ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT PROCESS The OD Process is based on the action research model which begins with an identified problem

or need for change. The process proceeds through assessment, planning of an intervention, implementing the intervention, gathering data to evaluate the intervention, and determining if satisfactory progress has been made or if there is need for further intervention. The process is cyclical and ends when the desired developmental result is obtained.

The OD process begins when an organization recognizes that a problem exists which impacts the mission or health of the organization and change is desired. It can also begin when leadership has a vision of a better way and wants to improve the organization. An organization does not always have to be in trouble to implement organization development activities. Employee Once the decision is made to change the situation, the next step is to assess the situation to fully understand it. This assessment can be conducted in many ways including documentation review, organizational sensing, focus groups, interviewing, or surveying. The assessment could be conducted by outside experts or by members of the organization. After the situation is assessed, defined, and understood, the next step is to plan an intervention. The type of change desired would determine the nature of the intervention. Interventions could include training and development, team interventions such as team building for management or employees or the establishment of change teams, structural interventions, or individual interventions.

Once the intervention is planned, it is implemented. During and after the implementation of the intervention, relevant data is gathered. The data gathered would be determined by the change goals. For example, if the intervention were training and development for individual employees or for work groups, data to be gathered would measure changes in knowledge and competencies. This data is used to determine the effectiveness of the intervention. It is reported to the organizations decision-makers. The decision-makers determine if the intervention met its goals. If the intervention met its goals, the process can end, which is depicted by the raising of the development bar. If it did not, the decision is made whether to continue the cycle and to plan and carry out another intervention or to end it. Talent Management:

Optimizing Talent in the New RecruitersPoaching Workforce Talent?

DoWeGetTalent Management?

Optimizing Talent in the New Workforce

Ive been thinking a lot lately about talent management in terms of the new workforce. We all know at some point, the economy is going to rebound. When that happens, the current speculation centers around whether companies will go back to their old ways and just start hiring people or will the new workforce be a blend of freelancers and consultants along with employees. As you can probably guess, my bets are on the latter. At least for a few years, I think well see more permatemps in the workplace. Which prompts a question about the best way to optimize the use of talent (either internal or external). If the new workforce is a hybrid composed of employees and contractors, then do companies still need to focus on hiring A-level players? Companies could focus on recruiting and retaining B-level (or C-level) talent and then bring in the A team only for projects that require it. Or should companies still focus on hiring A-level talent and, when they need an extra set of hands, then the contractor doesnt necessarily have to be top notch? I wonder how many businesses are taking the time to think through their talent strategy for the new economy. It seems to me this is a pretty important decision. There might be implications beyond a companys hiring strategy to how they deliver products and services. For example, if an organization employs B and C level players, this could impact customers and the front line delivery of products and services. If external consultants are brought in to create programs and/or processes, they would need to realize the capabilities of the staff theyre working with. On the other hand, lets say the company employs only A players. This might change the projects that are given to consultants. Maybe the focus is less about a consultants expertise and more about scalability. So it would not only be acceptable but advantageous to have B level contractors. And of course, they would only do B level work. Now you might be saying why cant you have A level talent in both places. Well, realistically speakingeveryone is not nor will be an A player. Thats because, in part, companies dont make the investment to develop people or employees dont have the desire. The end result? B, C and possibly even D level players will be in our workplaces in some capacity. Im interested to know where you think companies will place their emphasis.

Competitive Recruiters Poaching Talent?

Are corporate recruiters re-inventing the rules that govern their work when it comes to sourcing talent? Internal recruiting functions may be headed in that direction, suggest results of i4cps new study on competitive recruiting practices. The figures show some companies are putting aggressive sourcing methods to work. Traditionally, internal corporate recruitershave abided by what used to be called a gentlemens agreement. Actively seeking to poach top talent from competitors just wasnt done. At least it wasnt done overtly or regularly in most industries. But respondents to our study might be signaling the arrival of a new day in the quest for the best candidates and a new stage in the war for talent. Such aggressive approaches could be the result of mediocre success among many internal recruiters. Our study shows that the largest percentage of respondents (53%) rated their firms only about average in recruitment effectiveness. A third claimed better-than-average results, but just 5% called their recruiting effectiveness excellent. Respondents who rely on their own internal recruiting functions to source talent agree that applying the kinds of assertive techniques that external search firms, or headhunters, sometimes use could help them improve their results. Nearly three-quarters say that, to a high or very high extent, headhunting methods increase recruitment effectiveness in certain areas. Almost as many respondents credit the techniques with helping target strategic talent. Other potential benefits include cost savings, faster recruiting results and even the ability to send a signal to competitors. Doing what the headhunters do One in four study respondents said that, to a high or very high extent, they advertise in local markets or regions of competitors. Also to a high or very high extent, 20% acknowledge that they actively source competitors employees in key and/or skilled positions, and 10% say they contact competitors employees directly. Some organizations say that direct contact of competitors staff is their means of seeking out passive candidates individuals currently employed but who might be open to a job switch if an offer came their way. Jaime Elving, Project Manager of Executive Recruiting & Onboarding for i4cp member company PNC Financial Services, confirms her organizations use of personal contacts with employees of other firms. Passive candidates are some of the people were most interested in talking with, she says. Even if the person our recruiters speak with isnt an actual candidate, he or she may be able to give us names of colleagues or friends who are interested. PNC also advertises extensively in local markets, achieving the dual goals of reinforcing its employment brand while also communicating its business brand. Cindy Akins, Vice President of Human Resources for marketing research firm Millward Brown, observes that the economic downturn has made some employees particularly amenable to contact from competitors. "Companies have downsized, but theyve held onto their best people. However, I think theres a feeling that those employees arent necessarily that happy. So if you can reach in and get a couple of good people from your competitor, the industry knowledge is already there, and you may be getting someone who has client relationships and other attractive attributes. I think the feeling of dissatisfaction that a lot of employees have right now makes them more inclined to jump if theyre contacted." She adds that unfortunately that happens with our employees as well. We havent lost many people, but were worried about the situation in 2010. In fact, another recent i4cp study found many employers are already taking action to prevent increases in employee departures as the economy gains traction. Things may get even more aggressive in the future as the economy turns around. We plan to use these techniques much more, said 16% of respondents to i4cps study. Twenty percent said they

intend trying the approach either for limited regions or positions. Another 22% said they were discussing it, while 20% said they didnt know. That left fewer than a quarter of partic ipants denying theyd use headhunting methods more in the future. Some respondents express reservations about assertive recruiting tactics, fearing that they might trigger a bidding war for talent or incite competitors to drop the gloves and target their talent. Few expressed concern about the use of such techniques being seen as bad form for internal recruiters, although our research suggests that in Europe at least in Germany the question of ethics keeps some firms from taking action. The former head of recruitment for the Europe/Middle East/Africa region of a major business software firm noted that the gentlemens agreement sensibility is still strong there. We dont do outreach to our competitors employees, he says, but we do accept applications from them. Making the most of methods used While the study primarily concerned itself with the activities of internal recruitment functions, it also asked about external search firms and the use of social media for applicant sourcing. About twothirds of respondents said they used outside recruiters once in a while for certain key positions. Most often, companies turned to headhunters for help finding talent to fill senior leadership positions. And larger companies were more likely to take that route than were smaller firms. Gruppo Campari, a leader in the branded beverage industry, uses headhunters to help locate talent for specific roles across their Italian operations. Usually high-level management or other specialized positions, explains Valrie Nizard, HR Global Product Supply Chain & Group Functions, who coordinates outside search-firm usage. She ensures optimal results for Gruppo Campari by performing a quick analysis when a requisition is made. We do a quick assessment of a number of things, Nizard says. Obviously, how much it would cost to use an outside firm, but also how easy we think its going to be to fill it by doing the search ourselves. Based on that assessment, we decide which method will be preferable. Relatively few companies say theyre using social media to a large extent for recruiting purposes. But, among those that do, online networking sites seems to be a tool of choice. Once weve found people on LinkedIn who seem to be viable prospects, we contact them, says Millward Browns Akins. That enables us to avoid time-consuming cold calling. Although her company doesnt actively contact competitors people, Gruppo Camparis Nizard says that her recruiters do call when we want to seek applicants from another industry the fast-moving consumer goods field, for example. In that case, we will check profiles on LinkedIn. If we find someone were interested in, we will contact them directly to see if theyre interested in pursuing anything further. i4cps 4-Part Recommendation: 1. Carefully weigh the benefits of using your internal recruiting function versus seeking talent through external search firms when vacancies arise. Gruppo Camparis use of a quick assessment to weigh costs and benefits drives strong decision-making about recruitment. 2. Consider using multiple methods of sourcing candidates in order to meet varied talent needs in your organization. For a few select and very hard to find roles, we might still contact an outside firm, says Jaime Elving of PNC, though as much as possible, were relying on our own efforts now.

