Change management needs a competency framework

Change management and the need for competencyChange is inevitable. Whether it is planned or reactive, change typically occurs as a necessity to rapidly evolving frameworks across all industries, around the globe. An organization’s ability to implement change successfully is key to competitiveness and a highly valuable differentiator.

 

BUILDING COMPETENCY MODELS CERTIFICATION ON JULY 18-20, 2017 IN ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA

But managing and executing change in the workplace takes very specific skills and a thorough understanding of all the elements that have, will and may affect the company and its employees once the need for change has been acknowledged.

Recognizing the change management competency in your employees

The change management competency refers to the behaviors and skills required to anticipate the need for change, as well as to successfully implement and promote acceptance of change. Individuals who possess this competency constantly expect and welcome change, and adapt to it with little effort or disturbances in performance.

While change management is a critical competency at all levels of the company, it is particularly true for the C-suite because for change to be successful, it must be embedded in the culture and core values of the organization, and communicated effectively and convincingly to all employees.

Many individuals are reluctant to change, often due to fear of the unknown and the discomfort of the learning curve ahead. It is imperative for organizations to understand the normalcy of this behavior, and factor in the inevitable push back from a certain number of employees when attempting to implement change.

Accordingly, identifying and developing advocates for change is one of the most important steps of change management, as these are the employees who will help you not only implement change, but also promote it across your entire workforce. Organizations must seek those very individuals who, regardless of their function, exhibit the characteristics and behaviors of the change management competency, which include:

  • A thorough understanding of the company’s goals and limitations
  • Great awareness of industry developments
  • A desire to continuously improve processes and optimize results
  • A deep attachment (or engagement) to the company, culture and values
  • An inclination to providing support in transition periods
  • A record of above-average performance

The ability to recognize the need for change shouldn’t be confused with the constant pointing out of weak areas within the organization, the latter of which may prove to be more of the result of a dissatisfied employee. Rather, an employee who possesses the change management competency will come to the table with solutions and valid reasoning for wanting to implement change. The intent of the behavior is therefore extremely important to assess to identify true change advocates.

Leadership skills are only but a small token of the change management competency, for without support or a profound understanding of the need for change, a leader can easily steer your employees in the wrong direction, thus serving as a barrier to change.

The role of the organization in communicating and managing change

Of course, identifying your key change management personnel isn’t, by itself, going to guarantee a successful transition. Your organization must develop reinforcement programs to reward behaviors that support the change, and otherwise work to minimize resistance.

To effectively manage change, companies must:

  1. Define the change and every implication at all levels of the organization
  2. Develop an implementation plan and stress-test it with key personnel
  3. Establish a reinforcement strategy to facilitate the transition
  4. Communicate the change, the reasons for the change, the internal and external impacts, as well as the execution plan, to all employees
  5. Provide tools and resources to support employees through the transition

Remember that when implementing change, you should anticipate a drop in motivation and performance from some employees. To minimize these side effects on your bottom line, you need to ensure that you have properly identified your advocates for change by defining the parameters of the change management competency for your situation, and tasking them with the responsibility to promote and support the transition. Read more in Gaining Commitment to Organizational Change.

Click here to read the chapter in the Competency Development Guide on developing the Managing Change competency.

Click here for the definition, behaviors by role and level of proficiency for Managing Change from Workitect’s Competency Dictionary.

 

Share Button

Why your talent management is key to organizational success

42-25498443bAs we enter the third quarter of 2014, most organizations are preparing to kickstart the financial planning process for 2015. If your intentions are to gather a few key executives, discuss the competitive landscape, review market demand, trends and innovations, and develop strategies based on these findings, you should probably expect to encounter a few challenges.

Why? Simple: Your chances of success are driven by your employees’ ability to adequately execute the strategies you develop, because even the best course of action or the most accurate market analysis cannot yield the right results if you do not have the talent to execute it with precision.

Companies cannot afford to overlook talent, particularly in the current economic environment. It is now more than ever critical to consider your workforce’s ability to take on new challenges and adapt to changing directions before deciding on the very strategies that will take you where you want to go.

To do so, companies need to get HR involved in their annual planning exercise: first to provide a precise account of the skills, competencies and expertise readily available in-house, and then to identify any gap that need to be remedied in order to support the goals and strategic direction of the organization going forward.

By enlisting HR’s expertise in planning for the year ahead, companies grant themselves the opportunity to optimize the effectiveness of their strategies, as well as the organization’s competitiveness and overall performance.

Talent as a key differentiator

Talent has become the ultimate differentiator and a critical source of competitiveness for organizations around the globe. Nevertheless, very few executives grasp the intricate dynamics of talent development and business strategy. In fact, a survey conducted for The Talent Imperative states that “fewer than one in ten executives from midsized private companies say their talent strategies are intimately aligned with overall strategic planning.”

According to the study and a supporting Forbes article, if talent is often overlooked as a source of competitive advantage it is simply because it isn’t made a priority at the C-suite level. Rather, executives seek out new market opportunities, without first evaluating if their current workforce can support these ventures. Such a course of action typically translates into sub-par results because, as previously mentioned, it is your workforce’s ability to execute your strategies that is key to success… and a healthy bottom line.

Executives must stop assuming that their employees will be able to adapt and perform in exact alignment to the strategies they develop, but it is still HR’s job to plead that case, to demonstrate the importance of accurate workforce assessment and effective development programs in achieving your organization’s objectives over time.

Before adopting a new course of action, you must therefore:

  1. Conduct an accurate assessment of your employees’ competencies – this can only be achieved with an objective and effective performance evaluation process.
  2. Identify what (if anything) is lacking and how to fill that gap to achieve your goals – this requires transparent top-down and bottom-up communications to understand the strategic direction of the organization, as well as the potential/motivators of your workforce.
  3. Implement a talent development strategy based on your findings – assuming you have clear channels of communication and objective performance assessors.

