CIPD - Blogs

Meet Mark Temple

Bingleby — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 18:03:00 GMT

The second interview for the new CEO which Sally Gulliver and charismatic headhunter Harry Aske carried out was in a discreet room tucked away in the basement of Global Blancmange.

Sally told me about it afterwards. I was indisposed, having had a number of strictly medicinal Baby Bios the night before. I never before realised the ruinous effects of certain medicines, especially taken with enthusiasm.

Mark Temple loped in to meet them. He was outlandishly tall, standing over six five in his executive socks. Bespectacled, he had (reported Sally) a voice like a hamster who had just been having a particularly riotous time on his wheel: high-pitched and enthusiastic. He shook hands with them both as if their arms were levers he was able to pump for information. ‘So tell me, Sally, how long have you worked here? Any good, is it? Can’t believe you lost so much share in Q2 to Universal Semolina – their proposition’s terrible. Reception’s a bit tired, isn’t it? Do people like working here? Not sure I would. That’s mostly why I want the job.’

They looked at him, baffled. Harry cleared his throat, tentatively. ‘You wouldn’t want to work here – so that’s why you want us to employ you?’

>‘You wouldn’t want to work here – so that’s why you want us to employ you?’

‘Yes! I wouldn’t want to work here, don’t see why other people should. So need to do something about it! How can we make the employees want to work here? How can they make our customers want everything we do? The two fundamental questions! Well, that, and where’s my coffee. Where is my coffee, by the way…?’

They got him a coffee.

‘So,’ he continued, without obviously pausing for breath, ‘tell me what you see your main issues are, and the kind of person you’d like to sort them out. Got any sugar? Daft question to ask in a pudding factory. Hang on, what’s in here..?’

Before they could stop him, Mark Temple, coffee cup slopping in his hand, marched out of the interview room and straight into the meeting room next door, followed hastily by a spluttering Harry Aske, and a protesting Sally Gulliver. ‘Hello! What are you doing? That looks interesting. My name’s Mark – these good people are attempting to interview me. Good God, is your pipeline really that dire? Suppose I shouldn’t be surprised, with research showing the Global Blancmange brand has plunged 12.8% in the last five months alone. What’s it like working here? What would you do, if you were in charge? Don’t suppose you happen to have any sugar?’

Next Friday: Meet Annie James

@BinglebyinHR

Bingleby was confiding in Richard Goff

Meet Robin Mayhew

Bingleby — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 18:39:00 GMT

‘If you don’t mind me asking,’ said Harry Aske, the gently charismatic headhunter who was helping Sally Gulliver find Global Blancmange a new CEO, ‘why are you carrying that pot plant, handsome beast though he is?’

I was beginning to warm to Aske. Never realised he had such a discerning eye.

Sally reddened. ‘Well, he doesn’t get out much…’

We were in an obscure, discreet office, about to meet Robin Mayhew, the first candidate. A knock on the door and in he came: tall, urbane and faintly grizzled at the edges. He shook Sally and Harry’s hands with unrelenting force before inviting them both, irrelevantly, to sit down. ‘So,’ he began, ‘Tell me why you want me.’

Sally gave a startled hiccup. ‘Well, we’re not entirely sure we do, yet…’

Mayhew made a steeple of his fingers, often a sign of fake piety. ‘I talked to Geoffrey. Place sounds a hell of a mess. Reminds me of Runny Ices, where I worked back in the 90s.’

Harry bravely tried to take control of the situation. ‘Tell us about your experiences of turnaround situations.’

Mayhew’s eyes glinted with a tiresome kind of nostalgia. ‘You name it, I’ve turned it around. I remember when I was CFO at Crunchy Cakes plc…’

We then endured almost two hours of anecdotes, very few of which seemed to bear any relevance to the role, or even the questions asked. Halfway through I was longing for my window-sill. If this is the price you humans pay for mobility, you can keep it.

Finally Sally drew the conversation to a close. Mayhew stood, barked ‘I look forward to hearing from you,’ crushed their hands again and left.

Harry puffed out his cheeks. ‘Well, that was an experience. Could you work for him…?’

‘Never mind me, I’m not sure anyone could.’ Sally screwed her eyes up in a bid to be as fair as possible. ‘I suppose, trying to see some positives, he has a certain non-nonsense style about him…’

‘Remember,’ said Harry Aske gnomically, ‘There’s only the smallest of margins between ‘no nonsense’ and no sense.’

Sally chuckled. ‘Let’s see what next week brings…’

Next Friday: Meet Mark Temple

@BinglebyinHR

Bingleby was confiding in Richard Goff

Asian takeaway. By Deborah Moon, HR Consultant

Reward blog — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 10:00:00 GMT

As readers of this blog will be only too well aware, the issue of executive remuneration, in both the private and public sectors, has been the subject of much public, political and media scrutiny and debate. Various measures and reforms have either been implemented or proposed designed to provide greater openness and transparency, improve and enhance understanding and decision-making and achieve a greater sense of equity and fairness in remuneration matters. It is within this context that the report Salaries for a Capable and Committed Government, published at the end of December, covering the outcomes from a review of the basis and level of political salaries in Singapore, makes interesting reading. Although the report contains specific information concerning the remuneration for particular political appointments, it also identifies a number of underpinning themes and key principles which will resonate with those of us currently reflecting on the future direction of executive pay in the UK.

The review has been led by an appointed committee, comprising representatives from the private sector, labour movement and social sector. It takes account of the views and perspectives of a range of different stakeholders, including the public, and has been supported by Mercer (Singapore) Pte Ltd who provided independent remuneration data and technical expertise to the review committee. The role and composition of remuneration committees and the involvement/contribution of other stakeholders and remuneration consultants has, of course, been one of the topics of debate in the UK, with a variety of views expressed on this issue.

The overall approach and resulting recommendations of the report are underpinned by three key principles:

salaries need to be competitive to ensure people of the right calibre are not deterred from stepping forward to lead the country;
there should be a “discount” in the pay formula to reflect the ethos of political service;
there should be a “clean wage” with no hidden perks.

Particularly interesting is the provision for a performance linkage, not only with that of the individual appointment holder but also with the socio-economic progress of the country’s citizens, particularly those of average and lower income levels (perhaps not something our politicians would be too keen on in the current economic climate!).

In terms of pay benchmarking, the report recommends this be based on a wider pool/range of professions, industries and sectors than that used previously and which is considered to be simple, transparent and easy to understand. It provides for a pay mix and structure comprising both fixed and variable components, with recommendations also made regarding pension provision and medical benefits in keeping with the principle of a “clean wage”.

A job evaluation methodology was used to evaluate the job size of political appointment holders, enabling an informed assessment of potential comparators and relative remuneration levels, taking into account the required calibre and experience, responsibilities and impact and scope of decision-making. Drawing meaningful pay comparisons within and across sectors is something we have struggled with in the UK, for example, the somewhat arbitrary references to the “Prime Minister’s salary” as a suggested benchmark for senior management pay in the public sector.

The report reflects on the contribution and importance to national economic success of a capable and committed political leadership, with a need to secure talented individuals who are willing to serve their country. Any “financial sacrifice” should not be such that it deters individuals from taking on political leadership roles. This is a consideration we need to be alert to in the UK in relation to public sector pay, with due regard given to the challenges faced and demands placed upon the leaders of such organisations. If pay levels are perceived as inadequate then it is likely be harder to recruit and retain individuals of the required calibre, a point identified in Will Hutton’s report into fair pay in the public sector, published last year.

The report also highlights the practice of operating a “clean wage system” where salaries are fully accounted for, set at a competitive level but with no “hidden perks and privileges”, contrasting this with other countries where less transparent arrangements and difficulties in control and accountability have been subject to criticism.

Reading the report, the following points emerge as being of particular interest to the current debate within the UK:

the importance of relevant, robust and reliable benchmark data to inform pay decision-making;
the need to take account of the particular organisational context and for there to be an appropriate fit between reward practices and broader culture, aims and objectives;
establishing a clear performance link, with meaningful indicators and target rates to ensure accountability for particular roles and responsibilities, and keeping these under review as conditions change;
ensuring there is an appropriate balance between the variable and fixed pay elements of the remuneration package;
providing flexibility in pay arrangements to recognise experience and seniority both in initial appointments and for future promotions;
reviewing overall remuneration arrangements at regular intervals in the light of prevailing economic, social and political considerations.

The report reflects on the reasons for Singapore’s success, including the importance of taking a long term and strategic perspective, making careful and considered choices and investing for the future. Are these principles ones which will help us ensure an informed and rational debate regarding executive pay within the UK?

An interesting alternative on executive pay. By Clive Wright, Hyperion HR Ltd

Reward blog — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:18:36 GMT

It was Blaise Pascal who wrote in 1660 “I made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter.”

