HR Conundrum

It’s seems fashionable nowadays for people to use HR as a punching bag for  failures. CEOs find them inept at helping to achieve business strategies whilst employees say HR won’t take their side to help solve problems. Since the infamous 2005 article ‘why we hate HR”, I believe the voices have grown louder and bolder. Even Ram Charan has taken a pot shot with HBR’s “Its time to Split HR”. If what they said is true, then it’s no fun or glamour to be in HR. But, is it really true of HR and if so, why?

I have a different view, coming from 15 years of corporate experience and evidence. I prefer not to generalize or stereotype people because we are different and behave with a reason, influenced by social and cultural conditioning. Further, I am skeptical of opinion survey findings taken from selected sample pools. You don’t blame an entire basket because of few bad apples. I wished I could investigate all those CEOs that Charan said were disappointed with HR. Come on, how low can you hit with “HR not acting like trusted partners”. No wonder HR is a hot seat cum thankless job.

HR is critical for business success and organisational survival because people are the most important assets. How often have we heard that cliché. But, we all know that reality is far from rhetoric and truth.

Professional Status.- Am I happy with HR?. Certainly not, with the kind of disrespect shown. But, they say respect has to be earned so I ask, "what must HR do?". The way I see it, HR has no choice but to gain recognition by acquiring professional credentials!. HR can argue and claim all they want but it’s not technically accredited, similar to professions like Accounting, Engineer, Architect, Doctor, etc. My justification is purely psychological. Do you see CEOs and management gurus picking on these professionals on their capabilities to contribute or needing to earn their seat at the C-suite?. When companies suffer financial failures, do you see the CFO get the whiplash or sacking? 

At one time, I regretted venturing into HR, instead wished had gone into Safety & Health (S&H). You see, unlike HR, S&H is a ‘regulated’ competent job, governed under Regulation 4 of the Occupational Safety and Health (Safety and Health Officer) Regulations 1997. We can dispute their professional status but they sure have recognition and demand respect. As mandatory qualification, one needs to attain the green-book certification before holding the S&H job. What I admire and envy more is they have legislated laws and regulations that governs and stipulates the minimum S&H requirements that a company should provide, in terms of standards and operating procedures. Visit http://www.dosh.gov.my/index.to to view the list of competent S&H Officers. 

No doubt, HR too has legislated laws that outlines the standards governing employment, union and industrial relations. But, it does not, by any stretch of imagination, serve the dynamic needs of an evolving HR. It is an open truth that the regulations largely exist to safeguard the needs of employees from abuse and victimization.

What about audits?. If HR is such an important function, how come there is no regulated audits performed on it's functional portfolio?. At best, what you have is annually external financial auditors checking on P files and salary records. Tell me, what's so strategic about that. You reap what you sow. I suppose that's why Charan suggested parking HR administration under Finance.
                        

Business Partner - From labour administration to talent management, HR has   undergone evolutionary mutation. The now trendy word referred to HR is Business Partner (BP). David Ulrich posits the future of HR to center around four roles – HR Business Partner, Change Agent, Administration Expert, Employee Advocate. Easier said than done, it carries varied interpretations and delivery in operation or application. Companies, depending it's size and maturity, would view it differently and vary in priority. One size fits all solutions does not really fit the reality on the ground for many companies. Citing success in major MNCs as case examples does little to help the smaller companies to imitate. This is the myth Phil Rosenzweig breaks with Halo Effect. https://books.google.com.my/books/about/The_Halo_Effect.html?.

All the big players have the luxury of unlimited resources, time and money, for lofty ideals - project consultation and elaborate program experimentation. They can even break up HR into multiple specialist functions. Small businesses (SMEs) have to make do with scarce funds and on the run productivity. At worst, they can ask Finance to adopt HR or at best hire a HR generalist to juggle all the roles and remain unprejudiced to each. Being a generalist, this is my contention against Charan’s idea of splitting HR. I don’t mind outsourcing payroll but not compensation. How does one reconcile the accountability for performance, rewards and internal equity.

Strategic Clarity - It's a paradox and dilemma. As aptly captured by Ulrich’s quadrants, HR essentially wear four hats - two strategic and two tactical. But, the problem is that some businesses like SMEs, are just not ready, financially and culturally, to step up the game. HR people who hail from these company background are administrators who lack the capability or capacity to meet the demands of strategic business partner. When CEOs hire mismatched transactional HR to steer strategic transformation, what can you expect?. And, what’s even worse is they expect HR to leave the tactical hat at the door when they come in to discuss at the executive table. Yes, that’s how companies run into trouble with industrial disputes. Ask Air Asia and MAS, why were they slapped with RM10 Million fine. BTW, do you think some functional head will get whiplashed or sacked? http://www.thesundaily.my/news/1013979

Do you know what is more worse than failing in the job?. It’s not knowing what to succeed in. The biggest setback and challenge HR face is not knowing what the business strategy is?. Does anyone? Yet, HR is expected to contribute towards a strategic plan that is confidentially hidden. I once facilitated a group of managers at crafting the balance scorecard strategic roadmap. When the COO presented to the CEO, his response was, “people are not ready”.