5 steps to injecting talent into your corporate objectives

If you agree with the above, then you already know that the characteristics of your current talent pool, along with your talent development and career mobility programs, should be key influencers of your top-level objectives. Developing strategies is one thing; executing them is another.

To ensure that your workforce possesses the skills, competencies and drive needed to propel the organization forward, HR must work with other executives to:

  1. Identify the roles and positions where performance can differentiate your organization from its competitors
  2. Establish metrics to define what success looks like in these roles, as well as how performance should be measured
  3. Fill those positions (recruiting or developing) with the right talent with the help of competency models that accurately identify the skills, knowledge, and personal characteristics of the top performers
  4. Develop targeted training and performance optimization programs that are aligned to your organizational goals and talent pool
  5. Enhance engagement and motivation by improving communication with respect to these goals and by building career paths for your employees

We recommend competency modeling as a basis for achieving this because a competency framework supports the idea that results are tied to performance. Not only does it ensure that the right people with the right skills are placed in the right roles, but a competency-based talent management process also facilitates career-pathing, promotes engagement, and fosters skills development; all of which serve to improve bottom-line performance and minimize turnover costs.

We invite you to read this white paper to learn how an integrated, competency-based HR system can serve various applications for selection, succession planning, career pathing, performance management, and training, as well as serve as a key tool to drive organizational change.

Share Button

Five Types of Competency Characteristics to Predict Future Success

There are many ways to define competencies but in sum, they can be referred to as the very characteristics causally related to criterion-referenced effective and/or superior performance in a job or situation.

Let’s note that a characteristic is not a competency, unless it predicts something meaningful in the real world, such as behavior or performance, hence the ‘causally related’ segment of our definition.

Psychologist William James said the first rule for scientists should be that “A difference which makes no difference is no difference.” A characteristic that makes no difference in performance is not a competency, and should therefore not be used to evaluate people. A competency must be a fairly deep and enduring part of a person’s personality, sufficiently so that it can be used to predict behavior in a wide variety of situations and job tasks.

The causal relationship of competencies in job performance management can be illustrated as such:5 Types of Competency Characteristics to Predict Future Success
But a competency must also be criterion-referenced, which means that it actually predicts who does something well or poorly, as measured by a specific criterion or standard.

Depending on the performance criterion they serve to predict, competencies can be categorized as ‘threshold’, which refers to the basic essential skills that a person must possess to produce at least the minimal output required by a job role, or ‘differentiating’, which distinguish superior from average performers.

Here are 5 types of competency characteristics to understand, identify and measure in your workforce, in order to better assess your employees’ current and potential output.

1. Motive

Last month, we wrote about the importance for employers and managers to be able to determine motive in their staff, as they more accurately predict job performance thank acquired skills and education. The things a person consistently thinks about or desires are drivers of behavior and, ultimately, performance. They determine and explain a person’s actions in the workplace or in a given situation. For instance, achievement-motivated people consistently set challenging goals for themselves, take personal responsibility for accomplishing them, and use feedback to improve on a continuous basis. And while performance management supports the alignment of an individual’s professional development to overall corporate results, it must also factor in the motives behind this person’s actions to understand past behavior and provide the right incentives to superior future performance.

2. Traits

Traits are those consistent physical and behavioral responses to situations or information. For example, reaction time and good eyesight are physical trait competencies of combat pilots. In a 2013 research paper, Routledge reminds us that the extent to which traits actually translate into actual behavior depends, at least in part, on how structured or regulated the situation is. But to predict performance in a workplace environment, traits should be viewed as intrinsic behaviors that people will exhibit without close supervision. Bear in mind however that traits are closely correlated to motives. An individual may choose to activate the necessary traits for a job role at any specific moment, depending on their underlying motive. Since every position comes with behavioral expectations from management, an employee with the motive or aspiration to access higher roles within the organization could choose to develop or exhibit the very traits required to perform in this role, even if they are not aligned with their personal preferences.

3. Self-Concept

Self-concept refers to our personal attitudes, values and self-image. It is the belief of how effective we can be in a particular situation. Psychology tells us that there are four categories of self-concept: the perceived self, the ideal self, one’s self esteem, and a set of social identities. Each of these elements plays a crucial role in understanding how self-concept relates to energizing, directing, and sustaining organizational behavior. After all, a person’s values are respondent or reactive motives that predict what he or she will do in a situation. For example, someone who values being in management, but does not intrinsically like or spontaneously think about influencing others at the motive level, may attain a managerial position, but then fail. If self-concept is partly developed from feedback from others (the very feedback that is then used to shape a person’s actions and behaviors), effective managers know how to accurately identify their employees’ concepts of self in order to:

  • Align these perceptions to the needs of the organization by assigning employees to the appropriate job tasks
  • Provide the right feedback to help employees achieve their ‘ideal selves’ – the driver or motive to performance

This form of motivation, which is achieved through consistent feedback, rewards and incentives, serve to increase the probability of the expected behavior in the future.

4. Knowledge

Knowledge consists in the information a person has in specific content areas. While the definition may appear to be quite simple and straight forward, knowledge is a complex competency. Scores on knowledge tests often fail to predict work performance because they fail to measure knowledge and skills in the ways that are actually used on the job. Many knowledge tests measure remote memory, when what is really important is the ability to find information. Memory of specific facts is less important than knowing which facts exist that are relevant to a specific problem, and where to find them when needed. Knowledge at best predicts what someone can do, not what he or she will do. So once again, knowledge alone cannot accurately predict an employee’s output or performance but rather, it must be interpreted as part of a whole, along with motive, traits, self-concept and skills, to name a few. It refers to the basic requirements to attain a given job role, but cannot be the sole criterion to recruiting.

5. Skill

Skill is the ability to perform a certain physical or mental task. For example, a dentist’s physical skill to fill a tooth without damaging the nerve, or a computer programmer’s ability to organize 50,000 lines of code in logical sequential order. Mental or cognitive skill competencies include analytic thinking (processing knowledge and data, determining cause and effect, organizing data and plans) and conceptual thinking (recognizing patterns in complex data). We’ve already discussed the difference between skills and competencies; skills refer to a person’s ability to learn in order to accomplish a task. They are acquired through education and hard work, and can be regarded as somewhat tangible. Competencies extend a bit further to include the behaviors, motives and knowledge required to utilize those skills to produce the desired results. They can therefore be defined as a group of measurable traits that allow an organization to assess an individual’s probability of superior performance, with respect to the skills he/she already possesses. Like knowledge, skills are often perceived as the ultimate requirements to attain a given job role, but they do not guarantee future results.

Hitting the bull’s eye: A customized competency model to performance

multiple-level-art_wht_bkgBuilding a competency model requires more than listing the traits or motives desired within a certain job role. An “off-the-shelf” model is likely to fail to recognize the unique aspects of your company’s unique strategy, culture and values. These generic tools are critical to the competency modeling process, as a starting point in your development process, but competency modeling should also look inward, at where your specific organization is, what it intends to accomplish, your competitive landscape, and the obstacles that may stand in your way over time.

We invite you to join us at any of our upcoming workshops to learn to develop a tailored competency dictionary, build a competency model in six steps, without external consultants, and adequately integrate off-the-shelf lists, such as PDI, Lominger, DDI, etc.

You will also learn how to successfully implement a sustainable competency system, which can be applied to almost every one of your HR processes, including succession planning, performance management, professional development, assessment, selection, retention, and many more.

Learn more here, or click here to register!

Share Button

Poor Talent Management Costing $Billions

Poor “Talent Adaptability” Costing $BillionsMost of us already know that high turnover rates can be extremely costly for companies – to the tune of some $10 billion a year in the U.S. alone. But a new study has revealed that poor “talent adaptability” – the ability for people to retrain for new skills or switch industries – is costing the global economy billions of dollars in lost productivity.

PwC had indeed conducted an extensive study, combining data from LinkedIn’s 277 million members with employer information from its database of people and performance metrics, which covers more than 2,600 employers across the globe, in order to determine how better alignment between talent and opportunity can drive economic growth.

Money talks: The facts aren’t always what they seem

According to Gallup, of the more than 100 million full-time workers in the U.S., only 30% are engaged and inspired at work, and roughly 20% are actively disengaged. It is in fact estimated that approximately 2 million Americans quit their jobs every month.

According to the Center for American Progress, the average cost to find a new employee for a non-specialized position that pays $50,000 per year can be as high as 20% of salary ($10,000. Not considering lost knowledge and productivity, it is clear that companies need to work intensely on retaining their staff, even if this means giving way to a 5% raise.

But is salary all that matters?

The most important question to ask yourself as an employer isn’t whether or not to acquiesce to a raise request from an average-performing employee, but rather to determine why your employees are quitting.

In its study, PwC found that out of all the reasons employees choose to leave their jobs, compensation only comes in third place, preceded by lack of career advancement opportunities and poor management/leadership. Other factors included boredom with responsibilities, work hours and lack of recognition.

Putting compensation aside, as it can be difficult for some companies to radically make a difference in that area, every one of the other reasons stated by exiting employees could have been avoided with the proper talent management strategy.

Remember: Talent doesn’t always come naturally. By investing in your workforce to develop their competencies, and rewarding them adequately for their achievements, you ensure your own success as a company.

The Millennial conundrum: Are your retention strategies tailored to your workforce demographics?

Data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that the average tenure of employees – males and females, 25 to 64, combined – was approximately 5 years in 2012. This figure has been relatively stable over the past two decades, with slight variations along the way.

Yet, when we look at Millennials specifically, we see that this timeline drops to 1.5 years, despite the fact that most claim they would rather stay with their employers for 10+ years. Considering the wide gap between intent and reality, it is relatively safe to assume that if Millennials have earned a reputation of career instability, the blame may need to be shifted from employees to employers.

Last month, we discussed how to identify your employees’ real motivation to performance. The article mentioned how employers cannot assume that every employee aspires to an executive position and more and more, younger generations are instead looking for that perfect balance between professional accomplishment and personal well-being. But when it comes to retention strategies, Millennials do want to be boss; they want to have the power to choose rewards that are meaningful to them.

Where there’s a problem, there’s a solution

The real problem with turnover is that the majority of companies don’t really take the time to invest in their retention strategies until they suspect that key employees may be considering leaving. Too often however, it is by then too late to avoid the inevitable. And even if it did save you an employee, you have done nothing to rectify the situation for the future.

The solution to limit turnover entails a multi-step process that begins before recruiting takes place:

1.  Take a look around

Regardless of your short-term hiring intentions, it doesn’t mean that you cannot grow your workforce organically and plan for future hiring needs. As such, begin with a thorough assessment of your industry – trends, gaps, needs, etc. – and benchmark your company against your main competitors: What are you missing? What do you need to outperform? What advantages do they have over you? You over them? Once you have determined all of those elements, you will have a much clearer picture of the workforce you need to succeed looking forward.

2.  Design your path to success

Based on your findings, develop competency models for all the job roles across your company. In the process, sit down with your employees to discuss these models, and to take the pulse on areas that may need improvement. Not only are your employees your best source of data to accurately determine the competencies and behaviors required to succeed in their own jobs, but they will also feel appreciated and valued – a clear detractor to turnover.

3.  Recruiting, training and coaching

Even if you do not intend to hire more staff right away, your competency models are not wasted. Rather, use them against your latest performance evaluations to identify skill gaps and develop professional development programs for your employees. Remember that two of the main reasons workers leave their employers are boredom and lack of in-house opportunities. Your employees want to succeed and excel at what they do so give them the tools to better themselves and feel accomplished in their job.

*Note that while it may sound counterintuitive, research shows  the best way to keep them from leaving is to prepare them to do just that.

