Platform Economy

Following up on a piece I posted a couple of weeks back called 'Intelligent Automation' about one of the major technology trends for 2016 that was highlighted in the  The Accenture Technology Vision 2016 report. and just like that last post, my life remains much, much less interesting than yours, I am once again spending my Sunday night doing two things: Watching NBA basketball (at least it's the All Star Game), and looking at the Accenture report.

There is some really interesting information, research, and conclusions about the most important tech trends for the coming 3 - 5 years in the report, as well as a (probably unintentional) nod to my friends over at Ultimate Software as their slogan 'People First', is literally all over the Accenture report.

Accenture identifies 5 big themes in their technology vision for organizations, and there is one other one, in addition to Trend #1,'Intelligent Automation', that I thought was pretty interesting, and notably a theme that I think is also on the rise in HR and workplace technologies. This theme or trend is called 'Platform Economy', and to get a sense of what this concept entails, here's an excerpt from the Technology Vision 2016 report:

Platform ecosystems are nothing less than the foundation for new value creation in the digital economy. Tech companies and enterprises that are born digital, such as Amazon, Google, and Alibaba, have long understood the power of digital technologies. But look a little closer. Many of these companies’ most groundbreaking innovations are not products or services; they are the platforms on which these products and services are built, and the business models that these platforms enable. Such platform-based business models fundamentally change how companies can do business.

What makes these models special? They allow companies to create entire ecosystems that do much of the work to grow the company and drive strategies. The platform has become the business model that is opening up entirely new paths to growth for companies. While tech companies and the born digital have successfully mastered platform strategies, the opportunity is now opening up to every company in every industry.

Companies with emerging platform strategies include Fiat (connected car), Kaiser Permanente (digital health), Disney (MagicBands), Caterpillar (connected machines), Schneider Electric (smart cities, buildings, and homes), Walgreens (retail pharmacy), Goldman Sachs (customer analytics), Bank of New York Mellon (financial services), McCormick/Vivanda (FlavorPrint), Houghton Mifflin Harcourt (education)—and the list goes on.

Let's take a bit of step back, or at least to the side, and think about what implications there might be for HR and workplace technologies, (more or less the topic of this blog when we are not having fun talking about diet soda and muscle cars).

Last year at the HR Technology Conference one of the technology solutions that we featured for its innovation and potential value for customers was the ADP Marketplace. With the Marketplace, ADP customers, (and there are lots of them), have access to a modern, simple, and powerful platform from which they can research, procure, implement, and provision access to dozens of complementary HR tools and systems that will work with and easily integrate with their ADP solutions. And while the ability to easily integrate supporting technologies with the organization's primary HR system of record doesn't on the surface sound all that exciting or innovative, just spend some time actually trying to make technologies from different providers work together efficiently and effectively in the real world.

The challenges in connecting disparate systems together are numerous - you might not have in-house resources capable of performing the technical work needed to create and maintain the integration, you might not be totally sure how the integration should even work, and you may find that the providers of the different systems you are trying to stitch together don't really have all that much incentive to make their products work together all that well. Solutions, make that platforms, like the ADP Marketplace are great examples in the HR/workplace technology space of what Accenture is talking about with the Platform Economy. The platforms are designed to give the customers and users with a more holistic and valuable experience, much of which will be derived from partners of the platform owner and which will, if executed well, make the platform itself more valuable.

I think Accenture is right about the Platform Economy and I think we are going to see more activity and emphasis on platforms and ecosystems in the HR tech space this year and for the next few years as well.

Have a great week! 

GUEST POST: Diet Sodas, Ranked

Editor's Note: Today, in a very special event on the Steve Boese blog, and perhaps becoming a regular Friday feature, we present very, very important guest post. 

Today's post is from none other than the former child star of TVs 'Blossom', Tim Sackett, now an HR and recruiting guru/jedi/pundit. Prior to achieving success in the world of HR and recruiting, Tim worked the county fair and carnival circuit for many years and is purported to have created numerous innovations that persist today, but sadly are not credited to Tim. Let's just say if you've ever had a spin on the Tilt-a-Whirl you probably owe Tim a thank you.

Tim has always been known to have an opinion (or three), on just about anything, and since the 'Ranked' series on the blog here has turned into such a viral sensation, Tim felt compelled to weigh in on a topic that hits very close to home for HR pros: Diet Sodas.

Enjoy! 

Diet Sodas, Ranked

by Tim Sackett

Why the hell are we ranking Diet Sodas on a HR Technology blog? Because we can! Also, if you don't know, diet soda is the life-blood of most great HR pros.  I know some of you will say coffee, but that's because you're not really an HR pro.  Diet soda is the drink of choice for true HR pros for a number of reasons:

- It doesn't give you bad breath and great HR pros actually talk to employees

- It's less expensive than Starbucks, and HR pros are underpaid

- It's crisp, clean and refreshing! (Oh wait, wasn't that a commercial)

Anyway, for those who know me, you know I have a diet soda addiction. I currently consume about eight diet sodas a day, that range in size from 12oz to the 32oz we-must-be-in-union-negotiations sized cups.  Heck, I drink to cans of Diet Dew before I even get to work in pull into work in the morning at 7:30am!

So, let's break down the Top 10 Diet Sodas of all time:

#10 - Tab

The original was the best, it caused cancer in lab rats. I had a volleyball coach in high school that drank a 12 pack of Tab a day! He never got cancer. Tab was one of the first attempts at major drink manufacturers to make and market a diet soda. It tasted like aluminum and the after taste was so strong you could still taste it an hour later, but it was so addicting!

#9 - Fresca

A grapefruit flavored diet drink. Fresca means 'fresh' in Spanish, which doesn't describe this drink at all, but I love the marketing! Fresca seems to be the perfect drink for older HR pros, who love cats and lean cuisine.  Strong after taste, but overall not an awful option when it comes to diet soda flavors.

#8 - Diet 7Up

Let's face it, no one really drinks Diet 7Up unless you have an upset stomach, or you're mixing it with whiskey.  I would actually question the sanity of an individual at work just drinking a Diet 7Up just because they wanted to. I've had a can Diet 7Up in my refrigerator going on 9 years now. Same can, no one ever wants it. It actually was one of the first diet sodas I ever tasted, that actually tasted close to the original.

#7 - Diet Barq's Root Beer

Really all Diet root beer tastes the same. Which is actually quite good if you like the taste of root beer. The problem is most people stop drinking root beer around 15 years of age, when it stops being cool to drink something with 'beer' in the name, when you can just drink beer.  All that being said, diet root beers changed the game for diet soda manufacturers because they were forced to develop diet drinks that didn't taste awful.

#6 - Diet Sprite

Unlike Diet 7Up, Diet Sprite became cool enough to drink, thanks mostly do the a marketing agreement Coke got with the NBA to market Sprite to kids.  Somehow, dumb parents around the country began to believe that "Sprite" was like a healthy alternative to Coke, because it was caffeine free. By that association, with the NBA, Diet Sprite became a clear diet soda drink of choice for professionals trying to act like they were cutting back on caffeine.

#5 - Diet Sunkist Orange

Really, put any flavor of Sunkist at this level - orange, grape, red drink, etc. Like root beer, these flavored diet sodas actually taste really good. It's like a candy treat in the middle of the day, minus all the calories. Sure you have to put up with some snickers from your co-workers for drinking a kids soda, but it doesn't matter because it tastes so good!

#4 - Diet Dr. Pepper

The first diet soda to sell itself as 'tasting' like the original. It wasn't the first, but they marketed it better than anyone else for that purpose and it got a lot of people to try it. Also, it lived up to its billing, for the most part. Diet Dr. Pepper really does taste like regular Dr. Pepper (wait, where have I heard that before?).

#3 - Diet Dr. Pepper Cherry & Diet Cherry Coke

Turns out if you add "Cherry" to any diet soda it makes it better!

#2 - Diet Coke

Okay, confession time. If we had an actual vote of HR pros and favorite diet soda, Diet Coke would win by a landslide. But, that's only the case because most HR Pros are just sheep and follow the heard!  The actual best-tasting diet cola drink is Diet Pepsi by far, but Coke adds a special chemical to their soda to make it more addictive (or at least that's what I read on Reddit). HR Pros love Diet Coke, and are very brand loyal (hat tip: Jennifer McClure).

#1 - Diet Mt. Dew

If God him or herself had to pick only one diet soda to drink the rest of their life it would be Diet Mt. Dew.  Part nectar of the gods, part crack cocaine, Diet Dew is the best drink ever made. Not best diet drink, best drink! If given the option of having an HRIS system or a Diet Mt. Dew soda fountain in my office, I would always choose Diet Dew!

