| Date post: | 23-Jan-2015 |
| Category: |
Business |
| Upload: | human-capital-media |
| View: | 1,338 times |
| Download: | 0 times |
Speaker: Kevin Oakes CEO Institute for Corporate Productivity.
Moderator: Daniel Margolis
Managing Editor Talent Management magazine
#TMwebinar
Connecting L&D With Integrated Talent Management
Tools You Can Use • Q&A
– Click on the Q&A icon on your floating toolbar in the bottom right corner.
– Type in your question in the space at the bottom.
– Click on “Send.”
#TMwebinar
Tools You Can Use • Polling
– Polling question will appear in the “Polling” panel.
– Select your response and click on “Submit.”
#TMwebinar
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Will I receive a copy of the slides after the webinar? YES
2. Will I receive a copy of the recording after the webinar?
YES
Please allow up to 2 business days to receive these materials.
#TMwebinar
#TMwebinar
Daniel Margolis Managing Editor Talent Management magazine
Connecting L&D With Integrated Talent Management
#TMwebinar
Connecting L&D With Integrated Talent Management
Kevin Oakes CEO Institute for Corporate Productivity.
7
Connecting L&D with Integrated Talent Management
Kevin Oakes CEO
8
Kevin Oakes CEO i4cp
About Kevin Oakes Background § Founder, CEO of i4cp § Former Chairman, Jambok § Former Chairman, ASTD Board § Founder, President, SumTotal
Systems § Former CEO, Chair of Click2learn § Founder, CEO Oakes Interactive
9
i4cp is the fastest growing and largest corporate network focused on the prac8ces of
high-‐performance organiza8ons.
Institute for Corporate Productivity
10
3M 7-Eleven Adobe Systems Alliance One Allstate American Mgt. Assoc. Ameriprise Amway Apollo Group AT&T Boston Scientific Cameco Catholic Health CitiGroup ConAgra Foods ConnectiCare Darden Restaurants Deloitte & Touche Depository Trust drugstore.com Duke Energy Duke University Edwards Lifesciences
Eli Lilly & Co ExxonMobil FedEx Express FedEx Ground Federal Reserve Fidelity Investments Flextronics General Electric General Mills Home Shopping Network ING Americas Intel Jack in the box KFC Kraft LG Electronics Lockheed Martin McDonald’s Corp MetLife Microsoft MITRE Northrop Grumman Olive Garden
Pelco PETCO Pfizer Pizza Hut PNC Financial Services Prudential Financial Qualcomm Raytheon Rio Tinto Group Samsung SaskTel Shell Oil Starbucks Takeda Pharmaceuticals Tampa Electric Company T-Mobile Toyota Motor Sales United States Navy U.S. OPM U.S. SEC United Water The Y YUM! Brands
Members (partial list)
11
Partners
12
High-‐performance organiza<ons consistently outperform most of their compe<tors for extended periods of <me.
These companies performed beBer over the past five years, based on these four indicators:
1. Revenue growth 2. Market share 3. Profitability 4. Customer sa8sfac8on
Defining High Performance
13
The 5 Domains of High Performance
i4cp research has shown that high performance companies excel in five core areas:
1. Strategy 2. Leadership 3. Talent 4. Culture 5. Market (customer focus)
14
What Does i4cp Do? We help organiza8ons leverage the core areas of high performance through 4 delivery vehicles:
1. Research 2. Peers 3. Tools 4. Technology
15
The 5 Domains of High-Performance Organizations And i4cp’s Centers of Knowledge That Support Them
16 16
Two faces of human resources
• Benefits • Time & ABendance • Payroll • Scheduling
Tac8cal
• Selec8on & Assessment • Learning & Development • Performance • Succession Planning • Compensa8on
Strategic
Source: i4cp
17
Add Value &
Maximize Upside
Limit Liability
& Protect
Downside
Impa
ct/C
ontr
ibut
ion
to th
e B
usin
ess
Strategic HR Planning
Organizational Design
Compensation
Compliance
Labor/Union Relations
Employee Relations Performance
Management
Survey Action Planning
HR Information Systems (HRIS)
A Century of Evolution in the Function
Labor Employee Personnel Human Organizational Relations Relations Resources Effectiveness
HR Continues to Evolve
HR as Business Partner
Benefits
Safety & Workers’
Compensation
Staffing
Training & Development
Culture & Image
EEO/AA
Talent Management
18
§ How long has the concept of talent management been discussed? (select one)
a) Started about 3 years ago b) No, more like 5-‐7 years ago c) I’m old. It’s been discussed for over a decade
Poll
19
Talent Management New concept or an old idea whose time has
arrived?
20
“There is no bigger problem in the global marketplace today than how to obtain, train and retain knowledge workers.”
- Michael Moe, Chairman & CEO
ThinkEquity Partners LLC
“The killer app for the next decade is talent acquisition and retention.”
- John Doerr, Partner
Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield & Byers
Predictions
Declared in 1999 – 2000,
just as the dot com bubble
was about to burst
21
An Investment Banker’s Graph
Published 10 years ago
Source: CIBC, February, 2001
22
Uniting the silos
23
From: Ambi8ous CEO Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 8:02 AM To: [email protected] Subject: SEIZE Market Leadership
Thanks for your 8me today. Please see aBached the drae presenta8on and proposed CAP chart regarding our joint opportunity…
A story…
…(Together, we) will realize the market leading vision we have articulated, and hope we can work together with you to seize this compelling opportunity. If you have additional questions please don't hesitate to contact me directly. I am also prepared to quickly travel to your location to fully articulate the opportunity to you and others. LET'S SEIZE THIS OPPORTUNITY NOW, AND DRIVE THE MARKET!!!
24
§ Foreword: Tom Rath § Gurus: Peter Cappelli, John Sullivan, Jon Ingham, Ed Lawler,
Marshall Goldsmith, Bev Kaye, Noel Tichy, Dave Ulrich § Prac<<oners:
Agilent, Novelis, Hertz, Cisco, Edwards Lifesciences, 3M, DeloiBe, General Mills
The Executive Guide to ITM
Chapters
1. Overview 2. Recrui<ng 3. Benefits 4. Performance Mgt. 5. Succession 6. Engagement 7. Leadership
Development 8. Conclusion
25
L&D’s Role in Talent Management Recrui8ng • Iden8fy competencies to hire for; Help develop assessments • Use assessment data in craeing custom development programs
Performance Management • Using performance data for immediate development plans • Training managers on how to give performance reviews
Engagement • Training managers on how to foster and improve engagement • Professional development opportuni8es increase engagement
Succession Planning • HiPo / Cri8cal Role Development program • Train managers on developing successors
26
Talent Management Study
30.4%
33.8%
35.8%
§ Conducted jointly by i4cp and ASTD
§ 518 Responses
§ High-‐level business, HR and learning professional contacts
§ Delineated between High and Low Performing Organiza8ons
27
Integrated Talent Management Model
The EVP serves as an
anchor
SWP provides direc8on
and ensures alignment
28
Higher Performing Organizations (HPO) Are More Effective At Managing Talent
Overall, to what extent is your organization managing talent effectively?
29
§ What is the primary func8on high performing organiza8ons include in integrated talent management? (select one)
a) Recrui8ng b) Succession Planning c) Learning & Development d) High Poten8al Development e) Performance Management f) Leadership Development
Poll
30
What Do HPOs Include in Talent Management?
31
Performance Management was found to be the Most Integrated Component of Talent Management
350.1 419.8
Higher Performers
Lower Performers
Market Performance Indicator Score (MPI)
…and when broken down by MPI scores, the integra8on score gap for Performance Management between high and low-‐performing organiza8ons was one of the largest found in the study.
Performance Management
* Please see the notes sec8on for an explana8on of how the Talent Management Integra8on Scores were calculated.
32
What Do Your Employees Think of Your Organization’s Performance Management Process?
