The managerial function of staffing is defined as filing, and keeping filled, positions in the organization structure. This includes identifying work force requirements, inventorying the people available, and recruiting, selecting, placing, promoting, appraising, planning the careers of, compensating, and training or otherwise developing both candidates and current jobholders to accomplish their tasks effectively and efficiently.
It is clear that staffing must be closely linked to organizing, that is, to the setting up of intentional structure of roles and positions. Many experts on management theory discuss staffing as a phase of organizing. Staffing is identified as a separate managerial function for several reasons.
First, the staffing of organizational roles includes knowledge and approaches not usually recognized by practicing managers who often think of organizing as just setting up a structure of roles and give little attention to filling these roles. Second, making staffing a separate function facilitates placing an even greater emphasis on the human element in selection, appraisal, career planning, and manager development. Third, an important body of knowledge and experience has been developed in the area of staffing. Fourth, managers often overlook the fact that staffing is their responsibility and not that of the personnel department.
To be sure, this department provides valuable assistance, but it is the job of managers to fill the position in their organization and keep them filled with qualified people.
Their main concern is profit maximization, innovation, risk taking, and similar activities. Yet another group of writers emphasizes decision making, especially the kinds of decisions that cannot be easily programmed. An additional view of the managerial job draws attention to leadership, with an emphasis on particular traits and managerial styles.
Closely related to this approach is the discussion about power and influence, that is, the leader’s control of the environment and subordinates. Other writers focus their attention on the behavior of leaders by examining the content of the manager’s job. Finally, the
approach favored by Henry Mintzberg is based on observing the work activities of managers. He found through observations of five executives that their work was characterized by brevity, variety, and discontinuity and action orientation. He also found that executives favor oral communication and that they engage in many activities that link the enterprise with its environment.
Monday, July 16, 2007
Tuesday, July 3, 2007
10 Principles of Change Management
Tools and techniques to help companies transform quickly.
Way back when senior executives in large companies had a simple goal for themselves and their organizations: stability. Shareholders wanted little more than predictable earnings growth. Because so many markets were either closed or undeveloped, leaders could deliver on those expectations through annual exercises that offered only modest modifications to the strategic plan. Prices stayed in check; people stayed in their jobs; life was good.
Market transparency, labor mobility, global capital flows, and instantaneous communications have blown that comfortable scenario to smithereens. In most industries — and in almost all companies, from giants on down — heightened global competition has concentrated management’s collective mind on something that, in the past, it happily avoided: change. Successful companies, as Harvard Business School professor Rosabeth Moss Kanter told s+b in 1999, develop “a culture that just keeps moving all the time.”
This presents most senior executives with an unfamiliar challenge. In major transformations of large enterprises, they and their advisors conventionally focus their attention on devising the best strategic and tactical plans. But to succeed, they also must have an intimate understanding of the human side of change management — the alignment of the company’s culture, values, people, and behaviors — to encourage the desired results. Plans themselves do not capture value; value is realized only through the sustained, collective actions of the thousands — perhaps the tens of thousands — of employees who are responsible for designing, executing, and living with the changed environment.
Long-term structural transformation has four characteristics: scale (the change affects all or most of the organization), magnitude (it involves significant alterations of the status quo), duration (it lasts for months, if not years), and strategic importance. Yet companies will reap the rewards only when change occurs at the level of the individual employee.
Many senior executives know this and worry about it. When asked what keeps them up at night, CEOs involved in transformation often say they are concerned about how the work force will react, how they can get their team to work together, and how they will be able to lead their people. They also worry about retaining their company’s unique values and sense of identity and about creating a culture of commitment and performance. Leadership teams that fail to plan for the human side of change often find themselves wondering why their best-laid plans have gone awry.
No single methodology fits every company, but there is a set of practices, tools, and techniques that can be adapted to a variety of situations. What follows is a “Top 10” list of guiding principles for change management. Using these as a systematic, comprehensive framework, executives can understand what to expect, how to manage their own personal change, and how to engage the entire organization in the process.
1. Address the “human side” systematically. Any significant transformation creates “people issues.” New leaders will be asked to step up, jobs will be changed, new skills and capabilities must be developed, and employees will be uncertain and resistant. Dealing with these issues on a reactive, case-by-case basis puts speed, morale, and results at risk. A formal approach for managing change — beginning with the leadership team and then engaging key stakeholders and leaders — should be developed early, and adapted often as change moves through the organization. This demands as much data collection and analysis, planning, and implementation discipline as does a redesign of strategy, systems, or processes. The change-management approach should be fully integrated into program design and decision making, both informing and enabling strategic direction. It should be based on a realistic assessment of the organization’s history, readiness, and capacity to change.
2. Start at the top. Because change is inherently unsettling for people at all levels of an organization, when it is on the horizon, all eyes will turn to the CEO and the leadership team for strength, support, and direction. The leaders themselves must embrace the new approaches first, both to challenge and to motivate the rest of the institution. They must speak with one voice and model the desired behaviors. The executive team also needs to understand that, although its public face may be one of unity, it, too, is composed of individuals who are going through stressful times and need to be supported. Executive teams that work well together are best positioned for success. They are aligned and committed to the direction of change, understand the culture and behaviors the changes intend to introduce, and can model those changes themselves. At one large transportation company, the senior team rolled out an initiative to improve the efficiency and performance of its corporate and field staff before addressing change issues at the officer level. The initiative realized initial cost savings but stalled as employees began to question the leadership team’s vision and commitment. Only after the leadership team went through the process of aligning and committing to the change initiative was the work force able to deliver downstream results.
3. Involve every layer. As transformation programs progress from defining strategy and setting targets to design and implementation, they affect different levels of the organization. Change efforts must include plans for identifying leaders throughout the company and pushing responsibility for design and implementation down, so that change “cascades” through the organization. At each layer of the organization, the leaders who are identified and trained must be aligned to the company’s vision, equipped to execute their specific mission, and motivated to make change happen. A major multiline insurer with consistently flat earnings decided to change performance and behavior in preparation for going public. The company followed this “cascading leadership” methodology, training and supporting teams at each stage. First, 10 officers set the strategy, vision, and targets. Next, more than 60 senior executives and managers designed the core of the change initiative. Then 500 leaders from the field drove implementation. The structure remained in place throughout the change program, which doubled the company’s earnings far ahead of schedule. This approach is also a superb way for a company to identify its next generation of leadership.
4. Make the formal case. Individuals are inherently rational and will question to what extent change is needed, whether the company is headed in the right direction, and whether they want to commit personally to making change happen. They will look to the leadership for answers. The articulation of a formal case for change and the creation of a written vision statement are invaluable opportunities to create or compel leadership-team alignment. Three steps should be followed in developing the case: First, confront reality and articulate a convincing need for change. Second, demonstrate faith that the company has a viable future and the leadership to get there. Finally, provide a road map to guide behavior and decision making. Leaders must then customize this message for various internal audiences, describing the pending change in terms that matter to the individuals. A consumer packaged-goods company experiencing years of steadily declining earnings determined that it needed to significantly restructure its operations — instituting, among other things, a 30 percent work force reduction — to remain competitive. In a series of offsite meetings, the executive team built a brutally honest business case that downsizing was the only way to keep the business viable, and drew on the company’s proud heritage to craft a compelling vision to lead the company forward. By confronting reality and helping employees understand the necessity for change, leaders were able to motivate the organization to follow the new direction in the midst of the largest downsizing in the company’s history. Instead of being shell-shocked and demoralized, those who stayed felt a renewed resolve to help the enterprise advance.