4.  Be the motivation

Good managers understand that their responsibilities don’t just reside in overseeing output and processes, but include all facets of leadership. If a great majority of workers who quit a job blame management, it is mainly because of a culture issue. To counter this, implement an executive program by which your managers are encouraged to help their subordinates achieve superior roles, and your recruiters are trained to identify workers who aspire to build a career, rather than just ‘fill a role’. The key is to motivate your employees to stay and plan their careers with your company; it is therefore crucial that you provide the tools and support to how they can achieve their goals with you.

5.  Get personal

As previously mentioned, newer generations of workers have voiced their desire for incentives and rewards that matter to them, and more and more ‘older’ workers have joined in, realizing how smaller things like an extra day off or flexible work arrangements can mean more than a 1% raise. But there’s an art to rewarding employees to improve performance, and the key is to make it personal. Why not offer a wide-ranging package of incentives, and let your employees chose what is most meaningful to them? You’d be surprised how much motivation can come from giving them the power to choose.

Of course, these steps have been simplified for the sake of space, but we have included several links to provide additional information on employee retention and talent management strategies. We also invite you to comment below or contact us with any question you may have.

Ready to take these first steps? Register to attend one of our upcoming workshops! Choose the location nearest you – Washington, Chicago or Fort Lauderdale – or let us come to you!

For a DIY solution, you’ll find a wide array of talent management tools and manuals on our website, as well as external links to studies and white papers that can further help you in the process.

Happy browsing, and hope to see you at one of our seminars!

Share Button

Eliminate HR? No problem? Not so fast.

Eliminate HR? No problem? Not so fast.	“Sometimes, the only thing worse than having an HR department is not having one.”

So begins a recent article published in the Careers section of the Wall Street Journal.

“Companies Say No to Having an HR Department”

“Employers Come Up With New Ways to Manage Hiring, Firing and Benefits”

There have been many articles written about the effectiveness of HR departments across the nation, the main criticism being that they have become inefficient in nature.

Yet, if HR has lost some of its appeal in eyes of line managers, the answer shouldn’t be to rid companies of its intrinsic value, but rather to identify the causes of this downfall. After all, when sales are down quarter over quarter, does a board choose to eliminate the sales department?

Why HR’s success is everyone’s business

One of the biggest challenges with some organizations is that HR is seen as a freestanding entity, controlling every facet of workforce management almost in an outsourced manner. Typically, when a manager obtains a green light to hire a new employee, he/she turns to HR with the expectation that it’ll know what to do to find that ideal candidate to fulfill the newly opened position.

But HR is no crystal ball. To do its job as intended, it requires input from those who know the company’s reality most: managers and executives. How can one reasonably expect anyone, regardless of their expertise in their given field, to have the ability to fill a position with no concrete knowledge of what success entails in this role?

The truth is, painting Human Resources as a silo at the service of the entire corporation is bound to lead to inefficiencies and excessive wastes of money… and talent. It is common knowledge that silos, in any part of the organization, should be eliminated, and HR should be invited to sit at the table regularly, if only to get a better pulse of where the company is heading and what it is lacking to get there.

If a company’s success depends on the quality and motivation of its employees, HR’s participation in your everyday processes means it can provide much needed expertise in terms of workforce planning, performance incentives and talent management to help ensure that every one of your projects accomplishes their intended objectives.

Without a HR Department….

To do without a Human Resources department, companies would need to first make sure they can accurately evaluate the cost of managers and other employees taking control of HR-related functions.

Granted, such a structure may promote accountability amongst your staff in charge and should, in theory, help optimize some of your talent management processes, but there is more to eliminating HR than what meets the eye.

Just think about potential liabilities and legalities, financial and managerial risks, missed opportunities with strategic deployments, conflict resolutions, etc. These are issues that no company can afford to neglect. If your organization has determined that it would best be served by cutting out ‘the middle man’ and attributing HR functions, such as recruiting, outsourcing, and succession planning, to its executives, there’s an important opportunity cost that must also be taken into consideration.

It may seem more efficient to let your existing managers handle the basic tasks that are often relayed to HR, but there’s a much bigger reason for the existence of a department dedicated to the expert management of your workforce.

A neglected source of profitability

Because it rarely deals directly with business development, HR is often perceived as an administrative cost center. Yet, when we consider that the cost of recruiting for a new position in this day and age has been reported to be approximately $3,500, wouldn’t it be important for your business’ profitability to ensure that you have the right experts working to minimize these costs?

And this is only one aspect of HR’s functions within an organization.

The HR Difference website describes HR’s true purpose as helping “make effective continues: “HR’s orientation is one of responsiveness to both immediate and long-term business needs, providing both operational excellence and strategic insight.”

In more specific terms, Human Resources deals with:

  • Recruiting and employment
  • Training and professional development
  • Remuneration and benefits
  • Internal policies and legalities
  • Culture and philosophy
  • Equality and diversity
  • Disciplinary and rewards programs
  • Corporate alignment and vision

This list is not exhaustive, but taking a good look at it may help you understand why relying on your managers to handle these tasks can be of great cost to your productivity. Do you really want your best executives to allocate so much of their time to these duties, for which they may not possess the right expertise and training?

In an upcoming article, we will discuss how you can streamline these processes to ensure profitability and value in your HR department.

In the meantime, we invite you to sign up to our newsletter to receive other materials designed to help you better understand, analyze and optimize your talent management processes.

BNA Guide to HR Benchmarks

http://www.bna.com/HR-Benchmarks-27417/

http://www.bna.com/uploadedFiles/Content/Products/Human_Resources/Reports/Guide%20to%20HR%20Benchmarks%202013_Web%20preview.pdf

Share Button

Benchmarking is not Competency Modeling

Human capital management is a relatively new science, but there is no denying that this practice has made tremendous progress over the past few decades, particularly in terms of recognition and efficiency within a greater organizational context.

Modern scientific advances, namely within the fields of behavioral and cognitive psychology, have helped support the development of many human resources theories that sought to establish a pattern to building and managing a workforce in a manner that sought to produce continuously superior results.

Of all the human resources theories to emerge over the years, competency modeling and benchmarking have probably been some of the most scrutinized. Strangely, it appears that the two schools of thought have grown to oppose each other, as if one couldn’t exist alongside the other.

But could it be that rather than taking sides, HR professionals – and consequently, organizations at large – could stand to gain by incorporating both approaches into their practices?

Let’s take a closer look.

Benchmarking, or the ‘grass is always greener’ theory

The Global Benchmarking Network characterizes benchmarking as “the systematic search for efficient procedures and better solutions for complicated problems and processes.”

Benchmarking ProcessUnder a more generic definition, benchmarking could be defined as the comparative study of processes within a precisely segmented group to identify best practices. Let’s remember that benchmarking can be external or internal, meaning that the group under review could range from an entire industry to an organization’s own branches, departments or teams.

Regardless of the group surveyed, the objective of benchmarking is to allow an organization to measure its ‘relative success’ as a means to improve and, ultimately, optimize its results.

Within an HR framework, we find that the most common metrics measured through benchmarking are recruitment costs, compensation, training expenses, and turnover. For example:

  • What is the lowest/average cost per hire within my industry?
  • How are my competitors achieving better results?

In this case, you are benchmarking your cost per hire to your competitors, and attempting to gather data to understand what they are doing to outperform you so that you can improve.

Looking inward: A customized approach to performance

Then, at what many believe to be the other end of the spectrum, we find competency modeling, which refers to the development of groups of related competencies that together describe successful performance, within a given job context – e.g., the competencies necessary to achieve superior performance in a senior production management role within the textile industry.

It is important to note that the term ‘competencies’ includes knowledge, skills, behavior, personal characteristics, interests and values – all of which combine to set the standard against which to measure an individual’s chances of success within a specific job role.

The fact that competency models can be used to assess a worker’s potential in a particular position has often led to the assumption that competency modeling mainly served recruiting purposes. Yet, in reality, these models carry a much broader definition, and can be applied to a variety of organizational processes (succession planning, performance management, training and development, compensation, etc.).

Much like benchmarking, the metrics obtained from competency modeling are the result of empirical and comparative studies based on a segmented group’s best practices; the exception being that competency models tend to be more focused on the performance metrics of the people behind the processes, rather than the processes themselves.

Understanding this difference is key to grasping the full potential of integrating competency models with a benchmarking approach.

Power to the people…or processes?  The chicken-egg paradox

While the intent of this article isn’t to argue which is more important: the process or the people implementing the process, it is nevertheless imperative to understand that even the most optimal process can fail if the people responsible for its execution do not possess the skills to implement it as intended. Similarly, even the most qualified executives may not deliver the intended results if the processes they must apply are not optimized for performance.

Acknowledging that both people and processes are instrumental to a company’s success makes it much easier to see how benchmarking and competency modeling can work together to provide an invaluable competitive edge for any organization.

Benchmarking can be an important component to optimizing organizational output, as it gathers data about the competitive landscape. But once you have become aware of your industry’s best practices, you need a strategic plan to not only replicate them internally, but hopefully also to build upon them to eventually set the bar within your sector.

Here’s where the input of benchmarking can be used.

Competency modeling can use the data gathered through benchmarking to develop models of superior performance that are customized to your organization’s unique descriptors, characteristics and goals.

Benchmarking is not Competency Modeling

In step 3 of Workitect’s competency modeling process*, it is necessary to identify the superior performers in a job for which the model is being developed, and then collect data to determine the skills, knowledge, and personal characteristics of those superior performers. One of the methods used to identify the top performers and collect data is a resource panel, also known as an expert panel.  In addition to studying people who are top performers today, the panel needs do a “future scan” to:

  • Identify ongoing or anticipated changes in the organization, industry, and relevant technology that may affect the job
  • Identify what each change implies, in terms of additional skills and personal characteristics that job incumbents will need

To illustrate more specifically to a job role, benchmarking would allow you to identify the best practices with respect to a CFO’s duties (key tasks and performance measures), while a job competency model will use the data gathered to identify the skills, knowledge, and personal characteristics required to perform these key tasks as intended, at the most cost-effective ratio for your organization, in accordance with your constraints.

*The building of job competency models, making use of benchmarking data, is included in Workitect’s Building Competency Models certification workshop.

Share Button

Competency-based performance management to reward top performers

Rewarding top performers through a behavior-based performance management processCountless books and articles have been written on the subject of performance management and performance appraisal. “New and improved” systems have been launched in most companies and yet, the same cynicism and dissatisfaction exists, particularly at the employee and lower management levels.

It is a constant battle for employers to find and properly implement an efficient performance management process by which valuable and accurate data can be used to assess the true ROI and potential ROI of your workforce.

Even here, at Workitect, we have discussed the topic of performance management in several articles, supporting companies in their search for bar raisers and top performers. But what is top performance anyway? How can a manager identify and properly reward those individuals who exemplify the qualities and attributes needed to continuously increase a company’s efficiency, competitiveness and future chances of success?

Debunking the myths of performance in the workplace

One of the most common myths of performance management is that the best employees should get all the glory. After all, they not only deliver, but rewarding them gives an incentive to others.

While this strategy may help you retain your best employees, it can also create an unbalanced work environment, which could in turn lead to demotivation and high turnover rates. Remember that approximately ¾ of your workforce is made up of “average” performers; those very workers who, day in and day out, do what is asked of them. They may not exceed expectations, but they nevertheless are committed to doing what is required, and doing it well.

Neglecting to nurture or develop these individuals’ competencies so that they may derive satisfaction from their work and achieve their career objectives is the equivalent of setting roadblocks to your company’s success. A top performer may possess the will or drive to excel, but an average performer still delivers on the work that matters.

What’s more, by recognizing good performers, rather than just the top 5%, you are investing in their potential and motive to improve their performance. Your average workers may be average today, but it is your responsibility to give them the tools they need to become bar raisers.

