IPL cricket and the corporate angle

In Outlook Kenneth L Shropshire, director, Wharton Sports Business Initiative, spoke about the IPL owners and their team performance and links with business performance. Interesting to note the differences since businesses often end up mimicking sports (note terms like talent, coaching, superstar players, etc.):

To what extent do the principles of running a business apply to sports?

It is often tough to determine this. The best measure of success is that if you have a team, say the Yankees, which consistently wins, your profits from that team increase as well. At times, teams are criticised for not finishing very high in the rankings; but then some of them are purchased for a very low price too.

How are conflicts between managers and owners or players often resolved?

One way is to see how much profit-sharing there is within the league. Players who do well need rewards, they should be encouraged to do better. But teams within a league also need to be encouraged to compete. That depends on optimal profit-sharing.

What about leagues pushing sportsmen to do more than they are able?

Too much emphasis on performance in sport, where you cross an ethical or legal barrier, is not viewed positively by the public in the US. That's why we're having problems with performance enhancement drugs, steroid use etc.

Related stories here on Outlook website:

What's not that clear is the strategy of using brands to piggyback on the fortunes of a sports team: defeat can have a negative impact on the brand. That's why experts say it's best to just treat it as a standalone business. "Corporate values do apply in the world of cricket; but unlike a regular business, these values do not make the outcome of a match predictable,"

Half of Employers Lack Leadership and Education on Workplace-Diversity

Erik Samdhal of i4cp sent me a heads-up to their survey:

A recent study by the Institute for Corporate Productivity (i4cp) found that 53% of companies do not sponsor diversity training in their organizations, 66% do not have specific diversity councils to serve as a watchdog on issues including race, gender, and sexual orientation and 77% do not have affinity groups in place to support minorities.
The study also found that 68% lack a high-level executive who oversees diversity initiatives. And 65% of respondents admit their organizations do not have a global diversity strategy.
“Many employers seem to think of diversity and inclusion as simply an EEOC compliance issue,” said Eric Davis, i4cp’s Associate Editor. “Employers need to view diversity and inclusion as an important strategy for developing talent. Organizations embracing that concept are more likely to have top-down diversity policies, which include accountability.”
According to the survey, when diversity programs are in place, accountability for diversity strategies tends to start at the top. When asked how leaders are held accountable for driving diversity in their organizations, 31% of respondents said CEOs are subject to annual diversity reviews. Twenty-three percent of those surveyed said their CEO’s compensation is tied to how well the chief executive carried out the organization’s diversity strategy. However, nearly 20% of respondents say their top leadership is not held accountable for ensuring diversity.

In one of my earlier organizations, I was frequently called on to present the session on Diversity and Inclusion policies for new recruits. When I realised that most new recruits were joining from Organizations where such words had never been mention, I switched to a "Devil's Advocate" mode and asked them why they thought an organization had to have these policies.

Most people would say something like "It's a good thing to do". "Societal obligation" etc. etc.

My response was that organizations almost never do something which does not benefit the shareholder. This comment would seem strange to them. How could a policy like this be linked to profit motive.

The link is quite simple. If you are out there selling to a diverse client and consumer base, across geographies and nations - then your workforce has to reflect that diversity.

If a company doesn't, then it is headed for the dustbin of history.

Add to your iGoogle page

Now it's easy. Click on the button below


By the way the MyBlogLog Community of this blog now has 124 members. And the Feedburner subscriber count has crossed 1800.

Cool!

By the way, I updated my About page here to add this bit :-)

Gautam has given talks on “Blogging for Business” at organizations. He’s frequently quoted in the press as an authority on business blogging. If you want to interview him or invite him to speak at a conference, e-mail him or call at +91-98665-11236.

So do you wanna?

Why Searching for Meaning at Work is pretty much useless

Lucy Kellaway writes in the Financial Times:

The search for meaning at work not only goes on unabated but also seems to be getting more urgent all the time.

This crisis of meaningless is a relatively new thing. A report from the Work Foundation published last week argues that looking for meaning at work would have seemed outlandish even a generation ago. But now, as a joint result of affluence and our general leaning towards introspection, it has become the norm. We all insist that our jobs should mean something.

The author of the report, Stephen Overell, points out that meaning is a subjective thing: what counts as meaningful work to one person won’t to another. This means that companies, for all their insistence on “employee engagement programmes”, can’t create meaning and should not try.

Instead they should concentrate on not destroying it – which many of them manage to do effortlessly enough through treating their employees badly.

Read the full article here . Thought provoking!

The Ron Paul Effect: Returns on Conversation

That's the term Rob uses to explain why he's not focussing too much on the web. Yes, it can be an echo-chamber. One should be talking and speaking to other non-web-social-media-people too!

I have a hard time focusing on the web these days because of the Ron Paul effect. For those involved heavily in the web and social media, it seemed as if Ron Paul was at least making a dent in the primaries. As it turned out though, most of the rest of the world had no idea who he was. I think about that every time someone tells me about the latest frivolous web tool that is going to be the next big thing. I wonder, “the next big thing to who? A bunch of web novelty seekers that just move on from big thing to big thing?” It only seems like “everyone” is using the latest and greatest tool because we are pulling from the wrong sample.

I’m not one of those people who thinks that web is bad, or that it is useless. I just think it is a time sink and that the return on “being part of the conversation” is negative for most people. That isn’t anything that hasn’t been said many times before. I just wanted to explain why I’ve been missing.

What's your return on "being part of the conversation"? Is it negative? Why do you persist then?

About Ram Charan and his consulting advice

Regular readers would know I am a big Ram Charan fan, so I loved this article about him on the CNN site. Some interesting vignettes:

Charan's weird and wonderful life is an unintended byproduct of dedication, he insists. Dedication to learning and teaching and service, to the whole set of Hindu virtues embodied by one of Charan's favorite phrases, "Purpose before self." "People used to ask me, What is your ambition?" says Charan, who turned 67 this past Christmas. "I say I have none. My dedication is going to take me where I'm going to be."

"A leader who does not produce leaders is not a great leader," he says. "If you agree, I'd like to put that in." (Gomber nods.) Charan is trying to help Emaar construct a document that will help its managers discern in others what he calls "natural talents," or "God's gifts." "Each of us has to be the best calibrator of natural talent of the people who work with us," he says. "What are the three to five most crucial natural-talent items that each person has? It has to be specific" - he taps the whiteboard for emphasis - "and very clear" - tap - "and repeatable" -tap!

He remembers when he was 7 years old in 1947, watching from the roof of his home as flames destroyed the cloth shop belonging to his father and uncle. After the fire the brothers started over with a shoe shop. Charan was in the shop every morning before school to help open and every afternoon after school until closing. He counted the rupees in the till at the end of the day, inspiring a lifelong appreciation for the "blood" of business. ("Any company I go to, the first thing I check is cash. How's your cash? Where's your cash flow? No blood, you got a problem right away.")

Charan never excelled at the academic research that leads to tenure at a top-tier school. He was interested more in cause and effect than statistical correlation. His aims were practical: How can I solve this problem? How can I help this person? This company? He began taking on more and more consulting gigs. Most B-school professors consult on the side; in Charan's case, it was his calling.

What defines his career, even more than the quality of his client roster, is its stability. This is his 37th year working for GE, his 33rd for DuPont. He worked with John Snow for 15 years before Snow left

His method is no method. He is wary of abstraction and belongs to no school of management theory. "Converting highfalutin ideas to the specifics of the company and the leader - that's the trick," he once confided to me in an elevator. "The other part is working backward to define what the need is, and then searching for what helps. Then you bring it to common sense, and common sense is very uncommon."

Charan brings observation, curiosity, and care. He lets his clients decide how to use him. Sometimes all he does is ask the right question. "I remember the first time he came to see me," says Caperton. "We were driving to the airport in Charleston, W.Va., and he said to me, 'Why are you trying to grow this thing so fast?' I was sort of shocked by the question. Three weeks later my financial guy came to me and said, 'We don't have money to meet payroll.' Charan realized we were growing too fast, that's why he asked me that question. That was a much better way to teach me, wasn't it?"

"Charan really pushed me on the whole business-partnership piece," Conaty recalls, meaning no more HR initiatives for HR's sake, "and the function as a result is much more credible and visible in GE today than it was."

"I knew what I wanted to do," says Reed, "but I wasn't 100% sure how to get it done. That's a big distinction if you're in business. A lot of consultants come in to tell you what you should be doing. This was not that. This was a question of how best to get it done."

Reed says, "Ram is a catalyst in the real sense of that word. He facilitates things happening but doesn't take part in them himself. And he is an immense source of energy. When you're trying to get large organizations to do things, energy is extremely important. He forces you to tell him what it is you want to do, and he forces you to really be clear in your own mind what those things are and what steps have to be taken. Often it's getting the wrong guy out of a job. But the point is, he starts out by basically forcing you to think with him and be very clear. Then, okay, you notice that he isn't doing anything, he's just forcing you to do it. Then once you've agreed on everything you want to do, he calls you up every ten minutes and asks why haven't you done it yet."

"I'm a lucky man!" Charan likes to say. "I am allowed to do what I love to do!" While I still don't really understand him, I am beginning to believe him. Surely there are many ways to live fully and be happy on this earth; probably, he has found his own.

Roundup of some great HR blog posts

Laurie has a cool compilation of links talking about HR and other animals, oh, actually she's talking about Animals and Human Resources ;-)

Kris Dunn at HR Capitalist says we should pause and think a lot before announcing a telecommute program to fight rising gas prices. Involve the business in the decision. Let them own it. Don't do it for the sake of doing it.

Steve at All Things Workplace blogs that talents should be made stronger. Are you putting your talents to work and developing them?

Scott provides a slideshow to Charlene Li's book Groundswell focusing on Social Technographics Ladder. Guess I am a Creator, Critic, Collector, Joiner and Consumer all in one :-)

Michelle Malay Carter puts on her worklevel goggles to THE question in HR "How do we get a seat at the table?"

