What prompted you to specialize in people topics?
Certain group dynamics and swarm intelligence are also present in the workplace. People topics and leadership are popular topics among business leaders; many people read a lot about them, and most have heard the saying “culture eats strategy for breakfast” or even quoted it themselves. But at the end of the day, these people issues are often deprioritized in major change processes because they are seen as less tangible and not measurable and cannot be handled with the usual means that managers are comfortable with. Closing this gap is a permanent motivation for me.
What role does people strategy play in transformation processes, and what are the challenges there?
Change is associated with uncertainty, switching perspectives, and possibly even different ways of working. This inevitably results in additional effort for employees: The way our brains work means that change requires mental effort. This consumes energy. We find it difficult to give up familiar habits. People are programmed to go through the world as efficiently as possible, so they estimate the effort and look for ways to avoid extra work. So, if we are not successful in creating motivation for the people to invest this extra effort and change their habits, we often find that we may get people to go through the motions with the transformation, for example, attend the trainings. But the behaviors and mindsets don’t change sustainably. This leads to undesirable results in terms of quality, scope, or the overall success of the project. For instance, in a transformation process like implementing a new IT tool, I can reprogram all computers and machines. But the employees, instead of using the new tool, might prefer to continue working on the old Excel spreadsheets in the background. In the end, a company is paying for a new tool, but not only has failed to harvest the benefits, but in fact has created additional inefficiencies because employees use workarounds and the tool in parallel. It is estimated that around 70 percent of the changes desired by companies fail precisely because employees receive too little consideration during the transformation.
And what can be done about that?
Well, this is where psychology comes into play. Just as retailers know exactly how customers shop and place the products they want to sell prominently while placing the cheapest products in the most inaccessible places, organizations should make change the easier, more rewarding option for employees when it comes to accepting uncertainty and new tasks. For any behavior change, make sure that three preconditions are in place: (1) Employees need to want to do things in the new way (because they like the solution, or understand the need for it), (2) they must feel they should do it (because everyone or “internal influencers” do it, or because it gives them a benefit or reward), and (3) they need to believe they can do it (they must receive training, and have enough time and mental capacity to wrap their heads around the change). And then, another lever often overlooked is to make the new solution be the more convenient option, and make the old, manual solution harder to access.
What value does a data-driven people strategy bring to organizational transformation?
People strategy is not just human resources strategy, but actually the way to get there. People strategy goes two ways: It is fed by the business strategy, identifying its implications on people policies and HR work. But it also feeds business decisions. For example, when a company considers setting up a new plant, people strategy involves answering questions such as “Where can I find the best talent? How mobile are they? Where do we find a good fit with the local culture to find the talent we need for our strategic goals? What culture do I want and need to build up in that new plant? For example, are we seeking high production levels above all else? Then we need a culture that always prioritizes adherence to all rules and standards above everything. Or are we seeking to build an innovation campus? Then we need a culture that encourages questioning and experimentation. How do the local talent markets behave, and what skill sets will people have in, say, 10 years’ time?”
The answers to these questions should then weigh into the decision of where to set up the plant, which jobs to move there, and which jobs to keep in other locations. They should even inform the look and feel of the buildings, the workplaces, the canteen. Only once these questions have been answered can you follow with the HR strategy, e.g. employer branding, talent management, or employee training measures.
What led you from psychology to strategy consulting?
I realized very quickly that I was leaning toward psychology, but I also knew from the start that I wanted to apply my knowledge in a very practical and, above all, diverse way. I am also someone who likes to work autonomously and influence things, so I had consulting on my radar as a possible option right from the start, and it was actually my big goal to work in one of the big strategy consultancies at some point. Since I had already completed my doctorate, I joined Strategy& directly at the senior associate level. Of course, being a psychologist in a strategy consultancy is somewhat exotic, but because I had a lot of specialist knowledge, I was quickly given more and more responsibility.
What challenges do you encounter when you take a data-driven approach to the supposedly soft topic of people?
I’ve always had a great interest in doing things using an analytical and data-driven approach, which is why I did my Ph.D. at the intersection of psychology and statistics. It makes sense in many ways, for example, to analyze certain human group dynamics based on data and derive a functional approach from it. You can also measure the progress and success of transformation projects among employees quite accurately with a combination of validated surveys and behavioral data, which gives us much better means to steer and adjust transformations and run them efficiently. In fact, because data is not yet widely used for people- and HR-related decision making, it has an immense potential to save costs and increase the impact of training programs, talent management, rewards structures, and culture interventions. My interest in both people and analytics allows me to bridge the gap between the data- and fact-driven side of business and the seemingly illogical nature of human behavior. In other words, I act as a mediator between these two worlds.
As part of a series of interviews with alumni, this one was conducted and edited by Ina Fischer, Strategy&.
