How to turn your business into a high-performance organisation
Another serious impact on an organisation's high performance extends from the health or otherwise of the wider economic climate, and that climate's outlook is not at its brightest across the UK at present. Add to that a lack of necessary awareness about HPOs and how to achieve that status in companies and you have a challenge to meet and a problem to solve. But André de Waal, academic director of the HPO Center, says there is a simple, defined framework for spotting an HPO: '[It's] an organisation that achieve[s] both financial and non-financial results that are increasingly better than those of its peer group over a period of five years or more.'
However, how this translates in practice, and what the secrets of high performance are, remain more challenging to pin down.
High performance = sustainable and seamless high productivity
Improving performance is a critical challenge for UK PLC. Though the UK's productivity level is the fourth highest in the G7 countries, it is 18 per cent lower than the United States, and we've been drifting further from international benchmarks since the pandemic.
So how do you set about creating and sustaining a high-performing organisation? De Waal, now a globally leading HPO practitioner, has developed a detailed list of five HPO factors based on years of research: management quality; openness and action orientation; long-term orientation; continuous improvement and renewal; and employee quality.
It therefore makes sense that building an HPO must start from the very foundations of the organisation – which can sometimes mean unlearning old ways. 'What got you here won't get you there,' says award-winning social entrepreneur Anisa Morridadi. 'If you look at leaders, entrepreneurs, athletes, performers – anyone at the top of their game – they leave strategies behind and adopt new ones to get to the next level.'
Taking De Waal's framework in a broader sense, Morridadi believes an organisation's ability to access high performance can be broken down into two factors: systems and, perhaps most importantly, mindset.
Building the HPO mindset
'It's not about your assets. It's not about your machinery. It's about how your people behave, and if they behave in a high-performance way, you'll automatically get the financial results,' says De Waal.
Morridadi cites learning from mistakes as a key factor: 'A critical element of high performance is visionary leadership. You have to create an environment where people can recognise the boundaries, push past them and learn from the results – how do we go again?'
De Waal echoes this, pointing to continuous learning as one of the most important behaviours that drives performance. What's the only type of mistake you're never allowed to make in an HPO? 'The same mistake,' he says.
Learning is one area where the UK has fallen behind. According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the number of publicly funded qualifications started by adults has declined by 70 per cent since the early 2000s. Employer-funded training has also declined, with a 27 per cent fall in spending per trainee since 2011.
The nature of workplace training has changed radically in recent years, from afternoon sessions in stuffy rooms filled with flipcharts to a more self-directed approach powered by digital learning systems like the one offered by MHR, a leading HR, payroll and finance software provider. An agile and effective training model allows you to learn in the flow of work. It is estimated that up to 70 per cent of learning comes from doing, and learning as you work is more effective because it means fewer distractions and greater focus on learning, as well as completing the task at hand.
Social learning, within and between teams, and the more easily digestible approach of bite-size learning are both well-placed to connect effective training with the process of doing. Learning on the job is the flexible friend of organisations bent on achieving high performance. Offering staff these kinds of routes to advance their career, and encouraging them to pursue self-development through feedback, is key to building a business environment that can sustain and fuel a thriving HPO.
Sustaining performance
A key component of an HPO is sustained performance. Morridadi believes that it starts with strong systems: 'You don't rise to the level of your goals; you fall to the level of your systems.'
According to De Waal, it means constantly embracing growth. 'Never stand still. As every sports person will tell you, it's not that difficult to get to the top.' The real challenge, he says, is staying at the top.
This is an area where technology can have a significant impact. While good technology alone won't deliver an HPO, De Waal acknowledges it's hard to deliver and sustain high performance without it: 'Without technology, I don't think you can become an HPO, but it's not enough [on its own]. It's got to combine with the people.'
MHR's HR payroll and finance capabilities are a prime example of technology systems that can accelerate the raw performance potential of a team, unlocking frictionless focus and company-wide high performance. Good systems embed good practice; great systems do that while also creating the platform for adaptability and change.
