Allow me to present a story:  Once in a history not to distant, I was a supporting initiative project team leader and change management team member working on a fairly complex change management initiative.  This robust and aggressive inititiative involved the entire organization, its business units, core business functions, staff support functions,  and information systems.  Thus, in the organizational textbook sense of change management, it met the criteria of being both complex and essential to maintaining the advantage in the industry of which it was a part. 

The concept was Appreciative Inquiry (AI) and my core role during the exploration stages was to unearth practical utility prior to  implementation stages of supporting initiative projects.  The organizational leadership, rightfully, in my opinion, did not believe in abstract concepts unless empirical evidence supported cost and effort; in other words, could a quantitative and qualatative business case be built around workforce actions built into the operational and functional actions of employees. 

The resistance to the concept initially came from my inability to link AI (in this case) into observable actions.  And here is an important point: Professionals with whom I work usually have very little issue or challenge in developing and linking abstract entities and theoretical management concepts during the strategy planning and visioning phases.  However, there is a tendency to “fake it,” or at least hope someone will not notice when it comes to relating the concept to observable actions that can be empirically measured and assessed.  As it related to my experience,  the impression formed that AI was another fuzzy management concept with no practical utility.  It became a concept in which one accentuated the positive to perhaps reach states of the ideal working environment.  Bright (2009) states that a one-sided reception of AI hinders its organizational employment potential stating, “I am concerned that an understanding of Appreciate Inquiry as simply ‘a focus on the positive’ undermines its full potential to create sustainable change in organizations . . . researchers have helped us understand that organizations are most vibrant and alive when they embrace the tensions of the human condition” (p. 2).  My point quoting bring is that this can apply to most abstract organizational intervention (i.e. emotional intelligence, cognitive diversity, etc.)

Specific to my case, I felt that AI was more than just emotional and abstract strategic entity and intervention merely to be integrated with selected management methodologies such as performance management and its accompanying tools.  As related to AI, Bright (2009) points out the operational components of AI stating that AI “. . . refers to an increase in the value of capital. Operational appreciation usually refers to the value of financial assets.”  This was my intuitive “aha” moment that allowed the concept to gain traction.  When I approached AI from both connotations (the philosophical and operational), I not only received the necessary buy-in, I received support in the infamous stakeholder meetings in which every dollar toward project and their teams has to be accounted.  To put this in a tangible perspective, what I did was capture the ideal in theory and the practical in “real world” and linked those to the core functions, tasks, and outcomes to be achieved by the workforce – related to readiness, brand equity, profitability, and organizational citizenship.  As a result (and understand I am compressing for space sake), the mind-set shifted from “we are broken” to “we have done this before and we can do it again . . . even better . . . within the context we need to move forward.”  Again, this was intuitive at the time and have I had the benefit of additional experience and sound research, the learning curve may have not been so steep.

The lesson here: Abstract entities and notions must make sense from a business and organizational perspective.  My personal experiences tell me that until you link the concept to the concrete (what is real for the stakeholders, clients, workforce, etc.), organizational interventions, especially among senior level leaders, are merely theoretical rhetoric, which captivate scholars and consultants at the moment.  It is important to know the business and the concept. 

Further Reading/References:

Bright, D. (2009). Appreciative inquiry and positive organizational scholarship: A  philosophy of practice for turbulent times. OD Practitioner, 41(2), 2-7.

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.

But the bigger question is how prepared were you and your organization for the conditions we now find ourselves faced?  Many reacted fairly quickly through various tactics that included hiring “freezes”, carefully orchestrated down-sizing, furloughs, etc.   Perhaps the biggest lesson we learned as HR business professionals is that we are not immune to ensuring we have an effective, proactive risk management plan in place to decrease the impact of the unknown, while also ensuring we are prepared for events that have a high probability of occurring.  I am not going to get into probability or statistics, but the point is this: We must ensure that our HR risk management planning and implementation processes are vibrant and continuously adjusted minimizing the impact of unforeseen, high-risk, high-impact events.  Furthermore our HR risk management planning must effectively integrate with the overarching organizational risk management plan – a key component therein.

