A CIO’s ability to deliver on business demands is only as good as its people. But what if they start quitting or demanding unaffordable wages, as they are doing now during the Great Attrition? How are IT, HR, and business leaders joining hands to handle this unprecedented situation and maintain sustained growth and profitability?

Contributor

• • Shahrin Oli Mohamed, Chief Information and Digital Officer, Global LNG Trading & Marketing, Shell

Download Podcast

Apple Podcast, Google Podcast, Spotify, iHeartRadio, SoundCloud, TuneIn, and Stitcher. Find other syndication channels here or search CIO Talk Network podcast on any other app.

Explore More

• • Leading in the Next Normal
  • Leading through Transition
  • Leading the New Digital-Native Generation
  • Leading in the Continuous Next
  • Leading with a Compass
  • Leading to Simple
  • Leading difficult conversations
  • Leading The Next Generation of Talent
  • Leading ‘Startup Magic’ Back to The Enterprise
  • Leading the Charge on a New Tomorrow

Transcript

Sanjog Aul [00:00:22]:

Hello, and welcome to CTN. To learn more about the show, please visit ciotalknetwork.com, andtoday’s topic is leading IT during the great attrition. So we know what has happened in the last few months. We’ve had people quitting or demanding unaffordable wages, and that is what is causing a lot of turbulence. People were taken aback. They were taken by surprise, and this has happened, of course, across the different business functions and companies and industries. However, the focus here is to see what is CIO’s group or the IT group doing to deal with it, and especially one is to deal with it, but 2nd is not to give up and or feel intimidated by it or paralyzed by it, but instead continue to lead IT to do great things even though the great attrition has hit us. So to discuss this, we have Shareen Oli-Mohammed, who’s the chief information and digital officer with Shell. Hey, Shareen. How are you?

Shareen Oli-Mohammed [00:01:33]:

Hey, Sanjog Aul. I’m doing very well. Thank you. How are you? Good morning.

Sanjog Aul [00:01:36]:

But can’t complain. Beautiful. Good morning to you as well, and it’s evening for you. Morning for me. That’s awesome. So let’s jump right in since I’ve set the context here, which is the great attrition. People are leaving left and right. They may have their own motivations, but then we also, in the organizations, are trying to figure out what to do given people are leaving organizations, essentially, and we are trying to innovate. We want to move at 100 miles an hour, but all of that was definitely impacted by this great attrition. So in what way? Let’s look at the impact. Let’s look at the places where it did make a dent within IT departments and organizations. What have you seen?

Shareen Oli-Mohammed [00:02:26]:

It is real. It’s happening across the board. I think in some countries more than others. I think in the US, it’s a little bit more pronounced than some other markets. I’m seeing it as more of a great realignment as opposed to the great attrition. So why am I saying that? What I’ve observed is people have come to certain realizations that they hadn’t in the past. There are a few different themes. One theme is around what are my priorities in life and how does that align with the work I’m doing? Another theme could be what are my interests and passions, am I doing what is aligned to my values? Am I doing what really brings me joy? Am I being treated in the way I want to be treated, etcetera. So I think there’s a convergence of these various themes, which is now leading people to take stock and have the courage to make decisions to move, for instance. So I’d say to that, it is real. It is happening. It is a challenge, but I also think there is a great opportunity in this for both employers and employees alike. If you can find that sweet spot, but I’m sure we’ll come to it in a moment.

Sanjog Aul [00:04:09]:

So when we look at this, the fact that it is real and it has taken us by surprise, and frankly, some of the reasons you told were almost like a wake up call for individuals. What are they doing about their life versus what they’re doing as an employee? So we can understand it to some extent and empathize, but at the same time, the business does get a shock. Business does not get the time, if you will, to plan for it. So with that said, what is it that you feel has happened with organizations? Is that a knee-jerk reaction that we try to figure out, we start scrambling, or businesses have started, or IT departments within those businesses have kept their cool and are taking a step back and reevaluating?

