Speakers: Ian Burgess and Alan Fowler.
Chair: Rajan Anketell

University of Edinburgh Informatics Forum, 10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh, EH8 9AB - map (click on Informatics Forum in the list of buildings).

This event is free of charge. Refreshments available from 6:00 pm.

Synopsis

Ian Burgess

The IT Industry is currently at a tipping point which if embraced will allow it to fully become instrumental in the facilitating the growth of the business that it is housed within. Will this tipping point require IT staff to think differently? is it a change away from the traditional IT skills? How do we position our IT teams to embrace this?

Alan Fowler

Business leaders have to be seen to take radical decisions to cut costs to maintain their personal reputation in the market. Understanding and meeting their needs dictates a radical new way of thinking about how to make business cases for change. There is good news for the IT industry in the results of eight years of case studies using this new approach, but it requires a 180° shift in outlook for some people in the industry.

To see more go to http://www.edinburgh.bcs.org/events/2009-10/100907.htm

It was a cold, dark and damp November evening in Edinburgh – but still they came!  The intrepid group of IBC Scotland members and friends who gathered at the Scotch Malt Whisky Society offices in Queen Street on 19^th November were on a mission.  In fact, two missions: to find out more about ‘managing business processes’ and to discuss managing the IBC branch in Scotland.  Here’s a ‘fly-on-the-wall’ version of what happened.

Managing Business Processes

The first topic was led by Peter Fraser of MandOS (Management and Operational Systems Ltd) who was formerly a managing consultant with KPMG.  Peter’s presentation identified some key issues and common mistakes made in managing businesses.  Essentially, all businesses have processes and need to manage them.  The key is to understand these processes, recognise how they support you or your clients’ business objectives, and how they relate to risks, roles and responsibilities.

Peter emphasised the importance of staff being ‘responsible, accountable, consulted and informed’ (RACI).  He also posed some vital questions about managing your current operations, your future and your people, such as:

• Can you explain clearly how you operate now?
• Can your staff access up-to-date information and documents easily?
• Do you know the key risks to your business?
• Is defining and maintaining your management system a real effort?
• Do you lose valuable knowledge and expertise when people leave?
• How quickly do new recruits become productive?
• Is your business developing faster than your people?

Following the presentation, the group discussed some of the key issues arising and carried these points into informal networking over coffee.

Peter Fraser contributed four modules to the Chartered Quality Institute’s recently updated body of knowledge.  The MandOS ‘PROMANADE’ management system software is used in a wide range of industry sectors and by specialist consultancies in risk management, HR and business change.

Peter can be contacted at pkfraser@mandos.co.uk or 01224 325230

IBC Scotland

The second topic of the evening enabled participants to put some of this management and business process theory into practice by focusing on the work of IBC in Scotland and the role of the branch committee.

Ian Burgess, IBC Scotland Chair, gave a brief update on progress over the past year, the growth in membership, recruitment of committee members and allocation of specific roles and responsibilities.  He also explained the development of a dedicated website, the programme of events for 2009, and strengthening links with and through Investors in People.  IBC Scotland was involved in advising Procurement Scotland on arrangements for tendering business and management consultancy through the new public procurement process, and in supporting the newly formed ‘Universities Business and Management Consortium’ which is bidding for some of this work.

Phillip Davey, IBC Regions Manager, attended the event and reported on some of the key developments nationally:

Open Forum discussion

In looking to the future, Ian Burgess invited those present to help to develop the IBC Scotland Business Plan for 2010-12.  The framework for the plan at present comprises a series of key themes including: further membership growth; the 2010 events programme (including a joint conference on Public Procurement with Procurement Scotland); developing relationships with University Business Schools; and devising a communication plan.

One of the highlights of the evening was the enthusiastic, free-flowing and wide-ranging discussion that took place around the potential future role for IBC Scotland.  Many useful ideas and suggestions emerged, including:

• The importance of both attracting new members into IBC, and being attractive to people and organisations outside – building our reputation.
• We could do more to raise the profile – telling positive stories and giving examples of the good work that is going on out there.
• Being clear about what IBC Scotland is selling – the benefits of membership and the range of unique selling points.
• The importance of liaising with other organisations, such as the Institute of Directors, and raising greater awareness of IBC with key partners.
• IBC Scotland should be a ‘centre of excellence’ for existing members.
• There is an enormous collaboration potential of IBC membership.
• Make greater use of new communications opportunities such as EYP (?) and Skype, etc. to reach new audiences and extend awareness.
• Those present volunteered to organise and support other events.
• There is a need to clarify the terms ‘consultant’, ‘business adviser’, etc. and explain that IBC is an umbrella term which covers many different roles in a variety of business settings.