Yet risk management is not just for unforeseen ”disasters”, your risk management plan should also incorporate the optimistic – it is often the optimistic, macro events that leave your organization exposed – causing lost opportunities, decreased market share, or customer turnover.  Furthermore, we as HR business professionals must ensure that our risk management plan compliments our organizational threats and opportunities and not the reverse.  Here are some examples for you to consider – remember our task is to think (and act on) of the human capital-human resource impact from an organizational strategic perspective. 

1.  Impact of increased demand: Is your organization poised for an increase in demand or are all your plans considering a flat-line/zero-growth scenario forecast for the next few years?  How will your organization respond to additional manpower required to respond to increased demand?  Is the workforce trained and equipped to handle additional demand?   

2.  Impact of emergent competitor cutting into market share:  A hidden competitor emerges quickly with a product that has increased functionality or a well-rounded, responsive service offering.  You and your organization must respond.  From a human capital-workforce planning perspective what plan do you have in place?

3.  Business organization decides to divest or invest business unit/line of business:  Senior leadership is continuously asking (whether you are in the room or not): “Is this the business we should be in?” Or, “Is this a business we should consider?”  What is your plan for both scenarios?  What are the costs, change management, risk of failure for a proposed merger?  What is the downside and upside of executing a divestment/exit plan?   

4.  Brand Introduction/New Product Development (Early Green light):  There are times when acceleration of a product or a service offering/introduction may be required (See Point #2).   What contingencies does your strategic human capital-human resource risk management plan have in place for such a scenario?  We all know the reasons for accelerated introduction, but how many of us are really prepared?  Some questions to ask in formulating your HR risk management plan: Do we have the required skills on-hand (skill-set inventory)?  What changes/updates must be made within our recruiting efforts?  Is the workforce training and development plans sufficiently developed to ensure that the workforce within the line functions can support early introduction of the product/service offering?

5.  Increased/Decreased footprint in overseas/global market.  The joint venture migration is ahead of schedule, or on a not so optimistic note, there is a need to exit a market sooner than expected.  Have you engaged and developed an exit strategy that meets the organization’s accelerated growth plan or exit strategy?  Every time I think of this detail, I think back to Mr. T in Rocky 3 when he was asked what his back-up plan for beating Rocky was.  Mr. T famously replied, “Don’t need one.”  However, you do.  Ensure that you have considered and developed a plan for an increased or decreased presence in overseas/global markets.

These are just some of the business scenarios you should be thinking about when developing your HR risk management plan.  See, it’s easy to develop for contingencies when your contingencies fit in a neat box during a planned meeting that looks for highly probable-high impact scenarios.  But one thing our current business environment has taught us is that the only predictable event is the one for which we did not plan. 

Finally be strategic about your risk planning.  Ensure that your risk management plan has a top-down perspective and is not developed with what you hope happens or can best plan for from a functional perspective.  In other words, ensure that it aligns, but takes into consideration, that which is unseen/not forecast, or detours your organization for better or worse.  Your risk management plan should be proactive, supplement the organization’s risk management plan (supplementing line risk management planning where appropriate), and rigorously consider impact (both positive and negative).

As we move forward into the 21st century, we see leadership coming to the forefront once again. Much has changed, but much remains the same. True leaders may or may not be born (that’s an argument for a separate study), but traits are common in all great leaders. Some of the most common traits of great leaders are:

1) Humbleness
2) Courageous
3) Accessible
4) Decisive
5) Honorable
6) Committed
7) Focused
8) Thoughtful
9) Determined
10) Communicators

There are a couple of other traits that are desirable such as visionary and able to laugh at oneself, however, those are not necessary traits required in order to be a great leader. A great leader can be essential to a moment in time despite the setting rather in church, within government, or in the workplace.

Great leaders also are called upon at some of the most awkward moments – with leaders not so much picking the time, but the time picking the leader. Ask yourself as you go about your day – what would you do if you were called upon to lead? Let that soak in for a moment. The setting is not important- it can be the coach of the Little League baseball team, or it can be being selected as President of a small business; the question is what would you do? What do you think leadership is about? Reflect and think about all the leaders mentioned in this post and compare the leaders against the traits we mentioned. Observe some of the qualities found. Do you possess them? Or, do you believe the leadership is all about ego — thinking that if selected they will follow.

