Thursday 17 November 2011

With Demos on social mobility

 

   This blog tends to deal with organisational social collaboration, and within this agenda, its main focus is often on social technologies.  That’s not actually my intent –I do want to focus more broadly on other aspects of being social in organisations eg social responsibility outside these organisations, as I do believe these issues all inter-relate, or at least require a similar perspective. 

Well yesterday morning I attended a roundtable on social mobility with political think tank, Demos.  With a few HRDs, journalists, researchers and parliamentary special advisors there, we had what I thought was a good discussion about this issue, a couple of points from which I summarise below:

  • The concern is over relative social mobility (ensuring the low-skilled / paid can progress upwards – as well as the high skilled / paid downwards) rather than absolute mobility (increasing the standards of living for everyone).  [And people talk about HR-speak!  Unless I’m missing something, I interpret this as concern for social mobility over what you get at the bottom of society if there isn’t any mobility.]
  • The government is struggling with challenges relating the open vs the big society (from an open society perspective, the big society’s focus on informal social networks is one of the main problems in society).
  • Some organisations invest in supporting social mobility (apprentice programmes, paid interns, work experience programmes etc) for philanthropic reasons, some because they think there is a business case – even if it sounds to everyone else as if they’re just doing it because they think it’s the right thing to do.  Most don’t do very much at all.
  • Individuals with ‘low social mobility’ ie crap jobs need to raise their aspirations – neither the government nor employing organisations can do this for them.

 

I didn’t get a chance to add to the debate yesterday, but the points I would have made are:

  • There isn’t a solid enough business case to invest in social mobility at the moment, particularly when many of them are just trying to stay in business.  I agree that talent management professionals should have a longer-term focus but I don’t think this is the right time to ask.
  • Having said that, there are some signs that focus in areas like social responsibility in increasing, and the government should obviously push the door when there’s an opportunity of it opening.  Organisations can sign up for the government’s social mobility contact here.  The most impactful thing I think organisations could do however, would be to start giving better feedback to job seekers, particularly those who have just left school or university, or are from disadvantaged backgrounds etc.
  • But what’s really needed, I think, is for organisations to change the way they work, and be smarter in what they do - and doing this, might well provide a business case. One thing that would help would be switch in focus from always recruiting the best people to recruiting the most cost effective, eg someone from a lower status university who might not be quite as good (though there did seem to be fairly broad support at the roundtable is that what differentiates the high status Russell Group universities from the rest is the attendance of confident if incapable ‘Dim Tim’s).  But because there’s less competition for theses less attractive individuals they can be picked up without paying anything like so much (a bit like John Boudreau’s arguments for focusing on pivotal talent management perhaps).
  • As another example, one of the speakers talked about PwC moving from recruiting graduates to school leavers.  Well I did this 15 years ago at Ernst & Young.  But the reason that we developed our Accounting Technician stream wasn’t about a philanthropic concern or even a business case for social mobility, it was because we’d redesigned the organisation and realised that not everything done by an auditor needed a chartered accountancy qualification.  So when Demos ask ‘how cna the government up-skill HR professionals to implement more effective social mobility strategies in the workplace’, I have to say 1, that they can’t, and 2, that it’s the wrong question anyway.  HR, and other business leaders, just need to be smarter at building their organisations differently (ie better).  If they did this, then work wouldn’t be so hour glass (or even squeezed toothpaste tube shaped.
  • I’d also like to see organisations loosing some of their focus on individual talent management and putting a bit more effort into building collaborative organisations (ah, back to that again!).  I think social mobility, and just generally better performance, would be a natural consequence of this sort of shift as well. 

 

Picture credit: accent on eclectic

 

  • Consulting - Research - Speaking - Training - Writing
  • Strategy - Team development - Web 2.0 - Change
  • Contact me to create more value for your business
  • jon [dot] ingham [at] social [dash] advantage [dot] com

.

4 comments:

  1. I've had a comment on this post on another post over at Strategic HCM: http://strategic-hcm.blogspot.com/2011/11/my-favourite-post-from-cipd11-was.html.

    In response to this I want to provide a bit more context about the meeting, which I should have added before (except that if I had the post would never have gone out at all).

    One of the main themes of the session was whether social immobility is a market failure or a social failure. If it's the first - if there's a business case, then government largely just needs to get out of the way. If it's the second, if there isn't a real business case, meaning that it's a social failure, then the government needs to do something about this.

    My reading of the group was that most people seemed to think there was a social failure ie that the market is largely doing what it should - meaning what is logical for it do to - and that the issue is social class (eg that 'high social mobility' parents have done well out of the system and they want their children - even the dim Tims - to do well as well. So there's no incentive for the people who run the system to change.

    There was less agreement on whether, under the current social system, there's a business case, but given chatham house rules I can't really go into this. But from my personal perspective, based upon what we discussed in the rountable, I didn't think there is. This doesn't mean that I don't think organisations shouldn't invest in social mobility - I think they should. And if I ran an organisation I definitely would. It's just that under the current socially broken system, and using the not very smart organisation models that most businesses have, I can see why organisations don't feel investing in social mobility is something they can do.

    ReplyDelete
  2. back again jon! "using the not very smart organisation models that most businesses have, I can see why organisations don't feel investing in social mobility is something they can do."

    this is the perfect opportunity for leaders to shake up the board, re-evaluate their values, think how to connect to their people more and the communities they serve.

    organisations are ripe to change, it just takes one brave leader to have the courage to reach out to their people (employees) and ask them how they want to re-shape their company culture. in some organisations, I imagine the board would get a massive wake-up call.

    i recently sat next to an executive leader of a multinational organisation. she told me that she'd just come back from a recent visit in India where she'd taken 25 of their high potentials to meet street kids and a female refuge. these experiences are life changing and employees come back feeling more connected to their employer than ever.

    anyway, i could go on, but even small businesses can do their bit and provide all sorts of mentoring opportunities. yes there is upfront costs of allowing employees time off to volunteer but let's think long-term, not short-term. the big issue is that leaders have to be authentic and believe in what they do...you will be able to measure employee engagement, loyalty, retention, sickness absence, increase in productivity, because those organisations who are already or turning themselves into forces for good, can prove it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Jon, Natalie - I can see both sides of this argument and I think you are both saying the same thing to be honest. I think Jon's comment:

    I’d also like to see organisations loosing some of their focus on individual talent management and putting a bit more effort into building collaborative organisations (ah, back to that again!). I think social mobility, and just generally better performance, would be a natural consequence of this sort of shift as well.

    Is spot on. I also think that whilst its applaudable that the executive you mention Natalie took 25 of their high potentials to india. Why high potentials? I think the shake up that you desire has to cut at the core of the bollox organisations peddle about talent. Why didnt she take 25 random people or even those that might have been on the "not trying hard enough list".

    The hierarchical organisation reflects a hierarchical society. If we want to encourage social mobility, we have to move away from the existing model of organisations.

    Interesting debate. The round table sounded good although i fear for demos if they are asking questions like:

    ‘how can the government up-skill HR professionals to implement more effective social mobility strategies in the workplace’

    I mean, please.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks Gareth, I appreciate the comment and the support for my perspective n this matter. I'm not how far you, me and Natalie are agreeing on this, but I think we probably all agree that it's a pretty awful situation to be in. One of the things someone said at the Demos meeting was that this was a useful report because it wasn 't all about the government doing something. But I think my conclusion was the government probably does need to intervene before we're going to see much response from business. But I do agree with you Natalie that efforts by individual companies should be aplauded.

    ReplyDelete

Please add your comment here (email me your comments if you have trouble and I'll put them up for you)