Hit me in the comments - what's your favorite diet soda and why?

Steve here - solid stuff Tim. I probably would have had Diet Dr. Pepper a little higher, but that is because I have been pushing hard for them to sponsor the HR Happy Hour Show.  

And as always you can disagree with these rankings, but of course you would be wrong.

Have a great weekend!

Competing not collaborating - check this before your next leadership retreat

Put enough smart people in the room and you are sure to work out a problem, devise a solution, or otherwise come up with a bunch of great ideas to cure whatever is the crisis du jour at your organization, right?

I mean, it seems like both common sense, and is backed up by most of our personal experiences that if you have a group of intelligent, motivated, and capable folks that at least some kind of solution or direction can be agreed upon. We have all been in these kinds of sessions and meetings - probably hundreds of times. It's not really all that complicated - get the right people together, let them collaborate, and good things generally happen. And usually the 'right' people are ones with some differing yet complementary skills, have a wide range of perspectives, and most of the time, have distinct power levels, either officially or unofficially in the organization. That proverbial mix of generals, captains, and soldiers if you get my drift.

But what happens if the room is filled with only generals - or in your case, a group of leaders who are more or less peers in the organization?

Well, according to a recent study from the University of California and covered in Quartz, it could be that in these 'leaders only' sessions collaboration gives way to competition.

From the Quartz piece:

Corporate boards, the US Congress, and global gatherings like the just-wrapped World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, are all built on a simple theory of problem solving: Get enough smart and powerful people in a room and they’ll figure it out.

This may be misguided. The very traits that compel people toward leadership roles can be obstacles when it comes to collaboration. The result, according to a new study, is that high-powered individuals working in a group can be less creative and effective than a lower-wattage team.

Researchers from the Haas School of Business at the University of California, Berkeley, undertook an experiment with a group of healthcare executives on a leadership retreat. They broke them into groups, presented them with a list of fictional job candidates, and asked them to recommend one to their CEO. The discussions were recorded and evaluated by independent reviewers. 

The higher the concentration of high-ranking executives, the more a group struggled to complete the task. They competed for status, were less focused on the assignment, and tended to share less information with each other. Their collaboration skills had grown rusty with disuse.

There's more to the review in Quartz, and of course you can access the full paper here. But the big 'gotcha' from this kind of research is the reminder that just because you assemble the collective 'best and brightest' in the organization to work through some kind of tough challenge, it does not mean that you can assume everyone in the room won't have their competition and self-preservation antenna way, way up. 

And it is also interesting to note that the researchers found that while individuals power hampered the group's ability to collaborate effectively, it did not detract from any one individual's ability to reason cognitively.  Said differently, the group of leaders studied performed worse collectively that they all would have individually.

Competition at work is sometimes, maybe lots of times, a good thing. It can serve to raise the performance bar in an organization. But be careful what you wish for when you put too many powerful, competitive leaders in a room and expect them to work out the best decisions for the collective.

It's said that power corrupts. It might also be said that too much power in one room amps that power and competitive nature of these people so far that not much good will come from it.

Be careful out there.

Goal alignment sounds boring, but it can get you fired (NBA coaching edition)

My favorite sport is basketball, my favorite league is the NBA, and my favorite team is the New York Knicks.

Yesterday, my beloved Knicks relieved their head coach, Derek Fisher, of his duties about 2/3 of the way through his second season as head coach, with the Knicks currently possessing a 23-31 record, good (or bad) for 12th place in the NBA's Eastern Conference and about 5 games out of the 8th place, and the final playoff spot in the East.

There were various reasons for Knicks' team ownership and management to make the move to release Fisher, but I want to focus on one in particular that has been cited in many of the reports of Fisher's firing. It's a classic HR/Talent Management concept as well - dull sounding goal alignment - the basic, but as we will see overlooked in the Knicks' case, idea that organizational goals should be defined, communicated, and understood throughout and down the organization. Playoffs? Playoffs?

The goal in question that at least partially served as a catalyst for Fisher's demise: for the team to finish in the top 8 places in the Eastern Conference and make the NBA playoffs, one season (and a few new players) removed from last year's franchise worst 17- 65 record, and dead last finish in the East.

