Do as I Say, Not as I Do!

Laura Chalkley

WHEN IT COMES TO WORKFORCE and succession planning, especially in local government, how true the words in this chapter’s title seem. It’s not that we don’t want to think about it. The truth is that the busyness of our jobs and daily lives gets in the way of our doing anything but putting out the fires that are popping up all around us. And if truth be told, many think that workforce and succession planning are human resources functions. But are they solely HR? It’s true that there is a lack of ownership and/or confusion around who is responsible for workforce and succession planning, and we have come to think the solution is a partnership, a shared responsibility between individual departments and HR.

The all-too-familiar cry in many local governments—“but I’m doing more with less!”—certainly doesn’t allow for time to think about what may happen in the next five to ten years. And the truth is that many local governments have suffered from significant budget cuts and reductions in staff; however, not too many corresponding services have been cut. But the bottom line is that we do need to think about it, and we do need to do something to prepare for the future.

What further challenges the traditional planning process are the changing demographics of our organizations and the economy. No longer do we hire the person right out of college who comes to work for the government with plans to stay for his entire career until retirement. We hire the very experienced, top-of-the-ladder candidate who has typically retired from a first career, or in rare cases we hire the person with limited experience who plans to stay three to five years and then move on. In addition, the economy has impacted those who are eligible to retire but can’t afford to anymore, so in some cases, people are not retiring as early as anticipated. The uncertain economy and rapidly changing technologies also have had an effect on predicting what the work will be five years from now. Will you need building plan reviewers and building inspectors if developers do not have the funding to build?

Peter Cappelli, professor and director of the Center for Human Resources at the Wharton School, spoke at a recent HR People & Strategy (HRPS) conference about “The New Challenge for Talent Management.” He said in part that one of the challenges is “generating the supply of talent to match estimated demand when demand is very hard to predict and when the supply of talent won’t stay put.”

So how can we even plan with all this uncertainty?

There are many models to choose from, and each individual organization has to choose which model best fits its culture and passes the reasonableness test—in other words, what is the organization capable of committing to in order to plan for the workforce of the future? My organization took a dual approach to workforce planning. The first was a focus on internal leadership development at various levels to prepare for the potential retirement of more than one-third of our executive and senior managers within the next five years. The second approach focused on general workforce planning for anticipated retirements in the next five years. We don’t have a crystal ball, though we do have some specific retirement dates on the books, but it is still imperative to analyze what our needs will be, decide what skills may be needed for the future workforce, and determine whether we can grow and develop employees to fill the need.

This chapter will mainly focus on the path we took regarding leadership development and will touch on some other models we developed to help individual departments analyze their workforce needs.

LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS

We started the process by collecting data on the retirement eligibility of executive leaders in the next five years as well as the “executive leader readiness” of senior and mid-level managers through a Succession Risk Analysis Tool sponsored by the Corporate Leadership Council. (Note: For our purposes, executives lead departments, senior managers support executives and typically manage divisions, and mid-level managers support senior managers and typically lead individual programs.)

The intention of the tool was to provide information about how strong the future leaders (successors) were; how many of the future leaders were ready to assume a greater leadership role today; whether or not the future leaders wanted to remain employed with the organization; and whether or not the future leaders were receiving valuable developmental experiences. The information gleaned from that survey confirmed all too well what we thought: We could lose approximately one-third of our executives and senior leaders in the short term. The promising news was that there was not significant short-term or long-term risk of maintaining a strong and ready successor pool of candidates for executive level positions.

Then we looked at executive leader readiness among our mid-level managers. While the executives overwhelmingly agreed that the successors were ready to assume executive leadership positions, when we surveyed the successors, they did not feel they had been provided adequate training or been given the opportunity to be able to deal with developing a department’s strategy, supporting organizational objectives, working on projects in which organizational politics make their job harder, and helping turn a struggling business unit around.

