Introduction

Clusters, as conceptualised by Michael Porter (1990), have been central in economic theory. Geographically concentrated interconnected companies within similar industries have spurred economic growth and driven innovation. Silicon Valley’s technology hub, Wall Street’s finance focus, and Milan’s fashion hotspot are just a few instances of this clustering phenomenon.

Although economic and geographical clustering offers intriguing insights, I’m particularly interested in applying this concept to the microcosm of individual organisations – their teams. Could the “cluster” effect potentially apply to the human aspects of businesses?

What is a team cluster?

Based on principles of organisational psychology, a “team cluster” is a group of people with unique strengths who work together to create an environment that fosters innovation and high performance, according to Sundstrom et al. (2000). This approach differs from the traditional “superstar” model, which relies on one exceptionally talented individual to drive success. Instead, it suggests that a team made up of consistently above-average members is more likely to achieve optimal performance.

The way a team works together is very important in this model (Forsyth, 2018). Adding a superstar could upset the balance of the team and cause conflicts or hard feelings. However, a team that is well-balanced will work well together and have better relationships, leading to better performance. The Galáctico project in Real Madrid which was cancelled in 2007, is an example of this (although there is a new one in development by all accounts).  

The power of a strong team can be seen in historical examples, such as Walt Disney Studios’ ‘Nine Old Men’, a group of animators who worked together to create beloved films like ‘Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs’ and ‘Bambi’. This shows how a team with a balance of talent can be more effective than relying on one exceptional individual.

Social loafing

According to a theory called social loafing (Latane et al., 1979), people often put in less effort when they are part of a group, especially if they think that someone else in the group is responsible for most of the success. However, having a well-balanced team ensures that every member’s input is valuable, which decreases the chances of social loafing and leads to better overall performance.

The ground-breaking development of penicillin by Howard Florey, Ernst Boris Chain, and their colleagues at Oxford University exemplifies the power of such a team cluster (Ligon, 2004). Each individual played a vital role in the process, validating the potency of a balanced, collective effort in accomplishing a shared goal.

Training and collaboration

Developing the skills and relationships of team members can strengthen the effectiveness of team clusters. This involves training and development to promote shared understanding, mutual respect, and collaboration within the team, as stated by Salas et al. in 2008. A prime example of this is the COVID-19 vaccine development teams, like the one behind the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, who utilised their diverse skills and knowledge to successfully develop a vaccine through collective effort and collaboration.

Team cluster dynamics

The success of the ENIAC team in history underscores the significance of diversity and equality in teams. The “ENIAC Girls,” a group of six female mathematicians who were among the earliest computer programmers, played a crucial role in the creation of ENIAC, one of the earliest general-purpose computers. This demonstrates the value of utilising various skills and viewpoints, as well as the power of inclusiveness in optimising team performance.

The concept of the team cluster model can be applied in different fields, including sports. However, the dynamics may differ due to the unique nature of athletic performance. Nevertheless, the idea remains valid that a team with a good balance of contributions from each member often performs better than a team focused on one superstar, as proven by Fransen et al. in 2015.

Leadership’s role in team clusters

Creating effective team clusters requires intentional development and management. Encouraging self-development and peer-to-peer learning can raise the team’s overall competency level (Decuyper et al., 2010). Additionally, it’s important to nurture an environment where team members feel valued and understand their contribution to the overall goal. Leadership plays a crucial role in creating a culture that values collaboration, continuous learning, and collective success over individual brilliance.

Conclusion

In conclusion, team clusters are effective because they bring together a diverse range of skills, encourage collaboration, and promote continuous learning and development. By combining these elements, organisations can use team clusters to improve innovation and performance. In short, the team cluster model shows that working together can achieve more than working alone.

References

Decuyper, S., Dochy, F., & Van den Bossche, P. (2010). Grasping the dynamic complexity of team learning: An integrative model for effective team learning in organisations. Educational Research Review, 5(2), 111-133.

Fransen, K., Vanbeselaere, N., De Cuyper, B., Vande Broek, G., & Boen, F. (2015). The myth of the team captain as principal leader: extending the athlete leadership classification within sport teams. Journal of sports sciences, 33(14), 1377-1387.

Forsyth, D. R. (2018). Group Dynamics. Cengage Learning.

Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(6), 822-832.

Ligon, B. L. (2004). Penicillin: Its Discovery and Early Development. Seminars in Pediatric Infectious Diseases, 15(1), 52-57.

Porter, M. E. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. Free Press.

Salas, E., Cooke, N. J., & Rosen, M. A. (2008). On teams, teamwork, and team performance: discoveries and developments. Human Factors, 50(3), 540-547.

Sundstrom, E., McIntyre, M., Halfhill, T., & Richards, H. (2000). Work Groups: From the Hawthorne Studies to Work Teams of the 1990s and Beyond. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 4(1), 44-67.

Introduction

In a rapidly evolving socio-economic landscape punctuated by significant disruptions such as the global pandemic, the concept of emotional intelligence, specifically empathy, has become increasingly relevant within professional environments. Empathy, the ability to understand and share the feelings of others, is now viewed as a key leadership trait and an essential component of effective team dynamics.

Data from a series of international surveys conducted in recent years (Meechan et al., 2022 ; Holt, 2022) underscored the importance of empathy in the workplace. An overwhelming majority of respondents endorsed the idea that increasing empathy would contribute positively to societal improvement (EY, 2021). This perspective resonated with a significant segment of the European workforce, where empathy was deemed critical for employee satisfaction and retention (Chrousos, 2021). A UK study by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD, 2021) showed a rising trend in companies investing in empathy and interpersonal skills development.

Impact of empathy

Empathetic individuals play an instrumental role in an organisation, fostering effective communication, nurturing relationships, and enhancing social cohesion. By gaining an understanding of their colleagues’ lives, they create an environment where people feel confident to share their ideas, leading to increased teamwork and innovation. Empathetic leaders can respond more effectively to individual communication styles, thus motivating productive contributions.

Implementation of empathy

However, the implementation of empathy within organisations has its challenges. Creating an organisational culture of empathy requires more than just superficial changes. It involves a shift in mindset at all levels of the organisation and a commitment to aligning company policies, structures, and procedures with empathetic values. Additionally, empathy is often wrongly perceived as a sign of weakness, which can be an impediment to its acceptance in the workplace. Overcoming such misconceptions and creating a supportive environment where empathy is valued and practised is crucial.

Empathy and gender

Research has shown a correlation between empathy and gender, with some studies suggesting that women might inherently possess more empathetic traits than men (Baron-Cohen & Wheelwright, 2004). This does not imply that empathy is exclusive to women but rather that empathetic leadership styles could be more prevalent among women leaders. This observation can be used to encourage greater gender diversity in leadership roles, thus fostering a more empathetic organisational culture.

Empathetic leadership

From an employee perspective, empathy in leadership is highly valued. Employees tend to feel more engaged and committed when they believe their leaders understand and care about their feelings and perspectives. This can increase job satisfaction, improve morale, and reduce employee turnover.

However, there is a fine line between empathy and over-involvement. Excessive empathy can lead to emotional exhaustion and blurred boundaries between professional and personal life (O’Connor, 2021). Thus, it is essential for organisations to strike a balance between fostering empathy and maintaining professional boundaries.  The sustainability of empathy over time has also proved difficult in some sectors and needs to be managed accordingly (Yu, et al., 202).

Performance impact of empathy

The impact of empathy on performance is also worth examining. While empathy can improve interpersonal relationships and communication within a team, its direct impact on performance metrics may be more complex. An overemphasis on empathy could distract from performance-oriented goals if not carefully managed.

Conclusion

In conclusion, empathy is far from being merely a “woke” concept, as some critics portray it.  It holds significant potential for enhancing the workplace environment, promoting effective communication, and improving job satisfaction and retention. However, a balanced approach is necessary. Organisations should encourage and cultivate empathy but must also be aware of its potential pitfalls and educate their employees accordingly. As with any other organisational strategy, the key to successful implementation lies in the delicate balance between empathy and performance.

References

Baron-Cohen, S., & Wheelwright, S. (2004). The empathy quotient: An investigation of adults with Asperger syndrome or high functioning autism, and normal sex differences. Journal of Autism

Holt, S. (2022). Nurturing empathy. Innovative Leadership in Times of Compelling Changes: Strategies, Reflections and Tools, 117-131.

Meechan, F., McCann, L., & Cooper, C. (2022). The importance of empathy and compassion in organizations: why there is so little, and why we need more. In Research Handbook on the Sociology of Organizations (pp. 145-163). Edward Elgar Publishing.

Yu, Chou Chuen, Laurence Tan, Mai Khanh Le, Bernard Tang, Sok Ying Liaw, Tanya Tierney, Yun Ying Ho et al. “The development of empathy in the healthcare setting: a qualitative approach.” BMC Medical Education 22, no. 1 (2022): 1-13.

