Is Your HR Operating Model Set Up to Win ? with Perry Timms - OrgDev Episode 95

Why has HR’s operating model barely changed in 25 years – while everything around it has?

In this episode of the OrgDev Podcast, we speak with Perry Timms about the uncomfortable truth at the heart of modern HR: we’ve spent decades optimising processes instead of redesigning how HR actually works.

As organisations evolve at pace – driven by digital transformation, new workforce expectations, agility, and shifting power dynamics – many HR functions are still operating with models built for a different era. Perry argues that incremental improvement is no longer enough. What’s required is a fundamental rethink of HR’s operating model, its role in organisation design, and its contribution to business value and societal impact.

We explore:
Why traditional HR structures struggle to support adaptive organisations
The limits of efficiency thinking in transformation work
Self-managed and freedom-centred work systems
The future of HR operating models
What “Better Business for a Better World” really means in practice

Wish you had a handy recap of the episode? So did we.

That’s why each week in our Next Step to Better newsletter, we’re sharing From Pod to Practice – a 2-page visual summary of each episode designed to help you take the learning from the podcast and into your work.

You’ll get:
■ Key insights from the episode
■ A reflection prompt
■ A suggested action

Sign up now to get From Pod to Practice delivered to your inbox each week: https://distinction.live/keep-in-touch/

About Us

We’re Dani and Garin – Organisation Development (OD) practitioners who help leaders and people professionals tackle the messiness of organisational life. We focus on building leadership capability, strengthening team effectiveness, and designing practical, systemic development programmes that help you deliver on your team and organisational goals. We also offer coaching to support individual growth and change.

Find out more at www.distinction.live

We'd love to connect with you on Linked In:
linkedin.com/in/danibacon478
https://www.linkedin.com/in/garinrouch

Transcript

(00:00) Hi, welcome to the org dev podcast. So, if organizations are evolving faster than ever, why has HR's operating model barely changed in 25 years? For decades, we've been optimizing processes instead of redesigning how HR actually works. One person who says enough is enough and is calling for a complete rethink is Perry Tims.
(00:23) Perry has a bold vision for how work should be better and real clarity on the role HR needs to play to get there. Perry is a leading figure in our industry. He's been named five times as one of the most influential HR thinkers by HR magazine and has now been inducted into their hall of fame. Perry has over 20 years experience in HR and OD and he's an international conference speaker, consultant and the practice lead at people and transformational HR.
(00:46) He's an adjunct professor at Halt International Business School and visiting fellow at Cranfield School of Management. And he walks the talk as well. Through his company PTHR, Perry has pioneered new ways of working from a 4-day operating week to self-organizing teams, a certified BC court model, and a focus on life friendly purpose-led design.
(01:06) And he's the author of three books including the energized workplace and transformational HR. But it's his new book we're really keen to talk to about because Denny and I have been reading it aidly and that is the HR operating model. And it's a fascinating subject. It's the right book at the right time with the right person. And Danny has spent the right amount of time reading it.
(01:24) for for those watching on or listening on audio, Danny's just presented a very well bookmarked book, which is always the sign of of a good book. So, welcome Perry. It's really lovely to have you join us today. >> Oh my goodness me. You cannot contain the excitement about me being here, especially now I've seen that book that Danny just put up with all those little yellow tabs on it.
(01:42) It is just like that's an author's dream. I'm telling you now. So tell us a bit about the book. What what inspired you to write it? Why now? Why this topic? >> So there is a story to it and unfortunately it kind of hinges on a couple of like really big events in the world, right? So back in 2005 when I worked in HR in what is the court service, I was asked to help introduce the HR business partnering model into the function there.
(02:15) And it happened to be on the day that the 77 bombings happened in London. So it's like wedded in my mind for a couple of reasons. So we were locked into the Tower Bridge Hotel to teach people business partnering against that backdrop. That was the first time I think I'd come across how that model actually needs to be put into play and what we need to sort of move away from at the time.
(02:34) So that it goes back to that sort of anchoring moment then. And then the other sort of sad occasion is actually Queen Elizabeth II's funeral where we all had a day off work as that was going on, right? So, I sat and watched that in the kind of solemn and respectful way that you would. And then for some reason, don't ask me why, I just sat up on the kitchen table and got my remarkable tablet out, started thinking it was the year that I was number one on that list, thinking there's something I've got to give back to this
(02:59) profession, and I started to sketch around what the operating model could be, quite literally, after watching that sort of solemn funeral procession. And then it just sort of started to come to me, and I sort of thought, wow, maybe I've got something here. I don't know why, but this maybe feels like I could stress test this with a few friends.
(03:16) So that's what I did. I sort of put it out to people I trusted who were practitioners in the world and sort of said, "Look, if we had an operating model like this and it needed to kind of shift into these sort of spaces, what what would you think to that?" And a few came back and went, "Oh, that's a bit different, but I like it.
(03:32) " And stress tested it a little bit with me. I then went back to HR magazine and said, "I I've got this concept of a new operating model and I'd quite like to serialize it for you as a kind of give back to my number one status." And the editor at the time said, "Oh, yeah, let's do it." So, a six-part series. I wrote that.
(03:47) All of these things just helped me go from a sketch to something that started to something. And then I went to Kogan Page and said, "Hey, I've put this series together. People are quite interested in this. Would it make a book, do you think?" Then funnily enough, we've just published a title on operator models, but we haven't got one on HR.
(04:05) So there's the story behind it. >> And we love a definition on the podcast because we have our audience is is varied from looking thinking about the profession to very experienced. So can we start with some definitions about what is an operating model and how is it different from maybe a business model? Yeah.
(04:22) And you know what? I had to I kind of really test myself on this because I can remember going into a client. It was around about 2015, I think. And they said, "Oh yeah, we've got this big consulting firm in doing our target operating model." And I thought to myself, "Target operating model? I haven't really heard about that much." And then from that moment on, I almost heard it every week.
(04:41) So I think where that's gotten to is that the business model of an organization tends to be this is how we meet the world. This is this is what we need to do the things that we exist to do. So the resources, the revenue, the customer, the segmentation and at the heart of it is the value proposition like what why we're even here.
(05:00) So that operating that bit the business model is that out how you meet the world. But the operating model is how you do what you do inside to make that business model come to life. And it's still only the second part in the trilogy as I see it because the operating model says how do we organize our moving parts? Our information, our structures and flow, our decision making, how we segment the kind of workforce and the technology we use.
