saxion.nl/strategisch-hrm | twitter.com/lectoraathrm

Presentatie over: "saxion.nl/strategisch-hrm | twitter.com/lectoraathrm"— Transcript van de presentatie:

1 saxion.nl/strategisch-hrm | twitter.com/lectoraathrm
Managing the NEW saxion.nl/strategisch-hrm | twitter.com/lectoraathrm 1

2 Outline Part 1: Introduction and Context, some Facts & Figures, the Boundaryless carees, what will be the new work reality (Maarten) Part 2: Generatie Y (Stephan) Part 3: Innovative Behavior (Janina) Part 4: Implications for education & discussion 2

3 part 1: New Labour Reality? Maarten van Riemsdijk
Managing the new: part 1: New Labour Reality? Maarten van Riemsdijk

4 Fundamental Truth? We have in the west economies in which opportunity, insecurity, flexibility and uncertainty coexist (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996) 4

5 Some reasons why Need for flexibility increases in companies
Strategy, technology, (global) competition In Holland (Europe), demographic trends lead to predicted labour shortages Labour policies are being designed for more flexibility and longer working lives 5

6 Demographics: the Netherlands, The EU
Demographic Development Europe Demographic Development Holland 6

7 Continuous training and adaption needed
Large cohorts of people (baby boom) will leave the workforce over coming decade. Aging population leads to unsustainable costs (pensions) Too few young people to do the work Hence: older employees have to work longer Retirement age >65 (67 right now) Getting new workers will be a challenge 7

8 New labour Relations Assumption: This leads to a labour reality that is: more prolonged more flexible more volatile more precarious and uncertain But offers new opportunities and challenges as well (for some). 8

9 In it: Employees are more responsible for their own career biography and prolonged employability. Companies will be held accountable for employability in and outside of the organisation. Keeping up will be a joint interest of companies and employees alike. 9

10 Employees know their employment will be temporary; They should ask how the work enables them to develop and stay employed. Companies know work will be temporary, yet they need good quality people; What will they offer to attract them, and keep them developing? 10

11 Boundaryless careers ? “…..Boundaryless careers are the opposite of ‘organizational careers’ – careers conceived to unfold in a single employment setting”. (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996 p.5). Boundaryless career does not characterize any single career form, but, rather, a range of possible forms that defies traditional employment assumptions. The key concepts are flexibility, networking, marketable skills, and continuous learning, which workers exchange for performance in a career that unfolds across organizational boundaries (Sullivan and Arthur, 2006). 11

12 Labour relation of Dutch employees by contract type (and self employed) CBS Statline March 2013 Mind you, 50% of Dutch employees with a flexible contract are students! 12

13 Average job tenure some EU countries expressed in years OECD extracted March 2012
USA: years; years (US bureau of labor statistics; sept ) 13

14 Job tenure some EU countries 10 years and over expressed as % of total working population CBS statline March 2012 14

15 Job tenure 5-10 years some EU countries expressed as % of total working population CBS Statline March 2012 15

16 Conclusion There seems to be some scant evidence that:
Labour relations might be fundamentally shifting But No evidence that: People become more mobile in their career. However: Companies say there is a shift, and do act on it. Government says so too and adjusts its policies. People ‘feel’ something is happening We need to take a closer look! 16

17 Human Capital Theory (Ben Porath, 1965)
Cit= (1- λ)C t-1 + μIt C = Human Capital I = Individual t = Time λ = Depreciation μ = Investmentquote I = Investment 17

18 Depreciation of HC (De Grip et al 2011)
Technical Peoples’ productivity depreciates because of General wear and tear (getting older) Atrophy Lack of use Work below your level Economical The market value of your productivity depreciates The content of your knowledge becomes obsolete The industry you work in goes down 18

19 Economical Depreciation
1. Function related depreciation Technological progress and organisational change or strategic choice: Hence competencies and knowledge of employees are no longer sufficient or even no longer relevant. 2. Industry- and company specific depreciation Caused by reorganisations of company closures, eradicating industry specific skills and knowledge Changes in the professional structure in an industry, leading to lower or no demand for some knowledge and skills. 19

