The Story of Garrett Jones

The Minnesota Twins have a well-deserved reputation as an organization that knows how to judge talent, to select, train, and consistently produce a steady stream of high quality players.  This organizational capability to find and develop so-called 'home-grown' talent is critical for a team like the Twins, who historically have had significantly lower salary budgets than many of their rivals like the Yankees and Red Sox.

Some of the top players that have been brought through the Twins system past American league Most Valuable Players Joe Mauer and Justin Morneau, as well as pitching great Johan Santana (now currently playing for the Mets).  By consistently making smart draft choices, having a consistent philosophical approach that is embedded throughout all levels of the organization, and by actually providing real opportunity for these home-grown players at the major league level, the Twins are contenders for the division and league title most years.  They are in a way a kind of baseball version of the NBA's Utah Jazz, my friend the HR Capitalist's favorite team.

With that background, I want to share a bit of the story of Garrett Jones, an outfielder now playing in the major league for the Pittsburgh Pirates, ( a team I took a shot at recently). Fans of the Pirates certainly, know some of Jones' story.  A player with 10-plus seasons toiling at various levels of baseball's minor league system, never really getting much of a chance to see if he had what it took to succeed in the big leagues.  In fact, Jones was in the minor leagues for so long, a little known baseball rule called the 6-year free agent rule, granted him his release from the club that owned his contract late in 2008 and allowed him to sign with the Pirates organization.

The club that 'owned' Jones for the 6-plus years?

The Twins.

One of the primary reasons Jones never got much of a chance with the Twins (about 30 games in 2007), was the presence of the star Morneau, who played the same position as Jones, as was one of the games best players. To be fair, Jones' minor league career did have some down points as well, so the Twins could also be forgiven for having some doubts about his upside.

Jones began the 2009 season once again in the minor leagues, but about halfway through the season, he was called up to the Pirates and proceeded to have an outstanding second half.  Jones hit 21 home runs and batted nearly .300.  For a perennial losing team like the Pirates, this performance was likely the highlight of the (sorry) season.  This year in the new season's first three games, Jones has already hit three home runs. 

The point of all this to me is that even organizations that pride themselves as great evaluators and developers of talent sometimes get one wrong.  Jones was plying his trade for the organization for many years, in fact for so long league rules allowed him to break away, and the Twins for whatever reason did not or could not give Jones the chance to prove himself at the highest level, helping both the team's fortunes, as well as improving Jones' career prospects. Professional sports, and the individual performance of the players themselves, are so closely monitored, scrutinized, and evaluated, that these kind of talent 'misses' are relatively rare.  Performance in sports is so measurable and public, that players possessing major league talent usually do end up in the major leagues.  Maybe Jones simply needed a change of scenery to really display his true ability, but in the end, at almost 30 years old, he is much the same player the Twins did not give much of a chance to.

Think of it, someone spends more than six years working for the organization, their performance, development, and potential on display in the most visible manner possible, and yet the organization (universally regarded as great talent evaluators) allows the player to leave, only to see him star for another team.

Maybe the Twins did not think Jones had the 'look' of a major leaguer or the talent ahead of him in the organization was clearly superior, whatever the reason his talents were not recognized.  But finally getting his chance with another team, he is turning in to a star.

I wonder if you look at the people in your organization right now, could you find similar untapped potential?

Are there people toiling away, solid performers, but not stars, maybe because they have not been given a big challenge, a lead role, or a big stage?

Will they eventually leave and hit the big time with one of your competitors?

Nah, you are a great talent evaluator, I am sure you have everyone pegged just right.

The Talent War Room

One of the highlights from Day 1 of The Conference Board's Talent Managment Strategies Conference was a session lead by Ed Colbert, Global Director of Organizational Effectiveness for Dow Corning Corporation.

Ed framed the entire session by sharing a story about how shortly after he was given his role as the Director of Organizational Effectiveness, with responsibility for Talent Acquisition, Learning and Development, Succession Planning, and Workforce Planning, he read an article about how the Director of Player Personnel for a major league baseball team went about his talent management duties.

The Pro Personnel Director's office had one wall covered with pictures of all his team's current starting players, with additional sections describing each players strengths and weaknesses, and some statistics indicating trends in the player's most recent performance. An adjacent area on the wall contained the same information for all the team's substitute players on the current active roster.

