Launchpad Power Point Presentation

Report
Accelerate Your Ambition With…
One Small Step For Employees…
One Giant Leap For Dimension Data…
Introduction
What have we really been “hearing” from our executives?
Are we positioning ourselves to meet our Strategic Objectives in the long
term?
1. Have great people – Are we investing enough in our people, and are we
handling “talent” in the right way?
2. Build client value – Are we maximizing our potential?
3. Accelerate service growth – Are we doing enough to prepare ourselves
for new opportunities?
4. Be Operationally Efficient (GSC) - Are we being operationally efficient
over the long term, or just the short term, with long term repercussions?
Do we really feel positively about what we do?
Are we really the CEO of our own career?
What Is Important To Employees,
and What Makes Them Stay?
Patterns Seen in Large Companies ($500 Million+
in Revenue), and Accompanying Data
Data on Potential Employee Churn
Deloitte published it’s biennial global study on employees working for large companies in January 2013, with the
following findings:
–
–
80% of employees plan to stay with their employer for at least the next year, compared with only 35% in 2011 - a 45% swing.
However, 46% of the surveyed employees have either moved to new jobs (9%), received a promotion (22%), or changed roles (15
%) with their current employers during the past year.
Employee turnover intentions vary by industry, but according to survey results, the industry with the second highest
risk of losing talent is ‘technology, media, and telecommunications’ with 23% of employees stating that they
intended to leave their employer.
- ‘Surveying the Talent Paradox from the Employee Perspective’; Deloitte
What Makes Employees Stay or Go?
Overall, 31% of surveyed employees reported they were not satisfied with their jobs. With 31% unsatisfied and only
20% planning to leave, there is an 11% delta of unsatisfied employees planning to stay.
Employees who are planning to switch companies cited “Lack of Career Progress” (37%) and “Challenge in their Jobs”
(27%) as the two top factors influencing their career decisions.”
Of all employees surveyed, “Lack of Career Progress” (27%) would be their top reason for leaving.
WHAT WOULD
ENCOURAGE YOU
TO LOOK FOR NEW
EMPLOYMENT?
FIGURE 2. MY JOB
MAKES GOOD USE
OF MY TALENTS
AND ABILITIES
Retention by Tenure
Data from Deloitte’s study indicates that employee tenure is negatively correlated to turnover
intentions, and that the longer employees stay with a company, the less likely they are to look for a new
job:
•
•
85% of employees who have been with their current employers for 5< years plan to stay for the next year.
Only 66% of employees who have been with their company for <2 years say that they intend to stay for the
next year.
Job satisfaction also was lowest during the one-to-three year range:
•
•
•
27% of employees in their first year strongly agreed that they are satisfied
13% in the 1-2 year range said they were satisfied
18% in the two-to-three year range.
That data positively correlates to data on how employees feel their skills and abilities are being used:
•
•
•
29% of employees in their first year agree that their skills are being utilized.
13% 1-2 year range agree that their skills are being utilized.
18% 2-3 year range agree that their skills are being utilized.
- ‘Surveying the Talent Paradox from the Employee Perspective’; Deloitte
FIGURE 5. DO YOU EXPECT TO
STAY WITH YOUR CURRENT
EMPLOYER FOR THE NEXT 12
MONTHS OR LONGER?
Generations, Turnover, and Trust
Age itself also appears to be negatively correlated with turnover:
– 26% of Millennials stated that they were planning to leave their current
employers over the next year.
– 21% of Generation X employees (ages 32–47) said they planned to leave.
– 17% of Baby Boomers said they planned to leave.
However: “While Millennials have the strongest turnover intentions, they
are not the most aggressive job seekers. Generation X employees are the
most active in the talent market, with 58% of those who intend to leave
reporting that they are currently seeking new employment and another
22% reporting they have been looking during the past year. “
Furthermore, these results were reversed when discussing trust in
leadership:
– 62% of Millennials reported that they trust their corporate leaders.
– Only 52% of Generation X and 54% of Baby Boomers said they trust their
corporate leaders.
Based on this data, the X and Y generations effectively balance out. Thus,
the primary indicator remains tenure, not age.
The Importance of Leadership
and Coaching
“To unlock a team’s abilities, a manager at any level must
spend a significant amount of time on two activities:
helping the team understand the company’s direction and
its implications for team members, and coaching for
performance. Little of either occurs on the front line today.”
- ‘Unlocking the potential of frontline
managers’; McKinsey & Company
Leading People, Day-to-Day
In one of McKinsey & Company’s recent studies on the state of
frontline management, managers were asked where they were
spending their time. The overwhelming response was that most
managers felt that they were not effectively leading and coaching
their teams, and were too mired in other tasks to do so effectively:
Why Are Managers Having Difficulty?
That same survey revealed a unanimous lack of approval in front line
management’s performance, but Senior and Middle/Lower management proved
divided on the cause:
•
•
Nearly 70% of senior executives are only “somewhat satisfied” or “not at all satisfied” with the
performance of their companies’ frontline managers.
81% of frontline managers say they are not satisfied with their own performance.
- ‘How Companies Manage the Front Line Today’; McKinsey & Company
The ‘War for Talent’ vs. The ‘War to
Develop Talent’, and the ‘Talent Paradox’
The data displayed in the previous slide displays that Executive
management primarily believes the issue is rooted the “Attitudes
and Behaviors of Frontline Managers” and “Quality of Available
Talent”.
“The ‘Talent Paradox’ [is used] to describe talent markets with
apparent shortages of skills and leaders in labor markets with
available—and willing—workers that do not have the required or
expected skills and experiences. That’s the employer view of the
talent paradox. The employee view of the same paradox is focused
on workers making do where they are, accepting less job mobility
and, in some markets, less compensation. At the same time, we are
seeing growing employee focus on the meaning and social impact
of their work, professional development, and opportunities to
attain greater levels of responsibility and challenge.”
- ‘Reframing the Talent Agenda; Deloitte
What is the Impact on Our Clients?
We can’t rely on peer-to-peer coaching, as there are too few rewards and
promotions available to most of our employees, and that inspires
competition. This is supported by Cornell economist Robert Frank, who
was recently quoted:
“…many organizations are essentially winner-take-all markets, dominated by
zero-sum competitions for rewards and promotions. When leaders implement
forced-ranking systems to reward individual performance, they stack the deck
against ‘giver cultures’.”
-
‘Givers take all: The hidden dimension of corporate culture’, McKinsey & Company
The resulting void of coaching and cooperation has profound effects:
“The effects of poor frontline management may be particularly damaging at
service companies, where researchers have consistently detected a causal
relationship between the attitudes and behavior of customer-facing employees,
on the one hand, and the customers’ perceptions of service quality, on the
other.”
- ‘Unlocking the potential of frontline managers’, McKinsey & Company
What Is the Alternative?
At best-practice companies - the 11% of companies where frontline
management spends most of their time directing and managing
others, emphasizing coaching, and developing their direct reports:
• Frontline managers allocate 60-70% of their time [with their
employees], much of it in high-quality individual coaching.
• Executives are much more likely to be satisfied (39%, compared with
20% overall) with the performance of frontline managers.
• Training is more likely to focus on developing leadership skills, so
managers are better prepared to take on those responsibilities.
• Managers are empowered to make decisions and act on opportunities.
“The bottom-line benefit is significant, but to obtain it companies
must fundamentally redefine what they expect from frontline
managers, and redesign the work that those managers and their
subordinates do.”
- ‘Unlocking the potential of frontline managers’; McKinsey & Company
Framingham-Specific Data:
What our People Think…
We surveyed three different demographics in the
Framingham office with one of two different anonymous
questionnaires, and compared their responses.
1) Survey One was sent to Framingham GSC employees,
and non-GSC employees.
2) Survey Two was sent to managers.
* We had a 77% participation rate from those in the Framingham office who were sent a survey. We feel this
is a substantial enough sample size that we can draw strong conclusions from the numbers, as standard
deviation should be minimal, and the impact of the residual population is likely to be on the low side of the
standard error scale.
Non-Management: Do you feel that Dimension
Data is invested in building your career?
GSC Staff
Non-GSC Staff
Non-Management: Do you feel that other Dimension Data
offices have more advantages in terms of career growth?
GSC Staff
Non-GSC Staff
Non-Management: If you were offered an opportunity to be coached and/or
mentored by a member of Middle or Senior Management, would you participate
if it required a time investment of 2-4 hours a month?
GSC Staff
Non-GSC Staff
In our experience, a small, but growing number of companies are recognizing the
importance and value of putting development and formal training at the center of their
talent efforts.
- An observation in ‘Reframing the Talent Agenda; Deloitte
Non-Management: If Yes to the previous question, do you feel
that you would feel more connected to Dimension Data, and
more happy in your job? Choose no if you said no to Question 4.
GSC Staff
Non-GSC Staff
“I have more information and understanding about where I'm going. I want to
progress with the organization--and know why--and this program has helped
me understand how to progress and what I'm progressing toward.”
- A personal account from Helen Cousineau; ‘Mentoring Success: How to Make It Work For You; Deloitte
Valuable Considerations For Data Set 1 & 2
External studies show that there are two primary and nearly
equal ways to retain key employees:
A. Offering promotion/job advancement opportunities
B. Offering additional financial compensation
Advancement opportunities can help retain talent without
providing additional compensation.
FIGURE 4. WHAT WOULD
KEEP YOU WITH YOUR
CURRENT EMPLOYER?
Management: Would you be willing to commit 1-3 hours a
month to coaching a subordinate on how to pursue a new
role?
Framingham Managers
“A favorite part of my job is helping other succeed in their own jobs, Mentoring is a good
way to do this. Also, taking others through situations is like giving myself advice through
someone else.”
- A personal account from Annette Winkelman; ‘The Mentor and the Protégé: How Mentoring Helps Them Both’; Deloitte
Management: Would you only be interested if it
was someone pursuing a role in your LOB?
Framingham Managers
They showed me how to be a good mentor, how to set up the relationships and goals, how
to be an advocate. We set up regular meetings and now meet every other Friday.”
- Annette Winkelman; ‘The Mentor and the Protégé: How Mentoring Helps Them Both’; Deloitte
Management: Do you feel we do enough to enable
our staff to be “the CEOs of their career?”
Framingham Managers
Valuable Considerations For Data Set 3
“The key is to help frontline managers become
true leaders, with the time, the skills, and the
desire to help workers understand the company’s
direction and its implications for themselves, as
well as to coach them individually. Such mangers
should have enough time to think ahead, to
uncover and solve long-term problems, and to
plan for potential new demands.”
- ‘Unlocking the potential of frontline managers’; McKinsey & Company
Introducing…
What We Propose For New Hires:
Phase 1 – “Starting Blocks” (0-6 Months of Employment)
• New Hire goes through “New Hire Training” / On-boarding
• New Hire attends Starting Blocks
Phase 2 – “Building Blocks” (6-18 Months of Employment)
• Employee attends Building Blocks to improve knowledge of LOBs and
their functions.
• Employee goes through at least one round of PDP with their direct
manager, and reviews the DD Job Framework (DDJF).
• Employee goes through ratings with their manager, who will suggest
any DDU trainings necessary to improve proficiency in current role.
Phase 3 – “LaunchPad” (18-36 Months)
• Employee completes “Knowing Yourself” and “Exploring Career Paths” on
HR portal
• Employees enters “Launchpad” Coaching and Mentorship Program
1. Mentors, Coaches, and Apprentices all must “Opt in”.
2. Coaches and Mentors complete “Coaching: Harvard DD11” on DDU.
3. Employees are assigned a Coach based on what role/LOB they are
targeting. Coach focuses on recommending qualifications.
4. A Mentor is assigned based on compatible personality traits.
Middle
Management
Lower
Management
Non-Management
Senior
Management
Mentor
Upper
Management
Coach
Middle
Management
Mentor
Coach
Mentor
Lower
Management
Coach
Conclusion
We are giving employees some tools, but not guiding them on how to use them.
Our people are our greatest asset, but we are not utilizing the knowledge and
experience of our own management. We need to empower them to help “pull up”
those under them.
This program is not designed to guarantee people promotions, but it is structured
to help those who know where they want to be to get there, and to help those
who lack direction to find one.
Many people are not good at identifying their own strengths. We need to help
them do so, and position them to meet our future needs, so that both our
employees and company can develop.
Furthermore, it is cost ineffective in the long-term to not help our employees grow
and expand their ability to contribute to our Strategic Initiatives, and then incur
the cost of replacing them when they leave the company because we have not
invested in or challenged them.
Our employees want this, our management is willing to help us do it, the company
benefits in the short- and long-term at no cost, and avoids future losses.

similar documents