Twitter, which purchased Posterous , has announced that as of April 30 they were closing down this blog platform. As a result we have moved the blog over to WordPress. The new site is found at http://humanresourcestrategist.wordpress.com/
To continue to receive notification of the posts please go to the site and click on the follow option in the right hand sidebar.
At a recent seminar, a woman who helps run a community college stood up to ask a question.
"Well, the bad news," she said, "is that we have to let everyone in. And the truth is, many of these kids just can't be the leaders you're describing, can't make art. We need people to do manual work, and it's those people."
I couldn't believe it. I was speechless, then heartbroken. All I could think of was these young adults, trusting this woman to lead them, teach them, inspire them and push them, and instead being turned into 'those people.'
You know, the people who will flip burgers or sweep streets or fill out forms all day. The ones who will be brainwashed into going into debt, into buying more than they can afford, to living lives that quietly move from one assigned task or one debt payment to another. If they're lucky.
No, I said to her, trying to control my voice, no these are not those people. Not if you don't want them to be.
Everyone is capable of being generous, at least once. Everyone is capable of being original, inspiring and connected, at least once. And everyone is capable of leading, yes, even more than once.
When those that we've chosen to teach and lead write off people because of what they look like or where they live or who their parents are, it's a tragedy. Worse, we often write people off merely because they've been brainwashed into thinking that they have no ability to do more than they've been assigned. Well, if we brainwashed them into setting limits, I know we can teach them to ignore those limits.
Think about your hiring practices, when you seek out new candidates do you fall into this stereotype view of the world?
To my HR purist friends I apologize if you think I believe that HR does not have a vital role within our organizations.I am in no way equating HR to playing the child game of house. What I am suggesting is that there is a new visitor in the neighborhood.
For some time I have had some elementary interest in a new tool to increase employee engagement called gamification. It came to the forefront when I received a LinkedIn Invite from Noreen Poli of Ready, Set, Go Social who asked me how to introduce her platform to the HR community.
The purpose of the gamification effort is to take the concepts alive in the online gaming process and apply them to the business arena. In each instance the employee is rewarded if you will with feedback, rewards and badges to show how well they were involved in the process.
According to an article by Rob Garcia in the upMover there are three areas of low hanging fruit where this can apply now - Employee referral programs, talent management and collaboration and health and wellness. In a separate article from Forbes magazine entitled Gamification: Three ways to use gaming for recruiting, training and wellness the author talks about Marriott using gaming theory in recruiting kitchen managers. The link takes you to an app on Facebook.where you are given the assignment to act as the kitchen manager. It is fun. It is engaging and it shows what we are talking about. Your assignment is to prepare food for customers and then have it sent out to the restaurant floor. Your feedback is the format when the plate is returned to the kitchen and you are able to see how much of the food was consumed. I tried it four times and the first plate came back half empty the rest came back mostly or not at all consumed. Marriott uses it as a recruiting tool to show candidates the responsibilities of the kitchen manager. Obviously since the platform allows you to save your results the candidate is able to show Marriott whether they can handle the job.
If your are interested in learning more there are several good outlets for more information:
1. The online educational site Coursera is offering a free 12 week course on the concepts behind gamification in business conducted by Professor Ken Werbach from the Wharton School of Business.
2. Professor Ken Werbach has written a book about this area called For the Win and it can be found as a Kindle E-Book for under $10.00
We need to keep searching for ways to engage our human capital assets for the betterment of our organizations. With the increasing role of the younger generations in our organizations, gamification allows us to engage them in the world they are comfortable in. Regardless of our generational level, I am sure that many of you out there play the Faceboook and Zynga games. Gamification allows us to bring that feeling to the business marketplace.
Daniel Bloom & Associates, Inc. has created a second blog here on Posterous entitled "Achieving HR Excellence Through Six Sigma - The Blog. Come visit, and join the community to look at how to continuously improve the process we call HR.
http://achieve-hr-excellence-through-six-sigma.posterous.com
On two separate times in the past week, my inbox contained entries which centered around the image that the corporation puts forth to the marketplace. In each one to some degree the organizations involved forgot what their purpose is -- to acquire and maintain customers. To do that we need to have the "right person, in the right job, at the right time and in the right place."
