Second Life: best practices.

It is characteristic of a paradigm shift that significant differences and disagreements on implementation strategies exist during early adoption stage.  As a result, I was not surprised finding myself in the middle of such disagreement past Friday, April 25^th.  That day I was privileged to be on the Corporate training in Second Life panel of the vBusiness Expo (http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/marketwire/0389917.htm). [An important note: Congratulations to Clever Zebra (http://cleverzebra.com) for great organization – rarely have I seen an event run so smoothly in any life – real or otherwise.] The discussion highlighted two opposing approaches in using Second Life in corporate environment.  Champions of the first approach first and foremost see Second Life as a social tool best suited to facilitate communication within the enterprise. Indeed, few people would argue that Second Life is a great communication platform.  What I would argue, however, that social networking is the most obvious, but not the strongest side of virtual worlds in general and Second Life in particular.  Indeed, you can find other tools that allow your team to remotely communicate, often using wider possibilities, such as use of whiteboard, VOIP, streaming video, etc.  In many cases your team will even feel more comfortable using remote conferencing tools, so if conferencing is the only reason you consider Second Life, you will be better off googling “remote conferencing software”.  My search produced 2,750,000 results for this term.  Not surprisingly, though, search on double-term “remote conferencing software”+”Second Life” produced no (as in “zero”, “null”) results, in its own way proving that Second Life is not a remote conferencing software. 

You might be surprised to hear that from such as committed supporter of Second Life corporate use, but I agree – if anything, conferencing is only tangential, at best, use of Second Life in the enterprise.  Second Life is unmatched in corporate training where it allows you to create experiential, immersive environment.  Even more importantly, it has tools to create training simulations in distinctly different areas, such as teamwork and leadership, communications, project management, technical training and others (see Second Life training simulations). Remote conference does not benefit much if every team member is represented by a three-dimensional avatar.  However, ability to run your three-dimensional avatar through a sales simulation in an environment closely resembling the real thing, or ability to assemble/disassemble piece of machinery in 3D before doing it in real life, or training tag-out/lock-out or other OSHA requirements, or training managers in giving meaningful annual reviews, or dealing with difficult people – these and other areas where companies spend a bulk of training budget and time – all benefit from the inherently strong experiential and 3D qualities of  Second Life.

Up until recently wider acceptance of Second life in corporate training was blocked by necessity to conduct training in a synchronous mode with instructor leading training at all times.  Indeed, in e-learning we expect trainees to be able to learn and practice on their own and instructor serve as a figure of authority and a safety net.  With the introduction of specialized e-learning smart robots (see Second Life robotic avatars) Second Life training can be switched to asynchronous mode.  Smart robots look and act as if they represent real people, but in fact are operated by computer software.  Every time a trainee logs in to complete assigned task the system logs the process for future assessment by trainee and instructor.  Detailed reports on specific tasks and progress reports are available.  Since robotic avatar software and training-related data are located on a corporate network outside Second Life data security is drastically improved.  This raises the whole issue of data protection and security in Second Life – too far from the topic of this post, but I hope I will have a chance to return to it next time I get to this blog.

Talent Management Time-Out

With the on-demand learning revolution--the thing about getting the information you need at the moment you need it most--employees are in the training driver's seat. My concern is they won't necessarily get where you want them to go, despite the great maps and traveler's guides. Learning is more fun--much more of a trip--than it was 10 or 20 years ago. Who doesn't prefer getting the tips she needs at the moment of her keenest struggle rather than sitting through 10 hours of in-person classroom time?  If the dry-as-watching-paint-dry class sessions can be reduced to a couple hours instead of a dozen, that's a good thing. The question, though, is whether we're able to guide ourselves to the places you need us to be? We have the information necessary to complete the next assignment, but what about the development big picture?  How do you reconcile long-term training needs, such as leadership development and succession planning, with the push to reduce structured learning in favor of on-demand support? 

I wonder if there's any such thing as on-demand leadership development, in which promising employees chart their own training course based on what they think they need most?  In my naivete I think it could be done. It would be similar to on-demand support for individual tasks, except in addition to asking what they need to get that next new product design accomplished, you ask them each quarter of the year to consider anew what their next in-depth training experience should be. Instead of mapping it out at the beginning of the year, you create a more dynamic plan that is reconsidered four times a year. That, of course, is in addition to the obvious, already-widely implemented solution of creating a repository of "on call" mentors who are ready to be tapped whenever needed. Could something like that be done, and, more importantly, how many of you already are doing it?

In a workplace environment of immediate solutions for immediate needs,it's easy to lose sight of end-goals. The challenge for managers is putting all the disparate tasks and accomplishments of employees into context--to review what they're learning along the way, and where they're heading next. If you're a high-functioning organization, you use annual performance reviews for that purpose. If you're already doing that efficiently, the next improvement is doing it more often. You could train managers how to check in with employees throughout the year, by way of regular performance feedback and ongoing conversation, to ensure they understand the direction the company wants them to head in their development and what all those get-it-when-you-need-it moments add up to.

Which gets us to another point: Do you know what all those moments amount to?  I bet at least some of you don't, either because you've never been asked to think about it, or because you've tried to determine it with your bosses, and they haven't been much help. Just as it's easy to get into a next-task-only mindset with great performance support at your fingertips, so too is it easy to forget there's more your employees need to understand than how to make the next deadline.

You've given them the tools they need to find what they need (or think they need) to get the next assignment done, but what if they're using these support devices to take a long trip that's not going to help the organization a few years from now?  You thought you were sending them on an extensive, exploratory nature hike, but it turns out they've only been successfully circling the block for the last year. Are you still glad you put them in the driver's seat?  A few more road signs might be needed.

How do you keep big picture learning and development top of mind in an on-demand work culture? Any tips, or are your learners stuck with no way to see the trees in your training forest?

Happy Training Trails

I don't travel as much as I like--visits to my father's St. Petersburg, FL, home, or the rare business-related trip to California or the Caribbean is usually as wild and crazy as it gets. But with the world's high-rollers, and high-rollers-in-the-making increasingly trekking continents away to places, for instance, in the Asia- Pacific region, the demand for travel and tourism training is mounting. My big hope (in addition to low-cost luxury vacations coming my way) is we Americans don't export our often shoddy hotel and resort training abroad.

Sure, hotel companies like the Ritz-Carlton are known for their legendary service, and you'll also do pretty well at places like the Waldorf=Astoria in New York, but what about the rest?  In my non-exotic, non-luxury travels in the U.S., I've been disappointed. As documented a little over a year ago on this blog, I've experienced the begging for tips motif at an establishment I shall not name in central Florida. At the beginning of this month, when my work-related wanderings landed me in Puerto Rico I experienced the humor of staying at a hotel known for its superior service only to find service that could be more accurately termed sub-par--what does a person have to do around here to get a wash cloth and a well-functioning toilet?  The staff was pleasant and didn't nag for extra pay their performance didn't warrent, but the service was not much better than what I'd offer to visitors of my "posh" junior one bedroom in Greenwich Village.

As  resorts  overseas  kick up staff recruitment and training for an expected influx of world travelers, the challenge is combining good employee attitudes and demeanors--the right manners and behavioral approach to guest interactions--with efficiency. Not an easy feat. During recruitment I wonder how these resorts will find new workers oozing both effectiveness and charm. What kinds of pre-hire assessments, if any, do you give them?  A written or verbal test featuring hypothetical scenarios would cover the efficiency concern, but how do you screen for deftness at handling routine guest requests and unreasonable demands?  The only thing I can think of is an off-line simulation exercise occurring in a mock guest room, or behind a mock front desk with instructors or fellow prospective peers playing the roles of guests. Think it'll work?

My other curiosity is what do to when recruiting for new resorts or properties in places where the workforce is not known for its high-level of education or skills?  Do you put them through a two or three week clinic--like they do for cheerleading tryouts--and after a brief period of instruction see who's swift enough at picking up skills to be considered a good bet?  It's dicey. What would you do if you were in the shoes of the recruiters and trainers of these new destinations?

Everything from language skills to mastering the finer points of minor toilet plumbing will be called for. If we can't do it with more than a century of world tourism practice here in the U.S., is there any hope for emerging destinations?  I'm optimistic: the workforce in the developing countries is used to struggling for achievement (or in some cases simply survival), and so may be more revved up than the average American worker for delivering service worthy of smooth flushing.

Whatever up-and-coming resorts in new destination regions do, please add a No Begging Seminar to the curriculum.

Interested in sharing your recruitment and training wisdom with new resorts in places like the Asia-Pacific region, and elsewhere?  What can these new establishments learn from our hospitality mistakes here at home?

