Poor Employee Engagement....or Poor Leadership ?

The ILM posted a good, thought provoking article in the Edge Online Magazine this week looking at the subject of maintaining employee engagement during the difficult business conditions that most employers are currently facing.


The article touches on the issue of how the term "employee engagement" can be misused within organisations, often looking to blame the employees for various ills within the business rather than actively looking to address these ills!  Low employee engagement is, more often than not, a sign of poor leadership rather than some inherent negative quality that the employees possess.




In many ways, low levels of employee engagement can be seen as a massive opportunity to do better  rather than an excuse for doing badly.  But how can we ensure that we continue to motivate our employees during these difficult business times ?  The answer is actually more straight forward than many people think.  The difficult market and business conditions actually create a perfect opportunity for us to stretch and challenge our employees (in a positive way) to find innovate and cost effective solutions to allow the organisation to continue to flourish.


It may not always be easy but give your employees the headroom and you'll be surprised how often then come up with good, workable and effective ideas....after all, we've selected good people and trained them well to do their jobs.....if we continue to communicate with them and set them challenging goals within the allowable constraints of the current business climate then we have every reason to believe that they will rise to the challenge and deliver results......and maintain high levels of motivation as a result !


<Read the ILM article here.>

The Demographics Time Bomb - Problem or Opportunity ?

I read an extremely interesting report today from Booz & Co concerning the demographics time bomb that is facing business and society looking at some of the metrics that can be used to measure where an organisation (or country) fits.  One of the metrics that they present is that of dependency (the "non working" proportion of the population that is dependent upon the "working" population).  Obviously, there is a difference between young dependents who will soon grow up an join the working population and older dependents that will continue to rely on the working population through until they pass away.  The report also identifies the strong link between dependency and the degree of "development" of the region.


From a UK and European perspective, the data presented makes a lot of sense and highlights the urgent and ongoing need to change our approach to the aging population and ensure that we continue get the best possible contribution from the older members of our society.


To quote from the report:


".....countries must redefine the notion of aging. Some governments have begun by attempting to raise the retirement age, but that measure is just a starting point. The real challenge is cultural. Countries need to raise a new generation that considers work to be a lifelong endeavor, with periods of varying intensity, rather than an activity that they perform for a preset number of years and then stop altogether at retirement. Developing this concept of work will involve the public and private sectors as well as civil society and academia. It must be introduced as early as preadolescence — embedded in the education system, and reinforced by flexible career paths that allow employees to gradually ramp down in their 60s and 70s instead of retiring."


I feel that there are two key areas that are missing from the report:


Skills Development:  As regions move into periods of "high old age dependency" then the industry in that region must be one of high revenues from relative few employees, i.e. using advanced technology and industrial concepts.  Such industry is likely to have a significantly more demanding skill set than less developed industrial regions, not only for employees entering the workforce out of "youth dependency" but also for workers who are already employed and need to "up skill" to maintain their value and contribution in the workplace.  Associated with this is a cultural change away from "a job for life" and towards "lifelong learning".


Strategic Thinking:  The report talks extensively about planning for the future and describing time scales of between 20 and 40 years.  However, countries and companies are not used to planning on these sorts of timescales.  For a politician, a long term view is thinking about what is required to get him re-elected into the next parliament...typically no more than 5 years away.  For business and industry, the relatively short term needs of the shareholder often take priority over long term reinvestment strategy and in this case, a 5 year view is often seen as sufficient.  Also impact upon this in a significant way is the position within whatever economic cycle is in place for the country or company and it's ability to pay today for the future plans...the current situation in Greece being an excellent example.


All countries (and organisations operating in therein) need to recognise where they are upon the "dependency curve" and take appropriate action to ensure that they are strategically prepared for their future (on a 5 to 25 year time frame) and this process will take time and energy.....and in my view MUST be completed with the buy in of the people affected by the changes that are being proposed !


Read the article here.  (Note that you may need to register a free account in order to see the report).

Are Business Leaders Trustworthy ?

This week, the Institute of Leadership and Management (ILM) issued their annual report on the levels of trustworthiness of organisations in the UK.  The research, which has been carried out each year for the last 3 years, shows that levels of trust in organisations has generally risen over the three year period which, given the delicate state of the economy and the obvious current lack of trust in Politicians, Bankers and News of the World Journalists, it shows that businesses are actually moving in the right direction !


