Life Planning, Not Just Career Planning

Career planning is a recommended activity for all of us. It helps us focus on our aspirations and goals, and it provides us with the opportunity to plan our personal development.

The "sweet spot" we all aspire to is to reach a position that gives us a tremendous amount of satisfaction, intrinsically as well as extrincically. I have been both a student and practitioner of career planning during my entire professional life, and I can testify to its rewards.

But we do not live just to work, we also work to live. Careers, although important, are not our entire lives. We are involved in families, communities, churches/temples/mosques, hobbies, etc.

Focusing on life planning is focusing on the "whole person". Aligning career aspirations with our other personal goals, in my view, is crucial. In systems terms, the different parts of our lives can help us optimize its "whole". Focusing on just any one part, and ignoring any other part, is akin to sub-optimization.

Having a successful career and a miserable personal life is NOT success -- it is an empty success, a hollow success. Career success at the expense of family or community or our spiritual well being is indeed an empty and possibly painful victory.

There are those who claim that to have a successful career, we must make personal sacrifices. I am one to say "yes, but". It is not one versus the other. It is all of the above. That is not to say that there are no sacrifices involved; what I am suggesting is that any sacrifices must me justified by the overall gameplan.

Loneliness, emptiness, and guilt are sure signs that something went wrong. I have seen many folks during my own career that suffer from either one or the other. All three maladies eat away at our very soul. They leave us unfullfilled, incomplete. I must admit that at one time or another, I too got sidetracked, for which I paid a lot of emotional capital to right things up.

I advocate, in the strongest possible way, the escalation of the planning process to include our whole life, to involve our significant others in the process (spouses, children, partners). By involving significant others, we bring more balance to the planning process. Through participation, we also build ownership and support for any career decisions we are expected to make.

Life is worthwhile living when we make it so. Enjoy the trip along the learning curve.

Reflection On OD

A few months back I attended a conference on the New OD at the Labor College sponsored by NTL Institute. NTL is the birthplace of OD and is one of the most reputable venues for learning about OD. As a graduate intern, I had the privilege of attending a two-year program at NTL in the mid 1970's.

I have been interested for the past three years about a new approach to OD that I find refreshing and illuminating. My own practice was based on the diagnostic approach -- the original paradigm that saw the organization as a set of problems to be solved. Problem solving tends to focus on what is not working, and not what is already working. It is painfully slow and always asks people to look backward to yesterday's causes.

The new paradigm (Appreciative Inquiry) sees the organization more as a mystery to be embraced and appreciated. As such, the new approach uses a dialogic approach to development.

Human systems, I am taught, grow in the direction of what they presently ask questions about. Therefore, conversations about positive core strengths bring to life, give meaning and enable organization members and stakeholders to share best practices. The focus of the conversations can run the gamut from achievements to strategic opportunities, from organizational learning to core competencies, from leadership capabilities to social capital, from vision of positive futures to strategic advantage.

The essence of Appreciative Inquiry (AI) is a narrative process of positive change. It follows a 4-D cycle: Discovery (what gives life), Dream (what might be), Design (what should be the ideal), Desitiny (how to empower, lean, and adjsut/improvise). These phases lead to appreciating -- envisioning -- co-constructing -- sustaining.

The reasons why this approach to OD has not be adopted more widely, in my view, are many. One might be that its practitioners see it as the one and only approach to change, when we all know that it all depends. Another might be that the diagnostic approach could be better suited to some situations.

I learned early in my career that one sure way to fail as a practitioner is to be seduced by a methodology or to become its devote'. OD is not a religion, in my view. It is a body of knowledge that if effectively harnessed can bring about positive change in today's organizations.

As Steven Covey has taught us, let's start with the end in mind. And then, we need to ask ourselves what is the best way (more efficient, more effective or both) to develop a specific organization by considering its unique culture, its strategy, and its overall capabilities.

Wise OD practitioners ( and there are many)use more than one approach and they select the most appropriate one based on the circumstances on the ground, and not in the textbook.

I encourage you to read more about Appreciative Inquiry. It has a lot to offer.

Life is not just breathing, it is acting

I did not say that; the famous Rousseau said it many, many years ago. He said: "la vie c'est nest pas respirer, c'est agir." The title is my translation.

Recently I saw this message on an office wall. It reminded me of the great wisdom and legacy of this great Frenchman. As a high school student (classical track) in Italy, we were required to read the works of all the major European writers, and Rousseau certainly fit that category. We read him in his native language -- French -- not through a translation. I was fluent in French as a teenager but unfortunately over the years I have lost my fluency, although I can read French comfortably. As a youngman, I admired Rousseau in particular. He lived during a critical period of French history. We owe much to the French revolution and the great writers of that period. They had a profound influence on the US declaration of independence.

The message from Rousseau resonates well in the management arena. Here in Silicon Valley, where I have lived for the past 50 years, I have seen variations of Rousseau's admonition, perhaps, not as elegantly as his. The one that I am fond of is "keep moving! To stand still is to fall behind!" In other words, do not stand there, do something (positively).

During our career journey we will encounter many decision forks. Taking a decision has a great deal of risk; too many unknowns, not enough information, or not enough experience. But choosing we must. The cost of not acting is often greater than the cost of acting. I have seen folks freeze as the proverbial deer caught in the head-lights of an oncoming car. I have also seen people choose without thinking through the risks. In the former case, people get run over by the oncoming traffic; and in the latter case, they wind up in places they do not want to go. There are consequences in both cases; but they are not the same. We gain wisdom through lessons learned. With wisdom, we improve our periphery vision, we learn about hidden pot holes along the way.

I am biased toward action. This bias comes from my up-bringing. I was told that "without pain, there is no gain." It has been drummed into my head to "take the bull by the horns." I have been chastised when I stood there, and I did not do something. I heard many times that "the best defense is a good offence." I was told that it is OK to make mistakes, as long as they not of the fatal kind.

I am aware that others with a different up-bringing were exposed to a different regimen of advice and counsel. They might have been reared to not make any mistakes, and to avoid failure. As a result, I see many suffer from "analysis paralysis," trying in vain to avoid risks. It is not easy to let go of a regimen inculcated in us from our formative years, but trying we must.

If others can succeed, so can you. So, don't just breathe, act. Enjoy the journey along the learning curve. You have company; you are not alone.

Business Partnering

This subject is a well known pet-peeve of mine. During my years as chief human resources officer, I did not let a single opportunity go by without my pilloring the misuse of the terminology.

HR, as a function, started a sobering revival in the early '90's. Academics and consultants provided intriguing tools for diagnosing the current state of the function relative to the expectations of senior management. The tools built on the seminal work identifying the four levels of HR work: administration, advocacy, development, and partnering. Together these four levels represent the four floors of the HR pyramid from the basics to the more esoteric.

The administrative functions of staffing, compensation, payroll, HR policy and work place services constitute the foundation -- or first floor of the four-floor HR building. The second floor is occupied by advocacy on behalf of the employee, on one hand, and advocacy on behalf of management on the other. The third floor houses development, both at the individual and organizational level. The fourth floor is the business partner floor where the HR function sits at the executive table, so to speak.

Needless to say, the fourth floor is where the honey is -- inclusion, power, recognition, whole picture view. That is why I call it the "wannabe place". In my view, you get there by doing a good job at the lower floors, and you cannot leapfrog to the top, but you can earn your place there. Business partner is not a job title but the payoff for outstanding professional work. It is not what you call yourself, but how internal clients view you as an HR professional. It is in the eye of the beholder -- the internal client ---that one finds the answer.

In the mid 1990's the consulting firm I was associated with conducted a study of some 60 organizations, of varying size, most if not all in the State of California. We asked the CEOs of these companies to complete a questionnaire containing 48 items surveying elements of the four-story HR model discussed above. We also sampled the chief human resources persons in these organizations as well as their direct reports. We found that 85% of the CEOs did not regard their HR function as a business partner at all; most viewed it as an administrative and employee relations function. A few recognized HR contribution to development and business problem solving. Most chief human resources persons, on the contrary, saw themselves, by and large as full-fledged business partners to senior management. Their staff saw reality more as a mixed bag. Big gap between the "what is" versus the "want to be"!

Some interesting field-based observations about the business partner model:

1. Under tough economic conditions, the HR function, unless perceived to be a real business partner, is downsized to the basics, the first floor. When this happens, one realizes that in the eyes of senior management the upper floors are seen as luxury and the lower floors as necessity.

2. When the model collapses, it collapses in a pancake fashion, by getting back to the basic minimum of staffing, compensation, payroll, employee services, and regulatory reporting.

3. Each floor has two components. The first floor has hygiene and regulatory. The second floor has concern for employees as well as concern for the organization. The third floor has concern for individual development as well as the development of the organization. The top floor includes being a resource to management on matters of HR expertise as well as a partner in the strategic management of the organization.

Experience teaches us that it is difficult for most HR professionals to be excellent in all four floors, let alone in both elements within each floor. For example, some HR folks are very good at articulating the employees' concerns to management, but they are incapable of articulating management's concerns to the employees. Some HR folks are great at making rules, but they are incapable of creating a productive and attractive workplace. Some HR folks are great at building teams, but they are incapable of building communities.

HR has a reputation problem. It is often not seen as adding value, to be a drag on the decision making wheel. This criticism is well founded. HR has deep and well known roots. It has an administrative and legal pedigree -- bureaucratic and legalistic genes, so to speak. It has a history for foot-dragging, slow to change, concerned with rules and regulations, and as a gate keeper. Although not all HR departments fall into this dismal category, there is enough history that helps perpetuate the perception.

The advent of the organization development field pumped life in HR's clogged arteries by shifting our direction to a client-centered reality. The rise of the customer satisfaction movement increased the awareness of HR's responsibility towards its clients and users.

But the job is not yet done. Much more remains to be done. Governments certainly do not make things easier by introducing complex legislation for HR departments with which to contend.

If you are calling yourself a "business partner", I suggest you get business cards that are more representative of how senior management assesses your performance. Meanwhile, continue to refine your approach, try to be the best you can be, meet your clients needs. They are the ultimate arbiters for your performance.

Ten Prayers God Always Says Yes To

That is the title of a paperback I bought at the San Francisco International Airport before catching a flight. The title caught my eye and I could not resist getting a copy to read during my flight.

The author is Anthony DeStefano. He is well known for having written the best seller "A Travel Guide to Heaven". You can purchase a copy of the book at Doubleday (www.doubleday.com). The book has received excellent reviews by a number of leading religious authorities. In my view, it applies to all denominations, Christian, Jewish and Muslim.

You may wonder why this blog, and what it might have to do with either HR or OD. In our jaded society, it is easy to roll our eyes cynically. Trust me, it is no joke or a gimmick to think about our profession in a more elevated notion!

I do not know about you, but I have often shaken my head in frustration, asking myself the question: "Why does not God answer me when I cry out to him?". Why does not God solve my pressing problems? If God is supposedly all-powerful, all-loving God -- who made the sun, the moon, and the stars and He has the power to do absolutely anything He wants -- yet so many times He seems to ignore our prayers, or worse yet, flat out turn us down.

The truth of the matter is that God does say yes to a lot. But often He seems to reject our simplest requests. Why? God is not a supermarket clerk. The truth is that God follows some strict guidelines when considering our requests, and they are often difficult for us to understand. He surely does not say yes to requests that are not good for our spiritual welfare. Although He never stops us from making bad choices, He surely does not want to help us making them. God gives us what we need, not necessarily what we want. He is concerned about the ultimate good, not the intermediary want.

The book goes on to list the ten prayers that God always says yes to. They are:

1. God, show me that you exist. If we pay real attention to this, we surely see that God shows us that He exists every day, every hour, in many subtle and not so subtle ways.

2. Why should I get involved? God wants us to be an instrument for His work, to do what is right for us to do. He wants us to feed His sheep.

3. What's in it for me? God will always outdo us in generosity. He will always bless us with His many gifts. Serving others is the greatest call of all.

4. I can't take it anymore? God will always get us through our suffering. He will always comfort us in our sorrow. He is with us. He does not abandon us.

5. Am I a terrible person? God forgives us for our trangressions, for our sins, for our foibles. His love is infinite and His love comes with no conditions attached.

6. This stress is killing me! God gives us peace. He relieves us of our burdens. He makes our journey bearable. He takes away our worries.

7. Okay, I admit it: I am afraid. God gives us courage. He sheds light to darkness. He removes our fears and consoles our souls. We are not alone.

8. Sometimes being smart just is not enough. God gives us wisdom. He helps us harvest from our experiences the lessons learned. He gives us insights, He makes us perceptive. He gives us a second, third, fourth chance.

9. Will I ever be happy again? God brings out the good in all situations. He helps us rise from the valley to the mountain top. He showers us with joy.

10. Why am I here, anyway? God leads us to our destiny. He helps us fullfill our mission. He makes our journey meaningful and our labors worthwhile.

HR and OD work are about serving others, about doing the right things the right way, maybe not the first time, but in time. To do a good job, we need God's help and His guidance. He cares that we serve others properly, genuinely, caringly. He has high standards and He wants us to apply them.

I might not have done justice to the book, but I can assure you that it uplifted my spirit and gave me courage to continue my journey. I pray that He guides you and bless you too.

Independence Day

July 4th America celebrates its independence from Britain. Fireworks, parades, barbeques, festivities. Americans celebrate their freedoms -- and there are many. It is a day when their love of country is in public display. Veterans are honored for their service to the defence of the country. Few other countries go to these lengths. There is pride and thanksgiving for living in a great society.

America is not perfect but it is still the symbol of freedom, opportunity, and the future. The country was found by Pilgrims from Europe, who came in search of religious freedom, and who wanted to escape unbearable conditions in their home continent. They came to build a country, not to exploit it. Over the years, immigrants from other parts of the globe have come to America. I am told that there are more than 175 nationalities in the USA. Talk about melting pot! So many wonderful flavors! They all have contributed uniquely to its progress and growth.

I have traveled to 70 countries, at last count. I have visited most for just a few hours or days; I have lived in a few for years. I have not found a better place to live, albeit as I have already said America is not perfect.

I am indeed a lucky person. I am citizen of two countries -- one by choice (America) and one by birth (Italy). I hold dual citizenship and I travel with two different passports. I learned some years ago that the Italian passport comes handy while traveling through the European Union, and that I save several hundreds of dollars when I visit Brazil and Argentina. The visa for US citizens costs several hundred dollars and it takes several days to get. Italians do not need a visa to enter these two South American countries.

I came at age 18 for a one year visit and decided to stay, to my parents chagrin. My father had waited 5 years to get a visa for us to emigrate to the USA and be reunited with his younger brother. My paternal grandfather Antonio emigrated to the US in 1912, returned to Italy to fight in the First World War in 1915, and came back to the US in 1918 for good. He died in 1943 and he is buried in New London, Connecticut. My maternal grandfather also spend 3 years in America around 1905-07 but he decided not to stay, preferring to return home.

My mother in particular wanted that the family stay close together but she did not get her wish. To overcome my father's opposition, I joined the US military so that I could stay. My middle brother Carmelo also decided to stay. My parents and my youngest brother Angelo returned to Italy after a couple years in America. Sadly, the 4th of July is also my late mother's birthday. She often reminded others that she was born on America's Independence Day!

Although I visit Italy frequently, I consider myself more of an American than an Italian. I have spent 75% of my life in the USA. I am married to an American citizen and so is my daughter. America is my home. It is where I want to be. It is where one day I will die.

I owe a great deal to this country. It gave me the opportunity to work my way through the university. This would have been impossible in Italy. I was also offered many opportunities as a professional and as an entrepreneur. I have made many lasting friends. I have become an American. I am reminded of this whenever I return to my home town, a fishing village on the Northern Sicilian coast. My relatives and their kids refer to me as the American. Here in the US my friends refer to me as the Italian or the Sicilian. I guess Americans love to hyphonate the origins ... Italo-American, Spanish-American, Irish-American, African-American, etc.

There is a song that Americans sing on the 4th of July. It always brings tears to my eyes. I would like to include a couple lines here:

Oh beautiful for spacious skies. For amber waves of grain, for purple mountain majesties, Above the fruited plain! America, America,! God shed His grace on thee, and crown thy good with brotherhood, From sea to shining sea.

God bless America!

Interesting Reading about Change

On my way to Paris I stopped at the bookstore inside the San Francisco International Airport and bought several magazines including the June 2010 issue of the Harvard Business Review.

What caught my eye was the cover page lead MANAGING CHANGE - How to Do It, When to Do It. Ther authors Marcia Blenko, Michael Mankins, and Paul Rogers are members of the Global Organization Practice at the Bain & Company, a well known and reputable consultancy.

I approached the article with much skepticism. After all, what else can be said about change? What captured my interest is the conclusion of the article: "Ultimately, a company's value is just the sum of the decisions it makes and executes." Hmm! Never thought about it that way.

The article goes on to review important lessons learned from reorganizations in 57 companies between 2000 and 2006. After much fanfare, most, if not all, such changes fall flat. The authors believe that these failure are rooted in a profound misunderstanding about the link between structure and performance. They conclude that performance is not determined solely by the nature, scale, and disposition of resources, however important that may be. A company's structure will produce better results if and only if it improves the organization's ability to make and execute key decisions better and faster than competitors.

The article advances a six-step approach to creating a decision-driven reorganization:

1. Identify your organization's key decisions.

2. Determine where in the organization those decisions should be made.

3. Organize the macrostructure around sources of value.

4. Figure out what level of authority decison makers need.

5. Align other elements of the organizational system, such as incentives, information flow, and processes, with those related to decision making.

6. Help managers develop the skills to make and execute decisions quickly and well.

Decision effectiveness and financial results correletated at the 95% confidence level or higher for every country, industry, and company size. The study pointed out that it is the quality of decision-making rather than the structure that should be the primary focus of the reorganization. No strong correlation was found between structure and performance.

To really appreciate the lessons learned from this article, it is important to read it in its entirety.

As I was reading the article my mind began to remind me of a classical failure that I recently observed in a multi-national company. The decision making process was totally misaligned with the intent of the structural transformation the organization embarked on.

For example, a senior officer at the corporate level was given the authority to approve major decisions regarding strategies and direction while the operating executives were made responsible for the success of the strategies they did not create, did not own, or fully understood.

The incentive system was not fully aligned with the change goals. As implementers realized that the likelihood to achieve their targets were beyond their reach, motivation began to decline and job pressure skyrocket.

The notion that the strategy had worked elsewhere (although many disagreed with this claim) and therefore should work everywhere was not only false but foolhardy. It ignored the important notion that no two organizations are alike and that there is no one best way. Size, history, national culture, market dynamics, and skill set matter a lot.

A proper decision audit would have revealed that the course of action was not just what important activities needed centralization to achieve economies of scale, but how these decisions were reached and by whom. Sad, but the entire intervention was a monumental fiasco, albeit well intentioned. The intervention was successful but the patient died.

How about you? Have you seen successful reorganizations? How would you say they might have differed from the unsuccessful ones? Lessons learned? For me, beware of of the one best way... it worked elsewhere so it should work here ... trust me, it will work.