View from the Hill

The Language of Leadership

The practical challenges of leadership in times of change came to the fore at this week’s Sue Hill Breakfast.  On one side of the table we had a manager who is facing the prospect of the loss of decades of knowledge and experience during a current redundancy programme.  On the other, one who is charged with reinventing a once-thriving information service that has had no direct senior management for a significant length of time. 

The first is in the ironic position of having actively encouraged the team to develop their skills and competencies over the years with the direct objective of feeling able to move on.  The other has to reguide an independent workforce back into delivering a service in line with organisational rather than individual imperatives. 

Both must maintain morale and direction, as well as service continuity, and ensure that their teams understand and embrace the need for change.

A number of wry smiles were raised at the question of whether restructuring and severance programmes were being conducted on a truly strategic and sustainable basis, or simply on the basis of headcounts and political expediency.  Regardless of local politics, it was acknowledged that the key to successful staff leadership in times of radical change and crisis is clear, honest and frank communication.  Where staff are properly informed in a timely and truly transparent manner, the equally damaging processes of worst-case-scenario rumour mills, or heads-down-it’ll-never-happen-here can both be avoided.  Whether HR departments, with their litigation-wary circumlocutions, always support this frank and fearless approach to communication can be debated endlessly.

Do organisations learn during these processes, or does so much know-how and expertise walk out of the door that every procedure and programme has to be reinvented and revisited for each generation?  Cases in point include some professional services firms whose outsourcing programmes resemble a merry-go-round: units outsourced then brought back in house for failing to deliver either service or efficiencies. Another breakfaster reflected on the schadenfreude of finding their own redundancy resulting in no less than 5 new staff being taken on in another hemisphere.

However our fellow breakfaster were far from doom and despair.  We also heard of exciting expansion programmes in the wake of regulatory change, and a tantalising mention of innovative new hand-held apps in an unexpected sector.  As our time ran out, I returned to work from Roast energised and wanting to hear more.

- Donald

Should Information tip the scales on the balance sheet?

Our Friday breakfast discussions highlighted the importance of online content strategy being understood and supported by everyone in an organisation, in particular at CEO and board level.  Information, unlike a warehouse full of product or work in progress, is invisible and often not recognised or valued as asset.  In the current climate the easily recognised costs of organised access to information are often being cut (the information managers) thus indirectly adding to the cost of ensuring that those who need it can find and identify the appropriate information.  This becomes even more difficult in a global organisation where the cultures may differ and local management have a differing view.  Corporate memory is an eroded value asset.

Equally having a sound information or online content strategy can bring benefits that outstrip information forced into an IT infrastructure that doesn't always fit the need of the users or the organisation.  One delegate mentioned that the corporate ethos of "make search work" was somewhat at odds with several thousand users developing their own mini libraries on local servers without understanding the need for globalised sharing.  This led another delegate to make the point that in their company people only admit where their information stored is if it appears they may lose it or lose access to it.

Risk is always an issue.  Users expect the keepers to circumvent the rules put in place by IT or even to try and bypass contractual limitations. The security of information in the cloud was seen as uncertain - sanctioned by some employers and feared by others.  Social Media is still blocked in certain types of organisation and consequently people use their own personal devices more and more.  This is something that mobile and home working tends to take advantage off.  Providing accessible access to internal information but encouraging staff to provide their own space, PCs and devices cuts overheads whilst at the same time giving risk management a higher profile as organisations try and balance security, access and reputational management.

Intriguingly cultures differ within the same types of organisations and recent co-operation between public organisations has brought that into perspective.  Of three local authorities moving to shared services one has everything outsourced, directly opposite to another where everything is done in-house whilst the third has a mix of both.  Change needs driving from the top down but you often still need information people to make sense of it.

Above all the ability to make a decision (be it right or wrong) is vital as failure to make decisions invariably causes damage and can stall progress.  In a tracked programme of change, four months of 13 months was attributed to failure to make appropriate decisions.  A valuable aid going forward has been to run risk registers alongside the process thus facilitating better decision making.

Asking delegates present to outline the biggest changes they had seen in the last five years brought forth growing user expectations, outsourcing (justification and value), mobile technologies, ways of working, lack of boundaries, globalisation ideology and keeping up with the pace of technological development and concepts.  The final comment brought a wry smile from all those present; "SharePoint is not the answer!"

Sue H

Yam Jam at breakfast - more than just toast and jam

Some interesting words reverberated around the lively agenda-setting session at the breakfast table at Roast on Thursday morning for the first SHR networking breakfast of 2012.  Strategic review was swiftly followed by strategy, business objectives and restructuring; budgets, economy, offsite and time fitted nicely with volume; intranets and wikis; and last but not least governance, reliability and compliance.

 One can be confident that 12 people working in strategic information roles will have something to say.  Those present represented all the facets of information not just sectorally but also nationally and globally

 It was exciting to hear of different organisations' views and usage of the myriad of communication channels.  Not all firms are fast movers and adopters and it seems that IT still hold the reins and are hesitant to condone organisation wide of tweeting, yammer, wikis and more.  Yammer implemented firm wide but working outside of the fire-wall raised eyebrows and certainly was of great concern to IT and we were greatly amused by the idea of a Yam Jam.  The need to drive IT to manage cultural shift away from fear of sharing was high in everyone’s minds.  At least one person found it frustrating and pointed out the difficulties in not being the owners of our destiny and thus needing to take a place in the IT queue which placed CRM ahead of KM.  We needed more time to talk about wikis vs intranets vs web but I heard enough to think I could find a use for an internal team wiki.

 I confess I came straight back to work and checked out http://digbig.com/5bfnkn a great blog by Austin Hunter on how he as a non social media user was able to use Yam Jamming as a way to discuss business priorities. 

Concern about corporate memory and impact of its loss came to the fore.  (Is corporate memory becoming an eroded value asset?)  So too did the mix in old business values re new highly mobile bright social media communicators.  This works well when we can ensure diversity in attitudes to work and life balance and boundaries. It’s good when oldies can understand young folks’ need to publicise all they do, and young ones understanding oldies need for boundaries between work and personal life in return!   

We all felt strategic reviews were happening more frequently and not always with good reason.  They shouldn’t’ be driven by panic.  Some felt them hard to endure and wondered what the end game was but others had found them positive and resulting in the creation of exciting new opportunities, directions and ways of working.

Our delicious breakfast (eggs benedict, full veggie borough, boiled eggs with marmite soldiers and more) nourished us for the day and also nourished our minds.

Economy and change - I'll say it again "Economy and Change - and did I hear outsourcing?"

Breakfast at Roast Restaurant this week ended with a vox pop of the eleven replete breakfasters.  The question asked was: "In one word, what has had the biggest effect on your daily work in the last five years?"   We all thought, wrote down our word and then said it out loud:  economy, change, economy, enterprise2, change, outsourcing, change, outsourcing, transparency, market research, change!  So four for change, two each for outsourcing and economy (surely related in some bizarre spider web way) and one for the rest.  There was consensus that the speed of change was the highlight.  It will be interesting to see who has what to say on that topic next week.

 

Earlier, while delectable kippers, old-fashioned boiled eggs with marmite soldiers, lush eggs Benedict and copious quantities of coffee were consumed the conversation focussed on the many things that occupy our working (and sometimes waking) hours.  Change of course had featured then as well.  A recruitment freeze was seen as both positive and negative in that it encouraged managers to think smarter as teams got smaller.  That tied in with showing demonstrable ROI when new systems or ways of working were introduced.  Decision making surfaced both as a positive (where prompt and effective decisions were made) and as a negative where failure to make decisions is like a weight around our necks impacts on progress.  Decisions lead to change - keep change positive - give colleagues credit to understand why change is needed, keep communication lines open and include them.  There was more of course - at times intense and at times we roared with laughter.   

 

Want to know more?  Come to a Sue Hill Recruitment Networking Breakfast.  You won’t be scrambled or boiled - just the eggs will be. 

 

- Sue (Hill)

 

 

Opening Up Government

Our second guest blogger of the week is Robert Drinkwater who joined me at this week's combined CDL, GIG & NGLIS Conference "Opening Up Government: Do Information Professionals Have the Key to the Door?"  As part of our commitment to Continuing Professional Development we were delighted to give one of our temporary workers the opportunity to attend this event.