(05:25) But that doesn't even stop there because it has to then go into org design which is like what what does it do and how does it interconnect and how do we deal with the variables and where do we put people and what do we call them? How do we reward them? And what's the kind of cultural dynamic that comes from this mechanical schematic that is the org operating model? So I I use the example in the book of of it being a blueprint, which isn't the house, but good luck in trying to build a house without a blueprint, but actually the org design then becomes well, what size
(05:52) are the rooms and where do we put the furniture and what's the interior decorating look like and the heating and the plumbing. So, so that metaphor really sort of helped me understand that flow between how we meet the world, how we set ourselves up to succeed, but what that actually looks like on an ongoing daily basis and and even in writing this book, I thought I've been really like missing the trick here about the three connecting sources and forces because once your designs in and you start to see the possibilities, you ought to
(06:18) probably loop back to your op model and go actually could do with a bit of tinkering here. And actually, that tells us that the business model might need a little bit of reshaping perhaps. So I think it's a lovely loop in thing between the three but we don't often do that. >> And you said you once you came into the heard the terminology operating model you started seeing it everywhere and it feels certainly for us I think that there's increasing mention of operating models and it's become a bit of a thing.
(06:41) >> Where do you think that's come from? Do you have a kind of hypothesis there? >> Uh I think partly the consulting world because an organization can't almost get out of its own head. So it's in its state of operating and it thinks we've got to transform and do something differently.
(06:56) And guess what? It kind of tinkers and twists a bit. It doesn't really fundamentally think, do I need to go back to the blueprint? It's almost cuz they're in the house, they're sort of thinking, oh, I don't I don't really know what to do here. Whereas, I think a consultant firm would come in and go, actually, what you're talking about there is a different way to use your garage, an extension to put on there, and we'll take it up a level and give you a loft that you haven't got now.
(07:15) And they're like, oh yeah, that's good. That gives us much more space and adaptability. But I couldn't sketch that out myself. So, I think it's sort of come from that as an industry. But I also think the nature of the chaotic and somewhat unpredictable state of the world's changes has also put so much stress on what a business model and an operating model is there to do that people realize they can't just keep changing and restructuring.
(07:40) They've got to kind of pair it right back to all the founding fundamentals. There's a lovely phrase that Thomas the philosopher come came up with. He said when it's a bit of a crisis we don't just do that through a linear adaptive nature. We have to think about the absolute fundamentals that we might need new versions of.
(07:58) And I think it's that I think people have thought I really need a new version of what I'm all about. And I think that's come because the world's chaotic problem stacking has just forced a lot of rethinking about that. >> And your book particularly focuses on the HR operating model. It feels like in in some ways a lot of organizations have got stuck as Garen said kind of 25 with the Dave Orick model, three pillars, you know, three stalls.
(08:19) >> What's your thought? Why why why does the HR operating model need to evolve? What was the challenge with >> I mean what a perennial 64 million all that kind of question really Danny but um I guess that was at the heart of my sense and agitation about the fact we hadn't got one for quite a while and there is something about why would we look outside of ourselves to get one from somewhere else why don't we inside create something new and I know this is an orgdev podcast and I am going to be a little bit org dev biased on things
(08:47) right but one of my agitations was orgdev is still too much a mystery serious black art sat somewhere in this operating model undervalued, underappreciated, even unknown. And it's almost like, but I've got this sense actually that it's all about the org design, the ordev, and the or effectiveness.
(09:06) Everything else almost stems from it. So why isn't OD the lead and HR kind of is a practice field or function that comes from it? It's like, well, actually, that's probably quite controversial and difficult to get off the ground because a lot of people are so affiliated with the HR bucket as the whole thing that it's in.
(09:21) But there is a way to perhaps liberate OD kind of forces, OD mindsets, OD practices, skills and so on. So I thought an operating model ought to be a way by stealth uh I have to say to to to do that that sort of elevation that sort of real noticeable nature of what it can do as in what OD can do. Um but also just the fact that HR in those three pillars/legs it kind of argues in itself is that a COE thing or is that a shared service? It's like who cares? Where's the value chain? why don't you just move to where the work is? We've almost been
(09:52) neglectful of our own org design while we've been trying to do everybody else's. And I thought that can't be right. So, so it was a bit of a call to action that if we look after our org design, we might be better positioned to do better things across the verticals and the value chains that the business has.
(10:08) And I just think this whole sense of an organization that's designed and fixed and then you only unfix it when the next big thing comes along, that's long gone. So, I think we needed something more responsive as well. By the way, it is quite mysterious. We do practice OD with gowns with hoods on this >> like the traitor program. Yeah. >> Carrying a lantern.
(10:28) >> What an image. Well, hey. >> So, I think it's fair to say most HR teams are so busy delivering that they rarely sort of take that time to stop and >> ask if they're they're organized in a way that still makes sense. But when you go into organizations, what few are some of the early warning signs that the HR operating model might need rethinking like >> what do you start to notice in the system and like it could be behaviors, decisions, outcomes that tell you it could be time to look at this or redesign it? >> Yeah, what a lovely question that is.
(10:59) I'll start at the top actually and I don't mean to be disrespectful to any HR director or chief people officer, but mostly they're doing senior team adult daycare. They're trying to sort out malevolent, mischievous leaders who aren't doing the right thing or getting them aligned or whatever. And it means that they're paying so much attention there.
(11:17) They're not looking at how their function is optimized and drives change to support that. So I thought, well, that can't be right. So we need to get a way that can actually unhook the senior leaders into a bit more determinable success for their teams. Not their fault, I have to say. They're being asked to play that role. But what they needed was more backup.
(11:32) They needed more data evidence. They needed more compelling cases. They needed to see more hot delivery. and they weren't quite getting that. So, they were always batting on a sticky wicket, I suppose you'd say. So, that's when I can go into the machinery of it. So, I'll give you an example. Business partnering. If you go in and say to a senior leader, what does your business partner do? You'll get a description that sounds like a super adviser fixing some faults and problems and sorting out a bit of cap.
(11:55) I'm like, I don't think that was the intention of the role. What about strategic advice? It's like, what why would I go to them for that? And then I see workforce planning nowhere and convulsive recruiting going on. And I see people who just pay token lip service to their engagement scores and just want to notch it up a little bit.
(12:10) They don't really care whether people care enough about the organization to devote themselves to it. I'm like, there's something not going right in the way that information flows into the HR team to then get pushed up to kind of go, this is important stuff. You need to work this out.
(12:24) And and ringing in my ear is this sense that I pick up lots of reports from various people. And in it, the human capital side troubles senior leaders. Have I got the right skills in the right way to do the right thing? and the determinable difference that high talent individuals and good deployment does.
(12:40) They're almost just hopeful about getting that recipe right. I'm like, well, that's not playing HR right at all. So, I think it's partly HR's own sense of I've just got to desperately add some value somewhere. doing the administration nice and slick and do some lovely L & D and a bit of change to actually the organization get in the right sense that what it should get from them and brief them and give them commissioning assignments that are much more stretching and humanistic and and powerful on performance.
(13:06) So it's almost like the requirement hasn't been speced but equally the agitation hasn't been put in about you can get so much more from us. So this was a way of saying if we can show a bit more pioneering spirit that results in impact and value the business might go how have you got good at that that's really I don't we'll tell you we'll show you how so it was almost us leading the way not just taking orders >> and so to open the conversation up even further from reading your book you come up with some quite quite challenging
(13:34) quite common sense and also some sort of quite innovative ways of actually getting HR teams to think and approach the work in a different way. Could you just define some of the core components that you're s proposing in terms of sort of updating the operating model? >> Definitely. So there is a a sort of a vertical and a horizontal way of looking at it.
