Culture anyone? No, not national dress or foods but rather
organizational culture defined as those values stated or not that
emerge in attitudes, behaviours and organizational practices.
Culture defines how authority functions and how communication,
discipline, respect, work ethics, problem solving, are all dealt with
internally.
Really, there’s nothing in the organization that isn’t somehow tied to
the values that reflect the culture. In fact, the “real” values of an
organization aren’t necessarily those very keen words or lines that
grace the reception area. Instead, they might be the attitudes and
behaviours that are carried out beginning with senior management
that seep into every nook and cranny of the organization.
Most employees can point to problem areas in their organization.
Maybe they can talk about distrust or crisis management practices, but
in the majority of cases, people are unable to see how the culture of
the organization from top to bottom is at fault. In truth, problems
permeate throughout, but in varying degrees and usually producing
differing results in each part of the organization.
Ignoring the culture card, is a sure sign that an organization is wasting
its energies by dashing from one crisis to the next without ever
reaching a resolution. This is no way to develop a solid competitive
edge! A well managed culture has each and every employee
committed to practising clearly stated values.
To the detriment of growth, organizations too often choose to feed the
old elephant. Firefighting becomes a way of life. This lack of
perspective often comes from an inability to understand the impact of
culture on the day to day operation of the organization.
My consulting experience has often involved situations where
employees describe the culture in negative, sometimes hateful tones.
These are the same organizations where productivity and quality
problems prevail.
Secondly, few understand that every organization is a system. A
system where movement or action in one department or organizational
level can have profound impact, seemingly unrelated, elsewhere. Like
the transmission on a car, small changes, either positive or negative
but reflective of the value system of the organization will rebound in
actions and moods in the most unexpected way.
But once cultural change begins and the crises of another time are
resolved (and when fewer emerge), change becomes a sought after
commodity rather than a buzz word to be feared.
And yes, changing an organization’s culture does take time. If an
organization is going to look boldly and fearlessly into its practises it
needs answers to questions such as: “What are the actual values we
as an organization are practising?” and “Are these the attitudes and
behaviours that will allow this organization to move dynamically into
the future?”
Once the organization has completed that apprehensive and
comprehensive first stage of intense introspection, the next is to
decide through its vision, mission, and commonsense what values will
allow the organization to move in the right direction. At this stage, the
organization designs its future through the development of its culture.
With values firmly in place, the organization then considers the
training that will allow it to integrate those skills needed to achieve its
cultural end point.
A healthy culture is defined as one that holds a positive spirit of
collaboration at its core. Where people are energized to support one
another as the company moves to a new level of customer
satisfaction. When people are empowered to act on their strengths,
the end result is a company working and thinking at its best. By
building a strong culture, the organization is more able and capable of
competing for the future.
~Dr. Helen Ramirez
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Tapping Diversity
Let’s be clear, diversity refers to the “isms” of racism, classism, sexism
and heterosexism that often go unacknowledged or occur at a
subconscious level.
Trainers believe that these “isms” are often so embedded in our
practises that we no longer recognise them for what they are --- forms
of discrimination that undervalue others. And yet here we are at a
time when organizations are beginning to reflect Canada’s actual
mosaic.
We are a people of diverse ethnicities, languages, colours, (dis)
abilities, and sexual orientation. We are men and women who are now
working side by side. These are positive signs not simply on a moral
level but in recognition that people regardless of their physical and
economic markers have something to offer. When organizations open
their hiring and training systems they discover the wealth of new ideas
and challenges.
An organization that values difference works at developing a culture
that opens spaces for dynamic thinking from the full spectrum of its
employee base. This means valuing each and every individual by
correcting the practises of a culture that might silence or marginalise
individuals.
In “old school” types of companies the mistake is in listening to the
concepts of only a small and uniform group of people. In this context,
new ideas based on different approaches, experiences and knowledges
are simply shut out. Those who are promoted are only those who
come from this coveted group.
Most companies are unaware of what constitutes discrimination. It’s
not uncommon hear statements like: “I’m not prejudiced.” or “It was
just a joke.” or “So and so is too sensitive.” These remarks that avoid
accountability mask the ways in which language and behaviours in fact
promote the alienation of those on the receiving line.
The real problem in organizations now is that such behaviours aren’t
seen as systemic. Sure a company might have strong statements on
sexual harassment and might even engage in some discussion of
rights during orientation, but follow through on a daily basis is the real
challenge. And certainly when promoting teams these issues need to
be addressed to ensure communication is open and respectful.
