Performance review time in any company is detested by most managers and employees. Most companies continue to follow the same old process of reviewing every candidate just once a year and make changes to compensation based on the outcome of the review. How can a manager expected to remember all the events from the first day of the year to the last? Is it right to expect a manager to record every significant event with the employee during the year? Should we expect the employee to accept feedback based on 'remembrance' of the manager?
If we seriously consider using performance reviews to provide quality feedback to improve the professional life of a employee, shouldn't the system be designed to collect the highest quality information on the person throughout the year? The highest quality of data is of utmost necessity to provide the highest quality feedback. Identifying completion of a project on time, with quality is the easy part of judging the performance. The hard part is to understand 'why' the project was not completed and to improve on skills and the work place values/character of the employee to enable him/her be more productive at work. Let us try to understand the requirements for a perfect performance review system.
The ideal system should be continuous, easy to use, efficient to track improvement or degradation and be designed to manage talent. Let us take it one step at a time. Typically, managers collect performance data on employees once or best case twice a year. I have seen some managers collecting data during the performance review time to substantiate their claim or knowledge of their employee. 360 reviews and peer reviews are talked about often, but, are rarely used effectively. An ideal system should enable anyone to provide feedback on any other employee at any time of the day. For eg., an engineer at the lowest rung of GE should be able to provide an opinion on the CEO based on his/her interaction with him during an all-employee meeting. The manager, with an access to the feedback of his/her employee should be able to check the data and provide feedback to the employee on a continuous basis (throughout the year). Such continuous feedback detailed with the context and the relevant time frame goes into improving the performance of the employee on a continuous basis.
Secondly, the performance review system has to be easy to use for anyone, anywhere and anytime. With the issue of having to remember events of relevance from a year ago for the reviewer, it makes it harder if the system requires the reviewers to write in detail of not only the performance but also the context. In an age of Facebook and Twitter where citizens express 'what they are doing?' in less than 140 characters, employers cannot and must not expect employees to provide detailed write ups during performance reviews. The system should be designed to not only receive feedback from anywhere, anytime but also be intelligent to make most of the few characters that the feedback is based on. Once the system is available on a continuous basis and is as easy as tagging a person, the feedback system will prove useful to not only the employee but also the entire organization.
Next, once the feedback is received, the system must be designed to track improvement or lack of improvement. Once the employee's performance is reviewed with him/her, the system should also be capable of monitoring the change on a continuous basis. In a perfect world, the employee would strive to improve on objections raised during the review and would like to see the results of the improvement (positive reinforcement). In the worst case, the system should provide the option for the manager to notice degradation of expected values and work with the employee to change course.
Last but not the least, the system with its intelligence and all the skills and performance data of the employee should enable managers within the company to identify the right fit for the employee. If the employee is not performing well in the current group, the question to ask is 'does he FIT well into this group? If his skills and values do not match with the culture of the organization, the question should be 'will he be a better FIT in another organization within the company?' or more importantly ' where would the employee be the BEST FIT?' in the company. A well designed performance review system should not only be able to collect data on a continuous basis but also enable managers make the right decision for the employee and the organization with the data.
Do the requirements for a perfect performance review system sound too ideal? Can it be done? YES, WE CAN!
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Friday, March 27, 2009
Managing People; Not Indians or Americans
I was recently approached by an American organization who was looking for an entrepreneurial leader to head their Indian office as their Managing Director. After a few discussions, I was told that they were impressed with my background and capabilities as a leader with experience in managing people in the U.S. However, they would prefer someone with the experience of managing people in India. Here's what was exactly said "We are really looking for an individual that has built a team in India and has lived there for a number of years. Unfortunately, your background has been in the USA". Why is my background of managing Americans, Indians, Chinese and many others not a strength but a weakness? Aren't people the same worldwide? That discussion really opened my eyes to the misconception of managing people in the industry today.
The concept of managing people, not Indians or Americans or Chinese, is simple once you pay attention to the culture that surrounds the people. First, understand them, person by person. Understanding Americans is no different from understanding Indians or Chinese. Every employee has a unique need, interest and passion. The duty of the manager is to pay the most attention in understanding the needs, both emotional and professional, of every team member. This is not an hour long process. With some, it may take multiple conversations over many months. Once those requirements are understood and clarified, it is then easy to work to their interests within certain boundary conditions established by the organization.
