Good old times! How simple was the leadership of employees in the taylorist organized companies of the past? Since each employee had his clearly defined tasks defined in his job description. And when an employee did not parry, he got a scrap.
Personnel development reaches its limits
And how easy was the personnel development at a time when even large groups of employees were largely active in the same activities - for example, in production or in the administration? The experts in the personnel departments were able to plan the development measures for the various employee groups on a long-term basis, partly because in the short term and in the medium term, little change was made either in terms of the objectives or work structures and content
More self-initiative
Today, the employees often work in network-like structures and the hierarchical stages and area boundaries lose their importance in everyday work. According to Dr. Georg Kraus, the company's consultant on the arts is developing "because many classical management tools, such as the pursuit of goals, are reaching their limits."
No question of intelligence
In addition, employees are now "ticking" differently than before. Instead of obediently meeting the orders of their superiors, they demand a voice. And instead of seeing their job primarily as an instrument to feed the family, they expect the work to be meaningful.
And with all these expectations, their executives are confronted. They are no longer simply superiors of their employees. No, they should at the same time be their "leader" and "coach."
Personnel development also reaches its limits - "at least in its old central and frequently top-down-organized form," stresses the management consultant, Sabine Prohaska. Because in our modern world, which is characterized by permanent change, the need for change and learning in companies and their employees is increasing. It is so large that it can be more and more difficult to cover with centrally conceived measures.
"The learning needs of the employees are also becoming more individual, so that it is increasingly difficult to record centrally and be satisfied with standardized development measures," says Sabine Prohaska. The management consultant concludes that human resources development must shift more to the operational level.
And the employees? They must become "self-developers". They need to recognize where they need learning and development. In addition, according to Prohaska, "they should also be able to satisfy themselves or with self-organized support." Operators on the operational front should encourage and support these learning processes among their employees, helping to ensure that the performance of their business continues to grow and the company can react more quickly to change.
These development lines have seen many personal managers already years ago. However, in concrete concepts these findings have hardly been reflected in everyday business. Also because it is still largely unclear: Is it possible to recognize the ability of employees to develop what is necessary to achieve certain goals and to become self-initiative? Or do employees bring these features either with or not?
Many practitioners in the companies tend to the latter view. Also because they gather the experience during the day of work: some employees simply see what is necessary to achieve certain goals. For example, to avoid overwork. Or to the fulfillment of customer wishes. They also become self-employed, even if the activities connected with them are not directly within their scope.
Other employees, on the other hand, either do not see what needs to be done, or they do not feel responsible for it. And again and again they have the excuse ready: "But nobody told me that I ..."
"It has nothing to do with either the intelligence or the training, whether an employee sees what has to be done," as Georg Kraus noticed. There are, for example, cleaning women who do not only clean round corners. You can also see it when the taps are wiped again. Or the detergents run out.
On the other hand, there are perfectly trained employees with the predicate sex of an elite university in the bag, which are professionally topfit, but still need a tight footing.
New skills are required
Because the quality of their work always suffers from the fact that they do not go beyond the intended goal: What is necessary, for example, so that the customer is enthusiastic about the problem solution? Or would the company achieve the desired return? Or to achieve another superordinate goal? And if so? Then they do not feel responsible.
Such employees are employees who are company-minded. But they are not top employees - no matter what professional biography they have, "emphasizes Julia Voss, from Hamburg," because they have to be taut. "And they are stressful in addition to the time budget Also the nerves of their leaders because they are either not ready or not capable of independent and responsible work.
Reconsider selection
Georg Kraus notes that such employees can use fewer and fewer companies as they understand themselves as high-performance organizations. "They can do some support services, but they have a key function in their organization The performance of the entire organization. "
Many companies are increasingly aware of this. Consequently, they question the competence requirements for their employees (from tomorrow). Employees who are not only responsible for their actions, but also for the further development of their competence, are also in demand, as well as employees who are responsible for the great achievement and achievement of the superordinate goals - and not just verbal.
"Such employees are still too rare in many companies, which is why it is not only necessary to re-orient staff search, selection and development, but also to manage employees," emphasizes Kraus Code>
Management needs to reposition itself
Previously, companies in personnel selection procedures were also trying to figure out the extent to which an applicant should be aware of what needs to be done, for example, by placing a staff member on the floor before a job interview
And then all those present were waiting anxiously: Does the applicant, after having passed the door, see the object? And if so, does he pick it up while he's on the staff? More generally, it has not been tested how "alert" and self-initiative is an applicant.
However, companies should do so in the future, if self-management and a look for all to key competences become very good employees, recommends Alexander Walz of the personal consulting Conciliat, Stuttgart. Most likely this is possible in assessment centers.
A further possibility could be: the company places the candidate in the selection interview a task, which can only be solved well, if some conditions are influenced.
The question of whether or not the candidate is able to influence the basic conditions that influence the pursuit of a top solution could be drawn as follows: How does the candidate approach a task? To what extent does he think outside the box? And what would he do to make the solution consistent with the area or corporate objectives?
Assuming the ability to see the big picture, and the willingness to engage in this, are key key competencies. "Then, in the future, executives should give their employees not only a feedback on the quality of their work results," advises Hubert Hölzl, a trainer from Lindau.
Leadership Development - or Superhero in Pinstripe
They should also give them a demonstration of how the work results have been achieved. Widely self-contained or under more or less stiff management? Already in the first run or after several interventions - on the part of management or customers?
This means that employees should be given a "clear signal that they are expected to act independently and responsibly, and that this is a central criterion for evaluating their performance," adds Hölzl. "The value of their workforce is also measured, which is why the degree of self-responsibility is reflected in the remuneration.
Employees have different start-up requirements with regard to their ability and willingness to look at the big picture in their work, because of their socialization and personality. Their potential development potential also varies. But this competence can also be developed.
According to Georg Kraus, the key to the success of the company is "how many small things have to be taken into account, so that quality is created and the customers are enthusiastic, and how the different goals a company aspires to influence each other As the market of the company develops, which is why certain behavioral changes are necessary. "
These connections and interactions to the employees again and again before the eyes, is a future core task of leadership. According to Hubert Hölzl, these tasks can be perceived by executives by reflecting with their employees: Why did we develop a top solution for the difficult task? Why was the solution unsatisfactory with regard to the problem y from the customer's perspective, which is why the customer complained? Or: Why are certain solutions, which a few years ago were still top solutions, no longer top solutions from the customer or company viewpoint, which is why our behavior has to change?
It is only when a leadership team is involved in a permanent dialogue with their employees that they can develop skills, recognize what is necessary to produce quality, and what development requirements they still have in order to be a very good employee (Or to stay).
Sabine Prohaska emphasizes: "The more pronounced the competence of their employees in self-management and development is, the more they are relieved - as they are less supportive, as well as controlling and correcting To intervene. "
In addition, the performance of a driving force is always measured by the performance of their team. For this reason, executives should also be interested in the continuous increase of the competence and the performance of their employees.
No comments:
Post a Comment