25 March 2015

A Rational Approach to Selection


Pi Day1The 14th March 2015, from a mathematical perspective, was the most irrational day of the century. This date is celebrated annually by mathematicians as "Pi day" because the date (in US month/day format) reads as the first few digits of the number Pi - 3.14. This year was a special, once-in-a-century event because, at exactly 9:26 and 53 seconds, the time matched the first 10 digits of Pi: 3.141592653.

There are a range of exciting things that you can do with Pi. Mathematics for fun is the subject of a recent book by Matt Parker in which he suggests a cunning way in which to win a few free drinks when out with friends. When asked (or bet), most people perceive a drinking glass as taller than the distance around the glass. In reality, the circumference of a UK pint glass is 1.8 times the height. This can easily be proved by using the first finger and thumb to reach around the glass and then compare to the height. Our brains mistakenly compare the diameter with the height instead of multiplying by Pi to calculate the circumference.

What about getting mathematical with recruitment?

A challenge any hiring manager or recruiter will recognise is; how many people should be interviewed to find the best candidate for a job? When to stop? Is the last applicant interviewed the best one for the role? It's something that mathematicians have considered since the 1950s when it was known as the 'secretary problem'. The problem was solved in 1961 and refined in 2006 by psychologist Neal Bearden.

The solution to maximise the chance of finding the best candidate from the pool of applicants relies on using some simple maths:

  1. Estimate the total number of candidates who will be interviewed, n
  2. Calculate the square root of that number, √n
  3. Interview and reject the first √n candidates
  4. Continue to interview and select the next candidate who is better than the first √n candidates

For a pool of 10 applicants, at least 3 candidates are interviewed before selecting the next best candidate. With 10 candidates this method will, on average, find the applicant who is at least 75% perfect. For a larger pool of 100 applicants, it will find the candidate who is 90% perfect.

It may not be the complete solution to recruiting, but research has shown that interviewers typically stop their search too soon and miss out on the best candidate. The use of this mathematical technique could help prevent a decision from being rushed; if it adds up to better recruitment decisions, it has got to be worth doing the sums!

23 March 2015

How L&D must change: report from our think tank

L&D is increasingly becoming the ‘guide on the side,’ focusing on innovation and consultancy whilst learning moves into the line, say L&D leaders.

How L&D must change: report from our think tank

In a recent talk to the Towards Maturity Ambassadors Group, Peter Cheese, Chief Executive of the CIPD, spoke of the changing face of Learning and Development, and how it needs to reshape itself for the future. On this very topic, we reached out to the L&D community to explore these issues in the earlier part of this year. We conducted a research exercise, the fruits of which we want to share with you now, over a series of linked blog posts covering:

  • L&D skills: is there a crisis? What skills does L&D need?
  • The supplier market: how well does it really serve L&D?
  • Problems and opportunities posed for L&D by technology.

The results were fascinating, shedding real light on how L&D is changing right now, and painting a picture of what the future might look like.

To kick this off, we asked the following question:

  • Is there a technology skills crisis in L&D?

… And we asked it in two ways.

Firstly, we asked a wide sample of attendees at the Learning & Technologies show for their views on whether they perceived a skills gap in the L&D sector as it becomes ever more technology focused.


Learning blogOver 53% of attendees polled felt the sector had a skills crisis, versus 32.7% who were comfortable with the current state of play, suggesting that for the majority of businesses there’s plenty of room for improvement.

Secondly, we posed a slightly wider question in the same vein to an invited group of L&D leaders in a ‘Think Tank’ facilitated discussion conducted under Chatham House rules.


‘Those who are most successful with technology aren’t necessarily those with the most technology skills … but the most business savvy’

Delegates were from organisations including Lloyds Banking Group, Mærsk, MOD, Pragma, Towards Maturity, Trafigura, TUI, and Vodafone.

This opened up a frank, no-holds-barred discussion that gave some clear pointers to the way forward-thinking L&D departments are reshaping themselves in order to maintain and increase their relevance to the business. Here’s what they had to say:

For the time-challenged … key points from our Think Tank discussion

  • Priority skills that L&D needs for the future might not be the obvious ones of technology and instructional design,
  • More important could be knowing how to work with the business, listening to your learners and comms/marketing skills,
  • It’s not just about a change of skillset, but a shift in underlying attitude too,
  • 70:20:10 is an important concept (but probably not in the way that you think!),
  • Curation is a critical new skill to master,
  • Coaching and mentoring, train-the-trainer is also important,
  • Some hard truths to accept: you can only fully control the 10%, a lot of learning belongs in the line – and L&D might shrink, but be focused more on innovation and consultancy.

Crisis? What crisis?

Is there a skills crisis in L&D? The answer to this question came back fast from our delegates – yes.

The good news is that, compared to five years ago, say, there is greater awareness now of a gap. CIPD’s most recent Learning and Development survey showed a feeling that greater business and commercial awareness is the factor that will most contribute to the success of an L&D professional. However, other research, notably that by benchmarking group Towards Maturity, casts doubt on whether the skills exist to get there. ‘They want to be able to respond faster, to be able to support performance … [and] they’re no longer just saying, “my job is to do courses, and if I use technology, then it’s to be able to do those courses bigger and faster and quicker”. They’re now much more likely to be saying, “my job is to support business agility” … The issue is they’re absolutely not equipped to do that’.

So what are the skills that are missing? Technology skills? Skills for instructional design? Think again.

‘We’re three month in … where’s our learning programme?’

Research reveals a paradox. Those who are best at using technology for learning for learning programmes – those who achieve successes for their organisations through this means – are not necessarily those with the most advanced technology skills themselves. ‘They are those that are more business savvy, more aware of their audience, more able to engage with stakeholders, more able to think broader in design – so that their design strategy isn’t just about, how do I do a course online …’

You might also think that good instructional design skills would be an essential. However, anecdotal evidence from our panel (and quite a weight of it) suggests that ID is of declining importance. One of our delegates, an L&D leader for a global company, well experienced in getting results with technology, expressed his dissatisfaction with some of his US colleagues who have learned instructional design at university and go ‘into role’ more or less as pure instructional designers. ‘They’ve got no business concepts and I think they do the industry a disservice. They might come out with the best instructionally sound solution, but actually the end result isn’t pragmatic’.

Designing learning by the book can take too long, given the accelerated business cycles of global companies, and by the time the programme arrives, it could already be redundant: ‘the business has moved on to the next agenda item’. What’s more important is for the L&D professionals to have good consulting skills, ‘get to the nub of the matter, and do just enough instructional design to get the right product’.

In one of this company’s territories, apparently, the ‘preferred learning style’ is now a three-minute video: ‘How much instructional design is there behind all those how-to videos on YouTube? And yet that is where we all go to learn now.’

So what’s the answer? ‘Deliver something short and sweet, that gets to the point straight away, and make sure you’re totally aligned with the needs of the business … that’s the skill, I think’.

Talk to the business

So it turns out that the key skills needed by L&D are the ability to talk to the business, and to translate that at pace into ‘action learning’, without leaning too heavily on traditional instructional design. In practice this means developing consultancy skills, and might call on a communications skills and capabilities more often seen within marketing and comms.

However the problem, as seen by our delegates, is not necessarily just about about skills gaps you can identify with a competency matrix – it goes deeper than that, into attitudinal, cultural and conceptual areas. It’s about how L&D relates to the business under the traditional model, and how that has to change.

‘This new-fangled thing that we’ve been doing for 20 years’

On this point, one of our delegates said: ‘I still think there’s a level of nervousness in L&D about this new-fangled thing that we’ve been doing for 20 years called digital learning’. Instructor-led training still gets more credence, and it’s a battle to make people believe that digital is now just as important a component of the learning mix. Meanwhile people are working so globally in many organisations (including this delegate’s) that ‘there is simply no other way for us to cope without thinking more digitally’.

L&D needs to take this on board and to proselytize for a change of attitude in the rest of the business, because as things stand, senior leaders will still reflexively come to L&D and request a course, because they are stuck in a very traditional mindset. Meanwhile when you survey what people in the organisation are actually doing to get the knowledge they need to do their jobs: ‘they use their mobiles, they’re downloading apps, they’re doing all kinds of stuff for themselves,’ but these learning behaviours are simply not seen as being in the same conceptual ‘bucket’.

70:20:10 is seen by our delegate as having been a useful tool in bringing about a change in understanding here – despite the cringe-factor associated with what has become a very over-used and often misunderstood buzzword: the ghastly 70:20:10 thing!

The real significance of 70:20:10

Some of these misunderstandings come from failing to see that 70:20:10 is an observation, not a model, and therefore represents a parameter to what L&D actually has the power to control or affect. ‘70:20:10 is happening whether we want it or not … there was this trend about 4 years ago to say, “how can we get into the 70%?” Actually no, stay out of the 70% … it’s happening on its own: don’t break it!’

The new skill of content curation is a key one in the 70%: providing relevant resources in a way that can support self-directed learners within their workflow, accessible via the channels and devices they have readily to hand.

L&D can have a more direct influence in the ‘20%’ – and needs to learn coaching and mentoring skills accordingly. The 10% is the only part of the mix that L&D can completely control – and even there, things are changing.

Seeing knowledge as a capability

A trend that several of our delegates either mentioned or supported in their comments was for training budget (and therefore ownership of learning) to migrate away from L&D into the line of business; this is not necessarily a bad thing.

There is a solid logic for it happening, which one of our delegates from the defence sector characterised in military terms: "if I’m in an organisation and I have responsibility for, and the authority to deliver, an output, why would I not want to own all of the capability, including the people – and including how they learn and develop?" Where L&D has final responsibility, "I can chuck it over the fence at them, instead of owning the responsibility appropriately." In some ways it is better for learning to be in the line.

An understanding which supports this point of view is to look at the knowledge within a given team or member of staff, in so far as it is the result of training, as a capability. Again, in the military context: "It’s dead easy when somebody builds a new weapon system: we all get it – it’s capability. When somebody builds a new piece of knowledge, however …" it’s less easy to see in that way.

The future shape of L&D

So what is the role for L&D, if budget and responsibility for learning sit within the line, or with particular functional heads?

We can see this by looking at the way many forward-thinking heads of L&D (we had several around the table) are already operating – as consultants and enablers of learning. Says one of our delegates, a noted ‘leader and bleeder’: "I’m pretty hands-off …

"We have three new projects out to tender at the moment, and where in the old days I might have managed all of them, now I say: here’s three providers you might use, set up the meetings and so forth – but then stand away. It’s the business talking directly to [vendors]." This is not to say he doesn’t maintain contact with projects. If a particular aspect of it becomes particularly troublesome – or if the vendor is (perish the thought), ‘trying to bamboozle us with science’ he might be called back in. "But I’m not making final decisions … I’ve got too much on my plate, anyway."

So L&D becomes the guide on the side, saying to the business: ‘you own it, you know exactly what you want, all I’d end up doing is to translate, and then I [might] get the translation wrong and end up recommending the wrong solution for you. It’s a big change and I welcome it because I think it is Learning listening to the business’.

And what is the ‘too much on my plate’ that crowds out his day?

Spearheading innovation, and doing the strategic vision thing, seems to be the answer. ‘What does L&D look like in the future?’ muses another delegate. "In my mind the person heading up that L&D capability has to have real imagination about the business and what L&D can do for it, with a team of real deep specialists who can exploit for the future; but the actual responsibility for ‘what do I need at the moment?’ is absolutely in line management … So, whilst L&D may get smaller, I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing, provided it’s focused on the right things."

To put it simply, L&D needs to focus on innovation and consultancy.

The skinny on L&D skills

So to sum up the key skills that it would be advantageous for L&D to hone, hire in or acquire:

  • Talking to the business / commercial acumen,
  • Listening to learners,
  • Consultancy,
  • Marketing/communications,
  • Coaching and mentoring,
  • Train the trainer,
  • Content curation.

In our next report from the Think Tank we’ll be talking about the supplier market; the people L&D have to buy from, partner with and outsource to. What are their strengths and weaknesses, and how do you get the best from them? Don’t miss it!

Source: Lumesse Learning - How L&D must change: report from our think tank

19 March 2015

Are You Ready for Gen Z – Part 2

Generation zAs a Millennial, I grew up during the largest digital revolution of my time. In those days technology was a luxury, not a necessity. I communicated with my friends and family using home telephones and left messages on answering machines.  My family didn’t own a PC until 1998 and even then the average price for a desktop was $1,300 USD. The World Wide Web was dial-up only and you were charged by the hour. I still remember the confrontations with family members about using the phone and internet simultaneously. A few years later, I attended college feeling cutting-edge with my Motorola flip-phone with the indiglo digital screen.  I listened to traditional lectures and took notes in class but spent many hours in the computer lab typing up assignments, chatting on AOL instant messenger and sending email; my we had come so far!  After graduation, I entered the workforce feeling fortunate that I was gradually introduced to these “luxury” items that I couldn’t work without today. 

What was once exciting to the Millennials is status quo for the Z-generation. They were born into a world where iPads, iPhones, laptops and internet access is a necessity and most of them were raised in households with one or more of these. So what excites them? What fuels their motivation? What do employers need to do to keep them engaged?

1. Work-Life Balance: generation Z does not expect to work traditional office hours; they will work during private hours and do private stuff during business hours. This doesn’t necessarily mean working from home but rather providing a flexible, collaborative, and diverse office space. As we know, they are inundated with information delivered by social media so they would rather be in the office where they can discuss and share ideas amongst colleagues. Google was one of the first companies to recognize that, in order to promote creative thinking and innovation, they must provide an environment that fosters that. So today the “Googleplex” offers ping pong, billiards, video games and outdoor meeting rooms. If they contribute ideas and perform at a high level, they expect to be trusted and will remain loyal. So maybe it’s time to remove those cubicle walls? 

2. Community: I recently learned about Salesforce.com communities and what a brilliant concept! These communities can be set up for all types of members (clients, vendors, candidates, etc). So let’s think in terms of HR, you can now have direct interaction with your most qualified candidates through an online community portal. So not only do you have early engagement between the candidate and the employer, but between the candidates themselves. This is a great way to get information into their hands, to hear what their thoughts are on company initiatives and allow them to voice their opinions (they want to be heard remember?). Essentially, this becomes the start of the onboarding process.   
Facebook is another great tool for gaining attention from the younger population. Creating a corporate Facebook page where you can share pictures of events, share trending topics to spark discussion, recognitions/awards in relation to your organization and/or employees. Other channels include GooglePlus, Youtube and WeChat (Asia Pacific only).

3. Leadership: we know that leaders have the most influence on the employee and the overall organizational culture. You can bet that, with four generations in the workplace, they will each bring different perspectives on priorities, methodologies and communication but a quality leader must understand and leverage the strengths of each. Generation Z specifically will want more face time with their line managers and demand more attention than other generations. 

4. Sharing: videos, blogs, pages, tweets, you name it - they’re sharing it; the term ‘sharing’ means something completely different to Gen Z’ers. The fact is, they are constantly connected to their networks and have a broad reach. This is great for marketing and gaining global recognition for companies and products; if this generation likes it, they’ll share it. I see this having a huge impact on recruiting and employee referrals. This will increase the number of referral based candidates over time, just watch…  So empower them with social based content and they will become part of your marketing team before you know it… Look at me!

12 March 2015

Garbage In, Garbage Out

Garbage in, garbage outThe Datafication of HR

If you’re reading this post, chances are that you’ve read about the importance of analytics and all of its benefits: from saving costs, to increasing retention, to finally getting this “seat at the table”.

There is even a new trend called the “Datafication of HR”. The trend is actually not that new. What’s new however, is that we are at a time where HR data abounds, and the tools to manipulate and analyse it are readily available.

But this is not a post about the benefits of analytics in the HR or Talent Management space; there are plenty of them out there (see Josh Bersin’s piece in Forbes, for instance).

This is a post about the underlying asset that makes analytics invaluable: the actual data.

Data in HR Systems

There is no lack of data in HR systems. Most ATS claim to manage millions of candidates and applications… every year! Quarterly objectives; Absence requests; Interview schedules; Progress in the various processes. Every HR transaction is now being recorded and tracked in a system that offers the ability to report on all of those pieces of information.

The data that is managed in HR systems can be broadly broken down in two categories:

  1. First, there is all of the data about the processes. This information is often inferred from the various transactions that occurred over time. For instance, the time it takes to fill a position can easily be calculated from the moment the position is marked as vacant to the time that a candidate is hired.
  2. Then, there is the data about the people: the employees, the contractors, the managers, the leaders and the candidates.
    This is the content that all of these processes aim at managing. The profile of a candidate. The performance of an employee. The potential of a manager. The trouble with data, and the benefits it provides with analytics, is that its value is as good as its quality.

Data Quality

Garbage in, Garbage out.

That sentence is used in just about all of the discussions you can hear about analytics.

If the data you have is of poor quality, all the analytics you have, and all the decisions you will make based upon them, are worthless.

If recruiters enter the hire date “when they have time”, time-to-fill metrics are meaningless.

If performance information is filled by managers who just want to tick the box, the view you have from an employee is useless.

Leading organisations who take analytics seriously have data quality initiatives that ensure they have the right data. They produce regular reports that are distributed to managers to flag inconsistencies in the data. For instance, they would flag that the candidate source is 'Agency' but no agency cost is recorded, or that the job status is closed/filled while the headcount is still live.
Some have even ’gamified’ that process by creating leaderboards which put the spotlight on individuals or teams that perform better in terms of data quality (the spotlight is also on the ones that perform the worst!). This creates even more incentives for ensuring that the data in the system is correct.
Moreover, you can automate that process, and some HR systems have embedded these data quality rules.

In the end, HR systems have been designed to manage all of these individual transactions. With the appropriate tools and processes, it is possible to build an environment where the quality of data around your processes will be quite high.

Unfortunately, it is not as easy with the data that you have about people.

People Data

The trouble with the data you have on people is that they have all been created by … people. And people are not a reliable source of information on people, be it themselves or someone else.

In his recent post “Most HR Data Is Bad Data”, Marcus Buckingham, points out (and backs it up) that “The research record reveals that neither you nor any of your peers are reliable raters of anyone. And as a result, virtually all of our people data is fatally flawed”.

That’s a pretty bleak perspective! One that doesn’t leave much hope on finally driving people and business decisions based on data.

Fortunately, there is plenty of people data outside of HR systems.

People Data is where the People are

If you were a sales manager, which system would you use to assess one of your sales executive’s performance? Your performance management solution provided by HR? Unlikely. Your Customer Relationship Management solution that is managed by the sales department? Much more likely.

Actions speak louder than words! This old adage also applies to analytics and to people data.

Your HR systems only manage HR transactions but there are plenty of other systems that are also part of your corporate IT landscape that manage transactions other than HR. These transactions are performed by the same people that you’re trying to manage in your HR systems.
And what they DO in those non-HR systems, is much more telling than what they SAY in your HR systems.

Talent Management – Connected & Interoperable

When we think about integrated Talent Management, we are seeing a system where Recruiting, Performance, Compensation, Learning, and Succession Planning, are all connected and interoperate.

This is great but this is only a part of the complete picture.

Truly integrated Talent Management, will not only connect all of your Talent Management processes, but will also ensure that you have the right data by getting it from the place where the data is (and that’s not in people’s heads).

In Conclusion

  • Data quality matters;
  • Your HR systems have plenty of data. Some about your HR processes, some about your employees;
  • The quality of the data you have on people in your HR systems might not be as high as you would like;
  • High quality HR data  exists, but you should look outside of your HR systems;
  • Integrated Talent Management is much more than just connecting your HR processes.

11 March 2015

Customer Focus

Customer FocusRecently, my HR team and I were asked to think about our own contribution to our external customers, as our business is focused on solving customer HR challenges and enabling them to be successful in the future.

As a HR professional, my focus is on our internal customers – employees, managers and the overall organisation. Initially I had trouble in deciding what customer focus actually means to me, but then  the ‘penny dropped’. As HR, we support our customers by supporting our managers and employees as much as we can in line with their expectations and needs - so I’m of course supporting them first.

As I wrote in a previous blog, our main role should be the one of a true business partner for our managers. We need to understand the business we are in and not just execute HR processes and procedures by following up what was decided. This may have sometimes been the case in the past but now it’s crucial to be flexible and adjust to individual cases and/or current business circumstances. Of course you must make sure you do not lean towards bias so that you have the ability to argue the exceptions or changes in process/procedures.  

I’m not sure how you, fellow HR professionals, proceed with a hire request, but I always discuss the profile with the hiring manager and never simply follow just the written job spec that we already have in place. My first step is to assess the skills and competencies of my existing team and what is missing. Secondly, I take into consideration any future plans that I have within my team and the difference between where we are now and what the objectives are for future employees. I then take a look at why the previous employee left the role. My role within HR is to also look at the candidates who apply and to make sure they can excel in this role and meet our customers’ demands.

When the freshly hired candidate starts their new job, we make sure that we educate them within our organisation around product, methodology and the role of the different departments in the process. We also help them to understand our customers better through a comprehensive training programme on HR domain knowledge.

However, you must make sure that you don’t forget the impact that HR has on retaining the right employees by listing and also being aware of retention risks. If it is possible, express this to your senior management and make sure that everything that can be done has been done to keep our valued and experienced employees.