Let’s however note that this doesn’t mean you should reward poor performers, nor that you should reward good and top performers the same. There is an important distinction to be made, but more on that later.

Step by step: understanding performance management as a behavioral tool

Performance management is much more than periodic performance appraisals; it aligns individual professional development to overall corporate results. In an interview given to Performance Management Magazine, the father of performance management, Dr. Aubrey C. Daniels, describes performance management as:

A scientifically based, data-oriented management system [consisting] of three primary elements – measurement, feedback and positive reinforcement. Although each of these three elements can exist alone, all three must be present [implemented systematically and in sequence] before you have true Performance Management.

In this definition, measurement refers to collected and anticipated performance data; feedback is the discussion between employer and employee on said data; and positive reinforcement is the reward or recognition of improvement in performance.

By Dr. Daniels’ definition, successful performance management takes a page out of behavioral theories, confirming the power of positive reinforcement in behavior modification. He indeed suggests that to promote a culture of top performers, companies must avoid two unfortunately all-too-common practices:

  1. Generalized rewards, such as an extra week of vacation every 5 years of employment or an x% raise every year, as this sort of incentive program rewards good, bad and top performers equally. “The good ones will conclude that it doesn’t pay to perform well, and the poor ones will conclude that it does pay to perform poorly. After a while, the extra week will just be taken for granted anyway.”
  2. Negative reinforcement – “No one works up to his/her potential unless he or she is positively motivated. For example, if you threaten an employee with being fired, chances are he’ll do just enough to keep his job, but no more. And, if jobs are plentiful, he might pull a Johnny Paycheck and tell you to “take this job and shove it.”

So what should a performance manager do to promote performance? Reward good performers with something (tangible or not) that is meaningful to them and 100% contingent on improved performance. Once again, understanding your employees’ motives to performance is a crucial tool in adapting your performance management reward system to yield the right results. Employers should make good use of the feedback session with their employees to understand their drive in the workplace – not just to read and explain the comments on the performance appraisal review.

Remember that not everyone aspires to become a leader. Success is subjective, and assuming that you can motivate your team simply by dangling the reward or promotion carrot is ludicrous. To succeed, a person must not only want to, but he/she must also be motivated to invest in developing the competencies that matter. In other words, if you want top performers, you need to know your team and give them the tools to succeed in accordance with their individual motives.

Measurement: It all goes (down or up)hill from here!

If finding the right reward is important to the success of your performance management system, identifying the right behaviors is even more crucial to the process. If you have difficulty recognizing good or outstanding performance from average or poor performance, even the best performance management system cannot be sustained efficiently.

Some organizations have found that managers should be evaluating employee behaviors and competencies demonstrated, in addition to organizational results achieved. Just as acquired skills and education cannot predict a person’s performance in a given job role, vague or subjective measurement points cannot support a healthy and future-oriented performance management process.

In an article published last month, we mentioned that one of the most common flaws of performance appraisals is that they focus on evaluating workers’ quantitative output, rather than their competencies and potential for outstanding performance. By focusing on purely quantitative results achieved (e.g., number of sales, revenue generated, etc.), you are overlooking several other elements of performance (e.g., leadership, team work, availability, etc) that may be impacting your business more than you think.

Many organizations shy away from a competency-based performance management system simply because it is easier to hold employees accountable for hitting or missing quantitative targets, rather than attempting to measure their qualitative input and planning for their future development. In a way, companies primarily use performance management to determine compensation and meet certain professional development targets, rather than using them as strategies to create bar raisers.

There are several guidelines for effective performance management, but the human factor is critical. Once you lose sight of the fact that you are dealing with individuals, each of whom have personal goals, interests, motives and competencies, evolving over time, no matter how brilliant your performance management process, you are bound to continue experiencing the same results.

For more information on performance management, browse our free resources or contact us for personalized advice!

Share Button

The power of customization in competency modeling

Iceberg_2-1

 

Over the years, competency modeling has been the subject of its share of criticism, particularly with respect to their level of complexity. Many have indeed argued that in addition to the fact that developing customized models that can be applied across the multitude of job roles within an organization is an arduous challenge, competency modeling is a language that most managers don’t speak. Rather, a great deal of HR professionals and line managers prefer to talk about skills and experience when assessing and selecting internal or external candidates for open positions

But can acquired skills and past experience really support an organization’s need to remain in constant movement, to evolve, to adapt to a rapidly changing environment?

As groundbreaking technologies make their way into our professional lives at a pace faster than most companies can adapt to, can the simple fact of having learned a certain skill guarantee a company’s future success?

A skill is a skill is… not a competency

There is an important difference between skills and competencies, although both terms are unfortunately often used interchangeably.

A skill is an ability an individual learns in order to accomplish a task. In an organizational context, this may be, for example, programming, translating, writing, etc. Skills are acquired through education and hard work, and can be regarded as somewhat tangible.

A competency extends a bit further on this definition to include the behaviors, motives and knowledge required to utilize that skill to produce the desired results. In the context of workforce planning and talent management, competencies can therefore be defined as a group of measurable traits that allow an organization to assess an individual’s probability of superior performance, in addition to the skills he/she already possesses.

In other words, competencies do include the underlying skills needed to produce a given outcome, but they also involve a lot more than the ‘technical’ abilities an individual has acquired over the years, to include what employees possess in the way of personal characteristics that enable them to produce superior results.

The bottom line: Why competencies matter

Typically, when companies realize they need an employee to fill a new or newly opened position, they begin the search for a candidate who ‘knows what they’re doing’, i.e., who can perform the task based on their educational and/or professional record. In doing so, the organization is evaluating the value of this candidate based on previously demonstrated skills, overlooking the person’s future contribution. Yet, in our current environment, successful companies must be a step ahead of the current trends to win the game.