20 Gratis (tot nu) toe)

21 Free (till now)

22 High costs

23 Cost versus benefits High costs

24 Costs versus benefits Exteremely High Costs

25 Cost versus benefits High costs Extremely high costs

26 Companies need More adaptability Functional flexibility
Longer employability at competitive level Be attractive to new generations Offer employability rather than job guaranty 26

27 Maybe HR policies should change
Become more differentiated, different offers for different groups of employees. Be less geared towards permanent contracts Offer temporary jobs right from the start Force employees to be functionally flexible Different jobs, changing job content Realistically discuss the work future of individual employees. Use yearly appraisal talks Offer not only company specific training but labour market related training opportunities 27

28 We are far off Very few companies look ahead
Very few managers allow their best workers to train/educate themselves Very few companies can predict technological change and its impact on work Strategic personnel planning is still very traditional Individual workers should therefore take the lead! 28

29 What can you do? Essential is to be employable (able to get and keep a job) In the modern career individuals need to be in pursuit of ‘‘opportunities to obtain training, enhance their human capital, and remain marketable” (Cheramie, Sturman, & Walsh, 2007, p. 360). 29

30 part 2: Generation Y Stephan Corporaal / @scorporaal
Managing the new: part 2: Generation Y Stephan Corporaal

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44 We hebben het groots aangepakt ...
- 150 afstudeerders, minor studenten en stagiaires hebben meegewerkt aan het onderzoek - meer dan 70 bedrijven hebben meegewerkt - we hebben met meer dan 450 laatstejaars vmbo,mbo en hbo studenten gediscussieerd in 34 focusgroepen - meer dan 1600 laatstejaars studenten zijn bevraagd met een vragenlijst. - meer dan 1500 medewerkers zijn bevraagd met een vragenlijst We argue that an innovative professional is the professional that we need in the future. After all…Innovative employees come up with new ideas and are able to cope with unpredictably (K. L. Unsworth & Parker, 2003). 44

45 Onderzoeksvraag Welke type banen en organisaties zijn aantrekkelijk voor jonge baanzoekers (Generatie Y)? Wat zijn de voorkeuren van jonge baanzoekers voor baan- en organisatiekenmerken In hoeverre beleven medewerkers in de zorg, techniek en overheid deze kenmerken. 45

46 En grondig .... Meta-analyse Chapman et al., (2005) op basis van meer dan 60 wervingsonderzoeken 46

47 Jongeren & werkinhoud Uitdaging Autonomie en duidelijkheid
Taken doen die aansluiten op bestaande kennis Autonomie en duidelijkheid: vrijheid in de inrichting van het werk Nieuwe dingen leren Autonomie en duidelijkheid: duidelijkheid over verwachtingen Taken doen die impact hebben op klant-tevredenheid/die resultaat voor de klant opleveren Autonomie en duidelijkheid: vertrouwen Afwisseling Afwisseling in sociale contacten Afwisseling in afdeling / fysieke werkplek Afwisseling in in type taken 47

48 Generatie Y & werkomgeving
Collega’s Opleiding & Ontwikkeling hulp van collega’s Opleidingsmogelijkheden vriendschappen ontwikkelen Doorgroeimogelijkheden sfeer Fysieke werkplek humor werkomstandigheden Leidinggevende beschikbaarheid van technologie persoonlijke interesse van de leidinggevende type werkplek respect van de leidinggevende Flexibiliteit participatieve stijl van de leidinggevende flexibiliteit in werkdagen en werktijden duidelijkheid over werktijden werkdagen flexibiliteit in plaats van werk (thuiswerken) 48

49 Wat heeft prioriteit? Kenmerk Sterkte verschil Doorgroeimogelijkheden
Zeer groot opleidingsmogelijkheden collega’s: sfeer fysieke werkplek: werkomstandigheden afwisseling in ruimten autonomie en duidelijkheid: duidelijkheid over verwachtingen Groot uitdaging: nieuwe dingen leren leidinggevende: participatieve stijl van de leidinggevende imago afwisseling in in type taken flexibiliteit: flexibiliteit in plaats van werk (thuiswerken) Gemiddeld fysieke werkplek: type werkplek afwisseling in sociale contacten leidinggevende: respect van de leidinggevende 49

50 Conclusies per sector:
Techniek: grote tot zeer grote verschillen tussen voorkeuren jonge baanzoekers en kenmerken van het werk in deze sector, met name voor mbo’ers en voor vrijwel alle kenmerken Zorg: grote tot zeer grote verschillen op het gebied van opleiding, werkomgeving en duidelijkheid werktijden Overheid: grote tot zeer grote verschillen op het gebieden van doorgroeien, afwisseling en het leren van nieuwe dingen 50

51 Wat heeft ons onderzoek opgeleverd?
Hele precieze kennis over de werkvoorkeuren van Generatie Y Een analyse van de verschillen en overeenkomsten van deze voorkeuren met het werk wat wordt aangeboden in de techniek, zorg en overheid Een instrument waarmee de aantrekkelijkheid van een organisatie voor Generatie Y in kaart kan worden gebracht (app is ontwikkeling) Case studies en praktijkartikelen met aanbevelingen over hoe om te gaan met Generatie Y 51

52 Aanbevelingen Opvallen tussen baanmogelijkheden door preciezer, begrijpelijker en realistischer te communiceren over baaninhoud en werkomgeving Ontwikkelings- en coachingstraject als aantrekkelijk alternatief voor een vast contract Structuur en duidelijkheid in plaats van ‘het nieuwe werken’ Werkomstandigheden / de fysieke werkplek, een klein detail maar van essentieel belang voor jongeren! 52

53 Managers ... Toegankelijkheid, participatieve stijl lijkt op orde
Sfeer Ervaring opdoen in verschillende type functie Toewijzen van een senior coach, ook betrekken in de gesprekscyclus Ervaringen, ideeën en ambities bespreken in sessies met het management Technologie op orde 53

54 part 3: innovative behavior Janina Banis / @janinabanis
Managing the new: part 3: innovative behavior Janina Banis

55 An excellent professional is an innovative professional
“An organization that depends solely upon its blueprints of prescribed behavior is a very fragile social system” (Katz, 1964, p. 132). Innovation takes a central role in the survival of organizations (Amabile, 1998; Cummings & Oldham, 1997; Seibert, Crant, & Kramer, 1999) It is innovative behavior of employees that is crucial for attaining organizational success (Axtell, Holman, Unsworth, Wall, & Waterson, 2000; Conti, Coon, & Amabile, 1996; Gatignon, Tushman, Smith, & Anderson, 2002; Unsworth & Parker, 2003; West & Farr, 1989; Woodman, Sawyer, & Griffin, 1993). We argue that an innovative professional is the professional that we need in the future. After all…Innovative employees come up with new ideas and are able to cope with unpredictably (K. L. Unsworth & Parker, 2003). 55

56 The world is changing 56

57 An excellent professional is an innovative professional
“An organization that depends solely upon its blueprints of prescribed behavior is a very fragile social system” (Katz, 1964, p. 132). Innovation takes a central role in the survival of organizations (Amabile, 1998; Cummings & Oldham, 1997; Seibert, Crant, & Kramer, 1999) It is innovative behavior of employees that is crucial for attaining organizational success (Axtell, Holman, Unsworth, Wall, & Waterson, 2000; Conti, Coon, & Amabile, 1996; Gatignon, Tushman, Smith, & Anderson, 2002; Unsworth & Parker, 2003; West & Farr, 1989; Woodman, Sawyer, & Griffin, 1993). We argue that an innovative professional is the professional that we need in the future. After all…Innovative employees come up with new ideas and are able to cope with unpredictably (K. L. Unsworth & Parker, 2003). 57

