Tuesday, 14 April 2015

Hiring Today? Don’t CYA.

I’ve recently observed a series of hiring processes in firms from mature to entrepreneurial.  What these disparate firms had in common is that, despite claiming they had significant gaps in their capabilities and needed to hire fast, whatever the level of person sought the speed of the hiring process was glacial.
This sloth was routinely accompanied seemingly by the appearance of anyone who could be remotely involved in the potential hire’s work environment appearing at some random point in the process. People turning up disinterested, clearly not briefed, asking the same unfocussed questions, often giving the impression they are just `meat in the room`.

And, along with this significant opportunity cost, then there was commonly stop-start hiring.  This is where a company is all over the candidates like a cheap suit for weeks, demanding endless meetings then disappears at the point a job offer should be being made only to reappear asking for yet another meeting, followed by yet more silence as the delay causes a turf war to erupt between HR and finance.  The job then vaporises.

Lack of clarity
The associated lack of clarity shown to the candidate as to how many interviews and exercises will be needed to have been gone through before a decision can be made benefits no one. The `could you just come in one more time there is someone else we’d like you to meet` request is highly frustrating for the interviewee who rapidly runs out of fictitious dental appointments, imaginary plumbing malfunctions or the sudden need to `work from home` to cover their increased absences from their current place of employment.

Often this inability to set expectations is accompanied, from the candidate’s viewpoint, by an apparent lack of accountability on who owns the process - recruiter, HR or future line manager. Delay at all stages in process in receiving feedback routinely involves the passing of the buck to someone else that the candidate may have never met.
Law of diminishing returns

The fact is that, in these situations, the law of diminishing returns very rapidly sets in and real reputational damage may result from such behaviour.  Ineptitude aside, this lamentable approach is primary driven by CYA.  CYA, if you hadn’t guessed, stands for Cover Your A*** (or A** if you are reading this in North America).
In short, even if it’s disguised as facilitating `teamwork` or `involvement`, the real purpose of this sort of behaviour  is to ensure, that, if the hire doesn’t work out, everyone can point at each other safe in the knowledge that they all - explicitly  or implicitly - agreed to the on-boarding decision. Everyone's a*** (or a**) is covered.  

Putting off the best candidates
To be fair, though, fear of the increasingly constrictive labour laws in Europe and often farcical restrictions on what can be asked at interviews and of references in the US often adds to the self-induced paralysis. 

This approach, though, adds little if no value to the process.  In fact, it might have a negative effect, giving the potential hire the distinct impression of a culture not in control of itself or that of uncaring or incompetent potential colleagues. 

The endless meetings too can also particularly put off the best candidates who are likely to be busy in their current job because they are the top performers. Meanwhile, bereft of information, candidates who stick with the process are left unfairly to wrestle with the challenge of chasing the opportunity concerned whilst not wanting to look desperate or annoying.

Weaselly feelings
It also pretty much the case, that, along with CYA-style recruitment, ultimately comes lack of clear feedback  to the unsuccessful candidate as to why they were not selected for the role.  This is because the more people - many of whom will be untrained as to how to interview - see the candidate the more objective feedback is diluted and the more `feelings` come into play.  `It was a really hard decision, but we just felt one of the candidates was a better fit`, is a typical weaselly response in this situation once the candidate or their external recruiter has chased repeatedly for a response.

Or the candidate gets no feedback at all or receives  comments sounding like they are from no one who was in any of the interview rooms because the company doesn’t care to get organised to do the decent thing or because it’s so difficult to assemble a coherent response from a disaggregated team they have to make it up. Again, that benefits no one.
The three meetings rule

To get over this my recruitment rules are these: There should always be a clear job description and list of the SMART competencies and potential experience required to be successful in the role so what is being interviewed for is unequivocal.  There should never, ever, be more than three meetings in no more than three weeks and this should be stated to the candidates from the start.
For more junior candidates, the first encounter should be with HR or a recruiter for initial screening.  The second should be with the person’s potential manager. The third should be not be a formal interview but should be a `fit` session with the team with whom they will be working and where anyone junior or senior can issue a veto on the hire.

For the most senior appointments the order should be partially reversed after initial screening , starting with the Chair or CEO - if it a board level appointment to establish suitability - before meeting other board members and non-execs to establish team  fit and with HR picking up the `hygiene factor`s at the end. That’s it.  Rejection can happen at any of the three stages.  If not, the process ends with a job offer.
In both of the above situations companies should also be prepared do what most employers fail to do, particularly those with a disorganised recruitment process - due diligence. It doesn’t have to be a Kroll-style investigation. Simply tactfully asking around and a few web and social media  searches can tell you a lot about what lies between the lines of the cv or behind the polished interview skills and allow interviewers to home in some realities that might be deal-breakers.

Full feedback
It all cases, should the candidate not be successful, full, frank and constructive feedback against the job specification and competency requirements must be given as each candidate should still wish they had been offered the job and will tell others so. They may also be prepared to apply for another position at a later date if the fit wasn’t right first time.

And if you get it wrong, it’s not the end of the world.  Probationary periods should be just that.  To ensure an individual doesn’t `accidently` exit probation, the person hired should be subject to more regular reviews during that period than post probation.  If someone isn’t working out, invoke the terms of the agreement, part company before acrimony sets in and start the three-stage hiring process again.
Lamentably, the companies that don’t have the courage of their convictions in the first place are often the same ones that don’t have the spine to rectify their mistakes later, so letting the bad apple rot the corporate barrel.  And that’s a sure-fire recipe for driving the best people out of the company and the inevitable corporate decline that follows.


Thursday, 2 April 2015

Tough Love, Freely Given - A Mentoring Manifesto

As the actor Kevin Spacey is oft quoted in a LinkedIn meme, `If you are lucky enough to do well, it’s your responsibility to send the elevator back down. `
I like to think I keep pressing the button. I like mentoring people.  I make no bones about it.  I get a kick out of helping raw talent quickly ascend to the highest positions. It’s become part of my DNA.
But, I’ve learned recently that there are diverging views on what constitutes mentoring and what is good practice.  Let me be clear. I consider mentoring is about one thing and one thing only - helping individuals achieve their true potential.
It’s about the mentoree, not the mentor.  It’s about them constantly improving.  It’s about them fulfilling their ambition. It’s not about theory; it’s about practice.
And for the mentor it’s about caring, but not about being compromised in that care.  It’s not about there, there; it’s about here and now and the realisation that the mentor is only as good as the mentoree’s success.
It’s about being constantly on call to help guide mentorees through decisions, providing perspective.  It's about distilling experience, letting people explain, reflect and safely experiment to build up their confidence.  
It’s absolutely not about allowing mentorees to sit forever in their comfort zones, obfuscating or making excuses for inaction. Neither is it about patronising, delivering mealy mouthed platitudes or creating warm fuzzy feelings.
It’s about fearless engagement with reality; about clear development goals and SMART objectives. It’s about holding people to account.

It is about exposing individual and cultural attitudes and their appropriateness to achieving goals. It’s about telling people what they might not want to hear.

It might be about empathy, but rarely about sympathy and it's definitely about emotional intelligence and understanding the whole person.

It’s about considering all the internal and external factors that might be compromising progress. It’s about working out and agreeing with the mentoree how to confront them, deal with them or bypass them. But it’s always about moving forward their personal development.

And it’s always about truth, clarity and mutual responsibility.
To paraphrase the slogan of one of my favourite causes, Big Issue Foundation, `it’s about a hand up, not a hand out`.
Most of all, though, it’s about tough love, freely given.


Tuesday, 17 March 2015

Tescopalypse Now - Every Little Shouldn’t Hurt

The once all-conquering retailer Tesco has recently lurched from crisis to disaster.  Stories of stores closing, share price diving, accounting scandals, criminal investigations, junk-rated credit and shrinking turnover and market share have been seen almost daily in the media. 
As if this wasn’t enough it’s been accompanied by the unedifying sight of a long-time CEO, having timed his exit perfectly, handing his successor a well-poisoned chalice whist knifing him in the front for good measure.  His successor, then, in turn, clearing out the boardroom like a table full of trays at a fast food restaurant.
Overpromise, overstate 
And now there's a reminder that the fallout over the supermarket’s £263m profit overstatement is far from over as Tesco faces a lawsuit filed on behalf of shareholders in the UK and Europe for the impact the overstatement had on its share price.
Tesco Shareholder Claims (TSC), a group funded by the US law firm Scott and Scott , will bring the claim, after the firm launched a similar case on behalf of investors in the US last year. TSC says it expects to claim for between 50p and 70p per share, which would mean a potential cost to Tesco running into billions if it was successful.
The Tesco tale has been not unlike that of some recently exposed celebrities.  It managed to combine both an apparently incredible success story, doing business `good` with some very nasty habits hidden from general view or ignored by those that stood to gain financially from or by association with its success – customers, employees, investors, media  and government alike.
Nineties to noughties
Of course, it’s fundamental that supermarketing is highly-competitive.  However things seemed to change in the mid Nineties, once Tesco had re-invented itself and overtook Sainsbury’s to become the UK’s market leader.
It achieved this for the right reasons; because it was motivated to succeed. It was the challenger.  It was more agile and more innovative than the once fast rising and, by then, complacent incumbent.  Its big breakthrough was actually knowing, through its pioneering Clubcard loyalty scheme, who its customers were and what they were buying
It got into an apparantly virtuous circle. By the mid noughties, Tesco had almost a third of the UK market and was expanding overseas, disastrously in the US it later emerged.  
From virtuous to vicious
But, by then, a heart of darkness existed in its Cheshunt trading estate headquarters, manifesting  itself in the horrible readiness with which Tesco was prepared to abuse its increasing power in order to sustain its profitable growth. Of course, big companies do this and as grown-ups we accept, negotiate or walk away.  But Tesco exerted a vice-like monopolistic grip and turned it into a vicious art form.  And the one group that certainly didn’t benefit from its rise were its suppliers
Bullying appeared to be front and centre of its business model and culture.  It treated its suppliers not as partners in the quest to satisfy or delight customers but like disposable items, squeezing them dry and then paying them as late as possible. I know, I was one of them for a short while. 
Luckily, being a supplier of marketing communications services at the time, that was where the pain stopped. It was also something we were prepared to trade for the associated prestige at the time of having them on the client base even though the work was mind-numbingly prescriptive and based on a tactical we-know-best-just-execute approach.
Of course, the work was always project-based so more procurement pressure could be applied at regular intervals - every little hurt rather than helped, to paraphrase Tesco's slogan. In the end, convinced we were never going to build satisfying business with them and seeing the way the team were being treated, we walked away.
It’s interesting to note too at time, if you were representing a client that had maybe supplied technology or services that had helped drive the Tesco miracle, any win-win cooperation story request was flatly refused, if you ever got a response at all.  The irony is that this is exactly how M&S had behaved a decade earlier.  And look what happened to them, clearly an early warning signal. Anyway, at least you can get a case study out of them these days.  As you probably now can out of Tesco  
But I digress. For most of the company’s suppliers, the misery didn’t stop with Tesco screwing up their cashflow and upsetting a few executives. For those wedded to the behemoth, margins became continually eroded and slimmer than the `waffer thin mint` proffered by John Cleese’s oleaginous faux French waiter to the morbidly obese diner Mr Creosote.
Non-stop bad behaviour
As something like one pound in every eight spent in the UK was spent with Tesco it started asking for seemingly endless series of extra payments from suppliers for the privilege of having them as an outlet.  It was Tesco’s way or the highway for those poor unfortunates who had bet their business on their Tesco contracts.  For some, as the recession bit, it was the road to ruin.
The bad behaviour didn’t stop with the suppliers. There was the unsavoury steam rollering of local opposition to high-street-destroying out-of-town superstores, the land banking and maximising every square inch of their ever-expanding, countryside gobbling, brutal sheds or their squalid `convenience` stores. Tesco came to ape the very worst aspects of Walmart’s legendary mid-Western blitzkrieg - all whist rolling out a series of CSR initiatives and charitable works, naturally.
Goodbye goodwill
But the Tesco story reminds us that even the greatest empires contain the seeds of their own destruction. The feisty agile challenger is always in danger of becoming the bloated, sloppy and, ultimately, doomed incumbent. And, like the glutton Mr Creosote, ready to explode the moment that the tiniest little hint that financial market expectations might not be met.
That happened and now it’s now got a big job on its hands. Tesco behaved so badly to so many people over such a long time that there’s no goodwill left for it to draw on. In fact, a lot of people

Friday, 30 January 2015

Y oh Y oh Y –The Importance of Knowing Your Audience

I’m shortly going to give my first couple of guest lectures to the current EMMS (Executive Masters in Marketing and Sales) cohort. EMMS is a post-graduate degree taught between the very pleasant campuses of the ESADE Business School in Barcelona and the SDA Bocconi School of Management in Milan. Both are ranked global Top 20 business schools, I’m glad to report.

The `Executive` bit refers to the fact the students take the course in modules whilst they are in full-time management positions.  Bearing that in mind, my act will be entitled `57 Years…  57 Lessons…` a theme designed to send the graduating students on their way knowing what I’ve learned in entrepreneurial business in 57 years on this Earth. This, I’m told, will contain valuable lessons for their current and future personal and commercial lives once freed from the part-time bonds of academe.
Recognise and act on Generation X, Y, and Z behaviours

Slide 33 in the PowerPoint fest is entitled `You are unlikely to be your audience` and warns `Generational change is profound. Learn to understand, recognise and act on Generation X, Y, and Z behaviours. `
Generational change is indeed profound. It affects much more than the common and usually grossly mistaken assumption in sales, marketing and communications planning and execution that the audience for the product or service thinks like the provider. 

The problem, it appears, extends far beyond the relationship between vendor and customer but is also rife within providing organisations.    In particular, it is that there is currently mutual incomprehension between what employers think Gen Y staff want from their positions and what younger employers actually desire in their careers.
It’s something that in an era of ever more rapid change my thrusting, international, Generation X-ish audience are going to have to deal with increasingly.  Whether they climb the ranks of multi-national management or embark on the entrepreneurial journey and start hiring.

Car crash of confusion
This generational gap was highlighted recently in research conducted by Penna, a company, unsurprisingly, that offers interim management, coaching and HR services. A thousand senior managers and a thousand Gen Y employees (aged between 18 and 34) were surveyed and the results show a car crash of confusion getting off to an early start. 

According to the results, employers believe leading a team and experiencing lots of different jobs and sectors are the most important motivators for Gen Y.  Wrong!  Gen Y employees actually rate achieving a work-life balance and ‘being totally fulfilled and happy in my work’ as most important - alongside earning good money, that is.
Interestingly, the report didn’t make the mistake of assuming Gen Y is homogenous. For instance, it split Gen Y employees into two groups - those aged 18-24 and those aged 25-34. That split reveals some rather contrary results, showing the 18-24 year-old group perhaps being much closer to Gen X values than their more laid-back older Gen Y siblings.

When it comes to leading a team , however, younger employees, the research found, are more driven (21 per cent), compared to those aged 25-34 (17 per cent). The clearly-out-of-touch employers believe managing a team is more important to older Gen Y staff (28 per cent).
Those aged 25-34 also rated the importance of work-life balance much higher (44 per cent compared to 31 per cent in the younger group). Employers underrated the significance of work-life balance for younger employees - 18 per cent believed it was important to 18-24-year-olds versus 27 per cent for 25-34-year-olds.

Values and loyalty
The research also revealed managers are underestimating the importance to employees of organisational values;  13 per cent of 18-24 year-olds said ‘values that reflect my own’ was an important factor when choosing a company to work for, but only seven per cent of managers believed this to be the case.

Loyalty also ranked highly with the employees, with 64 per cent of 18-24 year-olds agreeing they believe ‘it is important to be loyal to your employer’ compared to 56 per cent of 25-34 year-olds.  However, when asked what age group they’d most associate with loyalty to a company, only three per cent of employers said 18-24 year-olds compared to 26 per cent for those aged 25-34.
Problem or opportunity?

