Day: March 27, 2020

HOW TO CREATE PERSONAL PERFORMANCE GOALS (HINT: THERE'S AN 'I' IN 'TEAM')

Over the past few months I have been exploring the reasons why I struggle with individual performance goals even though I am a professional in the performance management system design industry. What I keep coming back to is that individual performance management goals are difficult to write, time consuming to develop, and quick to become outdated. 
I also think that calling them “goals” is misleading. To me, a “goal” denotes special work that is accomplished outside of regular duties, something that has a finite beginning and end.

Bring the Team to the Individual

So what do we do? Perhaps we’re over-thinking the process. Perhaps it’s as simple as sharing team goals with all employees, augmenting them with one or two work statements that have an element of “regular job” with a component of added speed, accuracy or service to help work towards some of the team goals.
The team goals come directly from the team business plan, which is shared and dissected by the team, generating ideas that can lead to team success. It is not so much the process of breaking down the goals as it is collaborating on achievement. Even if an employee’s role is tangential to the work described, she can still participate in the accomplishment of the team business plan. By being involved in dissecting the business plan, she has ownership in the result.
Performance review dialogue for team goals can be a conversation about contribution — reflecting on what went well, and what didn’t.

Don’t Stop at Documentation

The reality is that, unless the administrative work of setting, reviewing, adjusting and documenting goals actually adds value to the organization, I challenge the need to do it.
The documentation is not the end game — the successful accomplishment of the work is the end game. We document to ensure that leaders are doing their jobs and developing and challenging their teams. After all, isn’t that what performance management really is?
So rather than going through the annual exercise of breaking organizational goals into individual goals, why not take the interim step to develop the team or unit plan to accomplish the organizational goals, sharing and dialoguing with team members about the plan, the successes, the challenges and the results, and engaging team members in making real meaning in their work by clearly seeing how it contributes to the whole.

HOW TO CREATE PERSONAL PERFORMANCE GOALS (HINT: THERE'S AN 'I' IN 'TEAM')

Over the past few months I have been exploring the reasons why I struggle with individual performance goals even though I am a professional in the performance management system design industry. What I keep coming back to is that individual performance management goals are difficult to write, time consuming to develop, and quick to become outdated. 
I also think that calling them “goals” is misleading. To me, a “goal” denotes special work that is accomplished outside of regular duties, something that has a finite beginning and end.

Bring the Team to the Individual

So what do we do? Perhaps we’re over-thinking the process. Perhaps it’s as simple as sharing team goals with all employees, augmenting them with one or two work statements that have an element of “regular job” with a component of added speed, accuracy or service to help work towards some of the team goals.
The team goals come directly from the team business plan, which is shared and dissected by the team, generating ideas that can lead to team success. It is not so much the process of breaking down the goals as it is collaborating on achievement. Even if an employee’s role is tangential to the work described, she can still participate in the accomplishment of the team business plan. By being involved in dissecting the business plan, she has ownership in the result.
Performance review dialogue for team goals can be a conversation about contribution — reflecting on what went well, and what didn’t.

Don’t Stop at Documentation

The reality is that, unless the administrative work of setting, reviewing, adjusting and documenting goals actually adds value to the organization, I challenge the need to do it.
The documentation is not the end game — the successful accomplishment of the work is the end game. We document to ensure that leaders are doing their jobs and developing and challenging their teams. After all, isn’t that what performance management really is?
So rather than going through the annual exercise of breaking organizational goals into individual goals, why not take the interim step to develop the team or unit plan to accomplish the organizational goals, sharing and dialoguing with team members about the plan, the successes, the challenges and the results, and engaging team members in making real meaning in their work by clearly seeing how it contributes to the whole.

HOW TO TAKE THE EVIL OUT OF HR

I have heard this too many times: “Here comes HR. Something bad is about to happen.” 
Simply put, HR walks into workspaces and people worry about their jobs. In an effort to gain respect for our profession, I wonder if we’ve allowed ourselves to assume a role that is absolutely wrong for what we really want to achieve — trust.
Termination of an employee is a significant risk to the organization, even if all the proper steps are taken and the conversation is honest and accurate. HR is charged with managing the risk and, by golly, if we’re going to assume the risk, we are going to manage it. After all, it is our opportunity to grab a little power in the organization.
The performance and disciplinary process in organizations is cumbersome. If leaders were proactive about setting performance expectations, giving regular and clear feedback, and providing ample warning when the end is near, they would own the process and HR could go back to being a trusted advisor to leadership.
Do we in HR really want to allow ourselves to jeopardize the very trust we are trying to gain by micro-managing leaders in the performance and discipline process?
Many HR professionals have already turned this role back to managers. Some develop management skills, while others trust their managers to carry out disciplinary meetings without HR. Some still point the terminated employees back to HR to collect their ID, keys, cards, and get all of the appropriate forms signed.
But here is the challenge in that — at least from my perspective. HR should be trusted by leaders and by employees. By putting them in the position of being associated with terminating employees, we damage their reputation and put trust at risk.
Is there a better way? I have a couple thoughts:
  • HR should actively coach leaders in how to discuss performance and termination with their employees. When I say actively coach, I mean role play and pretend to be the employee and allow the manager to practice to the point where both have confidence that the manager will communicate clearly and not put the organization at risk.
  • If there is a difficult situation anticipated, have the next level manager participate rather than HR. This gives the next level manager insight into how the manager communicates and manages the organizational risk. It also keeps HR out of the “evil HR” role.
  • Provide a checklist to the manager for terminated employees, so that they collect the employee’s ID, keys and completed forms.
Allowing HR to distance themselves from the actual employee meetings may help in preserving a reputation of trust. Visiting business units for positive reasons is also a great way to avoid being seen as “the terminator.”

LEADERSHIP LEARNING IN THE TIME OF EBOLA

This isn’t a trick question, but a serious inquiry. I believe that learning happens at three levels in any organization: the individual level, the team level and the organizational level. Higher levels of learning are not necessarily the sum of individual or team learning, but a dynamic and evolutionary way that people come together to accomplish something.
Individuals can learn by reading a book, writing a paper, talking with others, and reflecting internally. Teams and organizations cannot learn by reading or writing. Given that teams and organizations are comprised of individuals, learning occurs in the spaces between the people — through interaction, dialogue and debate.
Apparently the Center for Disease Control counted on reading and writing as learning tools to protect against Ebola outbreaks, sending their protocol to healthcare providers to read and implement. I suspect that the two nurses who cared for Mr. Duncan would agree with me that reading the protocol wasn’t enough. Thankfully, in most organizations, we don’t face life and death situations, but perhaps there is a lesson for us to learn from this horrible situation so that we can avoid falling into the trap of thinking that simply communicating a change in behavior is sufficient to actually enact behavior change. 
Even without dire situations facing us, we do find ourselves needing to change behavior. Take, for example, those in leadership positions. As a leader, our behavior must change the moment we accept the role. We now have responsibility for the work, the people, and the results. That is a sobering responsibility, to have so much hinging on our leadership skill.
Yet we send new leaders into their roles without helping them to learn how to lead.  We may communicate to them the content that they need to know. We may even do a really good job of teaching them how to budget, complete performances reviews, and allocate other administrative work. Rarely have I seen organizations that help a new leader learn leadership behaviors, though.
Changing behavior requires practice, reflection, feedback and more practice, particularly when the behaviors are contrary to someone’s instinct, or are difficult to carry out. Helping someone learn these behaviors requires a systematic, consistent process of stating clear expectations, establishing consequences, and allowing the new leader to practice in a safe space.
What happens if a new leader is not given the opportunity to learn? She may have great instincts or have looked up to and observed a great leader. She may not have the instincts or role models. Everything that an organization accomplishes is through people, and leaders are in the unique position to either motivate or stagnate a group of people. Is leadership of the people of an organization something with which we want to take a chance?
Perhaps had the CDC realized the significance of the behavioral change required by the Ebola protocol, they may have sent advisors to help ensure that the learning was, in fact, taking place when the first case appeared. Like the CDC promulgating a protocol document and expecting that everyone will do the right thing and take it upon himself or herself to learn and practice, we cannot leave leadership skill to chance. It is too important to the success of our organizations.

SHIFT THE PARADIGM: CAROL ANDERSON'S WISH FOR HR IN 2015

What does 2015 hold for human resources? Honestly, I don’t know. I worry a bit about our future: will it bring more of the same or will we step up and make a change in order to create real value?
We need a shift. We are under fire and often seen as a necessary evil. We function as an overhead department and are pressured to reduce expenses. We devise programs that are dreaded and implement technology that is clunky. If we were a business, would our customers be buying?
Rather than make a prediction for 2015, I want to make a wish. I wish that human resources would use this next year to make a dramatic change in their approach to work — moving from an overhead department mentality, to that of a business provider.
I have a lot of years invested in this profession, and I truly believe that HR professionals have the ability to add tremendous value to organizations. But what does it mean to “add value”?
When I became an independent consultant and started reading and talking with others in the field, one message was consistent: we must create products and services that satisfy a need and provide value. This means doing a very good needs assessment, reporting back about what you hear and confirming the validity, and then devising a plan to fill the need. Once you implement the plan, you begin the process of evaluating effectiveness — gaining candid feedback from users about whether it addresses the need, and whether it is a feasible and workable solution. If it is not, then you tweak the solution until the need is met.
We don’t do that in HR. Instead, we tell the client (aka employee) what they must do, but rarely do we ever ask them for feedback. I know this for a fact because I have been one of those HR people who really didn’t want to hear any negative feedback because I felt powerless to do anything to fix it.
What if we used 2015 to do a really good needs assessment on one or two of our products or services?
Let’s take “talent management” as an example. What does talent management mean to your organization? Can you answer that question? Would your answer mirror that of your executive team? You probably have a talent management program in place. If you can’t answer the questions about what it is supposed to do, how do you know if it is the right solution?
Make 2015 the year that you commit to adding value to your organization, find out what value means, and assess your current programs for their value.
That’s a lot to do, all while keeping the wheels turning at the same time. However, just asking the questions of your executives and leaders shifts the paradigm. It says, “HR really wants to work with the business to make a difference to the business.” Once you turn that corner, I predict that you will gain significant credibility.

SHIFT THE PARADIGM: CAROL ANDERSON'S WISH FOR HR IN 2015

What does 2015 hold for human resources? Honestly, I don’t know. I worry a bit about our future: will it bring more of the same or will we step up and make a change in order to create real value?
We need a shift. We are under fire and often seen as a necessary evil. We function as an overhead department and are pressured to reduce expenses. We devise programs that are dreaded and implement technology that is clunky. If we were a business, would our customers be buying?
Rather than make a prediction for 2015, I want to make a wish. I wish that human resources would use this next year to make a dramatic change in their approach to work — moving from an overhead department mentality, to that of a business provider.
I have a lot of years invested in this profession, and I truly believe that HR professionals have the ability to add tremendous value to organizations. But what does it mean to “add value”?
When I became an independent consultant and started reading and talking with others in the field, one message was consistent: we must create products and services that satisfy a need and provide value. This means doing a very good needs assessment, reporting back about what you hear and confirming the validity, and then devising a plan to fill the need. Once you implement the plan, you begin the process of evaluating effectiveness — gaining candid feedback from users about whether it addresses the need, and whether it is a feasible and workable solution. If it is not, then you tweak the solution until the need is met.
We don’t do that in HR. Instead, we tell the client (aka employee) what they must do, but rarely do we ever ask them for feedback. I know this for a fact because I have been one of those HR people who really didn’t want to hear any negative feedback because I felt powerless to do anything to fix it.
What if we used 2015 to do a really good needs assessment on one or two of our products or services?
Let’s take “talent management” as an example. What does talent management mean to your organization? Can you answer that question? Would your answer mirror that of your executive team? You probably have a talent management program in place. If you can’t answer the questions about what it is supposed to do, how do you know if it is the right solution?
Make 2015 the year that you commit to adding value to your organization, find out what value means, and assess your current programs for their value.
That’s a lot to do, all while keeping the wheels turning at the same time. However, just asking the questions of your executives and leaders shifts the paradigm. It says, “HR really wants to work with the business to make a difference to the business.” Once you turn that corner, I predict that you will gain significant credibility.

