Remaining Highly Marketable in Any Economy

Knowledge has been described as the only source of sustainable competitive advantage in an information economy. Since knowledge is the primary product of knowledge workers, it is also the primary source of their employability.

Our research has uncovered five different ways that one can add value to an organization and thereby become an employee of choice in any economy:

Stage One—Acquiring Knowledge. People in this stage learn how to access and use the existing knowledge of the organization in order to complete their assigned work. They acquire the knowledge (i.e., theories, models, rules, principles, policies, processes and information) necessary to make effective decisions and take appropriate action.

Stage Two—Applying Knowledge. People in this stage use the knowledge of the company (i.e., theories, models, rules, principles, policies, processes and information) to independently plan and complete important tasks — without having to defer decisions about their work to others.

Stage Three—Creating Knowledge. People in this stage identify gaps in the organization’s existing knowledge base and create new knowledge to address both new and old challenges. They find creative new ways to solve previously unsolved problems and invent potential new products, work processes, tools, technologies, etc.

Stage Four— Sharing Knowledge. By sharing their knowledge and experience, Stage Four contributors help others acquire and apply knowledge toward making effective decisions and taking appropriate action. They also help ensure that the work of the group is integrated so the value of the whole exceeds the sum of its parts.

Stage Five—Leveraging Knowledge. Stage Five contributors create a cultural and strategic context that shapes the minute-by-minute decisions and actions of people throughout the organization. They exert significant influence on the decisions that define what the organization does, how the organization does its work, and how it competes in the marketplace. One task of this stage is to make knowledge more widely accessible by transforming personal knowledge into expert systems, structures, processes, policies, norms and strategies.

Assessing Knowledge Worker Employability

One critical element of our research involved asking managers to force-rank their knowledge workers based on “the value of each worker’s contribution to the organization over the past 12 months.” We then asked managers to identify the stages in which each employee was consistently contributing and correlated these stages with the ranking data. Exhibit 1 summarizes the results and shows the strong connection between the five stages of the knowledge worker and perceived contribution.

The three most important patterns that can be identified in Exhibit 1 are:

1. The increase in perceived value as people master additional stages. (Only 15 percent of those identified as making primarily Stage One contributions were ranked above the 50th percentile. Ninety-four percent of those identified as contributing primarily in Stage Five were ranked above the 50th percentile.)
2. The small difference in the average age of people contributing in the different stages.
3. The large jump in perceived value between Applying (Stage Two) and Creating (Stage Three).

Furthermore, we learned that while some knowledge workers focus on contributing only in one or two of these stages, the most highly valued knowledge workers usually perform in several of the stages simultaneously. To remain highly marketable, one has to move beyond the Applying Stage on the continuum. Only Creating, Sharing or Leveraging Knowledge consistently deliver competitive advantage for the individual.

We also found people performing in each of the five stages regardless of position. In other words, we found managers who were heavily focused on Applying Knowledge and technical professionals who were Leveraging Knowledge. Based on our findings, it appears that the tasks of the knowledge worker and the learning organization are one and the same: to become adept at acquiring, applying, creating, sharing and leveraging knowledge in ways that will enhance the organization’s competitiveness.

In our research we also asked managers to answer two questions about their team members:

1. Who on your team would you least want to lose? and,
2. Who on your team would you have the most difficulty replacing?

These two questions usually elicited the same list of names. The people identified were those who, in addition to fulfilling their Stage One and Two responsibilities (Acquiring and Applying Knowledge), were finding ways to contribute in Stages Three, Four or Five (Creating, Sharing or Leveraging Knowledge).