Consider these events. The first involved a cheerleader on the Baltimore Ravens. She was banned from being part of the cheerleader team at the Superbowl because she put on a pound and a half in weight. The second I received from fellow blogger, Trish McFarlane. who posted a blog reference on LinkedIn.It involved a post from the Proactive Employer in which it was reported that based on a message from G-D the HR Manager of the organization was fired after two weeks because her same-sex relationship would not look good for the organization.
Every day I see rants from employers who say that they can't find the necessary talent to fill their positions and yet they become concerned with the answer as to whether they are the fairest in the world. Trust me I know the arguments or have heard them before. When I worked in the corporate mobility world, the relocation management company competition was typically the beauty queen personage who would compete as much on the image as the solutions to the client's problems. But image does not necessarily help you find the right person for the right job in the right place at the right time. It may even be detrimental to your organization under ADA.
So the next time you have a position available consider these matters of fact for sourcing the candidate for that opening:
1. It is what they can do for you, not what they look like that is important - We are in a very competitive, rapidly changing business world. It is far more important to consider what Knowledge Performance Indicators they can bring to the table. It is not the time to select a person on the basis on whether they can compete for Miss America tomorrow.
2. Your needs are here and now in your business - Your sole concern should be finding a person with the right skills for that open slot. You can go out and hire that stereotype glamor individual and still not get the skills necessary to help the organization through these difficult economic times. He or she may lift the spirits of some of your employees but that may not mean that you are now more innovative or competitive.
We are considering scheduling an offering of our 2-day seminar on "Achieving HR Excellence through Six Sigma" in the Orlando market. Could you please respond to the survey found at http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/3ZVZYQV
We need a minimum of 20 individuals to attend to make the numbers work.
As always we appreciate your continued interest in this venue.
Those of you who are old enough to remember the TV Show from the 1960"s staring Peter Graves- Mission Impossible will remember that every show began with the following phrase:
Good morning, Mr. Phelps..... Your mission, Jim, should you decide to accept it, is to make XXXXXXXXXX. As always, should you or any of your IM Force be caught or killed, the secretary will disavow any knowledge of your actions. This tape will self-destruct in five seconds. Good luck, Jim.
So here is my question to you this Monday, are you ready to take the assignment before you? Are you ready to truly take responsibility for hiring the right person for the right position at the right time and at the right location?
In reading some of the magazines which come across my desk recently I found two very interesting articles The first was in the January 2013 issue of Mobility Magazine which is the trade association journal for the Corporate Mobility industry. The article reported the results of the 2012 Global Workforce Symposium's Benchmarking Survey which indicated that when asked if their organizations were facing shortages in qualified talent for critical jobs or roles, the attendees responded that 5% were to a very large extent, 24% responded to a large extent, and 49% were to some extent.
The second article appeared in the January issue of HR Magazine under the Executive Briefing which reported on the results of research by California State University San Marcos and Kenneshaw State University which found that there was an imbedded bias against those with a long term (i.e.18 months or longer) unemployment on their resume. What was further strange was that the research showed that if the unemployed worked as a volunteer the bias was reduced.
We have an unemployment issue in this country, much of it not due to anything that the human capital asset did or asked for. Part of that problem is a continuing belief that the best way to locate the right person for the job is to poach someone from a competitor, the so called passive candidate.
So if you take this assignment as a HR business partner, are you ready to examine your attitudes toward the available talent?
As kids we all remember going to friend's birthday parties where our parents modus operandi was to always include a game of musical chairs. As you also remember the goal was to be the person in the last chair when the music stopped. Concentrating your search for passive talent is the equivalent of a grown up musical chairs.
If you are taking this assignment, consider these strategies on your next talent search:
So, if you take this assignment, remember the goal of talent management is to enhance the organization. Don't rule out the very asset that will allow you to reach the reason for your existence within the organization.
Every year my wife and I have a tradition of attending the supposed "final tour" for B.B. King and as usual last night he sang is hit "The Thrill is Gone." In listening to it last night I began, based on some comments from some of my HR peers, to wonder if that is HR's problem. Have the majority of our peers -deep down inside- lost that thrill about the role HR plays within our organizations? Is the change self-inflicted or the response to a changed view of the function by management?
I hear almost everyday that some think we need to return to the days when we were called personnel. Our responsibilities were that of handling the administrative aspects of our human capital needs. as the business world evolved so did the nature of what we do. The problem began when we changed the name from personnel to human resource management. We were neither ready for the change nor asked for it. In our attempts to make the change we began to fall far short of the expectations that management now required from their HR departments. We became the organizational fireman or policeman depending on the circumstance but di not gravitate toward truly managing the human capital assets. this is part of the reason why HR becomes one of the first prts of the organziation to be dismissed when times get tough.
