I’m in Washington, DC this week: so far, I’ve seen two plays; seen the presidential motorcade whiz by; shopped at the Eastern Market, and visited the technology exhibit at the Smithsonian. The Smithsonian exhibit made me think of Jun’s overview of technology – Generation of knowledge and process in order to develop systems to solve problems that extend human capabilities. This HRIS class has definitely changed the way in which I think about things, and not just in terms of Human Resources. I am much more cognizant of technology all around me. Given that this is my 16th blog, this seems like a good opportunity to briefly reflect on what I’ve learned over the past 8.5 weeks.
What I hoped to learn from the class was an overview of HRIS technologies, including the basic systems set up and how the technology has changed the basic functions of HR. I have learned the processes that HR-related computer software can improve (hiring the right people, increasing employee productivity, managing employee records, managing employee benefits, payroll, performance management, compensation managements, learning management, and succession planning). While I’m still a little hazy on how that old-fashioned “back-office” HRIS stuff functions, I think that I’ve been given enough information to study it on my own. I learned that the architecture of these systems is relational databases, which I am very familiar with in a different context. Moving forward, I hope to explore newer HR systems like Zoho or OrangeHRM on my once the class is over. I’m actually excited to continue my learning through demos/sandboxes in this manner.
I have learned that the “back-office” HRIS systems were primarily intended to address administrative functions (that ever-replenishing mound of paperwork that still sits on my desk as a result of being a manually based HR administrator). HRIS has automated many of these laborious tasks, which has created the space for HR professionals to expand into more strategic areas. In hand with this, innovators are expanding the capabilities of HR technology to match. Web 2.0 has created user interfaces that allow for great ease in self-service that streamlines many processes. The rapid pace of technological improvements makes me realize that what is trendy today may be passé in a year, so it is really important to stay current.
Social networking has become an important component of communication. As more and more people connect in this manner, businesses are recognizing its value and figuring out ways in which they can utilize the technology in the workplace. HR Technologies are incorporating social networking to bring people together.
The changing demographics of the workforce will impact HR. Millennial, Gen Xers, and Baby Boomers will all be collaborating in the workforce, but they have very different work and communications styles. These differences are highlighted in the ways in which people use technology and their comfort in the ever-changing technological landscape. Businesses need to be conscious of this and create mechanisms for keeping technologically current to engage millennial, and ensuring that Baby Boomers can keep up.
I’ll be leaving class better equipped to handle social technology. I have my twitter account, my blog, my LinkedIn account, and now my Facebook account (and, yes, my daughter is my very first Facebook friend). I feel generally comfortable navigating these sites, and I will do my best to remain engaged in these technologies after the class is over. I have a much better understanding of the way in which Web 2.0 and SaaS have changed the Internet landscape, and I truly appreciate the possibilities this creates for business processes.
I will leave class feeling better prepared for the Future of Work, whether within the realm of HR or beyond. I may not have the ease and fluidity in technology use as a millennial, but I’m not afraid to get out there and give it my best effort. During my vacation, I was telling one of my friends about what we’ve been studying in class, and she said it sounds like something everyone should be required to learn. I wholeheartedly agree.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
How to get the scanners to like your resume
The demonstrations of Avature and Taleo amazed me. But it also made me curious about how a recruiter could possibly handle all of the information that they would receive from prospective candidates. Talk about information overload. I thought it would be interesting to find out more about the selection process when using these recruiting tools. I found an article in Fortune Magazine about Taleo recruiting for its own open VP of Product Marketing. The Chief Marketing Officer said they normally would get about 50 resumes for this type of position, but in this economy the received 250 resumes. But while the applicant pool quadrupled, the time he spent on reviewing candidates did not because he used Taleo’s own .candidate-screening program to narrow the candidate pool. He was able to quickly narrow down the applicant pool to a manageable 20 candidates. How? The automated resume scanning process that picks out key words to determine if the candidate’s resume is a good match to the posted position.
This ease in screening resumes is theoretically great for busy managers who do not want to wade through 250 resumes, many of whom probably shouldn’t be considered. Many companies are using this type of candidate selection software. According to the article, Taleo has 3,900 customers, including 48 of the Fortune 100 companies. Every quarter, 10 million new candidates apply to companies such as Starbucks, IBM and JPMorgan through Taleo software.
In order to have your resume be competitive these days, you have to understand how these systems work so that you can make sure that your resume is scan-worthy. Your enthusiasm and years of experience may not help you if your resume doesn't get picked by scanning software.
These systems function by the software parsing and scanning each submitted resume and breaking out the applicant's levels of experience. This information is summarized some for the hiring manager, who can also filter and define criteria. If an applicant’s resume meets all the criteria, s/he goes to the top of the list as a qualified candidate. Hiring managers set the candidate requirements - years of experience, level of education, location, etc. - and also can determine how many of these parameters the applicant must match.
The fact that an applicant can apply on line makes it tempting to assume that you can create a single resume and send it out en masse (what the article terms “spray and pray”). But, this is not an effective strategy because you need to tailor your resume to meet the specific parameters of the job postings. Otherwise the scanner will pass your resume right by. To be effective in this process, you must research each position you are interested in, and carefully read the position description posted online. Then, you need to figure out how to add the key phrases into your resume to directly reflect what the business is looking for in a candidate.
Here are some tips from the article:
If you just don't have a skill listed on the posting, you should not embellish but you can add the keyword in creative ways. If, for example, the job calls for someone with knowledge of SAS, a way to get around it is to say "SAS familiarity," "currently studying SAS," or even "SAS interest." You might not have the skill, but at least it puts you one step closer to having your resume read.
Along with reflecting the skills and experience listed in the job posting, you should use words that are industry specific. For human resources candidates, for example, terms like "leadership development," "talent management," and "succession planning" are key. Passé terms like personnel should be left out. Some professional resume writers suggest having a section at the top of your resume where you list core competencies or areas of knowledge. It's a good place to repeat some of the requirements in the job description. But make sure you're able to back it up with something in the body of the resume that speaks to those core competencies.
Most importantly, the article states that the resume needs to make sense to both the software and a human reader. It doesn't do you any good to get flagged by the software only to have a hiring manager think your resume looks like gibberish because you've overloaded it with key words."
Source: Beth Kowitt, Fortune Magazine, April 2009
This ease in screening resumes is theoretically great for busy managers who do not want to wade through 250 resumes, many of whom probably shouldn’t be considered. Many companies are using this type of candidate selection software. According to the article, Taleo has 3,900 customers, including 48 of the Fortune 100 companies. Every quarter, 10 million new candidates apply to companies such as Starbucks, IBM and JPMorgan through Taleo software.
In order to have your resume be competitive these days, you have to understand how these systems work so that you can make sure that your resume is scan-worthy. Your enthusiasm and years of experience may not help you if your resume doesn't get picked by scanning software.