On 11th April as part of the  NGLIS / GIG / CDL conference I attended a breakout session on Maintaining Professional Skills led by Donald Lickley.  The session was aimed at Information Professionals, so as a complete newbie I wasn't sure how much I would gain from it.  My doubts were quickly allayed.  Donald took as his starting point a modern LIS problematic, lack of job security and the threat of unemployment, and went on to suggest how to proceed.  As a new starter, I felt that this was relevant stuff.

Two pictures of an LIS career were set side by side.  The first - the 'myth of yesterday' - was a picture of one single assured job for life, with hierarchical progression and internal training.  This was contrasted with a picture of LIS today, a world of uncertainty perhaps, but one in which it is at least possible to take control.  The answer to the problem of insecurity seems to lie in just this.  If we assume responsibility for our own training and development rather than abdicating, as we might be tempted to do in the secure world of yesterday, then each of us may negotiate our own way through.  Donald went over some useful strategies, such as researching emerging skills requirements, identifying future employers and colleagues, and recognising informal opportunities for learning. 

The take home message for me had two parts.  First, if the LIS career of the future is a portfolio one, where self-responsibility and adaptability are required basic attributes, then I - along with everyone else - must be prepared.  Second, such preparedness is an achievable goal.

Thank you to Sue Hill Recruitment for providing me with the opportunity to attend.

This breakout session was co-presented by Karen George who spoke about the Self-Assessment Toolkit for the Government Knowledge & Information Management (KIM) Professional Skills Framework.  Other highlights of the conference for me were Annie Mauger’s keynote speech on CILIP’s current campaigns, David Smith’s overview of the evolving landscape of the Government information profession in the light of the Comprehensive Spending Review, and Carryl Allardyce  from the Knowledge Council speaking on the "Future of Shared Services".  Carryl’s remarks on the potential for shared management structures and mutualisation provided much fuel for discussion during the breaks.  Those discussions proved very timely in view of the next day’s announcement that My Civil Service Pension (MyCSP) is to be the first major central government mutual joint venture.

Many thanks to the conference organisers for delivering such an impressive event.  And congratulations to Andrea Drewett, the winner of the bottle of Sue Hill Recruitment fizz in the raffle at the end of the day.

- Donald Lickley

Eggs Benedict & Outsourcing

Last Thursday found me at my first Roast breakfast.  A couple of familiar faces across the table, but otherwise it was quick introductions all round, then heads down for some serious note-taking.  A number of interesting themes emerged as the discussion warmed up.  Change and restructure were at the top of many people’s minds, including the emerging challenges of the Comprehensive Spending Review, and outsourcing with all its attendant consequences.  Also a recognition that, ideal models of change management aside, the higher demands of central business requirements will often override internal consultation processes.

There is an understanding that a more sophisticated version of outsourcing is now a given, with the potential for entire service units to be involved, rather than individual functions, and there is a requirement for an adjustment in the mind-set of both management and front-line staff towards this.  While some will inevitably see it as a threat, there will be new career opportunities within the context of outsourced services.  Nonetheless, where outsourcing involves the relocation of some functions away from their traditional metropolitan centres, there is a risk of a reverse brain-drain effect: it seems likely that the most skilled and influential senior posts are likely to remain close to company HQ in the South-East.  A consensus emerged that we must come to terms with outsourcing as a new business model: it is also important for employers to have trust in outsourcing organisations, but also for the outsourcers to maintain integrity with their employers.

Sharepoint reared its head again – a central theme for 2011 so far.  Is it being held up as a panacea for all infrastructural ills?  If such initiatives don’t achieve the buy-in of senior colleague, will managers have the courage to acknowledge their mistakes and walk away?  Is it in fact misconceived to allow IT to drive strategy and what should the role of information architects be within these initiatives.  The contentious quote for the morning: IT staff are basically like plumbers – they plug things in, so why are they given such power.  And another, in relation to perceived inequalities in market salaries between IT personnel and information managers – there are inequities everywhere, so we need to just get over it.

So, challenging opinions for challenging times.  I’m looking forward to the next one.

- Donald

What would you change? - a breakfast question

Asking (near the close of a lively breakfast) a group of information professionals with a strategic remit one thing they would change in their working lives garnered a level and depth of conversation that could have gone on until after lunch. (Did I see one delegate looking longingly at the lunch menu having just finished breakfast - or did I imagine that?) The question did follow one on what had been the biggest single change factor in our working lives in the last five years.

 

So what is it that this illustrious group might change? The first person was adamant that it would be the Chief Knowledge Officer within their organisation. It was their view that the CKO was a stumbling block to effective knowledge strategy or management and had no real input into board level. Ouch! (Would you mention that in an appraisal I ask myself?) It did reflect much of the earlier conversation where it is clear that unless information strategy is endorsed at board level it won't percolate down through the chain of command. I suspect that the next person who thought scrapping organograms was making the point that if we are put in too rigid a framework we stop thinking outside of the box. Lines of communication within organisations and departments followed as something that could be changed and most people at the table agreed that this could be bettered in their places of work.

A request for acceptance of social media was aimed clearly at management and IT departments; both still fear fast change or fail to see the need to move with the times. New cohorts of students and freshly employed graduates live by smart phones, Facebook, Twitter and the many other facets of communication that bypass traditional methods. If asked, they would give up their computer before their phone. To engage students and new employees is difficult enough and more so where access or use of such tools is limited or even prohibited.

Two votes for information literacy showed that outside of information and library studies education there is still little done in tertiary education to include information literacy as part of the curriculum. Google has changed the way many access information but in the work and study environment it needs to be made clear that there are other ways of gathering information and danger in taking easily found data at face value. A suggestion that perhaps information literacy should be imbued with primary school education was made and accepted with due seriousness.

A vote to remove a whole layer of internal administrators was seen as a good way to free up precious resources that could be better used achieving the aims of business.

 

I'd report on more of the preceding discussion but this was done with exquisite excellence by Lyn Robinson, senior lecturer in library and information science at City University, London on her excellent and informative blog.

 

 

Lyn is one of those rare academics who regularly puts her head above the parapet, is always ahead of the game and who shamelessly uses our breakfasts as a harvesting ground for guest lecturers for her students. She sees the value in networking outside of ones usual comfort zone and ensures that this belief is passed to her students.

 

 

If you would like an invitation to one of SHR's regular breakfast discussions please contact any of the team at SHR.

- Sue Hill

Knowledge Process Outsourcing - take a leading role

This week I am delighted to introduce a guest blogger - Emma King. Emma is a research and information manager at PricewaterhouseCoopers. She attended the SHR breakfast on 25 June where one of the hotly discussed topics was outsourcing and the potential impact on our roles. We thought it would be interesting to cover outsourcing in a bit more detail here and Emma was happy to oblige. Over to Emma...

I recently attended a session on Knowledge Process Outsourcing (KPO). It was an interesting session, mainly because the majority of the audience were outsourcing professionals who were looking to further their understanding of KPO so that they can make this recommendation in their own organisations. I therefore got a real insight into how another profession can profoundly impact the delivery of research and knowledge.

The key learning I took away from this session is that as information or knowledge professionals, we need to be on top of this trend. If KPO is going to happen in our organisations then we should ensure that we take a leading role. We have the expertise that should be utilised to get the best possible result for the business based on our knowledge of research need and delivery. It was an eye opener to see how keenly outsourcers view the potential of KPO in their ever present quest to save money (there were many bold statements made about how KPO could achieve a 50% saving over time). However, it was also heartening to hear that our outsourcing colleagues have the same concerns as information professionals in terms of attrition, quality of work, and timeliness of the research conducted.

Discussion focused on quality of the outsourcers used and the consistency of the research they produce, as well as ensuring information security and protection of client data and confidentiality for compliance purposes and brand reputational risk. I do have a full set of notes which I am happy to share with anyone who is interested.

However, to give a flavour of actual issues raised I thought I would focus on one key point. There was a great deal of discussion around whether KPO should be outsourced to the organisation's own staff at an offshore location (Captive), or using a third party supplier (Vendor). KPO requires a particular expert skill set and it is a challenge to outsource this work successfully to the right people. There is typically a lack of trust from existing staff that the outsourcer will have the skills required, in part because existing staff have often spent years developing their own skill set and see this as their value to the business. Therefore, the message needs to be conveyed that using an outsourcer will free up staff’s valuable resource-constrained time and help them. This is arguably easier when using a Captive because the outsourced resource is essentially a member of staff in the same business, just in a different location.

Emma King, Research & Information Manager, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP