Building Effective Global Teams( by Imaad Mahfooz | Human Resource Executive Online)

-By Development Network-

Managing in today's complex world has been made even more challenging due to
global unrest and continuing economic uncertainty. In building and aligning
successful cross-functional and multicultural teams on global projects,
senior-level HR leaders must take a custom-tailored and nuanced approach.

The ongoing social and political upheaval presently underway in the Middle East
is beginning to have an impact on the global economy. Since January of this
year, when demonstrations began in Egypt, oil prices have been steadily
increasing in worldwide markets.

That turbulence adds to the previous three years, which have brought
unprecedented change to the global economy. Anxious and troubled capital
markets, rising energy and raw material prices and sharp declines in land,
housing and fixed-asset values all indicate the importance of multinational
organizations utilizing the key factor of production (their human resources)
that they are perhaps best able to manage.

In addition, sweeping changes in new business models, powerful multinational
companies from emerging markets and changes in employee demographics and
workforce mobility are prompting senior HR executives to deal with some very
pressing concerns. These include global abundance with locally scarce talent, an
aging workforce, rising demand for new skill sets, more diverse and distributed
workforces and flexible-work arrangements.

Together, these developments are creating workforces and work environments that
are as diverse and geographically dispersed as the businesses themselves. For
senior HR executives of international companies, this transformation of business
and human resources presents new challenges when:

a) Building a cross-functional and multicultural team for a critical global
project;

b) Aligning cross-functional teams in a time-challenged M&A or restructuring
environment; and/or

c) Improving organizational team effectiveness for high-priority,
enterprise-level global initiatives, such as business transformation and ERP
implementation.

These situations present important business challenges to senior HR and C-level
executives of organizations involved in managing cross-functional and
multicultural global teams that must work together to achieve organizational
objectives.

Fortunately, there are some proven best practices that can assist HR leadership
in building top-notch, cross-functional global teams.

Well-calibrated and trained teams comprised of local and expatriate resources
with a shared vision and purpose can generate short-, mid- and long-term
competitive advantages for senior HR executives looking to improve corporate
performance, while strengthening their human resources capabilities.

A Nuanced Approach

Cross-functional global projects in business and technology are especially in
need of a nuanced and custom-tailored approach, since managing cross-functional
and multicultural teams in disparate locations presents unique business and
social challenges. Our experience shows that managing and aligning a global team
operating in Mexico, the Netherlands and the United States, for example, is
quite different than managing one based primarily in the United States.

A cross-functional team can be defined as a group of employees from different
functions within an organization, such as human resources, information
technology, marketing and finance, who are all focusing on a specific objective
and have the responsibility to work as a team to achieve desired goals.

Multicultural teams, on the other hand, are made up of people from different
social and professional cultures who work together for a common goal. Managing
cross-functional teams is a complex endeavor by itself, but it becomes even more
challenging when the multicultural component is added to the mix.

In addition to sorting through cross-functional challenges, intercultural
differences can present serious obstacles to teams charged with achieving
international results. In fact, in today's global and knowledge-oriented
environment, the alignment and utilization of human resources is just as
important as raw materials, production and marketing.

Food is a personal passion of mine, and I see parallels between preparing an
elaborate meal and pulling together a cohesive team to accomplish important
business initiatives. Just as a capable chef is able to combine different
ingredients and resources into a memorable meal, today's senior HR executives
must harness the power of tangible and intangible resources and disparate
functions to achieve desired business objectives.

At one global manufacturing organization operating in North America, plans were
made to move production and sourcing of select products from Poland to China,
but tight timelines and difficulties in collaboration on the three continents
resulted in quality-control issues and cost over-runs.

A project-performance assessment pointed to problems with people issues -- such
as cross-cultural communication and timely follow-up on production deadlines --
that were making matters worse.

In response, HR leadership identified within the organization a manager with
international experience who was then trained in cross-cultural team-building
concepts.

In recognizing the different communication and team-behavior styles of teams
operating in North America, Poland and China, a cohesive "one team, one company"
strategy was implemented. By determining areas of expertise necessary for
different portions of the project, tasks and related timelines were distributed
accordingly, with each regional team sharing responsibility for their piece of
the project, with the result that the $42 million project was completed on
budget.

Managing cross-functional global projects can be even more difficult in business
environments coping with organizational change, business and technology
transformation, mergers and acquisitions, or when integrating different systems
and organizations.

Add time pressure and the situation becomes even more complex, such as the
situation faced by a global energy company, which had acquired another worldwide
company as part of a complex merger.

The two companies had different ERP systems and different HR procedures, which
had to be reviewed and sorted out in a compressed time frame; this major
corporate transition required that years of deployment decisions be made in a
matter of weeks.

The larger company had spent decades building firm-specific human capital --
bringing people in at lower levels and promoting them from within -- while the
smaller company had a more open-door policy for employees. Somehow, crucial
human resources and payroll components from both companies had to be integrated,
while one ERP solution had to be selected that could help align people,
processes and technology in achieving organizational goals.

A joint steering committee of managers from both organizations was put into
place by senior HR and technology executives to identify crucial processes
required for the merger and to select the ERP platform best able to sustain
them.

Using a rapid and succinct project-goal-alignment process, the steering
committee identified key HR-process value drivers relating to talent management,
succession planning and payroll, and aligned critical HR and ERP
interdependencies. A new SAP ERP-oriented HR payroll mechanism was installed,
which streamlined the payroll function across the organization, while lowering
HR man hours through process automation and self-service.

In working together toward a common goal, the steering committee was able to
improve the HR function, align it with technology and redeploy the HR workforce.

When chief human resource officers are faced with such challenges, it's
important to create teams with a common sense of purpose and a shared commitment
to action that can generate desired results, while also cultivating future
leaders within the organization. Successful team building requires strategic and
holistic talent utilization as well as a shared vision for achieving desired
business and project goals. In my experience in managing and aligning on-site
and off-site teams on various global HR and business-transformation projects, I
have found the following six factors to be the key components for building
cross-functional and multicultural global teams:

1. Agreement on project goals, project plan and project scope definition.
It is advisable to have the company, management, team and project manager agree
on a clear understanding of project goals, including outlining the business
objectives, setting a time frame in which they are to be accomplished, and
spelling out why they are necessary.

The scope of this understanding -- including requirements and specification --
should be encapsulated in a project plan so the team can measure progress during
the project. The plan should include both a cohesive description of the overall
strategy as well as sufficient details to show clear tactical responsibilities
and specific accomplishments.

A controlled project scope ensures there are clear agreements on the project's
objectives. Any proposed changes should be carefully evaluated for their impact
on cost and schedule, and all relevant changes should be approved before work is
started on them.

2. Review of team composition and working styles.
An assessment should be conducted on team composition (different corporate
functions represented) and how members interact, process information, make
decisions and organize themselves, in order to optimize cross-functional
expertise and determine individual preferences in working together.

It is sensible to consider the following when building global team initiatives:

a) Enterprise-level initiatives such as business transformation and ERP require
the calibration of cross-functional components (e.g. HR, finance, procurement,
IT, etc.).

b) The use of human resource outsourcing, shared-services centers and offshore
workforces is expanding significantly to include small and mid-sized
organizations. These mechanisms will likely grow as globalization continues
throughout the world.

c) A significant portion of recent globalization of the labor force has been
enabled by Internet technology and driven by the desire to control costs.

d) Previously, a large number of traditional multinational companies and new
international players have operated with double standards regarding workforces
in the developed and developing world.

e) Fast-changing economic power and global demographics are prompting growing
economic powers, such as China and India, to re-examine HR procedures in order
to compete globally.

f) Improving standards of living and education in emerging countries, coupled
with new technology tools facilitating mobile and virtual workforces, are
prompting a reassessment of the old expatriate-focused model for managing global
projects.

3. Team cohesion.
Once the review of team working styles is complete, it is advisable to design a
"team map." This can be done by examining the team's different functional
strengths and weaknesses in performing the top three to four tasks needed for
producing the desired end-product or solution.

This valuable exercise identifies individual work preferences, promotes unity of
vision and purpose, enhances cross-functional team alignment and fosters a sense
of teamwork focused on common goals.

When faced with project log-jams, it is better for HR leaders to avoid
intervening directly with the team. In instances when direct involvement is
needed, it is better to have minimal involvement with day-to-day team functions,
as inordinate involvement can prevent team members from solving problems
themselves and learning from that process.

A more prudent approach involves encouraging team members to adapt to each
other's work styles by acknowledging cultural differences and working
accordingly. If there are still issues, members can be counseled and/or
reassigned to reduce interpersonal friction.

4. Cross-functional and multicultural communication issues.
Managing cross-functional and multicultural teams requires keen insight and
planning, as cultural differences can aggravate issues when it comes to team
performance. The following cultural components can lead to potential
conflicts and reduced performance:

a) Direct and indirect communication:
Some team members (e.g. from the United States, United Kingdom and Germany) use
direct, explicit communication in asking questions and identifying problems,
while others (e.g., from China, Japan and Malaysia) are indirect in asking and
responding.

b) Language fluency and speaking accents:
Members who are not fluent in the team's dominant language may have difficulty
communicating their knowledge. This can prevent the team from using that
person's expertise, creating frustration or perceptions of incompetence.

c) Dissimilar hierarchical attitudes:
Team members from strong hierarchical cultures, such as Japan, expect to be
treated differently, according to their status in the organization. Members from
egalitarian cultures, such as the United States and UK, do not. The failure of
some members to honor those expectations can cause humiliation or loss of
stature and credibility, which can affect overall project performance.

d) Contradictory decision-making styles:
Members differ in how quickly they make decisions and in how much analysis they
require beforehand. In some cultures, a seat-of-the-pants approach may be seen
as being proactive, while it may be viewed as rash and ill-thought-out in other
cultures. Someone who prefers making decisions quickly may grow frustrated with
those who need more time.