The next wall of the office contained pictures and player profiles of the organization's top prospects in the various affiliated minor league teams. These pictures and profiles were organized by role (pitchers, catchers, etc), readiness (players closest to be ready to contribute to the major league club higher on the wall), and color coded by overall 'potential' rating.

Finally the back wall of the office had pictures and profile information of players on other teams (both major league and their affiliated minor league teams) that this Director of Player Personnel was monitoring or tracking for as potential acquisitions for his team in the future. These players represented or had demonstrated both potential targets for filling current needs on his team's active roster, as well as more long-term prospects that seemed to match the team's philosophy or style of play.

As Ed from Corning read the article he came to the conclusion that this Director of Player Personnel had the very same job as he did. The goal of both roles was 'To put the best team on the playing field today, and ensure continued success in the future'.

Assessing the current players was performance management, identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the players was talent profiling and development, examining the capability in the minor league teams was succession planning, and evaluating the external markets for players was talent acquisition and workforce planning.

In fact, Dow Corning has taken the sports metaphor so far as to title the internal communications leader their 'Sports Information Director' and some of their corporate recruiters as 'Talent Scouts'. The Talent Scouts are not just handed open Job Reqs to fill, but rather they are assigned an organization, department, or capability (similar to how the Director of Player Personnel manages the team's talent), and asked to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the current people on their 'team', assess the likely pools of internal successors, and understand and engage the external community of potential talent to further develop Dow Corning's capability to put the best team on the field. It is sort of a 'mini' Player Personnel role, a more active and proactive approach, rather than simply reacting in classic 'search' mode when a position comes open and needs to be filled.

Finally, Ed made the point that while managing the player personnel for a 25-person baseball team is quite a bit more manageable than what most organizations have to grapple with, that the fundamental concepts are really the same. Keeping the process simple, even to the point of using the walls of an office, or even a 'Talent War Room', to keep abreast of the organization's key talent, and most critical roles are keys to a successful talent management strategy and the execution of that strategy.

I knew all that time I spend watching, thinking, and talking about sports would pay off.

The Talent Management Strategies Conference

Today and tomorrow I will be attending The Conference Board's latest Talent Management Strategies Conference in New York City as a guest of the Conference Board.

The event's subtitle - 'Leveraging Your Talent to Drive Business Outcomes' is meant to describe the overall focus of the event, trying to share information from some of the world's leading organizations on some innovative and effective strategies for leveraging talent to drive results.

Some of the sessions that I am most looking forward to attending are:

'Talent Management Leader: Head of Player Personnel', obvious since I am an easy mark for Talent Management and sports metaphors. This session looks to emphasize the importance of understanding the talent on your own team as well as the talent of your competition as they do in professional sports in order to find ways to maximize your advantage. I hope to ask some pithy question about drafting, whether coaches are important at all on top teams, and who will win the NBA championship.

'Creating an Employer Brand to Attract and Retain the Right Talent', a look at how Children's Healthcare of Atlanta used employee perspectives, blogging, and other strategies in their branding efforts.

and finally - 'How Social Networks Boost Collaboration, Productivity and Engagement', a look at how enhancing collaboration, enabling better understanding of employee interaction, and facilitating relationship building have led to important benefits for Google, Inc.

I am glad to be joined at the event by fellow blogger and an all-around superstar Jennifer McClure, the Cincy Recruiter.

Be sure to follow Jennifer's and my Tweets about the event on the hashtag #tcbtalent.

Disclaimer - The Conference Board is providing transport and lodging for me to attend the event, but all tweets, posts, comments etc. about the event are entirely my own, and The Conference Board has not asked for any special consideration.

The Wisdom of Jeff Van Gundy

The always entertaing former NBA coach turned announcer Jeff Van Gundy was reflecting on the difficulty that many coaches have with connecting with their much younger and far wealthier players.  Van Gundy's opinion was that a coach's message can, over time, start to lose its resonance, and it's effectiveness. JVG

Van Gundy made what I thought was an excellent point in the discussion:

If you as leader are the only one that always has to tell the truth, then you need more leaders on the team.