5. Create ownership. Leaders of large change programs must overperform during the transformation and be the zealots who create a critical mass among the work force in favor of change. This requires more than mere buy-in or passive agreement that the direction of change is acceptable. It demands ownership by leaders willing to accept responsibility for making change happen in all of the areas they influence or control. Ownership is often best created by involving people in identifying problems and crafting solutions. It is reinforced by incentives and rewards. These can be tangible (for example, financial compensation) or psychological (for example, camaraderie and a sense of shared destiny). At a large health-care organization that was moving to a shared-services model for administrative support, the first department to create detailed designs for the new organization was human resources. Its personnel worked with advisors in cross-functional teams for more than six months. But as the designs were being finalized, top departmental executives began to resist the move to implementation. While agreeing that the work was top-notch, the executives realized they hadn’t invested enough individual time in the design process to feel the ownership required to begin implementation. On the basis of their feedback, the process was modified to include a “deep dive.” The departmental executives worked with the design teams to learn more, and get further exposure to changes that would occur. This was the turning point; the transition then happened quickly. It also created a forum for top executives to work as a team, creating a sense of alignment and unity that the group hadn’t felt before.
6. Communicate the message. Too often, change leaders make the mistake of believing that others understand the issues, feel the need to change, and see the new direction as clearly as they do. The best change programs reinforce core messages through regular, timely advice that is both inspirational and practicable. Communications flow in from the bottom and out from the top, and are targeted to provide employees the right information at the right time and to solicit their input and feedback. Often this will require overcommunication through multiple, redundant channels. In the late 1990s, the commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Charles O. Rossotti, had a vision: The IRS could treat taxpayers as customers and turn a feared bureaucracy into a world-class service organization. Getting more than 100,000 employees to think and act differently required more than just systems redesign and process change. IRS leadership designed and executed an ambitious communications program including daily voice mails from the commissioner and his top staff, training sessions, videotapes, newsletters, and town hall meetings that continued through the transformation. Timely, constant, practical communication was at the heart of the program, which brought the IRS’s customer ratings from the lowest in various surveys to its current ranking above the likes of McDonald’s and most airlines.
7. Assess the cultural landscape. Successful change programs pick up speed and intensity as they cascade down, making it critically important that leaders understand and account for culture and behaviors at each level of the organization. Companies often make the mistake of assessing culture either too late or not at all. Thorough cultural diagnostics can assess organizational readiness to change, bring major problems to the surface, identify conflicts, and define factors that can recognize and influence sources of leadership and resistance. These diagnostics identify the core values, beliefs, behaviors, and perceptions that must be taken into account for successful change to occur. They serve as the common baseline for designing essential change elements, such as the new corporate vision, and building the infrastructure and programs needed to drive change.
8. Address culture explicitly. Once the culture is understood, it should be addressed as thoroughly as any other area in a change program. Leaders should be explicit about the culture and underlying behaviors that will best support the new way of doing business, and find opportunities to model and reward those behaviors. This requires developing a baseline, defining an explicit end-state or desired culture, and devising detailed plans to make the transition. Company culture is an amalgam of shared history, explicit values and beliefs, and common attitudes and behaviors. Change programs can involve creating a culture (in new companies or those built through multiple acquisitions), combining cultures (in mergers or acquisitions of large companies), or reinforcing cultures (in, say, long-established consumer goods or manufacturing companies). Understanding that all companies have a cultural center — the locus of thought, activity, influence, or personal identification — is often an effective way to jump-start culture change. A consumer goods company with a suite of premium brands determined that business realities demanded a greater focus on profitability and bottom-line accountability. In addition to redesigning metrics and incentives, it developed a plan to systematically change the company’s culture, beginning with marketing, the company’s historical center. It brought the marketing staff into the process early to create enthusiasts for the new philosophy who adapted marketing campaigns, spending plans, and incentive programs to be more accountable. Seeing these culture leaders grab onto the new program, the rest of the company quickly fell in line.
9. Prepare for the unexpected. No change program goes completely according to plan. People react in unexpected ways; areas of anticipated resistance fall away; and the external environment shifts. Effectively managing change requires continual reassessment of its impact and the organization’s willingness and ability to adopt the next wave of transformation. Fed by real data from the field and supported by information and solid decision-making processes, change leaders can then make the adjustments necessary to maintain momentum and drive results. A leading U.S. health-care company was facing competitive and financial pressures from its inability to react to changes in the marketplace. A diagnosis revealed shortcomings in its organizational structure and governance, and the company decided to implement a new operating model. In the midst of detailed design, a new CEO and leadership team took over. The new team was initially skeptical, but was ultimately convinced that a solid case for change, grounded in facts and supported by the organization at large, existed. Some adjustments were made to the speed and sequence of implementation, but the fundamentals of the new operating model remained unchanged.
10. Speak to the individual. Change is both an institutional journey and a very personal one. People spend many hours each week at work; many think of their colleagues as a second family. Individuals (or teams of individuals) need to know how their work will change, what is expected of them during and after the change program, how they will be measured, and what success or failure will mean for them and those around them. Team leaders should be as honest and explicit as possible. People will react to what they see and hear around them, and need to be involved in the change process. Highly visible rewards, such as promotion, recognition, and bonuses, should be provided as dramatic reinforcement for embracing change. Sanction or removal of people standing in the way of change will reinforce the institution’s commitment. Most leaders contemplating change know that people matter. It is all too tempting, however, to dwell on the plans and processes, which don’t talk back and don’t respond emotionally, rather than face up to the more difficult and more critical human issues. But mastering the “soft” side of change management needn’t be a mystery.
Way back when senior executives in large companies had a simple goal for themselves and their organizations: stability. Shareholders wanted little more than predictable earnings growth. Because so many markets were either closed or undeveloped, leaders could deliver on those expectations through annual exercises that offered only modest modifications to the strategic plan. Prices stayed in check; people stayed in their jobs; life was good.
Market transparency, labor mobility, global capital flows, and instantaneous communications have blown that comfortable scenario to smithereens. In most industries — and in almost all companies, from giants on down — heightened global competition has concentrated management’s collective mind on something that, in the past, it happily avoided: change. Successful companies, as Harvard Business School professor Rosabeth Moss Kanter told s+b in 1999, develop “a culture that just keeps moving all the time.”
This presents most senior executives with an unfamiliar challenge. In major transformations of large enterprises, they and their advisors conventionally focus their attention on devising the best strategic and tactical plans. But to succeed, they also must have an intimate understanding of the human side of change management — the alignment of the company’s culture, values, people, and behaviors — to encourage the desired results. Plans themselves do not capture value; value is realized only through the sustained, collective actions of the thousands — perhaps the tens of thousands — of employees who are responsible for designing, executing, and living with the changed environment.
Long-term structural transformation has four characteristics: scale (the change affects all or most of the organization), magnitude (it involves significant alterations of the status quo), duration (it lasts for months, if not years), and strategic importance. Yet companies will reap the rewards only when change occurs at the level of the individual employee.
Many senior executives know this and worry about it. When asked what keeps them up at night, CEOs involved in transformation often say they are concerned about how the work force will react, how they can get their team to work together, and how they will be able to lead their people. They also worry about retaining their company’s unique values and sense of identity and about creating a culture of commitment and performance. Leadership teams that fail to plan for the human side of change often find themselves wondering why their best-laid plans have gone awry.
No single methodology fits every company, but there is a set of practices, tools, and techniques that can be adapted to a variety of situations. What follows is a “Top 10” list of guiding principles for change management. Using these as a systematic, comprehensive framework, executives can understand what to expect, how to manage their own personal change, and how to engage the entire organization in the process.
1. Address the “human side” systematically. Any significant transformation creates “people issues.” New leaders will be asked to step up, jobs will be changed, new skills and capabilities must be developed, and employees will be uncertain and resistant. Dealing with these issues on a reactive, case-by-case basis puts speed, morale, and results at risk. A formal approach for managing change — beginning with the leadership team and then engaging key stakeholders and leaders — should be developed early, and adapted often as change moves through the organization. This demands as much data collection and analysis, planning, and implementation discipline as does a redesign of strategy, systems, or processes. The change-management approach should be fully integrated into program design and decision making, both informing and enabling strategic direction. It should be based on a realistic assessment of the organization’s history, readiness, and capacity to change.
