An end of year survey by Axios found that people of all political persuasions are substantially more fearful about 2022 than they were about 2021. And to be clear, they were already trepidatious about 2021. Overall, we’ve moved from 36% of the population to 54% being more fearful than hopeful—a year over year increase of 34%!
Why should this matter to CEOs? Because the most important lesson the pandemic has taught us is that people don’t stop being human at work. They bring their humanity, including their fears and aspirations, to work. When work itself is a source of stress, and when people don’t feel either safe or valued, their engagement and productivity plummet. The fact that the number one worry reported in the survey is the stability of respondents’ own jobs and the broader economy, CEOs ignore this at their own peril. The “great resignation” of 2021 makes it clear that tens of millions of employees are willing to leave their jobs if the conditions are, on balance, more negative than positive.
After jobs and the economy, the number two fear is for democracy itself, followed by healthcare. Since many Americans get their healthcare through their employer, two of the top four worries are work related!
So, what are executives to do?
First, the lessons of the initial two years of pandemic are as urgent in 2022 as they have been so far. Executives must focus on people leadership and that includes a few central issues.
Making the work environment safe and stable
Supporting employee wellbeing, including mental health
Recognizing and validating the humanity at the core of employees/personnel/workers
Leading in the current environment is more natural for some executives than others. The reality is that many leaders came up through the ranks in organizations that look little like what is described above and were trained to see employees as an expense line item whose value was measured solely by productivity. In fact, it is fair to say that in many cases people have been seen as disposable, not much different from technologies or marketing campaigns. That approach is proving to be broadly untenable in today’s world.
The most effective contemporary leaders have several traits in common. Probably most importantly, after an uncompromised focus on people, they recognize that they achieve more success through others than through their own efforts or technical expertise, which, of course, requires a focus on people! Secondly, they are comfortable, if not enthusiastic, about decentralizing control across the organization, thereby empowering the human capital under their purview. Relatedly, they reward innovation and risk-taking, which not only meets employee needs for self-efficacy and self-actualization, it also dramatically increases the organization’s capacity to operate in hyperchange, hypercompetitive markets! Lastly, effective leaders use emotional intelligence to know when to engage the people in their sphere with compassion and empathy. They are also comfortable expressing their own vulnerability and humanity, which by the way, is essential to reducing fear and creating a sense of safety. As noted in the title of this article, that may be the most important task of CEOs in 2022.
The really good news is that even leaders for whom the traits and skills described above do not match how they were developed or what they typically lean on in difficult times, it is possible to learn new ways of leading and being. At the Transformation Collaborative™, our leadership development opportunities are frankly unlike anything available elsewhere. We work with small groups to stretch leaders beyond where they’ve gone before and challenge them to consider more than they thought possible. If you’d like to talk about how we can help you transform as a leader, reach out to us here.
Of course, the pandemic of 2020, 2021, and soon to be 2022, has generated a combination of factors that are unique for just about everyone alive today, but one, unexpected outcome has been the rebellion of many workers, across the spectrum of employment, to working conditions that employees previously broadly “put up with,” despite often debilitating effects. Although we’ve seen frequent mention in the media throughout the pandemic of the need for organizations and their leaders to support their employees needs as people as well as employees, my sense is that the “great resignation” suggests that huge numbers of employers have failed the test. Of course, there are almost certainly multiple potential variables driving the exodus, such as increased savings for some families, historically low unemployment (and thus availability of other jobs), stimulus and unemployment benefits, etc. However, what is likely at the core of the massive, collective decision to quit jobs, sometimes in dramatic fashion, is the calculus now shared by so many Americans that even if they have to give up income and make different life choices, working conditions in many cases have simply become untenable to the point that they would rather make potentially substantial sacrifices to avoid the drudgery, disrespect, health-risk, and even abuse that come with many jobs. In fact, we’ve learned that even $15 or $16 per hour is not enough to compensate misery for many workers.
Just how big is the phenomenon?
In August and September of this year combined, over 6% of the entire U.S. workforce quit, followed by another 4.2 million workers in October, for a staggering total of over 12.5 million! That has never happened before in American history. This trend has continued through November and December, but we don’t have official USBLS data yet for the most recent two months.
