I was just checking my Yahoo! mail where I saw an email highlighting a really cool piece of research recently done in the UK, studying how the Google generation (people born after 1993) go about getting information. The study, information behaviour of the researcher of the future, was commissioned by the British Library. Guess what – people are not going to spend time pouring through libraries and books to get the information they need, but rather simply search from the web or better just have it intelligently pushed to them – is this really a surprise? No but it does raise the question: why have we put up with enterprise software that is so dumb in how it delivers information? Generally, enterprise software is great for handling transactions but no real guidance on how to make better decisions faster.

SuccessFactors has just released the 83d release of our product, called ULTRA, which has received enormously positive feedback from customers, prospects and analysts. But what is so special with this new release? Yes, it is completely integrated and easy to use with very intuitive navigation and delightful appearance. So what does that have to do with finding the information you need when you need it? Information alone is not terribly useful. This is why ULTRA strives to deliver contextualized content. That simply means delivering answers to questions that you might have, or ought to have to effectively execute the task at hand. Today, no one has any time for anything including time to find the information they need, which would be lost time for productive work. If you need relevant information, but fail to go out and get it you will be forced to make a less informed decision. This could have a huge impact on your overall productivity. In ULTRA this concept was widely considered during its design, which is why in ULTRA information is delivered with the relevant context and tools so that you can make informed decisions. Even if you actually don’t know that you need it.

For example, there is a Coaching advisor that gives the individual practical advice on how to address specific needs or shortcomings, as defined in a competency assessment? If you have a need for better communication skills (and who does not btw…) real, practical advice on how to improve those skills is just there. Need to get a quick look at how people in your department are performing vs. their potential, check out the nine-box summary and drill down to the individual level to troubleshoot performance problems – content in context. These tools have not only helped me, but have also benefited the members of my team for whom I complete performance reviews. That is what truly smart software provides for its users. The writing assistant is another powerful tool that I just used to assist in writing a performance review for an analyst on my team. I think that alone saved me the evening, freeing up some valuable time and getting me home in time to have dinner with my wife and kids. Thanks to the ULTRA team for making it easy for the Google generation and for the rest of us…

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

70% of total cost of doing business is people cost

80% of the value of a company is not found on the balance sheet

Why are people only an expense post on the income statement?

Today: Profitable companies see their people as a necessary cost of doing business.

Tomorrow: The economy goes in cycles and the cost of doing business quickly becomes a big problem when companies face problems continue to grow or even maintaining the top line. So people go from being a cost to becoming a problem. I thought this is an important reminder right now with some indications of the US and world economy moving into slower growth and potentially a recession. Are your people becoming a problem that you will deal with?

Talkers: Some organizations talk about their people as their greatest asset but what they typically mean is that they actually understand that people also belong on the balance sheet and refer to people as means of production. That is a great industrial factory floor viewpoint of people. They are a means of production as is raw materials and capital. However they don’t need to write of this asset. It is also a pretty stale view assuming a constant value of this asset.

Walkers: Modern organizations should see their people not only as a cost but also as a capital investment. There is however a fundamental difference between a dead asset and a person. An asset will depreciate over time. Of course to various degrees depending on what it is and how it is being used and maintained. A person’s value will increase over time in terms of the ability to deliver value to customers. This additional value contribution potential springs from experience, network, knowledge, skills and courage. The more this type of asset is being used the more it appreciates (of course within human capacity). Ongoing growth and learning should make an individual more capable of dealing with broader and more complex issues at a faster pace. Nothing new here and I think that this viewpoint is greatly illustrated by Larry Bossidy while explaining the turnaround of AlliedSignal (The Job No CEO Should Delegate, Bossidy, HBR, 2001). However if companies only pay lip service to this they are selling them self short in terms of limiting growth, harvesting productivity gains and ultimately creating shareholder return. Growing the greatest asset will grow the company and set it part from competitors.

Dr Kirk Hallowell from PDI and I are working on a more in depth paper looking into the right metrics to measure and and manage people as assets. We will present our findings in a webinar end of January. Our goal is to show how greater people practices pays of financially and introduce some specific metrics that we suggest organizations start using to achieve real results.