All posts by : TISOMO

HR analytics

The Ball of Wax we call HR Analytics

Author(s): Julie Fernandez, (Information Services Group (ISG), Stamford, Connecticut, USA

It is not far-fetched to imagine a company using recruiting technology to help it find potential candidates for specific jobs. And it is not science fiction to imagine that the technology is based on machine learning, which involves identifying and repeating certain patterns and applying algorithms. Does this mean the software could, therefore, “learn” that most candidates hired come from a specific school or town? Does this encourage bias – or even profiling?

The potential for bias is certainly there, but does it have greater influence than the biases inherent in people-driven decisions?

First, it is important to recognize that human judgment as it is used today in recruiting is flawed. Even the most careful recruiter is drawn to certain nameless qualities. And, even if you ignore personal experience and bias in human recruiters, the battery of tests and selection methods available to HR teams today cannot be considered “fact-based” indicators of performance. Because so much of what enterprises mean when they talk about performance is unexplainable, they use two terms to measure how someone might contribute to the workplace:

  1. Performance indicators: These include sales, productivity and satisfaction metrics and attrition and promotion rates.
  2. Predictors: These include background/experience, test scores and interview performance.

These kinds of people analytics – also known as talent or HR analytics – can tell us a lot, and machine learning tools and techniques are evolving all the time to tell us even more. We are not far from having apps and products that can conduct sophisticated analysis to improve the speed and quality of finding and evaluating candidates for hire. No less than an army of data engineers, statisticians and dataphiles are racing to create competitive advantage in talent acquisition – better results with data-driven intelligence.

Armed in the past with little more than an applicant tracking system, are recruiters ready for the leap from being data-deprived to being artificially intelligent? For many companies, sourcing and attracting talent begins with casting a wide net and staying connected in the candidate pool. Social media channels have recently made it possible to access unprecedented volumes of data about the employment skills and experiences available in today’s workforce. The talent marketplace is exploding with software and services that aim to improve sourcing using data-driven analysis to perform candidate matches, automate rankings, short-list and pre-screen candidates. The dramatic impact to these top-of-funnel sourcing activities promise as much as 57 per cent efficiency[1] to the formerly unstructured work of narrowing down candidates, all the while yielding better quality and diversity outcomes.

Companies today are quite comfortable evaluating tools and services for the user experience, for case studies in their industry and for estimated results to justify value for a business case. Without any real data expertise, what is the likelihood that HR buyers will go the extra mile to consider the methods, biases and algorithms that statisticians and purists would consider sound and defensible enough to act upon? Embedded HR analytics begin with a foundation or parameters that establish what makes a good hire, so alignment on this foundation is critical. Beyond the basic data premise, HR should also become familiar with various techniques that are used to improve the validity of results from any predictive analysis that is being calculated and applied, including the following:

  • At the top-most level, logic should identify and compare characteristics of best and worst outcomes, testing for statistical significance to focus on what is meaningful.
  • Next refining the analysis to subsets of data that determine results within the same unit/group (industry, field, business, geo, etc.) and job will yield more custom results. Adding credentials and experience that are industry-specific apply to certain job types or provide deep geographic context will resonate to companies seeking competitive advantage for talent in those areas.
  • Advanced methods should be used to ensure relevance and root out bias including techniques, such as regression analysis to identify and isolate certain characteristics or outside influences
  • Finally, a methodology that incorporates a look-back and adjustment based on hire, attrition and promotion results can be used to bring the analytics full-circle.

Establishing rule-driven programs to identify new talent or narrow down best-fit candidates has received a great deal of attention for its potential to drive efficiency in the search. Reducing time spent by recruiters to identify a top slate of candidates accelerates the search for talent and produces quantifiable value measured in cost-per-hire and time to fill. It is easy to get excited and lose sight of the effectiveness objectives – to identify hires that are best-fit for the position and who thrive in your company’s culture.

Another top problem area that HR professionals want to use people analytics data to solve is that of employee retention, or voluntary turnover, which XpertHR’s Michael Carty asserts is the number one data priority area for HR beginning in 2018[2]. XpertHR also cites voluntary resignation rates that have risen from 8.9 per cent in 2012 to 13.1 per cent, reflecting the strengthening labor market. Separately, blogger Maren Hogen[3] paints an even starker picture for making employee retention an HR priority. Of her nine alarming employee retention statistics, four indicate that as much as a third of all employees are at risk, whether newly hired or longer-term employees:

  • One-third of new hires quit their job after about six months.
  • One-third (33 per cent) of employees knew whether they would stay with their company long-term after their first week.
  • Some 35 per cent of employees will start looking for a job if they do not receive a pay raise in the next 12 months.
  • One-third (33 per cent) of leaders at companies with 100 plus employees are currently looking for jobs – even those in senior leadership aren’t immune to leaving.