So, in the absence of strategic clarity or goals, how does HR deliver effectively? Just like any other support function – standard best practices. Yes, we are reminded to think global but act local, in the spirit of "Malaysia Bolih". Actually, it's simple and easy, "Why do HR exist?. To find and place the right people in the right job at the right time. The only challenge for HR is to figure out what constitutes the “right people”, in terms of quantity and quality. If they can't do that, then they shall find the short end of the stick. 

Strategic clarity can only come from strategic leadership and it is not something to be delegated or abdicated. There is a very good reason why research says, culture eats strategy for breakfast”. Take succession planning. Is it not a strategic imperative for talent retention and business sustainability?. But, honestly speaking, how many HR have their hands on it?. The next time a leader picks on HR, nudge them to watch this leadership code  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FC6p9yXdOjE 

Three Sides to a Coin - Basically, HR exist to serve two key stakeholders – employer & employees. When HR act in support of policies and procedures that favours one party, the other becomes unhappy. Caught between the devil and the deep sea, HR becomes the unpopular punching bag and, in extreme cases, victim of hate vandalism. Of course, HR do get reminded of where their loyalty should reside, considering who pays their salary. How many people empathize that there is anothe side to the equation - HR perspective. How does HR remain motivated and engaged in their job?. How do they resolve issues of conflicting interest and contradicting agendas?. How do they play the cards in choosing between the harder right and easier wrong?, Yes, HR are people too. The exception is that theirs is not an enviable job. It comes with the stigma of suspicion, distrust and  ridicule by those whom they serve - internal customers.

Did you know that HR has drawn the most number of groups in LinkedIn. I do believe the same to be true in other professional social media platforms. Such is the intellectual exchange on HR related subjects. Isn’t it an irony to hear people bash HR, the very people entrusted to help talent management and development. How can they help if they themselves are perceived and treated as untalented.

So, why would anyone be foolish or daring enough to go into HR?. I suppose it’s for the same interview storyline of St Peter at the pearly gates. 

 

Responsibility For Accountability

Did you know that in some countries there is no direct translation for accountability. This includes Spain, Italian, Portuguese, Indonesia and even my home Malaysia. Accountability is either referred to responsibility or directly translated by replacing some letters, as in “akauntabiliti”.

Both responsibility and accountability occupy a significant influence to management thinking and leadership behavior. We often hear of it mentioned in job descriptions, contract agreements and speeches, but do people really adopt it in practice. I find people are more receptive to the call of responsibility but, not accountability. Why is it so?. 

What’s the difference between responsibility and accountability?. Why do people forsake the latter?. Let’s start with some definition to explain the distinction and why people treat it almost indifferently.    

  

One version http://www.thefreedictionary.com/responsible on responsibility says, 

1. Liable to be required to give account, as of one's actions or of the 
discharge of a duty or trust: Who is responsible while their parents are away?    
2. Required to render account; answerable: The cabinet is responsible to the  parliament

 

Here, the word account is used to explain responsible. Now, should it be accountable or responsible?. If we replace responsible with accountable, would it mean different?. Revisit this later to answer it yourself.

 

 Merriam Webster says,
 1. "responsible" implies holding a specific office, duty, or trust;               

2. "accountable" suggests imminence of retribution for unfilled trust or violated obligation.

 

Does accountable carry a negative connotation of culpability?. And, can you distinguish responsibility from accountability by mere selection of verbs?.  

 

Another,  http://www.diffen.com/difference/Accountability_vs_Responsibility states the main difference between responsibility and accountability is that “responsibility can be shared while accountability cannot.” 

 

If accountability can’t be shared, does that mean teams can’t be held collectively answerable for their work?.

 

If you want more reference go to the answer or many more answers.

 

This is the problem. Far too many people lend injustice to using these words loosely and interchangeably to the point it becomes insignificant and confusing to management application and life experiences.    

 

My take on this is simple. Responsibility deals with doing whereas accountability deals with answering. Both requires ownership for action. You are Responsible for the action (duties, tasks, process and resources entrusted to you in performing your role/job). And, you are Accountable for the Action (decisions, outcome and consequences), resulting from performing your role/job. In other words, responsibility is carrying out the job and accountability is answering to the people who entrusted you with the authority and responsibility. People can be your boss, subordinate or yourself. That’s why they say, you can delegate responsibility, but not accountability. 

   

As you can see to appreciate at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-ClR8rvUsA&list=PLTIQYp46ac08dT1bGmvvYtwapm-v1WKN_, accountability embodies to deliver a powerful message. So, how can it be downplayed by professionals, managers and leaders?. Ever wondered why intentional execution and change, be it strategic or tactical, suffers failure. To claim accountability for success is easy but not failure?. When leaders do not hold people accountable for their failure, worst still, repeatedly, it sets a bad precedence and signals weak enforcement. We see happening at our workplace. Execution failures due to defiance, negligence, abuse, non-compliance, substandard delivery, compromise and other dysfunctional behaviours. In most cases, it’s brushed off conveniently as office politics or being ‘irresponsible’. To ignore accountability is to encourage workplace mediocrity and entropy.

   

According to Gallup study only one in 10 people have the talent to manage. http://www.gallup.com/businessjournal/182378/one-people-possess-talent-manage.aspx. Leadership should pay heed as to why accountability must be taken seriously. Accountability is cited as one of the 5 dimensions of a high talent manager and key predictor of performance across different industries and types of role.

 

Let me share a few examples to accentuate the critical value of accountability.

 

Heard of stockbroker "Bernie" Madoff? He was held responsible by investors to manage their money (65 billion USD). When his Ponzi scam was exposed in 2008, he was held accountable by the law for fraudulent practice. There is a difference between functional responsibility and moral accountability. That's why Bernie is serving prison for 150 years.

 

A corporate example would be, Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel who resigned in the wake of massive data breach that left personal information of it's customers open to hackers. Gregg, in his letter to the board, said, "held himself personally accountable"

 

Let’s rationalize the function of accountability with a hypothetical example much closer to home, i.e garbage disposal. In my housing area, the responsibility to collect garbage has been delegated to an independent contractor engaged by the government appointed private company named Alam Flora. So, whenever there is a complaint on garbage disposal, to whom do we go - those responsible or accountable?. In this case, is it the Independent contractor, Alam Flora, local government, Minister or Prime Minister (PM)?.Where does the buck stop?. The way I see it, we go the Independent contractor held responsible for the job and if we do not get a satisfactorily response or remedy, then we escalate it all the way  to the Prime Minister (PM). Don’t agree?. Tell me why?.

 

I say the PM because he is at the top of the supply value chain. He appointed the Minister and delegated the responsibility to the Minister to provide public services, in return for collected tax. We can argue and even agree that the PM does not have the time to entertain or look into every citizen’s complaint. But, that does not absolve him of accountability because he is responsible for placing the right people to manage the government machinery. Remember, I said accountability concerns with action (decisions, outcome and consequences), resulting from executing or failure to carry out one’s role/job. Now, who is the top most person accountable in the government?. Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individual_ministerial_responsibility

 

This is the predicament and challenge we face in corporate governance. Taking responsibility for accountability. I do not believe we don’t know or comprehend the semantics between responsibility and accountability. It’s just that we are comfortable in dealing with the operational dynamics of responsibility and authority, but not accountability. We either pretend to be ignorant or not willing to risk being answerable for actions or outcomes that are influenced by factors beyond our control. Shifting blame is far easier and safer than self-blame. That’s why the notion that accountability can’t be delegated does not sit well with many managers.      

 

Finally, let me share my own experience. Many months ago, I complained via phone and email to the local agency against illegal dumping of construction waste at the edge of football field in my housing area. When I did not get any response after a month, I escalated it to online complaint with Public Complaints Bureau, http://www.pcb.gov.my/bm, under the PM’s Dept. When nothing moved, I personally dropped an email to the top management and c.c. to the PM’s Secretary and Chief Secretary of Civil Service. All I invoked was their accountability to the client charter - Manage and resolve public complaints against government agencies within 15 days.

 

Within 3 days, the waste was cleared and a signage erected. I even got a personal call from one of the Bureau’s Director that they would came back and landscape the area. That they did.

Nothing in life comes easy. Integrity and ethics is about behavior in holding people accountable for decisions, actions and consequences? Talk is cheap. We preach “be the change we want to see” yet are we committed to enforcing accountability for change ?. Alas, commitment is another loosely exaggerated word. I guess I have my next topic.    

Journey Into Coaching

Why did I take up Professional Coaching? Was it something that I had long contemplated and deliberately planned to do or was it one of those flavour of the month that would be cool to have on the list of training attended.

 

Actually, desperation led me to the path of coaching. I was going through a difficult pace at work, staring at a dead end situation without a clue for solution. Four long years had passed since I embarked on an ambitious human capital transformation program through several change initiatives, to developing technically competent Engineers into effective Leaders. Towards that end, we rolled out an ambitious Management Training Program that incorporated modules such as Strategic Planning, Performance management, Delegation, etc. Unfortunately, the training investment did not produce the desired results, due to operational constraints and failure in learning at the workplace. I was faced with a dilemma. How do I make managers see the light of what must happen to see through changing the status quo. That’s when I turned to coaching - a means to an end. I surveyed the market and coincidently found Thomas Crane running “The Heart of Coaching” workshop. What interest me more was the follow-up “Train the Trainer” workshop for those wishing to conduct in house residential programs. I realized the potential of the program as a breakthrough tool in getting leaders commited to engaging the workforce towards  creating high performance work culture. I attended the 2 days program and experienced  renewed energy and faith. The cure to my pain was finally answered. And, to support my plan, I brought along two managers.

Upon returning from the “Heart of Coaching”, I met my boss and presented my proposal to institutionalize coaching across the company. The idea was to run in-house coaching  programs with work-related coaching hours leading to professional certification. I suggested that, to make savings, I shall conduct the trainings upon attending the certified TTT. Before I could continue, my boss retorted, “What makes you to be qualified to coach?. He further added, ”You know how it is, you can’t change a leopard’s spots”. I was stunned and speechless, unable to make much of what or how to respond. I felt an implosion inside me. For the first time in my career life someone had boldly challenged my capacity and capability! 

Over the next few days, I thought long and hard. I had to consider coaching in a different momentum, one that could take me beyond the interest of my job and workplace. Now, it was for personal development on how it can help leverage me as a better leader. I performed an online search and connected with my network of friends to find out the best coaching program available in the market in terms of accreditation, applied value, duration, cost, coursework flexibility of payments, recognition, etc. After much sourcing, consultation and deliberation, I finally found my destiny with ICF accredited Corporate Coach Academy in Kuala Lumpur.

Coaching is a manifestation of significant behaviour that is tangible, genuine, experiential, actionable and measurable. It comprises of actionable steps that cannot be rhetorically overlooked, undermined, brushed aside and neglected by managers and supervisors.

The essence of the coaching model at CCA is founded on 3 simple steps, i.e the role of the coach is enable a coachee to :

1.SEE - Acknowledge that a serious problem exists and need to be resolved, now!

2.SAY –Create remedial solutions and commit to schedule plan of action steps.
3.DO- Execute the plan, report the progress and tweak it to success.

After 7 months of labour, sitting through exams, mentor coaching, 120 hours of assignments and recorded evaluation test, I finally made the cut. I could now add the title CPC to my name card. So, now what - where do I go fromhere?. Acquiring the modality of powerful questioning has not only made me a better coach but, more importantly, enveloped me in state of deep learning and heightened my level of consciousness and forward action.

Coaching, for me, was a life changing experience. It has undeniably made me a far better person– stronger inside. The greatest transformation I see in myself is the submissive acceptance to let go of things that are temporary and transitory in nature. As I learned how to coach others, I went through a metamorphosis, self-reflective and reviewing my own disposition - life plan, desired goals, happiness factor and priority of values such as trust, love, kindness, relationship, networks, money, patience and even anger. The coaching adventure served as crucial ‘check point” to refreshing my own personal life - making sense of the journey travelled this far and new path that I want to map out vis a vis to my destination. I have awaken from my own filters, limiting beliefs and have worked to become a better listener, communicator, leader, motivator and human.

Although I do not pursue coaching as a full time professional career, it dominates and plays an overwhelming role and influence in my training and consultancy works. I help people, at all levels, see their talent potential and the spirit within them to achieving excellence, generating solutions with ease and committing to action on goals. My passion and focus still remains in the arena of human capital management. I leverage on my coaching skills to offer objective, visible and measurable results of people performance to achieve effective operational outcomes and better business results. Having a strong footing in the areas of strategic mapping, performance management, competency mapping, change and leadership development, I help organisations see the gaps and breakthrough in connecting the dots. At the individual level, I feel a sense of fulfillment in reaching out to help (sometimes, pro bono) people become a better - be it in career or life.

If not for that chance encounter with my CEO, I would probably not have gone into professional coaching. Hence, I owe my gratitude to him for kindling the fire within to go on this journey. Thank you, Mr Mac. 

Tales of Two Behaviours

Over the last two weeks, I received the links to two Youtube videos from friends. Both were very interesting videos that brought across so much meaning to the purpose of living and need for continuous learning in life, no matter what age it be. 

The first, was a local Malaysian clip that went viral, involving a key speaker who is said to have behaved arrogantly and inappropriately to a fellow student from the audience. Watch the controversial part that got out of hand  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cV2-IrTKt3o.

Now, I don't care nor wish to discuss the merits of the questions or facts put forth by Bawani or Sharifah. I remain apolitical and cast aside my inclinations. All, I want to say here is purely from the perspective of bringing out some invaluable learning from adult behaviours or misbehaviours. So what sort of lessons can we take away ?. Well, I can think of few:

Communication

1.       Listen, Listen, Listen -  No, I am not being sarcastic to Sharifah. I’m merely impressing that we ought to seriously understand why god gave us two ears and one mouth. The art of listening is a skill that is easy to preach but hard to follow. It takes a lot of patience and conscious restraint in us to control our innate desire and tendency to speak, rather than listen. When we fail to master the listening skill, we tend to get distracted and gravitate towards shutting off the speaker. Hearing is different from listening. In hearing, we do not pay attention to what is said, rather we tend to devise ways to counter what the other person says. This is exactly what happened with Sharifah. Instead of allowing Bawani to finish her speech, she interrupted and demanded Bawani to listen, about 11 times. Given her adult maturity, forum experience and superior education than Bawani, surely she could have demonstrated tact and class in handling the situation.       

2.       Language -  I was not at the hall to know how it went down, but from what I saw in the clip, it seemed like Bawani was emotionally upset with certain statements made by Sharifah. I do not know what exactly worked her up, but whatever it was, she could have varied the tone, pitch and volume. In my view, it seemed like she was speaking loudly as if at some open protest rally. Bawani is by training a psychologist and currenlty studying to be a lawyer. And, she is also a Social Activist. Given this background, I am not sure which cap was she wearing when she was speaking to Sharifah. For her own professional sake, she needs to acquire a polished approach in articulating her thoughts and points across. She needs to learn and practice how to speak in a cool, calm and collective manner that can withstand against charges of provocative verbalisation. On this, Sharifah had the upper edge and which she harnessed to her advantage with support from a large group audience.   

Emotional Intelligence. 

Was Sharifah angry or emotionally upset with the stimuli - Bawani. Based on how she responded, it seem very much so. Sharifah lost her cognitive control (cool mind) and  flipped to experience the “amygdala hijack”. Coined by Daniel Goleman, it relates to the emotional part of the brain the Amygdala which regulates the "fight or flight" response. When threatened, the Amygdala can respond irrationally. A rush of stress hormones floods the body before the prefrontal lobes (regulating executive function) can mediate this reaction. Any strong emotion, anxiety, anger, joy, or betrayal trips off the amygdala and impairs the prefrontal cortex’s working memory. The power of emotions overwhelms rationality. That is why when we are emotionally upset or stressed we can’t think straight. For more insights, go to  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amygdala_hijack.

Sharifah is no Zidane but her infamous behaviour is just as good as a head butt!. I am sure she must, for her self development, review the video and do some soul searching reflection – why she did what she did. I am trying to empathise. What exactly was going through her mind from the time Bawani started speaking until her irrational mind kicked in. Was her rationale mind, during those critical moments, listening, recording, controlling the amygdala, analysing and mapping out a response over what to say in counter points, analogies and conclusive deductions. What can you make from, “Don't make comaprison iwth other countries, then what are you doing here, go to Cuba, Argentine, Libya …..”. This is definitely not the kind of statements that should come from a supposedly “better” educated person, no matter how patriotically provoked you may be. And, what about comparing human problems with that of animals?.  This part was, in my opinion, the final blow to her reputation, as someone with questionable EI.             

Answering Questions

Sometimes, the best way to answer a tricky or sticky question to which you don’t know or have a reasonably good to risk with is to simply “postpone” it. If Sharifah had been listening attentively, she could have answer Bawani is a professional manner without getting drawn into a frenzy of arrogance. In addition to rebutting what Sharifah had said in her speech, Bawani had posed some questions.  Acknowledging and respectfully brushing aside Bawani’s views and opinion aside, Sharifah should have focused on the questions, at hand. Instead, she alleged that Bawani was lacking education, citing her "disrespectful" attitude towards the elderly and therefore undeserving of being answered to. Once again, if this was a manipulative tactical ploy (and yes, diverting attention to the free Galaxy Note lucky draw !) to deflect from a sticky situation, it was in extreme immature, rude and cowardly taste.

Now, let me share another side of human behaviour. No, this is not about the mis-behaviour of educated adults. Quite the opposite, it’s about a humble kid teaching adults on what I have said above – communication, EI, Answering Questions – and much, much more. Most importantly, this story is about the most vital ingredient towards becoming or being a successful leader – unconditional love. The Team Long’s story is similar to Team Hoyt’s. The difference is, it's  about a brother’s sacrifice for a special reason. I really don’t know if anyone, including myself, could be like this kid. Seeing is believing, so, here it is. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouhURNLsnjo&feature=player_embedded

Beautiful people like Conner Long appear, from time to time, to knock some senses in adults and show us the values of humanity that we take for granted or overlook, as we busily compete in the rat race. I hope we all can assimilate a little of what Connor has given or characterizes. In fact, we all could make this a better place to live in harmony, respect and love.

If there is a will, there is a way.

If it is to be, then it is up to me.

Why Training Fails and How to Make it Work.

After working for than 35 years, I have witnessed my fair share of failures in training, wearing different hats as manager, HR, participant and trainer. Now, I know there are various reasons why training fails to deliver results. But, among the most glaring and overwhelming reason is because there is no authentic integration among the key stakeholders in deciding if, at all, training is the most appropriate and effective solution. The problem is not so much acute with “hard” technical skill trainings like MS Office, 7 QC tools, Forklift Driving, Machining, Wiring, etc. The biggest challenge lies those “soft” skill areas relating to attitudinal and behavioral change, which very much depends on applying it at the workplace, where the rubber meets the road. And, it is very convenient to make a scapegoat in putting the failure on the external training  provider or trainer. 
                   

I have personally gone through many trainings that have not served me nor the organisation much benefit, other than to meet the metric of completing the training hours per employee per year. I still can’t believe. We are into the 21st century and I still come across such metrics even amongst global MNCs! This goes to indicate how few organisations consider training, more precisely learning, seriously enough as a leadership functional responsibility in ensuring that the time and monies spend towards improving the competency of people yield returns.   

For years on now, training business and organisations have grappled with the difficult challenge of measuring training success. Many have used ROI as a means to measuring the benefits. Once again, this may be simplistically true in so far as hard skill areas where one can quantify the results in dollars value. But, when it comes to soft skills it is not so straight forward. How do you measure leadership or emotional intelligence in terms of dollars?. These skills are not the lone domain of individuals, rather requires the holistic support of the environment in which the individual interacts with. Training is a collaborated undertaking, not an isolated undermining!. There are no short cuts to tasting the fruits of labour. Training has a methodological structure  and process and if you .       

In 1998, unknowingly, I was roped at the eleventh hour into attending a leadership cum motivation training. The training was speared by the top leadership in consultation and collaboration with none other than Dr Paul Chan of HELP Institute. There were about twenty odd participants, mostly senior officers with many years of experience but who have been passed over for promotion. It was not until the opening address by the top gun that I realized this. By lunch time, my adrenalin was already peaking to ask why was I there. Shockingly, I was told that I was among the few ‘thrown’ in to inspire and motivate the others, into believing there is light at the end of the tunnel, to their career. To cut the story short, upon returning to base, I took the leadership to task, through a written report, questioning why had they blatantly departed from the fundamentals of the training cycle and had failed to engage the 'few' participants in letting them know in advance what was expected out of them before, during and after the training. And, this happened at the most unlikeliest of places – Army Training Command Headquarters, where I had served my last posting before retiring as a SO2 Doctrine & Evaluation.     

Herein, lies the problem - Leadership !. Many managers and bosses out there don’t think and act responsibly in treating their people with the same humility, maturity and respect. They have a “I know best” stance and don’t feel the need to listen to what their staff have to say with regards to matters involving their personal learning and development. These so called “leaders” are flawed in thinking that training is a unilateral decision and they are doing their staff a favour. These leaders know only of one style of approach - command and control. They communicate in one directional – to do to the staff, not with the staff.

We all know that soft skills are difficult to perceive and measure in a constant and consistent manner, hence why many leaders and participants alike, feel hesitant and pessimistic in investing in it. Because it is connected to psychology and character makeup of individual people, the returns may take a lot longer than what most leaders are willing to patiently wait. In addition, the training may even be a total waste, if the root cause lies elsewhere in the system. Training is not a panacea and to think it is the shiny silver bullet to all people problem is foolhardy.

The way in which I feel organisations can make training successful is to first make the connection with those who stand to benefit most – Participants or Trainees. After all, aren’t they the direct benefactor of the learning process and outcome. How does it help if they are not consulted and clearly informed of what they are expected to deliver or demonstrate upon returning from a training program?. Managers should sincerely and trustingly discover and communicate the agenda of closing employee performance gaps, be it in the current job or future growth plan. This will save the manager, staff and company a lot hassle and wasted resources. 

The other important area to improve would be to make measuring training outcome more realistically simple and plausible. When it comes to soft skills, instead ROI, managers should consider using what Donald Kirkpatrick calls ROE – Return on Expectations. Yes, what better way to measure that which training is required to close - the list of gaps and expectations of leaders, translated in competency and behavioural indicators. Meeting the expectations would cause to produce the desired effects.

Training is the single biggest change initiative that organisations invest in people with intent to help them improve their performance and their purposeful contribution. Yet, many do not see the benefits from it because of certain disconnect in the training cycle. Training or learning, is not taken to a conscious level of ownership and commitment by the stakeholders. What is meant to be a diagnostic, collaborative, integrative and synergistic undertaking, ends up being a annual calendar based intuitive wish-list activity, designed to offer employees breakaway time-off from work.

In my humble opinion, for training to succeed, the management must  step up to appreciate and understand the concept of training cycle and how it generates – learning, both formal and informal. It is highly recommended that managers attend training workshops on the 5 phases of training cycle – TNA, Design, Development , Execution and Evaluation. It is too elaborate and serious of a business to be left to HR Department,  who may not necessarily be best positioned to articulate the strategic and operational needs of people. Many organisations take the easy way out by outsourcing the training function and hoping the external trainer or provider knows best in offering the answers and solution. Whilst this may work for some, for sure no external party will know better the internal environment challenges and if the training is going to be applied at work. In worst case scenarios where there is a lack of expertise, managers should take ownership of the beginning and end of the training cycle – TNA and Evaluation. This way, they can keep sight of the identified learning objectives and how to effectively measure the outcomes.                

The Inconvenient Truth

 The other day, themalaysianinsider reported a study conducted by two public university researchers that showed “Malaysian employers practise racial bigotry”.

 The topic was indeed eye catchy because it touched on one of the most sensitive and controversial realities that Malaysians live with – race or ethnic discrimination. And, at the core of it is about favouring, whether outright openly or creatively disguised, one race over another. This time, the focus is on Malays and Chinese. Obviously, it got to my nerve that the 3rd largest ethnic group had been insignificantly ignored from the study. I had to restrain myself for several days, but the antagonist in me would not relent.

As I scanned through the comments column, the sound of criticism grew louder. Majority did not think the study had justifiably served it’s useful purpose. In summation, a fruitless piece of academic research gone waste!

Malaysia is a paradox of paradise. We are rated amongst the world’s most friendliest people, yet we can be among the worst racist bigots. What do you expect from a non-homogeneous set of people as diverse as Malaysians. They say, "one man’s meat is another’s poison" and so you will tend to find opposing views on racial discrimination – one denying and sweeping it under the carpet and another crying foul and resorting to vengeance. Then, there is that third group - the insignificant yet optimistic minority that yearns for a practical end to all forms of race, sex and age discrimination. That’s people like myself who, having tasted the short end of the stick on many instances, hope for a miracle!.

As much as Malaysians would prefer to deny or avoid discussing under the excuse of racial tolerance and peaceful coexistence, the fact remains that we have a build-in element of discrimination as part of our political structure and system of governance. The constitution accords preferential treatment of one ethnic group – the indigenous Malays and natives of Sabah and Sarawak. Let me ruffle some feathers.

The Malaysian constitution provides for the protection and assurance of economic prosperity of the indigenous group called “Bumiputra” (sons of soil) of which the majority form the Malay ethnic group. And, this assures that the Malays are accorded special focus and privileges in the government’s agenda of national economic progress. There is nothing uncommon about it because even developed countries, including the mighty USA have such constitutional reforms to protect the rights of indigenous natives. The only distinction is, in Malaysia, the protection covers not the “minority” rather the Malay majority. And, so we have specific Affirmative Action (AA) programs (AAP) in place to ensure that Malays are not neglected from the mainstream economic development and strata of society. And, one of the ways to advancing that goal is to ensure Malays form substantial numbers in areas like governance, business investments and employment. Hence, why you see more Malay employed in government and GLCs.

So how do the non Malays, especially the economically affluent Chinese who dominate the private sector businesses, feel and response?. The inconvenient truth is per what the research study revealed. Since 1969, the wedge had slowly edged deep into the fabric of Malaysian governance policies, including employment, at the expense diversity and meritocracy benefits. This cause and effect has now accumulated to a level where non-Malays shun government jobs whereas private sectors favour non-Malays. I can’t say if it’s a case of emotional tit-for-tat response or purely based on the merits of competency. One may not like or agree, but that’s the“real-ity”. It is pretty much a common knowledge. One can see it in media advertisements, asking for Bumiputra or Chinese speaking candidates. And, we are all too familiar of the economic value of Mandarin and how the language commands international appeal.

I would be lying if I said I have never "endured" racist bigots during my employment in the government (22 years) and corporate HR (12 years). Once, I had an Executive Search  approach me for an IR/ER position in a Singapore owned manufacturer of soft drinks. During the discussion, she told me bluntly that they could not find anymore suitable Chinese and Malay candidates, hence decided to look for Indians !. That’s why I have, unequivocally and unreservedly, made it my lifetime (whatever left of it) to champion the cause of professionalism through meritocracy and competency, without fear or favour of skin. No matter what, I find it unethical and hypocritical for any employer to hire people on the basis of race !. I may be an island on this but I don't care what others may think or say. I have the moral intelligence to reject racist bigots and their clever antics. I sincerely believe and follow what an exemplary human soul once said, "be the change that you want to see".

 

Since we now know of what the study has validated, do we want to something to stop the rot?. Are we ready and willing to take actions in removing the barriers racial discrimination across the employment market?. Is the country’s leadership willing to ratify the anti-discriminatory laws and legislate the Equal Employment Opportunities Act?. These are questions I have often thrown across to many, including HR practitioners. The silence is deafening. But, I am not defeated. I still harbour the vision of seeing Malaysians become  colour blind and free of racist bigotry. Malaysia is a blessed country and deserves to be a better place to befriend, work and live. 

Here's an award winning clip that showcases how a human resource "talent" goes to waste http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1G_Lxlk4Fxk. Though, I sympathize with the predicament of the main character, I disagree with choice of career path he had taken. "Two wrong does not make a right". Malaysia is a land of abundance to opportunities. No matter what the circumstances are, resorting to vice is definitely an unjustifiable act and devoid of moral character. The environmental stimulus can be negative, but one's conscious response must be positive.  

Career Survival Rules

Sales Manager Tan & Service Manager Kassim, walked into my room. Stress and tension was written all over their face. They informed me that they wanted to download their grievances on their boss (who happens to be my boss, too!).

Each told their version which pretty much centered on the leadership style of the boss. The complaint was that the boss indulged in too much PR, at the expense of jeopardizing their job performance. They felt unhappy that the boss had failed to support them in sticky situations against “powerful” clients, who had close political connections with the board of directors. On few occasions they had to reject the client’s demand, in the interest of the company’s cash flow and policy compliance. Unfortunately, the boss had reversed their decisions, to please the clients. This made them feel small and slighted. 

I explored the options available for Tan & Kassim, in resolving their conundrum with the Boss. After separating the facts from assumptions, both acknowledged the upside and downside to the boss. He is a humble and nice person who goes all out to please everybody. However, when push comes to shove in choosing between an employee and client, he would not standby the employee. Tan and Kassim knew this better, as old timers in the company.  

After hearing enough, I advised them that this is something that they needed to sort out with their boss, in no uncertain terms. They agreed but requested my presence to help moderate the discussion.  I consented and asked, “What is the expected outcome that they wanted out of the meeting?” They said, “they don't expect the boss will change, but at least they  want to be heard and be done with”.

It was a good 2 hours no holds bar meeting. Tan & Kassim Both got their grievances off their chest and expressed that they would like to see the Boss support the empowered decisions they make with clients. The Boss was his usual nice self,  listened attentively and assured that he would not interfere. Quite honestly, I had my reservations on how far the Boss would walk his talk. And, I sensed that Tan & Kassim knew that, too.   

Over lunch, I decided to let Tan & Kassim know 2 simple yet golden rules that needed to know in order to survive in their job.  
 

Rule 1.  No matter what, never ever go against your Boss. (Believe me, there was a time I had refused to accept it). In the name of finding happiness and engagement in the work you do, this rule is numero uno to every employee. And, that includes for the top employee – CEO (unless you happen to be the owner or son !). 

One must realize, whether you like it or not, that an employee has to serve the Boss. It never works the other way. I am also aware of this new thinking on leadership called servant leadership. But, you and I know the real deal at work - employee is the servant and boss, the master. When this “master-servant” relationship turns for the worst, the employee’s career is doomed. No matter what values or principles you may hold unto, you just simply can’t sustain in your job if you don’t have the chemistry working with your boss. So, before taking the plunge, think twice on the first rule “Never ever go against your Boss”. That includes saying, behaving, joking, thinking and even silencing, when the boss expects your support.

Rule 2. If you break Rule 1, be prepared to face the consequences. Simple law of physics reveal that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. And, this applies equally well on the most complex organism – human mind. In breaking rule 1, the span and degree of consequences can vary, from subtle deprivation to open intimidation. If the employee does not quickly overcome the differences with the boss, the communication and relationship will head south. A hairline fracture  will worsen into a deep crack. Imagine the pent-up emotional undercurrents between two unhappy and angry individuals. Yes, in all the cases it is the employee who has to bear the brunt of the fall-out. Recall the Malay proverb, “Durian and Cucumber”. Therefore, it is critical for an employee to adapt, build and sustain a healthy and symbiotic working relationship with the boss. If not the parasitism will settle in and the inevitable will result - resignation or termination.

If you have a story in which the boss had to resign due to an employee’s victimisation, tell me about it. I can then come up with another, not rule, but tip on how to survive a career standoff with your boss.

The above rules come from personal career experiences and from employees who have sought my advice on what they should do. As hard as I tell them to be guided and stand firm by deep seated values and principles, it is insufficient guarantee to survive at the workplace. You win some, you lose some. But, I will firmly stamp to say that an employee must take accountability for his or her career. That decision, going forward, lies not with the boss. The boss can offer all the opportunities but the final decision lies with the employee. So, irrespective of how the work relationship with the boss is, don't take it out against the boss.

I always believed that when one door closes, another will open. Look at it from the bright side. In cases where an employee throws in the towel because of the boss, the employee  should be thankful. The boss may have helped the employee grow, elsewhere.  I went through it, many times.  

Life is all about the making decisions and acting on it, based on freedom of choice. You chose what to you want to be or become. No one can force you into doing something that you wish not to do. Hence, no one is a victim until they themselves say they are. We are all gifted and talented in many different ways and can choose the path we wish for, be it the most or least travelled. The same rules applies to Tan, Kassim and the rest in any employee-boss working relationship. They do not have control over changing their boss, but they certainly have the powers to change themselves in determining the outcome of their career survival.          
 

“If you say you can or say you can’t, you are right” – Hendry Ford.