2. Start at the top. Because change is inherently unsettling for people at all levels of an organization, when it is on the horizon, all eyes will turn to the CEO and the leadership team for strength, support, and direction. The leaders themselves must embrace the new approaches first, both to challenge and to motivate the rest of the institution. They must speak with one voice and model the desired behaviors. The executive team also needs to understand that, although its public face may be one of unity, it, too, is composed of individuals who are going through stressful times and need to be supported. Executive teams that work well together are best positioned for success. They are aligned and committed to the direction of change, understand the culture and behaviors the changes intend to introduce, and can model those changes themselves. At one large transportation company, the senior team rolled out an initiative to improve the efficiency and performance of its corporate and field staff before addressing change issues at the officer level. The initiative realized initial cost savings but stalled as employees began to question the leadership team’s vision and commitment. Only after the leadership team went through the process of aligning and committing to the change initiative was the work force able to deliver downstream results.
3. Involve every layer. As transformation programs progress from defining strategy and setting targets to design and implementation, they affect different levels of the organization. Change efforts must include plans for identifying leaders throughout the company and pushing responsibility for design and implementation down, so that change “cascades” through the organization. At each layer of the organization, the leaders who are identified and trained must be aligned to the company’s vision, equipped to execute their specific mission, and motivated to make change happen. A major multiline insurer with consistently flat earnings decided to change performance and behavior in preparation for going public. The company followed this “cascading leadership” methodology, training and supporting teams at each stage. First, 10 officers set the strategy, vision, and targets. Next, more than 60 senior executives and managers designed the core of the change initiative. Then 500 leaders from the field drove implementation. The structure remained in place throughout the change program, which doubled the company’s earnings far ahead of schedule. This approach is also a superb way for a company to identify its next generation of leadership.
4. Make the formal case. Individuals are inherently rational and will question to what extent change is needed, whether the company is headed in the right direction, and whether they want to commit personally to making change happen. They will look to the leadership for answers. The articulation of a formal case for change and the creation of a written vision statement are invaluable opportunities to create or compel leadership-team alignment. Three steps should be followed in developing the case: First, confront reality and articulate a convincing need for change. Second, demonstrate faith that the company has a viable future and the leadership to get there. Finally, provide a road map to guide behavior and decision making. Leaders must then customize this message for various internal audiences, describing the pending change in terms that matter to the individuals. A consumer packaged-goods company experiencing years of steadily declining earnings determined that it needed to significantly restructure its operations — instituting, among other things, a 30 percent work force reduction — to remain competitive. In a series of offsite meetings, the executive team built a brutally honest business case that downsizing was the only way to keep the business viable, and drew on the company’s proud heritage to craft a compelling vision to lead the company forward. By confronting reality and helping employees understand the necessity for change, leaders were able to motivate the organization to follow the new direction in the midst of the largest downsizing in the company’s history. Instead of being shell-shocked and demoralized, those who stayed felt a renewed resolve to help the enterprise advance.
5. Create ownership. Leaders of large change programs must overperform during the transformation and be the zealots who create a critical mass among the work force in favor of change. This requires more than mere buy-in or passive agreement that the direction of change is acceptable. It demands ownership by leaders willing to accept responsibility for making change happen in all of the areas they influence or control. Ownership is often best created by involving people in identifying problems and crafting solutions. It is reinforced by incentives and rewards. These can be tangible (for example, financial compensation) or psychological (for example, camaraderie and a sense of shared destiny). At a large health-care organization that was moving to a shared-services model for administrative support, the first department to create detailed designs for the new organization was human resources. Its personnel worked with advisors in cross-functional teams for more than six months. But as the designs were being finalized, top departmental executives began to resist the move to implementation. While agreeing that the work was top-notch, the executives realized they hadn’t invested enough individual time in the design process to feel the ownership required to begin implementation. On the basis of their feedback, the process was modified to include a “deep dive.” The departmental executives worked with the design teams to learn more, and get further exposure to changes that would occur. This was the turning point; the transition then happened quickly. It also created a forum for top executives to work as a team, creating a sense of alignment and unity that the group hadn’t felt before.
6. Communicate the message. Too often, change leaders make the mistake of believing that others understand the issues, feel the need to change, and see the new direction as clearly as they do. The best change programs reinforce core messages through regular, timely advice that is both inspirational and practicable. Communications flow in from the bottom and out from the top, and are targeted to provide employees the right information at the right time and to solicit their input and feedback. Often this will require overcommunication through multiple, redundant channels. In the late 1990s, the commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Charles O. Rossotti, had a vision: The IRS could treat taxpayers as customers and turn a feared bureaucracy into a world-class service organization. Getting more than 100,000 employees to think and act differently required more than just systems redesign and process change. IRS leadership designed and executed an ambitious communications program including daily voice mails from the commissioner and his top staff, training sessions, videotapes, newsletters, and town hall meetings that continued through the transformation. Timely, constant, practical communication was at the heart of the program, which brought the IRS’s customer ratings from the lowest in various surveys to its current ranking above the likes of McDonald’s and most airlines.
7. Assess the cultural landscape. Successful change programs pick up speed and intensity as they cascade down, making it critically important that leaders understand and account for culture and behaviors at each level of the organization. Companies often make the mistake of assessing culture either too late or not at all. Thorough cultural diagnostics can assess organizational readiness to change, bring major problems to the surface, identify conflicts, and define factors that can recognize and influence sources of leadership and resistance. These diagnostics identify the core values, beliefs, behaviors, and perceptions that must be taken into account for successful change to occur. They serve as the common baseline for designing essential change elements, such as the new corporate vision, and building the infrastructure and programs needed to drive change.
8. Address culture explicitly. Once the culture is understood, it should be addressed as thoroughly as any other area in a change program. Leaders should be explicit about the culture and underlying behaviors that will best support the new way of doing business, and find opportunities to model and reward those behaviors. This requires developing a baseline, defining an explicit end-state or desired culture, and devising detailed plans to make the transition. Company culture is an amalgam of shared history, explicit values and beliefs, and common attitudes and behaviors. Change programs can involve creating a culture (in new companies or those built through multiple acquisitions), combining cultures (in mergers or acquisitions of large companies), or reinforcing cultures (in, say, long-established consumer goods or manufacturing companies). Understanding that all companies have a cultural center — the locus of thought, activity, influence, or personal identification — is often an effective way to jump-start culture change. A consumer goods company with a suite of premium brands determined that business realities demanded a greater focus on profitability and bottom-line accountability. In addition to redesigning metrics and incentives, it developed a plan to systematically change the company’s culture, beginning with marketing, the company’s historical center. It brought the marketing staff into the process early to create enthusiasts for the new philosophy who adapted marketing campaigns, spending plans, and incentive programs to be more accountable. Seeing these culture leaders grab onto the new program, the rest of the company quickly fell in line.
9. Prepare for the unexpected. No change program goes completely according to plan. People react in unexpected ways; areas of anticipated resistance fall away; and the external environment shifts. Effectively managing change requires continual reassessment of its impact and the organization’s willingness and ability to adopt the next wave of transformation. Fed by real data from the field and supported by information and solid decision-making processes, change leaders can then make the adjustments necessary to maintain momentum and drive results. A leading U.S. health-care company was facing competitive and financial pressures from its inability to react to changes in the marketplace. A diagnosis revealed shortcomings in its organizational structure and governance, and the company decided to implement a new operating model. In the midst of detailed design, a new CEO and leadership team took over. The new team was initially skeptical, but was ultimately convinced that a solid case for change, grounded in facts and supported by the organization at large, existed. Some adjustments were made to the speed and sequence of implementation, but the fundamentals of the new operating model remained unchanged.
