Public Works Succession Planning - APWAcolorado.apwa.net/Content/Chapters/colorado.apwa... ·...

Who’s Next?Who’s Next?Public Works Succession PlanningPublic Works Succession Planning

Who’s Next?Who’s Next?Public Works Succession PlanningPublic Works Succession Planning

APWA Colorado ChapterAPWA Colorado ChapterAPWA Colorado ChapterAPWA Colorado Chapter Where will we find our next leaders?

Denver Tech CenterDenver Tech Center

October 13, 2014October 13, 2014

Denver Tech CenterDenver Tech Center

October 13, 2014October 13, 2014

leaders?

,,

H B llH B ll

,,

H B llH B llHarry BrullHarry Brull

MountainViewMountainView ConsultingConsulting

Harry BrullHarry Brull

MountainViewMountainView ConsultingConsulting

@[email protected]

612.414.8998612.414.8998

@[email protected]

612.414.8998612.414.8998

Succession ManagementSuccession Management

The process by which business leaders th h th i ht t l t t hiensure they have the right talent to achieve

strategic goals. This includes

Ensuring the availability of ready successors … in the right place … at the right timeB ildi b h t th f k lBuilding bench strength for key rolesAligning ready talent with the strategic

direction of the larger organizationd ect o o t e a ge o ga at oFilling key openings from within, without

delay, and with confidence to maximize business results

1 Copyright © 2005, Personnel Decisions International Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

business results

AgendaAgenda

Lessons from the private sectorLessons from the private sectorWhy succession management is growing in

importancepCommon pitfallsHow to build a more robust successionHow to build a more robust succession

management process that provides a real leadership advantage


Why the Increased Focus on Succession Management?

Why the Increased Focus on Succession Management?Management?Management?

More recognition that:gHaving the right talent is criticalThere are not enough of them aroundThere are not enough of them around They are more likely to leaveN t h i th i tlNot having them is very costly

So organizations that identify buildSo, organizations that identify, build, retain, and optimally deploy strong talent will have a distinct leadership advantage


g

What Does Success Look Like?What Does Success Look Like?

Compared to some benchmark, having:

Strong, high performing talent in pivotal roles

Quick processes to successfully place superior p y p ptalent in key positions A strong bench Robust processes for managing succession Effective acceleration of development and

readiness Retention of critical talent


Real Leadership AdvantageReal Leadership Advantage

Well placed confidence that your current and future leaders are increasingly strongerincreasingly stronger than the competition, resulting in improved performance and sustainedand sustained competitive advantage.

5 Copyright © 2006 Personnel Decisions International Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

g

Where do Companies stand with respect to Succession Management?

Where do Companies stand with respect to Succession Management?gg

Studies consistently show only 50 to 60% have y ysome kind of a succession process or plan in place

94% of companies have not adequately prepared leaders to step into senior executive positions*

Little sign of succession as providing a leadership advantage


– *2003 study by DBM

The Public SectorUS Dept. of Labor Statistics

The Public SectorUS Dept. of Labor Statisticspp

We’re getting old: 45-64 group growing faster than g g g p g gany other

Government folks even older: 44% age 45+ (private t 30% OF )sector 30% OFs)

Fewer young’ns: Government 27 % under 35 (private sector 43%)sector 43%)

10 years of drought: Government ownsizing means fewer younger workers

Fewer of them: Supply of 25-34s slowed to 11% growth (compared to 14% a decade ago)


The Evolution of Succession Managementg

ReplacementPlanning

TalentInventory

“Back of the

Envelope”SuccessionManagement

Near-term needs

Back-up charts

Long-term needs

Key roles

Immediateneeds

Single positions

Strategic needs

Continuous p y

Managementbench strength

Single positions process

Talent portfolio

Integrated Development

objectives Integrated

systems


Where Does your Organization Stand?Where Does your Organization Stand?

Quick SurveyQuick SurveyDiscussion: How well is your organization’s successionHow well is your organization s succession

management process working?What are the biggest challenges in your

i i ’ i ?organization’s succession process?