5. Acceptable behavior.
Once the team has defined and agreed upon new, non-negotiable behaviors for the
team, this information can be documented for future behavioral reference and
application.

6. Management support.
Despite their best intentions, global project teams and project managers do not
always have enough authority to make all the decisions necessary to accomplish
project goals. This is where timely and substantive support from senior
executives can make a huge difference in a project's results. Timely decisions
and sufficient resources are two very important examples of key management
support.

With cooperative, involved management from senior HR executives, global teams
can gain the knowledge and confidence to collaborate effectively within a new
environment through the self-creation of shared and actionable project plans.

Even while managing in a complex global environment, HR executives can help
their organizations prosper by understanding the importance of best practices in
forming and utilizing global teams.

This can be a win-win strategy in two important ways. First, the organization
benefits by successful on-going business operations and timely, cost-conscious
completion of projects. Secondly, potential new leaders can be identified from
within the organization.

For more Articles and Information : http://www.developmentnetwork.co.nr/

Managing the 'Difficult' Employee (by Peter Cappelli | Human Resource Executive Online)

-By Development Network-

A new study finds that about one in five workers have a personality disorder
that negatively impacts their career. Disorders had a more negative effect on
workplace outcomes for women than for men. Also, dysfunctional personalities
were substantially higher for those with more education and were twice as high
for those living in the South as opposed to the Northeast.

In every office and workgroup, it seems that there is at least one employee who
seems to be at the center of most of the problems.

We've all heard the anecdote that 20 percent of workers account for 80 percent
of the supervisory concerns, and while it's hard to find hard evidence to
support that figure, it persists because it seems to align with most everyone's
experience.

Even when the issues and context change, the difficult employee continues to be
at the center of conflicts and problem.

Is it really the person who is the problem? A new study based on survey data
from the U.S. Census and the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
suggests that, yes, it probably is.

In "Does Having a Dysfunctional Personality Hurt Your Career," which was
published this year in Industrial Relations journal, the researchers found that
18 percent of adult men and 16 percent of adult women have personality
disorders.

Such disorders are a form of mental illness defined as "pervasive patterns of
enduring cognition and behavior" (i.e., how you think and act) that deviate from
expectations in society and that cause difficulty and distress when dealing with
others.

Deviation from expectations means that they interpret memos in distorting ways,
seeing conspiracies that don't exist; they interpret innocent comments as
personal slights; and they refuse to accept simple changes in procedures.
Personality disorders are less serious forms of mental illness than "clinical"
illnesses such as bipolar disorder or depression, but they nevertheless cause
real problems for the individuals and those around them.

The study by Susan L. Ettner, Joanna Catherine MacLean and Michael T. French
assessed these disorders in face-to-face interviews using standard diagnostic
tests, although for a variety of reasons, the results probably understate the
true incidents of these problems.

The most common of the personality disorders is obsessive-compulsive behavior,
followed by more general antisocial behavior and paranoia. For reasons that
aren't clear, the incidence of personality disorder seemed to be substantially
higher for those with more education and was twice as high for those living in
the South as opposed to the Northeast. In the context of the workplace, the rate
at which those with personality disorders lost their jobs was roughly double
that of those without disorders, while the incidence of having serious problems
with bosses or other employees in the workplace was three times as high.

When controlling for other factors associated with these disorders, the negative
effects of the disorders themselves on labor-market outcomes and workplace
issues were smaller but still significant statistically and meaningful in terms
of their size.

These disorders had a more negative effect on workplace outcomes for women than
for men. Is that because we expect better social skills from women? That men
cover up problems better? Or is it that the jobs at which women
disproportionately work require more social interaction? Hard to say.

One might imagine that individuals who are anti-social - willing to lie, cheat
and violate social norms -- would have the most problems. But it turns out that
having obsessive-compulsive behavior is associated with the most negative
workplace outcomes.

Perhaps the anti-social people are more skilled at covering up their problems or
at smoothing them over. It might also be that OCB is particularly disruptive in
the modern office because change is constant and individuals rarely have control
over how they do their work.

OK, so what do we do with this information?

I suppose it is some comfort to supervisors to know that at least some of the
difficulties they have with "problem" employees may be related to these
disorders and that inadequate supervision is not the main reason for the
conflicts and disruptions.

No doubt these findings will also be used to support the "War for Talent" notion
that there are "A" players, who are just good performers no matter what, and "C"
players, who are always causing problems, and that the goal is to sort them out
before hiring.

Before we draw that conclusion, though, it is worth remembering that no one
chooses to have a personality disorder. Once they are diagnosed, personality
disorders are covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act and other
state-level legislation, and most of these disorders are treatable, some more
easily than others.

