Feature

Being an invaluable flexible asset

Employees are the greatest assets for any organization. But, how they prove their invaluable worth, rests upon them. Renuka Vembu on how the two aspects are interwoven and work hand-in-hand

Being an irreplaceable asset v/s the need for flexibility and agility has been a long fought debate. Has it changed with changing times and merging boundaries leading the way for newer interpretations and skewed meanings? Or is there still a clear demarcation of the softer demands of each role as well? Does every role have its specific requisites pertaining not only to skill sets and scalability, expertise and experience, psychometric tests and analytical proficiency, but also pertaining to attitude and attributes of a person taking up that position? And, in this given framework, how are companies groping to maintain a blend between the two?

Weighing the sides

In the 21st century corporate world, invaluable asset is the newly coined term for employees of a company. Every organization describes its human capital as the guiding light behind its success glory. Does invaluable translate into irreplaceable or also mean staid? Likewise, flexibility is the attribute that is looked out for in every employee that a company has or wants to hire. It is the need of the hour for companies, and the means of survival for the workforce. But, does flexibility mean non-satisfactory performance, unreliable and thereby changeable.

There is a thick difference of opinion about the thin margin between the two.

Patrick David, Executive Vice President, Global HR, Hinduja Global Solutions, said, “No organization can afford to have extreme dependency on individuals. It is a proven fact that individuals change jobs a number of times during their professional lives, and therefore, having high levels of dependency on individuals places the organization in a difficult position when such people decide to move on. We, therefore, hire people with diverse backgrounds, skills, capabilities and even personalities and through training and growth and sharing of such resource we ensure that dependency is not extreme.”

Nipa Modi, CEO–CRP HR Services, CRP Ltd., opined, “A replaceable team member may provide scope for improvement and continuity to the company. There is no reason for discontinuity in services availed from him as it can be availed through somebody else. If we look at the world at large, we always find that we have a succession and backup plan and try and ensure a second in command so as to see that work does not get hampered.”

Organizational preference

The preference of selecting and appointing an employee depends upon experience, seniority, role undertaken, proficiency, dexterity, attitude, emotional quotient, behavior, etc. These metrics vary depending upon the industry, business, role, position, and other factors.

When we talk about employees as assets, it is essentially in the context of the person being a mainstay with the team and organization, shouldering responsibilities, taking up initiatives, being firm-footed, etc.

Flexibility is related to adaptability, being nimble, bringing in a fresh wave of ideas, being abreast with the latest updates, ready for experimentation, etc.

An employee who has had a long-term relationship with the company can also show the above traits, but it is largely believed that they stagnant and stay comfortable in a cocoon rather than exploring newer avenues, over the course of the years.

However, Rajiv Krishnan, Managing Director, DDI India, added, “Do not get into the ‘valuable asset’ versus ‘dispensable’ kind of categorization. What would be more useful for a company would be to have performance and potential mapping of its employees (sometimes called the GE Nine-box matrix) and have different strategies to engage people who fall in different zones.”

What apparently comes through with discussions with the industry experts are that, there are no hard and fast rules, or defined definitions; everything seems acceptable in a relative context. And an organization would need a mix of different inhabits of people who add their own flavor to the work and culture.

The side-effects of each

Modi asserted, “A replaceable team member brings in multitasking ability, new ideas, new areas of development, an image makeover of the company, time and cost management, etc.

In hindsight, an asset employee may in the long run become a liability for not getting oneself upgraded or updated with the latest happenings in and around the business. All in all, resistance to change is the biggest disadvantage.

A replaceable employee may not always be loyal, may jump jobs for greener pastures hence incurring high cost of replacement and training. This in turn brings a high indirect cost to the company; the continuity to business is hampered.”

Iti Kumar, Vice President, People Development, GlobalLogic, detailed, “A valuable employee is considered to be an asset to the organization. The advantages of having a skilled and valuable resource in the team are many:

• Valuable employees have a sense of loyalty towards the organization and are closely linked to the core values of the organization
• Being subject matter experts they are able to guide and mentor new joiners or juniors who need their support
• They have strong hands on knowledge of the various organization processes and practices. Accordingly, they adhere to those practices and try to give their best output
• They also contribute in the various employee engagement activities, task forces, forums and other initiatives which take place in the company
• They strive to bring a value-add in their work and closely work with the management to help the team and the organization to meet its goals and objectives
• Such employees generally continue for a longer duration due to the trust and the confidence they place on the organization and vice versa

Though the benefits are many for the organization to have valuable employees, however there could be a few perils attached:

• Being an old and important resource, the employee may start feeling that he or she is very critical to the company and the team, and may start taking liberty
• He or she may not be flexible in sharing information of their product knowledge since they would feel insecure in doing so. This actually results in a power-centric approach. Such people tend to feel superior and feel valued about themselves as they hold certain information under their control
• They may become demanding and may initiate discussions with the management to increase compensation, change in job profile or content or may throw tantrums at the workplace only because they feel that they are indispensable
• Such employees also feel that they are empowered to object or raise concerns on any organizational level changes like changes in policies or processes or rules

But contrary to some of the common perception, David viewed that people who stay in an organization and who are dependable and have spent time in the system provide the foundation or the bedrock on which the organization survives. These people need to continually reinvent themselves, by keeping abreast of changes in the market, new and innovative ways of doing things, and making sure they can continue to provide new ideas, since these ideas lead to innovation. People, who tend to move around a lot, typically have lots of ideas, and a different perspective on how things can be done. Their challenge is to understand the organization and contextualize their ideas to the culture of the new organization.

To walk the tight rope

For senior or mid management levels, strategic roles, confidential projects, specialized skill sets, a long-term outlook is deemed necessary.

Whereas for jobs that are more to do with creativity, or for junior positions, a young fresher out of college or relatively an amateur in the field with a couple of years of experience whose resume reads good, or for fields like sales and marketing, they are more likely to infuse the energy and enthusiasm and devise new tacts of dealing with daily work.

Ashok Srinivasan, Vice-President, Operations Support, Expertus, explained, “While most organizations prefer to have team members who are mobile and flexible about their roles and responsibilities, it is for individuals to strive to become assets to their respective organizations. The advantage of being a replaceable team player is that the organization is not overtly dependent on you and you prove to be useful in any role assigned to you. The reverse is true for the invaluable asset as the organization is dependent on you, which is not good for the organization in the long haul. A combination of positive attributes of both types is therefore the best bet as candidates initially should strive to be good team players and then can become individual assets over the long-term because of sustained performance.”

While to maintain equilibrium, not overtly rely on a single or a set of employees, and have a succession plan in place, is an organization’s onus, the reverberating sound is that every employee should prove to be an asset to an organization. Opportunities are provided to them and resources are available at their disposal—temporary or project-based, experienced or in the budding stages of their career—each person in the workforce should contribute to the work to the best of their capabilities, refine their knowledge base, re-skill through continuous trainings, be abreast of the latest developments, be committed and responsible, be trustworthy and building credibility, stick to timelines and deliverables, take up initiatives and be engaged, show leadership and ownership traits, etc.

They must contribute to the final output and be an active part of organizational development, as much as creating attractive resumes for themselves and enhancing personal growth. Even in the short run, employees can showcase their distinguished features and accomplishments. It is what you do; not how long you do.

renuka.vembu@expressindia.com