Talent and Perfor...
Follow
Find tag "managers"
897 views | +2 today
Talent and Performance Development
Making sense of performance and talent development systems to create & sustain high performance in organizations. For the BEST of the BEST curated news in performance, change, agile learning, innovation, motivation, social media and careers, SUBSCRIBE to Reveln.com/Tools/
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Deb Nystrom, REVELN
Scoop.it!

How Avery-Dennison Does Strengths Right, Building Strong, Versatile Leadership Teams

How Avery-Dennison Does Strengths Right, Building Strong, Versatile Leadership Teams | Talent and Performance Development | Scoop.it

A global manufacturer and distributor uses its Leading to Win program to promote a team spirit through recognizing strengths and weaknesses, getting everyone’s best contribution to the team, boosting team connectivity and resilience. Participants are encouraged to discuss and reconsider team roles and group dynamics.

___________________
   
The result is not just stronger and more versatile leaders, but also stronger and more versatile teams.

     

___________________

      

The program uses divergent perspectives and underrepresented strengths that often get neglected. Further, it illuminates blind spots so the team can avoid going overboard with shared strengths. The result is not just stronger and more versatile leaders, but also stronger and more versatile teams.

    

From an individual and team perspective:   managers frequently don’t understand their strengths and therefore are prone to underdo or overdo them. Through self-awareness and effort they can make better use of their strengths. The approach also identifies weaknesses they can’t afford to ignore for both managers and teams.

    

Summary reports present aggregate data from both assessments that team members analyze together to identify trends and their implications.

    
The program uses divergent perspectives and underrepresented strengths that often get neglected. Further, it illuminates blind spots so the team can avoid going overboard with shared strengths. The result is not just stronger and more versatile leaders, but also stronger and more versatile teams.


 

Deb Nystrom, REVELN's insight:

This piece features a balanced view of using strengths and weaknesses tools, featuring 360 feedback, for large organizations that have the resources and maturity to do 360 right.  360 processes can be easily under-resourced, which only creates more problems than it solves. 
   
The two assessment tools central to the success of the program are (from the article):

    

Realise2, a self-assessment of 60 strengths gauged according to performance, usage and energy. Results are sorted into four categories: realized strengths, unrealized strengths, learned behaviors and weaknesses.

   

The Leadership Versatility Index, is a 360 that provides feedback on how co-workers observe strengths, learned behaviors and weaknesses. The LVI’s “Goldilocks” rating scale ranges from “too little” to “the right amount” to “too much.”

Source:  Chief Learning Officer's August 2014 feature, "Strength is Not Enough."

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Deb Nystrom, REVELN
Scoop.it!

Hire & Fire is Different at Holacracy®-Powered Companies

Hire & Fire is Different at Holacracy®-Powered Companies | Talent and Performance Development | Scoop.it
In a typical top-down management structure, the power to hire and fire employees is generally in the hands of managers.


With the decentralization of authority, the separation of people and role, and the dynamic evolution of those roles, [its] more like free agents going about their work with no central planning.  This then begs the question: who can decide how and when to hire or fire?


Holacracy doesn’t answer that question; it simply gives you a framework and processes for your company to figure it out. 


Brian Robertson — designed a 3-Tier Partnership App to answer a different question: “How can we account for the difference between partners deeply committed to the organization, and those for whom the commitment is lesser and more temporary?”


  • It separates “partnership commitment” from financial compensation.
    
  • It defines three tiers of partners: Standard Partner, Tenured Partner, and Core Partner. Each tier requires a higher level of commitment to the organization, and in return offers a higher level of commitment from the organization.
     
  • It was designed for a relatively small organization.
    
   

Related posts & tools by Deb:



                
       

Deb Nystrom, REVELN's insight:

Social media is an artifact of a new age, choice driven, commitment oriented.  Holacracy is at the cutting edge of how this looks in adaptive organizations that thrive on flatter, open structures.   It's an open question:  Will it scale?


Comparing and contrasting holacracy used at a biggger company, Zappos, is on my companion Change Leadership Watch ScoopIt here entitled:


Zappos is going Holacratic: No Job Titles, No Managers, No Hierarchy

~  Deb 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Deb Nystrom, REVELN
Scoop.it!

Managing Without Authority

Managing Without Authority | Talent and Performance Development | Scoop.it

You are held accountable for results, but you can’t hold your people accountable. When they don’t meet expectations, you are the one who gets in trouble.


I’ve worked in organizations where this kind of frustration got so bad that managers resorted to fistfights. You could say they used crucial altercations instead of crucial conversations in their desperation to get performance back on track.


As you can imagine, these slugfests had the opposite effect. They stimulated cycles of retaliation and revenge.


...[This] taps  into a leadership concern that is nearly universal. ...As a leader, I’m given a heck of a lot more responsibility and accountability than authority. As a result, leaders are left managing without authority.

Deb Nystrom, REVELN's insight:

Perhaps authority and the role of management itself is changing. This is relevant, the emotion and anger, to the Escape from the Red Zone article Scooped below, referencing  Peter Naylor and Claire Crittenden.   The title starts with "No More Criticism..."  ~  Deb

more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Deb Nystrom, REVELN from The Science and Art of Motivation
Scoop.it!

No More Criticism, No Advice: Emotions Drive Achievement & Performance ~ Classic

No More Criticism, No Advice:  Emotions Drive Achievement & Performance ~ Classic | Talent and Performance Development | Scoop.it

This classic article "Escape from the Red Zone" has very current ideas.  "Peter Naylor and Claire Crittenden have a revolutionary approach in their Seven Practices listed in this article about confronting the business world's last taboo: emotion."


Excerpts:


People are motivated by either "red" emotions -- anger, fear, greed -- or "green" emotions -- genuine enthusiasm and confidence. Either ...gets results. Yet one set of emotions ...slowly destroys people; the other can actually improve people's quality of life.


__________________________


Flattery, advice, criticism, and motivation rob workers of their freedom and ignore the...emotional current ...between manager and subordinate

__________________________


...All organizations in the contemporary world manipulate emotion, warp it, force it into the red zone...   A few, and only a few, are struggling to get well.


...Their alternative model for organizational life and the politics of emotion has simple ground rules:

  • No flattery. 
  • No advice. 
  • No criticism. 
    

...No telling people how to do their jobs -- outside of a genuine training environment. Never. At all. Period.

        

__________________________

   

Recognize achievement, let the numbers speak for themselves. 
   

__________________________


...Flattery, advice, criticism, and motivation rob workers of their freedom and ignore the essential emotional current that runs through encounters between manager and subordinate," Naylor says.   Nine times out of ten, that emotional current is red: a Molotov cocktail of anger and fear, grounded in feelings of subjugation.


_______________________
 

If you do this over a period of time -- design and validation -- people will be transformed."

_______________________



..."The problem is, people don't want to be responsible. But when you give advice, who now has the responsibility? Anyone here ever heard of empowerment? If you do this over a period of time -- design and validation -- people will be transformed."

    

Excerpts from the seven (7) practices that make it work:

    


1. Don't give advice, explore emotions.   ...ask, "How do you feel about this?" Keep asking it, adding only, "Gee, that's interesting, tell me more." ...Later it's appropriate to return to problem-solving mode -- even if it's only 15 minutes later.

    


2. Don't set goals; design outcomes.   Envision a "product" for every project, something tangible.   ....Clarify...product, the actions, the benefits. Get them down on paper.


     


3: Never criticize, only validate.   Do it on paper, in tangible, solid form. Recognize achievement, let the numbers speak for themselves. 

  


Source:   "Escape from the Red Zone" featuring Peter Naylor and Claire Crittenden by writer David E. Dorsey In Fast Company magazine.


Deb Nystrom, REVELN's insight:

This classic article from the 1997 is worth a second look today.  The connection to brain science is very current.

