25
Feb

A team of Bovo-Tighe consultants recently had the great opportunity to explore how their Psychology of Achievement development tool would work in a very different culture. It turned out to be a great success, as it was a learning experience for both facilitators and participants.

Click here to see a photo essay on the experience.

As we participate in more and more international projects, we are finding a rhythm to our programming that now works well across multiple cultures.

We are also bringing back great perspectives to our US-based clients, so it is a “win” for everyone!

23
Feb

Corporate cultures have deep roots, and have been built and perpetuated over years. No leader can change a culture from the top-down by commanding change. A culture shift must be built from the bottom up, focusing on the thousand little actions, habits and traditions that sustain the culture, and shifting mindsets of the keepers of the culture one event at a time.

Here is a link to a great article from Booz and Company that supports our viewpoint.

It is hard work to stick to a true bottom-up cultural mindset change; it takes lots of “blocking and tackling,” too. To work best, it has to be the idea of those culture keepers to make the change themselves, with your gentle husbanding of the process.

Clearly corporations are catching on to this, because demand for Bovo-Tighe services jumped quite a bit during the recent recession, which we can only ascribe to our hard-earned reputation as excellent “process husbanders!

16
Feb

CEOs often say “People are our greatest asset!”

Do they really mean it? Or do they just say it because people expect them to say it?

John Gibbons, a columnist for the Institute for Corporate Productivity just wrote a diatribe about it. The first part of his piece described my own suspicious reaction to a CEO spouting on about people are “critical to his company’s success.” Their actions before and after such a statement too often belie their commitment to its principle.

People, in the eyes of too many senior managers, are replaceable. The costs of recruitment and the disruption of turnover are soft costs that are hard to capture, unlike the replacement cost of computers or other harder assets. 

As Mr. Gibbons notes, when you can quantify the costs of staff turnover, or of increased productivity through human development, you get a senior manager’s attention. How, though, do you go about gathering the hard data to prove the value of employee productivity enhancement training?

Here is where I take exception to one aspect of Mr. Gibbon’s rant: You don’t need lay in expensive analytic structures (often software solutions) to start properly measuring the impact of better human capital development investments. You simply need to engage the participants in measuring their own success. It is a win-win-win. Through rigorous tracking and reporting of behavior changes and the results generated:

  • The employee sees the results of his or her empowerment, and is encouraged to further excel. (We have lots of case studies that back this up.)
  • Their bosses burnish their reputations as good leaders, and are encouraged in their commitment to employee development
  • The company gains documentable financial advantage through the innovations that the participants generated by being more engaged and productive.

For over twenty years, Bovo-Tighe has made tracking of productivity improvements a mandatory part of every engagement it runs with clients because we want senior executives to understand the power of investment in human “assets.” Perhaps software tracking and analytics might make that task a little easier, but it is still people who must be motivated to interact with the software to make the reports it generates meaningful.

Before he got into his sales pitch for “Evidence-Based Human Resources,” that is what Mr. Gibbon was getting at!

14
Feb

Compensation plans attempt to motivate employees to greater productivity at an affordable price for the company. Unfortunately, they run afoul of psychological factors that blunt their impact. Employees are human, and look at relative compensation with a crazy mix of their own needs, their perceived self-worth, and how they weigh the output and effort of those around them.

Here are some of our thoughts on the topic, published in a recent ezinearticle.com post.

14
Feb

One of the great myths of compensation theory is that people work largely for money. Dangle a big enough carrot before employee noses, and productivity will skyrocket. Plus, varying the type of compensation by position should drive people to “self-sort” themselves into the right jobs for their skill sets. Hard-driving salespeople go for straight commission (pure pay-for-performance), while compliance officers opt for salary plus bonus.

It is clear anecdotally that pay-for-performance schemes underperform, and end up paying too much to generate the desired behavior. A recent working paper by three business school professors gathers a lot of the work done on this topic together, and make some broad conclusions that resonated with us here at Bovo-Tighe.

Our co-principal, David Tighe, even wrote up an article for it, posted now on ezinearticles.com

To summarize the authors’ conclusions, humans are not automatons. Psychological factors muck up the relationships between employees and their pay plans. Read the paper for the details, but here are much-simplified capsules on the three main psychological factors that affect pay plan success: Continue reading

11
Feb

That question is an acid test of your own leadership style, and it is one you have to ask constantly, because you don’t get “leadership” right once, or permanently. You must always “move, change, stop, assess, ask, check in” with those you lead to stay on top of your game. It helps to take the same approach to peers, too.

We recently received a great article on this “self-questioning” leadership style from a great client of ours, George Hendrix at Northrup Grumman. He gets what leadership is all about, and sent the article because he found it a great reminder to keep his leadership perspectives and skills sharp. Continue reading

2
Feb

Let’s clear up a misunderstanding about employee engagement: It is not an end unto itself, but the first stage in fostering a productive, contributory culture in your company that innovates better, competes better and therefore is more profitable.

Think about what engagement means to people in love (outside of work, mind you): It is a declaration of commitment, to marriage, making a comfortable home, bearing children and successfully raising them, and ultimately to enjoying a golden retirement together.

So it is with engaging employees: The goal is not engagement for its own sake, but using engagement to achieve business goals “faster, better, cheaper,” to borrow NASA’s phrase.

Full engagement is a pre-condition to success:

  • It instills the right positive mindsets, that lead to
  • Embedding a culture of effective teamwork and involvement, that leads to
  • Each employee making a full contribution to executing the business plan, that leads to
  • Improvements and enhancements to the business or its plan that make it even better.

 And so on: “Rinse and repeat,” if you will, every year from now on.

You cannot exceed expectations without fully engaged employees. Get to work laying that Foundation of Excellence today.