What makes a happy workplace?

Recently I had the pleasure of carrying out a series of interviews with leaders in their respective fields. With their agreement, I’m going to blog about the talks and share the audio and video content.

My first interview was with the very infectiously positive Henry Stewart. This guy has enthusiasm and passion for what he does in abundance. I love that.

I chose Henry because I enjoyed meeting him at one of the Connecting HR unconferences, subsequently at the inaugural L&D Connect unconference and then reading his book, the Happy Manifesto.

We started talking about how he began his journey into creating a happy workplace. He was part of a group of people who started a campaign publication and in the process raised £6.5 million. Wow, right? What a great way to start a business, and with capital at your disposal. They lost it in six weeks. But why, I asked?

Henry: Because we created a company that was a truly dreadful place to work. It was full of endless meetings, back biting, and blame. We hired some fantastic people and created an environment where it was impossible for them to work. What should have been an ethical and principled company was worse than when I was working at IBM.

As you listen to the playback, you’ll hear a consistent laugh from Henry which is infectious and I couldn’t help getting dragged along by it. Love it!

We moved on to talking about Maverick by Ricardo Semler. Henry swears by it as a text focused on people that he gives everyone a copy who joins Happy.

I asked Henry why he thought the theory behind Semler’s success could work here in the UK.

Henry: Why not? The old way wasn’t working. This made sense. People can be trusted wherever they are, and it seemed to work.

Nice and simples. I’m liking this guy the more and more I talk to him.

I picked his brain about this concept of ‘pre-approval’.

Henry: You have to have clear parameters. The moment I see the detail I want to get involved. It’s no longer Johnny’s project. I have to say – how are we going to measure this? As long as he accepts those are the measures, he needs to understand what I won’t accept. And he’ll create a great site, and if not, he’ll get feedback. There are 8 steps to help make this happen. It’s to avoid me as the manager seeing the detail, which I’ll mess up. Because when we get involved we always get it right, don’t we?! I can’t get involved in everything and I can’t come up with the best ideas.

I’ve been fascinated by his association with Action for Happiness which I enjoy following on Twitter, and wanted to find out more about this.

Henry: They’re simply trying to help people be happier. It’s about helping other people. It’s about staying active. It’s about good relationships. These are simple steps people can take.

Me: Do you see this movement is gaining momentum?

We saw last year (2012) it was on the front page of Harvard Business Review. Research has shown us that the best 100 companies to work for produce better market results than investing in the FTSE 100. If you went back 25 years and invested in them, you’d have made a greater return than traditional investments.

Me: What do you say to the cynics and try to win them over?

Henry: I do a thought exercise – do you agree people work best when they feel good about themselves? Nearly everyone puts their hand up. So what’s the point of management? Maybe it’s to help people feel good about themselves? What would your organisation be like if that’s the focus of management? Most people come up with positives. Not everyone will go away and do this. We can’t always do this, but people agree it’s the right thing to do.

Me: So what’s the challenge behind not doing this?

Henry: The challenge is that this is the best way to help them (people) be productive. Is it the priority for them (organisations), that’s the challenge. There are some companies who are ready to lap it up, and others who are just stuck.

Me: How can HR/L&D get involved with this or influence this?

Henry: They have to be making the links internally. They need to know what they’re expecting as a result in three months time before launching a programme like this. You need to ask questions like, what do you (the organisation) want to achieve? It can’t be about just spending some budget so you don’t lose it the following year. It needs to be about talking the language of the business so they understand the benefit of doing so.

Me: Do you find interest from HR/L&D field? Or is it mainly entrepreneurs and CEOs and MDs?

Henry: I’m pleased that at the Happy Conference we have about a third who are CEOs. With HR I find there are those who enjoy working with people, and those who enjoy working with process. Those about the latter need to get out of the job(!).

We finished the talk by talking about the Happy Workplace Conference which has now since passed. If you want to know more about The Happy Manifesto, visit the website. Henry does regular talks and speaking engagements and can be followed on Twitter here.

And if you’re interested in hearing a very amateur attempt at recording the interview, that’s right here. Unfortunately I’ve not mastered merging MP3 files, so this interview is in five parts – there’s about 40 mins of interview.

Part One.

Part Two.

Part Three.

Part Four.

Part Five.

I’ve got a nerve

I’ve got a nerve.

One of the topics I get all het up about is inclusion. There are plenty of people writing about their experience of being excluded because of various factors. There are plenty of people writing about the need to include people of all ilks, and not discriminate. There are some very smart people moving beyond these conversations and making compelling arguments for the case.

Inclusion. It matters.

I’m fortunate. Very fortunate.

My folks chose to graft and send me to a private school to get a good education in my early years. I got my GCSEs – distinctly not all A’s and B’s. More like C’s and a combination of the rest. That’s not a good thing to making a point of. The private education was meant to do better for me than that with respect to my results. What I did learn about though was things like being independent. I went on school skiing trips, camping trips, week long I.T. camps, trips to the ballet, to Canterbury Cathedral, and more. I learned how to be confident in myself even though I may not have been academically brilliant.

From there, I went on to college to do my ‘A’ Levels in psychology, sociology and french. A year longer than I should have been there, and I got my grades to get me on a bachelors degree in psychology. I enjoyed that subject a lot. And after that, and some wondering whether I was going to go down the educational psychology route, I decided on occupational psychology and got my pass in 2003. I was a straight C student through all that. I didn’t find it easy, and often questioned what I wanted to do.

My family were there through all that. My friends came and went through all that. I also worked in a lot of different part time jobs through all that. I learned a lot about other cultures in that time. Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Sikhi, Hinduism, all became fascinating topic of interest for me. I wasn’t scholarly, but I knew a lot of people from all those religions and actively sought to find out more about them. I even did my undergraduate dissertation on the topic of homosexuality and religion.

I’ve got a nerve.

It wasn’t until I started work life that I was exposed to more. I thought I was fairly good at being sensitive to others and knowing how to behave. Then I met people who were wheelchair bound. I met people who were homosexuals and lesbians. I met people who were challenging poor behaviours at work. I learned slowly that difference exists in the big bad world, and you can choose to either accept people for who they are, or you don’t. I saw that people tended to be better when they were inclusive. I like being inclusive, and don’t like to exclude anyone. Harmony and relationships are important to me. So I take the time to learn more about these other ways of living and what that means for people.

Later in my working career, I started to work in positions where I was having to help others understand more about this topic of diversity. Wow that was hard. I had to learn a lot about my own prejudices and my own behaviours I was exhibiting. That was tough. I had to face up to facts about myself and how I thought about the world. That’s not an easy set of thoughts to own up to. I had to accept I had prejudices against gay people. I had to accept I had prejudices against certain religions. I had to accept I had prejudices against disabled people. Holy crap.

I’ve got a nerve.

Through hard work, I learned that this was just crap. I had to learn how to challenge myself. I had to learn how to value others. Because, you see, I didn’t – not really. I accepted them. I even tolerated them. How very superior, right? How very unintelligent. How very crass and single minded. I don’t think I was ever openly dsicriminatory to anyone. But that wasn’t my issue. I was privately discriminatory.

How do you get past that? How do you stop that kind of thinking?

There’s no silver bullet here people. I can’t point at a particular thing and say “that right this, and that right there” was what helped me. I had to challenge what I knew by talking with others. By talking to people in the know. By reading what I could. By taking time to reflect and find out what was going on in my head.

I’ve got a nerve.

At the same time as all this, I remember learning about being English. That’s a weird thing to say, right? I mean, why would I want to learn that? I grew up in this country, so why wouldn’t I know about the culture I’ve grown up in? Because growing up in a country, and knowing its culture are not the same thing. Things like football, cricket, tea, English breakfast, beer, London Town, music, art, books – all of these things and more, make up what I love about being an English man.

Voting, sarcasm, self-deprecation, politics, schooling, education, the NHS, this is all part of who I am and what I know. Banter – oh my, what would we do without banter! I’ve learned, both through my own and through others mistakes, just how powerful a thing banter can be. It can build relationships, and it can cut people to their core. It is, of course, a British affair and not restricted to the English. And I’ve learned how to use banter as a way of testing boundaries with people. I don’t always get it right, but I do enjoy the conversation.

I’ve got a nerve.

And at some point in the last five years I started to value people. I saw past my prejudices, my biases and my own self-limiting beliefs about others. I saw the folly in that thinking and realised I love the human condition. It’s weird, wonderful, and scary. Difference rules, and we should all strive to be unique. We all need a place to land and a place to thrive. It’s why I blog now. I have a voice to help others find theirs. It’s why I’m so keen on the learning and development field. I learn so much about others that I improve myself. I become a better person because of the people I work with every damn day. We’re all brilliant, and I want to harness that brilliance and share it with everyone.

I’ve got a nerve.

I am here

Flow.

It’s a sense of things happening in and around you. That conversation you can hear, is summoning something inside you. Your commute you take, it’s driving you to choose your actions. What will they be? Let’s find out.

Actions.

When I choose to hear that voice speaking to me and I take action on it. When I hear that voice inside and I learn to have that internal dialogue. I learn from myself. Not because I must, but because I understand what I am telling myself. My experience and learning takes me on a journey to reach a point in my life. I take action based on this sense I have inside me.

Dialogue.

I have the privilege of hearing your voice. It speaks to me and I am moved by it. I engage with it and learn about you. You share something with me which reveals you to me. Did you know this? Did you know I am here for you? Did you expect me to enter your mind?

Sustenance.

Is a moment where I indulge my body. The choices I make to fuel my body are mine to make. I have full congnisance of the world around me. I am aware of what I place before myself. It helps me to reach a goal. It’s my goal. This is me being selfish.

Diversity.

I embrace the person I am with. They are complete human beings. This is, and always will be, awesome. I am but a ripple in the ocean, and I am the drop. You and I, we are here and I hear you. I see you. I understand you. I need you. I loathe you. I am who I am because of me. I am who I am because of you. Where does this take me? What journey am I on? How can I know unless I respect and walk with you?

Silence.

Taking a moment to hear nothing. To watch a bird take flight. To see a couple walking hand in hand. To see a homeless guy sit and beg for his money. To just be. To not be plugged in. To not be listening. To be calm. to find calm. To hear nothing. To hear only that which matters.

Life.

I live it. I live it with you. I live it for me. I live it for you. I live it for who I am. It is affirming. It is frightening. It is what it is. I thrive in it. I lose myself in it. I welcome it. I am life.

Time.

It flows. It doesn’t stop because it doesn’t know how. How do you take that concept and make it meaningful? How do you manipulate it for your wares? Are your efforts futile? Where are you going with this time? It’s there, forever moving. I can either move with meaning, or I can move with none. I move because the time insists I do.

Disruption, balance, and equilibrium

This week I head into super-blogging mode at the HRD event held by the CIPD. I need to get those muscles going, so make an offering today.

We all amble and fumble through life wanting to achieve certain things. Sometimes we have a clear idea of what these things are, and sometimes we don’t. It’s a proven methodology to set goals that are SMART and how it can help focus the mind. What had also been proven is the need to balance your goals so that you don’t push yourself beyond your capabilities, abilities, or competence. I may have a desire to fly a fighter jet, and I could set a clear goal to get there, but I am keenly aware I may never be able to do this. The best I may have to accept is being a passenger.

Through positive psychology, I advocate carrying out daily and regular activities that enable you to be your best. Through concerted and disciplined efforts, we can increase our well-being and lasting sense of happiness. I think that’s important, and is available to everyone. I want people to thrive, and this is why I do the work I do. People at work have no less opportunity for living a vibrant life, than those who have money to spare and the time to reflect on such things.

For some of us, we even think about our own self-awareness. That is, I understand how to take on information about how I am acting, and how this impacts others. With this understanding I am able to moderate my behaviour (if I choose to), and effect change. This is what it means to be self-aware. Not all of us have the capacity for this, and even few of us see this as a thing to do.

It’s one of the hardest things to help people understand on courses or workshops. There are good ways to help make things happen, or you can beat the drum to the same beat you always have. If you want to change, it means disruption. Something in you needs to be disrupted. The status quo isn’t acceptable. I’m not talking about organisational change or commercial imperatives. I’m talking about the person reading this. The person listening. The person hearing. Something in you needs to be upset. Whatever balance you think you had needs to be disrupted. It needs to be disrupted because you have a desire to be different, but are not sure what this looks like.

One of the absolutes in life is uncertainty. We have no idea what tomorrow holds – in many cases we don’t even know what happened yesterday. That uncertainty causes us to experience happiness and sadness in equal measure, as we choose to see it. That uncertainty, counter-intuitively, provides us with balance.

This balance we have in our lives, everything hinges on this. I choose to work the hours I do. My contract may stipulate it, but I choose to be part of a company where I can work the hours suitable for me. I choose to exert my efforts to the capacity I want to. Whether I am engaged or not is irrelevant. If I want to be productive, I will be. I choose to spend time with family as I see best. No one can influence that but me. I choose to socialise in ways important to me. Regardless of others expectations or desires, I do this my way.

When we are confronted with something that causes us to be disrupted, that balance is thrown off. Our equilibrium needs to be re-calibrated. This is why I do the work I do – and why I connect so keenly with others through the likes of Twitter and this blog. We are expert at causing that equilibrium to be disrupted so you review that balance. I design solutions and interventions that help to regain that balance for a period of time. Key to this, though, is that this balance is only ever temporary. Because, as humans, life is never stable. That uncertainty is always rearing its head.

Call it flow, call it balance, call it life – it amounts to the same thing. I have this sense of life based on what I choose to do.

What do you choose to do?

A Story about Change Leadership

Reblogged from People Performance Potential:

There's a lot that can be written about leading change and aspects such as change resistance.  It's a major part of my professional practice and I'll be writing more pieces on leading change in the coming weeks.

To start though, I want to share this story with you. I hope it makes you think about what is possible when you want to create change.

Read more… 980 more words

Hacking the performance review

There’s this thing happening in the near future, a collaboration with the CIPD and Gary Hamel. They’re calling it a #hackathon. How very interesting.

It’s a project to crack workplace practise, make it meaningful and add actual value.

This week we’ve seen the likes of Perry Timms and Rob Jones get involved in the conversation and give some thoughts on poor performers at work and the unnecessary level of process we are sometimes guilty of putting into place. Both good places to start a conversation and get those grey cells working.

The other day on Twitter I asked what term we could replace the term performance review with. And so, dear readers, I ask you to be involved in this discussion. Let’s remind ourselves of the purpose of the performance review, and the options available.

Performance reviews in most organisation are that formal point of the year when you sit down and have your appraisal with your line manager. There are a lot of people writing about how to perform a good annual review. Even I did once… or twice… or three times…

That’s not the point though. The point is we need to move on. We need to move on from this concept of appraising performance and move towards a concept of appreciation and progression. And here comes the obligatory challenge – what about the retrospective element of reviewing work? Hold. That. Thought. Compadre.

Here’s where I lay out the ideal. Performance reviews need to be one of the first things that get hacked. Into little itty bitty pieces that can be scattered in the wind. It has served its purpose as a way of managing your people. For most people it’s looked on with disdain, and that same majority would much rather it just didn’t happen.

But what to replace it with? Well, there are two main contenders for replacing the traditional manager-employee review. In both instances, the onus is on the individual. That is, if the individual wants to receive feedback on work achieved, it is up to them to do the necessary leg work and provide the evidence. To whom?

Well first option is to have a panel of reviewers. The individual presents their evidence for a job well done over a given period of time, and they are interviewed/interrogated/examined about their work. Based on this, the panel decides on the performance of the individual, provides feedback, and makes recommendation for future work. These reviewers would likely be other managers. What I like about this is it gives the opportunity for other managers to learn about work happening across the organisation and gain better understanding of workplace pressures, challenges and successes. It also presents a real challenge of committing to the process in a regular and consistent fashion in order that fairness of the panel is maintained.

The second option is to have peer reviews. The individual again presents their evidence for a job well done, but in this case to a panel who consist of your peers. That is, no one is in a management role reviewing your work. The feedback you receive is based on the understanding of the work you present, and your work is shared across the organisation. This allows a level of transparency and openness about work practices which may not have been evident before, and the feedback is likely to be objective. The main challenge to this is trusting the word of your colleagues, and being able to identify what development or progression you could benefit from.

There is also a big assumption with both of these models that the pay system is not linked to the performance review process. This shouldn’t happen anyway. It’s a poor excuse for managing staff by coupling it with a pay review and expecting people to clap like sealions when you wave a bit of money in front of them. Such a degrading way of treating people, and yet most organisations are absolutely wedded to the process.

Instead this should be laid out up front in the employment contract. Your base salary is this. Increase in salary is based on specific criteria – most important of these being organisational success. No organisational success = no pay increase. Bonuses are paid under exact circumstances. Submission for pay increase needs to be under these principles. There are very good ways of making all of this happen. It just doesn’t need to be nor should it be linked to the performance review process.

So what about the retrospective element of appraisals? Well, as I’ve mentioned in the posts above, and as I tell every line manager I work with, that retrospective element should be happening regularly and consistently throughout the year. The annual review is then a summary of previous conversations, where the only thing to actually talk about is what’s happening in the future? We’ve summarised everything we’ve been talking about regularly over the previous review period, and we both understand if it’s been a successful, non-descript or poor year. So now let’s focus on the coming review period and what needs to happen tomorrow.

Again, I’ve said this before, but if your annual review is the only time to actually review your person’s performance, then a) you shouldn’t be a manager b) see a) c) your organisation doesn’t believe in the process for it to be effective d) you need better development in this area e) all of the above, especially a).

This also then questions the very relevance of being a manager. If part of what a manager is responsible for is the development and progression of staff, and I’m suggesting this is removed from them and shared with others in different ways, what are they left with? Well, people still need to have a line manager for a host of operational and development based needs. The role of the manager isn’t to hold the hands of every person they’re responsible for, it’s to give support and develop staff based on organisational needs.

So, I’m intrigued by this hackathon, and what it could unleash. It needs people to get behind it, and I’m sure there will be.

And bearing in mind everything I’ve just mentioned and talked about above, what would you call the performance review?