So has the thrill of being the gatekeeper to the human capital assets gone the way of many other things in our lives? I would suggest that the answer is in the negative. The workplace has changed and we need to change with it. We can still find the thrill within our business lives if we follow some simple steps:
The thrill might be gone in the careers of many HR professionals but with the right view and the right attitude the thrill can be returned. Are you ready to bring the thrill back?
Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
You are sitting at your desk and a box arrives from the Worldwide ERC containing the study material for the 2013 Certified Relocation Professional Examination. Your first thought after opening the box is how you are going to find the time to prepare for the examination? For many of you the answer is I don’t know! The corporate mobility body of knowledge grows every year and there are many new things you have to master in order to prepare successfully for the examination on May 15, 2013
Fortunately, there is a better way. The Daniel Bloom & Associates, Inc. 3- day Boot Camp for the CRP 2013 will help you identify those strategies that will enable you to successfully pass the examination.
Attended by over 1000 of your fellow mobility professionals since 1991, representing all the various segments of the industry, the Boot Camp has proven to be successful in their preparation for the exam.
The 23rd Annual CRP Boot Camp is your direct route to:
Ø Gaining a better understanding the entire corporate mobility industry
Ø Identifying the critical areas covered by the exam
Ø Identifying successful testing strategies for answering the examination questions
Ø Increasing your service capabilities delivered to your clients by understanding their needs
Ø Receiving support information to reinforce the examination information
Ø Gaining real life examples of the material implementation
Ø Concentrated review without interruption for the examination
Ø Network with other professionals who are also preparing for the examination.
The workshop materials include a 355+ page outline version of the current CRP material updated for 2013, a nearly 800 question sample test like exam to acquaint you with the style of questions that could be asked on exam day, admission to the 3-day class, a copy of the class powerpoint presentation and a second 125 question exam based on the 2013 material.
Developed by Daniel Bloom & Associates, Inc.Human Capital Strategists, the Boot Camp will be facilitated by Daniel Bloom the CEO of Daniel Bloom & Associates who was one of the first mobility professionals to receive the designation in 1990 and is the author of Just Get Me There: A Journey through Corporate Relocation."
Truth, Justice and Your Organization
I can just hear some of you now, but in watching TV and reading the news I was hit with several points which made me question the direction our organization's are headed in. We strive to speak the philosophy that we want our employees to have full transparency into our organization. We expect our employees to be engaged in the processes. The we flip the coin and see stories like the following:
1) Local TV station ran a story about customer service. The owner of the business tells the reporter that if a customer complains directly to the company, they get less attention then if they post the same complaint on social media. In the same breath, we as organizations tell us that it is paramount that we cut off the conversation by limiting employee access to social media during work hours.
2) I for the most part shy away from discussing politics but there were several reports of misguided acts by politicians which had direct impact on the society in which we live. But in each case the acts were essentially thrown under the carpet.
3) The reports surfaced this weekend about the actions of the trade office of JP Morgan Chase. The CEO said that the Dodd-Frank legislation was too restrictive yet they did exactly what caused the 2008 downturn in the first place. It was primarily caught because of the financial reforms put in place because of these types of actions
As leaders of our organizations, the expectation is there that we will function in an ethical manner with our customers, our vendors and just as important or employees In this 21st century it is no longer possible for us to expect that our employees will do what we expect when we tell them one thing and then do just the opposite.
Our organizations rely on our clients to provide the mechanism to keep the organization running. When we tell them "Hey if you broadcast to the world your problems with us, we will give it more weight then if you just call or write about your problems what picture are you delivering?
We need to remind ourselves that shortly our organizations will be run by a different generation and for the most part the lack of transparency and ethical behavior will not be tolerated.
So tell me, are you abiding by truth and justice or is your organization operating behind a set of smokey mirrors? Are you telling your human capital and your customers one thing while doing the exact opposite under the nomenclature of getting things done faster, better and cheaper?
Am I Missing Something Here?
I was watching the morning news this morning and across the bottom of the screen was a running display of the latest news. One such headline stated that the TSA had patted down an 89 year old man in the airport the other day. When you see the rest of the story at the end of this post you will understand the rest of the post more clearly.
