Development Network - Articles and Information (http://www.developmentnetwork.co.nr/)
We all have ridiculous things we used to believe (I outlined many of them in Why Do Delusional People Think Their Spending Will Be Different Than Other People's?) Stupidly, I genuinely used to think that "fear" was a physical feeling. So when people…
Click here to read the full story
--
HR executives -- and their C-suite leadership -- must act now to deal with the
"new normal" of talent management. A global recession, a lack in needed skill
sets, an aging workforce and disconnected talent strategies are combining to
create corporate crisis.
It is impossible to tune into any form of media these days without hearing about
job creation: Where will jobs be created? When they will return? How can
governments around the world support job growth?
This topic will dominate discussions for the foreseeable future, but I think a
better question that will rise to the forefront will be: Where are the skills?
The global recession of 2008-2009 brought to light a worldwide unemployment
epidemic. With unemployment rates running at an all-time high, according to the
United Nations Labour Agency, countries around the world are counting on both
the public and private sectors to assist in solving the problem.
While global unemployment is important, perhaps an even more important issue to
HR leaders is how to gain an understanding of what skills exist inside their
organizations, what skills they will need in the future and how they will build
talent strategies that align to those skills.
Better visibility into the skills that are needed versus the gaps that exist
will help organizations realize that this issue is less about new job creation
than about new skill development.
In most crises of supply and demand, we can manufacture a new supply. Whether it
is oil, consumer goods or even money, ways are found to create more. However,
when it comes to individual skill sets, solving the supply and demand crisis is
not as simple.
And without visibility into what we already have, what we need, and where and
when we will need it in the future, it's virtually impossible.
This lack of visibility is a nearly unanimous area of deficiency I find as I
travel around the world to meet with our customers.
Unfortunately, at the same time, I witness the depressingly familiar reactive
approach from HR leaders to solving the problem. Many HR leaders combine their
lack of clarity into the skill sets and motivations of the workforce with the
ongoing, long-time struggle to tie their organizations' talent strategy to
current and emerging business needs.
Frustrated by the current state of the organizations' talent-strategy approach,
some individual business units have taken matters into their own hands --
building their own talent inventory processes and systems that are separate from
the rest of the organization.
While this approach temporarily works on a unit-by-unit basis, talent and skills
eventually bleed out of these worldwide organizations because of this
decentralized effort.
When we add the problems of disconnected talent strategies and supply-and-demand
talent issues to high global unemployment of "lesser-skilled" workers and an
aging workforce, you have an explosive situation.
While this sounds dramatic, demographics underscore that skill sets leaving the
workforce outpace skill sets entering the workforce. We cannot simply create an
extra group of 18-to-20-year-old individuals already prepared to enter the
workforce with the skills needed by businesses today.
Combining that situation with the demand for new skills and the lack of clarity
for future needs and we find ourselves in the "new normal" of talent. This "new
normal" will be one of the largest crises we face during our lives.
So, how does this relate to HR technology?
That relationship became intensely clear to me after a recent conversation with
a CIO. He asked me: "Now that we are not hiring, I assume that you would agree
with me that we do not need to spend on talent-management technology, correct?"
It literally felt like a punch to the gut when I sat back and thought about it.
Candidly, there couldn't be a more false assumption to make than this. Honestly,
it's tragic.
Talent-management technologies are not only more important than ever, but they
should be the No. 1 driver of every HR organization and business leader
worldwide. In a world where everything becomes a commodity in a matter of weeks,
the only long-term differentiator is talent: buying, building, retaining and
mobilizing talent.
In the past, talent-management spend has been measured predominantly by how much
organizations spent on new recruiting technologies. Consequently, the thought
that "jobs are not coming back" has created a perception that investments in
talent-management technology are no longer needed.
But talent management is more than recruiting. HR must know the business
strategy, understand the organization's current depth of skills, and know when,
how and where the business will either grow or acquire additional skills.