I also think emotion and beliefs / the spiritual are both the last taboos in business  (belief / the spiritual via an example in  Theory U and Otto Scharmer.)   


I've also posted this piece on my Motivation curation stream.   It's relevant for anyone who has a work relationship with anyone else.

 ~  Deb

more...
Deb Nystrom, REVELN's curator insight, October 29, 2013 1:20 PM

This is a classic article from the 90's who time has come.  You've probably heard that all buying is emotional?   This article brings it into the heart of organizational, team and personal performance.  It's a revolutionary approach that needs a wider audience.  Hopefully, it will get one.   


I found the article because I had been searching for the "fire hydrants" story for awhile.  I remembered reading it in the 90s.  The trail led me back to find this FastTimes article.  ~  Deb

Scooped by Deb Nystrom, REVELN
Scoop.it!

Multitasking Makes Managers Less Thoughtful and Students - Multi-media Messes

Multitasking Makes Managers Less Thoughtful and Students - Multi-media Messes | Talent and Performance Development | Scoop.it

Chronic multitaskers have a harder time with everything.

Research on electronic devices at meetings from Stanford from Clifford Nass's Communication Between Humans and Interactive Media Lab clearly indicate that those who engage in media multitasking are unable to ignore irrelevant information and have difficulty identifying which information is important.


Even watching that stream of type crawl across your television screen during the evening news makes you less likely to retain information from either the program or the crawl. 


Source:  Harvard Business Review 


From another source, The Week:

In a recent TED Talk, Nass explains how college students "triple and quadruple-book media." He says, "When they're writing a paper, they're also listening to music, using Facebook, watching YouTube, texting etc."
     

To see what impact this has on their brains, Nass tasked 262 college students with completing three experiments that examined different aspects of multitasking: Switching quickly from one task to another, filtering out irrelevant information, and using what is called "working memory," an aspect of short-term memory that allows you to hold multiple pieces of information in your mind.
     

The results? Chronic multitaskers have a harder time with everything: Telling what information is relevant, managing working memory, and ignoring irrelevant information. 

         

Source:   Theweek.com/article/index/250739/chronic-multitasking-makes-us-worse-at-everything

Related posts & tools by Deb:


            

         

 


Photo by EraPhernalia Vintage Flickr 

Deb Nystrom, REVELN's insight:

Multitasking is increasingly being shown, in research, to be ineffective and inefficient.  It's time to remove it as a boilerplate addition to job descriptions.  It dates the  job description and the organization using it.  ~  D

more...
Deb Nystrom, REVELN's curator insight, January 31, 11:09 PM

It's time to remove "must be able to multi-task" from 2014 job descriptions.

Scooped by Deb Nystrom, REVELN
Scoop.it!

Our Dangerous Obsession with "Vanity Metrics" and External Recognition

Our Dangerous Obsession with "Vanity Metrics" and External Recognition | Talent and Performance Development | Scoop.it

Our LinkedIn connections, speaking engagements, and press profiles should be seen as rewards for the value we create, not the actual process by which value is created.


If you’re too focused on these “vanity metrics,” you risk painting an all-too optimistic picture of yourself without accurately identifying, measuring, and improving the underlying drivers of your performance.

    

___________________________

     

 “Strive not be a success, but rather to be of value.” ~ Albert Einstein

    

___________________________


...Instead of measuring your progress using the yardstick of external recognition, focus on achieving your vision first, and you’ll be more visible than you can imagine.


...people who tap into their deep intrinsic motivations are much more (PDF) likely to succeed on long-term projects and hit loftier goals than those who are powered by the praise of others.

Related posts & tools by Deb:



Deb Nystrom, REVELN's insight:

This article lends perspective to overdoing the visibility factor in social media and in professional networks & in using speaking gigs.  What do you actually contribute via Vision and Desired Outcomes, to make a difference?  ~ D

more...
Richard Platt's curator insight, December 12, 2013 6:39 PM

Interesting article, and much of what it states is true however we are not so sure that it's going to change a lot of people's behavior though.  We have always beleived that character counted more than being a character, but its good to be both though....;-)

Scooped by Deb Nystrom, REVELN
Scoop.it!

