It’s today: HR 2.0 webinar

 

   I hope you’ll be joining me for my Social HR / HR 2.0 webinar at 3.00 GMT today.  (That’s 10.00am CDT if you’re in Houston like me.)

 

If you can’t, or even if you can, join me, you may also be interested in these next two webinars I’ll be delivering:

 

I’m sure I’ll also be blogging on HR 2.0 again later…

 

 

  • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
  • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
  • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
  • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

.

READ MORE - It’s today: HR 2.0 webinar

MagazynHR – the strategic approach to HR

 

MagazynHR  You can read more about my perspectives on strategic HR (if you speak Polish) in the current edition of MagazynHR.

 

Technorati Tags: ,,

 

  • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
  • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
  • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
  • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

.

READ MORE - MagazynHR – the strategic approach to HR

Dan Pink on Drive at the HCI Summit

 

  I’ve (nearly) completely missed out on posting on Dan Pink’s book, Drive, previously somehow.  I don’t know how that happened – it’s certainly something I talk about a lot.  I accept most of Paul Herbert’s case (which I still think are the best constructed arguments) against Pink’s thinking.  But I also still think it’s the nearest thing like a hand grenade lobbed into the middle of the HR community that there’s been.

And although I’ve heard Pink talk and seen his animated presentation, I’ve not seen him present live (even virtually) before.  So having done so, I thought I’d share a few perspectives here.

The basic argument is that incentives don’t work for doing complicated and creative things - creating rather than adding to existing categories.  And it’s this sort of work – non-commissioned rather than commissioned work – that’s going to be the future of organisations.

Or at least they don’t work past a certain point.  yes, you’ve got to treat them fairly, to pay them adequately.  People are finely tuned to fairness.  You violate this norm and people will find it profoundly demotivating – basically you’re toast.  So you’ve got to pay people enough to take the issue of money off the table.  And focus on recognition after the fact rather than just incentives.

Instead, we need to focus on meeting peoples’ needs for autonomy, mastery and purpose.  (I’d just add relatedness to this list – Pink writes about this in his book when he discusses self determination theory, but he doesn’t make it one of this key themes).

Autonomy is the pathway to accountability.  Management may give compliance but more and more we need engagement.  Pink talked about:

Netflix which pays its people well to take the issue off the table but (rare in Silicon Valley) doesn’t give its people stock options as it wants people to think about customers not stock.  And also allows people to take as much vacation as they want.

Facebook where new hires attend a 5 or 6 week boot camp before individuals decide in which team they want to work

Atlassian’s ‘FedEx Days’ where every Thursday, people are told to go and work on anything they want, with whoever they want, in what ever way they want, but need to come back to show people their ideas on Friday afternoons in a free wheeling session.  This one day has led to a whole variety of ideas for fixes, new products and internal processes.  The principle is that employees want to do things for the organisation and these days get the organisation out of their day.

Intuit which announced a new strategy to focus on mobile technology.  None of the departments were able to change direction on a dot, but individual employees created 7 mobile apps in their 10% time before any formal projects even got started.

 

Mastery is about getting better at stuff.  People are most engaged and feel most loyal when they’re progressing.  But for this to work they need to have feedback, and have their work recognised by the organisation.  Annual performance reviews are useless except as cover for litigation.  Ideally, you need to engage people to do their own performance reviews – get the to set out their own performance goals and at the end of the month, invite themselves into their office and ask themselves what they need to change.

 

Purpose – it’s really worth reminding people about the organisation’s purpose, especially if it’s naturally compelling, and focuses on why as well as how (what I call mojo).

 

OK, most of you will know a lot of this already, but I still think it’s an important issue that a lot more HR teams need to consider in more detail than they have.

Alternatively, we can go on wasting money paying people to do stuff without getting any impact on what they do.  And demotivating them in the process.  Your call!

 

 

  • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
  • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
  • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
  • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

.

READ MORE - Dan Pink on Drive at the HCI Summit

Social HR webinar next week

 

  Just a quick reminder that I’ll be writing more about social HR (including learning) - that I’ve been writing about in my last couple of posts - in this webinar on Tuesday 15th March.  Do join me if you can!

 

 

  • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
  • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
  • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
  • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

.

READ MORE - Social HR webinar next week

 

 

I’ve had your questions from my webinar last week.  But firstly, let me briefly repeat my responses to the questions I did answer:

 

1. What about 360 degree feedback – isn’t this social?

To an extent yes, but 1.feedback also needs to be shared back with the people providing it, and 2. the focus needs to be the social unit, rather than the individual, ie it needs to be an entire team or community providing and sharing feedback on each other.

 

2. How do you select the best technology for online learning?

This is part of the process I’ve already referred to in which organisations need to select online learning or other enablers as appropriate.  The same applies at a more granular level to the selection of which technology (or which style of team facilitation etc).