Screening applicants for medical conditions will also be a full employment plan
for your legal department.

In addition, many individuals with these disorders may be terrifically effective
performers, especially in tasks where they work independently.

So, supervisors are likely to be on the hook for managing the one-in-five or so
adults who have these personality disorders for the foreseeable future.

What does that mean in practice?

Maybe it means making new and different use of employee-assistance programs to
help these individuals identify their problems and seek treatment. Maybe it
means helping to redesign their tasks and jobs to find those that truly "fit"
what they are capable of doing. And it still means holding them accountable for
dealing with others in ways that meet the norms and expectations of your
organization. Some part of that may ultimately mean meeting with your legal
department to decide how much variation you can live with.


[About the Author: Peter Cappelli is the George W. Taylor Professor of
Management and director of the Center for Human Resources at The Wharton School.
His latest book, with Bill Novelli, is Managing the Older Worker: How to Prepare
for the New Organizational Order.]

For more Articles and Information: http://www.developmentnetwork.co.nr/

Leadership Challenges for Women at Work (by Colleen O'Neill and Stacey Boyle | Chief Learning Officer)

-By Development Network-

Organizations around the world have made commitments to develop future leaders
and enhance diversity in order to achieve better results for customers,
stakeholders and employees. However, there is a marked lack of emphasis on
leadership development for women, the largest of all diversity-targeted groups
in any geography.

This disconnect poses a tough challenge for learning leaders, whose programs and
initiatives for leadership education must overcome this organizational inertia
in order to develop more women for top executive roles.

The solutions may not come easily or soon, but facts are emerging to sharply
outline the problem. According to the 2011 Women's Leadership Development survey
conducted by Mercer in conjunction with the Human Capital Media Advisory Group,
the research arm of Chief Learning Officer magazine, 71 percent of global
organizations do not have a clearly defined strategy or philosophy to develop
women for leadership roles.

These findings underscore a Harvard Business Review research report released in
January 2011, titled "The Sponsor Effect: Breaking Through the Last Glass
Ceiling," which stated: Women occupy 3 percent of Fortune 500 CEO positions, are
outnumbered four to one in the C-suite, comprise less than 16 percent of all
corporate officers and occupy only 7.6 percent of Fortune 500 top-earner
positions.

The Mercer survey included responses from more than 1,800 human resources,
talent management and diversity leaders at organizations throughout North
America, Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Asia Pacific. A broad cross-section
of industries took part, with for-profits, high-tech/telecommunications,
financial/banking and durable manufacturing organizations representing the
largest segments. Responses, which addressed current commitment and support for
women's leadership, plans for the future and obstacles to success, were fairly
consistent across regions.

Survey data reveals 47 percent of employers surveyed globally indicate their
organizations do not offer any activities or programs targeted to meet women
leaders' development needs. While 21 percent of organizations said they offer
some activities or programs, only 6 percent said they are planning to add
programs and activities in the future.

Global Differences, Top Programs

It appears while many multinational organizations value gender diversity in
leadership, they are focused on broader diversity objectives and not
specifically on accelerating the development and pipeline of qualified women
leaders. As a result of not having a clearly defined strategy, the climate of
support for developing women leaders is mixed.

Of survey respondents, 44 percent said their organizations support development
of women leaders to a moderate extent, while just 19 percent said their
organizations support women's leadership development to a great extent.
Organizations in the U.S. and Asia Pacific showed a higher than average
response, with 27 percent supporting the development of women to a great extent,
while organizations in EMEA were below average at 14 percent.

This affirms that gender diversity in leadership can be a complex issue. While
some organizations don't recognize the unique attributes women leaders bring to
the table, others don't believe women should be treated differently than men.
Even organizations committed to having a more diverse leadership team may not be
making the kind of progress necessary to achieve their goals.

This lack of progress might be attributed to a flawed perception of what's
valuable to women's leadership development. For example, according to the
survey, the top solutions listed by organizations worldwide specifically
targeting women leaders' needs were flexible work arrangements, 66 percent;
followed by diversity sourcing and recruiting, 44 percent; coaching, 44 percent;
and mentoring, 43 percent.

These same four programs also were identified as the most effective in
developing women leaders. The emphasis on flexible work arrangements is an
important acknowledgement of a work-life issue that traditionally has been
associated with working women. But executive sponsorship and programs such as
coaching and mentoring may be more valuable for leadership skills development
even though survey respondents viewed these solutions as having less of an
impact than flexible work arrangements.

In the U.S. and Asia Pacific regions, organizations showed a higher than average
response of 69 percent that provide flexible work arrangements, while Canadian
organizations showed a lower response, 60 percent. More U.S. and Asia Pacific
organizations also provide coaching, 51 and 45 percent respectively, compared to
42 percent of organizations in EMEA and 37 percent in Canada.

