Monthly Archives: December 2011

CBTM #5: Fighting the War for Talent – Focus on Career Management!!!


Today’s guest post is from Anne Kohler of The MPower Group and is the fourth in a series of seven posts on Competency Based Talent Management.

We’ve been hearing about the “War for Talent” in the Sourcing / Supply Chain space for quite some time and it does not seem to be improving. In our previous posts, we explored how the lack of a holistic approach to competency based talent management (“CBTM”) is the root cause of the problem. In addition, we have advocated that to be sustainable, CBTM must cover ALL five phases of an employee’s journey through a company — recruiting, performance evaluation, training / development, career management and succession planning.

Let’s focus here on one element – Career management. According to Wikipedia, Career Management is the combination of structured planning and the active management choice of one’s own professional career. While career management should ideally be the responsibility of the individual, it MUST be driven by the organization. To start, employees need to know which skills / competencies are required to be successful today and how those skills /competencies need to grow and develop in order to progress within the company. These can only be defined by the organization and are the foundation for CBTM. A well-defined competency model, which is critical here, can also be used and integrated into the other four phases of CBTM. In addition, individuals need to see the career options (career path) and the expectations associated with moving through the path. How many Sourcing / Supply Chain organizations have actually taken the time to not only define the competencies but also lay out a career path for their employees? Not many. By the way, the first people to leave because of the absence of career management are the people you most want to hold on to — your high potentials. They are off listening to other companies who seem to be able to articulate a career path – can’t all companies do this during the recruiting phase even if it is all smoke and mirrors?

Without a Career Management process in place, you will:

  • lose your best people
  • constantly be recruiting (this is an expensive proposition)
  • never realize the full ROI of your asset (your people) base
  • lose the opportunity to infiltrate (love that word) the rest of the organization with Sourcing / Supply Chain thinking
  • never get beyond tactical contribution (real value comes thru competency growth)

The consequences of ignoring Career Management as part of your talent management program (if you have one) can be devastating to an organization. While the official definition of Career Management places the responsibility with the individual, the organization needs to put the infrastructure (process tools, metrics, mentors, etc.) in place AND drive the adoption and execution of the process. If we look at Career Management as benefiting both the employee and the organization then we MUST ensure that it is happening — tools are of no use unless they are being utilized.

What do you need to do to fix the career management void? Here are a few Next Practice tips:

  • Develop a competency model which allows employees to see their path for success
  • Tie career progression to competency growth
  • Ensure that competency growth is NOT about “what you know” but more about “what you DO with what you know”
  • Link career paths across functions by competency
  • Ensure career management is integrated into ALL phases of CBTM
  • Create a “success culture”, providing organizational mobility and access to new opportunities
  • Provide employees with “stretch” assignments to further competency growth
  • Ensure your organization is the “place to be” to ensure professional growth
  • Provide ongoing feedback and coaching so that employees can grow and take advantage of new opportunities

If you are interested in getting involved or would like to follow this topic further, here are a series of critical activities coming up:

  • Release of the results of the Executive Forum we just facilitated at the IACCM Global Forum for Contracting & Commercial Excellence on Talent Management.
  • A major research project to not identify the problem one more time but to identify Next Practices to solve the problems.
  • A webinar with IACCM on CBTM.
  • A White Paper to focus on Next Practices in CBTM.

Please contact Crystal Jones at crystalj <at> thempowergroup <dot> com for more information.

Remember, Energy Efficiency is the First Step in Energy Conservation!

If you’re a buyer of computers, electronics, machinery, automobiles, buildings, or anything else that requires power, the first thing that should still be on your mind these days, with petroleum and oil prices about to go through the roof again, is energy. It now costs more to power an average desktop workstation for its expected life-span than it does to buy it, just as it does to power and cool your average server. Getting 40% off MSRP on a pick-up truck that only gets 15 mpg isn’t a great deal anymore if it’s going to be driven 30,000 miles per year, because, at current fuel costs, you’ll be spending 45,000+ in fuel costs over 5 years … over two times what you’ll be paying for the truck!

That’s why it needs to be said again that energy-efficiency technologies can reduce energy consumption by 25% or more, as per the results of a McKinsey study from 2008 that also found that improved energy efficiency can cut energy requirements by 25% in many developed countries, as I noted in my post on Cutting Carbon Footprints on the Country Level.

