The Optimized People Development System

Author: Tim Waldo

  • A New Kind of Savvy for Middle Managers

    A New Kind of Savvy for Middle Managers

    Savviness is always a moving target. After all, it is an exercise of continuous learning requiring time, effort, and a determined focus. The dictionary defines savvy as having or showing perception, comprehension, or shrewdness especially in practical matters. For frontline supervisors and managers in manufacturing, artificial intelligence and automation are demanding the ability to exercise these powers in a fast-moving convergence.

    Savvy Times Two

    Knowing people, how they behave, navigate change, absorb information, etc., has always been a necessary capability of successful leaders. They utilize their understanding of people, their comprehension of situations, and their communication skills to guide the team to success.

    For manufacturing managers, being technically savvy has also been a requirement. They should understand the product, the processes, the tools, and the equipment, to help the team achieve its goals. Add to this the urgency to acquire knowledge of AI and automation and how these technologies can impact operations.

    Now, in this new era of AI, tech savviness has a new people component. A new leadership challenge that encompasses comprehending not only how people interact with technology, but how they react to it as well. Envisioning how to protect them while encouraging them to use technology to its fullest. And being shrewd enough to manage the team when new “superstars” arise as AI champions.

    Successful AI implementation and ROI have eluded many organizations because they failed to see the necessary combination of tech savviness along with people savviness. Jay Titus, in a recent article for Industry Week, made the case for retaining middle managers and augmenting their training in the age of AI. The article highlighted that adoption and scaling of AI have technical aspects, cultural aspects, and structural aspects. As he rightly concludes, “…something that executives can mandate from above, but middle management is ideally positioned to carry out.”

    Leaders at all levels should be prepared for the fact that there will be significant changes to the behaviors of organizational systems as these two disciplines evolve and combine. Changes that are crucial to effective technology adoption. Ripe opportunities for a new approach to savvy leadership and opportunities to optimize the most important of organizational systems, the people development system.

    Guiding Change

    To carry out this mandate, this new savviness requires mid-level management to become proficient in important skills that may well include some new topics for many of them.

    They should be well versed in systems thinking so that they can understand how AI and automation will impact operations and the people involved in those operations. There is also trust building. These managers can nurture trust in two directions – trust in the technology and trust between team members as new AI powered agents and assistants join the team.

    Consider the case for middle managers with well-developed AI fluency. Imagine a machine operator who is interested in AI. That operator goes and learns about AI and wants to use it to improve their work, so they talk with their supervisor. At a minimum, the supervisor, to be effective in this scenario, would need to understand what is being discussed. The supervisor would also need to understand the implications to the operation if AI tools or decision-making support were deployed.

    That same supervisor would need to know how to lead in other nuanced ways. For example, if someone’s identity is threatened by an AI agent that suddenly makes knowledge and information available to everyone, the tech+people savvy manager will need to understand these implications and armed with sound training as a coach, be able to help this team member with the transition.

    Savvy Orchestrators

    Titus portrays middle managers differently, encouraging organizations to consider their role as evolving with technology. “When middle managers have the skills to understand the technology, to redesign workflows to take advantage of it, and to coach their teams toward higher-quality outputs, AI stops being a question mark and becomes a powerful strategic asset.”

    The organization’s people development system is the vehicle for helping these leaders evolve into this new era of technology and ensuring that the culture is people centered. The PDS can enhance a new type of savviness for these managers while helping them understand the impacts on people when adopting technology. Increasing the probability of benefiting from technology adoption.

    Organizations that are able to look past the cool parts of AI and automation adoption – the tools and capabilities – and see the effects on people and organizational systems will recognize the value of developing a new set of leadership competencies in their mid-level management ranks. Abilities that will create a new kind of tech+people savvy leader.

    Image AI generated.

  • Successful AI Adoption and Motivated People Both Require This

    Successful AI Adoption and Motivated People Both Require This

    It is a complex endeavor, hard to quantify, easily destroyed, and we have been unable to improve it for 30 years. And now, it’s getting more difficult to manage, even as it continues to be one of the most vital elements of the success of our systems. Sustaining employee engagement has proven to be tough, and in the era of AI it is increasingly essential that we figure it out.

    The irony is that successful adoption of AI and employee engagement share similar requirements. Both need more human centricity – better connections between people, ensuring that people find their place, and effective ways to align purposes (both the individual’s purposes and the organization’s). Fortunately, most organizations already have a system to help with these. The key is to optimize that system to the mutual benefit of the organization and the team.

    Connecting

    Relationships are the currency of employee engagement. Yet, this idea often gets lost in the AI discussion. In most of the conversations I’ve had recently with manufacturing leaders and AI proponents, they are laser focused on the new tools, applications, and capabilities of the technology.

    When I ask about their team and how adopting technologies might affect their people, many tend to hesitate, some are genuinely surprised by the question. They are thinking deeply about how AI will impact production systems, logistics, engineering, and other vital systems. But the system that gets very little attention is the most important one.

    Morag Barrett penned a recent article for Fast Company addressing the impact of AI on relationship where he made this observation, “The quality of connection between human beings is the single most important variable in every system we’re worried about, and it’s the one we’re all still treating as optional.”

    An organization’s people development system encompasses their internal workforce development efforts. It’s the system that promotes relationships, communicates to system stakeholders, and helps create culture, among many other functions. Importantly, it is a system that can be improved upon. This is the premise of the OPDS framework.

    After improving system functionality, the second level of optimization for the OPDS is People Centeredness where stakeholders explore and improve the system’s capacity for developing people, where learning organization concepts are applied, and where the work of relationships is emphasized.

    Graphic by ChatGPT

    This is the level of improvement where leaders consider if the PDS is supporting the uniquely human work that is required to make the most of AI and automation. The key questions here are: does our PDS really serve people well? Does it foster engagement on multiple levels? Does it promote the human in the loop aspects required by AI adoption?

    Belonging

    Being engaged at work has many facets. This is part of the complexity involved. Some would say that the relationship between employer and employee is a type of social contract. But it’s more than that. Engagement is an emotional decision that drives commitment and investments of time, energy, and dedication. It’s more than just an agreement of you pay me; I give you this.

    Addressing the fear that AI could potentially disrupt the work-for-wages balance, Barrett asked, “What happens to dignity, purpose, and identity when contribution is decoupled from compensation? Work has never been just about money. It’s been about belonging to a team, a mission, a community of people who need what you bring. What happens when that belonging is no longer guaranteed?”

    Being mutually committed and relationally connected underpins belonging. The optimized PDS intentionally fosters a culture where people know they are valued and know they share some responsibility for the wellbeing of the organization and for the people they work alongside. Everyone makes sure everyone belongs. That takes strong leadership, great communication, and a shared determination.

    Purpose

    The pursuit of purpose and meaning is an age-old search; it has never been owned by one generation. However, what has changed is how the search for these has moved up the ranks of priorities in the realm of work.

    Mark Twain famously said, “The two most important days in your life are the day you are born and the day you find out why.” It seems that work has always played an outsized role in defining one’s purpose and in the age of AI, purpose is one of many constructs under threat.

    The optimized PDS comprehends that both the organization and the individual team members are motivated by purpose, so the system strives to know what those purposes are and help every team member in their journey toward their purpose.

    System stakeholders have frequent conversations with members and track their progress to ensure the connection to purpose. There are structured learning opportunities, for example through a personalized individual development plan. Retention efforts and performance management efforts help support the journey as relationships within the team provide encouragement and accountability.

    Being connected, having a sense of belonging, and understanding one’s purpose helps to create a virtuous cycle. Interestingly, both the organization and the individual value this cycle. Each is encouraged and strengthened by this same reenforcing loop.

    Employee engagement has always been a challenge. AI will not make this easier, it will make it more challenging, and it will do so at a faster pace. The organization’s people development system is a vital part of the solution to greater employee engagement. It is the vehicle that ensures that humans are always at the center of the organization’s strategy, even when that strategy is heavy on the tech side.

    Feature Image generated by ChatGPT

  • Unconventional Choices in the Era of Artificial Intelligence

    Unconventional Choices in the Era of Artificial Intelligence

    It seems premature to use the word unconventional at this stage of the AI adventure, the conventional being far from established. However, nascent standards are taking shape, driven by fast developing trends and the din of voices from all areas of life intent upon forcing certain choices as this technology encroaches.

    It feels, in some instances, as though choices are being made for us. AI is here to stay; therefore, we will use it. AI will wipe out jobs so figure out how to adapt. The choice to use AI or not, for now is still a choice. Although, that too seems to be changing. Nevertheless, there are some choices, coming soon, that humans will have to make. AI can’t make these choices for us.

    It’s About Time

    One of the main selling points of artificial intelligence, often the first one rolled out, is that it will free people from certain tasks giving them something that is wholly separate from the amazing output of the technology – time. We will all be freed from the burdensome stuff that sucks up our time. But, freed to do what, exactly? What will we do with this newfound time? How will organizational leaders guide these choices?

    Choosing what matters most

    In AI conversations, the thing that seems to be talked about most is greater productivity; we will have more time to make more stuff and deliver more services. But do we really need more stuff? Can our systems adjust so quickly to a rapid increase in volumes of products or a tidal wave of more services? Most businesses and markets will face serious constraints from multiple directions, limiting the amount of rapid growth the system can allow or sustain.

    Perhaps the first unconventional choice is to not focus on AI to super charge productivity but instead seriously explore how this innovative technology might promote better outcomes for humans. If we suddenly have more available time, we could build stronger relationships which might lead to greater team chemistry, stronger collaboration, and a level of creativity we’ve never experienced.

    Such a choice would allow us to invest this brand-new time we’ve discovered into an expanded concept of people development and the wellbeing of every team member. Imagine having a team of individuals each one thriving holistically – at home, at work, in the community – all choosing to engage and contribute because they are less stressed, more excited about the future, and generally feel like they are a part of something special.

    Today, employee engagement is miserably low and has been for 30 years. Key demographics are missing from the workforce and show no interest in reengaging. Work related stress is high and getting higher. Workers and employers seem more suspicious of each other than ever before. And the effects of these symptoms are mounting. Making more stuff is not going to change this dynamic.

    Choose to See AI differently

    Could AI help reverse the deteriorating rate of engagement? Maybe, if we can see past the parts that have a lock on people’s attention. Certainly, the tools, the capabilities, and the possibilities AI offers are great, but its potential for organizations to build a different kind of workplace culture is far longer lasting.

    What if AI is a once in a lifetime opportunity to recenter our attention, an opening allowing us to make a much-needed course correction? AI has the capacity to augment human capability. If we choose to see it as such. AI seen from this perspective changes the conversation. It promises to offer intriguing solutions to vexing problems by fixing some foundational ills.

    Instead of choosing to pursue artificial intelligence for greater productivity, maybe we choose the unconventional; to make AI about people. To improve organizational culture that leads to more stable workforces. Maybe we will choose to produce enough high-quality stuff but not so much that it causes damage to other parts of our vital systems. Maybe we choose to unlock greater levels of innovation and creativity by focusing on the human aspects that can do our world some good. Along the way we might even influence what eventually becomes conventional wisdom in a technology driven world.

    Image from Microsoft 365

  • Now vs Next – A Retention Challenge

    Now vs Next – A Retention Challenge

    “Let’s get married! After all, we can always get divorced if things don’t work out…” Nothing shouts commitment like a good caveat. Although it’s not a new phenomenon, the trend of “I’m in…maybe” is growing between employers and employees in today’s workplaces. More and more, survival in the current employment environment means keeping options open and viewing your exit as a given, instead of a possibility. Looking for the next opportunity, even as you’re starting a new one today.

    If the mindset is always what’s next, how does that impede team development? If the team doesn’t develop as a committed unit, what happens to employee engagement? The impact of engagement is undeniable, which is why an optimized people development system, one that seeks to understand those it serves, is so important.

    It is easy to understand how this dynamic has developed. This is self-protection in an era where the meaning and purpose of a job continues to change. In a thought provoking Forbes article, Nirit Cohen shares some compelling reasons for these changing dynamics in modern workplaces, “People will not anchor their identity to institutions that do not help them grow. The organizations that succeed will not be the ones that demand commitment, but the ones that remain useful. When work no longer defines who we are, the only organizations that matter are the ones that help us become who we need to be next.” Useful. How does a company remain useful to employees who define a career path so very differently?

    Loyalty went away

    This evolution of attitude goes back further than Covid and AI. Gallup’s annual survey and others show that the trend has been developing for 30 years or more. Even before that, we saw loyalties – from both the company and the employee – began to change back in the 1980’s. When various shifts brought an end to the idea of lifetime employment and a happy retirement with one company. Each party has become expendable in the view of the other. The pandemic and technology only exacerbated the situation.

    Today, people relate to their jobs differently. Cohen opines that, “Perhaps disengagement is not withdrawal so much as diversification. People who no longer define themselves by a single job experience layoffs as a transition between expressions of their capability, not as a collapse of self. The job mattered. It simply did not define them.”

    The article focuses on knowledge workers; however, other industries should pay attention as well. Attitudes toward work tend to seep over boundaries and spread as workers mix and mingle and share experiences and ideologies.

    So, is there a next here?

    “When people can walk away psychologically before they walk away contractually, retention strategies built on fear, prestige, or inertia stop working.” Underneath Cohen’s statement are some simple questions and a challenge; do we know what our retention strategy is built upon? How can we improve our strategy in this area and create significant distance between now and what’s next?

    The obvious starting point is a careful examination of the current retention strategy. Gather the PDS stakeholders and explore the foundational elements of this part of the system (the Talent Stream Map can help with this). What assumptions are at its base? Does the process value individual growth? What adjustments should be made to ensure that these values are embedded into the delivery of retention efforts across the PDS? The team will undoubtedly have many questions.

    Although the article does not address the relational aspects of a job, we know relationships are a vital part of retention. In fact, a great deal of individual growth is supported in and through relationships with colleagues. Relationship building is facilitated through a strong PDS. Coaches that help explore one’s potential and can help team members see what’s next within the organization help keep those members engaged. Look at the PDS and assess the system’s ability to train and deploy a cadre of coaches.

    Teams that tackle meaningful challenges together can also create stickiness. Those charged with leading these teams should be trained in emotional intelligence and should understand that team building is one of their primary responsibilities. Does the PDS support leaders in this way?

    With the new mindset as described, tracking development and growth is another way to promote retention. An optimized PDS uses tools like development pathways to communicate what is expected but also these serve as an effective reminder of their growth trajectory. Development pathways provide a connection between the organization and the individual where both can explore and continually focus on the value each brings to the equation.

    We may not like it, but market dynamics are what they are. Employee engagement is an emotional response, and, in this environment, people seem less compelled to connect and commit at this level. The optimized PDS is empathetic, fosters relationships through coaching and team building, and constantly communicates with team members that the best “next” is right where they are, on this team.

    Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

  • Can Your System Achieve Employee Engagement?

    Can Your System Achieve Employee Engagement?

    For over a quarter of a century employee engagement has been dismal. Difficulty in defining the concept has had a lot to do with this stagnation. However, a shared vision of a truly engaged workplace by all stakeholders is possible with an attentive people development system. A PDS intent upon moving the needle on this stubborn but important metric.

    When the phrase appears, employee engagement generally implies that an individual has a deep level of commitment, a strong willingness to be involved, or a high degree of dedication to being a part of the team and excelling at their work. The word excitement often shows up in the definition, sometimes the word motivation, and happiness might also appear.

    Some explanations seem to border on the concept of achieving a state of mental flow, suggesting that engagement is being fully absorbed by and enthusiastic about the job. Some days, yeah. Some days, no. Several people that I’ve worked with in the past who were very much bought into the success of the company could seldom be described in these terms. Nevertheless, they understood their connection and responsibility to the team, and they did, on a regular basis, contribute a great deal.

    It’s a complicated concept; one that has changed over the years. Tony Martignetti and Moe Carrick, business leaders and authors, compellingly argue that employee engagement is being replaced by a sense of employee connectedness. Pointing out that the move toward connectedness has been driven by social and cultural forces that have obvious impacts in the workplace.

    Along those lines, I prefer to think of employee engagement as a mutually beneficial harmony reached when both employer and employee recognize and accept their responsibility for the success and well-being of the other. It takes all parties to achieve this harmony, and it takes a responsive PDS to promote and protect it.

    A Shared Understanding.

    Since all stakeholders have a vested interest in this, it seems like a good idea to start by understanding employee engagement very clearly. And though it sounds simplistic, getting all PDS stakeholders on the same page is a good first step in building stronger allegiances.

    It is talked about so much in certain circles that it can lead to assumptions that everyone knows what engagement is and how it matters, which is obviously not the case. Getting everyone’s mental models of this vital connection out in the open and agreeing upon a unifying model can reduce misunderstandings and misinterpretations of the concept.

    Leaders of organizations, just like individual workers, have the right to think about engagement what they will and to have certain expectations about what it takes to achieve this state of harmony. There may be very little distance between the two ideals, or there could be a chasm. Alignment of expectations and agreement around everyone’s responsibilities could mean the difference between dismal performance for another quarter century and levels of engagement that are truly beneficial for all.

    How Far Apart are We?

    One of the primary roles of the PDS is culture building. An engaging culture connects people, shares openly, clarifies goals, promotes learning, and ensures that stakeholders share responsibility for outcomes.

    An optimized PDS helps create space for dialog and allows the whole team to debate the definition of engagement and agree on ways to improve it. This falls easily under the training and development function of the system.

    Start by creating small cross functional teams and share the data – turnover, average tenure, survey results, etc. Let the team know how these numbers impact both the organization and every individual within it. Then ask the teams to help improve the numbers. Everyone benefits when these indicators improve and self-interest is a powerful motivator.

    Part of the retention efforts of the PDS should be to bring senior leaders into community with frontline workers through one-on-one coffee breaks, lunches, or small group brainstorming sessions. These are perfect times to bring up the topic of engagement. Ask questions about engagement, extend the dialog created in the cross functional groups. Discuss the roles that each stakeholder plays and then help them play those roles well.

    These interactions are also great opportunities to further explain how being engaged is in everyone’s best interest. Thanks to the proverbial grapevine, these conversations will find their way back to the entire team. Done well, this can feed into other positive conversations, helping to drive higher levels of commitment.

    Of course, this means that the leaders must be educated on those impacts and trained in having these coaching/development conversations. Another job for the optimized PDS! To be effective, leaders must understand how important employee engagement really is and how they impact it.

    Measure it…But Differently.

    Employee engagement is usually measured via a survey asking people about their state of mind at a particular time. Which can skew the results dramatically, depending upon moods, circumstances, and other life situations.

    Instead, look for and measure individual behaviors that tend to be driven by a higher level of buy-in or consensus. These might include:

    • Number of teams/groups individuals have joined,
    • Number of requests individuals make for development opportunities,
    • Levels of development attained (individual development plans are great for tracking this!),
    • Number of ideas generated per individual,
    • Involvement in and contributions to events (improvement events, community-facing events, peer support events, etc.),
    • Relationships developed (social connections with co-workers, coaching, etc.),
    • Willingness to be part of initiatives,
    • Changes in attendance patterns,
    • Personalization of workspace.

    Keep doing engagement surveys, one on one encounters, and peer evaluations to assess the harmony. Even better, be creative in identifying other more meaningful metrics, realizing that being engaged influences several behavioral and personal performance indicators. Share these measures liberally with the team, encouraging them to value these outcomes.

    Old Systems Will Struggle.

    According to Martignetti and Carrick, “To build connected organizations, leaders must shift from driving engagement to designing relational ecosystems and from motivating individuals to strengthening networks.” Here’s a pressing question; can the organization’s internal people development system support this shift in thinking?

    Look more closely at the system level for opportunities that can move the conversation in the right direction. Systems thinking is one of the three guiding principles of the Optimized People Development System framework because the PDS is a dynamic system and difficult to see. It is also the most important organizational system for fostering connections and relationships.

    Employee engagement has languished far too long. Establishing a shared definition and innovative measures of employee commitment and their wellbeing can help move the numbers in the right direction. An optimized PDS, one that fosters a new mindset around engagement and connection can help keep that movement going.

    Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay 

  • Time to Challenge the One-Sided Employee Engagement Push

    Time to Challenge the One-Sided Employee Engagement Push

    Stickiness hasn’t changed in the last quarter of a century. According to Gallup’s long running, annual surveys, employee engagement has remained around 30% and active disengagement around 17% since Y2K was a thing. Gallup’s surveys and others confirm that getting people to consistently participate at a higher level desperately needs to be improved.

    Employee engagement is a prime area where improvement can benefit everyone. People are frustrated. Money and productivity are being lost due to low engagement and the negative impacts of a disengaged workforce show up at multiple levels beyond just the workplace.

    Why haven’t we been able to move the needle on the levels of engagement? It’s not like we haven’t been trying. I, and many of my workforce development peers, have been preaching to employers for years the need to create an engaging workplace. And most have been sincere in their attempts to do this demanding work. Still, we hear very regularly that these same employers are struggling to find people who want to work, people who will stick around long enough to see the benefits and advantages of being on the team. Some, including the MikeroweWORKSFoundation, have lamented the loss of the will to work. Maybe we’ve been focusing too much on only one side of the equation.

    Limits to an Engaging System

    Each team member is a system, just as the organization is a system. When these two systems are integrated, both are impacted. So, the probability of success by the organization in building an engaging environment will be limited if the newly integrated systems do not share a common goal around, or even a unifying understanding of the purpose and value of work. If the individual system is unaware of how to engage, unable to engage, or unwilling to engage, how successful can the organizational system’s attempts at engagement be?

    Focus on the Other Part of the Equation

    Here’s a potentially controversial solution – let’s help individual team members appreciate the many values of work and why engaging at work is in their best interest. There are distinct and powerful reasons for individuals to pursue being engaged at work.

    Beyond the obvious economic benefits, work is good for the health – physical, mental, and yes, spiritual health. A good day’s work influences positive feelings toward life. Workplace stress is well documented. How much of this might be relieved with a healthier view of work? Family life benefits when things are good at work. A different mindset about work could help promote this.

    Work is an integral part of the human experience. Always has been, always will be. But it goes beyond just the part of work we get paid for. The theme of work runs all the way through the Christian scriptures starting with the first verse of Genesis. I’m no religious scholar, but a cursory search indicates that work is pretty prominent in many other belief systems as well. We need to help people take a holistic view of work. The whole person comes to the job, so the whole person should be taken into consideration, including the spiritual side.

    Other Benefits

    In future posts we’ll unpack some more details of the benefits and values of work. Looking at the definition of engagement is helpful. So too the way we measure it. Engagement at work is very much an emotional reaction. How do we feel about the work, the people, the mission, and vision of the organization? It is emotionally intelligent for everyone to engage at work. How might we bring EQ into the solution to this challenge? Other topics might find their way in as well. Your thoughts and insights could add immeasurably to this exploration, so I invite you to opine as we explore.

    For years we have, in my opinion, pushed employee engagement mostly from the employers’ side of the equation. Certainly, there is still work to be done by employers; however, the other stakeholders must also take responsibility and do their part to engage and be engaged.

    An Optimized People Development System can be a strong vehicle for change in this effort. Examining the concept of engagement while looking closely at the internal system we depend upon to find, train, and retain people can offer strategic opportunities for improvement. Improvements to the system and the philosophy under which it operates could certainly help the organization and each individual within it, stick together longer over a shared appreciation for the true scope and amazing values of work.

    Image by Mohamed Hassan from Pixabay

  • Patience is a Virtue, and Soon, a Crucial Leadership Skill

    Patience is a Virtue, and Soon, a Crucial Leadership Skill

    It’s ironic that a technology that drastically speeds things up will require people to slow down in many areas of their work. Leaders in the AI era will have to develop something that we’re not typically known for…patience. In a sped-up world, the ability to play the long game will be a needed leadership trait.

    This Fast Company article is a great read for leaders, highlighting the need for different ways of thinking in the fast paced world of artificial intelligence. This new approach to leadership will also require ways of measuring certain outcomes differently. Outcomes that may take some time to materialize.

    Most business leaders have been conditioned to chase short term measures – this week’s production numbers, this month’s sales, this quarter’s financials. Generations of managers have been trained this way, and this has filtered down and out across the workforce.

    McDearmid captures the frenetic tension quite well. “For years, we filled our calendars, stayed visible, and kept the machine moving. Our worth was measured in hours, output, and presence. It had to be. Humans were the system, and the system required us to keep it running. We didn’t question it because that was how things got done.”

    The repetitive stuff was the work, and the measures by which the work would be gauged. Fueled by numbers relatively easy to get, requiring minimal patience. However, the human work of curiosity, collaboration, and changing mental models can be slow to unfold. Exploration can take time. Intentionality too.

    The article describes the directional change that leaders will need to make. How their focus must change from tasks to direction setting, seeking clarity for the initiative, and clarifying vision with the team, to name a few. It also points to the fact that leaders will need to be able to think differently about how long it will take to see some important deliverables.

    “AI has taken the repetitive pieces off our plates and has given us back the chance to think, create, and build with intention. It gives us room to lead.” In this new, redesigned space for leadership the ability to ponder and contemplate could be useful skills. Leaders with imagination and a gardener’s mindset will have an advantage. Systems thinking will be highly prized. Because ushering slow moving change through a system previously built for speed will require a shift at the system level.

    It may seem counterintuitive to work on the skill of slowing down in a sped-up world. However, learning to wait calmly for important and often subtle changes is a skill that itself takes time to develop. The sooner we start training leaders to slow down and wait, the faster we can realize the advantages of AI.

    Image by Annette from Pixabay

  • A Strong Start to a Long Journey: A PDS Sweet Spot

    A Strong Start to a Long Journey: A PDS Sweet Spot

    We often use the journey metaphor when talking about starting a new job. And if you’ve ever had a bad start to any journey, you know how the beginning can impact the whole trip.

    TalentLMS and BambooHR recently presented a research report titled Next-gen Onboarding: Redefining the New Hire Journey. While this paper points to generational differences and to the prominence of AI, looking closely at the findings can also help leaders identify system designs and system behaviors that, with targeted improvements, could help people stay for longer journeys.

    Ensuring that new team members get a good start is what makes the onboarding portion of an organization’s people development system so very important, and a prime area for system optimization.

    6 questions to ask of your PDS.

    1 – Is our onboarding approach still heavily orientation focused?

    The paper points to the need to invest more time and effort into this early stage. If your approach to integrating new hires is speed oriented – get it done and get to the workstation – then you are probably going to continue to struggle to keep new hires. Orientation is different from onboarding. Many organizations miss this opportunity. Spread the onboarding process out over a long period of time and drop the firehose.

    2 – Is our onboarding process informed by and shaped by our retention and training processes?

    “65% of employees view onboarding as the start of a continuous learning journey…” So, what happens after onboarding? Does the initial phase of the plan connect seamlessly with the other PDS systems – retention, training, performance management?

    Speaking of that continuous learning journey,

    3 – How does the new hire know how we will help them grow?

    If you’re not using development pathways, now’s the time to start. Share the map of the journey since they are at the starting point. Having an AI assistant involved at this point could be highly effective.

    The survey found that during the onboarding process, 39% of new hires admitted to having second thoughts about their decision to join the company. For the youngest generation it was 49%.

    4 – Does our onboarding approach instill confidence?

    Full customization to suit each person may not feasible, but some adjustments that consider generational differences could help drive success rates higher. An exploration in this area could be very fruitful.

    5 – Does our PDS support growth for new hires?

    According to Talentlms.com onboarding can often fall short. “When it comes to skill-building, new hires are rushed, left without follow-through, and handed training that doesn’t match their role. If companies want new hires to grow, they need to design onboarding that actually makes room for it.”

    Aligning with the onboarding, an optimized PDS supports growth by using personalized development pathways. These help communicate the potential growth, keep team members on track and motivated to achieve the growth, and ensure that all parties benefit from the growth.

    6 – Is the communication in the recruiting process supporting onboarding success?

    The conversation that began at the recruiting stage should grow and take firm roots in the onboarding process. Showing the prospective team member a template (the development pathway) is also a great start to a successful journey. Communicating with the other PDS stakeholders so they can continue the conversation is also vital.

    The onboarding process can often be overlooked when considering continuous improvement opportunities for the people development system. This is a helpful report for teams searching for ways to make improvements to this critical system. It validates the need to understand the supporting elements of the full people development system. Here’s to starting more journeys off well.

    Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

  • The Same Kind of Same as Me

    The Same Kind of Same as Me

    Ever see yourself in the reflection of another generation? This sometimes happens to me when I see a survey about the differences between the age groups. Recently I saw one by ResumeTemplates.com on Gen Z workers.

    I am not from Gen Z. Along with everyone else though, I have been placed within an age group, one that has progressed through life with all kinds of expectations. But I have chosen the ones that I value. Experiences and circumstances have shaped all parts of my life. And I have adapted to what life has presented. The generation that raised mine was motivated by a few different things, some of which I rejected. And I now understand that everyone from any generation can claim these statements as their very own.

    Actually, we’re not all that different

    I don’t see anything in this particular survey that I could point to as something my cohort didn’t do at some level. A few yelled at the boss. A few cried at work. Most of us complained about the boss, been unprofessional, etc., etc. Maybe the percentages were different.

    A quick search will proffer many surveys over the years comparing Boomers to Gen X, Gen X to Millennials, and Millennials to Zs. Seems like they all focus on the differences and try to explain the reasons for those differences, justify the changes in attitudes, or rationalize the shifts in behavior.

    Surveys help us take a pulse of how things are going and how people feel, but they also tend to feed a narrative that can make people believe that the generations before and after them are somehow unique. Often, they cater to confirmation bias, confirming that something is dreadfully wrong with that bunch!

    Been there, done that

    On occasion though, observations drawn from these studies do more to show the similarities between generations. “Gen Z doesn’t need to suppress who they are,” says Chief Career Strategist Julia Toothacre. “But learning to read the room and adjust accordingly is what builds long-term credibility.” Yep, we had to learn this lesson too. Every generation has. Perhaps we could help each other?

    It could be beneficial and constructive if we focus less on our differences and try harder to recognize similarities and learn from each other. Someone should do a survey that asks, “How many similarities are there between this generation and those others?” Surely, it’s been done before. If so, please share. I’d love to see them.

    An opportunity for the PDS

    Comparisons are a thing, as we’ve seen, and since this is a blog about workforce development, here are four ideas to optimize your people development system to help generations take advantage of their similarities and their shared values.

    1. Avoid highlighting differences! We would certainly benefit from identifying as one team with diverse gifts and levels of wisdom instead of saying things like, “We have four generations on our team and we’re all different!”

    2. Intentional team building. Activities that bring generations together in cross-generational, cross-functional teams connecting different perspectives in the spirit of solving problems and learning from each other.

    3. Bridge the divide with coaching. Train up some coaches on this specific topic and turn them loose within the team. Ideally, you’ll have coaches from all generations!

    4. Communicate. Ensure that everyone on the team understands that the goal is to identify and capitalize on commonalities and similarities across the whole team.

    The divide between generations is largely a self-inflicted malady. An optimized people development system can go a long way in providing a cure and building bridges to connect all ages represented on your team.

    PS…Props to the movie Same Kind of Different as Me. It’s about seeing the value and purpose in other people. Check it out.

    Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

  • Gen Z Thinks Differently, 3 Ways Your PDS can Still Get Their Attention

    Gen Z Thinks Differently, 3 Ways Your PDS can Still Get Their Attention

    Your system is open. Your people development system that is. Being an open system means that it is influenced by and therefore obliged to react to outside signals and influences. Some of those powerful influences include the mindset and motivations of generations of workers.

    Randstad asked some Gen Z technology workers about their work preferences, finding some differences and a few similarities with other generations. Fortunately, the feedback provides useful insights for all employers as they consider how modern people development systems might need to evolve in the future.

    This next generation of workers has different values, different ideas about work, and, like every generation before and after, will be needed in the workplace. Which means that the systems used to find, train, and retain them must adapt or at the very least, find some way to accommodate.

    Knowing that these young workers are thinking about life and work differently, here are three ways to optimize your PDS to tap into their potential.

    A grain of salt.

    Don’t paint the entire generation with the same brush. There will be those that like to work with their hands, those that prefer to be in community with other workers, and those that are inclined to stay longer than a couple of years. Influences from other generations will still be seen in younger workers.

    Optimize your people development system to tailor job postings that speak to them, job descriptions that inspire them, and recruiting methods that communicate clearly. Work on finding those outliers, they are out there.

    Focus on growth.

    The desire to learn and grow is not exclusive to this generation. What is different about their approach to work is their willingness to move quickly if they perceive that growth is limited. This is borne out again in Randstad’s survey results.

    Reenforce PDS tools such as personalized development pathways and career ladders to communicate opportunities early and often. Augment these tools with strong onboarding practices, robust training initiatives, and focused performance management efforts.

    Lean into technology adoption.

    Gen Z has never known life without technology. They expect the workplace to maximize automation and all things AI. Industry and the marketplace are also driving adoption of technology, so the PDS has to do the same.

    The optimized PDS will ensure that technology is used across all five of the functional areas of the system that supports all generations of workers. A workplace that utilizes generative AI and agentic AI will have a PDS that not only uses AI tools, but will teach people how to think about technology, how to think with technology, and how to use it safely and effectively. Outside influences are powerful forces that challenge PDS stakeholders to adjust and adapt. The system itself will need to change to attract and retain talented workers in Gen Z.

    Image by Franz P. Sauerteig from Pixabay