, , ,

Does Leadership Intent Equal Business Success?

Does Leadership Intent Equal Business Success?

 Not really! The consistently large gap between behaviours, intent, desired culture and reality remains an issue.

I was flying home to Brisbane last week and had the opportunity to read the latest ‘Inside HR’ magazine from cover to cover. It is always an interesting read with much that grabs my attention. However on this occasion, by the time I was towards the end of the magazine a theme had started to form in my mind.

There were various articles and highlights within the content that rang alarm bells for me. Or maybe it was more that the messages were articulating many of my own recent thoughts more clearly.

CoachStation: Leadership, People and Business Development

Let me show you what I mean through various excerpts taken from the magazine:

Engaged employees are at least three and a half times more likely than disengaged employees to say their organisation is committed to bringing innovative products and services to the marketplace. Highly engaged employees are nearly six times more likely than disengaged employees to use challenging goals to improve performance, and more than seven times more likely to agree that their senior leadership team encourages innovation and creative ideas. (1)
The best HR teams and leaders are driving innovation across three key dimensions: achieving the next frontier of functional effectiveness  (6)

The gap is widening between what business leaders want and what HR is delivering, according to a global research report, which found that HR needs an extreme makeover driven by the need to deliver greater business impact and drive HR and business innovation. The Deloitte 2015 Global Human Capital Trends report, which involved surveys and interviews with more than 3300 business and HR leaders from 106 countries, found that while CEOs and top business leaders rate talent as a key priority, only 5 per cent of survey respondents rate their organisation’s HR performance as excellent. In addition, just 11 per cent of respondents feel that their organisations provide excellent development for HR. “To put it bluntly, HR is not keeping up with the pace of change in business,” the report said.

“Today, there is a yawning gap between what business leaders want and the capabilities of HR to deliver, as suggested by the capability gap our survey found across regions and in different countries.” The research report found the most significant capability gaps for HR in Australian organisations were in the areas of HR and people analytics, reinventing HR, performance management, leadership, and culture and engagement, while the smallest capability gaps were in the areas of people data, simplification of work, learning and development, and workforce capability.

Other Deloitte research has found that only 30 per cent of business leaders believe that HR has a reputation for sound business decisions; only 28 per cent feel that HR is highly efficient; only 22 per cent believe that HR is adapting to the changing needs of their workforce; and only 20 per cent feel that HR can adequately plan for the company’s future talent needs. (8)
The report shows a widening capability gap in HR’s ability to deliver strong talent solutions, in the areas of:

  • Engagement and retention (the number one challenge around the world this year), HR teams are 30 per cent less ready than a year ago
  • Building leadership and filling leadership gaps (the number two challenge around the world), HR teams are only half as ready as they were a year ago
  • Delivering learning and training solutions (the number three challenge around the world), HR teams are only one-third as ready as they were a year ago.

What is going on? Why are HR organisations having such a hard time keeping up? After studying this marketplace for the last few years and talking with hundreds of clients, the answer is simple. HR today is undergoing more change than ever before, and we are on the brink of disruptive change.

The obvious theme here is that HR is not up to scratch in supporting the goals and actions required for many organisations. Although in my experience this is a genuine issue, holistically it is too easy a statement to make and glosses over the more entrenched issues organisation-wide. It is a much more difficult set of questions that requires multiple solutions owned by leadership, HR and their ability to drive action beyond mere words.

Amongst various factors, HR and its current position/reputation is a symptom of other issues that exists within organisational cultures based around competence, capability, intent, passion and desire. It is untrue to state that many people and specifically leaders do not care about their employers or employees. It is not about caring, but more about doing.

The pace of change; need for outcomes; short-termism; and skill gaps in leadership are hurting business at a time when it can least afford the challenge.
What I have learned is that good intent does not equal improvement, growth or success!