One extremely interesting observation is the finding that CEO's in large public sector organisations and found to be less trustworthy than their counterparts in Private or Third Sector organisations and this probably reflects the ongoing unease over public organisational change sector cost reduction activities.


The report can be downloaded from the ILM Website.

Organisational Change leads to Employee Stress.

I came across an excellent report this week published by CIPD looking at trends in sickness absence.  The report contains some extremely interesting findings.  CIPD report that "for the first time....stress is the most common cause of long-term sickness absence for both manual and non-manual employees.  Public sector respondents identify organisational change and restructuring as the number one cause of stress at work, highlighting the impact of public sector cuts to jobs, pension benefits and pay freezes.   Job insecurity is also reported as a more common cause of work-related stress in the public sector this year."


While this may not come as any great surprise, it is interesting to see evidence of elevated stress levels caused directly from organisational change activity and, if evidence were needed, points out the importance of effective and competent management of change within organisation.


The full report can be downloaded from the CIPD Website.

Decision Time for Manufacturing Industry ?

I came across a well written report by Booz & Co this week on the crossroads at which Manufacturing Industry finds itself in the US at the current time.  I have for a long time been a strong supporter of the view that a strong economy is built on the back of a strong manufacturing sector and there are some good insights in the report as to why these links are important.


The report also looks at the subtle shift that is taking place in manufacturing sectors over the decisions making criteria that are being used to decide where new manufacturing infrastructure will be located.  Labour cost have often been cited as the reason for moving an organisations manufacturing base but there are more and more organisations that are looking to the skills of the employee base as being the key driver due to the ever increasing technicality of the manufacturing equipment being used.  Associated with this, is the location of "clusters" of similar types of operations resulting in pockets of higher skilled labour and the back up of related service and supplier industries in the area.


Another driver that is increasing energy costs that result in a shift in the balance of "delivered" costs away from the influence of employee costs and becoming mush more influenced by the distance to market.  The final driver is taxation policy and regulation within the region. 


Overall, the report makes for very interesting reading and whilst focused upon US manufacturing, there are many overlapping issues for manufacturing industry globally.


Read the report here.


You may need to sign up to be a Booz & Co subscriber but they have some good publications and it is free to do so!

BPM are working on Seven Marathons Charity Fundraising Project

Beaufort Performance Management is delighted to announce its involvement in a major Charity Fundraising Project that is taking place this Autumn.  BPM is working in partnership with First Ascent to co-ordinate a charity fund-raising project for Kevin Parke.  Kevin work's as Procurement Director for a major beverage manufacturer and the project pulls together Kevin's enjoyment of marathon running along with features of his company's Corporate and Social Responsibility commitment to a healthy lifestyle as he attempts to run 7 marathons in one week.  To make the challenge more interesting, it will take place in each of the territories in which his company operate across Europe and USA.

The event is aiming to raise funds for the UK based children's anti-bullying charity Kidscape.  Kidscape is committed to keeping children safe from abuse and is the first charity in the UK established specifically to prevent bullying and child sexual abuse.  Kidscape believes that protecting children from harm is key.

Kidscape works UK-wide to provide individuals and organisations with practical skills and resources necessary to keep children safe from harm.  The Kidscape staff equip vulnerable children with practical, non-threatening knowledge and skills in how to keep themselves safe and reduce the likelihood of future harm.

Find out more about Kidscape on their webiste.

BPM's partner in this project is First Ascent.  First Ascent develop, support and encourage ambitious leaders, teams and organisations to achieve great success, generating bespoke solutions to help these clients achieve and exceed their goals.

Find out more about First Ascent here.

The Seven Marathons Project is due to take place at the end of September.  If you want to find out more about this project you can follow progress of the planning and the actual event itself on a specific Blog Site which can be found here.  


BPM would like to wish Kevin every success in his challenge.

Conflict and Difficult Conversations.

I attending a fascinating workshop this week run by the Manchester NLP and EI Group.  The workshop was run by Natasha Goggin (www.transformconflict.co.uk) and was on how we can better manage conflict through the use of NLP & EI.  Presenting with Natasha was Jo Berry.

Jo brings an incredible insight to conflict resolution as her world was turned upside down in 1984, when the IRA bombed the 'Grand Hotel' Brighton, England, killing her father Sir Anthony Berry. Jo made a personal commitment to bring something positive from this tragedy and to understand those involved. She chose to give up blame and instead start a journey of healing.  Jo met Patrick Magee, the bomber, in 2000 and from that initial 3 hour meeting came a life long journey together speaking and demonstrating their ability to see each other's humanity, dignity and respect.

Most of us will never be faced with a conflict situation as significant as Jo was but we can all learn a lot from what allowed her "difficult conversation" to deliver a positive outcome and use this when we are faced with difficult conversations in our business or private lives.

For me, two very strong pointers came out of the workshop:

• People generally behave in the way that they do for a good reason.....To themselves.  If we are wanting to break the conflict cycle in a difficult conversation we must work to understand why the other party is thinking, acting or behaving in the way that they are.....and by this I mean the underlying reasons not the rhetoric that will likely be used to justify their comments, acts or behaviours...and this is a two way street, both parties must be prepared to entertain this.
• Very often, conflict situations arise when one or both parties feel they have no choice in what is happening.  This is frequently seen in business conflict situations where "the management" are trying to force a change through and the "the workers" feel their only option is to fight it.  If we can change the discussion to look at what we would like to achieve rather than how we are planning on achieving it, there will almost certainly be more options (and choice) open to those involved.  Once choice is available, discussions will tend to move towards a logical review of the options rather than a stalemate position of the planned action.

So how can we use this information to our advantage and ensure that we reduce the frequency and significant of difficult conversations ?  The most effective way I have observed  is to ensure that there is a third party involved....an arbitrator or facilitator who is independent from either party and ensures that the ground rules are clear and that both sides play by the rules.  

This isn't always easy !  Finding someone within a business who is truly independent from the two parties involved in a conflict is not always possible due to management reporting lines....and the same can be said about conflict in a family (parent and child) environment.  But by creating the right environment for the discussion to take place, agreeing the ground rules of respecting the position of each party and ensuring the discussions allow both parties a feeling of having a choice then we stand a reasonable chance of reaching a reasonable outcome.

Leadership Skills - Communication.

A few days back I posted an article on Getting Things Done which looked at various themes around using the power of influence in a business arena and also considering the importance for a leader of having a good balance of softer "people skills" with a harder "results drive".


Since that posting, I have been reminded of a few more important skills that a Leader should have in his tool-kit.


The first is being able to build rapport through communication.  Research has shown when communicating with others only 7% of our message is actually portrayed by the words that we use......of the rest, 13% is in the way that we say things and the remainder, a massive 80%, by our body language.  Effective leaders are able to read and use this language....either consciously or subconsciously !  NLP offers us some really good insights into the communication preferences that people have and opens up new avenues for better communication.


Along a similar line, This week's Booz & Co Strategy and Business E-Zine carries an interview with Peter Guber, the Hollywood Film Producer, Author and Entrepreneur which discusses the merits of being able to bring "narrative communication" into business management.  In terms of engaging with people, communicating facts and figures is not the be-all and end-all of selling an idea or gaining commitment.  In addition to delivering a "rational argument", the most effective leaders are also able to sell their ideas through  delivery of an "emotional argument" too.  The interview makes for an interesting read !

Getting Things Done.

The common theme of the week this week in many of the articles that I read on the web would appear to be about getting things done.  The first common theme that I noticed was two separate articles on using the power of influence to get results.  The two articles, one published by ILM and the other by Booz&Co remind us of the requirement for all managers to develop some influencing skills to get things done.  

In all modern organisational structures we do not have direct line management control over those that we need on our side in order to deliver the goals and targets for which we are responsible.  The need to influence people in other departments or business groups and often at different management levels than ourselves (sideways, upwards and downwards) is a skill that can be learned but requires regular practice.

The two articles are complimentary and cover the do's and don'ts of becoming a good influencer.  Influencing will become much easier when the people you are trying to influence believe that your course of action is the most appropriate to take......and this conclusion will best be reached if there is a healthy mutual respect between you and you shared sense of commitment, loyalty and trust.

Read the ILM Edge Online article "How To Influence" here.

Read the Booz&Co Strategy and Business article "Using Influence To Get Things Done" here.  (Note - you will need to sign up for an account if you don't already have one).

