I - Web viewAvon. Nokia. BAT. Pécs Water Board. Budapest Water Board. Philip Morris. Coca-Cola. ... One of the simplest ways is to examine the first word mentioned by

C A R E E R M A N A G E M E N T I N H U N G A R Y

R E S E A R C H P R O J E C T

S T A K E H O L D E R A N A LY S I S – R E S U LT S O F T H E O N L I N E S U R V E Y

B A S E D O N Q U E S T I O N N A I R E S

B U D A P E S T , 2 8 T H F E B R U A R Y , 2 0 0 6 .

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

KARRIERMENEDZSMENT MAGYARORSZÁGON

PREPARED BY:

© Attila Bokor © Mandy Fertetics

© Anita Frisch © Andrea Toarniczky

C A R E E R M A N A G E M E N T I N H U N G A R Y

R E S E A R C H P R O J E C T

S T A K E H O L D E R A N A L Y S I S – R E S U L T S O F T H E O N - L I N E S U R V E Y B A S E D O N

Q U E S T I O N N A I R E S

2 2


List of contents

List of contents................................................................................3I. Introduction: Research plan and methodology......................................................4

Starting points..........................................................................................4General goals of the stakeholder analysis................................................4Research plan...........................................................................................6Structure of the material..........................................................................8Research team..........................................................................................9

II.Demographics: Talents in focus..............................................................................11III.Career primarily means money – safe financial background – and SUCCESS, and THEREFORE means leadership career...........14

The meaning of career...........................................................................15Career goals...........................................................................................17And the money?......................................................................................19Summary................................................................................................19

IV.People feel that they are left on their own in managing their careers,their success is only up to them........................................21

Whose responsibility is it?......................................................................21Who is the critical factor?......................................................................24Summary................................................................................................25

V.Respondents do not perceive a premeditated career management activity or processes at their organisations...................................26

The overall picture/impression...............................................................27Connection between indicators of satisfaction......................................29System operation....................................................................................31Summary................................................................................................33

VI.The most critical point of CM activities is connected to information flow and the transparency of processes.....................34

Results....................................................................................................34Who knows anything?.............................................................................35Summary................................................................................................37

VII. The majority considers the direct superior a relatively credible supporter, and HR a supporter that lacks credibility....................38

Credibility...............................................................................................38Relationship of subordinate and superior..............................................42Summary................................................................................................44

3 3


I. INTRODUCTION: RESEARCH PLAN AND

METHODOLOGY

I.1. BasicsThe research team of Budapest Corvinus University and OD Partner Kft. launched the comprehensive research program ”Career management in Hungary” in a joint effort. The description of the general outline and the basics of the program is included in the summary report of the interviews conducted with HR managers. This paper contains the summary of the results of the on-line survey (Stakeholder analysis) based on questionnaires. The PowerPoint appendix is a crucial supplement to the summary, which gives a general overview of the survey's statistical results, covering each aspect of the analysis.

I.2. General goals of the stakeholder analysisThe most relevant goal of this subproject was to take a leap beyond HR experts’ interpretation framework of career management and to reveal participants' expectations and their feedback on current practice. To be more specific, these included:

To get acquainted with the desires, goals and experiences of leaders and talents concerning career management. To reveal their expectations towards HR, their superiors and themselves. To survey the benefits of career management for leaders and colleagues, therefore for the company itself.

Further than the aims of the specific research project, the goal of this subproject was to create a database that could be operated on the long run to allow us to keep track of the changes within the values, motivation and behaviour of various generations of national employees regarding their careers. It may as well offer a better understanding of changes in the national business and cultural environment, and create an opportunity to make better forecasts of these changes.

I.1.1. The use of results

Results of this research support the more systematic strategic role of HR and its functional development both directly and indirectly. Directly, through the applied evaluation/analysis tools, methodology and

4 4


publications describing and analising best practices. Results indirectly influence the content of HR-based training and education. Results can also be directly used in higher education and postgraduate courses in economics.

We hope that this branch of the research will be useful for all the participants. The summary and the organisational reports offer the opportunity for HR leaders to compare and relate their self-perception with the feedback of respondents, their subordinates and superiors. We also hope that HR leaders who read this report will be able to draw specific and general conclusions about the current situation, the dilemmas they are facing and get a deeper insight into the status quo.

During the anlysis of the research material and the composition of this material we adopted two different roles:

On the one hand, the perspective of the external expert: to reveal thouroughly based statistical connections, to collect the dilemmas of respondents in a structured way and to analyse and interpret them. On the other hand, from the perspective of the external expert to offer new aspects and to offer feedback by adopting a conscientious, critical approach to support development.

Our aim was to create a material which can be used as a source of learning, based on the following aspects:

Overview: due to the relatively large sample the material offers the opportunity to identify trends and dilemmas concerning expectations, motivation and the evaluation of various HR systems that support career management. The breakdown of different organisational and individual aspects offer the chance to identify phenomena and problems with greater clarity and to reveal the underlying reasons and factors that affect them. The combination of the overview and the organisational report offer the opportunity to identify unique patterns within the organisation, strengths of the organisation and areas to be developed. It is worth comparing results of this subproject with the material describing conclusions of the interviews with HR managers. This is the most useful way of contrasting the general and organisation specific self-perception of HR with the feedback of stakeholders on career management. A combination of all these aspects create the opportunity to find development opportunities and unique, inspiring ideas.

5 5


I.3. Research planThe basic assumptions and hypotheses of the research have been described in the material analysing the results of the interviews conducted with HR leaders.

I.1.2. The questionnaire

Based on the assumptions and goals of the subproject we specified the following research questions:

What is the typical interpretation of the career? What are the typical career goals? What is the role/responsibility of different members in influencing their own careers? Which formal and informal tools support most success in their careers? How do they evaluate the career management tools and systems of their organisation:

o Promotion policyo Identifying talento Development toolso Communicationo Credibility of each member (HR, leaders)

What responsibilities do leaders adopt to support the career development of their subordinates and what are the problems they perceive? Work/life balance – does it pose a problem at different stages in their careers? How much of a problem does it pose? Which demographic and organisational aspects influence the above questions and what is their influence?

The on-line questionnaire was based on the above questions, and it was tested on a sample of 13 people. The questionnaire can be found in Appendix 1.

We conducted our research in compliance with the confidentiality and ethical norms of the academic standards we adopted. Organisations that participated in the empirical research were granted anonimity, inasmuch that specific quotes and analyses do not reveal the company where the specififc information originated from. (The indices of the quotes only reveal whether they are from the same company or different ones.)

6 6


I.1.3. Sampling

Sampling questions appeared at two levels during the research: which organisations and which employees within these organisations were to be chosen as respondents. From a scientific point of view the sampling was primarily defined on the individual level, this was the area where clear criteria were identified. The basis for respondents was to have a degree in higher education, and a current status as an employee within a business organisation. As a further principle, we asked HR leaders responsible for establishing the sample within their organisations to take into account the following factors:

Respondents should be important and relevant targets of the given organisation's career management goals and systems. Respondents, if possible, should reflect the structure of the organisation's hierarchy and its professional fields. Respondents with presumably both positive and negative opinions of the organisation's CM operations to be represented in the sample. Respondents should stand up to their opinion and have a way of thinking which is decisive for other members of the organisation.