Should these findings prove to be true over time we could be having to handle a shortage in management in future, assuming that younger generations in the workplace are not automatically going to want to sit behind the desks of todays’ leaders and managers.  I think you can count on that.
More likely, in my opinion, is that Gen Y’s new attitudes along with new technology will drive further change in the nature of management and the structure of companies.  The alternative will be a decline in engagement levels, productivity, and increased staff attrition rates accompanied by the inevitable and perennial cries of skills shortage.

But we should always be wary of lies, damned lies and statistics. It’ll be most useful for those in charge of managing Gen Y to take the time to sit down with them and find out what they want - or at least what they think they want - and build that into their management and business development strategy.   
Get engaged

As slide 63 of the presentation warns, `You can’t create something new without destroying something old. Learn to let go and move on before someone does it for you! ` So, get engaged with Generation Y.  They will be running things, so help them do it well on their terms and from their perspective.
After all, the world of business didn’t fall apart when we dispensed with the conventions of wearing ties, using fax machines or talking into wired devices that just transmitted voice, did it?  And , yes, Gen Y, unbelievably, we late baby boomers once did that stuff.


Wednesday, 21 January 2015

Encouraging Entrepreneurship - Do As I Do, Not As I Teach

Given the nature of my daily work it always astounds me that only around 10 per cent of the world’s adults can be regarded as entrepreneurs.  But their influence vastly outweighs their number.  It’s this minority that are significant drivers of economic growth and, crucially, of the innovation that leads to sustainable growth and job creation.

It’s axiomatic, then, that to progress we need more entrepreneurs, but many potential entrepreneurs don’t make it. Although any entrepreneur will tell you theirs is not an easy lifestyle choice as it inevitably involves coping with difficulty and failure, too often their pain is increased and chances reduced by pernicious and unnecessary barriers embedded into society and its institutions.

A recently published UKTI report, written by The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), ` Helping entrepreneurs flourish: Rethinking the drivers of entrepreneurship’ looked at how to foster an entrepreneurial mindset - both through education systems and business experience - and, crucially, the factors that enable entrepreneurs to thrive.
It drew on seven in-depth interviews with entrepreneurs and other experts, a lot of desk research and two surveys—one of established entrepreneurs and another of people aged 18 to 25.

Its findings are illuminating, not least because they reveal an apparent change in attitude to the business of wealth creation.
2020 vision

Far from being looked down upon, as it once was, as grubby `trade` not fit for the attention of society’s most talented, entrepreneurship is now viewed as a highly attractive job option.  In the global survey of young people, the top choice - at 30 per cent of the respondents - said that their preferred occupation by 2020 would be running their own business.
Showing how much the tables have turned in recent years, amongst this group 75 per cent are open to starting a company one day, and a further 7 per cent have already done so. Over a third of student respondents regarded running one’s own business as a source of personal work reward  (37 per cent) and a way to create something new / innovative (35per cent.

Reality check
Something that will come as no surprise to anyone who has trodden the entrepreneurial path is that part of this willingness or desire to become an entrepreneur, however, may be a lack of understanding of the difficulties: over half (57 per cent ) of respondents running their own business say that aspiring entrepreneurs underestimate how hard it will be.

A factor that’s often overlooked by government and policy-makers, perhaps because it’s so blinding obvious, is that existing entrepreneurs are crucial in developing those aspiring to be, particularly through mentorship and employment-based learning. Entrepreneurs believe that having mentors who have built up their own firms is vital for success.
Do as I do

The growing number of mentorship schemes and the amount of time existing entrepreneurs give away to help others is testament to the regard for, and value of such activity.  All this despite the fact that the inevitable constraints of running a business restrict the time available for anything else - including external mentoring.
Even more helpful, therefore, is example; running a company in ways that instil and develop entrepreneurship in employees: 81 per cent of entrepreneurs say that they acquired more entrepreneurial skills through work experience than through education.  It seems the old mantra of `Those who can do, those that can’t teach` still applies.

Intellect and attitude
Respondents from both surveys for the report ranked passion and determination as the most important attributes for entrepreneurial success. Such attitudinal qualities like intellect are difficult or impossible to teach or may not exist in conventional teachers.  This may help to explain why those who have started businesses are more likely to say entrepreneurs are born rather than made.

On the other hand, those interviewed for this study point to the numerous other factors needed to become successful. Policy choices and the cultural environment can clearly support entrepreneurship by helping aspiring entrepreneurs understand the hard and soft things they need to know to avoid some of the many pitfalls of starting a business.
Education appears to have some positive influence on entrepreneurial success, but this is currently limited. Those surveyed for this report have seemingly contradictory views about the role of education in their development.  This debate has raged at least since the 1850s when it became apparent that that the UK was falling behind its, then, major industrial competitor, Germany, and the United States’ place as the world’s biggest economy was a couple of decades away.

University challenged
Among entrepreneurs, for example, 79 per cent say their university education aided them to start their own business. However, very few cite their primary and secondary schooling as a top influence in helping them launch their enterprises.

Similarly, nearly half of the 18-25-year-olds surveyed thought an academic degree is important to entrepreneurial success (with that share rising to two-thirds in North America), but just 19 per cent said their university is effective at giving students the specific skills they need to start a business.
Successful entrepreneurs, then, it seems, benefit from education, but traditional academic teaching methods risk undermining attitudes conducive to entrepreneurship as well as not engaging with the skills needed to be successful.

Problem-solving, communication and networking
The report concludes that entrepreneur-friendly education requires a shift not only in how schools and universities teach, but also in what they teach. The experts interviewed for the report recommend a greater focus on problem-solving, communication and networking skills.

Crucially attitudes need to move away from a traditional academic attitude of just educating those who may one day start a business somehow at the expense of the rest of society. The good news is that these so-called 21st-century skills are increasingly being promoted within educational circles and by business as beneficial for all students but change cannot come soon enough.
You can download the full report here http://www.economistinsights.com/sites/default/files/Helping%20entrepreneurs%20flourish.pdf

Tuesday, 16 December 2014

Secure Your Talent, Secure Your Future. Don’t Make These Mistakes...

As an entrepreneurs chances are you just want to get on with the job of taking your disruptive product or service to market.  After all it’s what you started up to do.  The problem is as soon as your business starts to motor you need to hire.  Recently, though, I’ve observed a series of entrepreneurial companies repeatedly making a total hash of their people hiring and management, and, as a result, creating unnecessary management overhead and seriously damaging their prospects.

An early New Year’s resolution
If you don’t want to be in that situation or if you’ve just been putting off getting to grips with your employee issues perhaps it’s time to make an early New Year’s resolution.  There are certain mistakes, it seems to me, entrepreneurial managers tend to make again and again and just paying attention to these few areas can pay big dividends.

The first is reactive recruitment.  Typically, in entrepreneurial firms little attention is paid to staff planning.  People are hired in a panic after a contract is secured.  But getting the right people into the right positions at the right time should an ongoing process.  Recruitment must be done by fully thinking through needs going forward and planning accordingly. This is vital in a market that is perpetually short of talent and for securing the resources that are mission-critical for any business that wants to grow successfully.
Getting started

But getting it right needn’t be complex, a few simple rules apply.  The starting point both for the employer and the candidate in successful recruitment is the development of an accurate and up-to-date job description and candidate specification.
Creating these should not be neither onerous nor time consuming. A job description should be no more than a sheet of A4 and only needs three components.  Firstly, there should be a clear job title that reflects the level of seniority and the responsibilities inherent in the job. Secondly, there should be two or three short sentences or bullet points that summarise the purpose of the position.

The third and final section should set out the key tasks.  It doesn’t have to contain everything required of the potential executive, just the essential day-to-day responsibilities that define the job. Of course, given entrepreneurial firms are by their nature regularly `all hands to the pumps` make sure you specify that the job holder must also `carry out any other reasonable request from management` or words to that effect.
Trust existing employees

You can then use the job description and candidate specification to start to communicate both internally and externally that you are recruiting - together with details of the hiring process, how to apply and including closing dates.  It’s always worth offering a recruitment bounty to current employees.  It’s not only cheaper than using recruitment consultants but also says important things about the trust you place in your existing people.

You will need to supply this to any chosen recruitment specialists too.  You should also take the time to talk them through both the documents and the context of the position – why you are hiring, the culture of the firm, characteristics of employees that make for successful recruits, career progression examples and so on.  This will enable them to act as seamless extension of your firm, identify the best fit candidates and preferentially `sell` your opportunity against positions open in other companies.
Ensure any recruitment consultancy adds real value by tasking them with pre-interview selection based on your briefing.  For candidates that apply directly use pre-interview screening by phone to try and determine whether the candidate is worth meeting face-to-face or simply route all applications through the recruiter if you are happy to pay their fees.  In any case, the requirement for a CV and a cover letter, for instance, will quickly reveal whether a candidate can present information and use language correctly together with the maturity and emotional intelligence they show in justifying their application.

Ensuring company fit
Whatever their skills on paper, any hire will need to fit well within your firm, as in small companies the impact of poor hires is much greater than in larger enterprises. No matter how formally qualified for the job the candidate may be don’t hire them if you have the slightest doubt about whether they’ll fit in, particular if they have a chequered job history.  But beware the temptation to hire the same type over and over again – that won’t build effective teams.  

Interviews can be made more effective by using a competency-based approach.  That means asking very specific questions about relevant skills and asking for detailed examples of how those skills have been put to use by the candidate in the past or are being deployed currently.  Make sure the questions are open – this means they are possible to answer with a straight `yes` or `no` and  couple this with objective testing for key technical skills to make the selection process more valuable.
Walking the talk

Once the person is on board the daily business of ensuring good performance should involve a managed settling-in or probationary period.  This should be accompanied by the setting, communicating, demonstrating and the living of standards – `walking the talk`.  Also the giving of regular, objective feedback, praise and reward where due and targeting improvement or correction as necessary should start from day one.

Even if this is achieved one of the other things that can quickly end up biting entrepreneurs is poor - or even non-existent - record keeping.  Good record keeping should simply be part of your day-to-day routine and if you are in certain industries or grow big enough to be subject to external compliance then you’ll be glad you got into good habits from the outset.
Writing it down

Recording activities such as training, feedback, performance or behaviour issues is especially important, particularly if things start to go wrong with an employee.  Unless you have clear and accurate evidence, it’s impossible for you to have objective authority about a particular matter let alone a grown-up discussion - especially if a situation to be discussed occurred some time before.
In particular, ensure anything during a person’s employment that involves responsibility for actions on either side is agreed, written down and dated. Even recording informal discussions about performance or behaviour is necessary if only by an email confirming your conversation because it proves that you have taken reasonable steps to correct under-performance or poor behaviour.  

Doing it quickly
It’s a reality that even the smallest firms have people employed whose performance falls well below that of their colleagues.  Not targeting poor work performance is the surest way to spread the cancer of disillusionment and resulting poor performance throughout a firm. The most important thing is to take appropriate action as soon as you notice that the employee is not performing work to the standard required.

If addressed early it’s not the end of the earth and so doesn’t have to become a big deal. Start by investigating the cause of the sub-standard performance directly with the employee.  If you can quickly identify, remove or reduce the cause of the problem, the employee's performance is likely to improve just as rapidly.
One of the reasons poor performance is not addressed quickly is because managers fears they will be disliked for their actions. Also that the employee concerned may get defensive or aggressive when presented with the situation or the manger themselves will end up saying something they regret or that can be used against them.  

Sticking to the facts

If things get sticky take a deep breath and focus on the facts and remind themthat you have a right and a duty to care for, manage and encourage an employee to do their job to the standard required ethically and in their contract.
Remind them that the discussion is about business, it’s not personal.  It’s not about whether the employee is liked or not, it’s about whether they can do the job to the standard required.  If you have been keeping records then you will have clear evidence of poor work performance to support your case or good performance to help balance it.  You’ll then look like you mean business too and are intent on getting to the bottom of the problem for the benefit of both parties.

Hiring slowly, firing quickly
After you’ve had a discussion with the employee and everything is on the table, the next stage is to create a performance improvement plan.  Agree and set down precise targets which are capable of being measured (SMART applies in spades here) and meet regularly to identify and agree progress.  If performance doesn’t improve then a justified and managed exit procedure will have to begin.

Finally if you think none of this yet applies to you, remember at least the maxim when it comes to entrepreneurial people management; everything should be based on hiring slowly and firing quickly!


Wednesday, 19 November 2014

Staying Motivated – How to Rise Above the Daily Grind

For most of us, running a business is about a lot more than just making the numbers.  If that alone was the sole reason for turning up at work then I’d wager most of us would find it hard to get out of bed in the morning. 

We spend a lot of time doing it so work should be enjoyable – it should be a creative pursuit, it should be personally fulfilling and it should keep us growing.  Such aspirations are not just altruism they are the key to productivity for most of us in the workplace - entrepreneurs but also for the people we employ.
The problem, of course, is that it’s easy to lose sight of these aims in the daily grind as we negotiate the endless tension between doing rewarding work and just getting things done. It’s therefore worthwhile taking time to gauge your company’s culture and assess your own ability to help both yourself and your people stay intrinsically motivated at work.

Do not throw money at the problem
Do you and your team stay on top form and keep productive when the work just piles up? How do you all remain inspired by your working environment when the tyranny of bottom line is ever present?

If you feel you might be wanting in either respect the last thing you need to do is throw money at the problem.  Extrinsic rewards like more pay or bonuses are unlikely to resolve motivation problems or increase individual enjoyment of labour.  In fact, a recent study by the UK Association of Accounting Technicians (AAT) found that eight in ten people would turn down a big salary increase if it meant working with people they loathed or an environment they didn't like.
In contrast, the top reasons reported in the survey for wanting a job were responsibility and recognition whilst the top two reasons for staying with a company were having a good relationship with colleagues and enjoying the job role. Experience tells me that these aspirations are in no way unique to Accounting Technicians, existing in pretty much all of us.

The implicit bargain
It’s always struck me too that the implicit bargain that is struck in any employer/employee relationship is that a company's ultimate commitment to an employee is to grow their personal market worth in exchange for the employee’s work in increasing the firm's market value. So how does your company grow its employees, not just I terms of their capabilities but as individuals?

There are, of course, good and bad ways to achieve this. Career paths dictated by specific benchmarks or pre-determined timelines smack of the industrial age `nose to the grindstone` attitudes that certainly won’t attract and develop the best teams these days.
The reality is most significant people development happens not on periodic training courses, in seminar rooms or in response to targets but as the product of day-to-day experience and challenge.

So it’s important to assess how you balance risk and reward in your team. Do you allow or even enable people to take risks? Do you push people outside of their comfort zone into leadership positions? Do you give people projects for which they don’t appear wholly qualified? Do you trust people with big decisions, even if they are initially intimidated by the task?
Stretching without fear

This is important because for everyone the opportunity to deepen and add to skills is the key to staying stimulated.  That means ensuring the mentoring needed to develop skills in leading projects, managing team dynamics, and constructively giving or receiving feedback exists in spades throughout the company. And that means you as well, entrepreneur.  Consider hiring non-executive directors, get a personal business coach and make sure you learn from your people.
Personal development apart, as an entrepreneur few things are more motivating than enabling personal and professional growth in others. The freedom to stretch themselves without fear and seek original and creative solutions will ensure their day-to-day work is replete with exciting and challenging opportunities for learning and ownership.

Conflict minimisation
The aim is always to minimise the conflict between the work that people want to be doing and the work that must be done so it doesn’t turn into a stultifying unfulfilling downward spiral. Try also removing the quotidian goals and tasks from yourself and your team, at least for a few hours, so that you can re-connect with the principles and work that inspired you originally.

By participating in activities or tasks that are outside of delivering the bottom line or involve different behaviours than the day-to-day, such as a non-profit work, academic teaching or a `blue sky` thinking projects, people  of all sorts can become dramatically re-energised and refocused.
Of course, as any entrepreneur battling to keep their business afloat will attest, the ability to self-motivate in this respect is critical and essential to identify in people selection.  But the impact of self-motivation alone can be limited if company culture, structure, and growth potential don't support it.