Levels of Concern, Limiting Factors

What's worrisome is where there is inconsistency of a lack of targeted
strategies for developing women leaders, organizations do not appear to be
overly concerned. When asked about their level of concern regarding various
aspects of women in leadership, the top three issues ranked "very concerned"
were having enough women in the leadership pipeline, 21 percent; retaining women
once they reach leadership levels, 20 percent; and having women develop the full
range skills necessary for a senior leadership position, 19 percent. These
relatively low levels of concern don't square with organizations' overall
strategies around diversity and leadership.

That said, the top three factors preventing women in leadership talent pools
from advancing to the next level in their organizations were work-life balance
and lack of an executive sponsor, which were nearly tied at about 42 percent,
and insufficient breadth of experience, 29 percent. Organizations in Asia
Pacific and EMEA also listed willingness to relocate as a leading factor
preventing advancement, 36 percent and 27 percent respectively.

Similarly, survey respondents said the biggest challenges women face in their
development as leaders pertains to work-life balance, lack of role models, lack
of opportunities for career advancement and a lack of support from upper
management. And while their organizations may not have expressed significant
concern about women's leadership development, many survey respondents indicated
their own desire to improve their program's effectiveness by instituting formal
coaching and mentoring programs, promoting development for all potential
leaders, emphasizing younger-generation leaders and launching affinity groups.

When it comes to offering programs to help women advance as leaders, the
solutions being provided by organizations don't always address the issue.
Leadership development is a multiphase process that goes beyond flexible work
schedules and basic coaching; it must include opportunities to obtain leadership
experience, and more importantly, it must have support from senior management.

Many organizations have talented women in their leadership pipelines, but to
successfully advance them into leadership roles, they need a strategy. In
addition to plans and programs to develop women, this strategy should outline
how to change the organization's corporate culture to recognize the business
value inherent to diverse leadership.

Learning Implications

Learning leaders have an opportunity to frame the issue as a strategic
imperative and to advance the science and practice of women's leadership
development. Most companies still rely on traditional approaches such as
offering flexible schedules rather than taking a more systematic and integrated
approach. Accelerating the development of women leaders will require coordinated
individual and companywide change efforts. The problem should be attacked on two
fronts: helping women build and demonstrate their leadership skills while
simultaneously changing the organizational culture.

Further, the lack of executive sponsors and an insufficient breadth of
experience were cited among the top factors preventing women in their
organization's leadership talent pool from advancing to the next level. This
calls for an exploration of exactly how executive sponsorship can drive career
advancement, and what touchstones may be required for it to work effectively. Is
it necessary, for example, for an executive sponsor or mentor to have had
diversity training and specific capabilities to effectively mentor women
executives? What must women bring to the task of partnering with male executives
in terms of shared vision and career growth?

Leadership in today's global business world is about creating and sustaining
cultures of risk taking and innovation, and unleashing new ideas and fresh
approaches in order to drive business results. Despite the thin ranks of women
in the C-suites, there's ample evidence that high-profile women CEOs and
executives have been among the most aggressively innovative and fresh thinking
on a global scale. Programs and initiatives that can develop and reinforce
techniques to promote business innovation and creativity will be vital for
tomorrow's women leaders.

However, embracing these goals and strategies isn't going to change the
long-standing leadership paradigm overnight. Among the comments made by
respondents to the Mercer survey, there were frequent references to the
predominance of "old boys' clubs," inflexible corporate cultures and
male-dominated leadership teams that do not support or enable women to move into
comparable leadership roles.

Further, there are some real development challenges ahead for women. Survey
respondents cited women's "struggle to be able to relocate or work on a
long-term global assignment due to spouse work commitments and inability to
travel." Others said there was not enough recognition of the need for targeted
development, noting a lack of leadership support, while still others opined that
"Women don't ask for the promotion. Men do and get it, whereas women wait to be
recognized for all their hard work, and it never comes."

Chief learning officers can play a major role in ensuring women and minorities
have the experiences and leadership development opportunities they need to be
successful. After all, who could deny that true leadership diversity is a
fundamental element of a global talent management strategy and a bottom-line
necessity for global business in the 21st century?


[About the Authors: Colleen O'Neill is a senior partner in Mercer's human
capital business. Stacey Boyle is vice president of the Human Capital Media
Advisory Group.]

For more Articles and Information: http://www.developmentnetwork.conr/

Who Are Your Pivotal Leaders?(by Stuart Crandell, Ph.D. | Talent Management)

-By Development Network-

There's more to organizational success than simply surviving. Now that the
economy has begun its slow ascent from the ashes of the Great Recession, leaders
are turning their attention to excelling, which requires the most pivotal talent
available.

Now more than ever, organizational leaders realize that the right talent in the
right roles will lead to operational and business success. Since resources are
still constrained, talent managers are focusing their development spending on
high-potential talent. A recent PDI Ninth House study found that nearly
two-thirds of global organizations planned high-potential programs in 2010,
which makes sense considering that high-potential talent pools are breeding
grounds for successful leaders.