Participation in the research was voluntary for organisations. Among participant organisations, ones that offered 20 respondents were to receive an organisational report as feedback prepared by the research team. To enhance the range of respondents, a group of respondents were also created from alumni – graduate and MBA – of the Budapest Corvinus University. (A total of 90 respondents belonged to this part of the sample.) And finally the list of companies that participated in the survey based on questionnaires:

Aegon McDonald’sÁllami Autópálya Kezelő (National Motorways)

MOL

Avon NokiaBAT Pécs Water BoardBudapest Water Board Philip MorrisCoca-Cola Procter&GambleErnst & Young RichterFCI Connect SAP

7 7


Győri Keksz (Danone) T-OnlineMNB (Hungarian National Bank)

Young&Rubicam

Magyar Telekom(Hungarian Telekom)

Individual respondents: BCU Alumni

I.1.4. Return rate

Altogether 1355 invitations to fill in the questionnaire were posted, 737 of which were filled in and were useful enough to become part of the database, which gives a return rate of 54.4%. This is a very good rate for surveys of this kind and the size of the sample can be considered appropriate from a statistical point of view.

I.1.5. Data Analysis

The following standard statistical methods have been applied during the research:

Examination of means and distributions to identify comprehensive patterns. Idientifying factors to determine groups with unique characteristics: cross table examination, ANOVA and correlation analysis. Factor analysis to reveal deeper patterns and basic factors of inluence.

The current stage of analysis can be considered the first report of the situation. Revealing deeper structural aspects, patterns, multiple correlation and indirect connections offer further exciting results, as well as the application of cluster analysis to identify groups with different career strategies.

I.4. Structure of the materialThis research report, as an intermediate and not a comprehensive report, primarily focuses on the most exciting results and also on consequences that can only be stated conditionally but which are most definitely relevant for specific actions. (A comprehensive analysis, the evaluation of the different set of questions, a sytematic overview of the influencing factors can be found in the supplementary PowerPoint presentation, with the appropriate diagrams. The structure of that material reflects the logic followed during the composition of the questionnaire: the first set of questions characterise respondents, the second set are evaluations of the

8 8


organisational CM culture and systems, followed by questions on the leaders' performance and on work/life balance.)This summary first presents the most important characteristics of the sample then some exciting statements are highlighted together with results and our interpretation and comments without aiming to cover all the questions in the greatest depth. The summary is structured according to the following statements, which are intented to be slightly provocative yet reflect the opinion of the majority of respondents: (The term 'people' applies to respondents of the questionnaire. Large scale generalisation can be achieved either by further statistical analysis or by systematically enlarging the sample.):

1. Career primarily means money – safe financial background – and SUCCESS, THEREFORE means leadership career.2. People feel that they are left on their own in managing their careers, their success is only up to them. 3. Respondents do not perceive a premeditated career management activity or processes at their organisations and it seriously affects their satisfaction.4. The most critical point of CM activities is connected to information flow and the transparency of processes.5. From the organisational members of CM the majority considers their direct superior a relatively credible supporter, but HR, as a supporter lacks credibility.

I.5. Research teamThe research team was composed to combine the advantages of a sound theoretical background, practical experience and expertise to achieve the desired results. Therefore team members comprised of colleagues of the Management Institute at Budapest Corvinus University with outstanding education and research experiences in the field as one group and consultants of OD Partner Kft. with significant experiences as organisation development consultants and HR experts as the other. Members of the research team who contributed to the project:

Attila Bokor, Ph.D, associate professor, Management Institute at Budapest Corvinus University, Faculty of Organisational Behaviour; organisation development consultant, partner of OD Partner Kft. (research leader)

Anita Frisch, organisation development consultant and trainer, OD Partner Kft.

Mandy Fertetics, expert on the social responsibility of companies, KÖVET-INEM Hungária

Viktória Ladányi, organisation development consultant, OD Partner Kft.

9 9


Henrietta Szabadi, independent HR expertAndrea Toarniczky, lecturer, Management Institute at Budapest

Corvinus University, Faculty of Organisational Behaviour

Budapest, 28th February, 2006

10 10


Demographics: Talents in focus

The following table includes the most relevant demographic data of all 740 respondents:

Demographics RatioGENDER

Woman 41,0%Man 59,0%

POST/POSITIONColleague 27,9%Expert 20,1%Supervisor 16,3%Middle manager 27,1%Top manager 8,7%

ORGANISATIONAL/PROFESSIONAL FIELD

Facilities/Maintenance/EHS 1,4%General Manager 2,7%Client Relations 6,8%Supply chain / Logistics / Purchases 7,1%HR / Legal 9,7%IT 10,0%Finance / Accounting / Internal Revision 11,7%Production / Technology / R&D 13,8%Other 16,5%Marketing / Sales / PR 20,1%

AGE-25 years 6,9%26-28 years 22,4%29-30 years 19,3%31-35 years 24,6%36-40 years 14,8%41-45 years 5,1%46-50 years 3,7%51-55 years 2,0%56- years 1,4%

11 11


Demographics RatioHOW LONG THEY HAVE BEEN WORKING FOR THE CURRENT

EMPLOYER1 year 11,4%2 years 13,9%3 years 12,4%4 years 9,3%5 years 9,0%6 years 7,3%7 years 8,5%8-10 years 13,0%11-15 years 9,9%16-20 years 2,0%20- years 3,4%

NUMBER OF CHILDRENNo children 62,6%1 child 14,6%2 children 17,2%3 children 4,4%4+ children 1,1%

SIZE OF OGRANISATIONsmall organisation (<100 employees) 9,9%medium organisation (100-1000 employees) 36,8%large organisation (> 1000 employees) 53,2%

NATIONALITY OF OWNERForeign 62,9%Both foreign and Hungarian 26,9%Owned by the Hungarian State 10,2%

The table allows us to make the following characterisation of the sample: The vast majority of the sample is younger or middle-aged. (88% of the sample is below the age of 40 years.) The ratio of people between 29-40 years within this group is high (58,6%). The ratio of those who are single and those who don't have any children is probably high due to the first two points. This also supports the latest tendency that people get married and start rearing children later, when they are in their 30's.

12 12


It is interesting to note that 31% of the 31-35 year-old age group has only been working for the current employer for less than a year. It seems that the likeliness of moving to a different company is higher at this age. The sample is balanced in terms of the different levels within management and functional/organisational fields. The majority of respondents work for large organisations and the ratio of companies in foreign ownership are high.

An important characteristic of the sample, as the following two diagrams indicate, is that the vast majority of respondents consider themselves talented in their professional field as well as a

talented leader. Furthermore, respondents also consider themselves to be at the rising phase of their career courses. Therefore revealing their feedback and their future expectations are relevant both as an input for current CM practices and also for the changes to be made in the future. It is also interesting to note that respondents are more willing to state that they are talented in their profession than their leadership talent. This may be based on objective evidence (good self-evaluation), may refer to the uncertainty of expectations (professional competencies and success criteria are more obvious than prerequisites of a successful leader), but it may also refer to a kind of professional identity (I am aware of my

professional background, this offers me a sound basis. However, my self-perception as a leader is still unclear.)

15,57 64,52 5,75 2,1012,06

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Hol tartkarrierjében?

Még igazán el sem kezdődött a karrierem.Felfutó fázisban vagyok.Most vagyok a karrierem csúcsán.Jelenleg egy karrier hullámvölgyben vagyok.Már karrier csúcsán túl, ereszkedő fázisban vagyok.

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

SZAKMAI tehetségönértékelése

VEZETŐI tehetségönértékelése

Az átlagosnál kevésbé vagyok tehetséges.

Az átlagos mértékben vagyok tehetséges.

Az átlagosnál tehetségesebb vagyok.

Kimagasló tehetség vagyok.

13 13


It is also worth noting that only 3 to 5% of respondents claim to be an outstanding talent. Underestimating their own skills is especially characteristic of women. Both in terms of their professional talent and their talent as leaders a significantly higher percentage of women than men consider themselves just as talented as the average.