Key Issues From Your surveyKey Issues From Your survey

Most (77%) do not have a succession plan in Most (77%) do not have a succession plan in place

Challenges g -Passing along institutional knowledge (82%) Finding adequate replacements (58%

Presenter focus How to better capture institutional knowledge

(73%) How to groom employees (67%) How to prepare a plan (61)

10

How to prepare a plan (61)

Copyright © 2005, Personnel Decisions International Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Common Evidence of ProblemsCommon Evidence of Problems

Key roles unfilled for long periodsKey roles unfilled for long periodsEmergency outside hiresKey roles filled mostly from outsidey yReplacements unsuccessfulHigh turnover among HIPOsg gLack of bench strength is concerning

Board/ExecsComplaints about promotion decision

fairness


What’s at the Root of Problems with Succession Management?

What’s at the Root of Problems with Succession Management?gg

Lack of focus and attention from senior line execsOptimistic pursuit of external “players”L k f b t i tLack of a robust succession management

processStarting over every few yearsStarting over every few yearsLack of skill in decision making about peopleLack of comfort making tough people

decisions (public sector) Fear any process will smack of

“anointment”


anointment

Typical Succession Management ProcessTypical Succession

Management Processgg

Review Review Define

Organizational Implications

Define Organizational

ImplicationsEvaluate Metrics

Evaluate Metrics

Strategy Strategy

Revise Success Factors

Revise Success Factors

Promote/ Place Talent

Promote/ Place Talent

Assess Talent

Assess Talent

Implement Development

Plans

Implement Development

Plans

Conduct Talent Reviews

Conduct Talent Reviews

Build Development

Plans

Build Development

Plans


Taking It to the Next LevelTaking It to the Next Level

Six keys to a more robust succession ymanagement process and building a leadership pipeline for sustained p p p

advantage


Six Keys to a Robust Succession Management Process

Six Keys to a Robust Succession Management ProcessManagement ProcessManagement Process

Solid Understanding of Talent NeedsSolid Understanding of Talent Needs

Robust, Targeted Data on Talent

Carefully Managed Talent Reviews and Decisions

Realistic, Robust Approach to Develop Talent

Robust EvaluationRobust Evaluation

Core Principles, Policies, and Frameworks


Key #1: Solid Understanding of Talent Needs

Key #1: Solid Understanding of Talent Needs

1111


Talent Need QuestionsTalent Need Questions

Which roles are most critical?Which roles are most critical?What types of talent do we need in each role?

How many do we need in each role?

How will our needs differ in the future?


Typical PitfallsTypical Pitfalls

Review of needs doesn’t adequately consider the longer-term

All roles treated as equally important Performance requirements are too generic,

not aligned with changing business needsCompetencies not differentiated among

various roles or levels


Performance ModelsPerformance ModelsO

NTE

XTO

NTE

XT

Role ChallengesRole ChallengesCompetenciesCompetencies

TEG

IC C

OTE

GIC

CO

ResponsibilitiesResponsibilities Technical/Technical/

Key ExperiencesKey Experiences

STR

ATST

RAT

pp Technical/ Technical/ FunctionalFunctionalExpertise Expertise

What must the role do?

What do people need to be

successful?

What is needed to prepare for

the role?


Differentiated Talent ArchitectureDifferentiated Talent Architecture

ChiefChief

Senior Senior ExecutiveExecutive

Chief Chief ExecutiveExecutive

ExecutiveExecutive

Business Business Unit LeaderUnit Leader

MidMid--LevelLevelLeaderLeader

First LevelFirst Level The 50% Rule

IndividualIndividualContributorContributor

First Level First Level LeaderLeader

The 50% Rule…


ContributorContributor

Challenges and Success Factors Differ by Level

Challenges and Success Factors Differ by LevelDiffer by LevelDiffer by Level

Consider how Senior Executive rolesConsider how Senior Executive roles differ from mid-mgmt. roles on:

Financial responsibility

Value chain responsibility

Time horizon

Strategic focus Value chain responsibility

complexity

Strategic focus

Stakeholders

Breadth of responsibility Visibility: internal and external


Leadership Competency Architecture (LCA)Leadership Competency Architecture (LCA)