Value provided varies between
employees, departments &
managers
70%
33
1. The performance management process includes developmental plans for the next work period
2. Manager training is provided on conduc8ng a performance appraisal mee8ng
3. The quality of performance appraisals is measured 4. There is a system in place to address and resolve poor
performance 5. The appraisal includes informa8on other than that based on the
judgment of managers 6. The performance management process is consistent across the
organiza<on 7. Employees can expect feedback on their performance more o[en
than once a year 8. 360˚ or mul<-‐rater feedback is used to support the performance
management process 9. The performance management process includes ongoing goal
review and feedback from managers
9 Keys to Performance Management
34
No Silver Bullet
35
Talent Management Responsibility & Success in High Performing
Organizations
36
Higher performing organizations report greater alignment, budget & infrastructure in place
37
High-Performance Organizations Have More Backing on Talent Management from Leadership
38
Talent Management The Importance of Integration
39
Effectively Integrating Talent Management is positively correlated with Market Performance
Percent indica<ng high or very high extent
Please state the extent to which you agree with the following statements:
**Correla8ons with Market Performance Index are all significant at p<.01 (2-‐tailed)
20.0%
23.3%
33.3%
36.7%
61.1%
65.3%
69.4%
73.6%
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0%
Our leaders see integrated talent mgt. as vital to organiza<onal success
My organiza<on has processes in place to align talent management to business goals
My organiza<on’s processes and policies support integrated talent management
My organiza<on effec<vely integrates the components of talent management
Correla<on with MPI
.21**
.20**
.22**
.23**
Higher Performers
Lower Performers
Market Performance Indicator Score (MPI)
40
Strategies to Integrate TM that are associated with high market performance are not widely utilized
Correla<on with Market
Performance
Integra<ng technologies and sharing data for the various talent management func<ons
13.9 .20
Appoin8ng a single func8onal owner of talent management internally 26.5 .14
Standardizing talent review and feedback processes 35.9 .10
Ensuring consistency among the different TM ac8vi8es 23.2 .13
Crea8ng transparency across func8onal silos 15.1 .15
Establishing organiza<onal culture that supports TM 25.4 .19 Increasing visibility of talent management ini8a8ves 20.8 .16
Expanding number of talent management ini8a8ves 18.8 .14
Training managers to enhance their talent management capabili8es 17.9 .13
Using technology to improve talent management 18.4 .18 Gaining support from top management 40.1 .16
Percentage of respondents answering high extent & very high extent
41
Integration Is a Challenge For All Organizations
42
Talent Management Measurement
43
§ Only 12% of respondents said that they have talent management metrics to a high or very high extent
§ At the same 8me, more than seven out of 10 organiza8ons acknowledged that they should measure talent management to such an extent
Talent Management Measurement
44
§ Quality of Hire § Is your organiza8on acquiring “beBer” talent?
§ Quality of Separa8on § Is your organiza8on losing valuable talent?
§ Quality of Movement § When talent moves in your organiza8on – what happens?
§ Time to Full Produc8vity § How long does it take to become “fully produc8ve”?
Research Focus on TM Metrics
45
Talent Management Measurement Study
Company Type
Global
Multinational
National
§ Conducted April 2010 § 426 responses
This study sought to iden8fy the talent management measurement prac8ces of high-‐performing organiza8ons and to quan8fy their impact on organiza8onal strategy.
47.4% 27.7%
24.9%
30.5% 31.5% 32.5% 33.5% 34.5%
10,000+ employees
1,000 -‐ 9,999 employees
1 -‐ 999 employees
Company Size
33.8%
34.3%
31.9%
46
Talent Management Accelerator Group
47
§ Who is responsible for calcula8ng the workforce results? § HR Analy8cs Team (22.0%) § Head of HR (21.2%) § Within the Business (11.4%)
§ What systems/technology are used to calculate the workforce results? § HRIS system (41.1%) § “Talent Management” System (15.3%)
Note: Spreadsheets & Databases (34.7%) are not correlated to TM Success
§ How oeen workforce results are produced? § Monthly (28.5%) § Quarterly (30.2%)
The Who, How and When of reporting is not as important as the actual act of reporting…
No Significant Sta8s8cal Difference
No Significant Sta8s8cal Difference
No Significant Sta8s8cal Difference
48
§ Execu8ve Team / CEO are the only groups correlated to High Market Performance
…but Who receives the workforce reports is important
Q: Who receives the workforce metrics reports? (Select all that apply)
49
§ Which of these metrics does your organiza8on track?
(select all that apply)
a) Voluntary termina8on rate b) Involuntary termina8on rate c) Total aBri8on
Poll
50
Finding: Organiza8ons are more likely to measure why employees separate or how many employees leave the organiza8on, but are less likely to analyze who is separa8ng from the organiza8on.
Talent Metrics Survey Results
51
Finding: Organiza8ons are more likely to measure why employees separate or how many employees leave the organiza8on, but are less likely to analyze who is separa8ng from the organiza8on.
Talent Metrics Survey Results
Are There Differences Between High
and Low Performing Companies?
52
Attrition Metrics – Tactical
Finding: When comparing large organiza8ons (10,000+ employees), there is no significant difference between Higher and Lower Performers’ likelihood of measuring tac8cal reten8on metrics
53
Attrition Metrics – Strategic
Finding: When comparing large organiza8ons (10,000+ employees) Higher Performers are more likely to measure who is leaving the organiza<on than Lower Performers.
54
§ Quality of Attrition
55
QoA describes who is leaving the organiza8on and answers the ques8on “is the firm losing its most valuable employees?”
What is Quality of Attrition?
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0%
Quality of Afri<on
Pivotal Roles
Demographics
High Poten<al
First Year
20.4%
25.9%
31.4%
32.5%
47.9%
36.5%
47.2%
52.8%
51.4%
72.9%
Overall High Performers Low Performers
56
Quality of Attrition Scorecard
57
Quality of Attrition Scorecard
58
§ Again, not a surprise that there are large gaps between “Should” and “Do”.
§ The smallest gap is § Uncontrollable separa8on
rate (D 25.2) § The 3 largest gaps are
§ High-‐performer separa8on rate (D 53.5)
§ Controllable separa8on rate (D 47.6)
§ RegreBable termina8on rate (D 44.3)
Q: To what extent does your organization use the following metrics for the purpose of managing talent better and to what extent do you think it should use these metrics?
The Should/Do gap on separation metrics
59
§ Quality of Hire
60
Lower Performers are often more likely to measure tactical recruiting metrics vs. Higher Performers.
61
Higher Performers are more likely to measure quality of recruiting efforts than Lower Performers
62
Correlated with High Market Performance .14% Correlated with Talent Management Effec8veness .44%
Measuring QoH is an opportunity to gain a competitive advantage.
63
New Hire Information
Date Number of New Hires
Number of Management
Number of Professionals
2010 (YTD) 170 28 (16%) 95 (56%) 2009 549 66 (12%) 346 (63%) 2008 659 119 (18%) 402 (61%) 2007 790 119 (15%) 514 (65%) 2006 705 99 (14%) 423 (60%)
New Hire Fit
Survey Questions 2010 2009 2008 (sampling)
% of Managers that would hire again 85% 88% 79% Manager Satisfied w/ Candidate Pool 83% 78% 64% % of Employees that would accept the position again 89% 75% 81%
Number of “bad hires” 4 (2%) 27 (5%) 16 (10%) Number of “at risk” hires 36 (21%) 137 (25%) 48 (29%)
Retention over Time Population Overall Management Professionals Term first 90 days 2010 11% 14% 12% Term less than one year 2009 22% 7% 8%
Term 1-‐2 Years 2008 14% 3% 7% Still with Organization 2008 65% 72% 68% In future years, compare the Still with Organization by year – looking for improvements Performance over Time Population Outstanding/
Exceeds Meets Needs Improvement
With one year of tenure
2009 5% 85% 10% 2008 2% 83% 15%
With two years of tenure 2008 6% 86% 8%
In future years, compare the tenure bands - looking for improvements
Example: Consolidated Quality of Hire Report
To provide context about hiring pa3erns
“Real” Time Indicators
Reten;on by Hiring Class
Performance by Hiring Class
64
Movement Metrics
65
Promotion Rate Promo8on Rate is defined as a change in job code and an increase in salary in the HRIS system of record including progression promo8ons, internal hires, development assignments
66
Internal Placement Rate Internal Hire is defined as a current employee is selected for a role that was posted on an external job board
67
Quality of Movement Scorecard
68
§ Effec8vely managing talent is a trait of high performing organiza8ons
§ Integra8on of func8ons is difficult, but necessary § Technology only helps organiza8ons who have already organized themselves to be integrated
§ Effec8ve measurement can raise the bar on talent management’s visibility and effec8veness
§ Learning and Development can be the glue in uni8ng the tradi8onal HR silos
Summary
69
Corporate 411 First Avenue South • Suite 403 • SeaBle, WA, U.S.A. 98104
Telephone 866-‐375-‐i4cp (4427) • Fax 206-‐624-‐6951
Research 8950 Ninth Street North• Suite 115 • St. Petersburg, FL, U.S.A. 33702
Telephone 727-‐345-‐2226 • Fax 727-‐345-‐1254 www.i4cp.com
For More Information: [email protected]
© 2011 Institute for Corporate Productivity, Inc. Member companies may reproduce and distribute this file on an unlimited basis to their employees for internal management purposes only. Nonemployees (including outside consultants) may not be given copies of or access to i4cp’s reports, online services or conference materials.
Join Our Next TM Webinar
Work-Life Balance is NOT a Perk
Tuesday, Sept. 27, 2011
•
TM Webinars start at 2 p.m. Eastern / 11 a.m. Pacific
Register for upcoming TM Webinars at www.talentmgt.com/events
Join the Talent Management magazine Network
http://network.talentmgt.com/
#TMwebinar