Whilst these first two articles focus on the "softer" side of influencing people to get things done, the third article, again by Booz&Co, approaches the issue from a slightly different stance.  The article features an interview with Adam Kahane, author of Power and Love: A Theory and Practice of Social Change (Berrett-Koehler, 2010) and looks at the balance that high performing leaders must strike between being "people-centric" at one extreme and "goal-centric" at the other.

To quote the article "This is a concept that business leaders need to understand, because in times of crisis (and afterward), the people of an enterprise are put under a great deal of stress. Many people in major corporations today are still wondering if they will lose their jobs. A system that follows only the impulses of compassion and solidarity (which Kahane calls love) will lose its competitiveness; a system that follows only the impulses of resolve and purposefulness (which he calls power) will sacrifice its people heedlessly and risk its capability for growth and recovery. A mix of power and love, however, becomes a stance that a leader can hold, and this stance may, in the end, be the single most important factor in enabling a leader to accomplish great things."

This third article "How to Balance Power and Love" can also be read in full from the Booz&Co Strategy and Business E-Zine.

Health and Safety - Risk Verses Hazard ?

Chris Grayling, the Employment Minister has today announced a number of measures aimed at cutting the bureaucracy of health and safety.  Announcing the changes Grayling suggested that the plans "shift the focus of health and safety activity away from businesses that do the right thing, and instead concentrate efforts on higher risk areas and on dealing with serious breaches of health and safety regulation".

The measures include a register for Health and Safety Consultants to ensure that advice given in this field is better regulated and also a reduction in the number of health and safety inspections carried out in workplaces with the remaining inspections focused upon the "high risk" workplaces.

Press reports can be found <here (Yahoo)> and <here (CIPD)>. 

The roots of these changes date back to the Lord Young report entitled Common Sense - Common Safety which was published last autumn.

Whilst I am a great fan of simplifying systems to make them more helpful to industry and cutting red tape I do have some concerns over these measures and, more specifically, their interpretation.  The key question that I have is the definition of "high risk" workplaces.  Having worked for many years in the chemical industry I am well aware that this industry deals with some fairly significant "hazards" but through tightly controlling their operations the "risk" posed to employees and the public is kept at a very low level.....however the public perception of the industry is still that it is a "high risk" industry. 

A simple search through the Health and Safety Executive's press releases shows that the vast majority of businesses that are taken to court over breaches of health and safety law or as a result of injuries or fatalities to employees are not the "high hazard" industries but normal business such as garages, engineering firms, building sites, haulage depots and the like.  The most common themes would (not unsurprisingly) appear to be working at heights, working with moving vehicles and working with unguarded machinery, issues that are present in the vast majority of UK businesses and all of which have been on the HSE's hit-list over the last few years.

So, coming back to Grayling's quote to "shift the focus of health and safety activity away from businesses that do the right thing, and instead concentrate efforts on higher risk areas and on dealing with serious breaches of health and safety regulation" I can see a major Catch 22 situation.....without inspections being carried out by the HSE, how do you know which business to target?  I hope that the answer will be a practical one and not a political one.

2011 - The Year of Engagement ?

This week my posts seem to be focusing quite heavily upon employee engagement and this is also a central theme in this weeks ILM "Edge" ENewsletter with an article entitled "Time for the Engaging Leader".  The thrust of the article is that in these difficult times it is more important than ever to have your workforce on your side.  To quote the article:

"Gaining the trust and confidence of employees means seeking their views and feedback, understanding any issues they have and seeking to address them. It’s about making open and honest dialogue the cornerstone of a stronger working relationship that will steer the organisation through uncertain times.

This is the time to build or strengthen a culture of real engagement at all levels of the organisation. There’s no doubt that this requires careful handling: leaders must seek to inspire employee confidence and commitment at a time when many uncertainties remain. But unless they realise and respond to the need for more proactive engagement, they will be leaving employee confidence to chance. And that’s too great a risk to take."  

Without doubt, this is a theme that I fully endorse.  Where organisations focus upon engaging their people I find that this release their knowledge and creativity and generates practical and workable ideas and solutions. Not only does this generate better ideas, it ensures that the solutions will have grass roots support at the point of implementation and therefore a strong commitment to make them succeed.

So, to help you succeed in 2011.....are you doing all you can to engage your people ?

Cutting Costs or Cutting Numbers ?