14 14


II.CAREER PRIMARILY MEANS MONEY – SAFE FINANCIAL

BACKGROUND – AND SUCCESS, AND THEREFORE MEANS

LEADERSHIP CAREER

The statement expressed in the title reflects two notions: firstly, it supports a stereotypical notion and secondly, it grasps the mainly unresolved tensions underlying career management. The statement can be analysed when broken down into elements and reveals messages at different levels.

II.1. The meaning of careerThe good news first. The first question of the questionnaire asked respondents to list the first 5 words that come to their mind about 'career'. The results, several thousand expressions, can be analysed and evaluated in numerous ways. One of the simplest ways is to examine the first word mentioned by respondents. This is plotted in the adjacent diagram. As we can see, the most popular word by far was SUCCESS. There may not be anything surprising about it, it is a commonplace that people want to be successful and given the contemporary use of language, success has become a synonim for career. Yet it may be worth the effort to pause for a second and contemplate this result and seriously consider its message, perhaps from different perspectives:

As opposed to money and progress, success has unlimited resources within organisations. It may as well be merely the interpretation of expressions and the way it is communicated in the majority of cases. It is essential to observe that there is something which is extremely important to the employee that the organisation and the leader can

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

elismerés

kihívás

önmegvalósítás

fejlődés

lehetőség

munka

előmenetel

pénz

siker

15 15


give without sacrificing anything. (God forbid, it may even be something they share.) The question that comes up instantly, though it may be rhetorical, is that how many leaders or HR managers are convinced that their job is to make their people successful? How many of them perceive this expectation, consider the expectation important and how many are able to turn it into practice? Naturally, success is a very general term and the question must be raised, 'What makes people feel successful?'. A different question though, is that how many organisations make the effort to express this question? Being aware of the need for success poses threats as well as opportunities. Success also implies sports connotations: being compared and competing with others. There is also compliance, the external expectation – e.g. how different are the connotations attached to success and happiness? A person who strives to be successful, obviously depends from his environment, the feedback received from the environment and the level of expectations. Success also incorporates failure and decline because peaks are invariably followed by depression. Furthermore, success is a volatile short-term phenomenon, a momentary experience that must be continuously reinforced. These aspects simultaneously offer opportunities and pose threats from the leader's perspective.

Given the limited amount of space we cannot take on the challenge to fully understand this outstandingly high success orientation. Surely, it is a mark of our times, a characteristic of this generation (A basic and frequently mentioned characteristic of the generation X is success orientation.) And then the not so good news. If we take into account all the words listed, not just the first ones, then the overall impression of success changes. The adjacent diagram is a summary and its main mesage is that in people's minds the traditional interpretation of career (still?) prevails: basically to earn money, secure a safe financial background and to be promoted. It seems that for the majority the definition of success sounds like this. Indeed, results indicate that the most important factor by far is earning money, career as a leader has only been mentioned by fewer. The general speculation that given the

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Törtetés, irigység, küzdelem

Törekvés, lelkesedés

Elismertség, státusz

Felelősség

Munka,

Elismerés – megbecsülés

Sok munka, stressz, kitartás

Fejlődés, tanulás, szakértelem

Lehetőség, kihívás, önmegvalósítás

Előmenetel, vezető, pozíció,

Siker, elégedettség, boldogság

Pénz, egzisztencia, jólét

16 16


current standard of living and the stage of development, the most important driving force for talented people entering the business arena is money is supported here.

It is clear that development, learning and self-fulfilment also appear among the connotations, these are the 4th-5th most frequently listed factors. If we examine the issue more carefully and focus on the frequency of words that

can be connected with development then the situation is not too encouraging. Two thirds of respondents fail to mention this aspect in any way and development as a decisive factor is only mentioned by 8% of respondents. It seems that the latest concept of a career, based on continuous development, experience in various roles and interchanging these roles, is not a widespread notion. Though answers to other questions reveal that those respondents whose definition of a career included development, have a more positive impression of their careers and their satisfaction with career management tools and services offered by their organisation is higher. It remains a question whether development was originally a personal requirement of their career perception or whether it is the influence of a supportive organisational environment and reshaped expectations. Due to the fact that the given sample does not reflect a clear organisational connection, it seems that the former option is more thoroughly based. (It is an interesting phenomenon that this aspect is frequently mentioned by new entrants in the labour market. Yet it remains unclear whether it is a new and characteristic factor of generation Y, i. e. an emerging trend or whether it is only due to the constant characteristic of new entrants.)Eventually, the dark side of the career also appears: sacrifices must be made for it. It seems that primarily on the private side: lots of work, stress, pushiness are among the frequent expressions.Career has a dual meaning: it refers to the success and the sacrifice it takes. We can also state, matching the traditional interpretation of career and the classic relationship between employer and employee, the psychological contract, that the interpretation has the form of a business agreement: I get something from the organisation but I have to pay in return.

II.2. Career goalsA wide range of respondents are characterised by stressing career progression, which is also supported by the reactions given to the

57,8 34,2 6,0

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

fejlődéshez valóviszony

nincs megjelenik erőteljes kizárólagos

17 17


questions concerning career goals. The vast majority of respondents wish to achieve major progress in their career within no more than 5 years' time. It reflects a high level of expectations as well as great internal

tension, and supposedly – quite certainly – overt self-confidence and unrealistic expectations, therefore makes the situation of their direct superiors and HR managers difficult. The diagram clearly indicates that 72% of respondents have aspirations of reaching at least the level of medium managers and third of them specifically want to become top managers within this

period! (An interesting aspect with serious conclusions is that the number one leader's position is either at a mystical distance or is unattractive for a certain reason because very few aspire to achieve it.) A built-in tension within the expectations is further stressed by the breakdown of career goals compared to the current position. It is clear that from the employee status middle manager and from higher positions top managament is the goal within 5 years. The fact that the position of expert does not have an ”appeasing” effect either, 80% of them wish to step up and establish a leadership career, is also an interesting insight. Despite an earlier conclusion, that the majority of respondents feel talented professionally rather than being talented as a leader, they do not shy away from having a quick career as a leader within a short time frame. The desire of people to be promoted is incredibly strong, 95% of employees, 82% of experts, 90% of supervisors, 68% of middle managers want to be promoted within 5 years. The pace is only reduced for top managers, where – only? – 20% wish to be promoted to the number one position. These two diagrams alone are able to reveal why career management has become a hot topic recently in Hungary, and at the same time they also show why this area shows signs of hopelessness.

0,00%10,00%20,00%30,00%40,00%50,00%60,00%70,00%

munkatárs kiemeltmunkatárs

alsó szintűvezető

középvezető felső szintűvezető

Első számú vezető Felső vezető Középvezető

Alsó szintű vezető Beosztott munkatárs Kiemelt szakértő

18 18


In reference to earlier results we can state that there is a significant difference between the career aspirations of women and men. A substantially higher percentage of women than men are satisifed with the position of supervisor or expert. On the other hand, a significantly higher percentage of men wish to become top managers. It remains unclear whether this reflects fears and self-restriction based on individual values or women are simply more cautious and realistic in their aspirations. (Or, considering the high ratio of people without children in the sample, a significant part of them wish to have children during the next five years and consequently, they lower their career expectations.)

