Performance - What and How

This is the time of the year, when appraisals happen. The news will be out - who performed and who lagged . Rewards, increments, promotions will be awaited by one and all. At the end of it - some would be more happy than others. HR department would tick mark the annual ritual as having been completed with a sigh of relief.

Look at this process closely. What will be used  is the Performance Data. The larger organisations would flaunt their inflallibility - because of Performance Management System infrastructure. The smaller ones would use some measures, scraped from different parts of the organisation. Given this input, the supervising managers are likely to conduct an appraisal based on objective  and irrefutable facts as reflected in the results. The employee would get into this meeting prepared for a  one sided discussion revolving around the What of Performance - the hard facts. He or she, may not have the heart and the courage to highlight the How of the performance. Such discussions would be a matter of one upmanship between the boss and the subordinate resulting in disgruntlement and potential attrition.

The above process has an error bias and hence it is likely that a high performer in one year does not appear to be a consistent performer the next year. One major aspect  is the lack of exploration of the "how" part in a scientific manner. Fortunately tools are available to open this area - e.g PDI Ninth House has a tool called Talent View of Leadership Performance. In addition to the performance data a 360 degree tool digging out the how of the performance can supplement the performance data. Such a tool can reflect the challenges in the role, degree of difficulty, situations faced etc.With these inputs the appraisal process is more scientific and can result in a  better buy-in from the employee on the feedback.

Any performance appraisal must neccessarily focus on the employee and more rigorous and transparent the process, the better is the quality of outcome. Employees would look forward to their own development and the organisation can expect better retention figures. The reward and recognition system will earn  credibility and aspirational value.

When all CEO's are saying that processes and technology can be replicated , and people are the only differentiator, does it make sense to take short cuts in the process ?

Employability in year 2011

As we get ready to usher in 2011, most parts of the world are staring at economic reality and uncertain future. No one knows for sure in India, how many are employed for a livelihood. Last cited information indicates a total of 459 million people with 7% ( 26 million) under organised employment. A recent reference by the Ministry of Labour indicates that Contract labour is 130 million. The rest would  presumably be self employed and or engaged in agriculture. While this is where we stand today, future forecast states that India would be needing 240 million new work force by 2022 and  another 80 million by 2015 as per CII estimates. So, what is happening on ground. Most employment surveys indicate, that hiring has improved , doubt remains if that is actually creating the millions.

If this is the demand side, let us look at the supply side. More than 240 million would pass out from schools and vocational education would be needed for 170 million students. The remaining may need higher education. The current capacity of our infrastructure is barely 3 million students in higher education. Shortages of trainers, vocational education infrastructure is apalling . All the major private players in vocational education space can barely address intake of half a million a year.

I wonder if the Government is actually serious in doing something about this gap. Take a look at skilled resources who are retiring out of defence forces every year. A backlog of nearly 2 million retirees already exist, and yet they have hardly any meaningful resettlement plans while the industry is supposed to be starving for skilled talent. Simply by using this abled work force by transferring their current skill set into corporate requirement can help in mitigating some of the acute shortage that industry is clamouring e.g., in the Automotive industry a significant population can be absorbed in franchise network across the country.

The government seems to be more worried about assessments and certification. Since government is not likely to be the largest employer , certification should be driven by industry. Most businesses are looking at rural economy. I am sure opportunities exist in all parts of the country. Creating , mini cooperatives by enabling entrepreneurship can spar rapid economic development. We have seen in the past. AMUL did wonders to Gujarat. China did it 25 years ago, and they have a GDP 5 times of India. L&T realising need for skilled labour in construction has set up a school where training is imparted on the job/ apprentice model. The pass outs are placed suitably. They have stated in ET, that Rs 24000 is the cost incurred by L&T for training vocational skill. Team Lease , a staffing solution provider has plunged into this business. They see it as a natural integration to their core area. They are charging Rs 30,000 to Rs 60,000 per candidate. This means, cost of imparting vocational education is not going to be cheap. Surprisingly Government of India seems to have provided Rs 15 per hour for modular employability courses. Such prices will make a mockery of skill development. These Government run institutes have facilities but no faculty. Some are languishing with out dated equipment and teaching processes.

It is high time , that a cooperative model is created between the private sector and government institutions with least red tapism, if one has to seriously do something about creating employability and entrepreneurship in the Indian sub-continent a partnership model is a must. The key enablers would be to draw out a curricullum based on industry needs, faculty with industry experience ably supported by performance and learning and development experts. While this can come from the private sector, the Government , should make available their current resources and facilities. Industry can augment investment in technology and tools for the prepare phase and support employment post training. Such a model can address the needs

Micro Learning

It appears that organisations realise the value of continuos education, but are constrained to let people dedicate time and effort for the same purpose. The reasons for such a paradox , vary from resources to loss in business productivity. These are some real testing times for L&D folks. Adding fuel to the fire are the learners - the texting folks, who value independence as opposed to compliance.

