Guy Ellis reveals how to keep employees interested in your firm
"The war for talent is over - talent won." (McKinsey & Company, 1997)
This famous quote kick-started almost a decade of intense debate about the role of talent within organisations. But is it fact, or fiction?
Since the seminal work of Michaels, Handfield-Jones and Axelrod in 2001 (The War for Talent, HBS) summarising the talent surveys carried out by McKinsey, senior management and human resource professionals have suffered a constant bombardment of news about the ongoing 'talent war' between employees and organisations.
It would appear that wherever organisations turn, employees now hold the balance of power.
But is there really a battle being fought, or is it nothing but a storm in a canteen teacup?
Is 'the war for talent' just the latest attempt by the consulting and recruiting industries to create a market since Sarbanes-Oxley halted the audit gravy train and Y2K was exposed as a fraud, or is there a pent- up tension waiting to explode once the economy turns?
The evidence from the floor is contradictory.
Why are so many employees leaving big corporations for smaller local concerns; why is so much made of the work/life balance; why is stress so topical; why do the majority of US MBAs set up their own businesses?
The signs are there - but no one is debating the key question: why are employees disengaging from large organisations?
Let's look at the myths surrounding the talent war:
- Employees leave organisations because they aren't valued, developed or paid enough
Wrong. Survey after survey states that employees leave firms because they don't get on with their manager
- Organisations find it difficult to hire the right employees.
Risky future
Correct. But the reasons can range from a poor understanding of what they need, a declining population in the Western world and the unwillingness of candidates to move from their current organisation to a more uncertain and therefore risky future. None of these is the result of talent wars.
- Talent management programmes (TMPs) add value to the bottom line.
Correct. But for the wrong reasons. A structured TMP gives investors confidence, breeding stock price growth. This growth in stock price has yet to be clearly proved.
- Employees that are valued and developed will be more productive.
Wrong. The Hawthorne effect demonstrated decades ago that simply paying attention to a group of employees leads to increased productivity.
Many organisations need to step back and ask themselves some fundamental questions.
What is the organisation's purpose or reason for existing? Why do employees join, stay and continue to perform?
Extensive research has demonstrated that humans have a basic need to belong to a group and feel part of a shared identity.
Where individuals feel that they are a valued member of a group, research shows they will do their best to support and further that group's objectives.
Fundamental detachment
In today's ever-increasing complex world, organisations have lost touch with their employees' basic psychological needs.
Most TMPs are therefore nothing more than plasters used by organisations to hide a fundamental detachment from their employees.
Rather than spending millions trying to implement integrated TMPs that do not get to the root of the problem, organisations should take a few basic steps.
Redefine the organisation's vision. Be bold, be explicit and provide a quantifiable road-map for getting there.
Be explicit about how every employee can help the organisation achieve the vision. Don't be prescriptive, but recognise that many employees will be looking for guidance and boundaries as they find their own way of being part of the shared vision.
Do everything possible to ensure that the organisation empowers employees to achieve the vision.
An organisation is a group of people, each bringing their own unique experiences, skills and knowledge (in other words, talent). Help each person to find the best way to use their talent for the greater good.
Structures, systems and processes all have their place in ensuring work is as productive as possible - but they can often get in the way of the vision. Continually question everything, and assume nothing.
Communicate. Make sure communication is two-way, inclusive and uses every available channel. Listen to the feedback but remember that while the 'how' is flexible, the vision is not.
Recognise, reward and celebrate. Share successes, build on the mistakes and constantly reaffirm how the firm supports and values its members.
Integrate employees' work with the rest of their lives. Move from 'face time' to clear deliverables. Encourage employees' families to mix together.
Be part of your employees' work/life balance, not the problem.
Simplistic but fundamental.
What's the worst that can happen?
Change will occur. But empowered employees with a clear mandate will drive the change. They will know what the goal is and the only debates will be about the best way to achieve it.
Employees will migrate to roles that best suit their talent - which may not necessarily be what they were trained to do. Productivity will increase; expenses will decrease. Investors will notice both the bottom line improvement and the internal feel-good factor.
Short-term gain
Some employees, including superstars, will not share the vision and will leave. This may bring short-term pain, but why would the organisation want to keep employees that aren't helping to achieve its goals?
The great news is that the employees who are left won't need the fancy titles and expensive development programmes to encourage them to remain.
And once word gets out, candidates will flock to your doors wanting to join. Battle won.
- Guy Ellis is a director of Gack Consulting.
CASE STUDY
There once was a manager - important, seen as potential for the future, but still with a lot to 'prove'. The manager tried to do his best, learnt from his seniors, went the extra mile, but it never seemed enough. But still he tried to 'play the game'.
One day, employees were offered the chance to shine - the annual 'take your child to work' event was offered and the manager grabbed it with both hands. Not only would he show his eldest what he did every day, but the company would recognise his true worth.
The day came and began well. Events ran to time, computers worked and speakers turned up. All too quickly the final event arrived - a presentation on how the organisation hired the best, paid the most and developed its employees to become the future leaders of the industry.
The presentation started well - the chief executive, who was not a person to be messed with and had made his reputation by being hard and demanding, handled the children well. The final comments were being made when a hand shot up from the front. The manager strained to see the questioner and groaned softly as he recognised the voice that began to speak ...
"If your company is so wonderful, why is my Daddy so unhappy?"