(13:54) It's four intersectional circles as the kind of basis of the schematic. So if I deal with the um vertical one because that's perhaps easier for people to understand. You got to be anchored in terrific operations and processes and do all the things that keep the company safe and compliant and trusted and regulatory.
(14:10) So you can't get away from that at all. But we don't want to call it like some shared service admin mysterious thing that just happens anywhere that you could botify at a moment's notice. You want it to be really powerful value adding stuff. So it starts there and then it literally goes straight up into the the sense of products.
(14:26) And this is probably where it is a bit different because HR doesn't talk about its things as products at all. It has an outcome in mind. It has usability and it has something that really technology have defined as features and functions and value creating stuff. And I know there are some people that have got PX and people experience with the product and great stuff going on in that world.
(14:45) Big leap for a lot of HR professionals. So I was trying to bring it a bit nearer and go if you got an L & D program, it's not an L & D program. It's a product. It's a product that's helping people develop, be more versatile, be more adaptable and so on. And so I wanted them to adopt a product mentality to get more of a sense of is this really built with them in mind or just because I know how to put a policy together because that's what I see policies put together.
(15:09) like where's the usability in that? Do you know what I mean? So, so that's the horizontal and then the vertical is I think what might hopefully light you up more. It's we've got to get absolutely hot on systems. All the systems, not just the technology systems or the procedural systems, but the whole entity of work as a system and inter relationships as a system.
(15:29) So systems thinking and the OD stuff is absolutely living strongly in there going come on use me more but linked across it to science and I am not saying that everybody in HR has to become a psychological degree qualified individual but it wouldn't hurt and I really want those people like me who haven't got a psychology degree to just get so curious you just keep a massing insight about what it is how you use it people science neuroscience social psychology anthropology it's like there so many things we could lead with that
(16:01) have a science background. And of course, data science and modeling comes in there too that it's like we are missing out on potentially almost like a supercharge on what we believe is the right kind of things for an organization to stand by because we're not playing science strongly enough and the links to systems and what it does to influence your products and how you then processor orient them.
(16:23) So that's how the model has come to be. And most people seem to really like the fact that I'm calling out science deliberately, but secretly they're loving the systems more because that's never been a big feature of it. And I'm getting much more curiosity about systems thinking, what it is, and how they use it. I >> I love what you're saying there about the systems piece.
(16:41) And but I guess what I'd really love to go back to the product piece that you're talking about there because that is quite a departure, isn't it? You know, you're sort of saying something that we sort of see as band-aid or something that's just part of the work is actually potentially a product. And products aren't ever finished.
(16:56) They're always iterated and developed and that as well. So if if you're kind of arguing that HR should move from process driven to product driven, I guess you given us a couple examples, but can you give us examples of some of that in action? Like we've seen organizations experimenting with that and how it works. >> Yeah. Yeah, definitely.
(17:11) So I've worked with one client recently on it. So it's very fresh in the mind and and so they have relabeled the HR function as people experience. That's what they're they're driving it through as to to depart it from its administrative kind of current paradigm and and within it they've looked at the products from a sense of even before people join them almost like what can we give and deliver people that helps them make the choice to come to work for us.
(17:37) So they're thinking about like pre- onboarding I suppose well even not pre pre-application stuff. So they're thinking differently about employer brand and they're thinking about it not as a marketing tool. How can we get people to know who we are, where we've come from, where we're going, and what it might be like to come work here, even if they don't even consider applying.
(17:57) And I'm like, whoa, whoa, loving the feel to that. Then they're looking at the recruitment process and going, that is at the minute little bit torturous on both parts. And so, we want to make that much more open. And they were thinking about things like neurodeiverse friendly and so on and so forth. And because they're in an industry where there isn't high female representation, they want to make sure that people who are women think that's a place I could be at.
(18:20) So they're starting to think very deliberately about those. And they are starting to think about products and usability and tone and sort of empathy and how they design it from a point of who are we after, what do they need, how do we provide it. So, I guess you might say that's where they're starting to get a little bit more into the personalized sense of it without tying themselves up in knots trying to hit 56 different use cases.
(18:43) They're just taking a really where don't we play strongly enough and how could we and taking a product mindset to that and they've pushed that all the way through even to exit. They've also said actually when people leave us there's a product there which is why what can they help us with? Do they want to keep in touch and so on.
(19:02) I'm almost like, wow, what a refreshing way to look at it. And they wouldn't have got there if they didn't start thinking products. >> And what does it take in terms of kind of shifting culture or mindset or skills and capability for people to move from where they are to that kind of product approach? >> Quite a lot is a short answer, but the approach starts, I think, with getting really comfortable in knowing what kind of data you can base it on so that it's not just whimsical trend flow flying stuff.
(19:27) It is a bit more like, well, what information have we got? So actually before they got into thinking about a product, they thought we've got to get our information house in order and we we we need to do that. But actually what they did was they started to think about their data management and knowledge as as if it were a product that they were making available to the rest of the HR teams. That was a nice shift.
(19:43) They started to think that way too. So design thinking does come in. So the empathy, the prototyping stuff that comes through, they're starting to think in that way. They're starting to think in shorter cycles, Danny, of how they develop a bit of it and then test it and then bring it back in and bring people in with expertise that they wouldn't normally have done before because I think they're recognizing where they were short and deficient and it might slow it down or stop them even doing it and they think, "Yeah, but we know
(20:07) people we could bring people in." And their early experiments with that has found that actually people quite enjoy coming into HR saying, "Oh, this is interesting work." And they're like, "Oh, what have we been doing?" And selling our own like stimulation for coming in. Um, so they're building capabilities like that, but I think they recognize they are at the start of the start of that.
(20:26) So I think what they really want to do is get really hot on how they get proper prototype and proper customer inputs and feedback in a much more regularized way. So they would say they're a bit messy and amateur right now, but the intent is really there. And I think when they get much more, I suppose you'd say accomplished in it, they will start to have almost like a formulaic but still very adaptable and and deployable version of it.
(20:48) and they're already starting to do the same in their learning um arena because that feels much easier for the learning team to kind of go ah yeah this is stuff that's really help us design proper good programs now so yeah so I think it is about being analytical on your data being very customer savvy and walking a mile in their shoes and if not bring them in and they'll help you do that and then turning that into prototype usable things that people can then sort of stress test to then get to a cycle where you feel really comfortable and
(21:13) confident with the the product you got and then how you communicate it the bit they are probably struggling with at the most at the moment is how they communicate it because people just think it's another HR initiative and they're like no this is different. So at the minute they are sweating their coms. >> Yeah, I was going to ask that.
(21:28) How do you It's almost an education piece for your audience, stakeholders and your customers >> because it's a very different way of experience in HR because HR does have a does have a kind of we love a kind of policy that's shiny and finished and beautiful and kind of shifting to a kind of minimum viable product can feel quite >> yeah challenging >> whiskey. Yeah.
(21:48) Risky >> and and you're potentially you're introducing something that's countercultural. So it's an actual culture shift exercise, isn't it, as well? So are are there particular organizations that lend themselves to sort of the 3.0 or do you think there's there's opportunity for for all HR teams to look at in a different way? >> I would say that those organizations who operate in what I would call sort of very well-defined arenas like farmer um bizarrely I think would like this more.
(22:16) I didn't think it would be that friendly to places like hospitality and retail, but I'm actually getting some good feedback from people in hospitality and retail. So, that surprised me a bit. I thought, "Oh, surely you're more the traditional sort of thing with high volume and all that kind of stuff." But they're like, "No, no, no.
(22:30) This gives us a really strong edge to do things that are actually probably a little bit lacking when it comes to um succession planning and things like that." So they're sort of pinning it on some of the deliverables, technology definitely, but also I think in in places like housing because um if you're in the housing arena, yes, you've got a service of providing housing, but I mean it's very complex and community-led and very sort of societal and government-driven and the systems and the science bit I think is almost like an unleashing of
(22:57) something they've perhaps wanted to play a little bit more strongly in to be nearer to the innovation that the housing organization might have to put into the customer arena or social agenda or whatever it is. So, actually that is an area where I think it it could turbocharge them quite significantly. Um, but I'd say anybody that's got an orderly sense of of who they are and what they do, I think this is a really nice almost like countermeasure of a little bit more fluidity that sits strongly within that orderliness. So,
(23:26) it's almost like you don't have to match the orderly by being regimental. you can actually create some opportunities you wouldn't have otherwise done by being a little bit different to then put it back into the orthodox setup. >> And I'm getting a hint in terms of like there there's definitely an agile underpinning to some of this work, isn't there? And and a lot of teams say they're doing agile, but they they they rarely are.
(23:48) >> I know. Um, so I guess from from your experience, what does it take for an HR team to sort of embrace more of an agile approach in reality and and and what tends to trip people up because it it's often agile in name only, isn't it? >> And and and it is and I've seen people say, "Yeah, we're on sprints.
(24:05) " And I'm I'm looking at it, I'm thinking that's just phases of development. You're not doing it in a sprint fashion. You haven't got open iterative cycles and any even retrospective type things feedback at the end of it. So um you're absolutely right about the sort of agile theater perhaps that some people are are in versus the agile reality.
(24:22) So the reason I think this would work and help um really make that noticeable and if anything almost like unavoidable is the fact that this model says the work doesn't sit neatly in business partners or shared service or center of excellence. The work exists and you form from different parts of it to come to it and it might sit more strongly in one of the four spaces.
(24:41) Is it a productled thing? Is it a science-led thing? Is it a systemled thing? Is it a processled thing? So that's almost like the host energy uh source, but it's got a pull from to others. So I think it forces us to get out of our job based silos and kind of go to where the work is and therefore I think it has a different feel and a different cycle to it because it isn't I'm going to pass it over to them when I've done my bit.
(25:01) I mean that's about as unaggile as you could get, right? So and that's part of the reason why I've deliberately not prescribed tons of roles because I'm not doing a like for like. I'm just creating a few indicative things that people might want to stand behind like performance analysts and practice leads, meaning makers and people love meaning makers.
(25:18) I like I don't even know what it is, but I like it because it doesn't exist now and it needs to. Do you know what I mean? So, I've underprescribed the role somewhat. And if nobody ever calls themselves a business partner again, I won't be unhappy about And on the subject of sort of job titles and hierarchies um if I'm reading your book right so um you're sort of proposing more of a skills-based organization which again is quite a departure sort of organizing around the work and um starting to really sort of challenge how we approach structure and talent and
(25:44) even identity at work as well. So can you just unpack that a little bit for everyone? >> Yeah, I recognize that we we we form an almost unhealthy attachment sometimes to what the job's called and we almost identify ourselves as that. you know, I'm this and I'm the analyst. I'm like, is that it? Like, do you really want to just describe yourself with that job title that somebody else just plucked out of some matrix anyway? So, uh, but I do recognize that that in itself needs to be replaced by something. So, I think
(26:09) the things I'm trying to help people advocate are that they are more able to describe the impact their work has, not just what it's called. So, therefore, if you deliberately remove them, you can say to people, well, where do your skills and capabilities come out the most? and they describe it in some form of analytical thing or design thing.
(26:27) So it's like oh so you're a systems designer. It's like yeah it's like well that'll do. So kind of keeping it generic like that but it has to be followed up with so that dot dot dot and that's the value create in peace the impact that it has. And I think if we model that more in HR we can probably get more comfortable in how we detach our business colleagues from their own job descriptions which mean absolutely nothing really apart from some sort of social cred.
(26:51) So, if we really want to create a skills-based organization, we have to be the best at that before anybody else will buy it. And I think there's something about where I've seen HR teams working with some of the farmer companies that have gone down the skills-based route. They're still hanging on to their job. They just I think they jar with those skills-based flexible entities.
(27:10) So, I'm almost thinking, well, you haven't even read the room, have you? Do you know what I mean? So, I really want us to pioneer that, get very, really comfortable with it. work out what it means to things like reward and recognition and career progression in our own domain because then when we get more comfortable with it like we've already got a version of this.
(27:27) It's like our beta that we can then take into the final version for you. So there's a lot of deliberate stuff that's perhaps um not quite prescribed because it depends obviously but I I really want us to get really good at that kind of thing. Bit more um working in liinal spaces and being very ambiguous about things but still delivering great impact.
(27:47) I think if we had to summarize one of the catchphrases that have come up over all of the podcasts that we've done, it depends is probably right up there because it does, doesn't it? >> It really definitely does. >> One of the things that stuck with me when I was reading the book is you at one point you say you need to make the entire organization interested in the HR operating model and I thought that was really powerful because there's a kind there's a profile and a reputation issue. Yeah.
(28:08) >> With HR, isn't it as a function at the moment? >> Probably more so today than than ever I would say. >> Oh yeah. I mean, I think we had a little moment in the sun in the not nicest possible way when COVID happened and it was all just chaotic and we held it tight and did lots of overachieving things.
(28:25) And I can remember lots of people who weren't in HR telling me like, I'm glad I got the HR I've got because they really helped us out. They sorted this out, sorted that out. Then when it came to things like, well, what happened afterwards? We know there's been loads of snapbacks and all sorts of things going on, right? But I think it then became almost like the business kind of going, so what are you going to do next? It's almost like, I don't know, what do you want to do next? you're you're in the business seat here.