One of the hardest lessons I learned about leadership was when I was selected as a department head of a human resource-personnel department and found 150 people under my direct report and another 3,000 to support. Proud because at the time I was the most junior officer department head, I quickly learned that ego, directive, and blind ambition ARE NOT the traits of great leadership. I did not get the leadership challenge right (or even close to right) until being in the job for almost a year. I inherited a disgruntled department because I was replacing a very poplar department head to leaving a department that had no fewer than three going away parties for me upon my departure. Many tears shared and memories forever embedded in my mind. Not because I was so great, but because I finally recognized the greatness of others. The department was not about me; it was about the men and women that made up the department and the work they did in support of a fairly large organization. I figured it out, but it took a lot of soul-searching and reflection on my part to unlock the key to being an effective leader (their assessment not mine).

The point being is that the pathway to leadership is not easy – but it will be easier if you remember what being a leader is all about – and it is not about you!

“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.

1) Secure a Lawyer/Attorney: Ideally, you are going to be negotiating and securing clients with real businesses and real customers/clients.  In a perfect world, you will negotiate the requirements, define the project, and implement.  However, in the real-world there will be gray-areas regarding intellectual property ownership, process ownership, and disputes regarding service delivery.  You must get a lawyer that specializes in these matters.  Interview several, get creditable recommendations, and secure a lawyer.  If you are working on a shoe-string budget, work out reasonable payment plan and payment option, and stick to it.  No one likes to work for free and your attorney will work her heart out, but you must pay her.

2) Secure an Accountant: Many will venture into bookkeeping services if they keep financial records at all.  I will tell you right now that without a knowledgeable accountant on your team, you are putting your business in jeopardy.  Your accountant will provide such valuable advice and services that include the dangers of commingling fund/capital, capturing depreciation on office equipment, amortizing loans, writing down bad debt, capturing interest on loans, and many other valuable services.  Consistent with my advice on obtaining a lawyer, interview several accountants, work out a payment plan, and stick to it.

3) Trademark and Register Intellectual Property: Many will be tempted to go the cheap route and think that inserting “TM” and “R” symbols within unique business processes, concepts, slogans, graphics, etc. provide them common law ownership of intellectual property.  Don’t make it hard.  Register your intellectual property, unique processes, and systems.  Protect yourself.  Don’t get caught in ligation counting on common law or assumptions.  Protect your ideas, concepts, and property with a vengeance.  As a business owner that specializes in services, your intellectual property distinguishes you,  distinguishes your business, and offer a competitive advantage. Don’t put your business model at risk.

4) Review Your Financials Regularly:  As I share in interviews and in speaking engagements, it’s not your lack of expertise that will put you out of business, it’s the absence of running your business like a business that will put you out of business.  You must know where you stand financially at all times.  In addition to having an accountant, ensure that you keep your books (back-up or primary – your choice) and can pull up the financial state of your business at the click of a button.  Look for trends: Are you bleeding?  Are you profitable?  What services are making you money?  What services are you lagging?  Knowing your financials is equivalent to keeping tabs on your health.  You neglect it, your business will neglect you.

5) Know the Difference Between Staying Productive vs. Staying Busy: Here is where many new entrepreneurs get in trouble.  They proclaim their independence, develop business and marketing plans, and work on securing clients.  However, in most cases, the new entrepreneur rarely distinguishes between staying productive and staying busy.  Working on a website for 30 days is not productive.  You are not meeting with prospects that will become clients.  You are not working on requirements that will fulfill a client’s needs.  You are are in essence “marking time.”  Designing logos, going to print shops, and developing newsletters and business cards are important, but do not bring in the revenue – at least directly.  As a matter of fact, these activities may prevent you from making money because you may feel productive when in fact you are just staying busy.  You have to (no MUST) “beat the street,” schedule and meet with those interested in your services, and know how to distinguish “tire-kickers” from organizations  that are willing to utilize and pay for your services.  Don’t get caught into the mad cycle that spending 8-14 hours a day behind your computer is making you money.  You have value to add to organizations and your services are not free.  In other words: Your business has to make money.  You have to stay productive; you have to have paying clients.  Do not feel guilty that you are charging money for your valuable services.  As simple as that sounds, many new entrepreneurs just don’t get it.