Employee engagement is how strategy comes to life, not a campaign on the side. When people understand the why, how it helps customers, and what will change for them, they invest their energy and ideas. This is implemented when leaders:

  • Translate the strategy into clear, human language, link it to values, and be honest about trade offs. Invite teams to shape priorities, risks, and measures, since ownership builds commitment.
  • Set role clarity and decision rights so everyone knows where to act and where to collaborate. Recognise progress often, close the loop, and keep the story of the strategy alive.
  • Make engagement operational, not accidental. Use simple rhythms such as weekly team check ins and regular 1:1’s to connect work with strategic goals, surface obstacles, and agree next steps.
  • Share visible measures that track outcomes, quality, and experience, and pair them with short feedback loops so learning turns into change. Equip respected people as ambassadors who model the behaviours, tell real customer stories, and help peers translate intent into action.
  • Align goals, development, and rewards with the strategy so doing the right work feels natural. When people can see themselves in the plan, effort shifts from compliance to contribution, and momentum lasts.

The articles highlight the ‘gap’ that exists between what business leaders want and need and what is being provided to support them and what they are providing themselves. In fact, the key points in the excerpts that struck me are the need for change yet the struggle to make this happen in reality. What do leaders and HR need to do fill the void that exists?

The opportunity to change culture by focusing on the key initiatives and measuring outcomes is something that I believe many organisations can improve. An idea in itself is not enough. What difference does or will this idea, concept, improvement etc. make to the organisation, its processes, people or customers is often discussed but not always efficiently met? The opportunity to hold team members and employees accountable is one that is missed too often with the outcomes and measurable change not highlighted as a core focus.

Most leaders would argue with this, stating that of course, the outcome and results are critical. But, few actually lead their teams with this in mind on a daily basis.
“We need to turn what we know into what we do!”

The key to this change in culture and expectations has to at least in part, be a change in mindset. Talking about leadership and its criticality to business success is not enough – no matter how success is measured. Leadership by its nature requires that you build strong and effective relationships; know and connect with your team; and influence through coaching, not telling, for example.

In the same magazine there was an excellent interview with Alex Bershinsky who highlighted the need to focus on people and that traditional strategies and tools are, in many cases, quickly becoming irrelevant.

A recent research report found that many leading organisations are moving away from viewing performance management as a once-a-year event where employees are assessed and evaluated, to a series of ongoing activities that include goal-setting and revising, managing and coaching, development planning, and rewarding and recognition. The report found that continuous coaching is becoming increasingly important, as employees want to receive individual feedback and feel valued by their organisations for their unique contributions…The focus on these conversations is less about ‘here are your four KPI’s and tell me what you’ve hit or missed’ and more about ‘how are you going, how can I help you, what are you struggling with and what do you need from me to improve?’ So, it’s a very short, regular talent conversation.

“So we’re not using ratings, but the idea is to get away from ratings, distribution curves and batch data and instead provide real-time feedback to develop the 95 percent of our people who are terrific, versus the 5 percent who aren’t performing – which is the reverse of what most performance management systems are geared to do. That’s a real cultural shift.”

You can only hold others accountable if the appropriate expectations and standards have been established in the first place. Getting bogged down in ‘doing the do’ and not making time for your people will ensure that you fail to progress your business. This is relevant whether you have a formal performance management system or not. Tenets such as accountability, expectations; standards, relationships, connection, ownership and other key elements fill the void created by poor leadership, when applied. This takes effort, prioritisation, practice and planning.

As a leader, it also requires a personal strategy for assessing and measuring performance. It is not solely HR’s responsibility to drive this. Waiting for someone else to develop this strategy can only negatively affect you as a leader or employee. Taking the lead and positively impacting employee engagement in your team is a fantastic place to start.

Develop your own leadership skillset and capability. Then apply your new knowledge in positively leading your team. If Deloitte are correct in stating that employee retention, engagement and leadership are the number one and two business challenges this year, then you will be ahead of the game.

Need I mention ownership and accountability again!? Give it a try and let me know how you go.

Feel free to Email, Print or Share and Comment.
, ,

Leadership Benefits: Self-Awareness and ROI

Does self-awareness and an understanding of leadership impact really matter to organisations?

