Employee Added Value

Employee Added Value

Organisations need to liberate Employee Performance.

This newsletter, 'People-centric and Strategic HR' is about a new multi-sided model for HR. In the last edition of the newsletter, I suggested that organisations need to add value to their employees, helping them to perform, and improving business performance. This edition starts to review how this value can be added.

?

Employee Value for Money

Today’s employee experience approaches are important enablers for helping employees to create value (CV+), and by enabling this, improving business performance. However, from an employee perspective, much of this activity is just value for money for them (E-VfM).

Most people don’t go to work for a good experience at work, so whilst everything we’re doing on employee experience is appropriate and useful, it’s not really ever going to have much impact on employees’ motivation, performance, customer experience or business results.

Employee experience is necessary but not sufficient – today, we need to add value to employees too.


Employee Added Value

In my last newsletter, I defined adding value, in any context, as meeting the specific requirements of a client / customer / other stakeholder. So it’s less about the general best practices of the value for money level, and more about the unique challenges of a particular scenario.

From a strategic HR perspective, adding value (AV) is about understanding the needs of a business and supporting it by providing outcomes or capabilities in people and their organisation, which is then delivered through appropriate HR activities and interventions. Because it’s still about supporting a business, adding value isn’t being truly strategic, but is a hugely important part of being a more effective business function.

From a people-centric HR perspective, I now suggesting that employee added value (E-AV) needs to be about how we help employees to meet their work objectives.

I know that this isn’t a new need, and is obviously something we already emphasise in order to ensure the overall objectives of a business are met. For example, although from a strategic perspective, I often break organisation outcomes down as human, organisation and social capital, I also like the AMO model’s categorisation as ability, motivation and opportunity to participate. It’s often that opportunity that’s lacking, and I’ve long thought we’ve fallen short in addressing it.

Returning again to our current people-centric perspective, this same issue is seen in the way that many people still believe that their organisation often hinders rather than helps them to perform.

No alt text provided for this image


Liberating Employees from their Organisation

I first came across the idea about HR as ‘human liberation’ as a suggestion from Sir John Harvey Jones in a talk to an HR network, Exchange, that I used to run back in the 1990s. However, I first started to really look at the way organisations hobble their people’s performance after reading Boston Consulting Group consultant Yves Morieux’s HBR article in 2011, ‘Smart rules: six ways to get people to solve problems without you’. I thought these findings were quite shocking back then:

“Complexity has grown substantially meaning that the opportunities for re-engineering are even more pronounced. This can be seen in BCG’s analysis of 100 US and European listed companies, which found that over a 15-year period the amount of complexity assessed by the number of layers, coordination bodies and decision approvals needed had grown by 50–350%. Managers can now spend up to 40% of their time writing management reports and another 30% in coordination meetings.”


I also thought this graphic from Adobe Workfront’s State of Enterprise research in 2016 was quite powerful (the graphic was included a good BBC video on David Graeber’s work, which also links to the negative perception many people have their jobs) - I use it in the Academy's Work and Job Design programme:

No alt text provided for this image


No alt text provided for this image


In ‘Time, Talent, Energy’, Bain consultants summarise the various issues described here as 'organisational drag' and suggest that in addition to 15% of an organisation’s time being spent in meetings, senior executives can spend 40% of their time in them, with up to 25% of all this time being unnecessary.

More recently, Gary Hamel and Michele Zanini have suggested the problem is ‘bureausclerosis’ and that this can be measured though a bureaucracy mass index based on the following seven issues:

  1. Bloat: too many managers, administrators, and management layers
  2. Friction: too much busy work that slows down decision making
  3. Insularity: too much time spent on internal issues
  4. Disempowerment: too many constraints on autonomy
  5. Risk Aversion: too many barriers to risk taking
  6. Inertia: too many impediments to proactive change
  7. Politics: too much energy devoted to gaining power and influence.


Gartner also note the impact of what they call 'work friction' based on the sort of issues shown in the slide below, suggesting that:

  • 74% of employees experience 3 or more work friction points
  • 26% experience 7 or more work friction points - accounting for a 31% drop in intent to stay
  • Hybrid and remote employees are 40% more likely to experience high levels of work friction.

Gartner also predict designing organisations to address both this and employee change fatigue will be HR's second highest priority for 2023:

No alt text provided for this image


Note that all these areas go beyond just a nice experience. They're also issues that stop people doing their work as effectively as they could do, and most often would like to.


Reducing Organisational Debt

The problem has also recently been referred to as organisational debt – the idea that the cost of not developing organisations to enable employees to perform to their potential has been growing over time, a bit like the cost of investing in short-term technological fixes, ie technical debt.

