Reinventing Performance Management. Part 3.

 

Jon Ingham

What is new in performance management? Performance management has undergone a remarkable transformation in recent decades, with innovative organizations leading the way in redefining its principles and practices.

• One notable shift has been the move away from traditional, rigid performance appraisals towards more continuous and agile feedback systems. Forward-thinking companies recognize the importance of ongoing communication and development, fostering a culture of regular performance discussions rather than annual evaluations.

• Innovative approaches also emphasize human-centric strategies. Organizations are increasingly focusing on individual growth, aligning personal development goals with broader organizational objectives. This shift from a top-down to a collaborative approach empowers employees, fostering a sense of ownership and engagement in their performance journey.

• Another noteworthy aspect is the increasing emphasis on social and team-oriented practices. Rather than solely focusing on individual achievements, there is a growing recognition that many goals are achieved through teamwork and collaboration. As a result, performance management practices are adapting to incorporate team-based metrics and evaluations, encouraging a sense of camaraderie and mutual accountability and fostering a positive team culture where individuals are not only accountable for their own performance but also contribute to the success of the team as a whole.

• Additionally, technology plays a pivotal role in this evolution. The advent of data analytics and AI-driven tools allows for more objective and real-time performance assessments. These tools not only streamline the process but also provide actionable insights for continuous improvement and make it easier for employees to engage.

In essence, Jon argues that innovation in performance management is characterized by agility, a strong emphasis on human development, more social inclusion and innovative technology. His insightful revision highlights both the progress made and areas that still require attention. In conclusion, Jon endorses a move towards "flourishing" as a new paradigm for a renewal of performance management.

https://tinyurl.com/msmfsdtu

Dave Ulrich: Reinventing the Organization

 

I continue to be impressed by Dave Ulrich's ability to articulate the future of HR, leadership and organisation. Since my current focus is on organisational management, that applies in particular to Dave's recent focus on organisations, with the suggestion that organisation has four times the value of talent (in Victory through Organization). So I really appreciate Dave writing the Foreword to The Social Organization (TSO) too.

And now, writing with Arthur Yeung, Dave has once again moved his thinking on a significant notch. Reinventing the Organization deals with the formation of the Market Oriented Ecosystem (MOE) which I referred to when posting on Dave's and other sessions at the Drucker Forum in Vienna last year.

In many ways I see the book as a follow-on from mine. TSO dealt with the opportunity for melding networks, including the use of platforms, internally. MOE is a build on that, extending the ideas internally and developing them externally too. But I still believe that in the majority of cases, the first useful step to create a MOE might be to develop something more like the melded network from TSO. That then provides a great basis to develop this approach outside of the firm too (see more on this later).

Regardless of where you start, Dave’s book is by far the best book you can read to understand the development of platform based ecosystems, particularly over the last five or so years. It's a deep book, and quite hard going (for me, that's not a negative) so although I've been through the book twice, I need to spend quite a bit longer on it too. Therefore, my notes here summarise my early, rather than fully formed, thoughts.

However, I think I have now got my head around why Dave suggests the book provides an evolution in organisational thinking - a reinvention of the organisation rather than just incremental experimentation. Dave explains this as “reinvention means more than just changing people’s reporting relationships, building teams or announcing a new strategy. You must build a fundamentally new organisation, redefining how your organisation works. Besides understanding and shaping your work setting, you need to change how you coordinate the work, the principles that govern it, and your own and others’ leadership actions.”

If I'm correct, then Dave’s organisational reinvention isn’t about the MOE itself, but the way we see organisations which Dave suggests has progressed from a focus on structure (leading to a focus on hierarchy / bureaucracy) to one on more holistic organisations (the systems view of McKinsey’s 7S or Jay Galbraith’s Star model), and mainly through Dave’s own insights, onto the outcomes or capabilities which an organisation provides. I think TSO develops these ideas further too, describing how organisational forms and other options can be selected to provide the capabilities and organisation principles which are required. That logic applies to the selection of a MOE just as it does a functional, team based or other organisational form. So despite the following diagramme, I don’t think the MOE itself is the radically new idea.