58 Innovative behavior “Innovation is the successful implementation of creative ideas within an organization” (Theresa M. Amabile, 1996, p. 1). Innovative behavior can be separated in two different but related processes, the generation of a useful idea and the implementation of an idea (Axtell et al., 2000) ‘Creativity’ is referred to as the generation of ideas (Hennessey & Amabile, 2010) and in fact is often described in many studies with innovation simultaneously (Theresa M. Amabile, 1996). ‘Proactivity’ is: “taking initiative in improving current circumstances or creating new ones; identifying opportunities to improve things, challenging the status quo and creating favorable conditions” (Crant, 2000, p. 436). 58

59 Creative behavior ‘Creativity’ is referred to as the generation of ideas (Hennessey & Amabile, 2010). Creative behavior often requires a deviation from the standard way of working (Ford, 1996) and exploration of unfamiliar territory (Amabile et al., 2002). 59

60 Proactive behavior “taking initiative in improving current circumstances or creating new ones; identifying opportunities to improve things, challenging the status quo and creating favorable conditions” (Crant, 2000, p. 436) It has three features: 1. Anticipatory, 2. Change-oriented, 3. Self-initiated. Proactive behavior is action oriented instead of passive (K. L. Unsworth & Parker, 2003) 60

61 Predicting innovative behavior
We know the development of behavior is caused by both enironmental factors and personal factors. We focus on the personal factors. We want to test a better model to predict innovative behavior. 61

62 Personality predicts innovative behavior
Big five (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Opnenness, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness) Conscientiousness, openness and extraversion are more strongly related to proactive behavior concepts than neuroticism and agreeableness (Tornau & Frese, 2013) The most well-known personality inventory that has been linked to motivation and performance is the five-factor taxonomy. It has been extensively reviewed……‘The big five’ consist of 1. Neuroticism; emotional instability, 2. Extraversion; assertiveness, preference for emotional interaction and need for activity and stimulation, 3. Openness; curiosity flexibility of thought and openness for new ideas, 4. Agreeableness; compassionate and 5. Conscientiousness; motivation, persistence and goal-directedness. These dimensions have been thoroughly researched and linked to academic success (Kappe & Flier, 2012) and career success (T. A. Judge, Higgins, Thoresen, & Barrick, 1999; Kappe & Flier, 2012; Mclean, 2001). In their meta-analysis of the big five personality dimensions on job performance Barrick and Mount (1991) found conscientiousness to most strongly relate to job performance across occupational groups; extroversion to relate to performance in sales and management positions: extroversion and openness to relate to training proficiency. However, in these studies career success is often operationalized from a classic conception of careers and measured with subjective criteria like job satisfaction or objective criteria like income and occupational status (T. A. Judge et al., 1999). Although probably not as strongly as proactive personality, some big five factors do predict innovative behavior. Conscientiousness, openness and extraversion are more strongly related to proactive behavior concepts than neuroticism and agreeableness (Tornau & Frese, 2013) and are therefore included in our model. Openness and extraversion are relatively strongly related to creativity, but conscientiousness is not (King, Walker, & Broyles, 1996). The latter is however related to proactive behavior (Tornau & Frese, 2013) because it includes action orientation and persistence which are important aspects in bringing about change. Extraversion relates to proactive behavior (Tornau & Frese, 2013) because of its active component. Innovative behavior requires action. Extraversion predicts creative behavior (Batey & Furnham, 2006; King et al., 1996) as creativity is characterized by “high energy” and “confidence” (Barron & Harrington, 1981) and so is extraversion (McCrae & Costa, 1987). Frese and Fay 2001 found it to be empirically related to personal initiative. Openness is used almost interchangeably with creativity. It was found to relate to proactive behavior (Tornau & Frese, 2013) and creative behavior (Batey & Furnham, 2006; King et al., 1996) as it entails curiosity and willingness to try new things. 62

63 Personality predicts innovative behavior
Locus of control refers to the belief individuals have about having control over events. High confidence is important for creativity (Barron & Harrington, 1981) and persistence for proactive behavior (Parker et al. 2006). Locus of control is a personality trait outside of the big five taxonomy, although it is bears similarities with emotional stability (the reverse of neuroticism) as they are both labeled as positive self-concepts (T. a. Judge, Erez, Bono, & Thoresen, 2002). High confidence is important for creativity (Barron & Harrington, 1981). Locus of control refers to the belief individuals have about having control over events. Individuals who believe events are under their control arel referred to as internals and individuals who belief events are caused by outside forces are referred to as externals. Externals are more compliant and conforming. Internals rely on themselves for direction (Spector, 1982). We thus expect internal locus of control to be positively related to innovative behavior as it relates to several aspects of proactivity  (Tornau & Frese, 2013)..   It might be argued that Locus of control is a motivational construct as there may be an interactive relationship with experience (Spector, 1982) and because it is related to effort, motivation and performance (Spector, 1982). Moreover, as it resembles a belief to which a person has control (Ng, Sorensen, & Eby, 2006). Vrooms motivational theory states that motivation is the expectancy that effort leads to performance, performance leads to result and that result has value for the individual (Van Eerde & Thierry, 1996). Internals expect positive outcome from their behavior whereas externals do not believe their efforts will make much difference. Finally, locus of control is related to numerous motivation variables: intrinsic task motivation, expectancy, instrumentality, job involvement, self-development and psychological empowerment (Ng et al., 2006). Although it bears much resembles resemblance to motivational states, most research suggest it is a personality trait (T. a. Judge & Bono, 2001; T. a. Judge et al., 2002; Wang, Bowling, & Eschleman, 2010). We therefore depict is as a distal antecedent. 63

64 Personality predicts innovative behavior
Proactive personality predicts creative (T. Kim, Hon, & Lee, 2010) and proactive behavior (Parker et al., 2006) It is a compound variable that includes both social and non-social behaviors (Bateman & Crant, 1993). Proactive personality predicts creative (T. Kim, Hon, & Lee, 2010) and proactive behavior (Parker et al., 2006) which in turn predict positive work outcomes . (T.-Y. Kim, Hon, & Crant, 2009). It also predicts organizational effectiveness, individual career success (Seibert, Crant, & Kramer, 1999), innovation (Seibert, Kraimer, & Crant, 2001), entrepreneurship (Becherer & Maurer, 1999; J. Michael Crant, 1996) and job performance (Chan, 2006; Thompson, 2005). It’s the trait that best fits the profile for individual success and employability (Fuller Jr. & Marler, 2009) as it correlates with protean or boundary less careers attitudes (Briscoe, Hall, & Frautschy DeMuth, 2006). Proactive personality is a relatively stable behavioral tendency and described as: “…is one who is relatively unconstrained by situational forces, and who effects environmental change” (Bateman & Crant, 1993, p. 105). It is a compound variable that includes both social and non-social behaviors (Bateman & Crant, 1993). Proactive personality scale shares some variance with conscientiousness and extraversion (Bateman & Crant, 1993) and some facets of neuroticism and openness (Major, Turner, & Fletcher, 2006). However, big five only accounts for 26% of the variance in proactive personality (Major et al., 2006). Moreover, it  predicts job performance better than any of the factors separately or combined (Fuller Jr. & Marler, 2009), suggesting it is an important measurable component of organizational behavior (Bateman & Crant, 1993) that is not covered by the big five . In fact a compound variable  is a better predictor when tailored to an outcome than basic personality traits (Hough & Schneider, 1996). As argued, proactive personality is very well tailored to innovative behavior. This personality variable therefore is the most important predictor in our model. 64

65 Testing my model 65

66

67 part 4: Implication for education
Managing the new part 4: Implication for education

68 Onderwijs Onderwijs is volgens ons niet zozeer gericht op het aanleren van bepaalde wetenschappelijke en sociale normen, maar vooral op de ontwikkeling van het kritische en creatieve vermogen om nieuwe normen te scheppen.  Wij denken dat waarheid niet bestaat en denken dat onderwijs vooral gaat om de vorming van een kritisch individu dat zijn rol in de samenleving zelf kan bepalen. Het gaat dus niet zozeer om waarheid, maar om vrijheid.  68

69 69

70 70

71 71

72