Work Productivity and Employee Health: The Role of Absenteeism and Presenteeism

Please confirm the following details to complete
the sign up process.Take advantage of our FREE content and continue networking with your peers. Already a member? Sign in.

View the original article here

Building Talent Through Ongoing Recruitment & Leadership Development Efforts

Please confirm the following details to complete
the sign up process.Take advantage of our FREE content and continue networking with your peers. Already a member? Sign in.

View the original article here

Google's Project Oxygen: A Case-Study in Connection Culture

Contributor:  Michael Lee Stallard
Posted:  03/25/2011  12:00:00 AM EDT  |  1

Google recently went public with the results of its Project Oxygen research to identify the practices of Google’s best technical managers. Their approach called for a study of 100 variables by data-mining performance reviews and internal surveys.  Laszlo Bock, Google’s Vice President for People Operations, summed up the findings when he said the most important factor they identified was “making that connection” between the manager and the employee.  Google is right that the manager-employee connection is important, but it’s only part of the story.

That’s what I told Google’s leaders when I presented at the Googleplex in 2009 as part of the Leading@Google Series.  In 2002, I first recognized that employees who gave their best efforts and aligned their behavior with organizational goals frequently used the word “connection” to describe why they were so fired up about their work.  Since that time, my colleagues and I have been identifying the multiplicity of ways that great leaders in business, government, the social sector and sports connect with the people they lead to achieve sustainable superior performance.  In 2007, we published our findings about connection in the book Fired Up or Burned Out.

After of nearly a decade of studying connection, I’ve come to believe it is one of the most powerful and yet least understood aspects of organizational performance.  In the business context, the feeling of connection between management, employees and customers provides a competitive advantage. Unless the people who are part of a business feel a sense of connection—a bond which promotes trust, cooperation and esprit de corps—they will never reach their potential as individual employees, nor will the organization reach its potential.

An organization with a high degree of connection breeds employees who are more engaged, more productive in their jobs, and less likely to leave the organization for a competitor. Organizations with greater connection also have employees who share more information with their colleagues, leading to better-informed decisions and new products, processes and entirely new businesses. Connection is what transforms a dog-eat-dog environment into a sled dog team that pulls together.

So what is connection anyway? When we interact with people, we generally feel that we connect with some and not with others. Phrases such as “we really connected” and “we just didn’t connect” are common in our daily conversations. Connection describes something intangible we sense in relationships.

We define connection as a bond based on shared identity, empathy and understanding that moves self-centered individuals toward group-centered membership.  When connection is present, we feel energy, empathy, affirmation and are more open. When it is absent, we experience neutral or even negative feelings. Although we know what it’s like to feel connected on a personal level, few among us understand the effect connection has on us and on the organizations we work in.

Reflecting on my personal and professional experiences and on the research I’ve read and conducted made me realize three things:

First, connection is a powerful force that creates a positive bond between people based on both rational and emotional factors.Second, connection contributes to bringing out the best in people—it energizes them, makes them more trusting and resilient to face life’s inevitable difficulties.Third, connection can vary tremendously across organizations depending upon local culture and leadership.

What is it about connection that makes it so powerful? Without going too far into the psychology of connection, let me just summarize by saying simply that we are humans, not machines. We have emotions. We have hopes and dreams. We have a conscience. We have common deeply felt human needs: to be respected; to be recognized for our talents; to belong; to have autonomy or control over our work; to experience personal growth; to do work that we feel is worthwhile in a way that we feel is ethical. When we work in an environment that recognizes these realities of our human nature, we thrive. We feel more energetic, more optimistic, and more fully alive. When we work in an environment that fails to recognize this, it is damaging to our mental and physical health.

For those of you who see the value of connection, I want to show you how you can bring it out in the workplace by creating a “Connection Culture”—a culture with the necessary elements to meet our human needs. The core elements of a Connection Culture that meet these human needs are vision, value, and voice.

Vision

The first element of a Connection Culture is vision. Vision exists when everyone in an organization is motivated by the organization’s mission, united by its values, and proud of its reputation. When people share a purpose or set of beliefs they’re proud of, it unites and motivates them. 

At Google, many employees connect with its mission to “organize the world’s information and make it accessible and usable.” These Googlers understand that Google’s search engine will help change the world by making people smarter and better decision-makers. They are motivated by that prospect.  Googlers are also united by its values that include “do no evil” and its “Googley” style, which incorporates the values of being authentic, genuine, fun, and curious. Being Googley ties in to Google’s passion for its modern, bright and colorful visual identity that is incorporated in everything from its website and written materials to its interior office design and building architecture. Google’s reputation connects with Googlers in several respects. The firm is well-known as one of the most innovative companies globally. It has a reputation for hiring smart people, and it is recognized for having one of the best workplaces in the world.  All of this makes its talent feel proud to be associated with Google.

