The distance between good and better
How to deliver value using Talent Analytics
The debate between good & bad or good versus evil is an ancient one. The need to measure for good has impact on an organization’s performance objectives.
To begin with, measuring to decide what is good versus the expected levels is both helpful in determining how good is good and the distance between good and better.
Performance appraisal is not the only measure for Talent Analytics.
Attrition Analytics helped IBM save $300 mn while Google saved over $400 mn by reducing onboarding time. Building an Analytics culture can improve engagement, like shoe retailer Clarks noted savings of £60mn per percentage point gain through employee engagement as reported in Clarks 2019 Report.
The use of data can benefit both the organization and the employee. According to research and People Analytics practitioners, a company can save an average of $500mn using Analytics. And it all begins with the intent for measurement-based decisions. Also, for those ‘expert practitioners’, the idea is to push further for interesting means to draw value to push for better rather than grandstanding at good.
Get Reuben Ray’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
In the distance between good and better also lies unknown unknowns which can deliver value if investigated and analysed on a regulated basis. Japanese firms became giantslayers through Kaizen, a continuous approach towards gaining value. In the distance between good and better also lies gaps in process and potential, which might need development, analysis and improvement.
So how does one measure or perceive, especially in cases of behavior, where most of it is felt and rather difficult to determine through a scale? The answer lies in the ability and scale of impact. The ability to cause an impact or a difference is the first sign of change and thus deployment of talent metrics becomes a no-brainer. Else, how would one know when and what triggered the ability? Now consider measuring 1000 individuals. This is where automation and Talent Analytics comes into active value creation.
The scale of impact is measured by the count and score of particular traits responsible for improvements. The scale should cover both subjective and objectives modes of measurement; one can know further about this by viewing the video link provided above. The idea is to ensure dilution of biases to the maximum possible levels, if not the absolute removal of it.
Does every company need to do it? Yes, and the smaller you are, the more you are faced with the fate of diminishment. Smaller features, products and services are often easy to integrate, implement or easy to produce. While this may not be universally true, small businesses, empires and ideas have been constantly swallowed or intermixed within larger structures; hence the smaller you are, the earlier you must watch every step and it’s level of impact. An anthill can create a hill, albeit there are no other creatures around, and a good kick is all it takes to dislodge its existence.
I have often found smaller companies care little about having the right set of people; guess if a particular function had only 2–3 individuals and one of them committed a grave mistake? The mistake would not be spotted till the damage is done as there is no scope for maker-checker concept with such small teams in the first place! On the other hand, gains are also smaller in terms of scale when it is limited to ones and twos. However, a measuring tool could not only spot the gain, it could also be the basis for disproportionate value creation by inducting a few more members into the team for the function. The distance becomes shorter while the gains grow higher.
Sometimes, good is better.
The hygiene principle tells us to limit goodness to good itself. Afterall, it costs to deliver goodness, and increasing it further towards ‘better’ would only increase costs without ny additional gains in productivity. A simple pulse survey could tell you this!
The clear distinction to obsess over hygiene factors is a constant for most HR practitioners. However, drawing the clear distinction between hygiene versus motivational factors to distinguish between satisfaction versus engagement. This calls for measuring performance driving attributes and classify for determining the right distance between good and better benchmarks. The silent role of Talent Analytics is what smells like rich coffee at the outcomes.
Finally, adding value to business by determining the distance between good and better cannot be complete without mentioning the hiring conundrum. The need to hire the better candidate is not only exciting, but also meaningful, beneficial and gainful. Benchmarking here plays the biggest role and Talent Analytics as the secret sauce. So can you do it? Well, reach out to me to discuss your needs and let us transform to cover the distance faster, together. Till then, ciao!