10. Speak to the individual. Change is both an institutional journey and a very personal one. People spend many hours each week at work; many think of their colleagues as a second family. Individuals (or teams of individuals) need to know how their work will change, what is expected of them during and after the change program, how they will be measured, and what success or failure will mean for them and those around them. Team leaders should be as honest and explicit as possible. People will react to what they see and hear around them, and need to be involved in the change process. Highly visible rewards, such as promotion, recognition, and bonuses, should be provided as dramatic reinforcement for embracing change. Sanction or removal of people standing in the way of change will reinforce the institution’s commitment. Most leaders contemplating change know that people matter. It is all too tempting, however, to dwell on the plans and processes, which don’t talk back and don’t respond emotionally, rather than face up to the more difficult and more critical human issues. But mastering the “soft” side of change management needn’t be a mystery.
Challenges for HR Professionals in the Knowledge Industry
Introduction:
The new millennium is here & this is definitely not a bad time for professionals to gear themselves up and think about the future, their future! It is time to plan, envision, prioritize and set goals for the new millennium.
But what is wrong even if we remain the way we are at present. Do we really need to change? If so, what is that which should change and to what extent? Are we referring to the entire reengineering of HR? These are a few questions, which we should pose to ourselves and attempt to answer.
The new millennium is here & this is definitely not a bad time for professionals to gear themselves up and think about the future, their future! It is time to plan, envision, prioritize and set goals for the new millennium.
But what is wrong even if we remain the way we are at present. Do we really need to change? If so, what is that which should change and to what extent? Are we referring to the entire reengineering of HR? These are a few questions, which we should pose to ourselves and attempt to answer.
- HR as a strategic partner
- HR strategy emanating from the Business strategy
HR’s growing role in the competitive environment - Impact of Information technology on HR
- S/W professionals compensation as the major challenge of future
- The manpower scarcity
- Training & Development
- Revamping and improvement of its major functions like Performance Appraisal, Training & Development etc.
- Emergence of predominantly knowledge workers
The emerging picture
The result is a picture of HR and the work environment in the year 2000 that's decidedly upbeat and confident in the status and influence of HR professionals. Although we paint a picture of HR taking a tangential path, or rather an altogether U-turn, taking completely unexpected twists and turns, it has its roots in reality.
A new Challenge for us
The challenge is not just in terms of updating technologies but also in terms of keeping young workforce motivated and challenged at all time. This breed of young and energetic individuals is challenging a lot of the time-tested theories of employee recruitment, staffing, motivation and general HR practices. There are lots of challenges while recruiting these young bloods. They are as under:
1. Attract people with multidimensional experiences and skills.
2. Infuse fresh blood in the organization.
3. Develop a culture that attracts people.
4. Design entry pay that competes on quality and not quantum.
5. Anticipate and find people for positions that do not exist yet
Hence it follows that the role of HR will be: -
1. To develop fully "self–expressed" individuals.
2. To enable and facilitate their effective participation in teams.
Emotional Intelligence
We are not able to harness the best from our employees because we are not able to care for their emotional needs. One of our key focus areas in the current year is to enhance the emotional intelligence of our people. Without it a person can have the best training in the world, an incisive, analytical mind and an endless supply of smart ideas, but he won’t make a leader. Smart people are no more the ones with high IQ; they are the ones with High EQ.
It has been noticed that there is high co-relation between Emotional Intelligence and effective performance. Persons who have high Emotional Intelligence has following characteristics:
1. Good Interpersonal Relations
2. Independence
3. Highly driven & Motivated
4. Emphatic
5. Self Driven & Managed
The survey conducted by Daniel Goleman of 188 companies of large and global sizes reveals the following: -
1. Emotional Intelligence proves to be twice as important as other job related factors.
2. Emotional Intelligence played increasingly important role at the highest level of the company.
3. Star performer has higher Emotional Intelligence capabilities.
4. 90% of the performers attributed to Emotional Intelligence rather than cognitive factors.
Balancing work and personal life
Balancing work and personal life is a significant area of concern for us. We believe that achieving the right balance between the work place and home is crucial to the efficient running of our organization. Incidentally the findings of a recent survey done on 2500 highest-ranking MBA's from B-schools in Europe and USA, management graduates also identified balancing personal life and work life as their top most career objective.
Change Advocate
Now there is need for HR professionals to work as change advocate. Change advocates are those factors that are responsible for bringing the change in the individual behavior patterns. For being a better change advocate we have to be extrovert, possess considerable interpersonal skills, have to be creative and take risks and have to be good in organizing activities. The following are the characteristics that an HR professional should have in order to be a better change advocate:
a) Homophily: Degree of closeness and similarity between the employee and us. The closer the relationship, the easier and more successful the change.
b) Empathy: We should be capable enough to understand feeling, emotions and thoughts of the employees. Sincere understanding leads to improved communication between the two, which will be helpful in bringing the change.
c) Proximity: Easy access to each other.
d) Structuring: We should have proper and clear planning of all activities that are related to change. If they are planned properly than the change is easier.
e) Openness: Degree of openness would considerably affect the outcome of the program.
f) Reward: Members expect that the change will bring potential benefits. These rewards should be for both in the short run as well as in the long run. It is up to us to inform the employees about the same.
Strategic Partner
Human resource will have to play a substantial role in the business. In order to perform this role HR professionals should have:
a) Thorough Knowledge of business as well as of Human resource functions.
b) The ability to lead any change process, innovation, problem solving etc.
c) The leadership ability to influence the organization.
Human Touch
To have better HRD practices into the organization, it is important to have a conductive atmosphere. Quality of work life is one of the most important factors that lead to such conductive factors. According to me this will lead to an atmosphere of good interpersonal relations and highly motivated employees who strive for their development. Though monetary benefits still occupy the first place in the list of motivational factors but others should not be ignored like: job restructuring and job redesign, career development, promotional opportunities etc.
In our industry Human resource is the vital resource as they are our raw material and it is our responsibility that we should take care of them. I think that whatever company does for the welfare of its people should have human touch in it. Gone are the days when candidates use to change jobs just for salary, now what they are looking for is what companies are offering beyond salary. This can be easily justified from the fact that most of the IT companies are concentrating more on the non-financial benefits.
We should plan to have get - together to celebrate achievements made by teams and individuals. B'day's gift to be given. dinner coupon on their marriage anniversary. Flexi time, paid vacation, cards/ mail to recognize personal achievement, appreciation letter, outing of project team at the end of the successful completion of the project, free health check-up, canteen facility, recreation room etc.. These activities will definitely motivate employees to work with full concentration which inturn will increase their efficiency. We need to increase the credibility of HR within the organization that can be done by:
) Being accurate in all HR work
b) Being predictable and maintaining consistency
c) Meeting commitment to do what we say on time and within specified budget
d) Being personally comfortable with peers, subordinates and superiors.
I believe that the Human Being is the most underutilized resource and a large amount of human potential lies untapped. By understanding human beings and providing the appropriate environment it is possible to harness that latent power within the human being, which will make all the difference between success and failure in the time to come, the power of the human spirit.
The main objective of this article is to focus our attention on that primary aspect which is the very cause of the existence of HR --- The Human Being.
Monday, July 2, 2007
Why do some new managers succeed while others fail
There are few tasks more critical--and more tricky--than bringing on a new manager. After all, the right person can bring new energy and creativity to a company, and free you to concentrate on the grand vision. The wrong one can irritate employees, customers, vendors--in short, do real damage. The difference between success and failure? It almost always depends on what happens during the new manager's first three months on the job--or so says Harvard Business School professor Michael Watkins, who studied the experiences of hundreds of managers who were hired with high expectations, only to fail at their tasks. Watkins, whose findings are collected in the forthcoming book The First 90 Days, recently spoke with Inc. senior editor Mike Hofman.
