Initiative junkies

Citation

Bajer, J. (2012), "Initiative junkies", Strategic HR Review, Vol. 11 No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1108/shr.2012.37211aaa.002

Initiative junkies

Article Type: Strategic commentary From: Strategic HR Review, Volume 11, Issue 1

Thought leaders share their views on the HR profession and its direction for the future

The biggest challenge facing HR is to stop managing scarcity and learn to channel abundance, instead. This is easier said than done, especially when we look at the variety of attention grabbing initiatives that have been keeping us busy, with few business outcomes to account for. Consider the following.

• •

  An organization mobilizes its management twice a year to prepare and conduct performance evaluations across the workforce. The outcomes? Some disappointed and anxious people, fear-driven average ratings, avoidance of true performance management conversations and, ultimately, unaffected performance levels.

• •

  Another organization decides to work on its values, to bring about the right behaviors in all employees. The outcomes? Many iterations to come up with the “right” wording, expensive communication campaigns and, ultimately, unchanged behaviors and a growing sense of skepticism.

Such questionable initiatives have kept HR and business departments very busy over the last decade. The lack of measurable results from these initiatives derives from the fact that they are based on a “scarcity” model, which in turn, has produced further scarcity. A “scarcity” model is underpinned by the belief that, left to their own devices, people would not work, behave, collaborate or innovate sufficiently well and therefore it is our job to coax, cajole or coerce them into doing the right things. Despite significant research that shows that people thrive when given a job with a purpose they can believe in, the world of people management tries to drive engagement by reducing the time people spend at work, compensating them with fringe benefits for the inconvenience. The “people” business, for good or for bad, has had too many years of getting good at managing scarcity. However, the approaches used by the “Googles” of this world (companies that today we hold as best practices and aspire to imitate) are based on a different belief system altogether, the “abundance” one. It is not about copying what they do, but about believing in why they do it. Opposite to the “scarcity” model, the “abundant” one trusts that the majority of people naturally want to do what is right and do it well. It believes that people want direction rather than control, and opportunities to make a difference out there rather than with their own pockets.

Is your organization focused on scarcity?

Hand on heart – consider today how much a scarcity model is driving your organization when it comes to people. Are any of the following familiar?

• •

  Scarcity of talent. We work hard to attract and retain those few candidates that fit the right profile. We run psychometric tests, assessment centers, cognitive interviews, etc. to find needles in a haystack. Furthermore, once inside our organizations, we separate the wheat from the chaff by choosing the right talent and investing time and money in nurturing them in the hope that we’ll never again have succession planning or cultural fit problems.

• •

  Scarcity of diversity. We work hard to reach out to those less likely to “make it” in our organizations, helping them along the way. We work through quotas to achieve targets in the hope we’ll have the right mix at the top someday.

• •

  Scarcity of skills. We create pyramids based on well-defined skills, experience and knowledge, where those at the top know more than those at the bottom. We “package” knowledge so we can “distribute” it at all levels, using LMS applications to make sure people take the right training at the right time, as today they do not have enough of the right skills.

• •

  Scarcity of engagement. We believe that, if left to their own devices, people would not choose to work in our organizations. We created a world of engagement metrics based on extrinsic motivators (careers, bonuses and perks) assuming that motivation cannot come from the value that we create for our customers by just doing our jobs. Seeking commitment, we have developed a world of attachment.

• •

  Scarcity of trust. “What doesn’t get measured, doesn’t get done,” claims the popular motto, under which we created a plethora of metrics to make sure people do as they are told. In addition, we developed feedback mechanisms (i.e. 360-degree feedback) to compensate for lack of direct, constructive, daily conversations. Consequently, suspicion and speculation have taken the place of trust.

• •

  Scarcity of values. There is a belief that people would be naturally selfish, un-collaborative and not interested in making a difference. Consequently, we create lists of corporate “core values,” launch campaigns to “educate” our workforces and design careful metrics to hold people accountable, making sure they behave according to “our values.”

• •

  Scarcity of communication. A common assumption is that communication problems in an organization can be fixed by shouting louder. Instead of building coherence and integrity in our messages, we focus our resources on producing webcasts, town hall meetings and blogs in the hope that people rate our communication departments highly.

A change of mindset required

I believe that what we need is a change of mindset. Trying to apply new initiatives without changing our traditional, scarcity-based models, will simply not work.

Add to our picture the demographic, social and economic changes happening today: generation-Y’s value driven behaviors, grey haired talent retention strategies, the role of social networks in how we recruit, develop and maintain relationships and the continuous borderless flocking of migratory global talent, to name but a few. What will happen if we continue to apply our scarcity driven people initiatives in the future?

Of course, if we are to channel abundance, instead of managing scarcity, we will need to develop new skills, processes and tools. An abundance model does not mean chaos and anarchy. It means that we focus on helping committed people make a difference to our customers, trusting that most of them will. It means that we work on making our organizations internally coherent so people can naturally grow and thrive in them. It means that we work on removing distracters, helping our organizations be truly driven by value-adding purposes.

Alternatively, we could return to the comfort of our initiatives and hope that someone, somehow, someday breaks the cycle.

Javier BajerFounding CEO of The Talent Foundation.

About the author

Dr Javier Bajer is a cognitive psychologist and one of the foremost specialists in leadership and workforce performance. He focuses on what gets people to engage, collaborate and accelerate change, turning latest behavioral economics research into concrete applications at global organizations such as Accenture, HSBC, Shell and Hewlett Packard. Javier Bajer can be contacted at: javier@workforceperformance.com