Something Weighing You Down

Who knew, your employees will wonder, when you mentioned becoming a Lean company you were talking about their waistlines as much as over-fattened business processes?  Or that when you spoke of tightening the corporate belt what you really meant was enabling them to tighten, rather than loosen, the belt to their pants for a change? Those are just a couple of the irritated jokes/rants you'll experience if you try to inflict weight control/healthy living on your workforce in an effort to curb rising health insurance costs. It's not a matter of better, more positive communication of the message; it's a matter of them needing the heaping bowl of hot fudge-laden rocky road ice cream in front of reality TV at the end of the day to forget how stressful work life has become.

As you think up ways to help them shed those pounds through expensive, "progressive" wellness programs, think about the fact that many people--maybe even your devoted employees--gain weight when they're unhappy, need to relieve tension, are bored, or uninspired and need something to literally spice up or sweeten life. New corporate wellness offerings, such as the increasingly popular intra-office health fair, are okay, but what may be more effective is observing whether your company is suffering from a bout of misery eating. The symptoms?  The worker who doesn't do his work without an open bag of pretzels or popcorn by his side. Or the one who seems to return from her coffee break with an accompanying donut or cupcake more often now that another round of layoffs is pending.

You can't (and wouldn't want to) assume the role of office psychologist/corporate Richard Simmons to your "expanding" workforce. But you can break up the monotony and isolating stress that causes vending machine visit-inducing boredom and depression. Work with managers to create daily, or at least weekly, meetings to stimulate quick bursts of creative thinking/enjoyment. Suggest, for instance, 15-minute mid-morning or afternoon get-togethers in the kitchen, break room, or an unused conference room to brainstorm and air the day's grievances. Make the gatherings a routine happening so you can plan games or contests to encourage discussion and idea generation. Maybe every Monday at 11 a.m. you'll award an extra vacation day or early winter Friday departure to the worker who arrives with the most novel new product or marketing idea. Or maybe it's as simple as an award every Wednesday afternoon for the employee who brings in a story from the media or his/her own life that has lessons for the way the company does business. The goal is to get them inspired enough to forget jelly donuts--no easy task--and then, in addition to sharing interesting thoughts, get them talking enough to share work-related angst.

If such "meetings" are too touchy-feely for your corporate culture, ask managers to think about increasing the number of collaborative projects they assign. Work with them to figure out which employees can aid each other more regularly, and what upcoming departmental needs can be fulfilled better, or at least just as well, through work groups rather than individual assignments. The enigmatic allure of Ring Dings really isn't that mysterious--they represent a comforting presence in the life of an employee who doesn't have anyone to share the burden of the upcoming deadline. Human company is not a cure for sweet tooths and poor eating habits, but if there are one or two fellow sufferers sitting beside you as you labor over your tiresome chore maybe talking out the horror will be just as good as gorging on Tastykakes or MoonPies. Even better, all that collaboration--which by the way should be in-person for the best psychological benefits--might result in better products or services for customers.

Reeses Peanut Butter Cups, Snickers, and all that "Low-Fat" sugary pastry and potable goop from Starbucks are comforting. But more comforting are people to share the workload and have an honest misery discussion with. Sometimes when the going gets rough--if you're a sugarholic anyway--it's tempting to envision an office that's actually a gingerbread house with co-workers (especially the difficult ones and bosses) who are hollow chocolate figurines (human versions of chocolate Easter bunnies) instead of stress-generating people. But since that's not usually a realistic possibility, I advise teaching managers to help employees make the most of their shared difficulty. Getting together regularly and often to share feelings and collaborate on work is fulfilling and won't result in cavities or a need for a raise to cover the cost of perennial pants replacement.

Are you helping managers maximize collaborative work opportunities and organize brainstorming gatherings to offset stress and unhealthy living and increase productivity?

The Good Thing About Sinking Ships

If there aren't any other boats around, and you've noticed your ship has a hole in it, that's a bad thing. The good part for the captain, though, is none of the shipmates are likely to jump until a rescue boat appears. If a rescue boat never materializes, all will go down with the ship. Not a great scenario, but for a company battening down the hatches to weather a predicted economic storm it's comforting that you may not lose as many employees as you thought--if, for no other reason, than they have no place else to go.

But it's nice to think of your workforce staying out of more than desperation. So the question for trainers and human resources becomes how to keep employees engaged and motivated amid budget cuts and other cost-saving measures. If you have to cut development programs or niceties, which do you cut, and how do you decide which workers will bear the brunt of it?

