organisation: a process

Very often Organisations are viewed through a structural frame as a limited entity. There are various market scales and indices to evaluate in terms of its quantifiable aspects ; be it commercial, physical, financial or people. Governance institutions like exchanges or rating bodies also exist to assign labels and grant visibility.Even virtual organisations occupy cloud space with an internet address. In fact static views helps control,regulations and public accountability. These are largely results based,post facto and not on ongoing processes. The on going processes reflects organisation's effectiveness or sustainability for future. Even P/E multiples is not a reliable indicator in this respect as it is not based on internal processes. It is the intangible processes like performance, leadership, values etc, evolving or changing on a continuous basis, fuels the soul of an organisation. Leaders review these processes on a continuous basis. like skillful driving (process)to maneuver in heavy traffic; not the Car/technology or driver/demographics. The control on processes alone can help ensure growth and development to the organisation. One can reflect on the integrity of the processes, its potential to fuel prospective business cycles. for eg, Succession plans if based on extrinsic factors, erode faith of employees over interdependence between growth and performance. Annual appraisals slips into yet another ritual,impotent; processes get derailed over a period of time. Another process is for eg. transparency in value addition, equitable sharing of added value amongst stakeholders and customers: undoubtedly improves market credibility. FMCG companies will vouch for the efficacy of such processes for customer retention. People who miss out the process side of 'organisation' will continue look at the dashboard readings etc, on the visible entity side of an organisation, blind to its trailing nature ; that lull before the storm.

unbiased hiring....

...never exist..you 'hire' when you get 'biased' to some one over the rest. The integrity is tested on what 'factor' you get biased on. Certain factors could be illegal, we know. But there are a whole lot of 'legal' bias factors which can sabotage the chances of getting a right candidate. It hardly helps whether you use latest technologies, virtual cost effective modes, or best head hunters. You will stumble upon that bias unless you are aware of those. Even the line manager who assists HR guy can make that mistake. Very often candidate gets assessed for wrong qualifications. Top most is the biasness over 'language skills'. Does for eg the accent, coming from origin, should be factor ? unless you are hiring a RJ ? Studies show effective communication always perform better in Interviews. This is what is taught in a finishing school ! Also interviewers get carried away when the hear the 'buzzword' from the candidate on some topic. It is taken as a key measurement for knowledge or awareness. HR guys in IT companies does experience this daily. The language biasness can take you next level ie 'dialog comfort' zone, in that 20 minutes of interview session. Once that comfort zone sets in between the interviewer and candidate all other assessments may fail. It is necessary at that juncture for an HR guy to break that zone. Next is 'Appearance' factor. Obesity, injuries on body, spectacles, height, dexterity, dress colour, hair make up, baldness, beard,even personal accessories like tie/mobile/handbag etc.. There is whole of factors that are ' DISTRACTIONS' to hiring 'Integrity'. Normally short people, those who dress plain, with out dated gadgets, wrong hair colour, or left handed or those not wearing contact, gets often a raw deal. The trouble is it takes extra effort for the hiring guy to see through without getting distracted by these 'personal' likes/dislikes. Physical attractiveness is a real hiring 'BUG'. Yet another common factor is "Just like me "factor. This comes in terms of Alumni, common previous employer, sports, club, origin, native, similar work ( not performance ) background or even common friends ( referral risk). Ineffective screening of CVs brings in such risks. Often these gets played out on a 1-1 setting and at times behind HR. Panel assessments controlled by HR in a controlled setting helps eliminate these biasness or halo and maintain selection integrity. Accountability of hiring decision rests 100% with organisation and HR; not the candidate and not with Agencies, certainly. Measure of retention ability is a critical indicator of hiring quality.