It makes sense. If the coach, manager, or leader is the sole voice of the organizational 'truth', he or she will always be fighting an uphill battle. In the NBA, Van Gundy felt that you needed one or two players, preferably star players or at least starters, that were completely on board with the coach's approach and could help to reinforce the 'right' way to prepare, practice, and play. These respected players could help keep the team together, and serve as a kind of validation for the coach's program.

I think this concept can apply in corporate organizations as well. Work groups and teams all have some natural leaders, roles models, and respected members. Managers that can forge understanding and connection with these leaders will likely have a better opportunity to fold in all the entire team, perhaps leading to a more cohesive, and better functioning group.

This idea of leveraging key internal leaders or champions also has application in tools and technologies that are being increasingly deployed inside organizations to facilitate collaboration in the enterprise.  Technologies like wikis, forums, and microblogs are often positioned by project leaders as solutions that will bring significant value to all members of the organization. But they also can have 'adoption' problems, with many employees reluctant to replace traditional and proven methods of collaboration (e-mail, phone, voice mail, shared network drives) with the new processes and tools.

Recruiting and deploying 'champions', a few key and hopefully respected employees to serve as guides and leaders in the adoption of these new approaches, and that serve as examples for the other members of the organization to follow is often a critical success factor in these projects. These are the ones that will kick-start forum discussions, post new findings on a wiki page, and actively share bookmarks, and tag and organize content.  Without these leaders, your project may not thrive.

Just like the great JVG says, if you as coach, leader, or technology evangelist are the only one 'telling the truth' you are going to have problems getting everyone to see the light.

HR Technology as a Training Ground

Last week on the HR Happy Hour show in between some bombs being dropped (certain HR types being described as 'secretaries' or 'blue-hairs') one really interesting technology related point was made. 

Specifically, experience working in one of the leading HR Technology vendors, perhaps one that focuses on Talent Management technology like a Halogen or SuccessFactors, provides an excellent knowledge base for future success in an HR organization, and that an HR leader in search of talent should consider HR Technology companies as a great source. 

Traditionally software companies have looked to recruit from customer organizations (I was recruited by Oracle many years ago in this way). It was an interesting, and I think correct observation. The best technology implementers possess the following attributes, all of which would benefit the internal HR organization.

Problem Solving

No two HR technology projects are ever the same.  Even if the consultant has spent a few years implementing the same solution, each project haFlickr- raptortheangels a unique set of requirements, demands, personalities, and pressures to make each one unique.  Solving new problems is a critical component for success, and one that the best consultants can master. In particular, being adaptable to varying levels of support from clients, and knowing when to take decisions and when to get help are skills that come easier to experiences tech consultants than to some others.

Results focus

Lots of technology vendors hold their consultants to extremely challenging target for utilization, revenue and profitability.  It can be, at some companies, a high-stress, high-reward type environment. To be a successful technology implementer you have to be able to deliver under pressure, managing multiple and sometimes conflicting demands and expectation.  A good, experienced tech consultant will be cool under pressure and probably be able to teach the rest of the HR staff a thing or two about successful project delivery.

Customer driven

Delivering successful technology projects requires relentless customer focus.  Tech consultants certainly operate under parameters and constraints, but the best ones know how to navigate these and maintain focus on the best possible customer outcomes.  During an engagement, a good consultant learns the customer's motivations, concerns, and weaknesses and incorporates this knowledge into the overall solution delivery. A mindset that continually places customer success first will benefit any internal or traditional 'support' organization.

Breadth of experience

Most technology consultants will have worked on a wide range of projects, across different industries, regions, and market sizes.  The number and variety of these experiences typically affords a good consultant a great range of direct experiences as well as a large network of contacts from which to draw from.  It may have been competency modeling for an accounting firm, performance management at a University, or compensation planning at a professional services firm, a good consultant carries all the learning from these engagements to your HR department.

Technology skills

Certainly if you recruit a new resource from a technology company you'd expect a high level of technical knowledge.  But this knowledge is exactly the kind most HR departments lack, specific ability to assess technology and apply it to help solve HR and business issues.  This is the hardest tech skill for most HR groups to acquire, and it will become more and more important in the future.  If you think your HR shop has enough tech skills today, you are probably wrong, since technology moves so fast, and has become so critical, beefing up your strength in this area is a necessity.

What do you think? Should you source your next key spot in the HR department from one of the HR Technology vendors?  Or am I way too biased as to the importance of Tech in HR?