II.3. And the money?On average, respondents expect to earn 195% of their current income in three years' time. (The median, i. e. the most frequent value was 200 per cent…) Hopefully this is not meant to reflect the expected devaluation of the national currency in the meantime. The situation is very similar to the case of career progress plans (desires to be more specific): self-confidence, unrealistic expectations, built-in tension. It does not appear to be an easy task to satisfy these employees – talents. Earning expectations, an interesting phenomenon, are not significantly related to the amount of time spent at the organisation, the current position, the field or gender, yet there are substantial differences from these two aspects: According to age groups: the 29 to 35 year-old age group expects the

highest financial growth (the period of having a family?);

Given the number of children: ”I have no kids but I have a career” – this is where earning expectations are highest: 300% on average!

Another talkative conclusion is that satisfaction with the

career does not clearly influence earning expectations.

II.4. SummaryGiven individual needs and career motivation, the situation is quite straightforward. Respondents have aspirations of a quick progress and earn significantly more money even faster. Success orientation is very strong and though there were signs of interpreting career as a process

Mennyit kíván reálisan keresni 3 év múlva (jelenlegi 100%)

0,005,00

10,0015,0020,0025,0030,0035,0040,0045,00

0-100 101-150 151-200 201-250 251-300 301-

19 19


based on development, it only characterised a very narrow segment of respondents. The reaction to these unrealistic expectations may be anxiety or ridicule but the fact is that career management programs that fail to consider these expectations or fail to address them have slight chances of being successful.

20 20


III. PEOPLE FEEL THAT THEY ARE LEFT ON THEIR OWN IN MANAGING THEIR CAREERS, THEIR SUCCESS IS

ONLY UP TO THEM

Considering both the scientific literature and the results of interviews with HR leaders, the basic message to employees today seems to be that they are fully responsible for it themselves. The age when the career was like a journey by rail where the loyal employee with a good performance ”rode along” established tracks and stopped at the stations along the way is over. Today the message is that everyone should hop on the seat of a bicycle and find one's way and opportunities and the responsibility of being supportive and establishing the frames lie with the organisation. We were intrigued whether this message reached employees on the other side at all, and if it did then the way they interpreted it.Several questions of the questionnaire helped the examination of this area. We examined the preferred division of responsibility between the individual and the organisation, as well as the factors of a successful career.

III.1. Whose responsibility is it?The questionnaire had a simple question inquiring respondents about the responsibility for their careers, how is it divided between themselves and their organisation. The result is crystal clear, both in terms of the mean value of answers and

the distribution. If we consider full responsibility as a 100% then individuals take most of the responsibility, two thirds of the responsibility on average. A more detailed explication of this gives that 90% of people take at least 50% of the responsibility themselves and three quarter of people take at least 60% of the responsibility. The most frequent answer (median) was 70% personal responsibility, a surprisingly high figure. It seems that people already know that the career is one's own responsibility. Maybe it does not need to be communicated or stressed so much any more? Considering the interviews with HR leaders, this is quite surprising, as the perception of most organisations is that people are still waiting for opportunities and they are not determined enough. This high

Átlag

67%

33%

Egyéné Vállalaté

29,3 45,7 19,8 4,2

1,0

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

1

Tisztán az egyéné (0-20%) Inkább az egyéné (21-40%) Vegyes (41-60%)Inkább a cégé (61-80%) Tisztán a cégé (81-100%)

21 21


level of willingness to take on personal responsibility raises questions: how conscious is this willingness, how much of a choice is it and what are the specific consequences on behaviour. We strive to address these issues, yet the basic formula is simple: respondents have understood that they are responsible for their careers themselves. Is there a characteristic pattern concerning responsibility? A strong influence of either the generation or the age group cannot be registered. Taking a high level of personal responsibility is characteristic of new entrants, the very young and of managers at the highest levels. It is worth noting that there is a leap of increase with those who have spent six years at their current company. (A recurrent phenomenon of the research is that people who have been working for their current firm for 6-7 years are more critical. They seem to form a group about to make changes and due to certain problems they are more susceptible. We must refer to the fact that one third of the 31-35 year-old bracket have just moved to a new company recently!) Taking personal responsibility is lower with people at the employee position, the eldest age group and those who have been working for longer and those employed by larger companies. The perception of responsibility however, has no connection with how talented people consider themselves – either in their profession or as a leader – how much money they want to earn, or how many workplaces they wish to have!

This question also offers a conclusion concerning the extremes. 30% of respondents feel that they are practically FULLY responsible for their careers themselves. Considering that the majority works for large organisations this

seems surprising as well as unreasonable. What could be the reason? Despair, entrepreneurship, self-confidence, self-conceit? It is difficult to answer this question in itself. If we look at the general indicators of satisfaction then we see that the most satisfied group is where people take 60-80% of the responsibility themselves. Extremely high or extremely low figures tend to reflect a lack of satisfaction. Those who claim that the organisation is fully responsible for their career are the most dissatisfied people from every aspect. Considering the typical career messages and philosophy of organisations this hardly comes as a surprise.

1,00 1,50 2,00 2,50 3,00 3,50 4,00 4,50

01 Elégedettség a karrierrel

11 Munkahelyhez való viszony változása ezévben?

25 Elégedettség a karrier menedzsmentfolyamatokkal összességében.

34 A vállalat hatékonyan használja az éntehetségemet.

36 Komolyan gondolkozom azon, hogy kilépek avállalattól/munkahelyet változtatok.

Tisztán az egyéné (0-20) Inkább az egyéné (21-40) Vegyes (41-60)Inkább a cégé (61-80) Tisztán a cégé (81-100)

22 22


In comparison with the outcome, it becomes apparent that those who take personal responsibility – at a more balanced rate – are more satisfied both with their personal careers and with the support of the company as well. The question is, what is the cause and the effect? People who take on most of the responsibility themselves are supposedly content with less support from the company because their expectations were lower in the first place. It is also clear that the organisations that have outstanding performance concerning their CM activities have a workforce where the average personal responsibility people are willing to take is significantly higher. Having seen the results, it is worth reminding people of what their responsibility is. HR is able to create more efficient and fruitful CM activities if the partners involved know what is required from them.A natural question would be to ask whether the willingness to take personal responsibility has any influences on behaviour? Various analyses reveal that there is hardly any:

Wilful demonstration of their performance and seeking visibility is typical of those who take a higher rate of personal responsibility. At the same time, they are more open to external or management coaching and e-learning. (Maybe towards development tools where personal responsibility is clearly defined?) Whereas those who fail to recognise their own responsibility consider their leaders less of a ”career partner” or an opportunity, and they do not acknowledge development opportunities as much.

III.2. What is the critical factor?

One of the most surprising results of the entire research was the question when respondents were asked to identify key factors of a successful career. The answers are obvious: the secret of progressing in their

careers lies almost exclusively within themselves. To make the message even more acute: even luck as a factor has greater role than the systematic career planning of their own organisation. (Of all the

questions that asked respondents to give an evaluation, this one, the perception of systematic career planning, was the question that got the lowest score in the entire questionnaire!) During the evaluation of this

23

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Karrier sikereimet a MUNKAHELYEMEN FOLYÓ TUDATOSKARRIERTERVEZÉSNEK köszönhetem

Karrier sikereimet SZERENCSÉS HELYZETEKNEK köszönhetem

Karrier sikereimet MAGAMNAK köszönhetem

Egyáltalán nem Inkább nem Nem tudom eldönteni Inkább igen Teljes mértékben

23


answer we must take into account distorting factors: social psychology revealed the phenomenon – called attribution error – a long time ago that people usually internalise success whereas problems are caused by external factors. Nonetheless, the given scenario offers the question: is there any trace of organisational career management? Given the results, several issues need to be given consideration. Is it the individualistic cultural aspect, familiar from various examples of cultural research, that is implied by the results? (If this is the case, then what changes are necessary in comparison withth current international practice?) Or is it a positive message reflecting a high level of individual responsibility? While accepting the existence of all other hypotheses, we are convinced at this stage that results primarily reflect a situation where individuals are left to their own devices. They do not reflect the premeditated decision of talents but reveal that they are drifting, adapting to their environments. Whatever the reason, it is surely not trust towards the organisation and the HR tools.There are significant differences between the companies in this regard. There are companies where 60% of respondents feel that the organisation has systematic career management, there are companies where none of the respondents feel that. No strict regularities can be identified according to the type, industry, owner or size of the companies either. Each group has companies that have an outstanding or a really low performance. In comparison with the interviews conducted with HR managers, it can be stated that companies operating continuous internal flow in an integrated approach, generally perform better. The factor of luck is highest at companies in state ownership, in the public sector.

III.3. SummaryTaking a high level of personal responsibility seemed a positive message at first but given the details it brings up several dilemmas. On one hand, very few specific consequences of this responsibilty could be identified. Interestingly enough, what it influences most, is the general satisfaction with the career. On the other hand, if we take into account the causes of a successful career, then it is no longer about deliberately taking responsibility but that they seem to be completely left on their own.…

24 24


IV. RESPONDENTS DO NOT PERCEIVE A PREMEDITATED CAREER

MANAGEMENT ACTIVITY OR PROCESSES AT THEIR

ORGANISATIONS

One of the important questions of the research was to reveal how the satisfaction with the career and with organisational career management influenced the general satisfaction of employees and how it influenced their willingness to quit the organisation. The questionnaire included questions that inquired about outcome indicators, ones that could be connected with the results of career management either directly or indirectly. These can be grouped according to the table.

Character QuestionGENERAL I am seriously considering quitting the job/leaving the

companyChange of relationship with organisation during last year

DIRECTLY CONNECTED WITH career management

Career satisfactionMy career success is due to the premeditated career planning of my organisation.The company is aware of my talent/potential.

The company utilises my talent efficiently.General satisfaction with career management processes.

The company is able to retain the most talented employees.Individual goals and personal satisfaction are important for the company.

WLB I am satisfied with my current work/life balance.

25 25

1,00 1,50 2,00 2,50 3,00 3,50 4,00 4,50 5,00

Karrier sikereimet a MUNKAHELYEIMEN FOLYÓ TUDATOSKARRIERTERVEZÉSNEK köszönhetem.

A vállalat képes a legtehetségesebb munkatársait megtartani.

Elégedettség a karrier menedzsment folyamatokkal összességében.

Az egyéni törekvések és személyes elégedettség fontosak e cégnél.

Munkahelyhez való viszony változása ez évben?

Elégedett vagyok a jelenlegi munka/magánélet egyensúlyommal.

A vállalat hatékonyan használja az én tehetségemet.

A vállalat tisztában van a tehetségemmel/potenciálommal.

Nem gondolkozom komolyan azon, hogy munkahelyet változtatok.

Elégedettség a karrierrel


This is the subchapter describing how respondents evaluated these important outcome indicators.

IV.1. The overall picture/impressionAs to how, if we wish to answer the question briefly, then we could state that respondents evaluated the results connected to career management as rather weak. Career management cannot be considered a success story, on the contrary... If we cast a glance upon the following graph showing the average evaluation of all the outcome indicators, then we can see that some of them reflect a relatively good value, the majority a mixed/medium value and some of the indicators were awarded poor results. An interesting aspect is the fact that the highest value was given to the satisfaction with one's career, almost 80% of respondents fit in the

satisfied category. As we have seen in the previous chapter,

respondents are convinced that this is primarily due to themselves. If we combine the two pieces of information then we cannot avoid asking the unpleasant question, what is the need for organisational career management activities? People are content with their own achievement and they were able to achieve it on their own. (At this point we must admit the distortions of the sampling method: if respondents were really

people who are key people or talents at their organisation

26

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Az egyéni törekvések ésszemélyes elégedettség

fontosak e cégnél

A vállalat hatékonyan használjaaz én tehetségemet.

A vállalat tisztában van atehetségemmel/potenciálommal.

Nem gondolkozom komolyanazon, hogy munkahelyet

változtatok.

Elégedettség a karrierrel


26


then their satisfaction is almost certainly higher than that of the average employee.) The answers also reveal that most people do not consider quitting their organisation, ”only” a third of them seriously consider the notion of quitting their current jobs. (Or maybe this is not a low percentage at all?!)Furthermore, we can also state that the majority of people are not too dissatisfied with the way their talent is acknowledged and utilised by their organisations. (Yet these answers already got a score of 3, mediocre, which, supposedly, is not the feedback most organisations expect to get from their people. (Roughly 50% fit into the satisfied category.) Evaluations concerning organisational career management activities are outright poor. We have seen earlier that respondents do not perceive any premeditated career planning, and what we see here is that they are not satisfied with career management processes and according to them, their

organisation is not capable of retaining talents. That is, while they are satisfied on the

individual/personal level, they are absolutely not satisfied with the activities of the organisation in this regard... (Suppposedly, distorting factors that affect their perception of these phenomena could probably be identified in both cases.) The evaluation of their organisation shows that they are dissatisfied and they give mediocre score for themselves.Finally, people who have grown more statisfied and who have grown more dissatisfied during the last year are at balance. Approximately a quarter of all respondents fit into either group. (This question significantly influences the intention of leaving the organisation, there is nothing surprising about this.) One's level in the hierarchy influences satisfaction most. The higher one's position is in the hierarchy, the more satisfied the person is with his own career and with organisational processes as well.

27

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Karrier sikereimet aMUNKAHELYEIMENFOLYÓ TUDATOS

KARRIERTERVEZÉSNEKköszönhetem.

A vállalat képes alegtehetségesebb

munkatársait megtartani.

Elégedettség a karriermenedzsmentfolyamatokkal

összességében.

Munkahelyhez valóviszony változása ez

évben?


27


IV.2. Connection between indicators of satisfactionConnection between the above outcome indicators can be revealed by factor analysis. This method allows us to see which indicators are connected and which are independent. It also allows us to prove whether evaluations of career management activities are connected with general satisfaction indicators such as the intention of leaving the comany and the change in one's satisfaction during the last year.The first results of the investigation support our preliminary model based on logical assumptions. It means that the intention to leave the company and the change of satisfaction can be considered general indicators of satisfaction. Satisfaction with work/life balance is a separate indicator, independent of career management indicators. However, it marks an important insight, namely that this independent indicator influences the intention to quit the organisation and the relationship with the company just as much as career factors. Therefore satisfaction with work/life balance seriously influences satisfaction. Furthermore, there is a slight tendency that those who consider themselves more successful in their career evaluate work/life balance in a more negative way.Due to the fact that this topic is only a secondary aspect of the research, results connected with this area will not be discussed in more detail in this summary. Further details can be found in the appendix, the PowerPoint presentation includes further information. (As well as referring to the intention that we wish to examine the topic in detail during our next research.)Outcome indicators of career management move together, there are no outstanding indicators, or one's that would move independently of others. Within this group of indicators the two most decisive questions appear to be the ”company acknowledges” and ”efficiently utilises my talent”. In other words, these two factors influence the satisfaction of respondents most. If they evaluated these two factors as 'good' then the likelihood of them giving 'good ' evaluation for other career management activities and outcome was high. It appears logical that the evaluation and attitude of respondents are most affected by factors directly affecting them rather than more general results. Meaning that a company can be very good at retaining its talents in general but if they fail to recognise me then my evaluation of it will be 'poor'.