One thing the unprecedented labor realities of the pandemic has demonstrated is that showing tangible care for employees may itself turn into a significant competitive advantage over time even if it compromises profits in the short term. And in many cases, it will actually drive growth and profits, even in the short term. An interesting example is in the shipping and logistics industry. UPS has experienced a fraction of the turnover during the pandemic experienced by FedEx and Amazon. Why might this be? UPS has a stable, unionized workforce, that not only makes more money, but receives good benefits, and works in more employee-friendly and stable environments. Amazon had to spend billions of dollars in just the second half of 2021 to hire both new and replacement workers and suffers substantial turnover. Only one small part of FedEx’s workforce is unionized, and with the exception of their pilots, have suffered significant turnover as well. To be clear, this is not an argument for unionization per se. In fact, unionization does not make sense in many smaller, modestly paid workplaces. It is an argument for recognizing that workers/personnel/employees/labor also happen to be human beings and that even when wages are low, the work environment can be fair, respectful, stable, and supportive of employee wellbeing. When it’s not, employers will pay a far higher cost in the long run.
If your organization is ready to transform its view of human capital and reap huge rewards, reach out to us at the Transformation Collaborative™ for a complimentary consult on what that might look like for you.
As terrible as the pandemic has been, it has also provided some very valuable insights. In fact, no organization should get through the pandemic without a comprehensive post-mortem on what worked, didn’t work, could have been done differently, and was learned through the entire process. In what ways is the organization stronger? What fault lines were revealed? What are the greatest risks and opportunities going forward? What problems weren’t fixed or are worse? At the very least, a key responsibility of organizational leaders at this point is to carefully inventory everything they have done differently as a result of the pandemic, then assess what changes and interventions should be preserved and potentially optimized going forward. This includes processes and procedures, policies, applications of technology & automation, and ways of thinking and being. It is strategic, operational, and cultural.
One of the most interesting takeaways from the COVID crisis is the extent to which things that many believed were simply not possible beforehand became possible! The pandemic demonstrated the power of context on perspective (and proved that we have likely overstated the significance of time and place). Many people became less risk-averse and more open to experimentation. Many of us also embraced the notion of “good enough” relative to the alternative. We also discovered that, when time is of the essence, we can make decisions much more quickly than we ever did in the past. This may be a watershed for higher education in particular, which has historically been deeply risk-averse and unable to act quickly and nimbly.
A silver lining of the pandemic is not only the realization that some things, both in terms of services and educational delivery, that we previously did not think were possible or advisable, are not only possible, but in many cases have proven advantageous and even preferable. As institutions begin to assess whether or not a change/intervention merits preservation in the next normal, there are multiple potential criteria for such an evaluation. These include outcomes like convenience, time, accessibility, cost & efficiency, efficacy, accuracy, quality, ancillary benefits, and others. If you’d like a free consult on how to formulate and implement such an assessment reach out to us at the Transformation Collaborative™ and we’ll lend a hand.
Lastly, we also need to be cautious about misconstruing the nature of the interventions we have made during the pandemic. The vast majority of change has been incremental and transactional and the product of crisis management rather than genuine reinvention. We have achieved phenomenal things in the face of unprecedented challenges during the pandemic, but we also need to guard against misunderstanding the extent to which what we’ve embraced is a change in how we do something, than changing the something itself. For example, shifting financial aid to an online, self-service modality might be convenient, faster, cheaper, and preferable, but it doesn’t change or improve anything about the tuition model or how students pay for school!
Gallup, originally a public opinion polling company from the 1930s, has been gathering data on the U.S. and global workplace for 50 years. Their combination of reputation for independence and quality, as well as their unrivaled database of workplace data, has allowed them to mine significant conclusions about what matters in organizations. Three of the most salient discoveries of the last several years, right up through 2021, relate to the criticality of 1) employee engagement, 2) organizational purpose, and 3) coaching as the single most productive activity a manager can do. In fact, there are likely not three more powerful causative variables for success than these three.
Why does employee engagement matter? Engaged employees are far more productive and the work they do tends to result in greater performance, particularly around outcomes that are most important to the organization. They also tend to be more resilient in the face of challenges, have a greater sense of their own efficacy, are able to work with less direct supervision, manifest a more internalized sense of accountability, and are more likely to feel that they are an important part of the organization. Unfortunately, 50 years of research by Gallup suggests that only about a third of employees in the U.S. regularly display behaviors associated with “engagement.”
Fortunately, there are traits and behaviors associated with engagement, which can be observed in both employees and leaders. They include things such as intentionality, planning, collaboration, internalized motivation and accountability, resilience, and a tendency to play to strengths to get the job done—including accepting challenges that stretch one’s capabilities. Engaged workers are also comfortable working for extended periods without supervisor feedback, but do not hesitate to request input when they believe the boss might have an insight that would be helpful. In other words, they don’t reach out to a supervisor for approval or permission, they reach out for support.
