'Strong Leadership' or Bullying?

You may well have heard the old adage ‘people join organisations but they leave managers’. Well, at the risk of challenging an HR ‘fact’, I’m not sure it’s quite that simple. People leave for more pay, better opportunities, restructures, non-work reasons and sometimes they leave because of their managers- but I guess that’s not quite as catchy. What is beyond challenge is that your manager will have a significant impact on your enjoyment of work and probably your performance- after all, that’s their job right? We’ve all had bad managers, but I’m pretty sure most of us have also had really good managers. So I think we should give managers a bit of a break- or at least treat them a little bit differently. In my experience, middle managers are often the lynch pins of organisations. They are the link between leaders and the majority of the organisation. They have to balance competing strategic demands whilst rolling up their sleeves and getting stuck in. They have to deliver difficult messages and handle the fall-out afterwards, they also play a key role in planning and organising, motivation, employee experience and ultimately, business results. Of course, some managers are better at this than others - some focus too much on the task and others get too caught up in trying to keep everyone happy. It’s my view that this normally stems from four places: Fear of failure - this could be fear of poor results or fear of the team hating me! My response might be to try and control things too closely or lose focus on accountability in order to keep people happy Under-investment in management development - there are a range of tools and methods that managers can draw on to help manage and motivate their teams more effectively but sometimes the investment (time and a little bit of money) isn’t there at the outset when it’s needed most. Unsound selection decisions - for many, becoming a manager is the only progression route available. Being a good Account Manager doesn’t necessarily equip you to manage other Account Managers (let alone multi-disciplinary teams) A lack of self-awareness - when we’re new to the management job we sometimes don’t have a full enough understanding of our own approach and how that impacts on others If I think about the really great managers I’ve had, they’ve struck a balance between giving me autonomy and holding me accountable, inspired the team behind shared goals, been able to take different approaches when the occasion required it and been self-aware enough to acknowledge their blind-spots and mistakes. I see a lot of investment in structured development at the higher levels of organisations, such as leadership development programmes and executive coaching but not as much investment at the start of the management journey- where I think there’s a real opportunity to influence the direction that new managers and leaders could take. I can’t irrefutably prove it (although we can look at some measures and track impact), but it’s my hunch- based on experience- that a small investment of time, money and support at this stage of a manager’s career could be transformational for organisational performance. To quote another old adage 'prevention is better than cure'. I’ve been working with clients recently to develop their approach at this end of the spectrum- focusing on self-awareness, emotional intelligence, understanding your value as a manager, coaching and accountability. We’re making it really practical as well, dealing with real world situations rather than getting bogged down in theory- and we think it could have some really powerful results. If you’re interested in having a conversation on this topic and how it might apply to managers in your organisation, please get in touch via ben@sightscreenhr.co.uk

Good evening, and welcome to From the Boundary #2, a whistle-stop round up of the latest in HR and business news from Sightscreen HR. We start this round up with news from the employment tribunal that greater protection should have been afforded to an employee who was dismissed after he ‘ blew the whistle' on bad practices at the bank he worked for. Despite having legitimate complaints about his ongoing lateness and time-keeping, the judge found that the Royal Bank of Canada should have taken steps to properly investigate its employee’s disclosure relating to box-ticking on compliance issues. A nudge to employers that they must take protected disclosures seriously, whether or not they have other legitimate complaints about an employee’s conduct or performance. On to much discussed news about Hermes new ‘self-employed plus’ status for its couriers. Under their previous self-employed status, Hermes couriers were not entitled to minimum wage, annual leave, sick pay and other rights afforded to ‘workers’. Under this new ‘plus’ status Hermes is offering a fixed hourly rate and all of the aforementioned benefits but will exercise more control over the routes the couriers take. Hermes drivers will be given the option of remaining under the current arrangement or moving on to the new terms. There are varying opinions on this innovation, with Personnel Today describing it as potentially 'revolutionary' and People Management quoting experts who say that it won’t ‘ 'solve' the gig economy. Despite the mixed reaction, this is certainly a sign of innovation in a sector grappling with the tax and legal implications of operating in a way that current legislation wasn’t designed for. Hermes have worked with Trade Unions to try and get on the front foot, what remains to be seen is how the tribunal views this status if tested (although working with the Unions was a smart move on this front). Back to the tribunal and Morrisons have followed in the footsteps of Tesco and Asda to be the latest supermarket to face an equal pay claim from staff past and present. The claims hinge on the fact that male dominated roles in warehouses had greater rates of pay than ‘shop floor’ roles that were largely undertaken by women. The claims argue that the in-store roles are of equal value to the company to the work undertaken by warehouse staff. And this is where employers need to think very carefully- have you objectively evaluated roles across your organisation in a consistent and fair manner to determine the fair salary or pay rate? This is not about two people doing the same job, but two people doing different jobs of equal value getting the same pay- and this is where it can get tricky. The BBC helpfully illustrate this with their example of cleaners v binmen . This is not new legislation, it’s been around since 1984, but it could start to get costly for employers who ignore it- some estimates have put Tesco’s possible bill at £4 billion. Finally, new research has concluded that accent bias still exists and that a broad accent can be a barrier to career progression and social mobility. It’s 2019! It was a surprise to me to read this at first, but I then thought about all the times I’d heard of people having to hide their accents- from Directors moving from North to South being told they’d need to ‘soften’ their accent to progress, to teachers moving South to North changing their accent to ‘fit in’. Yet another reason for businesses to assess the evidence basis for the decisions they make and do all they can to mitigate unconscious bias – diverse teams equal business advantage . As ever, if you have any questions about any of these topics or need HR support for your organisation, please don't hesitate to get in touch using info@sightscreenhr.co.uk or by giving Ben a call on 07703063913

