I was attending a training program (an internal one on a new system being introduced) and I was amazed at how many people present thought of this as a break from their work. A lot of them entered the program late and others who were there earlier were more interested in the snacks that were given rather than in the course content.
This led me to think of our age old models that we use for measuring training effectiveness. The most frequently referred to and one which comes to mind first is the 4 level-evaluation made popular by Donald Kirkpatrick.
Very briefly, the 4 levels measure the following:
Level 1 – Reaction: How the participant feels after the training or learning experience
Level 2 – Learning: The measurement of increase in knowledge
Level 3 – Behaviour: Extent of application of the learning on the job
Level 4 – Results: Effect on the business or environment
The 4 levels are perfect if we are assuming that the effect of training is limited to the post training program scenario.
However, in a practical scenario, we see a number of employees who have already closed their mind to the training before even entering the session. This may be due to various reasons: thinking that they don’t need the training, the trainer is not good enough, viewing it as a break and time to enjoy, perceived as a filler in times of recession and so on.
If this is the case, it is highly improbable that the results of level 2, 3 and 4 would be positive (Level 1 may still be positive – these employees may still feel nice because of the food and the facilities.:). But why would you blame the trainer and deem the training program as ineffective when the employee already has a closed mind.
Hence, is it not essential that we understand the mindset of the participant and take that as input before trying to measure the effectiveness of the program in the various levels of the Kirkpatrick model?
We need a “Level 0” before we get into the training program. This would essentially look to answer the following key questions:
- How was the training need identified – Was it purely a ‘nomination’ given by the line manager or is it backed by other sources of data? Is the employee aware of the process of Training Needs Identification?
- Has the employee been informed why he is being sent for the training program – Is it a developmental need, a motivational tool, or a job requirement?
- Does the employee perceive the need for the training program – Has the employee understood and does he agree with the reason being given?
- Will the program add value – Does the employee think that he will be able to implement what he goes through in the program? Will this help the individual and the organization?
Understanding the employee mindset around these areas would be an important input to other levels and help us identify if interventions are needed at the employee end, the trainer end, or the facilities end.
And this might also save a lot of effective trainers from being kicked out because the employee is not ready for the training program that is going to be delivered. After all, we must not forget the all important EMPLOYEE in measuring the effectiveness of the training being provided.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Training Effectiveness – “Level 0” Measurement
Monday, April 20, 2009
Employee Satisfaction vs. Engagement vs. Commitment
This started with an innocent question I was asked in office.
”What is the difference between an Employee Satisfaction Survey, an Employee Engagement Survey, and an Employee Commitment Survey”
While most HR consultants/HR practitioners use these terms interchangeably, I ventured to dwell on the difference between them. Let us think of the difference between these from three perspectives:
a) If we go by definition: Looking at the pure definitions (Source: Dictionary.com),
Commit: to bind or obligate, as by pledge or assurance;
Engage: To gain over; to win and attach;
Satisfy: to fulfill the desires, expectations, needs, or demands of (a person, the mind, etc.);
So looking at the definition, it looks like the HR managers might have to fulfill the basic needs of the employee first, what we know very well as hygiene factors. These might range from something as basic as the seating area of the employee, the compensation being offered, or transport to and from the office.
Once the employee is fairly satisfied with his working conditions, the next step for an HR manager would be to try to win over and convince the employee that the organization cares for him/her beyond the work environment. These could range from outbound programs for a relatively younger workforce to bringing in the families of the employees for various engagement programs and other work-life balance initiatives.
Employee commitment can be garnered only when the satisfaction and engagement measures are backed by strong career growth measures, a feeling of trust and constant development in the personality of the employee.
b) From the Employees’ perspective:
I have seen very few employees who are “satisfied” with the compensation they are getting. While other “hygiene” factors might be taken for granted, a typical employee is satisfied only when the right engagement measures are put in place.
In terms of commitment, there is a school of thought that says that a lot of it is intrinsic. However, I have seen a number of employees who are highly committed in the initial few days in an organization. But they lose steam over time simply because the other factors (those essential for satisfaction and engagement) are not in place. So while I agree to some extent that commitment comes from within, it has to be backed by other factors and constant reinforcement for it to remain on track.
c) From the Employers’ perspective:
As far as the organization is concerned, the first step is to segment the population of employees and try to identify what would satisfy and what would engage which group of employees.