More good stuff from ILM this week on managing the activity of cost reduction.  This weeks Edge Online magazine has a good article on the pros and cons of cutting numbers as part of a cost reduction exercise.  The conclusion (perhaps not unsurprisingly) is to keep numbers and ensure that the workforce are fully engaged in and committed to the cost reduction exercise.

To quote the article:

• "Reducing costs through redundancies can be a false economy, according to Colin Barrow, author of Cut Costs, Not Corners. “Research suggests that it’s moderately ineffective and you end up with a demoralised workforce looking for another job,” he says."
• "It is vital for managers to communicate the business case for making cutbacks to staff. “They should also involve employees in identifying and evaluating the options,” Barrow says. He recommends that managers encourage staff to come up with effective cost-saving ideas that can be implemented."
• "Once the cost-saving areas have been identified, the next stage is implementation. This is where leadership and communication skills come to the fore, says Layman. [Alan Leaman, chief executive of the Management Consultancies Association] “It’s about respectful communications, which are absolutely key to implementation of cutting costs. It’s about getting serious buy-in and consent from employees.”

As I discussed in my post yesterday, difficult times call for strong leadership that knows how to get the best out of the workforce.  Don't alienate your workforce....utilise  them !

Conflict - Avoidance or Management ?

This week the CIPD issued their latest report on Managing Conflict in the Workplace.  (The report can be seen <here>.)

There are a number of very interesting observations in the report which shows that between 2007 (when their previous survey was completed) and 2010 most respondents are saying that there have been sharp rises in the use of disciplinary action, grievance procedures and the use of mediation measures.  The data also shows significant rise in the time taken to prepare Line Managers to handle conflict situations and time taken by HR professionals in helping to troubleshoot in conflict situations.

It is perhaps not entirely surprising that these results coincide with one of the most difficult trading periods that most companies have seen for more than a generation.  The requirement to tighten belts in many organisations has lead to reduced tolerance of poor performance (and corresponding rise in disciplinary action) and also many a hastily implemented organisational change leading to unhappy employees and a rise in grievances.

One very interesting point of note is organisations suggesting an increase of "vexatious claims", people adding on a (false) accusation of discrimination in order to strengthen their grievance or tribunal claim and there is, in fact, little to stop employees doing this and potentially large benefits to be gained if a tribunal can be convinced to find in their favour.  There are strong parallels in Lord Young's report "Common Sense - Common Safety" issued last year in which he suggested a link between the rise in "No Win - No Fee" type litigation as being a driver for more and more companies and organisations to hide behind Health and Safety red tape.

Lord Young's executive summary states "Today accident victims are given the impression that they may be entitled to handsome rewards just for making a claim regardless of any personal responsibility – adding to a real sense that we live in an increasingly litigious society."

The CIPD report also discusses arbitration as a measure to help manage workplace conflict and whilst this has a place I believe that the report focuses too heavily on retrospective measures.....things to be done AFTER a conflict has arisen.  What can companies do to AVOID conflict ?  Even in difficult times, the likelihood of conflict within an organisation becoming a significant issue can be minimised by good leadership that includes active employee communication and engagement.  I do not suggest that good leaders can turn bad news into good, but they can ensure that the impact of bad news is effectively managed such that the negative impact is controlled and minimised.

Are your managers ready for this challenge ?

The Rise of Generation C

If you have not yet heard the term “Generation C” then you need to sit up and take note.  Generation C is the term given to people who live their lives through the internet…..connected, communicating and computerized.  LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter are just the beginning!

As a rule, Generation C people were born after 1990 and by 2020, they are predicted to make up 40% of the population in the US, Europe and the BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China).  By then, they will constitute the largest single group of consumers worldwide and they will be taking a more and more significant position within the business community as employees and managers.

How will employers need to change to accommodate this increase in Generation C staff?  How will commerce be affected?

Booz & Company recently produced a very good report on the rise and rise of Generation C in their Strategy & Business online magazine.  Read it <here>.

(Note – You may need to sign up for an account…..it is worth it as they produce some very good reports!)

Interview with Edgar Schein - Org Change Guru.

I came across an article this week posted on the the Booz & Company "Strategy + Business" website which includes a very good interview with Edgar Schein, MIT’s sage of organizational culture, explaining why the quest for accountability within an organisations culture should start with interdependence.  

Read the article <here>.

Govt Review of Sickness Absence

I join the CIPD in welcoming government’s major review of sickness absence as part of its shake-up of welfare reform.  See the CIPD's comments < here>.