Key #2: Robust, Targeted Data on TalentKey #2: Robust, Targeted Data on Talent

2222


Measuring Current Performance in Typical Organizations

Measuring Current Performance in Typical OrganizationsTypical OrganizationsTypical Organizations

“B” “A”“C” BPlayers

APlayers

CPlayers

Results/Goal Attainment


Differentiating Performers on What and How: Performance²

Differentiating Performers on What and How: Performance²

A Players

cies orm

ance

)

High

B Players

ompe

tenc

ow o

f Per

fo

Average

C Players

Co

(The

Ho

Low

Results(Th Wh t f P f )

Misses Targets Meets Targets Exceeds Targets


(The What of Performance)

9 Box on Performance and Potential


Performance² × Potential Matrix

men

t

VeryHIPOsHIPOsUnder

AchieversHigh

Ass

ess

HIPOsAchieversLow Performers

Average

tent

ial A

HighSolidAt Ri k

Performers

Low

Pot

“A” Players

HighAchievers

Solid PerformersAt Risk

“B” Players“C” Players


A PlayersB PlayersC Players

Typical Approach to Assessing TalentTypical Approach to Assessing Talent

Boss ratings of performance g p(what and how – competencies/values)

Boss and boss’ boss ratings of potential Boss and boss boss ratings of potential, based on some broad criteria

360 d f db k i t 360-degree feedback as input


Typical Pitfalls:Typical Pitfalls:

Reliance on Error-prone Boss Judgments about People Typical rating errors Different standards, experiences, exposure to

the person being rated, and biases. Difficult to accurately compare one person’s Difficult to accurately compare one person s

performance and capabilities with another Rating people the same in order to avoid tough g p p g

conversations Lack of agreement when evaluating talent.


How Solid are Boss Evaluations?How Solid are Boss Evaluations?

STUDY FIRST QUESTION: 6,000 leaders evaluated by

two bosses Collected for research

purposes only

“How would you rate this leader’s competence in his/her current position?”Seven point scale:purposes only Seven-point scale: Outstanding, one of the best Clearly above average, much

more competent than mostp Somewhat above average,

more competent than most Average, competent Somewhat below average; weaker than

most Below average; much weaker than most Very weak; one of the worst


Very weak; one of the worst


RESULTS Over 80% were rated “above average” Of the 15% who were rated “outstanding” by one

bboss 2nd boss disagreed 62% of the time 2nd boss rated same person “somewhat above average” p g

or lower 29% of the time Of the 17% who were rated “average” or lower

by one bossby one boss 2nd boss disagreed 39% of the time



SECOND QUESTION

“How would you rate this leader’s long-range advancement potential?” Seven-point scale CEO/President Senior executive Senior executive Executive Upper Middle managementpp g Middle management Front-line management N t it d f t


Not suited for management


RESULTS

Over 70% were rated “executive” potential or higherg

Of the 16% who were rated “senior executive” potential or higher by oneexecutive potential or higher by one boss 2nd boss disagreed 53% of the timeg


How Solid are Boss Evaluations?How Solid are Boss Evaluations?How Solid are Boss Evaluations?How Solid are Boss Evaluations?

How confident are you in your “talent evaluators?”How can you be sure you are identifying and

investing in the right talent? g g


Different Data for Assessing Performance, Potential, Readiness, and Fit

Different Data for Assessing Performance, Potential, Readiness, and Fit

ChiefChief



ExecutiveExecutive



FitFirstFirst LevelLevel Readiness

Performance

FirstFirst--Level Level LeaderLeader




Getting More Robust, Targeted Data on Performance²

Getting More Robust, Targeted Data on Performance²

A Players

cies orm

ance

)

High

B Players

ompe

tenc

ow o

f Per

fo

Average

C Players

Co

(The

Ho

Low

Results(Th Wh t f P f )

Misses Targets Meets Targets Exceeds Targets


(The What of Performance)

Getting More Robust, Targeted Data on Performance

Getting More Robust, Targeted Data on Performance

PERFORMANCEPERFORMANCEResults Results

Performance, Performance, Track RecordTrack Record

Leadership and Leadership and Functional Functional PerformancePerformance


Track RecordTrack Record PerformancePerformance

A More Robust Measure of the “How” of Performance:

TalentView ™

A More Robust Measure of the “How” of Performance:

TalentView ™




men

t

VeryHIPOsHIPOsUnder

AchieversHigh

Ass

ess

HIPOsAchieversAt RiskAverage

tent

ial A

HighWellHi h Ri kLow

Pot

“A” Players

HighAchievers

WellPlacedHigh Risk




Getting More Robust, Targeted Data on Potential

Getting More Robust, Targeted Data on Potential

LeadershipLeadershipE iE i

Career GoalsCareer Goalsd M ti tid M ti ti

AcceleratorsAccelerators

POTENTIALPOTENTIALPersonality Personality and Interestsand Interests

Cognitive Cognitive AptitudesAptitudes

ExperiencesExperiences and Motivationsand Motivations

Foundations(Capacities)Foundations(Capacities)

PERFORMANCEPERFORMANCEPERFORMANCEPERFORMANCEResults Results



PrerequisitesPrerequisites


From Performance and Potential to Readiness

From Performance and Potential to Readiness


men

t

VeryHIPOsHIPOsUnder

AchieversHigh

Ass

ess

HIPOsAchieversAt RiskAverage

tent

ial A

HighWellHi h Ri kLow

Pot

“A” Players

HighAchievers

WellPlacedHigh Risk




But, Performance × Potential Doesn’t Equal Readiness

But, Performance × Potential Doesn’t Equal Readinessqq

ChiefChief



ExecutiveExecutive



FirstFirst LevelLevel Readiness

Performance





But, Performance × Potential Doesn’t Equal Readiness

But, Performance × Potential Doesn’t Equal Readinessqq

ChiefChiefPerf X Pot = Readiness


Chief Chief ExecutiveExecutivePerf X Pot = Readiness

ExecutiveExecutive



FirstFirst LevelLevel ReadinessPerformance





The Transition to a New LevelThe Transition to a New Level

Big jump in responsibilityBig jump in responsibilityNeed to contend with new challengesOften require new or higher levels ofOften require new, or higher levels of

capabilityNeed to let go of the previous job (e.g.,Need to let go of the previous job (e.g.,

the 50% rule)


We Must Get More Robust About Assessing Readiness

We Must Get More Robust About Assessing ReadinessAssessing ReadinessAssessing Readiness

It drives one of the two the “big ticket” talent It drives one of the two the “big ticket” talent decisions – who to promotePerformance and potential evaluations havePerformance and potential evaluations have

less significant consequencesUnless the size of the jump is small potentialUnless the size of the jump is small, potential

does not assure success


A More Robust Measure of Readiness: Formal Assessment

A More Robust Measure of Readiness: Formal AssessmentReadiness: Formal AssessmentReadiness: Formal Assessment

Measures of experience, cognitive ability, and p , g y,work style/motivationsBusiness simulations of the unique challenges g

in the next level roleMultiple, objective, highly trained assessorsSpecific performance standardsBenchmarking of talent—comparison to theBenchmarking of talent comparison to the

broader market


Getting More Robust, Targeted Data on Readiness

Getting More Robust, Targeted Data on Readiness

READINESSREADINESSPerformance Against Performance Against Future Role ChallengesFuture Role Challenges

