You Don’t ‘Create’ a Culture… You CHANGE It!

Speaking with a potential client, she asked about the process to “rebuild” their culture. The ensuing chat was interesting (I would call it “great!,” but the client hasn’t signed on yet…!)

First, culture isn’t actually “rebuilt.” It exists — in complete form — in every organization.

You may not LIKE the culture, may want to CHANGE the culture, but remember: It’s a change management effort, and has all the corresponding efforts and challenges of any organizational change process.

A specific culture can START anywhere within an organization, though it can only really be DRIVEN by the top. The top controls processes, most extrinsic motivations, environments, and sets values and acceptable behavior (the whole ‘lead by example’ thingy).

To change culture, all levers must be congruent… policies must match behaviors; values must be supported by procedures and accepted norms; compensation must match desired behaviors, actions, and results.

They’ve all got to work together, and when changing a culture (vs. maintaining), you really can’t afford even small inconsistencies.Without over-stressing my keyboarding skills, desired culture change will never take place via “programs,” off-sites, workshops or other isolated events.

It’s gotta be the whole enchilada. It must have complete support of the senior-most staff, and necessarily reinforced (in part) via performance management.

In other words, it’s kind of a big deal…

Be Brazen.

Investment in Leadership

Investment in training is growing faster than any other human capital or HR-related expenditure. That’s according to Mercer, a ridiculously large consulting firm connected to Marsh.

Their recent survey showed that 51% of profitable firms (there’s a criteria for you) were planning on increasing their investment in Leadership and Career development in 2008. That’s more than for cash-incentives, base salary increases, and even health care.

If you’ve been waiting for leadership development to become really popular; to make the investment decision a near no-brainer, then now’s the time. In other words, everyone is doing it.

Besides just generally good for business, there’s other reasons to develop your managers and leaders:

1. You’re working with another small compensation increase for 2008 (see article on my website). You simply cannot afford to “buy” productivity and effectiveness. Alas, we must manage…

2. Better managers and leaders allow you to succeed in multiple areas of the business; more spending on training and less on base pay to attract, retain, and even engage a competent workforce.

3. Better management is a differentiator, higher pay is not.

4. Promotion and development opportunities are frequently cited as one of the top 3 reasons that high performers leave organizations.

So, your business will be better, key employees will stay longer, and base pay budgets don’t get blown out of whack — and we still can’t understand the significance of leadership development…?

Why in heaven’s name are we NOT doing it??

Fees, Fees, Everywhere, Fees!

I received the following question from an HR Director in the midwest:

Contingency Fees: What’s the value? It seems that the fee percentage in permanent placement ranges from sometimes less than 20% to 30%+ of the candidate’s first years salary.

So, what’s the diff??

Where’s the value change between the 20% firms and the 30% firms?

Though I do not conduct contingency searches today, I spent many years in the Director/VP desk wondering much the same thing…

The answer, however, isn’t mysterious.

The difference is frequently just timing. If a recruiter or firm’s current production is down, volume low, or revenue a bit off for the week/month/quarter, a firm may take closer to 20% for that particular search, instead of their customary 25-30%.

Perhaps they already have a couple of ringer candidates in the hopper, and they low-ball just to close a quick sale.

Maybe, they’re new at the business, and right now they just need to pay the bills (surely I don’t have to make all the obvious cautions here…).

Maybe, they’re just stupid. I doubt that, but let’s include all possible answers.

Now, having said that…Here’s the part that really gets me:

I spent a good many years in senior-most HR roles. A manager/company that will quibble over 5-10% on a $100K search for a valuable contributor to their organization, is so colossally short-sided and pound-foolish that it takes my breath away.

A hiring company’s bigger concern should not be whether the fee is 20%, 25%, or 30%; or whether the fee includes just base comp, base plus bonus, etc… The hiring company’s sole concern — SOLE concern — should be “Can this firm deliver one or more solid, successful candidates to fill my serious need?”

If not, then 15-20% is certainly no bargain; if yes, then we’re spending way too much time quibbling over a few thousand dollars.

Just my thoughts…

Leadership Laws: #5

In this final related blog entry, I’m closing out the “5 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership” I outlined in a recent article.

This fifth law is something we all wrestle with mightily. It’s caused many a manager or leader to be ineffective, or less than fully effective, and robbed many an employee of the benefits of nearby, accessible leadership.

Law #5. Employees need their managers to be leaders; they don’t need a shoulder, a buddy, a simpatico, or a commiserator. If you want a friend, buy a dog.

We really do struggle with this. Everyone wants to be liked, and it always seems difficult to decline a beer after work, or something similar.

I’m not advocating a monk-like existence, disallowing any contact with your troops; merely reminding you that they would like to have a friend, but they need a leader if they are to be successful.

You do want them to be successful, don’t you?

Thanks for your patience as I moved through these 5 irrefutable laws (at least in my opinion). These laws are fairly intuitive, and certainly not rocket science… or brain surgery… or rocket surgery.

They are simple management and leadership axioms that have passed the test of time.

Sometimes, it’s the simple things that work. Try it sometime — you just might like it.

Cheers,

All you need to know about incentives…

Someone recently asked me to give them a general overview of incentives. Never-mind the cliff-notes request format, we simply over-complicate this stuff.

Understanding incentive compensation is simple, and is largely human nature:

1. That which is rewarded is repeated,

2. You don’t get what you want, hope for, manage to, or request — you get what you pay for (as a tenet of compensation, not necessarily a life philosophy), and

3. Simplicity wins.

Exception, contrarian arguments like you mention are just that, and based more on opinion than empirical evidence.

Well crafted incentive schemes will generally work when we can show that:

1. Working harder (bigger, better, stronger, faster) will improve my job performance, and

2. My improved performance will create rewards, perhaps an increase in salary or valued benefits, and

3. I value these rewards.

(oft-paraphrased from Vroom, though not sure his was original)

Again, simplicity wins…

Leadership Laws: #4

In this and the final remaining blog entry, I’m expanding on the “5 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership” I outlined in a recent article.

The fourth law should be unnecessary — make your expectations — as a manager and leader — clear. And that’s “clear” as in crystal, not mud.

Law #4. Make your expectations clear, then back up a bit and give employees room to do their job. That doesn’t mean “never look back;” to inspect what you expect isn’t micro-management, it’s just good-management.

Employees – even top performers – need clear expectations. In fact, especially top performers. Give ‘em a target, provide resources and guidance, remove obstacles when necessary, then let them do their job.

Check back later, since you still have the real management responsibilities and accountability. Hate to quote Ziglar again, but there’s a lot of truth in remembering to inspect what you expect.

Tell your staff what you expect — in clear language; inspect the results of their efforts toward those expectations, then hold them accountable for that performance.

Let’s keep this simple — it doesn’t have to be difficult.

At C-Level Newsletter

Join our mailing list to receive our newsletter jam-packed with info, leadership tips, and fun musings.

You have successfully subscribed!