Shareen Oli-Mohammed [00:05:13]:

So I don’t see chaos and mayhem. I do see a challenge and I do see in some instances a burning platform. So why do I see that? There have been instances where we were caught by surprise, but in many of the instances where we had high employee engagement, where the teams were highly engaged and communicative with each other, we could plan for it as well, andI think this is an important lever that organizations can pull, i.e. planning, but to answer your question, it is not always chaos. Yes. In some instances we were caught off guard where folks had said that they want to leave and we don’t have a backup, but it didn’t occur at a large scale across the board that led us to be crippled. Now, so that’s one part. The other part is also around the market; the tech market is hot. So as much as we see folks leaving, we also see a really good pool of candidates for roles that are being posted, be it backfill or other roles, andthat’s interesting because I think what I’m seeing now is a kind of filtration where, at least on our side, we’re a lot more cognizant of elements such as right shared values and culture, andthese are the real building blocks of retention. So to put it simply, I don’t see a large scale devastation. In some instances it’s been painful. In some instances that has allowed us the opportunity to think differently and perhaps plan for it a little bit better and help folks within the organization plan out even if that’s where they want to go. So I think it is a situation where we can manage it in a controlled manner, if that makes sense.

Sanjog Aul [00:07:45]:

No. Absolutely. So one is that’s good news the way at least you presented that it is not that their organizations crumbled, if you will. They had the backup, but then it is also a function of a company like Shell, which has got quite a history, and it’s got its business, processes and people related things figured out, and it’s a mature organization. There may be a different outcome of this attrition for companies of different sizes or maturity level. So let’s kinda keep that aside for a second, but let’s talk about the roles that we want to create and or fill or even envision. When we are in such a flux and you are trying to figure out how will you fill the gaps because of the attrition, is it still a good idea to continue with our grand workforce planning and

Speaker 0 [00:08:44]:

strategic workforce capability development when we are

Sanjog Aul [00:08:44]:

dealing with this chaos? Plan

Shareen Oli-Mohammed [00:08:49]:

for it. So what plan for it. So what do I mean by that? So for us, for instance, we try now to get ahead of the curve. So we try to get a view of our road map sort of 1 to 3 years in and associated capabilities that are gonna be needed and sort of high level scheduling. Now in the past, we weren’t always doing that, and that’s where we found ourselves in a little bit of firefighting mode. Right? We need to start these projects. We don’t have people, and then you rush to find people. You might settle for perhaps not the best fit. That leads to unhappiness on both sides, and that then contributes to such a vicious cycle. So I think it’s monumentally important, more so now than ever to actively plan for it. Now when you have a forward view, a few things happen. A, obviously, you have the ability then to take the time to find the right person without the time pressures. Recruitment takes time in and of itself. This also gives us the ability to plan for it internally. Move people around internally, orchestrate growth, for instance. So you might have a person who’s enrolled at the moment, and the project might end in, say, 6 months. Could we then plan to move these individuals into other projects that’s coming up and allow for upskilling to take place in the meantime? That results in a win-win situation really, where you’re forced to understand as well your people and their aspirations, andthen you’re actively participating in growing them, whilst also leveraging the corporate knowledge and the experiences that folks internally have as opposed to having to recruit from outside, onboard, etcetera. So I think planning is monumentally important and is absolutely a critical lever for this.

Sanjog Aul [00:11:21]:

One was the recruitment in the older time. So when I say older means pre this great attrition time where we had some assumptions made, some experience dealing with people with a certain mindset. Would you say you would start looking at workforce differently because of this wake up call or other themes that you mentioned, which would have actually led to the great attrition and start looking at your workforce differently? And if yes, in which areas and how?

Shareen Oli-Mohammed [00:11:54]:

I think this was always there, but this has perhaps increased the need to shed a light on the importance of things like empathy, care, developing people. It was always there, but perhaps we didn’t pay as much attention as we could have. So for instance, we have regular yearly engagement scores, but then we’ve also now put in place weekly touch points, and pulse checks every month, etcetera, to really listen to the organization because no two individuals are the same, and people have different needs, and that’s partly the reason for the attrition. People are trying to figure out that match. So I think the shift is that it’s put a lot more focus on things like empathy, care, development plans, and really personalize people’s growth. Whereas in the past, we may not have put as much focus on it. This also results in the need to then ensure middle management have the skills and the bandwidth to play this role because they play an absolutely pivotal role. They’re the glue that holds the organization together, really. So we need to make sure that our middle managers are equipped, are upskilled as well, around things like fostering psychological safety and mentoring, coaching, etcetera.