For me, some of the potential actions to reduce all the problems listed above are relatively simple. For example:

  • Reducing meetings. Many organisations run far too many meetings. I wrote this post on meetings just before the pandemic, but the problem has increased substantantially since then – firstly, during the pandemic, as we weren’t able to meet in the traditional way. And secondly, since then, in the new hybrid environment, where I think we’ve largely failed to adapt to the constraints and opportunities of the new hybrid working environment.
  • Reducing email. We’ve known for a good decade or more that email is a fairly poor tool for many types of communication, but other than in a very small number of organisations, it remains ubiquitous. Now that so many companies use Microsoft Teams, we could reduce both email overload and the latest and maybe baddest contribution to bureausclerosis which is Teams sprawl, by much more effective use of our communication and collaboration systems.
  • Increasing asynchronous communication. A large part of both solutions above is to move to more asynchronous communication. Businesses can be much more effective when they allow people to work in their own time at their own rate, and this is an essential basis for a move to much broader flexible working (one of the ‘basics’ from my last newsletter).

?

However, other actions do require more fundamental change. These centre largely on radically increasing employee autonomy. I’ll provide an overview of what may be possible here in my next newsletter, providing part 2 of this article on employee added value.

However, remember that all of this is still only one, if a major part of how we can progress beyond today’s focus on employee experience. Therefore, once I’ve outlined how we can liberate employees by increasing their autonomy, we’ll move on to review the next step of employee created value (E-CV) too.


I’d love to hear your own views on the points I've made above.?Please share your comments below. I look forward to discussing these and broader points around multi-sided HR with you! Also, please subscribe for future insights on multi-sided HR.

I also invite you to check out my broader insights on both strategic and people-centric HR in the Strategic HR Academy. Learn about the latest thinking and opportunities in on-demand courses on HR and Competitive Advantage; Performance Management and Reward; Organisation, Process, Work and Job Design; Strategic Partnering and HR Transformation. Then discuss application within your own organisation with me and other HR practitioners in periodic study groups (The 2023 Strategic Priorities study group is starting shortly!).

Kind regards - Jon

Judith Fiddler

HR-Preneur. 1 million+ safe HR hearings, 8 published books

2 年

Great share, Jon Ingham!

Anthony Hesketh

Associate Professor/Senior Lecturer at Lancaster University

2 年

An interesting piece Jon. I love the idea of 'bureausclerosis’ - which really resonates - although examining Gary's and Michele's variables for measuring it in the linked article didn't get over my bar for measuring value. I look forward to seeing how you deal with this in Part 2. ATB

回复

要查看或添加评论,请登录

Jon Ingham的更多文章

  • Organising and managing employees as customers

    Organising and managing employees as customers

    In this edition of my newsletter, I look in more detail at the impact of a multi-sided (strategic and people-centric)…

    4 条评论
  • How to add and create value in both strategic and people-centric HR

    How to add and create value in both strategic and people-centric HR

    Welcome to my newsletter on multi-sided HR. In this edition, I explore how practitioners can create new value for their…

    2 条评论
  • Four Opportunities to extend EX (beyond just less awful!)

    Four Opportunities to extend EX (beyond just less awful!)

    My last couple of newsletters have focused on insights and learning from what I thought was one of 2023’s best online…

    14 条评论
  • What is EX? (part 2: on Joe Pine's Experience Economy)

    What is EX? (part 2: on Joe Pine's Experience Economy)

    In last week’s newsletter, I reviewed Dave Ulrich’s insights on employee experience / EX and 'HR 3.0'.

    4 条评论
  • One more time, what is employee experience?

    One more time, what is employee experience?

    Welcome to my newsletter on multi-sided (strategic and people-centric) HR. I’ve already provided some insights on…

    11 条评论
  • Company Capability and Culture

    Company Capability and Culture

    2023 has been a busy year and I've not provided you with an update to my Multi-Sided (strategic and people-centric) HR…

    4 条评论
  • People-centric and Strategic HR - Newsletter Overview

    People-centric and Strategic HR - Newsletter Overview

    Jon Ingham’s newsletter on “People-centric and Strategic HR” aims to anticipate where the People & Culture profession…

    4 条评论
  • Why we need Multi-Sided HR

    Why we need Multi-Sided HR

    The Business Benefits of People-centricity This newsletter, 'People-centric and Strategic HR' is about a new…

    3 条评论
  • HR's Neo-Copernican Revolution

    HR's Neo-Copernican Revolution

    What Putting People First really means This newsletter, 'People-centric and Strategic HR' is about a new multi-sided…

    23 条评论
  • People-centric vs Strategic HR

    People-centric vs Strategic HR

    The world has changed. The shift started with a new focus on employee experience vs engagement about 10 years ago (see…

    7 条评论

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了