All-and-all, many of you may cringe at my advice or assume that you can do workarounds.  However, and truthfully, you are an entrepreneur first if you decide to freelance, contract for services, and/or consult.  You have to think like an entrepreneur; act like an entrepreneur, and earn revenue like an entrepreneur.

Best of Luck!

On-boarding is real and though cost reductions have been made in many key HR areas, many organizations are finding it necessary to either implement or improve its existing on-boarding processes.  You have two arguably equal goals in the on-boarding process.

• Reduce the time to productivity
• Increase retention

That’s it.  It’s that simple and everything else either supports the two aforementioned goals or is background music (this includes the theoretical engagement and talent management arguments) .

With the aforementioned goals in mind, I wanted to provide you, my fellow HR professional, with my real-world experience on how you can bring your on-boarding program to life.  Prior to going into these tips, let me offer a piece of advice:  Many of you will try to emulate and design your program around “best-in-class” on-boarding programs.  Although this may be feasible and even necessary to gain your “organizational bearings,” it is important for you to take into consideration the unique needs and goals of your organization – just what is the end-game and supporting goals within the larger context of the goals mentioned earlier.  This is done by listening to your line-managers and asking for feedback.  An equally important source of information, when designing or improving your on-boarding program, will come from recent new hires and seasoned employees.

When I took over the on-boarding process for my organizational unit, I poured over exit data as well as new hire feedback that was offered via questionnaires, focus groups, and follow-up interviews.  Upon review of all the data there were common themes that reoccurred, forming the basic thesis and providing the foundation of what needed to be accomplished within our on-boarding process.  In my specific case, respondents felt that the on-boarding process was a “check-in-the-box” program offering little value in the long-run.  Second, respondents felt that the information that they were exposed to had little direct influence on their jobs-careers.  Third (and perhaps most interesting of note), respondents and recent new hires, on average, did not feel a strong sense of engagement after having completed the on-boarding process, and/or the program committed very little in the area of company loyalty – which again impacts the obtainment of the goals mentioned above.  And finally, respondents saw no correlation between the on-boarding program/process in reducing turnover and/or increasing their productivity and/or their willingness to contribute to the organizational mission and divisional-departmental goals and objectives.  Based upon the data reviews and evaluation, we had a huge challenge and the underlying conclusion was quite simply this: Our on-boarding program missed the mark.  Its very reason for existence was non-existent.  What follows below are the specific steps we took to improve our on-boarding program/process:

(1) Pushed Information to New Hire Upon Notification of Selection.: The on-boarding process traditionally starts once the new hire reports to your organization.  However, we pushed the envelope on this issue by starting orientation immediately upon notification of new hire date/report date (in the case of existing-transferring employees).  Access was given to Intranet resources and tasks were assigned/designed to be completed prior to “showing-up” for work.  This allowed the new hire to internalize valuable information, contribute in a tangible sense to the organization, and provide a glimpse into organizational culture.

(2) Mentor Assignments:  As soon as the new-hire is notified of their selection, he/she was also assigned a mentor.  This mentor communicated at defined intervals that matched and sometimes was included within organizational communications.  However, the mentor was also encouraged (read required) to communicate outside of traditional organizational channels.  This communication was not reduced to the writing of e-mails and letters, but also included the use of Web 2.0 tools and person-to-person meets.  Perhaps most important, the mentor had to meet a set of predefined standards.  Previously, mentors were thought to be last resort or light-duty candidates that line managers sought to make productive or more bluntly, push to the side.  However, mentors under the revised on-boarding process were the very best the division-departments had to offer.  Each mentor, prior to being assigned, was required to meet with the organizational head, myself (as HR Head), and Director of Operations if this was his/her initial assignment.  Performance appraisals-reviews were poured over and in short, this was viewed as a key ingredient of our success.

(3) Included Key Training Events.   Key technical and non-technical training events were include within the on-boarding process to a considerable level of depth and detail.  Training normally conducted once new hires reported to parent division-departments was incorporated in addition to the normal training received on topics such as mission, culture, values, ethics, and overviews of key organizational-human resources information.  The training topics covered were based upon feedback received from line-managers that were concerned about organizational specific training not provided in previous learning environments – thus having a direct impact on productivity.  The development of the training is beyond the scope of this blog, but did include elements of “train-the-trainer” as well as sign-offs of key tasks by mentors and observation by mentor’s supervisors.  In addition, linkage was established within our Knowledge Management process and in between schools and outside entities so that connections could be made and drill-downs conducted based upon previous learning-development experience and training events.