Some engineers, when first introduced to the model, question whether managers really do value Stages Three, Four and Five more than Stage Two. They ask, “Do managers put their money where their mouths are?” Our research confirms that they do. When we controlled for factors such as education, age and tenure, we found that each stage was associated with a 10 percent increment in pay. That means that a 30 year-old Stage Three (Creating Knowledge) electrical engineer with a BS degree and 7 years’ company experience will earn an average of 10% more than an electrical engineer with the same education and experience who has not expanded beyond Stages One and Two (Acquiring and Applying Knowledge). Similarly, a Stage Five (Leveraging Knowledge) electrical engineer will earn 30 to 35 percent more than an equally educated and experienced engineer in Stage Two (Applying Knowledge).

In order to thrive in an information economy, organizations need contributions in all five of the stages. And as competition intensifies, Stages Three, Four and Five become increasingly important. The five stages model, called the Contribution Continuum, provides a framework for analyzing and building one’s personal employability. One does not have to contribute in all fives stages to be highly employable, but remember: Although Stages One and Two are essential to your employability, they are not sufficient. Since almost everyone will in due course learn to contribute in Stages One and Two, these first two stages do not usually differentiate top performers. Stages Three, Four and Five are the differentiators and therefore the path to maximum employability.

Authors: Nigel Bristow—President, Targeted Learning and Michael-John Bristow—Associate, Targeted Learning

This article, and many other tools to career success, can be found in Beyond Job Satisfaction Fieldbook, on sale now.

Targeted Intensive Practice Part II

Targeted intensive practice involves a long-term commitment to a process of continuous improvement that will drive extraordinary achievement. This process involves five steps:

Step1: Set Goals. High achievers are continuously setting very specific short-term goals that are beyond their current grasp. Implicit in this first step is the belief that failure is a necessary part of the learning process.

Step 2: Plan. High achievers identify the specific steps that are necessary for them to achieve their goals, and who they need to help them reach their goals. The assumption is that greatness is never achieved alone.

Step 3: Act. High achievers implement their plans with an intensity and focus that demands all their faculties. This is what is often referred to as “practice.”

Step 4: Review. High achievers rigorously review their actions and outcomes against their plans and goals, noting gaps and opportunities for improvement. Feedback from others is a critical part of this review process.

Step 5: Revise. If the goal is not achieved, then the plan is revised and the cycle is repeated. As soon as that goal is achieved, the bar is raised and another goal is set.

How did Benjamin Franklin become the best-selling author of his generation? How did Mozart become one of the greatest composers of all time? How did Michelangelo sculpt and paint himself into immortality? You got it. Targeted intensive practice over an extended period of time.

Think of talents as muscles rather than as fixed, innate abilities possessed by a lucky few. Just as muscles grow by having greater demands placed on them, so too our talents and mental capacities grow when we push ourselves to do difficult things.

Extraordinary innate ability is not the source of our greatness. Rather, greatness is the result of a long-term commitment to targeted intensive practice. We are the masters of our destiny – not our genes.

Targeted Intensive Practice Part I

Over the past several years, in order to understand the mystery behind extraordinary achievement, we carefully studied the lives of the “Immortals,” people who successfully cemented their names in the grand story of human history: Michelangelo, Mozart, Da Vinci, Einstein, Benjamin Franklin, Julius Caesar, Beethoven, Isaac Newton and many others.

We were able to tease out only three traits common to every one of these Immortals. First, they loved the work they were doing. Second, they each worked incredibly—almost superhumanly—hard for many years in order to achieve their greatness.

But the world is full of hard workers who love what they do yet never become Immortals. What really differentiated the Immortals from everyone else was the third characteristic: their capacity to learn from experience. This skill, it turns out, can be learned.

People often use the word “talent” to explain the mystery behind extraordinary achievement. Most dictionaries define talent as an “innate aptitude or skill.” In other words, our talents are biological gifts conferred upon us at birth and we either have them or we don’t. This notion of talent keeps most people from ever achieving their true potential. The belief that I was not born with a certain talent causes me to do things—or not do things—that guarantee my continued mediocrity. For example, if I believe I don’t have the inborn gift for music, then I conclude that dedicating time and effort to becoming a great piano player is just a waste of my time.

As yet, there is little evidence to support innate ability as the driving force behind extraordinary achievement. Anecdotal evidence exists, but not one peer-reviewed scientific study has proven the connection. In contrast, there are many rigorous studies to confirm that extraordinary achievement is almost exclusively the result of skills and mindsets that are learned, not innate. The process whereby these skills and mindsets are learned is a process we call “targeted intensive practice.” In two weeks we’ll show you how to do it!

Regardless of your level in the organization, your impact at work is highly correlated with your ability to influence others. Whether you are trying to persuade your manager to change a behavior that is hurting your effectiveness, convince a client to adopt a new work practice, or get your company to embrace a new business strategy, your ability to influence others is crucial to your effectiveness.

Consider the following scenario: you are presenting a proposal to a group to get them to adopt a new work process. The members of this group are very happy with the current process and have already convinced themselves that they do not need a new process. You, on the other hand, are convinced that while these processes run smoothly, they are not sufficiently efficient to keep the company competitive in the long term. Although these processes were once state-of-the-art, the competition is rapidly closing the gap and may soon overtake your company.

Here is the question: which of the following two approaches should you adopt?

a. Start by confirming your mutual interests, and then explain the cons of the current process and the pros of the new process.

b. Start by confirming your mutual interests and then acknowledge the pros of the current process and the cons of changing to a new process.

If you answered “a”, you are in the majority. But is this the most effective approach?

If you know your audience is likely to oppose your ideas, first discuss the issues and concerns that are uppermost in their minds. If you are proposing a change, you demonstrate your understanding of the audience’s views by focusing first on the pros of the current process and the cons of changing to a new process. Tell them you share their concerns – and mean it! Only after you demonstrate your understanding of, and concern for, their needs, will they trust you sufficiently to listen to your views on the issue.

Download our job-tool, Four Keys to the Perfect Pitch, to discover the most effective ways to influence others and to receive a guide to prepare for any persuasive presentation.

Blog Job-Tool Download: Four Keys to the Perfect Pitch

As we end the second quarter of 2010, many of you will be working through mid-year reviews. These interim reviews are often neglected while year-end reviews tend to hog the performance-management spotlight.

This neglect is unfortunate. While year-end reviews are important, interim reviews will – if they are done correctly – have a far greater impact on individual and organization success. The reason for this is interim reviews ensure that:

• Problems are identified and addressed in a timely fashion
• Support and encouragement are more evident
• People learn more from both their successes and failures

In addition, interim reviews lay the groundwork for more productive and less stressful year-end reviews. Whether it is a ten-minute weekly checkup or an hour-long mid-year discussion, interim reviews help to keep goals aligned, promote learning, and ensure that goals are achieved.

If you are on the receiving end of a mid-year review, you need to influence the mid-year conversation to ensure that you get the direction and support you need in order to maximize your contributions to the success of your organization. If you are on the giving end of these reviews, you need to structure the conversations to reinforce the appropriate focus, confirm progress, redirect efforts, and ensure that your people have the support they need to deliver exceptional results.

You may already have a process in your organization for conducting interim reviews. If not, or if you would like to improve the quality of your mid-year review conversations, download and use our Six Question Interim Review Back-Home Application. This job-tool will walk you through a process to help you prepare for and implement successful interim reviews.

For a quick overview of the six questions, use the agenda below.

1. Discuss progress in terms of the performance goals and development plans that were established at the beginning of the year.
2. Ensure ongoing alignment of goals: How well do current individual goals align with those of the organization, the team, and the individual’s long-term career plans? Do any of the individual’s career goals need to be changed?
3. Consider, from the individual’s perspective, what has gone well so far this year and what is continuing to go well.
4. Discuss the individual’s most important opportunities for improvement.
5. Explore how the supervisor/manager can support the individual in his/her work.
6. Explore any other suggestions the individual may have for the supervisor/manager.

Blog Job-Tool Download: Six Question Interim Review Back-Home Application