We’ve recently discussed how it is ludicrous for an employer to assume that all employees aspire to be boss one day. Many are very content with fewer responsibilities in their careers, placing more emphasis on achieving success elsewhere in their life. As a result, a company in the staffing process may now be placed in a situation where it must choose between a candidate with 15 years’ experience in the field with no career advancement motive, and a candidate with 5 years’ experience with a great inclination for acquiring new skills.

This desire to learn is not a skill, but part of a competency cluster that is crucial to companies. In general, competencies at the motive or trait level (e.g., initiative) are more difficult to develop than competencies that resemble skills (e.g., persuasiveness, communications). It is those harder-to-develop competencies that should be the criteria for selection, rather than ‘skills’ that can be learned.

Customization: Looking inward to play your strengths

Building a competency model for future success requires more than listing the traits or motives desired within a certain job role. In fact, a 2011 article mentions that if competency models have fallen short of their goals, it is because too many organizations decide to create just one model or buy an “off-the-shelf” model for the entire organization, thereby failing to recognize the unique aspects of their own strategy, culture and values.

The article then goes a step further, comparing this method to taking another company’s logo, tweaking it a bit, and calling it your own. Competency models defined in this way will provide clear direction on how to be successful in another company and will result in poor linkage to results and poor alignment with strategy.”

We cannot deny that generic tools are critical to the competency modeling process, as they serve as a guideline, a starting point in your development process. After all, by utilizing the tools at your disposal, you save considerable time and money. But the competency modeling process involves more than listing ‘desirables’ on paper. It entails looking inward, at where your organization is, what it intends to accomplish, your competitive landscape, and the obstacles that may stand in your way over time.

There are as many ways to learn to build a truly valuable and viable customized competency model for your organization as there are applications to modeling:  succession planning, performance management, recruiting, training and development, etc.

You may want to take advantage of onsite workshops, which tailor for you generic competency models to the needs of your organization, or attend public workshops, where small groups gather to learn the techniques required to develop and implement their own models, with the support of an array of already-available tools.

What’s more, Workitect also offers webinars and white papers to further guide you in the process, so that you may derive the best value from the tools we have developed over our decades of experience.

We invite you to contact one of our consultants to discuss the best solutions for your situation.

Share Button

Matchmaking Through Competencies

Competency models no longer need to prove their effectiveness within the recruiting process. Most organizations know that by utilizing a competency model customized to their future needs, the selection process becomes all that much more efficient.

Yet, many continue to rely on competency models as a preliminary tool, rather than an ongoing development tool, thereby recruiting candidates based on their readiness to demonstrate the skills required to perform in a given role. But some competencies can more easily be developed than others, and by overlooking a person’s potential to acquire new critical skills, employers may be closing the door in the face of future top performers.

What’s more, recruiting on the basis of competencies that can be taught on the job entails having implemented the right development programs to ensure that these employees really do have the opportunity to evolve into the bar raisers they were hired to become.

Selecting for (the right) competencies

In general, competencies at the motive or trait level (e.g., initiative) are more difficult to develop than competencies that resemble skills (e.g., persuasiveness, communications); the latter of which might best be developed through a combination of training and on-the-job experience. It is those harder-to-develop competencies that should be the criteria for selection or career pathing to a job, rather than the competencies that can be learned.

The table below is an extract from an actual competency model completed for a Project Manager position. It summarizes recommendations regarding selecting for or developing the competencies in the position.

project_manager_compentency_extract-table

You’ll notice that seven of the competencies are recommended as selection criteria, due to the fact that they are deemed difficult to acquire on the job. These form the basis of your selection process and should be the primary skills assessed by your interviewers in their decision-making.

The competencies under the Train column are less critical than the others in the recruiting process, as they can be acquired through experience and on-the-job training. The competencies under the ‘Develop’ column refer to skills that can be further developed with proper coaching or mentoring, granted that the interviewing candidate demonstrates learning abilities and motives to do so.

Ideally, all the competencies in the model should be criteria of selection. However, what this exercise shows is the value of rating competencies once your model has been developed. Doing so provides a means of determining the relative importance of each competency in the decision to hire or promote.

For example, given two candidates who each possess 9 of the competencies, the candidate who lacks Self-Confidence (a competency recommended for selection) is much less desirable than the one who lacks Managing Performance (a competency recommended for training). The operating principle behind these guidelines is to select or promote into the target jobs according to the competencies that are most difficult to develop, and not to give excessive weight to the other, more developable competencies.

Developing your employees’ competencies

Understanding that your selection process should account for candidates who not only possess the right skills but also show great potential in developing additional competencies is one thing, but the process doesn’t stop there.

To ensure that you and your employees derive value from a competency-based assessment, it is important to ensure that further to the selection of qualified applicants:

  1. You implement and utilize the right development and performance evaluation programs
  2. Your employees make use of these assessments to plan their own growth

Your competency-based system therefore needs to define a process by which development and other related activities will occur. The process should describe a sequence of activities and expectations of the participant, the participant’s manager, HR, and the participant’s coach, if any.

Two tools are needed for this purpose: a development planning form and a resource guide with ideas for developing each competency.

The development planning form usually includes the following features:

  • A requirement to target a small number (2-4) of competencies for development
  • Specific activities to develop or practice each targeted area
  • Dates set for the accomplishment of the activities
  • Criteria or processes by which the participant will assess his/her mastery of the targeted areas

The resource guide is a book that provides general guidance on ways to develop competencies, including:

  • Books, articles and other readings explaining a competency and describing ways to use it effectively
  • Internal courses offered by the organization
  • External courses endorsed by the organization
  • Ways to practice the competency or apply it on the job
  • Ways to learn from experts (by observing or interviewing them)
  • Coaching suggestions for managers

Workitect’s Competency Development Guide and eDeveloper™, The Successful Manager’s Handbook and The Successful Executive’s Handbook are great support tools in this area. However, if your competency models use competencies that differ significantly from the generic competencies presented in these manuals, you may want to develop a customized resource guide, so that your employees can easily find ideas for developing each competency.

Remember that consultants who specialize in competency-based assessment and development can also create a customized resource guide for you. Furthermore, if your program involves coaching, you may want to consider bringing in professionals to work with your employees (typically six months to a year) to help with their development plan and improve their skills on the targeted competencies. Professional coaches can add tremendous value in motivating your employees to reflect on their behavior and think through challenges they are experiencing in their jobs and their careers. Here again, remember that coaching should be tailored to the needs of each participant, and The Executive Coaching Forum website offers many excellent free resources on this topic.

The value of a competency-based approach to talent management and workforce planning isn’t just in what it can do for your recruiting process, but how it can be integrated to every one of your HR processes: selection, assessment, performance management, training and development, succession planning, etc.

Read more about the different applications of competency models, or contact a Workitect consultant to discuss your particular situation.

Share Button

Behavioral talent management: Not everyone wants to be boss

motivatorsTalent management, in its purest sense, refers to a high-level HR strategy that sees to the optimal utilization of human capital to maximize an organization’s chances of success. But when it comes to managing a workforce, the human variable of the equation isn’t always easy to define and as such, predicting an outcome can be extremely arduous for managers who overlook important human behavior concepts, including motivation and aspiration.

Success probably carries as many definitions as there are people walking the earth. To some, it’s a general disposition in life while for others, it is mostly centered around a specific aspect, such as career, finances or love. This diversity in the very definition of success is part of what makes developing and implementing a talent management approach so difficult for executives attempting to optimize workforce performance.

After all, your ‘incentives’ to performance must be broad enough to allow for a cost-effective, streamlined process, but they also need to be sufficiently customized to the varying needs of your employees.

Performance: A question of satisfying needs?

Most of us are familiar with Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, and how each level affects an individual’s behavior in life. But the continuation to this story, developed by David C. McClelland, is a little more obscure, despite the fact that his Need theory is often considered a major contributor to understanding human behavior in an organizational setting.

McClelland’s theory claims that humans possess three main needs, or motives – Achievement, Affiliation and Power – each of which dictate specific behaviors in the workplace.

Motives Characteristics
Achievement
  • Need to be challenged
  • Need for a sense of accomplishment
  • Need for regular feedback
Affiliation
  • Need to belong and be appreciated
  • Need for collaboration/interaction
  • Aversion to uncertainty
Authority/Power
  • Need for control/influence
  • Motivated by competition
  • Propensity for status/recognition

Unlike Maslow’s theory under which it is understood that a person will not intentionally seek out to fulfill a need for as long as other more pressing, or basic, needs haven’t been fulfilled, the McClelland theory states that most people possess a combination of the above motives, to varying degrees based on culture and life experiences.

Based on this knowledge, the Need theory can help you optimize your talent management processes in a manner that is consistent with both your employees’ social ‘motives’ and your organizational need to maximize their performance.

Identifying your employees’ real motivation to performance

In a recent article, we discussed the importance of tapping into your workforce’s potential and interests to develop their competencies and create a culture of bar-raisers. According to this system, it is only “once employees understand the gap between their own skills and the competencies required by the position they aspire to attain” that training for optimal results begins to occur in the workplace, driven by employees’ need to succeed.

But success, as we previously mentioned, is a subjective matter, and it is ludicrous for an employer to assume that all employees aspire to be boss one day. Many are very content with fewer responsibilities in their careers, placing more emphasis on achieving success elsewhere in their life. What’s more, it is critical to have a diverse workforce to ensure performance at all levels of the organization.

McClelland’s theory assists us in accurately identifying your employees’ dominant need so that you may set appropriate goals (and expectations!), as well as provide the right feedback and incentives to get the best results out of every employee.

For instance, realizing that an employee possesses the potential to develop certain competencies required to access superior roles within your organization does not mean that your talent management system will succeed in unleashing it. Rather, McClelland’s study reveals that if the dominant motive of an employee under consideration for a managerial role is affiliation, presenting the benefits sought after by authority-driven individuals is unlikely to yield the intended results.

This can easily be compared to the effects of a customized value proposition on your business development strategies, relative to a generic proposal that doesn’t highlight the benefits sought after by the potential client. The potential of a new collaboration may be great, but failing to understand the motives of the person on the other side of the deal is unlikely to translate into the results you seek.

What’s good for the goose isn’t always good for the gander

By integrating and analyzing the most dominant need in your employees, you place yourself in a situation where you can adjust your own behavior and talent management approaches to drive superior results.

For instance, the theory proposes that to succeed in top management positions, a person should have a strong need for power and a low need for affiliation. And while authority-driven individuals are more likely to excel in these senior roles, it is achievement-motivated individuals who are better known for “making things happen and getting results”. But to encourage this behavior, employers need to provide constant feedback, with a fair share of praise. As such, when dealing with these employees, managers need to offer objective and regular performance reviews in order to set the pace for improvement and ultimately, superior results.

When combined with a customized competency-based approach to talent management, these insights into the characteristics of each person’s dominant motive to performance are critical to an organization’s success.

The case of ‘deliberate practice’, or the grooming of top performers

Once you have identified those employees who have 1) the competencies required by a given job role and 2) the motive to succeed in that role, it is important to assess the value of your professional development programs.

Scientific research shows that the quality and quantity of your coaching are as equally important, and that top performance is primarily the result of expert-level practice, NOT innate talent.

K. Anders Ericsson, a psychologist and scientific researcher at Florida State University, wrote a paper entitled The Role of Deliberate Practice in the Acquisition of Expert Performance, in which he states:

“We argue that the differences between expert (top) performers and normal adults (employees) reflect a life-long period of deliberate effort to improve performance in a specific domain.”

In other words, top performers – here referred to as ‘expert performers’ – are individuals who are developed to excel and deliver results. And this is where identifying the very motives that will drive an individual to train to become an expert performers becomes highly critical to the process.

To learn more about talent management, we invite you to browse other valuable articles and downloadable PDFs here, or join us at our next seminar, set to take place in May in Washington. 

Share Button