Looking for the great truth, I found simplicity, seeing simplicity, I discovered the essence ”.
Eastern Proverb
“Blanchard? Situational Leadership? Seventies; old-fashioned, everyone knows it. "
"The Myers Briggs Type Indicator? Outdated, there must be something more modern."
"Adizes and his managerial roles? Many don't know him… I don't know if they will understand."
"Lazzati? The MAO?… MAO sounds familiar to me, but I don't think it works here "
I have a friend, and at the time an outstanding colleague, who once told me: “Jorge, from a certain age I promised to take things much more calmly… therefore, I do everything more slowly… I walk slowly, speak slowly, read slowly, I always smile and above all, I have much more patience with certain Human Resources or Training departments with which I have to work ”.
I remember my friend every time I hear phrases like the ones in the heading that, believe me, are verbatim quotes from managers or direct assistants of the "number one" area of Human Resources and / or Training, of at least five out of ten companies I visit.
If one were to take away the first part, that is the author and his proposal, it would seem that one is talking about a car brand or a computer model, or any other product that is intended to be introduced in an already "evolved" market, so its launch in that market would be a resounding failure.
It is here, when I remember my friend's appointment and I try to make the dialogue with my interlocutor go, more or less, along these tracks:
JFB: Taking advantage of the knowledge you have of the Situational Leadership Model, how do you align, adapt this theory to the business objectives of this Company?
HR: I didn't understand your question…
JFB: Do you have the evolution matrix of the degree of development of the people, of their relationship with the key competencies of this company, and how do their behaviors evolve according to the business objectives of your company?
RRHH: No, I'm afraid not…. I know that people did the two-day course, they are supposed to handle the "little squares" of the degree of development, but there was no follow-up after how they applied it. But we are working very well on all that.
JFB: Do you have a “mapping” of the expected evolution of the predominant Leadership style among your key supervisors, as suggested by the Model?
HR: We have the “Competency Model” that says that a Leader in this company must be “Integrator and promoter of a High Performance culture…” We invest a lot of time and money in the development of this model.
JFB: Well, what does that mean in terms of a number, of a sale…?
HR: There are no indicators that allow you to establish this relationship.
JFB: I recommend that you review the application of the Model, because it can help you, among other things, to elaborate the information that I mentioned in the questions… by the way, you told me that they also worked on Personal Styles - MBTI…
RRHH: Yes, they had fun "guessing" who was ISTJ or ENTP and all that…
JFB: Relationship with the business…, specifically in the increase of the gross margin in your case?
RRHH: No, I don't think that contributes, besides as I told you, in my opinion the model is already outdated.
Back to sources…
By the way this excerpt does not represent a generalization. However, similar responses are those that I usually hear from colleagues who say they "know" certain "classic" management models.
These meetings lead me to share with you some reflections:
- Certain areas of HR / Training criticize / discard / archive valuable classic Management models because they are "out of fashion". They know the "theoretical" face of the model but have enormous difficulties in applying it to the reality of their own company. They discard models that are not have been able / able to adapt and turn into complementary management tools to the formal processes in force in their companies, such as Selection, Performance Evaluation, Talent Detection, Design of Competency Models, Operationalization of behaviors linked to business objectives, etc. reality shows me overwhelmingly and on a daily basis that, properly adapted, the models of Situational Leadership, Personal Styles and Managerial Roles, to mention just a few "classics", provide excellent management indicators,valuable for any manager and to enrich traditional HR processes.At the company level and in accordance with their business objectives, the HR / Training Areas have not contributed to creating best practices or "new models" that exceed those that are discarded for "old". A lot is invested in garúes that promise that the problems of your company will end, in exchange for you. I listened to it for two hours; But the great practicality and validity that Maslow still has is unknown, whose invaluable contributions go far beyond the often erroneously interpreted, and worse applied, "Pyramid of Needs". People Management Models are criticized, from what they do not say. I hear, for example, “The Adizes model does not contribute to the development of job profiles; so it does not serve us ”. In discharge of the distinguished author,I must say that their model is never linked to the development of profiles. There is still a clear profile of buyer of "courses that are fun" (quote from the head of Training of a distinguished chain of Hypermarkets in Argentina), instead to consider the course as the starting point to align behaviors and performance with business objectives. It is unknown that "the change we want to achieve in our people with the course" (textual of the Head of Training of a hotel chain based in Buenos Aires), it will never be achieved with the course. The change is a long-term process, so it does not last 16 hours. of a "fun" course.A clear buyer profile of "courses that are fun" still predominates (a quote from the person in charge of Training of a distinguished chain of Hypermarkets in Argentina), instead of considering the course as the starting point to align behaviors and performances to objectives of It is unknown that "the change we want to achieve in our people with the course" (textual of the Head of Training for a hotel chain based in Buenos Aires) will never be achieved with the course. The change is a long-term process, so it does not last 16 hours. of a "fun" course.A clear buyer profile of "courses that are fun" still predominates (a quote from the person in charge of Training of a distinguished chain of Hypermarkets in Argentina), instead of considering the course as the starting point to align behaviors and performances to objectives of It is unknown that "the change we want to achieve in our people with the course" (textual of the Head of Training for a hotel chain based in Buenos Aires) will never be achieved with the course. The change is a long-term process, so it does not last 16 hours. of a "fun" course.It is unknown that "the change we want to achieve in our people with the course" (textual of the Head of Training for a hotel chain based in Buenos Aires) will never be achieved with the course. The change is a long-term process, so it does not last 16 hours. of a "fun" course.It is unknown that "the change we want to achieve in our people with the course" (textual of the Head of Training for a hotel chain based in Buenos Aires) will never be achieved with the course. The change is a long-term process, so it does not last 16 hours. of a "fun" course.
Organizational learning cycle:
This graph summarizes our experience applying the “Beyond the Training” ® methodology; it shows that the real challenge does not consist only in training, but in generating habits that lead to business objectives.
In this approach, “traditional” training fulfills a necessary role, but not enough at all. The condition of sufficiency is to transfer it to work (that is, that knowledge becomes skill), and transcendently that skill becomes a result-oriented habit.
Only from the generation of habits, which experience will validate as "drivers" for the fulfillment of business objectives, will the necessary attitudinal change and consequent alignment of performance to corporate goals be generated gradually but steadily
Of course this path is complex and takes time. It is precisely there, where I invite many of my colleagues to not believe that exclusively with training "we will achieve the change that our people and company need"
The classics: the first step
Experience teaches me every day that the best way to know the viability of a Model is not to say that it is outdated or to criticize it from what it does not say.
It goes through experiencing it, working it, comparing it with business objectives, and why not, RECREATING it from the reality and specific need of each company.
Going back to the sources implies knowing how to read “the fine print” of great authors, who we have read so much and so little applied. If no one dares to say that Drucker is old-fashioned, why else are Maslow, Blanchard, Adizes and so many others dismissed as "anachronistic"?
Perhaps it is healthier to recognize that it has not been known to find the “practical and situational application to the business” of the models that many today ostracize.
As long as organizations remain with the Models stored in the library, they will continue to search for the "latest trends on how to get the great truths"… until these too go out of style, of course.
