August 25, 2010
Following on from last week’s blog on the ‘Race for 2012’ manifesto I’d like to share some suggestions of how we can all get involved in achieving these aims. There are lots of ways organisations can provide help, and not just those whose core offering is IT related. Companies can add their support by donating IT equipment that is no longer needed; offering training to employees who may not be required to use the internet as part of their role; spreading the word by including details on your company intranet or in a newsletter or hosting awareness raising events which include the wider community. If you’re in need of inspiration you can visit the website to see a selection of what others are doing as part of the ‘Promise in Action’ scheme.
On an individual level perhaps we should all take up the rallying cry of the manifesto and seek out the people we know who don’t already use the internet to prompt and support them to find out where they can get access to it. Do you know anyone who would appreciate the access to online job adverts, savings, or simply a way to keep in touch with friends and family in distant locations? You can get help with this using the ‘Pass IT on’ website, which has tips on how to get people interested in using the internet and a guide to getting to grips with the basics.
As well as the social case for increased internet access, PwC estimates that the total economic benefits of getting everyone in the UK online is in excess of £22bn – during an ‘age of austerity’ this is surely something worth putting a little time and effort in to!
To view or submit a ‘Promise in Action’ visit: http://raceonline2012.org/success-stories
Leave a Comment » | 
citizenship, Community, economy, Technology | Tagged: access, age of austerity, economic benefits, internet, IT, job adverts, manifesto, online, Promise in Action, PwC, Race for 2012, savings, training, UK | 
Permalink
Posted by Cary Cooper
August 12, 2010
This month’s CIPD Labour Market Outlook survey has revealed that 32% of HR professionals anticipate redundancies in their organisations over the next quarter. In the public sector this figure is 36%, with local government being hardest hit – 63% of those organisations expect to be cutting jobs.
There has been a drop in numbers of job losses in some recent months, but uncertainty over the extent of public sector reform has caused these figures to rise again. With the private sector also feeling the effects – because many jobs are linked to public sector cuts in terms of outsourcing, building projects, consultancies and the rest – there is a psychology of fear in the marketplace among HR professionals and recruiters. I can understand why they would project a worst case scenario prior to public sector reform, especially amid plans for a 25-40% cut in many government departments and local authorities. However there is a danger that the more we emphasise the negative, the more likely we will create a self-fulfilling prophecy!
As the private sector begins to come out of the recession with more confidence, those organisations will ultimately need more trained and skilled staff – gaps which could be filled by many who have been working in the public sector. The old stereotype of public sector workers being relatively unskilled and bureaucratic is just so out-of-date. Yes, jobs will go in the public sector but the best staff will have the competences and skills to find jobs in the private sector, or even start their own businesses.
There are plenty of talented people out there and we as a society need to help them to find work that further stimulates the economy – through the creation of new businesses, by supporting the expansion of SMEs or retraining to upgrade skills in a new growth area for UK industry. One thing’s for sure, ‘Doom and gloom’ is no recipe for success. As George Bernard Shaw wrote in Mrs. Warren’s Profession:
“People are always blaming their circumstances for what they are. I don’t believe in circumstances. The people who get on in this world are the people who get up and look for the circumstances they want, and if they can’t find them, make them”.
http://www.cipd.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/0F1E51BB-8703-4A7E-9F67-037C63576E34/0/5302_LMO_report_Summer10.pdf
Leave a Comment » | economy, Private Sector, Public Sector, Uncategorized | Tagged: bureaucratic, CIPD, circumstances, Confidence, economy, expansion, George Bernard Shaw, government, growth, HR professionals, job losses, Labour Market Outlook, Private Sector, Public Sector, public sector reform, redundancies, SMEs, UK industry | Permalink
Posted by Cary Cooper
July 8, 2010
So, we near the end of another World Cup and how do we feel? Needless to say, England supporters remain disappointed by the lack-lustre display that was served up by their ‘heroes’. All that hope, all that excitement and expectation that we invested in the team’s performance – and what did we get back? If it was a financial investment there’s no way on earth that you’d go for it, but sport is different.
Uniquely, sport offers a release, a (mostly) safe place where our emotions, hopes and dreams can be expressed wholeheartedly and without fear of reproach. It enables us to put the doom and gloom of the economic situation and all the grim news stories to one side by directing our emotions towards both national pride and the thrill of winning. Well, that’s the idea! But where does it leave us when the people nominated to deliver the dream don’t turn up or just weren’t good enough in the first place? Should we now be expecting a period of national emotional deflation caused by the huge gap between what we hoped would happen and what actually did happen?
I think the fact that for most of us football, indeed all sport, is not ‘real life’ is our insurance against national depression when things go wrong. It’s precisely because we see sport as an escape from real life in the first place that the huge, tear-inducing disappointment when our country gets knocked out of the World Cup is actually quite ‘disposable’. Even the day after the Germany game people in offices and shops all over the country began to joke about England’s demise and carry on with their lives as the disappointment gradually receded into the background.
So sport, unlike so often in life, offers us a win-win: as fans it lifts us sky high and provides lifelong memories when we get the result we want, but when our teams fail we can move on from and rationalise the disappointment relatively easily. I’m not sure that this is exactly what he meant back in 1981, but when re-read in this light the famous words of the great Liverpool manager Bill Shankly still ring true…
“Some people believe football is a matter of life and death, I am very disappointed with that attitude. I can assure you it is much, much more important than that.”
1 Comment | Community, economy, emotion, Personal Resilience, Productivity, Well-being | Tagged: emotion, emotions, end of world cup, football, football and emotion, happiness, improving well-being, Personal Resilience, Positive psychology, psychological well-being, resilience, Robertson Cooper, sport, sport and emotion, Well-being, World Cup | Permalink
Posted by Cary Cooper
June 25, 2010
The emergency budget that we received this week was, of course, widely anticipated and covered by the media. In this sense, the inevitable cuts were expected and few people will have been surprised by how far the government have gone. Of course, the full impact of 25% cuts to all government departments, except for health and international aid, are yet to be experienced – so it’s largely theoretical right now! It will only be when these cuts hit that we will feel the real impact in the short- and medium-term.
That said, the quicker we, the public, understand and can anticipate the implications of the cuts, the better for us psychologically – and for the large number of people working in the various government departments and public sector bodies. Pain of this sort has been experienced before in our recent history – during the various World Wars, during the depression, during the major industrial relations disputes of the 70s – but it has been a long time since ordinary people have experienced such a major jolt to their way of life. This will fundamentally affect our feelings of job and financial security, as well as our levels of happiness.
The good news, if there is any, is that the coalition government is also trying to find ways to stimulate the private sector. The hope is that it may be capable of taking on some of the fallout from the public sector provided that the switch from growing one to growing the other can happen fast enough. This is laudable but there will still be palpable stress, worry and insecurity in all reaches of society, particularly for those who are the most vulnerable.
There is a lot of uncertainty about this week (and not just in relation to England’s fate in the World Cup!). Not knowing what the future holds and whether the government has got it right can seem frightening. However, we’ve lived with uncertainty for the last two years and maybe when we come out on the other side of this we’ll understand what is really important in our society. I’m thinking about our families, our relationships and the communities we left on the shelf in the search for the almighty buck!
1 Comment | Community, economy, election, NHS, Private Sector, Public Sector, Stress, Well-being | Tagged: 25%, budget, coalition, communities, cuts, Depression, emergency budget, England, families, government, government departments, happiness, health, industrial, international aid, medium-term, Private Sector, Public Sector, relationships, security, short-term, Stress, uncertainty, World Cup, World Wars, worry | Permalink
Posted by Cary Cooper
June 18, 2010
After 7 hours of testimony at a House Committee yesterday, Tony Hayward looked drained and gaunt – like he’d reached the outer limits of his ability to cope. This was a 21st Century witch-hunt, whose purpose was to punish BP rather than to collaboratively come up with solutions to stopping the leak and minimising the environmental damage. The spectacle of the committee in Washington yesterday brought to mind the Salem witch trials and I was shocked at the personal venom displayed by the representatives in the name of ‘discovering the truth’.
But you don’t discover the truth by haranguing an individual to the point of exhaustion. It is not in the interest of BP to keep the leak spewing oil, so this Committee were politically posturing because they felt they needed to be seen to name, blame and shame. The feelings of Mr Hayward as an individual were irrelevant – this unfortunately highlighted a dark side of human beings when events aren’t in their control. It was very noticeable that one representative made this point and in doing so actually supported the CEO of BP, but after a recession he apologised for these ‘inappropriate’ comments and towed the party line again.
This happens in the workplace all the time – when a crisis event or circumstance arises that individuals feel they have no control over they tend to want to blame somebody, to project their frustrations outward. But does this solve problems? Not really. Indeed, it tends to create additional problems as in this case where we are now reaching a political hiatus in US-UK relations, particularly at a time when the UK has put its proverbial ‘neck on the line’ for the US in Afghanistan.
The committee’s treatment of Tony Hayward is regrettable. We seem to have very short term memories in relation to the results of putting excessive pressure on people who find themselves in the firing line. It’s not so long ago that this happened in relation to David Kelly over WMD in Iraq. Yes, naming and shaming might make politicians and the media feel better, but it doesn’t resolve problems and can damage individuals and institutions alike. In the workplace, it’s important to keep this in mind, particularly as we are entering difficult economic times, where naming and blaming when things go wrong and the going gets tough is all too easy an option to take.
Leave a Comment » | bullying, citizenship, economy, Engagement, health, Leadership, Management, Motivation, Personal Resilience, pressure, Productivity, Stress, Well-being | Tagged: Cary Cooper, control, employee engagement, Engagement, happiness, HR, improving well-being, leaders, Leadership, Management, managers, morale, Motivation, Personal Resilience, resilience, Well-being, workforce sustainability | Permalink
Posted by Cary Cooper
June 11, 2010
I mentioned the attempted takeover of AIA – AIG’s Asian Business by the Prudential briefly in my last blog but I’m also interested more closely in the psychology behind the Prudential’s failure. It seems that shareholders may have become very sensitive to Boards trying to overstretch themselves and less interested in endless growth through continuous acquisitions. That would be a genuinely new paradigm! There are probably a number of sound commercial reasons for the judgement made by Pru shareholders, but I can’t help wondering whether less rational psychological influences also played a role. Could it be that after the events of the last two years there is an increased sensitivity to over-ambitious Boards fuelled by global growth at all costs and a certain level of hubris?
There is no way of knowing whether the Pru Board’s bid for AIA would have led to a successful acquisition had it gone through, but clearly shareholders felt it was the wrong deal at the wrong price. Might we be entering a phase where group decision-making by shareholders and investors tends towards being over-cautious rather than overly risky? James Stoner in the early sixties highlighted the phenomena of ‘risky shift’ and ‘cautious shift’ in group decision making. In the former groups gravitate towards riskier decisions than the individuals within them would have taken if they had made their judgements in isolation, and cautious shift is where the opposite occurs. It may be that the current zeitgeist is sub-consciously leading investors and shareholders towards decisions which are collectively more cautious than the ones they would make in a more bullish climate or than they might individually make. The opposite has clearly taken place in the past as, to our current cost, risk was the name of the game. One view is that this may actually represent a healthy correction to a tendency for reckless risk-taking by some businesses - of course, the danger if this becomes embedded is that an increased number of opportunities will be missed.
Cautious decision making can also be driven by the need to stay in control during uncertain times. This is understandable, but again it is worth considering the trade-off between retaining control of a tightly defined business and failing to exploit new opportunities that require an initial release of control to open up new avenues. The Board of the Pru may have been psychologically ready to explore new opportunities in Asia and assumed their shareholders were also ready to support the investment required to do it. Big mistake! The Board may have been able to convince them that this risk was worth taking if it wasn’t for the the last two years of recession that provided the context. As things turned out it failed to anticipate the cautious shift that has occurred as the result of recent broader events in the financial climate and uncertainty about what the future holds. We’re almost certain to see more examples of this caution in the coming months and years.
2 Comments | change management, economy, Management, Private Sector | Tagged: acquistions, AIA, AIG, Asia, Boards, decision making, endless growth, financial climate, global growth, groups, individuals, investors, James Stoner, new opportunities, over-cautious, Prudential, psychology, rational, recession, reckless, risk-taking, risky shift, shareholders, sixties, takeover, uncertainty | Permalink
Posted by Cary Cooper
June 9, 2010
We have had a number of political storms over the past month; the BP oil leak, the BA strike, David Laws’ resignation, the Pru & AIA merger and then the Israeli blockade on ships going to Gaza. In these, and most political situations (with a small p), we get the inevitable anger; accusations, and defensive posturing in response and then counter-aggressive responses – with the vicious circle continuing on and on until another media storm grabs our attention.
I suspect that when such stories hit the headlines people who have been accused of making mistakes have a strong need to defend themselves – this is often their first reaction and takes precedence over acknowledging their errors of judgement or culpability for making the wrong or inappropriate decision. On the other hand, there definitely do seem to be some people/groups who feel the need to establish blame; to name and shame and to point the finger at the culprit. But let’s face facts, in these times where a coalition government is making difficult decisions that will affect every citizen it’s time for industrial relations to move to the next stage – a less adversarial stage that involves more adult behaviour. This means working together and, like the Conservative party, making previously unimaginable concessions – rather than harbouring class allegiances. As the emergency budget is likely to shout at us – it’s time to get real!
In politics, in business, and indeed, in most walks of life people make mistakes. Even when decisions are made with the best intentions things don’t always go to plan. It would be much more healthy and stand us in much better stead if we were able to admit this without feeling there is going to be major retribution. In business and politics, we need to create a really open culture where people can take calculated risks, knowing that if they fail the proverbial sky will not fall on their heads. We’ve heard David Cameron and Nick Clegg promise this change in politics – the signs are promising but it’s too early to tell whether this will really happen. Nevertheless, in the world of business we must start to aspire to these values and follow suit. A climate of accountability is an antidote to a blame culture – if we combine that with open, honest communications and supportive behaviour we can expect to enter a new era of working life in the UK.
Leave a Comment » | citizenship, Community, economy, prime minister | Tagged: accountability, AIA, BA, blame, blame culture, BP, business, citizen, class, coalition, Conservative party, culpability, David Cameron, David Law, defend, emergency budget, Gaza, government, headlines, honest communications, industrial relations, intentions, Israeli blockade, judgement, media storm, mistakes, name and shame, Nick Clegg, oil leak, open culture, political, Pru, resignation, retribution, risk, strike, UK, values | Permalink
Posted by Cary Cooper
May 26, 2010
What’s your incentive for choosing a healthy lifestyle?
NICE (The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence) is putting forward a new initiative to encourage healthier lifestyles – using financial incentives to change behaviour. Rewards are set to include groceries for quitting smoking, sports tickets for participating in healthy activities and shopping vouchers for staying drug-free. Already, several NHS Trusts have started their own schemes – for example Tayside in Scotland are offering weekly grocery vouchers of £12.50 to pregnant women if they haven’t smoked that week.
Opinions vary on whether this is a worthwhile initiative. In support, you might argue that people respond to incentives and anything that encourages people to adopt a healthier lifestyle is a good idea. In contrast, you consider this to be bribing people to do something that should already do, or even encouragement for people to start smoking a few cigarettes in order to qualify for the scheme. Critics argue that public money should not be spent in this way – pregnant women should give up smoking for the sake of their unborn children rather than for financial gain.
As with most initiatives, the evaluation process is going to be critical in determining whether it is successful and sustainable. The Tayside scheme was seen as a success by the NHS because of the 450 women that have taken part, half had given up smoking a month after enrolling and one-fifth (21%) had still quit after a year. This is twice the success rate of standard stop smoking services.
To answer the sceptics, the evaluation research will need to be broader than measuring drop-out rates for participants. The cost-benefits for large numbers of people becoming more active and giving up smoking will be reflected in personal health implications and the subsequent effects on NHS services. Long term savings can be made by reducing levels of obesity and smoking, for example parents who stop smoking will be healthier themselves, and will also reduce their children’s chances of developing asthma. Only when measuring these wider outcomes can the initiative properly be assessed on whether it is successful, sustainable and value for money.
Of course in an ideal world, everyone would make healthy lifestyle choices without the need for financial incentives. However, this is frequently not the case. So realistically, the use of incentives may need to be part of the longer-term solution by embedding healthier behaviours. If these in turn become the ‘norm’ we could quite quickly see sustained and broader improvements in the overall health of large numbers of people.