For the critical set of employees, the organization would want to identify a clear gradation of measures moving from satisfaction to engagement to commitment. For others, depending on the budgetary constraints, they may decide on identifying the key measures to be taken.
So we see that the 3 terms are different and have different meanings for the employee, the employer and even the dictionary. Let us not club the 3 and project them all in the sane vein!!
”What is the difference between an Employee Satisfaction Survey, an Employee Engagement Survey, and an Employee Commitment Survey”
While most HR consultants/HR practitioners use these terms interchangeably, I ventured to dwell on the difference between them. Let us think of the difference between these from three perspectives:
a) If we go by definition: Looking at the pure definitions (Source: Dictionary.com),
Commit: to bind or obligate, as by pledge or assurance;
Engage: To gain over; to win and attach;
Satisfy: to fulfill the desires, expectations, needs, or demands of (a person, the mind, etc.);
So looking at the definition, it looks like the HR managers might have to fulfill the basic needs of the employee first, what we know very well as hygiene factors. These might range from something as basic as the seating area of the employee, the compensation being offered, or transport to and from the office.
Once the employee is fairly satisfied with his working conditions, the next step for an HR manager would be to try to win over and convince the employee that the organization cares for him/her beyond the work environment. These could range from outbound programs for a relatively younger workforce to bringing in the families of the employees for various engagement programs and other work-life balance initiatives.
Employee commitment can be garnered only when the satisfaction and engagement measures are backed by strong career growth measures, a feeling of trust and constant development in the personality of the employee.
b) From the Employees’ perspective:
I have seen very few employees who are “satisfied” with the compensation they are getting. While other “hygiene” factors might be taken for granted, a typical employee is satisfied only when the right engagement measures are put in place.
In terms of commitment, there is a school of thought that says that a lot of it is intrinsic. However, I have seen a number of employees who are highly committed in the initial few days in an organization. But they lose steam over time simply because the other factors (those essential for satisfaction and engagement) are not in place. So while I agree to some extent that commitment comes from within, it has to be backed by other factors and constant reinforcement for it to remain on track.
c) From the Employers’ perspective:
As far as the organization is concerned, the first step is to segment the population of employees and try to identify what would satisfy and what would engage which group of employees.
For the critical set of employees, the organization would want to identify a clear gradation of measures moving from satisfaction to engagement to commitment. For others, depending on the budgetary constraints, they may decide on identifying the key measures to be taken.
So we see that the 3 terms are different and have different meanings for the employee, the employer and even the dictionary. Let us not club the 3 and project them all in the sane vein!!
Friday, April 10, 2009
Times of Recession – What does an employee do?
Well well well…we are stuck with the deepest recession since 1929. It’s the worst time for people to be working for different organizations and different managers. Gone are the days when you used to keep your resignation in your pocket, had multiple offer letters and used these to get increments, promotions, and the best of allowances. Even I had resigned without a job a few years back when I had a “fight” with my manager and had multiple offers within a matter of days. But I would not dare do that now!
Companies and the leadership have realized that these are not the best of times for employees. And you find employees clocking 80-100 hr weeks on a regular basis sitting at their office desks. Working for impossible deadlines seems to have become a norm these days with employees lugging their laptops with them even on vacation.
And we find not all employees working at all points of time, a lot of it being done for the so called “Impression Management” or “Boss Management”.
So if you are one of those who are stuck in office having nothing to do, what do you do with your spare time. Should you not make use of this time and try to do something productive.
A lot of us have aspirations of having our own business at some point in our lives. But we rarely do anything about this for one of the following factors or some others:
- We are earning too much in our jobs and need at least that much to survive
- Lack of an idea
- Laziness
- Lack of capital
Many of these factors have been nullified by the recession hitting us. No one can now say that they expect to get a hefty raise. No one can say that they do not have to spend more time in office. A lot of new ventures have closed down giving new opportunities for entrepreneurs who can make a difference. So, for budding entrepreneurs who have an idea and have the will to work for themselves rather than wasting time in their offices, NOW is the right time to become an entrepreneur.
The next question that comes to mind is why would you want to become an entrepreneur at this point of time when it is so tough to get business, all corporates are in cost-cutting mode, and individuals are not willing to step out and spend money. The counter-point here is that this is the worst it can get. All these challenges will drive a budding entrepreneur to set up the right processes, work towards having the best customer relations, and learn the art of selling and negotiation. As times improve, the going will only get easier. Having seen the worst of the times, it will only be easier when the world economy comes out of the recessionary phase.
I know this is easier said than done but if you want to try and not feel 10 years down the line that you missed the bus, now is the time to start working. And this time FOR YOURSELF!!
So if you are one of those who are stuck in office having nothing to do, what do you do with your spare time. Should you not make use of this time and try to do something productive.
A lot of us have aspirations of having our own business at some point in our lives. But we rarely do anything about this for one of the following factors or some others:
- We are earning too much in our jobs and need at least that much to survive
- Lack of an idea
- Laziness
- Lack of capital
Many of these factors have been nullified by the recession hitting us. No one can now say that they expect to get a hefty raise. No one can say that they do not have to spend more time in office. A lot of new ventures have closed down giving new opportunities for entrepreneurs who can make a difference. So, for budding entrepreneurs who have an idea and have the will to work for themselves rather than wasting time in their offices, NOW is the right time to become an entrepreneur.
The next question that comes to mind is why would you want to become an entrepreneur at this point of time when it is so tough to get business, all corporates are in cost-cutting mode, and individuals are not willing to step out and spend money. The counter-point here is that this is the worst it can get. All these challenges will drive a budding entrepreneur to set up the right processes, work towards having the best customer relations, and learn the art of selling and negotiation. As times improve, the going will only get easier. Having seen the worst of the times, it will only be easier when the world economy comes out of the recessionary phase.
I know this is easier said than done but if you want to try and not feel 10 years down the line that you missed the bus, now is the time to start working. And this time FOR YOURSELF!!
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Eliminating HR – Performance Management
So now that we are done with analyzing the Recruitment function, let us come to the next sub-function in the HR domain. Let us take a look at the Performance Management function this time.
Performance Management as a term has been much abused in HR parlance. When an HR person talks of this, he might mean only the annual appraisal process or he might be talking of something as broad as the managing the entire time spent by an employee right from on-boarding till the exit process.
I will stick to the Performance appraisal process for the purpose of this article.
So what are the broad steps that go into a typical Performance appraisal process :
1) Goal/Objective Setting: This step entails the setting of goals for the financial year on the basis of which the appraisal would be done at the end of the year. This may be an informal discussion between the subordinate and the manager. Or this may be a structured process where there are defined KPIs (Key Performance Indicators) cascading from the functional objectives for the year. The end objective is to have a list of goals/KPIs that are to be achieved by the end of the year. However, we were referring to an ideal world here. In most organizations, the process for objective setting goes on and on and on AND ON!!! Typically, we find that around the months of September / October, HR people are running around the managers / function heads to close the goal sheets / KPIs for the team members.
2) Quarterly / Mid-year review: A review, which could be done mid-year, quarterly or even monthly in certain cases, is the typical next step. This is something that is not done by all organizations and in some cases this is done only for a few specific functions. The basic objective of this step is to track the progress towards achievement of the targets. There might have been changes in the business environment which might elicit a change in the KPIs / Goals for the individual. This review provides a formal platform to discuss any issue that the employee might be facing.
3) Appraisal: This is the most dreaded time for most employees and you will find them at their best behaviour towards the end of the appraisal cycle. Again, this process might be a very basic finalization of a final rating by the manager. Or it might be an elaborate 360 degree process consisting of the self appraisal, manager appraisal, subordinate and peer appraisal or any of the parts thereof.
4) Normalization and Communication of Rating: Normalization is the process where the ratings are scaled down/up depending on the perceptions and relative ranking of employees by the Heads of Functions / CEOs of firms. A critical input here is the amount of money that the organization wants to disburse among employees. Some companies have a fixed % of payout depending on the rating you get while others come up with a new % every year depending on how well they have done for the year. This is followed by the communication to the employee of the final rating through a discussion / e-mail.
Now let us see the value adding role played by the HR team and see if we can afford to do away with it:
1) Goal/Objective Setting: The HR team initiates the process on the system and gives ‘tight’ deadlines within which the process has to be completed. Business managers understand how tight these deadlines are and this process spills on towards the last quarter. If every business team took upon themselves that they do not need a follow-up team to see if they can finalize goals for themselves, we would not need an HR team for this process. A simple tweak in the IT system would absolve the HR department of this step.
2) Quarterly / Mid-year review: This is not a step that is conducted in all organizations. HR plays only the role of a facilitator and while the HR team might be involved in the discussions that happen, they have a very limited role to play as an overseer and ensure that the process happens smoothly. It is anybody’s guess as to the “value adding” role of HR here.
3) Appraisal: This step is mostly conducted by the direct managers with HR playing the role of follow-up and compilation of data and results. HR initiates the process, sets the timelines and keeps sending mails until the appraisal process is complete. While there is no “strategic” aspect involved here, the administrative aspect can be handled by anyone.
4) Normalization and Communication of Rating: This is mainly a political exercise with employees being force-fitted into the “bell curve” in the organization. How effective that process is, I have already opined in one of my previous blog posts.
So that’s another critical process for the HR team where we do not need the HR team. Then why waste your resources on hiring and maintaining an entire team for this.
Performance Management as a term has been much abused in HR parlance. When an HR person talks of this, he might mean only the annual appraisal process or he might be talking of something as broad as the managing the entire time spent by an employee right from on-boarding till the exit process.
I will stick to the Performance appraisal process for the purpose of this article.
So what are the broad steps that go into a typical Performance appraisal process :
1) Goal/Objective Setting: This step entails the setting of goals for the financial year on the basis of which the appraisal would be done at the end of the year. This may be an informal discussion between the subordinate and the manager. Or this may be a structured process where there are defined KPIs (Key Performance Indicators) cascading from the functional objectives for the year. The end objective is to have a list of goals/KPIs that are to be achieved by the end of the year. However, we were referring to an ideal world here. In most organizations, the process for objective setting goes on and on and on AND ON!!! Typically, we find that around the months of September / October, HR people are running around the managers / function heads to close the goal sheets / KPIs for the team members.
2) Quarterly / Mid-year review: A review, which could be done mid-year, quarterly or even monthly in certain cases, is the typical next step. This is something that is not done by all organizations and in some cases this is done only for a few specific functions. The basic objective of this step is to track the progress towards achievement of the targets. There might have been changes in the business environment which might elicit a change in the KPIs / Goals for the individual. This review provides a formal platform to discuss any issue that the employee might be facing.
3) Appraisal: This is the most dreaded time for most employees and you will find them at their best behaviour towards the end of the appraisal cycle. Again, this process might be a very basic finalization of a final rating by the manager. Or it might be an elaborate 360 degree process consisting of the self appraisal, manager appraisal, subordinate and peer appraisal or any of the parts thereof.
4) Normalization and Communication of Rating: Normalization is the process where the ratings are scaled down/up depending on the perceptions and relative ranking of employees by the Heads of Functions / CEOs of firms. A critical input here is the amount of money that the organization wants to disburse among employees. Some companies have a fixed % of payout depending on the rating you get while others come up with a new % every year depending on how well they have done for the year. This is followed by the communication to the employee of the final rating through a discussion / e-mail.
Now let us see the value adding role played by the HR team and see if we can afford to do away with it:
1) Goal/Objective Setting: The HR team initiates the process on the system and gives ‘tight’ deadlines within which the process has to be completed. Business managers understand how tight these deadlines are and this process spills on towards the last quarter. If every business team took upon themselves that they do not need a follow-up team to see if they can finalize goals for themselves, we would not need an HR team for this process. A simple tweak in the IT system would absolve the HR department of this step.
2) Quarterly / Mid-year review: This is not a step that is conducted in all organizations. HR plays only the role of a facilitator and while the HR team might be involved in the discussions that happen, they have a very limited role to play as an overseer and ensure that the process happens smoothly. It is anybody’s guess as to the “value adding” role of HR here.
3) Appraisal: This step is mostly conducted by the direct managers with HR playing the role of follow-up and compilation of data and results. HR initiates the process, sets the timelines and keeps sending mails until the appraisal process is complete. While there is no “strategic” aspect involved here, the administrative aspect can be handled by anyone.
4) Normalization and Communication of Rating: This is mainly a political exercise with employees being force-fitted into the “bell curve” in the organization. How effective that process is, I have already opined in one of my previous blog posts.
So that’s another critical process for the HR team where we do not need the HR team. Then why waste your resources on hiring and maintaining an entire team for this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
