Helping You Build a Leaderful Organisation®
On
Your Merit!
Gail
Broady
Adapted
from her original article, first published in
Australian
HR Monthly August 2001
The
War for Talent
It
is widely recognised that two of the real challenges of the current decade
are
Yet
despite the clearly and quickly shrinking pool of qualified people, and despite
increasing competition for good people, a surprising-and disappointing-number
of managers and small business owners seem to believe they can - and should
- be allowed to select, develop and promote in ways which seem lawful but
which may have the effect of maintaining traditional racial, age and gender
profiles in their workforce.
These
managers
- claim
to understand that it makes good business sense to open their doors to a
variety of people.
- claim
no objection to 'different others' joining the workforce, management or
leadership. are strongly opposed to affirmative action for different others
- while failing to recognise that 'familiar others have been 'affirmatively
actioned' for decades!
- argue
strongly for the use of merit criteria in selection and appraisal and
- assert
that when assessed 'on merit alone' different others 'often just don't
measure up'.
While
I wholeheartedly agree that the principle of merit should be applied consistently
- and intelligently - in selection and appraisal, I question - and challenge
its blind application. And by blind application I mean the application
of the merit principle without thorough, honest and insightful job analysis.
Our
Application of the Merit Principle May Be Flawed
I
believe that there is frequently a fundamental flaw in the application of
the merit principle to the selection or appraisal of different others. I also
believe that, where this is overlooked (even perhaps endorsed?) the 'blind'
application of merit significantly Ð and increasingly-compromises ability
to attract and retain good people.
So
what is the flaw?
What
some managers fail - or perhaps refuse - to recognise, is that a different
other brought into a position traditionally held by a 'familiar other' has,
in
fact, a different and additional job to any other person filling that position.
The
Different Other has a Different - EXTRA - Job!
The
'different other' coming into a role traditionally held by familiar others
is actually being employed as a change agent Ð a person charged with bringing
about change - as well as holding down the particular position.
In
such circumstances the task of the different other is to change entrenched
aspects of organisational culture and practice Ð culture and practice that
existing members of the organisation may feel strongly about.
Additionally,
they will be called on again and again to defend, challenge and educate fellow
workers about difference, prejudice, exclusion and inclusion, and legislation
regarding equal employment opportunity, harassment and discrimination.
Their
extra duties must be acknowledged explicitly - and championed - if they are
to have any reasonable chance of success, and if the organisation is to have
any hope of being able to tap the shrinking but increasingly diverse pool
of qualified and skilled people.
Different
Others May Work in a Different - and Hostile - Workplace!
Another
thing anti-affirmative action managers conveniently overlook is the fact that
different others inhabit a very different and usually hostile workplace to
familiar others.
They
are excluded from power networks, social support networks, and informal decision-making
networks. Co-operation and support are often withheld covertly, and some people
actively work against them. They face prejudice and discrimination every day,
before and during work, in addition to every other daily challenge at work.
They
face competing demands for their attention and energy. In every meeting and
interaction they have to decide whether to confront and challenge, 'just let
it slide', report or educate-and do their job as quickly and as well as everyone
else who doesn't face these demands because they're 'familiar'.
They
encounter different levels of support from leadership and management. Some
managers are only too aware of difference but lack the sensitivity, understanding
or skill to manage across cultural and other boundaries. Worse still, some
managers are prejudiced and in a position to exercise that prejudice in covert
and corrosive ways.
Throwing
different others into such dangerous waters while proclaiming that they have
the same job and the same opportunities and therefore should be measured against
the same criteria is a very cruel joke and has nothing to do with
merit.
So
what can we do?
If
managers seriously want to apply the merit principle to different others they
need to be clear about the fact that they are employing them in a dual role,
and make this plain to others.
Before
advertising a position to which different others are encouraged to apply,
they should conduct a truthful and probing analysis of the position they advertise
positions and then advertise the position honestly making it clear that they
seek a different other to fill a change agent role while carrying out a specific
job. Difference should be a desirable criterion for selection
(NB Appropriate and specific advice and exemption should be sought prior to
doing so, from the relevant State or National EO authority).
Written
job descriptions should formally and explicitly recognise the change agency
role that the recruit will be taking on, and the worker's responsibilities
should be adjusted so they work one job, not two.
Their
team leaders, supervisors and manager should be required to undertake relevant
awareness, sensitivity and management training. Their performance evaluations
should consider how effectively they practice inclusive management and how
well they integrate and develop different others into their work areas.
Only
once they have done all this can managers and leaders claim to have applied
the merit principle. More importantly, they will develop their culture - and
reputation - to be able to attract and keep the good people they need to retain
the edge in an increasingly competitive labour market and global business
environment.
The
author wishes to acknowledge Sally Jetson of Sally
Jetson & Associates for contributing to the development of these ideas.
Gail can be contacted at gail@corporatesoul.com.au.
NOTICE
This article is published in the interests of provoking thought and discussion
about our processes of selection and appraisal of 'different others'. The
ideas and opinions expressed here do not constitute advice except of the most
general kind.
Specific issues relating to the way you select and appraise staff should
be discussed with qualified personnel and advisors before action.
You
are the
person
to read this article!
Remember to exercise judgment and discretion in choosing whether, when and
how to use any of these concepts and suggestions to inform your consideration
of issues.
Nothing in this article constitutes advice for specific matters or issues you may be considering - so please ensure that you source appropriate, professional advice on specific matters you confront.
COPYRIGHT NOTICE REGARDING OUR ON LINE ARTICLES
©
2002 The Corporate Soul P/L
You may print off ONE
COPY for your personal use.
Permission Required for Further Distribution
Please email gail@corporatesoul.com.au to discuss distribution or other uses