3. Evaluate social media, such as LinkedIn, as a support tool for more assertive types of outreach. Companies can look for likely candidates in such venues before they reach out, increasing their likelihood of finding candidates who not only possess the qualifications desired but who also are apt to fit well and succeed within the organizational culture. 4. Dont forget to measure your results, and make adjustments to your recruiting programs if needed. Go beyond metrics that simply reflect recruiting activity and look at the quality of the hires youre making. Are people fitting in? Becoming engaged, high-performers? Are they staying? If your answers are yes, chances are that youre making good calls when it comes to your recruitment outreach. Do We Get Talent Management?

So theres good news and not-so-great news about talent management: On the positive side, organizations especially top performers recognize that operating in silos restricts their ability to respond quickly to changing business needs. A holistic approach totalent management has become mission-critical. Some organizations have already plunged full speed into integrated TM, but with mixed results. The bottom line is this: We get the message about the importance of TM, but when it comes to practical application, most organizations havent yet gotten it right. Most companies that say they are working in earnest at integrated talent management readily acknowledge that they dont do it very well. Commissioned by ASTD, i4cps Talent Management Practices and Opportunities survey found only one in five respondents reporting that their organizations manage talent effectively to a high or very high degree, a clear indication that theres ample room for improvement in gaining proficiency in talent management. Sometimes the road to high performance begins with recognition of the obstacles that are holding us back. i4cps research has identified a handful of major stumbling blocks that are keeping companies from managing talent effectively. Addressed in detail in our new Talent Management Playbook, those challenges include slapdash strategic planning (if any), poor internal communication about TM, ambiguous leadership and insufficient training for managers. Some may argue that its the rule rather than the exception that most companies start down the TM path without a clear plan, making effective execution impossible. Successful TM implementation begins with clearly defined outcomes that align with the overall business strategy. Organizational strategy also dictates the focus on functions to be integrated: recruitment, retention, compensation, succession planning, learning and development, performance management, or more.

Indeed, i4cps survey revealed that the need to execute strategy is the leading driver of organizations desire to improve at TM even among companies that are effective talent managers already. Clear messaging about the purpose, goals and value of TM is key: Companies need to first define what TM means, determine which employee groups should be targeted, and then communicate this clearly across the organization. For example, most companies focus TM on pivotal talent, but the meaning of the term can differ widely from one organization to another. A company facing a looming shortage among skilled workers in a specific operational area might consider those employees pivotal talent. In another firm, high-potentials in line for executive positions could be pivotal. TM objectives and programming will vary accordingly. Involved leadership is crucial senior managements commitment to talent management must be communicated clearly and constantly. TM cannot be relegated to HR alone; a C-suite champion is vital to achieve company-wide buy-in and drive long-term success. i4cps research shows a direct correlation between senior-level support of TM and successful outcomes. Further, survey results showed a correlation between TM effectiveness and its inclusion as a strategic imperative for the entire executive team. One i4cp member told us that his company has established a committee that addresses this: We have an executive team who are members of a talent management committee. This includes executives from across business functions throughout the company. It also includes the CEO. We meet quarterly and set goals for the year for talent management. Another example is Providence Health & Services, which began in 2008 to assess its resources in terms of what was needed to develop a plan. Their chief HR officer secured support from the executive council to build out a centralized talent acquisition organization and put dedicated staff and resources in place in order to define and develop a sustainable strategic center of expertise. The company doesnt approach its efforts as an initiative, but as a core function that must be sustained and connected to the strategic business planning cycle, and the firm credits its success with having a strong champion on the executive team. Finally, survey responses pointed out that managers may need specific training in order to manage talent adeptly. All the program objectives and metrics in the world wont help an organization move forward if the expertise and capabilities required to constructively handle day-to-day interactions with workers arent there. Arm managers with the know-how they need and greater talent management effectiveness will follow. And theres an additional benefit: Education and line managers buy-in often go hand in hand. i4cps 4-Part Recommendation: 1. Dont jump the gun; invest time in strategic planning that identifies business outcomes and how talent initiatives support them. 2. Reach consensus on the meaning and value of talent management to your particular organization and its culture. Communicate this clearly and often. 3. Establish distinctive leadership for TM with accountability grounded in the executive team. 4. Involve line managers in the process and equip them with the training they need to manage talent effectively.