When I was in HS nearly 50 years ago, we were required to take a wide assortment of classes and have involvement within our local community. We totally understood who the players were and what their roles were. On the same broadcast the state of Florid was reporting a dramatic cut in the passage rate on the written part of the state assessment exam. I then hear employers who are telling us that they can't find qualified employees in the US.
I suspect that in the name of fiscal responsibility we have systematically over the years cut the very programs which make us viable parts of the community. Students today no longer get taught civics ( a fact that drove the actor Richard Dreyfus mad), we have watered down the history that is taught in order to meet the demands of right wing activists who dislike the teaching of real history or science and not made up theories of where we came from.
Unless we turn around the curriculum of this country to widen the knowledge of the students that are following us, they will not be able to function in a vital role within this country.
Now the rest of the opening scenario: the 89 year old man who was subjected to the pat down by TSA - Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of State of the US.
Was the TSA patting down everyone who went through the airport, or was the education of the TSA agent so lacking in background that he or she did not recognize who this was and therefore probably not a security risk. Considering i would believe that he still holds high security clearance from the government.
What are your thoughts? Are we giving our students the education they need to function in the global workplace?
I admit it I have an addiction. Back in 2001 I was introduced to the writings of Kathleen O'Neal Gear and her husband W. Michael Gear who have written a series of 23 historical fiction books centered around the lives of the North American Native Americans(http://www.gear-gear.com)They are fast reads but full of twists and turns. Their latest one is called People of the Back Sun in which the Standing Stone village is manned by about 400 warriors and they are up against the opponent who is taking on the Standing Village with a force of several thousand warriors. Through out the book there are reference to how the matron of the Standing Stone village is looking at things from a strategic perspective as she tries to plan a response to this elephant at her door.
Turn your concentration away from the Gear book and think for a moment how do you respond when the elephant is knocking on the door of your organization? Many organizations take the road of trying to imitate the elephant. The view is that the only way for you to win in this market is for you to become the other elephant in the room. Not only is this not practical it seldom works. As the high matron did in the Gear book, you have another path which more than likely will succeed more often than trying to match the elephant.
In People of the Black Sun, the high matron took stock of the assets she had and reviewed what actions she could take strategically to combat the elephant. She reviewed her assets and what her ultimate strategic goals were. How can she utilize those assets to deliver a win faster, cheaper and better than the elephant. Consider these strategic responses:
Here we are on the weekend before Christmas and the Iowa Supreme Court handed us an early "gift" Before I explain what the gift was, let me take you back in time to when Bobby Darin was still performing and he sag the following words:
"WelI … I don’t know what you got But it’s got me and baby I’m hooked Like a fish in the sea. You make angles call from above. You could make the Devil fall in love. An-a … who-o-o wouldn’t fall for irresistible you."
Over the past several decades we have seen the requirements for our talent acquisition efforts become more difficult. We have to be sure that the job requirements are bona fide occupational qualifications - in other words the requirements for the job actually meet the skills needed to perform the duties of the position. We can't tell someone that we will not hire them based on gun ownership, sexual orientation, age, religious beliefs, where we came from or health status. Now the Iowa Supreme Court adds a new twist.
In the case before them, a Dentist had hired a dental technician a decade ago. He admitted to his wife that he could not keep his eyes off of her. The wife's response was that either she goes or I do. The Dentist fired her.
The Iowa Supreme Court decided that it is perfectly legal to fire someone who is irresistible . Now let me get this straight, everyone of us whether male or female has walked into a work environment and found that employee who is stunningly attractive. In the majority of cases we may not take any actions on those beliefs but it now becomes, at least in Iowa, grounds for taking away someones livelihood. Not because she or he has done anything wrong but because their appearance can jeopardize a marriage. So does that mean going forward we need to add to the job description that an individual cannot be too attractive for fear of distracting the workplace? We are not talking about a worker undergoing sexual harassment, we are talking about a worker who just plain looks too good.
I apologize to HR.net for stealing his format. Steve I promise it is a one time only event.
This afternoon we continued our family tradition and attended a performance by the Trans-Siberian Orchestra who introduced a new show entitled the Lost Christmas Eve. The center piece of the performance was a story of a business man who years earlier had the unfortunate luck of losing his wife during child birth and having a supposedly disabled child who he essentially disowned. It was a fitting response to some of the feelings that I have undergone in the last 48 hours. Those feelings ranged from utter rage to utter respect. Forty three years ago I graduated with a BA in Education and spent 6 years in the classroom working with some of the age groups from Sandy Hook Elementary School. I can sympathize with the efforts sometimes to naught that these teachers went through. On the other side is the rage from understanding that these children are the ones who believe that they can fly, society has not molded their thinking to show them that this is probably not going to happen. I have the honor of being able to still stay in contact with a number of my former students today.