I felt this way when I was writing this blog. I wanted to write a short punchy piece on the alternative proposals to restrain executive pay but the more I looked into it the more proposals I found.

You can’t read a newspaper or turn on the television news these days without someone criticising executive pay. In a television interview with Andrew Marr David Cameron said it is wrong for executive pay "to keep going up and up and up" when the companies have not been very successful. He told Andrew Marr that such awards were "frankly ripping off the shareholders" (although he omitted to say that if executives got paid less maybe the employees could get more).

On 19th January he said in a speech that "popular capitalism" should allow "everyone to share in the success of the market" and criticised an "out of control" bonus culture in the City.

David Cameron said that the average pay of FTSE executives went up by four times between 1998 and 2010, and some executives had been rewarded highly despite a conspicuous lack of success and that some had even received high payments on failure or, seemingly, resignation or dismissal. Possible remedies suggested by him have been shareholder votes, employee representatives on the Remuneration Committee, more transparency on exec pay and publishing ratios of CEO pay to median or lowest paid employees

These suggestions will be formalised when Vince Cable publishes the government response to their consultation on executive pay this week.
And in case anyone thinks that this is an issue being tackled just by the government, Ed Miliband has given his proposals to tackle high executive pay include increasing transparency by simplifying remuneration packages, proposing that companies should publish a pay ratio between the highest paid executive and the company median or average and the government could publish a league table highlighting the biggest pay gaps. Accountability could be promoted by putting an obligation on investors and pension fund managers to disclose how they vote on remuneration packages. And Labour also wants a repeat of the bank bonus tax - to increase "fairness”.

To put some facts on these arguments, figures in a recent a Business Department discussion paper stated that, "over the last 12 years employee earnings have grown 4.7% on average per year compared to 13.6% for FTSE100 chief executive officers". Or in another context, in the year up to April 2011 bosses' pay rose around 10 times as fast as most other people's pay.

Vicky Wright in her blog for PM Magazine does not think that any of these suggestions will work and that legislation is not the answer. John Cridland, director-general of the CBI, agrees that legislation is not the way to address the issue.

But Deborah Hargreaves of the High Pay Commission thinks that “Having an employee sit on the remuneration committee would help break open the closed shop and put some grit in the wheels”. I agree that this would be an interesting way to address the issue and disagree with those who say that the employee will not have all the information necessary to make the relevant judgements (it’s not beyond the wit of man to make sure they have it) and those who can’t see a way of electing the representative. Whichever way the employee representative is chosen it’s got to be more democratic and transparent than the existing process to choose the non-execs to sit on the remuneration committee!

But let me now look at this from a different perspective.

Nick Clegg wants to grow a “John Lewis” type economy with more employee share ownership.

A recent report from Roffey Park states that company directors have a “distorted” view of their success and reputation compared to less senior managers in their organisation. And this leadership institute’s latest Management Agenda report says that Board members are “out of touch” with lower ranks in their perception of how effectively change is managed.

“For the second year running, the Management Agenda findings suggest board directors are out of sync with the concerns and issues facing managers at all levels beneath them,” said Michael Jenkins, chief executive of Roffey Park.

“Their disproportionately positive views doubtless reflect their greater control over strategy and operations, but there is no excuse for senior leaders being out of touch with their people.”

And as we all know, companies must prove to employees that remuneration management for employees is robust and well managed, especially at the executive level.

So let me suggest an alternative approach to resolving the executive pay dilemma and the disconnect between executives and employees. Let’s amend the Companies Act to require listed companies to hold an AEM as well as an AGM. The Annual General Meeting is a chance for the owners, the shareholders, to meet with the Board, get their thinking on the business, question the Board and vote on important issues. How about making it a requirement that companies hold an Annual Employee Meeting, perhaps in each major location, say over 500 employees in one place? The CEO and Chairman would be required to explain the strategy, the business results, proposed investments and to make a detailed presentation on executive pay, the rational for it being at the level it is, the bonus, LTI and pension payments and the added value that the executives have brought to the company to justify the awards.

As well as having a moderating effect on executive remuneration, I’m sure that the communication and feedback on all aspects of the business would improve employee engagement.

Stop Press; I see in the Sunday newspapers that there is a further proposal, from the investors this time to limit the fees of remuneration consultants. This might be the most challenging proposal of all, especially given the change agenda above and even more so if it is included in the requirements for transparency!

This blog was written on 22 January and therefore before Vince Cable's announcement on 23 January 2012.

The Great CEO Hunt Begins

Bingleby — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 08:28:00 GMT

Sally Gulliver had been seeing a lot of Harry Aske, the personable, dishevelled headhunter who was helping her find a new CEO for Global Blancmange.

I wasn’t sure I approved or not. I thought I probably did. Although it did not seem unwise to reserve judgement. Especially until we saw who he came up with for the role…

Steam from the tea in Harry Aske’s mug formed lazy question marks in the air of our office as the two of them reviewed their shortlist.

‘So: we’re down to three. Sir Geoffrey’s come up with Robin Mayhew, and as Chairman, his view’s significant; plus Mayhew has a good track record…’

‘…very good, but of course we won’t favour him simply because the Chairman recommends him,’ Harry pointed out gently. ‘After all, chairmen have been wrong before.’

‘No no, of course not. But he’s a very strong candidate: very much a blue chip cv, lots of FTSE experience at CEO and COO level…’

‘He’s certainly worth seeing. But I’d question how much turnaround experience he has. I think you need a CEO who can turn a business around, and take people with them as they go…’

‘… which as we know is a hell of a trick to pull off. Whereas Mark Temple does have experience of that, and you say he’s got a good track record of engaging people. But he hasn’t got too much top job experience, and absolutely none in FMCG. In fact, he’s mostly financial services, which is a completely different beast.’

‘And then there’s Annie James. Lots of FMCG experience, quite a bit at CEO. Seems hungry. Keen.’

‘And of course it would send a hell of a message to appoint a female CEO. There are few enough of them around as it is.’

Harry frowned faintly. ‘Completely understand that. And I think Annie would be very god, having placed her before, but it’s vital we appoint the right candidate for the organisation.’

Sally frowned faintly back. ‘True, Harry. Thank goodness you said that, as I was just about to appoint completely the wrong person for the organisation…’

Next Friday: Meet Robin Mayhew

@BinglebyinHR

Bingleby was confiding in Richard Goff

Bad attitude? By Mark Goodlake, Astellas

Reward blog — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 09:47:22 GMT

The CIPD annual report on Employee Attitudes to Pay makes fascinating reading. I would urge you to take a look.

I was fully expecting page 1, paragraph 1 to tell me that employee pay satisfaction had fallen through the floor, thinking about pay freezes and the like. In fact it was my jaw that hit the floor – over the last four years, pay satisfaction has risen in general. I thought some more about this. I can’t remember a time when employees would accept below inflation pay rises – even in the darkest days of the 70’s, pay rises were typically expected to be inflation plus.

I think it shows we live in extraordinary times where having a job is valued as highly as having a pay rise. And of course mortgage rates remain historically low so if you are lucky enough to own a house, low mortgage payments help offset the pain.

But it also begs the question: do we overemphasise the importance of pay on employee morale, at the expense of other engagement drivers? I dug further into the report and saw that only a third of people were satisfied with their organization’s performance management. That’s worrying. I wonder whether we put enough effort into making the appraisal round valued by staff. Or are we guilty of spending too much time on things employees don’t see as terribly relevant like distribution curves? Shouldn’t we be looking at making the process focus more on what the individual values, like their development?

Perhaps even more worrying is that employee attitudes to their employer have declined consistently since 2008 – people report feeling less valued and motivated to perform. They also feel the way the company communicates is worsening. We know from research that improved employee engagement is linked with improved company success. Whilst improving our reward communication and flexibility is part of the answer, I doubt it is the full story. It’s about getting all the pieces of the engagement jigsaw in alignment – reward, talent management, communication, employer branding and the like.

So what’s my conclusion? Whilst people do of course worry about their pay rise, they seem to be realistic about constraints. But they are likely to be less forgiving of an employer they don’t feel proud to work for. And when the economy does improve – they will be off somewhere else. You have been warned…..

CEOs you can cut out and keep

Bingleby — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 09:32:00 GMT

Harry Aske arrived promptly at 9am. He was well-spoken but not well-dressed, having the instinctively dishevelled look of the intensely intellectually curious.

I watched him as he sat down in front of Sally, reverently nursing a cup of tea. ‘So: you’ve been here at Global Blancmange almost a year now, Sally; and previously you held generalist roles at the DIY chain Bodgemans plc, and in FS, with Basingstoke Life.’

Sally nodded. ‘You’ve done your research.’

‘Now that the entire cosmos is Linked-In, there are no secrets any more, only CVs. So what’s your impression of Global Blancmange, at this stage in its evolution – and what do you think it needs from its CEO?’

Sally proceeded to take him through the company, its most pressing business challenges, its structure, its strengths and its flaws. Throughout Harry Aske listened intently, nodding politely and slurping tea as if explicitly sponsored to do so for some considerable sum in aid of charity.

When they had both finished speaking and slurping respectively, Harry Aske put down his teacup and said: ‘Righto. So what I’m hearing is, you need someone with a more charismatic, frankly more mature and self-aware approach to leadership, who’s going to be able to inspire people here at GB, quickly, to address some pretty major business threats; and who can get the Exec team working together much better, support you to retain some key talent, and revive a pretty tired brand in the marketplace. Am I there, or thereabouts?’

‘Yes’, said Sally guardedly; but I could tell she was being guarded because he was right, and she didn’t want to seem too enthusiastic, rather than because he was wrong. ‘Think you’ve got anyone for us?’

Harry Aske smiled. ‘CEOs you can cut out and keep? Not yet. But we’d certainly like to try. Any chance of another cup of tea?’

Next Friday: The Great CEO Hunt Begins

@BinglebyinHR

Bingleby was confiding in Richard Goff

Is it time to talk about value rather than reward? Angela Baron, CIPD

Reward blog — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 11:06:00 GMT

I have just received a nudge to remind me that it’s my turn to write the reward blog which just happened to occur whilst reading an excellent new report from the Work Foundation (The Skills Dilemma) about the under-utilisation of skills in the UK economy. The challenge says the report is not in up-skilling the workforce but in driving employers to organise work and design jobs to enable people to use the skills they have. Quoting some alarming statistics such as 56 per cent of employees in the hospitality sector reportedly being “over-skilled” and highlighting the difficulties low-skilled, low wage workers have to overcome to progress at least some light is shed on why the UK productivity gap with our main competitors remains stubbornly wide despites a series of initiatives to ratchet up skills.

And why was I reading this so avidly? Because following the work I have been doing over the recent months and years on the value of human capital, career management and sustainable performance - to name a few - I have become more and more aware of the importance of designing work and jobs to ensure that individuals’ efforts and performance are effectively translated into organisational performance. That people are not diverted into activities which don’t add value to the organisation. That long hours, intensive effort and a predilection to agree with the boss is not mistaken for real value adding drivers such as effectiveness, a willingness to acquire and share knowledge, creativity and innovation.

The last reward blogger on this site Glen Jenkins asked if the mantra had changed, if UK bosses have abandoned the notion of employees as their greatest asset in favour of cost control. In human capital terms we all applauded the transfer of employees from the cost to the asset side of the balance sheet, seeing training as an investment and employee capability as a resource to be mined. But maybe we were getting ahead of ourselves if we can still find such over-whelming evidence of under-utilisation of skill and well qualified individuals having to settle for low paid and unsatisfactory work and the subsequent waste of talent and opportunity that represents.

Maybe, just maybe there is scope for a bit of a re-think about how we price work. Maybe rather than seeing pay as a reward for people sacrificing their time, effort and knowledge we should look at the value of people, what they bring and contribute to the business, and perhaps even more importantly the value they bring to society. It has been interesting to read how many people have exempted NHS workers and teachers from a general rant about how public sector workers get more reward for less effort, presumably because they think the educators of the next generation and the guardians of the nation’s health have more value that someone who makes sure we don’t eat dodgy food in restaurants, that our buildings are safe or our streets sanitary?

Maybe thinking about how much value can be extracted instead of how little reward can be offered (or how much can be demanded) might encourage a different mindset which would get to grips with organising work and designing jobs in a more productive way. Maybe we could make the best use of the talent we already have and create career paths where people are enabled to build their capabilities and value rather than capping ambition in a spiral of cost reduction and work intensification. Maybe we could get away from an over focus on the bottom line to build more sustainable organisations and hence sustainable jobs. But as I said just maybe!

New Year, New Everything…

Bingleby — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 16:54:00 GMT

The prediction from our Chairman, Sir Geoffrey Shudder, that a new CEO would start “in early January” was to prove rather ambitious. The person he had in mind turned out to be allergic to cream and sugar – something of a drawback if working for a worldwide blancmange company.

Instead it was Sally’s job to find such a beast, and the search agencies knew it. She came back from her Christmas holiday on 3 January to fifty messages.

‘Hiyaaa! This is Fiona from Plaice & Hope, the premium executive headhunters? We heard you were looking for a new CEO? Let’s do lunch? Be great to see yooo?’

‘Sammy Gulliver: crazy name, crazy guy. Global Blancmange, love that company, always eat your pies. Nick Blade here, I’m your personal account manager at Groovy People™, ‘the search agency with a difference’. We’ve got CEOs coming out of our ears and some of them have got your name on. Call me, Sammy: it’d be cool to connect. Yeah?’

>Sammy Gulliver: crazy name, crazy guy

‘Hiyaaa! This is Fiona from Plaice & Hope, the headhunters? Heard you were a CEO? Lunch? Be great?’

‘Sally Gulliver, this is Tamara Wreak, of Wreak Global Solutions, in Neasden. I can get you a top drawer CEO, fast. I need you to ring me back before close of play, giving me the package in precise detail. I’m on my cell. Let’s get this wrapped up, please. By close of play – I’ll expect your call.’

‘Hiyaaa! This is Fiona, Plaice & Hope? New CEO for lunch? Great?’

The definitively final peep of the delete button rang out consecutively. Then:

‘Ms Gulliver. My name is Harry Aske. I’ve been talking to some people at Global Blancmange, and I’d also like your take on how you think your next CEO should shape up. Sounds like you need someone very different to the previous incumbent. It may be that we can help – we’ve placed a few FMCG CEOs before now, with some success. I don’t do lunch but I do do tea. Preferably in cups. My number follows…’

Intrigued, Sally picked up the phone.

Next Friday: CEOs you can cut out and keep

@BinglebyinHR

Bingleby was confiding in Richard Goff

New Horizons

Bingleby — Fri, 23 Dec 2011 13:19:00 GMT

Sally Gulliver had been called into CEO Martin Simmonds’ office. She was going to be fired. They had never really got on, and now Sally’s attempts to transform the HR function, and the leadership of the company, were too much for Simmonds. I guessed she would be gone within ten minutes.

I spent that time thinking about everything we had shared. I would miss her very much. Global Blancmange needed her; but apparently it wasn’t intelligent enough to know it.

After a while, I realised thirty minutes had passed, and still no Sally. Odd. I started to whistle some Rachmaninov I’d heard over the weekend on The Light Programme, in time with the ticking of Sally’s office clock. Forty minutes. Had they thrown her out of the building without letting her say goodbye? Fifty minutes.

After over an hour, Sally Gulliver returned. To my astonishment, she was smiling. Still, perhaps that made sense: Simmonds, amongst others, had always made life difficult for her at Global Blancmange. Perhaps it was the sheer relief at leaving.

‘Bingleby,’ she said, ‘I have some news.’

‘Ah,’ I said, my leaves flolloping mournfully.

‘There’s been a change at the top.’

I sighed. ‘So you’re off, then. This your last day, is it? Given you the boot, have they?’

>I sighed. ‘So you’re off, then. This your last day, is it?'

She shook her head, slightly embarrassed. ‘Ah, no, not me. Martin Simmonds. He’s been fired.’

My buds bristled with astonishment. ‘Really?? They’ve sacked the CEO? But weren’t you just called in to see him…?’

‘I was called in to his office. Turned out Sir Geoffrey Shudder, the Chairman, was in there, and wanted to tell me first! The consultant Simmonds brought in, and his findings that the leadership here was below standard, was the last straw for Sir Geoff. He’s sent Simmonds packing. Someone new is starting early January!’

One should never, I feel strongly, indulge in schadenfreude. But if the choice was between Sally Gulliver, and Martin Simmonds, there was only one right answer.
Perhaps, finally, it was time to celebrate Christmas. And look forward with genuine relish to the new year…

Next time: New Year, New Everything…

@BinglebyinHR

Bingleby was confiding in Richard Goff

Careers don't wait for Christmas

Angela Baron — Wed, 21 Dec 2011 14:55:00 GMT

It’s Christmas! The halls are decked and the holly already wilting and I get the impression that many people are making the most worried about what 2012 might bring.

From the approach of the Mayan prophesied doomsday of 21 December 2012 to the, rather closer to home, depressing growth forecasts and rising unemployment statistics, we all appear to be taking a “wait and see” approach to the new year.

And this appears to apply pretty firmly in the jobs market. Those in a job are concentrating on hanging on until times get better and those not are taking whatever work they can find just to keep afloat.

My taxi driver the other day told me about his son, recently graduated from a good university with a solid 2.1 and reduced to walking the streets of West London handing out CVs with the message, “how will I ever get any job experience if no one will give me a job?” This savvy young man finally landed a job but one that clearly does not make the most of the talent he has to offer. My own 16 year old A star student is already starting to question the value of a degree if the outcome is “big debt no job”.

The experiences of these young people now will inevitably cloud their opinion of the jobs market in years to come and subtly influence their career choices. The recent CIPD research into career management found that the vast majority of young people rely on family and friends for their career advice. Hence if the experience of that social circle is of opportunity and fulfilment that’s going to be reflected in their advice, but if it is job insecurity and employer rejection their words of wisdom might sound somewhat different.

The same piece of work also revealed a high degree of pent up frustration in the jobs market with many employees, particularly the young, expressing a desire to move jobs but prevented from doing so by a lack of opportunities open to them or worries about putting themselves at greater risk of redundancy and unemployment.

Amid all the uncertainly the old chestnuts of low productivity and low skills have not gone away. The government mantra may temporarily have changed from “more, better quality jobs” to just “more jobs” but to build a high value added economy we still have to address the issues of up-skilling the labour force and ensuring adequate access to development and opportunity for all..

So the challenge for all of us is not just navigating our own insecurities but trying to find a way to keep our best young talent engaged with their education and development and making sure we can build an economy that can use their skills and offer them career enhancing opportunities rather than forcing them into dead end jobs, albeit temporary, that will cloud their future career decision making.

No surprise to see the plethora of initiatives recently announced by policy makers to tackle youth unemployment. What we also need is a bit more support and direction to make sure that those young people can make the best use of the opportunities available to them to build sustainable careers, developing the capabilities and skills employers valuable and the flexibility and employability that is going to equip them to stay out of unemployment for the rest of their working lives.

The CIPD research into careers management can be found at: http://www.cipd.co.uk/research/_managing-careers-organisational-capability

Social media and reward communication. by Adam Sorensen, Worldatwork

Reward blog — Tue, 20 Dec 2011 09:05:29 GMT

I have spent the last few weeks reviewing the workshop proposals for the 2012 WorldatWork Total Rewards conference. It seems that this task always falls right at the end of the year. In many ways, the submissions we receive tell the story of what has shaped the world of reward management in the last twelve months – what we have accomplished and what have been our biggest challenges – while offering a glimpse of the opportunities that will shape our profession in the coming year.

One theme I have seen in a number of proposals is the increasingly important role that social media will have on HR communication generally and reward communication in particular. As someone who still has not bothered to set up a Facebook account, I confess that I am a bit perplexed by the whole notion of social media and what it might mean for the way we interact in an organizational context. On one hand, it seems that social media is merely another communication tool like email, intranet sites, and HR portals. But, on the other, proponents of social media talk about the technology as if it is a true “game changer” that has created a different type of interaction altogether, which makes me wonder if I’m missing something.

What’s interesting is that the majority of the proposals I have seen on the topic are not the usual “finished story” that we often see where a company has taken on a challenge, developed a solution, and is ready to share their success. Instead, HR practitioners seem to be grappling with social media and its implications for their work and are genuinely looking for advice and answers from the larger reward community. Not surprisingly, concerns about privacy seem to dominate the discussion even though practitioners seem to have a “sense” that social media could be a powerful tool in helping both employers and employees communicate more effectively.

Frankly, I’m not sure where the discussion about social media in reward communication will ultimately lead. There are a few companies that are already incorporating social media into their reward communications. Others have taken the other direction and decided not to pursue social media at all. But the vast majority of companies seem to be somewhere in the middle with a sense that there is some as-yet undefined potential in social media but without a clear idea about how best to proceed. While this will probably not be the defining reward issue of 2012, the way we use social media (or not) could have a profound impact on how we manage and communicate about many of the other top challenges we will face in the coming year.

You’re Fired

Bingleby — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 10:56:00 GMT

Monday morning slouches into the office, rain-bothered and bleary-eyed, and – in Sally Gulliver’s case – with the threat of the sack hanging over her.

Not that she knows that yet. As she takes her coat off, I clear my throat and say: ‘Sally. I believe you should sit down.’

She looks at me nonplussed. After a moment, she does so.

Grimly, I tell her what I overhead at the weekend: that CEO Martin Simmonds is determined to get rid of her, and was explaining how he planned to do so to Sir Geoffrey Shudder, Global Blancmange’s Chairman.

Sally’s face turned pale. But before she could say a word, her phone rang. ‘Yes?’

She listened, and then replaced the receiver. For a long and terrible moment she said nothing. Then, her voice husky with anxiety, she murmured: ‘I’ve been called into Martin Simmonds’ office.’

I didn’t know what to say. The only things that occurred to me to say were platitudes: it isn’t the end of the world, what does Martin Simmonds know about HR anyway, and so on. None, I knew, would help.

I confined myself instead to shaking my leaves gently in sympathy and encouragement. Sally, her face still pale, nodded: I think she knew what I was trying to say.

The door closed behind her.

Next Friday: New Horizons

@BinglebyinHR

Bingleby was confiding in Richard Goff

You’re In My Sights, Sally Gulliver

Bingleby — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 09:14:00 GMT

It took the best part of a week for CEO Martin Simmonds to stop spluttering. Even then, he wasn’t exactly winning any prizes for coherence.

‘Can’t believe… astonished… blithering idiot…’

Not quite the words he used, but perhaps that more elegantly conveys the gist.

‘I bring in a top consultant, at great expense, to sort out our basket case of an HR department – and all he does is tell me they’re doing everything exactly right? And then charges me a five figure sum for the privilege!’

On some occasions there are advantages to being a plant. It being the weekend, the Global Blancmange offices were empty. Sally Gulliver would be bounding through the meadows with Nigel, or Philip, or Montmerency, or whatever the hey her latest flame was called (I presume they were bounding through fields; that’s what human couples always seemed to do on TV, so it must be true).

Yes, the offices were empty – except for Martin Simmonds, who was striding up and down the corridors in decidedly unrelaxed casual clothes, ranting into a mobile phone. I wondered who he was talking to…

‘She’s got tom go. She has got to… I mean, she even questioned my leadership style! She suggested members of staff should tell their managers what they thought of them! I tell you, Serge, it was chaos…’

Serge? Some contact on the continent?

And then suddenly I realised. In his haste to justify himself, he was garbling ‘Sir Geoffrey’ - Sir Geoffrey Shudder, Global Blancmange’s Chairman. Simmonds was telling Shudder that Sally’s career with us was over!

On some occasions there are advantages to being a plant. And on other occasions, great disadvantages. Sally was in grave danger: and my leaves were utterly unable to press the buttons on her phone…

Next Friday: You’re Fired

@BinglebyinHR

Bingleby was confiding in Richard Goff

The mantra has changed. By Glen Jenkins, CIPD reward examiner

Reward blog — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 09:16:08 GMT

The mantra of HRM that ‘people are the organisation’s most important asset’ and as such, must be nurtured to achieve competitive advantage has been around for some time. In reward management, this has been reflected in part in the concept of total rewards where reward practitioners consider all rewards in their arsenal and pay is only one element in gaining employee engagement. From this perspective, pay, whether fixed, variable or deferred, is also seen as strategic, an investment that generates returns of increased employee motivation and performance, improved recruitment and bettered retention of employees in support of strategic goals.

However, as growth has stagnated in the economy, so the mantra has changed. The focus and the language of reward no longer reflect employees as assets in pursuit of competitive advantage but more a cost or a factor of production. Pensions are no longer, among other things, viewed as a means of ensuring retention of good, loyal, long serving or scarce staff but are viewed instead as a cost to be avoided or reduced. Moreover, recent comparisons between the private sector and public sector pensions have highlighted the need to cut deferred pay generally rather than use it strategically. Similarly, meeting employee expectations on fixed pay has previously been a key strategic objective in order to recruit and retain good employees. Yet in some circles, no longer is this seen as appropriate or even necessary and for some, blanket pay freezes or rises below inflation have become the norm with the ability of management to act strategically curtailed. Even variable pay that links pay to performance has succumbed to the change particularly when we consider executives. A government discussion document on executive remuneration recently stated that executives are costing too much or don’t provide what they say on the packet. The consideration of any strategic agenda such as paying for talent is thereby diminished.

Why then has the mantra changed, you may well ask? We have been told that employees, managers and executives are now too costly, we can no longer afford them or have the ability to pay them and we must reduce labour costs to save the nation. However, consider government information on the UK labour environment provided by UK Trade and Investment which points out that this year in the UK, labour costs are competitive in both the service and manufacturing sectors and hourly rates for production workers are lower than in many other countries. We also have the highest average hours worked per week in Europe and UK employers make one of the lowest social security contributions. In addition, there is a strong skills base in the UK with an ‘excellent record of attracting major foreign investors from all over the world’.

If UK employees are already so competitive, is this narrow focus on the bottom line healthy. Should we not be focusing more on the uniqueness, innovativeness and quality of our human capital to improve the competitive advantage of UK plc and promote growth? Thinking solely about costs arguably goes against the very core of strategic reward. We have to get back to the original mantra and refocus on people as long term assets and how to further develop them so they can be employed to improve our stagnating economy.

The Trouble with Blenkinsop by Bingleby, the pot plant in HR

christmasblog — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 16:05:00 GMT

If you are not a regular reader of my weekly blog, then quite frankly, I’m shocked. Are you really telling me a talking pot plant has nothing to offer you?

Grudgingly, then, I shall introduce myself. I am a plant of some maturity, currently residing in the office of the Head of HR (one Sally Gulliver), at sprawling corporate Global Blancmange. If it helps your feeble human minds, my voice sounds exactly like Winston Churchill’s. I have no idea why this is: all pot plants sound like him.

And if there’s one time of year I resent, it’s Christmas.

It’s not the jollity, you understand; I’ve always been fond of a spot of jollity. It’s not the decorations (though some of that tinsel can be blinking heavy, you humans aren’t shy of sharing a burden). Nor is it the carols, and it’s certainly not the presents.

It’s the competition.

Look at it from my point of view. I spend around forty-eight weeks a year in triumphant command of my space in Sally Gulliver’s office. And then, in the first week of December, what happens?

Blenkinsop happens. That’s what!

Blenkinsop the Christmas Tree cultivated by Sally Gulliver, nursed all year round in her back garden and plonked in the middle of her office – in pride of place, I might add – for four insolent weeks, as if he had a right to be there. I abhor Blenkinsop.

Why? Well, for one thing, he smells. Humans seem to like the whiff of pine needles but where I come from; it’s the botanical equivalent of B.O.

And I don’t mean to be an intellectual snob here, but to be brutally frank, in our world, trees are the thick ones. They have no class: no interest in art, no – how shall I put it? - savoir faire. All they seem to do is grow endlessly, and drop leaves on you. What’s the point of that? Name me one tree who’s written a symphony; just one. You can’t, can you?

And Blenkinsop’s conversation is soil-crushingly dull. He only gets out of his space at the end of Sally’s garden for a few days every year, so he’s a bit like a freelancer: when he’s suddenly in company, all he does is talk non-stop. What about, I hear you ask? Well, let’s just say that as he spends forty-eight weeks a year stuck in a hole at the end of a small garden in Streatham, staring at a fence, his outtake on life isn’t destined to be sparkling with bon mots. I’d say it’s like watching paint dry, but at least watching paint dry gives you an illusion of progress.

So come on, all you colleagues out there in CIPD-land. Help a poor talking pot plant. What should I do about Blenkinsop?

@BinglebyinHR

Bingleby was confiding in Richard Goff

Roger Stephens and his Astonishing Findings

Bingleby — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 09:00:00 GMT

Martin Simmonds, CEO of Global Blancmange, and Roger Stephens, the consultant he’d brought in to ‘advise’ Sally Gulliver, sat opposite her in her office like two displaced gargoyles in need of a church roof.

I knew how nervous Sally Gulliver was. Roger Stephens was about to present his findings on the HR function, having picked it apart stitch by stitch, and questioned Sally every hour of every day for a fortnight. And it was clear that he had an agenda from Martin Simmonds to undermine or even tear apart the little Sally had so far achieved, and the many bigger ambitions she had for the organisation.

Martin Simmonds leaned back in his chair, folded his hands across his belly and said: ‘So, Roger: how can we transform our HR department into something fit for purpose?’

Roger Stephens didn’t quite respond to this, which surprised me. Instead, he addressed Sally: ‘As you know too well, any HR function worth its salt has to insist on effective, joined-up and open-minded leadership. If the HR function does nothing else (and in practice, of course, it has to do much else), if HR can improve an organisation’s leadership, then you have a function that is entirely fit for purpose.’

A frown started to steal across Martin Simmonds’ face like a slug in the wrong garden.

Roger Stephens continued: ‘The leadership in Global Blancmange is dysfunctional. I would go as far to say wildly dysfunctional. The leaders in this organisation seem to revel in their lack of alignment; they have no obvious shared purpose or common goals; and for the most part they seem to actively relish not getting on with each other, or jointly taking the business forward.’

Sally Gulliver looked uncertainly from Roger Stephens to Martin Simmonds, and then back again. ‘Forgive me,’ she began, ‘but isn’t that what I’ve been saying all along?’

To my surprise, Roger Stephens smiled. ‘Yes it is,’ he said, handing her a copy of the report. ‘And you should take this report as a ringing endorsement of your understanding of the business, the needs it now has, and for the most part, your ability as an HR function to deliver on those needs. Any further questions?’

Dumbstruck, Sally Gulliver shook her head. Dumbstruck, Martin Simmonds stared.

And I could have sworn I saw the ghost of a conspiratorial wink flicker over Roger Stephens’ face.

Next Friday: You’re In My Sights, Sally Gulliver

@BinglebyinHR

Bingleby was confiding in Richard Goff

The Reward Balancing Act by Tony Hatton-Gore of Rewardhr Ltd

Reward blog — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 09:33:54 GMT

Getting value from reward is about demonstrating return on investment, particularly when times are tough. It seems to me that in doing so the reward manager is often called upon to balance a number of potentially conflicting requirements.

Strategic Thinking and Operational Focus
To make this happen reward managers need not only the thinking/analytical skills for development of a total reward strategy aligned with the needs of the business; but also project management, IT and commercial skills to deliver quality outputs and value. Strategy is no good on its own i.e. you have to implement as well.

Global Principles and Market Flexibility
We must determine how both to maintain focus on the bigger picture, such as strategic or global principles and objectives; and to reflect specific market requirements in each country or sector without undermining delivery of the strategic vision. Sometimes differences in practice are not as fundamental as they seem.

Whole Organisation and Executive Reward
This is about applying the principles of aligning reward with value and performance to the majority of employees as well as to the leadership. We want to get the best from the whole company as well as managing the key issue of top people’s pay.

Thought Leadership and People Development
The reward manager can lead the organisation’s thinking on reward related issues and in doing so help equip managers and fellow HR professionals with the skills to manage and communicate reward, and thereby engage their people.

Addressing these various dimensions can help us rise to the challenge of demonstrating real value to the business in how we manage reward. I would like to explore these and other aspects of the changing nature of the reward role and would love to hear from you.

Social Media in the Workplace and Employee Communication by Doug Shaw

Social Media Conference — Mon, 28 Nov 2011 16:38:00 GMT

com•mu•ni•cate: Verb/kəˈmyo͞oniˌkāt/

To share or exchange information, news, or ideas.

Social tools are everywhere. Some companies try to restrict access to these tools for fear of what their employees may say, about the company, about each other and about the customer. Why do companies persist in employing people they clearly don’t trust? I wish I knew the answer. And as fast as the company blocks access to Facebook, Twitter, Foursquare and more, employees arm themselves with smart phones and tablets and step outside the restricted zone. Control is increasingly becoming an illusion.

Far too often the role of employee communication is in fact a broadcast role, not a communication one. The company predominantly wishes to get its message across and is not particularly interested in hearing back the other way. In a recent conversation about employee communication, the CEO of a global company professed to me a complete ignorance of the world of blogging despite the company having an active blogging platform which staff used to share issues and ideas. Instead he preferred a printed newspaper sent to all staff once every two months. That’s not communicating, that’s telling.

In order to be authentic communication should be available via social tools in order to create dialogue more simply and effectively. At their recent annual conference, the CIPD invited me and a few others to guest blog throughout the event. They applied no editorial restrictions and even provided us with the tools to help get the job done. This trust was repaid in rapidly delivered blog posts keeping people informed and providing additional perspectives throughout the conference.

I believe using social tools as a means of communication creates fantastic opportunities to engage with each other, with customers, with any group you care to think of. And of course as fallible humans, we will make mistakes along the way. When we drop the ball we simultaneously create an opportunity to recover and delight whoever we’ve just disappointed.

Social tools are here to stay. The smart workplaces will embrace them and define new employee and customer experiences, and if I was the printed newspaper favouring CEO, I’d be worried.

Doug Shaw is the founder of What Goes Around Limited and can be found on Twitter via @dougshaw1. You can hear Doug speak at the Social Media in HR conference at his session 'Maximising Engagement and Participation Through Social Tools'.

Young Apprentice: Don't Sweat the Concept or you could be Canned

John McGurk — Mon, 28 Nov 2011 11:42:33 GMT

This was a creative commercial task where the teams were greeted at Wembley by a spectral Lord Sugar on the massive screen. The task was to design, market and pitch a new deodorant aimed at the youth market. Harry M led Gbemi, James and Lizzie in the task and he started off as he meant to go on. He failed to learn the lesson of James who led his team very well. James parked his ego and reached out to the others in his team Harry M could he watched and learned.

Zara led the other team, she sees herself as a film maker and was happy to leave design to the others. Having a poor street dancer swivel sweatily while she did her Sofia Copolla allowed them to get the film made. Sadly on the other team Harry M confused being decisive with being dictatorial and the antler locking between James and Harry M resembled Blairdrummond safari park in the rutting season. They were also a bit too pleased with their advert which was without storyboard or structure.

The boys had the hilarious concept of having a girl geek spray herself with vanity as it was called to attract fit guys. Given that both Harry M and James have looks which can best be described as country casual and James could have been houked out of a potato field, their geek girl thing was a bit of wish fulfilllment.

Whilst the boys got their girl geek filming in the can, Gbemi and Lizzie were off designing the can. Sadly it ended up making the old Brut packaging of the seventies look like the work of Philippe Starck. Gbemi ended up taking the fall which was sad as we started to see more of her good side. I see issues of class and confidence at work here. Harry M has been on the losing side five times and is incapable of working with others and isn't that great... he should have gone. But Gbemi’s lack of confidence and polish done it for her. The other team's product 'RAW' wasn’t that great but the decision of the experts and Lord Sugar was final.

Mentoring issues here would be that Harry M needs to learn and that just having a posh voice and determined tone doesn't make you right, and Gbemi needs to discuss her ideas more and communicate better with others. She was pretty dogmatic herself on the design task but as I keep saying they are all so achingly young. I think James came over over well though he was a bit Jekyll and Hyde, with his bull at the gate/butter wouldn’t melt approach to Harry M. Zara needs to focus on the less glamorous stuff now and again or she could look like a limelight hugger. Still tipping Harry H, don't really see anyone with his stature or skilfulness and “can't believe he is only 16!” said my inner Meldrew!

Now I am getting a bit worried with the firing of Gbemi that we have ended up with a lot of privileged kids all of whom have super-confidence and connections. Though some may have struggled now and again, head girl Hayley, fabulous Zara, Ulster grammar boy James, the diversity of background is being washed out of the process. Lizzie has a Liverpool accent but that’s about it. I think Gbemi deserved to stay and Harry M should have gone but once again that supercilious confidence of the public schooled coupled with their connections shows up and with the age discount gets you far in life. But the kids like Mohammed, Ben and Gbemi need to learn that presentation and confidence counts for a lot and that’s the one sure thing in this process as lord Sugar likes to call it.

Nice To Meet You! I’m Here To Undermine You!

Bingleby — Fri, 25 Nov 2011 08:34:00 GMT

Sally Gulliver had had a testing week.

It was 7pm. She walked into her office, covertly pulling a face at me, followed by Roger Stephens, the consultant our CEO had brought in.

I studied Stephens for a moment. I estimated that in human terms he’d seen at least fifty summers - many of them I suspected at some tasteful resort, with a supremely elegant price structure, paid for by selling expensive gifts of advice such as that he was about to impose upon Global Blancmange. He was not tall; I suspected he was secretly grateful when Sally Gulliver sat down.

He had about him a certain forensic quality, of a kind more usually associated with cats. His nose seemed to twitch with suspicions as he padded over to the seat Sally offered him.

‘So that gives me some idea of your operations here.’ His tone seemed grudging.

‘And you’ve met all the team, and have a sense of their capabilities…’

‘Hmm.’ Stephens didn’t sound convinced.

Sally Gulliver bridled. I knew her to be a determined defender of her team, much of the time; though she could get cantankerous with those she felt weren’t pulling their weight. ‘Problem…?’

Stephens looked up at her from under lidded eyes, lazily, as if Sally Gulliver’s team were mice he was playing with. ‘I don’t know yet. I shall give you my findings next week.’

There was a brief but frosty silence after this ominous announcement, into which I inadvertently hiccupped. I like to think that went some way towards breaking the tension.

>There was a brief but frosty silence into which I inadvertently hiccupped

‘Tell me more about your survey and its findings about the leadership here,’ said Stephens idly, flicking his tail. Actually, I may have imagined that last detail.

So Sally Gulliver did: until at last, at 8pm, Roger Stephens finally went home.

‘What a week,’ huffed Sally, after the door had closed behind him. ‘I don’t know if my team is safe; I don’t know if what we’re trying to build here is safe; I don’t know if I’m safe… That’s enough for me, Bingleby. Have a good weekend. I’ve left what you call the Home Service on the radio, okay? See you Monday.’

I hope so, Sally Gulliver. I certainly hope so.

Next Friday: Roger Stephens and his Astonishing Findings

@BinglebyinHR

Bingleby was confiding in Richard Goff

Blogging for HR by Neil Morrison, HR Director at Random House

Social Media Conference — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 11:57:00 GMT

I’d like to set a challenge to get more UK HR practitioners to blog. Why? Because blogging is great professional development, it sharpens the mind and because there are too many “experts” in the blogosphere and not enough people actually doing the do. There are fewer UK HR bloggers than in the US and I think there a number of reasons for this, amongst them fear of the unknown. So as someone who has been kicking around the block for a while, here are my answers to the concerns that I often hear raised.

I don’t have the time.

Ok, so blogging does take time, at least initially, but the more you do it the quicker you get. I tell people it is about finding your voice, once you have your voice it is amazing how the posts tend to write themselves. You don’t have to blog every day (having done this in the past it is like a full time career!) just once or twice a week as the mood strikes you. People have times when they are writing lots and times when nothing will come. You can save the posts from the productive times and use them as you need.

I won’t have anything new to say

Take it from me, there isn’t a single blog post that hasn’t been written before, fact. But there are a million different perspectives to be had on a subject and with the news constantly changing, you get a whole load of potential new topics presenting themselves each week. Blogs that add insight, perspective, thought and challenge are as popular as those that try to be at the cutting edge.

People won’t want to read what I have to say

True. Well not to start with anyway, but the HR blogging community is very supportive and if you take the time to comment on other people’s blogs you’ll find people start to comment back. It takes a while to build an audience – you can’t expect hundreds of loyal readers overnight. Using Twitter to connect with people and share links is a great way of getting a readership boost.

Twitter? Now I know this isn’t for me.

You’re not the only one that thought that. Scary isn’t it? With all those horror stories and celebrities with millions of followers, why would an HR person want to go on Twitter? I don’t have an answer, but I know someone who does. Alison Chisnell, Group HR Director for Informa Business Solutions and my fellow panellist at the Social Media Conference has written about that here.

I’m not very good with technology.

There are a number of free blogging platforms, Blogger and Wordpress are the two most popular and both are remarkably easy to use when you get over the initial “rabbit it the headlights” moment. Essentially when it comes to writing a blog post they are both like Word. And as for the blog itself, the design can be as simple or as complicated, the technical skills needed are needed really aren’t that great. But if you do get stuck, ask another blogger….they’re always willing to help out.

I’m not sure people will like what I have to say.

Blogs are about expressing opinions and as with everything in life, there will always be differences of opinion. Most people are polite and courteous in their challenge although every now and then you get a little “flare up”. My personal experience is that the community is pretty good at self-policing when someone steps over the invisible line but at the end of the day your blog is your blog and comments that appear will have to go through moderation. If you think something is offensive, then just click delete.

I don’t know where to start.

Here is my five step plan to starting blogging.

1) Have a look at the other UK HR blogs, you can find a lot of them here or here. See what people are writing about, look at the different types of blog and see whether anything specific resonates.
2) Take the leap and sign up to Twitter. Look up other UK HR professionals either through searching for the #connectingHR hashtag or there is also a handy list here. Start to talk to other HR people involved in social media and build connections.
3) Set up a free blog with Blogger or Wordpress. Take some time to get comfortable with the functionality, the design. Use online guides if you get into trouble but don’t feel the need to tell anyone what you’re doing just yet.
4) Write something. For many of us it will be the first time since school that we’ve written anything vaguely creative. If you don’t like it, delete it. But keep trying until you feel you’ve something good enough (it will never be perfect!)
5) Click publish. You know you want to really. And let your friends on Twitter know. You’ll be surprised at the positive feedback and encouragement that you’ll get. Trust me.

And if you need any help with any of this, then you can contact me on Twitter at @neilmorrison, via my blog www.change-effect.com or on email, neil@change-effect.com. I’ll be more than willing to help.

Neil is speaking at the CIPD Social Media in HR Conference on 7 December, find out more about his session 'Organisational Approaches to the Use of Social Media Internally'.

10 Social Media Policy & Guidelines Documents

Social Media Conference — Tue, 22 Nov 2011 15:43:00 GMT

This blog post contains a collection of 10 ‘Social Media’ guidelines documents & policies pulled from around the web. Some are from the UK, some are from further afield, but all are interesting in one way or another!

First – a little bit of background on why we thought it useful to pull these together.

In advance of the CIPD's upcoming 'Social Media in HR' conference, we thought we'd take a look to see which social media topics were most popular among the CIPD’s website users. Here's a little wordcloud showing other words people use when searching the CIPD site for ‘social media’:

As you can see, there’s a nice mix: recruitment, talent, engagement, some around law, a few around bullying. But one of the bigger themes is around ‘policy’, ‘guidelines’, ‘policies’ & ‘usage’.

“How interesting” we thought, and began to pull together some of the more interesting guidelines and policy documents companies have posted to the web so far.

Have a read through, & please do leave a comment letting us know:

Does your organisation have a Social Media Policy?
Have you taken the leap & published any guidelines on your website?
If “no” to the above, are you in the “wait and see” camp, or the “there’s no need for a policy here” camp?

10 Interesting / Useful Social Media Guidelines Documents

1. The BBC's Social Media Guidance

The BBC's 'Social Media Guidance' document splits down into 3 sections:

'Personal Activity'.
'News carried out in the name of BBC news'.
'Activity as part of official BBC news output'.

As an example of what the content of those looks like, here are 3 snippets from the ‘Personal Activity’ section:

"Remember that even though you are acting in your own personal capacity, you are on show to your friends and anyone else who sees what you write, as a representative of the BBC. If you are editorial staff, it doesn't make much difference whether or not you identify yourself as someone who works for the BBC"

"You are allowed to say that you work for the BBC, and you can discuss the BBC and your work publicly. But your name/title should not contain BBC in any form. And you should make clear that the views expressed are personal, and not those of the BBC"

"If you want to start a blog where you feel conflicts of interests are possible, you should discuss it first with your line manager; he or she won't unreasonably stop you, but will want to discuss potential risks. If you already have a blog like this, you should have already had this conversation. If you haven't, then make sure you do."

Read the full PDF at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/14_07_11_news_social_media_guidance.pdf

2. BT's Social Media Guidelines

Putting their money where their mouth is, BT's Social Media Guidelines sit outside of the BT’s main network of sites, on the personal blog of Richard Dennison, the man in charge of their Social Media / Intranet. The document is a long, long stream of bullet points, broken up into 10 sections. Among them you’ll find:

BT’s explanation why they feel it’s important to have a set of Social Media guidelines:

"BT recognises that its transformation into a global communication services company delivering software driven products relies on a workforce that can actively participate in collaboration and innovation with colleagues, customers, partners and suppliers on the web using social media tools. It is therefore important that we all understand how social media tools can help BT achieve its business objectives and that we are empowered to contribute effectively to this collaborative activity on the web when it supports our roles within the organisation."

…and some closer guidance on what’s ‘good’ & ‘bad’. While the BBC guidelines were largely a 'framework' approach, BT's attempt to guide people a little more specifically by setting out ideal behaviour. For example:

"A good blogger... Knows how to maintain good relationships online. It’s more than just responding to comments and emails. It’s more than just linking, cross-linking, promoting and cross-promoting fellow bloggers. It’s about knowing when to assert yourself and when to back down. It’s about following up on your word and keeping your promises. It’s about respect and responsibility."

Read the full guidelines at http://richarddennison.wordpress.com/bts-social-media-guidelines/

3. Intel's Social Media Guidelines

Intel – the computer chip manufacturer – have produced a tightly organized, specific set of Social Media Guidelines. The document breaks down into 4 main sections: 'Guiding Principles', 'Rules of Engagement', 'Contractors & Endorsements', & 'Moderation Guidelines' Their 'Rules of Engagement' section is firm, fair, and very specific. Here are 4 the 11 rules:

Your Responsibility: What you write is ultimately your responsibility. Participation in social computing on behalf of Intel is not a right but an opportunity, so please treat it seriously and with respect. If you want to participate on behalf of Intel, take the Digital IQ training and contact the Social Media Center of Excellence. Please know and follow the Intel Code of Conduct. Failure to abide by these guidelines and the Intel Code of Conduct could put your participation at risk. Contact social.media@intel.com for more information. Please also follow the terms and conditions for any third-party sites.

Create some excitement. As a business and as a corporate citizen, Intel is making important contributions to the world, to the future of technology, and to public dialogue on a broad range of issues. Our business activities are increasingly focused on high-value innovation. Let's share with the world the exciting things we're learning and doing—and open up the channels to learn from others.

Be a Leader. There can be a fine line between healthy debate and incendiary reaction. Do not denigrate our competitors or Intel. Nor do you need to respond to every criticism or barb. Try to frame what you write to invite differing points of view without inflaming others. Some topics—like politics or religion—slide more easily into sensitive territory. So be careful and considerate. Once the words are out there, you can't really get them back. And once an inflammatory discussion gets going, it's hard to stop.

Did you screw up? If you make a mistake, admit it. Be upfront and be quick with your correction. If you're posting to a blog, you may choose to modify an earlier post—just make it clear that you have done so.

Read more at http://www.intel.com/sites/sitewide/en_SA/social-media.htm

4. IOC - London 2012 Social Media, Blogging, & Internet Guidelines

If you imagine what the International Olympic Committee’s London 2012 social media guidelines might look, and then click through to the document, chances are you won’t be far off. While some sets of guidelines are quite warm & friendly, these include strongly worded sections under titles like 'Liability', 'Monitoring' and 'Infringements'.

Here's the section looking at 'monitoring':

"The IOC will continue to monitor Olympic on-line content to ensure that the integrity of rights-holding broadcasters and sponsor rights as well as the Olympic Charter is maintained. The IOC asks for the support of all participants and other accredited persons in halting any ambush activity or any sites engaged in conduct which is offensive to or adversely affects the goodwill associated with the Olympic Games and the Olympic Movement. The IOC asks that participants and other accredited persons discovering unauthorised content, please report it immediately to www.olympicgamesmonitoring.com"

The monitoring site doesn't appear to be open for business yet, but the fact that they are creating an entire separate site for monitoring shows how serious they are. Read more at http://www.olympic.org/Documents/Games_London_2012/IOC_Social_Media_Blogging_and_Internet_Guidelines-London.pdf

5. Template Twitter Strategy for Government Departments

Twitter is – of course – well known for allowing users to write just 140 characters per message. Alongside that, a 20-page guidance document may look a little out of place. This ‘strategy’ guide was published by Neil Williams who was (at the time of the document’s publication) Head of Digital Comms at the Department for Business, Innovation & Skills.

Whereas most other documents in this post were designed purely to guide employee behavior, this document attempts to guide both individual and organizational use of Twitter. The document is designed to be modified by individual departments to suit their own needs. As a result, it may be useful for anyone trying to put together a twitter policy/guidelines document for a very large organisation.

An example of that is this section, talking about defining a departmental 'tone of voice':

"Though the account will be anonymous (i.e. no named officials will be running it) it is helpful to define a hypothetical ‘voice’ so that tweets from multiple sources are presentedin a consistent tone (including consistent use of pronouns)"

Though it perhaps goes a little far at times, specifying exactly how long each team should spend on particular activities:

“The Digital Media Team will be responsible for sourcing and publishing tweets, co-ordinating replies to incoming messages and monitoring the account. This activity is expected to take less than an hour a day. Evaluation will take longer: approximately one day every 3 months. The provision of content will require some low level input from communications colleagues and private office. This will be an add-on to business as usual internal activity – for example a quick discussion of potential tweets at daily press cuttings meetings, or emails between digital media and private office/speechwriters/stakeholder relations teams to identify potential content for tweets.”

Read more at http://www.scribd.com/doc/17313280/Template-Twitter-Strategy-for-Government-Departments

6. Walmart's Twitter External Discussion Guidelines

At the other end of the lenghth spectrum, ,Walmart’s 600 word "Twitter External Discussion Guidelines" document is short & to the point. Here are 4 key points they address:

"While many of our 2.2 million associates around the world are using Twitter and other social networks, all official Walmart Twitter users will be identified on this landing page and will have a link back to this page from their Twitter profile. Unless otherwise noted, U.S.-based Walmart approved Twitter users will follow the following naming conventions of "business unit + name/category." For example, "walmartmeeting," "samsclubrobert," and "walmartgames." We won’t reply to off topic @replies. Personal attacks and foul language = FAIL. Adding to the discussion = WIN. @replies should contribute to the dialogue. Please support any claims with links to sources whenever possible. We love opinions. We love it even more when you back them up.