The new idea - and I suppose it’s not that new, but as a result of this book, it’s now more strongly articulated, is that we should always think about an organisation’s ecosystem and not just an individual organisation. Eg I liked the suggestion that MOEs focus on stakeholders more than processes.

So actually, the new logic, I think, is to be clear about the external environment and the required capabilities, and then to develop the ecosystem, systems and structures to support them. I think that this is at least a partial reinvention of organisation design. So I’d adapt the diagramme like this:

By the way, the mini-slide I’ve chosen to illustrate capability on the top left in the above diagramme is the one from TSO showing how the different elements of an organisation from the systems perspective can link with the different aspects of capability, ie human, organisation and social capital. I still think that works for an ecosystem too, although the social capital needs to be extended to what I normally call relationships capital, which is the value of the connections and relationships outside of the single organisation.

You could argue, and maybe this is what Dave is doing, that the traditional ways of seeing systems and structures needs to be replaced by the key features of the MOE, which I explain in a later post. However, I don’t think that’s so. MOEs still have the 7S’s structures, systems, shared values, style, staff and skills, or the Star model’s people, rewards, processes and structure (see the ecosystem model from IRC4HR below), or whatever other set of elements you pick (eg in TSO I present the Organisation Prioritisation Model which focuses on work, infrastructure, people and connections as well as a largish number of organisation and HR enablers, which might not be a reinvention but is, I think, a bit more suited to today’s organisations, and ecosystems too).

Assuming that a reinvented organisation has got to have a particular feature takes us back to the first step in Dave’s evolution diagramme when we assumed all organisations had to have a hierarchical, functional structure, just with a more modern equivalent replacing this. I don’t see that as helpful and certainly don’t believe it would contribute to more evolved thinking. Much better to start with a set of core elements and then build up from there.

It’s still helpful to have an archetype. Dave’s three legged stool for HR is a good example of this, but that’s different to saying all HR organisations need to have three legs. Or that all organisations need to have a platform.

Dave actually suggests there are three archetypal MOEs but I’m just going to review their basic features - see my next MOE related post over the next few days for more on this.

https://tinyurl.com/cudc3zv2

The 20 Companies That Produce the Most CEOs

 Consulting firms have the highest share of employees who go on to become chief executive officers of American companies.

That's according to a recent report from OnDeck. The researchers used LinkedIn data to determine what proportion of employees at major companies end up as CEOs.

An infographic (below) covers key findings from the report.

The researchers found that McKinsey & Company produces the highest share of CEOs (7.1% of former employees now hold the title). It is followed by Bain & Company, Boston Consulting Group, and Kearny.

Check out the infographic to see the 20 companies that topped the list:

https://www.marketingprofs.com/

Understanding, Engaging and Developing Your Workforce

 

Understanding and developing your people

The most valuable resource of any organization is its people. Staff well-being and their level of satisfaction directly impacts on an organisation’s performance and success.

Satisfied people are not necessarily high performers. Happy, content employees are less inclined to seek improvements or do things differently. In today’s climate, this is not a good position for any organization. A company needs energised, motivated staff eager to try something new.

Motivation

Organizations need to understand behaviors and the key motivating factors for employees. Motivational theories can be helpful at understanding motivations, though satisfaction at work is achieved through a complex interplay of variables. High pay rarely compensates for poor working conditions, and modern offices and good working conditions rarely compensate for very low pay.

Engaging your employees

Engagement is a combination of commitment to the organization and its values, plus a willingness to help colleagues. It goes beyond job satisfaction. Engagement cannot be ‘required’ as part of the employment contract. There are many individual and organizational factors determining engagement. Engaged employees speak positively about their organization, have a strong desire to be a member of their organization, and make an effort to contribute to its success.