Value

The second element of a Connection Culture is that people are truly valued. My colleagues and I refer to this element in a culture simply as “value.” It means that everyone in an organization understands the universal nature of people, appreciates the unique contribution of each person, and helps them achieve their potential.  Value also includes protecting people from abuses such as workplace incivility, sexual misconduct or prejudice—actions that make people feel disconnected from their community because it failed to protect them.

At Google, research shows that employees feel valued if they connect with their manager.  Google's Project Oxygen research picked up on some leadership behaviors that reflect value. The best technical managers help their employees with career development, take interest in employees’ lives and make time for one-on-one meetings with employees.

Voice

The third element of a Connection Culture is “voice.” The element of voice exists when everyone in an organization participates in an open, honest and safe environment where people share their opinions in order to understand one another and seek the best ideas. When people’s ideas and opinions are sought and considered, it helps meet the human needs for respect, recognition and belonging. “Being in the loop,” so to speak, makes people feel connected to their colleagues, just as being “out of the loop” makes people feel disconnected.

The CEO and founders of Google conduct “TGIF” meetings every Friday.  Googlers vote on the topics they would like to see addressed in the TGIF.  These meetings give employees a sense of voice that makes them feel connected.  One of the variables that Project Oxygen identified was that the best technical managers ask questions and don’t dictate answers.  This also reflects voice.

The bottom line is that we all need connection to thrive at work and in life. Here are a few suggestions about how to get started:

Everyone should understand what connection truly is and continuously strive to increase it among the people with whom they live and work.Identify the vision that will unite and motivate everyone in your business. That vision may be becoming the best at what you do. It may be bringing something new to the world or conducting your business in a way that reflects your values. For example, Disney’s vision is to “make people happy.” To jump start the process, get your most motivated people in a room and ask them when they have felt proud of the company. Listen to their stories and you’ll likely find a vision to rally around.Get to know the personal stories of the people you live and work alongside. Learn what has made them happy and what has disappointed them. Find out what their professional and personal hopes are for the future. As people get to know one another, value will increase and connection will be strengthened.

Connection is the key. It makes a difference in families, in workplaces, in schools, in volunteer organizations, in communities and in nations. No one   can thrive for long without it.

Michael Lee Stallard is co-founder and partner of E Pluribus Partners, a leadership training and coaching firm.  He is also a co-author of the best-selling book Fired Up or Burned Out: How to Re-ignite Your Team’s Passion, Creativity and Productivity. Stallard helps leaders create work environments in which employees give their best efforts and align their behavior with organizational goals in order to achieve sustainable superior performance.

Prior to E Pluribus Partners, Michael was chief marketing officer for the private wealth management businesses of Morgan Stanley and Charles Schwab. Earlier in his career, he worked in investment banking, marketing and financial management positions at Barclays, Van Kampen Investments and Texas Instruments.

Download a copy of Michael Stallard's "Connection Culture" manifesto.

View the original article here

Producing Innovation: A Systems Approach

February 4,2010 by From the HRIQ Editorial Staff

Almost every organization wants to produce meaningful innovation. It is an area to which the most attention is being given today.

Innovation is just one component in what is being called "change management." Organized abandonment, continuous improvement and systematically exploiting success are the other components of change management.

Indeed, only after an organization develops policies and procedures for abandonment, improvement and exploitation can the organization hope to be a successful innovator. 

In subsequent articles we will discuss the other components of change management. This article focuses on using a systems approach to producing and managing innovation.

Of late, the subject of "a systems approach to innovation" has become "in," with dozens of articles, seminars, podcasts, webinars and the like devoted to it.

Peter F. Drucker once defined innovation as:

"The design and development of something new, as yet unknown and not in existence, which will establish a new economic configuration out of the old, known, existing elements.

"It will give these elements and entirely new economic dimension. It is the missing link between having a number of disconnected elements, each marginally effective, and an integrated system of great power."

An Example and Its Lessons

It is this "systems" aspect of innovation that is invoked when we say Thomas Edison created a new industry.

In an excellent Harvard Business Review article (November, 2009) titled, “How To Jump-Start the Clean-Tech Economy,” Mark W. Johnson and Josh Suskewicz wrote:

"Thomas Edison grasped the systemic nature of technological transformation a century ago when he introduced the electric light bulb. He realized that the technology he envisioned—no matter how innovative—couldn’t by itself sweep aside the kerosene-based lighting industry.