Historically, companies have used exit surveys or termination reason codes to try to describe why employees leave, but how much more effective would it be to be able to predict which employees are most likely to leave the company? Getting an early heads-up provides management a chance to act to prevent its top talent from leaving while preparing for succession or backfill. As companies look for data-driven insights that will help prevent talent loss, we are seeing a wave of provider tools from the likes of Vizier, Otipo, Deloitte and WNS that are focused on workforce retention. Still, others are waiting more patiently for their global HCM software (Workday, SuccessFactors, Oracle Cloud, etc.) to advance from dashboard HR metrics to a more robust suite of analytics as part of the integrated HR technology suite.

The appeal of plugging in and turning on a product that taps into existing source data, displays visual HR metrics, and then predicts successes and relevant outcomes is captivating. However, the tremendous swirl of HR technology innovations means there are many stages to maturing from HR data created painstakingly for one-off requests to a culture of visual HR metrics at-the ready, and then beyond to a consumer of predictive analysis available to support key HR decisions. Even the savviest of dataphiles will recognize the scrutiny that you will be met with along the way:

How much competitive advantage can you gain from a commercial package?

The newness of having and using data to inform and even predict HR outcomes is powerful and has already created a compelling call to action for HR professionals. But as commercial toolsets are built, they must anticipate data sets that will be available and relevant to reaching insights about HR turnover, recruiting, absence, performance, pay and more. You might wonder if these commercial modules can address your company’s unique employment needs with out-of-the-box algorithms or whether they are destined to become a feature that is table stakes in your HR technology roadmap. Until machine learning makes it possible for outcomes to evolve separately for each data set and problem statement, you may find your data-driven insights look and act much like that of your peers.

What can we analyze and predict without clean data, big data and concerns for data privacy?

HR has long been challenged with having and using any data or metrics at all. Only recently have global HCM systems become a reality for HR organizations with more than a few thousand employees, prompting unprecedented levels of data aggregation and cleanup. Even so, many special-purpose data sets (absence, benefits, recruiting, learning) still reside in point solutions or external data sources that may need to be linked or scrubbed for use. Supposing quality data are available, is there enough of it to ensure your outcomes will be relevant? A Wharton School Professor, Peter Cappelli, put it bluntly in the title of his article in the Harvard Business Review “There is No Such Thing as Big Data in HR[4].” Simply stated, solving HR challenges at a scale of hundreds or thousands of candidates or employees is one of the reasons that tapping into large record stores across clients or from giants like ADP is attractive. New concerns surfacing just this year question whether it will even be possible to access HR data, stored and used for analytics purposes. How do data privacy concerns impact the use of personally identifiable information (PII) with recruiting or other HR tools that use machine learning? The European General Data Protection Regulation effective May 2018, along with a host of local data privacy regulations, will bring increasing scrutiny to the rights of employers to aggregate and leverage personal data without express consent from employees and candidates.

Can I reasonably control for bias and influence that are programmed in?

This question comes at a time when social media bigshots Facebook and Twitter are being criticized for programming universal bias in their display of content and a suspicious refusal to share the underlying algorithms. In time, it may not be hard to assess whether institutional bias was present. HR professionals should take note of the issues raised by this broad example. First, the premise of bias alone is enough to cast doubt on company practices, intent and reputation which in people matters can have grave consequences. Second, there are no clear precedents for determining who is accountable, if there was intent and whether there is fault or damages. To address these perceived risks, HR professionals will want to adopt measures that mitigate the risk of unintended bias by ensuring due diligence or seeking a means to certify or protect against allegations stemming from using the output of HR analytics.

Because machine learning and artificial intelligence programs are rules-driven, they may someday be able to identify and flag bias when and if it shows up, essentially overturning human decision-making. But when, and under what circumstances, will human judgment overturn an automation result? If the automation recommends the hiring of a group of recruits who then promptly leave the company, how will humans manage the fallout? Is it defensible to de-select a number of candidates based on a model that predicts their fit and success for the position? And if predictive analytics are responsible for sweetened pay or benefits to an at-risk employee versus his/her peers, how does HR ensure it is on solid ground in equitable pay and opportunity to its broader employee base? Can employers broadly trust the outcomes of predictive tools and programs when even the largest and most resourceful tech companies falter, as was recently reported that Amazon scrapped its AI recruiting tool that showed bias against women[5].

One thing is certain – as HR departments become increasingly reliant on advanced technologies and the numbers they produce, they also will experience the need for new skillsets required to deploy and use them. It is a difficult-to-find combination that bridges technology and ethics and that can oversee the monitoring, auditing and enforcing of such automation. This is just one of several new roles arising from the adoption of a digital workplace. As HR departments race to deploy cloud technologies, robotics process automation, and HR analytics there is a growing need for a center of expertise (COE) dedicated to HR data and technology. Here, strong HR process knowledge is combined with a penchant for HR data and technology to own HR data cleansing, harmonization and maintenance, as well as oversight of any teams or providers responsible for your strategic HR technology platforms. Armed with the knowledge and inner workings of all of your best HR data sources, the HR Tech COE is an ideal place to focus resources on workforce analytics to drive business insights and recommendations.

We may be just at the beginning of the debate about tools that thrive on the use of more and more data points to make what have historically been “gut” decisions. It would be wise to get clear now about the implications of advanced analytics on recruiting and people management.

workforce planning

Workforce Planning: One of the Most Challenging HR Compliance Issues for 2018

Author(s): Beth Zoller, (XpertHR, New Providence, New Jersey, USA)

Each new year brings changes in the workplace, government, society, culture, technology and the legal landscape that translate into challenges and obstacles for employers. To gain insight into these challenges, XpertHR conducted a survey in October 2017 soliciting input from over 1,000 HR professionals on their view of the most significant compliance challenges in 2018.

Workforce planning amid an evolving workforce

With an evolving workforce and changing societal demographics, workforce planning appears to be one of the top challenges for employers. In today’s increasingly global environment, twenty-first-century employers need to respond to both external and internal factors that shape and impact the recruiting, hiring and retention of workers.

The use of technology and mobile devices allows workers to communicate in more effective and productive ways with employers, managers, coworkers, clients and customers. Brick-and-mortar offices and the traditional 9 to 5 workday is quickly fading, and we continue to see an increase in flexible working arrangements, remote working and a focus on achieving a greater work-life balance. Employers are witnessing the rise of the gig economy and alternative work arrangements, as workers are no longer swayed by the promise of a steady paycheck and benefits and crave freedom and flexibility. Notions of automation, smart devices, robotics and artificial intelligence are beginning to disrupt the workforce and challenge traditional workers.

Hiring today is challenging and complex amidst the many laws that restrict an employer’s ability to gain valuable and insightful information into job candidates. Additionally, there also may be a disconnect between the skill sets of individuals seeking jobs and the positions an employer needs to fill.

Generationally, millennials and Generation Z have joined the workforce in record numbers and are seeking new ways of working and have different expectations of their employers. Further, employers must confront and account for an aging Baby Boomer population, increased health-care costs and making plans for succession and retirement.

XpertHR’s survey confirmed workforce planning amid the evolving workforce as a top challenge:

  • almost 50 per cent of respondents said this was among their top three workplace challenges;
  • 52 per cent of respondents viewed increasing employee engagement, morale and satisfaction as very or extremely challenging;
  • 48 per cent viewed retaining employees as very or extremely challenging;
  • 47 per cent were very or extremely challenged by succession planning;
  • 46 per cent viewed aligning talent retention strategy with business objectives as very or extremely challenging;
  • 44 per cent viewed upskilling employees for future responsibilities as very or extremely challenging;
  • 43 per cent viewed managing performance and providing professional development opportunities as very or extremely challenging;
  • 29 per cent stated that joint employment and the changing definition of the employer was very or extremely challenging; and
  • 28 per cent were very or extremely challenged by flexible working/telecommuting.

Respondents stated that “growth and retention”, “capacity planning, talent pipeline development”, “retention in a very competitive workforce” and “attracting and retaining skilled labor”, “the ever-changing laws and keeping up with them”, “recruitment of high performing individuals”, “providing training related to the changes” and “the declining and aging population in rural locations” were top concerns. Additionally, one respondent noted that “it goes beyond compliance — it’s how to create a transformative HR strategy”. Another respondent revealed that, “employee engagement/organizational health will continue to be a top focus for us”.

What an employer should do

Given these challenges, it is important to be proactive and prepared. An employer needs to be able to effectively plan its workforce to make sure that it has the right people for the right jobs at the right cost to be successful in a global and competitive marketplace. An employer also needs to take into account the unique factors that affect its business and shape its workforce.

To begin, HR should identify key stakeholders and members of management in different areas of the business and open up communications with them to understand the organization’s short- and long-term goals and how employees can play a role in bringing them to fruition. It is also critical to understand how to effectively use data throughout workforce planning, from recruiting and hiring to performance management to retention. Good data analytics can help to understand where and how to focus efforts and can assist in tracking progress. Primary goals should be to increase productivity and efficiency in the workplace and keeping costs low.

With respect to hiring, an employer should:

  • focus on looking for experience in the industry, but also focus on the skills, competencies and talent individuals may bring to the table that can benefit the organization;
  • keep budget and business goals in mind;
  • consider whether when and how to use gig and contract workers as part of the workforce and what the primary objective will be (i.e. cost savings);
  • understand how technology and mobile applications can aid recruiting; and
  • be aware of new laws that ban an employer from seeking salary history information or criminal history and make sure recruiting is legally compliant.

With regard to training, an employer should encourage employees to continue professional development and work with them to develop long-term skills. A focus on leadership and development, along with mentoring and coaching programs, may provide support and guidance to employees who will be able to move into key roles in the organization. An employer can help close the talent gap by creating an atmosphere centered on education, professional development and leadership opportunities throughout an individual’s career. Employees should be able to highlight their key strengths and competencies and work to build on them for the better of the organization.

An employer should consider how it will handle performance management and reviews, what its goals will be, who will conduct the review and how often reviews will be conducted. It is important to evaluate employee retention and engagement and why the employer may be losing employees, which employees it is at risk of losing and how to retain them (i.e. increased compensation, better benefits, better work–life balance).

It is important to listen to feedback from employees, whether it be through informal meetings, employee engagement surveys, etc., to know what is, or is not, working in terms of employee engagement and retention as this can provide valuable information to employers on how to improve.

With aging Baby Boomers, an employer needs to consider retirement and how employees will leave the workforce, what packages and benefits it will offer, when employees will be eligible, who will replace them and will it be possible to retain older workers in an alternative work capacity.

The workforce is often an employer’s single largest cost. Therefore, having the right people in the right place and at the right time and cost is extremely important. With proper planning, you minimize risks associated with executing a business strategy. As the cornerstone of strategic human resources, workforce planning can have a positive impact on a company’s ability to acquire, inspire and retain talent.

Workforce planning is, and will likely continue to be, a primary concern for HR and one that will require thoughtful planning and development as the workforce continues to grow and evolve.

Clear Company, HR.com (2016) “Workforce planning: a forward-looking approach to getting the right people in the right Jobs”, available at: http://info.clearcompany.com/hubfs/Workforce%20Planning.pdf

 

brainstorming

The End of the Traditional Manager

BY ADAM HICKMAN AND RYAN PENDELL

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

  • Traditional management practices are outdated
  • Leaders must equip their managers with new tools
  • The future manager may not resemble anything we’re used to

By nearly every measure, the workplace is rapidly evolving. Compared to decades past, today’s workplace is defined by:

  • More flexible workspaces: 74% of employees have the ability to move to different areas to do their work
  • More flexible work time: 52% of employees say they have some choice over when they work
  • More remote working: 43% of employees work away from their team at least some of the time.
  • More matrixed teams: 84% of employees are matrixed to some extent.

But this new fluid workplace isn’t just about the work environment. Workplaces are increasingly project-based, and employees today are attracted to interesting problems and meaningful work — not just a job title.

To be more agile in a project-based work environment, teams make more decisions without approval from above, which means non-managers must act more like leaders and think more “big picture” like executives.

But thinking and acting like a leader is what companies want in an employee. Organizations are looking for employees who can make independent decisions with confidence, problem solve with diverse peer groups, and manage their own time, projects, workload, relationships, and career path by themselves.

Implicitly or explicitly, companies often expect employees to “be their own boss” and do for themselves what used to be considered “management.”

This shift in the workplace alters what employees need from their manager. In short, a manager who is always visible, watching every minute and stopping by to ask if you got the memo is becoming obsolete.

