Dear Nimali

Would I be correct in thinking that the "Management" you are talking about includes the people who started the company?

Certainly they sound like a group of inexperienced, short-term oriented people. The sort who function well at a tactical level but lack both the experience and understanding needed to move up to Strategic thinking. This is a common problem within new start-ups which are starting to take off and third generation family businesses where the new generation coming through are more interested in the money than the business (in the latter case failure of the business is the most common outcome).

My solution would be to bring in some "magic" coaches. People who because of their detachment from the company and reputation/seniority within the world of business can stimulate a new perception of the problem and induce the changes in attitude among the people who are the source of the problem. This idea is usually quite easy to sell to them on the simple argument that they are "Talent Too" and also need the development to keep the company competitive.

If I can help further please contact me.

Nimali

I would suggest that if you are working for this company then it's time to look for a new position. Any management which thinks that punctuality, longevity of service and loyalty represent talent is already loosing to its competitors.

Selecting talent should not be based upon what people have done but upon what they have not yet realised they can do. To establish that assessment centres need to be used to test them thoroughly.

This company is looking for "Mini-Me" people and will never grow beyond the thinking of the current management.

Pedantic English Coach Warning!

How is this "maximum" set. Maximum means there can be no more than that number. Was "most" the word that was wanted here?

I was once taught by a very experienced and perceptive Psychologist that the thing we find most annoying or difficult to live with in others is the failing we refuse to accept in ourselves.

When ever you meet a "difficult" person in life, find what it is in yourself which makes them seem difficult and fix that. If you do you will generally find the "difficulty" goes away. When it doesn't look deeper (into yourself).

Sorry Rajan,

Your HRM is correct but HRD is Human Resource Development and "Personal" means relating to the individual - It's personnel which is the people in the company. Personnel Management is the day to day work undertaken by the HR department, hire, fire and discipline work.

Here in Europe it's common practice to not only put up contact details but actively encourage contact and questions. It encourages a "Self-sort" with fewer candidates applying who are not at least 80% suitable.

Frequent Service Breaks

These can signal many things.
1. Someone who is overestimating their ability and talking themselves into jobs they cannot do.
2. Someone who underestimating their ability and getting bored quickly with the jobs they get.
3. Someone without the ability for the job but who insists on trying none the less.
4. Someone psychologically unfit to work.
5. Someone with under developed social skills (I know one person who is brilliant at his job but has Aspergers, he needs special support but the company find his genius - literally - indispensable.) Some companies don't/won't support people like this.
6. Someone physically incapable of fulfilling that type of work.
7. An HR culture which discriminates against this person/group of people.
8. A "sellers market" to many jobs chasing too few applicants.
9. An HR environment where people are simply employed not developed.


I could go n and on and on but the one clear signal to me is bad HR practices whichever it is from the above list.

I've often been in interviews where that question was asked, I was never convinced the answer was fully honest.

As to your questions

1. Because the interviewer lacks a plan in their interview strategy and technique.

2. Some form of "Your company is so much better.

3. No, see answer 2

4."Mind your own business!"

5. I believe this question is useless (see above). Better questions are along the line of "What would make you stay with this company for life?"

Hello Dilip

Thanks you for this it is a useful place to start, however there are a few thoughts I would like to share with you.

1. An informal chat is a good way to establish if the managers in an organisation think they have a problem but I don't believe it's a good way to undertake TNA. When you only talk to managers you don't know if the manager is the problem. A much wider appraisal of perceived problems is needed before committing a company to the expense of additional training. Without this it is almost impossible to show ROI on training.
2.You do not advocate recording or taking notes during your initial meeting. What gets lost between the Lunch table and the office? There is always something which "falls through the cracks" in these situations, too frequently it proves to be something important.
3. What KPI are the staff being assessed against? Nowhere in your process or tick form do you have any reference to any KPI. If your measurement and analysis are not built on clear benchmarks how can you prove you are being consistent across an organisation? Objectivity is key in both good TNA and implementation of solutions. All else is opinion.
4. The form itself - Section B has open questions but requires closed answers. It may seem like only a minor problem which can be corrected with a simple change of design but it shapes thinking and that in turn can cause problems with the TNA and solutions derived from it. I recommend you look at http://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/index and particularly http://www.edwardtufte.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0001yB to see how the "shape" of a "document" (in this case PowerPoint) shapes the data and particularly shapes the thinking. The consequences are quite terrifying.

I hope these help.

One last thought, if you always give managers who think they have problems lunch then you will end up with some mangers will "find" they have problems when ever they fell like having a free lunch. The risk with that is not the cost of feeding them, it is that over time you will come to discount their problems - "Oh, he's feeling hungry today!" - and risk missing something important.

I did know one recruiter who would send an itmised bill for the "expenses" incurred, rent of room, electricity, salary, support costs etc. She didn't expect to get anything back, just to make a point.

It amused her that occasionally an interviewee would pay.