Executive Summary:
'The War of Talent', 'talent shortage', or 'talent management on the number one agenda' are phrases that never stop being in any congress or event of which we have a passion for getting people to do their best of themselves, for themselves and for others. However, based on my experience, if what you want is to get people to do their best, you have to see it from another side… I offer this vision here: it is not about seeing from above how to manage the talent of employees / managers, but in applying our multiple intelligences to help them discover themselves:
a) what is that talent that makes them unique and what the company needs;
b) in what situations and how could they enhance it;
c) create scenarios and opportunities for them to effectively test it;
d) give them feedback on how they did it and how they could continue to improve it.
Because when one understands that the place to be located in the analysis by talent is not 3000 feet high, but next to it, and when that location finally took place, people emerge from this experience of communication vitally strengthened, recognized and above all … Grateful. And from the deep gratitude for the awareness of their own strengths, the desire for devolution is born. And that's where the victory took place. Mutual. Durable.
Today I am talking about Coach to Manager.
Si está preocupado por retener a su gente clave, aquella que le permitirá llevar adelante su estrategia – local o regional- que tanto recursos (tiempo, esfuerzo y expertise) le costó trazar, no lo culpo. La mayoría de los expertos en Recursos Humanos, consultores y ahora también los CEOs tienen su foco en ello. Compruébelo usted mismo: tipee ‘WAR OF TALENT’ en Google y vea cuántos hits aparecen… más de 39.4 millones! Será que es buen negocio para alguien dejar planteada la guerra? No conozco a nadie que se haya beneficiado con una guerra. Allí es donde el ego le gana al espíritu.
I remember the time that I proposed in an organization to leave the conventional paradigm mentioned (of scarcity) to go to visualize talent from a more complete perspective, that considers the human being that contains it. Well, I didn't get much approval… let's say… none! I listened to things such as: "you just take care and make sure you implement these changes" or "I understand what you are saying, but you don't understand, things are different here, people do not leave, people need money ($) and do whatever is".
But people did leave. And not just new ones. Many of the first, of the pioneers, of the 'right hand' and of the 'capos' decided to give up on the idea of leaving their life (or principles) in that job. But how, wasn't it that money was everything?
I insisted that different questions begin to be asked. Smart questions. Do not ask questions that have pre-assembled answers. Questions that would make you swallow hard before asking and before answering them. That they arise from the heart, that they involve the body and the mind.
Let the spirit advise them and defend them courage. That they give shape to that intangible that is talent, in order to have clearer guidelines that indicate where the fibers that mark the route of satisfaction, permanence and commitment in people circulate. What I asked managers is to ask their people, for example:
- How do you feel on Monday mornings? How do you feel on Friday afternoons? How different could we offer our clients? What obstacles do we put, from leadership, on your way to be able to do your job? How does your work contribute to the business? How do you think we could save money? If your work is not 10 points, what is missing for it to be? What was the last decision that management made and you did not understand? How could we communicate Those decisions, next time more effectively? How could you make your work more efficient? If you could change the collective behavior of this organization, what would it be? What potential benefit could we provide and what would be of help to you? How it looks,How does it feel to work as a team in this company? What makes you proud to work in this company? What did you learn last week? From whom did you learn something?
… and others.
And the questions made people speak, express their voice, and so the talent, that natural talent that people have to tell whoever asks their truth - with the expectation that something will change - made themselves heard. And there the first lesson was given: people can and want to choose, it is their right, and they choose those who give them the opportunity to show them what is the competition, trait or attitude that is valued corporately and places it where it is.
Or would you not like someone you respect at work to tell you, above all, why you are still where you are? Or what do they value most about you? Or what do you want that does not change? Or what do you want me to teach others? That's what I mean by telling the employee what talent the company needs from him.
And you like me know that the quality of response that one gets depends largely on the quality of the question that is asked. In the case of the 15 expressed in this sheet, they look for clear clues that clear the uncertainty as to what the individual considers that could be done to improve their performance and results. In other words, it is the employee himself who will express the intention to develop and enhance those skills that would increase his value, image and self-confidence. This is what I mean by helping you discover what and how to enhance your capabilities.
Americans say that talent is shown 'where the rubber hits the road'.
I ask you: are you doing something to create opportunities where the talent of your people can be put into practice? Making an analogy with boxing: if you were your employee's 'representative' (and he was a talented boxer), are you preparing him to fight him? You don't need to send it out to a ring in Las Vegas, but little by little, to local clubs. The combat in sports has its analogy in projects at the organizational level.
I'm not telling you to assign the responsibility of team leader at first, but to do so as a member of a team, where you can feel useful, confident and part of something higher. That's what I mean by creating scenarios and opportunities for you to test yourself.
And after having told them what was the most needed talent, in what and how they could apply it and having included them in challenging projects, the situation changed. People, exposed and trying to give their best (we all have this internal tendency) began to express their voice, and with it to release a first talent: that of responding creatively and sincerely to honest questions and concrete experiences.
And there, the simple ability to capture, on the part of the interlocutor, what is subtly released, and transform it into recognition and concrete rewards, in turn began to create an implicit philosophy of respect for one's abilities and willingness to walk the mile extra. That is what I call giving feedback and telling them how they could continue to improve.
The moral of this story is knowing that we cannot claim the right to want to 'manage' or 'manage' the talent, knowledge, culture, satisfaction or any other intangible that flies over the company.
That they are not organizational nouns but personal adverbs, which modify the ability of people to respond to a context and a relationship, thus generating a result. And that a paradigm that visualizes the person from a global perspective is more likely to cover people's motivations than another that only aims to satisfy their own needs, no matter how well-intentioned they may be.
Then, talent management should not be the 'business priority' of the moment, but being able to answer yourself: if I already have the base group in my company with dozens of talents waiting to be released, what do I do with them now? It's about maximizing current talent, not managing it. And it really is not a war for talent, since in war no one wins.
Your quest should be the other way around, making everyone win - the employee, you, the organization, and society. And so, winning the hearts of the people and establishing the mechanisms and supports that contain their discipline, people will stay in their company. Do the right thing, others will follow suit.
