Timing TO Right

by Matt Poepsel, PhD

So we’re all very familiar with the talent optimization framework. And what I want to point out today is that it’s not like we reached this optimal state, and we’re just going to stay there magically forever. Even if we could find ourselves in this optimal position, where are all of our employees have the highest possible levels of performance and experience, they’re driving all of the great business results we want and having a great time doing it.

That’s not something that’s just going to automatically stay that way. There’s so many changes that take place within our organizations, but also in the external environment, competitors are always up to no good, whatever it might be. So ultimately, we have to decide how we’re going to continuously revisit talent optimization. Now in this example, and I put it in here clearly, it’s example, it’s going to be different from organization to organization, I’ve got the four aptitudes laid out along the left. And you can see some of the timeframes along the top now, in this example, diagnose if we think about the diagnostic, which is all about trying to assess employees own interpretation of their performance and experience, as well as that of one another.

That’s something that we might want to do annually. If we’re in a very chaotic environment. Or if there’s a lot of change, we may choose to do that every six months, or maybe even more frequently with things like pulse surveys. But diagnosed in this example, if we’re talking about a large traditional experience survey, that might be something that we do once a year, in order to find out where things have kind of gone south on us. And we want to figure out how to get back on track design, I recommend doing design quarterly. The reason is because even if the team members don’t change, and the charter doesn’t change, we still want to understand team dynamics within the context of day to day work. And that can change over time for a lot of different reasons. So even if they’re in a relatively static environment, quarterly is fine, even if it’s just to pull things up and say how are things going and using some design tools and techniques as a backdrop of how the work is is unfolding.

With hire is an example like in a smaller company, maybe you’re only hiring once a month, May a midsize company. If you’re certainly hiring a lot, or if you’ve had a ton of turnover, you may use it more frequently. But let’s just say in this example, that the organization has sat down and said, You know what we’re going to be doing hiring roughly once a month to get a team together, make sure we have important job requirements in place and all the things that talent optimization tells us what to do. And then finally inspire in my opinion is the one we want to use the most often, when you think about that relationship between a leader or supervisor and their direct reports. Or if you think about peers working with one another, inspire based tools, which are all about trying to understand and celebrate one another’s differences and try to find and negotiate the best ways of working together. It you don’t have to do that in any real, it does take a lot of time.

But I think that I like to see the frequency of Inspire usage being extremely high, because there’s just so much that can benefit that can come from learning about one another and using what we learned in terms of improving our work together. This, again, is the way that we want to stay in this optimal position where all of our employees have high levels of performance and experience. And we have to make sure that we’re getting the timing right. If we find that we’ve slipped in some area, we want to go back and look are we using the tools as frequently as as the recommendation is here? Certainly tailored to our own individual organizational experience.