SHIFT THE PARADIGM: CAROL ANDERSON'S WISH FOR HR IN 2015

What does 2015 hold for human resources? Honestly, I don’t know. I worry a bit about our future: will it bring more of the same or will we step up and make a change in order to create real value?
We need a shift. We are under fire and often seen as a necessary evil. We function as an overhead department and are pressured to reduce expenses. We devise programs that are dreaded and implement technology that is clunky. If we were a business, would our customers be buying?
Rather than make a prediction for 2015, I want to make a wish. I wish that human resources would use this next year to make a dramatic change in their approach to work — moving from an overhead department mentality, to that of a business provider.
I have a lot of years invested in this profession, and I truly believe that HR professionals have the ability to add tremendous value to organizations. But what does it mean to “add value”?
When I became an independent consultant and started reading and talking with others in the field, one message was consistent: we must create products and services that satisfy a need and provide value. This means doing a very good needs assessment, reporting back about what you hear and confirming the validity, and then devising a plan to fill the need. Once you implement the plan, you begin the process of evaluating effectiveness — gaining candid feedback from users about whether it addresses the need, and whether it is a feasible and workable solution. If it is not, then you tweak the solution until the need is met.
We don’t do that in HR. Instead, we tell the client (aka employee) what they must do, but rarely do we ever ask them for feedback. I know this for a fact because I have been one of those HR people who really didn’t want to hear any negative feedback because I felt powerless to do anything to fix it.
What if we used 2015 to do a really good needs assessment on one or two of our products or services?
Let’s take “talent management” as an example. What does talent management mean to your organization? Can you answer that question? Would your answer mirror that of your executive team? You probably have a talent management program in place. If you can’t answer the questions about what it is supposed to do, how do you know if it is the right solution?
Make 2015 the year that you commit to adding value to your organization, find out what value means, and assess your current programs for their value.
That’s a lot to do, all while keeping the wheels turning at the same time. However, just asking the questions of your executives and leaders shifts the paradigm. It says, “HR really wants to work with the business to make a difference to the business.” Once you turn that corner, I predict that you will gain significant credibility.

WHY CLEAN DATA IS THE BEST DATA

In today’s HR landscape, data is having a moment. But I’d like to suggest that not all analytics are created equal.
HR data is essentially HR business intelligence. This should be the basis on which decisions are made about the people of the organization. All of the cool technology in the world cannot override bad data, which is why the accuracy of HR data is a highly strategic function.

First, let me provide some perspective.

In 1980, I was responsible for a department that included personnel records. There was a supervisor who had been in the organization for years. Her staff had been with her for almost the same amount of time. I was used to the impeccable (and regularly audited) records from my prior position with the Marine Corps, and this department maintained similarly accurate and credible personnel information.

Next I went into banking, and while “records” were not part of my responsibility, I relied on the data for my compensation analysis. When I got there in 1989, I found another amazing records overseer who kept our data clean by checking and rechecking all of the personnel forms that arrived on his desk. Our job codes, EEO codes, departmental hierarchy — everything needed for good analysis — was clean.
Then came automation.