My wife and I are considering relocating to a town much like we grew up in which was molded much like Newtown. In a past life (LOL) we lived in New Fairfield, CT which is very similar in nature to Newtown and in fact is only minutes from there. So we can understand the violation the citizenry is feeling at the moment.
However there is another perspective we have to consider. Whether we are talking about your local school or our workplace, the implied environment speaks a bout providing a place that is safe and healthy in return for the use of our intelligence capabilities. But due to the work of one political faction we are striving away from that expectation. We live in a world that due to certain efforts has become a world centered around violence or the potential for violence. Consider that here in Florida the 2010 Census tells us that there are 19,057,542 residents and 1,000,000 of them have concealed weapons permits. This same political faction takes what ever steps they need to in order to pass a plethora of regulations across the country that tells our schools and businesses that even though you are responsible for delivering a safe workplace, you can't stoop your employees from being a weapon to the workplace.
It is time we change that environment. I have an extended family member who hunts to put food on the table. When I lived in Iowa I owned both a rifle and a hand gun and went hunting. So I do not object to the concepts in the 2nd amendment. I do however have a serious problem with open markets for weapons that have no useful purpose other than to maim and kill humans. I do have a problem with policies in the workplace which increase the potential for us to provide our human capital with a non-safe environment. We lower the productivity of the human capital assets when part of their concentration at work is on whether someone, no matter what the reason, decides the solution to their arguments with society is to start shooting. This is true whether we are talking about a movie theater in Aurora, a college in Virginia or a small elementary school where parents sent their kids because they believed the violence would not make its face known there.
We are a human resource strategist and it is our mission to show organizations of all sizes how to run a more productive work environment. Part of that discussions, based on Sandy Hook, has to be changing the philosophy of the workplace. We need to tell the political factions that our mission is enable corporate policies which protect our asset -our business as well as our human capital assets. As managers we need to let the officeholders that represent us that enough is enough. If you can prove that you need a weapon for a reasonable response to your environment, fine. But that does not include weapons which are designed to kill other than hunting. As managers we need to stop bucking under the pressure from factions which understand only verbatim response to writings from decades ago. Consider the several hundred survivors of the Sandy Hook episode and tell me how we explain to them the rationale from allowing the prevalence of weapons to increase with out boundaries. How do you explain to the parents that just lost 20 children that the government policies within this area are fine and it is just a freak occurrence by someone who may have had mental problems and it is not representative of society as a whole?
To my fellow members of management and Human Resource in particular, stop for a moment and think about whether your professional responsibility allows you to sleep at night when we fall short on providing that safe workplace that our students and fellow workers not only expect but demand.
I recently was involved in a conference call with a prospective client who was asking me whether I would be available to come speak to their office meeting about how the staff could work closer with corporate HR professionals. I got off the call and began to look back to the time in my career when I was in the external recruiter's seat and what was important to me to establish that relationship.
So for what it is worth, here are my thoughts.
We have just recently undergone a decisive election era in which some very strong views have been expressed. Some of those comments made me take a moment and reflect on the status of diversity within this country and the workplace in particular.
One of the facts that became abundantly clear is that there is a dramatic change in the demographics of the society in which we live. Change is tough but when the majority suddenly finds itself in the minority it raises a wide range of responses. And this is where the Diversity Scam arises.
Let me lay some ground work before discussing my reasoning. We find ourselves in a rapidly changing business space. An organization only succeeds when it can meet two very interdependent factors The first is that we only succeed when we are competitive within the market. We constantly need to be aware and cognizant of the needs of our customers.Th other side of the coin is we must be innovative with what we offer to the marketplace. With the changing demographic we need to be open to the inclusion of a wide variety of ideas and backgrounds with the hiring of human capital assets. The problem seems to be , from my conversations with fellow HR professionals, that many of the members of the changing demographic seem to want to move to their organizations and organizations. Why?
The management tiers of our organizations have traditionally been occupied by white male members of our society. With this they have very set ways as to the methods that organizations should operate under. That philosophy is being challenged. The establishment is uncomfortable with what thi means for the future of their workplace.
The message from our customers and society is that diversity in the workplace is a necessity. So in order to appear as though we are part of the current global environment , the message is that all of our communications pieces from the recruiting brochure to the annual report sate that diversity is a key component of our strategy. But look at the organization as a whole and what do you find?
While there are many exceptional examples of organizations which walk the walk and talk the talk. The far greater numbers extend the message through the communication devices but never intend to follow through on it unless they are forced to jump through the hoops of the EEO-1 form. Instead what diversity is found within the organizations is restricted to the low paying lower levels of the organization. Restricted at the lower levels where what diversity does exist can be pushed off into back corner of the organization. These human capital assets are not exposed to the tools to move up the corporate ladder to reach that corner office.
The difficulty is that with "those people" now becoming the majority in the workplace, just talking the talk will not make the organization more sustainable. In fact it will make the organization less likely to succeed. Like most scams, the perpetrators eventually get caught and it comes back to haunt.
As we reach the Thanksgiving holiday season and the opening of the run to the end of year, we as organizational management need to re-assess our views and our initiatives. We need to understand and accept that the inclusion of the new normal demographics makes the diversity scam totally unacceptable in the marketplace.
It is time that organizational management come to recognize that they need to change their views of the workplace. First, this is not your father's company anymore. The demographics of the global workplace have changed and it will not survive with a less than true message. Second, the new generational workers are much more comfortable in an open society whether it is life or work and they will force you in the direction of full diversity And finally as a member of your organization's management team your goal is to protect the ability of the organization to survive into eternity. We can not do that if we purposely forget about a large percentage of the society within which we operate.
So stop for a moment and really analyze are you both talking the talk and walking the walk in regards to diversity. Tell me whether your organization is part of the scam or really believes in the inclusion of a wide range of views and attitudes represented by the changed demographics within your portals.
In the past couple of weeks we have seen and heard from a number of business owners who have tried to put a price tag on the implementation of the Affordable Care Act cloaked in the argument as to why they have to add costs to their ultimate end users- the customer.
Whether it is the owner of Papa John's Pizza or the franchise owner of Denny's they seem to be forgetting one very important piece of the picture. In each case where would these organizations be if their human capital made the concerted decision that since we have been categorized in such a low number, we are going to go where we are more appreciated?
The demographics of our businesses have changed. The old adage that the proof is in the profit has morphed into how can we show that our human capital asset are a vital part of our organization. Telling the world that we have to raise our prices $.15 because we have to provide the benefits to our employes to make them more productive for the organization leaves the wrong impression in that regard.
According to a presentation at the 2010 SHRM conference in San Diego, a study sponsored by Kronos and conducted by Mercer found that unplanned absences cost the organizations in this country 8.7 percent of the total payroll costs.
The Kronos study revealed the following data points:
Based on these data points explain to me the logic of the Papa John's et al comments. If I am correct in my assumptions that the CEO of Papa John's and the Denny's franchisee are not capable of being in every facility that their organization's runs 24/7 then making the investment in a healthier workforce in the long run means that the organization actually saves sources of funding for the profit down the road.
There are numerous examples in the business world of when human capital left in mass the organization rapidly dissolves and goes out of existence. The human capital assets of today's business environment expect to be appreciated. Take for example Gen Y - if they do not feel a part of the organization they are gone in an average of 18 months. So do you risk alienating the next generation of your workers by telling them that their value to your organization is $.15 per customer. I would think not.
There has been much in the news around the presidential election about certain people taking assistance because they think of themselves as victims. Let me say from the outset this is not a political rant. It however is a consideration about the concept of being a victim in our global workplace.
I recently finished reading Dave Ulrich's latest book, HR from the Outside In,(which by the way I highly recommend be read by all HR professionals) It looks at the global HR profession from the perspective of the latest Human Resource Competency Survey. In the book Dave Ulrich and his team make reference to a quote from William James, In one sentence William James established the essence of this blog post. He said
We are not victims of the world we see; we are victims of the way we see the world
Stop and consider that for a moment. We on a consistent basis hear claims that the government is against us; the labor unions are trying to destroy our businesses and society. We hear that the reason we can't expand our businesses is because of too much red tape and regulations. But is that really the reality of the situation? Are we victims of the world we see? Or are we victims of our own piece of reality?
Lets take just one aspect of the reality here and consider the two perspectives. If we picture the scenario that one of the problems organizations are having is the difficulty in hiring workers to fill needs with the organization and compare the views:
We are Victims of the world we see
If this is your view of the world, you can argue that the difficulty facing the organization is due to the fact that the world economic environment is in dire straits.The policies of global governments are hindering the advancement of our organizations. The solution to the problem is we need to cut costs and the easiest way to achieve that is to cut headcount. We therefore have to overload the current staff because the work still has to get done. Besides have you seen lately what happens when we post a position? Have you seen all the untrained people who apply? How can I possibly have time with the other responsibilities I have to get through them all?
We are victims of the way we see the world
Have you seen the range of complaints from the EEOC lately? They are literally plastered with examples of organizations that take this view of the world into the workplace. The range of complaints are clear demonstrations of the fact that these organizations think that they are victims of the world they see. Consider these examples:
An organization refused to hire a pregnant woman as a group leader - We can't hire them as they don't represent the image we want. Besides they won't stay with the organization after the arrival of the child anyway.
An organization placed an employee of different color in a lower position than a white employee - Those people are always the rebels and don't like following rules so we need their services but not as bad as the other employees. Besides they don't want to work anyway. Just look around town and they are always hanging out on the street corners with nothing to do.
Years ago Napoleon Hill wrote that what the mind can conceive and believe it will achieve. So if you take the position that you are the victim of the world you see, sorry t say you will be that victim. If you expect that a certain employee is nothing but trouble, they will be. If you categorize a group of employees under certain characteristics, they will be that characteristic.
It is your choice whether you view the world we see as part of a grandeur scheme or as a victim. Dictionary.com tells us that a victim is a person who is deceived or cheated, as by his or her own emotions or ignorance, by the dishonesty of others, or by some impersonal agency. So when you look at the world do you create your own reality by suggesting out of ignorance that you are the victim in the business world?
I would strongly suggest that in order to bring this global marketplace back to a point of strength we need to learn to work together, not as the victim of some imaginary stereotype of a group of people or conditions that you face. It is your choice whether you continue to segregate your organization from the new normal or join the global village.
I had planned a new blog post with this title on a different topic but several recent events has turned me in a different direction.
The early settlers of this country, including some of my relatives, came to this unknown territory called North America to escape religious persecution and the limits to free speech. In the 1950's and 1960's we lived through the Civil Rights movement to make the point that we all have the right to the pursuit of happiness without being ostracized because we don't think or act like the "norm" of our culture, what ever that is.
In the past 48 hours I have witnessed the problems when we make stereotypes the basis of our human interactions. I was in a local store to return an item when the customer before me tried to return a purchase and the UPC on the item did not match the receipt. After he left the store employee turned to one of her co-workers and said "THEY try to that all the time" in front of other customers. The Arab Spring in the middle east was centered around the right to have more freedoms, including the right to think and behave outside the societal norms. I open up Social Media and find frequent postings that really hinge on outright hatred to those who don't meet this picture of the person who is like them.
Here is the problem- when we begin to stereotype individuals through this filter, we demean the society and more important our workplace.As an organization we only succeed when we discover new and exciting innovation regarding the products. This innovation only comes from the act of collaboration and it only works when we recognize the value of varying views. When you enter the collaborated process by discounting someone views because they do not think, look or act like you do you have diminished the contribution to the innovation process of your organization and this have lowered the sustainability of the organization.
The poet Adrienne Rich may have delineated the environment better than I can. I have paraphrased it slightly since we was meant for educators,, but she said "When someone with the authority, say, a manager, describes the world and you are not in it, there is a moment of psychic disequilibrium, as if you looked into a mirror and saw nothing. Yet you know you exist and others like you, that is the game of mirrors...."
One of my social media friends, Dawn Khan, posted on Facebook yesterday the following suggestion - "Wow I wonder if you will miss those you left alienated after November with ranty,whacky conspiracy theory, hate mongering posts? It is not about my side or the high way, its about respecting that there are many people on the road driving besides us, and we all can be there..."
We are no longer confined to this little space you call home. We are involved in a global marketplace that is highly dependent on a wide range of views and beliefs.When segment of that marketplace dismisses another part of that same space based on stereotypes it as if we looked into the mirror and only saw us. POGO many years ago said during the advent of the environmental movement "We have met the enemy and they are us." We can be our own worse enemies by demeaning the rest of the world. Want to be the cream of the top in the marketplace, then make it a goal today to get rid of the stereotypes and recognize the worth of everyone in the workplace whether they are of different races, religions, abilities, ages, sexes. The differences are more important than a sterile view of the world.