Introduction

It’s not who you are underneath, it’s what you do that defines you. Batman said it so it must be true. (Technically it was said to him first then made a running motif of the film’s core theme, but we may be splitting hairs.)

What we do does define us. Look no further than the first question directed your way by any small talk specialist at a party: what do you do? The question has a more pronounced meaning than simply what is your career. It’s designed to get a sense of what that profession says about you – your class, education, status, salary.

The most popular surname in Germany and Switzerland is Müller, meaning miller. In Slovakia, it’s Varga, the word for cobbler. In the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the US, it’s Smith, due to the word’s attachment to a variety of once common trades such as blacksmith and locksmith [1]. Your work, then, used to be your literal identity.

In purely nominative terms, that has changed. We do not live amongst Wayne Footballer, Elon Disruptor or Donald Moron. But in terms of social function, our profession is still the definitive modus of identification, at least on first glance. In today’s world, unlike in Batman’s, our job is both what we do and indicative of who we are underneath.

Work as identity

The vast majority of people spend the bulk of their waking hours at work. That was true pre-pandemic when office work practices were the norm. Home and hybrid working have changed things somewhat. There is more flexibility to work schedules, but that does not detract from the amount of our time given to work. In fact, the ability to do our jobs from home has in many cases seen work spill over into what was once free time. Anne Wilson, a professor of psychology at Wilfrid Laurier University in Ontario, terms the psychological state that accompanies investing a disproportionate amount of time and energy to work as “enmeshment” [2].

Wilson found that workers with greater autonomy over their schedule –  such as those in high-powered executive positions, lawyers, entrepreneurs and academics – were most affected by enmeshment. However, with greater autonomy over scheduling and certainly location now afforded to the many workers across the world, enmeshment’s prevalence is only growing.

What do you mean?

Given the prominent role our career plays in how we either identify ourselves or are identified by others, it makes sense that we want our work to provide meaning. After all, if work takes up most of your time and is seen as a solid representative indicator of who you are, then having a meaningful job surely necessitates that you also lead a meaningful life.

Meaning has the highest impact on whether an employee chooses to stay at their job or move on [3]. In fact, employees who derive meaning from their work are more than three times as likely to stay with their organisations [4]. On top of that, employees who consider their work to have meaning report 1.7 times higher job satisfaction and are 1.4 times more engaged with their work [5]. Meaning, it seems safe to say then, is good.

And yet a 2017 report from Gallup found that just 13% of the world’s workforce felt “engaged” at work [6]. Gallup defines unengaged workers as those who are “checked out” from their work, distinguishing between unengaged workers and those who are actively disengaged. This latter group, “act out on their unhappiness, take up more of their managers’ time and undermine what their co-workers accomplish” [7].

According to a separate Gallup study from 2013, actively disengaged workers cost US companies a whopping $450 billion to $550 billion per year [8]. In other words, for any cynical employers reading this who think their workers’ pursuit of meaning is nothing more than a tiresome display of existential narcissism that falls outside their professional remit, think again. Meaning is money. Meaning is business. And your staff’s search for meaning is your business.

A map to meaning

Positive Psychology lays out the most prominent job satisfaction theories. There’s Edwin Locke’s range of affect theory, predicated on the importance of meeting expectations. If employee A wants a team-oriented work culture, for example, offering one will provide them job satisfaction, and vice versa.

Then there is the dispositional approach, which posits that while our job satisfaction may fluctuate slightly according to our specific workplace circumstances, more important than whatever workplace culture we’re currently part of is our natural disposition. People with high self-esteem, high levels of self-efficacy, and/or low levels of neuroticism are more likely to be satisfied in their job than those of the opposite disposition, irrespective of whether the job caters to their specific needs or not.

The Job Characteristics Model argues that workplace satisfaction is contingent on factors such as skill variety, task significance, autonomy and feedback. While Equity theory posits that satisfaction depends on a trade-off between input and output. The level or hard work required, enthusiasm for the job and support of or for colleagues is being constantly evaluated against the financial compensation, feedback from higher-ups and job security the role offers, for example.

No theory is fully complete but all offer windows into what satisfaction supposedly looks like – with a great deal of crossover. Essentially a job that does all of or some of the following will prove satisfying: meets employee needs, offers work that is appropriately challenging, gives staff a decent level of control, provides a positive atmosphere (generally best obtained through co-worker collaboration and feedback from senior figures.). None of that, we’re sure you’ll agree, is groundbreaking information. As solutions, they’re easily identified, but harder to put into practice.

Tangible options

A practice often associated with job satisfaction is that of job crafting. For a deep dive on what crafting entails, read our article on the subject here. In short, it involves redefining the way you work, adjusting your role so that it better aligns with your specific skill sets. Sculpting a more personalised version of your position helps you – and in turn, the business – thrive, while simultaneously helping you derive meaning as you’re less likely to feel that your unique strengths are going to waste.

In accordance with the pursuit of meaning, psychologists Claudia Harzer and Willibald Ruch acknowledged the significance of finding a “calling” [9]. While many professionals may not end up working in the sphere of what they consider to be their calling, through crafting they can help bring their would-be calling to their existing role.

Another tangible step one can take to ensure they obtain a sense of meaning from their work is to prioritise relationships. Aaron Hurst, founder of Imperative and the Taproot Foundation and the author of The Purpose Economy, notes that his 20 years of research into the subject of workplace fulfilment found relationships to be, “the leading driver of meaning and fulfilment at work. If you lack relationships, it’s almost impossible to be fulfilled at work or life in general” [10].

Hurst’s definition of meaningful work revolves around three core questions. Do you feel like: (a) You’re making an impact that matters? (b) You have meaningful relationships? (c) You’re growing? If the answer to all three is yes, meaning will surely follow.

Assigning meaning

Of course, we all ascribe meaning to different priorities based on our outlook, upbringing, and social and fiscal circumstances, amongst other factors. As Douglas Lepisto and Camille Pradies describe in their 2013 book Purpose and Meaning in the Workplace, some people “may derive meaning not from the job itself, but from the fact that it allows them to provide for their families and pursue non-work activities that they enjoy” [11].

As noted earlier, some professions feel less like work and more like a calling. Researchers have found that those in jobs they consider their calling are amongst the most content [12]. One of the examples they give is that of zookeepers, noting that “though more than eight in 10 zookeepers have college degrees, their average annual income is less than $25,000.” On top of that, “there’s little room for advancement and zookeepers tend not to be held in high regard” [13]. Despite the relatively limited fiscal reward and few opportunities for growth, job satisfaction among zookeepers is strikingly high. That’s because many of them are doing a job that they deem to be their purpose.

Not only that, but to follow on from Hurst’s point regarding relationships, zookeepers were found to also feel that their co-workers experienced the same motivation and sense of duty they did, helping them form closer bonds. “It’s not just that you do the same work, but you’re the same kind of people,” explains Stuart Bunderson, PhD, a professor of organisational behaviour at the Olin Business School at Washington University. “It gives you a connection to a community” [14].

Approach

We’ve already looked at the dispositional theory around job satisfaction, which contends that our natural outlook has more bearing on our sense of purpose or satisfaction than the scope of the role itself. But we don’t all need to be shiny, happy people (as R.E.M. would put it) to find meaning in our work.

Michael G. Pratt, PhD, a professor of management and organisation at Boston College, demonstrates the variables of approaches we can adopt by relaying a tale of three bricklayers hard at work.

When asked what they’re doing, the first bricklayer responds, “I’m putting one brick on top of another.” The second replies, “I’m making six pence an hour.” And the third says, “I’m building a cathedral — a house of God.” [15]

“All of them have created meaning out of what they’ve done,” Pratt says, “but the last person could say what he’s done is meaningful. Meaningfulness is about the why, not just about what” [16]. Perhaps that’s why a 2013 Gallup report found that “employees with college degrees are less likely than those with less education to report being engaged in their work — even though a college degree leads to higher lifetime earnings, on average” [17]. They’re earning more money, sure. But they’re not scratching that vocational itch.

We’ve already written about the professional benefits associated with adopting a positive mindset here. A notable finding is the way that our approaches – both positive and negative – can land us in a feedback loop of sorts. A 2021 study in the European Journal of Personality investigating the relationship between self-esteem and work experiences found that, “The overall reciprocal pattern between work experiences and self-esteem is in line with the corresponsive principle of neo-socioanalytic theory, stating that life experiences deepen those personality characteristics that have led to the experiences in the first place” [18].