(28:46) I was like, well, we just want to get everybody back in the office then. It's like, oh, really? You want me to do that? You want to stand with that? And I think there's an odds thing there with almost like power grabs and controlling mechanisms and HR realizing that's not what it should play anymore. So, I think we've got caught in the rock and hard place situation there, Danny.
(29:03) So, I'm totally with you about the sort of current vibe, which is, oh, let's dig the knife into HR again and give it a kick in the shins and stuff. And it's almost like, oh, come on. That's just you acting as a bit of a sort of human shield there with HR out front for those because they're your decisions and you're asking HR to do something which is almost impossible to tabulate.
(29:24) So I think the interest in the HR operating model is where we can kind of do something that's so inventive and so progressive that the business kind of goes how have you done that? How have you moved from being somebody I used to tolerate and kick a bit to actually giving me stuff I didn't even ask for? That's amazing.
(29:42) So I think I need us to get to that because I don't think we meet the business on its own demands. I don't think they're giving us the right demands. I think we go ahead of it and go I've looked over the hill. This is where I think we need to be. This is how we do it. This is what science said. This is what the value that create. Business leaders go how do you work all that out? It's almost like well I just didn't follow what you asked me to do.
(29:59) There's a famous story of um Greg Dyke, you know, the BBC commissioner from back in the day and somebody was working with him in the HR field. He would call him into the office and he'd give him about nine projects to do and and the poor HR leader was trying to do these nine projects coming back with reports and Greg said, "Oh, I forgot I even asked you for that.
(30:17) I don't want that anymore." So the HR director got used to this and kind of like said, "Okay, you given me nine things there, Greg. What three things are most important?" It's like, "Oh, okay. Well, those three." And it's just a both a simple version of that and almost like a don't expect to be asked to make the right decisions.
(30:30) I think we got to go out there and illuminate them for leaders now because they don't all know what to do anymore. >> And I think there was a thing in there, wasn't he? you know just that power of asking that question. You've given me nine which are the most important three. So there's a real important role for HR.
(30:43) Yes. And anybody working with senior leaders to ask those questions. >> I um I had the pleasure of talking to a group of um CPOS in charities and um we I sort of saying if I had a magic magic wand what's the one thing you'd really like me to do? And a few people came up with things like you know a bit of capacity and so on.
(31:00) But but a couple came back and just went I just need to know what the priority is because it's about 15 of them. I don't know which one to put my bets on. And and I guess I'm really I'm always really interested. So So why would a professional walk out of that room with nine priorities knowing that they can't do it? I know. >> So is is there something around the profession around sort of lack of confidence or boldness or >> you know do you have a hypothesis around it? >> I do.
(31:25) I think it's our desperate attempt to show merit and value and just almost like you give me the impossible and I'll at least try and give you something. And it's almost like, well, why don't you ask that's impossible, but what is possible? Do you know what I mean? I think we've gotten a little bit seduced by the just keep doing loads of stuff and and we'll eventually get loved and appreciated.
(31:44) And it's like, no, no, you'll just get piled on even more with stuff that's furious and not well thought out. I mean, I've caught myself doing that anyway. So, like, you know, I had a flashback then to about 2010. So, I totally get why it's happened. That's kind of my hypothesis. And that's because we're not as confident, assured about the things that we really do and should get behind.
(32:03) Some of which we're not asked to do. Some of the stuff is that we know is right for the people in the business. Um, and some of it comes from the fact that we've perhaps been a little bit comfortable away from the sharp edge and we've just kept the lights on. I think we got to go out there and go, I got me torch. What else is possible? And I think we've got to do that now.
(32:23) So um I think a bitter lesson there from from where we've tried to be pleasing and it's not worked. >> And the other thing associated with that you talk about in the book is the kind of that HR is very focused in the here and now and not future ready. We're not kind of involved in those future conversations. >> Oh yeah. Yeah.
(32:39) It's so rare that I get the joy of seeing a chief people officer and their team like ahead of the organization going do you know this is coming? Do you know this is possible? and business leaders kind of go, "No, I thought I knew what was going on here." It's so rare and and and I just kind of get really frustrated by the fact that we are head down so much and we are not head up and and even head together on some of that futures stuff.
(33:04) So, so I love environments and I've got one example with a client. We started out from a talent and workforce planning agenda and as soon as we got into it, she started to go, "We've we've got to get a bit bolder here because the future's going to hit us before we know it. even if we build this right, it's going to crumble uh within years.
(33:21) So, so with great kind of intent and a bit help from me and a lot from her team, she got the board to project 2050 and work back from it. It's one of the most glorious things I've ever seen because I've never seen um executives get both excited and confused in the same mind, which is helpful sometimes, but then so appreciative of the fact that HR facilitated that discussion.
(33:41) It's almost like they got newfound respect for and they're almost like well can you keep doing that for us because we don't get that from anywhere else and I was like yes >> and and sort of going full circle with some of the things you were saying earlier which is the role of systems thinking that is a huge opportunity for HR isn't it because the one thing that HR has that a lot of teams don't have is access and the ability to actually sort of see and shape the system as well and and the ability to facilitate coordinate
(34:06) and and those things are really powerful things that potentially are mistrixs aren't they >> oh massively so it's literally like we have had access to not just the the kind of fresh fruit aisles, the whole supermarket infrastructure and we haven't exploited it at all. And I think you're absolutely right, Gavin, that we master that uh and become really adept at using that to facilitate the right conversations with leaders.
(34:29) They won't even recognize necessarily the value that's being added, but they'll bring that conversation in more and get HR to facilitate it and lead it. So sometimes we don't have to even reveal the hand that we're playing with. But I think if we get them to start betting and and working in the right way, we almost don't need to reveal our tricks, but but having a systems thinking mindset is just the most critical thing I think we could ever do in in HR.
(34:52) Hi, we're just pausing this interview for a moment. Have you ever finished an episode of the ordev podcast and wish you had a cheat sheet that summarizes all of the key points? Us too, so we made one. It's called From Pod to Practice. And each week in our newsletter, we'll share a two-page summary of the latest org dev episode.
(35:12) And it includes key takeaways, a reflection prompt, and one small action you can try. >> And it's all in a digital format with space at the end to add your own notes and reflections. And it's designed to help you take the learning from the podcast into your day-to-day work. So to get your copy, just sign up to our next step to better newsletter.
(35:26) The links in the show notes, or you can visit our website at www.distinction.live to get the latest from Pod to Practice in your inbox. And let us know what you think. We'd love to get your feedback. >> Obviously, we're talking about sort of redesigning the operator model. I'm assuming it's not a quick fix. It's more of a journey than anything.
(35:42) >> Yeah, >> this is a horrible generalizing question here, but just sort of as a huristic in your experience, how long does it take to do it well >> and and which voices and perspectives are critical to have in the room from the very beginning? Yeah, I think you're absolutely right because if you are a very wellestablished, reasonably large HR team, you will be looking at this as like, well, this is a mountain I've not climbed before.