We all work hard and deserve to relax, let off steam and `network` from time to time.  However as we approach that time of the year when festivities may get the better of some people Employers and Mangers need to be fully aware of their liabilities and obligations as regards their staff – especially outside of work !

By following a few simple rules (and learning from the mistakes of others) organisations should be able to allow (and participate in) work-related get-togethers (including conferences) with full peace of mind – all year round.

Join us below and we will Help you:

• Know your rights and liabilities in respect of staff, both at work and out-side of work.
• Realise the right to manage comes from both written and unwritten rules.
• Comply with your legal obligations and get legislation working for you.
• Build true employee engagement, commitment, and trust.
• Identify your liabilities and ways to limit or remove them.
• Learn from the successes and mistakes of others, using real-life examples.

Attendees will receive free draft memo which they can circulate to their staff in advance of the `party period` to provide good advice (and protect their commercial behinds!).  Certificates of attendance for CPD purposes and informative hand-outs will also be available.  Participants will have the opportunity to raise any queries or specific concerns in advance of the seminar and participate in a frank Q&A session afterwards.

The Speaker:

Fred Best BA (Hons) Bus Law & HRM, MIBC, FCIPD Senior HR Consultant, Real HR Results
A former legal adviser for a national advice organisation with experience of over 200 employment tribunals.  Fred is a Fellow of the CIPD, an accreditated work place Mediator and a member of the International Stress Management Association and Institute of Business Consulting.  He preaches a philosophy of a stitch in time saves nine, that most mistakes are avoidable and believes that real solutions and success are only achievable through people.

Dates       -       Venue       -       Times:

2^nd December 2009  -  Edinburgh (City Centre)  -  1800 to 1930

3^rd December 2009  -  Stirling UNiversity  -  1800 to 1930

4^th December 2009  -  glasgow (City Centre)      –  1800 to 1930

Cost:  no charge

For queries and bookings please
email: sales@eventsforbusiness.co.uk or call 01383 852931

NB:  This seminar is available as a stand-alone or in-house option on a UK/Eire-wide basis.  Any queries here should be sent to the above email address.

]]> http://www.ibcscotland.co.uk/events/the-xcess-factor/feed 0 http://www.ibcscotland.co.uk/events/mediation-what-we%e2%80%99ve-all-been-waiting-for http://www.ibcscotland.co.uk/events/mediation-what-we%e2%80%99ve-all-been-waiting-for#comments Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:35:08 +0000 admin http://www.ibcscotland.co.uk/?p=94 Your job would probably be so much easier if you didn’t have to deal with people – right?!  The reality is that in business you have to deal with people but if we get it wrong it can cost us dearly in many many ways.  According to a survey disputes with employees, colleagues, customers and suppliers cost the UK economy £33 billion a year YET two thirds of organisations fail to plan for them OR properly educate staff how to avoid or manage them.  The majority of employers abandon senior managers to sink or swim when a dispute arises.

The current options and systems for dispute resolution aren’t working – any of us who have been involved in disputes know this to be very true.  Government, The Courts, and many respected organisations now agree it’s time to change and embrace new approaches such as Mediation.  It represents a very welcome return to some tried and trusted management styles – a people centred approach where real solutions and improvements to the working relationship are easier to achieve and sustain.  Mediation has existed for thousands of years – early uses evident in early communities including Chinese, Christian, and Islamic cultures.

Join us to learn how you (and your clients) can save money, maintain and strengthen business relationships, improve staff relationships & performances and avoid litigation (including the negative publicity and destructive affects that goes with it!) by embracing mediation to resolve commercial and work-related disputes.  An up-date on the current legal requirements for UK employers in respect of dispute resolution and a staff memo / contract insert will be given to all attendees to help ensure they meet current obligations.

Our speaker; Fred Best BA (Hons) Bus Law & HRM, FCIPD, MIBC, MMII, MISMA

Following many years senior managerial success Fred embarked upon a career in Employment Law, Human Resource Management, and People Training.  As Employment Law Adviser with a national advice organisation he was involved in over 200 tribunal cases.  Fred excels as HR Director for various clients with substantial success in assisting individuals and businesses (large and small).  A contributor to business start-ups in Scotland and in 2007 Fred co-founded a charitable Institute to tackle the growing problem of stress at work.  A Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) and member the International Stress Management Association (ISMA), Mediation Institute of Ireland (MII) and active Committee member of the Institute of Business Consulting (IBC) in Scotland.

Fred approaches issues in a professional, waffle-free, `can-do` and pragmatic manner which always delivers specific and realistic people-centred solutions.  Excels at helping clients plan ahead, avoid (and learn from) the mistakes of others and to get the best from their staff.  He passionately believes that real success occurs through people and uses his experience, knowledge, legislation, and HR best practices to delivers real improvements and solutions.

Date: 10th December 2009          Time: 1830 to 2000         Cost: FREE

Location: Edinburgh Sherriff Court, Chambers Street, Edinburgh, Midlothian, EH1 1LB 

Booking / Further information; Contact Rochelle Massyn at THRIVE
Tel: 0131 526 3104       Email: rochelle.massyn@thriveforbusiness.co.uk

NB: Above seminar is available as an in-house option and on UK/Eire-wide basis.

CWW offers obvious potential for IBC members to increase their value and profile from the experience they would gain from the CWW Projects.

Examples of the Current Projects Under Way Include:
 

Example 1

Linking up 20,000 villages in India with Internet Capability

Example 2

Analysis of foreign investment conditions in India for the establishment of a venture philanthropy platform to enable high growth social enterprises to access soft equity and debt facilities from wealthy philanthropists.

Example 3

Strategic review and business planning processes to prepare a leading social enterprise for external investment to establish a standalone commercial company to support over 100,000 families across 70 villages in Tanzania.

Example 4

Develop infrastructure for the Kenya Social Investment Exchange (KSIX) to deliver a trusted, high quality, source of social projects for investment that offer both social and financial return.  This will lower aid dependency and increase both foreign and local investment.

Currently CWW are looking to support the Scotland Malawi Business Group to support local business and train and develop the local consultancy industry. The objectives of this project are to build indigenous consulting capacity and expertise in Malawi while providing timely, practical and meaningful advice and guidance to the micro small and medium enterprise sector in Malawi. The pilot was funded from the Scottish Government’s International Development Fund, as will the substantive 2/3 year project.

If you have any interest or specialist skills which may be relevant,  are simply looking for a challenge to improve your consulting/advisory skills or want to have something meaningful on your CV give Daliah at CWW a call on 08452000342.

 For More Details download the PDF File Attachment: File Attachment: CWW – CBE – CIRCULAR TO CONSULTANTS.pdf (51 KB)

19 November 2009 at 7.30pm

Scottish Malt Whisky Society, 28 Queen Street, Edinburgh EH2 1JX

This event is part of a winter programme organised by IBC Scotland and is open to IBC members and friends.  As well as the main session on managing business processes, there will be an update on progress from the IBC Scotland Committee, and an opportunity to discuss key priorities for our Business Plan 2010-12.

Peter Fraser is a director of MandOS (Management and Operational Systems Ltd) and a former managing consultant with KPMG.  He contributed 4 modules to the Chartered Quality Institute’s recently updated Body of Quality Knowledge.  MandOS’ PROMANADE management system software is used in the UK and overseas in sectors such as Oil and Gas, Engineering and Services.  The software is also used in Local Government, Universities, NHS and Police, and by specialist consultancies in risk management, HR and business change.

 ‘Managing Business Processes’

Peter’s presentation will have broad relevance and appeal.  In simple terms, all businesses have processes and need to manage them.  The key is to understand what these processes are, how they support your business objectives, and how they relate to risks, roles and responsibilities.  Peter will explore some of the basic concepts around processes and systems; help us to improve our understanding of these; and relate this knowledge back into our own, or our clients’, business settings.

Registration and coffee is from 7.00pm.  The main presentation at 7.30pm will be followed by questions and discussion.  Following a short break there will be an update on IBC Scotland progress, and a discussion on business plan priorities for the future.  The event will conclude by 9.30pm and afterwards there will be opportunities for networking and socialising.

Registration: An event fee of £30 for members (£35 for non-members) is payable.

I very much hope that you will be able to join us for this event.  To reserve your place contact Stuart Mackenzie by 6th November: StuartMQM@aol.com or 01259 724733.  Places at this event are limited, so please book early.