(4) Extended Orientation Period.  Next, because of the aggressive scope of our revised on-boarding process, we found it necessary to extend the length of the process.  Thus, our two-week program was extended by four weeks for a total of six weeks.  During those six weeks, the prospective division-department was a key allay; however, the prospective division-department did not assume “reporting responsibility” of the new employee.  Instead, the new-hires were considered temporary assignees of HR.  This allowed a clean relationship and strict accountability of the new hire, yet provided the necessary motivation for key line managers to participate in the on-boarding process.  With a shared commitment from HR and prospective line managers, new-hires were infused with a sense of urgency to complete yet another milestone: Successful completion of the on-boarding program and assignment to their new division-department.  In addition, the new-hire, mentor, and line-manager(s) received a predetermined amount of hours in which they could test drive their new skills and knowledge in the prospective department.

(5) Defined Follow-Up Periods:  In partnership with the organizational head, line-managers, and HR, defined follow-up periods were identified at specific intervals for the new-hires first 12 months of being attached to the organization.  These follow-up periods escalated in level of transparency and involvement. As an example, at the three month point, the new-hire was interviewed by his departmental supervisors and mentor.  At the six month point, the new hire received interviews by the division head, department supervisor, and mentor.  This process continued until the new-hire received an interview with the organizational head, mentor, division line manager, and departmental supervisor.  If at any point, the new-hire had a concern and/or perceived weakness that was included within the on-boarding process, he/she had the option (or at the direction of the supervisor-manager) to receive additional or repeat training for specific events.  This “stop-gap” had an additional benefit of ensuring that line managers, supervisors, mentors, and the new hire herself were committed to the engagement process.

(6) Senior Leadership Involvement:  Perhaps the most important element of the on-boarding process was the involvement of senior organizational leadership and key staff employees.  This included the organizational head, his assistant, and key staff departments that included our legal team, key departmental personnel that worked in non-line positions, and several HR subject-matter-experts. By including all these key leaders and organizational unit staff members, the new-hire could make a connection of how their technical and day-to-day tasks contributed to the larger strategic effort.  Just as important, the new hire felt a connection to the organization in a holistic sense – making for a well-rounded professional in the end.

In conclusion, it is important to note that this is an overview of how I, as the HR Head, built upon an existing, albeit weak, on-boarding process.  Your steps and/or insight into the process will be unique; however, you may see elements within this post that you can apply within a reasonable time frame (this assumes you have an input, formal or informal, to the on-boarding process).  In addition, normal assumptions should be included.  For instance, enabling technology was utilized, automation was employed, training targets and ROI metrics were developed.  What’s included above are “meat-and-potato” steps that were taking on the ground floor.  In other words, it was my goal to provide you information in a practical context and not with the normal consultative language often provided with no tangible example or methodology of how to get there from here.

In the end your obligation to your new employee does not end with hiring or even the completion of the on-boarding process.  Instead, the socialization, integration, productivity, engagement, and retention goals make this one of many critical steps in the human resource and professional development process.  The on-boarding process, in my view, is a continuum of processes that takes your employee from selection-recruitment all the way to the time the employee leaves the organization – and maybe beyond if you have an on-ramp/off-ramp – rehire culture.

How did my story end?!  Turnover was reduced by 30% during the first 12 months after formal incorporation.  Productivity increased by a similar percentage; morale as measured through the various feedback avenues and annual organizational assessment-climate survey significantly improved.  In other words: We got it right, but still had room for growth and improvement – as it should be.

Properly on-boarding employees is a strategic business necessity.  On-boarding should be viewed with the key goals that we mentioned above – increased productivity and increased retention – that lend themselves to your organization obtaining a strategic (competitive) advantage.

The rest my friends is background music.

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.