Put more simply:

an individual with high self-esteem tends to experience more job satisfaction, and experiencing job satisfaction positively affects the individual’s self-esteem. Thus, the reciprocal effects imply a positive feedback loop for people with high self-esteem and favorable work experiences and, at the same time, a vicious circle for people with low self-esteem and unfavorable work experiences. [19]

In your hands

A 2018 PwC/CECP study found that a remarkable 96% of employees believe that achieving fulfilment at work is possible, with 70% saying they’d consider leaving their current role for a more fulfilling one [20]. One in three even said they’d take a pay cut if necessary. Meanwhile 82% considered deriving meaning from work to be primarily their own responsibility, with 42% saying that they were their own greatest barrier to finding fulfilment at work [21].

There’s no one size fits all solution for finding meaning at work, but adopting a positive approach, building genuine workplace relationships, chasing your “calling”, or crafting your existing role so that it better aligns with your unique strengths and interests are all techniques worth exploring.

References

[1] https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20210409-why-we-define-ourselves-by-our-jobs

[2] https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20210409-why-we-define-ourselves-by-our-jobs

[3] https://www.fastcompany.com/3032126/how-to-find-meaning-during-your-pursuit-of-happiness-at-work

[4] https://www.fastcompany.com/3032126/how-to-find-meaning-during-your-pursuit-of-happiness-at-work

[5] https://www.fastcompany.com/3032126/how-to-find-meaning-during-your-pursuit-of-happiness-at-work

[6] https://positivepsychology.com/job-satisfaction-theory/

[7] https://www.apa.org/monitor/2013/12/job-satisfaction

[8] https://www.apa.org/monitor/2013/12/job-satisfaction

[9] https://positivepsychology.com/job-satisfaction-theory/

[11] https://www.apa.org/monitor/2013/12/job-satisfaction

[10] https://bigthink.com/the-learning-curve/finding-fulfillment-at-work/

[12] https://www.apa.org/monitor/2013/12/job-satisfaction

[13] https://www.apa.org/monitor/2013/12/job-satisfaction

[14] https://www.apa.org/monitor/2013/12/job-satisfaction

[15] https://www.apa.org/monitor/2013/12/job-satisfaction

[16] https://www.apa.org/monitor/2013/12/job-satisfaction

[17] https://www.apa.org/monitor/2013/12/job-satisfaction

[18] https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/08902070211027142

[19] https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/08902070211027142

[20] https://www.forbes.com/sites/kathycaprino/2018/12/10/4-ways-to-help-your-employees-experience-more-fulfillment-and-why-you-need-to/?sh=79bf3b525991

[21] https://www.forbes.com/sites/kathycaprino/2018/12/10/4-ways-to-help-your-employees-experience-more-fulfillment-and-why-you-need-to/?sh=79bf3b525991

Introduction

In any organisation, the vitality and productivity of its workforce is crucial. Gauging this contribution through performance assessments can act as a stimulus for growth or can become an obstacle when subject to biases. A noteworthy bias often overshadowing the review process is recency bias, tending to replace objective judgement with the impact of recent happenings. This piece delves into the depth of recency bias within the context of performance evaluations, its implications, and the ways to mitigate its influence. Our investigation draws on a wealth of insights from organisational psychology research and successful industry practices.

What is Recency bias?

Performance assessments are not merely a corporate ritual. They serve as strategic instruments to measure employee performance, provide meaningful feedback, set targets, and determine crucial outcomes such as promotions and compensation changes. However, these evaluations can be subjective and susceptible to cognitive biases. The issue of recency bias, where the most recent events or behaviour unduly influence the evaluation, often overlooks a consistent history of performance.

The principle of recency bias suggests that an individual’s latest actions or achievements disproportionately sway evaluators, sometimes casting a shadow over the individual’s past endeavours. This cognitive bias can distort assessments, potentially obstructing both personal development and organisational progress. Research within the field of organisational psychology underscores the significance of recency bias in performance evaluations. Studies indicate that individuals tend to give greater weight to fresh information when forming impressions (Todorov & Uleman, 2002).

This bias can twist evaluations, leading to sub-optimal decisions and employee dissatisfaction. Thus, recognising and combating this bias is crucial for fair and accurate evaluations. In the business world, several companies have identified the potential downside of recency bias in performance evaluations and devised strategies to curb its impact:

Strategies to reduce recency bias

Google, for instance, cultivates a culture of continuous feedback. This involves real-time performance evaluations, ongoing coaching, and constructive criticism, effectively reducing the effect of recency bias on annual reviews. This continuous feedback approach promotes a focus on long-term development rather than recent incidents.

Adobe adopted the “Check-in Model”, a system that encourages regular discussions between managers and employees about progress, difficulties, and goals. By taking into account a wider timeframe for evaluations, this method lessens the influence of recency bias. Deloitte implemented a similar approach with their “Performance Snapshot” system, providing employees with continuous feedback and conducting frequent performance evaluations. This broader information base minimises the impact of recency bias, allowing a more comprehensive and accurate assessment.

Though the above examples offer valuable insights, there are further strategies to help reduce the impact of recency bias in assessments:

• Embracing a multi-source feedback approach can provide a more well-rounded view of an employee’s performance, as it involves varied stakeholders such as colleagues, juniors, and customers. This diverse feedback can counterbalance the impact of recency bias.
• Encouraging self-reflection and documentation among employees can help maintain a record of their achievements, skills, and challenges throughout the evaluation period. When this record is referred to during performance discussions, it provides a balanced perspective and combats the undue influence of recent events.
• Lastly, focusing on clear criteria and objectives during performance evaluations can reduce subjectivity. Transparent expectations and predetermined metrics can significantly lessen the possibility of recency bias, leading to more accurate evaluations.

Conclusion

Performance evaluations are key to the success of any organisation, but the presence of recency bias can threaten their effectiveness. By understanding the sway of recency bias and taking proactive steps to mitigate its impact, we can foster a culture of fairness and objectivity that ultimately benefits both individuals and organisations.

Reference:

Todorov, A., & Uleman, J. S. (2002). Spontaneous trait inferences are bound to actors’ faces: Evidence from a false recognition paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(5), 1051-1065.

Introduction

A decade ago, the Harvard Business Review presented a viewpoint that Human Resources Directors (HRDs) needed help to assert their influence at the boardroom level, predicting that roles like CTOs and CDOs were set to outpace them. In this revealing blog post, we explore why, contrary to these predictions, HRDs have emerged as key players in the corporate hierarchy and how they’ve successfully carved a niche for themselves at both C-Level and D-Level. The narrative that unfolds is a testament to the unexpected evolution of power dynamics in the corporate world.

HRDs: The Unforeseen Influencers in the C-Suite

Historically, corporate leadership was synonymous with the CFO, CEO, and COO. As the business landscape evolves, it’s essential to identify figures whose influence is growing beyond these traditional roles. Here, a recent meta-study published in the Journal of Organisational Leadership comes into play, indicating that organisations with strong HR leadership witnessed a striking 23% boost in employee engagement, leading to significant improvements in performance and profitability. This challenges the stereotype of who the movers and shakers in the corporate world should be, highlighting the powerful impact of HRDs.

The Talent Tug of War: A Stepping Stone for HRDs

In the fiercely competitive arena for top talent, HRDs have grabbed the spotlight. They’ve used their strategic acumen to navigate the challenges of attracting, developing, and retaining the best in the business. A Harvard Business Review article published in 2011 claimed that HR still needs to work on gaining clout in the C-Suite. But, a decade later, HRDs have emerged as critical players, challenging that very notion. A recent study by a respected global consulting firm featured in the Harvard Business Review demonstrated that organisations with HRDs heavily involved in talent management saw a remarkable 35% improvement in retention rates for high-performing employees.

Driving Organisational Success and Culture

According to the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), organisations that adopt strategic HR practices have reported a 20% increase in productivity and a 25% decrease in turnover rates. HRDs are crucial in shaping and nurturing a healthy organisational culture and enhancing employee engagement, retention, and productivity. They are positioning themselves as invaluable allies to C-suite and D-level executives, actively contributing to the company’s success.

Reimagining Leadership for the Future

Today, companies are acknowledging the importance of people-centric strategies more than ever, and HRDs are well-positioned to shape the future of leadership. Their expertise in harmonising talent management, leadership development, and cultural transformation places them as key drivers of success.

An article by McKinsey & Company titled “The new possible: How HR can help build the organisation of the future” emphasises the strategic role of HRDs in the modern corporate environment. As they step up to the plate and redefine the path of organisational growth, HRDs are demonstrating their invaluable contribution to the C-suite and D-level executives.

In a post published by the Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance, the authors advocate for elevating the Chief Human Resources Officer (CHRO) to a more strategic role with a regular boardroom presence. As companies increasingly recognise this, HRDs are being given greater responsibility for overseeing talent development and cultural efforts.

Conclusion

The rise of HRDs as influential power players is not conjecture. It’s now a reality supported by compelling evidence, as seen in the meta-study and various reputable publications. As companies navigate the changing corporate landscape, leveraging the strategic contributions of HRDs is vital for driving productivity, attracting top talent, and crafting a thriving organisational culture. The time has come to embrace the emergence of HRDs and usher in a new era of corporate leadership.