And remember the 2008 The Industry Week article on Growing the Energy Efficiency Market that focussed on a 2008 ACEEE (American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy) report on The Size of the U.S. Energy Efficiency Market: Generating a More Complete Picture. The report, which was supported by the Civil Society Institute, the Kendall Foundation, and the North American Insulation Manufacturer’s Association, found that:

  • The U.S. has the potential to reduce energy consumption by an additional 25% to 30% through strategic use of energy efficient technologies
  • Energy-Efficiency has met about three-fourths of the demand of new energy related services since 1970, proving that it works
  • Investments in more energy-efficient technologies could result in an efficiency market worth more than 700 Billion by 2030

So do what you can to drive for energy efficiency. The operating cost reductions to your Supply Management organization that will follow will be well worth it.


Editor’s Note: This is an edited reposting of a 2008 SI blog post on how Energy Efficiency is the First Step in Energy Conservation. It’s a good message to remember at this time of year when many people put up those energy-inefficient holiday lights and displays from ten and twenty years ago without thinking that can, when overdone, create quite a strain on the grid.

Do You Know How Much Your Trash Costs You?

An average organization is filled with cost-savings opportunities. One big opportunity is cleaning services — and the savings go beyond manpower savings by identifying those third parties charging above market average rates for unskilled janitorial services and replacing them with third parties charging market average rates.

For example, trash removal often represents a considerable savings opportunity in a large organization, and one that can be identified and executed in a matter of hours. Typically, the cost of emptying your dumpster out back is a function of two factors:

  1. Hauling Fee
    The cost to obtain a dumpster and to have it removed; driven by the frequency of the pickups.
  2. Tipping Fee
    The cost to ‘tip” the dumpster into a landfill. Driven by the local landfill costs.

Assuming the organization does not change the amount of trash it is generating, it can look at the size of the dumpster it uses. If it has a bunch of small retail locations with mostly non-food trash, it may be able to reduce its costs by increasing the size of the dumpster it uses and reducing the number of hauls.

For example, let’s assume the organization has a 2 cubic yard dumpster and that the hauling fee is fixed at X for dumpsters between 1 and 8 cubic feet. If the tipping fee for a 2 cubic yard dumpster is X and this is emptied every week, the total cost for a month is going to be:

Two Cubic Yard Picked Up Every Week:

Monthly Pickups 4 once per week
Tipping Costs X X for 2 cubic yards
Hauling Costs X fixed
Total 8X 4 * (X + X)

If the organization replaces the 2 cubic yard dumpster with a 4 cubic yard dumpster, while the amount paid to tip will stay the same per cubic yard, the hauling fee will effectively be halved (as it does not increase for a 4 cubic yard dumpster).

Four Cubic Yard Picked Up Every Other Week:

Monthly Pickups 2 every other week
Tipping Costs 2X twice the 2 cubic yard
Hauling Costs X no change
Total 6X 2 * (2X + X)
SAVINGS 25%  

This is just one of the many savings opportunities detailed in Spend Visibility: An Implementation Guide — the newly released white-paper from Sourcing Innovation that is, to the best of our knowledge, the first white-paper that not only defines what spend analysis and spend visibility really is, but that also offers a step-by-step, vendor-free, implementation guide that demonstrates how an organization can achieve substantial year-over-year savings!

Download your FREE – No Registration Required – copy of Spend Visibility: An Implementation Guide, which is already being called The Definitive Book on Next Level Performance, and find out what other, significantly larger, savings opportunities await you!

Should You Be The Best?

This sounds like a silly question as it sounds like a question where the answer should always be a resounding yes, but a recent Harvard Business Review blog that said you should stop competing to be the best, which made some good points, makes you think about it.

The blog, which quotes the current thought leadership of Michael Porter, known for his five force analysis, says that “may the best X win” is absolutely the wrong way to think about competition, because it’s practically a guarantee of mediocre performance. Why? First of all, in the vast majority of businesses, there is simply no such thing as “the best”, so this would make the competition-to-be-the-best mindset completely wrong.

This is because many consumers in a market segment have different needs and wants. Some just want functionality. Others want style. Some want goods with average durability. Others want goods that can can take extreme abuse. Some want basic designs. Others want luxury. How can you define best when there are so many market needs?

Business, despite the claims of those who promote Sun Tzu’s Art of War as the ultimate business strategy rulebook, is not war and, in many markets, there can be more than one winner that can thrive. Consider retail. As the blog points out, both WalMart and Target co-exist and thrive and win in their market segment by offering different types of value to their customers.

And when rivals all pursue the “one best way” to compete, they find themselves on a collision course, trapped in a destructive, zero-sum competition that no one can win. Eventually all products and practices become almost indistinguishable, leading to pure price wars, which leads to a deterioration of profitability. This isn’t good for anyone.

The real way to win, according to Porter, is to compete to be unique. Innovate and deliver superior value to your chosen customer segment, not market segment. Make price only one factor in a multi-factor consideration. In doing so, generate positive sum competition and grow the industry — and, in the mean time, earn sustainable returns from the value generated.