Canadian HR Reporter

STRATEGIC CAPABILITY NETWORK'S PANEL of thought leaders brings decades of experience from the senior ranks of Canada's business community. eir commentary puts HR management issues into context and looks at the practical implications of proposals and policies. CANADIAN HR REPORTER August 8, 2016 EXECUTIVE SERIES 9 www.scnetwork.ca Michael Clark Organizational Effectiveness Karen Gorsline Strategic Capability Join our professional community of Canadian HR & Organizational Leaders: • Connecting @ monthly events • Collaborating with peers • Challenging conventional thinking The Power of Human Capital CULTIVATING LEADERSHIP FOR 35 YEARS Great Leaders GROW www.scnetwork.ca Is that you, academia? It's me, corporate Canada Orchango executive Edmond Mellina has once again opened up an intriguing win- dow on HR-applicable research being conducted in academia. Using the Nive River that runs through his hometown of Bayonne, France, as a metaphor for the divide between scholars and practitioners, Mellina uses these sessions to demonstrate that the river can be crossed. e research included managing organizational cynicism, pro- moting forgiveness and reducing technologically induced stress, with each of the professors doing a good job succinctly present- ing their findings and remedial suggestions. As I did last year, I wondered, "What else is out there that I could tap into to help my clients?" e next question follows naturally: "Where can I find out?" Firstly, I discover that there does not appear to be a dedicated clear- inghouse of academic research. Being in HR, with all our painful modesty, we might accept this as just being realistic for research on the so-called "soft skills," but even for STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) research, there is no deliberate, comprehensive database of ap- plied (and applicable) research. If you want to find something, you need to sleuth. For example, regarding behav- ioural research, you can dig into the federally sponsored Social Sci- ences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC). Every year, it publishes a list of the researchers who received funding. Over 650 grants will be awarded in 2016. (Note that all three of the academ- ics presenting at this SCN session received funding from SSHRC.) Next, you can search the agen- cies that match-make public- private partnerships — the PPPs. e Ontario Centres of Excellence comes to mind, but the scope of their work appears limited in scale and scope: ey have relatively few awards and those for em- ployment- and investment-heavy industry, HR-applicable research would likely not even qualify. In Ontario, there is the Human Re- sources Research Institute (an off- shoot of the provincial HR asso- ciation), but its funding is limited. So, why aren't academics and corporates joining together in droves, enjoying what seems like an obvious win-win? After all, academics are looking for fund- ing while corporates are looking for competitive advantage and high-potential employees. One reason is the dark side of public-private partnerships: Un- due influence. In late 2013, the Canadian Association of Univer- sity Teachers (CAUT) published a scathing account of university- industry research partnerships primarily in the oil patch. Under the alarming title "Open for Busi- ness," CAUT found evidence — disputed by the researchers in- volved, natch — of compromised academic integrity and abused public interest. Does this mean academics are wary of being tainted by business? Does this mean corporates believe partnerships are PR scandals in the making? Surely, this is merely a matter of transparency and pro- cess with fair dealers in the mid- dle making sure everything stays above board. I would love to see this question addressed at next year's session. Mellina is clever to use the Nives River as a metaphor for the divide between academics and practitioners, and that the river can be crossed. After all, Bayonne has six bridges over the Nives. Michael Clark is director of business development at Forrest & Company, an organizational transformation firm with over 25 years experience in developing the organizational and leadership capacity in organizations. Facing organizational challenges from within Both employers and academic researchers see organizations facing challenges from within that represent as great a threat as any competitor in the marketplace. Disturbing behaviours such as organi- zational cynicism, workplace mistreat- ment and vastly differing responses to technology have become per- vasive in both personal and work lives. ese behaviours can often undermine the corporate culture required to remain competitive. Both organizations and academia are exploring what can be done to rectify these issues from their own perspective. Academia is seeking to under- stand the manifestations, the underlying causes, the impact of relationships and the implications for productivity. Academics have the benefit of distance and the luxury of focus when they look at data and situations. Academics ask questions like the following: Cynicism: What if a worker is cynical? Or the supervisor? Or both? How do various combina- tions impact relationships? Are some people more disposed to being cynical? Based on the an- swers, what can organizations do of offset any negative effects? Workplace mistreatment: When mistreatment has been experienced, what are possible responses? What responses are the most destructive? e most positive? Without advocating, condoning or attempting to forget about an incident, is it possible to forgive? If so, what is involved in forgiving and can it be promoted as a process? Technostress: Where is the line between encouraging the use of technology and understanding misuse? Is technology use addic- tive and creating unrecognized stress? How does it impact gen- erations, genders, personalities or other segments differently? Does second-hand stress occur as a re- sult of constant use of technology by others and, if so, what are its impacts? Organizations look at their ex- isting culture in an evolving world and ask what are the desired be- haviours for the future and what are practical steps to address these issues: cynicism, mistreatment and technostress. Examples of ap- proaches being taken by organiza- tions include the following: Cynicism: Create an under- standing that cynicism exists in the organization and can be ex- acerbated by occurrences in the environment perceived and dis- sonant (such as an overly rosy picture depicted when times are bad) and feelings of a lack of con- trol or lack of voice. Create aware- ness of the constructive value of cynicism and of the value of those who raise questions or see other perspectives. Help leaders under- stand how to better respond to questions raised by cynics. Workplace mistreatment: With a focus on leaders, develop practices and structure to under- stand the mistreatment and how to respond when it occurs. Create a climate where leaders who apol- ogize are not seen as weak. Create an understanding that forgiveness is a process for moving forward and is not forgetting. Technostress: Develop ap- proaches to deploying technol- ogy to increase productivity that do not also increase stress. Cre- ate ground rules of use (such as phones in meetings). Understand when discussions are best sup- ported by discussion and reflec- tion and when by active use of technology to supplement (such as in-the-moment researching or model building/testing) and make the difference in these meeting types clear. Ask if technology is controlling the person or the per- son is controlling the technology. Academia and organizations need to seek each other out and collaborate with these critical is- sues. Synthesizing learning from both points of view will lead to a deeper understanding of under- lying causes and relationships. From this understanding, organi- zations can develop more focused responses and practical initiatives to address organization cynicism, workplace mistreatment and the impacts of pervasive technology. Without collaboration, each will only have part of the picture — academic theory not geared to real world problems or shot gun types of initiatives that use scarce resources, with no assurance of positive impact. Karen Gorsline is SCNetwork's lead commentator on strategic capability and leads HR Initiatives, a consult- ing practice focused on facilitation and tailored HR initiatives. Toronto- based, she has taught HR planning, held senior roles in strategy and poli- cy, managed a large decentralized HR function and directed a small busi- ness. She can be reached at gorslin@ pathcom.com. Does second-hand stress occur as a result of constant use of technology by others and, if so, what are its impacts? So why aren't academics and corporates joining together in droves, enjoying what seems like an obvious win-win?

• Cover