HR leaders need to be able to visualize changes in talent supply and demand, and
proactively capture needed talent before the business even requires it. The only
way HR can accomplish this is through the use of talent-management technology.
The definition -- and legacy -- of HR in the future is talent management.
And technologies such as workforce planning, and proactive talent acquisition
through candidate-relationship management and talent communities will help
induce clarity as well as drive the overall talent supply.
So, too, will the use of skills inventory through technologies -- such as a
basic talent profile, deep succession management on critical jobs, and
enterprisewide social-collaboration tools -- help organizations manage talent.
Technology that supports the development of skills that align with business
strategy -- such as ongoing performance management and proactive re-skilling
through learning and career planning -- also help organizations optimize
existing talent, retain it and realize its true value.
Finally, technologies that support compensation management and employee
engagement are required to ensure the workforce is invested in both its future
-- and the future of the enterprise -- and is rewarded for its impact on the
business strategy.
So ... is this the time to invest in an upgrade without talent management
embedded? No! Is this the time to stop investing in talent-management
technologies and invest in "more business-critical" tools? No!
Human resource leaders worldwide need to lead the way in solving the
supply-and-demand talent crisis. They must build talent strategies that tie
their agendas to that of the business and the CEO.
Once those strategies are linked, the business case for HR technology is a "no
brainer," the concept of "business critical" tools shifts back to a focus on
talent, and the HR function shows its impact on driving business outcomes.
Is this the time to stop investing in talent management? No! Quite the opposite,
this is the exact time to invest more, and organizations that don't will be left
with a serious competitive disadvantage.
[About the Author: Jason Averbook is co-founder and CEO of Knowledge Infusion in
Minneapolis, a full-service HR and talent-management consulting firm that
creates talent strategies and then works with organizations to select and deploy
technologies to drive strategic outcomes.]
-For more Articles and Information: http://www.developmentnetwork.co.nr/
There's an energy crisis facing our organizations. But this crisis can't be
solved by switching to compact fluorescent light bulbs or simply turning up the
air conditioning a degree or two. This crisis goes deep into the core of our
personal and professional habits, and the resulting fatigue is putting all of us
at risk.
"When [individuals and organizations] struggle for energy, they struggle to have
life, and if you're unable to generate the energy that is necessary to meet
those demands, some ball is going to drop," said Jim Loehr, chairman and
co-founder of the Human Performance Institute and author of 15 books, including
The Power of Full Engagement.
Think of the nurse at the end of a 12-hour shift who faces an emergency
situation that requires rapid diagnosis and makes a careless mistake, or the
air-traffic controller who nods off while monitoring incoming flights. Physical
fatigue creates a risk that directly affects our safety and well-being.
Fatigue also has implications beyond our ability to physically perform on the
job. It makes it difficult to connect with and care about others and leads us to
be more impatient and detached. It diminishes our ability to focus, be creative
and develop innovative and original ideas. It even plays a role in ethical
lapses.
"When people are tired [and] they're in an energy crisis, they don't hold the
line like they should," Loehr said. "They're much more easily coerced - maybe
just a little or maybe a lot - to the dark side."
Based on research with high-performing athletes, Loehr and colleagues at the
Human Performance Institute have developed recommendations for delivering high
performance in the business world. It starts with recognition that human energy,
or the lack thereof, has far-reaching implications.
"Take energy out of the equation in business [and] nothing happens," he said.
"Nothing happens until your energy causes something to move."
While organizations have a number of often expensive programs and incentives
aimed at developing technical and leadership skills, they pay comparatively
little attention to employees' energy and health, usually leaving it up to the
individual to manage in their personal time. That approach focuses too heavily
on the demands made by the organization and too little on how energy is supplied
by the individual, with potentially debilitating results.
"We know what we want to spend our energy on but we don't look to how we renew
energy," Loehr said. "As soon as energy is reduced in any significant way,
learning comes to a complete stop, engagement begins to fall immediately. You
don't have the discretionary effort to put into the job or mission or task, and
it places into jeopardy all the things we want to accomplish."
