KI kann die Vorarbeit machen, dann kommt es auf die Führungskräfte an.
Interview mit Gregor Mielke von der HPO Research Group
Lieber Gregor, als HPO Group habt ihr schon vielen Organisation geholfen, ihre Organisationskultur weiterzuentwickeln. Dass es mit dem Kickertisch nicht getan ist, dürfte mittlerweile bei den meisten angekommen sein. Erzähl doch mal: Was heißt Kulturwandel in Organisationen für dich bzw. euch?
Ja, das stimmt. Kicker und Obstkorb reichen schon lange nicht mehr, haben wahrscheinlich auch noch nie gereicht. Bestenfalls sind sie ein Symbol für eine bestimmte Kultur. Kultur hingegen beschreiben wir als die Summe der Verhaltensgewohnheiten der Menschen, die eine Organisation ausmachen. Oder, wie Bright und Parkin es einmal so treffend ausdrückten: „So machen wir das hier.“
Dass sich die Beschäftigung mit der eigenen Organisationskultur lohnt, hat sich zum Glück mittlerweile herumgesprochen, Kultur wird immer stärker zum zentralen Wertschöpfungshebel. Und will man Kultur nun verändern, braucht es zum einen eine gute Bestimmung des Ist- und des Soll-Zustandes der Kultur. Hierbei kommen unterschiedliche moderative Techniken und auch Messverfahren zum Einsatz. Auch und gerade KI leistet hier einen stetig wertvolleren Beitrag. Und zum anderen braucht es zwingend ein Leitungsgremium, das die erwünschte Kultur vorlebt. Systematische Kulturveränderung ist immer ein Prozess, der stets von oben beginnt.
Für uns heißt Kulturwandel also im ersten Schritt, eine Organisation professionell dabei zu unterstützen, ihre kulturellen Kernmerkmale auszuformulieren, denn auf dieser Basis ist erst ein Abgleich mit einer dann zu definierenden Zielkultur möglich. Um im zweiten Schritt dann das Leitungsgremium besser darin zu machen, die Zielkultur tatsächlich als Team vorzuleben. In den darauffolgenden Schritten helfen wir weiteren Führungsebenen dabei, sich so aufzustellen, dass im Idealfall alle Führungskräfte tatkräftig am Kulturwandel mitwirken. Eingerahmt ist dieser Prozess von einer möglichst intensiven Einbindung aller Mitarbeitenden bspw. in Workshopformaten, Fokusgruppen oder auch durch KI-gestützte Mess- und Befragungsmethoden.
Der Moderator eines Gesprächs bezeichnete KI einmal als “Fast Moving Target”, weil ihre Entwicklung zu schnell voranschreite, als dass es unmöglich sei, parallel Regeln für den richtigen Umgang mit ihr zu finden. Die Technologie ist uns quasi immer schon zehn Schritte voraus. Was bedeutet das für die Unternehmenskultur? Brauchen wir im Zwischenmenschlichen auch eine Beschleunigung oder sind hier eher andere Werte gefragt, wie Stabilität, Verlässlichkeit und Dauerhaftigkeit?
Na ja, zum einen muss in der kulturellen Ausrichtung einer Organisation natürlich berücksichtigt sein, dass die Dinge sich ja tatsächlich immer schneller verändern und die Welt immer komplexer wird. Nicht umsonst ist die Dynamik einer Organisation einer der zentralen Stellhebel moderner Kulturentwicklung. Und hier sehen wir KI als wertvolle technologische Hilfe, die Verborgenes aufspüren und Wissen schnell und systematisch zugänglich machen kann.
Aber zum anderen ist der eigentliche Kulturwandel ein langsamer Prozess, in dem Menschen ihr Verhalten und manchmal auch ihre Einstellungen, Glaubenssätze und Werte adaptieren. Kultur selbst ist sehr konservativ, weil der Mensch wie auch ganze Organisationen dazu neigen, die Erfolgsfaktoren der Vergangenheit gegen eine Störgröße namens Zukunft zu verteidigen.
Die Kultur eines Hauses bestimmt eher darüber, wie offen und wie neugierig mit KI umgegangen, wie schnell sie eingesetzt und genutzt wird. Aber um diese Offenheit für Veränderungen zu generieren, sind die oft langsamen Veränderungsprozesse auf der Haltungsebene zentral. Um Kultur nachhaltig zu verändern, braucht der Mensch Zeit, Zeit für das Aushandeln von Beziehungen, Zeit für den Aufbau von Vertrauen, Zeit für das Lernen voneinander. KI kann hier unterstützen und in einer idealen Welt schafft KI einen Zeit- und Erkenntnisgewinn für den Menschen. Der wiederum gibt den Menschen in dieser Kultur Raum zur Reflexion, zum Lernen, zur Regeneration und zum besseren Miteinander, bei gleichzeitig besserem Output.
Am Ende mag KI ein “Fast Moving Target” sein und dadurch wenig steuer- oder sogar kontrollierbar. Sie kann Prozesse verbessern und beschleunigen und viele Dinge mehr. Aus Sicht der Kulturentwicklung braucht eine Organisation aber Zeit für das gemeinsame Aushandeln und Leben einer gewünschten Kultur und hier darf KI gern unterstützen, nicht aber so viel Tempo reinbringen, dass Menschen abgehängt werden. Kultur ist die Summe der Verhaltensweisen der Menschen, nicht das Abbild einzelner.
Ihr sprecht in eurer Beratung immer wieder von “Postagilität” bzw. der Notwendigkeit, den “perfekten Mix” zu finden. Was hat es damit auf sich?
Agilität war das Schlagwort der Organisationsentwicklung der 2010er Jahre. Die damit verbundene Forderung nach höherer Flexibilität und dezentraler Verantwortung war durchaus berechtigt, doch die dahinterliegende Vehemenz hat viele Unternehmen schlichtweg überfordert. Unsere Forschung hat gezeigt, dass langfristiger unternehmerischer Erfolg nicht in maximaler Agilität zu finden ist. Der Schlüssel liegt vielmehr im optimalen Mix aus klassischen Koordinationsmechanismen (wie hierarchischer Führung und klar definierten Strukturen und Prozessen) und agilen Methoden und Ansätzen. Wir sind also im Zeitalter der Postagilität angekommen. Es geht darum, eine unaufgeregte Normalität im Umgang mit der gesamten Bandbreite der Steuerungsmechanismen zu finden.
Welche weiteren Hebel der Organisationskultur müssen wie gestellt werden, damit Mitarbeitende zu Höchstleistungen auflaufen?
Zahlreiche Studien zeigen, dass sich eine handlungsleitend ausformulierte Kultur positiv sowohl auf quantitative als auch auf qualitative Performanceparameter auswirkt. Dabei kommt es nicht darauf an, ob eine Kultur „schön“ oder „gut“ ist. Kultur ist auch nie „schlecht“. Stattdessen beschreibt man Kultur als “funktional”, wenn sie dem Unternehmenszweck dient. Oder eben als “dysfunktional”, wenn sie diesem nicht dient. Und das völlig unabhängig davon, ob der Unternehmenszweck nun ein „guter“ oder ein weniger “guter“ sein mag. Der Unternehmenszweck bestimmt letztlich auch, welche Kulturaspekte mit Höchstleistung korrelieren. Das kann in einer NGO oder Non-Profit-Organisation ganz anders sein als bei einer großen Investmentbank. Am Ende kommt es immer auf die individuell passende Mischung aus strukturgebenden, konservativen und dynamisierenden Elementen an. Was wir aber schon sagen können, ist, dass Aspekte wie Vertrauen, Sinnstiftung, Beziehungsqualität, Autonomie, flache Hierarchien, Kollektivinteressen und ein empathischer Führungsstil dazu beitragen, dass sich ein Unternehmen im Schnitt positiver entwickelt als der Wettbewerb.
Wie finden Unternehmen heraus, was ihre Kultur ausmacht? Lässt sie sich messen?
Ja, Kultur lässt sich messen. Je nach zugrunde liegendem Modell können die Ergebnisse variieren. Da Verhalten und damit am Ende Kultur aber nicht per se physikalisch zu messen ist, sind wir immer auf die subjektiven Einschätzungen der Mitglieder einer Organisation angewiesen. Verhalten ist immer eine Bezugsgröße. Erst der Vergleich mit anderen kann aufzeigen, welche Qualität einem Verhalten beizumessen ist. Und diese Bewertung von Verhalten unterliegt erheblich der sozialen Erwünschtheit. Kultur übt einen starken Homogenisierungsdruck aus, Menschen sind geneigt, sich kulturkonform zu verhalten und diese ebenso zu beschreiben. Das bedeutet, dass eine Kulturmessung dann an Qualität gewinnt, wenn den Mitarbeitenden ohne vorgefertigte Fragebögen ein Ohr gegeben wird, um ergebnisoffen über eine aktuelle oder auch angestrebte Kultur zu sprechen. Das ist ein großartiger Vorteil, den Zortify’s KI zur Kulturmessung ins Spiel bringt. Dank NLP und der Fähigkeit der KI können die Antworten auf allgemein gehaltene, offene Fragen verstanden und auf Kulturmerkmale hin analysiert werden. In Ergänzung zu den klassischen skalenbasierten Fragebögen ermöglicht ZortifyCulture uns einen signifikant höheren Erkenntnisgewinn bei gleichzeitig verringertem Aufwand.
Dass divers besetzte Teams bessere Ergebnisse liefern, wird immer wieder betont. Kulturwandel heißt also auch, dass Menschen mit ganz unterschiedlichen kulturellen Hintergründen, Muttersprachen und Prägungen gleichermaßen gehört und eingebunden werden. Inwieweit kann KI-Technologie hier konkrete Vorteile bieten?
Ja, das ist forschungsseitig klar bestätigt. Heterogene Teams sind den homogen zusammengesetzten in der Regel überlegen. Einzige Ausnahme: Geraten Teams unerwartet unter starken Stress, liegen homogen zusammengesetzte Teams leicht vorn. Da dies aber vermutlich nicht der Standard ist, tun Unternehmen gut daran, ihre Teams heterogen zu besetzen. Um hier alle Teammitgliedern im Zuge einer Kulturentwicklung an Bord zu haben, ist es natürlich unabdingbar, allen hinreichend Gehör zu verschaffen. Auch hier arbeiten wir erfolgreich mit Zortify zusammen. KI-gestützt können wir Mitarbeitenden die Möglichkeit geben, sich in ihrer eigenen Muttersprache zu äußern, per NLP lassen sich die Freitext-Antworten in ihrer Bedeutung erfassen und clustern. Das wäre auf Deutsch in dieser Form sicher nicht annähernd so gut möglich und trägt unserer Beobachtung nach deutlich zur Akzeptanz einer kulturellen Weiterentwicklung bei.
Wie können Unternehmen anfangen, ihre Kultur Stück für Stück zu verändern? Hast du ein konkretes Beispiel?
Wir haben eben diskutiert, wie ein systematischer Kulturwandel initiiert und begleitet werden kann. Davon abgesehen verändert sich die Kultur eines Hauses natürlich laufend, wenn auch langsam. Kultur beharrt und mäandert und fließt und verändert sich durch die Interaktion über mal mehr, mal weniger durchlässige Systemgrenzen mit der Umwelt. Sie verändert sich durch alles – Menschen, Strukturen, Prozesse, Führungskräfteverhalten usw. – aber letztlich immer entlang geistiger Größen, durch geteilte Annahmen und Werte. Die Frage ist dann nur, ob sich die Kultur in die gewünschte Richtung verändert. Kultur kann demgegenüber zielorientiert und effektiv von oben verändert werden, wenn die Menschen in der obersten Führung lernen und sich verändern wollen. Wenn es entsprechend neue Annahmen, informelle und formelle Spielregeln gibt und sie die Macht haben, diese mit langem Atem durchzusetzen. Es braucht also Personen, die es vorleben. In der Regel sind es Führungskräfte, an denen sich die Mitglieder einer Organisation intuitiv ausrichten. Aber auch andere Personen können genügend Strahl- und Inspirationskraft haben, um Vorbilder zu sein.
Will sagen, es braucht zuallererst die Protagonisten einer erwünschten Zielkultur. Wenn sich Kultur in eine bestimmte Richtung entwickeln soll, braucht es die Definition dieser Richtung, also ein IST und ein SOLL, und Art und Ausmaß des Deltas bestimmen die Folgeaktivitäten. Und dann braucht es Menschen, die diesen Protagonisten folgen, es ihnen gleichtun und den anderen somit zeigen, dass es attraktiv ist, neue Wege zu gehen und das veränderte Verhalten zu adaptieren. Dies muss führungsseitig unterstützt und positiv hervorgehoben und belohnt werden. Und dann braucht es Zeit und Ausdauer bis zur Verstetigung des neuen Verhaltens als integraler Bestandteil der neuen Kultur.
Konkrete Beispiele gibt es erfreulicherweise viele. Wir erarbeiten bspw. gerade mit dem IT-Bereich eines großen Energieversorgers eine neue Bereichskultur. Aus vielerlei Gründen, u.a. der Arbeitgeberattraktivität, möchte unser Klient Engagement, Zufriedenheit und Innovationsfreude im Bereich erhöhen und einen „Arbeitsplatz der Zukunft“ erschaffen. Leitsatz ist „Wir haben eine positive Kultur im Bereich, die Freude am Arbeiten schafft.“ Verkürzt bringt es das Motto auf den Punkt: „Thank God, it’s Monday!” Diese Stoßrichtung ist im Führungskreis beschlossen und als Grundidee der Veränderung ausgegeben worden. Und obgleich Kulturmessung mit Zortify Culture und die weitere Arbeit mit dem Führungsteam noch ausstehen, haben wir gemeinsam mit allen Mitgliedern der Organisation bereits die ersten kleinen Schritte hin zur Zielkultur erarbeitet. Als erste Zielgrößen sind gegenseitige Wertschätzung, Freude am Arbeitsplatz und Gestaltungsfreiheit definiert worden. Und die konkreten nächsten Schritte muten z.T. klein, aber nicht weniger wirksam an, darunter wöchentliche Feedbackübungen, Bildung einer Fokusgruppe mit ausgewählten Mitarbeitenden, Team-Workshop zum Erwartungsabgleich in puncto Gestaltungsfreiheit, Einladung von Experten zum Thema „Mentale Gesundheit am Arbeitsplatz“, monatliche Kurzfeedbacks an die Führung (in den Teams), Einführung eines IT-Stammtisches und viele mehr.
Welches Arbeitsumfeld brauchst du persönlich, um in den Flow zu kommen?
Da bin ich recht anspruchslos. Nur die Aufgabe muss interessant genug sein. Ein wenig Inspiration kann nie schaden. Wenn ich dann sehe, dass es vorangeht und ich am Ende einen Unterschied für Menschen machen kann, dann kommt der Flow von ganz allein.
Mehr zur Arbeit der HPO Research Group
“Humans are both the brain and the heart of organizations.”
Interview with Miriam Mertens, CEO of DeepSkill
Dear Miriam, AI as the brain and humans as the heart of an organization – is that what a bright future in companies will look like?
That would be a misconception: Humans are both the brain and the heart of organizations, and AI supports people in their work. AI is incredibly good at answering questions, but humans are much better at selecting the right questions. And implementing things with heart.
Looking at the comment sections on LinkedIn one can`t help but think that the human part is not developing very well. Is AI, in the end, the better, more empathetic leader that shapes company culture for the better? Is it the better brain and the better heart? Or, to put it differently: Do human qualities really become more important in the face of advancing technology, or are they really more of a hindrance on the path to a joyful, appreciative, and motivating work environment?
That impression can indeed arise – precisely because people don’t take enough time to focus on collaboration and building trust. Let’s take the feeling of appreciation as an example: Talking to my colleague or superior, feeling they really listen to me, pay attention, take my issues seriously and act on it – this is something AI will never be able to authentically generate.
AI can be extremely helpful in freeing up time so that we can take the time for exactly these kinds of conversations and interactions. By taking over analytical and routine tasks, it gives people the freedom to do what they are really good at: being human.
AI systems are already capable of making objective, analytically-based decisions, providing constructive feedback, coaching, and motivating. They are available 24/7 and neither have egos nor bad moods. So why do we still need human skills in companies, and which skills are those?
There are many abilities that AI can’t replace. For example, creating a feeling of appreciation, attention or affection. Conveying real deep meaning. And because only we humans have these skills, it is vital that we train our own workforce really well in them.
Let’s take the example of salespeople in the banking sector: nobody needs a human contact person in a bank to fill out a loan comparison portal and calculate the correct interest rates anymore. But when it comes to addressing people’s fears in a credit decision, reducing complexity for them, listening to their worries and needs or even empathizing with them to find out which criteria are really important for the credit decision, people’s emotional intelligence comes into play. Companies whose employees do not have these skills will have a very difficult time in the future.
How will recruiting and employee development change in the coming years?
Two trends are emerging: On the one hand, we are observing the ‘War for Talent’ on the labor market and. On the other, the trend towards a ‘Great Resignation’. Over the past two years, it has become clear that it is an employee market and no longer an employer market – the pool of talent has thinned. Companies that hide behind employer brand campaigns are quickly exposed if there is no corresponding corporate culture behind them. The expensively recruited candidates know their market value, take advantage of the oversupply of jobs and are more likely to resign.
When it comes to active sourcing, many recruiters are now approaching employees from other companies. It is therefore all the more important that there is a cultural fit so that employees are committed to the employer in the long term. To clear up a misunderstanding: this does not mean that employers have to do everything that employees demand. Rather, the aim is to create an attractive and modern working environment in order to retain employees. It has become more important to recognise the value of existing employees. Despite transformation changes, their wealth of knowledge and the experience they have gained within the company are precious.
With the help of employee development, existing employees can be supported in the process of transformation. Studies show that 80% of transformation projects usually fail because of the people, not the project itself. It is therefore important to involve employees in the process and not present them with a fait accompli.
At DeepSkill, you work with AI systems to promote the emotional skills of employees in organizations. How do you do that?
We call them ‘Deep Skills’, as our company name says. This is an overarching term for all skills that involve emotional and social competences. Skills such as emotion regulation, communication skills, changing perspectives and team development. Skills that employees need to be able to operate effectively in the modern, hybrid world of work. We have clustered these skills in our DeepSkill competency model. Allowing us to quickly and easily configure tailored coaching and training programmes.
AI helps us in different ways to make learning and the return on investment (ROI) of employee development significantly better. Firstly, AI enables the full personalization of learning materials, increasing the relevance of learning content for our learners and making learning much more effective. Secondly, we synchronize the company’s strategic goals with optimal learning paths, allowing for real behavioral change. This is also where Zortify comes into play: AI-supported diagnostics allow us to tailor learning content, formats, and intensity to each individual based on precise assessments. Off-the-shelf training is a thing of the past. Every learner receives exactly the right content and can develop in a targeted way based on their assessment results.
Employee diagnostics and personnel development are seen as the new super duo. They only work well if they go hand in hand. Would you agree to that?
Diagnostics makes it possible to identify employees’ areas of development and show in detail where their strengths lie. Which potential is still untapped and in which areas it is worth investing in further development. Personnel development is then the decisive lever for unlocking this potential. Without personnel development, the recognised areas of development cannot be fully exploited and the expected return on investment does not come about. At the same time, personnel development without prior diagnostics runs the risk of implementing measures in the dark and not addressing the relevant development needs. By combining diagnostics and personnel development, companies benefit in two ways: development needs are addressed in a targeted manner and potential is optimally utilized.
For more information about Deepskill check out their website and/or their LinkedIn account.
Did you know that DeepSkill received 1.5 million Euro funding last year? – Read more about the financing round and how DeepSkill is investing in innovative employee development technology in “Personalwirtschaft” magazine.
Prefer audio? – Then we recommend the interview with Miriam in SAATKORN‘s podcast.
You enjoyed the insight into the very practical use of AI in HR? You want more inspiration and hands-on tipps on how to start? – Check out the interview with Tom Ritsch, Co-Founder of AOAIO, and the interview with Dr. Hans W. Hagemann of Munich Leadership Group.
“Leaders must push team members out of their comfort zones.”
Dr. Hans W. Hagemann of Munich Leadership Group about the importance of being honest without scaring people off
Dear Hans Werner, you write that the latest brain research has debunked long-held myths about the fundamental limits and motivations of people. What myths are these and what new findings should make leaders in particular pay attention?
The most significant realization is the importance of sufficient sleep, exercise and nutrition and their interplay for long-term cognitive performance. A few years ago, people were almost envious of colleagues who boasted about working 16 hours a day and getting by on four hours’ sleep. They wanted to constantly deliver peak performance. Diet and exercise played a subordinate role. The logical consequence was burnout, which was usually swept under the carpet.
Today, we are replacing the myth of constant peak performance with the concept of Best Perfomance for our clients. It’s about being able to call up the right performance with the utmost precision at all times. When you’re driving your car, you don’t drive through the city center with the pedal to the metal, you call up the right performance and are vigilant about constantly adjusting it. And while you are doing this, you are training your powers of observation, self-awareness and agility.
The world has changed rapidly in recent years. Despite this, many leaders still think and act in outdated ways. What needs to happen for this to change? What findings from brain research can help? Or to put it another way: can leaders outsmart their brains, according to the motto ‘Don’t believe everything you think?’
Some of the outdated patterns are hierarchical thinking, the belief in linear progress and the fairy tale of constant growth. Yet the central theme of our time is disruption. It is the most important task of leaders to get this into the minds of employees and support them in accelerating transformation. However, we are seeing too much soft-pedaling in companies. The situation is not taken seriously enough, irrelevant information is relied upon, people cling to slogans or completely pointless token projects are launched. All of this costs unnecessarily valuable time and ultimately leads to learned helplessness.
More knowledge about the function of the brain helps enormously. The basic principle is that our brains always try to provide us with the greatest possible security. Leaders need to get employees out of their comfort zones in order to create change. They need to use emotions much more constructively. They need to create psychological safety, increase curiosity in a targeted way and help the team to deal with uncertainty. Then the desire to perform will grow.
Does the ‘typical leadership brain’ exist? And what characterizes it?
No, there is no such thing. It’s down to the interplay between personal behavioral preferences and the respective environmental conditions. We observe time and again that the same leaders are extremely successful in one environment and suddenly underperform when they move to another. The basis of our work is therefore to give leaders as much self-awareness as possible and help them to make the best possible use of their individual strengths in every environment.
What else is important to be a good leader? What qualities do the leaders of today and tomorrow need to have?
We work intensively with our clients in training and coaching sessions on the topics of self-reflection, openness to new ideas, dealing with uncertainty and providing orientation.
Every leader is a role model, whether they want to be or not. You are always on stage. Each of us has a network of so-called mirror neurons in our brains that constantly scan the behavior of others and tempt us to imitate them if the person in question seems important to us.
It is therefore less important what leaders say than what they actually do. An increasingly important leadership skill will be to ‘shake up’ employees, as we call it, in a controlled manner. Making them insecure in their established behavioral patterns in order to move them out of their comfort zones without frightening them. Only there, outside the comfort and fear zones, is learning possible.
Leadership qualities are no longer only necessary at the top of a company, but in every team. How do companies find such personalities?
Through targeted observation of their own talents. There is no better playing field than the real situation. Leaders must learn to observe very closely what is happening in their own environment. They must recognise talents by their strengths and promote them in a targeted manner. As we will be working more and more in networks and matrix organizations, natural authority will become more important.
Who contributes good ideas without boasting about them? Who thinks in overarching contexts? Alos, who is listened to, whose contributions carry weight? And, who expresses seemingly absurd ideas from time to time, is not easily discouraged and shows resilience? We run development centers with some of our clients in which talents and their strengths are identified at an early stage in a playful and appreciative manner. The right use of these talents and how they are handled will be decisive for the success of the company in the future.
The further development of AI has accelerated the transformation of the world of work many times over. Can our brains even keep up with this? How do we manage not only to grasp the complex environment around us, but also to work with it?
It all depends on whether what is happening around us is perceived as a threat or an opportunity. And leaders have a huge influence on this. Imagine you’re a parent driving through thick fog with your three small children in the back seat and you can’t see your hand in front of your eyes. Of course you’re scared. But you can deal with it by adjusting your speed, using the fog lights and paying extra attention. What about the kids? –You can of course tell them that you’re scared and that you’re prepared for a collision at any time. But as a consequence, you probably won’t be able to control the screaming in the back seats. Alternatively, you could point to the navigation system and tell them that there’s a petrol station five kilometers away where you can take a little break with popcorn. The situation is the same, you’ve told the truth, you’ve given guidance and you’re moving on. In the future, it will be a matter of dealing constructively with growing uncertainties.
How is AI changing the process of recruitment itself and to what extent can findings from brain research be helpful?
Selecting the right people and providing them with targeted support in developing their talents into strengths is becoming a game changer in a competitive environment. We have been using psychometric tools for several years as an instrument for self-reflection, always combined with intensive debriefing for the individual leader. Some tools have come to a standstill in their development or are no longer up to date. AI will help to create much more accurate profiles through the precise processing of huge data sets and considerably more in-depth calculations.
This is where Zortify’s AI-based diagnostics really help us. We use it as a starting point for coaching when conducting in-depth personality analysis. Zortify’s AI differentiates very well, especially in the top management area, and prepares the ground for a profound examination of one’s own understanding of leadership. Leaders who have been in the business for a long time find this a particularly welcome leadership update. In addition, it will soon be possible to predict successful behavior in different team setups.
To what extent will it be more difficult for applicants to get a position with socially desirable answers in the future?
Social desirability is the main bias that we need to get a better handle on if we want to use personality analysis in talent recruitment and development in a meaningful way. I don’t see how we can significantly limit the effect of social desirability with conventional personality methods. Sure, there are lie scores that also measure the honesty of the answers. But as long as we only work on the basis of questionnaire-based self-assessments, everyone is free to answer honestly or dishonestly.
If we cannot avoid social desirability, how can we make it visible?
In HR diagnostics, we achieve better results when we combine different methods that are valid in themselves. For example, Zortify opens up a new source of information by using indirect personality measurement via the analysis of written free text responses. This makes it possible to visualize differences between the self-assessment using questionnaire items and the findings from the indirect method of text analysis. That’s very promising.
Why is it so important in psychometric diagnosis to add indirect methods (method within the method)?
Projective methods, for example, help to get distance from one’s own emotions that could distort the answer. ‘What would you say about a colleague who …’ makes it easier to tackle sensitive issues. In our Development Centres, there are many practical simulations in which real difficult situations are dealt with in a playful way instead of just cognitive self-assessments.
Will AI be the brains of the organization in the future and will humans have to master the so-called ‘soft skills’ above all?
We will see. I believe that AI will indeed be the rational artificial brain that will provide all kinds of information in every conceivable form and analysis in a matter of seconds. Unbiased. But this will also lead to increasing conformity. The difference will then be made by leaders who work creatively on the basis of a solid human value system. And a high level of self-awareness and who recognise the special nature of situations that no one else can see. In this context, I believe that there will be a reassessment of the importance of cognitive and emotional biases. After all, we humans are top performers precisely because the sum of our personal biases makes us unique. And sometimes somewhat quirky personalities with all their flaws, peculiarities and unpredictability.
What future of work are you looking forward to?
To a time with even more mutual appreciation, more flexibility, more self-determination and, above all, a desire to perform.
Munich Leadership Group Website
“We are not looking for consultants, we are looking for people who fit in well with us.”
Tom Ritsch, Co-Founder of AOAIO
“We are not looking for consultants, we are looking for people who fit in well with us.” – Interview with Tom Ritsch, Co-Founder of AOAIO
Hi Tom, this week we’re looking at the question of why companies should even bother assessing candidates in depth if they don’t have much choice anyway. What would be your spontaneous answer to companies that think this way?
This is probably more about internal and external employer branding. Even if it seems that you can’t find suitable employees, this is exactly what you should be focusing on. Companies must always work on positioning themselves on the market for existing and potential employees. Employer marketing is the key to sustainable success here.
When it comes to the skills shortage, we see different perspectives: some say the shortage is real, while others believe that there are enough people to do the job, but the antiquated structures in companies prevent them from working efficiently. Partly because they are not working in the positions or roles that suit them. Do you share one of these perspectives or do you have your own?
The shortage is partly real, but often a good excuse. In my opinion, it’s about doing an excellent job at all levels. Yes, I also believe that there are enough suitable employees (as always, exceptions prove the rule), but recruitment is still often wrong. Companies need to learn to focus more on the personality to see whether someone fits into the company and the team. Of course, if someone needs certain skills for the job – languages, programming, finance, etc. – they have to have them. But for me, the focus is on the person and the fit. At AOAIO, for example, we are not looking for consultants, we are looking for people who fit in well with us and who I would take with me to the customer any time. You can learn a lot in our job, but empathy and social skills must be there, as well as entrepreneurial potential. So I agree with the statement that it is outdated structures that prevent us from finding suitable employees. In the first place, companies are still searching as they did 20 years ago (it’s a miracle that they don’t still advertise in newspapers) and secondly, the processes and requirements are no longer up to date.
At AOAIO, you support companies in transformation processes. What challenges do these companies share and what differences are there, perhaps with regard to different industries?