"Instead of asking how he could solve the technical problem of inventing a light bulb, Edison asked how he could get consumers to switch from kerosene to electricity. He understood that despite the many advantages of electric light, it would replace kerosene only if it had its own, economically competitive network.

"So, while scores of people worldwide worked on inventing a light bulb, Edison conceived a fully operational system. His technical platform included generators, meters, transmission lines and substations, and he mapped out both how they would interact technically and how they would combine in a profitable business.

"Edison tested his concept in a pilot project...on a small scale in Lower Manhattan, a favorable foothold market because the buildings were close together and filled with potentially enthusiastic customers: Wall Street firms that were eager to be on the technological cutting edge and that had employees who worked long into the night.

"It was not coincidental that he was demonstrating his system to the very people who could fund its expansion.

“He also used his public standing to acquire regulatory support—for example, to get the needed permits despite opposition from the lamplighters’ union.”

All the ingredients of creating a successful electricity business existed, except one. Adding the electric light bulb created an entirely new economic capacity.

Said Drucker: "Innovation is not invention or discovery. It may require either—and often does. But its focus is not knowledge but performance—and in a business this means economic performance."

Edison, in essence, asked: What is lacking to make effective what is already possible?

To describe the need is not to satisfy it. But, according to Johnson and Suskewicz, describing the need gives a specification for the desirable results. Whether they are likely to be obtained can then be decided.

Another Example

In the 1970s, the publishers of Industry Week magazine co-founded a company called Penton Learning Systems (PLS is the owner of this website and IQPC).

PLS's mission and purpose was to "supply the missing link between a number of disconnected colleges and universities, each marginally effective in designing and developing short courses for managerial and professional workers, and an integrated system of great power."

The Concept Was Simple

Let's say Michigan State University (MSU) offered the best short course on Developing the Annual Marketing Plan... and California Institute of Technology (CIT) offered the best short course on Conserving Energy in Buildings and Plants.

MSU could "import" CIT's Energy Management course and "export" its marketing planning seminar to CIT.

If 100 schools entered the consortium, and each provided just one outstanding two or three day seminar and faculty member, then every institution would have access to 100 outstanding seminars and faculty members.

The concept proved valid: 105 colleges and universities joined the consortium.

Schools, such as Southern Methodist University, University of California-Berkeley, University of Cincinnati, California Institute of Technology, Northwestern University, Michigan State University, University of Minnesota and the like became active "importers and exporters" of timely seminars that could be offered to their local markets.

For 15 years, Penton Learning Systems managed this consortium with great success.

It assisted in the design and development of over 30,000 short courses/seminars in the fields of quality management, project management, finance and accounting, marketing management, strategic planning and the like.

The Point?

Schools could not by themselves continuously define and staff salable short courses that met a wide variety of training needs of institutions in their market area.

In reality, universities and colleges know how to produce degree-granting programs.

But most know very little—or have the appropriate marketing intimacy knowledge—to design and develop a continuing series of timely short courses that solve very specific problems target audiences in their local markets face.

PLS's innovation was to supply the missing link between a vast number of disconnected colleges and universities and combine them into an integrated system capable servicing the training needs of the markets they served.

All the elements were there. What was lacking was the simple element of a dedicated entity designed to organize a disorganized industry.

Other value-added services were required: the disciplined selection of a faculty that could face an adult audience; the design of the right programs; direct marketing expertise; negotiation with faculty to keep their fees realistic and sensible; and a logistical support system to facilitate the exporting/importing of quality faculty.

Tremendous economies of scale were achieved. New economic capacity was created for each and every school in the network.

In Conclusion

Maximizing opportunities looks for the best way toward realizing the ideal business. Thinking through the ideal business design—that is, focusing on the whole rather than parts—increases the probability of success.

Johnson and Suskewicz summed it up best when they said:

"The framework for thinking about new systems consists of four interdependent and mutually reinforcing components: an enabling technology, an innovative business model, a careful market-adoption strategy and a favorable government policy."

The systems approach is required not only for clean-tech businesses. It is now a requirement for every institution in society—businesses, government, colleges and universities, and the like—that want to produce and manage meaningful innovation.

A piecemeal approach won't suffice. To produce real innovation executives must be able to see resources and efforts a whole.

Partial analysis is likely to misinform, misdirect, and end in failure. Only the overall view has a reasonable probability to succeed.

*Human Resources IQ is not affiliated with the Peter F. Drucker School of Management or the Peter F. Drucker Institute. Any mention of Peter F. Drucker School of Management or the Peter F. Drucker Institute is solely at the discretion of the authors.

Sign in or Sign up to post a comment

View the original article here