Energy has never been viewed as a resource that needs to be managed in the same
concentrated, coordinated way that we manage any other corporate resource, Loehr
said. That lack of focus has resulted in a relatively unsophisticated approach
that often confuses effort with energy.
"Effort simply refers to the volume of energy, the quantity that you have to
spend," Loehr said. "But you can spend large quantities of energy that's very
scattered, unfocused [and] has very poor quality in the sense that it's negative
and sarcastic."
To tackle the energy crisis, organizations need to begin with the fundamental
understanding that energy operates in an oscillatory fashion, meaning people
continually expend and recover energy. Without some infusion of energy and time
to recover, it quickly becomes unsustainable.
CLOs can play a role by including personal and organizational energy management
in leadership development programs. Beyond training to develop rituals that
generate energy, such as getting enough sleep and exercising regularly, CLOs can
help leaders learn how to apply and focus individual and organizational energy.
People can be trained to be more positive with their energy, strengthen their
focus and boost engagement, Loehr said.
Some organizations, such as hospitals and the military are actively managing
energy because there are direct consequences to failure to do so. The broader
business world is just beginning to get it, looking up from the bottom line just
in time to see the energy crisis looming.
"We have never really viewed this as being central to the bottom line and it
really is," Loehr said. "The only thing that makes everything happen is your
energy, and when your energy is no longer available, all that brilliance is
stalled."
[About the Author: Mike Prokopeak is editorial director at Chief Learning
Officer magazine.]
For more Articles and Information: http://www.developmentnetwork.co.nr/
Marsh & McLennan Cos.' CHRO tells how a keen focus on the varieties of human
capital risk -- employee engagement, talent management and an aging workforce --
are necessary for the success and survival of today's HR executives, but
especially important is the risk of CEO succession.
For many human resource executives, the shift to a global, knowledge-based
economy has changed the game when it comes to identifying the real drivers of
corporate success. We no longer view workers as interchangeable cogs in a matrix
of assets, defined by the fixed capital of property, machines and their tangible
products.
Instead, we recognize human capital as our primary asset, and we require a clear
picture of how our workforces' capabilities, performance and culture correlate
to the bottom line. By now, we know that managing human capital risk -- or any
risk, for that matter -- means identifying what is predictable and being able to
respond quickly and effectively to what is unpredictable.
It's a matter of having nimble structures and strategic vision, so we can cope
with the threat or probability that an action or event will affect our
organization's ability to achieve our objectives. For HR leaders, that's
anything that threatens a firm's ability to attract, develop and retain the key
talent that drives business value.
Human capital, of course, is crucially different from structural capital in that
it is owned by the individual -- that is, individuals who can walk out the door
and take their unique capital with them, unless their competencies, knowledge
and skills are either tangibly recorded or somehow incorporated into an
organization's procedures and structures.
That's a primary example of human capital risk -- loss of key talent -- but
consider some others that often fly under the radar of human resource executive
thinking:
1. Employee engagement.
The risk of insufficiently or poorly engaged employees can yield a direct hit to
the bottom lines of organizations, taking a toll in terms of turnover,
productivity and the company's internal and external brands. Companies that fail
to survey their human capital regularly, respond to substantial issues revealed
by survey research and communicate effectively to the workforce are playing
Russian roulette with their long-term success.
2. Hiring practices and talent management.
The risk of ineffective hiring practices, in which the right talent may be
overlooked while the wrong talent takes its place, can be a major drain on
corporate success. It can also have complicated sources -- from outmoded or
insufficient job descriptions to less-than-rigorous interviewing and
background-screening processes.
Beyond hiring, talent-management failures -- ranging from weak onboarding
practices to poor training, limited development opportunities, stale performance
management and a lack of mentoring -- can compound the risk.
