Saturday, November 30, 2013

Drinking the Kool Aid

Can you state your company’s values? How about it’s mission?
***
Did your answer surprise you?
***
How does that make you feel as an employee?
***

I started playing with this question myself this quarter as I witnessed three very distinct cultures around this difference, and decided to share a few thoughts.

Organization A – very prominent, clearly articulated corporate values. They are printed on the building walls, security badges, and are able to be recited verbatim by every employee (at least that I met). This is pretty phenomenal considering it is a multinational company with thousands of employees. Vision, mission and values are defined from the highest executive level and have remained consistent for many years, even through mergers and rebranding of the company.

Organization B – 50 year history with stated values, but each employee speaks of them differently. The essence is there, and is carried out in practice differently by the individual employees. The vision and mission have changed recently without much overall change or acknowledgement from the employees. They are mostly behind the idea of the vision and value verses the actual words set by the board.

Organization C – newer organization with a highly co-creation focused approach to setting direction and metrics for success. A newly revised mission was created from the Board level, and others engaged felt a lack of engagement that led to mistrust and challenge to the direction of the organization.

One central theme of these is that all 3 organization HAVE a mission statement (and values) that are clearly articulated. The source, history and embodiment of them is all different, but does that matter? This raised the question of how important IS a mission statement. I stumbled across an interesting perspective on the formality of a mission statement on an HBR blog: http://blogs.hbr.org/2011/01/do-you-have-a-mission-statemen/ that looks at the value of a mission statement or being on a mission.

With regards to values, the interesting part of this comparison for me is where the values are defined. Are they better suited to come from the leaders of an organization (like A and B) or should they be co-created as the participates/employees (as C seems to want)?

To answer this, lets step back and reexamine what corporate values are intended to do. Core values are what support the vision, shape the culture and reflect what the organization values.  They are the essence of the company’s identity – the principles, beliefs or philosophy of values. Many companies focus mostly on the technical competencies but often forget what are the underlying competencies that make their companies run smoothly — core values. Establishing strong core values provides both internal and external advantages such as:
  • ·      Core values help in the decision-making processes. For example, if one of your core values is to stand behind the quality of your products, any products not reaching the satisfactory standard are automatically eliminated.

  • ·      Core values educate clients and potential customers about what the company is about and clarify the identity of the company. In this increasingly competitive marketplace, having a set of specific core values that clearly articulate to the public can be a competitive advantage.

  • ·      Core values are becoming primary recruiting and retention tools. With the ease of researching companies, job seekers consider the identities of the companies they are applying for and weighing whether or not these companies hold the values that they as individuals consider important.


When looking at these three bullets and reflecting on my personal experience (note: and mental model(s) that lead my personal preferences to favor order and rules) I come to the conclusion that defining mission and values is the responsibility of the leadership of a company, and it is also their responsibility to communicate those decisions to all participants and employees. Lack of communication leads to detachment, resentment, and could lead to disintegration of an organization if people are misaligned in their purpose or direction for doing work.

So I ask, what is your option of how important that EVERY employee or participant (or client/customer for that matter?) can state verbatim the values and mission, or is it enough to have a rough idea and allow individual interpretation? Each of these states have implications for effort required by leadership, and can influence the organization’s culture to be viewed as overbearing or allowing for individual expression. They require different levels of leadership engagement, and possibly higher or lower expenditure of overhead to achieve message adoption. Also, what is the implication for an employee or individual that does not fit these values or mission? Is it their role to move on or speak up to change it?

I would love to hear your thoughts and experiences.

Thursday, November 7, 2013

Stakeholder Engagement Primer 2: Engagement Planning

Key Elements of Stakeholder Engagement Plan Development

1. Intent
As introduced in my previous post, this series is an overview of high level best practices for successful stakeholder engagement.

Successful stakeholder engagement planning combines two phases: groundwork and execution. This guidance provides an overview of this second phase: key elements of a stakeholder engagement plan.  This plan should be used to engage with stakeholders identified in pre-engagement preparation, and should mirror the landscape that you are trying to engage with.  

2. Stakeholder Engagement Plan Development
As every engagement is unique, each should have a customized stakeholder engagement plan. The elements below outline the elements that you should consider in preparing an actionable plan. All elements should be addressed (or thought about and set aside if they are not relevant) prior to any stakeholder engagement to ensure a smooth process and desirable outcome for all parties. Poor planning can derail progress and so every effort should be made to develop a comprehensive plan. The stakeholder engagement plan will outline all relevant aspects of the stakeholder engagement process, giving you the tools for a successful execution. Well designed plans should include the following elements:

1.      Engagement Plan Summary
Develop an executive summary of the new venture and anticipated scope of engagement.

2.      Purpose and Objectives
Clearly define the intent of the stakeholder engagement for the proposed project. Develop specific objectives for the engagement process. (e.g., manage community expectations, increase support from community stakeholders, or solicit feedback and perspectives). These objectives should be measureable as they will be used to document progress and success of the stakeholder engagement process.

3.      Project Description and Context
Review relevant details about the project/organization’s presence, historical involvement in the area, as well as intent of the stakeholder engagement as it relates to the project, issue or business.

4.      Key Issues and Challenges
Provide details of known challenges and other background data that may play a role in stakeholder engagement. Include relevant findings from any relevant social impact assessments (including ESIAs) as appropriate.

5.      Key Messages
Develop or leverage communications collateral (the materials to share with stakeholders) and key messages to support engagement. Adapt or develop messages to address key issues or challenges specific to the local context. Define these key messages in your plan.

6.      Stakeholder Engagement Guiding Principles
State guiding principles of your company/organization/group as they relate you your specific project. Following these principals will ensure your plan is consistent with the corporate values and reputation your organization intends to uphold throughout this process, and will serve as a reminder and clear tool for communicating your values to involved parties.

7.      Stakeholder Engagement Strategies and Methods
Identify which engagement forums are available and make the most sense for the goal of the engagement. There will likely be a mix of approaches (meetings, open houses, town halls, collaborative committees, etc.) used to reach out to different stakeholder groups within the community and throughout various phases of engagement. Identifying strategies allows for resource planning to ensure resources, skills and personnel required are available for the project execution. The following table provides guidance on appropriate strategies, although there are many more that are not included on this chart.


8.      Engagement Tracking and Communication
Identify appropriate internal and external communication channels (stakeholders, media, event sponsorship, educational material development and delivery). This includes identifying key contacts for responsible for managing communications.

9.      Stakeholder Feedback Process
Define specific channels, timing and personnel to manage stakeholder feedback.

10.   Stakeholder Engagement Resources and Funding
State how the resource and funding needs associated with plan execution will be met. It is possible that this will be covered under existing budgets.

11.   Engagement Phases and Timing
Define timelines and phases for engagement as appropriate.

3. Execute
During execution of the Stakeholder Engagement Plan, refer back to the planning guidance develop, and provide updates as changes occur or additional elements evolve.  As you execute direct engagement elements, consider the following elements and logistics when planning for your stakeholder interactions. These considerations will influence the outcome of your engagement process.

1. Authority: in house vs. third party hosting, # reps vs. # of stakeholders present
2. Formality:  dress code, marketing and display materials, tone of information presented
3. Atmosphere: impact of venue lighting, comfort and ease of access
4. Facilitation: facilitation approach for each audience (engaged, listening, interactive, professional, hands on etc)
5. Participation: dynamics of stakeholders in the room, approach to disputes, logistics affecting participants (time of meetings, location and accessibility). Communicate clear expectations for stakeholder involvement. Develop respectful rules of engagement.

4. Report
Upon completion of the Stakeholder Engagement process, report results about successes and challenges in the process to inform continuous improvement of your Stakeholder Engagement processes. Execute any community communication strategies outlined in the plan and engage with participant feedback.


5. Resources
2.      Accountability Stakeholder Engagement Standard  http://www.accountability.org/standards/aa1000ses/index.html

Wednesday, November 6, 2013

Stakeholder Engagement Primer 1: Pre Engagement Preparation

Key Elements of Stakeholder Pre-Engagement Preparation

1. Intent of Stakeholder Engagement
Stakeholder engagement activities are an integral part of sustainable development of new projects, new business ventures, and maintaining relationships with local communities. Strategies to pursue stakeholder engagement vary widely, and follow many frameworks developed by many different organizations. As I embarked on my graduate project focusing on pulling together the high level guidance and best practices, I had the idea of developing a short primer to share some of these learnings with the rest of the BGI community through my blog. I hope you find it useful as a high level summary pulling from the best resources I have identified in my work.

Every stakeholder plan and engagement process will vary according to the nature of the local community, goals for the project, and resources available to complete it. This being said, one common link for all is that a key factor in successful execution of stakeholder engagements is the groundwork and background preparation prior to actually starting.  This groundwork is critical for a successful engagement, and all best practices recommend not rushing or overlooking this important phase. This post (primer part 1) provides an overview of steps and factors to consider as you prepare for engagement, and will provide an introduction to some of the best tools that I have found to dive deeper. The identification of stakeholders and groundwork prior to actually starting a formal engagement process will ensure optimal results of the goal focused engagement itself.

2. Pre-Engagement Preparation

1.      Understanding Context
Strategies to fulfill stakeholder engagement will vary according to the nature of the project in each community. In dispersed communities, organizations typically identify key stakeholders and work with them one-on-one. When operations of impact or the project occur near concentrated populations (for example, in a city), the focus tends to be on forums that touch more people at once. Stakeholder engagement liaisons can join or create collaborative forums to connect with multiple stakeholders.​​​ Since every venture is different, is can be helpful to review case studies of engagement successes with similar situations to help plan for your approach.

2.      Defining Vision
Setting a vision clarifies the specific objectives you are trying to achieve by involving stakeholders. As you define your engagement, important considerations include: identifying the top priority(ies) in why engagement is needed, specific and granular scope of engagement, and who is responsible for engagement success.

3.      Setting Expectations
Clear definition of expectations around the level of engagement you anticipate ensures your stakeholders will understand their time commitment, role and level of interaction during the process. The following table details the various levels of engagement, and can help you appropriately determine the level targeted for your situation. Consideration should be taken to ensure appropriate resources to execute selected level are available (time, financial support, expertise, staff support). This table was created from a variety of sources, and is my interpretation of how to clearly communicate the differences of each.



4.      Stakeholder Mapping: Who should be engaged?
With a vision for engagement and expectations for level of engagement anticipated, mapping stakeholders will assist you in understanding who needs to be engaged, and to what extent in the process. Stakeholder mapping is a collaborative process from multiple perspectives to determine a key list of stakeholders representing the entire stakeholder spectrum. The IFC standard referenced in the resources section provided a very clear, and detailed process for this. This is a high level summary of how mapping can be broken down into four phases:

1. Identifying: listing relevant groups, organizations, and individuals
2. Analyzing: understanding stakeholder perspectives and relevance and their key issues or concerns
3. Mapping: visualizing relationships to objectives and other stakeholders
4. Prioritizing: ranking stakeholder relevance and identifying issues

There are many tools and approaches to support stakeholder mapping. Please reference additional recommended resources at the end of this post.

5.      Next step: Engagement
With these initial considerations and background preparation considered, you will have a general understanding that will serves as a strong foundation for the stakeholder engagement process. The next step is to formalize your approach in a stakeholder engagement plan, that will allow you to track success, communicate goals and manage resources for execution. Development of this plan requires rigor similar to that of the stakeholder identification and groundwork completed above. So stay tuned for primer #2 on stakeholder engagement planning!

3. Resources
2.      Accountability Stakeholder Engagement Standard  http://www.accountability.org/standards/aa1000ses/index.html