Thanks, But No Thanks

What are your company's leaders worried about?  If you don't know, think about what's missing. This holiday season it's probably a party that feels like a reward. If you don't know what's coming, don't get your hopes up. It most likely won't be as swank as last year’s (which wasn’t as swank as the year’s before). You’re also probably missing numerous co-workers who were either laid off, or suspecting they were on the chopping block, decided not to do like the Thanksgiving presidential pardon turkey, and wait for an unlikely last minute reprieve.

 You can tell a lot about your leadership’s top concerns by noting what they’ve said “thanks, but no thanks to” this month. More serious than holiday parties are bonuses and raises. Has there been any mention of salary and hiring freezes yet?  As learning professionals, what your leaders say “no thanks to” often becomes your problem. Unlike them, you can’t say “no thanks” to the problems that arise from their streamlining. If hiring and salary freezes are in the works, what are your plans for retaining your workforce?  Don’t assume your competitors can’t offer them something better. They also may be suffering financially, and avoiding raises and additional new hires, but that doesn’t mean their ears won’t prick up if one of your high-level, or maybe even mid-level, star players say they want to join their team.

 Beyond the compensation issues, what are you doing to make your workforce feel valued?  Suppose last year your holiday party was held in an elegant event space with everything from shrimp to sorbet, plus dancing, and maybe even a band?  And now you either won’t be having a holiday party, or you’ve just sent an “invitation” to your huddled masses regarding the “holiday bash” in the 5th floor break room—adjacent to the Coke machine?  It’s funny, but also cause to worry if staff retention and morale is an issue. Your employees will laugh, but how appreciated do you think this “affair” will make them feel?  You don’t need to do lavish, but investing in a celebration this holiday season that isn’t an embarrassment just might be worth the spend if it results in fewer of your prized talent looking elsewhere or becoming too dispirited to keep up their old levels of productivity.

 In the realm of training, what is it safe to say “no thank you” to?  You obviously are loath to let any of your prize learning gems go, but since that’s another thing your executive board has expressed concern about, you’ll have to slash something. I vote for the Palm Springs, CA, senior leadership retreat you always do in March. How much does that cost you?  And, also, for you large corporations, how about axing one or two or three of the executives raking in the multi-million dollar salaries?  Yes, yes, I know, I’m heartless for suggesting it, but you know I have a point.  As a matter of full disclosure, I have to tell you I’ve never been rewarded with a multi-million dollar compensation plan, so there’s definite bias involved in my feelings. That said, if you ax even one of those “strategizers” you may be able to save at least several of the jobs at the middle or lower levels who belong to individuals feverishly toiling away for the last five years to realize the “big picture” thinking Mr. and Ms. Multi-Million Dollars.  By the way, to those of you in HR, a question:  What are those $10, $15, $20 million dollar people getting paid for anyway?  Are their ideas that much of a commodity?  Okay, but then why are we in the mess we’re in?

 Pre-holiday rants aside, there really does appear to be quite a bit your leaders are saying “thanks, but no thanks to” this month (and last month, too).  How far do you think holiday cheer will go in retaining and motivating your workforce?  You may have to push your leadership to start saying “Yes, thank you very much” soon. Being a yes man or woman isn’t always such a bad thing.

 What’s your strategy for coping with all your executive “no thank yous?”  What they say “no” to out of fear of a faltering economy, you’ll have to say, “yes, thank you” to as a new workforce management problem.

Stuck in the Middle

The middle is usually bad--as in the middle seat of an airplane, being placed in the "middle" of an argument, or being the middle child. There's an implication in all these scenarios of insufficient space and comfort, or being ignored in favor of those at the top and bottom. In the corporate world, the middle, as in middle-management, follows the pattern.  Entry-level employees are looked after with on-boarding programs, probationary periods, and follow-ups to ensure retention, and those at the top often receive the benefits of the executive suite, including relatively high pay, and perks such as hefty bonuses and luxurious incentive trips.

Where does that leave mid-level managers?  They have the "gravitas" of being the boss to their own set of workers or department, but while the executives make the plans, and those working under them follow orders and get credit for doing the work, what's the role of the middle-manager?  There was a more lucrative time (who knows how many years ago--before I was an adult probably) when the middle manager didn't make the big strategy plans, but at least had the comfort of giving orders he or she didn't have to pitch in with. These days, with an economy always on the verge of the ultimate tank, middle management not only has to dole out the assignments; it has to take on more than a few itself. It has to both manage the work of others as well as get its own piece of grunt work done. It's the worst of both worlds.

To ensure middle managers aren't taken for granted, you might try recognizing them a little more often. Most of us are currently cash-strapped, but what about non-monetary  recognition  such as a special middle management-focused award signed by the CEO that these workers can put on their resume, and which can be made an official part of their record for future job opportunities at your company?  Don't assume it won't mean anything if there's no added money involved. Added money is always an enormous plus, of course, but it's nice knowing hard work is appreciated, and it's even nicer knowing you have that recognition in a documented form that can be used towards future career growth.

In hard times, when many corporate learning curriculums are probably experiencing cutbacks, you also could use middle-management recognition as a way of narrowing the field of workers who qualify for training programs. That way you save money by limiting the number of employees given entry into leadership development seminars or career counseling while not throwing out the middle management with the bath water--or whatever it is that's going down the drain at your company.

You also might think about how to lessen the burden of middle managers. First, begin by acknowledging to them that there in fact is a burden. Along with recognition of a job well done, people appreciate it when those giving them the tasks that are making their lives harder point out that they know what they're doing to them. Then, see if you can start an intern program that would add additional manpower to their teams.

Another idea is to carve out a small portion of executive meetings for a middle management update--from a middle manager him or herself. You could select presenters by random means, or draw from the same pool of high-achievers you've recognized. The presenters don't need much time--maybe 10 or 15 minutes, or less even, to run down a list of their top five or 10 concerns for the quarter. You'd be surprised what your "strategizers" might learn from the work horses who do what they're too "high-level" to get their hands dirty helping with.

More than anything else, don't just ignore them, hoping they won't notice. Remember how uncomfortable you were the last time you had to sit in the middle seat on an overnight flight, or a lengthy train ride?  Your efficient middle managers are taking your company where your "strategizers" told them they want to go, but not without a post-destination headache.

What do you have in store for your middle-managers?  Anything good?  Or more time spent being ignored?

Performance Management Means...

"Performance Management" isn't my favorite term because it's too catch-all. It can mean anything from a bare bones employee appraisal process in which the goal is simply to determine if the worker should be promoted and/or receive a raise; stay where they are with or without a raise; or gotten rid of. At the other end of the spectrum, it can mean appraisal to determine all that plus how, if at all, each person fits into the organization's succession planning, and as a result of that determination, how each of them should be developed.

Or it can mean absolutely nothing. It can be bandied about when in fact nothing at all is being "managed."  In difficult economic times, it's hard to have meaningful "performance management" because it's hard to promise your workforce anything. How many companies can still commit to developing even stellar employees?  With budgets getting slashed right and left, their "development" may be no more than the reward of getting to keep their jobs and maybe, if they're lucky, get a raise. Can you do all that plus promise the added development your "performance management" system dictated is right for them?  I assume if they had to choose between a raise in salary and more instruction they'd chose the extra cash. It's cynical of me to think so, but I have a suspicion about that.

What's worse, a lot of companies, including a couple I've witnessed, have committed the horrible "performance management" sin of hiring new workers only to fire them within a few months (or even weeks in one case!) because the company suddenly changed course in a desperate effort to stay afloat. Or, most awful, knew at the executive ranks they had no use for those new workers, but due to corporate strategic confidentiality, weren't able to communicate the change in needs to the mid-level managers doing the hiring. Crazy to consider, I know, but I saw that last scenario happen with my own eyes at a former company. The decision-makers felt they couldn't tell anyone until just the right moment (whatever determines when that is) that the production department would be "consolidated" in a faraway location with, of course, a much, much smaller staff.