(36:05) It's going to take some pretty hard graft. And actually, there's a John Maynard KE quote I love to drop in. The difficulty lies not in the new ideas, but in escaping the old ones. So, I think we're we're hooked on that a bit because we feel a bit fragile and we're like, well, we're going to have to let go of that.
(36:20) It's almost like, yeah, but I I'm not holding on to anything then. So I I recognize the mental model thing is really tricky. So where have I seen it and how long did it take? So I started working with an organization about a year ago and they have gotten themselves ready to roll now with a new operating model in about 8 months. They're about 6,000 people.
(36:40) The HR team's about 60 people. So that gives you a sense of that. So that took quite a while still. And there was a little bit of convincing of the HR team because of their sort of holding on to orthodoxies and so on. But actually their hardest yards were going out to the business saying this is what we want to do and then kind of go well what do you want to do that for? Almost like absolute complete and utter abject rejection of the possibilities that were being put in front of them because they're like no no don't we just need to
(37:07) do that? It's almost like no wonder we've been where we are because you just asked us to operate just above the plimpole line, right? We're talking about absolutely like, you know, catamaran speed here, not tanker stuff. So, they had to do a real sales job. Now, they had to enlist the CEO who was kind of open-minded but unsure.
(37:26) And so it was almost like the vertical directors were the challenge, but they just found one who had a very strong operational lead who suddenly cottoned onto this and started to think about talent and succession in a way that actually he he wanted to get that conversation a bit more on the table. So So they shamelessly manipulated that energy at top level and sort of said, "Well, I'm I'm going to buy it.
(37:45) I'm going to do it. Um, and if I outperform you, then I'm all right, aren't I?" And they went, "Oh, get you." So they all started to get interested then. So they had to create a little bit of interest at high level. But yeah, the the the the chance to do something incredible and exceptional was almost like rejected in favor of no just keep keep in your lane.
(38:02) It's like oh that that was really quite hurtful and and you know the HR director and I had some pretty deep conversations about she was saying like do I still want to be here if I'm getting that kind of reaction? It's like well do you want to give up or do you want to push it on? So we we ended up doing a bit of co- counseling on that one and that's when I think she had a little aha moment and breakthrough and started to position it differently and enlist that ops lead bang.
(38:25) >> I was going to say the other the other thing we'll often hear when we work with particularly HR teams is how busy they are how much they how do how do they how do you get organizations to free up the time or HR teams to free up time or make time >> it is on this stuff. Yes, >> because the mental model thing you can work with almost like you know just hold your nerve and see how it goes and and so on and and and in fact just to that and it's a slightly linked answer to your question is about introducing the
(38:52) concept of experiments and feedback loops which HR is normally pretty poor at that. So introducing that actually brings a bit of energy bit of fast feedback and it does kind of almost like reduce some of the wasteful effort that we see in not doing it that way. So there's a bit of a shave time and claim it back there.
(39:11) I I often default to having to get people to just start measuring what they're up to because they don't because I ask them where do you spend your time? They're like they just show me the diary. I'm like I still don't know what you do and where you spend your time. You're in meetings a lot but what's going on? Why are you there? So I have to do a bit of handbreak, quick timeout, quick purge and I just try and help them create one, two, 3% capacity per day or whatever and and just pull the resource a little bit more. Just get a little bit smarter
(39:38) about it. So I have to do some quite forensic role based, job based, workbased, taskbased stuff. And sometimes the agile tricks help there without telling them that's the case. Like at least measure your work. Like if you got an L & D program to deliver, like how long does it take you to design it? how long does it take to deliver it? They're like, "Well, it takes this long in terms of a calendar.
(39:58) " I'm like, "No, that tells me the window, not the work you do, not the hours you put in." They're like, "Oh." And then they don't know. So, I then get them to start to literally do mathematical calculations to try and at least understand where they're going. Cuz only when they do that do they start to get dissatisfied and resent their wasting time on certain things and want to drop it.
(40:17) Only when they add it up are they're like, "What am I doing spending that much time doing that crap?" So I I have to create and it's a beckard change calculation uh um resistance thing is it I have to get them dissatisfied that they're wasting time before they'll then start to think about how to do it.
(40:31) But they have to do that systemically across team right I do get some people saying no no no I'm far too busy I can't do that I can't even spend time looking at why I'm so busy. I'm almost like all right you carry on then the rest of us are going to move on and they get a bit jealous FOMO. >> Yeah. And that's where the system thinking comes isn't it? Why am I so busy? What are the what's what's going on beneath us that's keeping me at that reactive place.
(40:51) >> Incredible how many people are, you know, potentially skiing downhill and absolutely no idea where they're going, where they need to stop, and whether they're taking the best route. And it's almost like surely part of the skiing is stopping and looking at the scenery thinking, well, where do I want to go now? So, they are literally bobsled into, you know, irrelevance.
(41:09) I I guess that there is something that teams can make an inadvertent mistake or a threat to doing operating model correctly is like the implementation of technology because in a way that that can take it out off your hands can't it like well we end up just organizing around the technology and its processes and and the vendor is always going to say well we're fine it will fix everything don't worry.
(41:27) Yeah. >> What's a good way to sort of leverage and work with technology without being sort of managed by it? Again, that's a lovely question. And a few people have sort of said that that maybe that what they might have liked to have seen in the book is almost like a secret recipe for how you can deploy tech to make all this happen.
(41:44) I'm almost like I dare go there even if I felt capable of, right? I think I just >> But I think myself for fail, but I'm happy to kind of address it now because I think we can we can think about systems in a particularly systems way. We can think about the products that the technology is there to deliver and serve and we can think about the processes that the technology is there to enhance or um we we lose or recalibrate or whatever it is.
(42:09) So the only thing out of the model that doesn't sort of fit as much as it might do is the science. But actually I think we do a science sense check on how do people feel about technology now. So we we would t we would take that sort of same model and start thinking we've got technology to deploy what is the product and how does the product work and we can get really product oriented with the tech like you say because I don't think we call out vendors enough about whether what they've got is what we need cuz I've seen so many installations where people
(42:35) then say but that's not as good as it was before I'm like how did that even happen right so so I think we get caught out in that now this requires I think a crack team to work on this you've got to get some people whose sole focus is how does this tech make the boat go faster and do the right stuff and they bring people in and they kind of work with but if you don't have that kind of ownership I would absolutely struggle to see how we're ever going to get the tech to work in that way but I think it's also like
(43:05) we don't often take the right kind of user perspective we don't run like labs and simulators and kind of get people in to sort of show us what work we do and how we meet them on their terms so I I think we're still looking HR systems a little bit devoid from ERPs and CRM and so on.
(43:22) It's almost like it's got to be so complimentary to them. That's where we can bring our tech analysts in if that's what we've got. So, so it absolutely needs to be treated as a very specific space that brings the best out of those four areas in the yacht model. And and therefore the phrase I've come up with on that, it's not a feature of what you've got.