28 28


Furthermore, it can also be proved that these satisfaction indicators of career management are also connected to the general satisfaction of

respondents, such as the intention of leaving the organisation. The adjacent diagram lists the outcome indicators that got the worst evaluation from respondents. It can be seen how closely connected is the attitude towards these questions and the change in the respondent's relation to his organisation during the last year. (And we have shown earlier that this question seriously

influences the intention to quit the company.) The connection between the attitude towards career management, organisational retention and satisfaction is tangible.Although this is hardly a novelty, it is worth noting that the organisation's career supporting activities significantly influence its ability to retain its people and to make them more committed.

IV.3. System operationThese questions can also be considered a group of indicators that reflect the effectiveness of career management: what are the factors that decide who would move up the scale in the organisation according to respondents. This also serves to authenticate their previous activities and also includes the important message of what the organisation expects of its employees. The overall picture fails to be encouraging yet again. Though none of the indicators stand out from the list, it is worth contemplating that respondents consider self-marketing to be the most important factor of a promotion. To make it worse, capabilities fail to make it to second place, taken by loyalty and fitting in with the leadership culture. Similarly to the first aspect, this also underlines meeting external expectations and points in the direction of politicking and promotion policies based on private agreements instead of

29

Mi kell az előre jutáshoz?

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

32,23

24,32

11,21

16,67

33,18

43,24

49,53

40,83

38,46

19,91

24,32

27,10

34,17

46,15

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Karrier sikereimet egyáltalán nem atudatos KM-nek köszönhetem

Karrier sikereimet inkább nem a tudatosKM-nek köszönhetem

Nem tudom eldönteni

Karrier sikereimet inkább a tudatos KM-nek köszönhetem

Karrier sikereimet teljes mértékben atudatos KM-nek köszönhetem

Sokat romlott. Romlott. Nem változott. Javult. Sokat javult.

29


performance or potential-based promotion. At least at the level of respondents' perceptions and beliefs.Though these beliefs and presumptions may not have a realistic basis they do produce real behaviour patterns. If people are convinced that their own potential is of no importance but their personal relationship with key decision makers is what matters then this devaluates the tools connected to the former aspect as people devote their energies to achieve better results with the latter. A second question based on this aspect is whether it is possible to operate a transparent, relatively objective planning and evaluation system, which can be communicated well, based on professional knowledge and leadership abilities. If promotion is based on self-promotion and loyalty then this is certainly not possible because the basic underlying principles are personal judgement and individual aspects. Naturally, we have not forgotten about reality. It is clear that visibility and in order to become part of the management team, personal acceptance and fitting in the group are important aspects that are to be taken into account and they are not aspects to be ashamed of. It is not their presence that causes worries but their relative significance compared to other factors. The importance of leadership skills and professional skills are low even compared with the mean value. To make it worse, only a quarter of respondents are convinced about the impotance of each of these aspects. The ratio for self-marketing and loyalty is almost twice as high. (Only 1-2% think that professional knowledge and leadership skills have full importance.)The lower respondents are in the hierarchy, the more critical they are concerning the factors of promotions. (Leaders are supposedly sharing the cause of their success therefore they are less impartial.) Experts are especially critical, more than any other group, about leadership talent. Being hurt personally could be one of the reasons due to the fact that they did not achieve a leadership position. It is also quite interesting that respondents who consider themselves less talented than the average or those who are outstandingly talented are also very critical. The reason yet again may be sour grapes, being partial or the influence of self-perception. It can also be noted that satisfaction with one's career also influences the perception of who is promoted at the company. Those who are satisfied with their careers have a clearly more positive opinion of this area therefore we are again faced with the problem of self-evaluation and being partial.It is also evident that the role of self-marketing is strongest according to the eldest age group. Curiously, the youngest bracket, respondents below 25 years, also indicate the importance of this factor. Obviously, this does not come from personal experience in their case. The question is whether this is an expectation towards them, something they unwillingly try to

30 30


meet or this is wilful preparation, a kind of value orientation, a more pragmatic approach towards career planning. If we compare individual factors of career progress with the different patterns of satisfaction then we can see that three factors have a basically positive and one factor has a negative message. Loyalty and fitting the culture have a positiv message as a factor of promotion, just like professional knowledge and leadership skills. (Those who feel that these factors are stronger, give better evaluations of career management systems, the efficiency of these systems and their own careers.) The overall impression of self-marketing is negative. (Interestingly enough, interviews with HR managers also revealed that this factor cannot be eliminated though the majority do not acknowledge it as a positive factor.)If we examine the various distributions, this is not exact statistical analysis yet, then people think that professional knowledge must be the most important factor of promotions. Because this factor's evaluation has the closest connection with different career management outcome indicators. That is, this is where the tendency is strongest that those whe feel that this is the basis of promotion are satisfied and those who feel that it is not are dissatisfied. This, however, is important in the sense that people still consider professional knowledge more decisive, more valuable, than their leadership skills in terms of their careers. We consider it a problem because it raises problems both in terms of horizontal movements and in terms of interpreting the leadership role.

IV.4. SummaryThe evaluation of general indicators of career management within our survey got unfavourable results. While the majority of people are not dissatisfied with their career courses so far, they are convinced that these results are not due to career management activities of their organisation. Another relevant statement is that dissatisfaction with career support – and a tilted work/life balance – are strong indicators of the intention to leave the organisation. Therefore it is proven that if these areas are handled appropriately then it significantly increases retention.To sum up the area, there is a question which can hardly be avoided. If the vast majority of people at these organisations are satisfied with their careers because they feel that it is due to their own merits and maybe a little bit due to luck as well and at the same time they do not perceive any systematic or efficient career support from their organisations then why is it so important to operate these systems?

31 31


V. THE MOST CRITICAL POINT OF CM ACTIVITIES IS CONNECTED TO

INFORMATION FLOW AND THE TRANSPARENCY OF PROCESSES

The study analysing the interviews conducted with HR managers has revealed that communication ought to have an important role from various aspects. We analysed the messages the organisation intends to send to employees in terms of what the key to a successful career is, how talents/succesors are informed (not informed) of their status and how transparent promotion decisions are, how clearly members see the principles and factors of the decision making process. We also stated that there are dual messages, where even HR does not believe what it is saying, e.g. about the chances of being promoted. We have also seen that the predominant way of communication within most organisations to inform people that they are considered talents are ”implication” and indirect references. The questionnaire offers the opportunity to examine the other side, the perspective of respondents.

V.1. ResultsResults speak for themselves: the set of questions on career management systems got the worst evaluation within the entire questionnaire. Mean values are critically low, especially low for the transparency of promotion decisions (merely a score of 2.24, the second lowest score of all the evaluation

questions). We can state that the most crucial problem concerning career management systems and tools is the lack of information. Communication theory tells us that the reasons most frequently underlying communication problems are relationship problems connected with trust, power, fears and manipulation. The questionnaire in itself does not offer a precise answer as to from whom or how respondents would expect

32

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Megfelelőinformációk a

karrierrendszerrel, -eszközökkel

kapcsolatban.

Minden szükségesinformációt

megkapok akarrierem

tervezéséhez.

Megfelelőinformációk az

előléptetési döntésekszempontjairól.

Egyáltalán nem értek egyet Inkább nem értek egyet Egyet is értek, meg nem isInkább egyetértek Teljes mértékben egyetértek

32


something different. HR interviews revealed that concerning career management, the direct superior, the number one leader and the HR manager himself are all important messengers as well as demonstrators of the message therefore these results are to be paid taken into account by all of them. (Given the feedback on the credibility of various members it will be especially useful for those in HR.)

