Consultant's Corner

RE: Perception - is it reality?

lisa.burton — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 13:41:55 GMT

Interesting, David.I must be sick, because part of me is amused by jokes about consultants, part of me frustrated. But, alas, my ramblings on that topic are perhaps fodder for another blog…. Back to your question…

As always, there is some truth in joking… There is a reality to the idea that we are mirroring information back to the client. If this wasn’t the case, the ‘discovery’ process would not be a part of our approach. During this time, we are learning valuable information about the client through conversations and workshops, including understanding client needs, direction, strategies already in place, culture, etc.If we didn’t do this, we would have the opposite problem (which is likely another consultant perception) in that we would preach theory and recommend ‘best practices’ that are not aligned with the reality of our client.

The trick is to gain a deep appreciation for our client’s business and needs.Then, tapping into knowledge of the field and client experience, develop future state recommendations that include a realistic path to arrive at this end state. It is a delicate balance, which requires more ‘art, not science’ skills. Fortunately, my fellow Knowledge Infusion colleagues are skilled at this art.

RE: How to Feast on Workforce Data without Choking On It

srumsey — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 03:02:40 GMT

And thos two conditions are the kickers, aren't they?

RE: Perception - is it reality?

srumsey — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 03:01:20 GMT

David:

Agree that this may be the perception of consultants, but it doesn't have to be this way, as we at Knowledge Infusion know. I think the trick to avoiding this scenario is in the clear articulation of expectations - not only the clients' of the consultant, but also the consultant's of the clients. There are things about the client that the consultant will never know unless told - e.g., dress code, cultural quirks, accepted vocabulary, etc. It is up to both to establish the kind of partnership that is very mutually supportive, everyone striving to reach both the same and compatible goals. We can change the game. We just have to work hard at it.

RE: Agree...And Then Stick to the Agreement

jbintliffritchie — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 13:24:00 GMT

Mike, you are right on with your recommendations. However, we find that for most organizations there are several barriers to be overcome to establish the model you lay out. A lack of analytic competency within HR, no electronic access to the necessary underlying data - you'd be surprised what is still kept only on paper, no measurment tool which can integrate and manipulate the underlying data to produce and present the measures - the data is spread over multiple sources from ERPs to spreadsheets, and no understanding of what measures within these catagories are truly relevant to their business and talent strategy. I would add a category to reflect the Strategic Measures that tie human capital directly to the business strategy and reflect the 1-3 key people dependencies within the strategy. An analytic roadmap or framework (as Lexy refers to it) can outline what steps need to be taken to address these barriers and build the analytic capability. A final step is to integrate the human capital analytics into the organization's overall business performance management framework so it integrates into the core business planning and reporting cycles.

RE: Agree...And Then Stick to the Agreement

Lexy Martin — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 16:09:56 GMT

This is brilliant and I will share. What I have in my mind's eye from reading this is the need to establish an analytical framework (likely in the form of a repository) that collects predictive measures based on the needs of the business and the associated KPIs; in-process measures from transactional systems that are periodic; and measures from what we call "post reviews" that we do on technology implementations or other program initiatives. From that repository then, the organization can tap just about any metric to make more informed decisions. Thanks for sharing.

RE: How to Feast on Workforce Data without Choking On It

mike.brennan — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 02:34:01 GMT

Mick,

I really like the further delineation of responsibilities and agree with them on the following conditions:

That the HR organization has enough of the right talent to fill these roles. The responsibilities you described for the Analytics COE and HR Generalists roles require tough-to-find skill sets. However, I've recently worked with a retailer and a financial services firm who have cracked this code. And I know there are others out there.
That the Analytics COE within HR works with its counterparts outside HR. This would include Finance, HR and/or Marketing. I wince every time I hear that Finance and HR can't agree on headcount!

RE: How to Feast on Workforce Data without Choking On It

Mick Collins — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:12:13 GMT

Mike,

I completely agree with both the need to assign shared responsibility for analytics with the understanding that clear demarcations exist between those roles. I would even take this a step further to distinguish three specific roles within the "HR Functional Personnel" category.

1. Analytics Center of Excellence: Staff whose primary responsibilities include gathering, computing, delivering, and analyzing metrics.

2. HR Generalists: Working with business partners, generalists "interpret" the metrics provided to them, providing business context and preparing the results for decision-maker consumption. This is an additional layer beyond the "analysis" provided by the Center of Excellence staff.

3. HR Decision-Makers: Act upon the metrics.

By outlining clear roles and responsibilities within HR, analytics staff can better align role expectations (what should I be doing with this data?) with day-to-day life in HR ("If I only have 1 hour to review this data, where should I focus my time?").

Thoughts?

RE: Finding Your Voice... Women In Leadership Need to Step up

Heather — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 19:47:44 GMT

Thank you for bringing this front of mind again for me. I work in an environment that is male dominated. When I started there was one other woman on the Senior Leadership team with me (she had only been here 4 months before I started). We both worked hard at getting ourselves heard. Except for a couple of senior leaders, there was always the snide comments, innuendos, and quite frankly, a lack of respect for the roles that we had in the organization. The other woman left approximately 8 months ago. I am the sole female voice on the SLT. Things have not changed much. I still continue to push forth for getting my voice heard. There are some different faces at the table, and some different mindsets, but further into the organization others do not see the value/respect the work that my team and I provide to the business.

I do try to more cognizant of how I present my ideas and focus in on the points as you outlined above. Do I still think that there are inequaliites in the workplace most definitely! But I can confidently say that I am trying to do my part to change my behaviours and then the responses from others should change too.

RE: Have you ever walked out of a meeting and said to your colleague: “I wish I had said/done…” or "Why didn't I..." If so, chances are you’re female……

lisa.burton — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 22:17:41 GMT

Thanks for the comments. I like the evolution of the feedback... I agree that this isn't necessarily a 'male/female' issue. It seems to come back to the 'so what' question... In other words, what are the implications? One impact is likely to the career paths of women and - from a business perspective - the implications of a potential lack of diversity/diverse viewpoints (defined in this case to mean male/female) from within an organization's leadership ranks.

Then, as Andy implies, there could certainly be an impact to the business if a potentially better qualified talent (one who might appear less confident) is passed over for someone who can talk the game. Although, alternatively, there is much to be said for an engaging, confident leader.

Interesting ideas!

RE: Have you ever walked out of a meeting and said to your colleague: “I wish I had said/done…” or "Why didn't I..." If so, chances are you’re female……

andy.gebavi — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 02:09:00 GMT

Great post Lisa! The phenomenon you describe doesn't only impact women though. Those of us in the higher testosterone camp that have more reflective communication/personality types are also often labeled as lacking confidence. Yes....all kinds of people process information in different ways. Some enlightened leaders get this. Maybe the real question should be: How many times have better ideas and more talented people been passed over for the fast-talking self-promoter? Hmmm....food for thought...