Well-managed chaos and organizational redundancy are both core components of a KM system and both are empirically verified to create sustainable and superior performance and advantage (Kloviene & Gimzauskiene, 2008; Zairi & Al-Mashari, 2005; Nonaka & Nishiguchi, 2001).  As it relates to creating new knowledge and utilizing existing knowledge, creative chaos contributes to an organization’s ability to achieve peak performance demonstrated through increased innovation in the form of products, services, and customer-client delivery. A key follow-on question to ask during the strategy formulation phase is “Is our system designed to exploit opportunities within our market in the form of enhanced products, services, or delivery?  This is an exhaustive question to be asked of all key stakeholders and is not confined within the C-level suite.  The input should be robust and measurable accompanied by defined expectations.  As an example, do you expect to reduce R&D time-to-market, increase patents, develop proprietary systems or products, and create strategic alliances and joint ventures?  Will leadership support a “fail-to-success” philosophy or is the margin for error slim?  How will internalization of processes be expedited?  How will you reward success and transparency?  What processes are in place – embedded within your KM infrastructure that rewards the sharing of knowledge?  Here are 4 key ways in which you can stretch your KM strategy and create intentional chaos:

1. Implement chaos with pre-determined objectives.  The opportunities are only confined by your objectives.  For example, how will you leverage your KM infrastructure in response to competitor entering the market with identical product or service delivered more efficiently than you?  What about new legislation recently enacted that has a direct impact on cost of service or product?  

2. Look for requisite variety.  Requisite variety is nothing more than implementing processes that can be quickly learned and duplicated.  Here is where you look for efficiencies from your workforce so that response to threats are addressed quickly with minimial impact on quality, service support, and customer experience – as a matter of fact, it may ideally be enhanced.  Here, you will evaluate your organization’s existing knowledge base and perhaps develop new bodies of knowledge.  This step tests your organizational culture and if you consider yourself a learning organization, it will test just how effective your organizational “university” can teach and implement skills when it counts most.

3. Evaluate organizational and individual performance.  At the conclusion of your “chaos event,” an assessment of learning, and individual and organizational feedback should be provided.  Don’t let your organization and your workforce guess at the outcome.  Develop a well-orchestrated communications plan with a key goal of allowing your team to recognize the connection between effort and benefit.  Each organization will do this differently.  If you are a young firm, you may want to project savings, revenue growth, and on-going capital requirements.  For more stable, mature companies, the chaos may actually be carried out until a defined point in your financial reporting to allow for quantifiable data and sound conclusions to be formulated.  However, it is important to remember that the shorter the measurement and time frame of your implemented chaos, the more likely you will not adequately capture any sufficient return on investments.  Avoid the trap of trying to measure ROI to quickly while balancing a realistic time for payback consistent with your organizational capacity.

4. Capture and implement new knowledge created.  The feedback cycle loop is where the chaos really counts.  The point of learning is to either discard existing knowledge or to create a unique body/subset of knowledge that did not previously exist.  In the case of organizational learning, your knowledge capture processes and supporting systems ideally capture knowledge that links to service, product, and customer-experience for the better, creating an advantage over your competitors or having a measurable impact on your organization’s readiness level.

Ever since Senge’s The Fifth Discipline was introduced, the concept of knowledge management and more specifically, the learning organization has fluctuated between passing organizational fancy to bona fide organizational practice.  Organizations that view KM as a bona fide organizational practice continually ask themselves, “Knowledge for what?”  The detailed answer is specific to your organization, but the short answer is this: Knowledge to improve product and service innovation while enhancing customer-client delivery.  You have to carry this point with you in order to elevate your KM strategy to its rightful place, which I argue is dead-center of your long-standing organizational initiatives.   So go out and create some chaos and clarify the confusion.  It may be just what your organization needs to survive and thrive.

Additional Reading/References:

Austin, M. J. (2008). Strategies for transforming human service organizations into     learning organizations: Knowledge management and the transfer of learning.  Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, Vol. 5(3-4).

Kloviene, L., & Gimzauskiene, E. (2008). The role of institutional factors on changes of performance measurement system.  Economics & Management, 49.

Nonaka, I., & Nishiguchi, T. (Eds.). (2001). Knowledge emergence: Social, technical, 
and evolutionary dimensions of knowledge creation. Oxford: Oxford University 
Press.

Zairi, M., & Al-Mashari, M. (2005). Developing a sustainable culture of innovation management: A prescriptive approach.  Knowledge & Process Management, 12(3), 190-202. doi:10.1002/kpm.229.

To put it straight-forward: Workplace diversity is a complex, contemporary organizational challenge that continues to be the source of misinformation, misguided perception, and uneven research findings (Van De Ven, Rogers, Bechara, Kangyong, 2007; Jayne & Dipboye, 2004). Business leaders, government employees, mid-level practitioners, non-profit members, and even the business start-up owner all have justified questions concerning the morale value, and business utility of workplace diversity. The question no matter how stated, simply boils down to “What is the business value and potential benefit of workplace diversity?”   

Six key points of consideration are hereby presented:   

Point 1 – There is a tendency to equate demographic diversity with federal equal opportunity and affirmative action laws.  This is done in error because of research and organizational initiatives that link the concept of diversity with federal equal opportunity and affirmative action laws.  This error leads to resistance and reinforcement of stereotypes, having a reverse, unintended consequence on justifying the business need for diversity.  

Point 2 – Most workplace diversity initiatives consider only demographic components of diversity.  In considering only the demographic aspects of diversity, organizations do not go far enough.  As a matter of fact, organizations have in many cases only increased the likelihood that any diversity business case and subsequent initiative will be met with resistance.

Point 3 – Cognitive Diversity along with the business need is the root starting point when exploring the organizational benefit of diversity.  Cognitive Diversity, as I define it, is the observed and unobserved attributes that distinguish individuals and their accompanying value and belief system.  Of course there are varying views of Cognitive Diversity; yet, the properties of this definition allow us to include both the demographic components, and beliefs and attitudes components of diversity.    

Point 4: Workplace diversity must be centered on a business need (perceived threat, rare opportunity, or a combination of the two).  The moral case as unfortunate as it may sound is not enough.  Research shows that organizations that succeed at diversity base it on sound business considerations such as entrance or expansion within a market segment, product and services aimed toward diverse segments of the marketplace, exploitation of unexpected demand (or potential for demand) in an untapped or under-performing market (Note: Under-performing in the sense that demand for product or service was not foreseen; yet is empirically proven to show consideration for increase “presence”).

Point 5: Not all organizations should pursue diversity, especially based upon demographic consideration.  Diversity should not be pursued (despite what many tell you) to correct moral wrongs or to “reflect society.”   There are laws (both passed and under consideration) and other causes that serve such purposes.  As for “reflecting society;” your market may only represent a unique, defined niche of our collective society and any efforts to “represent society” will be viewed as insincere or not justifiable if your products and services appeal only to specific segments of the marketplace. 

Point 6:  If organizational diversity initiatives are pursued, it is essential to focus more on cognitive diversity vice the demographic components of diversity.  Highlighting differences, based on research and experience of organizations that pursue diversity (successful and otherwise), show that when demographic understanding is sought, the inverse happens – more confusion and increased hostility often results (Van de Ven, Rogers, & Kangyong, 2008; Jayne & Dipboye, 2004).  Furthermore, appreciation of demographic diversity naturally results when diversity is pursued at the deeper, cognitive level.   

 So what are the benefits of diversity if the business case warrants worthy of pursuit?  There is no shortage of benefits, if your organizational business case (considering the above) is conducted with rigor.  Some of the benefits of workplace diversity may include:

Goodwill of the Community. If diverse segments of your customer base are diverse and your organization reflects this diversity, your efforts will not go unnoticed. 

Potential increase in earnings and profitability.  Directly related to the above benefit, customers show appreciation represented via “buying power” and increased sales.  Quite simply: They buy more from you and less from your competitors. 

Increase readiness.  If you are a government organization, diversity efforts are appreciated through increased contribution or increased willingness to join your organization or cause. 

Outreach into potential talent pools.  With increased outreach and appreciation of diversity, you have increased individuals looking to contribute their talents to your organization.  If competitive advantage is embedded within human capital, which I argue this is so, than deeper, richer pools of talent with unique ideas and perspectives will enable you to leverage this diversity – resulting in, ideally, innovative products and services delivered faster and better than your competitors – for the foreseeable future. 

References/Further Reading

Jayne, M., & Dipboye, R. (2004). Leveraging diversity to improve business performance: Research findings and recommendations for organizations. Human Resource Management, 43(4), 409-424.

Van de Ven, A., Rogers, R., Bechara, J., & Kangyong, S. (2008). Organizational diversity, integration and performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29 (3), 335-354. doi:10.1002/job.511.

Perhaps your organization is being impacted by one of these factors, but an assumption is that a combination of these factors is having an impact on  your company.  It is during these times that ambiguity increases despite well-intentioned efforts to prevent otherwise.  One of the things that we as leaders need to focus our efforts (both individually and collectively) is on continuous communication and feedback. 

The danger of organizational ambiguity can have profound impacts, which  contribute to the factors mentioned earlier and taken together result in organizational politics.  Organizational politics itself manifests within our employees in the form of  stress, intentional and unintentional discrimination, and at the extreme, turnover. 

Thus feedback should consider multiple formats addressing areas to include employee performance, organizational direction-visioning, and business goals.  Your key objective as a leader is to maintain or improve performance so that your organization maintains or ideally improves effectiveness and its ability to  accomplish its organizational objectives.  Presented below are three ways to enhance feedback and create an open-feedback culture that ideally will increase morale, diminish the impact of organizational politics, and contribute to increased profitability, readiness, and affiliation with organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs):

1.  Ensure employees have access to relevant information regarding their performance.  This includes, but certainly not limited to individual efforts within the context of accomplishing organization, unit, division and department objectives.  With this access, senor leaders, managers, and supervisors should encourage open dialogue on not only the importance of the job, but how an employee’s job performance can improve at the individual level and mapping the linkage to organizational performance. 

2.  Provide informal and formal feedback outside of performance appraisal interviews.  As I persistently state within blogs, lectures, round tables, etc. is that performance discussions should not be limited to appraisal feedback sessions.  When you, as a leader, take the time to discuss employees’ performance in settings outside of performance appraisal review sessions and interviews, you are increasing trust-building and decreasing the impact of perceived organizational politics.  

3.  Discuss importance of job performance, teamwork, and feedback as it relates to desired OCB.  Integrate what your organization stands for as often as possible.  Your goal is to impact the subconscious work efforts of employees to align their behavior with organizational goals – that is always the number one objective.  Once your employees understand how their work behavior/performance outcome contributes to the organization’s ability to accomplish its objective, you have again decreased ambiguity and set a clear standard of performance. 

In the end, you, as a leader, must exercise the behavior and activities associated with transformational leadership during difficult times.  These are difficult times at some level and through your consideration of employees’ perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes as it relates to their job, job performance, job accomplishment, and job security, you will go a long way in enhancing organizational performance through increased productivity  and morale while at the same time create an atmosphere conducive to feedback, information sharing, and building trust.

“Ray doesn’t know business.  He doesn’t know the business I am trying to build.  He is one of those HR types that runs background checks and specializes in recruiting.  But he knows nothing about shipping, distribution, required freight costs and packaging.  Let’s not even talk about working with suppliers.” 

I nearly fell out of my chair and I looked at my friend who just stared at me as to say, “What is with you?”  Breaking the silence, I asked him, “Did you catch that?”  Returning my stare with a matter-of-fact smile, he stated, “Yeah, that’s the perception of HR on my job.” 

But for me it wasn’t that simple.  There stood two guys that had a vision of starting a company; the shingle based contracting business was only the beginning.  Yet even more surprising, they expressed an opinion of my passion and livelihood that is shared by perhaps many others – more than I (or we) probably like to admit. 

That casual comment has been on my mind now for almost two weeks with the words, “Ray doesn’t know the business” echoing in my head.  A statement so easily accepted by my friend that he barely even acknowledged that the statement had been made.  There I was with an undefined feeling that could only be described as a mixture of fury, embarrassment, and determination.  The question of ”What am I and my fellow HR professionals doing to change this perception?” looped in my conscience; loops in my conscience.   

I began to reflect on my conversations over the previous month with my fellow HR professionals searching for validation (or misguided perception) over the statement that the contractor had made. It also brought me back to the present and the topic of the day for HR: The strategic role of HR. 

We talk about it.

I support some of the practical thoughts and applaud the organizations and leaders that have found a strategic and practical solution that focuses on the business outcomes of their organizations.  However, I must admit, we still have work to do to change the perception (and reality) that HR is viewed as transactional back office work – by many and perhaps the majority of our business peers; we really don’t know – at least I have found no compelling study to convince me one way or the other. 

With all our talk of succession planning, talent management, organizational development, and a framework that contributes directly to our organization’s strategic goals and objectives, more often than not, when I dig deeper looking (and hoping) for my peers to state clearly a business case – they cannot.  Instead I hear (at best) discussion of management methodologies that are detached from the actual growth (or survival) of the companies in which they work. 

I search (sometimes in desperation) for someone to tell me the costs and financial impact to the organization’s bottom-line when employees are not properly trained in the field.  Or the horizontal-vertical misalignment that results when “key drivers” are not properly isolated or measured, directly or indirectly, to business performance (profitability or readiness).  Or why Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are even developed from a overarching business perspective. 

For the fact of the matter is that discovering, developing, and transforming HR into a strategic driver within organizations is hard work.  It’s important work.  It must be done for the sake of our “role” in the organizations and in many cases our organization’s survival. And to be honest: We will not convince many – more than I care to even predict.  But we will convince several: The forward thinking HR-centric firms or up-and-coming organizations that realize that human capital alignment is at the center of the brush with HR professionals kneeling at the source with match in hand ready to ignite the flame.  I will even count victory for the contractors discussing business growth as they work on growing their new businesses.  Heck, I will turn flips when the social entrepreneur who is finding some success in her homeoffice discuss the importance of having an effective HR framework for her business.

So who takes the lead: We do!  And it starts with an opening of Pandora’s box.  It continues with a quest to learn the value-creating process of delivering our organization’s products and services to the workplace.  It requires a keen understanding of how business works up-and-down, end-to-end. It will require a keen insight into how HR contributes to organizational branding, operational processes, salesforce readiness, and R&D innovation.

We must make it happen; we must look to the day when we hear – regulary:   “Ray is all about business and is instrumental to our business success.”

And it must flow every so easily – as a matter of fact.

For example, one executive stated that he needed skill development/technical training.  My questions to him were How much was the training going to cost?  What kind of training (specifically) was needed?  And, How did would he know that training being provided was effective?  In particular, what led him and the organization to come to the conclusion that  more training was needed:  Was it market position, defect rate, employee satisfaction feedback, customer satisfaction feedback, accident rates, or lost time?  Was it a combination of all of these measures – or did you even measure at all?

The second executive stated to me that he needed to have his particular SBU performance on par with the other SBU.  He also stated that because his product/service line was new that he was under much scrutiny.  My questions continued.  How do you know that the other SBU has it right? How is your SBU performing among industry competitors (locally, nationally, internationally)?  When do you know (or will you know?) you have gotten to where you need to be when two different markets are being served?

Finally, the last executive I spoke with stated that he wanted to “really go after” a chosen management methodology.  My questions continued: What is so important about this specific methodology? What is the resistance?  What incremental yard posts/milestones are in place to let you know that change is being captured and that the change management process accompanying the methodology implementation is taking hold?  What is so important about this methodology – is it growth based or improvement based?  Is it focused on ROA or revenue based that facilitates time-to-market and market penetration?

The final conclusion that I drew was that this organization had to define just what they were after.  Between talks of continuous improvement, training, and top-line growth strategies, I could not get a single consistent theme.  Now this does not take away from any of the professionals that I spoke with that day.  They are, I assume, talented individuals with a track record of success.  However, my point is that for there to be any improvement at all you have to clearly identify what you are going for else any improvement will do and little will have changed in what you are going after.  It is important for you, as a business and/or HR professional to see through the clouds of ambitious (and often competing goals), agendas that are contradictory, and measures that are consistent with where your organization wants to be positioned (are top line measures driven by top line enablers – drivers).  The list goes on.

Unfortunately, many professionals like to storm through strategy and business planning sessions to get back to work only to get back on the same path to nowhere.  It is up to you to prepare your peers and managers for the long path ahead by applying the needed focus required for the journey your organization wants to go after?

You want the chance to contribute to strategic growth and provide value – this is your chance and they exist in almost all organizations.  Go for it and share your story here.

In addition to what we are getting right, there are businesses that KNOW that a key differentiator from a good business (or a business at all) to a great business is to recognize, embrace, and implement key effective HR practices – that directly contribute to the bottom line.

Furthermore, businesses both large and small, make it point to focus on the bottom-line contributions that HR brings.  HR Magazine (September 2006) states that “Small businesses that invest in formal employee selection, management and retention strategies see direct, quantifiable results on the bottom line.” This insightful article concludes with a powerful quote by Christopher Collins, associate professor at Cornell University and conductor of the study: “. . . we’ve proven that specific human resources strategies have a meaningful, and statistically significant impact on small business financial performance.”

One of my favorite works, “The HR Scorecard” (Becker, Huselid, Ulrich) – the almost timeless classic – unearth findings still relevant today, seven years after its publication.  This formal study provided a framework for companies to implement bottom line HR strategies by highlighting the studied companies financial performance (those that got it right and those that didn’t), making the case for implementing the right mix and relevant HR strategies, which have proven to play an invaluable role in their financial success.

So the question in my mind is not, “Will HR find its way?” Or, “Will HR finally get it right”.  Nor should the HR professional, in my opinion,  continue to question what is more cliche than true.  The fact is that we are valued business partners; the organizations that get it right in terms of financial performance and long-term business success prove to us that we are getting it right.   We, as HR professionals, and the accompanying-relevant strategies that we bring to the table are entrenched in the fabric of the most successful companies, both large and small.  The question (or statement, depending on how it’s vocalized) is: “Does YOUR organization value the role of HR?”  The follow-on question I have for you is: “What are YOU doing to ensure that this continues (or starts) to be the case.

Various tools (to include Web 2.0) are enablers, which allow HR professionals to share best practices and give informal case studies on what is working (or not working) for their organizations.  It is now common wisdom that strategic (and functional) success comes in the form of an effective HR structure, aligned within your organization’s strategic framework.  If your HR practices point toward improving only HR effectiveness, can you blame your organization for not listening?  However, if you point to the specific benefit that your organization derives in a key business, bottom line method then backs straighten, conversation-dialogue takes place, executable plans are developed, and our prized and loved profession participates in key business activities to include formulating, communication, and executing our relevant roles within the larger, overall business strategy – if not, than it’s not the function; it’s the culture of your organization and if you haven’t made your case by now within it . . .competence, role-focus, openness should come to mind.

So instead of laying out “guidelines” and “what-to-do”, let me say what we’re doing right (what-to-continue to-do):

1) Continue to build upon the HR infrastructure and framework that you have tirelessly worked on.  That framework you’re building upon is consistently answering the questions that include “What metrics and measures provide the necessary analytic/data that drive key business decisions?”

2) Continue making the case for workforce planning and development.  If there is a business outcome that links to workforce planning, continue making your case, even if it sounds redundant.  Believe me, your counterparts don’t have a problem in making a consistent and oft repeated case.

3) Continue to be prepared by having expert insight into various scenarios on business decisions/proposals.  We need to continue to have the impact, trade-offs, pros and cons of scenarios that face our organizations in both the short and long-terms.  This scenario-based planning can be directly related to our function, such as the impact of hiring freezes, implementing-offering “voluntary turnover” packages/incentives, revising sourcing strategies, or actively recruiting in local or national labor markets.  Or the insight can be indirect such as decisions to expand product lines, expand (or contract) R&D, prepare for divestment of business unit/line, etc.  Whatever the scenario or proposed action – continue to be prepared.

4) Continue to communicate as a key change agent.  Even organizations where change occurs on a more slow-paced scale (read incrementally) are experiencing change.  Continue to embrace your role as an invaluable agent of change.  Continue to drive the relevant messages through your organization while pushing the communication up (feedback), pushing the communication down (objectives, goals, policies, etc.), and spreading it all around (key internal/external stakeholders).

5) Finally, continue to focus on service delivery.  Whether you are making relevant and smart use of enabling technologies such as ERP, self-service applications-software, or SaaS, your ability to continue to focus on delivery of HR services are and will remain critical.  Keep it up!  These enabling, technological tools will continue to grow as a whole and mature individually.

So HR professionals, give yourself credit.  For every argument you hear that we are not doing enough or we are missing the boat yet again, realize that (a) our profession has made considerable in-roads since the heyday of introduction (early 20th century and our days of being the “Personnel Department”); (b) the most effective companies get it – it’s not always about you – sometimes it’s actually the perception of your function or the wiliness for your company to realize the valuable role HR plays and contributes to business success (and survival), and (c) you are the reason that we are gaining interest and have become a very creditable profession – because you have demonstrated the ability to show inside and outside  your organization, that HR is a critical business function and deserves credit.

Anytime you doubt anything in this post, I want you to ask yourself? “What other profession do I want to be a part of?”

Is HR the answer?

I thought so.

The complexities of managing this emerging, dynamic workforce and the accompanying labor pool are the diverse needs and aspirations of the people behind the numbers.  I predict that many will find happiness in their new roles and will want to grow with your organization.  Others are already working on consulting projects and/or planning new businesses during their spare time.  There will be others that will try to find happiness in both worlds (with your organization and on their own).  The result will be something more complex than just managing across generations and inherent skill sets; it will mean finding the right plan and approach down to the individual level.

We will witness $80K – $100K professionals “bump” down in pay to $12.00 an hour in non-exempt jobs.  They will be working for a young professional manager that may possess less education, credentials, and experience, but will have to be managed nonetheless.  The challenge in this example is two-fold: What are the goals and aspirations of the individual and just how is your workforce equipped to deal with these employees?

Just as complex, there will be “survival employees” (for lack of a better term for now), that will find pleasure and perhaps discover a “second wind” in their new career/job.  Why?!  Because some of these employees will enjoy the challenge of starting again and moving into roles with considerable impact in the future.  Thus the question:  What does your succession and career development plans have “mapped” for such a scenario?

It doesn’t end there.  You will witness “survival” employees that will bring their egos with them.  Perhaps being accustomed to dealing with what they consider peers – How will your organizational structure respond to an aggressive employee that brought their ego with them – AND – may be a productive employee in one regard, but present challenges in another as they seek to reclaim a life that has since passed (at least in the interim)?

I could go on-and-on about the challenges that HR and other organizational leaders will face: These challenges will include professionals coming out of functional roles that they may have worked in for ten years or greater and adjusting their skill-sets and talents to roles that may require greater technical competence and less managerial skills in the short term.  How is your organization prepared to deal with these employees?

The answer may be in what I call Succession-Career Planning 2.0 and take my word, it will not be a handful of employees, but millions of people when all is said and done.  The challenge for all business professionals in all sectors is to be prepared to welcome these employees, leverage their talents consistent with strategic and tactical objectives, and assess individual needs consistent with organizational requirements.  Sounds easy?!  It will be one of the greatest challenges we will face as HR professionals.  And if you think succession planning is lip service now and are frustrated by leadership’s casual interest in the concept – just wait.  It will be even more challenging and the result may result in lost productivity, under-utilized talent, decreased (or increased) morale, increased (or decreased) cost per-hire, and training challenges.

Your ‘New Economy Survival Employee’ in many cases is going to want to set the world on fire – perhaps.  In other cases, he or she may just be along for the ride looking for something new.  Now is not the time to gloss over the fact, but to plan now for the long-term impact this may have on your organization.  This subject of course is worthy of it’s own work and I am confident that in addition to myself, many other business professionals and HR researchers, consultants, and professionals will write works, observe/share best practices, and excite leadership with the perils and possibilities that will come.  I, for one, am researching and interviewing both employees and leadership that are experiencing this – so more to follow.  However, here are some quick things to think about (and perhaps act upon) now in this new order:

1) Evaluate your recruiting function: Because we find ourselves in a “new world order” operating under “old economy” rules, many competent professionals whose talents, skills, abilities, and competencies will be left out.  On the other side (and extreme), there will be professionals that possess impressive professional backgrounds and credentials, eager to work.

2) Plan for the Career Ladder:  Even if you think the “survival employee” may only be with your company in the short run as he or she gets “back on their feet;” my prediction is that many of these employees will see a challenge.  What are your plans for a highly competent professional that takes a “survival job,” in the short term?  Are you poised to offer a career path?  Is the career path realistic?  Can you engage this hire, so that they see the value in both the short and long-term?

3) Prepare for the Generational-Economic Cross Divide:  Here is where your college intern turn manager and/or your young superstar is managing, in greater numbers, older and accomplished professionals.  What leadership skills are you equipping your young leaders with, so that they are “set up for success?”  How will they handle the new, former superstar that not only may be looking at their supervisor’s job, but beyond.  It’s a common occurrence that will become more common and your young leaders must be able to deal with these employees that will come in greater numbers – and will be hired.

4) Drilling-Down Succession Planning:  The biggest weakness and challenges of succession planning, in my opinion is that not only is it not executed near the levels as we are fascinated with the concept, but it does not go deep enough.  Your new, former high-success/high power superstar, entry-level “survival employee” is going to want a road map – especially if they like their jobs.  The competitive nature and stability in which they seek from their career/job will force you (hopefully) to not only “shore-up” your succession planning, but perhaps go-deeper into the organization to find your next high-pos.

5) Organizational Culture Meet Organizational Discovery.  Have your leadership and front-line supervisors discuss the possibilities for the organization in both the short and long-term for the “survival employee.”  What will be the new perception of not only an older employee – the ground work and law stands as a guide in that case – but, for the older, experienced and highly credential employee within your organization?  Will there be a supportive, firm, stable, inclusive environment in which the “survival employee” can perform?  How about an employee that meets all the aforementioned criteria and is perhaps moving from a middle marketing position to entry-level/mid-level, non-managerial administrative support position?

In the end, the challenges and opportunities, as previously mentioned, are too great for a single post.  Yet, it is something that we should think about.  Many already know that I view the current concept of Talent Management and the accompanying Succession Planning with a slight distaste because in the end, it does not go far or deep enough. So however you want to term it is not the issue – just how far you will go to take advantage of the new workforce that will be left as a result of the economic fallout (or crises if you’re real doom and gloom) should start with you.

Don’t blink.

Considering all the factors above, my argument-opinion is simple: Performance Reviews-Appraisals are not your enemy.  The performance review-appraisal process cannot and should not become the scapegoat reason for delaying performance feedback nor management’s resistance to utilizing it as a legitimate performance management tool.

Having read opinions that stretch across the spectrum on this issue, the point is that the primary issue with performance reviews/appraisals is the planning that goes behind the process.  The performance review-performance appraisal process, as a component of performance management, should be an essential ingredient in setting and managing expectations within your organization; and, if we, as HR-Business leaders, think that condemning the process is “an out” then my message is ” that dog won’t hunt.”  Such protests are merely excuses to not fully develop and refine the process, so the easy out becomes to blame the tools utilized versus the more accurate inability to employ a robust and effective performance management system.

So the question becomes, “How can we make it better?”  How can we employ our organization’s performance review-performance appraisal process in a method that works consistently and receives the creditability needed to contribute to individual development and delivery of organizational goals and objectives.  Here are some quick – very quick – ways to make it work:

1) Know the desired outcome of the incumbent position.  When we think of performance appraisals,  many managers quickly think, “How will my employees stack against each other?”  However, you must remember that the role of the performance appraisal is to measure the incumbent’s performance against defined outcomes measured carefully against developed performance standards,  position objectives, and the job analysis product the job description, captured by senior managers/leaders and job analysis functional specialists – clinical psychologists, during the workforce planning process.  The standards set forth in performance reviews-appraisals are, but should not be measured against a nominal employee that exceeds the standard(s) – at least, arguably, initially.  In essence: Performance standards are initially defined during the larger strategic planning-mapping process (again, workforce planning) and/or doing scheduled reviews – ideally.

2) Capture concrete performance objectives and consistently communicate these objectives to employees.  One of the (justified) continued complaints against HR is lack of concrete measurements and performance objectives despite all the evidence that demonstrates increased value creation when concrete performance and properly aligned objectives are defined and executed upon. The lack of clearly defined performance objectives are not confined to HR.  Line managers, senior leadership and HR must share in the responsibility and work in answering the question, “Just what constitutes non-satisfactory, satisfactory, and superior performance?”  Capturing specific job performance measurements within the performance appraisal itself may work; however, it is not necessary and may make your forms dated.  Instead, ensure that job incumbents know the definition of performance success (or failure) and when objectives are considered met in quantifiable language supplemented by specific work instances ((I personally recommend that time consistent job performance measurements be captured and supplemented by current (and flexible) positional performance objective criteria defined during through the workforce planning and/or workforce review processes) .  However captured, ensure that objective measures are communicated consistently to your workforce down to the individual level with formal-informal milestones suggested below.

3) Offset compensation performance measures with ethical performance measures.  The most common example of this is of course the banking and financial industries and how conflict often occurs when up-sales are not being made, loans are not being processed, or insurance products are not being sold.  However, to blame this on performance measures is not taking responsibility for adequately developing the very thing being complained about.  Performance measures tied to compensation such as merit or incentive pay, should have an ethical dimension to the performance factor, reminding employees that their ability to meet or exceed performance goals is not to be done at the expense of legal requirements and ethical considerations.  Though some advocate that incentive pay, merit pay, gain-sharing, etc.  should not be attached to performance standards, this misses the point that the linkage of the two are often necessary to adequately measure performance. The decision rests with senior leadership; the context through with such goals are interpreted are translated via the organization’s culture.  In other words: If your organization makes the decision to include monetary product-service levels within performance standards, your cultural tone will define at what lengths employees will take to achieve those standards, ethically and legally.

4) Remember that performance-appraisal reviews are a part of the process and not the process.  Here is where many managers lose sight of knowing the purpose of performance appraisals.  Performance appraisals are one of the tools at management disposal within the larger (and hopefully well defined) performance management process.  If you’re waiting until the six- and twelve month points to let employees know where they stand in meeting performance objectives then the performance appraisal nor the employee are your enemy – you are.  It is your role as an HR-Business leader to ensure that your professional peers and subordinates understand that High Performance Work Systems – in which HR processes play a critical role – includes a well-executed performance management process that is  consistently communicated, and that employee performance management is an on-going process. One of the most effective ways to accomplish this is to provide performance feedback that exceeds organizational requirements.  Thus if there is an annual/semi-annual formal performance review process, you should look and consider a quarterly feedback process that not only comments on performance, but shows how the job incumbent-employee can improve or sustain required performance.

5) Shared goal-setting – the often forgotten, proven benchmark. As professionals we read and may even directly observe-participate in effective goal setting against developed performance objectives; however, we often forget the effectiveness of accomplishing this in a systematic way – perhaps it is missing within the guidelines of managing the performance management process. However, when employees are empowered to help shape the goals that contribute directly to job requirements and performance objectives, the increased acceptance and legitimacy of the performance review process is increase.

There are supplementary measures and techniques individual to organizations that have proven effective.  Just remember what works for one organization, may not work for your organization.  The debate continues and will continue on the most effective among these techniques, which include separating salary discussion from performance reviews, providing peer-incumbent input “accomplishments” to formal performance reviews, and validating performance reviews through a two-party formal review process that often includes the direct supervisor and work-team-functional supervisor (as one example).  In  the end, it is my belief that all these may prove effective to a specific organization; however, are not effective for all organizations.  And that’s my key point: Your performance review-appraisal process must be consistent with your organizational culture.  If you have an open culture with free-flowing communication and a team-based atmosphere then peer validation and accomplishments may be warranted.  In contrast, matrix organizations and/or organizations where direct reports are separated geographically and/or direct observation is limited by the direct supervisor then the two-party review process may be warranted.  Is it fair to rank?  The answer to that question resides within your organization, your organizational culture, your performance criteria, and your process in which you promote and retain employees.

In conclusion, remember know this: The performance-appraisal review is not the problem (nor your enemy or scapegoat).  The problem is in the proper and relevant design, delivery, management, and execution within the larger context of your organizational performance management process that is the problem and that’ something and that’s something you can control.

Any middle-ground has no significant impact.  Many of us can personally attest to this research in the real world as  organizations either put the thumb on us as merely daily tacticians or those that let us flourish.  Here is a time for us to flourish. Before revealing the Five Activities that we, as HR professionals, should be considering-undertaking, I want to share this observation:  A serious lack of judgment, conscious or not, is occurring each and every day amongst us as HR professionals that has potential dire consequences (or at least significant) to our organizations, which can set-up our organizations (and ourselves) up for failure – in some areas. As reported in the January issues of HRMag, EEOC complaints are up, training budgets are down, and complaints will be thrown our way from every angle from recruiting to talent management to outplacement and employee assistance.  These complaints will continue to rise in my view for a couple of compelling reasons: Displaced professionals are frustrated; organizations are forced to deliver on service-product quality while in many cases reducing their workforces, and employees are tense, angry, and maybe feel guilty about surviving when family members are being laid off/”right-sized”.  Of course the phrase: “It’s that dang HR function!” should be ringing in your head, for it surely will come from the mouths of many.

What can we do during these times?  Here are 5 activities that I recommend:

1) Know the business strategy and short-term plans, and how HR impacts its functional counterparts in achieving the objectives of strategic-tactical (survival) planning.  Depending on your level in the organization, the depth of your access may be limited, but at the very least find out what you can.  The reason that this is so important is because this is where you can start to develop or refine your organizational HR goals and strategies to meet our current economic climate. And no matter the function, it is going to involve, in some way, the organizational workforce.  Your relevant access to the business short term-tactical and long-term strategic goals can insure that you remain abreast of the HR/organizational opportunities, threats, strengths, and weaknesses with a goal of being engaged and poised to answer: “What does this mean to our workforce?”  Be prepared to partner with all of your key functional counterparts.  Keep your thought process strategic, yet focused.  The end-result of this goal is to think about what it means to the existing and potential workforce.

2) Review Organizational Job Requirements/Job Description: I have “tweeted” this with my fellow HR professionals.  I sincerely believe that a good number of EEOC/AA/ADA lawsuits will originate because of unclear or irrelevant job descriptions that are not BFOQ for the organizational positions – a gap between KSAs required for the position versus an idealistic interpersonal candidate based upon personal perceptions and “wish list” skills.  The intentions are noble on the surface: Receive a qualified pool of applicants with an ideal skill set in a local labor market; however, the end result is going to be litigation in many cases – I can assure you.  What you can do is ensure that your line manager counterparts adhere to job requirements, so as not to be blindsided by frustrated employees/potential employees that will challenge the job requirements as being essential.  Do not think for one second that your organization will not be challenged during these challenging times.  Instead, expect it and be proactive.  The precedents of organizations that ignored this are of course beyond the scope of this post, but conduct your own research, reviewing SC,  CC, or even your own organization’s legal cases for those that ignored this activity at their own peril.

3) Review and Participate in Your Organization’s Outplacement/Employee Assistance Program Services.  Whether this is an internal function or outsourced, you need to take the time to participate or observe your organizational outplacement and employee assistance program services.  There is a flurry of HR legislation that is going unnoticed (or not being noticed enough) because our plates our full.  Ensure that transitioning employees are aware of legislation that impacts their benefits to include recent amendments do the FMLA and ADAAA.  Also insure that you (or the person you designate) personally observe these critical services as if you are receiving the benefit of the information provided.  Are job search strategies reflective of the latest trends?  Are you conducting robust mock job interviews?  Are employees aware of the hidden job market?  In addition, evaluate to see that information being provided reflect recent changes that have impacted benefits, for example HIPAA and COBRA.  Keep a keen eye on individuals that may fit the new broader definition of an individual with a “disability”.  Finally, what transition coping skills are your assistance and outplacement services providing?  Are alternatives to current career paths being discussed?  The list can go on-and-on, but you get my point.

4) Ensure that succession-replacement planning IS REALLY initiated and/or continues.  Succession planning is well understood in concept yet practiced very little in execution.  If there was ever a need to execute a robust and well-thought out succession plan, now is the time.  Succession planning is not about trying to make your plan fit in an HRIS requirements-delivery structure within COTS/SaaS modules.  It is about insuring your organization has a plan to develop internal talent to meet future HC requirements projected to deliver on strategic objectives – remember HRIS is the enabler not the driver.  That’s it.  It’s not as complicated as many make it out in theory.  Yet, it does involve work (serious work).  It requires that we know the business plan of our organization and take a hard look at our internal talent pool and formulate ways “to grow the workforce” to meet the requirements of our organization.  What I challenge each HR professional involved in this process to do (or at least think about) is – dig deeper than the top tier.  Our new economy will force people out of their comfort zone to stay competitive.  If we take a moment to unearth the benefits to our organizations by developing robust succession plans that reach deep into the organization, we build loyalty and create (or at least stabilize) buy-in.  When the workforce sees/feels/observes their organizations developing and nurturing their skill-set to meet organizational requirements – well, let’s just say there is enough empirical evidence to support the impact on productivity and reduction of involuntary turnover.

5) Review organizational training-development planning. We, as HR professionals, are well aware that a workforce reduction does not equate to sacrificing quality and customer service thus training and developing the workforce should still be at the top of your list, making the case for this common “HR Driver” to be put under thorough review.  Too many organizational leaders make the argument that fiscal disbursement will be focused on key activities and line managers (and us in our eagerness to ensure we are seen as “business oriented”), get to cutting without a through review of how the cuts will impact on the very thing we are trying to deliver in most cases – efficient and effective customer service and/or increased readiness to stakeholders.  The step to remember here is for us to measure the impact of a training reduction in quantifiable measures and costs.  If cutting a program outweighs the benefit of the training taking place, then it should be considered for discontinuation in the short term.  If however, the benefit of the training received outweighs the benefit of discontinuing training then the case must be made to senior leadership to possibly continue the training.  As obvious as this may sound, many of us do the tried and true method of cutting training across the board, often handicapping development and training activities that will see us through these lean times.  Yes, it requires work and does have to be stated within a business context, but this is one of our many exciting roles: To ensure that critical training is conducted in innovative, cost-effective methods despite (yet keenly aware) of the economic climate.  There are several innovative ways to deliver training that you keep that one may want to consider (again beyond the scope of this post).  A couple – I can’t help myself  on something this important – worth mentioning that can increase confidence and build buy-in: Appoint internal consultants to conduct training  where outsourcing may have occurred OR designate that core training be updated employing innovative collaboration tools (Wikipedia style) via peer platforming.  There are several ways to keep it cost effective, but on the table if need be. In the end, these activities are not all inclusive or exclusive.

The point of this post is to ensure that we are continually thinking from a business context, both in the short and long-term, about ways to increase our organizational effectiveness within the stark reality of our current economic climate .  Next, we must remain proactive and take the value to the organization vice our counterparts or supervisors requesting that we “show them the money.”  Take advantage of this challenging time to ensure that we, as HR professionals, continue to shine.

Of course I laughed it off and just thought that his analytical skill set and thought process just wanted black-and-white and binary rule set data that made it all digestible and easy for decision-making.  However, as I progress through subsequent assignments and conduct interviews and conversations with other business professionals and HR leaders, I have come to realize that he had a point.  Specifically, during one meeting, I sat and listened to a senior HR leader explain to me that the company’s goal was to “align the workforce to meet the strategic initiatives of strategic planning so that they could deliver on organizational objectives.”  I thought to myself – huh?  Are you not the face of senior leadership representing the most valued asset of the organization and that’s the answer you are providing?

Now don’t get me wrong.  There is nothing wrong with being able to communicate in contemporary, relevant, common language that can be shared with other professionals internal and external to the organization.  However, to explain to someone who is trying to get to ground truth (with concurrence) in such abstract terms leads to one conclusion: You have no idea what you are talking about.

Do you know what you are talking about?  Can you state in concrete terms what your organizational strategic goals are where it makes sense to anyone listing.  If you communicate like the example I just gave above, I will answer that question for you: You may know, but only you know that you may know.

Allow me to provide an example of concrete strategic objectives in plain language: “Our goal is to reduce involuntary turnover by 30% over the course of the next five years by improving our sourcing-recruiting functions, improve our talent management processes by leveraging our existing succession-replacement planning and improving our knowledge management capturing through the use of HRIM/S technology currently deployed to support the organization’s goal of shaping a workforce to sustain attrition due to retirement eligibility and improve time-to-market for emerging new product lines.”

So if it’s that easy, why don’t more HR professionals communicate in concrete terms?  Because in truth, it is not easy.  It requires us to get our hands dirty and plan the process at the strategic level, while ensuring that we “roll-up sleeves” directly or indirectly at the operational-tactical levels.  Furthermore, we often want to encompass as much as possible thinking that being too specific shows a lack of organizational depth.  Of course mind-mapping, project planning, and cause-and-effect diagramming is fun as we work in a conference room with plenty of water and coffee to keep us awake.  However, to go out and link into our organization’s line functions and know about front-line processes that impact our ability to deliver requires work (of a different sort).  This work is not as “glamorous” or may seem contradictory as we throw elbows at the oft-used phrase “seat at the table.”  As for trying to encompass everything you can to prevent from leaving anything out, here is the rule of any business initiative or goal in execution: If you cannot succinctly define it – it is not defined.

Is there any wonder why heads tilt to the side as you talk to mid-level management about the dashboard view of their divisions and departments when they can’t even get a quiet place to on-board and train their employees?  Is there any wonder why faces bleed with anger as you talk about ERP back-end migration strategies and incremental roll outs when they can’t even get the existing Passport inventory system to properly load data and ensure that accurate inventory arrives JIT?

So in the midst of all our “high level” talk and good intentions, our professional colleagues just want a system that works.  They want enabling technologies to settle, so that they can properly train their employees to use the system without having to worry about an upgrade that is looming around the corner.  Yeah, Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) sounds good in strategic planning sessions, but employees want to know, where is the custom data that they have grown accustomed too.  You are talking hibba-hobba.

It’s important when wearing your change management-change agent hat that you communicate to employees (to include managers and front-line personnel) in terms they understand, value, and relate.  For if you don’t, buy-in is not only hard, it may be a serious barrier to success for successful implementation.  Having worked on my share of change management initiatives, it is not an easy task to incorporate strategic level goals and objectives into concrete language that ties in relevant process; however, our creditability often rests on our ability to do just that.

Many professional may think that “it’s not that serious.”  But if you have been around a while, I want you to think about a couple of questions: How many change management initiatives, goals, processes, policies, etc. have you seen fail?  Now, out of the ones that failed, how many were due to a lack of enabling technology not being able to deliver and/or financial resources-resource allocation not being provided COMPARED TO employees not only not willing understanding, but able to understand (thus execute) and/or the lack of organizational buy-in.

It’s a costly mistake to understate the power of language and communication.