Mailbox

T+D, June, 2003

Just in Time I read retention articles "The Tides of Talent" and "From Assets to Investors" in the April issue the day before being unexpectedly called into an upper-level management meeting to discuss--of all topics--employee retention.

Thanks to the authors Craig Taylor, Beverly Kaye, and Sharon Jordan-Evans, I was able to contribute some timely and relevant information on the spur of the moment.

Thanks to T D for addressing the kind of issues that affect all organizations, large and small.

Pamela D. Hanna

Service Link, L.P.

Aliquippa, Pennsylvania

phanna@servicelinklp.com corn

Distinction

I found Kevin Oakes's topic in the April Suppliers, Will enterprise software companies take over a-learning? most interesting. I had the opportunity to see a demo of Click2learn software here in Calgary as part of our e-learning network. I'm currently engaged in knowledge management graduate studies...and the area of e-learning is one that I believe highlights how our organizational structures and approaches to HR functions need to change. Staff development and training need to be much more fluid--recognizing, capturing, and lever-aging learning in a variety of ways.

Generating, sharing, and leveraging knowledge for organizational success depends on an iterative cycle of individual and organizational learning. Oakes's differentiation of ERPs and CRMS as being transaction-oriented and fundamentally different in approach and structure to e-learning systems was most helpful.

I think the future of a system that can support human capital development and KM is one that integrates human capital development, KM, and business processing. KM is about managing the business in a way that leverages the knowledge assets embedded in people, processes, relationships, and technology.

Thanks to Oakes for high-lighting that distinction. How we move from traditional management information systems to ones that can integrate and support management in a knowledge-based economy will be a challenge.

Barb Krell

barbkrell@shaw.ca

Bob Weighs In [Re: "Why Women Don't Rule" (Intelligence, April)]: Wow, what a touchy subject to respond to. We've come so far, yet seemingly have far to go. Unfortunately, many who measure the success of women in the workforce do so through numbers that may indicate nothing about true success. That men still outnumber women in many facets of the working world shouldn't be construed as success or failure, just data. We've already learned equality in opportunity doesn't yield equality in numbers, so what's the point? The real issue is, do equal opportunities exist? The answer is yes and no.

The "yes" answer comes perhaps from the naive perspective from my years of military service. It suggests, contrary to popular opinion, that people in the military--regardless of race, gender, and so forth--are selected and advance on performance merit. Though the law previously excluded women from certain combat roles, active and aggressive measures were taken to ensure all relevant obstacles to advancement were identified and eliminated.... Many women were fast-tracked through advancement programs that would've taken men years, in order to ensure those who ultimately fill key decision-making positions aren't a danger to themselves or those they lead.

Does the civilian world act similarly? Probably not, but do the same circumstances exist? Without painting with too wide a brush, observations from my brief civilian service suggest that advancement is less about individual performance and more about perception. The perception can be created by a well-written resume or existing personal relationship. In either case, selection and advancement may have little to do with a well-documented career record of accomplishment, such as found in military records.

The inequality, or "no" answer, isn't exclusive to women, but other factors may contribute to its impact on women. It's perhaps the latter--existing personal relationships--that continues to disadvantage women most, particularly those attempting to enter the workforce after a career of motherhood, and thus skews the numbers. More valuable might be comparing the career advancement records of "successful" men and women. I'm not sure what we'd find, but my instinct tells me that women who have risen to corporate CEO have traveled much the same path as the men. If that's not equality, what is?

Bob Snyder

USAF Retired

Editor's Note: For Bob's view on other matters, see the February and May Mailbox columns.