New ideas? Or just a disruptive interlude?

There have been a couple of features in the news over the past few weeks which drew a huge amount of attention. The first was Richard Branson’s declaration that more companies should hire ‘disruptive talent’. This means people who don’t fit in the classic company mould or rules and do things their own way, but often achieve excellent results. The other item was around management consultancy giant Accenture’s decision to change the way it does annual performance reviews. They’ve decided to move away from end of year/end of project ladderings and ratings which take a huge amount of time and don’t compare like with like, to a more ongoing system of feedback between managers and their staff.

Speaking as someone who is certainly disruptive (whether talented or not is not for me to say) and who has experienced the Accenture merry-go-round first hand, both of these announcements initially filled this business director with glee. 

Firstly, it seems obvious that performance is better managed on an ongoing basis so everyone knows where they stand and that issues can be ironed out quickly. The Accenture system of laddering, where nobody on a project could be regarded as performing equally, seemed incredibly contrived, not to mention the dark art of how a rating linked to one’s pay and bonus. As one manager eloquently put it ‘it’s utterly bizarre that as we’re giving everyone more money, we’re somehow managing to piss them all off.’  Secondly, a huge amount of the workforce, primarily those under 40, are striving to be individuals who can make their mark on the world, feeling fulfilled and passionate about what they do. It seems clear that being oneself and doing things in an individual way, even if it does involve being disruptive, makes for a happier, healthier and more fulfilled employee.

However, my initial wave of positivity quickly wore off. Just because Branson says it’s a good idea and just because Accenture have changed an approach they’ve had for the last 20 years doesn’t make them universally correct. As influential industry players it makes them fashionable.

Plenty of companies already work on a basis of creativity, the media being a great example, where hiring freelancers rather than employees is the norm. And a huge number of companies have quietly gone about doing their appraisals through positive manager-staff relationships for years. So is not really the case that the big consultancies were stuck in dog-eat-dog world of the 1980s and were way behind a trend which they have suddenly ‘discovered’?

Taking a step back, surely the main point raised by this flurry of activity is that one size does not fit all. In a regulated or process orientated organisation, is ‘disruptive talent’ actually required or helpful? In sales organisation, is it about monthly feedback and the softer skills, or do the targets speak for themselves and allow people to be compared against each other?

More importantly, if you’re a big organisation, how disruptive can disruptive be? Does it mean that those employees considered to be ‘artistes’ can swan in and out as they like, while those who get on and do their jobs well are expected to be in from 9-5 and do as they are told? Are the disruptive ones really going to work for their employer, or regardless of how they’re treated, going to up and start their own company as soon as they possibly can? Where is the line between acceptably and unacceptably disruptive? And when it comes to performance and you want to give bonuses, how the heck does an organisation work out who should get more and who should get less if they don’t have some sort of laddered ratings scale?

It’s not about reading a news article and reworking an entire organisational culture and hiring practices accordingly. It’s about focussing on what works for the employer, the employees and ultimately, what works commercially.  And that’s where a good HR consultancy like Blacklarke, with an external perspective, can make a big difference.

All rested? Great, here’s 500 unread emails

We’ve all been there. You’ve had your two weeks spending time with friends and family in exotic locations, drinking wine at lunchtime and generally thinking that life’s pretty damn good. And then the rude awakening hits. It’s time to go back to work.

You arrive back in the office, having woken up early for the first time in what seems like forever, to be confronted with more emails and messages than you know what to do with. On top of this, you’re jet lagged, you’ve come home to a pile of bills, the washing machine has broken down and the rain outside doesn’t show any sign of stopping for at least a couple of months. Everyone’s asking if you had a nice holiday; all you want to do is crawl under a rock and sleep.

Theoretically, this makes absolutely no sense. You’ve had two weeks off and everyone, including you, expected you to come back feeling refreshed and ready go to. So why do you feel like it’s all a bit meaningless and overwhelming, even after the jet lag has passed.

Post-holiday blues is relatively common, no matter whether you’re the office admin assistant or the CEO. However, the world of work simply isn’t set up for it. You come back to work, block a few hours to catch up on your email and then you need to get back to routine. After all, it’s your job or your business and it’s what you need to be doing. The fact that you are probably performing abysmally and making mistakes isn’t the issue; it’s more important that you are where you are supposed to be.

When someone has been off sick, or off on maternity leave, best practice is to arrange some sort of return-to-work pattern, be it phased increases to working time, keeping in touch days or flexible hours. A holiday may not have lasted as long as these absences, but the contrast between the experiences while on leave and daily life back at work can mean a huge mental hurdle to get over. Yet despite this, very few companies prioritise post-holiday return-to-work activities.

One school of thought would be to say ‘put up and shut up’, but if you’re being paid to do a job and turn up without being mentally present, you’re going to do nothing but annoy colleagues, look miserable all day and be as useful as a pile of sand in the Sahara. If it’s your own business, are your mistakes or general lack of motivation going to have an impact on your clients and staff?

So what can we all do to help the transition from the top of the world back to reality?

• For a start it pays to have a handover conversation before going away. This should focus on the work you’ll be missing and what’s likely to be on your desk when you return. 

• Returning to find that nothing has been done in your absence and work has piled up can be overwhelming and demoralising, while returning to find out that everything has run like clockwork without you may make you question your presence in the organisation even further! It’s therefore about striking the right balance and ensuring that you and your colleagues are agreed on the priorities. Similarly, it’s also important to have a second handover conversation as soon as possible after returning to help you reintegrate and feel part of the organisation rather than cast adrift in an office where everyone else simply has no time to fill you in on what’s been happening. 

• Additionally, if you know you’re going to come back to a load of domestic chores, jet lag, or just are a regular sufferer of the blues, perhaps consider taking an extra day or half day before returning to work to have a softer landing. It may use some more holiday time or you’ll need to make up the time elsewhere, but if your first day back is going to be torture for all concerned, isn’t it the right thing to do?

And finally, if after your bump back to reality, that longing to go and work a ski season, plant a vineyard or go sailing around the world simply won’t disappear, perhaps your subconscious is simply trying to tell you something!

The Elephant in the Office – Time to Tackle it Head On

Large organisations have a great advantage – they are faceless. From a managers’ perspective, however good an employer is, no single employee is indispensable. They could disappear tomorrow, be forgotten within in a week and a replacement appointed by the end of the month. From an employee point of view, what they really think of the workplace isn’t something to talk about until they complete an anonymous ‘People Survey’ once a year, which gives an opportunity to give it from both barrels at a safe distance. It also gives the employer an opportunity to interpret the data as they wish, but that’s another article. Any conflict between employees can be resolved through a convenient transfer to a different department, closer supervision from above, or in-house HR getting procedural.  

Smaller organisations don’t have this luxury. A staff member leaves, is disgruntled, or badly performing and it visibly hits the bottom line – fast.

Yet I’m constantly told by small business owners and directors, that they spend more time dealing with staff issues than any other aspect of running their company. Why? Generally speaking, it’s because we don’t like confrontation, unwittingly letting things fester until we have real issues on our hands, which we deal with one by one, as opposed to examining root causes.  

Are you a disgruntled employee in a small business? You’ll probably mutter under your breath, moan to your colleagues and get away with as little as possible while looking for another job, generally with minimal discretion, making the atmosphere even worse. You’ll likely see things from your own point of view, not appreciating any pressures management is under and the expectations the company has of you. This is your job, you can probably find another one, but if your boss owns the business, don’t forget it’s their livelihood and probably their life savings at stake.

Or perhaps you’re a manager who’s unhappy with a member of staff? You’ll probably not assign them any work that you need done by someone you trust, generally be a bit standoffish, expect nothing, glower at them occasionally and hope they leave. You’ve assumed that because you work hard and know what needs to be done in your business, your employee knows the same and has enough stake in the organisation to give a damn. But have you really set your expectations explicitly?  

Human beings are lazy when it comes to communication, generally assuming, rather than checking, they’ve been understood, and as a result getting frustrated when things go wrong, mistaking misunderstandings for laziness, obstinacy or sheer stupidity. Individual incidents will often be addressed, but not what lies behind them.

So how to resolve this?  It’s simply about discussing what is actually happening in practice. Until everyone steps back and understands each other’s perceptions, it’s impossible to move forward and see the reality. For example, while a manager thinks he or she has given clear and explicit instructions, their staff member may have an entirely different understanding of what needs to be done, which is a clear recipe for disaster.  From the other perspective, an employee may be slow to complete their work as they believe they are diligently checking all the details, but for their organisation, speed of completion may be far more important than absolute accuracy. Neither employer nor employee are doing anything wrong, they are just coming from opposite perspectives.  

Discussions to resolve these issues don’t usually happen by themselves. When it’s your business or you job, you do become emotionally attached and it’s sometimes hard to take a step back. This is where independent experts come into play.  A short time with an external pair of eyes observing working practices and having candid conversations with employers and employees, can bring to the surface all the small frustrations and difficulties, as well as ways to resolve and prevent them spiralling into something more serious. Remember, regardless of whether you love people, or are the biggest misanthropist on the planet, it’s going to save you a heap of time and a lot of cash.