However, talent leaders at forward-looking organizations are going a step
further. They are identifying pivotal leadership roles within their
organizations and using their high-potential and succession planning processes
to ensure the right people are deployed into these roles in order to realize
more immediate, tangible and positive results.

Pivotal leadership roles are vital to an organization's success or failure.
These roles are readily identifiable because a change in a pivotal leader's
performance will have a significant impact on an organization's performance.
Weak performance in a pivotal role can create great risk for an organization's
mission, objectives or results, whereas high performance in a pivotal role often
provides greater competitive advantage and improved operational results.

Important Roles vs. Pivotal Roles

To identify pivotal leadership roles, talent leaders must understand the
difference between important and pivotal. Important roles are necessary to carry
out key business processes or operations. Pivotal roles also are necessary, but
they are utilized specifically when performance improvements can significantly
impact a company's strategic, financial or operational results. The purpose of
identifying the most pivotal leadership roles is to understand where talent
management investments will have the greatest impact on an organization's
performance and bottom line.

To understand the difference between important and pivotal roles, managers need
to understand the company's strategy. Consider the following hypothetical
scenario involving two companies in the airline industry. The first is a
budget airline whose strategy is based on efficiently and rapidly turning planes
around in order to fly more routes per day. The second is a more traditional
full-service airline whose strategy is to control high-value, long-haul routes
across continents by locking up gates at major international hubs.

For the budget airline, the ground crew roles are likely the most pivotal, since
they are essential in getting the planes ready for the next departure as quickly
as possible. Although the ground crew roles are important for the full-service
airline, they are not pivotal. Instead, the roles involved in negotiating gate
access would be the most pivotal because this airline's strategy is based on
having more access to more gates at key hubs.

If the budget airline wants to drive overall business performance improvement,
it does not need to invest more heavily in its gate negotiators. However, if it
improves its ground crew's productivity to fly an additional route per day, it
will significantly impact its asset utilization and business performance. In
contrast, the full-service airline would benefit much less from improving its
ground crew's performance as they are not key to its primary objective.

The Powers That Be

To understand which roles are pivotal versus important, talent managers need to
examine three main drivers of pivotal roles:

1. Quality:
Organizations need to know what their strategy is, and where it will matter most
to have better leaders.

2. Quantity:
Sometimes the issue is not about quality - having leaders with sufficient
capabilities - but rather about having enough leaders to meet an identified
need.

3. Specialty roles:
Organizations should know their rare leaders, those individuals with unique
knowledge and skills, as they often are the most costly and difficult to
replace.

Although it is essential for business success to identify and leverage pivotal
roles, company executives must understand that there is significant business
risk associated with these roles. If a company loses a high-performing, pivotal
individual, it can be damaging to business performance. One way to mitigate risk
is to have a robust succession plan to ensure successors are well trained and
ready to step in when needed. To do so, organizations should develop and use a
strategic assessment management process that:

a) Determines pivotal leadership roles for current business priorities while
recognizing that these positions may change as business strategies change.

b) Assesses incumbent leaders and potential successors to gauge skills,
strengths and weaknesses.

c) Creates a succession planning process that is directly tied to pivotal roles
versus generic leadership levels.

This process looks at the skills gaps for pivotal roles and fixes them through
development activities and programs.

Creating a Pivotal Accelerator Program

As a global healthcare company in the laboratory equipment and diagnostic
testing arena, Becton, Dickinson and Company (BD) focuses on growth, innovation
and talent to drive company success. However, two years ago, BD realized that
its bench strength was not as deep as it should be when it came to general
management.

Tom Ruddy, vice president of talent management, leadership and learning at BD,
knew the company needed a strategy for its pivotal general manager roles. Given
how critical these roles are to drive growth, BD had to ensure those currently
in the roles had the necessary skills and experiences to execute the growth
strategy, as well as ensure a robust pipeline of future general manager talent
in the feeder pools.

The BD talent management team established an accelerator program to develop
general manager talent. Some individuals in the program were already in general
management roles; others were selected as potential future general managers. The
program had three core elements:

1. Individuals participated in a detailed developmental assessment to determine
strengths, developmental opportunities and transition needs. Participants were
able to craft a development plan focused on the skills and experiences needed to
be successful in the general manager role.

2. After the assessment feedback, individuals were assigned mentors based on a
match between their development needs and the mentors' particular strengths and
styles.

3. Individuals were then placed on various projects and special assignments to
further their development and ensure they received exposure, experiences and
opportunities to acquire key skills required for success at the general
management level.

The accelerator program has been a quick success for BD's pivotal general
managers. Since the start of the program, 60 percent of participants have been
promoted to the general management level.