Under New Management

What happens when people have more autonomy at work?

Empirical evidence shows a correlation to increased performance and engagement as well as more sensitivity to failure when people have more independence at work.

In other words, autonomy leads to increased employee performance and engagement,but employees still need manager support during difficult situations. Managers can’t offer autonomy and disappear.

As long as businesses employ people, they need leaders who can develop talented individuals. Even for flexible, temp, gig or alternative workers, the personal relationship they have with their supervisor is the most meaningful relationship they have with their organization.

But there are new rules for management, and traditional management practices often don’t work anymore.

For example, often managers assume that remote workers’ expectations are the same as in-office employees’, but there is one phenomenon that separates these two types of workers: isolation. Perceived workplace isolation can lead to as much as a 21% drop in performance.

The reality is that you can’t manage the modern workforce using traditional management methods.

Today’s manager needs to be a coach, holding employees accountable while encouraging development and growth.

With many of the details of management now being automated, what’s left is the most powerful tool a manager has — meaningful conversations.

Consider your favorite sports coach and how they communicate with their star players. They have a deep understanding of their players through hours of dialogue. They know what to say to motivate each player differently — who needs more feedback, who needs less. Over time, great coaches develop the trust and openness needed to have tough conversations under pressure.

Most managers, however, aren’t ready for this kind of personal approach to dialogue with their employees. Organizations can help by providing managers training on how to lead strengths-based, performance-focused conversations regularly with employees.

The Future of Management

Could management itself become decentralized?

Instead of having one “manager,” imagine your best employees interacting with a team of specialized managers — one a technical expert, another an interpersonal relationship guru, another a career coach, etc.

Different managers address specific roadblocks to performance, while also consulting with one another to make sure that they are seeing each employee holistically and objectively.

Of course, managers would still need to have tough conversations with employees when necessary, but they would stay in the background when their team is performing well.

The chance to be mentored by this management dream team dedicated to your long-term career development would be a powerful draw for talented job seekers.

Regardless of what the future holds, it’s worth considering unconventional ideas when it comes to management. Sometimes it is easy to miss how quickly business as we know it is changing.

The old rules no longer apply, and that means leaders need to reinvent management for a more autonomous workforce of the future.

 

airplane cockpit

The Practice of Management: An Exit Row Seat?

By: Tanya Harris, SHRM-SCP, PMP

One of the marks of an excellent leader is his or her ability to bring about transformation in people and organizations. This leader brings perspective to the collective, meaning they must understand the requirements for sitting in the seat.

I Need a Verbal “Yes”

A great word picture to illustrate this is the airline industry. Most people want more leg room when flying, so when purchasing an airline ticket, they check to see if seats in the exit row are available. Have you ever stopped to think about the similarities of searching for extra legroom when flying and searching for extra responsibilities when looking for job opportunities?

Instead of looking for roles to highlight and grow current competencies, there is a desire to move into formal roles of leadership. The desire does not always align with competence and commitment.  Many people, search for leadership roles, but not the leader’s responsibilities or risk. Many want the leader’s praise and the paycheck, without comprehending the leader’s performance requirements or pressures of the role.  There are specific requirements to sit in the exit row.

Before takeoff and before general instructions, the airline flight attendants look for the leaders. As they announce the requirements for sitting in the exit row, they concisely explain the role of a leader:

  1. You must be able to understand the instructions concerning the exit door.
  2. You must be able to open the door.
  3. You must be able to guide others through the door verbally.

When you think about the role of a leader and their demonstration of effective leadership, these are the requirements. When you lead others, you need to know what must happen (vision and strategy). You must be able to pull it off (competence and motivation), and you must be able to take others with you (empowerment and connection). Leadership is influence. A person is not leading if no one is following, and effective leadership is not forced, followers.

Yes! I Have What It Takes

An excellent leader that transforms people and organizations understands that they must draw commitment from the team to create change that is effective, efficient, and sustainable. Viable organization transformation (change) requires continuous organizational development. An effective leader will courageously accept the challenge to do both, draw commitment from the team and develop the organization’s capabilities.

The leadership research shares that to transform people and organizations, the leader must demonstrate a level of competence to gain trust and respect. Competence is a leaders’ ability to say it, plan it, and do it in a way that there is no doubt that the leader knows the business—which then inspires others to buy into the vision, strategy, and the transformation (change). Kouzes and Posner have coined this phrase, ‘If you don’t believe in the messenger, you won’t believe the message.’ The leader must demonstrate competence, commitment to the cause and the people, and clearly communicate (simplify the message, know the audience,  demonstrate credibility, and seek response).

