adopting and implementing that learning to drive business results. Using the vowels ensures that the people being trained start applying what they learned. Implementing the vowels is the key difference between training people and developing competency.

To effectively turn a training program into competency development, you must have a good understanding of your desired needs. This requires that you start with the strategic direction and objectives of the company and what role your organization will play. This will show you which organizational competencies you need and will give you an understanding of the gaps you have within your organization. Now, the closure of those gaps can be tied directly to the company’s strategic direction and the role your organization will play, adding value not just for individuals, but for the company as a whole. Sending 2-3 people at a time to some public seminar designed for the masses may develop individual competency but it is never going to develop organizational competency.

Your gap closure strategies must follow a multi-faceted approach (coaching / mentoring etc.). Make sure your entire approach is rooted in Adult Learning Theory and has experiential learning as its basic tenet. Making people sit through day long lectures with no ability to actually practice the new behaviors and competencies in a safe learning environment is of little value. In addition, the curriculum must include the strategic competencies found during the initial gap assessment. A program consisting of functional or process skills alone is doomed. The strategic competencies must also be integrated into the core process modules so that people know how to actually deploy the new process.

Your training strategies must look beyond the technical skills and focus on the strategic skills needed to be successful like change management, communication, collaboration, and decision making. Oftentimes these skills are overlooked when training, although they are the most important to organizational success. Anyone can learn to use any process and those are the skills most organizations worry about when hiring and training. However, developing strategic skills can take your team to the next level and have more lasting effects on the group. It takes your group from Best Practices to Next Practices.

Developing the right competencies within your organization is not easy. It takes a lot of thought and energy to train and develop your team. Sometimes closing the gap can make you feel like you are trying to build a bridge across the Grand Canyon. If you start by looking at competency development in terms of AEIOU and strategic alignment, you will no longer need to build a bridge across the gap. You will find that your organization will soar.

In our upcoming posts we will continue to address Next Practices associated with the Competency Based Talent Management lifecycle.

If you are interested in getting involved or would like to follow this topic further, here are a series of critical activities coming up:

  • Release of the results of the Executive Forum we just facilitated at the IACCM Global Forum for Contracting & Commercial Excellence on Talent Management.
  • A major research project to not identify the problem one more time but to identify Next Practices to solve the problems.
  • A webinar with IACCM on CBTM.
  • A White Paper to focus on Next Practices in CBTM.

Regards,

Crystal

Reposted on Sourcing Innovation.

Did you like this? Share it: