Rule 3 - (this part's not fun - but the results are often very beneficial) be prepared to make changes including moving people out of the business when an organization is not getting the job done. Net is while it's not fun the changes will improve the organization, be better for the business and better for many individuals in the effected group.
Moving people out who cannot (or will not) do the work should be straight forward - if done unemotionally. HR should be able to provide the process - take the time to understand it. It is also easier on everyone if your company provides a transition plan (pay for a few months, outplacement, etc) - if they do - use it. Those plans can be used to ease the transition for the person(s) involved.
Note: I agree that ~10% of every organization will be performing below standard. As a result you have an opportunity to replace those individuals with higher performing people - people that may a better cultural fit as well. Many times you have the opportunity in this case to improve morale - your people know these people are not performing.
Moving people out during downsizing can also be straight forward (10% rule). It only gets painful if it is a significant downsizing that involves putting a lot more work on the remaining people. This situation is problematic - more so if there is no opportunity to "simplify" your operation and processes.
Other changes - reorganizations - can provide real opportunities to reward your best people. The best organization that I've seen at this we GE (actually GE Capital). We regularly reorganized based on the changing needs of the business - I.T. included. Those changes provided opportunities for people that have delivered.
Taking the time to figure out an optimum organization will pay dividends. Organizational changes can improve an organization. Moving people out will be painfull (short term) but could significantly improve your organization if thought through.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment