Corporate Eye

...compare, compete, excel

Lucy Nixon

Lucy Nixon

Leaders As Teachers

In the past it was called mentoring or coaching, now it is called “Leaders as Teachers”.  The term is rather self explanatory: C-Suite leaders help the up-comers to become leaders.

Easy to understand, not so easy to implement. It takes up senior leaders time – a valuable corporate asset – and there is setup time if it is done right. These are the key impediments to get the C-Suite to help the up-comers.

However, there are company models that are working and the benefits are noteworthy.

Bersin & Associates, a leading corporate learning consultancy, highlights the benefits —

Our research clearly shows that “leaders teaching leaders” offers many benefits:

  • It enables a company to build a culture;
  • It demonstrates to employees that learning is valued; and,
  • It provides leaders with a forum to consistently demonstrate company values, share business strategy, and set expectations of what it means to manage and lead effectively in the company.

One of the early adopters was Becton Dickinson (BD). They put in place their program early this century. The results are impressive– nearly all of the internal programs are taught by employees including all members of the C-Suite.

View a short video on BD’s program —Leaders As Teachers at BD

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmVfDC8IBXc[/youtube]

Read more about BD’s program. (PDF)

Another company that uses “Leaders as Teachers” is Capital One. The company started its University in 2004.

Noteworthy is that they embrace the corporate training strategy I mentioned in my post “The Revolution in Corporate Training”.

Capital One’s learning strategy is to encourage lifelong learning that is owned by our associates. Because the corporate university is all managed online, employees take control of their own learning

Source: Capital One University puts employees in the driving seat. (PDF)

A key offering of the University is the “Leaders as Teachers” program that ensures the transfer of knowledge from senior leaders to develop leadership skills in other employees.

The leaders as teachers program involves:

  • the executive-speaker series;
  • business-leader workshops;
  • short sessions with a senior leader speaking on an area of particular expertise;
  • leaders delivering entire training programs on particular subject areas, such as change management;
  • leaders involved in particular sessions on training programs – for example, presenting the company’s strategic imperatives during its induction program, OnBoarding.

Other companies using “leaders as Teachers” include Caterpillar and  Infosys. Ed Betof who developed BD’s “Leaders as Teachers” program offers the following advice to other companies —

1. It’s important that the chairman and CEO and leadership team be involved and supportive.

2. Emphasize the value of teaching learning as part of the criteria related to leadership potential.

3. Use a change-leadership process (Kotter’s eight steps) for long-term sustainability.

4. Develop “Big Mo” (momentum). Worry little about resistance, and focus on those who want to be involved. Enough momentum always trumps resistance. People like to be part of successes and to be where positive things happen. Momentum and involvement beget more momentum and involvement. At some point, they become the norm and part of the culture.

5. Make teaching valuable, engaging, rewarding, fun, and hassle-free.

6. Maintain strategic and business goal alignment. Our programs all have a common purpose: to grow the business and our people.

7. Maintain a strong link between classroom and real-work application. All of our teaching is in the form of active learning with application to participant responsibilities

8. Make leaders as teachers cost-effective. Leaders often learn as much as, and sometimes more than, the participants.

Article On BD website (PDF)

Now consider getting your C-Suites to turn those Millennials and Xers into Leaders.

Image: Graziadio Business Report

Darling, you’ve changed

online surveyAfter breakfast this morning, my daughter asked me not to buy what has been her favourite brand of gluten free pains au chocolat any more. Apparently, they’ve changed the recipe, and she doesn’t like them any more.

Apart from the minor domestic issues (what to source instead?) this raises a big question in my mind.

For these products – products which are rare, if not unique, and for which the market is small but necessarily very loyal – why not ask for customer feedback, and make it easy to provide?

Without this feedback, the company has no idea why one of its loyal customers has gone, and it is missing out on an opportunity.

Yes, I know that the company no doubt believes the new recipe is an improvement (even if only in production costs not taste) and that there may be new customers gained who do like the new version. But in a relatively small market like this one, every customer counts.

It would be easy to add a feedback blog, or an online survey, so that customers could tell the company what they thought, and perhaps email customers after a recipe change asking for feedback (even better if you can target those who buy that particular product), with a link to the blog/survey.

I saw a different gluten free manufacturer on Twitter this morning, asking people for their opinions on gluten free lunchtime options. It can be done…

Many corporate websites now ask for feedback, usually via a popup survey request – occasionally via a link in a sidebar. Although many people may click the No Thanks button, anyone who feels strongly has the opportunity to respond – and that in itself may assuage some of the irritation felt towards the brand.

What are you doing to get feedback from users when you make a change?

Diversity on the Corporate Website: The Challenge of Messaging

The second post in the Diversity series covered strategies for integrating diversity messaging. considerations about presenting diversity. So now we look at a second group of considerations—both practical and ethical—associated with presentation of diversity on the website. That takes in both subtle factors (such as imagery and language) and obvious content, such as policy statements and executive messages.

This post is a story and some questions. No answers!

The story: A few weeks ago, I came across a mid-sized company that had a most enticing recruiting brochure (available on their website as a PDF). I was about to add the company to my “places I want to work” list when I realized that there does not appear to be a single person of color in the whole brochure. There are dozens of people shown—even a snapshot of a company picnic—and everyone is, to put it plainly, white.

There are two possible exceptions, discovered when I returned for a more detailed trip through the brochure. But they are so subtle I didn’t notice them the first time.

Anyway, here’s what I found on the second review. And let me say loudly, this isn’t an interpretation or an indictment, it’s just a description:

Cover: Posed photo of four white people—two men, two women.
Page 2: Posed photo of white male CEO.
Page 3: Two pictures in classroom settings, with white female teaching white students. In the smaller picture, with extra magnification, it looks as if one student at the back of the class might be of Asian ancestry.
Page 4: Photo of white man talking to white woman at a desk.
Page 5: Group photo depicting employee recognition. Six men, six women, all white.
Page 6: Snapshot of family. Man, woman, two children, all white.
Page 7: Company picnic, at least 50 people in view. With extra magnification, all appear to be white, except for a Hispanic woman in an apron, who seems to be part of the catering staff.
Page 8: Pictures of a fitness facility. White man on treadmill, white woman with dumbbell.
Page 9: Two photos relating to health benefits. One shows a white male doctor, the other shows a white mother taking care of a white child.
Page 10: Two photos relating to career opportunities. One shows a white man looking over some papers, the other shows two women wearing headsets. One of the women might be African-American, but I don’t think most people would be certain of that.
Page 11: Picture of white woman.
Page 12: Picture of building exterior.

For context, this is a regional company, located more north than south, more east than west. It employs more than 800 people, and has won workplace awards. The text in the brochure hits every single right note about valuing employees, communicating with employees, work-life balance, community involvement, and so on. In fact, they have a whole page that details the array of parties and events—and it looks like a fun place, let me just say!

So let’s consider the possibilities:

  1. They just don’t happen to have any non-white employees. This would be unusual on a percentage basis, with a total population near 1000, but it’s possible.
  2. Some or all of the people in the brochure are not employees, so they don’t necessarily represent the make-up of the company. (Except for the CEO, no one is identified, and several of the illustrations look like stock photography. But the picnic is obviously real, and the employee recognition shot looks real.)
  3. No one considered the images as part of the message. This seems odd, since they went to the trouble of printing a full-color brochure (or at least the trouble of creating a PDF to represent same). But again, it’s possible.
  4. All of the above.

And now for the questions:

  • If they don’t have racial diversity in the company, should they pretend to? After all, if they are using stock photos, they could add a touch of color . . . but would that be dishonest? Hypocritical? And come to that—would it be dishonest (or at least misleading) in general to mix stock photos with real pictures?
  • Will readers notice that the possibly Hispanic lady is a caterer and the possibly African-American lady is the only employee shown wearing a headset? (It’s clearly a call-center headset, not something for hands-free at the desk.) If not consciously, then subliminally?
  • Is it fair to drill down on a marketing document with this degree of scrutiny? Should we draw any conclusions about the company on this basis?
  • Will prospective employees draw any conclusions? And if so, will some be bothered by the lack of diversity, while others find it attractive?
  • Could this messaging be accidental? Could it be intentional?

If you think of other questions, let me know. Except if the questions are “Why didn’t you mention disability?” and “What about invisible diversities?” I’ll get to those topics in the final post of the series.

Diversity and the Corporate Website: Four Strategies

In the first post of this series, I suggested there are four basic approaches to dealing with diversity topics on the corporate and career websites. I’m going to call them:

1. Not a Problem. Say nothing, except by implication.

2. Just the Facts. Post a policy or statement.

3. Effectively Engaged. Expand diversity messaging.

4. Devoted to Diversity. Make diversity a major feature.

Ideally, the strategy selected should fit the company—and realistically, the primary difference between a company that can use strategy 1 and a company that needs strategy 4 is size. The relative diversity reputation of a company may also be a factor (for example, a company trying to make up for poor PR in this area may need to be more aggressive), and some industry sectors may require more diversity initiative than others.

While none of the four strategies is inherently good or bad, each has both virtues and pitfalls. Here’s a quick summary of the pros and cons—based on common sense and my own observations:

StrategyProCon
Not a Problem Suggests the company is confident about diversity.May suggest company does not care about diversity.
Just the FactsProvides information without overemphasis.May appear to be merely lip service.
Effectively EngagedDemonstrates a significant commitment.Message may become fragmented.
Devoted to DiversityMakes it clear diversity is a primary value in the company.May appear to be patronizing, exploitative or exploitative.

To find examples, I visited three sites that I already like, on the assumption that they are probably doing the right thing! And one more that’s a diversity leader. So here we go:

Umpqua Bank, with about 1700 employees (9% minorities, 77% women), represents Not a Problem. No specific mention of diversity, just a brief, pleasant message about empowerment.

umpqua

The Meadows is a tiny employer, with a workforce of only 650 in 2008, growing to about 1,000 with opening of new permanent casino in 2009. Just 6% minority, about 60% women—but they have a really nice diversity statement that makes their Just the Facts approach seem sincere.

meadows

meadows-policy1

Jack in the Box has more than 40,000 employees, but if their diversity statistics are available, I can’t find same! The site includes two discussions of diversity—one at a policy level, the one at a culture level—to show they are Effectively Engaged. They also offer extended profiles of employees representing both ethnic and ability diversities. (Okay. I love the clever bit with the hats.)

jack-2

jack-3

Finally, Sodexo goes the extra mile to show they are Devoted to Diversity. This is the only site in the group I wasn’t familiar with, but Sodexo was the winner of the 2008 ERE Best Practices in Recruiting Award for Best Diversity Program. In fact, the ERE description says: “Whatever you are doing to promote diversity pales in comparison to the Sodexo approach,” so I certainly couldn’t resist a visit.

And although the Diversity portion of their Careers website is low-key in presentation, it is extensive and effective. A badge box revolves a series of diversity awards (they have more than two dozen), and sub-pages profile Sodexo “Champions of Diversity” and describe Employee Network Groups that cover a wide range of affinities. With over 100,000 employees, Sodexo is about half minority and more than half female.

sodexo

For a textbook example of diversity messaging, check out Sodexo’s 32-page Annual Diversity Report. Really—it’s worth the time.

A Macy’s Mystery, Continued

Picking up where the previous post left off, for a new day of sleuthing:

Question 1 . . . Did the companies that flunked Forrester’s 2008 review do anything to improve their Career sites? The Forrester report came out at the beginning of April 2008. I know from previous research that both AIG and Citi redesigned their sites sometime after February of 2008. As noted in Recruiting in the Headlights, they went with very different approaches: sizzle (AIG) and steak (Citi).

The Wayback Machine reveals that the other two financial companies have also redesigned their sites in the past year or so (Goldman Sachs sometime after November 2007 and Merrill Lynch after February 2008). Both stepped up to a bold, clean look on the landing page, with a giant graphic and just a few top-level “gateway” links.

As for the retailers: JCPenney has vamped up its Careers look sometime since the last Wayback capture in mid-2007 (big improvement, though blindingly red); Kroger has freshened up since early 2008 (not a radical change); and Rite Aid has not redesigned at all, just added a few drop shadows.

Now we jump to Question 3—concerning Macy’s—and the plot thickens. This is also a site I’ve looked at before (Communicating the Employer Brand), noting that it didn’t stand up well by comparison to Nordstrom. It appears that the current site design has indeed been upgraded since the Forrester review, and presumably addresses the functional issues highlighted by Forrester.

But this research has revealed an interesting story . . .

Once upon a time, the Macy’s (aka Federated) Career site was an industry darling. Not only did it win the ERE “Best Corporate Careers Website” award in 2005, it was also named by CareerXRoads in their “Top 25 Corporate Websites (PDF)” list, and in 2004 had been cited by ERE as one of “The World’s Very Best Employment Websites.”

Even setting the bar at a pretty ordinary height, I cannot imagine anyone would pick out today’s Federated/Macy’s site as among the world’s best, even if it works well. So—what happened?

In 1999, Federated launched a college recruiting site called Retailology, which was so successful that in 2001 it was extended to become a branded portal for company-wide recruiting. By September of 2002, according to a story in Internet Retailer, “more than 2.2 million job seekers–an average of 6,253 a day–have visited Retailology. The average visitor session length clocks in at more than a quarter hour, and some 205,000 people have begun the job application process by submitting their information to Federated online through Retailology.com.”

Many of the factors that attracted attention to Retailology have become best practices today—but they were on the leading edge then. For example: detailed job descriptions, real-time postings, career path examples for actual employees, executive profiles, diversity messaging, location highlights, an interactive forum on the college portion of the site, more than 70 employee interviews, and a “Connecting With Our Customer” section sharing “the experiences of exceptional sales and sales support associates,” along with “unedited thoughts and experiences directly from Federated customers.”

On top of all that, the site had an unconventional, fashion-oriented look:

retailology

We can probably agree that the Retailology design was outdated by 2007, and no doubt needed a makeover.

macysdesign2007But the design that replaced it (in June of that year) was not a creative update—more of a 180 turn from fun to serious, from fashion to business.

Much of that best-practice functionality was still in place, but the look-and-feel was decidedly different.

The 2007 version was probably the one reviewed by Forrester.

Sometime in 2008 the site underwent a design polish, and—fast forward—here’s what you see today:

macystoday

What drove the shift–and whether it pays off–are questions that can’t be answered from the outside. But I would love to hear opinions, insights, or information regarding Macy’s apparent decision to fit in rather than stand out.

And in the meantime (in case you were keeping up!) I promise to illuminate the remaining mystery of Question 2 in a future post.

Good Governance — Tell The Company Story

Last June I wrote a post Stories are Serious Business in which I chronicled how companies use stories in a variety of business functions. Since then, I’ve discovered that a number of companies are telling their story to enhance their corporate reporting. Robert Bruce indicates in “Corporate governance: Tall story”

Over the past few years we have seen a trend towards many different ways of measuring corporate success. At the heart has been the view that, with pure financial reporting figures becoming ever more complex, the story of corporate performance should be told just as much through narrative reporting and through the use of intangible issues.

This is an excellent trend. Telling the corporate story from an ever-growing number of sources within the organisation has to help to give a more useful picture to stakeholders and investors alike. The trend is also growing.

First there is the minimalist approach by Alcan Composites —

When you mouseover the year, a popup appears that further defines what happened to the company that year. Nice approach.

Dassault Falcon provides an innovative multi-faceted approach —

Do a mouseover on Our Story and navigate to the Timeline. You will see a comprehensive history with lots of images. When you click on a time period you see a concise narrative. You may also access the other options under Our Story. Dassault makes sure you get a good understanding about the company and what is stands for.

Another variation on this theme is Singapore based UOB Group. This banking company puts a comprehensive set of information in its Our Story section–

UOB crams lots of information useful to investors in Our Story. They don’t spend much time on history. But, you have quick access to Mission, Objectives, Strategies and Products and Services UOB offers. Well done.

Finally, if you need help telling your corporate history story here is a resource.