 

CoachStation: Self-awareness and Leadership Development

Nearly all managers and people in leadership roles believe they make a difference. In some cases, this is true. In reality however, the evidence continues to demonstrate that leaders overstate their value and influence.

One of the core traits observed in the best leaders I have worked with is self-awareness. This is tightly linked to a willingness to be honest with themselves as well as others. There are also points such as decision making beliefs and biases that influence our position on many topics. Our actions are also reinforced by these biases. All the more reason to take a strong position that as a leader it is important to regularly review your own performance as well as that of your team members. We overstate our performance across many fields, so anything that provides a more frank and balanced sense of self is valuable.

  • In a survey of college professors, 94% said they did above average work.
  • In a survey of corporate CEO’s, a whopping 92% said they were the only person who could do their job effectively. By the way, more than 50% of those corporations were losing money.
  • In an M&A involving a flailing target, the average firms pays 40+% more for the target acquisition than the current stock price. Why? Because the acquiring execs believe that they can run the acquisition more profitably. (1)

As an example, I have seen the challenge of holding yourself accountable as a leader when participating in performance appraisal calibration sessions within several organisations.
Dilbert: Honest Leadership Assessment
The discussion is often about what employees have not achieved or the reasons why they will be ‘marked down’. There are two strong points of failures with this:

  1. The disappointing attitude of some leaders that the employee underperformance is a surprise. If the leader acknowledges that an individual has underperformed, then they should be prepared to look at themselves and the failure to have made a difference for/with that person over the past 6-12 months. If it is not the leader’s responsibility to manage this, whose is it?
  2. The focus on the 10-20% of what an employee is not achieving is out of proportion with the discussion of the 80-90% of what is working well. In my experience, the vast majority of these type of discussions focus on what is isn’t, not what it is. This is particularly disheartening if there is little support and coaching provided to to turn this situation around throughout the period. I have been in situations where I have held underperforming employees accountable to the point of terminating employment after much effort to turn them around. Afterwards, during performance calibration sessions I have had other managers state that the decision to terminate is a good one as the employee has been a poor performer for years! My response will always be, “why had nothing been done about it then?” I hope you can see the irony in leadership statements such as this.

Does leadership make that much of a difference to business outcomes and success? You bet! The effort and willingness to grow and develop as a leader is the only way that this benefit can be realised, however. There is ample evidence that those organisations who focus on developing their leadership group see the benefit in many ways beyond improved employee engagement.

Organisations with the strongest leaders have nearly double the revenue growth compared to those with weaker leaders. However, most leaders lack the full complement of skills to thrive in today’s rapidly changing environment…organisations must adjust their approach to leadership and develop leaders who are able to build and enable. In order for organisations to achieve higher growth, truly differentiate themselves from competitors and maintain an edge, they must set a higher bar for their leaders, requiring them to go beyond setting strategic direction and driving execution. (2)

One of the keys to knowing whether you truly add value as a leader is through measurement, both tangible and non-financial. A key question here is, are all aspects of business measurable?

Calculating business benefits is often a complex art. As anyone who has been involved in business cases can testify, investments in ‘tangibles’ e.g. IT infrastructure, marketing spend etc. are often difficult to quantify in terms of the real monetary value they deliver. So when we start to think about investments that deliver ‘intangible’ benefits such as changes in leadership behaviour, the waters get murkier still. In too many cases, the evaluation of Leadership Development Programmes is not properly planned or budgeted for. Rather, it is seen as a tag-on, something to be put together at the very end…work needs to have clearly defined, specific and measurable objectives. So start with the end in mind:

  • What is the desired outcome of the programme?
  • What does success look like?
  • And then the killer question…what are the business metrics that we want to see impacted by this piece of work? (3)
The main point here is to ensure that you have a clearly set expectation for every employee, team and leader. You cannot hold people accountable for something that you have not set standards and expectations for in the first place. Confirming that each person understands and has the opportunity to participate in developing these expectations is also important. When combined with honest self-appraisal and subsequent action the opportunity to influence and contribute to your organisation is increased significantly.

Even more importantly, the influence on and buy-in you will receive from your team members will encourage you to continue down this developmental path and feel the effort is worthwhile. The alternative is to stagnate and continue to do what you have always done. Is that the type of leader you want to be?

(1)  http://switchandshift.com/when-leaders-wear-rose-colored-business-glasses

(2) Inside HR – Strong Leaders Grow Revenues Twice As Fast, Issue 2, 2014: Pg 6
(3) http://www.ysc.com/our-thinking/article/measuring-the-roi-of-leadership-development

Feel free to Email, Print or Share and Comment.
, , ,

People and Process: Aligned or Loggerheads?

I often wonder what it is about processes that many managers have a need to see as entirely separate from their people.

Similarly to my previously documented thoughts regarding the key differences between leaders and managers, the ‘need’ to focus solely on the process is often due to the conscious or unconscious decision to concentrate time and energy on the simpler or more controllable part of the equation.

Unfortunately for those leaders with this mindset, unless you are in a pure process driven environment (which is rarer than many people think unless/until robots take over our world!), this leaves out the core reason why
these processes often fail – a focus on our people!

The ability to bring individuals and team members into the process is key to project success or meaningful outcomes. Engaging the people and teams involved, communicating the context and being specific about why the process exists or change is required, will often be the deciding factor between process success and failure. Rarely will a process in itself be the difference – it requires input, management and control of and with your people.

If we are not clear about what role our team member’s play in the overall project then the entire process change will likely fail.

This is a regular occurrence within the project and business world, where much of the planning and time is dedicated to setting up the ‘right’ program and lean elements that will provide the most effective structure or process. It is too often assumed that with cursory levels of communication and a base understanding that employees will simply fall into line and grasp the key elements.

These core elements may well be understood however buy-in, context and discretionary effort are almost always limited or compromised when an individual does not participate in the early project planning cycle and/or has little ownership or accountability into inputs or outcomes.

Interestingly, during the post-implementation discussions and review some managers often look back at these (failed!!?) outcomes and wonder why the process failed, without even considering the broader picture and what part their decisions and narrow focus initially may have contributed.

Often the phases and stages are not clearly distinguishable…so, thinking of people and process as intertwined but with different inputs may assist in removing the barriers for change. Our people are the all-encompassing link that will ensure true success and sustained change!

When managing people and change, keep these points front of mind:

  • Processes do not deliver outcomes, people do. If we treat process as the hero and people as an afterthought, we set the work up to struggle. Unless you live in a pure process driven world, which is rare, the human side will make or break the result.
  • Bring your team in early. Explain the context, the why, and what will change and what will stay the same. Be clear about the problem you are solving, the benefits, and the trade offs. When people can see themselves in the plan, resistance drops, relevance rises, and energy goes where it matters.
  • Role clarity is the hinge between a neat plan and real progress. Spell out who owns which decisions, where collaboration is needed, and how handovers work. Invite your people to help shape inputs, risks, and measures, rather than telling them after the fact. Ownership builds commitment, and commitment beats compliance every time.
  • Too often we invest our effort in the perfect structure or programme and assume a quick briefing will carry the rest. It rarely does. People might understand the steps, but without buy in and context, the extra effort that lifts performance is missing.
  • After a rollout, it is easy to blame the process when results disappoint. Look wider. How did decisions get made, how well did we listen, and did people feel trusted and involved. Leaders who hold both the plan and the people view build stronger delivery and better outcomes.
  • Treat people and process as intertwined. Set simple rhythms for communication, short feedback loops, and review both the mechanics and the relationships. Your people are the link that turns a good plan into sustained change.

Effective leaders ensure that they seek to understand both the planned outcomes and how their people are going to influence and drive all of the elements within the process to achieve that outcome.

This type of thinking provides a more solid platform to ultimate success.

Related articles
Feel free to Email, Print or Share and Comment.