 

3. What’s the difference between a network and a community?

Communities are more discreet, have a sense of membership and there is a greater need for relationships to be formed in advance of doing work.

 

4. Does change to become a learning organisation need to start at the top of the organisation?

Well you certainly don’t want the top to block change, but I do think social change has to be a bit different to traditional changes eg sponsorship can (should?) come from the middle of the organisation rather than just from the top.

 

5. I still don’t see how online learning is social

I’ve already tried to address this one.

 

But I didn’t get to these:

Q: Is social learning the best for all personalities, preferences and learning styles

Not necessarily, and it’s not even the ‘best’ for any particular individual, but it’s the best for the learning of the whole social unit (team / community / organisation).

However, if you look at learning from a social constructivist, and certainly a social connectivist, perspective, then yes, in general, social learning is going to be THE best – for everyone.

There are also different ways to engage in social learning of course – it doesn’t all require extrovert behaviours for example.

 

Q: What percentage of participation can be considered to be normal or adapted in a virtual community of learning inside an organization?

The general rule of thumb – for learning as well as other types of community - is 90 lurkers to 9 contributors to 1 creator (Jakob Nielson’s theory of Participation Inequality).  But this isn’t a rule!  Implemented carefully and thoughtfully, you can get much higher rates of active participation than this.

 

Q: What strategies or activities are most adapted to stimulate the collaborative learning in virtual environments?

The key is getting people using the available technologies.  There are a few ways this can be achieved – see this post: http://blog.social-advantage.com/2009/10/3-modes-of-web-20-implementation.html.

 

Q: We are involved with team coaching and team appraisals. Is that social.

Yes, absolutely – depending on how it’s done of course!

 

Q: How critical is the content and the technology to the emergence of enhanced organisational learning?

They’re both less important than the people, ie the adoption.  Implemented right, people will make the technology work, and will provide the content.

 

Q: Can you scale an online learning episode in terms of its social learning opportunities?

Absolutely, this is the advantage it offers over pre-internet, or certainly pre-web2.0, organisational learning.  And in some ways, the larger the scale, the more the social.

 

Q: Is a social learning focus not richer done through a social medium (face to face) ?

I think that’s often the case.  This is the reason that I suggest online learning where you can see or at least hear someone is probably more social than social networking supported learning, although this sounds like it should be more social.

But it’s also the reason why I included the water cooler slide – we shouldn’t forget about face-to-face opportunities to be social too!

 

And thanks to whoever said that they really liked the petri dish slide – “excellent visual for proving the social mix 'culture' point”.

Cheers!

 

 

  • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
  • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
  • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
  • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

.

READ MORE - Your questions on Online Learning and the Learning Organisation

My best hacks and stories at the MIX

 

  Actually, it’s not just that HCI / the MIX didn’t select my hack, that’s OK (everyone makes mistakes!).  It’s more that I don’t think the best of the rest have been selected either.

However, some of the stories (suggestions rather than ideas) that have been selected are very impressive.  Here are my favourites:

 

Definitely some good examples to join the ranks of other mavericks!

My favourite story of all though isn’t on this list, and is one describing celebrating failure at NixonMcInnes.  The entry refers to the company’s blog and a really interesting post describing their measurement of happiness through the use of a sophisticated analytical system which could otherwise be described as three buckets on the floor (see picture).

I also really like this post: What if a company is a community?:

“I like the idea of viewing ourselves as a community because that speaks so much more to our human-ness than the idea of a company or corporation. Community implies a group of people operating as individuals with individual needs and wants, but connected together through common interests. Company suggests a single entity into which individuals have been incorporated.”

 

This obviously relates to what I’ve been writing about in my recent posts on Social HR and I’ll be covering in my webinar in a week on Tuesday (3.00pm GMT on 15th March).

 

PS it’s interesting how many of the MIX / HCI’s stories come from companies outside the US and particularly from the UK!

 

 

  • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
  • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
  • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
  • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

.

READ MORE - My best hacks and stories at the MIX

HCI Top Talent Blog 2011

 

  Strategic HCM has been chosen by analysts at the Human Capital Institute (HCI) as one of HCI's Top 50 Talent Blogs for 2011.

 

You may remember that I had entered a competition at the end of last year to win a prize at the Management Innovation eXchange (the MIX) which would have given me a ticket to HCI’s summit in Atlanta this week.  Well, my management hack was featured in a weekly update from the MIX but I didn’t win the prize (it was scoring very highly until it attracted a couple of votes which must have been near-zero in the last couple of days of the competition!).  However, I will still be attending some of the summit virtually, so look out for posts on it from me this week.

 

 

  • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
  • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
  • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
  • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

.

READ MORE - HCI Top Talent Blog 2011