Take a look at: http://walmartstores.com/9179.aspx

7. The US Coast Guard's "Way Ahead"

With the epic title 'THE WAY AHEAD', the US Coast Guard’s guidance document is written entirely in BLOCK CAPITALS, and is about as 'no nonsense' as we’ve seen. Here is point 3 of 9:

“BECOMING A MORE AGILE AND CHANGE-CENTRIC ORGANIZATION REQUIRES THAT WE UNDERSTAND AND INTERACT THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA. ACCORDINGLY WE MUST ADJUST TO THIS PARADIGM CHANGE AND MOVE FROM A VERTICAL INFORMATION MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE TO A MORE NETWORKED ORGANIZATION. THESE CHANGES OFFER TREMENDOUS ADVANTAGES IN MISSION EXECUTION AND SUPPORT, COMMUNICATION, AND KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT, INCLUDING OUR NEW BUSINESS MODEL FOR LOGISTICS. HOWEVER, THE MANAGERIAL AND CULTURAL IMPLICATIONS OF THIS CHANGE ARE SIGNIFICANT. THAT SAID WE WILL MOVE FORWARD TO ADAPT OUR ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE, POLICIES, AND PROCEDURES TO POSITION US FOR SUCCESS IN THE FUTURE.”

The 9th (and most succinct) point is simply “INTERNET RELEASE AUTHORIZED.”

Read more at http://www.uscg.mil/ANNOUNCEMENTS/alcoast/ALCOAST45708.txt

8. Gartner's 'Public Web Participation Guidelines'
Gartner’s guidelines document ranges from ‘loose and friendly’ to ‘tight and formal’.

Here is one of the stricter notes:

“You may not initiate or maintain a personal blog, social network discussion group, or other internet site that discusses or relates to Gartner, our business, or to the information technology industry.”

Followed later by a section explicitly trying to protect the company’s commercial interests:

“As Gartner associates, we want clients to pay us for information. At the same time, associates who create Gartner’s research content (e.g., analysts, consultants, Executive Partners, Leadership Partners) may want to participate in Web conversations about IT — which means exchanging information and opinion about IT. To ensure you aren’t divulging too much information, be thoughtful about what information you post and how you respond to feedback. Ask yourself: “Is this the kind of information that our clients normally pay us for?” If the answer is “Yes” or even “Perhaps,” then confer with other Gartner colleagues before posting.”

And these strict, commercial guidelines are followed later still by a section advising employees to be ‘playful’:

“Web participation is about enjoying personal interactions, not delivering corporate communications. Always identify yourself. Write in the first person. If your Web participation feels like work, you’re probably doing too much of it and it’s likely to interfere with your work at Gartner. A big part of the Web experience is that it is more playful than most other media. Your Web participation should reflect this characteristic. The most successful blogs are those with an informal and humorous style. It’s OK — some might say mandatory — to poke fun in Web postings, but keep in mind that such humor should always be appropriate and should stimulate discussion, not stifle it.“

At just over 2,000 words, it’s perhaps more of a ‘lunchtime read’ than a 2-minute skim: http://blogs.gartner.com/?page_id=69

9. Chartered Institute of Public Relations

The CIPR have released quite a grown-up, very nicely organised 'Best Practice Guidance' document. The heart of the document is a set of 10 'Dos', 5 'Dont's', along with a set of legal considerations.

If you've ever wondered where all of those "all views are my own" notes on twitter bios came from, point 8 in their 'Dos' list may well be one source:

Add a ‘views are my own’ disclaimer where appropriate

This disclaimer is typically needed if a practitioner uses an individual social media account to share both personal and professional opinion on matters. For example, it is advisable to add a ‘views are my own’ disclaimer to a Twitter biography, if a practitioner tweets about client and industry related news / opinions, [professional] and also shares their personal views on a subject that lies outside of their work remit [personal] through the same Twitter account. This will avoid confusion and will reenforce that a practitioner’s personal opinion on issues is NOT the opinion of their company.

Download the full PDF at http://www.cipr.co.uk/sites/default/files/CIPR_social_media%20_best%20_practice%20_guidance%20_2011_1.pdf

10. ACAS

And finally... ACAS have put together a very useful set of guidelines on social networking. They begin by advising employers to:

Draw up a policy on social networking
Treat 'electronic behaviour' in the same way you would treat 'non-electronic behaviour'
React reasonably

The guide very helpfully contains a section titled ‘How to develop a social networking policy’. Here's a snippet:

“A report published in 2010 by My Job Group found that 55% of employees questioned admitted to accessing social networking sites at work. The research does not suggest that use of these sites is affecting productivity but your induction programme is a good way to set clear boundaries about the use of the internet. Each organisation will have its own culture and standards of 'acceptable behaviour' but it is best to be as clear as possible about these from the start.”

Read the full guide at http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=3375, or you may like to jump straight to the 'How to Develop a Policy' section.

How about you?

That’s it - a whirlwind tour of 10 social media guidelines & policy documents ahead of the CIPD’s “Social Media in HR” conference.

Let us know what you think in the comments. Have you tackled social media guidance? Is it a ‘hot topic’ for you or a ‘maybe next year’?

And, of course, are you planning to come along to our Social Media in HR conference?

Reward and clear thinking. By Katharine Turner, Towers Watson

Reward blog — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 10:35:00 GMT

“England and America are two countries separated by a common language”, said George Bernard Shaw in the nineteenth century. I sometimes wonder whether we have a more local problem.

I am as capable as the next person of abusing the English language. But am I running a double risk as a specialist in compensation? Like any specialism, reward management is chock full of jargon and acronyms – compa-ratios, incentive zones, market postures, and quartiles do not do justice to the lexicon of ‘pay-speak’.

We make up phrases and words such as ‘bang for your buck’ and ‘incentivise’ when we might be better understood if we said ‘impact’ or ‘value for money’ and ‘motivate’ instead. We love to calculate percentages of percentages and may not be as disciplined as we should about ensuring that we specify the idea behind the mathematics or even what the percentages are of.

But if it is normal for professionals in specialty areas to succumb to argot or short-hand, why should we in the pay field be worried?

It’s quite simple. Pay is already difficult enough to get right. It doesn’t matter if we are talking about the pay of executives or the pay of employees on the shop floor. Those of us who have the task of formulating pay policies, advising decision-makers on pay decisions or communicating pay matters really need to make sure that decision makers and those on the receiving end of carefully-designed pay arrangements really understand.

This means making sure that reward ‘junkies’ don’t get bogged down in a private language. I don’t know who it was, who, when writing a letter to a friend apologised for writing a long letter because he hadn’t the time to write a short letter. Brevity and clarity can take time to achieve. Clarity of thought is often the progenitor of clarity of language. If ever there were a time for clear thinking on how to get pay right it is now. Let’s start with some clear thinking and the language will follow.

Why Are You Still Here?

Bingleby — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 14:30:00 GMT

I was perched on the shelf of one of the meeting rooms, which was filled with Sally Gulliver’s HR team. ‘Martin Simmonds called us all in five minutes ago,’ hissed Sally to me, darkly.

And in he walked, our CEO, and there was something worryingly purposeful in his sride. Behind him a smaller, neater man followed, in a pencil-grey suit, with pencil-grey hair, and pencil-grey eyes that seemed to gaze carefully into everybody in the room. Even me.

‘Good morning everyone,’ said Martin Simmonds, as if expecting a rousing reply, or a round of applause. Like the coffee and biscuits, neither had been ordered, so none came. ‘I expect you’re wondering why I’ve called you all here.’

An expectant, bewildered and faintly bored silence confirmed this was the case.

Martin Simmonds cleared his throat. ‘I’ve called you all here because I’d like to introduce you to an old contact of mine, Roger Stephens. Roger’s with Billingham Schlep, the blue chip consulting firm, and I’ve asked him to come in and... advise you, as our HR team, on what you deliver.’

I noted he used the word ‘advise’ in the same way a loan shark would use the word ‘loan’. In other words, I suspected everything would come at a price.

Will Comfort’s hand shot up. ‘In what way will this... development affect Sally Gulliver’s leadership of our team?’

An astute question. Perhaps too astute.

A dry smile slithered across Martin Simmond’s face. ‘I am in doubt this development, as you call it, will very much help to, ah, sharpen her thinking.’

>A dry smile slithered across Martin Simmond’s face

The silence that then fell across the room had the abruptness of a jaw dropping.

Next Friday: Nice To Meet You! I’m Here To Undermine You!

@BinglebyinHR

Bingleby was confiding in Richard Goff