On ZDNet: A micro nuclear reactor in your garden?

BNET Insight

Sterling Performance

Spotlight on UK business and management

Promotion? No Thanks

July 16th, 2008 @ 9:27 am

7 Comments

Categories: Management, Workplace

Tags: Job, Marcus Buckingham, Recruitment & Selection, Human Resources, Workforce Management, Robin Stuart-Kotze

Marcus Buckingham asks a key question about managing talent: “What would happen if men and women spent more than 75 per cent of each day on the job using their strongest skills and engaged on their favourite tasks, basically doing exactly what they wanted to do?”

They’d produce great results, in all likelihood.

To harness that productivity for the organisation, people should be given jobs that suit both their abilities (current performance) and their capabilities (potential performance). They should also understand the actions and behaviours they need to use to perform the job well.

This is not what normally happens. We often promote people out of a job they are good at — and in a way that makes it clear that cannot say no.

To top it all, they receive no hints about how to approach their new job — what specific actions they need to demonstrate to perform well. You’re just supposed to know.

It’s a common mistake to move your best sales person to sales manager, the best engineer to manager, a strong functional specialist to general management. Not to say that excellent sales people cannot become excellent sales managers. Of course they can. But do they want to?

Some people are at their best right where they are, and moving them or promoting them in order to reward their excellent performance is a formula for failure.

Couldn’t managers ask people what they feel their skills are and what they think they could do to add the most value to the organisation — and then try to give them these jobs?

Is it that we think people are intrinsically lazy and will only want to do as little as possible? Or that there are jobs no-one would ever elect to do? What might seem interminably boring to you may be very interesting to me.

One chief executive I worked with recognised the two-sided nature of talent — ability and capability. He laid out this challenge to his top 300 or so managers around the world: “Rather than have us tell you what and where your job should be, would you please tell us where you think you would add most value to the company. List the three jobs you think you would be best at and we will do our best to put you in one of them.”

It resulted in some dramatic shifts. One senior line manager who had been in charge of a large business unit in Africa elected to move to a public affairs role in Brussels. The net result was that people came close to Buckingham’s 75 per cent goal. Revenue and profitability soared and the company’s value tripled.

Managers need to trust people to choose their role. They also need to understand that not everyone wants a job change or career progression. Where they are is just right.

Talkback Share your ideas and expertise on this topic Add your Opinion

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

  •  
    asander07/17/08 Report as spam
    1

    The downside

    This approach would work well if everyone knew what they were truely capable of or interested in. It would be hard to apply this to new workers just out of college / university. There will also be workers who are less self promoting and will under-estimate what they are capable of. These people may need the boost of confidence that comes with someone more senior recommending them for a different role.

  •  
    Joanna Higgins07/18/08 Report as spam
    2

    No promotion - the downside

    Quite. I've just read Big Think's reference to the Brafman book, which indicates that we don't always choose rationally. And in most businesses, promotions are a recognised reward for performance. But creating a sideways option would certainly give everyone a bit more latitude, wouldn't it?

  •  
    mey1607/17/08 Report as spam
    3

    RE: Promotion? No Thanks

    basically, Peter Principle.

  •  
    simon.greener@...07/18/08 Report as spam
    4

    Promoting from within can be a bonus

    You should not shy away from promoting from within. However it is crucial to specify rigorous and realistic criteria to assess a candidate's interest, experience, ability and potential for a role. A promotion from within the company to a more senior position couldn't fail to be anything but appropriate as long as the candidate has the potential, ability and interest. Experience is the least important as every organisation has different cultures (the way of doing things). If anything the internal applicant has positive qualities because of their inside knowlege.
    In my experience many senior managers make it a policy to hire from outside an organisation - it's wasting local talent if it exists and increases costs making the hire from outside.

  •  
    pinukcom07/25/08 Report as spam
    5

    RE: Promotion? No Thanks

    One of the issues with many talent management and leadership development programmes is that they are founded in the mind-set of the current management (or their HR or consultant advisers). Despite much fashionable talk to the contrary, most of this still thinks in terms of careers as either a) ladders within corporations for those who can aspire to middle-to-senior management and b) zig-zag paths through consulting and top management posts in a number of companies for the jeunesse d'orée who are born (or at least educated) to greatness.

    It was certainly my experience that it was not possible to do what you felt you were best at (or even what others KNEW you were best at) because there was an expectation that you wanted to and needed to broaden your experience (and the company's options of how to use you in future), even if that meant doing jobs that you didn't much like and/or were not much good at, so that one day you could aspire to the jobs held by the people who influenced the shape of the leadership programmes - i.e. you were expected to have the same aspirations as they had had some years previously and to be prepared for some character-forming (i.e. miserable) experiences along the way.

    One of the more bizarre consequences of this is that divisions often have a rotation of COOs (new one about every 3 years) who have little empathy with the business they are running or its customers (both of whom know they won't be there long) because this is seen to be somehow better for the greater good and even for the division (better than promoting someone from within it who actually wants the job and might be very good at it? of course!). Customers and employees can get very cynical about this kind of behaviour and react accordingly.

    It works (or at least, people put up with it) as long as there is some form of implicit contract of loyalty between the indidivuals and the organisation, however when that is weakened as it has been over the past 20 years - for good reasons, no doubt - then people either a) leave b) stay but decine to play the game any more or c) take advantage of the actions of the a + b types by being one of the few who is prepared to put up with the crap. So the "talent pool" is filled with what kind of people?

    Need for a serious re-think.

  •  
    rs-k07/28/08 Report as spam
    6

    Response to pinukcom

    Thanks very much for your really interesting comments. I'm setting up a blog to put forward and discuss management issues, particularly to do with managing people and I would like to invite you to contribute. My email is rsk@behaviouralscience.com Drop me a note if you're interested.
    Regards,
    Robin

  •  
    billparis08/06/08 Report as spam
    7

    pinukcom pinned it down

    In my last job at an US-based analyst firm, I took many different (but related) responsibilities during a re-organization just to end-up with a crap offer to manage the business development of new services with no team, unrealistic growth targets and a flawed go-to-market strategy. My supervisor's explanation ? "Your 'can do attitude' and credibility within the sales team (doing consulting and pre-sales tasks) are key to the position and you currently do not use your best capabilities". Maybe he was right and I was flatterd, but the new position had absolutely no connection with my career path so far and, after a lot of thinking and double-checking I could not see where it would take me. So, promotions can be perceibed as a dead-end if the perception of loyalty is broken. People need to see the high-level vision for their professional development or, at least, what opportunities may be presented in the near future. In my opnion, that's a good way to translate the company's strategy into personal strategies.

What do you think?
The following tags are supported in BNET comments: <b></b> <i></i> <u></u> <pre></pre>
You are currently a guest | Login?

Trackbacks

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://blogs.bnet.co.uk/sterling-performance/2008/07/16/promotion-no-thanks/trackback/

No trackbacks yet.

advertisement
Recommended Business Articles
advertisement