As part of the SCOTSEC Security Exhibition and Seminars 2009 programme, on Tuesday 20 October 2009, the Scottish Business Crime Centre and Strathclyde Police are hosting a Counter Terrorism Awareness Seminar for Security Personnel followed by a Project ARGUS event.

A Business Resilience Seminar for Managers will take place the following day, Wednesday 21 October 2009, both at the Glasgow Audi Conference and Event Centre, Braehead, Glasgow.

Both these events are free and delegate places will be allocated on a first come first served basis to IBC Members.

If you would like to attend any of these events please complete the attached delegate form, indicating which day you would like to attend, and send to Lyndsay Kean at events@sbcc.org.uk

File Attachment: Flyer – Audi Centre 2009.doc (239 KB)

File Attachment: Delegate Application Form.doc (80 KB)

A  successful firm I have worked with recently  in the financial sector spends significant  time developing their project managers, typically about 26 days a year. They claim their success in a competitive global market is partly down to developing engineering project teams.  Research from the Chartered Management Institute into performance of UK organisations would support this assertion that performance and management development are linked.  The national average for developing managers generally being 22 days a year, up from 8.2 in 2000, with performance improving accordingly across a range of indicators including financial, quality and customer focus i.

My message is that whilst good management recognises project managers need to be developed, much of the current practice  in this respect is inappropriate and wastes resources.    Alternative approaches are available, but require a shift in management thinking  to achieve performance  improvements.

Managers do need development in the use of  project management tools and methods as well as systems applications.   However, managing people, politics, and relationships are where the principle issues in managing projects and change are to be found.  Because of the perceived difficulties posed by human performance questions, the classic response is to use systems and procedures to engineer away these complex human factors.  To this end, frameworks for delivering projects have been developed partly with this in mind, for example PRINCE 2.  However, it is a fallacy that success is assured just because you have good systems in place.  Systems engineering has its limits[i].  A truth we cannot escape is that making the systems perform to expectation always requires good relationships and management of organisational politics[ii].  On its own, the command and control, tools and techniques approach to project management performance improvement has significant limitations.

Of course, the way forward is a combination of good project management systems and the creation of sound relationships.  However, traditionally most mangers believe it is easier to tackle project performance from a management systems perspective than it is from a human performance standpoint, which is either ignored or treated superficially[iii].  There is something safer and more certain about the idea of implementing new systems to get project delivery on track, rather than deal with the often confused underlying human factors.  This view supports a commonly held belief that by implementing procedural ways of working the human issues will solved.  Implicit in this way of thinking is a belief that people are in effect extensions of the project machinery.  If only they would co-operate and comply with what is expected of them as ‘team’ players, within the rules of the game as dictated by the market and management, all will be well.

The fact is that many people deeply resent the implications of this assumption.  Even so, if the assumption were true, we would not still be faced with the challenges we have today which have their origin in people rather than technical issues.  Over the last twenty years, a combination of Management by Objectives, Total Quality Management, Business Process Reengineering, and now Six Sigma, among many other management methodologies, should have resolved most of the still pressing performance issues v.  Added to which, the training of many thousands of practitioners and the implementation of PRINCE 2 has not resolved the issue of project performance.   Look, for example, at the failure rate of IT projects alone and you will see that working on improving delivery systems and applied methodologies is not enough on its own.  The Holy Grail is control and certainty in delivering projects to time, cost and specification.  In my experience, most non-delivery has a human factor at its root and  people are anything but predictable.  In addition, in our society, people at work are increasingly difficult to control by direct intervention.  Paradoxically, over controlling people performing as  knowledge workers in a project environment often makes them less efficient and effective because of the implicit constraints on their ability be flexible, creative or to apply professional judgement.  So perhaps we need to train and develop our people so that they are better placed to work in a changing and uncertain environment without an over-reliance on systems, rules, and procedures.

What do they need?   Managers need an ability to deploy the social skills necessary for maintaining good working relationships, and also they must be able to solve technical questions from first principles.  Not being able to do so impels the practitioner into an over reliance on formula such as Six Sigma or PRINCE 2.  So, what is top of the management skills agenda today?  According to the Chartered Management Institute, it is managing people, team-working, leadership and being customer focused.  This is a significant shift from only four years ago when the list consisted of technical and functional skills, managing operations, financial management, and the consistent  factor of managing people

Within the latest agenda there the common theme of what is currently referred to as Emotional Intelligence[iv].  Of course there is nothing new here, Plato and Socrates talked at length about what they called virtue.  They were interested in the same personal qualities and questions about what makes the difference to human relations in groups and society, but framed the discussion in a different package.  Most of the questions we face about people in organisations are timeless, what changes is the context and how that affects us as human beings, whose characteristics have changed very little over time.

The traditional approach has been to send people away on training courses and then expect them to go back into the workplace and apply their learning.  Overall, this does not work well.  Traditionally, we have assumed that theory and knowledge are the basis of competence, which is why we tended to value academic qualifications over vocational ones.  I am aware of a public utility in the UK who is busy sending all their project managers on a certificated five day theoretical project tools and techniques course on the assumption that staff and managers  will come back ‘qualified’ and competent, thereby able to reform the firms poor project performance.  It would be unusual if this approach was successful.

Not unusually, the result is far from what was anticipated due to lack of workplace help in turning theory into practical reality.  Added to this, those commissioning the training did not understand how people learn or might apply that learning, or indeed, what caused the poor project performance in the first instance. The cause, it seems, is down to cultural factors and business processes that are at cross-purposes with business imperitives.  Perhaps a better way to assess competence is to recognise that it comes in large measure from a wide variety of experience gained over time. Knowledge acquisition is a way of adding to the quality of that hard won experience.  The APM Practitioner Qualification is an excellent example of how the profession is responding to this trend.

Paradoxically, it is not that theory and knowledge are in some way seen as less important; there is still a place for the so called ‘academic’ course.  On the contrary, to deliver results in a changing world we need a balance of theory and practice that can be applied appropriately in the context of the task.  In a changing environment, we need new ideas to help us find ways forward when we are going to places beyond the scope of our previous experience.  In such circumstances, there is nothing quite as useful as a good theory!  The key skill is to learn how to learn for ourselves, to ‘research’ our way forward while working on the problem at hand.  Furthermore, there is also recognition that context and environment have a significant bearing on performance.  As for experience, which is what makes the qualitative difference in developing professional authority and gravitas, there is no substitute for a variety of practical opportunities to apply knowledge and skill gained over a long period of time.

Consequently, alternative methods of people development, which have been available for many years, are now coming into their own.  Examples include Coaching (both skills and behavioural), Action Learning, and Action Research, which are not to be confused with a method of developing people on formal courses known as experiential learning.  Coaching, Action Research, and Action Learning have a common focus based on solving actual work related problems on the job and learning directly from the process.  People learn as the job is completed, so learning transfer becomes part of the solution, not a problem in itself as it often is with traditional training and education.

The sustainable results can be outstanding.  A colleague completed a programme using these approaches for a large transport sector organisation (it was London Underground Ltd) in which the savings to the organisation have already, within eighteen months, saved several million pounds on a £75,000 outlay, which is much better value for money than a more traditional approach could deliver.  Coaching and Action Research focus primarily on individual performance, while Action Learning is usually a group activity.

Significantly research by the Chartered Institute of Personnel & Development[v] suggests that when asked about learning preferences the majority of people said they appreciated learning by being shown and practicing on the job, with only ten  percent saying they leaned best in a classroom and less than five percent saying that they learned best  from books, video or E-learning media.  The workplace is where we learn most, not the classroom, so why inappropriately impel people into an inefficient process they dislike?

Before we can start to understand how to go about developing project managers we need to see our actions as part of whole system. There is an assumption that if people are not performing well the problem must be the people, so they need fixing with some training.  This is another fallacy, which often leads to inappropriate action.  Research carried out in 2002 by the Chartered Institute for Personnel and Development suggests that ninety two percent of human non-performance issues are not caused by lack of skill, knowledge or experience[vi].  The most common causes are lack of clarity about role, purpose and what was required of them, as well as anomalies in the environment which inhibited people doing what they know should be done to deliver a good job.  For this reason before making a decision about developing people,  we need to consider six aspects of the project environment, all of which are interdependent components of a diagnostic frameworkix.

Strategic Purpose: Are the core purpose, group strategy, core activities, goals and targets aligned and congruent with what has to be delivered?

Structural Processes: Does the organisation structure, procedures, policy and budgets support the work effectively?

Informal Networks: Sub-groups, power blocs, friendships and networks are the means by which most of the power in an organization is held in reality, there by enabling the job to be done.  Politics, power and relationships are central to organisational life; we need to understand how things really get done, or not done, as the case may be.

