How to unblock your people’s creativity

“We need more self-starters” said Matthew.  I could have sworn he was glaring at me.  He had been CEO for a year now.

“In what way?” I asked.

“Our people just won’t make decisions.”

“Why not?” I asked.

“I don’t know!  We’ve empowered our people but they’re still bringing all the decisions to us.”

“Frustrating.” I agreed.  “So what have you tried?”

“Like everyone else, we’ve done our OCI, we’ve come out…”

“…red and green.”  I finished for him.  “And you want blue.”

“How did you know?”

“Because if people are shivering, I’m pretty sure when I look at the thermometer what it’s going to say”.

Matthew sat back.  He seemed deflated. Read more…

The (not so) hidden key to integrating business units

“I’ve got some issues between my two key General Managers” said Ingvild, the CEO.

Self-organising doesn’t mean self-directed

“The thing about Scrum” I was saying to Melinda, one of my ex-colleagues and also one of the kindest and nicest people I’d ever worked with….”is that nearly all of it makes sense in a way that’s totally requisite.”

“Scrum?” she asked.

“Sorry, what I mean by Scrum is the software development method that’s based on principles of Agile.  The Agile stuff is about frequent checking in with the customer, that developers can sort themselves out, a whole approach that makes sure a team’s collective capability is used well.  What Scrum does is nicely define roles within a team under the Agile philosophy so that everyone knows what they’re doing.  That’s my potted overview anyway.”

“Isn’t that the stuff you teach with requisite?  That by clearly defining the role relationships in terms of who can ask who to start or stop things, people can be freed up from one of most common sources of conflict?”

“Yep, all the role relationships in a Scrum Team are a version of natural requisite role relationships.  No issue there.”

“So what’s the problem?” Read more…

Why do you use this ‘requisite’ stuff?

No therapy required: How to get your people working together

Have you, or are you about to, invest money in getting your people to work better as a team?  To get them to get along, to understand each other, to form closer bonds so work will truly flow across your organisation like the ball moving from defence to attack?

From the Inbox: Who approves reclassification requests?

A question from my Inbox (feel free to ask your own, click here)

Hi Adam,

A question: We’re reviewing our policies at the moment, and this came up: Should the Manager-once-Removed have a role in assessing role reclassification requests?  Any light you can shed appreciated.

Hey there,

The answer is: the MoR is not just involved, they actually make the decision!  Because in a well-designed hierarchy, the MoR is the supplier of resources (in this case, salary budget) to the Manager of the person making the request (I’m assuming the request takes the Manager out of agreed budget limits).

Let’s take a typical hierarchy of Specialist – Senior Manager – General Manager.

The mental leap here is that it’s the Senior Manager requesting the reclassification based on a recommendation from the Specialist. The Specialist is providing advice on how more could be delivered (or is actually being delivered) and the resourcing required, the Senior Manager agrees, and it’s the General Manager, as the Manager-once-Removed to the Specialist, who makes the decision.  This is because they are the supplier of resources (salary) to the Senior Manager.

The Senior Manager says something like this to their GM: “This is what I can deliver with more funding; the funding would go to a reclassification of Jim’s role.”

You could draw the analogy to the Senior Manager asking for funding for an upgraded piece of technology to deliver more, but remember people have feelings, so don’t get carried away with this comparison (unless you’ve got Sarah Connor in your team).

Cheers,

Adam.

Don’t (automatically) blame the performance appraisal

“We’re thinking about ditching performance appraisals” said Bill.  He was the CEO, I was sitting down with him and Theo his GM of HR.  “Or at least revamping the whole thing.”

“Run me through it” I prompted.  “What are you seeing that makes you think they aren’t working?”

Theo answered; “Formal feedback and anecdotal evidence.  We put out some simple questions, namely, to each employee; ‘I find the performance appraisal process to be useful to me in my work’, and to each manager ‘I find the performance appraisal process helps me to make my people more valuable’.  Both with the usual 5-point system between ‘not at all’ and ‘absolutely’.”

“What did you get?”

Bill jumped in; “We struggled to get to 3….which meant ‘somewhat’.  Mostly got 1s and 2s which means ‘not at all’ or ‘barely’ some value.”

“So as you can see…” Theo continued…”the system that my area leads isn’t too flash!”