So much for the honeymoon. Why are the first three months so crucial? Employees who work for a new manager make judgments based on remarkably little data. So do a manager's peers. And those judgments are sticky. Successfully building credibility early can propel a manager through a lot.
What's the most common mistake business owners make when it comes to new managers? Simply not paying attention during the assimilation process. You can't just hire a person and say, "Okay, go." A person needs to work with you to learn the company, the culture, the political situation.
Spending a lot of time managing the manager...sounds like micromanaging. But the impulse to not spend time with new managers is deadly. It's especially deadly for business owners, because they tend to have extremely strong ideas about what works and what doesn't. On an emotional level, business owners are often not prepared for change. If you don't set out your expectations and values early, you are likely to be at each other's throats.
How do you spot when new managers are getting into trouble? You can always look in their eyes for the hunted look. And obviously, if they're pissing off a lot of people, that's a problem. But you should also look to see whether they are moving out of their comfort zone. Some managers will immerse themselves in functional expertise like marketing or finance as a means of avoiding the big, cross-functional issues they really ought to be grappling with. That's a big warning sign.
How should you intervene? Get managers into your office and see where they are struggling. Is it style? Is it resources? Ask how things are going without putting them on the defensive. But if they're flailing and they're unwilling to talk about it, it's now a matter of managing their exit.
Can a bad start be reversed? That depends on how poorly it goes. If new people make major business mistakes and alienate people, they're cooked. If they're merely mediocre, they've still got a shot, but they have to nip vicious dynamics in the bud. What can often happen is that they make a bad call, and the people around them draw back from sharing critical information, which sets them up to make another bad call.
When a new manager fails, what's the cost to the business? A bad hire can be an inconvenience for a large organization. For a small business that doesn't have the same margin for error, a new hire in the wrong role at the wrong time--that can be a near-death experience. The leverage of an individual in a small business is huge, which is why small-business owners have to move beyond "sink or swim."
So much for the honeymoon. Why are the first three months so crucial? Employees who work for a new manager make judgments based on remarkably little data. So do a manager's peers. And those judgments are sticky. Successfully building credibility early can propel a manager through a lot.
What's the most common mistake business owners make when it comes to new managers? Simply not paying attention during the assimilation process. You can't just hire a person and say, "Okay, go." A person needs to work with you to learn the company, the culture, the political situation.
Spending a lot of time managing the manager...sounds like micromanaging. But the impulse to not spend time with new managers is deadly. It's especially deadly for business owners, because they tend to have extremely strong ideas about what works and what doesn't. On an emotional level, business owners are often not prepared for change. If you don't set out your expectations and values early, you are likely to be at each other's throats.
How do you spot when new managers are getting into trouble? You can always look in their eyes for the hunted look. And obviously, if they're pissing off a lot of people, that's a problem. But you should also look to see whether they are moving out of their comfort zone. Some managers will immerse themselves in functional expertise like marketing or finance as a means of avoiding the big, cross-functional issues they really ought to be grappling with. That's a big warning sign.
How should you intervene? Get managers into your office and see where they are struggling. Is it style? Is it resources? Ask how things are going without putting them on the defensive. But if they're flailing and they're unwilling to talk about it, it's now a matter of managing their exit.
Can a bad start be reversed? That depends on how poorly it goes. If new people make major business mistakes and alienate people, they're cooked. If they're merely mediocre, they've still got a shot, but they have to nip vicious dynamics in the bud. What can often happen is that they make a bad call, and the people around them draw back from sharing critical information, which sets them up to make another bad call.
When a new manager fails, what's the cost to the business? A bad hire can be an inconvenience for a large organization. For a small business that doesn't have the same margin for error, a new hire in the wrong role at the wrong time--that can be a near-death experience. The leverage of an individual in a small business is huge, which is why small-business owners have to move beyond "sink or swim."
Leadership
What Needs to Be Done
Successful leaders don't start out asking, "What do I want to do?" They ask, "What needs to be done?" Then they ask, "Of those things that would make a difference, which are right for me?" They don't tackle things they aren't good at. They make sure other necessities get done, but not by them. Successful leaders make sure that they succeed! They are not afraid of strength in others. Andrew Carnegie wanted to put on his gravestone, "Here lies a man who knew how to put into his service more able men than he was himself."
Check Your Performance
Effective leaders check their performance. They write down, "What do I hope to achieve if I take on this assignment?" They put away their goals for six months and then come back and check their performance against goals. This way, they find out what they do well and what they do poorly. They also find out whether they picked the truly important things to do. I've seen a great many people who are exceedingly good at execution, but exceedingly poor at picking the important things. They are magnificent at getting the unimportant things done. They have an impressive record of achievement on trivial matters.
Mission Driven
Leaders communicate in the sense that people around them know what they are trying to do. They are purpose driven--yes, mission driven. They know how to establish a mission. And another thing, they know how to say no. The pressure on leaders to do 984 different things is unbearable, so the effective ones learn how to say no and stick with it. They don't suffocate themselves as a result. Too many leaders try to do a little bit of 25 things and get nothing done. They are very popular because they always say yes. But they get nothing done. Creative Abandonment A critical question for leaders is, "When do you stop pouring resources into things that have achieved their purpose?" The most dangerous traps for a leader are those near-successes where everybody says that if you just give it another big push it will go over the top. One tries it once. One tries it twice. One tries it a third time. But, by then it should be obvious this will be very hard to do. So, I always advise my friend Rick Warren, "Don't tell me what you're doing, Rick. Tell me what you stopped doing."
The Rise of the Modern Multinational
The modern multinational corporation was invented in 1859. Siemens invented it because the English Siemens company had grown faster than the German parent. Before the Second World War, IBM was a small maker, not of computers, but of adding machines. They had one branch in England, which was very typical for the era. In the 1920s, General Motors bought a German and English and then Australian automobile manufacturer. The first time somebody from Detroit actually visited the European subsidiaries was in 1950. A trip to Europe was a big trip. You were gone three months. I still remember the excitement when the then head of GM went to Europe in the 1920s to buy the European properties. He never went back.
21st Century Organizations
Let me give you one example. This happens to be a consulting firm headquartered in Boston. Each morning, between 8 A.M. and 9 A.M. Boston time, which is 5 A.M. in the morning here in California and 11 P.M. in Tokyo, the firm conducts a one-hour management meeting on the Internet. That would have been inconceivable a few years back when you couldn't have done it physically. And for a few years, I worked with this firm closely and I had rented a room in a nearby motel and put in a videoconferencing screen. Once a week, I participated in this Internet meeting and we could do it quite easily, successfully. As a result of which, that consulting firm is not organized around localities but around clients. How To Lead a 21st Century Organization Don't travel so much. Organize your travel. It is important that you see people and that you are seen by people maybe once or twice a year. Otherwise, don't travel. Make them come to see you. Use technology--it is cheaper than traveling. I don't know anybody who can work while traveling. Do you? The second thing to say is make sure that your subsidiaries and foreign offices take up the responsibility to keep you informed. So, ask them twice a year, "What activities do you need to report to me?" Also ask them, "What about my activity and my plans do you need to know from me?" The second question is just as important.
Prisoner of Your Own Organization
When you are the chief executive, you're the prisoner of your organization. The moment you're in the office, everybody comes to you and wants something, and it is useless to lock the door. They'll break in. So, you have to get outside the office. But still, that isn't traveling. That's being at home or having a secret office elsewhere. When you're alone, in your secret office, ask the question, "What needs to be done?" Develop your priorities and don't have more than two. I don't know anybody who can do three things at the same time and do them well. Do one task at a time or two tasks at a time. That's it. OK, two works better for most. Most people need the change of pace. But, when you are finished with two jobs or reach the point where it's futile, make the list again. Don't go back to priority three. At that point, it's obsolete.
How Organizations Fall Down
Make sure the people with whom you work understand your priorities. Where organizations fall down is when they have to guess at what the boss is working at, and they invariably guess wrong. So the CEO needs to say, "This is what I am focusing on." Then the CEO needs to ask of his associates, "What are you focusing on?" Ask your associates, "You put this on top of your priority list--why?" The reason may be the right one, but it may also be that this associate of yours is a salesman who persuades you that his priorities are correct when they are not. So, make sure that you understand your associates' priorities and make sure that after you have that conversation, you sit down and drop them a two-page note--"This is what I think we discussed. This is what I think we decided. This is what I think you committed yourself to within what time frame." Finally, ask them, "What do you expect from me as you seek to achieve your goals?"
The Transition from Entrepreneur to Large Company CEO
Again, let's start out discussing what not to do. Don't try to be somebody else. By now you have your style. This is how you get things done. Don't take on things you don't believe in and that you yourself are not good at. Learn to say no. Effective leaders match the objective needs of their company with the subjective competencies. As a result, they get an enormous amount of things done fast.
How Capable Leaders Blow It
One of the ablest men I've worked with, and this is a long time back, was Germany's last pre-World War II democratic chancellor, Dr. Heinrich Bruning. He had an incredible ability to see the heart of a problem. But he was very weak on financial matters. He should have delegated but he wasted endless hours on budgets and performed poorly. This was a terrible failing during a Depression and it led to Hitler. Never try to be an expert if you are not. Build on your strengths and find strong people to do the other necessary tasks.
The Danger Of Charisma
You know, I was the first one to talk about leadership 50 years ago, but there is too much talk, too much emphasis on it today and not enough on effectiveness. The only thing you can say about a leader is that a leader is somebody who has followers. The most charismatic leaders of the last century were called Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Mussolini. They were mis-leaders! Charismatic leadership by itself certainly is greatly overstated. Look, one of the most effective American presidents of the last 100 years was Harry Truman. He didn't have an ounce of charisma. Truman was as bland as a dead mackerel. Everybody who worked for him worshiped him because he was absolutely trustworthy. If Truman said no, it was no, and if he said yes, it was yes. And he didn't say no to one person and yes to the next one on the same issue. The other effective president of the last 100 years was Ronald Reagan. His great strength was not charisma, as is commonly thought, but that he knew exactly what he could do and what he could not do.
How To Reinvigorate People
Within organizations there are people who, typically in their 40s, hit a midlife crisis when they realize that they won't make it to the top or discover that they are not yet first-rate. This happens to engineers and accountants and technicians. The worst midlife crisis is that of physicians, as you know. They all have a severe midlife crisis. Basically, their work becomes awfully boring. Just imagine seeing nothing for 30 years but people with a skin rash. They have a midlife crisis, and that's when they take to the bottle. How do you save these people? Give them a parallel challenge. Without that, they'll soon take to drinking or to sleeping around. In a coeducational college, they sleep around and drink. The two things are not incompatible, alas! Encourage people facing a midlife crisis to apply their skills in the non-profit sector.
Character Development
We have talked a lot about executive development. We have been mostly talking about developing people's strength and giving them experiences. Character is not developed that way. That is developed inside and not outside. I think churches and synagogues and the 12-step recovery programs are the main development agents of character today.
Successful leaders don't start out asking, "What do I want to do?" They ask, "What needs to be done?" Then they ask, "Of those things that would make a difference, which are right for me?" They don't tackle things they aren't good at. They make sure other necessities get done, but not by them. Successful leaders make sure that they succeed! They are not afraid of strength in others. Andrew Carnegie wanted to put on his gravestone, "Here lies a man who knew how to put into his service more able men than he was himself."
Check Your Performance
Effective leaders check their performance. They write down, "What do I hope to achieve if I take on this assignment?" They put away their goals for six months and then come back and check their performance against goals. This way, they find out what they do well and what they do poorly. They also find out whether they picked the truly important things to do. I've seen a great many people who are exceedingly good at execution, but exceedingly poor at picking the important things. They are magnificent at getting the unimportant things done. They have an impressive record of achievement on trivial matters.
Mission Driven
Leaders communicate in the sense that people around them know what they are trying to do. They are purpose driven--yes, mission driven. They know how to establish a mission. And another thing, they know how to say no. The pressure on leaders to do 984 different things is unbearable, so the effective ones learn how to say no and stick with it. They don't suffocate themselves as a result. Too many leaders try to do a little bit of 25 things and get nothing done. They are very popular because they always say yes. But they get nothing done. Creative Abandonment A critical question for leaders is, "When do you stop pouring resources into things that have achieved their purpose?" The most dangerous traps for a leader are those near-successes where everybody says that if you just give it another big push it will go over the top. One tries it once. One tries it twice. One tries it a third time. But, by then it should be obvious this will be very hard to do. So, I always advise my friend Rick Warren, "Don't tell me what you're doing, Rick. Tell me what you stopped doing."
The Rise of the Modern Multinational
The modern multinational corporation was invented in 1859. Siemens invented it because the English Siemens company had grown faster than the German parent. Before the Second World War, IBM was a small maker, not of computers, but of adding machines. They had one branch in England, which was very typical for the era. In the 1920s, General Motors bought a German and English and then Australian automobile manufacturer. The first time somebody from Detroit actually visited the European subsidiaries was in 1950. A trip to Europe was a big trip. You were gone three months. I still remember the excitement when the then head of GM went to Europe in the 1920s to buy the European properties. He never went back.
21st Century Organizations
Let me give you one example. This happens to be a consulting firm headquartered in Boston. Each morning, between 8 A.M. and 9 A.M. Boston time, which is 5 A.M. in the morning here in California and 11 P.M. in Tokyo, the firm conducts a one-hour management meeting on the Internet. That would have been inconceivable a few years back when you couldn't have done it physically. And for a few years, I worked with this firm closely and I had rented a room in a nearby motel and put in a videoconferencing screen. Once a week, I participated in this Internet meeting and we could do it quite easily, successfully. As a result of which, that consulting firm is not organized around localities but around clients. How To Lead a 21st Century Organization Don't travel so much. Organize your travel. It is important that you see people and that you are seen by people maybe once or twice a year. Otherwise, don't travel. Make them come to see you. Use technology--it is cheaper than traveling. I don't know anybody who can work while traveling. Do you? The second thing to say is make sure that your subsidiaries and foreign offices take up the responsibility to keep you informed. So, ask them twice a year, "What activities do you need to report to me?" Also ask them, "What about my activity and my plans do you need to know from me?" The second question is just as important.
Prisoner of Your Own Organization
When you are the chief executive, you're the prisoner of your organization. The moment you're in the office, everybody comes to you and wants something, and it is useless to lock the door. They'll break in. So, you have to get outside the office. But still, that isn't traveling. That's being at home or having a secret office elsewhere. When you're alone, in your secret office, ask the question, "What needs to be done?" Develop your priorities and don't have more than two. I don't know anybody who can do three things at the same time and do them well. Do one task at a time or two tasks at a time. That's it. OK, two works better for most. Most people need the change of pace. But, when you are finished with two jobs or reach the point where it's futile, make the list again. Don't go back to priority three. At that point, it's obsolete.
How Organizations Fall Down
Make sure the people with whom you work understand your priorities. Where organizations fall down is when they have to guess at what the boss is working at, and they invariably guess wrong. So the CEO needs to say, "This is what I am focusing on." Then the CEO needs to ask of his associates, "What are you focusing on?" Ask your associates, "You put this on top of your priority list--why?" The reason may be the right one, but it may also be that this associate of yours is a salesman who persuades you that his priorities are correct when they are not. So, make sure that you understand your associates' priorities and make sure that after you have that conversation, you sit down and drop them a two-page note--"This is what I think we discussed. This is what I think we decided. This is what I think you committed yourself to within what time frame." Finally, ask them, "What do you expect from me as you seek to achieve your goals?"
The Transition from Entrepreneur to Large Company CEO
Again, let's start out discussing what not to do. Don't try to be somebody else. By now you have your style. This is how you get things done. Don't take on things you don't believe in and that you yourself are not good at. Learn to say no. Effective leaders match the objective needs of their company with the subjective competencies. As a result, they get an enormous amount of things done fast.
How Capable Leaders Blow It
One of the ablest men I've worked with, and this is a long time back, was Germany's last pre-World War II democratic chancellor, Dr. Heinrich Bruning. He had an incredible ability to see the heart of a problem. But he was very weak on financial matters. He should have delegated but he wasted endless hours on budgets and performed poorly. This was a terrible failing during a Depression and it led to Hitler. Never try to be an expert if you are not. Build on your strengths and find strong people to do the other necessary tasks.
The Danger Of Charisma
You know, I was the first one to talk about leadership 50 years ago, but there is too much talk, too much emphasis on it today and not enough on effectiveness. The only thing you can say about a leader is that a leader is somebody who has followers. The most charismatic leaders of the last century were called Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Mussolini. They were mis-leaders! Charismatic leadership by itself certainly is greatly overstated. Look, one of the most effective American presidents of the last 100 years was Harry Truman. He didn't have an ounce of charisma. Truman was as bland as a dead mackerel. Everybody who worked for him worshiped him because he was absolutely trustworthy. If Truman said no, it was no, and if he said yes, it was yes. And he didn't say no to one person and yes to the next one on the same issue. The other effective president of the last 100 years was Ronald Reagan. His great strength was not charisma, as is commonly thought, but that he knew exactly what he could do and what he could not do.
How To Reinvigorate People
Within organizations there are people who, typically in their 40s, hit a midlife crisis when they realize that they won't make it to the top or discover that they are not yet first-rate. This happens to engineers and accountants and technicians. The worst midlife crisis is that of physicians, as you know. They all have a severe midlife crisis. Basically, their work becomes awfully boring. Just imagine seeing nothing for 30 years but people with a skin rash. They have a midlife crisis, and that's when they take to the bottle. How do you save these people? Give them a parallel challenge. Without that, they'll soon take to drinking or to sleeping around. In a coeducational college, they sleep around and drink. The two things are not incompatible, alas! Encourage people facing a midlife crisis to apply their skills in the non-profit sector.
Character Development
We have talked a lot about executive development. We have been mostly talking about developing people's strength and giving them experiences. Character is not developed that way. That is developed inside and not outside. I think churches and synagogues and the 12-step recovery programs are the main development agents of character today.
IT outsourcing in the US to increase
IT outsourcing in the US to increase at 5.9 %. The American IT outsourcing market is expected to increase at a compound an annual growth rate of 5.9 per cent, from $13.3 billion in 2006 to $17.7 billion by 2011, a new report has summarized.
There will be continued shift within federal market away from a government-owned, government-operated model towards a contract-operated approach, the report said. This shift, it says, is fueled by the impending federal IT workforce shortage, war in Iraq, and federal contract spending slowdown.
The report has been prepared by INPUT which helps companies develop federal, state, and local government business and counts 1,300 members, including small specialized companies, new entrants to the public sector and the largest government contractors and agencies.
The most important factor leading towards a greater reliance on outsourcing in the future is the fact that a significant portion of the federal technology-related workforce is entering retirement age.
To obtain the IT talent required and to minimize the costs of acquiring new technologies in relatively short time frames, spending in the areas of business process outsourcing and application services will contribute the greatest growth to the federal outsourcing market over the forecast period, the report said.
The level of federal IT skill in the out years is not very promising to meet the federal IT demands of the future. As baby boomers choose retirement, federal agencies will outsource more and more mission-critical functions if the talent needed to perform these tasks can be done more efficiently by contract personnel.
By the end of the forecasting period, agencies will have switched to a wholesale preference for smaller outsourcing contracts or multi-sourcing contract arrangements. This could be viewed as a total about-face when considering the recent trend in favor of the outsourcing mega-deal.
The general sentiment in the tech community is that Indo-US business momentum, irrespective of the Americans’ political preferences, will continue.
The outsourcing industry is seen to have evolved and grown since the presidential elections in 2004. Outsourcing today is a sector of higher visibility and acceptance. The emergence of the global delivery model has taken away the focus from an India-only offshore model to a multi-geography model that has further enhanced the acceptance of outsourcing.
What happened to the resistance against moving jobs in manufacturing and textiles to China, Taiwan and Hong Kong is seen to be happening now in IT/BPO. ‘That resistance died out with all stakeholders realizing the cost benefits.
Resistance will be there only till a mutual economic feasibility point is met. After that, it’s a matter of sustaining that relationship. That’s what is happening between India and America now.
There will be continued shift within federal market away from a government-owned, government-operated model towards a contract-operated approach, the report said. This shift, it says, is fueled by the impending federal IT workforce shortage, war in Iraq, and federal contract spending slowdown.
The report has been prepared by INPUT which helps companies develop federal, state, and local government business and counts 1,300 members, including small specialized companies, new entrants to the public sector and the largest government contractors and agencies.
The most important factor leading towards a greater reliance on outsourcing in the future is the fact that a significant portion of the federal technology-related workforce is entering retirement age.
To obtain the IT talent required and to minimize the costs of acquiring new technologies in relatively short time frames, spending in the areas of business process outsourcing and application services will contribute the greatest growth to the federal outsourcing market over the forecast period, the report said.
The level of federal IT skill in the out years is not very promising to meet the federal IT demands of the future. As baby boomers choose retirement, federal agencies will outsource more and more mission-critical functions if the talent needed to perform these tasks can be done more efficiently by contract personnel.
By the end of the forecasting period, agencies will have switched to a wholesale preference for smaller outsourcing contracts or multi-sourcing contract arrangements. This could be viewed as a total about-face when considering the recent trend in favor of the outsourcing mega-deal.
The general sentiment in the tech community is that Indo-US business momentum, irrespective of the Americans’ political preferences, will continue.
The outsourcing industry is seen to have evolved and grown since the presidential elections in 2004. Outsourcing today is a sector of higher visibility and acceptance. The emergence of the global delivery model has taken away the focus from an India-only offshore model to a multi-geography model that has further enhanced the acceptance of outsourcing.
What happened to the resistance against moving jobs in manufacturing and textiles to China, Taiwan and Hong Kong is seen to be happening now in IT/BPO. ‘That resistance died out with all stakeholders realizing the cost benefits.
Resistance will be there only till a mutual economic feasibility point is met. After that, it’s a matter of sustaining that relationship. That’s what is happening between India and America now.
Eight Hour Week
Many Indians work 80-hours a week, the highest average worldwide. Worldwide this is now well known which is evident from the outsourcing work coming into India. This is because of unusually high commitment levels on the part of Indian professionals.
In fact, most Indians take pride and talk easily about this “sacrifice”, fondly believing it would help further their careers. Americans and Brits typically work 40-hour weeks. France has legislated a 35 hour week and Germany is working towards 36 hours.
Abroad, it is amazing to see people get up and leave office sharply at 5pm! It looks as of they are lazy or overstaffed or both. By the same logic people in the developing world, have to work more and this gives an impression that we are understaffed. A comparison of productivity ratios, however, reveals quite the contrary!
In the process a research study conducted revealed certain factors that keep people at the workplace for extended hours. Let us call them ‘motivators’ which we are deliberating below:
E-mail: Many employees spend most of their workday on email. Colleagues comment that they have cleared 150 mails from ‘Inbox’ today, expecting sympathy. What we choose to ignore here is that that email is an efficient communication tool, and not a substitute for work.