Just in Case

Have you ever really thought about “why” the airline attendants are asking these questions? The attendant is seeking to know if there is a real commitment to the cause so that in times of trouble or challenges, a competent, committed, and compassionate leader is at the helm. In organizations, employees (followers) want to know that there is a sense of security for them and the leader at the wheel is fully prepared to carry the weight of the responsibility.

If you are in an exit row seat and not able to carry out the duties of the role, the attendant will happily find you another seat and replace you with someone who understands the requirements, and is capable and committed to following through. This truth should also apply to organizations.

Bottom-line, an effective leader knows that to develop organizational capabilities to deliver the vision and strategy, the people process (human capital) must align. The organization must have the right people, in the right roles, at the right time, for the right cost, to execute the right goals, which translate to effective, efficient, and sustainable transformation.

leadership

The Practice of Management: The Relevant Leader

By: Tanya Harris, SHRM-SCP, PMP

“Knowing Yourself”

“I have often thought that the best way to define a man’s character would be to seek out the particular mental or moral attitude in which, when it came upon him, he felt himself most deeply and intensively active and alive. At such moments, there is a voice inside which speaks and says, “This is the real me.”

-William James

Peter Senge’s work on “the learning organization” identifies a leader as someone “helping people see the big picture, promoting understanding of how different parts of the organization interact, and explaining how local actions have longer-term and broader impacts than local actors realize.” The theory of Leadership has evolved throughout the century as scholars have developed theories to explain a leader’s role within complex systems for initiating change and managing dynamic social networks. As such, providing a single definition of leadership is impractical. Organizational scientists, executive coaches, and leadership development consultants, all seek to define and answer the question, “what makes an effective leader”? Gallup shares that while leadership competencies are critical in determining the success of an organization, no leader possess all competencies or strengths. Despite the segregated views, experts reach a point of mutual understanding when it comes to one key attribute a leader must demonstrate– the ability to be relevant.

What Does It mean to Be Relevant?

To be relevant means the ability to adapt and evolve. A relevant leader is not defined by a particular set of talents and traits, but by having exceptional clarity about who they are and who they are not. Simply, the relevant leader is maniacally self-aware of their strengths and their weakness. Relevant leaders seek to surround themselves with the right people, in the right roles and build off the strengths of each person.

The Need for a Relevant Leader

Leaders must monitor, assess and reflect on how and why the competitive landscape is changing and the causal factors underlying that change. The relevant leader can challenge themselves quickly, bring in a fresh perspective and expert advice, as well as earnestly invite and consider opposing viewpoints.

Leaders are influential in determining the outcome of their organizations through their decisions, strategies, and influence on others. Organizations are not only competing amongst themselves, but they are experiencing a rapid change in the external environment such as changes in workplace demographics, disruptive technology, globalization and changes in market conditions. The need for a relevant leader is paramount during this time, as they must be adaptable and resilient, be prepared for new threats, foster connections, all while leading with authenticity.

What Makes a Leader Relevant?

Relevant leaders demonstrate a high degree of Situational Awareness (SA). Situational awareness is a foundation for understanding and making sense of what is going on and then effect change if needed. Relevant leaders demonstrate a high level of Emotional Intelligence (EI). Emotional Intelligence is how leaders handle themselves as well as their relationships. There are other attributes or characteristic that can be used to facilitate, “what makes a leader relevant?” However, regarding these competencies, leaders with highly demonstrated situational awareness and emotional intelligence have the intellectual flexibility to understand the power of “connections and collaboration” to drive the vision, mission, and strategy, while staying ahead of the “competition.” When assessing situational awareness and emotional intelligence, concerning “what makes a leader relevant,” consider these points:

Control Situation, Not People

Situational Awareness (SA) is forward-looking, projecting what is likely to happen to inform effective decisions. The Leaders tasked is to align the goals of the organizations with that of the individual. The relevant leader understands that participation drives alignment and promotes cohesiveness. Shared situational awareness becomes an essential function of cooperation and collaboration among team members who share a common understanding and interpretation of objectives. The relevant leader focuses on empowerment rather than control. This leader creates a carefully, structured, flexible and transparent planning process that combines top-down, bottom-up and middle-out inputs to align disparate groups. A relevant leader connects with his constituency on a deeper level and supports them in finding a higher purpose underlying their job or role within the organization.