Given the encouraging results from the accelerator program for the pivotal
general manager role, BD expanded the program to other pivotal roles within the
company. To determine similar roles, the company's senior human resources team
collaborated with executives from all business segments to determine the key
roles critical to each segment's success. Leaders were asked questions such as,
"Which roles are critical to help drive business growth?" and "What are the
roles where a sub-performer could cause the most damage to your business?"

From these meetings, BD determined that a handful of pivotal role pools existed
within the organization with 327 employees currently positioned in those roles.
For BD, pivotal roles were general managers along with specific roles within
research and development and key functional areas such as finance, supply chain
and procurement.

Those 327 employee positions represent only 1 percent of BD's entire employee
base, thus illustrating how pivotal programs are highly targeted to those
individuals who truly make a difference in a company's business strategy.

Limited Resources Influence Programs

With the benefits of focusing on pivotal roles clear, the next question is: What
is the best way to fit this into a talent management strategy?

Although the economy is turning around, company executives remain financially
cautious, and most HR leaders have limited resources. Talent leaders must
therefore take a close look at their business. Where are they today? What are
the current, critical initiatives? What are the long-term strategies? What
skills and teams will be needed to ensure the organization meets its short- and
long-term initiatives? What kind of assessment processes are in place to ensure
a seamless transition of talent when needed?

Talent leaders also may wonder if they should focus on pivotal leaders or
high-potential leaders. Where will they see more financial rewards? Often
pivotal roles focus on the immediate, critical initiatives needed to execute the
strategy and drive current operational performance, whereas high potentials are,
by definition, talent assets needed to build for the future.

Both are necessary; it's not an either/or scenario. Pivotal leader and
high-potential programs should dovetail. In fact, pivotal leadership positions
often are powerful development opportunities for high-potential employees. A
talent management strategy that leverages both in a strategic, cohesive approach
will be an effective use of scarce development resources and will help to ensure
a company's success now and in the future.

For more Articles and Information: http://www.developmentnetwork.co.nr/

Snaptu: Case Study: How Jennifer tripled her rate (working 1/3 the hours) by mastering the art of networking

Most of us suck at networking. We think it's sleazy. We're not sure what to say. And even if we "believe" we should do it, we rarely do! Sounds familiar…like working out, or managing your money, or even keeping in touch with friends and family. Yet…

Click here to read the full story

--
This email was sent to you from Snaptu mobile application.

Tips to Prevent Conflict in the Workplace ( by Natalie Morera | Talent Management )

-By Development Network-

Some leaders may stand on the sidelines as workplace conflicts play out because
they think they can't make everyone get along, but ignoring clashes in the
office may have a bigger impact down the line.

"[In some organizations, this type of] behavior is tolerated and unaddressed by
people at all levels of the organization for a period, if not explicitly
encouraged," said Richard D. Hart, respectful workplace specialist at ProActive
ReSolutions, a workplace conflict resolution company. "Over time, the behavior
and related impact escalate to a point that others are finally forced to pay
attention - the proverbial last straw."

Hart typically assists leaders who are dealing with disruptive and
disrespectful employees. The scenarios are fairly similar each time: Employees
are involved in chronic, long-term, "low-level behaviors," such as failing to
respond, rolling of the eyes, avoiding eye contact, sarcasm and belittling,
Hart said.

Preventing this type of behavior requires leaders to focus on people's actions,
not their feelings, personalities, perception, beliefs, values, expectations
and other things - not because they aren't important, but because it's
difficult for an organization to change such traits, Hart said.

What matters most is how the employees work as a group. "People's behavior in a
workgroup is both the best predictor of conflict and the best indicator of
conflict," Hart said.

Once people stop communicating because conflict has occurred, an organization
can see effects on the bottom line. The company may lose employees or lose out
on productivity because certain employees don't or can't work together.

"People who don't like each other who are having difficulty and are in conflict
with each other typically aren't talking to each other," said Tim Scudder, CEO
of Personal Strengths USA, a workplace conflicts consulting company and author
of Have a Nice Conflict. "They're not sharing information. They're not
collaborating. It can start to create the silo effect where we're solving
problem[s] only for ourselves without solving problems for the broader team.
When those types of small problems become common inside an organization, it
really starts to affect the whole culture."

When it begins happening on a broader scale, the information people need to
perform their jobs effectively is not free flowing, and this can result in a
drop in productivity, retention, etc.

To avoid this, there are steps leaders can take to prevent conflict. Hart said
every organization should focus on three outcomes in the workplace. Ensure
that:

1. Everyone at all levels of the organization consistently treats others with
respect.

2. Everyone in the organization participates actively in the workplace, so
information is shared, co-workers assist each other and workers help solve
problems.

3. Everyone in the workplace speaks out to managers and colleagues about
important issues affecting them or others.

The best way to achieve these outcomes is to build capacity in three areas,
Hart said:

a) Prevent problems between people by helping them interact respectfully with
each other.

b) Repair relationships broken by conflict by bringing people together to work
through issues and get agreement on future behaviors.

c) Protect people from the harm of extreme behavior such as violence by
understanding and managing risks in specific cases.

