Managers, clones and hiring

Have you ever experienced an interview where managers are looking at hiring candidates that are clones/replica of themselves? And then you get back from the discussion wondering if it was for a role that you didn’t fit into. Or, you got hired for a role that held much more promise than the one you eventually got.

It’s not an uncommon scenario. The easiest way for a manager to conquer the hiring heights is to look for candidates that match the job description 100% and yet would bring in a bit more competency to the table. It’s an ideal scenario that has, less ramp-up time, good fit and most importantly easy to manage. They’re easy to manage (or at least so it seems) because they already know what needs to be done. Zero conflict situation. Perfect.

Except that they are far too many issues that will crop up in due course of time. That’s when the ‘safe’ managers will take a hit. Imagine a situation where the product needs a new roadmap to be defined and everyone at the table thinks alike! Breaking news: The product just got killed.

What should you do if you are a manager stuck in this hiring situation? First and most importantly, don’t benchmark candidates against the last person in that role. Treat each candidate’s competency differently. Assess your current team’s strength and hire to fix gaps. Be prepared to accept new perspectives. Give the candidate some room to learn things in the role. Finally, be ready to take risks (at least the calculated ones) as a manager. If you can’t, then ask yourself if you are in the right role.

What should you do if you are a candidate stuck in this situation? You were promised a meatier role, but ended up in a role that’s identical to your last job. It’s time to communicate with your manager. Understand the duration of your current responsibilities in the role. If it’s for a fixed duration, then ask for a timeline to start taking on more/newer things. I’m quite sure there’s no manager (in their right senses) that would say ‘No’ to a team member asking to take on work. If the answer is no, the responsibilities will continue for an indefinite time, it’s a call you need to take. Are you willing to continue or move on?

Does HR have a sense of humor?

A recent discussion with friends, led me to ask this question.

Does HR have a sense of humor?

My first reaction was, “Yes!”. Obvious choice? Not really. I really do believe that, since I’ve met HR people with a great sense of humor. However, many in the group disagreed. So I decided to ask this question to an open audience. One way to validate was to go out there and ask folks who have/are interacting with HR on a regular basis. Twitter provided that perfect platform to test the question and some of the replies I got are here, here, here, here & finally here! Maybe my friends had a point, since it didn’t come as a surprise to them that most people think HR doesn’t have a sense of humor!

I’m not out to counter those replies, but I’m just as curious to know why folks feel the way they do about HR. One plausible answer could be, just maybe, most often than not, a company’s HR team is the first point of contact to people outside the company. It’s a huge responsibility to represent one’s firm/company in the right light. So that to some extent plays a part in taking away the funny side of HR. Another possibility could be that HR fears they won’t be taken seriously or considered to be professional in their approach towards work.

On second thoughts, a sense of humor is more a personality trait. It’s the hallmark of great salesmen or manager. Even good leadership relies on well-timed sense of humor to energize employees. So maybe it’s time to ask the serious-type HR folks to chill-out a bit. It’s possible. Heck! Even job-descriptions have sense-of-humor listed as a requirement for roles that have a client-facing function! I suppose we can categorize HR as a role that has client interactions too. No? Why then ask for something that one doesn’t follow? Beats me.

So here’s a message to all HR folks: Have fun! Spread some laughter. It acts as an ice-breaker.

Go break a leg! Figuratively, duh!

Guest Post: Stopping yourself when you react to others pushing your buttons

Author: Carolyn Matheson
Twitter: @capcoach

We all know what it feels like to have our buttons pushed. Something happens, that seems to take us over, every muscle in our body tightens up and we turn into somebody no one wants to be around.

Steve was in a rush to get to the store but someone else took the parking space he had his eye on. His button had been pushed. He was going to let the other driver know how mad he made him and that he couldn't get away with taking his car park space. Leaping out of the car he started waving his fists and swearing at the other driver who was taken aback in shock.
In his anger, it didn't occur to Steve that the other driver did not have a personal vendetta against him. He had just been told his department at work was about to be re-organized making him angry and fearful even before he reached the store. The final straw was the other driver and Steve allowed him to push a button which was ready to be triggered by almost anything. Steve's reaction was an immediate and emotional response, with little thought to the consequences.

As he got back in the car his stomach was tied up in knots, his heart racing, he put his head in his clammy and sweaty hands. A thought popped into his head, 'what was that all about, I am so ashamed of my behaviour'.

The more you know about what is likely to push your buttons, the more you can anticipate your reaction and be ready with simple tactics. Often something has happened just before you started to become defensive. It is easy to blame others - the boss, family, colleagues, the economy, debts; anyone but ourselves.

Warning signs that you might be susceptible to button pushing:

• Extreme tiredness, inability to relax, difficulty in sleeping, overactive mind, feeling very disconnected from yourself and others.


• Waking up in the morning and wanting to go straight back to sleep.


• Worried about health, money or work.


• Easily distracted and having difficulty concentrating. What are your warning signs?

Suggestions to stop you reacting to other people

• Say No! Don't take on more than you can handle


• No one pushes our buttons like our children. If you recognise that you are about to react, keep your lips firmly sealed. Step away from the situation for a while and think through your options. Go for a walk. Just a 15 minutes’ walk is enough to unfreeze your brain so you gain a different perspective.


• Put yourself first. I have noticed that when I am calm and relaxed it is much easier to deal with anything that life throws at me.


• Discover the power of laughter. If you get tense, the negative energy will increase. You can't laugh and be angry at the same time. It's impossible!

About the author:

Carolyn Matheson is a Master Certified Coach, and works with executives and their teams across the world. She is one of the world’s leading executive coaches whose world turned upside down 5 years ago when diagnosed with a chronic illness.

Entrepreneurial instincts

Here’s a question that I’d recently asked on Twitter.

Does HR value people with entrepreneurial instincts ? Or do we try and fit square pegs in round holes?

Surprisingly, I got consistent replies from across geographies. The answer was – No, HR doesn’t value entrepreneurial instincts. We try and fit square pegs in round holes. There are multiple answers to this question. Some may work, others might not. Some have the required flexibility, while others deal with rigidity.

As clichéd as it sounds, entrepreneurs are a rare breed. They come with characteristics and traits that differ a lot from most people. Traits include (but not limited to): high competency, high levels of risk taking, high self confidence and very competitive, creative bent of mind, innovative spirit, proactive behavior and need for freedom at workplace.

Given that we know certain traits of an entrepreneur it brings me to ask a couple of questions:

What can HR do to value entrepreneurial instincts?

• To start with, it can improve the talent management system in the organization that gives flexibility to entrepreneurs to choose their career paths.
  
• Map the entrepreneurial traits identified and create performance management systems that include innovation at the center of the review. Look towards the results achieved rather than the approach.
  
• Encourage and train managers to accept or have for a higher tolerance for failure. Not all entrepreneurial ideas will take off.
  
• Get the recruiters to hire right. If the Company doesn’t have a culture that supports entrepreneurship, then it doesn’t make sense to get someone who will eventually leave you just as quickly. It’s critical to identify what’s needed for the role.
  
• Work closely with managers to indentify what percentage of their workforce needs to be entrepreneurs. Not everyone needs to be an entrepreneur.
  
• Have a robust feedback system. Entrepreneurs need to be given feedback on a regular basis.
  
• Bring in transparency into the performance review system. Employees need to know the parameters that define the role of an entrepreneur. However, there’s a catch to this approach. You cannot have performance review processes that make it mandatory for innovation! It’ll back-fire big time, since this approach will ask employees to take up roles that they aren’t comfortable with.
  
• Promote the jobs internally within the organization and then share it with the outside world. Employees must be encouraged, based on their competencies, to take up roles that require innovation. And they’ll appreciate the role was shared with them first.
  
• Money matters. Even to that entrepreneur who tells you that he wants freedom for innovation above all else. Really. Pay structures need to be flexible depending on the role that one play’s in the Company. Entrepreneurs should have a high incentive plan, that’s directly linked to their performance. Better performance means more money.

Why doesn’t HR value entrepreneurship instincts in employees?

• The challenge is not in accepting the need for entrepreneurship within the Company. It’s the lack awareness on how to make the fit happen. The need to look for a way to fit in innovation, risks and costs involved, are a bigger challenge. There’s already a team in place and business has defined its goals and objectives. Challenging status quo in a process oriented Company might not work in the best interest of the Company.
  
• Company culture plays an important role for hiring/retaining entrepreneurs. If the culture doesn’t support the system to fit in entrepreneurs, then it’s a disservice to both the candidate and the Company to come together to work.
  
• HR might not have been given the authority to take the call on hiring entrepreneurs. It means that HR/recruiter will eventually fall back on the hiring manager who’ll make the decision.
  
• Lack of transparency might make it really hard to determine if the Company really needs an entrepreneur. If not, not amount of talking/incentives/promises will keep them back.
  
• It could also be a result of of not identifying the candidate's entrepreneurial instinct at the hiring stage.

What’s your take? Your replies will give some food-for-thought to HR readers of this blog.

Perspectives

From a reader:

I am a litigating lawyer and have been with my current firm for almost 4 years (I joined them straight after college). About 3 years back I got married and took a transfer to a different location. I have really learnt a lot with the current firm and have been given a lot of opportunities. But I'm really bored here now. I feel like I'm being taken for granted and am not getting the full recognition from my bosses (my immediate boss and the one above him) though my clients now specifically ask for me to handle their matters (which is a big big deal when I'm barely 4 years into the profession and get to handle matters involving a ton of money). I can handle work pressure but the stress created by my boss is tough to handle. For instance, I have a junior who is supposed to be exclusively working with me but my boss gives him independent work and keeps him busy, which means I’m effectively on my own.

Anyway, I want to make a move to a company where the work & ambience will be very different from a litigation firm. I don't want to move to another firm because there is just too much stress and I really need a break. But I am scared to take the plunge - what if I can't adjust in a company since I am so used to a firm? As in I do a lot of my work independently and my bosses don't really interfere with the calls I make on my matters. I will have a strict hierarchy & reporting structure in a company.

I'm confused. Please help.

Well, I’m going to take your question in parts and answer them to the point.

First, at the current firm, you’re getting to do your own thing which means that the boss trusts your decisions completely. Now, that could also translate to the fact that he doesn’t have to spend time reviewing your work. It then brings us to the fact that your boredom isn’t really due to the lack of opportunities. It’s stemming from the fact that while you need to be given space to do your own thing, you are also asking for recognition for it. That may not be the way that your manager sees the situation. He might feel that the best recognition has been given in the form of letting you do your own thing! No? It’s going to be a matter of perspectives, until you sit down with your manager and share your views.

Getting opportunities of the kind that you’ve described are rare to come by at an early stage in one’s career. It looks very likely that the hidden reason for a job change is the working relationship with your manager. You may want to address that quickly. It could also be that your manager’s seeing the appreciation from clients and doesn’t really want to make changes in working styles that could backfire.

Stress which you feel is created by the manager (like giving work to your direct report) could be sorted out too. Talk it out to your manager. He needs to know that you aren’t comfortable with his approach and that you are responsible for the performance of your direct report. For all practical purposes, he might feel that your direct report is under utilized or the job allotted doesn’t fall under your activities. It’ll stay that way if you ignore the issue and wish it to go away! Start with having a discussion. Try and be candid.

Here’s a tip though, most often there’s a tendency to bring up an issue when it happens. For example, you may want to bring it up the next time you see your boss assigning work to your direct report. That could be plain bad timing! Since there could be urgency around getting that specific work done and you could look like delaying it. On the contrary, have the discussion once your direct report finishes the work and hands it over to your boss. You can then explain your stand when things are calm. Start with explaining that when works gets allotted without your knowledge, it becomes hard for you to plan your deliverables. It could also put the direct report under dilemma to prioritize his work, leading to delay in completion of projects. Your boss needs to know that his approach is hampering your work. The way I see it now is that you are delaying having that discussion with him sand you’re taking on the work that your direct report would have otherwise completed for you. Obviously, leading to a lot of frustration! Speak up.

If you like what you are doing and see a lot of opportunities, why would you choose to change jobs? Beats me. Often, the very idea for a job change crops up when the reason for the change could have been addressed in the first place. Makes sense? To be honest, you might get the same opportunities in a Company, but the number of people in there is going to be tough competition to beat. Not due to lack of competency. Not due to lack of knowledge. It’s a number game in a bigger Company and that’s going to take a while to beat. Also, there will be processes and procedures to follow. That might prove to be a challenge for someone who is used to working independently. It will work, provided you have the patience to ace the system.

The bottom line is that you have chance to sort out differences with your manager at the current firm. It might lead you to give up things that you would have liked if it was done your way. You’ll get things that you didn’t expect would come your way. That’s the way these discussions go. Once you are done having that discussion, you can then decide if it’s worth sticking with the firm. Your decision will then have more objective reasoning.

Good luck!

Guest Post: Perceptions of HR

Author: Monika Manchanda

Thanks for the honor of asking me to write a guest post. It’s a great feeling and whatever else I wanted to say here…Prateek stole it from me! I am telling you guys it’s like he read my thoughts and then put them in the introduction to this post. Just kidding…

Let me get down to the business of writing the post.

When I started to write a guest post for an HR blog my first thought of was does the term HR mean to a person in any organization. If you run a poll in an organization, 80% of them consider staffing or recruitment as the HR’s primary function. This isn’t what I think. I personally think staffing or recruitment should only be a part of HR.

Off course, every working person’s bible - Wiki has to say about HR:

“Human resources is a term used to refer to how employees are managed by organizations”

What role does HR play during an employee’s tenure with his/ her organization? I think the real HR work begins after a person is hired. Day to day activities like helping them settle down on the first day, legal formalities taken care of and introductions to the team made are things that a newly inducted employee looks forward too. They say first impressions count! The HR team must be able to handle the non technical trainings and most importantly handle the all important ‘Career Development’ aspect of an employee’s future in the company. According to me, the HR person must be able to gauge and understand a new employee’s goals’ and aspirations. They must be able to seamless integrate the candidate’s plans and the company’s plans. Over time a manager will have a clearer view of a person’s capability and determine their future goals within the organization but, the hope must be kick-started by a staffing expert.

Unfortunately, in reality a person sees the HR twice – the day we join a company and during the appraisal period. It always helps having a friend in the HR department! Or so it seems.

In most of the organizations I have worked in a career spanning over 9 years, I have noticed that all of them have only taken the hiring aspect of HR seriously. This creates a negative attitude towards HR in most of the employee’s minds; which is not necessarily true. However, one of my previous employers did a brilliant job in segregating and defining the various functions of HR. To say that it was helpful would be an understatement.

So, I will conclude this post with a simple expectation. I believe HR is the only section in an organization which has the capability of being transparent and communicable to an employee even before joining, to the day we leave a company. They are the face of a company.

About the Author:
Monika is a technology professional with over 9 years of work experience in the software industry. She has currently taken a break from corporate life and is enjoying time with her son, gardening, traveling and writing.

Remote HR. Possible?

From my discussion with a reader:

Scenario: An employee works for a firm that doesn’t have an in-house HR team. Most of the HR related work (staffing, employee relations, performance reviews, general HR activities etc.,) are managed from a remote location. Email and phone are the best available options for communication. The HR person does visit remote locations once in a while to spend time with the employees.

Now, the employee is planning to quit, citing better career opportunities. Manager has initiated the exit process and asks HR to complete their part in the exit process. HR calls in from headquarters to conduct the exit interview. Asks employee the reason for deciding to quit and even tries their best to retain the employee. The HR has had very limited discussions in the past and have only stepped in when there’s a crisis. The employee isn’t comfortable answering most of the questions, because the HR person conducting the interview hasn’t even met/seen the employee.

I was informed it’s the same with other HR related activities too.

Leads me to ask: Does managing HR remotely work?

Well, if we consider the above scenario, the answer is a ‘No’. Managing HR from a remote location would mean that you still don’t get to feel the pulse of the organization. You really can’t expect employees to open up in a discussion with a HR person they’ve never met before. When it happens in an exit interview, you can be rest assured that it’s not going to be taken well.

Might have worked differently if it was a couple of employees working remotely and HR steps in to cater to their needs. It’s then a given, that HR will communicate only via phone/mail. It wouldn’t be possible to fly out to go meet just the two employees working remotely. Cost is a major deterrent. This is exactly the reason why managers are hesitant to let employees work remotely. In-person communication always has an advantage over remote discussions. Period. Agreed that there’s enough high-end technology that might help HR manage employees working in remote locations, yet, it doesn’t substitute for an in-person discussion.

Among various HR activities, employee relations top the list of HR activities that requires face-to-face interaction. Though emails/phone calls can answer the queries, it doesn’t allow one get a feel for non-verbal communication. That’s about 70% of every discussion! An exit interview provides a great chance to understand the reason for an employee’s exit. It could maybe even help with getting enough data for rehiring the employee in future. That would only be possible if you showed up in-person at the remote location.

There are a couple of repercussions that I can see stemming from having a remote HR team. First, managing cultural differences across locations can prove to be a challenge for a remote HR team. Second, future hiring can take a hit if either current/exiting employees voice their opinion on not having a local HR team to cater to their needs.

I’m not discounting the fact that there could possibly be a ton of advantages (cost, infrastructure, time, headcount, etc.,) which prompts HR team to work remotely. These costs will become negligible, when compared to the cost of losing great talent. Especially when you’re dealing with people who are helping you grow revenue, talking on behalf of your Company or bringing in good talent through referrals.

Choose wisely.

Obvious or Curious?

Well, before I start with this post, I want to ask you to read through the dictionary meaning of a couple of words, at least the one explanation that makes sense in this context.

Read up here on obvious and curious.

Now that we have, let’s get down to the post. This one’s really got me thinking.

• Does good talent take jobs that state the obvious? Or ones that leave them a bit curious?


• Do employees like reading a user manual (obvious) before using the intranet/HRIS? Or will they use it better if you create curiosity about the application?


• Can managers retain the best folks by opting for a natural career progression for everyone? Or will a few of them opt for a more risky career path if they find something curious?


• Is that sales person pitching your product in the way that’s sounds obvious? Or is he willing to create some curiosity in the customer & let him try it out first?

If you still haven’t answered truthfully, then maybe this post won’t have an impact on you. Cause the answer is screaming at us. Most of us (at least starting with me and many that I know personally) including talent, managers, sales folks, marketing honchos, customers & even the front desk receptionist, among so many others, love stuff that tickles brain-cells. We are constantly looking for something that conveys curiosity, stuff that’s compelling enough to take on the risk. It’s a battle of the obvious versus curious choice. Before you jump at a conclusion, it’s OK to take a side. Go ahead and pick your choice. It’s perfectly alright.

It only starts getting murky when the leader picks obvious and implements it without considering the curious set of people. Towing the line is then, the only option. However, repercussions of this will be experienced when the market picks up and the curious lot will be find jobs that suit them better.

So what’s this choice got to do with HR, staffing or employee relations? It does mean a lot. In fact it means creating a work environment with a difference.

The obvious choice is to play it safe. Create enough policies so that HR doesn’t need to answer any questions. Make the hiring process predictable enough to hire mediocre candidates. Rate every employee as a high-performer and not worry about the side-effects until it happens (like a lay off). Follow industry benchmarking even when you know you can do much better. Implement processes that doesn’t give room for people to question or improvise.

On the other hand, you have curious. It has people who like to question status quo. They take the time & effort to find alternate solutions. They’re inquisitive by nature and are constantly looking at raising the bar. Setting new standards in benchmarking is a norm. Willing to take risks and they are fully aware of the repercussions and have solutions for that too. Curious is always ready to engage employees in an open manner and strive towards creating an inclusive work culture.

If you are in HR and are telling me that allowing curious is a culture thing or is a numbers driven issue at a very big organization, I’ll strongly disagree. If it were that, the curious lot would have left you in their very first month on the job! Really. I suppose it’s then an individual trait. Some managers are allowing for it to grow, while many others are curbing it at the very start. As a HR person, are you having discussions with the business to allow for that curious mind to grow? That’s the HR power that you will bring to the table. Start with one and you’ll be surprised that there are more people than you can think of in your company who’ll endorse that view.

So when will you start?

Are you assertive enough at work?

Well, I was recently part of a discussion with a group of friends from a variety of work background. We had someone from engineering, HR, recruitment, sales, consulting, among others. The topic discussed was about being assertive.

The question we shared among the group was: Are you assertive enough at work?

The question was directed more towards their life at work than in personal life. While the entire group started out saying we were assertive, the real truth emerged only after sometime into the discussion. As much as we wanted to debate, we really weren’t assertive enough in our work life!! The dude in engineering wasn’t assertive when he told he sure wasn’t going to meet the product release deadline. The sales guy wasn’t assertive enough to tell a No to his client’s demands, fearing he might lose them. The recruiter wasn’t assertive when it counted the most, in telling the hiring manager to take a decision with the existing bunch of candidates. That the grass wasn’t greener on the other side of the candidate field. HR often ended up quoting stuff from policies, rather than a firm ‘No’ to crazy requests from employees (fearing attrition!)

Another obvious question asked was, do we then really need to be assertive? Off course we should be assertive. Isn’t that obvious? Being assertive really isn’t about forcing an idea on someone, pushing so hard that it forms cracks in a client relationship, does not mean you hide behind a HR policy instead of answering the question openly. It’s about being confident and not giving up on yourself when you know the outcome of a certain activity. Being decisive in your ‘No’ with valid reasons. If you choose to be assertive, you have then are decided to speak firmly about how you feel about a situation. It’s a thin between aggressiveness and assertiveness, striking a balance is the tough part.

There’s a ton of information on the web, telling/asking/showing/advising us on how to be assertive? Just what are we doing with that information? From our discussions, it was clear that most of that info got thrown to the backburner in a never ending rush to deliver results, please unrelenting clients and hire the next-best candidate.

So is being assertive a personality trait or one that we learn on the job? If we agree that circumstances reveal a person, is it then really possible to teach someone to be assertive (thinking on the spot rather than after the event has occurred)?

That gets me to ask you: Are you assertive enough at work? How do you manage to stay that way? Do share your thoughts.

Manager asking for too many reports without sufficient notice

From a reader;

I work as an analyst and part of my job description requires me to prepare/generate reports on a regular basis. I’ve a weekly schedule that is planned way in advance and it helps me to prioritize my work such that deliverables aren’t affected. This mode worked great with my previous manager who has since left the Company. I now report to a new manager and I’m finding it difficult to adapt to his style of working. He’s ok with my weekly schedules and has been very supportive at work. However, I’ve noticed many times that he has asked for too many reports (not in the weekly schedule) without giving sufficient notice. The requests are mostly from clients who want a report immediately. This has had an effect on my weekly deliverables. I don’t want to continue in this manner. I need to discuss and sort it out. How do I approach my manager?

Is this happening only to you or have the other team members (if any) brought up the same issue? There are two things that come to mind. First, I get the feeling that your manager is much disorganized and needs help with time management and prioritizing his work. Also likely that he isn’t able to manage clients well enough and he’s getting pressurized to deliver things quickly. Second, maybe his trust and confidence in your work is high and hence he is relying heavily on getting the work done only by you. Either way he shouldn’t be having too many last minute requests, at the cost of already-scheduled work.

Whatever be the reason, it’s time for you to set up a discussion. Now. His management style is hurting your deliverables and that will come up for scrutiny sooner than later. If it comes to that, you’ll not be able to justify by saying you were catering to last minute/unscheduled requests. There’s a high chance he’ll ask why you hadn’t brought up the issue earlier. You get my point? It’s better to sort these things out before it reaches a point of no return.

Timing is crucial when you set up a discussion. Don’t do it when he comes up with his next last-minute request. That will backfire. Instead choose a time when you’ve completed work on his latest request. That’ll give you some data points to talk about. You need to find out if he is comfortable with a formal discussion or an informal one? If it’s a formal discussion that he prefers, then set up a meeting on his calendar at his convenient time. Tell him you want to discuss a concern that’s affecting your work and deliverables. Next, when you meet him, go prepared with points that you want to discuss about. Don’t try and get defensive, rather have an open and candid conversation. Get to know his side of thinking and address them accordingly. If he’s a good manager, there’s a high possibility that he will see that his actions are indeed hurting your work and change them to work better. On the other hand, if he turns out to be a jerk, he’ll agree to change and yet continue with his previous style. Hope it’s the former and not the latter that you encounter, since you mention that he’s very supportive at work.

If he turns out to be a jerk and doesn’t change his style. You have a few choices. While scheduling your work the next time around, allow for some buffer. If a project requires 10 days, you ask for 14 days, you then have a 4 day buffer, should he come up with last minute requests. Make sure you document very request that comes your way. That will be helpful for later discussions and will also act as a cover. If that’s not the way you work, you decide if you want to work for this manager.

My experience says that nine of ten times, having discussions early into an issue helps clear the air. Good luck!

Post that might interest you: Yes, it's ok to disagree with your manager.

Awards aren't retention tools? Or are they?

Here’s the situation:

A manager has got to choose a top performer for giving the quarterly/annual performance based award. Should be a cakewalk, no?

Since he must have mentored, trained, tracked, monitored and given feedback for each team member’s performance over the last one year. Each one of them must have contributed their bit and in cases even gone beyond their scope of work. The review exercise isn’t done just for the purpose of the awards. It’s a critical part of the annual review process. Every thing gets captured. These stats help a manager identify the top performer. Well, that’s the ideal situation.

Apparently, that’s not what happens in most cases. I’m a big fan of performance based awards. As the name itself indicates, it purely based on performance. Yet, I’ve often come across managers who want to give out performance based awards to employees who show signs that they would quit soon (offer in hand!) or have started looking for better job opportunities with a competitor. That’s something that I strongly disagree with. Awards then serve as just another retention tool. I’m averse towards managers who use it for that purpose alone.

Yes, there are folks who do suggest that awards are part of retention strategies. That’s valid if you do have well defined criteria/parameters to judge performance and reward accordingly. Everyone on the team then is aware of their standing and hence decision making is a lot more transparent.

Here’s what an award really shouldn’t be:

• Lucky draw. You have one award to give; put names in a hat and pull out a lucky one! It’s just plain ridiculous. No. I’m not kidding. It’s happened.


• Make the award a cyclic trophy. This year Employee A gets the award, next year it’s Employee B’s turn!


• Popularity contest. Truly, this one takes the cake. I’ve been part of discussions where manager’s wanted to give performance based awards to their fave team member, who also happened to be popular among other team members. Again. It’s plain ridiculous.


• Have as many award categories as possible. It makes a manager’s job easy when he can choose multiple people from the same team for different awards! Sounds crazy?

All of the situations mentioned above do exist.

Employee recognition makes a huge difference and it is a big deal. Period. However, employees will take it seriously if it’s done in a transparent manner and managers play a vital role in deciding a recipient of the award. It’s obvious that the repercussions of an incorrect choice could be drastic. It’ll end up hurting team morale, causing rifts between team members, brings down productivity and not to mention the obvious, lot of exits.

The role of HR in this process is to ensure that key parameters for awards revolve around being fair, transparent and consistent. Get managers to stick to these parameters. If not, get rid of the awards. It's better to not have them, when it causes more issues.

• Have you received an award recently? Or anytime in your career?


• You felt you deserved to win that award that your colleague won?


• What has your experience been with performance (or anything similar) awards?

Would love to hear your thoughts. It will help other folks to deal with situations better. It will also help me to share your thoughts with people who frame criteria for identifying performance awardees.

That would make life at work a whole lot better.

HR asked to snoop around!

Got a question from a reader. It’s a lengthy one and so I’m posting a gist of it here.

Manager at a midsized Company is worried that he might lose talented team members to competitors, citing various reasons including better opportunities, performance reviews, higher salary, promotions, etc., He approaches the HR rep and asks her to snoop around and give him some information on who is going to/is contemplating whether to quit and by when. He claims this will help him plan his projects better and start looking for potential replacements.

The HR rep hasn’t been asked to do such a thing before in her role (or career) and is wondering what should be her approach to this request?

First, the manager’s just being a jerk. If your role has enough authority to take decisions, then its time to have a candid discussion with this manager regarding his future in a managerial role. Or maybe even in the Company. Harsh? Absolutely. Such a request is a red flag for his managerial abilities. That’s off course if you have the authority. Understandably it’s not going to be easy. But having the discussion isn’t just an option, its mandatory.

On the other hand, if you don’t have the authority, you must still go ahead have a candid discussion with the manager. Assuming your role may require you to interact with this manager on a daily/weekly basis, saying ‘NO’ now will set expectations for the future too. Here’s something that you could tell him, “I would not be able to do that. It’s against the ethics & integrity of my role.” No, you don’t need to be apologetic. That’s generally the thing that people say when they are asked such requests. When you start by saying, “I’m sorry…”, it gets understood as, “I may help you, but I don’t know what to do. Give me sometime.” So don’t give room for assumptions. Be assertive.

Next, it’s time you set things straight with this manager. His fear of losing talented folks from his team may stem from many facts, including bad managing skills, not being proactive, having issues with feedback (taking & giving), not in sync with business decisions, or plain fear to communicate any type of news that might impact the team, among so many other things. For one, he should be taking control of things that can be controlled from his end. Exploring opportunities within the team/Company, honest performance reviews, transparency in dealing with issues, etc., Instead of trying to control factors that are not within his reach. Get this manager to attend a training program to help him manage better, if you have the budget. Else, it’s time you nominate someone internally within the Company to train him, like Karen Wise suggests in this guest post.

You cannot control /avoid external recruiters from reaching your employees. Period. Trying to do that will result in you wasting your time & efforts. Asking the HR to snoop around isn’t going to resolve an issue that has deeper roots in his managerial traits.

Team member skips meetings regularly

Dear HR Store,

I’ve been recently promoted to lead an eight member team. As part of the team’s weekly activities we have a team meeting scheduled every Wednesday. It’s critical for all team members to attend the meeting. It helps us stay updated on the team’s goals/objectives. It’s also an interactive session where team members discuss a lot of things related to work. Stuff like challenges they faced during that week and their solutions are discussed. It’s a ground for learning too. My issue is with a particular team member who has been skipping these meetings regularly giving far too many excuses. At times it’s ok, since he is held up with other activities that are critical and needed immediate attention. But the occurrences are far too many to ignore. The other team members have begun to notice the pattern.

The team member doing this excels at his work. So I’m worried any hasty reactions from me could end up creating more problems. How do I go about resolving this issue?

Thanks,
Manager

Well, looks like this team member has been given too much leeway. Your case is a classic example for setting a ‘precedent’. It not only poses an immediate danger but also has long term repercussions.

Agreed that the team member excels at his work, but that’s no grounds for not complying with the rest of the team. Are you telling the others that they are good enough to be excused from the meeting? See. Setting precedents are bad. Period. You’ve just experienced the tough part of being a manager. Your ‘No’ should have enough logic and ‘Yes’ should make enough sense.

How do you go about dealing with this? First step would be to have a candid talk with him during your one—to—one meeting. Before you start with telling, “You should attend all team meetings starting this week”, give him a chance to explain his prior absence. There could a reason for missing them than just giving an excuse for attending to another activity during the same time. To start with, give him the benefit of the doubt. Maybe he is really overloaded with work. Maybe he doesn’t see enough value in attending the meeting. Or worse, he just feels he’s the best in the team and doesn’t need to attend meetings when he knows it all! If that’s the reason, you have more trouble than you think. Your response will depend on his reasons for not attending. Being supportive is fine, as long as it’s for the right reasons. If you’ve set up the meeting as a weekly recurrence, the team has been given enough notice. So getting caught up with other work at that time is a sign of bad time management. More than twice is never a coincidence. Set it right.

On the contrary, trying to enforce a rule like, “Everyone must participate in team meetings”, will backfire for sure. Team members will be present but they’ll never participate. So try and avoid taking that approach. If the agenda of the meeting is to figure out if the team is aligned to business goals/objectives and for sharing their challenges of the week, then your one-to-one meeting and email should suffice. Meeting every week to discuss the same things takes away the importance of the discussion. Sorry, I digress.

Back to your question. As a manager, you’ll have to play a dual-role in getting team members to adhere to team activities. One part of the role (the good part) is when you encourage team members to attend these meetings citing a chance to learn from others. The second part (the bad part) of the role is when you make it clear that all team members will be treated equally and any violations will have the same consequences. Being a manager is a lot tougher than you thought!

So first have a discussion with the team member. If it continues, write him a mail. I really doubt if it should get beyond this! If it does, you have to take a tough call. You don’t need a star performer with the wrong attitude who could end up hurting a well balanced team. That’s something you don’t want to deal with. Act fast. And have that discussion. It should sort things out. Make it clear that you are the authority on this issue and that shouldn't be taken for granted.

Next time. Be wary of setting precedents. You are the manager. And you should decide what works best for the team. Don’t let the entire team manage you! If it happens, there’s only one way it will go. Downhill.

Good luck!

Carnival of HR: Talent Management Edition

Jessica over at blogging4jobs is hosting the latest Carnival of HR 'Talent Management Edition'. I would suggest you head over there to read some great informative posts. Check it out! It would be worth your time spent. Don't forget to leave your comments on posts that you find interesting.

PS: The 'Carnival of HR' was started by the Evil HR Lady way back in 2007 and since then it has been regularly featuring recent posts from the best of the HR and management blogging community. Get to know more about the Carnival here.

Guest Post: Be Creative About Staff Development

Guest post by Karen Wise

Recently I have been thinking about how we develop our staff and ourselves. This subject seems to weave it's way into almost every aspect of my work at the moment: I've been delivering appraisal training to several different organisations: a staff's Personal Development Plan is discussed as part of the course; I recently delivered a break-out session at a Coaching conference on Continued Professional Development; and I'm going to be delivering a practical developmental seminar for coaches next month.

In the course of this work, through discussions and feedback from participants, I've begun to realise that there's a real need to change the way that managers approach the development of their staff.

Traditionally, when a manager writes a Personal Development Plan (PDP) as part of their staff's performance appraisal, external training is identified: some kind of taught course, a conference, further education resulting in a recognised qualification.

But at the moment, with the recession still biting at our heels, the organisational development budgets are not as large as they were a few years ago. Managers now need to start considering how to develop their staff in a cost-efficient way. So I'll give you an example:

A junior manager pulled me aside on a training session. He wanted a piece of advice on what course he could send a member of staff on who needed training in how to manage difficult conversations - there were no more places left on the in-house conflict resolution training, and all external courses cost more than his departmental training budget would allow.

So I asked a question: "Who do you know, more senior to you in this organisation, who is able to manage difficult conversations?" The junior manager was quickly able to identify someone.

So I said: "How about you approach this person to ask them if they could support you in developing your member of staff? Let's develop a plan."

1. Your member of staff and the manager will need an initial meeting - to make sure they can work together for this specific development need.
2. Your member of staff will then attend a couple of meetings to observe the manager managing a difficult conversation.
3. The member of staff will meet with the manager again and talk through his observations. The manager will in turn talk through some of the techniques they use to manage difficult conversations.
4. The member of staff will return to the workplace & apply their learning.
5. The member of staff and manager will meet again, perhaps one or two times to consolidate learning: identify any challenges, reflect on application to date, and measure the progress made.

It's quite simple really - and all it will take is the resource of time and commitment from the manager and the member of staff. Some might say that this is a form of mentorship - and I suppose that they would be right. However, this mentor relationship is defined for a specific need, and is time limited. The key benefit is that this form of development opportunity has high impact and is sustainable. The added benefit is the networking opportunities that it creates for the member of staff, and the exposure to a wider range of issues beyond their current sphere of work.

In essence, this idea is based on one of my key principles that development and growth is natural, given the right conditions. Choosing the right role model and having the opportunity to observe, then reflect and discuss with them their approach can happen in any organisation, anywhere. The example I give is just one way that a manager can demonstrate creative thinking when identifying the appropriate learning method to meet a development need.

When you're next completing a Personal Development Plan for a member of your staff - try and think creatively.

About the Author

Karen Wise, MCIPD is an Organisational Development Consultant and Business Coach, with over 12 years’ experience of working in Human Resources roles up to and including Director level. Karen now runs her own consultancy and coaching business, with a particular interest in maternity and wellbeing coaching.

Karen is a co-founder of Minerva’s Mind: an organisation that supports women to become leaders in their own lives, by exploring what leadership means today in every area of life. (www.facebook.com/minervasmind)

Karen is based in St Albans, 25 miles north of London, England, where she lives with her husband and two small children. She is also currently undertaking a Masters Degree in Coaching / Coaching Psychology at the University of East London.

Hiring: Candidate Tip - Part 1

Off late I’ve started getting a lot of questions from readers/candidates asking for advice regarding hiring/recruitment. More specifically about interviews, resume, cover letter, etc. A few questions do intrigue me enough to write a post with my reply. However, many questions are repetitive in nature and hence might seem redundant. I would be glad to answer your queries my mail, but here’s another way that I would go about answering those queries, on Twitter, using the hashtag #candidatetip. To make it easier for folks who are not on Twitter I’ll post those tips in parts on this blog. Hope that these tips would prove helpful.

So here’s the first part of the tips. Let me know your thoughts.

1. It’s best to avoid 'Comic Sans' as a font for your resume.


2. Do you mention your blog on your resume? I suggest you don't. Here's why: http://tinyurl.com/p9lxav.


3. No, you don't need to put your zodiac sign in your resume! Unless the role specifically asks for it. Really. Why would you put it there?


4. If you give 3 different email ID’s on your resume, the employer can choose to send their mails to any one of them or to all three ID’s! Be sure to check all mail in all your ID’s.


5. Maybe its time to get yourself a Skype a/c. Employers still aren't willing to spend on travel yet. It’s one more way to reach you!


6. If you have a preferable time to take a call but don't mention it in your resume/cover letter, your telling the employer your ok to talk anytime.


7. Don’t waste space in your resume by writing too much about your current employer. Maximum of 2 lines along with the official website should suffice.


8. You can't compare YOUR job offer with your friend's, even if both are from the same company. You just raised a big Red Flag! Here’s a post on this.


9. It's ok to reject a job offer. But keep the Company informed. You don’t join elsewhere & then call them. You just burnt a bridge.


10. Employers can reach any ref(s) from companies listed on your resume. Reaching ref's from present company is a no-no.


11. You don't call your prospective employer @ 10:30pm on a Sunday nite (unless its scheduled). Especially NOT when you're drunk! Silly? It has happened.


12. If you think you are the smartest one in the room (and have enough reasons to believe so). Then chances are you're in the wrong room. Get outta there. Go learn.


13. If you're scheduled for a telecon, DON'T switch-off your phone @ that time. If you can't take the call, just inform.


14. If you are not 100% keen on the role, don't take the job. It will catch up soon and only get worse.


15. When an employer asks for a week to revert, that’s 7 days. So don’t send mails/call during that week asking for an update. Reach them only if you have something critical to share. It’s ok to follow-up after a week.


16. Don’t give an email address that doesn’t belong to you. Even if it’s your spouse’s. It's sends out a wrong signal.


17. Keep your references informed about the call from prospective employers. If they aren't kept informed, it'll look like cold calling! If I had to do that, I wouldn’t ask you. Right?


18. On mails/any other form of written communication, if you get a name 100% wrong it’s ok. Apologize and get to know the correct one. Don’t tell it’s a typo error!


19. Put your cell on silent mode/switch off during an interview. It's basic manners. If you have to take a call in between, keep the interviewer informed before the start of the interview.


20. The excitement of getting highly paid for a job you don’t like; will eventually not sound exciting a year down the line. Really. You are better off not taking up that offer.

Stay tuned for more tips. And yes, if you are a hiring manager, recruiter or in any other role that requires you to hire candidates (and you are on Twitter), please use #candidatetip while tweeting. It would help candidates who could use those tips for better results.

Is this a bold move?

You decide that after reading this post.

There’s enough written about managers. I’ve written about it myself here, here & here. But this post is completely devoted to a much avoided/evaded part of a manager’s role: Giving Feedback

So here’s a suggestion I have: Why don’t we make giving feedback a part of a manager’s performance review? Make it objective and quantifiable.

Why should we go with this approach to management? Here’s why:

- It will make managers give feedback. Simple. Right? Yes, sometimes a basic request for feedback isn’t met. At times it’s completely avoided too.

- Feedback can be tracked and reviewed along with other parameters as part of the manager’s performance review. It would help identify areas in which the manager might need help, when it comes to giving feedback.

- Takes away the opportunity to just give hints and get away with it. The recipient knows exactly what’s been said.

- Avoids arguments. When the feedback is clear and precise it doesn’t give room for arguments, debates or worse, assumptions!

- When you make it quantifiable, the manager’s focus will be on giving feedback with enough data.

- Makes it a direct interaction between the manager and his direct report. Often, feedback is passed through other leads/employees. An approach that always backfires.

- It helps set-up a clear communication channel between managers and direct reports. Performance parameters can be set openly and discussed without any discomfort.

- Expectations can be set, managed and communicated effectively.

- It takes away the assumption that giving feedback is a one-time effort.

- Once the feedback is in place, it would help with formulating measures for improving the direct report’s performance. Follow-up can be well planned, tracked and executed easily.

- PIP (Performance Improvement Plan) will make more sense than before. Since feedback is captured on a regular basis and hence helps avoid surprising the recipient.

Thinks to watch out for:

- Managers need to be trained before implementing this move.

- Feedback is to be given only about work. Shouldn’t be a personal judgment of the manager.

There could be many more instances to look out for. That’s exactly why a training session would be helpful. Is this a bold move? Maybe not. It’s a matter of companies implementing and manager’s accepting it. Yes, Change is Strange!

Do you think your organization is ready for this? Are you ready for this? Do you manage people? Are you a leader? Do you report to a manager who gives feedback? Do you report to a manager who hates giving feedback? Would love to hear your thoughts. I’m open to receive feedback!

Learning on the job (flipside)

Scene from a recent shopping experience at a sports shop:

(Backdrop: There’s a sale at a particular sports shop. My wife went there in the morning and picked a t-shirt for me, which ended not being the right fit. During the purchase the sales guy at that time/shift had assured my wife that she could exchange it later if I didn’t like the fit/color. And off course only on terms that there was no damage caused to the goods purchased. Understandable. Later in the afternoon we tread our way back to the store to exchange the Tee and we end up meeting the sales guy from the next shift. Here’s what happens next…)

My wife: Hi Joe (sales rep), I picked this t-shirt this morning, for my husband. The fit isn’t right for him and so I would like to exchange it for another one.

Joe (thinks for a minute): Was this bought from the sale?

Wife: Off course, that’s what I told you. Here’s the bill for reference.

Joe: Ok, let me check.

(Runs to his pal in the store to check and then returns)

Joe: Sorry, that was the last one and we don’t have another one to exchange it against. You’ll have to keep it (offers no other solution, lost his chance to ‘WOW’).

Me: (!!!! Momentarily dumbfounded): Ok. Since it doesn’t fit me well, I cannot wear it. So could I buy another t-shirt not from the sale but at retail price and I’ll pay you the difference?

Joe (thinks again): Sorry. No. You can’t do that! Since your wife bought this at the sale, not from the retail section. You’ll have to keep it (Second chance, to give an alternate solution. Lost.)

Me (slightly agitated): Why can’t I exchange it for another one that costs more? You’ll stand to gain more money. (Makes sense, right?)

Joe: Sorry. I was informed (by his colleague) that the system doesn’t allow us to do that.

Me: So you telling me you can’t exchange it because a system that you are in control, doesn’t let you do it! Ridiculous. Can you please check with your manager?

Joe: (Again runs off to check with his manager & returns. Smiling.): Yes, he says you can exchange it. Sorry for the trouble, I’m new here and learning on the job.

Result: T-shirt exchanged for another one from a retail section and difference amount is paid. The store stood to make more money and we got a better Tee.

I’m a big fan of learning on the job. Don’t get me wrong when I tell you that learning on the job is dangerous. There’s a powerful downside to learning on-the-job.

- You really learn to approach things in a way your job-mentor would. No? That’s at least until you start thinking about the process or procedure to do certain things.
- Most often there’s no written document to refer too. So you are called upon to use your judgment/discretion in handling queries.
- There’s no budget allotted for employee training and development. So your sources of learning are colleagues, books (self-funded), networking sites or blogs. Sources that are FREE. The challenge is in identifying who is authentic and worth your time.

So if you are an employee asked to learn on the job: Here's a few things that you might want to watch out for:

- Ask questions. Listen. Ask questions. Listen…continue the learning process.

- Understand the escalation hierarchy. If your colleague (peer) is your max ceiling. It’s trouble. Get access to leads/managers.

- USE your discretion. The Company either tested you for it or knows you are good with using discretion. Don’t stop that.

- Are you allowed to make mistakes? Or do you get pulled up for each one you make? Helps you understand the Company’s stand.

- Go ahead and network furiously. It's the best way to help you learn on the job. Are you on FaceBook, Orkut, Twitter, LinkedIn? No? Start now.

- If you are uncomfortable/don’t like roles that require you to learn on the job. DO NOT accept the job offer. You'll end up doing a big disservice to yourself.

- Last, don’t forget to use Common Sense. It’s a powerful tool. (Sorry, that was sarcastic) But far too many of us tend to ignore it.

If you are an Employer promoting learning on the job: A few pointers that you could take into consideration.

- First, hire right. Many people like documentation at work that they could follow during their initial days. And if you don't have any, then maybe such people will have difficulty with the learn-on-the-job working style. You are better off hiring people who have had prior learning-on-the-job experience.

- There will be mistakes. Don’t get too critical. Better off giving constructive feedback. It’s part of an employee’s learning curve.

- Allow them to question. It will help tweak/build your processes and also understand their thinking methodology.

- While hiring, tell candidates that the role requires them to learn on the job. And dig deep during interviews to know their comfort with such an approach at work. Interviews that are situation-based would help immensely.

- If you have hired right, you’ll have employees who know to use discretion. A powerful skill-set. Especially when it’s learning on the job. Allow them to use it.

I’ve been a one-man HR team for long enough and have mostly learnt on the job. I’ve noticed that people are either comfortable or they are not, when it comes to learning on the job. It’s best to decide whether you want to take up a role that requires it.

I would love to hear thoughts from readers who have built their careers in similar fashion. Do share them.

Cost is just a negotiation tool!

Yes, it is. Especially when hiring highly skilled talent and its true in a good market or otherwise. Agree? No? Read on.

The reason I bring this up is because as much as we deny, cost is a major driving factor in hiring. And needless to say, managers want the best bang for the buck. That’s understandable. But don’t we know that you always get what you pay for? Yet for some reason hiring managers aren’t willing to buy that reason. If you believe that’s right. It’s easy to understand why a candidate will not take a sub-standard offer even in a bad job market. If you still persist with a sub-standard compensation, the candidate might eventually relent, but only until such time that the market improves. And when that happens, you can be sure that he’ll be in the first one out.

Think about any product you recently purchased that you felt was overpriced. Then you started using it only to realize that the benefits were so awesome, you even recommended it to your friends. That’s the ROI on cost. It works the same way with hiring too. The initial high price is long forgotten once performance kicks in. The tough and laborious part is in identifying who makes that cut, a.k.a, the selection process.

The flipside is obvious. Things don’t work out and you’re forced to move on. Now, far too many hiring managers take that path since it’s a safer option to assume. Have you ever known a manager who’ll pass a chance to tell, “I told you so!”? Never. It’s also the very reason that many hiring managers generalize the selection process and avoid taking that extra effort in hiring right. The ones that take it get the rewards. They hire high caliber candidates who go on to build better products/services.

So how do we resolve this issue?

As a candidate:

Understandably you are looking for a job real bad. But wouldn’t hurt to take a step back and evaluate your career too.

- Don’t accept that offer just because you want that job. Really. When you realize its not what you want to do (maybe a few months into the job) you’ll end up hurting your career in more ways than one.
- Your ex-colleague got paid more. That’s not reason enough to ask for the same amount. Build your own case.
- Taking up a job offer to let go later has its own consequences. It could range anywhere from burning bridges to hurting future references. Absolute no-no.
- Prepare yourself with enough information which will help you decide better. Make a checklist of things that you cannot give up, while others maybe you can. Which bucket does cost/salary fall under?
- When you go prepared with enough information on how much you are willing to negotiate, it helps to stay away from low-balling yourself!
- Also, it’s critical that you sell your value. If you can’t communicate your worth to them, they’ll do that assessment for you! Really.

As an employer :

Answer this.

- Does the role really need very high caliber candidates?
- Or are you hiring high caliber candidates just because they are now easily available at lower cost?

Your real answer will determine whether you have a problem on your hands or not. If you ignore it now, it will catch up sooner than later. Maybe a few months down the line. The only person getting fooled otherwise is still you.

Here’s the final take: Cost is just a negotiation tool. The one who knows to use it well, ends up getting the better end of the deal.

It’s now obvious. right?

Guest Post: "Gee! I'm the boss now!"

Author: Vidooshak

Talking to some younger cousins the other day, I was impressed by their desire to become a ‘team lead’ before the age of 25. Another spoke of how she wanted to quit because of office-politics and harassment at work. On further probing, the said harassment was described as being overlooked for promotion despite a lofty work experience spanning 9 months, and a manager expecting her to resolve customer issues even if it meant staying late at work.

For some reason, the definition of having ‘arrived’ includes becoming a manager—the earlier the better. Unless you have a whole bunch of people reporting to you, unless you can just pick up the phone and delegate, unless you can spend the day “in meetings” or on the BlackBerry there is just no satisfaction to all that hard-work. Whether in a call-center or technical field support, a software development firm or a sales organization, moving up (or away?) from being the first in the line of fire to a more responsible (a.k.a people-management) role seems to be an over-riding goal. In many cases, 5 years seem to be the maximum a person is willing to sacrifice doing the so-called grunt work.

While attending customer calls as a network engineer in other countries, I would often need to collaborate with much older people-- also there as network engineers. These were people getting their hands dirty unclogging the Internet drains, even through late 30’s or early 40’s, while here I am barely out of college, wondering what I did wrong to be stuck with a field job. They were not only happy to roll up their sleeves and get cracking; some of them consciously ‘avoided’ a managerial role. That got me thinking about our obsession with becoming a manager, especially in the Indian context.

I often hear about the frustrating ‘culture’ at top Indian service companies. Despite making billion dollar revenues, people complain about the bureaucracy at these companies and how stepping-up to a task can be suicidal. Everyone has many managers and everyone is probably managing many. The focus is on following process and looking over your back, rather than looking forward to a personal achievement.

A system with good managers that know how to get things done is an obvious asset. You will see excellent compliance but rare (if any) new ideas and better ways to do the same thing. When more of the ones that can think, imagine and innovate decide instead to delegate, it leads to process stagnation. That could be one reason why despite our IT success, we are still waiting to see a successful software product or true MNC born out of India, 20 years after the technology boom started.

Global MNC’s often expect us to design or service for a competitive market. Ironically, this privilege comes when you are in a managerial role, without the luxury of interfacing closely with that market as in the field-engineer days. Being isolated by layers of staff, one relies upon the experiences of a past life to spend fruitful time in this ‘ivory tower’. This can get difficult unless you’ve spent a substantial number of years in the trenches, facing enemy fire and honing survival instincts for just such a day.

In the old days, public sector units had a long and structured path to middle-management. In a career spanning 40 years, it could take 15 to 20 years before you got your first charge. Such organizations had their own flaws but the subject-matter expertise and depth of these individuals had few peers. A testimony to this is the plethora of retired oil and telecom PSU executives that have led India’s largest private oil and telecom firms to worldwide glory. Their mettle was forged in the slow fire of uncertainty, lack of resources and a life of research before Google. Today’s ‘flat organizations’ and smaller headcounts tend to reward you with this responsibility before you know it.

The more varied, wicked and vicious the early years, the better prepared one gets for handling monsters creeping at us when we occupy the hot seat. Until then, any ‘office politics’ is all in the mind; the so-called harassment is nothing more than rich experience. As for the manager ‘status symbol’, that obsession won’t die easy. India does not yet have a culture where patents and published research fetch you respect. So, college kids will continue to book their Honda Civic using the first paycheck. And hope they can delegate the driving to a junior, in a few years time.

About the Author:
Vidooshak (blog name) writes his blog over at Baingan-lores. According to his blog, he's a fond Papa who vents politically incorrect awe at India Shining inspite of Bangalore Whining.