It’s widely accepted that culture plays a powerful role in determining how people in organizations behave, but we rarely talk about an organization’s purpose in the context of its success. While there are many cultural values that support the achievement of strategic objectives and operational KPIs, purpose turns out to be at the top of the list, as reported by Gallup in the fall of 2021.
This trend has been at play for years, but the pandemic has accelerated a seismic shift in how people, both employees and consumers, feel about purpose in the companies they work for and buy from. In fact, majorities of both millennials (now the single largest consumer group in the U.S.) and Gen Zers, evaluate alignment in values as an element of buying decisions and there is a growing expectation that companies don’t just deliver a quality product at a fair price, but that the world is, in some way, better off because the company is in business. And, as Gallup notes, unlike their Gen X and Boomer elders, younger employees have no compunction about publicly protesting their own companies if they feel leadership is failing to meet ethical obligations. One might argue that the flip side of businesses abandoning any pretense of loyalty or commitment to their employees has freed employees of any sense of obligation to the company—even to the extent of protecting an employer’s public image. A genuinely purpose driven culture is one powerful way for management to address that challenge.
This notion of “net-positive” organizations, in which all stakeholders benefit directly and the collective “we” benefits at least indirectly, while aspirational, is becoming part of how both internal and external stakeholders evaluate institutions.
Gallup recently used AI algorithms to process millions of personnel data files and interviews and what they discovered is that the single, number one most important thing managers can do to support success in their employees is to engage in regular coaching.
In fact, coaching is so powerful that Jim Clifton, Gallup Chairman, recommends getting rid of all performance rating activities and shifting to regular, goals based coaching conversations. Yes, this would be a transformational cultural and operational change for most organizations, but the performance outcomes would be greater than from any other single initiative an organization could pursue.
So, if you are in a leadership role, the evidence suggests that engagement, purpose, and coaching should be on your list of prioritized initiatives regardless of the nature of your organization. If you want to engage in transformative change that generates game-changing results, you know where to start.
If you’d like to talk about transformation, reach out to us at the Transformation Collaborative™, and we’ll help you plan for a relevant, robust, and sustainable future.
The vast majority of the 1,500 or so higher education institutions that merged, were acquired under duress, or simply closed since 2010 did not explore or implement options for reinvention. Some engaged in deep expense cuts, layoffs, elimination of programs, or launching Hail Mary new programs, etc., but those were band aids on gaping flesh wounds. They were last ditch attempts to manage liquidity rather than efforts to transform themselves to meet the structural challenges of a declining market and huge shifts in buying decisions by students.
Even before the pandemic, many, many college administrators were engaged in fire-fighting and crisis management—admittedly exhausting work—but not work that solves systemic problems and a diminishing value proposition for customers.
In my work and dialog with a wide-variety of higher education leaders, one very disturbing trend that I see permeating all sectors of higher education, is the decision to delay or simply avoid initiatives that will increase the likelihood of thriving in the future due to challenges faced in the present. In short, most institutions are genuinely risking their futures because they are too busy with the present. While this same phenomenon resulted in the outright closure of over 1,200 institutions between 2010 and 2020, the risk is even higher now because:
The number of post-secondary alternatives available to consumers in the market is greater.
Public opinions about traditional higher education and its related ROI are worse.
Average institutional financial health is worse.
Demographics are less favorable.
The number of potential students who can or will pay or borrow for credit-bearing, degree programs are fewer than in the previous decade.
In fact, the enrollment decline between 2020 and 2021 alone is approximately half a million students, taking the ten year total over 3,000,000.
Tragically, over the last ten-plus years, the vast majority of schools that merged, were acquired in distress, or closed, met their fate without engaging in any transformative initiatives. They simply rode a dying horse into the ground. Potentially more tragically, because we should know better, I see the same dynamic in play today.
Of course, managing through disruption and crisis consumes huge amounts of energy and bandwidth. Moreover, most leadership teams had no previous lived experience of running the daily operation, managing through disruption, and planning for a transformed future all at the same time before the pandemic. However, my greatest fear is that many colleges and universities will win the battle (survive the short-term crisis) and lose the war (enter a state of irrelevance and fiscal paralysis or simply cease to operate) because they were too busy in the present to ensure relevance, sustainability, and prosperity in the future.
In effect, many leaders are currently on a path in which their legacy will be that they kept the doors open during the crisis, but were at the helm when the ship foundered and sank.