References

“The New Path to the C-Suite” – Harvard Business Review (2011): https://hbr.org/2011/03/the-new-path-to-the-c-suite

“Has Your C-Suite Changed to Reflect the Changing Times?” – EY (2021): https://www.ey.com/en_us/growth/has-your-c-suite-changed-to-reflect-the-changing-times

“Evolution of the C-Suite: What Changes Can We Anticipate in the Coming Years?” – HR Daily Advisor (2019): https://hrdailyadvisor.blr.com/2019/06/19/evolution-of-the-c-suite-what-changes-can-we-anticipate-in-the-coming-years/

“A Deeper Dive into Talent Management: The New Board Imperative” – Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance (2021): https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2021/08/12/a-deeper-dive-into-talent-management-the-new-board-imperative/

“The new possible: How HR can help build the organisation of the future” – McKinsey & Company (2023): https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insights/the-new-possible-how-hr-can-help-build-the-organization-of-the-future

Introduction

The coveted office window seat has been the subject of much debate and envy among coworkers. But why is it so popular? As it turns out, science has a lot to say about our preference for this prime piece of real estate. From enhancing productivity and creativity to benefiting physical health, the perks of a window seat go far beyond the view. In this blog post, we’ll explore the scientific explanations behind the allure of the office window seat, sharing some amusing stories along the way.

The Power of Natural Light

It’s no secret that natural light can do wonders for our mood and well-being. Research has shown that exposure to daylight is linked to increased serotonin levels, which in turn can boost happiness, attentiveness, and productivity (Cajochen et al., 2000). In one office-based study, employees with windows in their workspaces reported higher job satisfaction and improved mental health compared to those without access to natural light (Matusiak et al., 2019).

A study conducted by Heschong (2003) explored the impact of daylight on human performance and satisfaction in various settings, including offices. The findings suggested that employees with access to daylight, even without a captivating view, experienced increased productivity and overall well-being. This supports the idea that the benefits of natural light, such as improved mood and performance, can be more significant than having an inspiring view from the window.

Cognitive Benefits of Gazing into the Distance

Staring into the distance is often seen as a sign of daydreaming or lack of focus, but in reality, it can be an essential mental break that leads to increased creativity and productivity. Research has demonstrated that brief periods of mind-wandering help facilitate problem-solving and creative thinking (Baird et al., 2012). Furthermore, being able to gaze out of a window provides the opportunity to rest our eyes and reduce eye strain, which is especially important for those who spend long hours in front of a computer screen (Rosenfield, 2011).

The Connection between Nature and Well-being

The view from a window seat often provides a glimpse of nature, whether it’s a bustling city park or a serene landscape. Studies have shown that even brief exposure to nature can positively impact our mental health and well-being (Bratman et al., 2015). In one study, participants who took a 50-minute walk in a natural setting experienced reduced anxiety and improved cognitive function compared to those who walked in an urban environment (Bratman et al., 2015).

A study conducted by Kaplan (1995) found that exposure to natural settings, even through a window, can have restorative effects on individuals experiencing mental fatigue. In this study, an accountant who felt overwhelmed and stressed during the busy tax season was relocated to a window seat with a view of a small garden. They discovered that taking short breaks to observe the birds and plants helped them feel more relaxed and increased their focus throughout the day.

The Social Status of the Window Seat

Let’s not forget the social aspect of the window seat. Being situated near a window often signals a certain level of status within the office hierarchy (Vinchur et al., 1998). It’s not uncommon for employees to feel a sense of accomplishment and pride when they’ve earned the right to sit by the window.

So, the next time you find yourself envious of a colleague’s window seat, remember that science is on your side. Natural light, cognitive benefits, and connections to nature all contribute to the allure of the office window seat. Who knows, maybe one day you’ll be lucky enough to snag that coveted spot and enjoy its perks.

References

Baird, B., Smallwood, J., Mrazek, M. D., Kam, J. W. Y., Franklin, M. S., & Schooler, J. W. (2012). Inspired by distraction: mind wandering facilitates creative incubation. Psychological Science, 23(10), 1117-1122. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612446024

Bratman, G. N., Hamilton, J. P., Hahn, K. S., Daily, G. C., & Gross, J. J. (2015). Nature experience reduces rumination and subgenual prefrontal cortex activation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(28), 8567-8572. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1510459112

Cajochen, C., Münch, M., Kobialka, S., Kräuchi, K., Steiner, R., Oelhafen, P., Orgül, S., & Wirz-Justice, A. (2000). High sensitivity of human melatonin, alertness, thermoregulation, and heart rate to short wavelength light. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 90(3), 1311-1316. https://doi.org/10.1210/jcem.90.3.8550785

Heschong, L. (2003). Daylighting and human performance. ASHRAE Journal, 45(6), 65-67. Retrieved from https://www.techstreet.com/ashrae/standards/ashrae-journal-june-2003-volume-45-issue-6?product_id=1722476

Kaplan, R. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15(3), 169-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-4944(95)90001-2

Matusiak, B., Lyssenko, L., & Sakellaris, I. (2019). Window view, indoor daylight climate, and office occupants’ satisfaction, mood, and well-being. Building and Environment, 149, 347-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.12.017

Rosenfield, M. (2011). Computer vision syndrome: a review of ocular causes and potential treatments. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 31(5), 502-515. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-1313.2011.00834.x

Vinchur, A. J., Schippmann, J. S., Switzer, F. S., & Roth, P. L. (1998). A meta-analytic review of predictors of job performance for salespeople. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(4), 586-597. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.4.586

Innovation is everywhere. It always has been. From the discovery of fire through advances in weaponry, healthcare and industrialisation, humanity has always found a way to adapt to the latest grand alteration; the next big thing. Invariably, once something as profoundly groundbreaking as the aeroplane or the internet comes along, change is wrought. Old practices are overhauled, then quickly shunted into the annals of history to be either forgotten or roundly mocked – can you believe we used to…?

And yet, to trudge through the mastheads, web blurbs or corporate video montages of almost any organisation today is to see and hear the word innovation endlessly. It’s wielded freely and often vaguely, to the extent that its meaning is diluted if not lost entirely. You’d be forgiven for thinking, given its overwhelming prevalence, that innovation itself was a 21st century innovation. Some of the companies claiming to be innovators are indeed just that – Apple can justly lay claim to having changed the way the majority of people operate in their day-to-day lives. Others simply know how to cash in on a buzzword when they see it.

But what actually is innovation? What does it offer businesses? How should it be used? What are risks and tradeoffs of pursuing the oft-discussed “innovation mindset”, and can they be side-stepped?

What is innovation?

Innovation is a bit of a catch-all term, but generally it just means finding a better way of doing things. That doesn’t necessarily mean inventing something new, though that is of course included. Innovation is just as much about fostering improvements to existing processes and ideas as it is about designing some groundbreaking new product.

When Alexander Bell first communicated with someone on the other end of the phone line, that was an innovation. When industries moved in their droves from the traditional in-office 9-5 to a hybrid working system just a few years ago, that was an innovation too, albeit one forced by global circumstances. It can be too easy to believe (the self-promotion of self-proclaimed) innovators and think that innovation must be cut-throat: the death of the old way; the birth of the new. In practice, things are rarely so straightforward. Which is a helpful reminder of what innovation is not.

Innovation ≠ disruption

Innovation and disruption have come to be seen as one in the same. This is understandable as some innovations are disruptive. Naturally, the more disruptive the innovation is, the more coverage it will receive, thus developing an associative bond between the two in the mind of the public. Uber and Amazon would be prime examples of disruptive innovators. Almost overnight, industries that we took for granted were irrevocably changed. Many taxi drivers, as well as booksellers both commercial and independent, lost their livelihoods. Similarly streaming’s impact on the entertainment industry has seen a total upheaval in how multi-billion dollar organisations now operate, whether that was Netflix’s obliteration of Blockbuster or Napster and its contemporaries’ shake-up of the music industry that paved the way for Spotify’s ascendency.

But there exists a far more gentle (and far more prevalent) form of innovation; W. Chan Kim and Renée Mauborgne, authors of Beyond Disruption: Innovate and Achieve Growth Without Displacing Industries, Companies, or Jobs, call this “non-disruptive creation” [1].

Non-disruptive creation is defined as a means by which new industries, new jobs, and profitable growth come into being without destroying existing companies or jobs [2]. The obvious benefit of such forms of innovation are that they can “foster economic growth in a way that enables business and society to thrive together” [3]. Chan Kim and Mauborgne are swift to differentiate between this non-disruptive creation and disrupting, noting that, “Disruption imposes a clear trade-off between winners and losers…That’s because the leap in consumer surplus provided by the disrupter can nearly wipe out the existing industry and its incumbent players” [4].

Non-disruptive creation, on the other hand, “provides no evident losers and only minimal painful adjustment costs,” while having “a positive impact on growth and jobs” [5]. They cite Kickstarter as a good example of non-disruptive creation. The users were able to fund projects that otherwise would have struggled to accumulate backing; they could choose which projects they wanted to give their money to, as well as how much and how often, and artists on the site were able to realise their dream projects. No livelihoods were displaced. Everyone emerged a winner.

Chan Kim and Mauborgne argue that there is an increased demand from the public for capitalism to give back to society, rather than simply chasing the profit-at-all-costs ideology first theorised by Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman [6]. Non-disruptive creation, they say, is in-step with such demands.

Social defence

Whether an innovation is disruptive or not, it is still at the mercy of social defence. For innovators, social defence is the great nemesis, stifling their dogged pursuit of progress at every turn. As a definition, social defence is the – quite natural, and often unconscious – attempt to preserve the more traditional aspects of an organisation [7]. Essentially, the “legacy structures, strategies, or cultures that make leaders feel proud and their followers feel safe” [8].

To the innovator, such blockades to all things new and shiny can be sources of great frustration. They argue that change is on its way, if not already here, and that attempts to slow its approach are as futile as they are jurassic. But it’s easy to understand why legacy employees at a large and successful company would be reluctant to rock the boat. The old approach has carried them to such heights; it looks a dangerous game to turn around and bite the hand that has fed them so well. After all, new is not a synonym of better.

That said, change is inevitable, and there are plenty of examples of companies who fell by the wayside because they failed to see it coming, or outright ignored warnings it was on its way. Reactions of major industry players to large-scale innovations have been compared to that of grief, with denial and defensiveness featuring heavily [9].

The music industry’s reaction to the initial emergence of MP3 and streaming is a prime example. Unsure how to fold this game-changing new technology into its existing offer (or at least how to do so and still reap the major profits they were raking in at the time), they went on the offensive, suing the free streamers into oblivion. They won in court, but as Justin Timberlake’s smug grin tells you in The Social Network [10] (where he plays Napster founder Sean Parker), the major labels emerged from the affair as anything but winners. “You wanna buy a Tower Records, Eduardo?” Timberlake smirks, like the fourth horseman of the old industry’s apocalypse.

How should businesses approach innovation?

Writing in Harvard Business Review, Gianpiero Petriglieri, associate professor of organisational behaviour at INSEAD, argues that, “Leadership, at its core, is an argument with tradition. As a leader, you are always relating to a tradition that you are trying to preserve, expand, or change. That means, as a priority, that you must care about the tradition. Or, more precisely, you must care about what the tradition is trying to accomplish” [11]. This is where those desperate to innovate at all costs can go wrong. They see change itself as the destination, not the means by which they’re getting there.

Still, an openness to change is vital. This is at the core of the fabled “innovation mindset”. That mindset can be established in-house or it can be forced upon businesses by external circumstances. The Covid pandemic was a clear example of this. Workplace practices were altered almost overnight; overlong vaccination protocols were streamlined – only possible because the whole world was in step, a rare instance that likely won’t roll around again any time soon.

Susan Rienow, Country President of Pfizer UK, wrote as much in the New Statesman, saying of the incredible innovations and the speed with which they were introduced [12]:

…these kinds of breakthroughs don’t happen by chance. It takes the right environment, support and conditions for science and innovation to thrive. It is not just about expertise; it’s about mind-set and how we come together in pursuit of a shared mission. This mission-led approach and entrepreneurial spirit, coupled with collective and powerful collaboration, helped us achieve what had previously been unthinkable. This shouldn’t begin and end with Covid-19.

Risk vs return

The key, as is often the case, is balance. Genuine openness to change paired with an understanding of what your business is and why – as well as what would happen to it were that to alter. And it’s not solely about whether the business itself is fine to change. Equally important are the circumstances around the business, and its users.

All innovations change the trade-off between risk and return, and “many of the risks associated with an innovation stem not from the innovation itself but from the infrastructure into which it is introduced” [13]. What ardent innovators can miss is that the rate of innovation is often so high that it becomes counterintuitive to invoking systemic change – companies cannot restructure according to each new innovation because by the time they’ve done so the next innovation will have emerged to displace the one they’ve just changed to accommodate. Innovations can possess the most hurrysome of expiration dates – store in the fridge and use within 24hrs of opening, etc. – and so the urgency to adjust with haste feels palpable to the innovation driver. But if you were told the best way to store a bottle that’s soon to go off is to buy a new fridge, well, you can understand the reluctance. Especially when the next bottle is just a day away.

Which innovations are worth adopting or adapting for is a difficult call. Some will alter life as we know it forever; others will fade faster than last summer’s T-shirt tan. To an extent, it’s a gut call and a leap of faith. One that if you get right, can pay huge dividends. Approach with cautious openness, and do not fear the inevitable overhauls. Business, after all, is no more or less predictable or ephemeral than life itself.

References

[1] https://hbr.org/2023/05/innovation-doesnt-have-to-be-disruptive?ab=hero-main-text

[2] https://hbr.org/2023/05/innovation-doesnt-have-to-be-disruptive?ab=hero-main-text

[3] https://hbr.org/2023/05/innovation-doesnt-have-to-be-disruptive?ab=hero-main-text

[4] https://hbr.org/2023/05/innovation-doesnt-have-to-be-disruptive?ab=hero-main-text

[5] https://hbr.org/2023/05/innovation-doesnt-have-to-be-disruptive?ab=hero-main-text

[5] https://hbr.org/2023/04/driving-organizational-change-without-abandoning-tradition

[6] https://www.nytimes.com/1970/09/13/archives/a-friedman-doctrine-the-social-responsibility-of-business-is-to.html

[7] https://hbr.org/2023/04/driving-organizational-change-without-abandoning-tradition

[8] https://hbr.org/2023/04/driving-organizational-change-without-abandoning-tradition

[9] https://www.ericsson.com/en/blog/2018/5/5-key-steps-to-creating-an-innovation-mindset

[10] APA. Fincher, D. (2010). The Social Network. Columbia Pictures.

[11] https://hbr.org/2023/04/driving-organizational-change-without-abandoning-tradition

[12] https://www.newstatesman.com/spotlight/2023/01/fostering-innovation-is-key-to-securing-the-health-of-the-nation

[13] https://hbr.org/2013/04/innovation-risk-how-to-make-smarter-decisions

As the sun sets behind the opulent stadiums, top-level athletes and their agents are huddled in boardrooms, fiercely negotiating their futures. The stakes are high, and the pressure is palpable. But negotiating a job offer isn’t a skill reserved solely for sports stars; it’s just as crucial for C-level and D-level executives (Curhan, Elfenbein, & Eisenkraft, 2010). So, how can you, as a top-tier executive, ensure that you secure the best possible offer without alienating your potential employer? Let’s explore some practical rules, drawing upon organisational psychology and empirical negotiation strategy, to help you navigate the labyrinth of job offer negotiation.

1) Embrace the Power of Likeability

In the cutthroat world of business, it’s easy to forget the importance of likeability. Sports agents and athletes recognise that maintaining good club relationships is paramount to securing favourable deals (Deephouse, 1999). As an executive, striking a balance between being persistent and being likeable is crucial. Be firm with your demands and sensitive to your approach’s perception. Show empathy and understanding, and you’ll be more likely to forge a strong connection with your potential employer.

2) Focus on Your Market Value

Before entering negotiations, clearly understand your market value (Pruitt, 1981). Research industry benchmarks and consider your skills, experiences, and achievements. Having a solid grasp of your worth will enable you to negotiate confidently and realistically.

3) Establish Your Reasons for Negotiating

Be clear about your motivations for negotiating. Is it about the salary, benefits, or working conditions? By identifying your reasons, you can develop a strategy that addresses your concerns while also demonstrating how meeting your demands will benefit the organisation (Thompson, 1990).

4) Assess Your Bargaining Position

Understanding your industry’s supply and demand dynamics is essential for successful negotiation (Malhotra & Bazerman, 2007). If your skills are in high demand, you’ll have more leverage to negotiate favourable terms. Conversely, if the market is saturated, you may need to adopt a more cautious approach.

5) Know When to Walk Away

Sometimes, negotiations may not yield the desired outcome. Recognise when it’s time to walk away from an offer that doesn’t align with your values or meet your expectations. By knowing your limits, you’ll avoid accepting a subpar deal out of desperation (Fisher & Ury, 1981).

6) Conduct Yourself Professionally and Politely

Throughout the negotiation process, maintain a professional and courteous demeanour. Avoid aggressive tactics or making ultimatums, as these can damage your reputation and harm your chances of securing a favourable outcome (Shell, 2006).