Innovation and Intuition

A leader demonstrating a high level of Emotional Intelligence(EI) can look at a problem through a different lens based on circumstances presented, and scenarios created and adapts. The relevant leader is grounded in reality with optimism and is, therefore, able to implement innovative and more effective solutions. The leader must be able to come up with strategies not based just on previous experience, but also on intuition and the perception of the way organizational needs and challenges are supported. Organizational awareness fosters building a broad pipeline of capabilities and leading the efforts of the integration necessary to translate potential into impact.

Staying relevant as a leader is all about keeping a fluid focus. It requires a leader to foster stronger relationships with the team and an attitude of continuous professional development. If a leader fails to stay relevant, they limit their growth and ultimately the growth of the team and the organization.

Summing up the Relevant Leader

As previously argued, there is no single definition of leadership or no widely accepted general theory of leadership. However, there are a few common elements across the spectrum of research that exist. Theoretically, the relevant leader influences the organizational process. There is an emphasis on the characteristics of the leader and a recognition that the context or setting affects how leadership plays out. Let’s briefly consider the elements of influence and characteristics.

Influence concerning the relevant leader: Bass (1990) concluded that “defining effective leadership as successful influence by the leader that results in the attainment of goals by the influenced followers…is particularly useful.” Deciding on a shared direction and coordinating work so that people are aligned is facilitated by an influence process. It would seem to argue that one can conclude why influence is at the core of many current definitions of leadership. On the other hand, it is relevant to distinguish that influence concerning leadership can be a slippery slope. Legendary leadership guru, Peter Drucker, coined the following statement: “The three greatest leaders of the 20th century were Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. If that’s leadership, I want no part of it.” Influence cannot be confused with authority.

Characteristics of the relevant leader: What differentiates effective and ineffective leaders is perhaps the most frequently examined question in leadership research. The characteristics that researchers include covers a broad range of human capabilities, including personal attributes, actions or behaviors, competencies, expertise, and experience. Let’s briefly examine personal attributes and competencies.

  • Personal Attributes: Psychologist proposes that personal attributes are constructs that explain consistent patterns of behavior across situations. A leader’s cognitive ability and personality are two of the most frequently studied types of attributes. For example, the concept of charismatic leadership has become a favorite topic in leadership literature and what behavior is demonstrated by such a leader. Bass (1985) argued that “The effectiveness must be real or apparent. Often, the charismatic survives with more attention given the apparent than the real. Image of success and effectiveness is pursued.”
  • Competencies: Research suggests that competency is an interrelated set of knowledge, skills, and perspectives that can manifest itself in many forms of behavior or a wide variety of actions. Many organizations prescribe to the notion that as a leader ascends the leadership ladder, there are specific competencies for specific roles that must be demonstrated to signal a high probability of success as the leader moves into that role. For example, organizations have what is known as “Enterprise Leadership Competencies,” which is a set of competencies along with the description of the associated behaviors and definition based on your leadership level (i.e., from new and emerging leaders to strategic leaders). The demonstrated behavior or lack thereof of specific competencies can determine how far a leader moves in an organization.

Concluding Thoughts

Leadership is a concept that is broad, evolving and contextual. In its most basic sense, leadership can be understood as a social process for guiding and generating the direction, alignment, and commitment needed for individuals to work together productively toward common outcomes. Social and political trends are beginning to change the way organizations develop, measure, and reward leaders. The ultimate leadership challenge for leaders entering this new era of change is their ability to navigate through the fog of disruptive technology, prolific competition and mass globalization to determine and set the course for their organization to stay relevant.

Does Your Organization Have a Total Rewards Strategy?

Posted by UNC Executive Development on Apr 30, 2015 10:48:17 AM

Rethinking Total Rewards

There is a perfect storm brewing in workplaces. The economy is recovering, business is picking up, and employers are hiring. At the same time, baby boomers are preparing to leave the workforce which will lead to leadership, skills, and knowledge gaps that could threaten an organization’s future. For the first time since the Great Recession, employers will be working harder than ever to retain and attract the best workers. These retentions and recruiting activities have been traditionally housed with HR business partners and in the compensation domain of HR, but it is time to rethink these activities as part of a broader total rewards strategy.

