- Pablo Picasso
I propose a reinvention of the concept of a job role. Traditionally, a job role is described as a set of specific tasks, duties, and responsibilities. I suggest greater value is created by replacing tasks, duties, and responsibilities with values, principles, and goals.
The problem is simple. Tasks, duties, and responsibilities are not always clearly and visibly related to value in both the economic and philosophical sense of the term.
Not only are job descriptions of limited, temporary value (leaving companies in a never ending hangover to keep them current), they don't actually help build a constructive state of mind, culture, or results. Traditional job descriptions are a footprint of trying to legally convert people into machines. I say embrace and guide rather than constrain variance.
Rather than compartmentalize accountability into uninspiring units, unleash creative capacity by enabling with values, principles, and goals.
So - throw it away. Imagine instead you are expected to come in everday and think and behave based on a set of values, principles and goals.
Writing a "corporate speak" job description serves no one well, doesn't unleash creativity, doesn't enable adaptability, and doesn't directly encourage or highlight a specific. So, get rid of them and replace them with something deeper, more relevant, and more enduring - an impact mission.
E.g.
Value = Focus on the user/client/customer and all else will follow. (Customer experience)
Principle = Be where you need to be to achieve the results you need to (Autonomy)
Goal = Increase our Net Promoter Score by 5%
- Let people know the target, in percise terms without all the gunk of "how to" then get out of the way and let people flourish
2. Unleash imagination
- Give people an invitation to dream. Here is your value to aspire to, these are principles to live by, this is your target. Then, facilitate their success by providing resources, removing obstacles etc. Fundamentally, the employee is now feeling a sense of purpose and is driven because an intrinsic interest in the problem.
3. Encourage adaptability
- By providing the contextual constraints rather than all the detail, you allow individuals the authority to be adaptive by filling in and creating the rest of context for themselves.
4. Encourage proactivity
- No one is limited to thinking about the present or certain projects only. The full span of values will reinforce what is desired but the field of opportunity is unfettered allowing for communities of passion to emerge.
5. Increase fit
- Anyone who can't handle ambiguity will be terrified of this. They will run from you (probably). However, for the types who want to be part of something larger than themselves without all the trappings of bureacracy it might be the holy grail of opportunity.
6. Set the cultural tone
- Emotional drivers are an important part of the human experience of work. It is the soul of the org structure. Building a boundaryless culture enables a boundaryless structure which is likely to resist and minimize bureacratization and "controlism".
7. Transparency follows
- If my work can change regularly in service of a handful of values, then I need access to pertinent information (e.g., financial performance) and systems (e.g., purchasing). This means everyone can see everything. All data is transparent.
8. Personal performance accountability follows
- When my neighbours know my value (e.g., compensation and what I contribute), I'm either doing a great job, on my way to doing a great job, or I'm not. It reduces the opportunity for "presenteeism" or any other version of a lack of results.
9. Values become the common language
- It removes from values from being a vague reference to a vision statement to something which is lived and experienced daily.
10. It facilitates steward leadership vs. C&C
- If your Impact Mission is achieved through figuring out values, principles, and goals then it is resistant to micromanagement and "controlism". If you are freed to accomplish your mission and facilitated to succeed, you probably won't. Meaning, fault is more traceable to leadership roles/titles if that's where the issue truly is.
1. Identify your values, or your desired values. Define what they mean. What should your people aspire to imbue into their work?
2. Identify guiding principles. How are you unleashing your people?
3. Identify goals. What targets need to be hit along the way of living the values?
B - Prototype
1. Minimize risk by piloting in a given area. Try to "get the system in the room" and begin to map out what living by a set of values and principles would mean across the existing management systems, processes, and structures. Ask questions like "In order to achieve value x, what change would be required?"
2. Give the greenlight for a sector or team to engage in these changes. Document the journey.
3. Track results. Start with measuring change. How many things changed? Which things? How did people feel afterward? At the beginning look at "input measures". Number of changes, number of processes, steps, process, structures modified, cash used, etc. Over time, change to "output measures" (e.g., engagement, time-to-market, etc)
C - Refine and increase scope
1. Do the same thing, again, and again, and again. Each time, add another group of individuals.
2. Hold yourself accountable to your values. Measure inputs and outputs. You will discover what is sustainable and what is not.
I'd like to follow how this hack unravels. I'm starting a new company, and establishing this sort of foundation culture would definitely allow us to grow faster and would fit with what we believe our company stands for.
Open. Transparent. Employee led business.
- Log in to post comments
Yes to "Imagine instead you are expected to come in everyday and think and behave based on a set of values, principles and goals." I think that both startups/young companies and the best companies adopt this philosophy. It's why hearing news/politicians discussing "jobs" ultimately is bothersome. What's a "job"?
There is stuff that needs doing that fits in line with the mission, goals, and objectives. Great people need to get it done.
Organizations characterized by hiring leaders typically cannot fit their people into tight job descriptions because leaders naturally look beyond, to integrate and move forward.
- Log in to post comments
Sean, I think you are raising important issues about how work is structured and delivered. I like goal led activity, it provides the flexibility to change course without losing sight of the 'end game'. I do think that for some types of work tasks are important, nevertheless I agree that even people who have tasks to complete should be focused more on the value, principles and goals.
Perhaps it's worth thinking about different work-styles that are both needed by and organisation to support it's values and goals and those provided by people. Then, it's easier for people to engage and deliver value. Work-styles might include things like: transactional or routine work or experts to deliver complex programmes. Also worth thinking about multi-role activities or even 'personally shaped' roles developed by individuals explaining what they are really good at.
My sense is that peoples values and principles should be assessed very early, (entry to the team or company) and that more care needs to be taken to evaluate them than currently. And, then constantly re-assessed 360.
An analogy: In rugby the end game is clear - score, more than the opposition. The team plays with respect for each other, the opposition and the officials. They believe they can win but not at all costs. Each player has a primary role, but also plays a significant part supporting team mates. All players can experiment and creativity is encouraged. So, while they all have a clear understanding of the values, principles and goals, they are also acutely aware or their personal responsibilities, they have multiple roles to which they bring an expert style through rigorous training. They are assessed as players with respect to the job done, but, the primary assessment is as a team: support, commitment, encouragement, leadership - a team dynamic.
It would be a shame if we lose sight of frameworks or roles that help guide the application of expertise. The trick (the job of leadership) is to make sure that is only part of a more important strategy to help people to become much more creative, responsible and connected in a team dynamic without abandoning what has to be done. This is not easy and possibly why in some cases leadership become lazy and use roles as an inadequate template for control.
Hope this makes sense and helps to move things on.
- Log in to post comments
You need to register in order to submit a comment.