The Hindu Business Line : Differentiation: The only path to managing expectations

Urgent investment in developing managers is needed. This, third and final part in the series on differentiation of talent in India, presents a possible model for its effective implementation.

While many organisations claim victory in implementing differentiation, their employees feel otherwise. For differentiation to really succeed, it needs to be inclusive and humane. The model that I present is built on this belief.

The Manager's relationship

At the core of differentiation is an honest and trust-based relationship between the manager and team member. The manager, out of concern, must take the effort to objectively evaluate his team members' performance and give them candid but considerate feedback. The intention of the feedback must be to help and should be based on the belief that employees are willing and able to improve.

Differentiation has to be built on this solid foundation. Organisations that attempt to circumvent this and instead place a premium on technology, systems and process, or start with the belief that differentiation must be forced because managers are weak, will only weaken the long-term climate of performance within the organisation.

Leaders, with support from the HR, must make the necessary investments in helping managers develop the skills to handle the process of differentiation. The focus must be on developing emotional skills of the manager because having an honest conversation primarily calls for courage and candour — both of which are in short supply.

Congruent Leadership behaviour

The actions of the leaders through the year speak louder than their year-end mails and memos on differentiation. Their routine actions must reinforce the stated philosophy on differentiation.

Do they hire right, steer clear of political considerations while making people decisions, and replace "stars" who have failed to measure up?

Do they tolerate poor performances in visible ways, do they allow some managers to get away with violations while pushing some others harder?

Once organisations embark on the path of differentiation, they are subject to scrutiny. Actions that are inconsistent with stated policy tend to erode credibility and compromise the organisation's ability to implement it well.

Balancing performance with diversity

In practising differentiation, many organisations adopt a "one size fits all" approach. However, what works for one section or group of employees may not for others. Organisations are seldom made up of one homogenous group of employees. Their role, profession, socio-economic profile, tenure and position have implications on the applicability and ease of implementation of differentiation.

It is important that organisations recognise and respect these differences and work around them. For example, young employees and new entrants may need more support in settling down.

Redefining HR's role

Differentiation should be positioned as a part of an organisation's philosophical orientation towards performance and merit, and not a product of the HR's whimsical actions. To minimise the frustration HR professionals face in driving differentiation, their role in the entire process must be redefined:

They should stop being the process owner for the performance planning and goal setting process. This is the primary responsibility of the manager and is best done by him/her under the leadership of the CEO.

They should stop controlling the pay budget. Managers should be involved in seeing through the implementation of rewards in line with their recommendations.

HR has a huge role in using communication to ensure that the process of performance measurement and differentiation is well understood and fear and apprehensions are allayed. What is well understood by HR may not necessarily be by the junior most employees.

Finally, HR has a role in ensuring that they listen to the employees to see that the principles of fairness and objectivity have been upheld in the entire process.

In closing

Differentiation is good for business and also for individuals. However, its practice calls for preparation, sensitivity and a genuine effort to make it inclusive. If we are facing challenges with differentiation in India, it is not entirely attributable to poor managerial abilities. The realities of the external labour market forces cannot be wished away.

Employees readily accept differentiation when they are most concerned about keeping their jobs. When the external market is buoyant, it becomes very hard for organisations to go out and practice deep differentiation. From this perspective, both India and China are likely to face similar dilemmas in driving differentiation while also battling attrition.

Also, badly administered differentiation practices can end up creating perceptions of unfairness, victimisation and discrimination, and can create discontent and even lead to many forms of counter-productive or dysfunctional behaviour and action.

All this means that very urgent and serious investments in developing managers are needed, for without their support and leadership, differentiation will remain not merely an `HR thing', but a dangerous weapon in untrained hands.

(The author is the founder and CEO of totus consulting, a strategic HR consulting firm that designs and implements HR systems and process for organisations across diverse industries. This series on differentiation is the result of his consulting work and on-going research on the subject. He can be reached at ganesh@totusconsulting.com)

(Concluded)

More Stories on : Business Models | People Wise | Management

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Regulate commodity futures

A deal cast in iron

Going overboard on tax sops?

Ireland, Continent's Celtic Tiger

Why we think inside boxes

Differentiation: The only path to managing expectations

Fighting corruption with words!

Social welfare

`Creamy layer' `Creamy layer' politics