Here's an excerpt from one report on the firing on how management and Fisher's boss, Knick team President (and NBA coaching legend), Phil Jackson were disapponted in some recent comments from Fisher regarding the Knick's goal of reaching the playoffs this season:

More importantly, however, ESPN reports that Fisher wasn't developing as a coach quick enough for Knicks management. Some of that pressure may have been because the Knicks, for stretches, looked like a playoff team. Yet in the midst of a rough patch, Fisher, during an interview, said missing the playoffs wouldn't be a "disappointment."

"No. Disappointed in what?" Fisher said in an interview on ESPN radio. "We’re a developing team with a ton of new players. ... We have to be reasonable about who we are and where we are and accept what is and not get caught up in what we should be and allow other people to define what our success is."

Let's unpack that a little, exspecially for folks who don't follow the NBA as much as I do, (everyone).

At the start of the season the Knicks were incorporating several new players, their best player (Carmelo Anthony), was working his way back into form following an injury/surgey last year, and after only 17 wins a yar ago, probably could not have been reasonably expected to compete for a playoff berth this year. Jackson and Fisher, both veterans of the NBA, had to have known this, even if they said different things publicly.

But then a few things broke in the Knicks favor in the first half of the year. Anthony rebounded well from injury and was playing some good basketball, rookie Kristaps Porzingis was MUCH, MUCH better than anyone would have expected, and several new players made contributions to the team. The team was actually in contention for a playoff spot until their recent swoon - losing 9 of their last 10, culminating in the firing of Fisher yesterday.

So the organizational goal at the beginning of the season was probably something along the lines of 'Let's be better than last year, let's develop some new players, and let's figure out which players are not going to cut it.'

About half way in the season, due to some unexpected and better play, at least to Jackson and managment the goal shifted to 'Let's make the playoffs this season.'

But somehow Coach Fisher either didn't get the message, or, didn't buy in to the new goal as one that was reasonable, and one upon which his performance should be evaluated.

Against the first set of goals for the season, even at 23-31, Fisher's performance would have at least been 'acceptable.' The team is better than last year, rookie Porzingis has been a pleasant surprise, and (mostly) Fisher has found a way to be competitive game in and game out.

But against the revised or re-calibrated goal of making the playoffs this season? Well it seems almost certain after losing 9 of 10 that the Knicks are not going to achieve that. Fisher publicly stating that missing that goal 'would not be a disappointment' said to Knicks management that their was a disconnect between what the organization was working towards and what one of its key managers, (Fisher), had in mind. And so Fisher had to go.

It's ok for leaders to change course, set a new goal mid-stream, or ask even more from people who are performing well. But if those folks you are asking to do more and be better are not fully on board? Well then you have pretty different definitions of 'success' in the organization, and that ultimately will drive a wedge between leadership, management, and employees.

Note: I have probably watched 45 or so of the Knicks 54 games this season. I don't think they are a playoff team either.

PODCAST: #HRHappyHour 233 - Knowing Your HR Potential

HR Happy Hour 233 - Knowing Your HR Potential

Recorded Thursday February 4, 2016

Hosts: Steve Boese, Trish McFarlane

This week on the HR Happy Hour Show, Steve Boese and Trish McFarlane recorded a podcast of a rehearsal on the day before a webinar that actually happened last Friday. I know that might be a little confusing, but just think of the show as the audio track for a webinar for the Cleveland SMA called 'Know Your Potential', (slides have been loaded up to Slideshare and are embedded below), that Steve and Trish delivered last week.

The webinar (and this podcast), covered a range of topics, trends, and tips for HR, recruiting, and talent professionals - all aimed towards getting the most out of your potential for excellence in 2016.  So on the show we talk about some of the important trends for 2016, why they matter for HR and Talent pros, and how to leverage these trends in your professional life. Additionally, we shared some advice and tips on maximizing the value from online, social, and professional networks - an always interesting and rapidly changing space. Finally, while the webinar, (and attached sldes), covered some emerging HR and recruiting technologies, we cut the podcast short before this topic, as we will revisit it on its own show soon.

You can listen to the show on the show page HERE, or using the widget player below (email and RSS subscribers will need to click through).

The slides we used for the webinar and podcast can be found on Slideshare here, as well as embedded below.

Know Your HR/Recruiting Potential from H3 HR Advisors

 

This was a really fun show to do, and many thanks for checking it out, and to the Cleveland SMA for having us on the webinar.

Reminder: you can subscribe to the HR Happy Hour Show on iTunes or using your favorite podcast app for Android or iOS. Just search for 'HR Happy Hour' to add the show to your subscriptions and you'll never miss a show.