Note:  This is just a humorous look on my unscientific approach; however, please take the time to realize that being an effective leader does not mean you follow any set pattern of leadership or some preconceived notion of someone’s notion of being an effective leader.  Effective leaders are found with varying personalities and traits.  They possess a keen sense of who they are and are aware of their strengths and weakness, maximizing the former and supplementing the latter.

Auto-follows on keywords/Auto Tweets:

Strength:  Someone that values automation and one time effort to gain leverage.  Once system in place and/or value discovered, it is likely that you don’t want to reinvent the wheel.  In addition, you are extremely well-organized (there is a word for that), and you are also very methodical.  You will quickly move-on from one project to the next and likely are very good at starting businesses, setting a system, and moving on to the next project/phase.  Likely considered a very efficient leader who makes decisions in an effective manner.

Weakness:  Details make your eyes glaze and sometimes you are too quick to delegate.  Because you often have more than one project/program/concept going, those working on supporting initiatives are often confused as to just what is your priority.

Tweets Less Than Once Per Week:

Strength:  One who focuses on projects and prioritizes based on competing demands.  You can handle multiple tasks; however, those that seem less important to you likely get pushed to the back-burner.  Out of 3-5 competing projects, you will likely pick 1 that is worthy of your time, delegate projects 2-3, sit-on project 4, and dump project 5.

Weakness:  Leaders, co-workers, and subordinates often think you forget about them because they don’t always have your personal attention.  You don’t necessarily announce that you are tracking through delegation, and really feel that your time is to valuable to explain everything that you are doing – or defend your worldview.

Tweets More Than Once Per Week:

Strength:  A quick mind who keeps a “Daily 1-R” log of activities that must be done – in other words: You are viewed as someone who can complete multiple projects and still get the “little things” done.  Your leadership style is one that values details and demands that the perceived minor activities do not get overlooked.  You are likely a leader who has (or prefers) a dashboard view of organization and takes a round-robin approach to ensuring that all bases are covered.  You value input from the quiet person sitting in the back of the room and want to know what she has to say.

Weakness:  You can be perceived as going to deep and if you are a senior leader, often viewed as one “in the weeds.”  When briefed on major issues, subordinates often think that you are focused on strategic-high level information, but you quickly dive into details at a technical-journeyman level.  They adjust and go into detail, and you counter by quickly pulling the stick back to the “big-picture.”

Quick to Un-follow:

Strength:  Aggressive, Alpha-type personality with a “time is money” approach to leadership, projects, and tasks.  Your leadership style invites plenty of people to the table, giving them a chance to show their worth – the bad news for them is that they only have one shot and they may not know it.  You have a knack (and gift) for discovering value quickly.  Likely seen as detached by subordinates, you prefer summarized information, and make decisions based on .5 gut and .5 fact.  Your subordinates and co-workers view you as someone who gets bored easily and you will often pursue several initiatives at once in an effort to see which ones stick (provide value) and which ones can be discarded.  You are also considered a change agent; however, the “change initiative” must be significant and provide early indication worthy of your time and effort.

Weakness:  Because you are quick to move, you often frustrate those that may have received late notice that you were interested in one of their projects/programs, and did not have time to prepare adequately to capture your interest.  You also see no value in incremental changes thus settings in which continuous improvement is the primary culture are not a fit for you – you have no patience for semi-annual updates and prefer results that can be immediately gleaned from quarterly reports.  You often are viewed as a leader that has read one too many “Harvard Business Review” articles yet does not have a defining philosophy that has time to settle and take hold within your organization, project, program, etc.

Slow to Un-follow:

Strength:  A loyal leader that likely delivers bad news slow and utilizes negative counseling/discipline as a last resort.  You are a leader that will be slow to hire and even slower to “fire” giving someone all chances to prove themselves before you “throw them to the wolves.”  You are also empathic and when all subordinates and peers tell you to pull the plug, you will “stay the course” to see when and if value is ahead (this is from a personal and project perspective).  When presenting and the audience is getting frustrated by persistent questions from “that one” who always asks questions – consistently, you will stay with the person until the question is answered, leaving everyone amazed at your patience and concern for others.

Weakness:  You often spend too much time trying to save people or projects that are draining resources (time, money, material, etc.)  You often are criticized for delivering projects in late and/or over-budget and though are very good at what you do (often considered the best), not necessarily the most efficient leader in the area of scheduling. Your saving grace is that you are able to garner large support from the “grass-root” and “deck-plate” levels, and excel on quality and program effectiveness.

Tweets Both Business/Professional Updates:

Strength:  You are likely a leader that can build relationships across the organization, maintaining a human quality, yet gaining the necessary respect and fellowship when required.  You seek to balance morale with organizational objectives and make it point to see that your subordinates/employees have fun at work.  You are also one that given a microphone (or maybe without one) and a PowerPoint presentation can make even the dullest presentations come alive with both empirical data and strong anecdotes to tell a story that would be boring presented by someone with a different personality.  Personal and professional relationships are important to you and you are a master networker.

Weakness:  Data oriented-peers, co-workers, and subordinates often feel your “personal touch” is intrusive or unnecessary.  Your style may unknowingly make subordinates uncomfortable with peers seeing your style as going into irrelevant areas, having nothing to do with the business at hand.  You are also often viewed as someone who could obtain the same results in a more compressed time-frame.  You do possess a high-sense of self-awareness and realize this perceived weakness, but you accept the trade-off much to the chagrin of your peers, co-workers, and subordinates.

Tweets Only Business Updates:

Strength:  You are a no-nonsense leader that believes in focusing on critical activities.  Someone that could hold marathon brain-storming sessions on critical business proposals and activities.  You also enjoy what you do and are the type of leader in which subordinates often say to themselves: “He lives here.”  You  associate yourself (and often your ego) with your work and have large amounts of concentration/focus.  People like you often fill the ranks of senior business leaders within an organization and you advance quickly on a given career-path.  You also know the “nuts-and-bolts” of the business and how it relates to delivery on business objectives and meeting business goals.

Weakness:  You may be seen as dull and calculating.  Meetings and projects that you chair and/or are a critical team member are often seen as “no flash” ordeals.  Though you are a great leader within an established framework, you may resist entrepreneurship/business opportunities, perceiving them as reap with unnecessary and avoidable risk with no defined “systems” in place (however, if teamed with business-personal tweeter that can be remedied – of course, they have to get to you.)

Tweets Only Personal (with a Professional Profile):

Strength:  You are a social butterfly.  The one that when approached by subordinates with situations they view as serious or emergent, quickly put them at ease.  Leadership style makes nervous subordinates feel comfortable. Though you are very social, you do know your business and your work, but it does not define you.  Also one to ensure that others participate in hobbies and recreational activities.  Strong believer in re-charging the batteries.

Weakness:  May be viewed as the popular leader and may need a strong “second” to offset open-leadership style.  You sometimes upset others within your organization because you may be distracted easily and may be perceived to lack focus.  You may get away with more than many other peers because of your ability to search out and find common bonds – your peers often view this as relationship management taking precedence over results-oriented and documented performance.

Followers Greater Than Those Following (by a significant margin):

Strength:  You are the type of leader that everyone talks about and gathers around when walking the “deck-plate” and”front-lines.”  Extremely poplar, you may have large groups of people clamoring for your time, because you are seen as invaluable or a star-performer among your peers.  Even seniors view you with admiration at what appears to be a natural ability within you to motivate others with relatively ease.

Weakness:  Though you are very poplar (and appreciate the fact that people gravitate toward you), you also consult with a small group of advisers and peers when making key decisions.  Because you possess such a strong following of peers and subordinates, you will often have others give bad news, maintaining your personal reputation and brand, even if it means damaging someone else.  Also there is a false sense that you have an open-door policy, when in fact, there is a considerable bureaucratic process that one has to go through to often get to your level.

Following Greater Than Followers (delta of 20% or more):

Strength:  You are a great entrepreneur and will not take “no” for an answer.  You are the type of person who writes down his or her goals, which appear to be dreams to observers (i.e., meet consult with world leaders or sit on prestigious boards).  You have an ability to come up with innovative concepts or work proven models to perfection.  If your concepts come into reality, you are likely to progress to the aforementioned stage.

Weakness:  Many may perceive you as annoying, or as a dreamer, or as someone to avoid.  Others may see you as a threat and protect information from you and/or see you as an outcast with no room for your concepts or ideas.  Because you are persistent, you may also be viewed as someone to avoid.