Category Archives: Career Development

Health Warning: Entrepreneurship is not all Plain Sailing

Posted on by
Reply

Last month’s gathering of Lean Startup Melbourne was devoted to the emotional and psychological downsides to being an entrepreneur. Whether building a startup or managing a successful corporate career, we are accustomed to reading about business success stories; but while we do learn something about corporate failures, we don’t hear much about the personal cost when things don’t go as planned.

But first, given the seriousness of this topic, if anyone reading this feels in need of help then there are some excellent information and support resources available listed here. There are also some useful reference articles such as this.

The evening’s panel Q&A discussion was preceded by a very moving account from Tom Howard, co-founder of Adioso on his own challenges in building a startup, about which he has written here. Tom’s frank and honest story about dealing with personal struggles while trying to manage investor expectations was neatly summed up in this observation: “Writing essays on our struggle was some of the best marketing.”

The panel members were drawn from a mix of startup, entrepreneurial and corporate backgrounds, and their stories revealed episodes of depression, near-bankruptcy and burn-out – tales possibly all too familiar to some experienced startup veterans in the audience, or merely spectres of what the future may hold for other budding entrepreneurs eager to learn from their peers. One of the panel, Andre Obradovic is now a public speaker on mental health issues, and has channeled his own experiences into advocacy and raising awareness.

If there was one recurring theme that ran through the discussion, it was the surprise at what happened to them – seemingly successful individuals who suddenly encountered severe setbacks (personal, financial, emotional, psychological), that came close to derailing their ability to function in their roles (as people, partners, parents or employers). The positive conclusion was that in recognising what was happening, and doing something about it, these individuals have managed to rebuild their lives and their careers, and are probably all the stronger and more resilient as a result.

Meanwhile, a number of hopeful startups were brave enough on the night to showcase their projects in the evening’s Startup Alley: Influx (outsourced customer support for online businesses), Cloakr (mobile device solution for coat check services), Jutsu (personal goal-setting app), Followus (social media site management for small business) and Brakeboard (braking systems for skateboards).

Finally, the evening’s event was sponsored by a clutch of generous supporters: Mondelēz International, InnovAction, Zendesk, Bluechilli, The X Gene and hosts Inspire9.

 

 

5 Challenges for Performance Management

Posted on by
Reply

I recently facilitated a round-table discussion on Performance Management, with senior executives from commercial, not-for-profit and public sector enterprises. Our topic was current practice in Performance Management, and was hosted together with my colleagues at Bravo Consulting Group.

At the outset, we posed a number of discussion points, including:

Are there direct correlations between Performance Management, Employee Engagement and Productivity?

How is Performance Management linked to Rewards, Recognition and Compensation?

Do your people understand the context for Performance Management?

We also discussed the true costs of Performance Management systems (time, resources, software, administration), as well as the different attitudes of management, team leaders, HR and employees toward current processes.

The good news is that all the organisations represented are running annual or semi-annual employee appraisals. There was also an increased focus on performance outcomes (i.e., it’s not just about effort expended on job-defined tasks, but more about what is being achieved and how). And our participants reported the importance of using appropriate tools to deliver effective employee communications around corporate strategy, organizational goals, change management and project roll-outs to ensure greater alignment with, and context for Performance Management.

However, we identified a number of key challenges and critical issues facing any organization that takes Performance Management seriously, or who wishes to increase the effectiveness of their current practices:

1. Negative Perceptions of Performance Management

Despite the widespread use and acceptance of Performance Management systems, there remains considerable negativity around the process, the context, and the even discussions themselves. There appears to be a sense of foreboding when it comes to the mid- or end-of-year appraisal, a fact that was borne out for me just a few weeks ago: I was in the furniture display area of a well-known department store, when I overheard the floor manager say to one of her sales colleagues: “Mike says he’ll do your one-on-one at 3pm today.” What might appear to be a fairly innocuous statement visibly filled the employee with dread, at the prospect of his annual review. Surely Performance Management discussions should not be fraught with such unnecessary anxiety or stress?

2. Performance Management Systems Are All Different, And Too Rigid

Our round-table participants all reported using different software (and paper-based) systems, which is understandable given the proliferation of HRMS tools that support Performance Management. But many of these systems resemble accounting or project management software, and lack more qualitative or cultural performance measures. Alternatively, systems tend to be rigid, process-driven applications that often take a checklist and compliance approach to conducting Performance Management. They can also suffer from a “one size fits all” solution, and don’t readily help organizations to develop meaningful performance measures or point-in-time indicators, mainly because they are backward-looking and use retrospective data. Shouldn’t Performance Management help employees move towards the job that they want (and towards their longer-term career objectives), rather than confining the discussion to current or out-dated tasks?