Good control of attendance at work is critical on many fronts, not least the burden that long term sickness absence places upon the welfare state.  Form an organisation's perspective, ensuring that people have an attitude and culture of attendance is far easier to manage than attempting to manage absence issues.  It is also far more cost effective to keep and develop current employees than it is to recruit and train up new employees who have left on medical grounds.

Corporate Manslaughter laws finally show their teeth.

A jury at Winchester Crown Court this week found Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings guilty of the Corporate Manslaughter of en employee in September 2008.  The firm denied the charges, but a police investigation found that the company had a “cavalier attitude” to health and safety.  The company has been fined £385,000 to be paid over 10 years.

The introduction of Corporate Manslaughter laws has had a long and rocky history and I am sure that this case will get supporters of the legislation and those opposed to it re-join the debate on the pros and cons of the law.  

From the perspective of protecting the health and safety of employees it has to be a good thing as company executives can now be held to account in court for the failings of their company but the law falls short of holding them individually responsible.  

Personally, I do not think a fine of any size would ever remove the feelings of remorse and accountability from an executive or senior manager who is responsible for an organisation where a fatal workplace injury has occurred.  I believe most reasonable human beings will put the protection of the health and safety of their employees ahead of making business profit.....assuming that they are aware of what is going on in their organisation.

So hopefully, it will be this feature that gives the new law it's teeth.  Managers and Executives MUST know what is going on in their organisation and understand the culture that they are leading.

Further details on the case can be found here: 

http://www.peoplemanagement.co.uk/pm/articles/2011/02/engineering-firm-first-to-be-guilty-of-corporate-manslaughter.htm?wa_src=email&wa_pub=cipd&wa_crt=news_3&wa_cmp=pmdaily_170211

Public Sector Change Management

I see that the government today announced plans to have local authorities wanting to pay their executives more than £100k will have to seek approval of the councillors. (See BBC report - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12473979)

Whilst I can understand the "populist" reasoning behind this, I am not convinced that the policy will actually help control costs in the public sector and help balance the budget deficit.  The public sector is facing immense challenges that will require very strong and committed leadership to overcome.  The changes will only be successful if the leadership can engage the workforce in the change process.  I see this new idea as not being helpful in bringing leaders and employees closer together.

Social Networking for Businesses

An interesting post on the Chemicals Northwest Blogsite today concerning the rise of "social networking" type tools in the business arena.

To quote:  "Focused internally these capabilities [social networking tools] produce great returns – 30% of companies report increased speed of access to knowledge or experts, while 20% report decreasing travel costs, increased employee satisfaction and reduced time to market for products/services.  If internal networking is powerful, the step change is to be found in combining both external and internal networking; using technology to build closer relationships with the supply chain, peers or partner organisations. Such organisations are in the top 3%, seeing greater benefits for employees, customers and partners."

These recently, use of these social networking tools has been limited outside of the "social" arena but it is clear that businesses both small and large are getting on the bandwagon and with the speed of change that we see in the IT development field, business leaders will ignore this at the peril.

Read more at:

http://www.chemicalsnorthwest.org.uk/blog/it_u2019s_time_for_the_enterprise_to_exploit_the_technology_behind_the_soci/

Who are the Best Companies for Leadership ?

Every year the Hay Group undertake a survey on who the best organisations are across the world for leadership.  The research asks employees to rank their own organisation and also indicate the organisations they admire for their approach to leadership.  The research also gives us an insight into the features that make these companies stand out as paragons of good practice.


So what defines good leadership in these companies.....the research work suggests the following are all features of good leadership:

• They encourage a good work-life balance in employees through, amongst other things, family friendly policies.
• They embrace change and use it to their advantage.
• They engage and involve their employees and have a collaborative approach to getting things done.
• They actively manage succession planning and not just for the elite high performers of 'critical' job stations.
• They celebrate diversity within the organisation and gain value from the difference of ideas and opinions that result from a broad diversity.
• They encourage people to learn from others inside and outside the organisation looking to share and utilise best practices.
• They do not work with complex organisation structures.  Everyone is expected to lead as required.

Full details of the research can be found here:  <best companies for leadership>

Easy isn't it ??? So why doesn't every organisation follow these examples ???

Welcome.

Welcome to the Beaufort Performance Management Blog....watch this space to see how it develops !