Posts Tagged ‘Growth Mindset’
Safety and Contingent Workers – are the Savings worth the Costs?
Posted by: grandma in Employee Development, Employee Engagement, Leadership, Talent Management on May 9th, 2010
Some industries heavily utilize contingent workers to save money from employee owned burdens. One of those industries is oil and gas. A recent illustration of this issue is the Transocean oil rig incident in the Gulf of Mexico. Of the 126 people onboard that rig, 79 worked for Transocean, 6 for BP, and 41 of them were contingent/contract workers. Sometimes, contingent workers have skill sets outside of the core competencies/operator qualifications of employees – in this case Halliburton had just cemented the 18,000 foot well before the explosion. In other, and in most cases, contingent workers are hired to simply save money.
Contingent workers are less safe than employee owned workers. Why is this?
The metaphor I like to use for contingent versus worker is renting or buying a home. I think both of these illustrate the difference between owning a process or simply being part of one. Do the renters of your house take care of it like you did when you lived there? Probably not. Employees absorb the culture, the symbolism, the politics and the human factors of working in an organization. They have an ownership experience. Contingent workers, on the other hand, collect a paycheck and do not receive the same indoctrinization as an employee would.
Jeffry Pfeffer, professor of organizational behavior at Stanford, studied contingent workers in 1994 and determined that they were less safe than employee owned workers. I continue to validate his findings with HR professionals when discussing safety and human capital practices – they always concur with Pfeffer’s conclusion. Laurie Bassi, of McBassi and company, showed that companies with optimized human capital practices recorded fewer safety incidents than those with subpar HR practices. One of the pillars of her research was “learning capacity.” Learning capacity describes and organizations ability to instill learning in its employees. She showed that American Standard was able to reduce the number of incidents by nearly 25% when elevated levels of human capital were present.
I am a huge believer in the value of training and you can train someone into a mindset if they are willing to learn. You can train any employee into a safety mindset. There are many international laws that define the contingent classification. In some countries, like Canada, training for contingent workers has to be separate than those that are company trained. This disenfranchises employees from the cultural mindset needed to be safe. Willingness of contingent workers to be trained is also an issue – what is the upside of this training with no positive payout in the end? Even before the incident, Transocean put safety ahead of production as a company-wide goal. If they really want to create shared ownership and permeate a safety culture, they should stop sourcing contingent workers and start hiring them.
Talent Management – Which Module Should We Deploy First? Learning Management
Posted by: grandma in Employee Development, Goals, Succession Planning, Talent Management on March 31st, 2009
Talent Management integration is natural between the primary modules. When companies look to deploy a talent management solution they often struggle with how to map out a technology strategy. There are a couple of good firms that can help companies with projects like this (HRchitect and Knowledge Infusion to name two). Software firms like SumTotal, which is the highest rated Learning Management vendor, have built their company around “Talent Development”. Learning Management has been around at least 15 years and is the most mature module in the talent suite. It is the first module you should deploy. On the opposite end, Succession Planning is the last module that should go live because so many inputs are required for a sound succession plan – many of those inputs come from the Learning function.
Most companies have training programs already for their employees. Learning Activities need to be tied to a development plan; the association of these activities needs to be in place to execute the training. Your company should do development planning during the goal setting process. Development goals can be created alongside with work goals. It is a great time for your manager to convey a growth mindset and that they are amenable to pushing their employee to train. Tacit permission is needed so the employee can feel comfortable diverting from their job activities.
Learning Management is also the primer for Workforce and Succession Planning. Any company that plans its people around business initiatives will need to train its people. Any company that plans for succession and leadership development will need its people to acquire new skills.
The last, and most important reason, is that the return on investment for Learning is the greatest and most provable for all the talent modules. I hear a lot of CEO’s on analyst calls claim to develop and train their people – often these are hollow statements. If your company spends greater than 4.0% of payroll on learning and development, you know that this isn’t lip service.
Two Unique Measurements of Potential for Succession Planning – Part 1 – Managerial Mindset
Posted by: grandma in Employee Development, Leadership, Succession Planning on February 17th, 2009
One of the big issues I’ve seen with a company’s succession planning process is how to measure potential. Potential makes up the x-axis of the 9-box (or whatever flavor) versus performance on the y-axis. So how can this be determined?
Much like a focal performance review, you should also conduct a potential review. So what does determine the potential of someone? To most, it is an inate judgement call. Here are two unique measurements that you should obtain with this survey. The first is essential to the measurement because it is a gateway to potential.
1) Managerial Mindset (Growth or Fixed)
2) Level of Self-Efficacy
Today, we will look at the first measurement – Managerial Mindset. I think this is a huge determinant of potential – especially if the position they are coming into is a leadership one. Dr. Carol Dweck (Mindset-The New Psychology of Success) has done decades of research on this subject. A growth mindset is basically someone who thinks anything can be learned by anyone. A fixed mindset is someone who thinks intelligence is capped or that they can’t grow anymore. In other words, someone who adamantly believes in the Peter Principle has a fixed mindset. It is someone who would say “Leaders are born, not made.” In an interview with HR.com, Dr. Laurie Bassi (who by the way has some of the best learning research ever presented) said one of the biggest reasons training isn’t successful is because managers are not really supportive of the training. So on that premise, shouldn’t you measure someone on whether they are supportive? If you have managers that deny training to their employees or don’t encourage it, then they likely they have a fixed mindset. Fixed Mindset managers don’t provide good feedback, feel threatened by their employees growth and have an “elitist” us vs. them attitude.
The most important job at any company is the 1st level manager. They have the most influence on the individual contributor.
What is the cumulative effect of having 1,000 managers with a growth mindset? This would have a staggering effect on your organization. Make sure your measure Mindset in your Succession Reviews.
Update: This is a great article citing Scott Forstall having a Growth Mindset – he managed the team that developd the iPhone.
