Wednesday, 29 October 2008

Delivering on a personalised deal


Matching expectations   Continuing my explanation of the career partnership cycle...

An HCM perspective recognises that we all have different, individual engagement needs, which will, as the slide (I think from Denise Rousseau although I can't place the source) shows, go beyond the 'standard' EVP offered by an organisation.

I think this diversity of needs is only going to increase. People who see themselves as investors of their own human capital are going to be increasingly interested in what they are getting in return for their investment and how this meets their own individual needs.

Organisations are increasingly going to have to personalize their support, particularly to their most important people (eg their career partners).

Therefore, to engage career partners, organisations need to clarify each individual’s needs and then articulate these, together with the organisation’s requirements of the individual, in a tailored, personalised version of the organization’s EVP.

The performance management process can then be extended into a two-way ‘deal management' process in which delivery against the personalised EVP is the ‘parallel agenda’, on a par with the business agenda as a topic of conversation between the organisation and its career partner.

Many organisations are nervous about having this sort of conversation, fearing that it they help articulate and agree to particular engagement needs, they make themselves hostages to fortune.  That is, they may not be able to deliver on what has ben agreed and demotivate their people who would then leave.  My response would be that they are going to demotivate their people anyway.  A least if the individual EVP has been discussed, they have some chance of meeting these needs.  If it's never been articulated, there's almost no chance of doing so.


PS We'll probably touch on this topic on show 004 of Talking HR, "Engagement and Business Performance", which this week will be broadcast on Friday (31st October, at 3.00pm GMT).


Technorati Tags: ,,


  1. Oh Jon, openID on blogspot is a pain in the rear end. If I am not logged in to Wordpress, Blogspot deletes my comment.

    So my comment: I think you are reifying organizations again. Who is this organization?

    You are talking about an important point. What is the employment relationship? What is our framework for negotiating the details at the start and on an ongoing basis?

    That we are unable to discuss these questions easily suggests we have something to hide, as does obscuring the identity of interests behind the term 'organization'. And if the parties to the contract aren't clear, , well I rest my case.

    How about you and I poll members of the CIPD, IoD, members of professional/trade associations on how they understand the contemporary employment relationship and the terms that need to be discussed from both sides? I see book in it and an important platform for discussing the future profitability of organizations.

    Time for coffee too!

  2. Thanks Jo,

    I agree there's confusion about who makes the difference to engagement - I don't personally agree with Gallup that it's all about the line manager. So, who do I mean by organisation? Really still the line manager, but with HR's and business leaders' help and guidance.

    And re EVP, yes, I also agree, I think we've still got a lot to learn about this, although there's obviously some good stuff out there. I'd love to do some research on this, but we'd need sponsorship...

    Also, sorry you find commenting difficult and thanks for persevering!


Please add your comment here (email me your comments if you have trouble and I will put them up for you)