Future Role CapabilitiesFuture Role Capabilities

LeadershipLeadershipExperiencesExperiences

Career GoalsCareer Goalsand Motivationsand Motivations

AcceleratorsAccelerators



ExperiencesExperiences and Motivationsand Motivations


PERFORMANCEPERFORMANCEResults Results





Differentiated Readiness Assessments

Differentiated Readiness Assessments

ChiefChief



ExecutiveExecutive



FitFirstFirst LevelLevel Readiness

Performance

FirstFirst--LevelLevelLeaderLeader




Readiness of the Talent Pool Readiness of the Talent Pool

ed Ju

dgment

egy

e Vision

cial A

cumen

ganiz

ation

tion

geous

lyIns

pire

ence

ent

boratio

non

ships

t Communica

tion

keho

lder S

ucce

ssCus

tomer

Needs

ration

te With

Impac

t™ In

de

Use Sea

soned

Shape

Strateg

Demon

strate

V

Apply F

inanc

ia

Align th

e Orga

Drive E

xecu

tioLe

ad Coura

geEng

age an

d In

Display In

fluen

Develo

p Talen

Foster C

ollabo

Build Relati

onInspi

re Trust

Foster O

pen C

Drive f

or Stak

Adapta

bilityAnti

cipate

Cus

Global I

ntegra

Commun

icate

Readiness™

Participant A 3.50 3.50 3.50 4.00 4.00 3.50 3.50 4.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 4.50 4.00 3.50 3.50 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.50 94Participant B 3.50 4.00 3.50 4.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 3.50 3.50 3.50 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.00 91Participant C 3 00 3 50 3 50 4 00 3 50 4 00 3 50 3 50 3 50 4 00 4 00 3 50 3 50 4 00 3 00 3 50 4 00 3 00 3 50 88

Readiness™ Measure

Participant C 3.00 3.50 3.50 4.00 3.50 4.00 3.50 3.50 3.50 4.00 4.00 3.50 3.50 4.00 3.00 3.50 4.00 3.00 3.50 88Participant D 3.00 4.00 4.50 2.50 4.00 3.00 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.00 4.00 4.50 4.00 2.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 84Participant E 2.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 4.50 4.00 4.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 79Participant F 3.50 4.50 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 2.50 3.50 3.50 4.00 3.00 3.50 3.50 3.50 4.00 3.50 75Participant G 3.50 3.50 3.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 3.50 2.50 3.00 2.50 3.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 3.00 3.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 68Participant H 2.50 3.50 2.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.50 3.00 3.00 2.50 2.50 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.50 4.50 2.50 65Participant I 3.50 3.50 2.00 4.00 3.00 2.50 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.50 3.50 2.50 2.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.50 2.50 3.50 61Participant J 3.00 3.00 2.50 3.50 2.50 3.00 3.00 3.50 3.00 4.00 3.00 3.50 3.50 2.50 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.50 3.00 57Participant K 3.00 3.00 2.50 3.00 2.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.50 3.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 3.50 3.00 3.00 2.50 2.50 3.00 49Participant L 2.50 3.00 2.50 2.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.50 2.00 3.00 2.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.00 44Participant M 2.50 3.50 3.00 2.50 3.50 2.50 3.00 2.50 2.50 3.00 3.50 2.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 33Participant N 2.50 3.50 3.00 2.50 3.00 2.00 2.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 2.50 3.50 2.00 2.00 3.00 30Participant O 3.00 3.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.50 2.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.50 3.50 2.50 3.00 3.00 4.00 29Participant P 3.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.50 3.00 2.50 2.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 1.50 3.50 27Participant Q 3.00 2.50 2.50 3.00 3.00 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.50 20


Participant R 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.50 4.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 2.50 3.00 2.00 4.00 16Participant S 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.50 3.00 2.50 2.50 3.50 3.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.50 2.50 10

Group Strengths and Development Needs: Where are You Vulnerable?Group Strengths and Development Needs: Where are You Vulnerable?

alyz

e Is

sues

ink

rate

gica

lly

ow D

rive

and

mm

itmen

t

cus

on

stom

er N

eeds

e S

ound

dg

men

t

mon

stra

te

apta

bilit

y

ster

Ope

n m

mun

icat

ion

tabl

ish

Pla

ns

ampi

on

ange

ild

latio

nshi

ps

ster

am

wor

k

luen

ce O

ther

s

ad

urag

eous

ly

anag

e ec

utio

n

anag

e sa

gree

men

ts

ach

and

velo

p O

ther

s

Competencies

An

Thi

Str

Sh

Co

Foc

Cu

Us

Jud

De

Ad

Fos

Co

Es

Ch

Ch

Bu

Re

Fos

Tea

Infl

Lea

Co

Ma

Ex

Ma

Dis

Co

De

Where are youWhere are you most vulnerable?


3.33 3.26 3.22 3.17 3.13 3.13 3.11 3.07 3.04 3.04 2.98 2.91 2.87 2.83 2.78 2.65Averagefor group

Group Comparisons: Is Our Talent Allocated Optimally?