Sanjog Aul [00:13:50]:

Let’s take a quick break, listeners. We’ll be right back after these messages, and Shareen, when we come back, let’s talk about any exit interviews you might have done. Yes. People wanted to leave, but as part of the workforce management process, exit interviews are also conducted, or you might even have had unofficial conversations. You did touch that people got a wake up call, but are there any insights that were shared by them which would require organizations to make some foundational changes so that the leakage is minimized or even stopped. So, we’ll come back. Please stay tuned.

Speaker 0 [00:14:36]:

Today, enterprise technology is both strategic and global. Each week on CTN CIO Talk Network, IT thought leaders from around the world share their experience with listeners as they discuss with Sanjog Aul how they are trimming costs and partnering with business to innovate and help IT become more competitive, better care for customers, and improve the corporate bottom line. If you want to keep up with IT thought leadership, listen to CTN, CIO Talk Network, with Sanjog Aul at ciotalknetwork.com. You are listening to CTN CIO Talk Network with Sanjog Aul. To learn more about our program, please visit ciotalknetwork.com. Now back to the show.

Sanjog Aul [00:15:31]:

Welcome back. So, Shareen, when we look at these exits, have you had a chance or has your team had a chance to talk officially or unofficially with the people, and do you see a pattern?

Shareen Oli-Mohammed [00:15:47]:

Yeah. Some interesting themes, Sanjog Aul. So, firstly, it’s around pay, especially in hubs such as Bangalore in India, in different industries. So for instance, IT in trading is pretty niche, and you can’t benchmark IT in trading against IT in retail. Right? Because your competitors are hedge funds, investment banks, etcetera, and you got to meet that. So the first moment for us was around certain roles within trading IT, which is quite niche to trading, and that pay gap or needing to have competitive pay. Linked to pay as well is around benchmarking or being competitive in hubs. So pay came up as a big lever. The others were things like growth, andalso, there are nuances across gender, generation, and cultural needs, put it that way, or cultural themes. Right? So for instance, we saw in some of the younger folks, they placed a lot of importance on getting sufficient opportunities for growth, andopportunities for growth include things like mentoring, coaching, stretch assignments, training on and off the job, upskilling, the right certification, time off to do. Flexibility was another theme, and no surprise, largely with working mothers, for instance, who have a need for childcare, etcetera, but actually flexibility came in across the board. Right? So, I guess that you don’t find many people who say that you don’t want flexibility. Who’s gonna pass up an opportunity to work from whatever Barbados? So remote working, hybrid working, andI think if we unpack that at the heart of it, it’s about owning or taking back custody of your time, owning deliverables, and being given the flexibility to deliver in a way that is true to that individual. Right? Obviously, taking into account business needs as well. Yeah. I have the office hours and overlaps and things, but people want flexibility of their time. I don’t wanna be set at a desk 9 to 5. If I want the flexibility to start at 6 and end earlier, or I want an hour midday to go for a walk or whatever it might be. I want 2 days from home. So flexibility came in as a theme. The other piece was around culture. Right? So this is a big topic, but elements from there are, obviously, I’d like to work in a place that’s obviously not toxic, where it’s healthy. I’m surrounded by people I respect, whom I’m inspired by, who I can learn from, and having a sense of belonging, and whose work aligns with my values. Right? So that’s another key theme I want my work to align with my values, and centered around what that organization is doing, for instance. Right? So, obviously, we’re in oil and gas, and that in and of itself can be tricky, but for instance, folks have said, look. I like the sustainability element that gives me an opportunity to make a difference there. Obviously, if that wasn’t there, some people might make a different choice as an example. Right? And we respect that.

Sanjog Aul [00:20:41]:

So, of course, when people are leaving the organization, they might be joining elsewhere, and that’s how the whole workforce is coming up or it’s always developed that way, andyes, there would be new talent that you would like to bring and develop, but at different levels, you definitely need people with experience who will be coming from elsewhere, but then as you are trying to look for those people, either as a backfill or the new capabilities you want to bring into the companies, what would you do first with the organization to get it ready to attract people so they stay because you don’t want the revolving door

Shareen Oli-Mohammed [00:21:23]:

either. Yeah. There’s stuff around policies. So pay, flexible work policy, growth, for instance, obviously spending money on things like upskilling, etcetera. There are also elements that leadership can do. So for instance, and it doesn’t have to cost money, we’ve got mentoring circles and a coaching system and a buddy system. So I think it’s a combination of both: policy as well as leadership. In some scenarios, we’ve also—so I’m led to look at this from a marketing lens. So if we look at segmentation, I think we should treat individuals as a segment of 1, as an individual, and try and align their needs and wants and aspirations to what we have as an organization, andin some cases, we have wiggle room to work outside of the system slightly, andI think that’s important as well. I think having an open mind and that willingness to nudge and create new offers to respond to the market is equally important. I think in the past, we were perhaps a little bit too rigid. I’ve, obviously, been in a large organization, but I see a greater willingness to experiment, to explore, and to curate, andI think that’s going to be key in the future as well.

Sanjog Aul [00:23:14]:

So one is to, of course, get ready yourself. How would you tweak, not fundamentally change, but tweak your ability to filter people as you go through the recruitment process so that there is a better match, andyou bring in people who, if their needs are met and the softer needs and, of course, other pay and other needs are met, they would actually stay. There is no guarantee, but has the benchmark changed for who is supposed to be a keeper now?

Shareen Oli-Mohammed [00:23:51]:

That’s a really interesting question, Sanjog Aul. So I was reflecting on which instances have led to the greatest retention, andwhat I realized was the most effective in many cases, the most effective recruitment channel was through word-of-mouth. Yes, we get good results when we post roles, etcetera. However, the greatest fit and resulting retention has come from word-of-mouth. So for instance, if someone in the team—if we’re hiring, let’s say, a data scientist into one of our product teams—members of the team who reached out to their network to bring in someone whom they think would be a good fit for the team has resulted in a much higher level of fit. I think the reason for that is a few layers. So first, they’re hearing from someone who’s familiar to them, obviously. So there’s a basic level of trust, and that results in confidence. They probably have a good or decent relationship with the person, andknowing that that person is also going to be part of the team, it creates more reason to believe and excitement. They also hear the unfiltered truth, very transparently, of the culture, the situation, the role, the challenges, the nuances, the positives and the negatives. So when they come in, they come in very informed. They’ve got a familiar face and a softer landing, and they’re welcomed to the team because in a way, there’s already that free filter from the folks on the ground in and of itself. So I found that word-of-mouth has been very effective. Obviously, the other is, you can’t hide from pay. If you don’t tweak pay policies, then you’re going to get the best you can have the best people, but you’re not going to be able to attract them nor retain them. So, yeah, word-of-mouth, actually. Don’t underestimate that, and that’s been a very, very effective channel for us.

Sanjog Aul [00:26:33]:

And are there any specific characteristics of keepers which you saw earlier? And are you seeing that changing now?

Shareen Oli-Mohammed [00:26:43]:

No material difference. So it’s still the high performers with great attitude, who can bring in that wider lens and increase the level of competence and efficiency and effectiveness of the team. Personally, through my journey, I’ve learned that it’s never a good idea to retain these brilliant jerks, so to speak. Folks who are very high performing, but perhaps a little bit toxic or bring negative energy. That really brings down the entire team, and it spreads like cancer to other teams and other parts of the organization as well. So my personal learning has been: do not, however tempting that might be, retain the best person who is an absolute machine churning out features and an absolute star in running projects, but the overall cost to the organization is significant, andit will take time to then repair that and heal that and turn culture around, which is much harder to do.

Sanjog Aul [00:28:00]:

So if you were to look at IT, I mean, of course, IT has become the DNA for most organizations, andhuman capital management, HCM, is the function which is gaining steam, and there are a lot of companies who are focusing in on it or building or setting up systems to support this function. So besides the software part, where all do you think IT has been able to step up in helping the organization with respect to great attrition?

Shareen Oli-Mohammed [00:28:42]:

That’s an interesting one. So, with the push towards digitalization, there is a need to upscale the entire organization to become a lot more digital savvy. So I’m seeing a natural interest in technology coming from across the organization and a natural interest to collaborate and build products, etcetera. So I think IT can be a spokesperson in helping to attract folks who are tech savvy. Obviously, that’s what the organization needs, andalso partnering to upskill the organization. So I’ve seen, for instance, folks who maybe join in a commercial capacity, but because of a partnership, working closely and partnering up with some folks in IT, developed a deep love for data science and quaint, and decided to change careers even. So I think IT has the opportunity to really be a spokesperson to the organization to attract folks to the digital space among others. Obviously, the tech would help. Providing data and analytics around people management. One example is instead of exit interviews, why don’t we do stay interviews and let’s collect the data around that, and analyze and look at it in different dimensions across gender, across age, across teams, across roles, across countries, and see if we can find patterns on why people are staying and then maybe double down on that. Or maybe do analytics around propensity to leave through these pulse checks. These calls are going down in these areas. What’s going on there? Is it workload? So then let’s do something about workload. So it gives us the opportunity then to intervene earlier as well.

Sanjog Aul [00:31:09]:

Let’s take a quick break, listeners. We’ll be right back, andlet’s look at the scenario that we have today: we may have fewer people to do the job, andwhile we turn around the ship and try to build better processes, better approaches, better culture to attract the people and backfill, the work still needs to get done. So I’m not converting it into a scrambling match, but would it make sense for us to fundamentally rethink our processes and workflow so that the dependence on a larger number of people is reduced to a smaller number of people so that in case of contingencies like this, we are able to shift to a plan B and continue the work for business as usual while we go ahead and handle such disruptions more elegantly. Is there a possibility? If yes, what processes and workflows need to be tinkered, and where can technology help? Please stay tuned. We’ll be right back.

Speaker 0 [00:32:27]:

Today, enterprise technology is both strategic and global. Each week on CTN CIO Talk Network, IT thought leaders from around the world share their experience. If you want to keep up with IT thought leadership, listen to CTN, CIO Talk Network with Sanjog Aul at ciotalknetwork.com. You are listening to CTN CIO Talk Network with Sanjog Aul. To learn more about our program, please visit ciotalknetwork.com. Now back to the show.

Sanjog Aul [00:33:23]:

Welcome back. So, Shareen, we still have to get the work done, andyes, it is good that we are looking at everything as an opportunity, but business KPIs, Wall Street, and other hard metric-driven measures are not going to cut you any slack. So you got to keep the work going. How’s the work being handled today when you have suddenly a vacuum created because of lack of people? And how are you planning to fix it so that next time, if that happens at all and we cannot say if it’s a matter of when because some other disruption could come along, you’d be better prepared to handle things.

Shareen Oli-Mohammed [00:34:15]:

And therein lies the wisdom in and of itself. We’ve created a scenario where we have a vacuum and a revolving door. We need to mitigate that. So it’s a short-term view and a long-term view. First, I’ve learned the hard way that it’s about having the right size team. Undersourcing leads to burnout, disengaged people, lack of backups, andif someone leaves, you can come to a grinding halt potentially, but you still need the rest of the team. So what you end up with is having the burn rate without the output. The cost of that is far greater than the cost of having the right size team. Have potentially 1 or 2 extra, not more people, but have the right people. Don’t scrounge on headcount. Have a right-sized team to mitigate these scenarios. So what do I mean by that? You could very well combine roles, full stack for instance, but if you’ve got 1 person who’s full stack, you’ve got a key main risk. So for me, the first thing is really think about having the right sized team. Right sized here means sufficient backup, sufficient succession planning as well, a good mix of senior versus junior folks. There are other levers that we can use to reduce or to find savings, for instance location and efficiencies in how we do things. Optimize ways of working. Reduce time on admin, automate where possible, leverage—beg, borrow, and steal from other teams. Reduce meetings, reduce emails, reduce stuff that are urgent but not necessarily important. We used to spend ridiculous amounts of time on status reports. You have different types of status reports to different audiences. The organization was having to key in the same information in 3 different reports: 1 in the system, another on a spreadsheet, and another on a slide, andone you do weekly and another 2 times a month. This is an incredible amount of time spent on fat. That’s where we should double down and optimize ways of working to find efficiencies. Can you get software that allows you to key the thing once and then generate reports automatically thereafter? Can you remove the need to generate reports? Can you have your stakeholders self-serve? As an example, have your stakeholders join existing meetings without creating a new one just for a status report. Do we need to meet if it’s just to update people on what’s going on, as opposed to meet where we need a decision? And can we maybe reduce that to 30 minutes with prework and prep, etcetera. So I think it’s about finding efficiencies in the way we work, reducing and removing fat and waste, but at the same time, not scrounging on headcount. So very important: make sure you have the right capabilities and skills spread across the team at the right size so that it’s sustainable. We also had folks falling ill with COVID, and that made us realize this is costing us so much more than if we would just get 2 additional folks as backup; that would enable us to continue without having to pause and still incur that burn rate as an example.

