Gemma Livermore: Welcome to another episode of Seismic Sessions. Joining us here today, we’ve got Zarina Ward, who is Global Chief People Officer at Varian. Hi, Zarina.
Zarina Ward: Hi Gemma.
Gemma Livermore: Great to have you here. And we also have Andrew Salmon, Director at Alpha FMC. Welcome, Andrew.
Andrew Salmon: Hi there. Great to be here.
Gemma Livermore: Thanks for being here. And as always, I’ve got Rachael beside me.
Rachael Rowe: Hi, Gemma.
Gemma Livermore: So as our regular listeners know, we keep our structure of our podcast much more to a conversation than a Q& A. And we keep the structure trifold, which we set in the scene of our earthquake themes. So we will look back at the tremors.
Where the movements of change began, where we are now, the epicentre, and then we’ll look forward to where things are going, which are the aftershocks, always my favorite part of the podcast where we get to, uh, do some blue sky thinking. So without further ado, let’s go to our opening question, which we start every podcast with. Andrew, what does enabling financial services mean to you?
Andrew Salmon: It’s all about the clients, really. You need to deliver what clients want through people, storytelling, processes and technology, and by bringing those things together, enable growth and effectiveness.
Gemma Livermore: I love that idea. And Zarina, what about yourself? What does enabling financial services mean to you?
Zarina Ward: I think it’s about collaboration and really looking particularly in the financial services market, around how you link purpose with impact.
Rachael Rowe: Oh, I love that.
Gemma Livermore: Purpose and impact. I like that. So Rachael over to you.
Rachael Rowe: Thanks, Gemma. So, to start with the tremors, then, where the movement began, the movement of change began, let’s look back at how client facing sales and marketing teams used to be built in financial services and why we moved away from that structure. And if I can come first to you, Zarina, can you share how traditional team structures in financial services, particularly in go to market teams, were often hierarchical and functionality siloed?
Zarina Ward: Absolutely. So I think traditionally, the thinking was you would have a specialist function working on their piece of the puzzle as it were, and essentially what that led to was a quite disconnected group of people or teams working on their bit, in a hierarchical way, managing up to their leader, but that really did create quite a lot of disconnection really, and ultimately less productivity.
Rachael Rowe: That’s very interesting, the way that that siloed structure then kind of reinforces those behaviors, so it reinforces the, the silos that I guess we were trying to get away from in the beginning.
Andrew Salmon: Yeah, absolutely. I think there used to be a way of working where people would create a box to put themselves in and defend that territory very strongly, rather than working collaboratively with other teams and pieces of the organisation.
Gemma Livermore: Yeah, I’d like to just pick out there, do you think there were any key pain points that led to that realisation that changed from traditional team structures to what we’re doing now, which is much more effective client facing roles?
Andrew Salmon: I think people really realised that with the squeeze on resources and costs, that building your own box to sit in is a bit of a luxury that most organisations can’t afford. And managers were seeing that these teams were taking a lot of resources to get a fairly basic job done. There would often be performance issues that was unclear how to get things done. The teams would get stuck in a loop of chasing outputs all the time and not really devoting time to improve, to grow the box or merge the box with somebody sitting adjacent to them. And as technologies changed, I think these teams were not, were really missing out on the technological advancements and not being able to apply those, and therefore they couldn’t really scale.
Gemma Livermore: I like that merging the boxes with other people where you’re supporting each other’s strengths and weaknesses.
Zarina Ward: I think there’s also been a generational shift. If you look at how people in the younger generations will look at their tenure in an organisation, but also the roles in which they like to play, that they are looking to not be in a box and they definitely want to see a lot more grey in where they work so that they can work between the lines.
So I think that’s also happening at a generational level.
Rachael Rowe: Yes, that’s an interesting aspect, isn’t it? And I, think also if we think in terms of journeys, I suppose you have the employee journey on one side and then you have the client journey on the other side. And I think historically they used to be maybe quite linear, whereas nowadays, you know, they’re far from linear, and I think that boxed in kind of mentality doesn’t give, doesn’t lend itself to growth, either on an individual level or as an organisation.
So I’d be interested to dig in, Andrew a little bit, from your experience and what you’ve seen, how did these hierarchical silo teams, what kind of impact did they have on overall efficiency and client satisfaction, particularly in asset and wealth management?