My intuition tells me the smart route to take is making cuts and development sacrifices--if you must--across the board, rather than choosing a "second class" of your workforce to short shrift. Try to avoid the knee-jerk reaction of setting aside "high potentials" who will continue to receive the same level of learning support, while taking development help away for those among your workforce who need it most. True, your best performers need to be retained, and with their impressive skill sets can be lured away even in an ailing economy, but devoting the bulk of what's left of your training dollars to them, while throwing stray development scraps at the rest of the company, isn't the way to go. If you do, you may retain a few more high-performers than you would have otherwise, but at the expense of the morale of the majority of the company. They say one great employee is worth a few lesser employees, but the output of your company will suffer if you create a have/have not organization. You've retained your most prominent "stars," but what about the rest?  Mediocrity is decried but the truth is the majority of any organization's workforce fall into the so-so range, with true standout, job performance stars in the minority.

For more equitable training management in lean times, find ways to spread out the development sacrifice. If executives usually go to a posh resort in the Caribbean in February for their annual retreat, think about moving it to your home city, so there are no travel expenses, and maybe less of a venue investment. Also take a look at executive salaries. If you're one of those mega-corporations with CEOs and underlings raking in $20-$50 million, start the budget cuts there first. It's a nearly unheard-of strategy to start salary and bonus sacrificing at the top first, but it's the most savvy way to go to boost company-wide morale and engagement. If you're able--and bold enough--to shave superfluous dollars from those at the top, see if you can publicize those salary cuts to the entire workforce, so when they're asked to give up a position in their department, or find themselves giving their staffers news of a salary freeze, there will be less resentment.

Hole-riddled ships are never a good thing. But if everyone aboard knows they're all in the "same boat," you'll have less trouble keeping spirits, and investment in your organization's output, buoyed. You've got holes, or potential holes, but maybe if your workforce is energized you can stay afloat longer than you expected, or maybe even avoid sinking altogether.

How will you keep your workforce motivated and productive during times of budget and development cutbacks?  Is there any way to keep them engaged, despite the sacrifices?

Talent Management Mud

Are high-potential programs all they've been for the last 10 years or so?  I ask because all of a sudden I'm not hearing as much about them. Rather than experiencing a deep, abiding sense of disappointment, I'm relieved! To tell you the truth, these "hi-po" programs (hi-po sounds like dog food, doesn't it?) never intrigued me. The picture that comes into my mind when I think of the typical hi-po participant is Dwight Schrute from the sitcom "The Office"--a cloyingly eager type who may not actually be all that competent, but can usually be seen hovering somewhere near the boss. Like most of you, I've known my share of Dwights. One of them was so much in that mold she would volunteer to babysit the boss' child if she thought it would earn her some points. "What's playing a few rounds of Candy Land, and taking the brat to ballet class if it'll enhance my image?"

My hi-po cynicism amounts to a belief that hi-po programs are little more than structured office politics. Those who schmooze best, or know the right people, are put on the fast track while those with equal or superior abilities, who don't like playing brown-noser, are shucked off to the side. Am I wrong?  Show me how wrong I am about these programs by explaining some concrete, objective measures you use to decide who gets labeled "star" and who gets sidelined.

A fair approach that would benefit your organization more than the multiple hi-po recommendations requirement would be measures such as amount of revenue generated or successful innovation (new product, new marketing plan) contributed by individuals under consideration. Rather than have managers recommend hi-pos, ask employees across the company to nominate peers they feel do outstanding work. Meanwhile ask managers do to the same. You may be astounded out the variation between the hi-pos noted by fellow employees, and those cited by managers.

In the end, though, hi-po programs might just be counter-productive. I've heard that in studies of school children those labeled "star," and those labeled "loser" tend to play to their teacher's expectations. Humans, apparently, have the tendency to meet the expectations of leaders, for better or worse. "So, you think I'm a loser?  I guess I won't bother trying. Nothing I can do to change your mind anyway." Label a greater swath of employees "High Potential," and by virtue of doing that alone, you may end up with a handful more of star performers than you currently have.

Bottom line: employees like to feel they and their peers are rewarded for the amount of work--not schmoozing--they do, and they like to feel invested in. Watching a group of mostly average peers get elevated to hi-po royalty for no concrete, quantifiable reason is demoralizing. If you must have a hi-po program in place, be sure to set well publicized, measurable standards. The initiative won't be taken seriously or respected otherwise. Rather than being synonymous with budding leaders, your hi-po program will become the butt of numerous sounds-like-dog food jokes--I should know as I'm planning to author some of those jokes.

Tell us about how great your hi-pos are. By the way, how do you know they're so great?