Do We Really Want Our Organisation To Excel?

During the last few weeks, I’ve been speaking to a number of people. One was in HR and facing some difficult workplace situations. It seemed that a lot of improvement was needed in order to take “identified top talent” forward in terms of ability to lead, motivate and engage people.

He had worked on identifying training needs but, on offering relevant interventions, the take-up was miserably low. He had difficulty in 'selling' the training to this group. Less than 30% showed any interest.

What didn't help was the fact that HR was seen as more of a nuisance than anything and were just trying to add more unnecessary processes to the daily work.

'What can I do to increase the uptake of these courses?' he asked.

This kind of situation is not unusual.

The HR person was keen to help make a real difference to abilities and performance and had, for several months, worked hard at trying to generate an increased response. He was now at his wit's end. 'It's driving me mad,' the poor fellow admitted.

I asked him what his boss had done to guide or support him.

The answer was to the effect that he was told not to keep bashing his head against a brick wall. 'That's the way things are and you can't expect to change it. Your job is to set up the courses, so just stick to doing that and don't worry about it.'

So, we have a person keen to make a strong contribution to the organisation being, in effect, advised not to bother.

I was immediately reminded of an important part of the Preface and of the Introduction to the book “Lead To Win - Pioneering Powerful Performance”:

“For many years I have had a passion. I firmly believe, and this has been confirmed during my decades of experience and observations as a manager and as a consultant, that people love producing fantastic results.

I also firmly believe companies (read: “managers at all levels”) actively prevent people from doing so — unwittingly in most cases. This can so easily lead to lower performance and expensive staff turnover.”

And:

"So many organisations are like Formula 1 racing cars being used solely to toddle around to the local supermarket to get the family groceries. A definite quantum leap in performance is under the bonnet but is rarely, if ever, unleashed.

I do not use this simile lightly. People can and do achieve great things, amazing things, just because they want to."

This incident was a fine example of this in action.

Yet things could be so very different. The situation could be to a large extent turned around if senior management actually wanted to create a more dynamic and results-oriented organisation.

How?

Simply by taking it seriously and acting on it.

Let me explain.

First, to make things simpler, let's assume the identified top talent are 100 people.

One of my first questions is: why are 100 people considered "top" if they can't be bothered to learn more about how to be more effective in their work? To my mind, only the 30 have shown an interest in improvement. These are the ones to be nurtured.

By really focusing support in helping these individuals be successful, if we are doing our job effectively, they should start bringing in better results through their teams. These achievements must be quantified/qualified as they happen and form a significant part of their appraisals. Appropriate recognition/reward should follow.

The 70 who aren't interested are far less likely to achieve in this way and, therefore, will not be in line for anywhere near the same recognition.

What are the potential outcomes of this?

The 70 will be unhappy with their lot. Some will resign — which is not necessarily a bad thing because we can replace them with real top talent.

Many are likely to state that they've not been given the support the 30 were given and they want to avail of it now. Great. We can now assist them to become star performers.

Yes, this is simplified. Yes, there is more to it than this.

First, it demands commitment to results from senior management. In this, we must remember that commitment is different - very different - to a verbal agreement that it should be done and getting HR to act on it. Commitment means living it. If senior management follow similar practices to those they want adopted, it sends a very powerful message to everyone in the organisation.

Second, it needs a different approach to appraisals that brings not just a non-threatening way of measuring performance but instead a very positive one.

Third, the support must be practical and results-oriented. The 'usual' leadership and motivational theories must be replaced by simple, logical and straightforward approaches in dealing with people and processes — and ones that work.

As the many illustrative live cases in "Lead To Win" show, it can be done. Yes, it takes effort to change long-ingrained habits. The step-changes in morale and performance make the effort rewarding: to everyone in the organisation, to customer satisfaction, to quality of delivery, to costs and to profits.

FREE extract from 'Lead To Win - Pioneering Powerful Performance'

'Lead To Win' is NOT about theories.
It is NOT about leading from the front.

The book 'Lead To Win' IS about practical and logical ways of working with people and systems.
It IS about helping people get great satisfaction from producing great results.

Download and browse this extract to see how the contents of the book can, and have,  helped change morale and performance in a powerful and positive way.

https://app.box.com/s/qm59shgxr9147tuz7p6i

(Please 'Like' this to spread the word!)

. 

Leadership:… Always do what you've always done?

     "Always do what you've always done ... and you'll always get what you've always got."

To be an effective leader, we must be prepared to step outside the mould. We must dare to be different.