Still, in certain cases, there's the potential to learn from conflict, so it
needn't always be avoided.

"When we avoid conflict, we miss the opportunities that are inherent in
embracing conflict," Scudder said. "When we embrace conflict, we get a chance
to learn what matters to people. People only go into conflict about things that
are important. We don't have conflict about stuff we don't care about."

Each time a conflict arises, there's an opportunity to learn the values of the
people who are in that conflict, Scudder said.

"You have a chance to learn what matters to them," Scudder said. "When you
resolve that conflict in a way that is respectful and restorative of those
values, you end up building a much stronger relationship."

Avoidance is looking away from the problem that has already arisen, he said.
But to prevent conflict, one must look at the potential for conflict and take
measures to stop it from happening.

Conflict could lead to healthy outcomes if dealt with properly, Hart said. A
conflict can be an opportunity for people to step forward, display leadership
skills and build collaborative and trusting relationships. It's up to those
involved to solve it. Making room for differences of opinion, debate and
engagement is important, and the lack thereof may be signs of an unhealthy
environment.

"Once people start to behave differently and respond to workplace difficulties
differently, there is far greater chance of the other things changing as well,"
Hart said.


[About the Author: Natalie Morera is an associate editor for Talent Management
magazine.]

-For more Articles and Information: http://www.developmentnetwork.co.nr/

Why Communication From Leadership is Essential For Success [by Ladan Nikravan | Chief Learning Officer]

-By Development Network-
As workforces age and skills gaps widen, it's imperative for leaders to bring
together strategy deliberation and execution. According to research
commissioned by consultancies SuccessFactors and Accenture in April, 80 percent
of leaders recognize they are not doing their best to communicate strategy
through the organization. Further, according to findings from a survey of 1,400
corporate executives and employees announced in May by leadership development
and training firm Fierce Inc., more than 70 percent of respondents either agree
or strongly agree that a lack of candor impacts the company's ability to
perform optimally. As economic recovery continues and developing and
executing the organization's strategy becomes a priority, leaders should
reverse traditional information flow and facilitate a bottom-up flood of
opinions and ideas rather than one-way delegation from management.

"Conversations are the building blocks of relationships, and those
relationships either create [an] engaged or unengaged workforce - a positive or
toxic culture," said Halley Bock, CEO and president at Fierce Inc. "To nurture
cross-boundary collaboration, leaders should invite employees to be part of
executing the organization's mission and strategy. Too often, companies rely on
recognition or engagement programs to reward employees they want recognized.
The problem with that is that people don't engage with programs, they engage
with other people. The gift of your time, involving them and being specific on
how they contributed goes a lot further than leaders seem to understand."

While more than 90 percent of respondents to the Fierce survey reported
believing decision makers should seek out other opinions before making a final
decision, approximately 40 percent think leaders and decision makers
consistently fail to do so. Employers who fail to communicate their business
plans properly to their staff and dismiss their points of view are missing out
on engagement.

"Ninety-five percent of what leaders need is right there in front of their
noses," said Vivian James Rigney, president of Inside Us LLC, an executive
coaching organization. "They just need to slow down, listen and engage with
people. You get more valuable information, build bridges of trust and share
accountability much more effectively when you begin to communicate.
Organizations thrive best when there's a culture of calibrating lofty goals and
strategies with people resources and maximizing that. It's listening,
acknowledging and understanding that there's more to decision making than
listening to those at the top."

Workplace communication problems are not unique to any industry sector or rung
on the corporate ladder. Nearly 100 percent of respondents to the Fierce survey
prefer workplaces in which people identify and discuss issues truthfully and
effectively, yet less than half said their organization's tendency is to do so.
These issues are slowing down projects, productivity, employee retention and
the bottom line.

Workplaces lacking in collaboration and communication may arrive at undesirable
operational business results. According to Chieh-Wen Sheng, Yi-Fang Tian and
Ming-Chia Chen, authors of the article "Relationship among teamwork behavior,
trust, perceived team support, and team commitment" published last year in
Social Behavior & Personality, in order to cure maladies of ineffective,
closed-contact workplaces, leaders must communicate what the goals and
objectives of the organization are because employees are more apt to produce
when they are aware of what is expected. Leaders should empower employees and
involve them in the decision-making process to boost employee morale,
confidence and trust, and they should recognize, acknowledge and reward
employees who consistently demonstrate expected behaviors.

"Employees get enormous amounts of motivation from being involved," Rigney
said. "When they're part of the process, they believe they're listened to,
respected and part of something. This allows a dominant leader, an alpha
leader, to continue being the strong decision maker, but it also allows their
team to be with them and an integral part of the development of the business."

[About the Author: Ladan Nikravan is an associate editor of Chief Learning
Officer magazine.]

For more Articles and Information: http://www.developmentnetwork.co.nr/