Technology as a Data Keeper

The records-keeper job was eliminated because our HRIS was going to take over. We worked hard reviewing, auditing and cleaning data so that the “go live” would contain good data. That lasted about a week.
The good news: We could access, sort and analyze data quickly and easily. The bad news: The data got progressively worse.
Why? Because we shifted the job of keeping the HRIS up-to-date from an individual who knew the importance of the data to managers who couldn’t care less. I haven’t seen an organization with good data since. The promise of technology, which could have been such help, fell prey to a system that didn’t review, audit, analyze or even really see the importance of clean data.

Why is Accurate Data so Important?

Today, organizations not only have an HRIS, but many also have add-on human capital management systems which provide applicant tracking, learning management, compensation planning and other specialty modules. If they are smart, however, the HRIS is the “system of record” meaning that all core data is entered in one place and is fed to other modules. This is a critical first step of having accurate data.

How to Fix Jumbled Data

You must take the accuracy of your data seriously. Here are a few ways:
  1. Every data field should have a business owner. It is the business owner’s responsibility to audit the data in that field. As an example, the compensation department “owns” job codes. They should be the only one allowed to update the job code table, but should also audit the use of job codes regularly to ensure that managers are assigning them properly. Job codes are a critical element of HR analysis, in everything from compensation to employee relations. One wrong job code can throw a job’s comp-ratio way off.
  2. Organizational hierarchies should be deliberately established by a collaborative group of HR sub-disciplines. This should happen with the understanding of the implications of each structure on data reporting. For one sub-discipline to change a hierarchy without informing others can do damage to the reporting credibility.
  3. Reports should be produced by a single source within the HR team, regardless of the “owner” of the data. HRIS and human capital systems are too complicated, and a novice analyst can pull the wrong data too easily. One source for reporting should help to catch discrepancies before reports are distributed.

TECHNOLOGY OPENS THE DOOR TO BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE, BUT IT’S NOT THE KEY

So your company is investing in a new talent management system and you think you’ll get all kinds of great data from it, right? Well…maybe.
Just because you buy the latest HR technology product doesn’t mean you’ll get good business intelligence. Technology is not the key here. Solid business processes that result in accurate and timely information are the key.
Human resource data is particularly vulnerable to poor maintenance because the people entering the data are managers and employees that tend to approach the task with resentment (i.e. “doing HR’s work for them”). Not only is the data poorly maintained, but also the same data is reinvented many times over by different branches of HR that use the data for different purposes. What’s more, most HR teams don’t run quality audits on their data to ensure that data entry is accurate or that data is updated as necessary.
Here are some steps a company can take to trust their data and utilize technology tools.

Step 1: Find the Root Cause of the Inaccuracy

We often dump raw data and manipulate it with spreadsheets to make it look pretty. If the data provided to clients is wrong, find the root cause and fix it. It’s often a simple fix, but you need to dig for it.
Use the five whys to find the root cause.
A termination code is wrong on a report.
  1. Why? Because the manager entered an incorrect code.
  2. Why? Because the manager was using an outdated code listing on the intranet.
  3. Why? Because the code listing had not been updated.
  4. Why? Because the HR representative who was responsible for updating the code listing on the intranet had been out for an extended leave and no one knew to make the change.
  5. Why? Because all the responsibility is on one person to remember to update the codes.
If you simply changed the code in the system to the correct code, it would still be wrong the next time a manager refers to the code listing on the intranet. If however, you find the root cause, you not only fix the error, but also the systemic problem that led to the error — the process was too dependent on one person.

Step 2: Make Sure Your Hierarchy is Designed to Distribute Employee Data to Managers Correctly

Many HR systems are fed from payroll that is organized around the accounting department. In our increasingly complex organizations, however, hierarchies aren’t that simple. Employees may be paid by one department, yet may report to a leader in a different department. The unit leader may be part of a specific department for accounting purposes, but in distribution performance and talent reports and processes, they should actually show under their direct manager, not their leader.
This is a great opportunity to think collectively across HR silos, identify different organizational structure needs, and design a structure that works for each need.

