Defining the case for investing in skills is one of the core functions of HR professionals. That’s true whether one works at the level of a business unit, an organisation, an industry or in a national policy role. A number of articles in this issue highlight just how challenging this process can be – even for the most capable.
One reason is, of course, logistical complexity – which applies to many business situations, but is most dramatically illustrated in a major infrastructure project such as London’s new Crossrail link. Some 70,000 people will be employed throughout the supply chain at some stage, involving a wide range of engineering and construction trades. Crossrail has even teamed up with the Skills Funding Agency to set up a new academy to prepare skilled tradespeople for working underground.
In another respect, the Crossrail project is relatively simple because it has a fixed budget and timetable. The cost/benefit sums get more complicated when the impact of investing in skills also depends on future market prices and government policy. Firms in the offshore wind power industry know they will need more skilled workers, but cannot make sensible investment decisions until questions about the national power strategy, investment incentives, connection costs to the National Grid, and guaranteed minimum power prices are resolved.
At least, in both of these industries, it’s relatively straightforward to scope out most of the skills that will be needed – to achieve quality standards, meet safety legislation, and to compete with best-in-class globally. These provide a helpful framework to focus action. But in fast-changing and knowledge-intensive industries, and in management and leadership roles, skills are yet more difficult to map and evaluate.
Reading Jerry Connor’s article on learning agility, I’m struck by a different sort of challenge. At the leading edge of L&D, it’s not only a matter of being clear about what’s necessary – in this case, to reduce the haemorrhaging of talent from the top leadership pipeline – but also what’s possible. Developing the sort of “disruptive” techniques used by Cadbury and Bridge to stimulate mindset shifts and prepare managers for working at ever-greater levels of complexity, requires a deep psychological understanding of the potential of human beings to change and grow.
This experience and insight is too often absent from organisations. If it were more common, leadership programmes would be producing more rounded and resilient leaders. Come to think of it, we might also see a lot more quiet rooms provided in workplaces. So much of our working day is focused on the relentless stuff that needs to be done now. Having a peaceful space to go and think in, from time to time, can increase our capacity to be more self-aware and to see the bigger picture. Those are skills every organisation should consider a worthwhile investment.
Straight talking
We all know what can happen when a manager and employee avoid talking about the tensions between them. How many tribunal cases could have been avoided if problems had been discussed frankly at an early stage? Critics of business secretary Vince Cable’s proposal to introduce “protected conversations” into law are missing the point. The sad fact is that protected conversations wouldn’t be necessary if performance management was more effective. But often it isn’t. Cable’s idea may help to focus more attention and support where it’s needed.
Festive fare
Tidings of comfort and joy will arrive for thousands of agency workers on 24 December, when they become the first tranche to have 12 weeks working under the new regulations – and thus entitled to the same pay and conditions as permanent workers. If you’re having a company Christmas do this year, the serving staff could be among them.