In conclusion, mastering the art of job offer negotiation is essential for top executives looking to secure the best possible deal. By being likeable, focusing on your market value, establishing your reasons for negotiating, assessing your bargaining position, knowing when to walk away, and conducting yourself professionally, you’ll set yourself up for success. Remember, the path to the perfect job offer is paved with empathy, strategy, and perseverance. As organisational psychologist Adam Grant would put it, it’s not about winning or losing; it’s about creating value for both parties (Grant, 2013).

References:

Curhan, J. R., Elfenbein, H. A., & Eisenkraft, N. (2010). The objective value of subjective value: A multi-round negotiation study. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40(3), 690-709.

Deephouse, D. L. (1999). To be different, or to be the same? It’s a question (and a trade-off) that organizations face all the time. Research in organizational behavior and human decision processes, 80(3), 212-238.

Fisher, R., & Ury, W. (1981). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. New York, NY: Penguin Books.

Galen, M. (2013). Negotiating your next job. Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/nextavenue/2013/02/25/negotiating-your-next-job/

Grant, A. (2013). Give and take: A revolutionary approach to success. New York, NY: Penguin Books.

Malhotra, D., & Bazerman, M. H. (2007). Negotiation genius: How to overcome obstacles and achieve brilliant results at the bargaining table and beyond. New York, NY: Bantam Books.

Pruitt, D. G. (1981). Negotiation behaviour. New York, NY: Academic Press.

Shell, G. R. (2006). Bargaining for Advantage: Negotiation strategies for reasonable people. New York, NY: Penguin Books.

Thompson, L. (1990). Negotiation behaviour and outcomes: Empirical evidence and theoretical issues. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 515-532.

Introduction

Ireland has experienced a rapid increase in housing costs over the past few years, making it increasingly difficult for both Irish citizens and those coming to the country for work to find affordable housing. The most recent data available from the residential tenancies board showed that in Q2 2022, average rents for new tenancies in Dublin were €2,011 per month, and outside Dublin (non-Dublin), averaged €1,130 per month, and new rents nationally increased by 8.2% in Q2 2022 over Q2 2021 (1). The high housing costs have impacted employee morale, retention, and overall financial well-being. This article explores potential strategies that employers can adopt to help address high housing costs in Ireland and discusses the benefits and risks associated with these initiatives.

Employee housing assistance programs

One potential solution for employers is offering their employees housing assistance programs. These programs can come in various forms, such as rental subsidies, low-interest loans for home purchases, or even the provision of company-owned housing

The benefits of offering housing assistance programs can lead to increased employee retention, as employees are more likely to stay with a company that helps ease their financial burden. Additionally, these programs can improve employee morale, as workers feel more secure and supported in their housing situation. Research has shown that comprehensive employee benefits packages can be a key driver in employee retention and a differentiator for attracting top talent. It suggests that organisations that provide a robust benefits package tailored to the needs of their employees are more successful in retaining employees (2).

It is also seen that employees who feel cared for by their employer are ten times more likely to recommend their company as a great place to work. It was also shown that when employees feel valued and supported through benefits and other initiatives, they are more likely to be engaged and stay with the company longer. Research also reiterates benefits and assistance programs’ positive impact on employee retention (3).   For example, Facebook has offered housing subsidies to some employees living near its headquarters in Menlo Park, California, to help alleviate housing affordability issues (4).

Employers should be aware of the potential risks associated with offering housing assistance programs, such as becoming overly reliant on the company’s support or creating a sense of obligation from employees. To mitigate these risks, employers can work with third-party organisations or financial institutions to provide housing assistance without directly owning employee homes.

Advocacy for government support

Employers can also advocate for government support and policies that address housing affordability. This can include lobbying for increased investment in affordable housing, rent control measures, and tax incentives for businesses that provide housing assistance to employees. In the United States, some companies have formed the Employers Housing Council to address housing affordability issues and work with local governments to develop solutions (5).

By advocating for government support, employers can help create a more sustainable solution to high housing costs, benefiting their employees and the wider community. This collaborative approach can also improve the company’s public image and strengthen relationships with local government and community stakeholders.

The success of advocacy efforts depends on the willingness of governments to implement the proposed policies or provide the necessary support. Employers should be prepared for potential setbacks and be patient with the process, as policy changes can take time to materialise.

Flexible working options

Offering flexible working options, such as remote work or compressed workweeks, can help employees cope with high housing costs by enabling them to live in more affordable areas outside of city centres. The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated the feasibility of remote work for many industries, with several major companies, including Twitter and Shopify, announcing permanent remote work options for their employees (6).

Flexible working options can increase employee satisfaction, reduce commuting costs and time, and allow employees to find more affordable housing. This flexibility can also help companies attract talent from a wider geographical area.

Employers should consider the potential impact of remote work on team cohesion, communication, and company culture. To minimise these risks, companies can implement regular team meetings, clear communication channels, and occasional in-person gatherings to maintain a sense of connection.

Conclusion:

Employers in Ireland have a role to play in addressing high housing costs and supporting their employees’ housing needs. By offering housing assistance programs, advocating for government support, and providing flexible working options, companies can help ease the burden of housing costs on their employees, ultimately benefiting both the company and its workforce.

References:


(1) Residential Tenancies Board. (2022). Rent Index Q2 2022. Retrieved from https://www.rtb.ie/news/rtb-publishes-q2-2022-rent-index

(2) Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM). (2019, October 28). Employee Benefits: The Evolution of Benefits. Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/benefits/pages/the-evolution-of-employee-benefits.aspx

(3) O.C. Tanner. (2018). The 2018 Global Culture Report. Retrieved from https://www.octanner.com/content/dam/oc_tanner/documents/pdfs/2018-Global-Culture-Report.pdf

(4) Dwoskin, E. (2016, August 19). Facebook Offers Employees $10,000 to Live Near the Office. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-offers-employees-10-000-to-live-near-the-office-1471611000

(5) Employers Housing Council. (n.d.). About Us. Retrieved from https://www.employershousingcouncil.org/about-us

(6) Kelly, J. (2020, May 12). Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey Tells Employees They Can Work From Home Permanently. Forbes. Retrieved from
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2020/05/12/twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-tells-employees-they-can-work-from-home-permanently/?sh=547b4c6f7384

It sounds too simple, doesn’t it? Fluffy and naïve. “Just be a little more positive and you’re bound to see results.” Healthy scepticism and an eye roll feel a fitting response. And yet the benefits of adopting a positive attitude are increasingly well-documented and steeped in research from leading academic institutions.

Having a positive attitude can transform how we view work and perform in our roles. It also, notably, has drastic impacts on our health and well-being. In fact, John Hopkins Medicine reported that those with a positive outlook on life but with a family history of heart disease were, “one-third less likely to have a heart attack or other cardiovascular event within five to 25 years than those with a more negative outlook.”¹ All of a sudden that eye roll feels a lot less fitting.

To properly implement this advice of taking a positive approach, we must first understand what it is. And, crucially, what it is not…

A positive attitude

A positive attitude is not the same as a blinkered, fact-denying, all-is-shiny-and-well outlook. It does not mean contorting reality or pretending setbacks and difficulties aren’t real. That much positivity would of course, ironically, be a negative, transporting you into the realm of delusion. Indeed, research shows that people who are excessively optimistic might overestimate their own abilities and take on more than they can handle, ultimately leading to more stress and anxiety.² That’s not what positive psychology is about. Rather, it’s about perspective.

Believing in yourself, trying to learn from setbacks and constantly improve, and attempting to make the most from a bad situation are obviously advantageous traits. But they’re easier said than done. Positive thinking is the tool you can use to turn them from being nice hypotheticals to actionable practices that impact your life and career.

Positivity in numbers

Research into the power of positive thinking has yielded some striking results. In a landmark paper³ published by The Royal Society, Barbara Fredrickson, a positive psychology researcher at the University of North Carolina, tested the impact of positive emotions on the brain, in which 5 segmented groups were shown different film clips (two groups seeing positive clips, one group seeing neutral, two groups negative) and were then asked to imagine themselves in a scenario in which similar feelings would arise and to write down what they would do, starting with the phrase, “I would like to…”

The two groups who saw positive clips – of joy and contentment, respectively – wrote down a significantly higher number of actions they would take than both the negative groups and the neutral. Essentially, the findings found that positive emotions helped broaden the sense of possibility in the mind and open it up to more options, while negative emotions narrowed the field of possibility.

Research into positivity in the workplace has found its impact to be similarly prominent. A study by Dr. Martin Seligman at the University of Pennsylvania found that optimistic sales professionals outsell their pessimistic counterparts by 56%⁴. While Shawn Achor, author of The Happiness Advantage, found that, “doctors put in a positive mood before making a diagnosis show almost three times more intelligence and creativity than doctors in a neutral state, and they make accurate diagnoses 19% faster.”⁵ A separate survey found that optimists were 40% more likely to get promoted over the next year, six times more likely to be highly engaged at work and five times less likely to burn out than pessimists.⁶

Clearly, then, positive thinking has tangible benefits in the workplace and elsewhere. But for those whose natural disposition is a little less sunny, how do you start thinking on the bright side?

Techniques for positivity

The good news is that our thought impulses are not fixed. The patterns of our brains can be trained and altered until we’re able to wield them more effectively. In other words, if your natural disposition is to think negatively, you can change that – with practice.

There are a variety of practices you can bring into your routine to help make positivity a default. Atomic Habits author James Clear focuses on three⁷. First, meditation. The aforementioned Barbara Fredrickson and her colleagues found that people who meditate daily display more positive emotions than those who do not, as well as displaying increased mindfulness, purpose in life, social support, and decreased illness symptoms.

Second, writing. Clear cites a study in the Journal of Research in Personality⁸, in which 90 undergraduates were split into two groups, the first writing about an intensely positive experience each day for three consecutive days, the second group writing about a control topic. Three months later, the students who wrote about positive experiences had “better mood levels, fewer visits to the health center, and experienced fewer illnesses.”

Third, play. Clear advocates for taking time to do some fun activities, even at the expense of work (within reason – don’t skip that big meeting to have a quick go on the swings.) Too often, he argues, we are slaves to our calendars, to the detriment of our merriment and well-being. Stifling our joy stifles our work too. In the long run, taking and making time for more enjoyable activities helps far more than it hurts.

Those are just Clear’s three staples. Advice from others includes starting a gratitude journal⁹ (documenting some things big or small each day for which you are grateful), adjusting your language to introduce more positive phrasing, or even just smiling. A University of Kansas study found that smiling – fake smiles included – reduces heart rate and blood pressure during stressful situations¹⁰. 

Broaden and build

The benefits of positive thinking don’t stop at mood enhancement. For anyone looking at the numbers cited in this article and wondering, “how can a simple adjustment in temperament bring all those results?” The answer is that it’s not just about the improved psychology, but all of the other avenues that psychology opens up. This is what Frederickson refers to as “broaden and build.”

Because positive emotions broaden the number of possibilities you consider (as opposed to actively narrowing, as negative emotions do), you are then more likely to use that positive thinking as the launchpad to build more skills, resources and relationships, which then lead to further opportunities. By broadening the avenues you consider, positive thinking opens up a whole world of additional prospects. Essentially, then, positive thinking sets the wheels in motion for further success, which will likely produce further positivity – and so the cycle is born. As Clear says, “happiness is both the precursor to success and the result of it.”¹¹

Bringing positivity to the workplace

The benefits of positive thinking are clear and obvious. And better news still, positivity spreads. Amy Finlay, co-founder of Edinburgh IFA, notes that “Exuding positivity can be infectious and, over time, can influence your co-workers.”¹² The same is true for negativity, however, which is why it’s crucial for those in management positions to facilitate a positive workplace culture. If employees are imbuing each other with positive energy, they are more likely to concentrate, improve their productivity, volunteer for tasks, and better manage their time. If management lets a negative attitude set in, it’s bound to lead to worse productivity, sloppiness, and generally make the company an unpleasant place to be.

In summary

To cynics, adopting a positive mindset sounds like a frivolous, new age concept, especially compared with more tangible changes one can make to workplace practices. But in reality, positive thinking goes a long way to improving the quality of our work, our creativity, our attitude around the office, and our dealings with others. As well as just being a nicer way to live.

Looking for a more productive, fulfilling, happier work life? Why not give positive thinking a go?

¹ https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/wellness-and-prevention/the-power-of-positive-thinking

² https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/wellness-and-prevention/the-power-of-positive-thinking

³ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1693418/pdf/15347528.pdf

⁴ https://hbr.org/2019/03/the-financial-upside-of-being-an-optimist#:~:text=A%20landmark%20study%20by%20my,their%20pessimistic%20counterparts%20by%2056%25.

⁵ https://www.forbes.com/sites/carolinecastrillon/2022/06/23/how-to-embrace-positive-thinking-at-work/?sh=3e99b0bb43b6

⁶ https://www.forbes.com/sites/carolinecastrillon/2022/06/23/how-to-embrace-positive-thinking-at-work/?sh=3e99b0bb43b6

⁷ https://jamesclear.com/positive-thinking

⁸ https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0092656603000588

⁹ https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-pessimists-guide-to-embracing-positivity-11674431476

¹⁰ https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/wellness-and-prevention/the-power-of-positive-thinking

¹¹ https://jamesclear.com/positive-thinking

¹² https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/6912-develop-positive-mindset.html

It’s the sliding doors moment you look back on and think, “what if?” Or it could be less definitive. Rather than an obvious fork in the road where you chose to go one way not the other, it might just be a more generalised sense of dissatisfaction, that lingering feeling that in another life things might have gone a different way. It’s regret, and for many people it’s unavoidable – in life and in work.

A Harvard Business Review study¹ of more than 300 US-based workers and their colleagues found that just 6% of those surveyed reported never or almost never thinking about other professional paths they could have taken. 21% reported pondering other paths often or almost always. In other words, professional regret is ubiquitous. And, unsurprisingly, it can have a negative effect.

The aforementioned study also found – through self-evaluations and input from colleagues – that “workers who felt somewhat stuck in the past were more likely to be distracted and to daydream while at work, took more breaks and days off, were less engaged with their colleagues, and were more likely to search for other jobs.” It’s not necessarily that these people weren’t happy with their current lives; in fact, many of them reported that they were. But contentment with what you have doesn’t necessarily preclude one from having dreams of what might have been.

The age of dissatisfaction

Experiencing regret is natural. There’s a reason this year’s Best Picture winner at the Oscars (Everything Everywhere All At Once²) as well as modern culture’s monolithic blockbuster franchise (the Marvel Cinematic Universe) are both focused on the theory of the multiverse – other dimensions in which the films’ protagonists can interact with different iterations of themselves and witness how their lives would have turned out if they hadn’t done X or had done Y. Audiences connect because it chimes with their own internal questioning. What if I’d kept up the painting? What if I’d married the blonde? What if I’d had the confidence to really pursue my dream? We could ponder forever on the endless lives we might have lived and the better people we could have been. Except it gets us nowhere.

The concept of professional regret is nothing new, but aspects of modern culture serve to exacerbate the problem. The world has simultaneously got bigger and smaller. Bigger, in that the professional options available to people now are wide-ranging in a way it would have been impossible for our ancestors to imagine. A few centuries ago, your career was predetermined. It was what your family did and had time for time eternal (if you were a man, that is; if you were a woman it was unlikely you’d be allowed a career at all.) Diverging from this path was rare. In the modern worksphere, however, not only are the occupants more diverse but the jobs themselves are too. Children are raised under the clichéd auspice that they can be anything they want to be. The benefits are obvious, with even the most niche of interests often catered for in the professional market, provided you know where to look. But the downsides are becoming increasingly apparent too. Choice overload is stifling and leaves people feeling trapped. If you’re a student with a broad range of interests, how do you know if you want to pursue photography or science, move into politics, start your own business or pack it all in to open a beach bar in Tulum? Being able to do everything makes it increasingly easy to do nothing.

The world is getting smaller in that it’s more connected. Digitalization of the social and professional spheres have led to work and social practices that are sometimes unrecognisable compared with even relatively recent history. Practices of the 1990s are starting to earn their stripes as relics of a previous century.

Social media has had the most obvious impact – on professional regret, especially. Being able to witness the lives of celebrities or successful friends play out in real time on your phone is the masochist’s lifeblood. It is the actualisation of how you tell yourself the other half lives. From the discomfort of your sofa, you get to compare your reality to other people’s highlight reels, and tell yourself that if you’d played your cards right, it could, instead, have been you in the newsfeed, boasting to the jealous masses or cashing some indiscreet check for that sweet #Ad money. Social media and choice overload, paired with more the traditional shackles of work-life balance, financial considerations and good old-fashioned imposter syndrome, have led to a collective malaise, where even relative high-flyers spend their days obsessing over the lives of those one rung higher on the ladder and bemoaning their own shortcomings. Marlon Brando’s iconic words of defeat from On the Waterfront³ now pour from the lips of each and every middle-management yuppie and should-have-been-a-singer CEO across the land: “I could’ve been somebody.”

It won’t surprise you to learn that dedicating your actual life to lamenting an imaginary one is not a recommended route to happiness or success. But given our propensity to yearn for greener grass, how do we better manage such thoughts so that we’re not derailed by them, or indeed are able to channel them into something useful?