Sanjog Aul [00:38:57]:

Now while we talk about business as a whole, and of course there would be some overarching strategies you’re going to deploy, when it comes to IT, a unique animal in itself—most dynamic, I would say, with a lot of opportunity as well as a requirement for IT to pivot and to accelerate and to innovate—how does it look within and rethink its own makeup so that the people who almost always have a spinning plate, a lot of work and variety of work, the volume and velocity in which the work comes to them, are rethought so that such attrition or subsequent disruptions impact it less and less, because that’s becoming literally the DNA and the foundational layer of any organization?

Shareen Oli-Mohammed [00:40:19]:

Yeah. I mean, it’s monumentally important. We’ve had to really sharpen our focus. Previously, we would be hasty, and that results in a short-term focus. We need this team to roll out this product yesterday, so scramble to find the people, but with that short-term lens, you’re not always going to get the right mix of people. Then you form a team that might not be optimum, and you’ll need to dismantle it and pivot. What we’ve learned is to make speed and not haste. What does that mean? We’ve put a lot more focus on planning and readiness. So we’ve come up with a 10-item list of what needs to happen before we even think about putting a team together. Some of these questions also help us sharpen up whether we need to do this or not in the first place. Why are we doing this? What is the problem statement? Are we clear on the problem? Is this the right question to ask? Because what we found is that at times what seems like a good idea and instinctive may not actually yield the right level of business value and benefits. For instance, we shouldn’t be using spreadsheets to deliver multimillion-dollar cargos as an example. That feels right, but actually what problem are we trying to solve? What is inherently the problem with spreadsheets? Because spreadsheets can be a perfectly good tool, but it’s the year 2020. How can we not have a system for this? Why would we need a system for this? So it’s really challenging ourselves and asking obvious questions to make sure that, as an organization, we are working, first and foremost, on the right problems. We’ve also got a much bigger shift around business readiness as well because we can’t do this alone. For it to be successful, we do need to partner up with the business and folks around the commercial teams and other teams. They too in turn need to plan for it. These improvements and projects that cost a lot of money may not be able to be resourced from the business side by bringing folks externally. You might need to put your best people on it. You might need to put the folks who have the most knowledge in the organization on it to pair up as product owner and drive the product vision. If you bring someone in from outside the company, they may not have that knowledge. So what we’ve learned as well is that the business needs to also up the planning game and backfill, etcetera, and then knock-on effects. In situations where it’s volatile, as you’ve rightly pointed, we found ourselves not being able to or needing to pause projects, not because we’ve lost a whole bunch of people due to attrition, but because the organization is strained. So planning on the business side, being clear or being slightly prescriptive even around value and business readiness, really helps to set us up to succeed. Because the last thing you want is to start this thing and then you don’t have someone from legal or finance or procurement or settlements where they’re needed, andthen that causes a massive delay, and that just burns and wastes money. So those are some of the focus areas that we’ve tried to double down on to help set us up to succeed in these instances.