These systems function by the software parsing and scanning each submitted resume and breaking out the applicant's levels of experience. This information is summarized some for the hiring manager, who can also filter and define criteria. If an applicant’s resume meets all the criteria, s/he goes to the top of the list as a qualified candidate. Hiring managers set the candidate requirements - years of experience, level of education, location, etc. - and also can determine how many of these parameters the applicant must match.
The fact that an applicant can apply on line makes it tempting to assume that you can create a single resume and send it out en masse (what the article terms “spray and pray”). But, this is not an effective strategy because you need to tailor your resume to meet the specific parameters of the job postings. Otherwise the scanner will pass your resume right by. To be effective in this process, you must research each position you are interested in, and carefully read the position description posted online. Then, you need to figure out how to add the key phrases into your resume to directly reflect what the business is looking for in a candidate.
Here are some tips from the article:
If you just don't have a skill listed on the posting, you should not embellish but you can add the keyword in creative ways. If, for example, the job calls for someone with knowledge of SAS, a way to get around it is to say "SAS familiarity," "currently studying SAS," or even "SAS interest." You might not have the skill, but at least it puts you one step closer to having your resume read.
Along with reflecting the skills and experience listed in the job posting, you should use words that are industry specific. For human resources candidates, for example, terms like "leadership development," "talent management," and "succession planning" are key. Passé terms like personnel should be left out. Some professional resume writers suggest having a section at the top of your resume where you list core competencies or areas of knowledge. It's a good place to repeat some of the requirements in the job description. But make sure you're able to back it up with something in the body of the resume that speaks to those core competencies.
Most importantly, the article states that the resume needs to make sense to both the software and a human reader. It doesn't do you any good to get flagged by the software only to have a hiring manager think your resume looks like gibberish because you've overloaded it with key words."
Source: Beth Kowitt, Fortune Magazine, April 2009
CompareHRIS.Com
I was interested in a twitter post that someone sent about HRComparison.Com (and its US counterpart CompareHRIS.com). I followed the link and, for fun, played around with the HRIS Selector Tool. I thought it would be a good exercise for me since my organization has no HRIS system in place currently, and we could definitely use something like this as a starting point should we decide to consider a HRIS/HRM system.
The Selector Tool walked me through the standard features available through all participating vendors, and asked if I wanted specific features and how important it is in my software decision. If I selected certain features, I was asked additional questions to further define my needs for that feature. The Selector Tool also asked me if I wanted to exclude vendors that didn’t include particular features. Once I completed the survey, I was provided a list of products that most closely matched the requirements of my input selection.
Based upon the information I provided, the CompareHRIS selection tool indicates that these 7 vendors would meet my needs: iVantage® HRIS; InfinityHR; HR.net Enterprise; HRA HRIS; HRnetSource HRIS; Ceridian HR/Payroll Latitude; SharedHR. The next step would be to research these vendors to learn more specifics about each company and their products utilize a demo, investigate costs, etc.
I noted that this is an advertising tool for the HR software companies, who pay to participate. This made me somewhat skeptical because I wondered how this affected the products included in the selection process. I did not recognize the names of the vendors suggested for me, but I am not well-versed in this area. I did read on the site that their goal is to create an expansive library of products; I’m just not sure how successful they’ve been at it.
This was an interesting “field trip” and a good way to me to get a general understanding of the basic features available in most HRIS systems. In addition to the Selection Tool, the site also had a Products page, articles related to HRIS selection, and tips on how to make a wise HRIS/HRMS software purchasing decision. If I were seriously initiating a search for the ideal software solution for my organization, I wouldn’t use this as my only resource, but it helped provide a framework for the selection process.
The Selector Tool walked me through the standard features available through all participating vendors, and asked if I wanted specific features and how important it is in my software decision. If I selected certain features, I was asked additional questions to further define my needs for that feature. The Selector Tool also asked me if I wanted to exclude vendors that didn’t include particular features. Once I completed the survey, I was provided a list of products that most closely matched the requirements of my input selection.
Based upon the information I provided, the CompareHRIS selection tool indicates that these 7 vendors would meet my needs: iVantage® HRIS; InfinityHR; HR.net Enterprise; HRA HRIS; HRnetSource HRIS; Ceridian HR/Payroll Latitude; SharedHR. The next step would be to research these vendors to learn more specifics about each company and their products utilize a demo, investigate costs, etc.
I noted that this is an advertising tool for the HR software companies, who pay to participate. This made me somewhat skeptical because I wondered how this affected the products included in the selection process. I did not recognize the names of the vendors suggested for me, but I am not well-versed in this area. I did read on the site that their goal is to create an expansive library of products; I’m just not sure how successful they’ve been at it.
This was an interesting “field trip” and a good way to me to get a general understanding of the basic features available in most HRIS systems. In addition to the Selection Tool, the site also had a Products page, articles related to HRIS selection, and tips on how to make a wise HRIS/HRMS software purchasing decision. If I were seriously initiating a search for the ideal software solution for my organization, I wouldn’t use this as my only resource, but it helped provide a framework for the selection process.
Monday, July 20, 2009
successful social networking in business
In her article, Social Networking Connects Business, Karen Banna discusses the opportunities and challenges as social networking sites find a home in corporate settings. It is very important that businesses establish the use of social networking as a function in line with strategic business goals, such as engaging with customers, driving sales, or getting employees talking internally. John Kembel, CEO of HiveLive, Inc., a Boulder, Colorado-based developer of social networking software says, "some companies start with a focus on internal collaboration and efficiency, while others start with more of an external focus on customer engagement. We've seen the greatest success with those companies that start externally, bringing customers closer to their business though a community. This extroverted posture makes for the fastest cultural shift, driving innovation and competitive advantage."
Once the goal of networking has been established by the business, it is important to try a pilot program to ensure that the software works effectively for the business purpose. Some companies find better success if they have two different programs: one for external networking and another one for internal networking. Once the best software design(s) have been established, it is important to create acceptable-use policies that achieve the delicate balance of restricting improper use while still encouraging the freedom to communicate and collaborate in an effective manner.
The benefit to employees in utilizing social networking in business is to reduce information overload. Studies have shown that employees are more productive if they have many network contacts that create reliable source to help filter incoming information. 60% of all U.S. workers have used at least one networking site in the past year. Employees benefit from communicating with other employees to discuss problems, brainstorm potential solutions, and share different skill sets. Customers benefit by being able to interact with the business in a direct and collaborative manner, thereby increasing the quality and quantity of their feedback. The business benefits by increased productivity and innovation in its employees, and by increased customer satisfaction. When engineered properly, social networking is a win-win-win opportunity.
IDC provides the following five ways that businesses can succeed with social networking:
1) Assess your business needs before testing technologies so you can match needs with functionality.
2) Get at least one person from each business unit to test any potential technologies. Different business units have different needs, so what works for the IT department may be lacking for the marketing department.
3) To prevent abuses, create an "acceptable use" policy that provides employees with guidelines for using the company's social networking tools.
4) Determine how easily social networking tools can be integrated with your existing technology.
5) Install filtering an monitoring software. That way, you can monitor what's going in and out of the company and prevent or detect abuses.
source: www.smartenterprisemag.com
Once the goal of networking has been established by the business, it is important to try a pilot program to ensure that the software works effectively for the business purpose. Some companies find better success if they have two different programs: one for external networking and another one for internal networking. Once the best software design(s) have been established, it is important to create acceptable-use policies that achieve the delicate balance of restricting improper use while still encouraging the freedom to communicate and collaborate in an effective manner.
The benefit to employees in utilizing social networking in business is to reduce information overload. Studies have shown that employees are more productive if they have many network contacts that create reliable source to help filter incoming information. 60% of all U.S. workers have used at least one networking site in the past year. Employees benefit from communicating with other employees to discuss problems, brainstorm potential solutions, and share different skill sets. Customers benefit by being able to interact with the business in a direct and collaborative manner, thereby increasing the quality and quantity of their feedback. The business benefits by increased productivity and innovation in its employees, and by increased customer satisfaction. When engineered properly, social networking is a win-win-win opportunity.
IDC provides the following five ways that businesses can succeed with social networking:
1) Assess your business needs before testing technologies so you can match needs with functionality.
2) Get at least one person from each business unit to test any potential technologies. Different business units have different needs, so what works for the IT department may be lacking for the marketing department.
3) To prevent abuses, create an "acceptable use" policy that provides employees with guidelines for using the company's social networking tools.
4) Determine how easily social networking tools can be integrated with your existing technology.
5) Install filtering an monitoring software. That way, you can monitor what's going in and out of the company and prevent or detect abuses.
source: www.smartenterprisemag.com
twitter hacked!!
The recent press on the Twitter hack shows how our personal laziness can come back to haunt us. There are tons of on-line articles to read about this incident, and there seems to be lots of blame to go around on how this happened.
To me, this incident points out the potential vulnerability of web 2.0 systems and why we need to be really careful about the information we choose to put on shared drives and in clouds. This dovetails with the password security and packet sniffer discussion we had in my HRIS class last week. It's not that the security isn't there, exactly; it's that it is fairly easy to get around when users aren't vigilent in their use.
Apparently, the Twitter administrator's password was stolen by someone hacking his personal account which used the same password as his google account. All of Twitter's internal documents are stored as Google Docs, which resulted in the hacker getting access to highly sensitive documents through Google.
I have long been concerned about security issues related to Internet communications. I never put my social security number on any web form, ever. I resisted on-line payments for longer than most, but the ease and convenience won me over. At work, I've consistently been the nay-sayer to web application and payments from our membership without encrypted security. The liability for the organization, not to mention the potential damage to the customer is just too great. I cringe when our benefits broker requests the employee census electronically. I usually feel like I'm being too conservative and behind-the-times. Now I realize there is at least some justification for my concerns.
Those who are critical of cloud computing are probably going to have a field day using this incident as an example of the problems inherent in shared resources. I'm not savvy enough to write a critique on the technological shortcomings that contributed to this situation. I do, however, recognize the inevitable operator error here. Humans are lazy. When faced with multiple accounts requiring passwords, the Twitter Admin did what many of us do regularly. He didn't use a unique password for his accounts. The hacker didn't have to be a rocket scientist to crack the code.
Here are a couple of interesting articles if you haven't reached over saturation on the topic. I have to go now..... I have a couple dozen passwords to change :)
How Microsoft and habit abetted Twitter Hack: http://tinyurl.com/n4hrvj
Twitter docs hack exploits stupidity : http://tinyurl.com/n6yngk
To me, this incident points out the potential vulnerability of web 2.0 systems and why we need to be really careful about the information we choose to put on shared drives and in clouds. This dovetails with the password security and packet sniffer discussion we had in my HRIS class last week. It's not that the security isn't there, exactly; it's that it is fairly easy to get around when users aren't vigilent in their use.
Apparently, the Twitter administrator's password was stolen by someone hacking his personal account which used the same password as his google account. All of Twitter's internal documents are stored as Google Docs, which resulted in the hacker getting access to highly sensitive documents through Google.
I have long been concerned about security issues related to Internet communications. I never put my social security number on any web form, ever. I resisted on-line payments for longer than most, but the ease and convenience won me over. At work, I've consistently been the nay-sayer to web application and payments from our membership without encrypted security. The liability for the organization, not to mention the potential damage to the customer is just too great. I cringe when our benefits broker requests the employee census electronically. I usually feel like I'm being too conservative and behind-the-times. Now I realize there is at least some justification for my concerns.
Those who are critical of cloud computing are probably going to have a field day using this incident as an example of the problems inherent in shared resources. I'm not savvy enough to write a critique on the technological shortcomings that contributed to this situation. I do, however, recognize the inevitable operator error here. Humans are lazy. When faced with multiple accounts requiring passwords, the Twitter Admin did what many of us do regularly. He didn't use a unique password for his accounts. The hacker didn't have to be a rocket scientist to crack the code.
Here are a couple of interesting articles if you haven't reached over saturation on the topic. I have to go now..... I have a couple dozen passwords to change :)
How Microsoft and habit abetted Twitter Hack: http://tinyurl.com/n4hrvj
Twitter docs hack exploits stupidity : http://tinyurl.com/n6yngk
Sunday, July 19, 2009
on-line recommendations
An unexpected consequence of expanding my virtual network presence (see previous blog entry) was a recommendation request from one of my contacts. Someone had previously mentioned to me how important recommendations were on Linkedin, but I didn't expect to get a request within a day of creating my profile.
The request raises a new dilemma about recommendations, which we've previously grappled outside of cyber-space. The dilemma, which faces everyone, is the liability associated with providing a reference. These days, it seems like more and more businesses err on the side of caution and only provide the most basic facts in reference checks (yes, s/he worked here; yes, the dates of employment and/or salary data are correct). How, then, will on-line recommendations fit within these parameters? A co-worker and I decided we should run the query by the boss before doing the Linkedin recommendation. We've yet to hear back.
As is often the case these days, I almost immediately received a twitter post with related content (how do other people know what I'm thinking about?) It was a link to a blog entitled "Requested Recommendations on Social Networks: Why I Won't Do It" http://bit.ly/zq4Pp
The author thought that the filters in the Linkedin recommendation process dilute their value. Specifically, he thought the fact that the reviewee can review the submitted recommendation and then accept or reject it meant that there would rarely be objective content in those recommendations that end up being posted. Plus, it seems that providing a bad recommendation about someone in a public forum doesn't reflect particularly well on the contributor either.
The blog raised some interesting points, but they didn't seem unique to on-line recommendation processes. Potential employers face the same challenges getting objective information in hard-copy letters of recommendation and/or telephone references. I am asked to do a lot of letters of recommendation. I wouldn't accept the assignment if I didn't think I could act as a positive reference. That's not to say that I'm not objective in the content of the letter, but I screen out those few requests from people who wouldn't be well served by the information I could provide. As a reference seeker, I would not ask someone unless I felt that, on balance, they could recommend me positively. These same tendencies are going to transfer to technological processes as well. If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.
There are ways to improve the content of recommendations so they aren't such puff pieces, which is the overarching criticism in the blogpost. Recommendations that include specific examples of projects or outcomes will give a prospective employer better information than generalized statements like "s/he's a real people person." And, of course, people are trying to be creative in the way in which they obtain information. It seems like it's standard practice these days to Google job applicants to see what turns up. Sources with less filtering and more organic content generation, such as blogs and Twitter, may be the next wave. Untimately, we may end up being own own best (or worst) reference.
The request raises a new dilemma about recommendations, which we've previously grappled outside of cyber-space. The dilemma, which faces everyone, is the liability associated with providing a reference. These days, it seems like more and more businesses err on the side of caution and only provide the most basic facts in reference checks (yes, s/he worked here; yes, the dates of employment and/or salary data are correct). How, then, will on-line recommendations fit within these parameters? A co-worker and I decided we should run the query by the boss before doing the Linkedin recommendation. We've yet to hear back.
As is often the case these days, I almost immediately received a twitter post with related content (how do other people know what I'm thinking about?) It was a link to a blog entitled "Requested Recommendations on Social Networks: Why I Won't Do It" http://bit.ly/zq4Pp
The author thought that the filters in the Linkedin recommendation process dilute their value. Specifically, he thought the fact that the reviewee can review the submitted recommendation and then accept or reject it meant that there would rarely be objective content in those recommendations that end up being posted. Plus, it seems that providing a bad recommendation about someone in a public forum doesn't reflect particularly well on the contributor either.
The blog raised some interesting points, but they didn't seem unique to on-line recommendation processes. Potential employers face the same challenges getting objective information in hard-copy letters of recommendation and/or telephone references. I am asked to do a lot of letters of recommendation. I wouldn't accept the assignment if I didn't think I could act as a positive reference. That's not to say that I'm not objective in the content of the letter, but I screen out those few requests from people who wouldn't be well served by the information I could provide. As a reference seeker, I would not ask someone unless I felt that, on balance, they could recommend me positively. These same tendencies are going to transfer to technological processes as well. If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.
There are ways to improve the content of recommendations so they aren't such puff pieces, which is the overarching criticism in the blogpost. Recommendations that include specific examples of projects or outcomes will give a prospective employer better information than generalized statements like "s/he's a real people person." And, of course, people are trying to be creative in the way in which they obtain information. It seems like it's standard practice these days to Google job applicants to see what turns up. Sources with less filtering and more organic content generation, such as blogs and Twitter, may be the next wave. Untimately, we may end up being own own best (or worst) reference.
Sunday, July 12, 2009
expanding my network
I have capitulated (or seen the light) and created a Linkedin profile for myself. I have sent out a handful of invitations for people to link up with me (no surprise that the first accept came from my socially connected friend from friday's blog!), but being selective may not be the best strategy. Who knows? I'm not sure exactly what I'm expecting to achieve with this, but I can't really figure out the benefits unless I give it a try.
I read an article in the paper this morning about using networking sites for job-hunting purposes, which said you really need to use both Linkedin and Facebook in order to maximize your connections. I still think of Facebook as a student-driven thing, although I certainly know professionals use it also. Maybe I'll join if my daughter is willing to "friend" me...
I am enjoying twitter to the extent that I like the information that other people post. I've started to follow some HR folks outside of our class to expand my tweeter feed. I find that following the posted links by everyone (classmates, too) lead to very interesting articles, blogs, and podcasts that I wouldn't take the time to search out on my own. I followed one link that Steve Boese posted on Twitter: 8 ways to avoid overwhelming your follower's twitter stream. The advice was geared towards tweeting in a manner that wouldn't irritate one's followers by over-tweeting. http://bit.ly/v5Ly2
I'm not worried about overwhelming anyone with my additions; I'm much more likely to underwhelm. I worry that I'm not going to easily make the jump to the next step of active participation in these collaborative networks. I tend to be a pretty reserved person and I don't voluntarily share that much information about myself. Instead, I enjoy learning about other people and their interests. I'm afraid that I'll end up being one of those folks that posts once-in-a-blue-moon, which I hear is bad form. Blogging a few times a week is helpful; knowing I have a required number of posts to do forces me to share (and my apologies to all of you!) The next challenge for me will be to see if I can step outside of my normal comfort zone and start sharing voluntarily...
I read an article in the paper this morning about using networking sites for job-hunting purposes, which said you really need to use both Linkedin and Facebook in order to maximize your connections. I still think of Facebook as a student-driven thing, although I certainly know professionals use it also. Maybe I'll join if my daughter is willing to "friend" me...
I am enjoying twitter to the extent that I like the information that other people post. I've started to follow some HR folks outside of our class to expand my tweeter feed. I find that following the posted links by everyone (classmates, too) lead to very interesting articles, blogs, and podcasts that I wouldn't take the time to search out on my own. I followed one link that Steve Boese posted on Twitter: 8 ways to avoid overwhelming your follower's twitter stream. The advice was geared towards tweeting in a manner that wouldn't irritate one's followers by over-tweeting. http://bit.ly/v5Ly2
I'm not worried about overwhelming anyone with my additions; I'm much more likely to underwhelm. I worry that I'm not going to easily make the jump to the next step of active participation in these collaborative networks. I tend to be a pretty reserved person and I don't voluntarily share that much information about myself. Instead, I enjoy learning about other people and their interests. I'm afraid that I'll end up being one of those folks that posts once-in-a-blue-moon, which I hear is bad form. Blogging a few times a week is helpful; knowing I have a required number of posts to do forces me to share (and my apologies to all of you!) The next challenge for me will be to see if I can step outside of my normal comfort zone and start sharing voluntarily...
Friday, July 10, 2009
The law of the few?
Today, I spent the afternoon writing a letter of recommendation for a long-time friend and colleague. One of her greatest strengths is her ability to network with people. She is the most connected person I've ever met. This skill, which I've been amazed to witness over the years, is very difficult to effectively articulate in a reference. As I was thinking about it, I began considering the relative differences between old-fashioned networking, and the on-line veresion now occurring through facebook, linked-in, and twitter.
In the book, The Tipping Point, Malcolm Gladwell discusses the key elements necessary for social change. Tipping points are "the levels at which the momentum for change becomes unstoppable". One of the key elements is the involvement of certain types of people with unique social skills who keep the momentum going. He references "the law of the few" - where 80% of the effort will be done by 20% of the participants. These "few" he describes in three categories as:
Connectors - people who "link us up with the world ... people with a special gift for bringing the world together. " Gladwell attributes the social success of Connectors to something intrinsic to their personality. My friend is most definitely a Connector.
Mavens- "information specialists", or "people we rely upon to connect us with new information." According to Gladwell, Mavens start "word-of-mouth epidemics" due to their knowledge, social skills, and ability to communicate.
Salesmen - those charismatic few with powerful negotiation skills. They tend to have an indefinable trait that goes beyond what they say, which makes others want to agree with them.
Since these days I primarily think of social networking within the context of my HRIS class, I imagine that Gladwell's "few" are the driving force behind advances in social collaboration and HRM. They are the ones to naturally be in the forefront of use, knowledge, and persuasion.
This leads me to wonder.....Are the people actively engaged in on-line social networks those who tend to be socially connected out in the world anyway? Or, does the new technology allow people who aren't natural networkers to be more active that they would otherwise? I know that we are changing the nature of interactions, but are people changing too? I don't have any answers, but I'm intrigued by the questions. I'd be interested to learn what others think about this.
In the book, The Tipping Point, Malcolm Gladwell discusses the key elements necessary for social change. Tipping points are "the levels at which the momentum for change becomes unstoppable". One of the key elements is the involvement of certain types of people with unique social skills who keep the momentum going. He references "the law of the few" - where 80% of the effort will be done by 20% of the participants. These "few" he describes in three categories as:
Connectors - people who "link us up with the world ... people with a special gift for bringing the world together. " Gladwell attributes the social success of Connectors to something intrinsic to their personality. My friend is most definitely a Connector.
Mavens- "information specialists", or "people we rely upon to connect us with new information." According to Gladwell, Mavens start "word-of-mouth epidemics" due to their knowledge, social skills, and ability to communicate.
Salesmen - those charismatic few with powerful negotiation skills. They tend to have an indefinable trait that goes beyond what they say, which makes others want to agree with them.
Since these days I primarily think of social networking within the context of my HRIS class, I imagine that Gladwell's "few" are the driving force behind advances in social collaboration and HRM. They are the ones to naturally be in the forefront of use, knowledge, and persuasion.
This leads me to wonder.....Are the people actively engaged in on-line social networks those who tend to be socially connected out in the world anyway? Or, does the new technology allow people who aren't natural networkers to be more active that they would otherwise? I know that we are changing the nature of interactions, but are people changing too? I don't have any answers, but I'm intrigued by the questions. I'd be interested to learn what others think about this.
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Twitterpated
I experienced my first tweet chat last night and it was an interesting experience for me. I definitely felt like the shy kid in the back of the classroom again! I'm still getting used to the lingo used in twitter so I didn't always get it, but it was interesting to lurk. I am going to go back and check out some of the links that other people provided; looked like some interesting information to investigate. Bravo to my many classmates who jumped right in and participated!
I got stuck at work late yesterday afternoon so I had to be "in class" at the office. It was really distracting for me (people kept interrupting me). I misread a couple of the quiz questions (so much for multi-tasking!) which bummed me out. But, I learned something interesting about my co-workers.....As people noticed that I was on twitter, I got a lot of negative feedback. I was very surprised that every college student that wandered through was not active in the Twitter world. I thought everyone was doing it! It helped me better understand the resistance I've gotten to the idea of using yammer as an alternative to e-mail. I honestly thought it would be an easy sell. People seem to think that facebook, e-mail & IM are enough right now. But I'll keep working on my colleagues. We are hiring a new communications coordinator next week, so hopefully s/he will be excited by the idea of expanding our collaborative capabilities. We'll see.
I got stuck at work late yesterday afternoon so I had to be "in class" at the office. It was really distracting for me (people kept interrupting me). I misread a couple of the quiz questions (so much for multi-tasking!) which bummed me out. But, I learned something interesting about my co-workers.....As people noticed that I was on twitter, I got a lot of negative feedback. I was very surprised that every college student that wandered through was not active in the Twitter world. I thought everyone was doing it! It helped me better understand the resistance I've gotten to the idea of using yammer as an alternative to e-mail. I honestly thought it would be an easy sell. People seem to think that facebook, e-mail & IM are enough right now. But I'll keep working on my colleagues. We are hiring a new communications coordinator next week, so hopefully s/he will be excited by the idea of expanding our collaborative capabilities. We'll see.
Monday, July 6, 2009
Strategic Planning.....Tour de France
I'm proud to report that I was on the relative forefront of social networking technology during the brainstorming sessions of my organization's annual strategic planning retreat last Thursday. We were discussing ways in which to expand recruitment efforts to increase the diversity of our student population and to better orient new members into the residential communities as soon as possible. While admittedly we are dealing with our client base of college students, some of the networking strategies that we've talked about to better connect and communicate with employees can also be utilized here. Let's look at modeling some of aspects of new member orientation from employee on-boarding strategies (productive members? productive employees? similar). Let's use the web as a means of getting our current members to connect with potential new members (u-tube, blogs). Want to increase feedback mechanisms from our current membership? (Rypple, blogs). My younger colleagues were impressed that I was willing to make these suggestions. Of course, the next step for me is to be help actually implement these things. At least I see them as viable options.
On a "what do you do in your free time" note, I'm not a big July 4th celebrant; my favorite parts of July are my daughter's birthday (21 in a week!!) and the annual Tour de France, which began on Saturday. When I was immersing myself in Tour details, I came across an article about how the riders use Web 2.0 technology. There are web-based coaching tools (such as Ridefast.com) that allow an athlete to track their training progress and communicate with their coaches. The writer noted that Lance Armstrong trains primarily in Europe or in Texas, but his coach lives and works in Colorado. They do most of their communication through Web & e-mail. They can both use the web-based training program at different locations in order to share instant feedback. I also read that a couple of stages of the Tour are to be done this year without the normal communication devices which allow the rider to communicate with their teams while out on the road (going retro). It will be interesting to see if it makes any difference in riders' tactics. Of course, I'm happy the web provides so much information about the race and the riders throughout the two-week event. Maybe some day I'll be able to go to France and watch it first-hand.....Until then, at least I have tivo and the web.
On a "what do you do in your free time" note, I'm not a big July 4th celebrant; my favorite parts of July are my daughter's birthday (21 in a week!!) and the annual Tour de France, which began on Saturday. When I was immersing myself in Tour details, I came across an article about how the riders use Web 2.0 technology. There are web-based coaching tools (such as Ridefast.com) that allow an athlete to track their training progress and communicate with their coaches. The writer noted that Lance Armstrong trains primarily in Europe or in Texas, but his coach lives and works in Colorado. They do most of their communication through Web & e-mail. They can both use the web-based training program at different locations in order to share instant feedback. I also read that a couple of stages of the Tour are to be done this year without the normal communication devices which allow the rider to communicate with their teams while out on the road (going retro). It will be interesting to see if it makes any difference in riders' tactics. Of course, I'm happy the web provides so much information about the race and the riders throughout the two-week event. Maybe some day I'll be able to go to France and watch it first-hand.....Until then, at least I have tivo and the web.
Monday, June 29, 2009
System of Record
I am suffering from serious information overload this week. There have been so many interesting posts and links related to #hrst that it's hard to know what to focus on. In the interest of attempting coherence in this post, I'm going to just write a quick blog about Naomi Bloom's white paper, System of Record.
Ms. Bloom raised what has long been a question to me: how to clearly differentiate strategic HR from administrative HR processes. It always sounds like it should be easy, but it isn't always that clear cut in my mind. In my experience, the administrative components are the building blocks that allow for the higher-level management processes to take place. I appreciated her definition of strategic HRM as specific data, processes and business rules that increase the degree to which the organization's mission is accomplished by improving the performance of individuals and groups. When presented in this manner, it makes that effectively leveraging the Knowledge, Skills, Abilities, and other characteristics (KSOACs) should be the center of strategic HRM.
The concept of integrated IT systems that support both the administrative and strategic functions will undoubtedly be the wave of the future, once developed and launched. I imagine that these will be SaaS-delivered systems, as Ms. Bloom suggests, because this seems to be the way things are moving in general with technology. The benefit I see in SaaS systems is what I think of as "passive improvements" on the part of the user. If the system is constantly upgraded for all users whenever upgrades are made in the system by the service provider, then your organization never falls behind technologically (or at least with the software). I understand from other articles that not all systems that are billed as SaaS actually perform in this manner. But, I think it is something people will come to expect and rely upon. But that's another post for another day.
Ms. Bloom raised what has long been a question to me: how to clearly differentiate strategic HR from administrative HR processes. It always sounds like it should be easy, but it isn't always that clear cut in my mind. In my experience, the administrative components are the building blocks that allow for the higher-level management processes to take place. I appreciated her definition of strategic HRM as specific data, processes and business rules that increase the degree to which the organization's mission is accomplished by improving the performance of individuals and groups. When presented in this manner, it makes that effectively leveraging the Knowledge, Skills, Abilities, and other characteristics (KSOACs) should be the center of strategic HRM.
The concept of integrated IT systems that support both the administrative and strategic functions will undoubtedly be the wave of the future, once developed and launched. I imagine that these will be SaaS-delivered systems, as Ms. Bloom suggests, because this seems to be the way things are moving in general with technology. The benefit I see in SaaS systems is what I think of as "passive improvements" on the part of the user. If the system is constantly upgraded for all users whenever upgrades are made in the system by the service provider, then your organization never falls behind technologically (or at least with the software). I understand from other articles that not all systems that are billed as SaaS actually perform in this manner. But, I think it is something people will come to expect and rely upon. But that's another post for another day.
Musings on Projects
I've been giving a lot of thought to potential processes I could use as the core of my final project for class. I definitely appreciated Jun's comment about needing to clearly identify the problem before considering technology as the solution. There have been more instances than I can count where whiz-kid college students (our member base) have volunteered in our office doing a function that they decided they could computerize for us. In some instances, the projects have been spectacular failures, while others were well-executed successes. I have learned that the key ingredient to a successful process has been a programmer who truly listens to the needs of the customer. Where projects have failed, the programmer has made critically flawed assumptions about the business needs that drive the process. They thought that what they saw on the surface was all there was to it. Where projects have succeeded, the programmer has been willing to commit significant lead-time into asking questions about the underlying processes.
As Jun was describing the project management steps in class last week, I was relieved to learn that I generally perform those steps when working on a project, even though I've never really thought of the process in such a systematic way before. I've just been winging it, but in a way that was common sense to me -- think things through, create something meaningful, "sell it" to the decision-makers, and implement it successfully.
So, how does this affect my thinking about my project? I'm hoping to generate a project concept that will improve a business process I already perform on the job. As I've mentioned previously (probably several times at this point), my organization's HR functions are not supported by HRIS. This means I have many business processes that could benefit from some IT solutions. I have a couple of ideas in mind currently: systematizing our current employee/volunteer application process; integrating record-keeping related to wages & bonuses; or creating a wiki-type HR resource for employees. Improving any one of these processes will not only save me time, but will also make information more accessible to all employees.
As Jun was describing the project management steps in class last week, I was relieved to learn that I generally perform those steps when working on a project, even though I've never really thought of the process in such a systematic way before. I've just been winging it, but in a way that was common sense to me -- think things through, create something meaningful, "sell it" to the decision-makers, and implement it successfully.
So, how does this affect my thinking about my project? I'm hoping to generate a project concept that will improve a business process I already perform on the job. As I've mentioned previously (probably several times at this point), my organization's HR functions are not supported by HRIS. This means I have many business processes that could benefit from some IT solutions. I have a couple of ideas in mind currently: systematizing our current employee/volunteer application process; integrating record-keeping related to wages & bonuses; or creating a wiki-type HR resource for employees. Improving any one of these processes will not only save me time, but will also make information more accessible to all employees.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Community Building and The Machine
I've been on vacation the past two weeks, well, just because.... I've spent a lot of time taking care of family business, visiting friends I haven't hung out with in awhile, and I've actually felt pretty busy. Today was the day I gave myself permission to do whatever I wanted. Mandatory downtime, so to speak. And how did I spend it? Surfing the web. For class. Voluntarily.
I am still absolutely blown away by the "cyber-revolution" as CNN calls the current situation in Iran. It's not just what's going on to protest the election; it's the manner in which the information coming out of the country has gone viral. It is an awesome (in the true meaning of the word) spectacle to behold. Go Twitter!
I watched the YouTube video, "The machine is us/ing us" and was fascinated by it. I searched for its creator, Mike Wesch, and found an hour-long presentation he did that discusses the aftermath of the video and the digital ethnography work he's doing at Kansas State onYouTube. Here is the link if anyone else is interested: http://mediatedcultures.net/youtube.htm
I was a social psychology major in college, and I'm specifically interested in group dynamics. My interests align with cultural anthropology, and I often enjoy digging deeper into the "why" of "why do people do these things?" His presentation helped me better understand the "why" of the YouTube phenomenon.
Wesch says he views media as mediating human relations, and that changes in media reflect changes in human relations. YouTube, and I would suggest other methods of networking on-line as well, are ways to connect in a world where community is otherwise in decline. He states that our way of life has become individualized, independent, and commercialized, but that we actually desire the inverse: community, relationships, and authenticity. He calls this a cultural inversion.
I realize that these are broader context issues and aren't HR specific. But, I think how we work reflects broader social issues. If HR folks pay attention to how culture is shifting around us, we can stay ahead of the curve where human/employee relations are concerned. People truly do want to feel connected and want to feel they are part of a community. This is where I get back on topic and try to relate this to Human Resources. If HRIS can use technology to further enhance the sense of work communities, then it will be a very beneficial enhancement. I'm excited about what I've learned about Web 2.0 technology and its potential to bring people together. I can see the HRIS potential conceptually (remember we have no HRIS where I work) and I'm interested in learning more about the reality as our class progresses.
Oh, and I put everyone's blogs on Google Reader today (great job, everyone; fun to read!)
I am still absolutely blown away by the "cyber-revolution" as CNN calls the current situation in Iran. It's not just what's going on to protest the election; it's the manner in which the information coming out of the country has gone viral. It is an awesome (in the true meaning of the word) spectacle to behold. Go Twitter!
I watched the YouTube video, "The machine is us/ing us" and was fascinated by it. I searched for its creator, Mike Wesch, and found an hour-long presentation he did that discusses the aftermath of the video and the digital ethnography work he's doing at Kansas State onYouTube. Here is the link if anyone else is interested: http://mediatedcultures.net/youtube.htm
I was a social psychology major in college, and I'm specifically interested in group dynamics. My interests align with cultural anthropology, and I often enjoy digging deeper into the "why" of "why do people do these things?" His presentation helped me better understand the "why" of the YouTube phenomenon.
Wesch says he views media as mediating human relations, and that changes in media reflect changes in human relations. YouTube, and I would suggest other methods of networking on-line as well, are ways to connect in a world where community is otherwise in decline. He states that our way of life has become individualized, independent, and commercialized, but that we actually desire the inverse: community, relationships, and authenticity. He calls this a cultural inversion.
I realize that these are broader context issues and aren't HR specific. But, I think how we work reflects broader social issues. If HR folks pay attention to how culture is shifting around us, we can stay ahead of the curve where human/employee relations are concerned. People truly do want to feel connected and want to feel they are part of a community. This is where I get back on topic and try to relate this to Human Resources. If HRIS can use technology to further enhance the sense of work communities, then it will be a very beneficial enhancement. I'm excited about what I've learned about Web 2.0 technology and its potential to bring people together. I can see the HRIS potential conceptually (remember we have no HRIS where I work) and I'm interested in learning more about the reality as our class progresses.
Oh, and I put everyone's blogs on Google Reader today (great job, everyone; fun to read!)
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Class discussions create great conversation starters!
An immediate benefit from this HRIS class is that I feel slightly more comfortable discussing social networking than I did a month ago.
I had lunch with a former co-worker (and friend, of course) yesterday who now works for Google in Mountain View. (I proudly wore my Google guest badge all day. It felt as though I'd entered the DisneyWorld of IT, but that's another story.) I was able to at least spice up my contributions to the IT portion of our conversation with snippets about Twitter, Yammer (which he hadn't heard of), and blogs. I'm really fascinated with Yammer as a potential communication channel for my organization, which houses 1250 college students in 20 different locations around campus. We currently grapple with ways of getting important bits of information out to our house level managers in a timely manner. We all have company e-mail addresses, so Yammer could be a way to send out protected info in short bursts that students might actually read.
I did a little research on Yammer last night after I got home. As we talked about in class, Yammer aims to bring the types of technologies that are popular with consumers into the workplace. "People get to use great consumer internet sites, like Facebook, Twitter, and Geni , to communicate in their personal lives. Then, when they get to the office, all the software is antiquated and hard to use -- that doesn't make sense. We want to do something about that," said Yammer founder, David Sacks. Yammer claims it can increase communication while reducing email. Sounds just like what we need at work.
Last time we got together, my friend introduced me to the concept of "The Cloud", a term I'd never heard before. Basically, the Cloud refers to the way new technology allows us all to store, access and share information through the web, instead of on our hard drives. So, whenever I check my e-mail on Google, or you post photos on Facebook , we're using the cloud. To quote Google, "Everyone has their own space in the cloud." He asked me if we'd talked about it in class yet. We haven't, but I bet we will...
Anyone familiar with the newly developing Google Wave? It reminded me of our discussion in class about how social networking sites like Facebook & Twitter may eclipse e-mail. The Wave sounds like a way to create the ultimate one stop site for all your on-line social (and even business?) communication. I wonder how it might be useful in business and/or HR?
Here's a link that provides some details about Google Wave, if you are interested:
http://tinyurl.com/mmmtmv.
Our class discussions have made some great next day conversations for me. All of my friends and co-workers laugh when I tell them I'm blogging and tweeting as class assignments. Even my kids (ages 16 & 20) don't use twitter (yet), so for once I'm not behind the times. It make me think, OK, at least I can sort of keep up. Thanks, Jun (and class) for teaching this old dog some new tricks!
I had lunch with a former co-worker (and friend, of course) yesterday who now works for Google in Mountain View. (I proudly wore my Google guest badge all day. It felt as though I'd entered the DisneyWorld of IT, but that's another story.) I was able to at least spice up my contributions to the IT portion of our conversation with snippets about Twitter, Yammer (which he hadn't heard of), and blogs. I'm really fascinated with Yammer as a potential communication channel for my organization, which houses 1250 college students in 20 different locations around campus. We currently grapple with ways of getting important bits of information out to our house level managers in a timely manner. We all have company e-mail addresses, so Yammer could be a way to send out protected info in short bursts that students might actually read.
I did a little research on Yammer last night after I got home. As we talked about in class, Yammer aims to bring the types of technologies that are popular with consumers into the workplace. "People get to use great consumer internet sites, like Facebook, Twitter, and Geni , to communicate in their personal lives. Then, when they get to the office, all the software is antiquated and hard to use -- that doesn't make sense. We want to do something about that," said Yammer founder, David Sacks. Yammer claims it can increase communication while reducing email. Sounds just like what we need at work.
Last time we got together, my friend introduced me to the concept of "The Cloud", a term I'd never heard before. Basically, the Cloud refers to the way new technology allows us all to store, access and share information through the web, instead of on our hard drives. So, whenever I check my e-mail on Google, or you post photos on Facebook , we're using the cloud. To quote Google, "Everyone has their own space in the cloud." He asked me if we'd talked about it in class yet. We haven't, but I bet we will...
Anyone familiar with the newly developing Google Wave? It reminded me of our discussion in class about how social networking sites like Facebook & Twitter may eclipse e-mail. The Wave sounds like a way to create the ultimate one stop site for all your on-line social (and even business?) communication. I wonder how it might be useful in business and/or HR?
Here's a link that provides some details about Google Wave, if you are interested:
http://tinyurl.com/mmmtmv.
Our class discussions have made some great next day conversations for me. All of my friends and co-workers laugh when I tell them I'm blogging and tweeting as class assignments. Even my kids (ages 16 & 20) don't use twitter (yet), so for once I'm not behind the times. It make me think, OK, at least I can sort of keep up. Thanks, Jun (and class) for teaching this old dog some new tricks!
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
"gigs"
Gig-ification - another new word! I'm learning lots of them these days. Churn rate? fascinating...Can I use 'em in scrabble? :)
This morning when I was reading the newspaper, there was an article from Frank Bass (Associated Press) entitled "Temp work masks joblessness", which further elaborated on how folks who are employed in involuntary part-time and temporary positions skew the overall unemployment statistics.
The May unemployment rate didn't take into account those workers who weren't actively searching for work (either because they have given up or because they had some specific barriers to employment like poor health, child care issues, or lack of transportation). Including these folks would increase the unemployment rate to 10.6%. But, more startling is the fact that if you include the 2.2 million "involuntary part-time workers, the unemployment rate would balloon to 16.4%.
I found it interesting that the 1.2 million part-time temporary workers the government has and will hire as census workers this year help mask the true unemployment rates. 60,000 people were hired temporarily in April 2009, but are done with their temporary assignments and will be back on the unemployment roles in the next set of statistics. Ironically (never sure if I use that word correctly), the applicant pool for temporary field employees was so strong, they finished the work far more quickly than they expected. The government expects to continue census-related temporary hiring cycles like this through the fall, which will help push down unemployment numbers during upcoming months.
Okay, back to gigification. Things are a lot tougher economically than the unemployment statistics convey. Given that fact, people need to jump at any opportunity that comes their way, part-time, temporary, gigified. I do wonder, as the economy recovers, if employers will continue to offer out "morsels" of employment instead of "fat" full-time jobs with benefits. Is gigging merely a response to the tough economic times or the wave of the future?
This morning when I was reading the newspaper, there was an article from Frank Bass (Associated Press) entitled "Temp work masks joblessness", which further elaborated on how folks who are employed in involuntary part-time and temporary positions skew the overall unemployment statistics.
The May unemployment rate didn't take into account those workers who weren't actively searching for work (either because they have given up or because they had some specific barriers to employment like poor health, child care issues, or lack of transportation). Including these folks would increase the unemployment rate to 10.6%. But, more startling is the fact that if you include the 2.2 million "involuntary part-time workers, the unemployment rate would balloon to 16.4%.
I found it interesting that the 1.2 million part-time temporary workers the government has and will hire as census workers this year help mask the true unemployment rates. 60,000 people were hired temporarily in April 2009, but are done with their temporary assignments and will be back on the unemployment roles in the next set of statistics. Ironically (never sure if I use that word correctly), the applicant pool for temporary field employees was so strong, they finished the work far more quickly than they expected. The government expects to continue census-related temporary hiring cycles like this through the fall, which will help push down unemployment numbers during upcoming months.
Okay, back to gigification. Things are a lot tougher economically than the unemployment statistics convey. Given that fact, people need to jump at any opportunity that comes their way, part-time, temporary, gigified. I do wonder, as the economy recovers, if employers will continue to offer out "morsels" of employment instead of "fat" full-time jobs with benefits. Is gigging merely a response to the tough economic times or the wave of the future?
Monday, June 8, 2009
The Future of Work is Here --
First blog-post; scary....
The Time article, "The Future of Work", reminded me of a new book that is getting a lot of buzz, Womenomics. Anybody heard of it? While I haven't read it yet, I've seen several interviews of one of the co-authors Katty Kay. The books subtitle is Write your own rules for success. The thesis of the book seems to be that women have tremendous potential to be successful business leaders, but that we work differently than men. Women should not try to fit into the male business paradigm, but should negotiate for work environments that will allow them to flourish. The key is work/life balance that is encouraged, not just tolerated, by business. I kept expecting the book to be referenced in the "Women will Rule Business" section of the Time article and was rather surprised that it wasn't.
The Future of Work article touches upon many issues, but I think that the challenge of work/life balance resonated with me the most. The concept of career lattices is very compelling to me (as a woman who has spent the last 30 years in the work-force). There will be times when one's career is at the fore-front of their lives and other times when it may not be priority #1. I think that if company's recognize their employees as "assets", both parties will benefit from more flexibility in the work-place. I don't believe that people should have to sacrifice their personal lives to have productive and satisfying careers.
I have been tremendously fortunate to work with an organization where many of these future trends have existed for years. Flex time has always been possible and I have taken advantage of this for 20+ years. I have worked a 4-day week consistently; I took a 6-months maternity leave with both of my children; I have routinely rearranged my schedule to ensure that I made every parent-teacher conference and fulfilled at least some volunteer role outside of work each year. And, I continued to receive top raises and bonuses for my work performance!! Do I make a ton of money? No. But I've lived very comfortably, had a very interesting career, and have participated in my children growing up as much as any full-time working parent can.
This level of flexibility was reinforced with the advent of e-mail and remote access to our IT infrastructure. Of course there is the downside of constant access that can blur the work/life balance, and the weird addiction to checking one's e-mail 5 times/day on the weekends, but that's another story (and I'm working on it!). This touches on another topic in the "Future of Work"article -- that technology allows us to be productive outside of the physical office or office hours. In my job, for example, I work with college students who have a very different life-style than I do. Technology allows them to contact me at 3am via e-mail when I'm asleep and allows me to respond when I come into work at 9am before they wake up. Neither one of us has had to adjust our normal patterns of behavior, we have disturbed each other, and we've had timely communication. I can't tell you how much that improved things. It probably sounds funny, but it's true.
As I think it through, the level of flexibility granted to employees has resulted in tremendous loyalty to the organization. We feel appreciated as human beings. In turn, we don't think twice about putting in the hours necessary to get the results expected of us.
So, at least for me, the Future of Work already exists in many ways.
The Time article, "The Future of Work", reminded me of a new book that is getting a lot of buzz, Womenomics. Anybody heard of it? While I haven't read it yet, I've seen several interviews of one of the co-authors Katty Kay. The books subtitle is Write your own rules for success. The thesis of the book seems to be that women have tremendous potential to be successful business leaders, but that we work differently than men. Women should not try to fit into the male business paradigm, but should negotiate for work environments that will allow them to flourish. The key is work/life balance that is encouraged, not just tolerated, by business. I kept expecting the book to be referenced in the "Women will Rule Business" section of the Time article and was rather surprised that it wasn't.
The Future of Work article touches upon many issues, but I think that the challenge of work/life balance resonated with me the most. The concept of career lattices is very compelling to me (as a woman who has spent the last 30 years in the work-force). There will be times when one's career is at the fore-front of their lives and other times when it may not be priority #1. I think that if company's recognize their employees as "assets", both parties will benefit from more flexibility in the work-place. I don't believe that people should have to sacrifice their personal lives to have productive and satisfying careers.
I have been tremendously fortunate to work with an organization where many of these future trends have existed for years. Flex time has always been possible and I have taken advantage of this for 20+ years. I have worked a 4-day week consistently; I took a 6-months maternity leave with both of my children; I have routinely rearranged my schedule to ensure that I made every parent-teacher conference and fulfilled at least some volunteer role outside of work each year. And, I continued to receive top raises and bonuses for my work performance!! Do I make a ton of money? No. But I've lived very comfortably, had a very interesting career, and have participated in my children growing up as much as any full-time working parent can.
This level of flexibility was reinforced with the advent of e-mail and remote access to our IT infrastructure. Of course there is the downside of constant access that can blur the work/life balance, and the weird addiction to checking one's e-mail 5 times/day on the weekends, but that's another story (and I'm working on it!). This touches on another topic in the "Future of Work"article -- that technology allows us to be productive outside of the physical office or office hours. In my job, for example, I work with college students who have a very different life-style than I do. Technology allows them to contact me at 3am via e-mail when I'm asleep and allows me to respond when I come into work at 9am before they wake up. Neither one of us has had to adjust our normal patterns of behavior, we have disturbed each other, and we've had timely communication. I can't tell you how much that improved things. It probably sounds funny, but it's true.
As I think it through, the level of flexibility granted to employees has resulted in tremendous loyalty to the organization. We feel appreciated as human beings. In turn, we don't think twice about putting in the hours necessary to get the results expected of us.
So, at least for me, the Future of Work already exists in many ways.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