Group Comparisons: Is Our Talent Allocated Optimally?yy

4.14.04.03.93.83 73.73.63.53 4 A3.43.33.23 1

B

C3.13.02.92 8


2.8

Group Profile Differences: Do These Profiles Match the Unit’s Challenges?Group Profile Differences: Do These

Profiles Match the Unit’s Challenges?gg

4.25

3.75

p Sc

ore

3.25ABCra

ge G

roup

2.75

D

Ave

2.25Thinking Factor

Leadership Factor

Communication Factor

Self-Management Factor

M t I t l M ti ti B dth &


Management Factor

Interpersonal Factor

Motivation Factor

Breadth & Depth Factor

Which Strategic Challenges are at Most Risk?

Which Strategic Challenges are at Most Risk?

Cross-functional collaboration, communication and trust

3.11and trust

Integration & alignment of structures, systems, and processes

Streamlined and timely decision making and systems thinking

3.15

2.96

Further penetrate global marketsProactive & calculated risks, greater

innovationEnd-to-end strategic marketing 3.05

3.01

2.87

g g

Balancing needs of both customers and channels

Larger, more complex customer accounts

3.17

3.13

Build, engage, & retain the best talent 2.67

2.50 2.60 2.70 2.80 2.90 3.00 3.10 3.20 3.30

Competency Average


Competency Average

Accuracy of External Readiness Assessments

Accuracy of External Readiness Assessments

90ge

88

60708090

ve A

vera

gnc

e

44

58

30405060

ted

Abo

ver

form

an

44

102030

rcen

t Rat Pe

0Per

Bottom 1/3 ofAssessment

Scores

Middle 1/3 ofAssessment

Scores

Top 1/3 ofAssessment

Scores


Scores Scores ScoresCorrelation between our assessment results & job performance = .55

How Solid is Your Data?How Solid is Your Data?

Discussion:Discussion:What pitfalls do you see in evaluating talent

in your organization?in your organization? Share an example of where you’ve seen

these pitfalls at workthese pitfalls at workHow do these pitfalls impact the accuracy of

talent decisions?talent decisions?


Key #3: Carefully Managed Talent Reviews and Decisions

Key #3: Carefully Managed Talent Reviews and Decisions

3333


Relevant Data for Talent ReviewsRelevant Data for Talent Reviews

Education Language proficiency Demographics Data

Experience Mobility

Goals/career preferences Current assignment

Tenure in current role Retention Risk

Performance Accomplishments

Strengths Potential

Readiness Development needs

Development plan


p p

Typical Talent Review AgendaTypical Talent Review Agenda

Discuss organization needsg Review 9-box distribution of talent Plan replacements Identify/address blockers Review key pools Designate watch list Identify potential developmental experiences/

movesmoves


Talent ReviewsTalent Reviews

Discussion:Discussion:How do these discussions work in your

organization? gDo they happen?What ends up driving the decisions?What ends up driving the decisions? How robust is the decision-making

process?p ocess


Divergent OpinionsDivergent Opinions

“His team loves him and he has collaborated very well with his peers” …

“Sure, but he hasn’t executed his key initiatives.”

“She’s done a great job turning around her business” … “yes, but she’s alienated half of her stakeholders in the process”

“He has effectively driven major change while hitting his numbers” …

“Oh, but remember the incident at the sales conference last year?”year?

“She is a really good leader”… “I don’t agree. Providing clear direction and holding people accountable for results isn’t leadership if you can’t inspire theaccountable for results isn’t leadership if you can’t inspire the team.”

“I think he’s ready to advance”…


“I’d keep him in the job for another year”

How Do Decisions Get Made?How Do Decisions Get Made?

Boss’ view prevails?Most senior person in the room

decides?Consensus?Consensus? Path of least resistance? Those who sound most informed andThose who sound most informed and

impartial decide? Those who have the best data decide?Those who have the best data decide?Weighting views based on strength of

the data?


???