To address these needs, the HR department and training and organizational development team designed two new leadership development programs. One focused on mid-level managers, while the other focused on high potential leaders. The two programs were defined as follows:

1. Mid-level Manager’s Program. This program targeted mid-level managers, seasoned managers, and managers who had completed first-line supervisory programs and wanted to improve their skills and compete for positions of greater challenge and leadership. This program was designed with a strong emphasis on “self as manager.” It was a feedback-intensive, cohort-based program lasting five months. The specific components focused on multi-rater feedback and coaching, Myers-Briggs assessment, and an individual development plan; business skills included change management and management versus leadership, developing others, and managers as coaches. It culminated with an experiential learning project: the manager’s role in developing employees.

2. Leader’s Challenge Program. This program targeted high potential mid-level and senior managers and individual contributors to prepare to compete for positions of greater challenge and leadership. The program incorporated action learning for teams to solve real-time county issues, with executive sponsorship. Detailed 360 assessments, Myers-Briggs assessment, and executive coaching were provided for each participant as well as some classroom learning around “self as leader,” change management, healthy practices for leaders, leadership presence, and presentation skills.

As you may know, in the public sector, vacancies are filled on a merit-based system, so identifying high potentials needs to be carefully pursued. Our leadership development programs in no way guaranteed or even groomed individuals for specific positions. We looked to create a pool of talented and effective leaders within the organization. Our Leader’s Challenge Program differed from other leadership development programs in that participants did not have to supervise employees in order to participate. We recognized that there were very strong individual contributors within the organization who had potential for assuming executive leadership positions. Some individuals specifically requested the opportunity to compete for this program and had to have a strong recommendation from their department directors. Others were recommended by senior leaders in their department. We looked for diversity among the pool of applications including ethnicity, job profession, gender, age, and thought process, which we gleaned through an extensive application essay.

While we have seen seven promotions in the past three years from the approximately forty individuals who have completed the Leader’s Challenge Program, we have also benefited from graduates who have led high-visibility task forces and teams to solve organization-wide issues. We have been able to “deploy” some graduates to other areas in the organization to allow them to gain an even broader perspective on the challenges facing leaders, providing even further experiential learning.

GENERAL WORKFORCE PLANNING

As I noted at the beginning of this chapter, there is no “one-size-fits-all” approach to workforce planning. We recognized that there was a broader need throughout the organization to look at workforce planning. We also recognized that someone needed to take the lead to begin the discussion and instill this process as a way of thinking throughout the organization. We created a team within HR to work with teams from individual departments if they were willing to devote the time and energy to tackling the issue. The team consisted of an internal organization development consultant, a senior staffing analyst, and a senior classification analyst.

We started the process by getting the teams to focus on a typical gap analysis of future workforce needs. No matter what model you follow, there are some basic components that should be considered. To name a few:

Forecasting and assessment. Who is eligible to retire, and what are the future trends for the job? Are there any hard-to-fill or high-risk positions that need a plan?

Leadership development. Do we have the internal capacity to groom future leaders?

Internal opportunities. Is there a clear career path for employees to follow and take ownership of for their development?

Recruitment. Do we have the right mix of internal promotions and new hires?

We provided department leaders with a list of eligible retirees, with clear direction and emphasis on the word eligible. We then asked them to do the basic evaluation of potential retirees and identification of staff members who might be able to compete for the position with some skill development.

The following is an example of what we proposed as a Workforce Planning Process:

1. Individual departments review retirement date report furnished by HR. Report will be segmented by eligible dates in one- to five-year time frame and six- to ten-year time frame.

2. Review report for “classes” of positions as well as individuals to determine greatest replacement need.

3. List critical skills needed in the next five to ten years, if known.

4. Look at current staff members who may be able to fill positions.

5. Compare critical skills with current staff skill levels.

6. Prepare development plan for internal staff members who could potentially fill those positions.

7. Create a plan for recruiting for positions if there are no internal resources.

We also created a tool that departments could use as a template for analyzing current staff and future workforce needs based on a Workforce Planning Diagnostic Tool developed by the Corporate Leadership Council. Our next step was to ask for volunteers who would be willing to work with our HR team to begin the process. Two departments initially contacted us—a public safety agency and a department of libraries—and we began the work.

Working with the Public Safety Agency

The public safety agency has specific career paths for employees within the organization. Still, it was eye-opening for the leadership of this agency to look at the numbers and to work on a plan for the future of the agency’s workforce. The leaders had to look at the gap created by retirements out and promotions up and the change associated with the gap, as well as the need to look at unique skills and knowledge base that would be a struggle to replace if someone in those positions left unexpectedly. We then challenged them to examine the ideal organization and how to get there and to ensure that the desired outcomes and recommendations were aligned with the outcomes of a concurrent job analysis study and potential exam recommendations.

Team review and discussion covered a variety of topics, such as:

Operations, staffing levels, recruitment, retention, staff changes, etc.

Projected retirement and promotional analysis

Feedback solicited from eligible sworn staff regarding projected retirement dates

Projections that were created of upcoming retirements and promotions, reviewed staffing levels for next five years at each rank and determining when and where shortfalls would occur

Specific positions and individuals who were identified who had unique skill sets and knowledge areas that were of concern in terms of knowledge transfer

After reviewing all the data, the team proposed a path to work on that included reviewing the following areas and making adjustments in order to fill the gaps identified in the initial analysis:

1. Recruitment

2. Career development

3. Promotional process

4. Knowledge transfer

There is the recognition that this is just the beginning of the work and that departments will continue to partner with the HR team to provide for the continuity of operations for the workforce of the future within public safety.

Working with Department of Libraries

The second department we worked with took a very different path from either the high potential leadership development route or the all-encompassing view taken by the public safety agency. After more than a year of working on gathering and analyzing data on potential retirements, workforce needs, and industry trends, the conclusion in this department was that there was a huge gap between entry-level positions and mid- to senior-level positions. The department leaders did not feel they had the capacity to fulfill leadership needs in light of the anticipated retirement of senior leaders within the next five to ten years.

The solution to this particular agency’s unique need was through the development of an Emerging Leaders Program. The program is designed to identify and define emerging employee talent and develop these people’s skills in support of the agency’s mission, values, and services. Two additional goals were identified: (1) to increase the diversity of the staff at all levels to reflect the community they serve, and (2) to enhance the retention of highly engaged and talented employees, thus creating a source of successors or future leaders.

With input from HR training and organization development staff, the department leaders developed a nine-month program designed around department-specific knowledge and competencies as well as courses in communication, managing conflict, facilitation, skills, effective meetings, and difficult conversations, all of which were identified as skills needed to move into broader leadership roles. In addition, there are requirements for technology courses (e.g., Outlook Excel, PowerPoint) and participation in luncheon dialogues on topics ranging from “Ethics” to “Making Counting Count.” Participants also are assigned a mentor from senior leadership staff in the department.

Anyone can apply for this program, and applicants are selected based on the strength of their application and recommendation from their supervisors. The agency has just implemented its second cohort, so there are no strong metrics yet, but the program is designed to plan for leadership needs in the next five to ten years.

Concluding Thoughts

In closing, I’d like to share a quote from Effective Succession Planning, Ensuring Leadership Continuity and Building Talent from Within by William J. Rothwell (New York: Amacom, 2001, p. 16):

Strategic planning is a process by which organizations choose to survive and compete . . . To implement a strategic plan, organizations require the right people in the right place at the right times . . . Hence, leadership identification and succession is critical to the successful implementation of organizational strategy.

Laura Chalkley is division chief for training, organization development, and staffing in the human resources department of Arlington County, Virginia. She has been with Arlington for twenty-three years. Prior to this position, she was an internal organization development consultant. In June 2004, she was recognized as one of three finalists for the HR Leadership Awards of Greater Washington for enhancing organization efficiency and performance, and she was named “Personnelist of the Year” by the Local Government Personnel Association of Baltimore-Washington Area for outstanding performance in promoting employee growth and development. Laura graduated from Trinity College in Washington, D.C., with a B.A. in business administration, completed the Georgetown University Certificate Program in organization development, and earned the designation of Certified Public Manager through a program sponsored by The George Washington University and the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. She is certified as a Senior Professional in Human Resources (SPHR). She can be reached via email at [email protected].