What all companies share is the great challenge of digitalization and optimization and the enormous speed that is required. In contrast to the financial industry, where the message has gotten through, industrial companies in the SME sector are struggling enormously with these changes and the necessary investments. The core problem is still that the companies are doing well, perhaps too well, and therefore do not yet see the need for change. There are often people at the top who grew up in a different era and function differently, which is very dangerous for these companies. But often the core problem is that they do not know how to proceed. Who can I trust to do what is really important and necessary? Who understands my needs and who just wants to sell me software. This is something we often struggle with, or come up against when the wrong decisions have already been made. The digitization requirements are actually the cause, because instead of looking at the topic holistically – why do we need what exactly at what point and how does this help us to become more successful (digital roadmap approach) – individual processes are backed up with new software and thus adjusted. The process is rarely considered end-to-end and the customer perspective is all too often overlooked. The result: frustrated employees, dissatisfied customers, bad investments. That’s why I love to show the basic formula of digitalization:
OP + NT = EOP → Old Processes + New Technology = Expensive Old Processes
This means in one sentence: With all the digitization hype, one must not forget that the processes have to be adapted!
As a consultant you are specialized in “human transformation” in an organizational context. From your perspective, do the organizations need to change or the people?
That’s an interesting question. First of all, it’s up to the managers. Just because you read a book about New Work during the vacations doesn’t mean the organization will change. Organizational development has become a core issue and this includes taking people with you, involving them and giving them more responsibility. However, this does not happen overnight, it is a process. It always starts with self-reflection. So the answer is: everyone has to change and be prepared to do so.
How do organizations find the people who are right for them?
To do this, organizations first need to know who they are. What is the culture of the organization, what values are being lived and what makes it special? It is essential to reflect on the company. Just because values are written somewhere on the wall does not mean that they are actually being practiced. A cultural analysis or simply a suitable employee survey helps enormously. If it is clear what makes you tick you can look for suitable people on the market and place your messages in line with the target groups. Of course, for larger companies this can mean having several structures and approaching the market with a variety of approaches in order to position themselves. I address construction workers differently than HR employees.
Looking at the younger generation: How have career requirements changed and how can companies adapt to this?
I don’t quite know if I’m the right person to answer that. There are specialized companies set up by young people to answer these questions for established companies. I personally believe that it has changed massively and will continue to do so. I think it will move more towards a hire-on-demand-concept, which will make the human fit even more important. Project teams will be organized like you select the right players for a specific task in team sports. Careers are becoming less and less relevant and companies have to develop such New Work concepts. It’s not about a nice workplace with table football and a juice bar. It’s about concepts that are contemporary and meet all needs. But here, too, the first step is self-reflection: What does the company need in order to be successful? It always comes down to these three central questions:
- Where to play?
- Who is in the team?
- How to win?
What role does AI technology currently play in transformation processes and what role do you think it will play in the future?
A huge role! However, companies must first learn to understand what this hype is all about and where the benefits are significant. We successfully use Zortify’s AI based tools in our projects because we put people at the center of things and not simply rely on a self-assessment based on the Big 5. Those days are definitely over. Let’s use AI where it makes sense. It’s not so much about finding out who is right and who is wrong, it’s about helping people to improve.
You have just mentioned that you and your colleagues use Zortify’s employee diagnostics for your consulting. Can you give some examples of how you work with it? Perhaps you even have an anecdote about what you were able to recognize or achieve with the help of AI?
At the beginning of our transformation processes (SharedWhy), we primarily rely on Zortify GROW. This gives us very good insights into the teams and provides us with a perfect basis for reflection. We also often use iHPT (instant High Performance teamingg) in various areas. The central issue here is the perfect composition of teams. We work very closely with Zortify on this topic in order to develop it further as we believe there is enormous potential there. Especially with the iHPT process we are always amazed at how easy it is to get management to really think about it. These reports trigger excellent discussions, which often circle around the impact and role in the team. Suddenly questions arise such as:
- Hmmm, am I actually the right person on the management board to address the employees just because I’m CEO? Or is there someone in our team who is better at talking to employees?
Or
- Should we as managers communicate this change of mindset to our employees in order to act as role models?
Thank you so much for the insights. We have one last question for you: In the past you have founded a start-up in the sports sector. Imagine you’re standing on the sidelines of the field cheering for a prototypical SME in the “game for the future” – what do you shout to them?
That’s a bit difficult in the sport I’m involved in. First of all, there’s no sideline in golf and shouting isn’t really the issue. 🙂 Joking aside. I do the same as I do with the players I still coach and often use these metaphors in the business world:
- Your success doesn’t depend on this one action; think and act long term.
- Create a team of people you trust (internally and externally) and decide together.
- You train to be OK on a bad day, not to excel on a good day.
Thank you for the interview, Tom.
For more information about Tom and his work at AOAIO check out their website or follow Tom on LinkedIn.