Thursday, 15 June 2017

#HRVision17 how to divorce from Dave (Ulrich)





Two sessions at HR Vision focused on the Ulrich model and how this may now be being updated.

First up was Xavier Savigny from Bureau Veritas in a session titled 'Get ready for the future, and how to divorce from Dave'. Xavier described a number of cultural changes required by HR (e.g. saying no but also offering a new solution).

In terms of structure, Xavier suggested a change to Ulrich's three wedded stool, as shown above.


  • HR business partners become HR coaches, more focused on building the required skills in business and people leaders
  • Centre of Excellence specialists become innovation laboratory scouts recognising the need for these staff to continuously transform and experiment with new approaches
  • Service centre advisors being replaced by a digital platform (RPA, AI, chatbots, etc).

These are all useful and appropriate changes, though in a sense are a second honeymoon, rather than a divorce, e.g. specialists surely should always have been innovating?


However, if nothing else, it'll be interesting to start calling HR's updated structure the fried egg model! (see the above picture).

The second of the two sessions was delivered by Reza Moussavian at Deutsche Telekom and was titled 'What digital really means for HR - Dave and doing the same-same will not help!'







For Reza, the Ulrich model is too structured, hindering us by promoting structured thinking. Deutsche Telekom have therefore installed disruption into HR through a digital and innovation unit. This tracks all the HR startups, has run an internal HR tech conference, and uses design thinking which it sees as the greatest enabler for change. Eg it has developed 21 personas representing DT's workforce.


I was pleased to hear that, as I had suggested in my own keynote, HR is also responsible for digital collaboration.


Once again these changes are interesting and appropriate, but again, not that significant. Ie they still support a three legged stool and once again, the type of innovation Reza has introduced is really only the sort of thing that the central policy team (the seat of the stool) should always have been doing.



It's got me thinking - is this enough, or do we still need more radical transformation to the Ulrich model?  More on this next week.


  • Consulting   Research  Speaking  Training  Writing
  • Strategy  - Talent - Engagement  - Change and OD 
  • Contact me to create more value for your business
  • jon [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com




Wednesday, 14 June 2017

#HRVision17 - DaVita - da community company




I had a great couple of days in Amsterdam at Osney Media's HR Vision conference last week where I did a keynote on moving focus from individuals to groups. I described how most organisations have four main types of group, each of which need to be treated differently, which are hierarchical functions, horizontal project teams, networks and communities (from The Social Organisation).

Organisations often prioritise one of these types of group as well and it was great to see a session from Gwen Burbidge from DaVita, which sees itself as a community first, and a company second. And yes, this means it does work differently from most other companies which are mainly based on hierarchical functions.

Gwen, pictured above, also used the metaphor of a village several times, which I use in the Social Organization too. The company's CEO is called the major. The slide in the above picture provides a couple of snapshots of DaVita employees and cultural artefacts. For example, one is of the three musketeers, and their motto 'one for all and all for one' is frequently heard in the organisation.

This isn't a small company though, it's a community of 70,000 team mates which is something quite special, I think.

A lot of this comes from intentionality, i.e. the actions they take to make it a community. One of my favourite points is that everyone has their own favourite walk-on music! I'm not quite sure how this works but imagine their offices get quite noisy around 9, 1 and 5.00.

The mayor often asks intentionally directed questions, for example what is it your parents taught you that you are still very grateful for, what should be be improving, and what was your DaVita crazy moment in the last six months?

They also have start / stop / continue meetings, announced in advance so that introverts can prepare for them, and they often look for someone who knows about an area to lead these.

All senior staff participate in reality days where they go and work at a clinic at 6.00am with the team mates working there.

The purpose of all this is to create a place where people want to work (or a village they want to live in). The metaphor here is like it being a mix of air and water - they want to be profitable, but they know this needs them to be a good place for people.

It's a terrifically impressive case study, and definitely the sort of organisation I'd love to work in, if I was ever going to again. In The Social Organization, I write about maverick organisations which manage their people completely differently from 99.999% of the world's businesses, and I'd definitely put DaVita in this list of companies.

I was a little disappointed when I asked about how DaVita's HR processes are different as a consequence of them being a community, as there didn't seem to be any. That can't be a good choice. Although they have just implemented Workday which is probably a good fit.


You may also be interested in the slides from my keynote:



  • Consulting   Research  Speaking  Training  Writing
  • Strategy  - Talent - Engagement  - Change and OD 
  • Contact me to create more value for your business
  • jon [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com


Tuesday, 13 June 2017

Enterprise Digital interview on The Social Organization




I've been interviewed on The Social Organization for the Enterprise Digital conference.


The book is available at www.koganpage.com/SocialOrganization. Use code AHRTSO20 for a 20% discount.


  • Consulting   Research  Speaking  Training  Writing
  • Strategy  - Talent - Engagement  - Change and OD 
  • Contact me to create more value for your business
  • jon [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com



Saturday, 3 June 2017

The Social Organization out in the UK




Great to see my new book, The Social Organization, out in the UK.

Use code AHRTSO20 on the Kogan Page website for a 20% discount

https://www.koganpage.com/product/the-social-organization-9780749480110 

  • Consulting   Research  Speaking  Training  Writing
  • Strategy  - Talent - Engagement  - Change and OD 
  • Contact me to create more value for your business
  • jon [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com




Wednesday, 31 May 2017

Keynote at #HRVision17




Next week I'll be speaking at HR Vision 17 in Amsterdam.

The focus is a brave new world: the marriage of tech and HR:

As always, trends from the past year will continue to play a part in forming 2017’s future. With an ever competitive working landscape, employers are continuously searching for ways to distinguish themselves as a top company to work for, and that comes down to culture. Ranging from health and wellbeing, both mental and physical, to organisational design, to fostering innovation, to creating a diverse and inclusive workplace, to developing social leaders, to being a learning organisation, no company wants to be left behind in securing the best possible candidates. The need to adopt a continuous innovation model will be critical to this in 2017.


I'll be speaking on Thursday 8th June about facilitating group performance: building social organisations, workplaces and technologies:

People have evolved to live in groups and our organisations succeed or fail based mainly upon group performance. However most of our management activities focus on individuals. Shifting focus requires us to incorporate new group structures and to align the design of HR processes as well as workplaces and social / digital technologies with these new groups. I will describe and provide examples of social organisations in which groups provide the basis for effectiveness and competitiveness. The session will also review the role of HR, working in cooperation with other social leaders, in facilitating changes in perspective and management practices. You will learn how to unleash the power of our social brains and social networks to transform organisational performance.


Come and see me there if you can.


  • Consulting   Research  Speaking  Training  Writing
  • Strategy  - Talent - Engagement  - Change and OD 
  • Contact me to create more value for your business
  • jon [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com



Friday, 26 May 2017

Great new reads from Kogan Page /1: Exceptional Talent



Publisher Kogan Page have done a great job this year in having several stars from the world of HR blogging to write books for them.


In addition to my own book, The Social Organization, there is:






I'm aiming to read and post on all of these books and have already been reading another one, Exceptional Talent from Mervyn Dinnen and Matt Alder.

Despite the title this book focuses on talent management vs talent. That's probably a good thing and I completely agree with Matt and Mervyn that talent is an overused term. So despite the reference to 'exceptional', we 're not looking at a 'high-skilled, high-potential candidate who is in some ways special.  Again I think that's useful. M&M suggest this can lead to poor recruitment practice and I'd have loved to hear some examples of this (the book has plenty of case studies of successful approaches - eg one of my recent clients, Bromford Housing - but it can also be useful (and often more fun) to learn from the disasters too. But for me, an even more important reason to avoid a focus on the special ones is that this is vital to create and retain an inclusive environment.

I'd also suggest that the book focuses more on talent engagement rather than capability eg there's a lot of great ideas on employer branding, talent attraction and the candidate experience. Most of this is about the new approaches open to organisations, and perhaps required for exceptional talent management, brought about by advances in technology. I spend quite a bit of time in this area myself but will need to do some further research into Workometry, Life Guides, Papirfly, Quesocial, Rolepoint, Social Referral, Lever, Greenhouse, 4MAT and Punchkick too. It doesn't deal with Google Jobs but that's just an indication of how quickly things are changing in the space, and therefore how important it is to try to keep up with them.

However there's less focus on talent selection, where I think there's been a lot of innovation in technologies and other approaches too. But the biggest gap is talent reward. I'm not blaming M&M for this - as I've suggested previously reward is an area that as yet there's been little innovation taking place. That's going to change. Soon.  But it does cover talent onboarding, development, engagement, recognition and retention and again, makes a good case for why and how these need to change. I'd have liked to have seen more on the employee experience as well as the candidate one but in a sense, that's what the whole book is about.

I really liked the sections on social graphs, social sharing and social proof, and if you do too, you should definitely check out The Social Organization. This also make some further suggestions for how talent management processes need to change to respond to the social and technological factors M&M describe.

In summary, it's a great summary of the huge shift many organisations still need to make. Well, actually, I don't think any businesses have made it. But many have still to start. If that applies to you, you need to read this book so that you'll understand some of what you need to change.

As an added incentive, this weekend (26, 27, 28, 29 May) you can get a 50% discount on all of the above books, and all of KP's back catalogue too.


  • Consulting   Research  Speaking  Training  Writing
  • Strategy  - Talent - Engagement  - Change and OD 
  • Contact me to create more value for your business
  • jon [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com


Friday, 19 May 2017

Skillsoft / Sumtotal EMEA Perspectives 17




I was up especially early on Tuesday to attend Skillsoft's European conference , mainly to participate in a pre-conference roundtable reviewing new research from David Wilson from Fosway. There were a few quite interesting findings in their report, including that:

  • 87% of HR practitioners see skills gaps continuing to increase. This includes soft skills just as much as it does digital. Leadership skills are seen as slightly less lacking, probably because the people completing the survey saw themselves as leaders.
  • Learning will therefore continue to increase in importance, becoming the most important part of an employment value proposition.

Most of the roundtable focused on the need for employees to learn more quickly, which I agree is a growing requirement. However I think a still deeper need is to learn more, and more deeply. To me that puts a focus on 'search to learn vs learn to retain' and the evolution of mini into micro and now nano-learning in some doubt. I'd have liked to have raised this point.

Unfortunately, as it turned out, I wasn't there to participate in the roundtable at all but just to report on it (so I suppose I'd better do so). That led to my second main insight from the event which was a reinforcement of the importance of giving control of the learning agenda to the people wanting to learn, and involving them in steering their own learning process. Having a small group of people speaking and another group listening and asking a few questions at the end strikes me as rather bizarre in today's social world.

The speaking group also talked quite a bit about the need to give HR credit for the learning that people do as this is not often recognised. Really? I think that as long as HR / Learning acts strategically and effectively it will get the credit it deserves. More metrics may help but they tend not to be the main cause of business concerns about learning, or  a main way of dealing with them.


Learning and the rest of HR also need to be less siloed, which I completely agree with. However I disagree that using reward is the way to deal with it. Start with organisation design, linked performance objectives, whole group meetings - that will sort the problem in the vast majority of cases.


And a lot of the change is being driven by millennials, who value meaning and like taking sabbaticals apparently! (Actually we all value meaning and I took a sabbatical in 1990.)

There was nothing wrong with the research but I didn't enjoy my role in the session and so didn't hang around for much of the rest of the conference to see whether 'Percipio' would have much impact on any of the above, but the Twitter stream looked quite positive.




  • Consulting   Research  Speaking  Training  Writing
  • Strategy  - Talent - Engagement  - Change and OD 
  • Contact me to create more value for your business
  • jon [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

Friday, 12 May 2017

Tucana People Analytics World 2017




I’m late in providing my summary of Tucana’s People Analytics World 2017 and have struggled to find a topic that others have not already written about. However I think one useful perspective may be the level of variety within analytics at the moment.

This applies firstly to analytical approaches. Most of the presentations, not unnaturally, focused on quantitative analytical approaches. My favourite from these case examples was Microsoft’s use of social traffic metadata to suggest best practice behaviours of the most effective managers. Becky Thielen and Jeremy Tyers explained that this has shown, for example, that effective managers maintain larger networks than their reports:
  • Employees reporting to managers with large networks are 7% more engaged and have networks up to 85% larger
  • Employees with networks 110% larger than their managers are 50% more likely to be disengaged.



However, I also enjoyed the qualitative examples, eg Adidas’s analysis of employee experience during key moments that matter, following the same approach used for the company’s customers, and applying across HR / management activities, workplace and the digital workspace. This involved an an automated employee response system providing a Net Promoter Score, but also open text comments, and textual analytics to help see summaries and patterns across the business. Stefan Hierl suggested that to really need to understand what’s going on for people you need to read this stuff and hence gave leaders access to the comments of their people. He often talks to leaders about the numbers but you also need an equal focus on the qualitative side - what’s in the minds of people as this provides a better feeling for what’s going on. At Adidas, listening to people is a core competence of HR - we should not outsource this.

Similarly, some of the presentations focused on very data oriented approaches. I liked Experian’s example of flight risk modelling, taking data on over 200 employee attributes from multiple sources and plugging it into Experian’s business modelling tools. This has delivered circa 20 key statistically significant attributes.

But what I really liked about this particular conference was its heavy focus on a strategy based approach. This started with Alec Levenson’s session noting that the tasks and behaviors that do not improve strategy execution vastly outnumber the ones that do. Therefore analytics needs to start with strategy not data. The point was at least partly supported by Peter Howes noting that incremental improvement on traditional data reporting tends not to work that well.

Even more important than this level of variety about analytics was the variety about people management itself. This includes different views about the direction of causality between culture and behaviour, and engagement and performance. Peter Howes asked us whether we are making decisions about people with the same intellectual rigour as our decisions about other business factors: Finance, Sales, Production, Supply Chain. Whilst we don’t even fully understand the role of something as central as engagement this struck me and at least some other delegates at the conference as a rather ludicrous suggestion.

I think the amount of variety I have described above has a couple of important consequences.

1.   There cannot be a single maturity curve which all organisations need to follow. I much prefer Deloitte’s and 3n Strategy’s approach of identifying different aspects of analytical maturity each of which can be strong or weak independently of each other (eg Deloitte’s categories of strategy, people, process, technology and data).

However, for many organisations, the best approach may be a combination of the various approaches. For example, Eden Britt at HSBC presented a heavily quantitative, data oriented  approach, involving, for example, several smart analytical approaches for providing insight on attrition:
  •    Clustering - which are the areas of high attrition?
  •    Machine learning - who will leave?
  •    Text mining - where will they leave to?
  •    Markov models - when will they leave?



But Britt also emphasised the importance of deciding upon:
  •    What is the question you are trying to answer?
  •    What is your hypothesis?
  •    What data do you have?



His suggestion when requested to provide yet more data is to always ask: “How’s that data going to help you make a better decision or to do something in a different way?”

2. I think the variety in our approaches also raise broader challenges to emerging or prevailing wisdom:
  • It means there is limited use for standardised taxonomies. These may be OK for whether someone has a driving licence but not for eg employee engagement, or for analytics itself. These may help keep the lights on cheaper but they also interfere in the search for competitive advantage.
  • It may also mean there is limited use for benchmarking models and tools. For example, when comparing cultures, is hierarchical opposite to delegating?, or professional the opposite to social? - they’re not in my view of the world.
  • It means that setting up a professional body for people analytics would be largely unhelpful. At this point in the evolution of the people analytics field we need to encourage conversation on different perspectives rather than to see these constrained.



Thanks to Tucana and all the speakers for sharing their various approaches.


  • Consulting   Research  Speaking  Training  Writing
  • Strategy  - Talent - Engagement  - Change and OD 
  • Contact me to create more value for your business
  • jon [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com


Thursday, 13 April 2017

Future Models of HR




One of the areas which seem to have produced quite a few ideas this year is the future of HR, supporting the broader future of work.

My favourite report in this area is probably Henley's: HR with Purpose: Future Models of HR - partly but not just because I contributed to it.

A lot of the report emphasises the need for HR to act more strategically. Eg the diagram above suggests that creating an HR strategy is one of the most important needs for HR and is also an area of low capability.

I really like the value chain model which is proposed, particularly the split between people and 'HR' (or what I call human capital). Though, as the report points out, these HR capabilities may increasingly be provided by non-humans (robots, AI etc) too. It's also interesting to see HR capabilities identified as belonging to both individuals and groups (the groups part being the focus of The Social Organization). I believe the use and understanding of models like this can really help HR develop a more strategic role.




The key to doing this is to focus on the human capital and other outcomes an organisation wants to achieve. And further back than this, the core business strategy, often expressed through its values and purpose etc. And then developing HRM activities to support these.

I like these questions about capabilities provided in the report (though to me chemical engineering is an operational core competency not an HR capability):


This incorporates both strategic aspects of capabilities (such as chemical engineering  or engagement) and tactical delivery of programmes and processes to deliver capabilities (such as recruitment and retention) and raises some substantive and useful questions, such as:
  • What capabilities? How can we de ne the required capabilities? What are  the criteria for the capability? Can we substitute a capability that might be  easier to build? 
  • Why do we need that capability? What does it add to the organisation? Can we  know when it has added the predicted value?
  • When will the capability be needed? 
  • Where, and how, can we acquire key capabilities?
  • Who owns the capability? Is it necessarily a human capability or can it be built  via some other mechanism?
  • How much of each capability will we need? How can we know when we have  enough, or not enough? How can we maximise the utilisation of the capability?
  • How can we build, acquire, nurture and retain our key capabilities? If the  capability provides competitive advantage, then how can we protect it from competitors?
  • Do we already have capabilities that might contribute to our strategy or even suggest modi cation to the strategy?



The same applies to OD and the report includes one of the figures from my recent article with Dave Ulrich, in which I take each of the core structures from my OPM model and show how these impact upon HR:




I don't agree with everything in the report, e.g. it suggests separating out strategic HR from business partners' account management role. I think it's vital that HRBPs act strategically (i.e. are focused on capabilities), not just the centre.

The report also suggests that it is easier for a business person to learn HR and carry out HR strategy than it is for an HR person to acquire the required business knowledge. This misunderstands HR strategy which whilst acting in the context of the business needs to be fundamentally about people. It also under estimates the amount of people/HR related knowledge people need in order to act in this strategic role.

Other than this, the report contains some great thoughts about potential future models of HR.


  • Consulting   Research  Speaking  Training  Writing
  • Strategy  - Talent - Engagement  - Change and OD 
  • Contact me to create more value for your business
  • jon [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com




Thursday, 23 March 2017

A synopsis of The Social Organization




I have recently finsihed writing my new book, The Social Organization.

You can find out more about this at my new site I've been developing: Organisation.Social.

The site also includes a synopsis of the book if you want to find more about it now. You can pre-order the book already too.

Whilst I've been writing the book, I've not been doing much writing here. I guess that writing 100,000+ words had used up most of the words I wanted to write.

But there has been loads of interesting things happening in HR whilst I've been away and I'm feeling increasingly motivated to write about them. So I'm going to spend a couple of weeks catching up, and should then be helping you keep up to speed with developments in strategic HR as they happen.

Oh, and I'll be celebrating this blog's 10th anniversary this June too!


  • Consulting   Research  Speaking  Training  Writing
  • Strategy  - Talent - Engagement  - Change and OD 
  • Contact me to create more value for your business
  • jon [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com