Since training , is an intervention step to make a behavorial change, getting the new age workforce to recognise the importance of doing a job effectively and efficiently is a challenge.

Since much of learning is based on observing, conversing, trial and error, coaching and searching a system that can create a very short duration learning track covering some of the steps above may work.

Ray Jiminez's has an interesting solution to this - "One idea -one action". This has a deep seated connection that learning needs to connect with learners context. Try looking at a picture in a group, and what each one sees may be at variance to what others may see. It is also known that people create own strories out of the information stored in their mind. Remember Inception and dream within a dream. Very often, we leave this process alone in any kind of learning. Conventionally, we let people to form their own opinion after tabling an idea or a proposition. If this were to be reversed - show a picture and than ask a question ( more of thought provoking kind) , the idea gets planted by finding answers to questions asked. Or better still, Reverse it by getting the learner to ask those questions based on the image. This process triggers a connection between ideas, images and actions quite instantaneously. Some have opined that learning is not a linear outcome of an image , process and behaviour. Learning can happen at anypoint.

I like this idea , as it is based on natural learning principles of observing, conversing and trial error. As the modules can be extremely short (may be couple of minutes) , and one idea one action at a time, it is possible to build a whole repository reflecting various situation.

It is known that informal learning aligns with our natural learning ability. However, leaving learning completely open and self paced may not match organisational outcomes. Therefore , creating short cycle learning helps to give an informal flavour to a formal requirement. This helps in developing bite size learning chunks, and therefore an interesting step.

Is training a performance enabler or a measure of employee welfare?

Most organisations cut training expenses, whenever cost reduction is an imperative. During the recession, training expenses, manpower and associated costs bore the brunt. Now, when economic revival is visible, are companies spending on training? It appears that many organisations are following a cautious approach and training budgets are assigned after high degree of scrutiny and diligence. Decisions are now being taken at an executive level, even for a minor expense. Consider this paradox; most training expenses are booked as a measure of employee welfare rather than skill development solution. These days, several international training companies are doing good business, while the Indian ones are struggling to keep afloat. It appears that the certificate brand as perceived by the employee, as opposed to actual operation effectiveness and business impact is a key decision consideration. Often, training vendors are requested to submit a proposal to impart 1 day training as a part of a business meeting. No ADDIE here, period.
How did we get to this state of affairs?
In the earlier times, management trainee scheme was employed as an investment for developing the employee – using on the job exposure and classroom training, with a graduation like ceremony for successful completion and final placement. This was practiced in segments like Banking, FMCG and diversified groups like Tata’s. The businesses valued knowledge and skill in their command and control based organisation. With emergence of IT and OA in the early 80’s, Customer interactive skills like selling and client handling gained ground as a trend setting strategy used to educate the market- picked up from the pharmaceuticals. In the 90’s, when Indian economy opened its door, operations training through compliance requirements like ISO, six-sigma, CMMI, led corporate training as a measure to improve business competitiveness. As India moved ahead in this millennium, and information management driven through technology acquired high importance, measurement of performance got the focus. Since most business processes got automated (by-product of ISO and business process management) with better metrics management, training as a performance enabler got detached from the business performance. The metrics captured the outcome, but failed to capture the in process measures e.g. ., if “x” no of calls led to 1 order, (this got captured) but definition of a call standard was not. Since training enables better performance through modified behaviour (skill development), the enabling measure was missing. In the earlier days, this was well aligned. Take for example a repair technicians performance measure when post training intervention could impact repair at first call performance based on an acceptable standard. We now have a situation, that what get’s measured reflects the results but no further drill down is possible, because some of the process steps are missing. For training related intervention, many CEO’s fail to see the connection between training and performance due to absence of credible analytics.
How does the future hold?
Training will continue to be viewed as a dispensable performance enabler. Given the global business trends, the IBM CEO Study of 2010 indicates that people skills have reduced its importance from 2nd most to 4th position. It appears that training and development needs to redefine in the changing scheme of things. Focus , will shift from how well you do something to how well you know something, given, that further technological advancements may trigger solutions requiring little or low skills.
My two cents?
L&D must make the first move by talking metrics and talking performance. Vendors and training departments must collaborate to ensure that a feel good employee welfare workshop is not labelled training. Every Rupee spent in training must be measured for returns like any other investment. The function must necessarily help create and or facilitate measures that can accurately convey the impact of the training intervention by aligning skills to the business process. Take for example a measurement of a business meeting. The end outcome of this meeting could track participation index, decisions arrived, post meeting actions executed on time. If all of this is developed into a work process, a training intervention will reflect results. The important thing here is to get to this stage so that measures are aligned to the work process.