Second, it is important to expose and help employees understand the boundary conditions that exist in the environment. The boundary conditions include the values/culture of the company and rules and regulations of the organization. If there is not a fit with the values and interests of the employee with the culture and needs of the organization, the marriage will never work. Discussions on salary, options and other benefits can only delay the inevitable if there is not a match.
Once the needs and the interests of the employee are understood and a fit is established, it is the duty of the manager to 'feed' the employee right. I am not talking about the free breakfasts, lunches and dinners that companies provide as a perk. I am talking about the 'intellectual food' to feed the curiosity and interest of the individual. Providing the employees with a job function or a project that matches with their needs/interest and skill set is also critical. Never assign a program that does match with the individual's skills and needs and expect it to work. Such an assignment will not just result in the failure of the project but also result in loss of motivation and eventually the loss of the worker.
These are simple but key techniques in managing people, whether Americans or Indians or Chinese. Understanding the needs, finding the right match/fit and feeding them with appropriate jobs for success of the individual and the organization. Following these key guidelines has helped me not only build and grow great teams but also to keep them energized for the long term.
The concept of managing people, not Indians or Americans or Chinese, is simple once you pay attention to the culture that surrounds the people. First, understand them, person by person. Understanding Americans is no different from understanding Indians or Chinese. Every employee has a unique need, interest and passion. The duty of the manager is to pay the most attention in understanding the needs, both emotional and professional, of every team member. This is not an hour long process. With some, it may take multiple conversations over many months. Once those requirements are understood and clarified, it is then easy to work to their interests within certain boundary conditions established by the organization.
Second, it is important to expose and help employees understand the boundary conditions that exist in the environment. The boundary conditions include the values/culture of the company and rules and regulations of the organization. If there is not a fit with the values and interests of the employee with the culture and needs of the organization, the marriage will never work. Discussions on salary, options and other benefits can only delay the inevitable if there is not a match.
Once the needs and the interests of the employee are understood and a fit is established, it is the duty of the manager to 'feed' the employee right. I am not talking about the free breakfasts, lunches and dinners that companies provide as a perk. I am talking about the 'intellectual food' to feed the curiosity and interest of the individual. Providing the employees with a job function or a project that matches with their needs/interest and skill set is also critical. Never assign a program that does match with the individual's skills and needs and expect it to work. Such an assignment will not just result in the failure of the project but also result in loss of motivation and eventually the loss of the worker.
These are simple but key techniques in managing people, whether Americans or Indians or Chinese. Understanding the needs, finding the right match/fit and feeding them with appropriate jobs for success of the individual and the organization. Following these key guidelines has helped me not only build and grow great teams but also to keep them energized for the long term.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Successful Entrepreneurship; Focus, Focus, Focus
What's one very important attribute of a successful start-up? Is it the brilliant idea? Continuous innovation? or the plain old execution? All of the above are important for the young company to survive and flourish. However, over the last decade or so that I have dealt with start-ups including building a few of my own, I have realized that focus on execution is key. There are tons of examples of companies that had just another product like many others but out shined the rest with pure focus on execution. It's at any day better to bring a quality product with me too features on time vs. one with whiz bang features a year late.
Now, how do you build an execution machine? Focus, Focus, Focus. Focus on one thing for the entire team to strive for. Focus on building the team with members who have built the same into production many times before. Focus on building a quality product to solve a need in the market. Let us focus on each one of these criteria to understand a bit better.
Focus is everything in a start-up. It pays for the development team to focus on delivering one product. It pays for the marketing/sales team to focus on one market. It may even pay to keep the focus on requirements from a carefully chosen one customer. The focus delivers a solid understanding of the needs of the market and keeps the development team motivated to deliver one product. Distractions are too costly for any start-up that typically runs on a limited source of cash.
Focus on building the best team to deliver the product. Every team member of the delivery team must be handpicked for their experience in delivering a product to production many times. With a 12 month window to deliver a product to the customer in a limited budget requires each team member to be proficient in productizing the deliverable. There is a huge difference between members who have just designed multiple products versus the ones that have taken the specific product to production multiple times. Do not compromise in this area. There is no going back. Start-ups do not have the time or the money to revisit development. Take a look at your development team now. How many of your developers have designed the same block or a similar application to production? You may be surprised about the results. My analysis of over dozens companies in the valley reveal something very different. 6 out of 10 developers in the team had not taken the same/very similar product into production before.
Now that you are focused on the right market with the right team, it is time to focus on the 'needs' of the market. It's very critical that the entire team understands and differentiates the 'needs' of the customer versus the 'wants' of the customers. This is not easy. It took me a couple of hard learned trials to grasp this concept. The customers will always want more for less. The market will always want everything for free. If the customer needs it, he will pay for it.
Once you have a product that solves a real need in the market place, the entire team is focused on delivering the product to the customer and each of the team members have enough experience under their belts (to understand the pitfalls), there is a good chance of success.
Remember; Focus, Focus, Focus.
Now, how do you build an execution machine? Focus, Focus, Focus. Focus on one thing for the entire team to strive for. Focus on building the team with members who have built the same into production many times before. Focus on building a quality product to solve a need in the market. Let us focus on each one of these criteria to understand a bit better.
Focus is everything in a start-up. It pays for the development team to focus on delivering one product. It pays for the marketing/sales team to focus on one market. It may even pay to keep the focus on requirements from a carefully chosen one customer. The focus delivers a solid understanding of the needs of the market and keeps the development team motivated to deliver one product. Distractions are too costly for any start-up that typically runs on a limited source of cash.
Focus on building the best team to deliver the product. Every team member of the delivery team must be handpicked for their experience in delivering a product to production many times. With a 12 month window to deliver a product to the customer in a limited budget requires each team member to be proficient in productizing the deliverable. There is a huge difference between members who have just designed multiple products versus the ones that have taken the specific product to production multiple times. Do not compromise in this area. There is no going back. Start-ups do not have the time or the money to revisit development. Take a look at your development team now. How many of your developers have designed the same block or a similar application to production? You may be surprised about the results. My analysis of over dozens companies in the valley reveal something very different. 6 out of 10 developers in the team had not taken the same/very similar product into production before.
Now that you are focused on the right market with the right team, it is time to focus on the 'needs' of the market. It's very critical that the entire team understands and differentiates the 'needs' of the customer versus the 'wants' of the customers. This is not easy. It took me a couple of hard learned trials to grasp this concept. The customers will always want more for less. The market will always want everything for free. If the customer needs it, he will pay for it.
Once you have a product that solves a real need in the market place, the entire team is focused on delivering the product to the customer and each of the team members have enough experience under their belts (to understand the pitfalls), there is a good chance of success.
Remember; Focus, Focus, Focus.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
A+ with attitude Vs. A with the right attitude; What's your choice?
All of us have worked with colleagues who were brilliant (very high IQ) but have an attitude. They typically understand that they are much better than the rest of the population at work and behave as such. With their high strung attitude, they treat their team members with disrespect and nonchalance as the team members do not measure up to their intellectual capabilities. The team members, in turn, do not wish to interact with this person with an A+ intelligence. Does this highly intelligent and individually productive member of the team a good member for the long term? Where do you stand?
The other kind of employee is the one with an above average IQ but with the 'right' attitude. He/She may not get the problem solved as soon as the one with A+ IQ but would solve it eventually. With the yearning to learn and grow, this group of members can be molded to improve and perform at their peak performance over time.
The question is the following. Who would you prefer to hire? The A+ with the attitude or the A with the 'right' attitude? Are you hiring for the long term or the short term? Are you ready to compromise A+ productivity for A? How much do you compromise on the values of the team for the A+ member? These are tough choices to make. However, with the focus on long term benefit to the organization, values and attitude must be given the higher priority when hiring the next team member. It is very important that the organization place as high a priority on understanding the attitude and the values of the member to be hired as on estimating the capability to perform to the job requirements.
Providing an environment that's conducive to developing strong values and creating a fun but engaging environment is a must for long term benefits to the employees and the organization. It is at any day better to build a strong A team with the 'right' attitude for the long term vs. a team with A+ members with attitude that's destined to break soon.
The other kind of employee is the one with an above average IQ but with the 'right' attitude. He/She may not get the problem solved as soon as the one with A+ IQ but would solve it eventually. With the yearning to learn and grow, this group of members can be molded to improve and perform at their peak performance over time.
The question is the following. Who would you prefer to hire? The A+ with the attitude or the A with the 'right' attitude? Are you hiring for the long term or the short term? Are you ready to compromise A+ productivity for A? How much do you compromise on the values of the team for the A+ member? These are tough choices to make. However, with the focus on long term benefit to the organization, values and attitude must be given the higher priority when hiring the next team member. It is very important that the organization place as high a priority on understanding the attitude and the values of the member to be hired as on estimating the capability to perform to the job requirements.
Providing an environment that's conducive to developing strong values and creating a fun but engaging environment is a must for long term benefits to the employees and the organization. It is at any day better to build a strong A team with the 'right' attitude for the long term vs. a team with A+ members with attitude that's destined to break soon.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Leaders who SHARE and CARE
In a world filled with CEOs who pilfer their company's coffins for their personal interests, there are a few like Leonard Abess Jr., CEO of City National Bank of Florida whose recent action embodies the concept of ultimate leadership. When a Spanish bank bought into 83% of Leonard's bank recently, Leonard and his executives made a pile of dough like most executives do during a successful financial transaction. However, the similarities with most executives stop right there. Leonard shared over $60 Million of his personal fortune with ALL his employees. In all, he shared his personal wealth with over 471 present and past employees including tellers, secretaries and clerks with each employee getting an average of $127,000. This story reminds us that the world of business still has its share of leaders who really CARE for their employees and do not mind to SHARE, even their wealth.
I personally have had such an experience during the early 90s (downturn time) and will always remain indelible in my mind . One of my first managers at National Semiconductor, Ted Hasegawa called us in to a conference room one day and explained why most employees did not receive anything benefit that quarter from the profit sharing plan. However, he said that the senior managers in the company who belonged to a different bonus plan received a check. He then handed each of us (team of about 7 engineers) an envelope with a check and a personal note on how each of our performance during the quarter enabled him to meet his goals and therefore receive the bonus check. Ted showed that he CARED for us by SHARING his wealth.
I am not saying that it is a must for leaders to share their wealth in order to show us that they cared. Sharing wealth is a very hard thing to do and requires ultimate generosity. However, leaders can begin by sharing knowledge, sharing experience and sharing limelight with their employees. In a world where it all about ME, it is important that stories such as Leonard and Ted be shared and they be commended publicly to energize other leaders to share. Organizations must teach and coach their leaders to share their wisdom gained from years of experience to help grow the next generation leaders. While it is important for managers to be rewarded for their capabilities to achieve results, it is also important for organizations to emphasize and reward leaders on their capabilities to CARE and SHARE. Just imagine a world where every leader CARED for each of us and truly wanted us to grow into a better person by SHARING their experiences.
I personally have had such an experience during the early 90s (downturn time) and will always remain indelible in my mind . One of my first managers at National Semiconductor, Ted Hasegawa called us in to a conference room one day and explained why most employees did not receive anything benefit that quarter from the profit sharing plan. However, he said that the senior managers in the company who belonged to a different bonus plan received a check. He then handed each of us (team of about 7 engineers) an envelope with a check and a personal note on how each of our performance during the quarter enabled him to meet his goals and therefore receive the bonus check. Ted showed that he CARED for us by SHARING his wealth.
I am not saying that it is a must for leaders to share their wealth in order to show us that they cared. Sharing wealth is a very hard thing to do and requires ultimate generosity. However, leaders can begin by sharing knowledge, sharing experience and sharing limelight with their employees. In a world where it all about ME, it is important that stories such as Leonard and Ted be shared and they be commended publicly to energize other leaders to share. Organizations must teach and coach their leaders to share their wisdom gained from years of experience to help grow the next generation leaders. While it is important for managers to be rewarded for their capabilities to achieve results, it is also important for organizations to emphasize and reward leaders on their capabilities to CARE and SHARE. Just imagine a world where every leader CARED for each of us and truly wanted us to grow into a better person by SHARING their experiences.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Understanding and Maximizing Diversity at Work
In the business world, where managers are expected to find ways to improve productivity of a diverse set of employees, it is extremely important to find ways to identify the right FIT for each person in the organization based on their skills and values. Especially, in a global age where almost every large organization is spread worldwide, finding the perfect FIT by understanding the effect of local cultures on skills and values of every employee is critical.
Over these last 17+ years in the U.S and most of that in the Silicon Valley, I have realized the power of diversity at workplace. Silicon Valley work place is truly a melting pot of talented folks from every corner of the world with their unique culture. Each culture brings out certain unique work styles, skill sets and values to accomplish tasks. This uniqueness is pronounced in the first 5-10 years away from the home country and softens over time. As expected, these traits continue to morph generation after generation and reach the steady state 'American' values over time. However, it is important to realize that each of us bring a unique set of strengths which when utilized appropriately improves productivity and therefore success of the organization. Let us take a few examples of some of the popular immigrant groups in the tech world that I am familiar with from the Silicon Valley. Although, my intent is not to generalize, it provides a good baseline to start understanding of how people from different cultures contribute to their organizations.
The Chinese from mainland China are 'group-workers' and tend to accomplish the best when tasked with a group project. They prefer to work in a group with other Chinese friends and are open to seek help from other members of the team. Individualists, they are not, for they do not seek limelight on their own. People from mainland are truly hardworking, pay attention to details and do what it takes to get the job done. I guess these traits may be a result of the years of Maoism which promoted hardwork, basic living and the essence of community. Therefore, tasks that require execution as a team are best suited for the Chinese. On the other hand, Chinese from HongKong and Taiwan are entrepreneurial, seek lime light and are quite individualistic. You can guess why. Albeit being from mainland, they had to develop skills and values to survive and grow.
Indians are primarily individualists and tend to compete for limelight in the success of the organization. Due to an enormous push by the families to succeed, they are quite competitive and seek ways to achieve success quickly. Also, due to the very conforming educational system, Indians in general, tend to be 'followers' than 'creators'. With the focus more on completion of the task and not on the quality and timeliness of the job, Indians tend to work well in assignments that are not under extreme time constraint. If you are tasked to manage a project or a team in India, it is imperative to set the expectations on the quality of the deliverable and also maintain a continuous check on the timeline for delivery. With a competitive spirit, command of English and an ability to work with people from diverse backgrounds, Indians are positioned well to manage and execute on global tasks.
Americans are the thinkers/creators. The educational system and the culture within the country promotes thinking outside the box and being entrepreneurial. Taking risk is acceptable and failure is accepted as a stepping stone to success. There are tons of examples within the society where individuals who have followed their passion have succeeded to build the best products and the most successful organizations. With the emphasis on 'speaking out', the communication skills are developed and are most suited for jobs in marketing or sales.
With the uniqueness that different cultures bring to the table and the necessity to use maximize productivity to execute a program, it is essential that managers/leaders understand the nuances to best utilize the right personnel for the right job. This knowledge is also extremely beneficial to manage talent worldwide in a multinational company. Fundamentally, in a society where hardwork, attention to details and entrepreneurialism is nourished, businesses tend to succeed in the long term.
Over these last 17+ years in the U.S and most of that in the Silicon Valley, I have realized the power of diversity at workplace. Silicon Valley work place is truly a melting pot of talented folks from every corner of the world with their unique culture. Each culture brings out certain unique work styles, skill sets and values to accomplish tasks. This uniqueness is pronounced in the first 5-10 years away from the home country and softens over time. As expected, these traits continue to morph generation after generation and reach the steady state 'American' values over time. However, it is important to realize that each of us bring a unique set of strengths which when utilized appropriately improves productivity and therefore success of the organization. Let us take a few examples of some of the popular immigrant groups in the tech world that I am familiar with from the Silicon Valley. Although, my intent is not to generalize, it provides a good baseline to start understanding of how people from different cultures contribute to their organizations.
The Chinese from mainland China are 'group-workers' and tend to accomplish the best when tasked with a group project. They prefer to work in a group with other Chinese friends and are open to seek help from other members of the team. Individualists, they are not, for they do not seek limelight on their own. People from mainland are truly hardworking, pay attention to details and do what it takes to get the job done. I guess these traits may be a result of the years of Maoism which promoted hardwork, basic living and the essence of community. Therefore, tasks that require execution as a team are best suited for the Chinese. On the other hand, Chinese from HongKong and Taiwan are entrepreneurial, seek lime light and are quite individualistic. You can guess why. Albeit being from mainland, they had to develop skills and values to survive and grow.
Indians are primarily individualists and tend to compete for limelight in the success of the organization. Due to an enormous push by the families to succeed, they are quite competitive and seek ways to achieve success quickly. Also, due to the very conforming educational system, Indians in general, tend to be 'followers' than 'creators'. With the focus more on completion of the task and not on the quality and timeliness of the job, Indians tend to work well in assignments that are not under extreme time constraint. If you are tasked to manage a project or a team in India, it is imperative to set the expectations on the quality of the deliverable and also maintain a continuous check on the timeline for delivery. With a competitive spirit, command of English and an ability to work with people from diverse backgrounds, Indians are positioned well to manage and execute on global tasks.
Americans are the thinkers/creators. The educational system and the culture within the country promotes thinking outside the box and being entrepreneurial. Taking risk is acceptable and failure is accepted as a stepping stone to success. There are tons of examples within the society where individuals who have followed their passion have succeeded to build the best products and the most successful organizations. With the emphasis on 'speaking out', the communication skills are developed and are most suited for jobs in marketing or sales.
With the uniqueness that different cultures bring to the table and the necessity to use maximize productivity to execute a program, it is essential that managers/leaders understand the nuances to best utilize the right personnel for the right job. This knowledge is also extremely beneficial to manage talent worldwide in a multinational company. Fundamentally, in a society where hardwork, attention to details and entrepreneurialism is nourished, businesses tend to succeed in the long term.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Do what you want to do
Most of us spend an enormous amount of time at work, sometimes wondering if we work to live or live to work. There should be no confusion on why we live on this planet. Definitely, not to work 80 hr weeks in a job that one does not have a passion for. How does one realize own passion to make a living? A job where you are eager to jump out of the bed most mornings, get to work and kick some butt.
How and when does one realize ones own passion to make a living? When does one make the switch risking your boring but safe-bet life? There is no right answer. It can happen anytime in your life. When you are no longer having 'fun' most of the time(remember, no job is fun all the time), it is time to try something new. The 'something new' could be what you have been wanting to pursue for a while or a job or an organization that fits your values.
In my case, I took my first job in the USA about 15 years ago as a failure analysis engineer to work on identifying the root cause of failed semiconductor chips and finding a solution. I definitely loved solving problems. However, I missed interacting with people. I, then moved to roles in marketing, general management and even founded a couple of companies. During those times, I realized that one can have fun at work only when there is a match in values between yours and your bosses and the organization's. Leaders2020 and the concept of the Facebook application 'OfficeBook' was born as a result of those years of experience to help job seekers find the right place to work.
However, I have started to realize lately that I truly loved 'helping people' in all those interactions and in all those years. Being an advisor to many friends find their next fun job was something that I really loved. Working with them to understand their requirements, interest and passion and helping colleagues find the right fit interested me. Is human resources (HR) the right place for me? Is it time for another change this late? I am just 40 years young and have over half my life left to enjoy working.
It's never too late for a change. Do what you really want to do. Go for it. Follow your passion.
How and when does one realize ones own passion to make a living? When does one make the switch risking your boring but safe-bet life? There is no right answer. It can happen anytime in your life. When you are no longer having 'fun' most of the time(remember, no job is fun all the time), it is time to try something new. The 'something new' could be what you have been wanting to pursue for a while or a job or an organization that fits your values.
In my case, I took my first job in the USA about 15 years ago as a failure analysis engineer to work on identifying the root cause of failed semiconductor chips and finding a solution. I definitely loved solving problems. However, I missed interacting with people. I, then moved to roles in marketing, general management and even founded a couple of companies. During those times, I realized that one can have fun at work only when there is a match in values between yours and your bosses and the organization's. Leaders2020 and the concept of the Facebook application 'OfficeBook' was born as a result of those years of experience to help job seekers find the right place to work.
However, I have started to realize lately that I truly loved 'helping people' in all those interactions and in all those years. Being an advisor to many friends find their next fun job was something that I really loved. Working with them to understand their requirements, interest and passion and helping colleagues find the right fit interested me. Is human resources (HR) the right place for me? Is it time for another change this late? I am just 40 years young and have over half my life left to enjoy working.
It's never too late for a change. Do what you really want to do. Go for it. Follow your passion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)