Benchmarks

At the end of my last blog, I gave the strong impression that I didn’t value benchmarks. And I think that I’ve always felt very wary of them, but I don’t think that I’ve ever really examined why.

Let me be clear though, my reservations aren’t about uncovering best practice, or understanding how you are perceived in the wider market. There’s always a case for seeing how other people do things, and there’s as strong a case for ensuring that you carefully apply and adapt only that which will work for you. The school for which I am a Governor has made great strides by taking just this approach. And you’d be well advised to understand what the people that you might want to work for you think of you. Undoubtedly you’ll have something to offer many of them, undoubtedly some just won’t ever consider you and just as surely, some won’t understand all that you offer. That is all valuable insight.

So I suppose it’s a different type of benchmark that raises my hackles (or as a former colleague used to memorably put it “gets up my goat”). What’s employee turnover like at our competitors? What budget do they give to training and development? How does our engagement score compare? You’ll get some numbers, but for me they’re just too abstract to do anything useful with. Unless they talk candidly about each issue, you won’t get the context behind it. You won’t understand why the numbers are what they are, you just know their values. And there’s little value in that.

And what will you do with that number? You’re going to be under or over the number, so do you redouble your efforts, or do you rest on your laurels? Are you really just salving your curiosity, or ticking a box? I take the view that you should try to constantly improve, this kind of external stimulus seems irrelevant to that ambition.

So, next time the topic comes up think: is it a bench-mark, or a box-tick?

Getting the best from research: Surveys

I’ve blogged recently about focus groups and interviews. The other most used research method of mine is surveys. And they’ve been keeping me very busy over the last few weeks. The design, the build (with no little help from Survey Monkey) and, most of all, the reporting and analysis.

The great advantage of a survey is to quickly get the opinions of as many people as possible. Unless you’re planning a schedule of pop-up surveys, this is your one chance for the maximum information. But get tempted to ask too much and your recipients switch off. Unless they’re 100% convinced that they’ll see action off the back of your survey – and who can guarantee that? – too long or too complex a survey will see them answering without due consideration, not expanding on answers, or simply abandoning.

So, what’s to do? Well the best place to start is at the end.

If you know what you really, really want to get out of the survey, then you can focus on that, and start to be brutal about what you cut. Yes, you can get still get plenty of other information out too. And some clever question and page design can improve the flow and how long the survey feels. 

And that focus will help in the analysis. Even with just a handful of questions with a few options each, there’s already a lot (tell me if the maths is too complex…) of ways you could cut that data. The other temptation is to start asking “How did female middle managers who replied on a Wednesday compare?” It’s unlikely that that’s where the big story is. If there is another big story, and your analyst is worth their salt, they’ll find it.

A couple more points:

• Free-response questions. Some of the big employee surveys include a couple, and then provide no analysis on them. Crackers. That’s where the context is. Throw in the questions, be careful about whether you require people to answer them, then get them analysed.
• Following up: Of course, you can’t interrogate people’s answer in a survey. So get their permission to follow up, to perhaps come to focus group, be interviewed or have a handful of more precise questions put to them.

Then you’ll get genuinely valuable insight, and not just a benchmark. Of which more soon…

First Year Review

I’ve been out on my own for just over a year now. I missed the precise anniversary. But then I recently managed to miss the precise 10-year anniversary of meeting Rachel, so I’ve got form here…

As I reflect on what I’ve done and learned, what tops the list is that I’ve become a far better at business than I was. That’s manifested itself in lots of ways:

·         Business development is an obvious one. I’ve got two A4 pages of my potential and current clients, when and what I last spoke to them about, stuck right in front of my face. I can’t miss it; there’s no excuse not to pick up the phone. And it’s the current clients that are really important. Without a bit of love and nudging, they quickly become ex-clients.

·         New skills is another. Often a particular project will force me to get better at some aspect of research: of the design, the analysis, the reporting. But in my down-time (and there is some…) I’m actively looking for things that I’ll need to learn to make the next project easier to deliver and give a better result.

·         New offers too. So far what I can do and add to my clients’ capabilities has synched well. But it can be added to. I have some plans - watch this space!