3. An aging workforce.
The risk of an aging workforce has become a global issue, as demographic
realities in some of the most dynamic societies of the east and west --
including those of the United States, Europe, China and India -- point to an
increasing dearth of younger workers to take the place of retiring employees
whose experience and skill levels may be a key factor in driving business
results.
As challenging and as variable as these risks can be, let's also focus on a key
human capital risk factor faced by virtually every organization: CEO succession.
Indeed, from personal experience as a human resource executive and in light of
some recent research on the subject, I feel strongly that mitigating the risk
posed by CEO-succession issues is a key component of sound HR strategy.
Inside CEO Succession
For example, the 2010 Survey on CEO Succession Planning, conducted by Stanford
University, notes that the boards of most of the surveyed organizations agree
that their single-most-important task is choosing the next CEO -- but, on
average, they spend only two hours per year on succession planning.
Furthermore, 69 percent of the 140 survey respondents think that a CEO successor
needs to be "ready now," but only 54 percent of them are grooming an executive
for the position, while 39 percent say they have "zero" viable internal
candidates.
And, not surprisingly, statistics tell us that only 50 percent of CEO
successions are planned at all.
If we agree that CEO selection can have a profound impact on shareholder value,
it's clear that this is one of the most important -- and least managed -- of
human capital risks.
Writing in a December 2008 Chief Executive magazine article entitled "The Cost
of CEO Failures," Nat Stoddard, chairman of Crenshaw Associates, a New
York-based consulting firm specializing in career and transition management for
senior executives, and Claire Wyckoff, a writer and editor who has held
executive positions in both the corporate and nonprofit sectors, estimate the
total cost of such failures -- in terms of cash, inefficiencies and
opportunities lost -- is approximately $14 billion annually.
They write: "Leadership failure at the CEO level plays out in many directions:
There are direct costs related to the individual's compensation ... [and]
indirect costs, which result from errors in judgment, bad strategies, poor
execution, opportunities foregone and the disruption to the organization caused
by inconsistencies, lack of direction and, worst of all, loss of trust."
Indeed, CEO succession has become a vital aspect of corporate governance -- and
thus a key focus of my role as chief human resource executive -- at my
organization, which is itself largely focused on both risk and human capital.
Marsh & McLennan Cos. Inc. is a global professional-services firm, the parent
company of a number of the world's leading risk experts and specialty
consultants: risk and insurance services provider Marsh; risk and reinsurance
intermediary Guy Carpenter; Mercer, the provider of HR consulting, investments
and outsourcing services; and management consultancy Oliver Wyman. Together, we
employ some 51,000 people worldwide, with annual revenues in excess of $10
billion.
As Marsh & McLennan has evolved over the decades, so has its commitment to a
robust CEO succession plan, especially in the face of the inevitable challenges
and changes that large, global companies must face.
As we began to understand the true costs of CEO turnover -- in terms of hard
costs, and the less quantifiable but very real impact "CEO churn" has on
corporate culture and employee engagement -- it became clear that we needed to
take a more active approach to mitigating this key element of our human capital
risk (indeed, through our work with clients, we had witnessed firsthand
the negative impact of CEO and C-suite churn).
Since I joined the organization in 2008, one of our priorities has been to work
closely with President and CEO Brian Duperreault and the board of directors to
codify our approach to CEO succession.
From our perspective, nothing less than proactive management of CEO-succession
risk would do, and so, through regular consultations with our CEO and board, the
new Guidelines of Corporate Governance were adopted in September of 2010,
spelling out the board's belief that planning for CEO succession is one of its
most important responsibilities.
The board is now required to approve and maintain a succession plan for the CEO,
taking into account the recommendations of the directors and governance
committee. This means that, at least annually, the CEO meets with the
non-executive directors to discuss his or her potential successors and related
issues. Afterward, the board may update its CEO succession plan as appropriate.