“Maybe not” I answered. “But there’s a fair chance you’re looking at a symptom here, not a cause.”

“How can perform appraisals not working be a symptom?” asked Theo.  “A symptom of what?”

“Ineffective organisational design.” Read more…

Are you doing real OD work?

Maria was GM People & Culture and we were discussing the organisational development work her area was delivering over the next three years.

“OK, I’ll bite.  So what is ‘the organisation’ Maria asked.

“Try this on for size” I answered.  “The organisation is made up of the principles and practices in play that determine who gets to work here, and how they are expected to work together'”.

Maria was silent for some time.  After a while she looked up:

“I’m not sure what you mean”.

“Another angle” I replied.  “The organisation is the internal rules of the game on how people are supposed to work together, whether explicit or otherwise.”

“What sort of rules” Maria asked.

“Things like how you determine how many organisational layers are needed, who gets to make decisions about what, how processes are run, what minimal practices are expected from every manager and/or team, how people are expected to work out issues of priority, and so on.  But what we’re talking about fundamentally is your concept of what needs to be in place in a healthy organisation such that anyone who has the capability, is willing to learn and can get along with others will be able to deliver results.”

“My concept?”

“Yep, your concept, your underlying theory of your organisation, your basis for comparison should any organisational issues arise.” I said.

“And not the people themselves?”

“The organisation that the people are effectively dropped into”.

“Sounds impersonal to me.  Taking the ‘H’ out of ‘HR'”

“You’re seeing ‘impersonal’ and ‘caring’ as opposites, but that’s not the case.  Adjusting the temperature of a room to make it comfortable is not a ‘personal’ act, but it looks after people.  The same applies to working on the internal ‘rules of the game’ to make sure that they are allowing people use their capability in the direction of the organisation.   OD needs to stop doing the equivalent of teaching people how to not shiver in a cold room, when the real issue is a broken heater”.

Ultimately who is accountable for each of your areas being efficient?

Danni was General Manager Operations in a 1400-person organisation with about 600 people under her umbrella.   The new Board had made it clear they required a renewed focussed on ‘efficiency and effectiveness’.

“OK” Danni continued, “so I’m accountable that the work of my various areas is effective, meaning creates value for the organisation, and my Senior Managers are accountable that it’s done efficiently”.

“Nearly” I replied.

“Only nearly?” Danni laughed.  “I thought I was getting somewhere!”

“We are” I continued.  “But remember from the workshop last week, what is each manager accountable for?”

“The results of their people”.

“Which means ultimately who is accountable for each of your areas being efficient?”

“Well I guess that means me.  But now I’m confused”.

“Fair enough!” I agreed.  “But hang with me.  The work of each of your Senior Managers is to make their areas run more efficiently.  As in achieve a better outputs to inputs ratio.  And work is about making decisions to reach an outcome.  So your Senior Managers are paid to identify then choose a pathway that will see the outcome of a more efficient operation achieved”.

“Go on…..” Danni said, nodding slowly.

“But…..how much of an improvement in efficiency is considered to be a good job…..the result they are expected to achieve…..that’s your call”.

“Why my call?”

“Because you are…..” I began.  Danni smiled and joined in….”accountable for the results of my people“.

Why is HR advice optional but the system isn’t?

“What’s the difference between advice your HR person David offers your managers on raising staff engagement compared to the systems and practices he has set up to help them with it”?  We were getting close, I needed to press Jason on this.

He frowned with concentration.

“Well…lets start with what they have in common” he began.  “Both are designed to help them in doing their natural role as managers, which is to build a team that’s engaged”

“Yep.”

“But while I don’t expect them to follow every bit of advice David gives them, I do expect them to follow the systems and practices David set up”.

“Yep.  So what’s the difference? Why is one optional, and the other one isn’t”

“I actually don’t know!” he said with surprise.

“Let me ask you this.  When David set up the systems and processes to help raise engagement….did you look at them?”

“Of course I did.  David was new at the time.  He didn’t know our industry yet, he didn’t know us.  He did a great job with what he was able to learn, then we all provided input.”

“Who signed off that that it would be a good system  for your business to raise engagement?”

“In the end, I did.  I’m the one on the hook for the engagement levels in the whole business.”

I stayed silent.  Jason looked up.

“The staff engagement practices…. it’s not David’s expectation that they’re followed.  It’s mine.  That’s the difference”.