Workforce Development and the Skills Gap Podcast Por arte de portada

Workforce Development and the Skills Gap

Workforce Development and the Skills Gap

Escúchala gratis

Ver detalles del espectáculo

Acerca de esta escucha

 File 22: In today’s file, the team welcomes Amy Rudy, the Founder of Impact Sales Systems, to discuss the challenge of staying relevant in your industry or field and growing your knowledge, skills and abilities. It’s also going to require a level of resilience to remain agile in the future of work. In case you missed them, the previous 2 episodes focused on The Future of Work. Click the below links to listen: · The Future of Work (Part 1) · The Future of Work (Part 2) Meet Amy Rudy Amy is a sales and sales management coach. She works with business owners and sales teams on the behaviors behind selling. She often works with solely-owned and closely-owned businesses. Prior to launching Impact Sales Solutions, Amy founded a software development firm that built custom solutions for specialized challenges facing both small businesses and Fortune 500 companies. The Gap Left when a Founder Leaves the Organization Amy explains that a successful business will often outgrow the skill set that enabled it to launch and grow, in the early days. This is especially true of a business that had a sole owner/founder. It works for a while, but because so much of what makes the organization unique is tied to the knowledge, skills and relationships of that individual, it may be difficult to export that talent to a larger team. As the team attempts to take shape, the initial inertia can slow and leave the team wondering how it can regain the momentum and direction. Managing the Transition It may be a case of the leader wanting to retire or exit in 15 years, or so. However, when Amy is approached with the idea of accelerating that exit to 18 months or less, it’s virtually impossible. Now the exit can definitely take place, but it’s a question of how stable the company was built to withstand the event. It’s a matter of being strategic with the decision. If new leaders are beginning to surface and take on some of the responsibilities, they may be willing to do even more. There’s already a sense of forward motion occurring. The reality is often smaller companies are managed and controlled (along with the decision-making). This environment may work well for the leader, but the rest of the organization is underprepared to move beyond that individual; even to survive after the exit. Is the organization ready to operate with a business-mindset, rather than as a personal checkbook? Amy recommends planning for succession much earlier that people often assume is necessary. The Importance of Creating Succession Plans Jason asks about how this is initiated and developed. Amy comments that it’s a question of whether the organization needs “more of same” or needs to pivot. If the company needs more of the same approach, then documenting work processes and operations would make sense. Amy prefers to begin by asking the client(s) to describe their future. What does FutureCo look like? How much revenue will it produce? How much volume will be required to generate that revenue? Is it truly more of same or is it different? Will it need to move faster? Will the problems be more complex? She also challenges the client(s) to consider the required capabilities. Describe the necessary skills to operate at those levels and in those areas. How much cash will FutureCo require to operate at those levels? It’s a matter of really attempting to define what the intended future will look like. Once you have that vision defined, Amy notes that the business needs to measure where they are today, using the same metrics, for CurrentCo. When accurately performed, a true gap-analysis provides valuable insights. Leaders should then involve the people around them to figure out what needs to be done differently to become FutureCo, as envisioned. One of the underlying challenges becomes reality when the new leader steps into the role, but the insight and resulting roadmap doesn’t exist, because it walked out the door inside the previous leader’s head. This can echo throughout company leadership as people begin to protect what they know. There’s no real knowledge transfer and the organization becomes stuck, or worse yet, begins to regress. It may not be a question of who the organization replaces “Steve” with another Steve (e.g. more of same). Maybe Steve hit his performance ceiling. It’s it possible that moving forward will require a different kind of leader who can take what Steve began and effectively navigate into the future? Jason and Amy discuss the view that, “It worked, so why change it?” Assessing whether it’s still working and will it work in the future are importantly different questions. While this is a difficult conversation to have, Amy observes that there are people at the table who want to be part of the conversation, but unfortunately are not always given the opportunity to contribute their ideas, perspectives and...
adbl_web_global_use_to_activate_T1_webcro805_stickypopup
Todavía no hay opiniones