A Call to Action
When thinking about transformative opportunities for the future, if you’ve heard yourself or your leadership say things like, “We’re just too busy,” “There is too much on our plate,” “We don’t have the resources,” “We’re too tired from the pandemic,” “We need to fix other things first,” or other versions on a similar theme, BEWARE: you are rehearsing your excuses for when it’s too late. Just change each of the statements above to the past tense and you’ve moved from today’s lost opportunity and leadership failure to tomorrow’s regret.
What I’ve also observed—and this is equally critical—is that although few higher education institutions are both willing and able to engage in the kind of reinvention that will greatly increase the likelihood of surviving and thriving now and into the next normal, for those that are at least willing, there is a path forward. There are ways to “borrow” bandwidth, resources, expertise, etc. for assessing the current state, identifying the highest ROI initiatives, and executing on those opportunities. The Transformation Collaborative™ was designed from the ground up to be an embedded partner, with access to many individual and organizational affiliates, who, unlike typical consultancies, share accountability for execution and results. At least talk to us. Even if you’re busy. There is no obligation and you may be just in time to save your future.
Higher education is at a critical inflection point. The traditional financial and operational models that have sustained us for decades and that are designed to largely perpetuate the status quo are broken. The depth and breadth of current challenges requires a major rethinking and reinvention of the higher education system. And yet, most colleges and universities and their leaders have little or no core competency in what can be a really difficult and complex change process. What’s more, there are many structural impediments to change including the academic culture and high fixed overhead to name just a couple. That’s a tough leadership challenge!
In this webinar, Wallace Pond, experienced transformational change leader, will discuss how we got here, why transformation is the required path forward for many institutions, and what execution of transformative change looks like in practice.
He astutely notes that, “Stark dividing lines might be good for street traffic. Lanes may be good for bowling. But I don’t think they are great for institutions, nor for impactful leaders within institutions.”
As organizations become more complex and the success of leaders becomes more tied to what their employees accomplish than to their own technical skills or task completion, building and retaining your human capital is becoming central to the viability and success of all leaders. And, unlike technology or fiscal capital, human capital (and teamwork) is a competitive advantage that cannot be commoditized. If you care about your own success as a leader, you’ll care about keeping your employees and particularly your best people! If you need a financial argument, replacing employees can cost as much as 200% of annual their salary.
There is a spectrum of commitment to employee retention across organizations, with some basically ignoring retention as a purposeful activity and others investing significant effort and resources. What is interesting is that most employers misunderstand what employees actually value most. As a result, even where there are employee retention efforts, they often focus on the wrong things. Most typically organizations believe that compensation and benefits are core to employee retention. While the research confirms that employees need “adequate” compensation and appreciate generous benefits, actual employee retention is usually driven by other factors. And it seems that we fail to get this right early on because over 30% of new hires quit their jobs within six months! Likewise, at any given time, about 25% of all employees are “retention risks.”
What the research shows is that while employees will leave a job for improved compensation and benefits, those are actually lower on the list of importance of what they want from work than other items. Most studies put compensation anywhere from number 4 to 8 on employee lists of priorities.
So, what should you do to keep more of your employees?
Assuming that compensation and benefits are “adequate,” your leadership focus needs to be on the work environment and the work experience. There will always be turnover, but it’s become clear what factors limit the loss of employees over time.
Crunching lots of data, Facebook recently found that people stayed with the company when the following three things were true: They enjoyed their work, they used their strengths more often, and they believed they were growing professionally. All of these factors superseded compensation and benefits. As Lori Goler, Head of People at Facebook says, “If you want to keep your people — especially your stars — it’s time to pay more attention to how you design their work.”
Although there is some variability in the research, there is also a strong consensus about what factors support employee retention over time. The most important variables tend to be:
Flexibility and Autonomy
Professional Growth and a Visible Career Path
Engagement and Purpose
Compensation and Benefits
Ethical, Transparent Managers
Even though the prioritization is often somewhat different from individual to individual, compensation almost always shows up in the middle of the list or lower. As a manager, while you must compensate people equitably, it is liberating to know that your retention efforts are not only about money. On the other hand, creating an environment and work experience that will retain your people is a lot harder than just writing bigger checks!