Total rewards are the comprehensive monetary and non-monetary return employers provide employees in exchange for their time, talents, efforts, and results. These returns include health care services such as medical, prescription, dental and vision coverage, wellness offerings such as assessment and screenings, retirement benefits such as pensions, 401(k)s, retiree medical and life insurance, work-life programs such as paid and unpaid time off, dependent care, short-term and long-term disability, and flexible work schedules (Kwon and Hein, 2013). They also include base salary, bonus, stock options, variable pay, executive salary, and perks like company cars.

Offering employees career opportunities are also part of a total rewards strategy, a practice an increasing number of employers are adopting. Career opportunities include learning in the form of tuition assistance, corporate universities, attending seminars and conferences, self-development, challenge assignments, and even sabbaticals. Coaching and mentoring also fall into this category, along with advanced opportunities like overseas assignments, career ladders and pathways, and providing employees on and off ramps throughout their careers.

Good total rewards packages attract, retain, and motivate employees to do their best work, and they should be modified on a regular basis to keep employees engaged and to meet employees’ changing personal and professional needs during their career cycles.

Unfortunately, total rewards strategies are slow to change in most organizations. A survey by HR analyst firm Accelir found that only 15 percent of the organizations they surveyed in 2013 said they had revised their total rewards programs over the last two years. Business strategies in high-performing organizations change as frequently as every 12 to 15 months. This means that in most organizations, total rewards are not aligned with the organization’s business strategy and are most likely not having the desired effect of motivating employees and increasing productivity.

High Performing Companies Integrate and Differentiate Total Rewards

High performing companies understand that a comprehensive total rewards strategy differentiates them from their peers, attracts talent, improves employee productivity, and gives them a higher return on investment. In fact, according to a 2012 total rewards study by AON Hewitt, high performing companies are more likely to say that total rewards is an area of focus in their organizations. Consulting firm Towers Watson observes that companies which adopt an integrated total rewards strategy are five times more likely to say their employees are engaged and two times more likely to report that their financial performance is significantly better than their peers.

High performing companies also actively manage their total rewards approach. These companies:

  • Align total rewards to business objectives.
  • Develop a total rewards strategy that includes clear goals, objective measures, and competitive positioning.
  • Use measures other than cost to define success.

In other words, high performing companies seek to integrate their total rewards strategy into every aspect of their businesses. At the same time, these organizations differentiate rewards to create an external competitive advantage and target critical internal populations like high-potential employees, top performers, and women to develop, engage, and retain.

High performing companies also actively and regularly communicate their total rewards strategy to employees. Organizations should have an annual conversation with employees about all of the total rewards it offers employees, and not just about the annual raise that’s given during a performance review. In addition, HR and talent management professionals must prepare managers through training and development to have the confidence to have a compensation conversation with their employees.

How to Launch a Total Rewards Strategy

Human resource and talent management professionals whose organizations lack a total rewards strategy or whose strategy needs to be tweaked so it is integrated with business goals and differentiated to meet employees’ needs may want to consider the following steps offered by AON:

  1. Define the organization’s differentiator. High-performing companies are shifting more of their total rewards to the areas of career development and opportunities, learning and development, and coaching because these benefits are harder for other companies to replicate and because it provides them with top-level talent.
  2. Learn what motivates your organization’s employees. Different workforce segments desire a different mix of rewards. The best way to know what the employees in your organization are looking for is to ask them.
  3. Develop a total rewards brand. High-performing companies develop a total rewards brand that lets employees know what is expected of them and what they will get in return. High-performing companies develop and clearly communicate this employee value proposition.
  4. Personalize the experience. Employers should make sure that each employee understands their own personalized total rewards package by receiving personalized statements and other communication. These statements not only quantify the package, they also let employees know what they need to do to be successful.
  5. Use multiple channels of communication. When developing a total rewards strategy, a key to its success is to ensure that it is widely communicated to all employees. This helps communicate the brand internally and externally and can also go a long way in helping employees understand why the organization has customized total rewards to meet different groups’ needs.

Organizations are increasingly global, more diverse, and in dire need of finding and keeping the best talent. As the work place changes, leaders must also change their views of total rewards. To gain a competitive advantage, it is more imperative than ever to ensure that total rewards are aligned with and integrated into an organization’s short- and long-term business strategy, are frequently communicated to all employees, and are differentiated enough to appeal to the needs of key workforce segments.