Upcoming speaker engagements.

HR Transformation Asia conference 10-11 march 2015 , Sentosa, Singapore

South East Asia HR Summit 2015, 7-8 may 2015, KL, Malaysia.

Asian HRM awards

HRM Asia has announced the finalists for the HRM awards 2015. You can see further information of this on the link given here.

More blogs on my LinkedIn

I have been trying to do justice to this blog as well as post articles on LinkedIn. It will be grateful if you can kindly visit my LinkedIn profile to check if I have posted any new blogs there.

CREATING A CREDIBLE HR ORGANISATION

pic from http://virtualmarketingofficer.com/

Very often we have heard of why people hate HR. One of the recent ones which shocked me was an article that appeared in HBR written by Ram Charan who is one of the leading thinkers in the management space. His books which recently has been very focused on people related issues (  The Execution , Game Changers,  Talent Masters etc) have been a great value add for any people manager. However I would not be surprised at why he or many others are frustrated with HR, although I felt that a sweeping statement like “ Its time to say goodbye to the department of human resources” may have been misread by many people.

As it is often said in public policies that “ the people get the governments they desire”, it is true about human resources and its leadership too. Most often the HR departments that people get in many organisations is what the CEO’s , the management and the  employees really desire to have. Once a very senior CHRO told a group of us that he wants to bring in “GE practices at Wal-Mart budgets”. His intentions were absolutely nobles, but guess what-it’s not possible. It’s not possible because GE and Walmart are two different organisation having an entirely different purpose.  Wal-Mart’s mission statement is "We save people money, so they can live better". Now this means the HR department there will have to function different from GE which works on four principle of Imagine, Build, Solve and Lead. So in effect what you get from your HR department is what you really want ,and in all honesty that is what every company should aim for. Getting the right employees who finds a purpose to work for these companies  is the value add that HR can bring , but it should be noted that there cannot and may not be similar HR practices that will be followed in these companies who serve different purposes.

Dave Ulrich has countered many people including Ram Charan when they say it’s time to bid goodbye to HR using his 20-60-20 rule where he says one should focus on  “educating” the 60% of the HR folks who needs to move up the scale. I fully agree with Dave on this as I believe that it is this 60% of HR folks who needs to up skill and grow themselves to be true champions of business. I have myself encountered situations where I have at times doubted the value of HR , but then I guess rather than doubting the value add of HR I should probably be doubting whether it’s just the case of  trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

There is always a huge proportion of so called HR folks who are doing administrative services. Many  business leaders may not even be aware of the existence of these  folks who are actually the skeletal structure of the organisation but without them the organisations cannot function. Then there is the middle managers who interact on a day to day basis with business leaders and coordinate things between the administrative part of HR and business folks. They are a highly visible role and this is where I would put the 60% that Dave referred to who may create an “impression” of HR and needs to up skill. These set of people along with the senior most HR leaders in the organisation should have one main competency that is essential for HR credibility and I would put that as “ entrepreneurial skills”. These skills should make you fit in exactly into the purpose of an organisation and if your entrepreneurial skills don’t fit into the company’s purpose of existence then you would have to find one that fits you so that credibility is not compromised.

It is important for business managers and HR professionals to have a real understanding and dialogue of what HR “should” mean to them. This would help the organisation have a right fit as I have seen often that there is a disconnect between what you really want vs what you are willing to invest especially when it comes to people.  This would help ensure that you can hire the right kind of  HR leader and she/ he can can in turn design an HR organisation which really is made of the kind of people who is inclined to support the purpose and mission of your organisation. 

IS YOUR MANUFACTURING UNIT A " COOL PLACE" TO WORK?

While having a recent focus group discussion with some of our senior managers who manage the operations, one of them told me how companies are getting too focused on technology and process innovation that they forget about the key element of a shop floor- "The People". I could not agree more to it as over and over again we see instances of factories being classified as places which require the lowest level of skills and hence needing the least attention as far as people are concerned.

But is this true and even if it is true can you do away with having the least focus on them?

There was a time when labour force at factories were taken for granted and were treated as inventories which were easily replaceable. This was predominantly done for two reasons

1) Less turnover.

2) Industrial era mindset of managers.

3) Lack of knowledge on learning retention of employees.

All these 3 points are inter related. Anyone who has run manufacturing especially in most Asian countries would admit that attrition has now become a key concern on the shop floor. I am not even going into the percentage of attrition but the cost of attrition if calculated properly ( as i have done for one of my previous employers) could be as high as a million USD per month!!!. Also manufacturing jobs are no longer seen as being "cool" by the younger generation and hence finding the candidates itself is not easy. As per recent statistics 75% of your work force by 2025 would be gen Y, so you better make your workplace "cool" enough.