First up is news from Personnel Today that pay awards for 2019 are moving in a 'very positive direction' , with the median pay award in January reaching 2.8% (compared to an 2018 average of 2.5% in the private sector and 2% in the public sector). Set alongside the government’s easing of austerity measures and record levels of employment, this may raise expectations in other organisations about what is a reasonable or competitive pay increase. Sticking with pay, and news that disclosing the Gender Pay Gap has a positive impact on reducing it . This may not be particularly shocking news given the mantra ‘what gets measured gets done’ but it is the first empirical study of its kind on this topic. Findings included the news that disclosure of gender pay gaps led to an increase in the numbers of women being hired and promoted and lowered overall organisational wage bills. An interesting aside is that Denmark requires companies with more than 35 employees to disclose their pay gap. It wouldn’t be a huge surprise to see the UK’s legislative requirement lowered at some point from the current 250 employees. Perhaps a good time for smaller businesses to start planning… Moving on to the snowy and exclusive mountains of Davos , and Prince William has joined forces with Jacinda Arden to call an end to the stigma that surrounds mental health issues . Talking to global leaders at the World Economic Forum, the Prince and New Zealand’s Prime Minister said that it was time to end the ‘stiff upper lip’ approach. Organisations of all sizes need to be comfortable with supporting the mental health of their staff as the recognition of the seriousness and impact of mental health issues gains greater and greater traction. Sticking with health and the excellent news that George Alagiah has returned to present the News at Six following treatment for Bowel Cancer, which returned in 2017. He stated that it was ‘so good to be back in a newsroom’ but that he was ‘still a cancer patient so will take a while to find a work schedule that fits with ongoing treatment’. As well as being great news, this shows the importance of employers being flexible and supportive with staff returning to work from long-term illness. To finish on a different note, I’ve been seeing more and more about the importance of the circular economy. If, like me, you’re a bit unsure of what that actually is you can find more info from the Ellen MacArthur Foundation here . Essentially, it is an economic model that designs out waste and pollution, keeps materials and products in use and regenerates natural systems. This can be done by sharing, recycling, reusing, maintaining or refurbishing products. Companies operating in this way stand at just 9% of the global economy at the moment, but it’s on the rise. With the growth of more sustainable and purposeful business- and a growing social conscience, particularly in the younger generations- it is worth companies having a plan for how they can be more ‘circular’. If you, or your company, need support with the gender pay gap, reward and recognition or support for mental and physical health please get in touch at info@sightscreenhr.co.uk

Flexible working is one of those topics that has been ‘hot’ for a long time, yet the CIPD recently announced that the percentage of the UK workforce with a flexible working pattern in place hasn't increased since 2010. As a measure to tackle the stagnation in the uptake of flexible working, the Flexible Working Taskforce, Chaired by BEIS and the CIPD (and comprising members such as the Confederation of British Industry , Federation of Small Businesses and the Chartered Management Institute ), have launched a campaign to promote the use of the tag line ‘Happy to Talk Flexible Working’ in all job advertisements, at all levels. It is their hope that this will help to tackle “outdated attitudes” around flexible working. The CIPD note that members of the task force have all pledged to use this strap line when advertising vacancies and to promote the business case for flexible working. While this is a positive step, does it do enough to tackle those outdated attitudes and does it really have a wide enough understanding of the range of flexible working options available? Firstly, attitudes. I’ve been fortunate enough to work in a range of organisations over the last 15 years and it’s fair to say that the view of ‘flexible working’ can vary hugely. I’ve worked in organisations (usually public or third sector) where it was very much the norm and the option was taken up by the vast majority. However, I’ve also worked in organisations where the tools and policies exist but the culture prevents higher levels of take up. Whilst flexible working isn’t just about childcare, we know for a lot of women, the working patterns they adopt (as well as maternity leave) has a direct impact on their careers ( and the Gender Pay Gap ). How many organisations say ‘we promote flexible working’ but have no senior staff that work flexibly? This sends the message that to get on, you have to work (often more than!) full-time hours. This is heightened by the demands of the ‘always on’ economy and for many people leads back to the same old choice of life or work. A failure to consider patterns such as compressed hours (e.g. five days in four) because ‘it’ll open the floodgates’ or ‘everyone does extra hours’ also often disproportionately effects women. Again, this reinforces the message that if you want days off in the week you have to be prepared to suffer a salary reduction and the associated career impact. In order to truly make progress on flexible working, we need to move away from ‘hours worked’ and look at ‘job done’. This is trickier in certain roles and industries than others (and has links to conversations about better work , automation and use of AI) but if employees know what needs to be done (and get it done), does it matter if they start at 7am and work until 3pm? or take a break in the afternoon (to go to the gym or pick up the kids) and then continue to work in the evening? It’s about trusting the people you’ve hired to do the job you hired them for. Perhaps both employers and employees need to think less rigidly. While there are some circumstances where absolute certainty is needed for both the employee and the employer, there are a great number of other cases where working in a more agile way would raise the take up of flexible working and release all the benefits it can bring. This will probably take more than the adoption of a tag line, it must be part of an organisation’s culture. And, whilst legislation might help, it’s my hunch that the labour market, skills shortages, and innovation will be the factors that really drive this. To help organisations truly adopt flexible working, my ‘manifesto’ would look something like this: Understand the benefits that it can bring e.g. a bigger pool of talent, employee retention (which has huge  cost implications ), higher levels of focus and innovation Trust people to do their jobs (there are options available to you if they abuse that trust- but most people don’t) Think outside the box- flexible working isn’t just working ‘three days per week’ Start by assuming every job can be done flexibly until proven otherwise Role model- if it’s a genuine option with no career impact, there should be people at the top working in that way  Challenge perceptions- don’t let someone leaving at 4pm be accused of being a ‘part-timer’ Finally, like all things ‘HR’, isn’t it time flexible working got a re-brand? ‘Agile working’ is on the rise. Answers on a post-card…

Scrolling through LinkedIn the other day I saw two very different posts virtually side by side. The headline of the first was: ‘Successful people know the importance of rest & renewal’ The second read: ‘When life changes, only the relentless thrive’ I have no reason to doubt that the people posting those statements believed them, but the sentiments sounded so at odds with each other. It got me thinking about how difficult it is for organisations to decide on the ‘best’ approach for setting cultural expectations. The statements above seemed to be an example of the kind of things that an organisation's leaders and HR teams have to wrestle with all the time. Do we want an environment where people are relentlessly striving to deliver great results? or is it more important that our people know we value the importance of rest and renewal? Or can we have both? Can we strike a balance between the two? We sometimes see this balance or imbalance in sport. We know that top sports people are incredibly goal-focused, and they relentlessly drive themselves towards those goals. But we also often hear that ‘X’ is exhausted and needs a rest- England and Tottenham’s Harry Kane is the latest to be the subject of debate on this topic. It also seems all too frequent that people don’t want to admit they need a break. It’s somehow seen as a sign of weakness or failure- even though this cycle of flat out activity followed by rest and renewal is so fundamental right across the natural world that to not acknowledge it seems illogical (to quote our Vulcan friend). But it is a tricky one. Managers are under pressure themselves. Imagine saying to your bosses ‘I’m not putting our best person on this project because she needs a break’. Would that be acceptable where you work? How would your senior leaders react to that? So does the organisation have a duty to create an environment where everyone is working ‘relentlessly’ towards a shared goal, but where it’s OK to say ‘I need a break’? And how do you actually make that work? When you’re thinking about your company culture how do you balance ‘relentless drive’ and ‘rest and renewal’? What is the prevailing approach and how does that contribute to long-term, sustained success? If you want to talk about how to approach this in your organisation, or if you have any other HR consultancy, training or coaching needs, please get in touch via the website sightscreenhr.co.uk or at ben@sightscreenhr.co.uk