Measuring satisfaction

Common approaches to measuring satisfaction use a combination of qualitative and quantitative research designs. Off the shelf staff survey packages are available, but most companies choose a customized project design conducted by an external agency/partner or in-house HR team.

Qualitative research methods take their roots in the social sciences. They are often used in early consultations with staff identifying issues of greatest importance. At this consultative stage, staff should have freedom to express their views. Research is carried out through internal focus groups and depth interviews.

Quantitative research methods involve samples of large numbers and measurement. It is usual for staff surveys to be census surveys, inviting all staff to participate. The questionnaire is developed from issues which have arisen from the consultative stage, and the questionnaire comprises mainly closed questions.

The employee survey

Employee surveys normally cover key areas impacting on the staff experience, such as leadership and staff development opportunities.

The rating scales are usually determined by the sensitivity of the measurement required. There is no definitive or “correct” way to measure satisfaction – all scales need to be translated to a numerical scale in order to analyse the results.

Ensuring the highest response rate

When carrying out surveys, getting employees on-board can be challenging. Poor response rates, insufficient or unclear information and a failure to use the survey to drive actions are just some of the disappointments that are reported. Attention to several issues surrounding the survey can facilitate a positive response, including CEO involvement and a publicity campaign prior to the survey.

Comparing employee satisfaction

Benchmarking of employee satisfaction can be carried out internally where scores from within the company are compared using the same questions over a period of time, or externally, where scores from other external organisations are taken and compared.

External benchmarking has problems of comparability when taken out of the context of the original survey. It can be tempting to “cherry pick” questions from several sources where the data from other companies is publicly available, however, questionnaires tend to work in their entirety, and the total composition of the questionnaire therefore has an impact on the results obtained.

https://www.b2binternationalusa.com/

Evolving and Elevating Leadership Consciousness

 

How conscious is your own leadership and your leadership team? What do you and your leaders need to become to create the future you want?  What type of leaders are needed?  How can leaders enable breakthroughs at all levels of society - individuals, teams, communities, organizations (for profit and not for profit) and even nations?

---

Context

• The Consciousness which perceives the world is one with the Reality of the world. Consciousness and reality are one. [1]
• We construct our own reality - everything in our world is self created.[3]
• Timeless leaders free the confines of their consciousness and rediscover its identity with reality to liberate the human potential that lies with themselves and others (and others). [3]
• This translates in time in the organisational world to higher employee engagement, productivity, individual and organisational capacity and profitability.

 

Call to Action – Leadership profiling and Discovery workshops

The diagram below summarises the action steps that a company can take to access this newer (postmodern) science of liberating the immense potential, performance and effectiveness through higher stages of leadership consciousness development. This is an opportunity to get a head start for the challenges and opportunities that we all will have to face in the future of work and in our lives.

How some of our customers have seen demonstrated business benefits

"I love that the tool does get at deeper discussions, this is terrific." (HR Director P&G Europe)

"We as Omega truly are inspired by your intent and we are experiencing a true partnership. We are really proud to have partnered with you." Senior Director Human Resources, Omega Healthcare Management Services 

"It's heartening to see so many of us working towards a common vision in our own ways across the world. Look forward to working with you in trying to understand what we can do for our organisation...hopefully make it into a larger case study". Head of Personal Excellence & Organization Transformation at Tata Consultancy Services (TCS)

“Together with HR, I have reviewed and endorsed the “Being At Full Potential” methodology and believe it could be a great enabler in our journey as a Team. …  I entirely trust the solidity of the self-assessment survey he (Mark) is offering us to take. VP Global Sustainability P&G.

Leadership today - We are taught what to do as leaders, but we must learn how to be good leaders[4]

 Organisation have done a great job at teaching leaders in what to DO as managers and leaders - in setting direction, translating goals into concrete actions, establishing the right systems, structures and reward mechanisms to influence behavior, all contribute to the DNA of an effective “DOING” leader.

