Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
For anyone interested in the science behind Inclusion, here is a breaktrough article. It is detailed and lengthy, but educational AND very relevant.
Research over the past three decades have demonstrated that even though organisations may have the requisite diversity in their midst, the employees may not feel that all the strands of their social identities may be appreciated and included – hence, leaving them feeling excluded. Unfortunately, there are not many available tools for organizations to gauge such desired levels of inclusion.
~promotion/progression & development,
~organisational belonging, and
~ emotional well-being.
The overall measurement within the ten dimensions provides and index, which gives organisations an indication of where their diversity and inclusion practices are failing, and where resources and effort are needed to be applied to achieve the necessary change.
Are you familar with the concept of diversity and inclusion? Do you know the difference between these terms?
From the show:
The following actions or behaviors are NOT intended to blame others. My intent is to accomplish two goals:
~illustrate how our actions can unintentionally cause others to feel excluded
~list these actions in hopes that those who may be behaving in these ways, can reflect upon and evaluate the quality of their leadership based on the likelihood that their actions may cause others to feel excluded
Exclusion actions or behaviors -
* Interrupting (alone in a crowded room)
* Leaving others out
* Ridicule in private or public
* Abrasive and bullying behavior
* Making you jump because I can (disguised as "testing your limits)
Have you felt excluded because of the actions above? Other actions?
“When people were asked to chronicle their worst boss, they either cited lack of character or competency,” said Longenecker. “When we teach leadership, we now focus on character and competency. The list of bad traits leans very heavily towards character issues.”
from the article:
Here are Longenecker’s 12 characteristics of really bad bosses:
~Are arrogant, prideful, inflexible, and always right.
~Are unprincipled, untrustworthy, misrepresent the truth, and lie.
~Fail to create clear direction and clarify performance expectations.
~Are ineffective at providing effective performance feedback and recognition.
~Are really bad communicators.
~Are erratic and have unpredictable behavior and moods.
~Take credit and avoid blame.
~Do not plan effectively and are crisis driven.
~Do not develop their people or help them get ahead.
~Do not solve problems or improve processes.
~Are technically incompetent and lack talent.
~Make unwise, ill-informed, and ineffective decisions.
For HR directors and business leaders, the challenge in 2013 is to ensure they move with the times, getting the most out of new and innovative HR tools and technologies that are now available and ensuring that HR plays a central role in developing wider business strategy.
Via Andrew Spence, HR Trend Institute, Roger Francis
Excellent content with international perspective.
Bullying at the workplace: Statistics on bullying - Human resources News on Violence in the Workplace
"...between 35 and 50 percent of workers have been bullied or otherwise abused in their workplaces at some point during their careers." Duffy told us.
"And for those of you in HR, you might be very interested to learn of the frequency statistics that were reported in a very recent study – 31 percent of human resources personnel had been bullied and over half of that bullied group believed it was because of their role in human resources and their associated responsibilities."
As if the personal implications weren’t enough, there is also a financial aspect to this situation.
"In the United States, the actual cost . . . $250 million annually in expenditures related to health care, litigation, staff turnover, and retraining from workplace bullying and mobbing." Duffy explained.
This figure may be low given a lot of these types of costs are not always attributed to bullying when in fact they could be.
It's time to take a close look at the quality of leadership in organizations! Leadership is not a license to bully or condone it! The problem is that many of us don't know we are actually doing it!
"In many cases you have an executive team that's so sure about company strategy, but then you go inside the organization and find that nobody else has a clue,"
Intimacy is about leadership. Interactivity is about channels. Inclusion is about content. Intentionality is about goals, vision, and the strategy of getting things done.
Via Sabrina Murphy, Roy Sheneman, PhD
People Skills Excellence for Leadership, Customer Service, Teamwork, and Employee Engagement. 908.595.1515 USA
Showing approciation authentically and consistently is NOT as easy as we may think. In this article, Kate Nasser lists a balanced approach for consistent recognition and appreciation:
From the post:
Here is a balanced approach that respected successful leaders use.
~Know Your Team Members.
Message: Avoid using the same stock communication with everyone. The better you know the employees, the better you can engage them.
~Show appreciation to create a growth culture fueled by high morale. Message: Overlook the appreciation and their passion wanes. Shy away from correction and you facilitate their crash. Withhold coaching and they stagnate.
~Recognize Growth as Well as Achievement.
Message: If you want continuous improvement, highlight and recognize lessons learned as the fuel for growth.
~Applaud Talents That Are Constantly Applied to New Challenges
Message: To expand success, you must always maintain a solid foundation. Recognize talent that sustains the organization.
Maximizer: People with the Maximizer theme focus on others' strengths as a way to stimulate personal and group excellence. They seek to transform something strong into something superb.
No matter the resume of a leader, we humans take turns leading and following – it’s built into the fabric of our ultrasocial human brains. Think of the hotshot vice presid...
1. Is she a good person? This one’s a little vague, so I added the next one for clarity:
2. Will she be loyal to me, her follower? I’m talking mama bear loyalty, Liam Neeson in “Taken” loyalty; “Psycho Dad” loyalty. Will she put it all on the line if I need her to and if I’ve earned it?
3. Does she know what she’s doing? There are a lot of good and loyal people out there who just don’t have the know-how to get where they’d like to go. I won’t follow them until they’ve gained those skills.
4. Does she have the sense to adapt as needed? Leadership is all about changing course midstream, adjusting to a changing situation and finding – or making – a new way forward. Smart isn’t enough. Wise is also required to succeed as a leader. Of the two, I’ll take wisdom every time.
5. Is this worthy of my time and energy? Maybe you’re thinking I should have put this one first, but here’s why I didn’t: we humans are supremely apt at talking ourselves into some bad decisions if we want something badly enough. By looking at the worthiness of an endeavor only after checking the first four rules off, you’ll be more certain to give those first four rules all the weight they deserve.
Mathematicians and other rational people will ask if this produces any extra profit.
Van der Lee: “Willliam A. Schiemann (2009) has established a number of hard number observations based on very wide research. These findings are described in his book Reinventing Talent Management, How to Maximize performance in the new marketplace.
Schiemann demonstrates among other things that in organizations in which Strategy, Culture and Talent are aligned to each other (so called Highly Aligned Organizations) profit can double with respect to the competition.”
Richard van der Lee writes a compelling article on the value of maximizing staff member talent:
Enough of excuses such as ‘it takes time,’ ‘it is unprofitable,’ ‘it is the responsibility of HR,’ ‘we already pay enough staff expenses.’ “By utilizing talents that are relevant at that moment for market developments, organizations can align with the market more dynamically.
It is kicking at an open door when you conclude that utilizing talent, on the basis of the previously formulated definition, results in both customer satisfaction and an increase of satisfaction amongst employees, allowing organizations to take a lead over the competition with consequent improvement in (financial) results” Van der Lee states.
According to the Corporate Leadership Council, employees with lower engagement levels are four times more likely to leave their jobs than those who are highly engaged.
But the importance of employee engagement isn't just increased employee retention; it's also about higher productivity.
One study by HR strategy firm Kenexa found that of 64 organizations studied, the organizations with highly engaged employees achieved twice the annual net income of organizations whose employees were less engaged.