Leave a Comment » | citizenship, Community, economy, Guest Blog Spots, health, NHS, Well-being | Tagged: children, cigarettes, drop-out rates, embedding, evaluation, healthier behaviours, healthier lifestyles, improvements, incentives, initiatives, long term savings, National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence, NHS, NHS Trusts, NICE, obesity, pregnant, quit, scheme, Scotland, smoking, smoking related illness, sports tickets, successful, sustainable, Tayside, vouchers | Permalink
Posted by Cary Cooper
May 14, 2010
We have had a momentous change in government over the last 48 hours, with the Conservatives and Lib-Dems forming a consensus that they can lead together. The body language between David Cameron and Nick Clegg could not have been more positive, as both leaders confirmed this is going to be a five year coalition government, with collective Cabinet responsibility. We’ll see whether this is how things turn out, but after decades of combative politics we now have a chance of experiencing collaborative government and new behaviour that inevitably goes with it.
Yes, this was partly driven by the result of the election – but also by political leaders realising that the economic situation we find ourselves in requires consensus and movement towards common objectives for the greater good. It is a tribute to both leaders that they have seen this and that the rhetoric of ‘it’s in the national interest’ has been actualised. The Conservatives could have agreed to form a minority government in an effort to win another election in a year or 18 months; but they did not. They took the brave and courageous decision to work in partnership for the good of the country, even though it is likely to cause them political problems with some of their backbenchers down the line.
Now, what can business learn from this? Why can’t BA, the rail industry, the Royal Mail, and many other management teams, as well as trade unions, behave in a similar way? Rather than engaging in the “same ol’’ industrial relations battles of a bygone era, organisations need to focus on working towards common goals that will benefit both employers and employees. Does the country need, at this time of economic crisis, a return to 1970s class warfare and the ‘them and us’ mentality?! If political leaders with fundamentally different values can come to some kind of collaborative arrangement for the common good, business (and the public sector) can do the same! Ironically this kind of behaviour started in the private sector, but I think it sometimes gets forgotten – we called it ‘co-opetition’. Nick and Dave have given us a timely reminder that, now more than ever, businesses need to work together for mutual benefit and for the good of their staff.
1 Comment | economy, election, Leadership, Management, prime minister, Private Sector, Public Sector | Tagged: 1970s, BA, backbenchers, business, Cabinet, class warfare, co-opetition, collaborative, combative, Conservatives, David Cameron, economic, election, government, Lib-Dems, management teams, national interest, Nick Clegg, partnership, political leaders, politics, Public Sector, rail, Royal Mail | Permalink
Posted by Cary Cooper
May 10, 2010
This is a very stressful time for both David Cameron and Nick Clegg, as they attempt to juggle the multiple demands on them both to come to some understanding about how they are going to work together to govern. Over the last month, they have not had much sleep, have been travelling and away from their families constantly – now they are expected to come up with a coherent plan for government!
Admittedly, they are not alone in this process – they both have advisors and support from senior civil servants. But ultimately they have to make the tough decisions, with the added stress of disappointing a number of their respective followers and party colleagues no matter which decision they reach. It has to be stressful trying to juggle the concerns of the ordinary citizens, the economy, the markets, their party activists, the media and the wider financial community. This is not an easy balancing act for either, and we should all understand the intolerable pressures they are under. If the first few days are a sign of things to come it shouldn’t come as a surprise when, two years from now, we look at a PM or senior politician and say “hasn’t he aged”!
These high expectations are a reality for most people in senior roles in society. These people are expected to perfom as supermen/women – who we assume (given that they are paid handsomely!) should be able to deliver all that we and the wider community expect of them. We should all remember that they are only human, they also have families and important relationships outside of work. They have no more hours in the day than the rest of us, and sometimes events and situations will intervene and prevent them from achieving their goals.
The lively debates of the election have engendered strong emotional reactions to all three leaders, but a little bit of tolerance would not go astray right now. Leaders will not always deliver all that we want – it’s impossible to please everyone – but if they are committed, successful on the things that matter and give it their all, we should all lend them our support.
Leave a Comment » | economy, election, Leadership, Personal Resilience, pressure, prime minister, Stress, Uncategorized | Tagged: achieving goals, balancing act, citizens, civil servants, Community, David Cameron, debates, decisions, demands, economy, elections, emotional, families, financial community, govern, government, high expectations, leaders, markets, media, Nick Clegg, party activists, PM, politician, pressure, senior roles, sleep, society, successful, support, tolerance | Permalink
Posted by Cary Cooper