Leaders in the modern era are trained for the need to manage (and DO) things that works well in simple and complicated situations. We have learned how to be very good at this. We are taught well in what to do as a leader and we are good at it. But this world is clearly disappearing in the new technological age of unrelentless changes, complexity and often chaos that leaders must deal with constantly today. In other words, effective “DOING” leaders alone are insufficient for meeting today’s and especially the future needs of organisations.

But in terms of our innate Human Potential “How much of a person's true leadership potential is being expressed when we solely focus on the “DOING” or stay at DOING level? 50% 65%? 

Our Human Potential data shows that the average is 65% (see figure below)

What new learning will it take to move the ‘Human Potential needle’ to 80% or 90%?

Our Human Potential data shows that the average is 65% (see figure below).

New studies by many prominent constructive-developmental researchers[5] have shown us a new body of knowledge of higher stages of leadership development by new learning that can shift the “leadership potential meter”. This body of knowledge called “Action Logic”, first developed by William Torbert (building on the work of other scientists and researchers) and it is catching the attention of global leaders - both in high ranked organisations and large not for profit global organisations.

There are 8 action logics prevalent in the adult population as summarised by the generalised diagram (by Edward Kelly[6]) shown below.

The table below is a description of the 8 leadership action logics (adapted from Barrett Brown paper “The Future of Leadership for Conscious Capitalism”)

Vertical Learning is the key to shift the leadership potential to the next level of action logic or consciousness

According to the constructive-developmental scientists and researchers, there are two kinds of growth that we associate with adult development - vertical and horizontal and both are important, but they are very different. “If horizontal development is concerned with content and what we know, vertical development is concerned with how we know it (Harris & Kuhnert). As Cook-Greuter describes it, horizontal development is the gradual accumulation of new knowledge, new skills and experience, which can occur without any fundamental change in the individual’s overall meaning making, epistemology or worldview. Vertical development on the other hand, which is a much rarer form of development, entails a complete transformation in the individual’s meaning-making and in their overall view of reality that in turn transforms what they think, how they feel and what they do.[7] This is illustrated in the diagram below.

The new science of vertical learning is becoming central to leadership and high-performance development in organisations. 

There is an economic value business case for leaders to develop their leadership action logic or consciousness. In a study by Zenger & Folkman (of over 20,000 leaders), they state that “Good leaders create 3x more economic value than poor leaders, and extraordinary leaders create significantly more economic value than all the rest.” (emphasis mine). From their study, they show that good or great leaders have leadership characteristics that enable them to increase productivity, employee engagement, innovation and customer orientation.

Newer studies show that by developing the action logic or consciousness of leaders, they can potentiate a shift (an increase) in their leadership potential leading to higher performance and expanded effectiveness.[8]

Today, this new leadership action logic development and learning has been accessed by primarily by high-ranked global corporations or more progressive companies. They have paved the way for this adopting new developmental research science into the organisational world. But they also gain a head start in developing the next generation of Conscious leaders. 

We [1] believe is that leadership consciousness development goes beyond creating economic value. Together with creating economic value, conscious leaders also learn how to enable breakthroughs at all levels of society - individuals, teams, communities, organizations and even nations. In other words, conscious leadership goes beyond just creating economic value.  

By deploying our Human Potential realisation tool and methodology, we now have access to a new language and developmental practices (rituals, ceremonies and symbols) for shifting individual leader’s consciousness maturity or action logic across to their next higher state or level, and therefore to higher states of leadership performance and experience.

Another actionable pathway in learning and applying leadership action logic or consciousness

We [9] offer another viable and practical pathway to access higher stages of leadership consciousness or action logic. Our work lies at the intersection of cutting-edge science and ancient wisdom traditions.

Modern management science and ancient wisdom traditions recognize a certain state consistent among those who operate at high potential. These people tend to lead meaningful and fulfilling lives, create significant impact and have the ability to do all of this while remaining centered, irrespective of the circumstances they encounter.