3. Formal Processes Are Disconnected From Informal Processes

By making it a “process” (and an infrequent one at that), Performance Management becomes artificial, and divorced from day-to-day reality. This can result in performance issues being stored up and only “discovered” during the formal appraisal – which will add to the anxiety and stress if long-term resentments about manager-employee behaviours and relationships are only brought to light during the Performance Management process. A common outcome from the formal Performance Management process is a corrective or punitive response, due to the absence of continuing efforts to manage and direct performance. Why should employees only hear feedback about their performance at the end of the year, when it might be too late to address the issue, leading to knock-on implications for remuneration, recognition and promotion. Shouldn’t Performance Management be part of the everyday dialogue between colleagues?

4. Many Managers Are Simply Ill-Equipped To Have The Performance Conversation

Without the appropriate skills to foster meaningful and open dialogue with their direct reports, managers end up having to manage the Performance Management conversation, rather than helping their people self-manage their own performance. This awkwardness is compounded if there is a lack of organizational context for Performance Management; worse, poor performance is ignored or circumvented because managers do not feel confident to start the dialogue, which is not fair to the individuals concerned if they are not given the opportunity to discuss what might be the root cause of a performance issue. If there is no dialogue around Performance Management, how can employees know what they are being held accountable for, or appreciate the consequences of not meeting performance goals and objectives?

5. Performance Management Systems Ignore The Middle Majority

Most Performance Management systems (certainly the ones I have been exposed to) end up using forced bell curve distribution analysis to classify employees according to high, middle, low and under achievement categories of performance. I recall one former colleague who used to cite Garrison Keillor when annual appraisal ratings had to be allocated according to the expected distribution curve: “Well, that’s the news from Lake Wobegon, where all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average.”

When we asked our participants “what keeps you awake at night?”, one CEO commented that he worries about the middle 60%-65% of his employees – the bulk who “do a good job” – because more of his attention and focus is on the high and low performers (the top and bottom 15%-20% respectively). This “bias” can distort management perspective, and lead to disaffection in the middle band, unless there are adequate ways to recognize and reward solid performance independent of annual compensation or promotion. (This issue is particularly acute in Australia when we consider the impacts of slower economic growth, comparatively high wages and sluggish productivity – yet, employers face a war for talent as new and highly valued skills become harder to resource.)

Conclusion

If Performance Management could become a continuous dialogue, backed by meaningful performance criteria and underpinned by a greater emphasis on employee self-awareness and self-directed Performance Management, then organisations could spend more time on strategy and execution, and less time on managing individual performance. Not only would this create greater cost efficiencies in the Performance Management process itself, it would likely lead to improved productivity outcomes because there would be more clarity and engagement around goals, outcomes and incentives.

The Music Collectors’ Guide to Personality Types

Posted on by
12

ShelvesSomething a little less serious this week. Recently, I’ve been working with various clients across executive coaching, career development, talent management and psychometric testing. Given my former experience in music retailing (it was like Nick Hornby’s “High Fidelity” without the romantic interest….) and in deference to my own lifelong hobby of record collecting, I thought it would be amusing to classify people according to their collecting habits, as a way of helping HR managers and team leaders everywhere understand their colleagues.

So, in no particular order:*

1. Listomaniac – Always making lists of their favourite songs, and then constantly updating them. Whether it’s “Top 10 songs about ice-cream”, or “All-time Top 5 pop songs featuring saxophone”, or “10 Songs containing the word ‘toothbrush’ in the lyrics”, Listomaniacs love to demonstrate their arcane (but selective) musical knowledge, and are so absorbed with the process of list-making that they are incapable of committing to a final, definitive choice. Don’t expect the Listomaniacs on your team to make a decision, let alone stick to it. Definitely don’t give them too many choices or too much time to select the catering menu for the office party. (Cf. Mixologist)

2. Completist – More than a mere fan, the Completist is compelled to collect every record ever released by a particular artist (and some Completists are also driven to seek out unreleased recordings, including juvenilia, studio out-takes and rehearsals…). In more extreme examples, this form of OCD involves collecting the entire output of specific record labels or whole musical genres. While the Completist can demonstrate deep knowledge of their chosen subject, they can also get lost in the detail and don’t realise that not everyone shares their passion. When assigning roles to your team, make sure the Completist is in charge of their chosen specialist subject area, but set well-defined boundaries, and don’t let them near eBay. (Cf. Archivist)

3. Anthologist  – The Anthologist doesn’t have time to read music reviews or even listen to anything that hasn’t been recommended to them or curated for them by someone else. In fact, the archetypal Anthologist relies on the end of year polls and critics’ lists to decide what music to buy. Now, of course, the Anthologist’s task is made even easier through music subscription services, podcasts, and personalised web-streaming. Although capable of making discerning choices and informed decisions, the Anthologist often lacks any original thought, and would be lost without apps like Spotify. On the other hand, the Anthologist can give you the low-down on the latest thinking around best practice in agile software development, productivity tools and structuring compensation packages (because they’ve read some blogs and a few trade newsletters).