It's also hard to make a show of "managing" performance when many companies can't calmly consider the workload for each employee, and then, in a highly sane fashion, give each worker the precise duties that have been recommended for each, and nothing more. With a stressful financial climate reigning, the atmosphere at many, if not most, organizations is more akin to an hysterical person (hopefully not the boss) wildly throwing papers in the air hoping somebody, anybody, in the office will catch them and do whatever is needed to get the work done--regardless of what their job title happens to be. Am I being a little hysterical myself with this vision of mine, or is there some truth to it?

Of course, I like to think of the executives of a company diligently looking over the employee assessments of each worker, and then thoughtfully deciding the right assignments for each person, and then taking care to give them only that work deemed appropriate. But it just doesn't seem to work that way in reality. So why make any pretense about "performance management?"  Is it a PR thing more than anything else, or does the term still carry meaning at your organization?  If it does, what does it mean, and can you give any evidence that it actually means that?

If you can't give evidence that the term is meaningful, can you stop using it?  The word "management" implies much more organization and strategy than is usually present in companies worried about keeping up their profits, or just staying in business. It's possible--but unusual--to demonstrate organization and strategy in the throes of financial life and death. Maybe "performance hope," "performance goal-setting," or "performance tentative planning" would be better.

As is true about life in general, empty promises in the work world are worse than no promises at all. If you lead your employees to believe there's a definite plan guiding their work life, and then end up dumping vast amounts of tasks on their desks that appear irrelevant to the plan you shared with them, they might get demoralized. "Performance management" is a catchy term, but honesty is okay, too. If you're honest about not being able to keep everyone on organized, neat paths because everyone has to pitch in for the moment wherever they're most needed in order to thrive during a difficult time, your employees may surprise you with their response. If I were them, I would appreciate that my bosses respected me enough to tell me the truth, and would respond by doing all I could to buoy the company. Do you think this is an atypical response and that most others would respond by fleeing?

If you choose to stick with your "performance management" references regardless of whether it has any basis in reality, there's one piece of good news: the holiday season is approaching, and you could always bill "performance management" as the new Santa Claus. No one has seen or interacted directly with it, but it's a comforting story.

What does "performance management" mean at your company?  Do you, or anyone you work with, know?  Do you have proof that it actually means whatever you think it means in practice?

Effective training in 3D learning worlds – doing more with less.

If you are thinking of how you and your team will survive current downturn, you are not alone.  Over the last couple of months this became a theme of many conversations I heard and for a good reason.  Training is not going to be immune to this round of belt tightening.  Regardless of the level of your optimism, budget slashing seem to be the inevitable next item on the agenda, or perhaps it already affected you and your organization.  This is exactly the reason why AHG created a new training tool that allows you to cut budget without jeopardizing your work and future growth.  Trying to preserve budgets in current environment is a loosing battle. The better strategy is to concentrate on a solution that saves significant resources while improving training results – KPI’s, time to ready and durability.  Immersive Communication Training System (ICTS) can create uniquely-effective training solutions in 3D learning worlds, such as Second Life.  But this is only half of the story.  The second half is that you do need to hire or involve inside or outside programmers and training designers do not need to have technical background.  You create training simulations using intuitive Graphic User Interface.  If you are capable of using computer mouse to move color rectangles on a screen, clicking them to interconnect rectangles with arrows, then you can create a training simulation as simple as short sales call, or as complex as equipment handling lesson.

Prior to the age of personal computers, professionals would hand-write their notes and then have them typed by typists.  Similar situation still exists in training where instructional professionals design training and have programmers implement it using computer technologies.  It certainly looks like a silver lining of this downturn might be in the 3D learning environments (i.e. Second Life), and technologies, such as ICTS, to get rid of intermediaries.  Doing this might just be the key to preserve and position your team for better future in the times of slashed budgets.

You will find more information on http://www.ahg.com (click on the Immersive Communication Training System button, or click on the direct URL:

http://second-life-training.ahg.com/training_simulations/second_life_immersive_communication_training.htm

)