Andrew Salmon: Well, I can speak from personal experience because I inherited one of these very boxed in teams when I first started managing, uh, a team and they were responsible for producing all the marketing communication documents for an organisation. And the problem was that they were presentations experts and they were great at presentations and really good at that, but they really lacked all of the other skills around processes, technology, data that you needed to really be effective at that job.
And at the start, I had no idea that was the case. All I saw was that that team didn’t really perform well. I would get 2 or 3 calls a week from our clients saying, hey, you’ve screwed up again, you haven’t delivered on time and I had this gut feeling that the resources that we were using, weren’t set up in the right way that we had too many experts in one area, but we somehow couldn’t nail down the things that we needed to do each week because the processes were held in the experts’ head, they weren’t written down, the data was being transferred around the organisation by email. And so I quickly realised that we had to organise ourselves differently to improve and try to cut down on those calls, otherwise I was going to have a rather short tenure leading the team.
Gemma Livermore: I think that’s really interesting where you say that it was so boxed in when you first started. Do you think something like that would happen now, or do you think that’s just because we’re looking back at those tremors and that’s how things used to be?
Andrew Salmon: Well, certainly, I come across it in the clients that we work with. So one example is, working with a client at the moment, who says, look, we’d love to be able to build up our website more quickly and more easily, and the challenge that they’ve identified is that their web CMS, so that the system that manages the data that flows into the website, is difficult to use, and it needs coding every time they want to do something more complex than usual, and so answer swer for that question is, well, let’s look at different web CMSs and see what different web CMSs we could use to make it easier. And I put the other answer there on the table, which is, well, what about bringing in those coding skills into your core marketing team and making that a core piece of what marketing can do?
And that’s really the start of the idea of, of what I would call a Hedgehog Team where you’ve got spikes of different skills that are not necessarily the skills that you would imagine you need in a team based on the team name, you know, so that’s a marketing team, but we’re talking about coding, um, or in the document production team that I was running.
We quickly found that we needed process and data skills as well as those core presentation skills. And we tried without the presentation skills and we quickly found that people who do processes and data are actually not very creative. And the key point there is you need that mix of skills and by complementing each other, the people in the team then have a broader envelope of skills.
And that’s where this term, The Hedgehog Team came in because it’s about people having spikes in different areas. And if you have a thing with lots of spikes, well, that’s a hedgehog. So there’s your hedgehog team.
Gemma Livermore: Yeah, I love the hedgehog team idea. I feel like I’m a hedgehog in myself when I look back at my career and all the different talents I’ve picked up along the way. It’s really hard when you’ve been in the industry for a while to explain where your expertise lie and that hedgehog term I think just enables those of us that have been in the industry for a while to demonstrate why we have them and how it’s a benefit.
Zarina, I’d really love to come to you at this point because I know that you are very big in the diversity and inclusion side and looking back at client facing sales and marketing teams and how they used to be built, how was it, if we look back at the tremors, in terms of diversity and inclusion for you?
Zarina Ward: I think the historic thinking was that if you had a successful personal role in a team, that you should just replicate that same cookie cutter approach in order to create greater productivity or greater sales, marketing, whatever it was that you were trying to focus in on.
And the reality is, from a hedgehog team perspective, really, I think all the data shows us that diversity is more key. So actually, if you have a team with complementary skills, whether those skills are spiky, you know, much more from a diversity of thinking perspective, not diversity in terms of visible diversity, that actually the power and productivity of that team is very far enhanced if you can create that.
So, you can go down the, you know, historic psychometric path, but if you look at teams that are genuinely successful, you’ll find people that have lots of spikes and come together to make that, you know, a whole, as it were.
Andrew Salmon: Yeah, I think that’s one of the shortcomings of some people’s understanding of diversity, which is they fall into the trap of measuring the things that are easy to measure, whereas my experience is that bringing together people with those diverse skills very often takes care of the easy to measure things as well. In that, the teams that I was running ended up speaking a huge number of languages, coming from a huge number of nationalities, was more or less 50 50, male female. And so we looked very good from a easily measured statistics point of view, but that wasn’t really what we set out to do at all. That was a lucky byproduct of being diverse, with a hedgehog team, with different spikes and backgrounds.
Gemma Livermore: It comes down to breaking down those boxes again that you mentioned earlier, Andrew, isn’t it? You know, rather than putting people into a box, just break those boxes down and merge them where you need to and so on.
Zarina Ward: And in financial services, I would say in particular, you will really have, if you can get a good mix of people that are, diverse in their thinking, or for instance, you know, you’ll get some people who are very analytical and you would always want that spike, but you’d also in the marketing side of that, want people that are very client focused and extroverted.
So I think in financial services, that’s probably more pronounced than maybe some other industries.
Rachael Rowe: I think that’s quite a good segue as well into where we are today. So, if, we start to look at the epicentre, if you like, in terms of our conversation on this podcast. If we talk a little bit about what things are like now, Zarina, maybe coming to you first, how have modern approaches to team building, like the hedgehog concept, changed the dynamics in financial services?
So I think we were starting to go on that path. So I just want to open up that, that question for you.
Zarina Ward: Hmm. Well, I would say that the major shift I’ve seen, particularly I would say since the pandemic, but even before that, is that ultimately we’re looking for a company’s purpose or passion to fuel strategy rather than just the work that we do. And I think that’s important in terms of attracting and retaining talent, but also attracting and retaining clients.
So I think that has been the real game changer, that it’s not just good enough to be good at what you do, but it has to be driven by the purpose and passion that you have as a company.
Gemma Livermore: I think passion’s always the driver. I think it’s always great to see when people have a passion for their role. I think the rest is almost teachable a lot of the time, but you can’t teach that side of things. so it’s interesting that you brought that up.
Rachael Rowe: So just building on that, Andrew, you talked about the importance of combining different hard skills within a team, because I think often we talk about the soft skills. How do you find this integration improves performance in client facing roles, particularly I think in the current landscape within financial services?
Andrew Salmon: So I think the role of client facing people has really evolved and, maybe this is a challenging point to make, but it’s, really evolved away from the relationship driven sales approach into a much more digital and personal hybrid approach. And I think therefore those relationships skills are still super valuable, but if you want to run a really top tier sales organisation, you need to compliment that with some of these digital skills.
And that’s not just digital in terms of doing coding yourself in a sales organisation, it’s being able to leverage the other pieces of data and information around the organisation. So tools like Seismic, like the CRM system, being able to make the best of those and thinking creatively about what does that data tell me in terms of the 360 view of the client?
And then what can I then do with that as a salesperson? And then how can I orchestrate that at scale? And that’s, I think, a very different sales skill to managing a small team of people across the country, say five people covering wholesalers, doing that on a digital basis as well as a personal relationship basis, I think is really the future of, running a modern sales organisation.
Rachael Rowe: Yeah, I would agree with that. I think also as we look at the importance of personalisation in those interactions, certainly from a client perspective, I agree with you completely, Andrew. I think being able to get the information, but also be able to get that information quickly enough and then be able to act on it, they’re becoming very important skills, within the financial services context for sure.
Andrew Salmon: Yeah, and talking eye to eye on the same level as the person who’s coding up the website or running a digital marketing program, where you’re talking about Bayesian probabilities or something, that’s not something that a salesperson had to do in the past, but I think it’s very relevant and will make the difference between a good versus an excellent sales team when you can bring together those, those elements and really harness the technical skills of the broader asset management or wealth management organisation, to support and drive the work that you want to do as a sales team.
Gemma Livermore: Completely agree there. And I was wondering, if we mentioned your point where you talked about technology really opening up those spikes of knowledge within companies or within teams, Zarina, have you seen technology play a part from a diversity and inclusion angle in terms of including other people in teams, that wouldn’t have been able to before? So for example, if we’re able to automate their content production, perhaps somebody who is neurodiverse and unable to do the content from scratch, for example.
Zarina Ward: Yeah, I think the technology landscape is fascinating in terms, from a DE& I perspective, and especially from a sales enablement perspective, because I think the organisations that really seem to have it right are the ones that are using technology as a true enabler, but not as a replacement for the personal touch exactly to Andrew’s point, you still need the relationship skills and they still, I think, incredibly important in any sales process, but what we’re seeing, particularly with the rise of the integration of sales enablement functions with traditional marketing functions is really that use of data, AI, proposal generation, all of these types of tools that enable teams to get to the customer what they need more quickly, at higher quality without lots of human intervention, is then releasing the time to really build on those relationships. So I, I really see it as the complimentary skill sets of technology and humans coming together and doing that for good.
Gemma Livermore: Yeah. I was speaking to somebody recently and they were saying how, whereas historically in our industry, people have looked for high IQ, with technology now providing that IQ, will there be more of a need for EQ? And when you say, you know, we need those relationship building skills for client facing teams, perhaps we’ll see that being needed across different teams as well now.
Zarina Ward: I think the rise, particularly in financial services, of the importance of EQ has been going on for well over a decade, I would say. The thing that I think is even more fascinating than IQ or EQ, is CQ, which is cultural intelligence, which is really around, you know, the world is becoming a smaller place.
We’re all working in global roles. It’s much more accessible, especially with so many people going digital after the pandemic, you know, where it’s become much more normal to work virtually or from wherever you are. But then the challenge, I think, with that is really how you interact across cultures and again, technology really helps to cut through that.
You know, you don’t have to go through all your proposals and take your u’s out if you’re English and you’re presenting to an American audience, but it also just breaks those barriers down. But how to communicate, for instance, is really that cultural intelligence piece. So I think it’s and IQ, EQ
Gemma Livermore: I’m glad I learnt something new on podcast and hoping the audience have as well. So I love that. I’m an avid traveler and I think that was probably my best education when I was younger is going backpacking. So, uh, now I can add CQ to my CV.
Zarina Ward: Absolutely.
Gemma Livermore: Yeah, didn’t even know it was a bonus and I’ve got another spike to my hedgehog
Rachael Rowe: And it’s interesting because it’s almost a rise in the, in the human elements, if you like. I think when you’re looking at EQ and CQ in a world where AI is becoming more and more prevalent and, and, you know, technology has a really important role to play in the client outcomes, and operational outcomes.
It’s interesting that, you know, we’re leaning more heavily into the, human aspects or the human skills. But I wanted to come back to the hedgehog team approach because this really resonates with me, having kind of led and built teams for quite a long time now, and we only have to look at sports to understand that, you know, that you need lots of different skills in a team in order for a team to be successful rather than hiring maybe lots of folks who were all the same I guess I’d wanted to bounce this back to you, Andrew, if maybe we could dig into some specifics.
So has there been perhaps a recent project or somewhere where you’ve seen how the Hedgehog team approach has really driven significant improvement in either client outcomes or business operations? It’d be good to kind of get a sort of a real life, example of it.
Andrew Salmon: Well, I think the team that I mentioned is a great example as a petri dish of what you can do with that team, because that team started with, really, graphic design specialists who, as I said, were transferring data by Excel and we said, well, it’s not really effective what we’re doing here.
So the first step there was to bring in some process expertise and really there we, we had a very junior person straight from university and I said, hey, look, these are the experts, document everything they do, and after a month, we then had a very nice detailed process map of how does the team actually operate.
And that was great because we could then sit down with the presentation experts and talk them through the process. And reorganise it so that rather than collecting data whenever we wanted to deliver a presentation, we could bring all the data together and download it in bulk, so that we had one file with all the data you needed for all the presentations delivered as soon as that presentation data was ready.
So we just turned around how the team operated, and I don’t know what percentage productivity increase it was, but it was significant. And then the next question was, well, what about all this data flying around? How do we automate that? And we were actually one of the first clients of Seismic in Western Europe, but we didn’t get there immediately.
Our first step was to begin to batch up all of that data, and rather than have people sending us data, we took the step of bringing that data in ourselves. And that was, again, a different person that we added to the team who was complimentary with their data gathering skills that they could go and query different databases, and bring out the right clean data into our approach.
And that then allowed us, because we’d built that skill, we could then move into Seismic and back in those days when we started with Seismic, there wasn’t the depth of client support there is nowadays. So we’re very much learning by doing with video conferences with the U S. And so you need a little bit more data skills and, and IT skills in those days to get on board, but we successfully did that.
And Seismic then became essentially the middle lane of a three lane highway where we had large scale reports being produced as well as manual reports being produced. We had Seismic as the middle lane, and that middle lane then grew over time over the next 5 or 10 years, to then encompass quite a large volume of the firm’s production, and that team also grew with it and people were promoted and so on. So it was a great move for the team and also allowed the people within the team to grow over time by having that kind of hedgehog approach.
Rachael Rowe: And would you say with that, Andrew, that the, the success that you saw helped to drive the cultural shift within the organisation? What kind of impact did it have on the larger organisation, you adopting the hedgehog approach within your team?
Andrew Salmon: I think it definitely helped because the idea of collaborating and building people into your team who didn’t a hundred percent fit the name on the team was something that I saw other people doing quite commonly after that. I’m not sure we triggered it or we were the first, but if you look across the marketing teams we work with nowadays, the marketing data specialist isn’t a new role anymore and the marketing technology specialist, there’s room for these data process engineering type roles, as well as the traditional country marketeer in marketing teams today. So I think the, world has moved on and this diversity of skill is becoming much more accepted.
Gemma Livermore: I love the idea of the diversity of skill becoming more accepted and I think when you look back at the tremors and then to where we are now, I’ve definitely seen that happen as well. Zarina, what are your views on that?
Zarina Ward: I think, one thing I was just about to add actually is it’s really massive as well from a learning and development perspective because actually it enables people to learn skills they might not have even realised they wanted to learn. And it just neatly complements any formal learning path or, you know, career competency framework or whatever your organisation has, it just complements and sits alongside where people can constantly expand their skill set in a very natural way that is additive to what their team’s goals are, what their organisation’s goals are. So I think it’s very rich because these days people are looking to constantly learn new things, not get bored, you know, work at a faster pace. And I think it enables us to do that, to have these hedgehog spiky teams, where people can go off and do something, but it’s really additive to the team’s goals.
Andrew Salmon: Yeah, and to add one element to that, I think the other thing that I saw practically with hedgehog teams is that having those spikes brings up the people who don’t have that spike, up to a higher level than they’d otherwise get to if you, if you didn’t have that spike in the team. So, you know, if you’re working with a world class presentation expert or a world class data expert, you can get training directly from that expert. And so you get this crazy team performance where your presentations expert is actually pretty good at manipulating data and your data experts actually a pretty mean PowerPoint driver, and you put those together and you get a really, really great team performance out of it where people are actually not just hedgehog spiky, but they’re also multi skilled up to a much higher level than they’d otherwise get to.
Gemma Livermore: And there’s also another aspect there, which is loyalty. And when people learn something new, they release the oxytocin hormone, which is the bonding hormone. So they naturally become more loyal to the employer as well. So there’s also this continuous learning and continuous loyalty scheme that goes throughout it as well.
Zarina Ward: Yeah, I would add to that as well. I think it just stems attrition, Gemma, in terms of, if people are constantly challenged, they’re using their brain, they’re getting to do something new, it keeps them. It’s simple as that because they’re interested.
Gemma Livermore: There’s a lot to be said about being interested in your job as well, which I think people, yeah, don’t always take into consideration.
Andrew Salmon: Yeah, I think, what I always say to people is, is think about the pie chart of how you spend your day, which is if you’re in one of these boxed in organisations, typically you spend 100 percent of your day chasing after the next deadline. But once you’re in a hedgehog team, you start to think about, well, how can we improve the team?
What’s the next step? And you start spending, maybe it’s 10, 20, 30 percent of the day, not just chasing the deadline, because you’ve made time by being more effective with your team structure to then spend that 10, 20 percent of the time looking at the next thing, learning the next skill, thinking what do we do next?
And I think keeping that piece of the pie free to look at the future and try to improve is absolutely vital. And that’s what organisations like Google have done quite formally with their telling people to spend a day a week on personal projects, but I think you can do that informally inside the hedgehog team as well.
Gemma Livermore: And that next step approach, it’s as if you knew where I was going, leads us nicely into the next steps, which are the aftershock side of our podcast. So this is the section where we look forward and start to see where we see the future of the team building. So what is the next step in your mind, Andrew, to the Hedgehog team?
Andrew Salmon: I think implementing it fully gets you a really long way and I think most organisations that I work with as a consultant, are not there in every, every area yet. So, often the hedgehog team comes with different labels attached, but you can see it as part of agile or product based working. A lot of organisations are going in that direction. And I think it’s analogous in the sense that if you get people together from different backgrounds and focus on a client product or an outcome you want to achieve, and you frequently meet together and discuss how you’re going to improve, that goes in the same direction.
So I think my own management experience is not to be too worried about individual labels and what you call something, but just get out there and do it and try it and test it, see what works. And, I think those sort of approaches, can be further embedded in the organisations we’re working with.
Rachael Rowe: And I think it also brings up an interesting question in terms of the strategies that organisations need to adopt to nurture and retain the diverse skills that you need to build the hedgehog team. So I guess that that’s my question to you, Zarina. What kind of strategies have you seen being successful and what do you think, how do you think they will evolve over time?
Zarina Ward: I think that is such a good question because I think it’s one of the hardest things to achieve, as I think as, as we evolve and as hedgehog teams evolve, it’s really, I think, from a learning strategy, creating paths for people that don’t feel too rigid, where people can step on and off a career path, so that it’s always feeling additive to their own skill set, but as a common thread of that, having a lot of choice around what people do or don’t do. So that’s, I think, one of the hardest things, for HR professionals like myself, because there’s no such thing as a one size fits all anymore. But actually the beauty of it is, it really enables you to achieve diversity. So I think if you can think about it in those terms, and really value everyone for what they bring to the table and what they can nurture at the table and create your learning strategy around that, that’s the secret sauce.
Andrew Salmon: Yeah, I, fully agree. I mean, I’ve seen so many examples where somebody’s stepped outside their role. And for example, a young marketing person went and did a placement in the technology organisation, came back to marketing and was super successful and had a rocket shaped trajectory on their career over the next five years from that diversity of experience.
And I think, that doesn’t easily fall in a box. and I’m totally with Zarina that the HR task then of measuring, managing, compensating, all of those good things that HR does and contributes to, is an order of magnitude more difficult as a result.
Gemma Livermore: And it would be really interesting here at this point, because you mentioned it at the beginning, Zarina, is the generational aspect. And to your point there, I remember speaking to somebody on a recent podcast where they said the younger generations really look for portfolio careers now. And we’re at the first time where we’ve got five generations in the workplace. So with that in mind, how do you measure someone’s abilities when you’re searching for new talent and how do you make sure that you bring in all of those different skill sets when they’re coming to the table?
Zarina Ward: I think, it sounds a bit glib to say it, but I think the key thing is to have an open mind. And if I think about what happened during and then post the pandemic, is people became really quite close minded at looking at talent. And we went very much back to like, this is the box I’m looking to fill, because there were a lot of candidates on the market. So I think, that has shifted again, post pandemic, because now again, very much you see, definitely the younger generation thinking two years, two years, two years. So there’s no such thing anymore about, you know, not interviewing someone because they’ve been a job hopper that doesn’t really exist as a concept for most people anymore, thankfully.
But I think you’re also seeing that in the older generations where, you know, going back to one of your original questions, it’s very much people are looking around the purpose and strategy of a company, not just what is their job going to bring to them. So it’s so important organisations to think about who they are and how they show up as a company, not just this is what we do for our clients.
So that I think has been a really interesting shift.
Gemma Livermore: Yeah. And I guess as well, it would be good to know how you would propose past those spikes of knowledge from a Hedgehog team on as the older generation then leave the workplace?
Zarina Ward: Yeah, it’s a good question. I mean, I think part of, I’d actually like to get Andrew’s viewpoint on this because on the hedgehog side, I think one of the beauties of it is that you shouldn’t necessarily try to pass spike skills on because other people will have their own spikes and it should naturally evolve, like you wouldn’t want to then create a box because somebody had a spike and you want to recreate that.
You would hope that happened naturally, but maybe not. So yeah, I’d be interested in Andrew’s take on that.
Andrew Salmon: I think that’s a cool thought. I think my. view is that if you’re exposed to a spike, then you have the,
Gemma Livermore: Knowledge transfer almost.
Andrew Salmon: Yeah, you have the potential to then go and learn more about it if it appeals to you. And I think that the problem many people in a traditional career had was that they just never saw those expertises or those spikes in different areas, and therefore they couldn’t find what spikes really appeal to them that they really love that turned work into a great thing to do every day, rather than a hard slog for 30 years.
And so I think being exposed to hedgehog teams and seeing different hedgehog teams early in the career is going to give people that grounding and ability to then find the right spikes for them. So I’m, I would say, 80 percent with you, Zarina, and I think though being exposed to a variety of spikes earlier on is cool.
And then also maybe, as people go through their careers, I mean, I try to uncover some new spikes as I go. And I find that very invigorating and there’s a fake it till you make it thing and maybe I’m, I’m at some point there in some of the things that I try to do, but, um, I find it interesting to learn new things and become expert as you go.
Zarina Ward: And I was going to add to that actually, because one of the things that I see, I see more and more is people having just a lot more curiosity, and I think that links to people just genuinely having more interest in things, reading about things more and showing that curiosity. But I think that coupled with saying yes to an opportunity, if it arises, it is the real key.
Rachael Rowe: I think it’s interesting building on the consequence of that, because if you have this dynamic, very fertile environment, with folks developing their spikes, how do you maintain the balance of the skills within the team? And I, I guess this is a question to you, to begin with, Andrew, though I’m sure that Zarina, you’ll, you’ll have a few thoughts as well. How, how do you approach that challenge?
Andrew Salmon: I think twofold, when as a manager and organiser of a team, you have to have a clear idea of the skills that are absolutely must have and the skills that are nice to have, and have that in mind when you’re thinking about the composition of the team. And then on the micro level of how do you manage the individual people in the team?
I think you have to talk to them and counsel them about what spikes they already have and what spikes they might have in the future and where they might go. And I think, the thing that I always like to say to people is, look, we’re going to have a discussion here, which is going to be in your interest, not in the team or the firm’s interest.
And let’s talk about where those spikes might take you. And that’s a very much more fruitful conversation to have because you can always have good turnover in a team, you can always move somebody into a role where their next spike can develop, and you can always backfill in your team areas where, you’re lacking a spike.
So, I mean, that sort of composition of the team and continuously developing and optimising and trying new things I think is vital. So interested to hear what you think on that way of working Zarina.
Zarina Ward: And I wholeheartedly agree. I think equipping managers and leaders to have more open conversations around what people’s futures look like and then enabling that is absolutely the key because if you look at the data around returners managing your alumni properly, enabling those transitions, again, actually has a very positive ripple on your workforce and your employee experience.
So I would wholeheartedly agree with what you said.
Gemma Livermore: Well, I think we’re all sold on the hedgehog theory, that’s for sure. I know I, for one, was a fan of the hedgehog team at the beginning of this, having read your article, Andrew, but as the stories evolved and we’ve looked into the future, I feel that it’s really future proof as well, for several reasons.
But this is the part of the podcast which I hate, which is when we start to wrap up the conversation, which I could go on for much longer about this, but as we go to a wrap up question here, I’d like to find out if either of you work in a hedgehog team, and if so, what are your hedgehog skills? So, Zarina, first to you
Zarina Ward: Yes, I work in a hedgehog team, and my spikes are talent management, DE& I strategy and talent acquisition, although that’s from an earlier part of my career.
Gemma Livermore: And Andrew?
Andrew Salmon: Yeah, I think, certainly the consulting world, people come from very many different backgrounds. And so, have few spikes in terms of structuring thought and processes as a result, and then trying to focus on the client and I’m trying to develop a spike around technology. So I’m, learning more about that at the moment. And then those that know me, you probably know, I have a hidden spike in things like bicycles and bicycle
maintenance.
Rachael Rowe: I like the idea of a hidden spike. So akin to a superpower.
Andrew Salmon: Yeah, if you’ve got a broken bicycle, then I can probably fix it.
Gemma Livermore: We just have to get it to Switzerland first.
Rachael Rowe: Thank you both for sharing your insights and experiences with us today. It’s been a really enlightening conversation and I’m interested to see where the hedgehog theory evolves to, because I think that there’s so much potential within organisations to embrace this, particularly as silos are actively being broken down as we speak all across financial services.
So I think it’s a term we’re going to hear a lot more about. This is a really tricky part of our conversation because I’m going to ask you to sum up in one word your thoughts on our conversation today. If there’s something that’s been particularly resonated with you or that you feel\ represents our discussion.
So I will start with you, Zarina.
Zarina Ward: Oh, that is such a tricky one. I think the one word answer would be for me, impact.
Rachael Rowe: Yeah, that’s a good word. Andrew?
Andrew Salmon: Skills, I think that the hard skills that people have in the job are somehow not well curated, and I think if we bring those skills into the forefront of people’s thinking again then teams can be more effective.
Rachael Rowe: I love that. Thank you. Gemma?
Gemma Livermore: I will have to go with team because I think I love the fact that this is all about a team mentality and team building and that you can all thrive off each other’s skill sets, whether that be that you’re learning from somebody else or you’re relying on somebody else to fill an area where you don’t know about.
Rachael Rowe: Oh, I love that one too. And I get the tricky one now because you three have all come up with some really strong words. I think I’m going to go with diversity because I think diversity as a consequence of the diversity of the skills that we need to bring into our teams. So I think that’s going to be my word.
But again, thank you. It’s been a fantastic conversation and sure that we will revisit this discussion at some point in the future. Thank you very much.