(43:41) It ought to be the fabric on which it's kind of holding stuff together. So, so we do need to take that end to end completely sort of top view down to the functionality and I don't see that we do that enough. So, yeah, there's a big call in there to master technology and certainly we're being asked to get involved in a lot more AI related deployment now because of the links to task automation and so on.
(44:06) So, when's the best time to get good at that? Probably 5 years ago, but it'll do if we start now. We've got to be the hub, the accelerant, the lab environment. We've got to do all those sort of things. We're not resourced for it now. So, we better start learning quick. So, that's why I didn't want to answer in the book cuz it's that's just all a load of guff and waffle really.
(44:24) But, it really needs its own space. It needs its own capabilities and it needs people who can link it to all the systems and flows as part of the the whole enterprise and its people. >> We're we're just about 45 minutes in now and we're contractually obliged to ask you a question about AI. Okay, >> there we go.
(44:44) We kind of led to it that now, didn't we? >> Yeah, perfect jumping off point as well, I guess. Yeah. So, just interested. It's sort of quite a big question here, but like how do you sort of see the potential for AI affecting HR? Is it an existential threat? Is it overhyped? Like, how do you think it might influence the way in which HR works moving forward? a really nicely framed way of looking at it to sort of think about it as a sort of replacement for much of what HR stands by and does because I think if we ignore those opportunities I think we're being a bit
(45:14) dafted because I think there are things it should replace and it should make more accessible and automatable and so on. So for a start I think it's an enormously strong opportunity for us to get our information house in order that we haven't done. How long have we been talking about data analytics as a core skill in HR? We are still punching well below our weight on that one. Right.
(45:35) So, it's a real chance to do that, right? And if anything, master it to a point that we can almost be a little bit envied by our business analysts and our customer analysts because I think why would you not know everything about your people and what they do when we know everything about the customers and the business flows? Like, doesn't make sense to me.
(45:55) So, we've got a really strong chance to push that one. So, that's not a threat at all. That's a massive opportunity we ought to leverage, but we can't do it if we don't get rid of some of the stuff that we are currently having to do. So, so resisting outsourcing it to the bots just because it doesn't feel very human is a stupid argument.
(46:13) It's like, look, if it's a process stuff, I'd rather talk to a bot than a human and just get the right answer. So, give it bring it on and and then when it goes into exception handling, I want somebody who's skillful, adept, and interested in solving my problem. And I I'm happy. So it's more of that sort of service proposition. But I do think there's something about our responsibility to help the organization not get either carried away and sack loads of people, deploy bots and then have to employ them again which is stupid and costly. So that sort of
(46:41) ethical procedural impactful thing I think we we need to be that voice on the shoulder going oi steady on tiger this is something we need to incrementally build. But also I think we can lend back to the business then well if you're making efficiencies there it's not just about cutting people. This is about reskill redeploy and enhanced service proposition.
(47:01) Got one example that I saw where 500,000 call handlers across the globe had a lot of their work outsourced to a bot but but they were trained on that. So they kind of knew what customers were getting, but they gave emotional intelligence, negotiating skills, influencing skills to those agents to deal with the exception handling much more richly and deeply and powerfully.
(47:23) NPS scores are going off the charts and they're winning more work because their human capital is better than anybody else has. That's the stuff we need to be in the arguments about when it comes to AI outsourcing and automation because we talk about augmentation, but I think we've also got additionality here.
(47:40) what's additional that we can't do now that we can do for >> I think it's a really important role for OD and HR to play in terms of helping people articulate that what is what are the possibilities and what you know what skills and capabilities and training and learning do people need to feel confident to operate in that new world so >> definitely >> so one of the questions we always like to ask is what aspects of your work do you find most fulfilling and exciting and what what bits really bring you joy >> so I think it is the uh sense that you
(48:07) can intervene and participate particularly with a team in an undervalued HR environment and see the glint in their eye when they realize they can do so much more with so much power and influence because I think we've got used to being a little bit under the radar and battered a bit and all that kind of stuff.
(48:27) So that gives me an enormous amount of joy and I I never do that glibly as some kind of like I'm just going to give a bit of utopian magic walk away and you'll you'll be even more depressed when I've gone. I will want them to see how they can do that and what's in their agency and then their team kind of comes together around that cuz I you know I guess I've been around it long enough to have known that we are sometimes a little bit comfortable with that sort of nobody understands us Milwolf fan type mentality and I want us to be the
(48:55) surprising artists and I see that in people a lot. I see them like what really I could be that and do that? It's like, yeah, yeah. I mean, not specifically in those words, but you can tell there are frontiers they haven't even dreamt about yet that are within grasp if they play this right. That gives me huge joy because that's the only way I think we're going to unlock organizations from being mechanical machine.
(49:18) Morgan's metaphor psychological prison type environment to proper living organisms, which I think the world wants us to be like that. >> Fab. And then on the flip side, what what do you find most challenging about the work? This is going to sound really bad, but the pace that people actually work at versus the pace they tell you they want.
(49:38) So, I get the impression from people lots of things are really urgent and pressing and need to be done really quickly and all that kind of stuff. So, I gear myself up. I get ready and so on. Months down the line, I'm like, where did all that go? And and and I know you're laughing because you probably are feeling the same thing now, right? >> It's on fire. Help.
(49:58) Totally it. And then it's almost like, geez, is it just me thinking I can work to that pace? What happened there? So, I do get frustrated about people who take things slower than they have to for that reason. Almost like they impede themselves. But at the same time, I I do also get frustrated by people who are not thinking smartly enough and just knee-jerk into something.
(50:21) So, there's two almost competing contradicting things there. I want the pace, but I want the thoughtfulness as well. But I don't believe those two are exclusive. You can do them in beautiful cycles, but generally speaking, we got to get there a whole lot quicker, Danny, because that frustrates me. >> Throughout your career, what what are some of the biggest lessons you've learned along the way? >> Cool.
(50:42) Um, that I think relationships matter, right? It is about the kind of strength and and and conviction I guess you'd have with relationships, but it isn't about collecting people. It's like you are better off having a few really deep, powerful, meaningful relationships than lots and lots and lots and lots of them.
(51:01) I used to think having lots of them gave you the choice to play yourself into whatever arena, it just gets confusing and difficult and deenergizes you and you let people down. But I think if you're a lot more discerning about the relationships and you find the ones that really do deserve the depth and the honor and the respect and the continuation and the support and so on, those things just power you through I don't know what.
(51:29) So I I I would say my circle is a lot smaller now, but I'd say my circle is 10 times more powerful because the people in it are absolutely the right people in it. I rely on them, they rely on me. I couldn't do it without them. So, one question we like to ask everybody who comes on the podcast is what does your own learning look like? What does learning and development look like for you? >> That's changed.
(51:53) I would say that I've got much more comfortable with almost going into a bit of a meditative state. And I never thought I'd say that about me because I'm hyperactive and a little bit overenthusiastic about all sorts of things. I've learned to absolutely love trying to empty my head out and just be calm and almost not quite blank, but as near as blank as I could ever be.
(52:12) And I and that wasn't something I would have ever said about myself before. But now that started to reveal some incredibly powerful thinking that comes from it. So that's a learning thing that I do a lot more now. And I think I I've both matured and and kind of appreciated that more.
(52:31) Um, but I don't even think it's about age and and and miles on the clock. I think it's just the world is nuts on information. There's too much coming at you now. And I've been trying to kind of lasso it all thinking I'm not getting anywhere with this. So, I've had to develop something where I almost like take a a sensing approach to it as much as I do a thinking approach, right? I kind of sense my way into thinking, which sounds a bit odd.
(52:53) And then I think I still love environments where conversations and kicks reveal. They're so underrated when it comes to learning, right? You don't have to program things or be very deliberate and have an intentional goal for it. Sometimes just kicking around thoughts just helps you learn so much. So I've gone a little bit more into that.
(53:12) Uh and and I will say that you know using bots has also helped me as a sparring partner to just go tell me more about this and I love that. Uh reading is still a big strong thing for me. So I still love reading long form stuff. So thank you for reading my book cuz like you know some people can barely get past first 10 pages. Um, yeah.
(53:29) What I don't do, I don't do tons of catching up on loads of YouTube videos. I do love podcasts. I mean, I know I'm on one now. They feel like you are watching a lovely conversation. So, it's that conversational piece. Again, very rare do I attach myself to something programmatic. And that's not because I don't like that format.
(53:47) I'm just a bit too impatient. I just want to sort of do it at my pace and in my style. >> Fabulous. And is there a particular obviously your books were a given people should go and read those but there are particular resources books podcast videos that you recommend that people go and >> I mean what a question there's so many so uh lately I keep diving back into Henry Minsburg's I've got it by my side structuring in sevens like his update because I just love Minsberg's whole take on things there are some language things that he uses I'm like Minsburg
(54:18) what are you trying to say by using that kind of indoctrination language I don't like it at But I just love his mind and it feels like he's emptied his mind and all the organizations he's ever looked at into that book. So I still go back into that one. Gary Hamill and Michael Zenini have just released an updated version of a book called Humanocracy, which is lovely stories of companies that do things very differently.
(54:40) So I love that. And then I'm just looking over to my left. I'm reading a book at the moment by Eric Anger, which is How Economics Can Save the World. I think our secret to changing the way systems work is we've got to get economics that are much more pro-humanist and not profitering mechanical stuff. >> And then the last question because one of the original missions of the podcast is inspire the next generation of organization development practitioners from wherever they're coming from internally, externally, outside the
(55:09) field, in the field. >> What advice would you give someone who's just considering a career or just starting out right now? Oh, I mean it took me a long time to discover OD in my sort of career. I was working in change a long time. So like in the very early 90s I'd only been in the workplace about six, seven years and I was involved in change and as a result of that you know org dev and or design stuff was going on.
(55:30) I just didn't know that's what it was. Um so I think there's something about people are more curious about why do organizations work like this than perhaps they were 10 and 20 years ago. So I think there's something about scratch that itch and just dive into that sort of portal if you want of of going behind the curtain and looking at top and getting forensic and mapping things out.
(55:54) So so I would say Stafford Beer's viable systems model stuff, right? Just start there and use where you are now or where you want to be and start playing with that VSSM thing. Start mapping it all out, looking at the interdependent. Even if you've never been there and don't know what it is, just assume it is cuz I think that sketching out and that mapping out and that linkages stuff that's going to serve you really well if you want to get into any form of OD.
(56:19) So Stafford Beers VSSM stuff is like I don't know why we don't use it more. >> Brilliant. Well, Perry, you want to say a huge thank you. It's been a really great opportunity just to unpack lots of brilliant ideas. It is a really really thoughtprovoking book and even if organizations aren't quite ready to embrace the operating model there's loads of opportunities even just getting the team around to read a chat to then talk about it about what's possible as well there's so many different applications for the book as well Danny
(56:44) what are you taking away from the book from the conver today >> yeah so I think um just there's been some lovely provocation for HR I think to rethink how it how they approach things and the model but also I think to our organizations and leaders within organizations about what they can expect from HR so there's a dual thing.
(57:00) I love the what you said about HR having a pioneering spirit and really thinking about how it creates value and impact and role modeling how to do different how to do things differently um to the rest of the organization and then I love the combination of pace and thoughtfulness. So that was a really lovely combination for me that you know you can do you can still do both.
(57:17) It's not either or. Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Brilliant. And I echo loads of those things. I picked a new term agile theater. I think it's you like that. >> It's a very good phrase. It kind of looks like it but it's just a performance. Yeah, >> it is a performance. But I I I'm I'm actually in the conversation I've actually started to be converted to the idea of products, you know, like just in the way in which we perceive them as well.
(57:39) So, you know, seeing a policy as a product, the fact that it's not a oneandone and it's a way thinking about what is its application rather than just a band-aid as well. the symptoms, the challenge, but also there's actually a lot more capacity in HR teams than we probably let ourselves think there is.
(57:55) But we just need to develop some discipline about making the time and and as a professional, we just need to say no a lot more, don't we? And we need to step into our our confidence a lot more and be a little bit bolder as well. So, so there's loads of takeaways. So, so thank you so much, Perry. Um, you have an extensive body of work.
(58:12) Um, you got many books that you've done. You're on the conference circuit. What is the best way for someone to reach out to you, follow your work, to engage your services? What kind of things can they do? >> Thank you. Yes. So, obviously on LinkedIn for reach out and I do post a lot of my thoughts and comments on that.
(58:25) I've just started a substack and that's mainly talking about this concept I've come up with called the polymorphic organization intentionally shapeshifting and it's a real build on the HR operating model. Anyway, uh I still blog on Medium. There's still some stuff on there, but generally speaking, yeah, YouTube stuff you can probably Google and find me talking about things.
(58:44) Um, and and increasingly podcast channels. So, yeah, I've I've been on a few now, but I can honestly say like this one's been the one that I've like I just didn't want it to finish. >> It's been really good. Yeah. And for those of you any of the all the books that we've mentioned from Perry's previous works and the latest book are all in the show notes as well.
(59:00) So, you find a link that'll take you straight to the site as well. So, we want to say huge thank you Perry. If you are watching this and you're one of the few people that haven't heard of Perry already and you think you know someone who would really benefit from Perry's insights or you're part of an HR team that are feeling stuck and it doesn't have to be this way then please do share this podcast with them.
(59:21) As we always say there's there's so many shares of this podcast every week. So wherever you are in the world 100 countries now is it and we love the fact that people listening all over the world but most of all we want to say a huge thank you Perry. It's been brilliant. Keep provoking the profession.
(59:33) keep helping business be better and don't let HR stand still and get complacent. So, thank you. >> Good stuff. Thank you. And thanks for this and all you're doing. So, putting the spotlight on an OD is always going to be a winner for me. But you got a nice way about it. So, yeah, keep that stick.