Last Saturday, I had the opportunity to listen to a talk by Mr. Howard Khoo, CEO and Executive Director of the Hing Yiap Group of Companies, a public listed company in the business of lifestyle fashion and F&B. The title of his talk was " Shuffling Family, Work & Play".
Among the many points shared by him on how he balances family, work and play, one particular message stood out very prominently. He owed his successes to the family values which have shaped the lives of his family members over the generations. He shared with the participants of how the values of sharing, caring, diligence, respect, tolerance, patience and risk taking were inculcated among the young and younger ones by his grandmother, parents, uncles and aunts through their respective beliefs, words, deeds and actions. Likewise, his children are now being exposed to and instilled with the same set of family values by his own unique way of incorporating these values while on business cum holiday trips and participating in sports activities.
We have witnessed and still witnessing how decades old corporate giants had fallen like bowling pins and consigned to the corporate scrapbooks. Many experts have put forwarded several plausible reasons for these modern day corporate failures. The absence of integrity and the presence of unsatiated monetary greed and unethical business practices have been singled out to be the principal causes.
If the researchers were to go back into the genesis of each of these fallen giants, they would have uncover the corporate principles, values and business practices of these organizations laid down by their respective founding fathers based on their own family values. It is not wrong to say that family values form the bedrock of corporate values. However, when these organizations grew by leaps and bounds over the years, professional managers were hired to lead and run the businesses with the founding family members taking a back seat.
As these professional managers were rewarded based on the level of corporate performance, they would have thrown caution to the wind and took extreme risks in the pursuit of corporate and also personal successes. Along the way, someone somehow lost his/her moral compass and whatever espoused corporate values stay at lip-service level with no inkling of the original intention of those values.
To me, this undesirable situation can be avoided if the affected corporations had put in place a set of values-based core competencies to be demonstrated by all levels of employee at all times.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Competency + Attitude = Extraordinary Performance
In a special seminar last Saturday, I had the benefit of listening to Ms Helen Seibt, founder of the IDC Group of Companies (www.idc-training.com) which is involved in a wide range of businesses covering training, engineering, plant technology, bio-degradable products and flora and fauna. During her talk entitled "Attitude is Everything", she shared with the participants on how she overcome all odds and barriers to transform IDC to what is it today.
Eleven years ago, when she first set up IDC as a language training centre, her business income was not enough even to cover the monthly rentals. The Asian financial crisis in 1997 had caused the East Asian economies to go into a recession. However, seeing the strong determination to succeed of a young enterprising businesswoman, the shoplot owner allowed her to be in arrears. This opportunity enabled her to continue until business conditions improved later on. Today, IDC occupies two adjoining business units in the Amcorp Trade Centre in the city of Petaling Jaya. The lesson learned here is that "It's not about the choice you made but the chance you take!"
Helen is an avid backpacker and despite her busy business schedule, she could still find time to go off alone to somewhere to learn and experience life. Her toughest expedition was when she embarked on a journey to Tibet and then to the Mount Everest Base Camp. Without any specialized training nor any idea of how difficult the journey would be like, she managed to reach her destination within 10 days. The lesson learnt here is that "Attitude conquers altitude".
Where does Helen get her strong desire to achieve and the determination to succeed in both her personal and professional life? The secret of her success lies in the application of techniques pioneered by Success Motivation International, USA (SMI) which she learned through the SMI's programs of "Dynamics of Successful Management" and "Attitude is Everything". With Helen as an ardent believer and practitioner of SMI techniques, therefore it is no wonder that IDC holds the sole rights to represent SMI and markets its programs in Malaysia.
In competency management, Helen possesses the core competencies of achievement-orientation, continuous learning, and goal-orientation. A person who has knowledge and skills is not enough as that person is only technically competent to do a job. For the same person to perform excellently and achieves extraordinary things, that person has to also have the right positive attitude and behaviors too.
In short, Competency + Attitude = Extraordinary Performance.
Eleven years ago, when she first set up IDC as a language training centre, her business income was not enough even to cover the monthly rentals. The Asian financial crisis in 1997 had caused the East Asian economies to go into a recession. However, seeing the strong determination to succeed of a young enterprising businesswoman, the shoplot owner allowed her to be in arrears. This opportunity enabled her to continue until business conditions improved later on. Today, IDC occupies two adjoining business units in the Amcorp Trade Centre in the city of Petaling Jaya. The lesson learned here is that "It's not about the choice you made but the chance you take!"
Helen is an avid backpacker and despite her busy business schedule, she could still find time to go off alone to somewhere to learn and experience life. Her toughest expedition was when she embarked on a journey to Tibet and then to the Mount Everest Base Camp. Without any specialized training nor any idea of how difficult the journey would be like, she managed to reach her destination within 10 days. The lesson learnt here is that "Attitude conquers altitude".
Where does Helen get her strong desire to achieve and the determination to succeed in both her personal and professional life? The secret of her success lies in the application of techniques pioneered by Success Motivation International, USA (SMI) which she learned through the SMI's programs of "Dynamics of Successful Management" and "Attitude is Everything". With Helen as an ardent believer and practitioner of SMI techniques, therefore it is no wonder that IDC holds the sole rights to represent SMI and markets its programs in Malaysia.
In competency management, Helen possesses the core competencies of achievement-orientation, continuous learning, and goal-orientation. A person who has knowledge and skills is not enough as that person is only technically competent to do a job. For the same person to perform excellently and achieves extraordinary things, that person has to also have the right positive attitude and behaviors too.
In short, Competency + Attitude = Extraordinary Performance.
Monday, January 5, 2009
Dealing With Under-performing Employees
In every organization, we can identify three categories of employees based on their level of work performance. The first category consists of the A players or star performers and they represent a minority group making up to 5% of the total staff strength. The second group which forms the bulk is the B players or core players. Research has shown that about 90% of employees fall into this group. The remaining 5% of the employees are the C players or the under-performers who aren’t meeting their established goals.
Under-performing employees are not unqualified or incapable people. Today's A or B players can become tomorrow's C players. The causes of under-performance may be due to a lack of competencies, mis-match into a job role, ineffective management, lack of commitment and/or poor communications, or purely personal problems.
Let's take a look at the case of Johari, a senior researcher in a premier R&D institute. Johari holds a PhD in economics from a well known foreign university and worked as a lecturer in a local university. He was then headhunted to join the policy research unit of his present employer. As a senior researcher, his new job required him to develop a knowledge-based economic model for purposes of national development planning. During the first two years, he worked very hard and put in a lot of time and effort to emerge as a star performer.
However, things changed in his third year of service. Due to frequent changes in strategic directions, his organization went through a series of restructuring and reorganization. The policy research unit where Johari worked in was disbanded and its staff redeployed to other departments within the organization. Johari himself was first assigned to the Corporate Strategic Planning but subsequently, he was posted to two other departments i.e. Market Development and Product Commercialisation respectively within a span of 3 years.
During these times, Johari's work performance suffered and deteriorated year after year. Johari found himself trapped in a vicious cycle of decreasing morale, low motivation and non-performance. From a star performer, Johari became a C player shunned by almost all department heads and colleagues. Management was on the verge of a decision to terminate his service with the organization.
Meanwhile, the Corporate HR Division introduced a new performance management initiative known as the Employee Performance Improvement Program(EPIP). The EPIP aims to offer those non-performing employees a second chance to improve their work performance with the guidance of an external performance coach within a mutually agreed time duration. Johari was one of those non-performers recommended and he also agreed to be put under the EPIP.
The first two months were very challenging indeed for both Johari and his performance coach. However, once trust was established, Johari opened up and shared his problems, both personal and professional with his coach. Having understood exactly the causes of Johari's poor performance over the years, a specially designed work program with specific goals, deliverables and timelines were drawn up by his coach with agreement from top management.
After 3 months, there was a marked improvement in Johari's performance. His morale and motivation were up. The last I heard about Johari was that he is now back in the mainstream of things. Obviously, he has resurrected his career from a C player to become a B player and begins to contribute positively to his organization in a different capacity. It will take some time for him to become an A player again. In most situations, not many C players are as fortunate as Johari.
Dealing with under-performing employees is a tough challenge for the direct superior of the under-performer. Apart from having to deal with several team issues, they have to handle the difficulties in achieving performance targets and yet at the same time, thinking of how to retain the A players. Most managers or supervisors often take the easy way out by firing the C players with dire consequences to the organization with damages taking the form of future recruitment costs, termination benefits, or prolonged industrial court cases and hefty compensations.
Most of the times, what is really needed is just an external person to converse and coach the under-performing employees. However, at other times, when the organization has no choice but to let the under-performer go, then do so in a manner that allows the person to keep his/her dignity.
Under-performing employees are not unqualified or incapable people. Today's A or B players can become tomorrow's C players. The causes of under-performance may be due to a lack of competencies, mis-match into a job role, ineffective management, lack of commitment and/or poor communications, or purely personal problems.
Let's take a look at the case of Johari, a senior researcher in a premier R&D institute. Johari holds a PhD in economics from a well known foreign university and worked as a lecturer in a local university. He was then headhunted to join the policy research unit of his present employer. As a senior researcher, his new job required him to develop a knowledge-based economic model for purposes of national development planning. During the first two years, he worked very hard and put in a lot of time and effort to emerge as a star performer.
However, things changed in his third year of service. Due to frequent changes in strategic directions, his organization went through a series of restructuring and reorganization. The policy research unit where Johari worked in was disbanded and its staff redeployed to other departments within the organization. Johari himself was first assigned to the Corporate Strategic Planning but subsequently, he was posted to two other departments i.e. Market Development and Product Commercialisation respectively within a span of 3 years.
During these times, Johari's work performance suffered and deteriorated year after year. Johari found himself trapped in a vicious cycle of decreasing morale, low motivation and non-performance. From a star performer, Johari became a C player shunned by almost all department heads and colleagues. Management was on the verge of a decision to terminate his service with the organization.
Meanwhile, the Corporate HR Division introduced a new performance management initiative known as the Employee Performance Improvement Program(EPIP). The EPIP aims to offer those non-performing employees a second chance to improve their work performance with the guidance of an external performance coach within a mutually agreed time duration. Johari was one of those non-performers recommended and he also agreed to be put under the EPIP.
The first two months were very challenging indeed for both Johari and his performance coach. However, once trust was established, Johari opened up and shared his problems, both personal and professional with his coach. Having understood exactly the causes of Johari's poor performance over the years, a specially designed work program with specific goals, deliverables and timelines were drawn up by his coach with agreement from top management.
After 3 months, there was a marked improvement in Johari's performance. His morale and motivation were up. The last I heard about Johari was that he is now back in the mainstream of things. Obviously, he has resurrected his career from a C player to become a B player and begins to contribute positively to his organization in a different capacity. It will take some time for him to become an A player again. In most situations, not many C players are as fortunate as Johari.
Dealing with under-performing employees is a tough challenge for the direct superior of the under-performer. Apart from having to deal with several team issues, they have to handle the difficulties in achieving performance targets and yet at the same time, thinking of how to retain the A players. Most managers or supervisors often take the easy way out by firing the C players with dire consequences to the organization with damages taking the form of future recruitment costs, termination benefits, or prolonged industrial court cases and hefty compensations.
Most of the times, what is really needed is just an external person to converse and coach the under-performing employees. However, at other times, when the organization has no choice but to let the under-performer go, then do so in a manner that allows the person to keep his/her dignity.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Being SMARTER in the New Year
It's that time of the year where most people would make new resolutions for the coming year. All time favorites include "I've to go on a diet program!", "I must start exercising daily" and "I got to quit smoking". These resolutions are very personal and beneficial to the person/s who made them. Yet, we all know that most of these resolutions would have been broken before the new year is barely a week old.
Why are new year resolutions so fragile? My view is that they are so general that they don't lend themselves to specific action, measurability and commitment. Making resolutions and yet not resolute enough to see them through may reflect the character of a person.
However, for those who are so intent to be successful in achieving something during the year, I have a solution for you. Instead of new year resolutions, you can set personal goals with clear milestones marked over the next 12 months.
Corporate goal setting usually follows the SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achieveable, Realistic and Time-based) principle. In setting personal goals, I like to advocate the SMARTER way. As the achievement of personal goals pertains to personal successes, each personal goal statement has to have elements of Stretched, Measurable, Aggressive, Repetitive, Time-based, Emotional and Rewarding. For example, an individual who is 10 kg overweight and desires a balanced body weight, can set a personal goal like " To achieve a 12 kg reduction in body weight by end of June 2009". This means that the individual has only to take the necessary action steps to achieve a monthly 2 kg reduction over the next 6 months. Paul J. Meyer says "success is the progressive realization of worthwhile predetermined personal goals".
The good habits of being discipline and highly committed honed from the process of setting and achieving personal goals yearly invariably will positively contribute to the professional development of an individual at the workplace. Personal success is the cornerstone of professional success.
As a first step to personal and professional success, get rid of the old habit of making new year resolutions which you don't intent to follow through. So be smarter than others in the coming new year by setting personal goals the SMARTER way!
Why are new year resolutions so fragile? My view is that they are so general that they don't lend themselves to specific action, measurability and commitment. Making resolutions and yet not resolute enough to see them through may reflect the character of a person.
However, for those who are so intent to be successful in achieving something during the year, I have a solution for you. Instead of new year resolutions, you can set personal goals with clear milestones marked over the next 12 months.
Corporate goal setting usually follows the SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achieveable, Realistic and Time-based) principle. In setting personal goals, I like to advocate the SMARTER way. As the achievement of personal goals pertains to personal successes, each personal goal statement has to have elements of Stretched, Measurable, Aggressive, Repetitive, Time-based, Emotional and Rewarding. For example, an individual who is 10 kg overweight and desires a balanced body weight, can set a personal goal like " To achieve a 12 kg reduction in body weight by end of June 2009". This means that the individual has only to take the necessary action steps to achieve a monthly 2 kg reduction over the next 6 months. Paul J. Meyer says "success is the progressive realization of worthwhile predetermined personal goals".
The good habits of being discipline and highly committed honed from the process of setting and achieving personal goals yearly invariably will positively contribute to the professional development of an individual at the workplace. Personal success is the cornerstone of professional success.
As a first step to personal and professional success, get rid of the old habit of making new year resolutions which you don't intent to follow through. So be smarter than others in the coming new year by setting personal goals the SMARTER way!
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
25 Knowledge Nuggets from Blue Ocean Strategy Workshop
Yesterday, I had the good fortune to attend a 1-day workshop on introduction to the Blue Ocean Strategy (BOS) organized by the UCSI Blue Ocean Strategy Regional Centre in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. It was well facilitated by Jason Hunter, Director of Training, UCSI Blue Ocean Strategy Regional Centre.
I've read the BOS book and also attended a half-day seminar conducted by the one of the authors, Prof. Chan Kim, way back in 2006. From the BOS workshop yesterday, I gained further insights and learnings about the BOS concept and process.
From my 1-day exploratory trip, I've uncovered the following 25 knowledge nuggets:
1. BOS is about strategic thinking and not about strategic planning.
2. BOS is about seeing/observing things around you and not about looking ahead.
3. BOS is about focusing on your non-customers and not about listening solely to the voice of existing customers.
4. BOS is about understanding the pain points of the non-customers and not about the pleasure points of existing customers.
5. BOS is about reducing pains and not about increasing pleasure for the customers.
6. BOS is about searching for alternatives and not about improving existing products/services.
7. BOS is about applying outside-in thinking and not about adopting the inside-out approach.
8. BOS is about having a paradigm of "We don't know" and not about a mindset of "We know".
9. BOS is about problem creation and not about problem solving.
10. BOS is about making sense of the uncommon sense and not about uncommon nonsense.
11. BOS is about reducing costs and raising value and not about cost reduction or value enhancement.
12. BOS is about supply-side thinking and not about demand-side thoughtings.
13. BOS is about focusing on users, purchasers and influencers and not about users only.
14. BOS is about simplicity and not about complexity.
15. BOS is about breaking away from the pack and not about staying with the herd.
16. BOS is about creating a new industry and not about new products/services.
17. BOS is about value innovation and not about value improvement.
18. BOS is about asking WHY and not about answering WHAT.
19. BOS is about value creation and not about value addition.
20. BOS is about prioritising utility over price and cost structures.
21. BOS is about having strong stomach and heart to eliminate and reducing familiarities and not about finetuning acts within the comfort zone.
22. BOS is about having ardent desires, strong commitment, enthusiasm, hard work, staying power and flawless execution.
23. BOS is about exploration and not about efficiency.
24. BOS is about aligning the 3 propositions of value, product and people and not about having one or two of the other.
25 BOS is about looking for opportunity all around us if only we search for it in the right way.
From the above, I believe that for an organization to successfully navigate BOS pathway, it should possess the core competencies of strategic thinking, value creation, emotional intelligence, learning orientation, respect for diversity, integrity, accountability and achievement orientation.
I've read the BOS book and also attended a half-day seminar conducted by the one of the authors, Prof. Chan Kim, way back in 2006. From the BOS workshop yesterday, I gained further insights and learnings about the BOS concept and process.
From my 1-day exploratory trip, I've uncovered the following 25 knowledge nuggets:
1. BOS is about strategic thinking and not about strategic planning.
2. BOS is about seeing/observing things around you and not about looking ahead.
3. BOS is about focusing on your non-customers and not about listening solely to the voice of existing customers.
4. BOS is about understanding the pain points of the non-customers and not about the pleasure points of existing customers.
5. BOS is about reducing pains and not about increasing pleasure for the customers.
6. BOS is about searching for alternatives and not about improving existing products/services.
7. BOS is about applying outside-in thinking and not about adopting the inside-out approach.
8. BOS is about having a paradigm of "We don't know" and not about a mindset of "We know".
9. BOS is about problem creation and not about problem solving.
10. BOS is about making sense of the uncommon sense and not about uncommon nonsense.
11. BOS is about reducing costs and raising value and not about cost reduction or value enhancement.
12. BOS is about supply-side thinking and not about demand-side thoughtings.
13. BOS is about focusing on users, purchasers and influencers and not about users only.
14. BOS is about simplicity and not about complexity.
15. BOS is about breaking away from the pack and not about staying with the herd.
16. BOS is about creating a new industry and not about new products/services.
17. BOS is about value innovation and not about value improvement.
18. BOS is about asking WHY and not about answering WHAT.
19. BOS is about value creation and not about value addition.
20. BOS is about prioritising utility over price and cost structures.
21. BOS is about having strong stomach and heart to eliminate and reducing familiarities and not about finetuning acts within the comfort zone.
22. BOS is about having ardent desires, strong commitment, enthusiasm, hard work, staying power and flawless execution.
23. BOS is about exploration and not about efficiency.
24. BOS is about aligning the 3 propositions of value, product and people and not about having one or two of the other.
25 BOS is about looking for opportunity all around us if only we search for it in the right way.
From the above, I believe that for an organization to successfully navigate BOS pathway, it should possess the core competencies of strategic thinking, value creation, emotional intelligence, learning orientation, respect for diversity, integrity, accountability and achievement orientation.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Are Management Ideas & Practices Gender-biased?
In a business meeting recently with a former colleague who is now the CEO of a small company with a very high percentage of female employees, I was surprised by an unusual request from her for a more "female-friendly" management development program. She admitted that so far, her lady managers found it difficult to follow and thus relate to management practices learned from various management training programs. Elaborating further, she thinks that the main causal factor could be that most these management ideas and solutions are gender biased as they were mostly written from a male perspective!
It had never cross my mind of such a possibility as I've always thought that management concepts and principles are gender-neutral. Frankly, in my many years of experience in management development involving both male and female participants, this is the first time that I come across such an unconventional perception. I guess there's always a first time for anything.
Upon reflection, I think the lady CEO could possibly be wrong with respect to management ideas and practices being male-centric. However, she may be right in a way those management practices were presented for learning purpose when one or more of the following five situations happened:
1. Unsuitable case examples used for discussion.
2. Inappropriate simulation exercises were selected for role playing.
3. Ineffective facilitation to enable the participants to contextualize learning at workplace.
4. Languages and symbols used failed to connect to the female psyche and therefore resulted in ineffective communication.
5. Inability of the trainer/facilitator to contextualize training content to suit the needs of the participants .
I believe that it is the failure of training design and delivery that resulted in the inability of the participants to apply what they have learned back at their workplace irrespective of gender and profession.
Just thinking out aloud - would a female trainer/facilitator done any better in the given situation/s above?
It had never cross my mind of such a possibility as I've always thought that management concepts and principles are gender-neutral. Frankly, in my many years of experience in management development involving both male and female participants, this is the first time that I come across such an unconventional perception. I guess there's always a first time for anything.
Upon reflection, I think the lady CEO could possibly be wrong with respect to management ideas and practices being male-centric. However, she may be right in a way those management practices were presented for learning purpose when one or more of the following five situations happened:
1. Unsuitable case examples used for discussion.
2. Inappropriate simulation exercises were selected for role playing.
3. Ineffective facilitation to enable the participants to contextualize learning at workplace.
4. Languages and symbols used failed to connect to the female psyche and therefore resulted in ineffective communication.
5. Inability of the trainer/facilitator to contextualize training content to suit the needs of the participants .
I believe that it is the failure of training design and delivery that resulted in the inability of the participants to apply what they have learned back at their workplace irrespective of gender and profession.
Just thinking out aloud - would a female trainer/facilitator done any better in the given situation/s above?
Monday, December 8, 2008
A Case for Values-based Core Competencies
In these tough economic times, a company has to stay very competitive in order to survive and hopefully, rising above all challenges in order to ride the next wave of the economic up-cycle. Apart from taking the short-term measures of trimming the fats and reviewing existing business strategies, such a company has to also take actions with a longer-term perspective for future business growth.
One possible measure is to ensure that all remaining employees abide by its stated guiding principles in the course of doing business. These employees also have to strongly demonstrate behavioral actions consistent to stated corporate values at all times. Such desired situation can only come about only if and when a company implements a competency-based management with a bias towards values-based core competencies. Examples of values-based core competencies include among others, competency such as achievement orientation, integrity, ethics and social responsibility, respect for people, valuing diversity, and learning orientation.
A values-based core competency framework provides a competitive edge to the company in the form of a strong values-driven corporate culture. Corporate history has shown that corporations with values-based core competencies outperformed and even outlasted those with strategy-based core competencies. It is obvious that the prerequisite for the determination of a set values-based core competencies is the explicit declaration and subsequent practice of the stated corporate values.
All organizations have corporate values, either implicitly or explicitly stated. These values may include integrity, commitment, team spirit, quality concern, professionalism and accountability. However, more often than not, those espoused corporate values are merely "words-on-the-wall" organization propaganda. This failure of organization failing to live up to its values or what I call the “value practice gap” is mainly caused by the adoption and implementation of a set of corporate values formulated by a team of the senior managers during a facilitated weekend management retreat. I’ve known of a case where the CEO himself presented his preferred set of corporate values for adoption. Such top-down practice may work for formulating corporate strategies but definitely not for corporate values. Many organizational studies have revealed that it is the employees within the organization through their daily behavioral actions and work practices who determined the core values and thus, the corporate culture.
Therefore, it is my belief that the process of determining a values-based core competency framework has to be both participative and culture-specific. An important step is to get the top performing employees from all levels to be involved in identifying the core competencies and the appropriate desired behavioral indicators through a series of focus group discussions or behavioral event interviews.
One possible measure is to ensure that all remaining employees abide by its stated guiding principles in the course of doing business. These employees also have to strongly demonstrate behavioral actions consistent to stated corporate values at all times. Such desired situation can only come about only if and when a company implements a competency-based management with a bias towards values-based core competencies. Examples of values-based core competencies include among others, competency such as achievement orientation, integrity, ethics and social responsibility, respect for people, valuing diversity, and learning orientation.
A values-based core competency framework provides a competitive edge to the company in the form of a strong values-driven corporate culture. Corporate history has shown that corporations with values-based core competencies outperformed and even outlasted those with strategy-based core competencies. It is obvious that the prerequisite for the determination of a set values-based core competencies is the explicit declaration and subsequent practice of the stated corporate values.
All organizations have corporate values, either implicitly or explicitly stated. These values may include integrity, commitment, team spirit, quality concern, professionalism and accountability. However, more often than not, those espoused corporate values are merely "words-on-the-wall" organization propaganda. This failure of organization failing to live up to its values or what I call the “value practice gap” is mainly caused by the adoption and implementation of a set of corporate values formulated by a team of the senior managers during a facilitated weekend management retreat. I’ve known of a case where the CEO himself presented his preferred set of corporate values for adoption. Such top-down practice may work for formulating corporate strategies but definitely not for corporate values. Many organizational studies have revealed that it is the employees within the organization through their daily behavioral actions and work practices who determined the core values and thus, the corporate culture.
Therefore, it is my belief that the process of determining a values-based core competency framework has to be both participative and culture-specific. An important step is to get the top performing employees from all levels to be involved in identifying the core competencies and the appropriate desired behavioral indicators through a series of focus group discussions or behavioral event interviews.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