4. Populist – Never one to let taste get in the way, the Populist knows that a song is good because it went to Number 1 in the charts. Those “Now That’s What I Call Music…” compilations are made to measure for the Populist, who simply wants to buy the biggest-selling hits of the year all in one go. While many Populists might include a few “Greatest Hits” and “Best Of” albums in their collections, the more adventurous types have been known to buy a “proper” studio album (as long as it has at least 4 top 10 singles on it). On a positive note, the Populist will likely be happy working with numbers or in customer service, as they don’t need to exercise personal discretion, and because the data never lies.

5. Audiophile – The Audiophile has to have the latest and most expensive music hardware, with full 7.1 surround sound, if only to play Dire Straits. (I’m pretty certain that every hi-fi shop in the world only has one customer demonstration CD, namely “Brothers in Arms”.) Some would say that it’s the software not the hardware that matters, but the Audiophile knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. History is littered with music technology that promised the world, but failed to deliver – 8-track cartridge, Quadraphonic, DDC, MiniDisc, DAT – so it may be unwise to let the Audiophile on your team manage any IT projects. Likewise, they may insist on having the most expensive laptop available, but if they only use it update their Facebook page, maybe you should be a bit concerned.

6. Archivist – Like the Completist, the Archivist is a fount of musical knowledge – but unlike their counterparts, Archivists know enough of the received musical canon to be able to differentiate the great from the merely ordinary, and they know that not every artist has an immaculate back-catalogue. The Archivist also understands why Big Star’s “Third/Sister Lovers” is rightly regarded as one of the best (if flawed) albums of all time. At the extreme end of the spectrum, the Archivist is a neo-Trainspotter, able to recall minutiae such as the album catalogue numbers, recording dates, orchestral arrangers and sleeve designers (and studio caterer) of every 5-star album since 1957. But on a good day, the Archivist will display great perseverance in pulling together internal knowledge, external data and other essential information to get the right answers.

7. Mixologist – Finally, the music collector who is so enthusiastic about their personal taste in music that they just have to share it with everyone else, via lovingly created mixtapes. Adept at making tapes for every occasion and at every significant stage in their lives (the break-up tape, the road trip mix, songs for a sunny day), the Mixologist will also have regard to and openly acknowledge their sources, influences and inspirations. Unlike the Listomaniac the Mixologist’s choices demonstrate exquisite musical taste and are backed by erudite concepts, connections, and cross-references – they are not simply motivated by the compilation process. True Mixologists are happy to allow their tapes to be circulated, to be copied, and even to spawn “response” tapes in return. As team players, Mixologists will be more than happy to share information, and they like nothing more than to see their ideas taken up and then built upon by the rest of the team.

*Note: This list does not claim to be exhaustive; and of course as with all profiling tools, music collectors may display two or more of the above traits, often at the same time. But they will likely demonstrate a leading preference for a particular style of collecting. As the music critic once observed, “a little knowledge can be dangerous – but too much can be deadly boring”.

10 Reasons why the Lean Startup Business Model is here to stay

Posted on by
1

Is the Lean Startup Business Model a passing fad, or the “new normal”?

Here are 10 reasons why I think the Lean Startup model is here to stay:

1. Technology – Everything’s social, mobile and cloud-based, meaning reduced establishment costs, enhanced flexibility, and easier scalability for startups.
2. Millennials – The younger generation have different work drivers, informed by their lifestyle ambitions, career aspirations and personal expectations. Startups may often meet their needs more easily than established businesses, and can therefore attract talent better-suited to their requirements.
3. Everyone is their own CEO – “The Start-Up Of You” reinforced the idea that individuals are responsible for managing their own career, that they need to take control of their career decisions, and that a career does not always follow a continuously upward trajectory. Startups can allow people to make non-linear career moves.
4. Crowdsourcing – There’s no need to be an expert in everything – startups can outsource, collaborate, and rent rather than buy.
5. Crowdfunding – It’s no longer a pre-requisite to launch an IPO or negotiate an investment bank deal. The lean startup model has been key to the development of alternative funding models.
6. The waning fortunes of “big” corporates – With a few notable exceptions, large corporations can be slow to react to new market dynamics, and can miss out on new opportunities. The lean startup model is the antithesis to many traditional corporate ecosystems.
7. The post-industrial age – Before the industrial revolution and the arrival of factories, production lines and mass manufacturing, we had cottage industries – people working independently from home, in small-scale operations, often doing outsourced, piece-rate work, or bartering their skills. Startups are fostering a new era of cottage industries, where goods and services are traded through networks and peer-referrals.
8. Lessons from the dot.com boom & bust – We are wiser (after the event). Don’t assume the technology in itself is the solution or the product; don’t burn the cash and have nothing to show for it; start small but position to grow quickly through agile processes and nimble methodologies.
9. Flexibility is the key – Adapt and survive! This is the DNA of the Lean Startup Model.
10. Experience is sometimes better than a formal qualification – People are keen to learn and acquire new skills through direct exposure to interesting projects. Startups can offer this in abundance.

Acknowledgement: I am grateful to Brad Dunn of Nazori for triggering this blog.