When the Human Spirit is ignited, peak performance inevitably follows

In the realm of sports, music and arts we have known this for a long time. Acquiring more skills can only take us so far. Getting to Peak Performance however also requires doing the inner work of shifting mindsets, addressing our limiting beliefs and learning to manage the EGO through higher stages (or levels) of consciousness. Now is the time to bring this same thinking into the world of organizations.

Since the late 2000s, we have taken on the challenge to create a holistic model that will inform and help drive greater levels of Human Potential realization among individuals and organizations. The “Consciousness Maturity Index” is the product of that effort.

The ultimate test that decides whether leaders are reaching their ultimate leadership potential or not is by finding out how masterful they are in the manner they consciously experience reality.[10] 

Awakening our consciousness through vertical learning AND elevating levels of consciousness help us to redefine our view of reality (and help others to do so as well), to start showing up in our full potentialities as leaders and in “dancing” with the how the reality of the emerging situations is occurring  to us in the complex and uncertain world we live in.

Our Human Potential diagnostics gives leaders in organisations another affordable, practical and actionable way in advancing leadership action logic and consciousness, leading to the development and liberation of leadership potential that lies within themselves and their performance and effectiveness.

Our Human Potential diagnostics also give us a new kind of language and crucible for supporting, shifting and uncovering consciousness to help us to see the world with “new eyes” that reflects new possibilities and insights. The diagram below summarise how this new pathway helps us in learning and advancing leadership action logic and its correlation with consciousness maturity states or levels.

Developing a spectrum of next generation conscious leaders

It is a well know statement (attributed to Albert Einstein) that “No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness

that created it.” Through this new pathway of developing conscious leaders with the Human Potential Diagnostics, we are also developing a conveyor, pipeline or spectrum of the next generation of conscious leaders – in solving today’s and tomorrow’s problems, challenges and opportunities with new levels or states of consciousness. 

Companies developing a spectrum of leaders with different stages of action logics is better prepared to take advantage of the opportunities and face challenges in the fast change, volatile and complex future world that we are working in. These companies have a greater capacity and confidence to act in and on the world in a way it believes it can be effective and have significant impact.[11]

The diagram below shows how for example we can map or profile the spectrum of leadership consciousness levels or action logics of 10 leaders in an organisation. 

Creating the Future That We Aspire For

The Human Potential Assessment Tool and methodology makes it very easy for organizational leaders to discover how and where to place themselves (the types of leadership action logics and consciousness) based on today's reality, and more importantly, get a glimpse of what the emerging future reality and human capacity could look like at its full potentiality.

It is this future state, and the additional value that it can create for an organization, that triggers an openness to look at the deeper human levers sitting beneath the surface. Not only do we measure where you and/or your organisation are today on these leadership priorities, but we also provide you with a detailed map of your ideal end state.

With this ideal state in mind we work backwards to identify the areas of intervention at the deeper human dimension to bridge the leadership gap and the readiness to deliver short- and long-term expectation and outcomes demanded by customers and stakeholders.

---

[1] Rupert Spira – The Transparency of Things

[2] Debashis Chatterjee – The other 99%

[3] Ibid - adapted

[4] Inspired by an article I read, but could not find the reference to it 

[5] Piaget, Loevinger, Kegan, Cook-Greuter, Torbert, Ken Wilber, Barrett Brown and many (many) others

[6] Edward Kelly - Transformation in Leadership, Part 1: A Developmental Study of Warren Buffett 

[7] Ibid

[8] Reference – Barrett Brown – Leadership at the edge – leading complex change with postconventional consciousness; with adaptations

[9] Being at Full Potential - http://beingatfullpotential.com/

[10] Debashis Chatterjee – The other 99% - adapted 

[11] Reference - on action logic and action inquiry by William Torbert - http://www.williamrtorbert.com/

https://bit.ly/3svWz5o

Management Skills 101: How setting expectations is critical to leadership

Setting clear expectations leads to successful teamwork

How is setting expectations a critical leadership skill?

Research states one of the top reasons for unhappiness in the workplace is communication issues with one’s manager/supervisor. One of the key shortcomings for this case lies with the managers. Very often managers make incorrect assumptions that employees have all of the information needed about what needs to be done, without having been told how things work. Yet, if asked, the employees will give you a completely different picture about what is expected of them. Due to this evident disconnect, the employee fails to deliver the expected results, and the manager ends up blaming the employee. Resentment follows thereafter, leading to poor performance.

This is why it’s critical for you as a manager to get everyone on the same page, and to set the expectations clearly at the beginning of your professional journey together. In an article1, Kevin Eikenberry describes 4 main areas in which you need to clarify the expectations for your team.

The 4 key areas to setting expectations

Work – It’s imperative for your team to know exactly what is expected of them. There is a basic job description that a person is informed of when they join the team, however the unwritten rules about the level of quality expected in the work, and the depth of knowledge that needs to be exhibited, are what defines a successful work project. What are the boundaries of an employee’s responsibilities? What are and what aren’t the roles of the job? These things include, and even go beyond, the job description. For optimum performance and strong working relationships, these expectations must all be clearly communicated, understood and mutually agreed upon.

Communication – Communication is one of the most critical components of organizational life, and it is far too important to leave to chance. Everyone operates based on their preferences and their habits, which might be in conflict or different from the work habits and preferences of others in the organization. Setting the rules of conduct helps employees navigate the workspace more efficiently and confidently.

What’s the preferred way of communicating, both formally and informally? What needs to be communicated to all, and what can be handled at the employee level? What should be the frequency of communication? What particular information should be shared in each of the different mediums of communication? What are the protocols for communication at different levels – while reporting to the manager or even upper management?

Time – When working in tandem with multiple people on multiple tasks, it’s important to keep track of your time and that of the others working with you. Clarity is required in terms of expected response times to requests from different levels in the firm. Make sure also to clarify what the work-times of other team members are, in case you’re working in a virtual or international team.

Culture –  Defining the corporate culture is an important component to clarify for the team when managing expectations. Be it first time employees or experienced hires, they bring their past experience and habits with them.  If those experiences and habits differ from the organizational culture, non-clarification can lead to poor performance (perceived or reality) and to interpersonal conflicts.  It’s the responsibility of the manager to make sure that the organizational principles, behaviors, values, and overall expectations are clarified.

Evaluating Performance Expectations

After clarifying all expectations, it’s best to have a checklist to affirm whether you and your team are in accord with the expectations. According to John Baldoni2, there’s a 3-question checklist managers should ask themselves:

1. Does your team know what’s expected of them? It’s important to have your team paraphrase what has been told to them. Have a conversation to test their understanding of the expectations shared with them. People may know the specifics, but often lack knowledge about how what they do helps the entire organization.
2. Have you told your team what they can expect from you? It’s important to let employees know that you as their manager are available to them. It’s important they know how and when to reach out to you, and that you are accessible to them as a knowledgeable resource. For new hires, the role would be more as a teacher than as a boss. For experienced hires, you will have to be a coach and help them unlearn and relearn the behavioral and cultural aspects of their job. For the team, you will be the supplier of resources as well as their champion.
3. Do employees know what is expected of each other? In a team everyone has defined roles and responsibilities, so it’s also important that everyone knows how their work affects their colleagues and how to work in tandem to achieve team/organizational goals.

Communicating expectations in a clear way enhances relationships because your team is confident in their manager and can react and communicate directly in all aspects of their position. This clarity prevents employees from having to do rework or getting blamed for not meeting unclear or changing expectations. When expectations are communicated with the right amount of direction or delegation, depending on the person and the situation, employee ownership is further developed.

FOOTNOTES
1Four areas of expectations for great results
2Three questions to clarify – HBR