Our philosophy is simple, Happy employees create happy customers.

09 March 2015

Lumesse Wins High Impact Award for Excellence in Targeted Provision of Learning

Red CarpetLumesse is proud to announce that it has been a winner in the 2014 Skillsoft EMEA Channel Awards. This is to recognise our work as a partner of Skillsoft, providing tailored packages of learning to meet client business needs.

The Lumesse award was for ‘High Impact’. According to the official announcement from Skillsoft: ‘… Lumesse had a phenomenal year and achieved 130% against their financial goal for 2014 … 2015 is looking to continue this trend considering their commitment to make our partnership a success and their current pipeline.’

Andrea Miles, Director of Content, Lumesse, said: ‘We’re really proud to have received this accolade from our valued partner, and I commend the passion and hard work the team have put in to come up with this outstanding result.’

Lumesse provides both packaged and bespoke learning content to clients. Its packaged, or off-the-shelf (OTS), learning offering is a fully managed and tailored, consultative service for clients focused on meeting their business needs with appropriate and high-quality learning resources. Partnering with leading companies such as Skillsoft, Lumesse can draw on the widest ranges of content in the industry – comprising over a million learning assets – to create tailored packages and portfolios, with the customer only having to sign one contract and work with one contact.

Find out more about the Lumesse OTS service here.

03 March 2015

Are Your Staff Wasting Your Time?

Wastebin“Being a manager would be easy if it wasn’t for my staff: They take up so much of my working hours, I don’t have time to do my job!” Did that thought ever cross your mind? Especially when we are under pressure, when stress levels go up we tend to think “I might as well do it myself, I’m the only one who knows how to do it properly anyway!”. We go back to doing things that feel secure, stuff that we know how to do well. In crisis management this is called regression. This specific self-defense mechanism is often thought of as “going back to being a child”, but it just means “going back to a safe place”.

How did you end up in management? Some deliberately look for those positions, others get there by being very good at what they do and getting promoted. Either way, when you enter a role of management you are frequently expected to be better than your staff. But is that actually a good thing, being better than the people you have working for you? Better at what? As a manager, do you have to know it all?

In parts it’s a cultural thing. Different countries and cultures look at skills and power in different ways around the globe. When I was teaching in Ethiopia, the biggest cultural difficulty to me was convincing my management students that if you wanted to make things better, sometimes you had to find out what was not working and change that. But doing so could mean telling your boss that you knew better than him or her – and that was absolutely out of the question. So no-go. “Could we please be more efficient in another way, Ms Ravnskov?” And it doesn’t have to be Africa; there are clear cultural differences in Europe just going from north to south, east to west. If you want to look at it from a cultural perspective, go look at the work of people like Geert Hofstede and the five dimensions of human behaviour in this aspect. There’s even an app for it.

Being able to admit that you don’t know everything and that someone else even knows better is a strong advantage as a manager. Yet a lot of managers struggle with letting go. You might have been the best in your field at what you did, and to keep that position you spent a lot of time keeping up your expertise. But as a manager that is no longer your job. You cannot keep track with evolution in your field, all the nitty-gritty details, in your new job. Because if you do, then you are probably not allowing for the time you need to spend with your staff! And if you always have to be the best, does that mean you cannot recruit someone who is better than you? That should make your manager wonder what the company is missing…

As a manager, how do you achieve your goals? One of the perks of being a manager is the possibility to achieve so much more through your staff, then just going solo. You are no longer the lone ranger, or even the best team player - you are in charge. You are in charge of other people and it's through them that you will achieve.

If your staff is stuck because of unresolved issues such as unclear goals, the ways to achieve them or even a structured work flow - and you are the only key, the one they have to ask all the time... Then you are stuck in your old role as a specialist, while your employee is just frustrated. And it’s actually you who is wasting their time. Every hour spent with someone under your leadership, is a chance to double the time spent on reaching your target, by improving their skills and motivation. If you spend your time coaching or even teaching, the person you are guiding should be able to perform his or her task better and more efficient, thanks to your efforts, thus helping the team to achieve your joint goals. Every time you do this, there will be more people working in the right direction, doing the right thing. And that is your job, isn’t it?

If you have done this, then there are two more things you need to do to be successful – configure the rest of your time and work with feedback. But that’s stuff for another couple of blogs.


Get our latest posts

Subscribe by e-mail:

Voices of Lumesse


Meet the Lumesse blog squad

Contact us