Most managers who used to dominate the shop floor till some time ago used to run factories like running a military camp. Though there was and in some cases still a need to have strict discipline in factories , the younger generation who has much awareness of the world around them would not like to be treated like in a camp. After all they are not fighting a war, they are merely working for their livelihood.

Also , there was a mindset about the employees on the production floor as easily replaceable and not considered part of knowledge retention and innovation. This is gradually shifting too as we see more push for reduction of total manufacturing cost ( TMC) and other elements for companies to compete. If given a chance the workorce @ the shop floor would play a significant role in these areas.

Contrary to popular belief , my experience is that the shop floor folks are the easiest to be satisfied and their needs are sometimes very basic. Here are a few things that you may find very simple but easy to implement irrespective of any culture.

• ·        Walk through the shop floor and make your presence felt , not just for supervision but to be with them.
• ·        Pass on a genuine smile and greet your employees @ production floor. The higher you are at the organizational ladder the more impact it has. It doesn't cost you a dime too.
• ·        Make an effort to talk to at least one shop floor employee a day. Ask her/ him about his work ( not questioning please), his/her family or anything that has an emotional currency.
• ·        Celebrate small wins and make it part of your management system.
• ·        Find ways to involve and ask them for ideas. Though many factories have employee suggestion schemes, many dont get the desired results as it is often part of a large group brainstorming , lacks follow up or they are simply resistant /scared to express ideas. Break that shell and find creative ways to involve them.
• ·        Convert the work to passion. Work for most people get monotonous and boring when it is just done for the sake of earning a livelihood. Can you find ways to make these employees passionate about work?. It has been proven that when employees know what the end products are and how it is being used ( hopefully for something good) , they tend to get emotionally engaged rather than just getting rationally engaged with their work and the company.
• ·        Make your shop floors look attractive. I am sure we all have heard of sweatshops. Unfortunately many still do exists and even if they are not sweatshops they resemble a boring , disconnected and tired look. For example why do most factories need to be white in colour.

There are many other variable factors involved in engaging your workforce @ shop floor/manufacturing and there is no one size fits all solution. Taking personal ownership, being creative etc in leading the engagement can make a huge difference in making your manufacturing unit a " cool place" to work at.

 reproduced from my article in evancarmichael

Behind every successful leader is an even more successful team in the front

When i write this the first thought i have is of the humble experience of having worked with some awesome people who have been in my team. As leaders move ahead and grow in their careers there , amongst the many factors that made them successful,  the one that stands tall and in the forefront is "THE TEAM" that they have been part of. As the saying goes " you are only as good as you team", i would take it one step further and say that you are " only good because of your team".  A team can be a combination of one or more people who have worked together with you as a leader and it can be your direct reports and the people who have worked for them, your peers , your bosses and everyone who were part of your work. One of  my former boss Ronald once told me that whenever i recruit i should aim for someone better than me, which has always left a lasting impression in my mind because it shows the determination of a leader who is fully secure about himself and has the courage to build a team who can challenge him/her. Many a times i have been asked in conferences and round table discussions of how you can be certain that you have a good team. Here is a few quick checklist that may give you an idea if your team is the one who is going to make you successful.

 ·       Do you have a team which comprises of people who you can be better than you one day if they are in your role?

·       Do you have a team which is ready to challenge you privately and support you openly?

·       Do you have a team which is diverse enough?

·       Does your team feel that you stand up for them and take care of them when they really need you?

·       Are you value adding to your team?

Though the above may not fully describe a team which is going to make you, if you do well in most of these areas you are surely on the right track to building a team which is going is going to lead from the front for your success.

ARE YOU A RACE HORSE OR A WORK HORSE?

Have you seen  some of your staff or even yourself trying to keep busy all the day @ work? . This typically is the behavior of a work horse who would give meaning to the Parkinson's law which states that  "work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion". But  is this a productive behavior?. It certainly creates a perception of hard working employee and in industrial era was appreciated and rewarded. This might have got you or even now would bring you a job stability ( unless you don't end up doing something really miserable) , but this is not what would be needed to for you to grow to being a leader or taking on higher responsibilities.