The Happy Employee has a roundup of the World without HR Contest. Hey, nobody told me about any contest :(

The HR Wench has something to say to third party recruiters. Heh, yeah we HR types totally get along with third party recruiters. Something like Marketing and Ad Agencies, if you don't know HR ;-)

Theory of Constraints

Jack Vinson blogs about TOC and I think the rules for technology given below are applicable for any change effort:

On recommendation of a friend, I re-read Necessary But Not Sufficient by Eli Goldratt, Eli Schragenheim and Carol A. Ptak. It's another Theory of Constraints business novel. This time the focus is on the principals at a large software vendor (ERP systems) and their primary systems integrator.

The rules for technology:

1. What is the power of the technology?
2. What limitation is being overcome (limited capacity, for example)?
3. What old rules were followed because of the limitation (and need to be eliminated)?
4. What new rules need to be created?

I liked how the authors walked through the discovery and articulation of these rules with the characters. The "limitation" is often hard enough to discover, but those "rules" that came about because of the limitation are a bear. They quite often have nothing to do with the technology being proposed, but without acknowledging them, the limitation becomes the rules themselves and the technology (or any other change) will never see its full benefit.

So what are the rules because of old systems that you ignore when changing systems and processes?

Some interesting websites

There's a lot of action happening in the recruiting and work related sites section. Here's my take on some of the ones that have come to my attention:

• Talentty: I got to know of them when they added my blog to their blogroll. No request for coverage via a mail or something like that. Smart. However the blog does not have any updates after April 5th. Not so good. The main website itself has tried to segregate according to industry, and specialising in the Tech and ITES domains. There are also tabs for "Hot Jobs", "Walk-ins", "Onsite Jobs", "Startup" , "Freshers" and "Freelancers". The software section has the most jobs, however overall the number of jobs at Talentty is low. While they have added bells and whistles like RSS feeds category-wise, unless they are able to ramp up the variety and number of jobs I don't see Talentty making much of an impact on the jobsite scene.

• Orglex - This site showcases itself as a place for Industry and Organizational hubs. Putting a different spin on business networking when you join a hub. A hub is basically aggregated content from across the web on News, People, Blogs and Jobs that fall under that hub. Orglex seems to be positioning itself as a place for recruiters to find and get talent. While the attempt at aggregating all this content from across the web on one site can help it get membership, I think the lack of original content and exclusive jobs can affect the growth. The net is going local, and there are no geographical based hubs that one can join. So if I join management consulting and if there was a India hub too that I join then the technology should be able to filter that anyway, since news can be filtered by Google News. Interesting proposition, but work needs to be done on it.

• Workology - Has just come out of its invitation-only testing phase and apparently has 1000 members. It's primarily UK based and one sets up an account and tags oneself. The system then throws up work and projects for people who are interesting in contracting and consulting opportunities. In fact the site is geared for the new way of working - portfolio careers - and therefore shouldn't be your stop for a career related job. They have a blog too at http://www.workology.com/blog/

• Zyoin - It bills itself as the Next generation Career Portal, and it seems to be a referral jobsite too, a la Reffster. They also have PayScale's gadget to calculate salary to help jobseekers find the salary suitable for them I presume. Their blog http://zyoin.wordpress.com/ talks about online learning and assessment to be also in the pipeline. I still don't think that India is ready for referral jobsites. Somewhere there has to be an integration from these sites into organizational Applicant tracking systems and they should be geared to organization's internal referral programs. The other mistake these jobsites seem to be making is that they think that building a website is enough. They have to invest in a sales team and sell the concept to corporates since the bigger jobsites are well entrenched and leverage their existing relationships. And unless there is a proof of concept of online assessment to go along with it, corporates will not choose to try a new innovation.

The other thing I don't see is a concerted effort to leverage social networks that Indians seem to be joining in droves, like Orkut and Facebook and hi5. Building a site and trying to get an audience is a tough proposition for new sites.

Advorto's guide to Online Recruitment

Advorto, a UK based HR recruiting software company, has put together a free guide to online recruitment and they are making it available on registering some details if you visit http://www.advorto.com/guide.

Some of the areas the guide covers and are usually ignored by organizations are:

• Start with your career site - It's pathetic to see the bad quality of career sites that organizations employ. Marketing and Corporate Communications should be talking to IT and HR to make it a showcase to future employees.
• Consider other sites - Apart from the job sites, are there industry sites where your potential audience hangs out, virtually?
• Use your intranet, it’s free!
• Start a candidate e-newsletter - I gave this idea to a previous employer, got an award for it, but I don't think they have yet implemented it. And today I'd add to offer the newsletter by RSS feed too.
• Create an online referral system
• Consider using social networks
• Add a recruitment blog to your site

Most of these are not heavy on your recruitment budget, but usually HR and Recruiting heads in India are unaware of these new channels to boost the pipeline of candidates. This small pdf guide is sure to be a great resource for them! If you're interested in Recruitment in the new online world you can check their blog out too.