Internet: Browsing through recommended or ‘googled’ web-links and online trading and tracking of investment portfolios is another attraction during the workday. One now wonders how employees pretended to be busy before the advent of computers.
Gossip: While gossip is normally associated with women, men provide serious competition when it comes to workplace related gossip. Hot topics include the boss, his/her favorites and the newest pretty young tease in the block.
Impress the Boss: Insecure employees may be reluctant to be the first to leave office. Many also believe that being the last to leave reinforces the ‘committed employee’ reputation. Equally, egoistic bosses may insist or expect subordinates to stay alongside them in office everyday. Overnight, late-staying stopped except in genuine cases, which were few and far between.
Hang out: Companies began investing in the fun@Work theme and hang out with work mates after hours. Free/subsidized meals and air-conditioned office spaces may make the option more appealing, compared to the uncomfortable 3 in 1 paying guest digs or crowded one room tenements that they have to return to. Some IT companies, which provide dormitory beds, shower facilities and television sets, find that a cross section of employees rarely leave the campus! In many cases, the habitual late-sitter may start leaving the workplace on time upon getting married, without a perceptible dip in performed.
Free Downloads: Bandwidth connectivity provides heavier video and music downloads, online shopping and surfing, leading to both savings both in time and cyber cafe charges.
It needs to be clarified that these ‘motivators’ apply to ‘peace’ times. However, if the war continues through the year, then it calls for serious soul searching, lest we run the risk of premature burnout.
The above, ‘motivators’ theory is not applicable to all the employees but only a few. In other cases Indian professionals put on genuine efforts for career growth.
In fact, most Indians take pride and talk easily about this “sacrifice”, fondly believing it would help further their careers. Americans and Brits typically work 40-hour weeks. France has legislated a 35 hour week and Germany is working towards 36 hours.
Abroad, it is amazing to see people get up and leave office sharply at 5pm! It looks as of they are lazy or overstaffed or both. By the same logic people in the developing world, have to work more and this gives an impression that we are understaffed. A comparison of productivity ratios, however, reveals quite the contrary!
In the process a research study conducted revealed certain factors that keep people at the workplace for extended hours. Let us call them ‘motivators’ which we are deliberating below:
E-mail: Many employees spend most of their workday on email. Colleagues comment that they have cleared 150 mails from ‘Inbox’ today, expecting sympathy. What we choose to ignore here is that that email is an efficient communication tool, and not a substitute for work.
Internet: Browsing through recommended or ‘googled’ web-links and online trading and tracking of investment portfolios is another attraction during the workday. One now wonders how employees pretended to be busy before the advent of computers.
Gossip: While gossip is normally associated with women, men provide serious competition when it comes to workplace related gossip. Hot topics include the boss, his/her favorites and the newest pretty young tease in the block.
Impress the Boss: Insecure employees may be reluctant to be the first to leave office. Many also believe that being the last to leave reinforces the ‘committed employee’ reputation. Equally, egoistic bosses may insist or expect subordinates to stay alongside them in office everyday. Overnight, late-staying stopped except in genuine cases, which were few and far between.
Hang out: Companies began investing in the fun@Work theme and hang out with work mates after hours. Free/subsidized meals and air-conditioned office spaces may make the option more appealing, compared to the uncomfortable 3 in 1 paying guest digs or crowded one room tenements that they have to return to. Some IT companies, which provide dormitory beds, shower facilities and television sets, find that a cross section of employees rarely leave the campus! In many cases, the habitual late-sitter may start leaving the workplace on time upon getting married, without a perceptible dip in performed.
Free Downloads: Bandwidth connectivity provides heavier video and music downloads, online shopping and surfing, leading to both savings both in time and cyber cafe charges.
It needs to be clarified that these ‘motivators’ apply to ‘peace’ times. However, if the war continues through the year, then it calls for serious soul searching, lest we run the risk of premature burnout.
The above, ‘motivators’ theory is not applicable to all the employees but only a few. In other cases Indian professionals put on genuine efforts for career growth.
Indicators for organizational stability
Every one aims for the growth of their organization: Getting more projects and sales orders, increasing turnovers and employing more people are always the top priorities of business heads.
But, before we all begin to take the big leaps, we have to make sure that our grounding is strong and that we are stable within ourselves.
Following the policy which results in neither the advancement nor the decline of an undertaking constitutes a stable condition.
What has been achieved should not be lost. Even companies are now realizing that, as they march ahead, their support system should be in place to conquer bigger markets. That’s because it’s important to keep one’s house in shape to invite guests or alliances. Analyzing the following points will enable all the concerned in an organization to find out if the company is stable:
Financial stability: Ensure that the cash flow into the organization is regular and long-term. Out standings, have to be reduced. Collections from customers should be in time. A good banking and accounting system should be in place. Monitor finance reports regularly to keep an eye on these.
People stability: A company may be getting more orders, but what’s the use if existing employees are shifting jobs? Stability of people has to be ensured. It’s a major challenge to all HR heads that, before they recruit new people, their existing ones should not leave. It’s a case of ensuring that there is no or negligible attrition.
Learning stability: It’s a world of knowledge-workers now. It’s important to maintain a steady search for knowledge. Continuous innovation and upgrading to latest changes is the secret of success of all great companies. The decline starts when one thinks he knows it all. Learn from others and your own experiences.
Vision Stability: To fulfill the above requirements, a stable vision is very important. Before anyone starts an organization, it’s important to have a clear vision and a mission. If the company’s sole motive is only to earn profits, the future is going to be dark. It is also important to impart the vision of the leader to every single employee to inspire them to work. Only when the ‘inspiration’ is maintained will the organization grow.
Every member of the organization has to always remember to think long-term instead of short-term. The ancient Indian philosophy has cautioned individuals regarding following two paths—the path of the good, which is initially difficult but a winner at the end and the path of the wrong, which initially seems comforting but runs one into trouble in the future. A wise individual can easily decide the right path and so are progressive organizations.
But, before we all begin to take the big leaps, we have to make sure that our grounding is strong and that we are stable within ourselves.
Following the policy which results in neither the advancement nor the decline of an undertaking constitutes a stable condition.
What has been achieved should not be lost. Even companies are now realizing that, as they march ahead, their support system should be in place to conquer bigger markets. That’s because it’s important to keep one’s house in shape to invite guests or alliances. Analyzing the following points will enable all the concerned in an organization to find out if the company is stable:
Financial stability: Ensure that the cash flow into the organization is regular and long-term. Out standings, have to be reduced. Collections from customers should be in time. A good banking and accounting system should be in place. Monitor finance reports regularly to keep an eye on these.
People stability: A company may be getting more orders, but what’s the use if existing employees are shifting jobs? Stability of people has to be ensured. It’s a major challenge to all HR heads that, before they recruit new people, their existing ones should not leave. It’s a case of ensuring that there is no or negligible attrition.
Learning stability: It’s a world of knowledge-workers now. It’s important to maintain a steady search for knowledge. Continuous innovation and upgrading to latest changes is the secret of success of all great companies. The decline starts when one thinks he knows it all. Learn from others and your own experiences.
Vision Stability: To fulfill the above requirements, a stable vision is very important. Before anyone starts an organization, it’s important to have a clear vision and a mission. If the company’s sole motive is only to earn profits, the future is going to be dark. It is also important to impart the vision of the leader to every single employee to inspire them to work. Only when the ‘inspiration’ is maintained will the organization grow.
Every member of the organization has to always remember to think long-term instead of short-term. The ancient Indian philosophy has cautioned individuals regarding following two paths—the path of the good, which is initially difficult but a winner at the end and the path of the wrong, which initially seems comforting but runs one into trouble in the future. A wise individual can easily decide the right path and so are progressive organizations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
