BIFM North Region 2015 Key Learning Event 2

“Developing your Skills &

Knowledge in FM”

Mark Whittaker

BIFM North

2 | 2015 KLE2 – “Developing your Skills & Knowledge in FM”

Welcome & Thanks


Twitter Today’s event: #bifmkle @bifm_north & @bifm_pmsig @markcatchlove @HMInsightGroup @bifm_uk @Look_Sharp @IntWorkplace @Whitbags


Why this subject?


Why this subject?


The BIFM North Summer Ball

> Thursday 9th July:

> Hilton Deansgate

> See BIFM website & twitter feed for details




Can you help?


Contact Details – BIFM North

Mark Whittaker Deputy Chair, North Region (NW) E: [email protected] M: 07764840694 T: @Whitbags

Sue Gott Chair, North Region E: [email protected] M: 07764 809783 T: @Mrsgotty

Mick Anderson Deputy Chair, North Region (NE) E: [email protected] M: : 07713 122 164 T: @mandersfm

Today’s Event


Introduction to today’s speakers

1Modes of Work

Living Office

The Origins of Herman Miller’s Modes of Work

The story behind Herman Miller’s Modes of Work begins like most stories within our organization: as the nature of work changes, we seek greater understanding of how those changes affect people and their environments.

Over the past 20 years, improvements in communication, transportation, and information technology allowed businesses to expand to international markets. Opportunities and risks materialized in unpredictable ways and companies scrambled to keep their competitive footing. Creative, non-linear work began to take on new importance as quantitative process-based work increasingly became automated. While individual work continued to be prevalent, groups could more reliably and swiftly solve the complex problems presented by this new global landscape of work. Companies accommodated group work by reallocating space rather than incurring the cost of adding new space.

2Modes of Work

Living Office

As networked technology became increasingly prevalent and anyone could instantaneously connect with any other person, idea, or device, group work went by a variety of names, including “together work” and “collaboration.” To better understand these changes, our researchers partnered with Cheskin Research on a report in 1998, Collaboration: Applied Exploration Report.1 And in 2006, we partnered with a leading A+D firm on the study When Groups Work, which explored the relationship between the built environment and group work.2

More recently we embarked on in-depth research of “group/collaborative/community work” with the intent of creating solutions supportive of that kind of work. Could Herman Miller do for collaboration what our contributions to ergonomics have done for the performance of individual work? Could we take the design lead in provisioning workplaces that enhance the experience and results of people working together? And, in the process of learning more about collaboration, what could we learn about other behaviors in the workplace so that we could better support them, as well?

Our approach was to review what others had already learned and then build on it with our own primary research. We commissioned an environmental psychologist and workplace strategist to conduct a literature review of the research into the psychology of collaboration spaces.3 That review highlighted the impact of psychological factors on collaboration and the implications for workspaces, namely that teams with a mix of personality types create the most effective collaborations and require specific support from design, layout, furniture, and technology. In addition to the literature review, we drew on the U.S. Office of Naval Research’s cognitive model of team collaboration.4

Our systematic look at the popular press furthered our thinking. For example, one study of interactions between scientists showed that most of their important breakthroughs happened at one physical location, demonstrating a potent connection between physical space and different parts of the collaborative process.5

In 2011, we launched a primary research study to learn more about the role of workplaces in collaboration and to gather hard data about when, where, and how often people were collaborating.6

In the U.S., U.K., India, and Australia at 14 companies (that had identified themselves as highly collaborative), we observed 2,900 collaborative events as they happened and kept detailed logs over the course of over 700 hours of research. Researchers then dissected the collaboration process, looking for associations between the behaviors and the environments in which they occurred. We learned that 70 percent of collaboration happens at the desk. Our research also showed a disconnect between the essence of people’s needs and the organization’s perception of those needs. In spite of their organizations’ best efforts, people avoid 66 percent of so-called meeting spaces because they don’t meet their needs.

In 2012, we conducted another proprietary research project with the aim of empowering facility managers, architects, and other decision makers in the office design process to make better choices about their spaces.7 The study took a magnifying glass to the act of a collaborative event as the worker experiences it to understand both how it begins and ends, and the unique needs of people (from physical environments to furniture to tools) across distinct stages of the process.

Using a working definition of collaboration as “involving two or more individuals working towards a common goal and creating a new product (e.g., an idea, solution, or insight) beyond what they could have achieved individually,” the team established the objective of learning three major things:

1. The purpose—Why collaborate?

2. The activities—What are people doing?

3. The behaviors—How are they doing it?

To gather and make sense of the data, the researchers used the U.S. Office of Naval Research’s model. The model includes four distinct cognitive stages of collaboration—knowledge construct, team problem solving, team consensus, and outcome evaluation and revision—and the steps in those stages.8 We built on that model by adding two new stages: Project alignment and kick-off, and final reporting.

In this qualitative research, we took a multi-method approach with exemplar organizations (a digital interactive agency, a consulting firm, a manufacturing company, and a technology company). A total of 70 employees from these companies self-reported moments of collaboration using personal technology to capture more than 750 images of collaborative acts. The research also included scouting trips (observations)

3Modes of Work

Herman MillerModes of Work©Daniel Carlsten

Chat


Divide and Conquer


Process and Respond


Huddle


Converse


Co-Create

Chat Divide & Conquer


Show and Tell

Show & Tell


Contemplate

Contemplate

Converse

Huddle

Process & Respond

Co-CreateHerman MillerModes of Work©Daniel Carlsten

Warm Up Cool Down

Warm Up, Cool Down


Create

Create

Living Office

to those companies, ethnographic interviews, stakeholder interviews, journals that documented each participant’s day at work, and secondary research.

After the data collection phase was completed, researchers clustered the end users’ images based on why and for what purpose they needed to collaborate. The related data was used to understand the behaviors and activities that drove each of those collaborative events. Interestingly, although the research was on collaboration, participants did not exclude individual ways of working. For example, some participants sent photos that included no people other than the participant. When we asked why they included such photos, they said that they needed time to process, contemplate, and do individual creative work alone in order to fully contribute to collaborative efforts.

Initially, the collected data was grouped into 35 different types of events. Using an organized analytical process, we synthesized the events into a list of 10 behavior types— the Modes of Work. The first seven Modes of Work are done together and consist of collaborative activities between two or more people. The last three Modes of Work are done alone and consist of focused, individual activities.

The power of this research lies in its self-documentation methodology, which we intentionally chose because it allowed researchers to observe a social phenomenon—how people behave while collaborating—through the participants’ eyes. The participants themselves identified the behaviors behind the Modes of Work. Without that input, we likely would have classified some behaviors differently. In some cases, we even used the exact language they used for a behavior when we named a mode, e.g., Divide & Conquer.

MODES OF WORK

Together

Alone

4Modes of Work

Together Herman MillerModes of Work©Daniel Carlsten

Chat

Chat is an incidental and impromptu interaction with a colleague. It offers a chance to catch up, ask a quick question, or seek out an opinion. Chat often begins with a social focus that then sparks an idea or touches on an issue.


Converse

Converse is a purposeful interaction between two to three colleagues who address a defined topic. The activity varies in formality and privacy in accordance with the subject matter being addressed and the familiarity of the participants. One or more of the parties may participate through a digital device.


Co-Create

Co-Create is the generation of new ideas and content among groups. The activity may range in scale and formality from a quick problem-solving exercise at a white board to a multi-day retreat with an elaborate agenda. A variety of digital and physical tools assist people in sharing and generating ideas. Active engagement, conversation, content sharing, and creation are the key behaviors.


Divide and Conquer

Divide & Conquer happens when a team with a common goal finds it valuable to work on individual components of a project while maintaining close proximity to one another. Working in parallel helps to resolve issues quickly and enables spontaneous collaboration as the need arises. Developments and content are shared among the group as the goal is reached.

Living Office

5Modes of Work

Together


Huddle

Huddle occurs when a team needs to address an urgent issue, or discuss and receive instructions for a plan of action. The goal is shared resolution and accountability, with only a brief disruption to the flow of work.


Warm Up Cool Down

Warm Up, Cool Down occurs in the time leading up to and immediately following more formally scheduled engagements. The “warm up” may consist of last-minute adjustments to a presentation, or productive conversation with colleagues. The “cool down” offers an opportunity to discuss the content of the meeting, set next steps, and ensure alignment.


Show and Tell

Show & Tell is a planned gathering at which information is shared among teams, with clients and colleagues, or more broadly to the organization. The key focus is always the presenter or information being presented. These gatherings range from informal status updates and project reviews, to regimented and rehearsed speeches. The level of audience participation varies accordingly.

Living Office

6Modes of Work

Alone


Process and Respond

Process & Respond is the work generated by work. It occurs in response to (and generates) the feedback loop of emails, phone calls, texts, and messages that drive work forward. An individual may choose to set aside a specified time to do this work, or fill in the gaps of their day with it. It generally does not require extreme attention or deep thinking.


Create

Create occurs when a person engages with the specific content associated with their role, solves problems, and develops deliverables. This activity is not limited to traditionally creative fields, but rather reflects the mix of concentrative, individual tasks that help move all work forward.


Contemplate

Contemplate is an opportunity for an individual to pause and consider the best way forward in their work, or ignore it momentarily and provide respite. The activity consists of whatever calms, inspires, and recharges the individual: enjoying a view of nature, reading a book or magazine, or sketching in a notepad. It also provides an opportunity to digest complex information with the necessary degree of focus.

Living Office

7Modes of Work

The Modes of Work research is being used in two major ways. First, we’re using it to help organizations understand the whole spectrum of needs people have as they move through their workday, transitioning between Modes of Work. Understanding and supporting those needs and transitions will improve individual and organizational effectiveness, as evidenced by the exemplar organizations studied.

Second, once they understand the Modes of Work, companies are using them to purposefully consider the behaviors they feel will help them meet their business objectives and to design spaces that support those behaviors. We believe space provides cues that encourage and signal the importance of desired behaviors.

The Modes of Work help form the foundation of Living Office. They drove the development of our Settings (e.g., Haven, Forum, Landing). Each Setting meets behavioral, cognitive, and physical criteria based on our understanding of work modes. Strategic Placemaking, in which Settings are purpose-fully arranged within a Landscape (or floor plate) in such a way that they bring an organization’s unique strategy to life, is essential to creating a Living Office.

Because of our understanding of the Modes of Work, we can help organizations consider how to better provision for their people, their work, and ultimately their business.

1. Herman Miller, Inc., (with Cheskin Research) internal document, “Collaboration: Applied Exploration Report,” 1998, as cited in “Making Room for Collaboration,” http://www.hermanmiller.com/research/research-summaries/making-room- for-collaboration.html.

2. Herman Miller, Inc., and Gensler, “When Groups Work: A Joint Research Effort Exploring the Relationship Between Space and Group,” 2007.

3. Nigel Oseland, PhD CPsychol, “The Psychology of Collaboration Space,” on behalf of Herman Miller, June 2012. More than 50 sources were reviewed.

4. Norman Warner, Michael Letsky, Michael Cowen, “Cognitive Model of Team Collaboration: Macro-Cognitive Focus,” 2005, p. 3; pdf: http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA476887.

5. Steve Johnson, Where Good Ideas Come From, Penguin Group, 2010, citing Kevin Dunbar’s research, “How Scientists Build Models.”

6. Herman Miller, “Ws of Work: A Global Exploration on Collaboration,” September 2011. http://www.hermanmiller.com/research/research-summaries/what-it-takes- to-collaborate.html.

7. Herman Miller internal document, “The Anatomy of Collaboration,” 2012.

8. Norman Warner, Michael Letsky, Michael Cowen, “Cognitive Model of Team Collaboration: Macro-Cognitive Focus,” 2005, p. 3; pdf: http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA476887.

© 2013 Herman Miller, Inc. Zeeland, Michigan® Y and Herman Miller are among the registered trademarks of Herman Miller, Inc.

Living Office

Professional Standards &

Education Update March 2015

Karen Waterlow

North Region - June 2010

• People – Cultural and capability alignment to business direction

• Governance/finance/risk – Governance review. Review planning cycle, controls and risk management protocols

• Processes - Reintroduce PMO principles and practice, embed new systems for improved efficiencies,

effectiveness, customer experience and business intelligence

• Place – Develop a workplace strategy leveraging existing stakeholder expertise

• Develop a multi-layered, diverse

content library that can be easily

accessed worldwide.

• Facilitate information exchange

between organisations, practitioners,

opinion formers and subject matter

experts

• Nurture a broad range of communities

that reflect the diverse nature of the

profession and across the industry

• Position BIFM as the thought

leader on topics that impact the

FM profession and the built

environment.

• Develop propositions that are

aligned to each of our target

markets.

• Establish Professional Standards

as the industry recognised

benchmark (career pathway)

• Position BIFM as the thought

leader on topics that impact

the FM profession and the built

environment.

• Engage and influence policy

makers and opinion formers.

• Move FM up the leadership

agenda and influence

business leaders.

Passionate

Proud

Professional

Progressive

Strategic Context

The professional body responsible for

promoting excellence in facilities management

for the benefit of practitioners, the economy

and society

Mission

To be the internationally recognised authoritative

voice of facilities management and the

development partner of choice for professionals

and their organisations

Values Vision

1. To be the recognised

authoritative voice of the

profession

2. To be the 1st choice

development partner for

individuals and organisations

3.Become the First choice for

information, insight and communities

relevant to the profession

4.To ensure the organisation has the appropriate capabilities to fulfil its purpose and aspirations

Strategic Aims


The Vision


Skills Shortages

• A quarter of employers had entry level vacancies

unfilled (McKinsey)

• A third of businesses losing out on business because

they can’t find recruits with the right skills (McKinsey)

• OECD adult skills survey – most countries having

improving literacy and numeracy rates – not the UK–

the generation that grew up with Twiggy did better than

the generation that grew up with Twitter.

• Workplace Futures – poll of FM professionals

highlights skills shortages, recruitment and retention

issues.

BIFM Qualifications

• Vocationally related qualifications in facilities management – developed alongside employers – support career progression

• Access to young people- part of an Apprenticeship in Facilities Management

• BIFM – Regulated by Ofqual

• BIFM’s qualifications are regulated – accredited on the national framework – internationally recognised

www.bifm.org.uk/qualifications

http://www.bifm.org.uk/qualifications

Benefits of being a regulated AO

• Gives confidence to learners & employers that our qualifications are delivered by an organisation whose integrity, resources and competence have been independently checked.

• Informs users of our qualifications that they are monitored and are of the standard and level they claim to be.

• Gives assurance that our qualifications are suitable for the FM industry

• Our qualifications are transferable throughout Europe

• Enhanced international standing

• Accrediting and endorsing in-house FM training

Benefits to the Employer and Learner

• You can be sure that your certificate for a regulated qualification shows you have the level of knowledge and understanding the qualification claims

• The qualification will be easily recognised, not just in the UK, but also Europe and worldwide

• As an employer you know that someone who has a regulated qualification has reached a specific standard

• Enhanced currency to individuals – recognised by the profession and portable

BIFM level Who is it for? Equivalent level

qualifications

Level 7 Strategic head of facilities / estates

Masters degree

Level 6 Senior, strategic

facilities managers Bachelors degree

Level 5 Specialist facilities

managers Foundation degree

Level 4 Operational facilities

managers Certificate of higher

education

Level 3 First line and

supervisory managers A levels

Level 2 New entrants GCSE A*-C

BIFM Qualifications

Quick guide

• 3 sizes – Award, Certificate, Diploma

• All qualifications are stand alone

• Certain qualifications form pathways in Apprenticeships in FM

• Levels – represent challenge of qualification

• Built from mandatory and optional units

• Start at any level to suit you

• Customisable to suit you or business needs

• Assessments are practicable and work based

• Network of recognised learning centres, including employers

• Learn through, face-to-face, evening classes, distance learning, on-line learning, blended learning

How to study

> Delivered through BIFM Recognised Centres:

> Employers

> Universities

> FE Colleges

> Private training companies

> Delivery options include (for example):

> Face to face

> Distance learning

> On-line learning

> Blended learning

> Style of assessment (for example):

> Work based written assignments

> Professional interviews

> Short answer papers

> Presentation

Grades of membership

Member Grade Who is it for?

Affiliate (New member grade)

For individuals with limited FM experience, or those who are interested in FM but do not work within FM.

Associate (ABIFM) For individuals with an FM related qualification at level 2 or 3 or above and at least one year’s FM experience or those with two years’ FM experience.

Member (MBIFM) For individuals with an FM related qualification at level 4 or 5 and have 3 years’ general management + 2 years’ FM experience or 5 years’ FM experience + 3 years’ managerial experience

Certified (CBIFM) For individuals with a degree level qualification (or higher) in FM or is FM-related and recognised by a Chartered body and are of middle management level with at least 3 years’ FM experience (including two years’ management experience)

Fellow (FBIFM) For individuals who hold Certified member status and who have at least five years’ senior facilities management experience.

How do BIFM support its members?

•Providing members with learning, support and advice services to improve, extend and maximise their career opportunities within the FM industry.

Professional Development

•Members can share best practice and gain experience from different disciplines across the facilities management profession.

Networking

•We keep members up-to-date with the latest thinking in facilities management. This enables members to achieve their full potential and deliver the best of their ability.

Information and Knowledge

•Our clear membership grading structure provides pathways for anyone involved in FM at any stage of their career, which are recognised throughout the industry.

Recognition and Industry

Awareness

Developing your skills & knowledge in FM

David Sharp Managing Director, International Workplace

Competence:

what it is, and

how to lose it

#BIFMKLE @Look_Sharp

Learning outcomes • Take responsibility for your own learning & career

development

• Understand competence and how to cultivate it

• Understand your own personal learning style

• Appreciate the social nature of learning

• See what some market leading companies are doing

in L&D

#BIF

MK

LE @

Loo

k_Sh

arp

Your learning

portfolio

Are you

competent?

Knowledge

Experience

Practical ability

Training

When do you learn?

20: 10

What’s your

learning style?

The problem?

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it’s stupid.” - Albert Einstein

Learning style models

VAK model

Visual

Auditory

Kinesthetic

How do people learn in FM?

My learning style is predominately …

Visual Auditory Kinesthetic

Source: International Learning Styles Test, Jan 2014; 243 responses

47.11% 26.94% 25.95%


My employer takes my learning style into account …

Agree Not sure Disagree

Source: International Workplace Learning Styles Test, Jan 2014; 243 responses

26.41% 37.23% 36.36%


I think I’d learn more at work if I could learn in a different way …

Agree Not sure Disagree

Source: International Workplace Learning Styles Test, Jan 2014; 243 responses

28.57% 45.45%

25.97%

How do you learn?

Let’s find out …

?

Visual (red) Auditory (yellow) Kinesthetic (blue)

? ?

Social learning https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vyZl7hH7Eo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vyZl7hH7Eo



Thank you

David Sharp Managing Director

E: [email protected]

T +44 (0)7787 523138

Skype: david.sharp.intworkplace

#BIFMKLE @Look_Sharp

Date post:	19-Jul-2015
Category:	Presentations & Public Speaking
Upload:	whitbags
View:	132 times
Download:	1 times

BIFM North Region 2015 Key Learning Event 2

Presentations & Public Speaking