Every week, I review blogs that cover talent development to find the very best talent development posts. This week, you’ll find pointers to pieces about women in business leadership, executive search, overthinking measurement, and the links between engagement and stock price.
From Barb Arth: Women (Still Not) In Senior Leadership Roles
“Before the holiday rush, I discussed in my blog the ongoing lack of women in senior leadership roles globally, and I asked if women hold positions of leadership in your company. Your thematic responses were interesting.”
Wally’s Comment: There’s a treasure trove of information, analysis and pointers in the post by Bersin analyst Barb Arth. If we’re developing talent in this fast-moving, knowledge-based world, we need all the talent we can get.
From Bob Corlett: Mythbusters: Executive Search Edition
“For nearly a decade, I’ve been working to reinvent the executive search firm – but that’s really just my way of saying “I reject your reality and substitute my own.†By now, I thought every search firm would be innovating like mad, but a funny thing happened. Most didn’t.  Although many search firms have tinkered a bit with their pricing models, one big unexamined myth killed off the real innovation at most search firms.”
Wally’s Comment: Bob Corlett has conceived an alternative reality for executive search and made it work in his firm. This post will trigger your thinking process, even if you wind up not agreeing at all with Bob.
From Ann Bares: On Overthinking Measurement
“As we develop and put in place ever more sophisticated talent management tools and systems, featuring increasingly granular tracking systems and flashy, multi-color dashboards, do you ever wonder if we’re overthinking the measurement thing?”
Wally’s Comment: I’m a big fan of seeking the simplest possible way to get the job done. That often puts me at odds with those selling “sophisticated” systems that deliver power no mere mortal can muster. And that’s why I love posts like this one. As you read it, remember this wonderful quote from Rick Bayless: “You can sprinkle truffles on a dish and call it sophisticated, but all it really is is expensive.”
The following two posts each look at the links between engagement and company stock price and performance. These are sophisticated thinkers looking at the same issue.
From Josh Bersin: How Employee Engagement Actually Drives Stock Price
“One of the hottest issues in human resources is the need to develop high levels of employee engagement and satisfaction. We all know that organizations with happy people have lower turnover, deliver better customer service, and tend to be more innovative and responsive. But can we translate this into stock price or financial results?”
From Stephen J. Gill: Employee Engagement and the Bottom-Line
“Does employee engagement make a difference in the performance of companies? The evidence from a number of studies that correlate findings from employee surveys with financial indicators of company performance suggests that the answer is “yesâ€. And everything I know about high performing employees tells me that engagement and performance are related. But a high correlation doesn’t mean that this is true in every case. I want to know why some low-engagement companies are highly profitable and produce high shareholder return and why some high-engagement companies are not profitable and do not achieve an increase in share value. What is it about the work environment in some companies that even when employees experience what Towers Watson defines as “…a combination of effective and caring leadership, appealing development opportunities, and a feeling of empowerment that comes with the ability to control one’s work situationâ€, they are still not successful? And why is it that in other companies, where leaders are uncaring and distant, development opportunities are absent, and employees have little control over their work situations, financial success is achieved?”