Generally we don’t listen to one another very well. In fact we hardly
listen to ourselves when we speak. Good intentions don’t make biases
automatically disappear. Training, performance reviews and policies
and procedures must reflect this new reality.
Learning to communicate, listen and respect one another must include
learning to honour the way others operate and think. The most
dynamic organizations are the ones committed to constant
introspection and training. Perfection is a process.
Being accountable is the first step. Why limit the pool of candidates for
jobs or the potential for growth? Why not have a company that
mirrors the reality of the customer base? Why not have a company
where each and every employee feels valued and free to exchange
ideas?
In this borderless world, why not have a company that builds its
competitive edge from a culture of integrity that believes in the
strengths of all its employees?
and heterosexism that often go unacknowledged or occur at a
subconscious level.
Trainers believe that these “isms” are often so embedded in our
practises that we no longer recognise them for what they are --- forms
of discrimination that undervalue others. And yet here we are at a
time when organizations are beginning to reflect Canada’s actual
mosaic.
We are a people of diverse ethnicities, languages, colours, (dis)
abilities, and sexual orientation. We are men and women who are now
working side by side. These are positive signs not simply on a moral
level but in recognition that people regardless of their physical and
economic markers have something to offer. When organizations open
their hiring and training systems they discover the wealth of new ideas
and challenges.
An organization that values difference works at developing a culture
that opens spaces for dynamic thinking from the full spectrum of its
employee base. This means valuing each and every individual by
correcting the practises of a culture that might silence or marginalise
individuals.
In “old school” types of companies the mistake is in listening to the
concepts of only a small and uniform group of people. In this context,
new ideas based on different approaches, experiences and knowledges
are simply shut out. Those who are promoted are only those who
come from this coveted group.
Most companies are unaware of what constitutes discrimination. It’s
not uncommon hear statements like: “I’m not prejudiced.” or “It was
just a joke.” or “So and so is too sensitive.” These remarks that avoid
accountability mask the ways in which language and behaviours in fact
promote the alienation of those on the receiving line.
The real problem in organizations now is that such behaviours aren’t
seen as systemic. Sure a company might have strong statements on
sexual harassment and might even engage in some discussion of
rights during orientation, but follow through on a daily basis is the real
challenge. And certainly when promoting teams these issues need to
be addressed to ensure communication is open and respectful.
Generally we don’t listen to one another very well. In fact we hardly
listen to ourselves when we speak. Good intentions don’t make biases
automatically disappear. Training, performance reviews and policies
and procedures must reflect this new reality.
Learning to communicate, listen and respect one another must include
learning to honour the way others operate and think. The most
dynamic organizations are the ones committed to constant
introspection and training. Perfection is a process.
Being accountable is the first step. Why limit the pool of candidates for
jobs or the potential for growth? Why not have a company that
mirrors the reality of the customer base? Why not have a company
where each and every employee feels valued and free to exchange
ideas?
In this borderless world, why not have a company that builds its
competitive edge from a culture of integrity that believes in the
strengths of all its employees?
Perks are Never Enough: Motivating our Minds
These are different times and front running organizations know that
the old autocratic form of managing is not only unjust, but entirely
inappropriate. Today, good management is one that recognizes the
true value of each human contribution.
While the news of this shift is good, the transfer of these values can be
complex. Increasingly management styles tend to be more team
directed, yet organizations worry that their best minds are being lured
away or fear labour disruption. Their response is to increase the perks
being offered to employees.
What's missing? The actual intellectual potential of employees is being
left untapped. Organizations, are resorting to band-aid solutions with
a slew of incentive programs.
These range from bonuses for production and attendance, to share
incentives, exercise rooms, special dinners, shopping trips, coupons,
special events, golf weeks, raffles and conferences all in an attempt to
maintain stability.
The business book market offers a wide buffet of solutions to
organizational difficulties with hugely seductive claims. And yet, none
thinks to explore what researchers have been pushing organizations to
address for decades --- the innate intrinsic motivation of individuals.
In its most basic form, intrinsic motivation allows us simply to enjoy
our work. Rather than, as in extrinsic motivation, for the tangible
reward it might bring us.
Studies demonstrate we are more apt to persevere, work harder and
produce higher quality work when our levels of intrinsic motivation
have been triggered. The result is real progress without resorting to
excessive bells and whistles.
It's both simple and cost effective.
The intrinsically motivated individual is creative. This means being
able to communicate ideas, while thinking through ways to improve a
variety of work related issues. This individual wants to problem solve,
and desires positive change. Remarkably, ego is not part of this
person's make-up, only the desire to find satisfaction in the work itself.
Yet, not every task or job can be interesting. But, if the work
environment becomes directed toward creating a place for intrinsic
motivation, each intrinsically motivated individual will find ways to
make often surprising contributions.
Nor should it be forgotten, that most of us are intrinsically motivated
to some degree. The priority should be in ensuring that such
enthusiasm is not nullified by restrictive managing procedures. Too
many of our skills are under utilised. Skills that range from technical
expertise to human development.
To create an intrinsically motivated environment, hiring practices need
to shift to include questions that draw these qualities out of
candidates.
More than this though, is the importance of committing to a new work
environment at every level in the organization.
The benefits far outweigh the difficulties of implementing such an
environment. Surely, this is more cost effective than the scramble to
invent yet more perks to cajole employees to stay or to remain quiet.
By drawing on the intellectual resources of employees already in the
workplace, and assuring new hires meet this challenge, the
organization may find itself a leader in productivity, quality, and
human resources. An example others are surely going to want to
follow. With work so much a part of our existence -- rewarding work
is an ever enticing motivator.
the old autocratic form of managing is not only unjust, but entirely
inappropriate. Today, good management is one that recognizes the
true value of each human contribution.
While the news of this shift is good, the transfer of these values can be
complex. Increasingly management styles tend to be more team
directed, yet organizations worry that their best minds are being lured
away or fear labour disruption. Their response is to increase the perks
being offered to employees.
What's missing? The actual intellectual potential of employees is being
left untapped. Organizations, are resorting to band-aid solutions with
a slew of incentive programs.
These range from bonuses for production and attendance, to share
incentives, exercise rooms, special dinners, shopping trips, coupons,
special events, golf weeks, raffles and conferences all in an attempt to
maintain stability.
The business book market offers a wide buffet of solutions to
organizational difficulties with hugely seductive claims. And yet, none
thinks to explore what researchers have been pushing organizations to
address for decades --- the innate intrinsic motivation of individuals.
In its most basic form, intrinsic motivation allows us simply to enjoy
our work. Rather than, as in extrinsic motivation, for the tangible
reward it might bring us.
Studies demonstrate we are more apt to persevere, work harder and
produce higher quality work when our levels of intrinsic motivation
have been triggered. The result is real progress without resorting to
excessive bells and whistles.
It's both simple and cost effective.
The intrinsically motivated individual is creative. This means being
able to communicate ideas, while thinking through ways to improve a
variety of work related issues. This individual wants to problem solve,
and desires positive change. Remarkably, ego is not part of this
person's make-up, only the desire to find satisfaction in the work itself.
Yet, not every task or job can be interesting. But, if the work
environment becomes directed toward creating a place for intrinsic
motivation, each intrinsically motivated individual will find ways to
make often surprising contributions.
Nor should it be forgotten, that most of us are intrinsically motivated
to some degree. The priority should be in ensuring that such
enthusiasm is not nullified by restrictive managing procedures. Too
many of our skills are under utilised. Skills that range from technical
expertise to human development.
To create an intrinsically motivated environment, hiring practices need
to shift to include questions that draw these qualities out of
candidates.
More than this though, is the importance of committing to a new work
environment at every level in the organization.
The benefits far outweigh the difficulties of implementing such an
environment. Surely, this is more cost effective than the scramble to
invent yet more perks to cajole employees to stay or to remain quiet.
By drawing on the intellectual resources of employees already in the
workplace, and assuring new hires meet this challenge, the
organization may find itself a leader in productivity, quality, and
human resources. An example others are surely going to want to
follow. With work so much a part of our existence -- rewarding work
is an ever enticing motivator.
Frederick Herzberg and his impact on ideas of motivation.
Fred Herzberg, was an internationally respected professor of
management. With his death, I wonder if another
voice that so eloquently combines the virtues of scholar, practitioner
and ethicist in the world of management is able to meet his standards.
As a young American soldier, and one of the early liberators at
Dachau concentration camp Herzberg's task was to ensure that health
care and other provisions were provided for the hundreds of survivors.
These, and other experiences, accumulated through a life time of
practice, were key to Herzberg's understanding of how organizations
might function. Well he knew that the old autocratic form of
managing that ignores the employee is entirely inappropriate in this
vastly competitive world.
Management styles on the whole are attempting to be more team
directed but organizations continue to worry that their best minds are
being lured away or that labour disruption is only a contract away.
The response too often is to add yet more perks rather than address
the harder issue of employee satisfaction and engagement as Herzberg
suggested.
What's lacking? According to Herzberg, the missing piece is the
employee whose skills and intellectual contributions are left untapped
and thus, are less committed to their work or the success of the
organization.
It then becomes easier to seek out greener pastures elsewhere, or
demand greater wage and benefit packages to compensate for
mundane, uninspiring working conditions.
Too often in order to avoid this, organizations are resorting to bandaid
solutions with a slew of incentive programs. These range from
bonuses for production and attendance, to share incentives, exercise
rooms, special dinners, shopping trips, coupons, special events, golf
weeks, raffles and conferences.
The business book market offers a wide buffet of solutions with hugely
seductive claims. And yet, none thinks to explore what researchers
have been pushing organizations to address for decades --- the
inherent intrinsic motivation of individuals.
In its most basic form, intrinsic motivation allows us simply to enjoy
our work. Studies demonstrate we are more apt to persevere, work
harder and produce higher quality work when our levels of intrinsic
motivation have been triggered. The result is real progress without
resorting to excessive bells and whistles. It's both simple and cost
effective.
Yet, not every task or job can be interesting. But, if the work
environment becomes directed toward creating a place for intrinsic
motivation, each intrinsically motivated individual will find ways to
make often surprising contributions.
Here Herzberg was adamant -- motivation is internally derived when
an individual is seen and responded to as capable. Most of us are
intrinsically motivated to some degree, the priority should be in
ensuring that such enthusiasm is not stultified by inappropriate
managing procedures. And to create an intrinsically motivated
environment, hiring practices need to shift to include questions that
draw these qualities out of candidates. More than this though, is the
importance of committing to a new work environment at every level in
the organization.
Herzberg had this unique capacity to combine integrity with real nuts
and bolts reality. And surely, addressing issues of motivation at a
profound level is far more cost effective than that blind scramble to
invent yet more perks to cajole employees to stay or simply to remain
silent.
By drawing on the intellectual resources of employees already in the
workplace, and assuring new hires meet this challenge, the
organization is likely to find itself a steady leader in productivity,
quality, and human resources. Herzberg would be proud.
management. With his death, I wonder if another
voice that so eloquently combines the virtues of scholar, practitioner
and ethicist in the world of management is able to meet his standards.
As a young American soldier, and one of the early liberators at
Dachau concentration camp Herzberg's task was to ensure that health
care and other provisions were provided for the hundreds of survivors.
These, and other experiences, accumulated through a life time of
practice, were key to Herzberg's understanding of how organizations
might function. Well he knew that the old autocratic form of
managing that ignores the employee is entirely inappropriate in this
vastly competitive world.
Management styles on the whole are attempting to be more team
directed but organizations continue to worry that their best minds are
being lured away or that labour disruption is only a contract away.
The response too often is to add yet more perks rather than address
the harder issue of employee satisfaction and engagement as Herzberg
suggested.
What's lacking? According to Herzberg, the missing piece is the
employee whose skills and intellectual contributions are left untapped
and thus, are less committed to their work or the success of the
organization.
It then becomes easier to seek out greener pastures elsewhere, or
demand greater wage and benefit packages to compensate for
mundane, uninspiring working conditions.
Too often in order to avoid this, organizations are resorting to bandaid
solutions with a slew of incentive programs. These range from
bonuses for production and attendance, to share incentives, exercise
rooms, special dinners, shopping trips, coupons, special events, golf
weeks, raffles and conferences.
The business book market offers a wide buffet of solutions with hugely
seductive claims. And yet, none thinks to explore what researchers
have been pushing organizations to address for decades --- the
inherent intrinsic motivation of individuals.
In its most basic form, intrinsic motivation allows us simply to enjoy
our work. Studies demonstrate we are more apt to persevere, work
harder and produce higher quality work when our levels of intrinsic
motivation have been triggered. The result is real progress without
resorting to excessive bells and whistles. It's both simple and cost
effective.
Yet, not every task or job can be interesting. But, if the work
environment becomes directed toward creating a place for intrinsic
motivation, each intrinsically motivated individual will find ways to
make often surprising contributions.
Here Herzberg was adamant -- motivation is internally derived when
an individual is seen and responded to as capable. Most of us are
intrinsically motivated to some degree, the priority should be in
ensuring that such enthusiasm is not stultified by inappropriate
managing procedures. And to create an intrinsically motivated
environment, hiring practices need to shift to include questions that
draw these qualities out of candidates. More than this though, is the
importance of committing to a new work environment at every level in
the organization.
Herzberg had this unique capacity to combine integrity with real nuts
and bolts reality. And surely, addressing issues of motivation at a
profound level is far more cost effective than that blind scramble to
invent yet more perks to cajole employees to stay or simply to remain
silent.
By drawing on the intellectual resources of employees already in the
workplace, and assuring new hires meet this challenge, the
organization is likely to find itself a steady leader in productivity,
quality, and human resources. Herzberg would be proud.
Don't hire for a culture you don't have
Most of us fail to think about screening for new employees in any
depth. We don't understand the biases we bring into the process, and
more than this we don't connect what's happening in the organization
in terms of culture, training, and values, to what we're doing at the
front end.
I often hear the comment, "Oh I can tell if the applicant is going to
work within the first five minutes of the interview." What happens then
is the interviewer justifies his or her initial impression for the
remainder of the interview.
What's wrong with this?
Experience has shown that it leaves the process far too vulnerable to
personal bias.
Organizations are notorious for spending vast amounts of money on
training but rarely consider how their hiring procedures might
undermine or support their efforts.
Screening for the candidates that best suit the organization needs to
better thought out.
Don't hire people who aren't going to make it in the long run. If you
want intrinsically motivated individuals ensure your culture, your
management style and your organizational values will allow for that
kind of person to flourish.
Make sure the people involved in the screening process know the
organization, and know how to recognize the right skills.
Every screening process should have a variety of stages. Just as
production workers are tested for mechanical aptitude and dexterity,
so too should management applicants be tested on the skills they'll
need to perform well in their positions. References, and good talk are
simply not adequate. Skills must be demonstrated. A good screening
process will include a testing procedure, several interviews, and a tour
of the organization.
But there's more. The probationary period is simply an extension of
the selection process. It's a period in which the new hire can be
closely monitored by supervisors who are testing in two areas. First,
does this individual have the basic skills to do the job and, secondly,
(although equally important), does this individual have the intellectual
and emotional skills to enhance the organization.
Testing for intellectual and emotional intelligence, as the current
management vogue names it, is vital because these traits are
stubbornly established by adulthood. Trying to alter them (or create
them) is probably a waste of time and energy. The whole point of the
screening process is to eliminate the need to deal with these issues
after a probationary period has ended.
Hire people who will augment your organization. People who will want
to stay and add to your culture but don't expect superheros to hang
around if you aren't practising what you've learned in all those training
sessions.
depth. We don't understand the biases we bring into the process, and
more than this we don't connect what's happening in the organization
in terms of culture, training, and values, to what we're doing at the
front end.
I often hear the comment, "Oh I can tell if the applicant is going to
work within the first five minutes of the interview." What happens then
is the interviewer justifies his or her initial impression for the
remainder of the interview.
What's wrong with this?
Experience has shown that it leaves the process far too vulnerable to
personal bias.
Organizations are notorious for spending vast amounts of money on
training but rarely consider how their hiring procedures might
undermine or support their efforts.
Screening for the candidates that best suit the organization needs to
better thought out.
Don't hire people who aren't going to make it in the long run. If you
want intrinsically motivated individuals ensure your culture, your
management style and your organizational values will allow for that
kind of person to flourish.
Make sure the people involved in the screening process know the
organization, and know how to recognize the right skills.
Every screening process should have a variety of stages. Just as
production workers are tested for mechanical aptitude and dexterity,
so too should management applicants be tested on the skills they'll
need to perform well in their positions. References, and good talk are
simply not adequate. Skills must be demonstrated. A good screening
process will include a testing procedure, several interviews, and a tour
of the organization.
But there's more. The probationary period is simply an extension of
the selection process. It's a period in which the new hire can be
closely monitored by supervisors who are testing in two areas. First,
does this individual have the basic skills to do the job and, secondly,
(although equally important), does this individual have the intellectual
and emotional skills to enhance the organization.
Testing for intellectual and emotional intelligence, as the current
management vogue names it, is vital because these traits are
stubbornly established by adulthood. Trying to alter them (or create
them) is probably a waste of time and energy. The whole point of the
screening process is to eliminate the need to deal with these issues
after a probationary period has ended.
Hire people who will augment your organization. People who will want
to stay and add to your culture but don't expect superheros to hang
around if you aren't practising what you've learned in all those training
sessions.
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Brave New World of Teams
Extensive research has shown that good teams can lead an
organization in exciting new directions. They can push an
organization's growth potential without jeopardizing its stability.
Effective ones can bring value to an organization not only in terms of
profit and productivity but in terms of the more difficult human issues
that far too frequently exhaust an organization's resources.
Sadly, many of the organizations I deal with, fail to understand how
teams should develop, have no sense of their potential, and seem to
fear the loss of power created by a more dispersed decision making
process. Senior management doesn't want to relinquish control.
Too often organizations forget that when teams are encouraged and
given the resources to excel they create first and foremost a more
contented and stable employee base. Effective teams take ownership
over their tasks reducing the need for disciplinary procedures. And
since their makeup includes management, staff and production people,
the usual lines of distrust are often broken down.
What takes on greater importance in the effective team is the well
being of the organization and the team's drive to ensure its success.
The result is a cohesive and democratic meeting of people seeking not
personal glory but a more dynamic organization better able to transfer
its vision into reality. How the team functions and its tangible results
will impact areas of the organization well outside the domain of the
team itself.
In practice, organizations too often believe teams can be created
overnight.
Wrong.
Developing effective and committed teams require not only time but
people who understand the dynamics of team development and their
worth. This means understanding the complexities of human
interaction.
So don't create teams to placate a discontented workforce if the teams
aren't going to be supported fully. Inventing a team and throwing
people into the mix is a recipe for failure and a growing sense of
cynicism and mistrust.
Take time to develop the team's mandate. Examine the kinds of skills
(practical and emotional) needed for the team and create an open
selection process. Know that teams can be brought together to deal
with a wide range of tasks ranging from product development,
company expansion, strategic planning to quality of work issues. But
don't expect them to perform well if you haven't provided them with
some "how to" training.
Finally, find someone who can furnish the team with effective
leadership. What does this mean? Someone who draws out the best
in each member. Someone able to make participation both fun and
meaningful without compromising a stringent work schedule. This
leader knows each participant must have the knowledge and skills
needed to comply with goals so when key members leave, the team is
able to carry on.
But the real test, as we all know, is to what extent the
recommendations of the team are adopted by the organization as a
whole. My experience says that organizations often fail their teams
through a refusal to commit time, energy and monies to important
structure building endeavours.
Teams, good teams can work to anticipate crises, eliminating their
occurrence while creating a more solid base on which to build your
organization's growth -- they're worth the commitment!
~ Dr. Helen Ramirez
organization in exciting new directions. They can push an
organization's growth potential without jeopardizing its stability.
Effective ones can bring value to an organization not only in terms of
profit and productivity but in terms of the more difficult human issues
that far too frequently exhaust an organization's resources.
Sadly, many of the organizations I deal with, fail to understand how
teams should develop, have no sense of their potential, and seem to
fear the loss of power created by a more dispersed decision making
process. Senior management doesn't want to relinquish control.
Too often organizations forget that when teams are encouraged and
given the resources to excel they create first and foremost a more
contented and stable employee base. Effective teams take ownership
over their tasks reducing the need for disciplinary procedures. And
since their makeup includes management, staff and production people,
the usual lines of distrust are often broken down.
What takes on greater importance in the effective team is the well
being of the organization and the team's drive to ensure its success.
The result is a cohesive and democratic meeting of people seeking not
personal glory but a more dynamic organization better able to transfer
its vision into reality. How the team functions and its tangible results
will impact areas of the organization well outside the domain of the
team itself.
In practice, organizations too often believe teams can be created
overnight.
Wrong.
Developing effective and committed teams require not only time but
people who understand the dynamics of team development and their
worth. This means understanding the complexities of human
interaction.
So don't create teams to placate a discontented workforce if the teams
aren't going to be supported fully. Inventing a team and throwing
people into the mix is a recipe for failure and a growing sense of
cynicism and mistrust.
Take time to develop the team's mandate. Examine the kinds of skills
(practical and emotional) needed for the team and create an open
selection process. Know that teams can be brought together to deal
with a wide range of tasks ranging from product development,
company expansion, strategic planning to quality of work issues. But
don't expect them to perform well if you haven't provided them with
some "how to" training.
Finally, find someone who can furnish the team with effective
leadership. What does this mean? Someone who draws out the best
in each member. Someone able to make participation both fun and
meaningful without compromising a stringent work schedule. This
leader knows each participant must have the knowledge and skills
needed to comply with goals so when key members leave, the team is
able to carry on.
But the real test, as we all know, is to what extent the
recommendations of the team are adopted by the organization as a
whole. My experience says that organizations often fail their teams
through a refusal to commit time, energy and monies to important
structure building endeavours.
Teams, good teams can work to anticipate crises, eliminating their
occurrence while creating a more solid base on which to build your
organization's growth -- they're worth the commitment!
~ Dr. Helen Ramirez
Assessing Your Human Resources
A national employee survey as reported in Maclean’s suggested that
we Canadians don't like to think of ourselves or wish to be treated as
though we are cogs in an endless wheel of production.
The article suggests this is a new idea when in fact the sense of being
used and abused in the workplace is the perennial problem of any form
of work.
One CEO, a client of The Tamarack Group, said the increasing pace of
change and competitiveness in the market place demands that
organizations take better care of their employees. This means not just
one go at dramatic change but rather a constant and vigilant care over
procedures and processes with frequent evaluation of human resource
issues.
An organization that remains committed to its employees and
conscious of how satisfaction can affect the quality of work, will
continually calibrate itself.
This can be done most effectively through surveys designed to find the
birthplaces of fissures or where employee attitudes are shifting even in
their most subtle forms. Too many organizations have first hand
experience in discovering that not staying abreast of these changes
can quickly lead to disastrous ends.
Surveys are like road markers. Unlike any other form of research tool,
surveys can open opportunities for employees to express their
concerns within the broad categories of communication, productivity,
values, supervision, ethics etc.
They pinpoint problems that often come off as being mere whining by
employees when expressed over lunch or to union stewards. Our
experience has shown that organizations are frequently oblivious to
the warning signals these complaints are sending or discount their
connection to real structural problems. When this happens frustration
levels rise to the extent that business itself is affected.
Can organizations do this on their own? Our adamant response is NO.
This comes from our endless experience of watching organizations
create biased and leading surveys meant to tout their own successes
instead of being objective fact finding ventures. Such surveys
undermine the aims of the organization. The message once again
confirms employees' suspicions that the organization simply doesn't
care.
Organizations that recognize the principle of self-evaluation and the
importance of change are ones that often have the most satisfied and
motivated employees. What does this mean for the organization?
Surely it allows the company to continue to be more competitive and
grow into new areas knowing that it has the backing of a committed
team of people.
we Canadians don't like to think of ourselves or wish to be treated as
though we are cogs in an endless wheel of production.
The article suggests this is a new idea when in fact the sense of being
used and abused in the workplace is the perennial problem of any form
of work.
One CEO, a client of The Tamarack Group, said the increasing pace of
change and competitiveness in the market place demands that
organizations take better care of their employees. This means not just
one go at dramatic change but rather a constant and vigilant care over
procedures and processes with frequent evaluation of human resource
issues.
An organization that remains committed to its employees and
conscious of how satisfaction can affect the quality of work, will
continually calibrate itself.
This can be done most effectively through surveys designed to find the
birthplaces of fissures or where employee attitudes are shifting even in
their most subtle forms. Too many organizations have first hand
experience in discovering that not staying abreast of these changes
can quickly lead to disastrous ends.
Surveys are like road markers. Unlike any other form of research tool,
surveys can open opportunities for employees to express their
concerns within the broad categories of communication, productivity,
values, supervision, ethics etc.
They pinpoint problems that often come off as being mere whining by
employees when expressed over lunch or to union stewards. Our
experience has shown that organizations are frequently oblivious to
the warning signals these complaints are sending or discount their
connection to real structural problems. When this happens frustration
levels rise to the extent that business itself is affected.
Can organizations do this on their own? Our adamant response is NO.
This comes from our endless experience of watching organizations
create biased and leading surveys meant to tout their own successes
instead of being objective fact finding ventures. Such surveys
undermine the aims of the organization. The message once again
confirms employees' suspicions that the organization simply doesn't
care.
Organizations that recognize the principle of self-evaluation and the
importance of change are ones that often have the most satisfied and
motivated employees. What does this mean for the organization?
Surely it allows the company to continue to be more competitive and
grow into new areas knowing that it has the backing of a committed
team of people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)