Personal Competence: Do we have the overall skills, knowledge, experience and ability to carry out the role at personal and sub group levels?

Personal Identity: We need to question the cultural feel of the place and the individuals fit within the organisation. Is my heart and soul in this place and the work, do I feel comfortable working here?  Am I being asked to do something which offends my professional and personal ethics and sense of what is the right way to do the job?  If I am, I will inevitably resist imposed change and not have a positive learning experience.  I will inhibit the best-laid plans of anyone with whom I disagree.

Personal Identity and Informal Networks are perhaps the most crucial aspects to understand and manage when introducing change.  These are the aspects most ignored by most change initiatives, which is often a contributory factor in project failure.

When the analysis has been completed, it is clear where the cause rests, be it in the system, structure or some aspect of human relationships or possibly personal competence.  At that point an appropriate suit of integrated interventions can be quickly and efficiently designed, resourced and delivered.  As the cause and effects are much more apparent, it is easier to measure the results and to be certain of measuring the right factors in the most appropriate way.

One of the conundrums posed in response to the ideas and practices outlined in this article is that projects are relatively short lived and that managers do not have the time to spend on developing people.  This misses the point.  If you have a view that development means sending people on courses then you are probably right.  The point about what has been put forward is that we have to develop people on the job in the process of solving real issues in real time.  Coaching, Action Research and Action Leaning are all methods for learning by doing in the ‘real world’.  By taking a systemic approach to analysing why the performance issues exists in the first place, you avoid the trap of automatically sending people off on a training course, damaging their self esteem in the process.  You also fix the problem at its root cause by applying the appropriate changes to the system and coaching only what is needed.

What is high on the management agenda at present are soft issues such as team working and leadership.  These can not be taught, they have to be learned and developed in practice, partly through coaching on the job.  Every meeting, formal or informal is an opportunity to raise the game and do better than last time.  The key skill to be learned that enables people to improve performance in real time is called Reflective Practice.  It is the ability to reflect on actions not just after the event, but also in real time as they are happening.  Think of it as a feedback loop that allows us to judge how well we are doing and what might be done for improved performance.  Reflective Practice can be coached, but only when linked to real problems and issues which, when solved, will save time and money.

A final thought, what is the biggest obstacle to our learning?  Probably ourselves.  In making a study of performance in a global consulting firm some years ago Chris Argyris[vii] identified the following personal blocks to learning.

Wishing to remain in unilateral control, due to fears about consequences.  Paradoxically we need to let go of the need to control in order to gain control.

Maximising winning & minimising loosing is learned through social conditioning, and is a response to the need to prove ourselves.  This can block better options and progress.

Suppressing negative feelings, though social conditionings is often driven by fear of emotions and a wish to avoid uncertainty, which keeps us stuck in where we are at present with no possibility of a future options.

Having to be seen as rational is derived from social conditioning and a technical or scientific training.  The implication is a need to confirm with conventional wisdom to remain acceptable.  Yet most questions relating to leadership, teamwork and managing the politics of an organisation,  by definition, do not follow any kind of commonly agreed linear logic.

At a personal level, perhaps the biggest single thing we can do in relation to developing our ability to manage many of the key issues in delivering projects is to become reflective about our own practice.  We need to look inwards and change the one thing we can be certain of changing, that is ourselves, rather than wishing to change systems, procedures, and processes in the hope of making a difference, which all too often has the same effect as shifting deck chairs on the Titanic.

Stephen Doughty

December 2005

Stephen Doughty Associates Ltd

Contact:  info@stephendoughtyassociates.com

Telephone +44 (0) 1349 877697

Bibliography

i. Chartered Management Institute; Management Development Works: The Evidence: Key Findings; Professor  Leo Murray : May 2005.

ii Robert Louis Flood (1999) Rethinking the Fifth Discipline published by Routledge

iii Beverly Stone (1997) Confronting Company Politics published by Palgrave Macmillan

iv Karen Legg (2005) Human Resource Management: Rhetoric & Reality published by Palgrave Macmillan

v  John Seddon (2003) Freedom form Command and Control published by Vanguard Education  Ltd

[iv] Daniel Goleman (1996)  Emotional Intelligence published by Bloomsbury

[v] Chartered Institute of Personnel & Development Report: Who learns at work: March 2002

[vi] Chartered Institute of Personnel & Development Report: Who learns at work: March 2002

ix T. Martin Ringer (2002) Group Dynamics, published by Jessica Kingsley

x  Chris Argyris (1994) Good Communication That Blocks Learning, in Harvard Business Review; July/August

Biography

Stephen Doughty has a Masers Degree in Management Learning from Lancaster University and is a Chartered Fellow of the Chartered Institute for Personnel and Development.  He is also a  member of The Association of Management Education and Development and a Fellow of the Institute of Business Consulting.

Following a management career in both the public and private sectors, since 1997, a significant proportion of his time has been spent developing project managers both in the UK and abroad while for a time holding an Honorary Teaching Fellow at the Management School, Lancaster University, where he delivered post graduate programmes in project management.

The Traditional Costly Solution

In litigation even if you are a winning party you may bear some or all of the costs of the case. And then there’s the management time wasted and reputational damage which can sometimes follow. Litigation strains relationships, especially when the combatants are formerly close associates. People caught in the middle have their loyalties sorely tested, and often respond by avoiding both sides. Nights spent worrying about the litigation are also a cost. Litigation’s initial “rush” can be invigorating. It soon wears off, replaced by slogging through document after document, tiresome demands from the opposition, and unwelcome lawyer bills.

Why Mediation is the Right Solution in a Tough Economic Climate

1. Mediation represents a positive solution in these economic times because of the high success rate. The latest data from the National Mediation Helpline report a success rate of 66% for the 787 mediations conducted. My own opinon is that the potential success rate can be even higher. An approach that achieves a mutually agreed settlement has to be much better than to take a matter to Court, when it is often said the only winners are the lawyers.
2. Mediation is a solution which will save legal cost and enable both parties to move on with a settlement that they can both live with. In particular in employment disputes it is much better to have a solution which may enable the employment relationship to be preserved in some form.
3. In the current climate the introduction of mediation policies within disciplinary procedures and grievance policies is a very sensible and cost effective approach. And within your terms with suppliers try to include mediation clauses and seek to promote the benefits of mediation.
4. Litigation is too expensive to be the first reaction to any crisis. Having a mentality of keeping emotions in check will serve far better. Look to the alternatives to Court. Litigation should be considered only once the alternatives are ruled out. Once you have started a litigation it is quite difficult to stop.
5. Keep talking even when times are tough. Focus on benefits. An employee who is suing a former firm is much more likely to have a benefit in keeping some form of relationship with a that employer. If you can avoid the dispute becoming acrimonious despite the temptation both the employer and the former employee will benefit.
6. When you do mediate, prepare effectively and please do not treat the mediation like a Court case. Ultimately the skills of negotiating within mediation are different to those of winning a Court case so remember to use those differing skills.

When considering mediation consider these benefits.

• It works – statistically it has been shown to work in over 80% of cases
• It avoids the perils of litigation which is unpredictable, costly and time consuming
• It enables cases to reach a conclusion sooner than the legal process
• The process itself is actually quick – even the most complex cases can settle within 2 days at most
• It is particularly useful if you wish to keep an ongoing relationship with the other disputing party
• Parties retain control of the process rather than having a result imposed by a 3rd party such as Judge
• It’s confidential, litigation tends to be public and can damage reputation if the details of a case reach the newspapers or customers

Unsure whether your dispute could be settled through mediation?

If you are facing disputes related to staff issies contact Fred Best for a free initial assessment of whether your conflict could be resolved more quickly and cost effectively through mediation. Call Fred on 07951150596 OR e mail Fred on fred@caracall.co.uk

© Fred Best 2009

Interviews

Discrimination often takes place at the interview stage where:

• Male and female candidates are asked different questions.
• Questions are asked which are based on stereotypical assumptions.
• Sexist questions or remarks are made by the interviewer.
• Unnecessary questions, not relevant to the job, are asked of the interviewee in respect of domestic circumstances.  An example is to ask a young woman whether she has plans to start a family.

Avoid over-personal questions.
For example, about a person’s children or dependants and their care arrangements, or about family background, out-of-work activities, health or willingness to comply with dress codes – unless they are directly relevant to the job’s requirements.

TYPES OF APPROACHES / QUESTIONS FOR INTERVIEWING

Structuring the interview can also helps improve its ability to predict performance in the job and a growing number of employers are now taking this approach. A ‘structured interview’ means that:

• questions are planned carefully (e.g. written down) before the interview
• all candidates are asked the same questions
• answers are scored using a rating system
• questions focus on the attributes and behaviors needed in the job.

