In the last Three To See of 2009 we have posts on presenteeism, productivity and performance management.

My first pick was posted by Vincent Ferrari and appeared on the KnowHR blog: How Do Most Managers Measure Productivity?  Hours in the Office or Results?

I picked the video because it presents a common-place and complex argument in a simple way: What is more valuable (a) employees upping the amount of discretionary effort they contribute or (b) improving their productivity in working hours?

Enabling and engaging employees so that they do both appeals to many an organisation but if you had to choose one, which would it be?  Do your performance management practices back that up?

I thought this a useful reminder of how poor performance management practices can affect workplace morale and motivation and put the loyalty of employees at risk.  A thought that leads-in to my second pick: Need Talent?  25% of Companies Are Contacting Competitor Employees Directly which appeared on the Institute for Corporate Productivity (i4cp) website.

The post shares the results of a recent study of competitive recruitment conducted by the i4cp.  Amongst the findings:

• +40% of organisations are actively targetting competitors employees
• 25% of organisations use in-house recruiters to make a direct approach
• High performance organisations are more likely to source candidates through LinkedIn than lower performing organisations

I think that these findings combine neatly with the key points in my third pick. Dan Hilbert, who I interviewed earlier in the year, made an interesting contribution via his blog The Human Capital Samurai, with a post on The Single Most Powerful Human Capital Business Metric.

Hilbert makes the case for what his firm, OrcaEyes, are calling PerformanceTurnover™: "the number of low performers who leave the organization for every top performer who leaves" expressed as a ratio.

Hilbert claims that the ratio provides "a barometer of earnings-per-employee, shareholder value (“TSR”), sales, customer satisfaction, accidents and operational productivity."  Performance management and in particular "involuntary turnover" - the practice of systematically weeding-out low performers, seems to be an important mechanism in throttling the metric.  Hilbert says:

"In many ways, we’ve all known this in our gut for quite some time. Even though Exxon, GE, IBM and Schlumberger didn’t have this type of data, for decades the success of their businesses has been based on a simple premise, “We are only as strong as our weakest link.” To that end, these mega-successful corporations have Human Capital management models that support this maxim. Exxon and GE have formal models to empower this Human Capital model.  Every year, the lowest 10% of performers are given six months to a year to rise from the lower 10% ranking. If not, they are no longer with the organization. IBM and Schlumberger have slightly different variations built around the same premise. And these long-standing companies also share a number of other common traits:

1. They have dominated their market sector for the better part of 40 plus years.
2. They are globally successful.
3. They have all had to change their primary success formulas and markets in the past two decades, abandoning long standing successful business functions.
4. After reinventing their businesses, they dominate markets again."

What would happen to recruitment if all organisations adopted the "involuntary turnover" approach to performance management?  Would organisations ignore those candidates out in the market place and focus instead of levering the employed out of their competitors?  Can organisations afford not to take this approach?  The Cold War for Talent continues...

I hope you enjoyed this week's picks and I look forward to sharing more in 2010.

Tags: employee engagement, headhunting, Hilbert, i4cp, motivation, performance management, productivity, profitability, sourcing, talent acquisition, Talent Management

This entry was posted on Friday, December 18th, 2009 at 3:16 pm and is filed under Talent Acquisition, Talent Management, Three To See. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.