I confess I do sometimes enjoy teasing the accountancy profession for being out of touch with the real world. Some of them in turn, I am sure, think the world of HR is a soft and woolly zone of idealism where keeping people happy is more important than securing returns for shareholders. My return of this particular ping-pong ball is about their failure to recognise that it is the unmeasured intangible assets that produce value, and that profit is not the only objective of being in business, and … that the world does not conform to annual step changes where the new budget begins on 1 January or April, and the next 12 months are expected to fit into the pattern that has been planned for them.

As a new year is upon us once more with (it seems) ever-increasing speed, it is always a time to both look forward and reflect, not least on the discontinuity that life brings. What we can be sure of is that the world in December 2005 will not be the same as it is today. One of the great challenges for managers of learning is to help people and organisations ride the waves of change that roll in relentlessly and unpredictably month by month.

Our profession has both idealists and realists. There are many HR people, especially in the training professional arena, who are passionate about building organisations in which the politics of personal power is subservient to the greater good, where managers really care for the development of their people and coach them regularly; individuals both achieve personal fulfilment and deeply value all their fellow beings; knowledge is shared freely; racism, bullying, harassment and inappropriate behaviour are eliminated; and wonderful, supportive teams are built and maintained. You hear them say: ‘We have got to change the culture until …’

In a nation known for its cynicism, we definitely need people who care deeply about these things, and who stimulate and provide learning in them. On the other side, what I have called the ‘realists’ are those who believe that the nature of the human condition does not change. They might acknowledge that maverick cultures do exist for periods of time where people are truly passionate about their work, their colleagues and their customers. But their basic creed would include beliefs such as: people care most about themselves and their own interests; employees are powerless against political or shareholding masters; most managers will never be good people managers; carpe diem is the best rule of life; change is imposed constantly, often for its own sake … and so on. Their contribution to learning is to help people cope with the world around them – to be assertive, politically and self-aware, resilient to change, flexible and adaptable, and good builders of networks that might be useful.

Thousands of books are written annually supporting both of these perspectives. New laws are created daily (it seems) seeking to govern or restrain people’s behaviour, both socially and in the workplace. As ‘managers of learning’ glance ahead for the coming year, what balance should they look for in helping organisations and their people make progress?

I would be the first to say that their prime job is to support the business goals and objectives with appropriate learning, and not to impose their own values. In some organisations the ‘credo’ of principles and beliefs about people and their development is well articulated. Others have CEOs who have their own particular vision and ideas about the culture they want to create. Often, however, learning managers have little more than a vague umbrella of company values as a guide, and then they have two choices: either they can strategise how to encourage senior management to be more specific about the kind of organisation they want (helping them with a ‘visioning’ session), or they use their best judgement. The former is ideal; the latter is often the reality.

That judgement is a big responsibility. It should be based on what will make the organisation more effective through its people and the way they work together. It has to be a considered blend of the two approaches outlined above. The ‘moving to a better world’ interventions are probably going to be most successful with unit leaders who share such values – and there are always some in an organisation. Coping with the turmoil of reality, however, is for everyone to face. At the CIPD conference this year, Gary Hamel was the keynote speaker and his theme was the quest for resilience. He outlined four key challenges.

* Cognitive: the ability to understand what is changing and what the impact will be.
* Strategic: the need to continually create fresh options that allow adaptation.
* Political: the freedom to slay sacred cows and move resources where they can be most effective.
* Ideological: the foresight to move beyond simple optimisation to be opportunity-driven.¹

These challenges are for organisations – but apply to individuals too. The budget may be an annual exercise, but the continuity of change demands constant application of these skills. Building them is perhaps the top priority of all.

Reference
1. Gary Hamel and Liisa Välikangas, ‘The quest for resilience’, Harvard Business Review, September 2003, pp. 52–63. END

Andrew Mayo is a consultant, speaker, writer and facilitator in international HR management, with specialisms in people and organisation development. He can be contacted on +44 (0) 1727 843424, at andrew@mliltd.com or visit www.mliltd.com

Related News

• Security Practitioner Qualification
• Prime Minister’s lecture
• Line managers failing to support learning and development needs

Related Discussion Topics

• Need training advice Urgently
• Learning & Development Qualification
• Training Agreement

Latest News

• Skills for Life target achieved two years early
• The Institute of IT Training broadens its range of training awards
• Welcome for Equality Bill
• Inspirational single dad scoops learning and training award
• Retail sector talks shop with students