In addition, the CEO keeps in place, at all times, a confidential procedure for
the timely and efficient transfer of his or her responsibilities in the event of
an emergency or his or her sudden incapacitation or departure.
The CEO also periodically reviews with the non-executive directors the
performance of other key members of the firm's senior management, as well as any
succession issues relating to those individuals. The board is responsible for
determining that a satisfactory system is in place with regard to the education,
development and orderly succession of senior management throughout the
organization.
Risk Factors and HR's Role
Given the direct and indirect correlation of CEO succession to shareholder value
and costs, succession planning should be at the top of the enterprise-risk
agenda. The role of the senior HR executive in this process is threefold,
requiring:
1. A thorough, objective understanding of the company's current CEO-succession
plan; the CHRO should be analyzing and discussing the process with the CEO and,
directly or indirectly, with the board of directors.
2. A clearly defined set of core CEO competencies against which to measure
potential CEO candidates, and a one-, three- and five-year plan for developing
internal talent. This is, of course, a basic tenet of talent management;
however, the skills and accountabilities required of a CEO are vastly different
than any other senior-leadership position at the firm.
3. HR's championing of the notion of human capital risk -- and CEO-succession
planning, in particular -- as fundamental to the overall
enterprise-risk-management strategy of the firm.
The stakes are simply too high to treat CEO-succession planning as anything less
than a strategic imperative.
As Marsh & McLennan Vice Chairman David Nadler, an expert on CEO succession and
board planning, says, "A constant, collaborative process is crucial to ensuring
a successful transition -- and it must begin the first day a new CEO takes the
helm."
These prescriptions make such sense that we might expect them to exist within
every large organization, yet it's apparent that many companies do not face the
risk of CEO succession with a proactive management approach.
And while managing CEO succession is something that must be driven from the top
of any organization -- there's a distinct line of sight from the board to the
C-suite, after all -- not all examples of human capital risk management are as
clearly defined.
Let's consider another example of human capital risk, that of a technology
manufacturing organization, a client of ours, that faced dramatic changes in its
business environment.
In this case, the risk factors involved burgeoning competition from Asia and the
seismic shift from the analog basis of the company's products to digital
technology.
Senior management recognized the need to change its organizational structure, so
it created new units to sell new products and be more competitive with Asia and
the world in general.
But management was slower to consider the workforce aspects of these changes --
i.e., that a different business strategy required a different human capital
strategy, especially considering that the future of its business was going to be
digital, yet thousands of its workers still possessed only "analog" skills.
The company's human capital risk was compounded by a compensation structure that
tended to reward low performers in the older, analog lines of business.
And, not surprisingly, the company's stock price had declined some 90 percent
over a two-year period, as the market recognized the competitive disadvantage
the company was at. Restoring the company to competitive health, therefore,
required a keen focus on its human capital aspects.
The solution included an emphasis on compensation -- analyzing reward practices,
restructuring the compensation system to pay for performance and shifting the
bulk of reward compensation to employees with proven positive impact on the
company's bottom line.
In hand with that, performance evaluations and metrics were changed to reflect
the firm's new business goals. This meant that, in addition to having to meet
team goals, even low performers on high-performing teams had to meet individual
goals as well. Finally, new training programs were instituted to migrate,
wherever possible, employees with older, analog skills into digital skill sets.
The larger point of all this is that quantifying human capital risk and its
business impact remains a challenge for many organizations, especially in an age
of global business and increasing complexity.
It calls for a new mind-set, in which companies not only recognize the singular
importance of human capital to business performance, but aggressively
incorporate human capital risk as part of enterprise-risk management,
correlating workforce performance with the bottom line through more rigorous
data, analytics and metrics -- such as internal-labor-market statistics and HR
dashboards that enable management in new ways.
And, in the case of CEO succession, it's vital that such a primary
risk-management function be embedded in the corporate-governance structure
itself.
For HR, the challenge is to make these correlations between human capital
performance and business impact through education, effectiveness and evidence.
It's vital for HR leaders to carry the message that, in a global knowledge
economy, human capital risk has emerged as one of the biggest potential threats
to the value of the enterprise.
Just as the "war for talent" characterized previous decades of HR action, HR's
critical capability and value creator for the next decade will be managing the
risks of global talent.
[About the Author: Orlando D. Ashford is senior vice president and chief HR and
communications officer of New York-based Marsh and McLennan Cos. Inc. He serves
as the lead employee advocate for 50,000 employees in more than 100 countries.]
Regards,
Harvinder
For more Articles and Information: http://www.developmentnetwor.co.nr/
Leaders at BMO Financial Group believe there is a strong relationship between
the strength and diversity of the company's talent pool and organizational
performance. They have taken an equally strong stance on talent management to
boost employee engagement for 37,500-plus employees internationally as well as
customer satisfaction and the organization's bottom line. Based in Toronto,
Ontario, Mona Malone, vice president of human resources, is responsible for
BMO's personal and commercial bank, which has 17,000 employees. She took time to
share with Talent Management how BMO has become a leading example for the bank's
customers as well as its employees.
TM: How would you characterize BMO's approach to talent management?
Malone: Our approach to talent management is threefold. We put a lot of emphasis
on selection, development and assessment of people based on their potential and
point-in-time performance. We focus on selecting individuals who are the right
fit for our culture so they're aligned with the organization's customer
service-based, collaboration-based values. We also have a tremendous focus and
spend resources on developing people. Our commitment is to help every employee
achieve their highest performance. We have formalized development programs
whether you're a customer service rep, a bank branch manager or a first-time
leader to ensure you understand the expectations for that role, and you've had
an opportunity for training and development to achieve your highest potential.
On the assessment side we do two levels, based on potential and performance.
Twice a year you're formally evaluated on how you're doing against hard business
results and how you're doing in your leadership practices. We also conduct
talent roundtables where we talk about all levels of leadership from the CEO
down. We look at a leader's potential to grow into more senior roles: their
ability to deal with change, their adaptability, their customer service, their
business acumen.
TM: How is BMO's performance linked to strategic business objectives?
Malone: For the personal and commercial banking group, our business goals are
very much around revenue growth and customer experience. Our vision is to be the
bank that defines great customer experience, which is pretty bold because when
people think about a great customer experience, banking is not usually what they
think of. Customers are frustrated by experiences they get with banks. How that
translates in terms of performance management success is around two metrics held
in equal weighting: revenue growth and what we call a net promoter score - a
metric we use to determine the loyalty of our customer base.
It's very important that you're growing the business in a way that is a very
positive customer experience. How we articulate our business, strategy and the
alignment people see in how they're measured and rewarded has helped us in terms
of business success over the last three years. In our case, if you have a very
customer- and growth-oriented agenda, the way you evaluate individual
performance should align to that.
TM: What challenges impact talent management in your organization?
Malone: The unfortunate situation I would describe is when you're talking about
an individual for a promotion opportunity, if the discussion starts with "If
only a couple of years ago we'd thought of giving them this experience," or "If
only they had different experiences in different geographies before we put them
into this situation." If you wish you'd done things earlier and that people
would have had more opportunities to compete for different opportunities, that's
a challenge. When we're doing succession planning, we use "if only" as a gauge
that we need to focus earlier on career moves for people.
The other challenge is continuing to push tough talent calls. If the individual
isn't a great fit for their role - make a decisive call about moving them up,
out, into another job or exiting them - but do not let a bad fit go on for too
long.
The third challenge would be really feeling confident in the assessment you're
making of a leader's capabilities.
TM: Tell us about your succession planning strategies.
Malone: It starts with defining what it means to be a leader in our company. We
articulate it in nine leadership capabilities. We're clear on what the values of
the company are, what the capabilities are to be successful in a leadership role
- that's step one. The second big investment, and this isn't new for us, is
around leadership development.
We invest over $65 million dollars a year in employee development. We've
developed three core leadership programs. Leadership Essentials is for the
first-time manager of people. We don't assume you'll just learn that on the job.
When we put you in a role as a people manager, there are high expectations. The
actions you take impact a lot of people around you.
The other key development focus area is when you become a manager of managers or
a senior manager. We call that our senior leader development program. Our last
one is called Advanced Leadership Program, and that is for executives from new
vice presidents up to our CEO's direct reports. Our CEO teaches in that program.
This program is focused on those who take a broader, strategic leadership role.
Every one of our management committee has been through this program, as have 90
percent or more of our officers. Leadership is something you're constantly
honing and refining; it doesn't mean just because you're senior that you have to
stop enhancing your leadership skills. We place a huge importance on developing
leadership capability no matter where you are in your career.
The third area is around assessment, and this gets into succession. The first
element is how we assess leaders. As a result of those assessments we think
through succession in terms of your career plan in the organization and what
roles would be good fits. We call it being on the succession slate. We assess
that through our talent roundtable process. It's an absolutely huge investment,
not just in terms of dollars but in time: our CEO's time in terms of being in
every one of those advanced leadership programs, our senior officer's time
attending leadership programs and senior folks' time at these roundtables
talking about talent. We deeply believe that the strength of the talent pool
drives organizational success and performance, and the way you strengthen a
talent pool is by focusing on selection, development and assessment.
TM: What metrics have you gathered to prove ROI?
Malone: You can track shifts in people's leadership capability scores over time;
the ultimate measure is looking at business performance over time. But you have
to fundamentally believe that a focus on talent is connected with business
results. You can spend a lot of time measuring the component bits and still not
have a lot of impact. In this organization we have very strong leadership
competence focusing on the development and assessment of people. It drives
business performance, and not just from a metric perspective but from a values
perspective.
How do you determine that you are actually strengthening your talent base
through all of these practices? The ultimate measure is that your business
performance has improved, and when we look at ours over the last three years, it
has been incredibly strong. We have moved from single-digit net income growth
numbers to double digits. We have moved from being a laggard in terms of
customer experience to second in the market and closing that gap on the number
one competitor. We have significantly moved the dials in terms of the business
metrics you would look at, and we're looking at more leading indicators such as,
have we shifted the 360 scores of leaders, are we strengthening leadership
capabilities, are we able to promote people more internally versus externally.
TM: What processes or programs have you established to recruit and retain top
talent?
Malone: It's interesting because the Canadian economy has not been hit as hard
as the U.S. economy, so I still see retaining top talent as a significant issue,
especially when you think about a global marketplace for talent. How do we focus
on retaining our best? One, they should really have a clear sense of how the
organization perceives their potential. They should have a clear view to career
opportunities available. They should have mentoring and connection points with
many senior individuals in the organization.
When you're attracting talent, there are all the usual things - how you
compensate people and the exciting assignments that are created - but the
biggest attraction right now is we have a pretty compelling story. We've moved
from being a middle-of the-pack bank to being one of the fastest growing North
American financial institutions. The performance results we've had are really
impressive, but it's more than the financial aspect. We're carving out a vision
in a category that hasn't historically been known for customer experience and
have some really great proof points that we're achieving that vision. We attract
people that like ambitious change and being almost an underdog that is achieving
great results.
TM: What's next for your organization in terms of talent management?
Malone: There are two areas that we continue to focus on around talent
development. We don't see ourselves at end of job, so continuing to focus on
talent development in both the formal and informal ways and thinking about what
kind of development - whether it's coaching, feedback, job assignments that
individuals need to move to the next level of capability - is an area of
importance to us. Connected to that would be continuing to strengthen succession
planning for key roles and ensuring that we have the absolute best and the most
diverse talent considered.
-For more Articles and Information: http://www.developmentnetwork.co.nr/