When the going gets tough the tough get going - applying it to Learning and Development

When recession set's in, training department budgets get slashed and sometimes, severed. The last few years have been challenging for all , except for those who thrive on complexity and uncertainity. Most training managers and professionals have responded in predictible lines - scaling down activity and meeting expense budget. Many chose to deploy technology and evaluated options to use Communication and collaborative tools to prevent non-classroom expenses like travel, board lodging etc. The technology companies have used this cycle to push in their products to highlight importance of trackeability ,measurement and content creation.

Are these examples of real innovation in L&D which can meet the needs of learning, and performance?

Learning manager of a small sized financial company in the USA has chosen to follow a unique approach. His mandate was to make learning and development integral with minimal or no cost. Using creativity, and leadership buy-in, a program was carved out for high potential talent development. The CEO mandate, was to ensure that performing talent especially senior management, is developed and retained. A program was designed for a 18 month duration which covered all subject and domain areas that was considered neccesary to groom these performers. The curricullum was designed by inhouse subject matter experts with executive management group taking lead incharge. Faculty was inhouse developed and the executive managers conducted these sessions (90 minutes duration) on a pre-scheduled calendar. A graduation ceremony concluded the program. Participants were selected by a screening process cmparable to a university admission program involving detailed response on the interest, essay writing and senior management interaction , manager recommendation,and a buzz got evolved. Did this porgram succeeed , the answer is premature for final impact , but some benefits did accrue:-

• The executive buy in was high as they themselves developed and delivered classroom sessions
• Mutual expectations of role and performance got clarified.
• Executives indicated that their line of thinking got clearer
• Potential awareness of people capability through classroom interaction
• Porgram buzz created competition for getting in the program
• People could align learning with everyday performance

ALL OF THIS AT A MARGINAL COST

Who says innovation does not exist ?

The person is Robert Friedman - Dean Learning and Development of Motley Fools

listen to him here

http://www.humanresourcesiq.com/video.cfm?id=348

Proficiency - a real measure of performance

A rough calculation indicates that for every hour of training , the final implementation in performance is less than 10% ,after 3 weeks, if transfer of learning to performance is not taken care of. In essence this is a frightening situation, that for every training dollar invested, the potential leakage is very high. What is the problem ?

Very often, the measures highlight the end result, e.g., Number of calls made, Satisfaction scores, and at higher management, the measures tend to be more summative. Since training, is an intervention for enhanced performance, measures pertaining to observed behaviour change do not get the attention, that it deserves. If a sales person's job is measured in terms of calls made, and the training intervention calls for an enhanced behaviour of pre-call planning for every call, a measure to check and report this behaviour may become more relevant over and above the call quantity report. Likewise , the behavorial competencies of the role may need to be profiled for potential performance.

From the time a person gets trained till the time proficiency sets in , their exists a gap. This can vary from a few months to some years depending on the job complexity. A systemic approach can help save costs and improve productivity. This stage calls for mapping a learning path, best suited for proficiency development. It calls for a blending of training, post training transfer of learning, supported by informal learning which is tailored to suit skill development, supported by a measurement system, which can track and measure the observable behaviour. The concept can draw some parallel with TQM , where, measures such as quality , cost and deilvery are used for measuring a process. Going further, the entire skill development from induction to proficiency can be measured with process control measures to monitor degree of control and variation. A path which can accelerate this capability can also be implemented using the same concept. It is high time that an end to end process that not only measures the results but also tracks the observable skills at various points , is implemented. This calls for taking the first step by getting the L&D folks trained in TQM.

Training Certification or Certificate

Discussions are going on whether we should run after international certification when Indian ones could do the job. In training and development India's ISTD is the sole institution for awarding certificate in training and development. This establishment has been largely managed by Government and Public sector officials. For a country as large as India to meet the demands of a growing economy , Certification of domestic or international recognition is a necessity. So having a certification does make sense.
Training in India has evolved today. Most trainers follow pedagogy as a core principle. Since education in India has been more heads up than hands on (engineering colleges exist where labs are non-existent), it is not difficult to imagine the dismissal of applied knowledge or skill development training for the same fundamental indoctrination.Hence, discussions about certification usually range about the IQ aspect. A Wharton study had indicated that Indian managers scored the least internationally on managerial effectiveness. The score was 2.65 on a scale of 5.0, the benchmark was at 3.1.Most training and development leadership professionals are not qualified , unlike the west , where qualification and certification is considered important to step into the role.
While India has exported life changing transformational skills like yoga,and spiritualism , without any certification criteria, why should we be wanting certification now? I would think, the principal reason would be to go back to our roots and gurukul. This system of education recognised proficiency - look at music, dance where levels of proficiency is linked to experience and expertise. The ultimate being the acknowledgement of Pandit title. Since , we had it , let us regain it. Let us not be blind to the contribution of the western world on training and development. To play one against the other is like living in a fool's paradise. Opportunity lies in collaborating and blending both the streams for overcoming weaknesses in an exponential age.