The good news is that much of your effort toward employee retention also applies to other leadership imperatives around healthy organizations, empowering employees, sustainability and a number of other things you need to be doing anyway. And, in the end, improving retention is a win-win proposition that provides a positive, re-enforcing cycle for everyone involved.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Tony Bieda, 703.399.9172, email@example.com
AUGUST 9, 2021 – Colorado Springs: A new professional collaboration comprised of seventeen prominent practitioners and consultants in the post-secondary education sector was launched today in response to the crises in colleges and schools driven by pandemic shut-downs, demographic forces, new economic realities, and a strong awareness that the demand for quality education that is relevant, accessible, and distinctive is stronger than ever.
Dubbed “The Transformation Collaborative™” by one of its founding partners, Dr. Wallace Pond, the organization includes advisors, functional experts and thought leaders with a common purpose: helping institutions of higher education survive and thrive, now and through the next normal.
“The Transformation Collaborative™ is focused on colleges and schools reinventing themselves for the world they’re in rather than the one in which they were founded,” Dr. Pond said.
Functional expertise of the Collaborative includes leadership and governance, strategic planning, enterprise development, data analytics, compliance and risk management, quality assurance, academic programming, non-traditional instruction, student achievement best practices, student-based admissions and enrollment practices, and organizational health.
“Higher education is facing great challenges,” Pond said. “Even before the pandemic, the industry was in the ninth year of consecutive enrollment and revenue declines precipitating nearly 1,500 reorganizations, mergers, and closures. The traditional, credit-bearing, degree granting sector of the post-secondary education ecosystem is shrinking and will continue to decline for the near future.
Pond is convinced that when the current seismic shakeout is complete, the market, though smaller, will be more dynamic, nimble, customer-centric, and better integrated with other elements of the post-secondary ecosystem.
“There is a critical role for higher education to play in the ecosystem, but only if there is broad transformation, leading to a compelling value proposition and concrete ROI across multiple stakeholder groups.”
Pond said the list of deficiencies confronting status-quo colleges and schools is well-known and acknowledged, including reliance on a business model that relies on traditional tuition-driven liquidity (with high up-front cost), rigid curricula, poor transferability of academic credit or prior learning, exorbitant time commitments, a short shelf-life of learning content, and a “one and done” credential.
“Although the traditional higher education market is shrinking, the post-secondary market is growing. In fact, four of the six main components of the post-secondary ecosystem are expanding and the fifth, government, will begin to grow again post-pandemic, particularly via workforce development and professional development for public employees,” Pond said. “For most IHEs, growth will come from expansion into non-credit, non-degree program areas. This will likely include industry partnerships and other business to business opportunities, combined credentials (degrees and certificates), and post-graduate re-training and upskilling programs,” he said.
The TC has developed proprietary assessments, interventions, research algorithms and evidence-based best practices to support timely and effective organizational transformation, which becomes the foundation for institutional transformation and success, Pond explained.
“Bringing those resources and expertise to bear on client institutions is our next endeavor.”
Members of TC include co-founder Anthony S. Bieda, Alan Walker, Anda Goseco, David Leasure, Celia French, Diane Auer Jones, Guy Bell, Jim Hendrickson, Joe Sallusito, Linda Baer, Lou Pugliese, Melissa Morris-Olson, Nam Pham, Nathan Hoffman, Tonya Henry, Yolanda Gallegos, Don Tuttle.
Most organizations claim that people are their greatest asset. When those claims are actually true, those businesses, schools, institutions, etc. benefit from the single greatest competitive advantage possible—an advantage that cannot be commoditized or easily adopted by competitors.
So, what sets apart businesses and other organizations for whom human capital is their greatest resource?
First of all, those organizations are led by people who understand that human capital is as valuable and usually more valuable than any other kind of capital or asset. As such, they are as strategic about people as they are about the business itself. They invest purposefully in human capital development, which includes both professional development and personal wellbeing.
Such leaders focus on people before numbers because they know that whatever the organization’s key performance indicators are, none will be achieved without the commitment and productive engagement of people. The simple truth is that there are always people behind the numbers.
People-focused leaders have also discovered that in addition to achieving strategic and performance objectives, focusing on human capital provides direct, tangible benefits such as increased employee retention and much greater engagement by those retained. In effect, these organizations get the trifecta of experience (long tenure), engagement (productivity and quality), and dedication (loyalty and advocacy) from their employees. Specifically, when people are engaged at work there is 21% higher productivity, 37% lower absenteeism and employee turnover, and 22% higher profitability.
When leaders see people as their most valuable assets, they find ways to support them and bring out their strengths, but what is required for the many leaders who are not yet as people-focused as they need to be?
Who Are You as a Leader?
The first task requires taking a good look at your current strengths and purpose as a leader to determine to what extent those strengths actually support people. Do you understand human capital? Do you see employees as an investment to be maximized or a P&L expense to be minimized? Is your emotional intelligence well developed? Can you express empathy and compassion? Do you pursue success through self or through others? Do you always have to have the answer? Do you listen to respond or listen to understand? Do you hoard information or share it? Do you micromanage others or empower them? The answers to this short list of questions can paint a picture of the extent to which your current leadership profile is people focused or process focused. You can see a more comprehensive lists here.
Do You Have a People Strategy, and if So, What Is It?
Do you invest in individual experts or highly effective teams? Are your primary HR activities designed to measure behavior and rate performance or support personal and professional growth in your employees? Do you encourage diverse opinions and healthy conflict? Are you strategic and purposeful about Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) or is it a “side bar” initiative? Is your organizational culture aligned with your professed values or is there a “hidden”culture that drives behavior? And maybe most importantly, do you actually know what your people need to feel connected, engaged and successful or are you projecting onto them what you think they need?
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
Although common in education and psychology, a very famous developmental/motivational model of human needs that is rarely used or understood in corporate or other organizational settings is Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Maslow described his theory as a hierarchy of ascending needs, with the most basic at the bottom of the list and the highest-level human need at the top. This can actually inform inquiry into the extent to which the needs of people in the organization are being met or not. We have developed an instrument for assessing these needs in an organizational setting and invite you to contact us at either of the email addresses below for more information.
While the most basic physiological needs are typically not the direct purview of an employer, even the second level of safety and security needs may apply in many organizational settings and enlightened organizations recognize that the employees desire for belonging and esteem can also be fostered in the workplace. Of course, the highest level need in Maslow’s hiearchary is growth focused and addresses realizing one’s full potential through self-actualization. This is powerful for both the employee and the employer because it not only takes the individual far beyond the basic knowledge, skills, and abilities of their role, but according to Gallup, it supports a much deeper level of job satisfaction, engagement, and productivity. It feeds internal reward and an evolutionary kind of personal development. Some might ask, is supporting self-actualization really the role management in the workplace? Historically, it rarely has been, but as with a focus on human capital in general, supporting an employee’s full potential as a human being is a means of creating insurmountable competitive advantage for the organization. And the good news is that most of the heavy lifting comes from the employee. Leadership just provides the right environment and resources.
A Silver Bullet – Yes, There is One
Interestingly, supporting employees is actually a lot less complex than it seems, and, in fact, there is a single thing you can do that will drive greater results than any other activity. A recent meta-analysis by Gallup of data from 100 million employees worldwide determined that the single most powerful tool for increasing employee engagement is regular coaching, which can also be the primary vehicle for strategizing self-actualization opportunities. In fact, all the other stuff managers do is fine and often helpful, but coaching by itself accounts for up to 40% of the difference between engaged and disengaged employees. Most of the administrative stuff is of little consequence to engagement and performance.
One significant challenge that many leaders face related to “people strategy as business strategy” is that it is contrary both to what they were taught and what their organizational cultures actually value. Managers are rarely, if ever, rewarded for developing people or building teams or even achieving high levels of EDI. They are typically rewarded for short term KPIs, growth, and profitability. The irony, of course, is that a sound people strategy will support all of those objectives, plus sustainability and human capital as a core competency and competitive advantage. It just takes perseverance and a genuine belief that it is the right thing to do.
Lastly, as noted earlier in the article, we are not advocating an either or approach, but the evidence is overwhelming that whatever else you focus on (finance, planning, technology, P&L, product strategy, etc.), you will achieve much greater results if you lead with a strong people strategy and build out human capital as your greatest organizational asset. As Patrick Lencioni so astutely observes, you can’t fake it, buy it, or replicate it. You can only build it, but once you do, it is powerful.
About the Authors
Anda is an ICF PCC credentialed Executive Coach with 1,800 hours of coaching, who has been coaching for over a decade. She is a Certified Professional Coach (PCC) with the International Coaching Federation (ICF) and has been coaching and creating workshops for teams for over a decade. Her goal is to give her clients value by being effective and efficient– pinpointing root causes and providing solutions in a short amount of time. Her ideas on LinkedIn made her recognized as one of the top 100 Influential Filipino Women on LinkedIn.
As a recovering C-suite executive and educator, Wallace has come to understand that high performance and respect for humankind are not mutually exclusive. His primary motivation is for people who associate with him to be better off because of that association and that the world be a better place as a result of his efforts.