Sanjog Aul [00:45:15]:

Let’s take a quick break, listeners. We’ll be right back after these messages, andwhile we are talking about the IT department, let’s also talk automation. I know automation has been discussed to death in multiple contexts. In an organization where you are trying to get the repetitive work done, even putting some AI so that reasonably good rule-based and/or AI-based automation, if deployed, could reduce our reliance on people—not 100%, but in specific areas where similar attrition happens, you are not stranded. At least the business goes on. So should we start looking at a company which is not just having human workers, but also digital workers, and could our workforce be rethought to have a good mix of human and digital workers in such a way that on one hand it reduces our reliance on humans alone and keeps some of those mission-critical things happening in case of such disruption? And secondly, also free up those people. Let’s stick to IT for now. In the IT department, free up those people who already have a spinning plate to have less on their plate relatively. So they have a breather. They feel that they are also having a life versus just working and give them a chance to truly grow and come out of the grind. What is your take on it, Shareen? And what do you think we can do in this case to use all these buzzwords, AI and automation? Rightfully, they have created value, but in this case, how can they be exploited? Please stay tuned, listeners. We’ll be right back and explore.

Speaker 0 [00:47:16]:

Today, enterprise technology is both strategic and global. Each week on CTN CIO Talk Network, IT thought leaders from around the world share their experience with listeners as they discuss with Sanjog Aul how they are trimming costs and partnering with business to innovate and help IT become more competitive, better care for customers, and improve the corporate bottom line. If you want to keep up with IT thought leadership, listen to CTN CIO Talk Network with Sanjog Aul at ciotalknetwork.com. You are listening to CTN CIO Talk Network with Sanjog Aul. To learn more about our program, please visit ciotalknetwork.com. Now back to the show.

Sanjog Aul [00:48:12]:

Welcome back. So, Shareen, when we look at AI and automation, nothing new, but in this context of leading IT during the great attrition, could there be a creative use of this AI and automation related technology or anything else which will set the right foundation because now the technology department is eating its own medicine?

Shareen Oli-Mohammed [00:48:45]:

That’s a great angle, Sanjog Aul, andyou’ve hit the nail on the head. So one of the greatest points of frustration in the organization is inefficiencies, not having the right tools and processes to do their job. Bureaucracy—things take too long. There are too many approvals. We’ve made things slow. So absolutely I think we need to build a culture of optimizing, andin order to be able to deliver on that, IT needs to be more flexible. I think processes have been put in place with a bit of the old school of protecting the organization, of keeping costs down, etcetera. However, there needs to be the right balance, andsometimes we’ve gone a little bit too far in some instances. So absolutely, I think we need to empower the different teams to optimize and find efficiencies because that innovation of workflow and improvements of efficiencies come from the ground and from the grassroots level. Our role as leaders is to help to make that happen, andit can be something as seemingly silly as, I’m spending 5 hours a week on reports. That’s a lot of time. Or it could be something a bit more fundamental: this tool doesn’t work, and then this is our corporate accredited tool. Can we use something else? In those instances, it’s really having the courage to experiment. Instead of spending months getting different teams to assess and write a report on what tool to use, just go ahead, try it out. Try the new tool out in your small team, see if it works, and then roll that out to the rest of the organization. I’m massively simplifying this, but the sentiment behind it is around adding more flexibility, empowering the teams to optimize their own workflows, and backing them up by giving them license to experiment and try and fail if we need. Doesn’t matter.

Sanjog Aul [00:51:29]:

Now one is, of course, as you mentioned, pick up any tools, etcetera, but is there something fundamentally you would expect to do with your own workforce and use this particular turbulence as an opportunity to reset the way IT workers were invited in, the way they were treated, the way the work was assigned to them, the way they were measured, and the way they are taken care of and are grown so that at least you build immunity to such disruptions as much as possible or at least reduce the amount of leakage that could happen within the IT workforce so your business keeps going? Because frankly, all eyes are on IT.