·         Showing my value is vital. I developed some values for myself and giving extra value to clients is central to them. It’s about things they don’t expect and offering new ideas. It’s (hopefully) not about just doing the job, but doing it well enough to give them a reason to return. It’s also important for…

·         Justifying my time. There has to be some give and take. And I’ll have preliminary discussions or draft a proposal with anyone, anytime. But once we’re signed-off and working together, I won’t be timid about scoping and then charging all my time. Then I’ll absorb a little overrun, but once we’re into a substantial new piece of work, it’s the same process.

·         Being up for it is also written into my values. I want clarity on what I’m doing, but never at the expense of actually getting on with a project.

·         And last of all getting paid. I thought this might be harder than it’s actually been. But with all the above in place, and with a willingness to engage accounts depts and to ask the questions like “Are you sure I don’t need a PO number?” – it kinda falls into place.

Now, what all of these have in common is that previously I would have told you I was too busy to do them all consistently. Now, as I continue, if I expand, or if I ever take a salary again, I’ll be far more focused on making sure I’m busy at all of the above. It’s good business.

Why Research Culture?

As I’ve been touting myself about, I get the occasional objection. And probably the most common is: “I get employer brand, I understand employee engagement but why do you bang on about researching culture too?”

I’m a big believer in the interconnectedness of all things, and I think brand, engagement and culture are all intertwined. Intertwined to such a degree that it took my first eight blog posts to pick my way through it. (Maybe I should go back on that and get it down to one…)

Now, certainly, when looking at employer brand or employee engagement, there’s really only so many types of engaging experiences that you can have with an employer – and plenty of people have produced lists of those: Achievers and David Zinger and Best Companies. So, what I’m looking for as a researcher is two things:

1.       The combination of those engaging experiences that exist at that employer.
But there’s a finite number of combinations. And if you’re looking for x things, there’s x! combinations, and if there’s y employers in the world x! << y.
Or to put it another way, your employer ain’t so unique after all. It’s not so complex and interconnected. But it is, if you look also at:
2.       Culture.
The way you do things. Your values made real. The decisions your people make. That particular way that you operate as an organisation, and bring those engaging experiences to life.
That’s where it does get different and where your employer – and the experience you promise your employees and candidates - becomes truly, actually unique.
I’m not going to pretend that this is new. Every piece of employer comms that you’ve ever said “It’s good, but it’s not right for us/them” – that was a cultural judgement. But increasingly, people buy your products because of your culture. They choose hospitals or schools because of culture. Candidates and employees choose you based on culture. And that’s why good insight into the culture your employees experience, and how it can be improved, is so important.

Getting the best from research: Interviews

“I’ve always believed one-to-ones are more effective than focus groups” – so asserted a client last week. And I agreed. Their reasoning was that you can get a crowd mentality in focus groups – which can certainly be true (but then if you’re looking at workplace issues, you can get a crowd mentality there too.)
 

For me, it’s about arithmetic. If I speak to one person for just 15 minutes, I’ll get more from them than I will from any of the 12 people I speak to for 90 minutes. I’ll have the chance go deeper and explore more with them – and possibly to deviate a bit more from the interview guide.

But the chief down-side is arithmetical too. It takes a lot more time to speak to as many people. In those 90 minutes, I can talk to a maximum of 6 people one-to-one (and realistically fewer than that). It’ll create more transcripts, which will take longer to administrate, to analyse and to report. 

There are the benefits of being able to get more quickly and further into people’s heads. That can really help to understand what may initially seem like and alien organisation. And people may be willing to be even more open one-to-one. And, of course, you only have one person to manage. That’s, usually, manageable.

But there are downsides too. To some extent your interviewee may be devious, truculent and unreliable. They may have their own agenda and - particularly if they’re more senior – may be rather good at bringing you round to their opinion. You need to guard against this. Or they might not really want to take part and - taking your call between meetings - there’s only you to jolly them along.

And of course, there’s no-one but you to challenge them or introduce new ways of thinking - and it may not be appropriate for you to involve yourself like that. You can give them a good experience and make them feel valued, but you’re the only person that will learn anything new from the session. Sometimes focus groups can gain their own internal momentum, which can be very powerful.

So, you need to make sure you’ve got the best use of budget and time. Don’t put your eggs in one type of research – and I can help you strike the right balance.