By inviting, you’re dis-inviting
I heard an advert on the radio yesterday. It was put together by one of our government departments. The message was around ensuring that our children go to school, stay in school and do well in school. The ‘carrot’ was by doing that we’d ensure our children have a brighter future with great opportunities.
It’s a great message. It’s a critical message for a country like South Africa. But it was how they communicated it that made me pause and reflect on how easy it is to dis-invite through invitation.
In this case they did it by holding a promising future up against the hard reality of the parents of some of the children they were talking about. There were one or two fathers talking about how terrible their lives were, and how bad their jobs were. They went to work and were told what to do by their bosses. They were shouted at and treated badly. And it was all because of their education or lack of it. What a sad picture for many working people out there. I wondered how they processed this advert. Not a terribly clever one in my opinion.
I’ve picked the theme of invitation leading to dis-invitation, but there are multiple themes to explore here. I’ll leave that to you.
I remember doing some work with one of the larger South African retail companies. We were talking to the Organisational Development Director about the various development programmes they were running. he spoke of the difficulty in inviting 30 people to join one of the programmes. The problem was that they were part of a pool of 70 people. By inviting 30 you were dis-inviting 40. You were sending a strong message, like it or not, to the other 40.
It’s a little like the ‘Talent’ debate at the moment. The so called ‘War for Talent’ being waged out globally. By identifying talented people, you’re dis-identifying non-talented people. What is the impact of that in the short / medium / long term?
I’m not sure how you get around it? It’s certainly a reality. There are some cultures that would simply pass it off as ’survival of the fittest’ and ‘that’s just how it is, deal with it’.
I’m not sure. Is there another way?
No related posts.
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
I’ve been pondering your note. It occurred to me most people know that other people have talent they don’t have. They don’t begrudge the fact that some people can play basketball better, that others are good at playing a musical instrument, or for that matter, that some people are good at creating ideas.
Could it be that in the scenario you’ve presented (inviting talent while ‘dis-inviting’ the rest), that it just doesn’t matter?
I’ve been pondering yours since you posted it. And while I agree on one level, I think I only agree in an environment in which the criteria for talent is clearly defined. So sports is an easy example to use. The rules are clear, the playing field is defined.
But then we take the ‘talent’ concept into business, and don’t define the rules or the playing field that clearly. Add to that the over-use (in my opinion) of the word talent, and along with that confusion as to what we’re talking about when we talk about talent, and I think it’s a recipe for leaving many people insecure in the process. Both those that are supposedly talented and those that aren’t.
How do you know when you’re in, or not in?
Until business clearly defines what they mean when they talk talent, I think my point still stands.
But thanks for pushing me here. No doubt, the little I know of you, you’re going to come back with the next thought provoking addition to this conversation : )
I see what you mean.
Assuming they can only take thirty, maybe they could invite a different group of people each time, say, twenty-three to twenty-four, with key players (of the aforementioned thirty) divided equally among the three groups. There could even be a bit of friendly competition.
I still feel a bit like looking in from the outside. As with a joke, sometimes you have to be there…