Shareen Oli-Mohammed [00:52:23]:

Yeah. So for us, this journey started a few years ago where we came to the realization that IT is not a service provider and should not be treated as such. To get the most value out of IT, IT should be a partner, a technology partner, and should have a seat at the table in co-creating business strategy from a technology, digital, and IT lens. So that partnership has started, and it’s at varying degrees of success across the organization. We’ve made headway in some parts, and we lag behind in some other parts, but what that has allowed us to do is co-create, to have better control, to challenge and push back to make sure that we’re making the right choices as an organization. It allows us the ability to plan ahead, much ahead in terms of people, but also in terms of process, data, and tech. It allowed us to understand and drive home the importance of having the underlying processes go hand in hand with the tech. You can change your tech, but if your process is crap, you’re still going to have an inefficient workflow. It has also helped us understand the importance of data and building that in from the get-go, of working hand in hand with the business to understand and define, from day one, the data strategy, andall of this adds up to efficiency gains. It also gives us a view of capabilities needed within the organization. For instance, we have a big need for data architects, and good data architects—folks who have experiences in different businesses—where previously we hadn’t really focused on that. So yes, it has shaped the organization and continues to shape the organization. I think for me, utopia really is where we reach a maturity point that allows us to combine digital and information technology. There should not be a head of digital and a head of IT. That creates too much silo. For me, utopia is where the two roles converge and become one. You come up with a digitally enabled solution, but at the end of the day it’s still just tech. It’s another word for tech. You need tech to be able to do stuff and improve stuff. That’s what it is, andit’s about changing the narrative. So I think that’s where I’d like to see us go personally, and I think that’s where we’re going to be more effective and reduce and remove organizational boundaries and silos, but also upskill the organization. Why have two roles when you can have one? So that’s how I’m seeing it.

Sanjog Aul [00:55:56]:

So one last question, because it starts with the leaders given the strategy, etcetera, while the people come all together, but there needs to be some shift, or should there be a need to have any shift in the leadership mindset for them to take this wake up call, this great attrition, as an opportunity and to best bring the changes that we need to bring in an organization. How should leadership, that so-called discipline of leadership, be rethought, if at all?

Shareen Oli-Mohammed [00:56:39]:

Monumentally important. Many folks leave a line manager or leave a toxic environment, and the effects are far reaching across the organization. Now the opposite is also true. A leader who creates and crafts a culture that has high growth, high trust, people empowered yet challenged and supported, stretched as well as mentored—this also cascades through the organization and beyond. So I think leadership is absolutely at the center of this whole thing. What is leadership? Moments that matter—these moments of truth—are a function of the multiple interactions that you have with individuals. So if the leader has a powerful, impactful, positive interaction with his or her team, that then cascades down to the organization; if middle management is miserable, that also cascades. So I think it starts with the leader, and that permeates. It’s not about being nice; it’s about being fair. It’s about creating a healthy, happy workforce, andthat’s a function of values. I think more so now than ever, servant leadership and fostering psychological safety is going to make a huge difference because people are already under duress in their personal lives. Most everyone is battling something. Moments of care can really make the difference in someone’s day, week, and career as well. A show of goodwill there could mean you get loyalty, people putting in extra and giving slightly more. So I think it’s like compound interest. It multiplies. So I think it starts with the leader. It’s always been important, but more so now. Also because people are working from home, you don’t necessarily have that interaction. You might find it a little bit difficult to read the situation. So I think it’s even more important to invest enough time in engaging the teams in a way that makes sense for them. Some folks might want to connect every week. Some folks might want to connect every month. So it’s also about leaders having that flexibility to suit their team style in a way that works for them. One practical tip is really track employee engagement and staff happiness index by team and by individuals so that we have that view. I think that’s important—if you need to choose one thing to do, choose that.

Sanjog Aul [00:59:59]:

Sanjog Aul Once again, thank you so much, Shareen, for sharing your insights about how IT leaders, CIOs, and even business leaders can come together to lead IT during this great attrition. Thank you.

Shareen Oli-Mohammed [01:00:15]:

Thanks, Sanjog Aul. It was a real pleasure.

Sanjog Aul [01:00:19]:

Listeners, please like us on social media and subscribe to our podcasts as we are available on almost all major channels. So once again, thank you so much for listening to CTN. This is your host, Sanjog Aul, signing off. Till next week, take care, and God bless.