Carefully Managed Talent Reviews and DecisionsDecisionsDecisions

Consistent use of robust, relevant dataConsistent use of robust, relevant data

Training for review panels

M lti l d did t id d f hMultiple ready candidates considered for each opening

R l ti d ti f d tReal-time updating of data

Clear criteria for fit decisions

Clear oversight on decisions


The Talent Review: Bringing It All Together

The Talent Review: Bringing It All Together

FITFITSpecific Business Challenges Specific Business Challenges and Organizational Cultureand Organizational Culture

gg

Degree of MatchDegree of Match

READINESSREADINESSPerformance Against Performance Against

and Organizational Cultureand Organizational Culture

Future Role CapabilitiesFuture Role Capabilities

MatchMatch

READINESSREADINESSFuture Role ChallengesFuture Role Challenges

LeadershipLeadership Career GoalsCareer GoalsAcceleratorsAccelerators

CapabilitiesCapabilities



ppExperiencesExperiences and Motivationsand Motivations


PERFORMANCEPERFORMANCE

pp

Results Results Performance, Performance, Track RecordTrack Record




Track RecordTrack Record PerformancePerformance

Key #4: Realistic, Robust Approach to Develop Talent

Key #4: Realistic, Robust Approach to Develop Talentpp

4444


Development in Your OrganizationDevelopment in Your Organization

Discussion:Discussion:How does your organization develop potential?

Readiness?Readiness? What aspects of development work best? How often do people actually develop in theHow often do people actually develop in the

ways people had planned or hoped? What pitfalls are at work in your developmentWhat pitfalls are at work in your development

processes? What are the consequences of these?


these?

Developing TalentDeveloping Talent

TYPICAL PITFALLS

Inadequate Perspectives:

“Just provide theJust provide the right experiences, don’t focus on competencies.”



TYPICAL PITFALLS


“Just provide the

In Reality: Experience can be very

developmental butJust provide the right experiences, don’t build competencies.”

developmental, but… Experiences don’t always teach

the right things or at the right titime,

Experiences provide insights, not necessarily skills, …

Experience is an inefficient teacher



TYPICAL PITFALLS


“Just leverage peoples’Just leverage peoples strengths, don’t address weaknesses.”



TYPICAL PITFALLS


“Just leverage peoples’

In Reality: It’s very important to leverage

strengths particularly rare onesJust leverage peoples strengths, don’t address weaknesses.”

strengths, particularly rare ones However, not developing in weak

areas is risky business People don’t change their “hard-

wired” personalities or abilities, but they can and do improve their skills

d b h i l tand behavior a lot Developing weaker areas builds

versatility and reduces risk


Developing TalentDeveloping TalentTYPICAL PITFALLSHalf-truths:Half-truths: That individuals are most likely to

improve when they “own their own development” That individuals will be motivated to

developdevelop That individuals will want the proposed

assignments or moves, or at least learn to like themto like them That the assignment or experience will

provide the needed development


p p…

PDI Development Pipeline® Model

PDI Development Pipeline® Modelpp

Real WorldReal World Account-Account-InsightInsight New SkillsNew Skills Real WorldPractice

Real WorldPractice

Account-ability

Account-abilityMotivationMotivation

What are the conditionsWhat are the conditions which drive development?


PDI Development Pipeline® Model

PDI Development Pipeline® Modelpp

Real WorldReal World Account-Account-InsightInsight New SkillsNew Skills Real WorldPractice

Real WorldPractice

Account-ability

Account-abilityMotivationMotivation


Development That “Sticks”Development That “Sticks”

The Goal: Nine months from now the person:The Goal: Nine months from now, the person: Remembers what was learned Has translated the learning into practical behavior changes

Has applied those new behaviors on the job in ways that have improved performance

Has used those new behaviors enough that they are now Has used those new behaviors enough that they are now tools that they can be easily used in the right situation

How much planned learning achieves this goal?How can you design the experience to ensure

the goal is achieved?


Developing TalentDeveloping Talentp gp g

Discussion:H d i ti d lHow does your organization develop

potential?How are the various conditions requiredHow are the various conditions required

for real development ensured? What conditions are managed well andWhat conditions are managed well and

where are the pinch-points?