For that what you need is a race horse , someone who goes beyond the norms of a normal work, breaks the barriers and doesn't count the time he/ she or their team spends in the office. For this kind of a person it's all about performance and not about being afraid of having too much time in hand( which anyways won't get wasted). This person may make you feel that work is so simple and that things in office can be multitasked. The problem is that these people are normally considered still as outcasts or  hackers of work as described by Bill and Josh in their book" Hacking Work". Companies who don't allow internet access for their employees, having strict uniform guidelines etc are the ones who are afraid of these race horses.

Race horse at work are rare and as a company you need to have exceptional skills to locate and nurture them or else they would either become a workhorse or get poached by someone who values these race horses. As you have more of the new gen making up your workforce, there is a higher need for understanding the needs of these "faster" generation and giving them the right opportunity to grow. The choice is also for you as an individual to be a race horse and get taken care and rewarded( of course in the right organisation) or be a workhorse and be treated just like anyone else.

Japan is going to make it more easier to hire and retain foreign workers

Japan , which has one of the highest percentage of population above 65 years of age, has always been taking the brunt of a workforce which has been steadily ageing. While there are many similar countries which had opened its boundaries to fuel its economy, Japan has been a a bit reluctant to do so . This has led many Japanese companies to innovate and move into further automation ad creation of robotics for day to day life.

However with "Abenomics" there is a renewed focus on making Japan as an engine for the economic growth in Asia. Japan is also facing some acute shortage of foreign workers in the construction industry as it gears itself for the Olympics.

It is also encouraging to note that Japan is trying to increase the number of women at senior management positions in the country. This is a healthy trend in a country where women have not been explored to their full potential.

You can also read more on this at Reuters

What Is Your Brand?

  

As we go to a super market or a grocery store, most of us probably have a brand in our mind that we all would like to lay our hand on.   Brand is the "name, term, design, symbol, or any other feature that identifies one seller's product distinct from those of other sellers.  

So do people have a brand?. Of course yes, all of us have a brand though it may be a bit difficult to define what your brand id unless you have done a deep study of yourself or had a branding coach who has helped you position yourself. The interesting co- relation is how some company or product brands are synonymous with personal brands(  for example think Tag Heuer , Nike etc) . This is where the 4 P's of marketing ( product , place, price, promotion combine with the 5th P which is people.

So do you really need a brand?. The answer is that you already have . If you are not sure you would like to ask people who know you well what they think of you and i am sure they can easily describe your character in a few words . That exactly is your brand. If you are like most people , you may have not thought how it would impact your career , but one of the key characters of a good leader is to ask for feedback which helps her/him to check and recheck how others perceive her/ him as a brand and how one can do corrections if need be.

There are business leaders who have created a brand for themselves and that personal branding is tied to the company and the culture they have created in the organisation. Your brand can be part of that larger brand or it can be a independent one , but how your brand yourself can make or break your career. So if you have not thought much of it, it might be worthwhile to pay some attention to it.

There are some tests which would help you analyse your brand . One such one that i recently took was the one created by Sally Hogshead and in case you are interested you can check out their website.

China to reform its Hukou( residential policy) by 2020

In what would be a big relief for the migrant workers ( approx 260 million) and their employers , china has announced a big leap forward in removing its Hukou system.

The Hukou as it is termed in china is a household registration formality introduced as early as 1951 and though subjected to some minor changes in 1980, it has still remained a big stumbling block in welfare issues.
The rationale behind Hukou was to limit the number of people moving to minor and major cities. For example a migrant worker who has moved from the area where he has hukou to another where he does not have it is not eligible for healthcare, education and pension.

I have highlighted in one my blog how the hukou system has an impact on the business in china. While the change may not happen fast and quick ( as it can be catastrophic to completely abolish it in one go), the direction the government is moving is indeed commendable.

Glaxo to stop paying doctors to promote drugs and will also change it sales incentive plans by 2015

I have noted before in some of my blogs , how some of the sales incentive systems are driving wrong behaviors. The move by Glaxo is a huge step in an industry which for the past many decades have not really thought off breaking away from this very " traditional" practice of paying incentives based on the number of prescriptions written by a doctor.

I am sure this will bring in some major rethinking for other companies too.

You can read more on this news from The New York Times.

If you inspire you won't expire

 pic source:tinybudhha

Apart from the pun, this thought actually came to me when i read a comment on one of my posting in LinkedIn where one colleague had described  having an inspiring boss as a motivational factor.

A few years ago i had posted a blog titled " Why someone should be lead by you?". In that blog i had given a few examples to reflect on personal motivation and connection to the leader that would inspire you, some in a very positive way and some in ways harmful to oneself and others.

However, are there leaders who just don't inspire us in any ways?.  Leaders who are there just by the means of a title , and are barely "floating" in the system without value adding to anyone , let alone oneself. Frankly i have been fortunate that i have not met anyone like that in my career , because i find even the weakness of some of the leaders i worked with to be a source of inspiration for me. Also it is always worthwhile to remember that no one is perfect.

For the Leaders, like my colleague said " Most of us need someone to inspire us, support us, listen to us, advise us, mentor us (not just someone to blame!!!)" . That statement has left a mark in my mind and will help me center my thoughts when i may get off track while leading my team. It also might partially give me an answer to why someone should be lead by me?

The World's Most Talent Competitive Countries- Latest data from INSEAD

Though some of the names in the to 20 list may surprise you , like any survey a lot of it depends upon the methodology and the assumptions used . 

 As per  the  website, "INSEAD, in partnership with Singapore’s Human Capital Leadership Institute and Adecco, has created the first ranking of 103 countries on their ability to attract and incubate talent. The index shows the top ten slots mostly populated by European and rich countries, plus Singapore and the United States and a wide gap between prosperous and low-income countries".

Singapore, Australia  and New Zealand are the  countries in APAC to be listed among the top 20 list.

To read more on this , you may visit INSEAD webpage

China's new one child policy and its impact on the workforce availability.

In the recently concluded top legislator meetings China unveiled its ambitious five year plan. One of the key among it is the relaxation of the one child policy which was framed in the 1970's.

This one child policy has apparently helped china in a terms of averting an estimated 400 million births.It is difficult to say if this has helped the country or not. However it is certain that this has created a major demographic shift in china where the average age of the working class has steadily increased.

So the question here is whether this relaxation is going to bring a baby boom?.  Some statistical figures estimate that this would lead to about 1 million new births /year. However there a few things to note,

1. The implementation dates are left to provincial governments so a lot of this would be based on how these local provinces are going to react and implement this.
2. The policy is just " relaxed" and not entirely scrapped . The policy allows parents to  have more than one child especially if one of them were single child. Earlier it was applicable only if both were single or to some ethnic minorities.
3. Very often people forget that the if you pay a certain amount of fine to the government you still could have had more than one child, which basically meant that a lot of rich and middle class people had more than one children in china.  With the higher cost of education and lifestyles many are opting for one child even if they have an option for more than one children. I don't think this would change much with the new policy.
4. Though the government has put a lot of emphasis in creating job in rural areas, the key attraction for jobs is in metro cities like Shanghai or Beijing. Unfortunately the" Hukou" ( residential permit) system has not changed even in this new policy guidelines making it difficult for migration within the country.

Overall the country has reached what is called the  " Lewis turnover point" and any factory manager can tell you you that there is an overall surplus of demand for workers than the supply in that country. Though the country saw a drop of 18 year old children by one- fifth from 2000- 2008, the college enrollment tripled from 2.2 million to 6.6 million from 2000- 2010. This has resulted in a younger generation which wants to go beyond a "factory worker"  and would change the status of china from being called  the "world's factory" .

Though there are companies which still consider china as an LCC ( low cost country), this is fast disappearing and when there is a mismatch between what the new generation workforce wants and what the companies there set up shop for, you see very low levels of employee engagement and productivity. The latest survey from Gallup shows that the China with 6% employee engagement level is the lower in the whole world followed by India, both critical growth economies.

A question to the authors of Developing Global Leaders....

This is a good read for people who are moving in from "developed countries " to " developing countries". There are a lot of good example for a first timer.

However as  i was reading through this book a few questions curious questions came into my mind.

One of the question is,

 The authors cite the example of Bob having his first position in a" developing country"  as that in Singapore- I would like to ask the authors how they determined Singapore as a "developed country" though  it is classified as a developing country by WB and IMF. For further details on this you can also check the  wiki link.

You need to be good with maths to park here:)

This was great. We took this picture today while we were out for lunch in Singapore. Thanks Rob:)

I am wondering how people would be paying for the parking when this parking is not automated:).

The two-pizza team rule

Piece of wisdom from Jess Bezos of Amazon.

Excerpt from the wall street journal

One former executive recalled that, at an offsite retreat where some managers suggested that employees should start communicating more with each other, Mr. Bezos stood up and declared, "No, communication is terrible!"

He wanted a decentralized, even disorganized company where independent ideas would prevail over group thinking  He instituted, as a company-wide rule, the concept of the "two-pizza team"—that is, any team should be small enough that it could be fed with two pizzas.

This won't be a surprise coming from a man who supposedly keeps 2 days in a week completely unscheduled so that he can just spend time thinking, checking things online and let his mind wander!!!

A tribute to the "Human Computer"

Known as the "human computer" she died at the age of 83. Today would have been her 84th birthday.

I salute this prodigy and her ability to master the power of numbers. You can read more about her anywhere in Google which in fact today paid tribute to her by having a Google doodle on their search page that resembles a calculator.

However for anyone who is interested in a further read on this prodigy , i would recommend the following article,

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/24/world/asia/shakuntala-devi-human-computer-dies-in-india-at-83.html?_r=0

Mobile Leadership

I remember one of the discussions i had an year ago( in china) facilitated by Chapman Consulting where majority of HR leaders present in the meeting said that their companies were pulling back key decision making and top talent to corporate HQ.  I believe this must have been a reverse trend set during the economic slowdown. I am not sure how the response would be now.

However in today's globally connected economies  if there is one mantra to make  companies successful, it is going Glocal ( Globally Local). One of the biggest impediments of going glocal is the availability of leadership to drive this , especially "mobile leaders" who are willing to take the challenge of not just sitting in the company headquarters , but willing to relocate to locations across the world.

There has been an attempt made by many companies to move talent and leaders across various countries. This exchange is predominantly between the major economies in Europe ,USA and the BRIC countries. As we witness a slowdown in BRIC there is another set of nations lead by CIVETS( Columbia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Turkey and South Africa) which is   setting a new path for mobile leadership. It is relatively easy to move leadership talent from US to developed countries in Europe ( without going into the tax and payroll parts), or from less  developing or emerging economies to US or developed countries in Europe , however the reverse may be a hard sell. Even within APAC, this is a hard sell when it comes to moving people from one country to another. So it is an immediate need for organizations not just to develop leadership as a number one priority ( according to Deloitte Global Human capital trends 2013), but also to develop leaders who are mobile. Infact mobility should be added as key factor in assessing talent especially at leadership levels.

A good example is CISCO which chose Bangalore, India  as its second global Head Quarters and moved its Chief Globalisation Officer Wim Elfrink  there reporting directly to John Chambers who is the Chairman and CEO of the company based in California. Bayer did the same thing for its polycarbonate plastic business by moving it to Shanghai.

SEEING IS NOT BELIEVING

Very often we are carried away by what we see , as eyes are one of our most trusted and used sensory organs. In management , this coupled with our ability to hear plays a vital role in day to day operations of the organisation.

 Let us look at a few scenarios, 

 •Your manager wants to " see" you every day at office. 

 •Your employees wants to see your physical presence to motivate ( or sometimes demotivate) them.

 •Visuals around management principles and company leaders are hung around the company walls.

How often have you felt that not being in the same office as your boss has got you less "visibility". However is everything what we see in day to day office real?. You talk to a deception specialist or a magician and very often they will tell you how easy it is to fool your eyes. Precisely the same way your bosses may be lead to believe a certain way by those people who are highly visible to him. One of the ancient eastern teachings say that " the world around you is constructed by you", which basically means that whatever you see is what you really wanted to see. It is so true scientifically when we know that each of our eyes take 2 D images and it is the brain which combines these to form a 3 D image for it to make sense. When this is not available the brain would create an imaginary image and would justify its existence so that you really would believe what you are saying. 

 Now let us look a few scenarios where this could be happening at work and you don't even realize it!!,

 •You are looking at an employee who is continuously working, day and night and you judge that she/ he is a star. Infact what you are seeing is your own perception of what a crazy work schedule is , however the employee may be completely unproductive and is wasting a lot of time. This can happen specifically when there is a generational gap difference and you start judging work of an employee from how you and your generation behaved. 

 •Great visual presentations are an eye catcher, but very often we are so captivated by what we see that we miss out if the presentation was just purely impressive visually or did it have the real content that you had wished for . I have seen many presentations where people are so carried away by the visuals , that they forget to ask probing questions and feel completely disconnected after the " aura" is over. 

 •You see someone who comes for interviews dressed up immaculately with a suite and a matching tie etc. Generally , most untrained interviewers would form an opinion about the candidate in the first few seconds of meeting them and do the rest of the interviews trying to justify their impressions. 

So you see how this might impact the selection of a right candidate. I am very visually oriented , but in management i would advice caution using this to drive your decisions. A good leader has to combine his senses ( especially if she/he has visual as the primary sensory driver. Remember that what your eyes see is what your brain wants to see and believe.