Managing existing regret

There are a variety of techniques you can use to counteract professional regret. Some involve processing the thoughts in a different way, such as through mindfulness – accepting that the thoughts are thoughts and nothing more, and returning to the present before you spiral off and tumble down the rabbit hole. Alternatively, you could shift your perspective, adopting a more positive approach. Our thought patterns are not fixed; our brains can be trained and altered until we’re able to wield them more effectively. Try reframing negative ideas, such as replacing “should haves” with positive “what ifs”⁴. Rather than hitting the brick wall of “I should have never chosen this career”, you can say “what if I chose this because I was once passionate about it and I simply need to relocate what it was that drew me here in the first place?” Or “what if I took the skills I’ve gathered in this role and applied them to something I’m more invested in?” There are endless options, but turning dead end negatives into positives that offer options is a good place to start.

Another useful solution is crafting⁵. Crafting involves adapting your work role based on your existing skills and passions. In other words, rather than leaving your job for some other career that might suit your skillsets, adjust your role so that you’re utilising the many facets you bring to the table. Are you a budding writer stuck in a job that’s pure numbers? Offer to write a regular blog for your company. Are you a people person whose only interactions are with computers? Ask if you can get involved in client calls or join internal meetings. If you have something to offer, it will quickly become apparent, and you’ll not only feel more valued but like you’re being properly utilised rather than hiding your light under a bushel.

If you’re in a management position, it’s important to be on the lookout for hidden skills your team might possess. Maybe you’re looking to make an in-house corporate video and discover that rather than hiring a third party agency for twice the price, you have a co-worker who has spent his weekends shooting and editing short films for years and is looking to make more use of these skills in his day-to-day life. You never know what other lives lurk beneath your colleagues’ corporate veneers.

Mitigating future regret

Forbes⁶ cites a study from the journal Emotion⁷ which found that humans are most inclined to regret things associated with opportunities. Meanwhile a separate study⁸ found that 78% of people wish they’d taken more career risks. If you’re in the fortunate position now where you’ve been offered a grand opportunity and are considering taking a big leap but have trepidation, it’s worth thinking about your future self. Are you the type to spend the rest of your life wondering what might have been if you’d accepted? If so, wouldn’t it be worth finding out, or at least exploring the option thoroughly so that, should you turn it down, you can take comfort in knowing that you gave it due consideration? Trying something new is a scary prospect. But weighed against the possibility of a lifetime of regret, its fangs might lose a bit of their bite.

Which is not to say, of course, that the risk will pay off or that there won’t also be the other regret – what if I’d stayed? But even if it all goes wrong, rather than dwelling on what could have been, focus on what you can do now. Get up, dust yourself down, and go again. The Japanese have a name for this level of resilience: Nana korobi ya ok⁹i. It translates to “seven falls, eight getting up.” It’s the old Rocky Balboa motivational treatise: “It ain’t about how hard you hit, it’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.”¹⁰ If it’s good enough for Sylvester Stallone…

If your professional regret boils down to the fact that you really are in the wrong career, it can be tempting to start thinking that it’s all too late, especially if you are of an older generation, but that simply isn’t true. Experience is experience, even if it’s in a different field, and many of the traits we associate with getting older – caring less of what others think, having a better idea of your own mind and less fear of failure – are all positives.

Don’t fret about regret

Professional regret is commonplace. It’s human nature to ruminate on the roads not taken and the advent of social media has only served to pour fuel on an already raging fire. With the right perspective, however, and through crafting and personalising existing work habits, it’s possible to make your current role more satisfying and temper some of those multiversal ponderings. If you’re truly dissatisfied, it’s never too late to make changes. But first, give a fair assessment to your reality. You may come to find that the real grass beneath your feet is greener than you thought, and certainly offers a more solid standing than its fictional counterpart on the other side.7

References

¹ https://hbr.org/2023/03/are-you-hung-up-on-that-career-path-you-didnt-choose

² https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6710474/

³ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0047296/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0

⁴ https://hbr.org/2012/09/coping-with-career-regret

⁵https://steeringpoint.ie/insights/crafting-how-to-increase-engagement-performance-and-job-satisfaction/

⁶https://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegwalton/2018/05/30/what-are-your-regrets-most-people-regret-not-becoming-ideal-self-study-finds/#74c1f9c34925

⁷ https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/emo

⁸https://zety.com/blog/biggest-career-regrets#:~:text=Taking%20calculated%20risks%20is%20an,was%20not%20pursuing%20a%20passion.

⁹https://www.entrepreneur.com/leadership/8-entrepreneurs-reveal-how-they-discern-reflection-from/295635

¹⁰ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJHkTtvnUqA

In today’s fast-paced world, productivity has emerged as a critical aspect of our daily lives. The conventional approach to productivity involves time management, but recent research indicates that energy management is a more sustainable method for improving productivity and well-being. By utilising insights from various disciplines, such as organisational psychology, social psychology, nutrition, mental health, stress management, fitness, and focus, individuals can devise strategies to systematically expand their energy reserves and achieve more in their daily lives. This article will delve into the importance of managing energy levels and present real-life examples of individuals and organisations that have successfully adopted energy management strategies.

Energy Management and Organisational Psychology:

Organisational psychology has demonstrated that individuals who efficiently manage their energy levels are more productive and engaged in their work. Establishing clear goals, prioritising tasks, and incorporating short breaks throughout the day can help sustain motivation and energy levels. For instance, Google has implemented a program called “Jolly Good Fellow,” allowing employees to take time off to work on personal projects, subsequently increasing creativity and productivity in the workplace.

Social Psychology and Energy Optimisation:

Social interactions play a vital role in energy management. Positive social support from colleagues and supervisors can enhance work engagement, job satisfaction, and overall energy levels. For example, Patagonia, an outdoor clothing company, encourages employees to partake in outdoor activities during work hours, resulting in increased productivity and employee satisfaction. Moreover, a study conducted by Halbesleben & Buckley (2004) found that employees who perceived high levels of social support at work experienced lower levels of fatigue and burnout.

Nutrition and Mental Health:

A balanced diet is crucial for maintaining energy levels throughout the day. Consuming regular, nutrient-dense meals with complex carbohydrates, healthy fats, and lean proteins can fuel the body and brain. A study by the Harvard Business Review discovered that employees who ate healthier meals had a 25% higher job performance than those who did not. Additionally, addressing mental health concerns such as anxiety, depression, or chronic stress can improve overall well-being and energy management. General Mills’ meditation program exemplifies this, as it reduced stress and increased employee productivity.

Stress Management and Fitness:

Regular physical activity is proven to boost energy levels and mood. Incorporating exercise into daily routines can reduce stress, improve cognitive function, and increase overall energy. The law firm Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe introduced a “wellness program” that includes exercise classes and meditation, leading to a 50% reduction in sick days among employees. Furthermore, practicing relaxation techniques like mindfulness meditation or deep breathing exercises can help control stress and maintain energy levels throughout the day.

Focus and Avoiding Distractions:

Distractions can rapidly drain energy reserves, making it challenging to maintain focus and productivity. Techniques such as the Pomodoro Technique, which involves working in focused intervals followed by short breaks, can help minimise distractions and optimise energy levels. This method is particularly useful for individuals who struggle with procrastination or find it difficult to concentrate for extended periods. Notably, the famous writer Ernest Hemingway used the Pomodoro Technique to help him write his books.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, managing energy rather than time is a more sustainable approach to enhancing productivity and well-being. By incorporating strategies from various disciplines, individuals can systematically expand their energy reserves and achieve more in their daily lives. Real-life examples of individuals and organisations that have successfully implemented energy management strategies demonstrate the effectiveness of these techniques in improving productivity and well-being. Taking care of oneself, including eating well, practising stress management techniques, engaging in regular physical activity, and avoiding distractions, is essential for maintaining optimal energy levels throughout the day.

References:

1. Watanabe, N., Furukawa, T. A., Horikoshi, M., Katsuki, F., Narisawa, T., Kumachi, M., … & Cuijpers, P. (2018). A mindfulness-based stress management program and treatment as usual for university students with psychological distress: A randomised controlled trial. Psychological Medicine, 48(14), 2327-2336.
2. Loehr, J., & Schwartz, T. (2003). The Power of Full Engagement: Managing Energy, Not Time, Is the Key to High Performance and Personal Renewal. New York: Free Press.
3. Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The Job Demands‐Resources model: state of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309-328.
4. Chatterjee, S., & Yilmas, E. (2019). Nutrition and Well-being: A Systematic Review of the Impact of Food Choices on Mental Health. Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 46(4), 674-690.
5. Pronk, N. P., Katz, A. S., Lowry, M., & Payfer, J. R. (2012). Reducing occupational sitting time and improving worker health: the Take-a-Stand Project, 2011. Preventing Chronic Disease, 9, E154.
6. Cirillo, F. (2018). The Pomodoro Technique: The Acclaimed Time-Management System That Has Transformed How We Work. Penguin.