Key #5: Robust EvaluationKey #5: Robust Evaluation

5555


Evaluate MetricsEvaluate Metrics

TYPICAL METRICS% of open positions% of open positions

filled internally% of open positions p p

filled from succession list

DiversityCross-functional

assignmentsassignmentsTurnover of key talent


Evaluate MetricsEvaluate Metrics

TYPICAL METRICS% of open

ADDITIONAL METRICS % of A players among% of open

positions filled internally

% of A players among those promoted, hired Selection of A, B, and C

players by source% of open positions filled from succession

players, by source Turnover of A, B, and C

players

listDiversity

Talent developed by key leaders Overall supply vs. future

Cross-functional assignments

Turnover of key

Overall supply vs. future needs Business impact of talent

differences


Turnover of key talent

differences

Selection MetricsSelection Metrics

Number of “A” Players

TARGET(External)

“A” Players after 12 Months

Positions

20%

Positions Filled 18 6 (33%)

Internally 6 (33%) 4 (66%)

Externally 12 (67%) 2 (17%)


Turnover MetricsTurnover Metrics

Rolling Average for the Past 12 Months

“A” Players

Rolling Average for the Past 12 Months

“

40%A Players(n=20)

20%“B” Players(n=60)

5%“C” Players(n=20) 21%


Business Impact of Talent DifferencesBusiness Impact of Talent Differences

Impact of Leadership Performance on Net Profit: Company Ap y

AR

S)

High

(IN D

OLL

AT

PRO

FIT

N

ET

Low“A” Leaders

STORE MANAGER LEADERSHIP SCORES“B” Leaders“C” Leaders


STORE MANAGER LEADERSHIP SCORES

Real Leadership Advantage Drives Improved Business Results

Real Leadership Advantage Drives Improved Business ResultsDrives Improved Business ResultsDrives Improved Business Results

Compared to “C” Store Managers, “A” Store Managers had:43% Higher Employee Engagement18% Higher Customer Satisfaction18% Higher Customer Satisfaction32% Higher Net Profit ($1M+)


Key #6: Core Principles, Policies, and Frameworks

Key #6: Core Principles, Policies, and Frameworks

6666




Examples: Responsibilities of

corporate vs. operating units and line vs HR

What to communicate to HIPOs

units and line vs. HR Consistency of process

and practices across units

How to prepare HIPOs How to deal with blockers

C i i f ip

When positions should be filled internally vs.

Criteria for promotion Key definitions H t d l ith f ilexternally

Target diversity level

How to deal with failures



Core Principles, Policies, and Frameworksand Frameworksand Frameworks

Typical consequences when theyTypical consequences when they are absent: Inconsistency lack of integrationInconsistency, lack of integration InefficiencyConfusionConfusion ConsternationC fli tConflictSub-optimization


Six Keys to a Robust Succession Management Process

Six Keys to a Robust Succession Management Processgg

Solid Understanding of Talent NeedsSolid Understanding of Talent Needs

Robust, Targeted Data on Talent


Realistic, Robust Approach to Develop Talent

Robust EvaluationRobust Evaluation



Program RoadmapArapahoe County

Program RoadmapArapahoe County

1:1 mentorconversations/check in

Online, Blended Learning Courses

Planning Sessions Program Assessment(s)

Execute Action Plan• Coaching• Active Leader• Action Learning • On the Job Assignments • Learning Resources• Transfer to Work

Sessions Road Map Participant Selection

ProgramLaunch

Assessment(s)• Profilor

• Inventories• Simulations

INDIVIDUAL: Feedback & Action Planning

• Application• TLT

• Supervisor input

• Interview?

GROUP: Analyze Group Strengths and

Dev Areas

Accountability: Time2Change

Classroom/Workshops/Training

Executive Sponsorship - check in

85 85

Action :earning,Learning Communities/Cohort Support

Potential Program ComponentsPotential Program Components

Blended Learning coursesBlended Learning courses Mentoring

360° F db k 360° Feedback Individual development planning Action Learning

86 86

Thank youThank you


Public Works Succession Planning - APWAcolorado.apwa.net/Content/Chapters/colorado.apwa... ·...

Documents

Transcript of Public Works Succession Planning - APWAcolorado.apwa.net/Content/Chapters/colorado.apwa... ·...