Why Are We Managers So Poor at Feedback? It’s Like Trying to Explain How to Use a Towel to a Fish

Why Are We Managers So Poor at Feedback?  It’s Like Trying to Explain How to Use a Towel to a Fish | Talent and Performance Development | Scoop.it

Is the manager’s most important job to give feedback to employees? ....Study after study point to managers who are poor at giving feedback as the major reason why performance appraisals fail.


Excerpts:

"...most managers are so poor at it which means the feedback is infrequent, poorly timed, of poor quality, or all three."

Sibson Consulting reports that HR professionals are frustrated because managers don’t give constructive feedback and 58% of HR professionals give their number one feedback tool, the annual performance review, a C grade or below. 


Study after study point to managers who are poor at giving feedback as the major reason why performance appraisals fail.


...[The] ..four big reasons (barriers) why feedback is poorly done now:


  • …what managers call feedback is not feedback at all. It is criticism. Feedback is data from a process that is used for learning.
    
  • Second, current HR polices require managers to give the feedback. Why not give employees the ability and autonomy to collect their own data? ... Why not provide autonomy and trust to employees instead?
    
  • Third, the work environment most often discourages open and honest feedback. …How can managers give feedback to something they can’t see?
    
  • Fourth, most managers intuitively know….Attempting to provide feedback on the behaviors of employees without studying the entire system (the context) is like trying to explain how to use a towel to a fish.
   
Related posts by Deb:
      
Curing ONE of the Seven Deadly Diseases of Management, Performance Appraisals

       

From Chaos to Creative Performance Development in a VUCA World (One that is Volatile, Uncertain, Chaotic and Ambiguous) - Slideshare

        


photo:  by deepwarren Flickr cc 


Deb Nystrom, REVELN's insight:

This helpful article points to the systemic source of problems in performance appraisals and feedback.  It also implies that data and business intelligence have a bigger role that managers could help happen.  

Getting data in the hands of those who could best use it for, direct, untainted, well-timed feedback relieves managers of a burdensome, low-value task and empowers them to direct data tools to where they can do the most good.  ~  Deb

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Deb Nystrom, REVELN
Scoop.it!

Let's Invert the Performance Review

Let's Invert the Performance Review | Talent and Performance Development | Scoop.it

"...even well-executed performance reviews are glaringly one-sided."


Performance reviews ...[are] ...a great opportunity to synchronize manager and employee expectations, jointly set goals, and evaluate progress toward those goals. If you're a manager and not doing these things, you might as well skip the review process -- and reconsider whether you're fit to be a manager.


But even well-executed performance reviews are glaringly one-sided. They review employee performance on terms set by their managers. Why don't we see the reverse: employees reviewing the performance of their managers?


...Invert the performance review. Make the primary focus upward rather than downward.


Reasons:

  1. It's usually harder to judge managerial performance than individual contribution. Individual contributions mostly have tangible, attributable results. In contrast, managerial performance is largely reflected in how the team perceives the manager.

  2. Managers are key reason that employees decide whether to stay at a company or quit. 

  3. Without a formal review process, it's easy for managers to not get meaningful feedback from their employees. 
Deb Nystrom, REVELN's insight:

I wish I had a nickel for every suggestion I've received over the years for upward performance review of managers.   It's an evergreen request only implemented, in a limited way, through multi-rater feedback.   Still, systemically, it's worth inclusion on this curation stream because


1) It's mentioned as an idea, seemingly new;


2) It's an article on LinkedIn, a large, professional network;


3) It makes the point about execution problems and 360 feedback;


4) It relates to team performance.  Managers are often connected to a team concept of all those needed to execute on a goal successfully, especially those who report to them;


5) I'm a big fan of any Dilbert comic on this topic.


Best, ~  Deb

more...
No comment yet.