However, this does not mean throwing all caution to the wind. What we do should make some sense and provide good chances of success in achieving the desired goal.

It should also result in positive outcomes for others.

I am sure most people in leadership positions want to do a great job, so what prevents them from doing so? 

In a nutshell: they either don't dare to be different or they don't know how they need to be different.

This is what has prompted me to write “Lead To Win - Pioneering Powerful Performance” to provide the how. 

“Lead To Win” distils decades of experience, experiment, study and observation into an easy to read guide. There are live examples that illustrate how the proffered concepts have worked and brought success.

What also helps is the fact that the book contains very little theory. Instead it gives down-to-earth, practical steps, processes and approaches to both people and the work. 

The only question that remains is: Do you dare to be different by helping individuals get great satisfaction from producing great results?

If so, check out the book. Start by reading a sample by taking a "look inside" the slim volume in print or download the sample on your Kindle/Kindle app on Amazon: http://www.amazon.co.uk/-/e/B00DT7F13M

If you like what you see, get a copy and read it. Then comes the most important step that many book readers tend to forget: carefully adopt the concepts and make them work for you and your team.

Finally, see the different level of results! (Please note: I will appreciate learning of the successes you and your team achieve.)

If you would like support in implementing the concepts in your organisation, do get in touch. 

.

Those SME Challenges: How we can start meeting them. (Part 1.)

 Let’s start at the beginning.

 If we seek high performance, low maintenance leaders, the first stage is really getting the right person in place whether we are promoting or recruiting for such positions.

... And, in a large percentage of cases, this is all too frequently where things begin to go wrong.

In the nascent stage of their businesses, many entrepreneurs bring in people they know and whose performance they trust. The only problem with this is the fact that the stock of such people is limited and insufficient to continue fuelling growth. But how many entrepreneurs learnt how to recruit/select effectively? In terms of promotion, they make the same mistake as many other companies, both large and small — giving the baton to the best performer, or the person with the greatest knowledge, or the one who has been with the organisation the longest. When it comes to recruitment, they rely on the same old “favourites” of skills, knowledge, qualifications and experience, added which is whether they seem O.K. and presented themselves well at interview. Based on this, they get handed the baton.

Now the crucial question. What percentage of the new incumbents drop that baton? It is certainly far higher than is helpful to staff morale, customer service, productivity, and attrition, let alone the sanity of the Owner/Manager.

I regularly find what companies look for, and what they actually need for high performance in the role, are poles apart.

Understandably, effective leaders are difficult to find but it does help if we know what we should really be seeking in candidates, whether they be internal or external. This strong focus is vital to enable more right choices.

What should HR and Business Leader be looking for?

Unfortunately, the CV is not likely to tell us much, even if there are statements about being a manager and responsible for so many people and whatever processes. I am not saying this is fabricated. It can be quite true but it does not in any way confirm they lead people forward and whose direct reports enjoy working with them towards great results. They merely had the title but not necessarily behaved as a leader.

The word “behaved” was purposely used and emphasised to illustrate a fact: a significant amount of a leader’s success relies upon behavioural strengths, contributing, in most cases, more than skills, knowledge, qualifications and experience.

What are the behaviours leadership demands?

Different kinds of role will require different mixes of strengths and, although the tools can assist us in setting these and measuring them in candidates, the very simplified and broad brush strokes of what we train interviewers to focus upon for leaders are as follows:

• A strong need to take charge, set direction, and face (non-technical) challenges. Sees the “big picture”, goal oriented and makes things happen.
• If a strategic approach is needed, then an analytical, thinker and planner.
• Who does not rush into things too quickly, taking a little time to reflect before acting. Can take a degree of pressure and deadlines.
• Decisive and independent, leaving detail to others and requires little supervision.

Then the “learnt” behaviours:

• Maturity and judgement.
• Stability and persistence.
• Attitudes and beliefs. (We are not judging a person’s beliefs, merely ensuring they will be comfortable adopting the values the company upholds.)
• Self-motivation. 

Finally: Aptitude and speed of thought.

The interview.

The interviews need to be pleasant, not a “grilling” of the candidates. Questioning must be in-depth — it is too tempting to accept the first answer given and also to assume what the interviewee means, as opposed to ensuring we establish what they do mean.

I am pleased to announce this article has also been published by EmployWise on their Blog:

http://www.employwise.com/hr-best-practices/287-sme-challenges-how-we-can-start-meeting-them-part-i.html