Step 3: Get Your Job Data Straight

An HR system is, at its core, a matching system that contains both employee data and job data to be matched depending upon the purpose.  Compensation? The employee is assigned to a job code. Recruiting? The vacancy is assigned a job code. Learning and development? The competencies and learning paths are linked to a job code.
Job codes are both the most powerful and most misused elements of HR data. If an employee is assigned to the wrong job code, their salary grade, their EEO code, their bonus structure and possibly their benefits will be wrong. Companies must think collectively across HR silos and create job codes and job data that works across all HR functions.

Step 4: Make Sure Your Systems Talk to Each Other

One system for recruiting, another for learning, and yet another for the HRIS, may be nicely customized for the HR function using it, but it doesn’t translate across functions. HR needs to talk the same language for the sake of their customers, meaning that a job code to a recruiter should mean the same to a compensation representative.

Step 5: Audit Your Data

It takes work and it takes time, but your credibility is worth it.
Before you open the door to HR technology, be sure you have the ke

Finding time to make a change

Realizing it’s time for a career transition doesn’t need to come from a major life change like losing a job or turning 30. In fact, many people decide that it’s time to pursue a new direction even when they’re in a great situation.
That was exactly the situation Yen Klikna found herself in when she decided to enroll in the Medical Reimbursement and Coding online associates degree program at Bryant & Stratton College.
Klikna was working full time as a manager at a dispatch authority, making a quality living for her family. However, the job required that she needed to be on call most days. Combined with the commute to and from the job, her time was limited at home with her family. So she decided to start doing research on a career change that could give her more time at home.
“My priorities changed,” Klikna said. “I have a 3 year old daughter and I wanted to spend more time with her. I was tired of being stuck in traffic every day.”
After spending time determining that a career as a medical coder could lead to the opportunity to work from home, Klikna took the steps necessary to enroll in school. That led her to Bryant & Stratton and in December 2012, she completed her associate’s degree.
At that point her focus shifted to finding a steady job in the field that could eventually lead to her doing her work from home. Through her own diligence and the assistance of the Bryant & Stratton Career Services department, her job search began in earnest.
Klikna credits Career Services Representative Mike Lester for giving her the necessary guidance throughout her job search. Lester provided her with support in formatting her resume to ensure that it was tailored properly to the jobs she was applying for and he even assisted in sending her potential leads on a weekly basis.
While her job search was not a short one, Klikna began a part time position partway through 2013 and recently took on a full time position in March. Her new position also allows her to work from home twice a week, a perfect situation for a mom who was hoping to spend more time with her young daughter.
The preparation that Klikna received at Bryant & Stratton certainly played a major role in obtaining a job that fit her desires so well. She specifically mentions the AAPC exam she took after graduation as the one factor that truly told her she was ready for this career.
“That showed me what the coding world is all about,” she said. “You definitely need to do additional preparation for the test but Bryant & Stratton gave me a very strong foundation.”
That foundation included a close bond with many of her instructors and classmates. In fact, Klikna says that the interaction with those individuals helped convince her that this was the career path she wanted to follow. She hasn’t kept in close contact with many of her classmates since graduation, although a small group did correspond as they were preparing for their respective AAPC exams. The group used LinkedIn to communicate on the different tactics they were using to prepare for the test.
Today, nearly two years removed from graduation, Klikna finds herself in a terrific position. She has a position that she truly enjoys which provides her the opportunity to do work from home while spending more time with her family.
Even though she didn’t have a singular moment that indicated a change was necessary, she finds herself in a better place because of her choice.
If you are wondering if you can make a career change at 30 or even before, check with the Admissions office at Bryant & Stratton to see if there are any programs that could make your life better.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCzOJDJZHoBttdHAjJsnN9w?sub_confirmation=1