V.2. Who knows anything?An especially crucial question is the transparency of promotions. We have referred to the low mean value but the result gets even more shocking if

we consider that 87% of respondents state that they do not even have roughly appropriate information on the factors that influence promotion! The question is, who has the information then?

The solution is not simple because what appears to be the trivial solution, that is „well, top managers have it” approach does not appear to be true either, on the basis of

distributions. Only 3% of respondents stated that they are fully aware and 29% that they are aware of it more or less. (Employees and experts have practically no information at their disposal in this regard.) A different breakdown of the results also disposes of the myth that HR people are in the know. (We could have presumed that the results were low due to the lawyers who were fitted in the same group for reasons of manageability. This however, is not realistic becuse even the mean score for general managers is far below the score of 3, the mediocre value.)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

munkatárs

kiemelt munkatárs

alsó szintű vezető

középvezető

felső szintű vezető


33

1,00 1,50 2,00 2,50 3,00 3,50 4,00 4,50 5,00

Facilities/Fenntartás/EHS

HR / Jog

IT

Marketing / Értékesítés / PR

Pénzügy / Számvitel / Belső ellenőrzés

Supply chain / Logisztika / Beszerzés

Termelés / Műszaki / K+F

Ügyfélkapcsolatok

Üzleti vezető / General Manager

33


Furthermore, this is a rare set of questions where there are simply no leading edge companies to be found. The mean score of the company with the best performance is 3.07… It is not a question of size, industry or the nationality of the owner. It is a result that reflects a general characteristic of the current Hungarian organisational and business culture. (Though the size of the sampling as a limitation must be taken into account, therefore large scale generalisation is not possible.) Not even people at the highest level get sufficient information for career planning and people at lower levels get next to nothing.Though the problem is prevalent at every company and each organisational level, the magnitude of it is different in given areas. It is obvious that the managerial level is a very strong influencing factor of information: as the information trickles down, decision principles get less and less clear. As oppsed to this, those who have only been working for a year are optimistic as usual. (Presumably, they only know these principles from the communication materials of the company and do not have any first hand experience.) Having spent 2-3 years at the company the evaluation declines significantly and after a brief period of recovery – becoming an insider? – hits rock bottom in the 5th-6th year. In accordance with this, the most critical age group is between 31 and 35 years of age. They may possibly be people affected by certain promotion decisions, perhaps in a negative way, and this may be a reason for their disappointment. Naturally, it is quite clear that in general there are decision makers for each particular decision who know what the motives and aspects of their decision was. However, results indicate that this must be a very small circle, consisting of people who are not consistent in their decision making and make promotion decisions that are difficult to decode or who adopt a framework and principles in their decision making that lacks transparency. The figures may also indicate that specific decisions are not communicated to the larger organisational environment but maybe not even to those concerned as to why they were or were not promoted. To illustrate the gravity of the problem, even those organisations lack information which have established talent evaluation methods, potential and competency matrices, where each person gets regular feedback from his superior on his promotion opporunities. Supposedly, this indicates that the aspects of career planning and evaluation processes are not taken into account. It becomes more consistent at a later stage, when it comes to specific promotions. This is supported by the opinion of HR managers, the majority of whom stated during the interviews that these decisions are frequently informal and self-marketing plays a distinctive role in them. As we have seen, this insight was strengthened by employees as the most important factor of career progress.

34 34


Another question on information flow was whether respondents received information required for career plannning. This a significantly ”softer”

question than the previous one and based on the interviews with HR managers we may be inclined to think that the situation is a lot better in this regard. Some companies give messages, though informal ones, to its employees concerning the expectations and evaluations that apply

to them and a significant part of the companies operate established evaluation and planning tools. Yet the replies indicate a high level of dissatisfaction in this case as well. It can clearly be seen that the filtering effect of organisational levels is also present. The questionnaire did not offer the opportunity to specify the kind of information that respondents miss most: on one's potential or on progress opportunities and its chances. The latter is presumably the most critical factor. If we are being realistic then hardly anyone has any information about this.

V.3. SummaryOn the basis of our experiences, for all kinds of organisations, the most critical questions of satisfaction surveys are usually the ones about internal communication and career management. (And remuneration, of course.) Consequently, it is hardly surprising that the section where the two critical questions overlap, communication connected with career management, got such poor results. We are also aware of the fact that people's demand for information is virtually infinite and that it is an impossible goal to make everyone feel perfectly informed of all the questions. It is also clear that people in many cases require such information – about their future opportunities – that nobody has at their disposal within the organisation. Therefore their satisfaction with the available information will be low for reasons which cannot be influenced directly. Reactions to our inquiry reveal a more general type of information that is missing. Awareness of the career system and tools is low and the uncertainty factor does not apply to these, the issue can be addressed effectively with good internal communication. Furthermore, questions on career decisions were about the factors and principles, which should be transparent irrespective of the circumstances of specific decisions.We are convinced that we are faced with feedback that reflects the critically acclaimed communication strategies based on ”implications”

35

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

munkatárs

kiemelt munkatárs

alsó szintű vezető

középvezető

felső szintű vezető


35


and indirect references. Only the sender feels safe in these situations, there is so much noise on the receiver's side and so much uncertainty concerning the message that it frequently leads to dissatisfaction. Our impression is that the professionalism, planning and the functional control of HR concerning career management systems is primarily present during the preliminary planning and evaluation phase. (Selection, evaluation, development of talents and succesors.) Then comes the moment of truth, a specific promotion decision, and even HR admits that various other unique – personal, organisational and internal political – factors appear which make it impossible to create a consistent and transparent system. Though, most probably, this is the realistic situation for all organisations worldwide. Given the uncertain and delicate circumstances, solutions must be found to create a situation and a framework where communication takes place between two, equal partners. We are convinced that this is the road to be taken to increase satisfaction with information flow.

36 36


VI. THE MAJORITY CONSIDERS THE DIRECT SUPERIOR A RELATIVELY

CREDIBLE SUPPORTER, AND HR A SUPPORTER THAT LACKS

CREDIBILITY

One of the primary theses of the entire research is that a basic condition of career management systems is that individual actors must understand the processes and take responsibilty for their own part within them, that they must be able to make clear contracts with one another and that they interact and work together according to these contracts. During the interviews with HR managers we mapped their perceptions concerning the different members, the questionnaire offers the opportunity of getting some feedback from the side of talents and leaders on this perception.A basic condition for the cooperation of different members is that they mutually consider one another to be credible. As we saw in the research report of the HRA subproject, people at HR often call leaders to account for their role of developing and offering feedback and they miss the readiness of employees to search and identify development opportunities themselves. Let us see what talents have to say about the credibility and operation of leaders and HR people.

VI.1.Credibility

37 37


Answers to the questions concerning the credibility of top managers, the direct superior and people at HR fail to offer any rosy results either. For

any of these members the answer 'I completely agree' appeared very rarely. The mean scores are around score 3 for managers and it is significantly lower for people at HR (2.66).

Which means that none of the members can be considered credible according to the general view. (This paper is a summary focusing on vital information so we are not discussing the issue in detail but respondents' views on their colleagues are not much better either. The majority have the opinion that they are focusing on safety rather than development and the motor behind their career is not careful planning but luck instead.) The stability of the results is supported by the fact that respondents also trust their leaders more concerning work/life balance than they trust HR in this respect. What could be the reason, why do they feel that they cannot share these problems openly with HR? What does it mean that the direct superior is considered the most credible person by respondents? 42% of respondents claim that they are rather credible than not, whereas only about every fifth respondents states it about HR people. This result seems surprising, considering that theoretically – and usually according to the experience of people in HR as well – they are the ones who have contrary interests in the career of their

subordinates: they do not offer feedback, do not develop their colleagues, do not let them participate in training events, try to keep talents for themselves. What could be the reason for the relative satisfaction of respondents with them?

For most leaders the role of supporting others' careers does exist – at least towards talented people, and respondents belong to this group. Or do replies reflect the role of the leader so often described in Hungary, that leaders protect their short term interests? Or that the leader is simply more credible because he is closer to respondents therefore his motivation and

38

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

A HR hitelesen képviselia karriermenedzsment

elveket és célokat.

A közvetlen vezetőmhiteles képviselője akarriermenedzsmentelveknek és céloknak.

A felső vezetés hitelesképviselője a

karriermenedzsmentelveknek és céloknak.


3,35

2,74

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

3,50

4,00

Főnökömmelnyíltan

beszélhetek amunkát illetőmagánéleti

problémákról.

A HR-esselnyíltan

beszélhetek amunkát illetőmagánéleti

problémákról.

38


problems are understood better by respondents? And consequently, despite all their problems with the direct superior they still seem more credible than top managers or HR people who seem to be at a mystical distance from them? Or what we see is the result of leaders withholding information and manipulating their subordinates? That is they distort the information and decisions connected with different promotions and talent programs in a way that either top managers or HR people appear to be the scapegoats.

Within a survey based on a questionnaire it is impossible to answer these questions and it is also a certainty that there is no universal answer. For every organisation and individual the truth lies in a different place and they can only be identified with different research methods.If we move on, then the question must be raised, what does it mean that the HR person is the least credible member and that his acceptance can be considered critical? Though on the basis of the academic literature and their self-perception they should be the most important representatives of the principles and goals of career management, supporters of leaders and talents, sometimes being the mother hen, consultant, guru etc. (A reference to the metaphors of HR's self-perception from the HRA research subproject.)This general view of HR people applies to the vast majority of organisations, it is not the opinion of a few but a general impression. There is only one company where HR is more credible in terms of career management than the other two members and for two other companies it is at least more credible than the top managers. Although the most important allies of HR people, top managers gave the highest score, it is merely 2.76, that is significantly lower than the medium value and less than a third of them consider HR credible. (Given the breakdown of data, yet again, people who have been working for 6 years and those between 31 and 35 years of age are the most pessimistic.)

39

1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 3,5 4,0 4,5

04 Karrier sikereimet a MUNKAHELYEIMEN FOLYÓTUDATOS KARRIERTERVEZÉSNEK köszönhetem.

24 Megfelelő információk a karrierrendszerrel, -eszközökkel kapcsolatban.

25 Elégedettség a karrier menedzsment folyamatokkalösszességében.

33 Minden szükséges információt megkapok akarrierem tervezéséhez.

35 Az egyéni törekvések és személyes elégedettségfontosak ennél a vállalatnál.

37 Megfelelő információk az előléptetési döntésekszempontjairól.


39


If we leave behind the somewhat uncertain analysis of the results then one thing can be stated with certainty. The credibility of HR, top managers and the direct superior all decisively influence the satisfaction with career management tools and outcome. The credibility of HR concerning all the questions connected with information flow are all strong. We have shown in the previous chapter that this is a critical topic. At the same time, it offers the basis of improving and strenghtening the credibility of HR, the areas that it should cover and the specific actions. (What is to be communicated and how?)It seems that the credibility of various members is an essential condition of operating these systems. The figures also reflect that credibility of individual members are closely connected, that is, figuratively speaking, they are rowing in the same boat. There is no such situation where only one member is credible. It requires team work, synchronised messages and tools which are used according to the principles. This also implies that the behavior where one of the members, though informally, starts shifting the blame for the imperfections of the system then this member is undermining his own credibility as well as that of the entire system. (This may be an important message to people at HR as well as managers in general!)

VI.2.Relationship of subordinate and superiorWe tried to reveal the responsibility of the leader in career management with further questions. We asked respondents to choose the description

that fits their relationship with their direct leader most. The characteristic effect of the replies given to the question is indicated by the adjacent diagram, which shows that the answers have a direct connection

with the career satisfaction of respondents. (The length of the lines indicate career satisfaction.) The meaning of the diagram can be stated in different ways and presumably, both of them are true: 1. ”If your relationship with your boss

40

1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 3,5 4,0 4,5

diplomatikus

inkább diplomatikus

vegyes

inkább őszinte

őszinte

megfelelés

inkább megfelelés

vegyes

inkább önállóság

önállóság

autokrata

inkább autokrata

vegyes

partner

inkább partner

Karrierlégedettség

40


is not good then you are not satisfied with your career either.” 2. ”If you have a good relationship with your boss then it will help you significantly in achieving your career goals and be satisfied.”. As we see, there are two questions in the questionnaire where there were quite favourable results as opposed to the generally ”gloomy” reactions.

The majority of respondents consider their direct superior more of a partner than an autocrat and their impression is that they tend to expect independence of them rather expecting them to meet expectations. (There is the question of

relativity, what to make of 20% of respondents who feel the opposite, is this ratio high or low? Respondents who gave a negative answer to either of the two questions significantly overlap each other but are not identical, that is instead of 20%, in fact roughly 30% of superior-subordinate relationships in the sample are considered problematic, which is already a markable ratio.)Honest communication, a basic factor of career management, got significantly less favourable results. Although this aspect has a strong influence on virtually all the satisfaction indicators concerning career management and all general satisfaction indicators. The question arises, how is it possible to have honest career planning, feedback and development conversations if there is no honesty? For 60% of respondents diplomacy plays a serious role in this relationship. The situation can be understood because the career goals of the individual may harm the interests of the superior and it is not in their interest to reveal any weaknesses, problems or plans (e.g. to have children). (Women are somewhat more critical about the issue.) But then the next question comes up, if this is the case then how sensible, useful and credible are these conversations considered by each of the participants and how sensible, useful and credible do they consider the agreements and plans based on these conversations? If they don't then the organisation can implement tools and systems that are impeccable from a professional point of view but they will fail to work effectively. (It may not come as a surprise if we reveal that respondents who are most critical of their relationship with their superiors have been working for the same organisation for exactly 6 years.)

41

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Vezetőm:diplomatikusságvs. őszinteség

Vezetőm:megfelelés vs.

önállóság

Vezetőm:autokrata vs.

partner

Az 1. állítás igaz Inkább az 1. állítás igaz Mindkét állítás egyformán igazInkább a 2. állítás igaz A 2. állítás igaz

41


An important overall experience is that respondents at leading edge companies gave significantly better evaluation of their relationship with their superiors than the mean score. Though no direct connection can be established, multinational organisations and organisations with strong internal flow have a better performance in this aspect than the privatised Hungarian corporations and organisations where there is a lack of strong internal flow.

VI.3.SummaryTo sum up, the credibility of various members is quite mixed and the evaluation given for HR people is poor within the group. The evaluation of leaders is critical but compared to all other members and tools, it is relatively positive. An interesting conclusion is that the credibility of all members move together, in the field of career management members cannot ”credibly” shift responsibility to others.

The majority of respondents consider their direct superiors and not HR or the systems as their potentially most important supporter and partner in managing their careers at the moment. Establishing a good relationship with one's leader and honest communication are decisive factors of career satisfaction and the evaluation of systems.

It may be worthy of consideration for people in HR that the relationship with the leader also influences satisfaction with career management processes and tools as well. That is to say, satisfaction with issues that strictly belong to HR's responsibilities are also conveyed by leaders.

42 42

Documents

I - Web viewAvon. Nokia. BAT. Pécs Water Board. Budapest Water Board. Philip Morris. Coca-Cola. ... One of the simplest ways is to examine the first word mentioned by