There is a risk, however, that this means an overly rigid approach in which there is little opportunity to ask the candidate supplementary questions and the candidate does not feel at their ease.

A looser ‘semi-structured’ approach can allow more opportunity for follow up questions for interviewer, and involves them covering a planned series of topics with the candidate.

Ask questions to check information provided on the CV or application form.

• Probe any gaps in the candidate’s career.
• Ask for details on levels of responsibility, and costs and sizes of projects.  Find out who else worked with the
  candidate on these projects.
• Ask about the candidate’s skills, and seek recent examples of how the candidate has used them at work.

Explore the candidate’s potential.

Build on the information in the CV and the responses already given.

Ask candidates to:

• Identify their main strengths and most important experiences.
• Discuss the skills they need to develop.
• Outline how they will add value to the company if they get the job.

Different types of question can be used to reveal different kinds of information.

Open questions which cannot be answered with a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ encourage candidates to talk.  Good for exploring and gathering information.

Probing questions (e.g. “Exactly what happened next?”) aim to clarify what is meant by the answer to an open question.  Good for checking details already known or given in response to an earlier question.

Closed questions (e.g. “Would you be able to start next week?”) are used to establish facts and clarify specific points.  Good for finding out single facts or restricting a candidate who is rambling.

Reflective questions (e.g. “Am I right in saying your work involves you in…?”) repeat what the candidate said.  Good for checking the accuracy of your understanding, summarising, and leading to a close.

Situational questions (e.g. “Suppose you were asked to do…?”) pose alternative scenarios or viewpoints.  Good for getting the candidate to consider different possibilities or ways of working.

Destructive interviewing techniques can mean that you lose good people you should have been able to recruit.

Destructive behaviour reflects badly on the interviewers and your company.

• Offensive remarks (e.g. “You weren’t paid much in your last job”).
• Personal remarks (e.g. “I like the colour of your jacket”).
• Multiple questions (e.g. “When did you do that, why, what was the outcome…?”).  Multiple questions can be used to test listening ability, concentration and intelligence, but often just lead to confusion.
• Unfocused behaviour is both unproductive and rude.  For example yawning, gazing out of the window, writing letters, taking telephone calls or interrupting the interview to deal with ‘more urgent’ matters.  If there is the possibility of being interrupted then mention this at the start.

Combine, share, and assess the evidence for each candidate against the selection criteria.

• Use a scoring system to turn observations into numbers.  This makes it easier to compare candidates.

Calculate a weighted score.

• Multiply the score for each of the criteria by the corresponding weighting.  Add the results for each of the criteria.  Any candidate not achieving the required standard can be discounted.

Make your decision based on:

• Candidates’ weighted scores.
• Any other evidence you have collected.
• Your judgement.

Inform both successful and unsuccessful candidates of the outcome.

Keeping candidates waiting says all the wrong things about your business.

Do not let the interview go beyond its allotted time or allow interruptions to delay another candidate.

Not focusing on selection criteria leads to subjective and arbitrary decisions.

How the final decision will be made should be decided at the beginning.  Once the criteria have been identified they can be used for recruitment advertising, short listing, and designing the interview.

Failing to explore key skills and knowledge can lead to disastrous appointments.

Do not assume that someone who appears to have many years’ experience in a technical area (e.g. finance) can therefore do this job.

Making snap judgements usually means you are responding to your own prejudices rather than the reality of the situation.

Use notes and evidence to identify which candidate best fits the criteria.  Some interviewers favour candidates they like or candidates who are like themselves.

Under the Data Protection Act, candidates have the right to access your notes.  Only make notes of factual matters or your assessment of the individual in relation to the job requirements and selection criteria.  You must be able to justify the selection of one candidate ahead of others.  An acceptable response here is `He / She interviewed better than the others`.  Also where you can steer clear of agreeing to keep CV`s on file but especially undertaking to keep unsuccessful applicants informed regarding future vacancies – this represents more work than you think and should you fail to do this it could leave you open to allegations of bias or even discrimination.

Deciding too soon is an elementary mistake.

Judgement should be suspended until all the interviews have been completed.  Use evidence.  Do not pick the first candidate who seems to be suitable or rely on initial impressions of candidates.

Expecting perfection opens the door to irrational decisions and self-delusion.

• Do not expect to find the ideal candidate who will hit the ground running.
• Most people will require an induction if they are appointed.

Avoid being taken in by candidates with good interview skills.

© Fred Best 2009