Collaboration for innovation
Learning in a high-performance organisation goes beyond skills; engaging with stakeholders and customers to understand their changing needs is critical. 'What makes a lot of organisations stand out is not that they just chase what matters but that they're constantly asking what matters and why, and they involve their teams, their stakeholders and their customers in that process,' says Morridadi.
This inclusive approach has repeatedly been shown to drive better performance. But you can't just ask people to participate. 'You have to be quite explicit in creating an inclusive approach to risk-taking; that it's not just reserved for people with certain securities in their job title. You have to make it psychologically safe for everyone,' explains Morridadi.
Of course, with a range of factors both inside and outside an HPO impacting on the level of its success, perhaps we should accept that the very definitions of high performance are themselves subject to change. 'I'm 64, I'm probably now recognised as the world expert on high-performance organisations,' says De Waal. 'You know what? I have more questions now than I had nine or 10 years ago.'
If you want to stay on top – no matter how long you've been doing it – the journey to change, grow and adapt never stops.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
6 hours ago
- The Guardian
The biggest voices need to admit Australia is a low-taxing nation before joining the economic reform conversation
Treasurer Jim Chalmers has reinvigorated the economic policy debate with all the talk now about his economic reform roundtable. Unfortunately, the biggest voices invariably are those who desire to help themselves. The other problem is the debate remains bounded in purposeful obfuscation. That is why it is very pleasing to read Acoss's new report 'Taxing income less and consumption more: The case against', which factchecks some myths about Australia's tax system. Acoss provides three points that need to be the basis of any discussion of tax. If you can't admit Australia is a low-taxing nation, then you should not get entry into any roundtable discussion on the topic. As Acoss notes, Australia is the ninth lowest taxing nation across all the advanced economies in the world. We raise less tax than every nation in the G7 except for the US. We raise less tax than South Korea, Canada, Japan, or the UK. In 2022 (the latest OECD-wide figures) the average level of tax across the OECD was 34% of GDP, while in Australia it was just 29.4% of GDP. If the graph does not display click here That's the equivalent of an extra $128bn. And sure, you might say, 'that's how it is, we can't change that'. But we change things all the time in our tax system. Paul Keating introduced capital gains tax, John Howard introduced a 50% capital gains tax discount and the GST. We used to have inheritance taxes, and then Joh Bjelke-Petersen got rid of them in 1977: If the graph does not display click here We also change our spending – we haven't always had Medicare or the NDIS. Nothing needs to only be the way it is or was. In 1970, total government tax revenue was 20.5% of GDP; within 15 years it was 27.5% of GDP – that's a bigger shift than to go from where we are now to the OECD average. Nothing is fixed. If the graph does not display click here The myth that we are a big income-taxing nation refuses to die. Independent MP Allegra Spender, for example, likes to say in her social media videos and tax 'green paper' that 'we need to lower the tax burden on working people through lowering income taxes' because we need to rebalance 'tax revenue from income taxes on labour towards other sources of tax' to ensure 'sustainability'. Except, as Acoss details, we are the seventh lowest taxer of personal income in the OECD, and the 11th lowest when you include corporate income: If the graph does not display click here As the Acoss report notes, Australia's 'share of personal income and social security taxes is 40%, below the OECD average of 50%': If the graph does not display click here Australia is less dependent on personal income taxes than every country in the G7 and yet apparently, we need to reduce our dependency even more. Even compared to our own history we're not all that dependent on private income tax: If the graph does not display click here Often talk about needing to reduce our dependency on income tax is followed by a call to increase the GST. Conservative economists like to argue a GST is the most efficient tax. Caring more about tax efficiency rather than equity is rather revealing, but even still, as Acoss notes, the GST is not actually much more efficient than income tax. They note that previous Treasury research found increasing the GST to 15% and reducing income tax to compensate 'would deliver negligible GDP gains'. The difference in efficiency of income tax and GST is so small that it would barely register in the overall economy. So, the only reason you would do it is if it was fairer. But, as Acoss finds, it is decidedly not so. Around the bottom 60% of households would be worse off from an increase in the GST to 15% combined with a 5% income tax cut. If the graph does not display click here The government could instead increase low-income benefits, but as Acoss argues, these are notoriously temporary. They note, for example, that the GST support package included '$3 per week per child family payments … together with an increase of up to $7 per week per family for sole parent families'. That was great until 'seven years later, income support for sole parents with school age children was cut by $25 per week'. So where does this leave us? The problem is not dependency on income taxes, but that we have overly generous income tax breaks for those who do not need them other than for reasons that have little economic basis. As Acoss argues, 'tax concessions for superannuation are excessively generous for people who don't need support to save for retirement' and similarly 'capital gains tax and negative gearing concessions encourage speculation in land, undermine housing affordability and divert investment from more productive purposes'. We don't need to increase the GST, but we could broaden it to include things like private health insurance and private school fees which would actually be progressive. Some in the private school sector are already getting antsy about this (as they should). And here's the thing – we don't need to only fund things with more GST – we could tax wealth and better tax gas companies and all the proceeds could go into the GST bucket that the states get. There are a lot of ways to improve the tax system, but if you can't admit the three points above, you really should admit you don't belong in the conversation. Greg Jericho is a Guardian columnist and policy director at the Centre for Future Work
Scottish Sun
a day ago
- Scottish Sun
Labour has wrecked the economy… here's how YOU might be made to pay – from fuel duty to income tax
Find out which tax hikes could be coming — and how likely they are on a scale of 1 to 5 RYAN SABEY Labour has wrecked the economy… here's how YOU might be made to pay – from fuel duty to income tax Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) IF Rachel Reeves was heading into Parliament's summer break with a huge headache, things just got a whole lot worse. The Chancellor woke up yesterday to a storm around Government borrowing hitting £20.7billion last month. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 5 With soaring debt and past decisions hitting growth, Rachel Reeves is said to be preparing for a tough Budget and likely tax rises Credit: The Mega Agency The figure — higher than the £17.1billion forecast for the period — was fuelled by a rise in the interest charges on government debt. And now, instead of blue skies and sunshine over the summer, Ms Reeves will have to deal with dark clouds gathering over the Treasury. She has said that 'the world has changed' since her previous Budget, with Donald Trump's global tariffs creating uncertainty. But the harsh reality is that a series of decisions this Government made has wrecked what was always going to be a fragile recovery. READ MORE ON TAX RISES TAXING TIMES Keir Starmer opens door to Budget tax raid after inflation jumps to 3.6% The decision to increase NI contributions for employers had a devastating impact on expansion and hiring plans — and wrecked confidence. Anger was also levelled at her and Sir Keir Starmer for talking the country down when Labour first came to power, as they painted a gloomy economic outlook for Britain. This is all before businesses face the roll-out of the workers' rights package over the next two years, which will hit firms for £5billion, according to the Government's own impact assessment. And better prospects for working people appear doomed as wealth creators flee the country due to the high-tax environment, with around 16,500 expected to leave this year. Self-inflicted misery And this self-inflicted misery could be compounded further in the Budget this autumn as Ms Reeves tries to solve her spending shortfall. The financial black hole has only been made worse by this month's £5billion welfare reform U-turn and the £1.5billion she will now have to find after the partial retreat on Winter Fuel payments. Rachel Reeves FINALLY addresses Commons tears after she and Keir Starmer put on awkward show of unity Economists have already said that the Chancellor may have to fund a £30billion shortfall to meet her fiscal rules, and higher taxes are a near-certainty because Whitehall departments have already faced brutal cuts. Ms Reeves insisted yesterday that UK productivity was the problem. She said low investment levels compared to other G7 countries had led to UK output not keeping pace with our competitors. Reeves said it would be easy to cut capital spending, but these would be 'short-sighted, wrong decisions'. Here, we weigh up the Chancellor's options as she battles to balance the books, along with our likelihood rating of the moves being adopted later this year. 1. Wealth tax REEVES will fend off pressure from Labour MPs to bring in a wealth tax after being warned the well-off will flee the country. The Chancellor is set to reject calls for levies on property, investments and savings after Lord Kinnock called for a two per cent surcharge on assets worth more than £10million. But a host of other countries have already tried wealth taxes and they haven't raised the money needed to cover the public finances. Recent research shows that the UK has seen 18 billionaires quit these shores in the past two years alone. 1/5 2. Income tax threshold freeze IN one of the positives from last autumn's Budget, the Chancellor said there would be 'no extension' of the freeze in income tax and National Insurance thresholds. She said such a move would hurt working people and take more money from their payslips. But a freeze on income tax thresholds for the next two years would help Ministers raise around £8billion to fill the Budget black hole. The move would mean that even more people would be brought into the higher rate of tax, with the freeze due to come to an end in 2028. 4/5 3. Fuel duty on petrol & diesel 5 Keeping the duty frozen and maintaining the 5p cut brought in back in 2022 will cost around £5billion a year Credit: Alamy COST-of-living demands on households will pile the pressure on to freeze fuel duty at its current level for another year, rather than opting for a much-needed cut. Keeping the duty frozen and maintaining the 5p cut brought in back in 2022 will cost around £5billion a year. The Sun's successful Keep It Down campaign has saved motorists around £100billion since our battle with the Treasury started in 2011. The headline tax rate on petrol and diesel is currently 52.95p per litre. Back in October, Reeves said raising fuel duty would be the 'wrong choice for working people'. 2/5 4. Capital Gains Tax PROFITS made from sales on shares, investments and property could fall into play for raising funds for Treasury coffers. Reeves raised the top rate of CGT by four per cent at the last Budget, but experts say if it goes up again the move could backfire. Higher rate taxpayers pay 24 per cent CGT on the profits from sales, which contrasts with 40 per cent if it was earned income. Nimesh Shah, from accountancy firm Blick Rothenberg, said: 'People may choose to hold on to things like houses so as not to crystallise the tax bill — or they may simply leave the UK and crystallise the gains abroad.' 2/5 5. Tourist tax on hotel rooms 5 Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner is pushing for councils to have new powers to tax tourists, but there are worries this could hurt already struggling hospitality businesses Credit: AP DEPUTY Prime Minister Angela Rayner is pushing for councils to be given new powers to bring in a tax on tourists. The Labour number two is facing opposition from Reeves to bring in a surcharge similar to those other countries impose on hotel rooms. But the Treasury is understood to be concerned that it would just hit struggling hospitality businesses that have already been badly bruised by the National Insurance raid. 4/5 6. Income tax, VAT and NI pledge LABOUR promised at the last election to protect 'working people' from tax hikes, but uncertainty has arisen about who could be protected. A key pledge was not to hike the main revenue raisers of income tax, VAT or National Insurance when the party came to power. Treasury minister Darren Jones has insisted anyone who gets a payslip is a 'working person'. It comes after Cabinet colleague Heidi Alexander said those on 'modest incomes' would be protected. 1/5 7. Small business taxes 5 Craig Beaumont of the Federation Of Small Businesses says the Labour Government must prove it supports 'the country's everyday entrepreneurs' Credit: Alamy A MILLION bosses who own small businesses and set up as limited company directors fear being clobbered on their pay. The business community worry the first £500 of dividend income being tax free could be hit in the autumn Budget. Craig Beaumont, of the Federation Of Small Businesses, said: 'The Labour Government must show if it stands behind the country's everyday entrepreneurs'. 2/5 8. Pensions tax relief raid 5 Future pensioners could face cuts to tax relief on pension contributions, with a drop from 40 per cent to 20 per cent for high-rate taxpayers raising around £15 billion Credit: Getty FUTURE pensioners could see the tax relief on pension contributions lowered to help raise funds. Higher-rate taxpayers get 40 per cent tax relief and basic-rate taxpayers get a lower 20 per cent rate. If the rate was brought down to 20 per cent it could mean around £15billion would be raised. The idea appeared to be rejected last year. But it could be back on the table as autumn approaches to bring in necessary funding. 4/5
Telegraph
2 days ago
- Telegraph
Labour is coming after your pension
Attempts to reform our out of control welfare system have flopped. Taxing non-doms has backfired, with many fleeing for Dubai and the Caribbean. And as for turning Britain into the fastest-growing economy in the G7 it is, to put it politely, still a work in progress. Still, never mind. The Labour government has apparently found a way of fixing the black hole that is widening in the public finances. With a 'review' of the state retirement age announced today, it is coming after your pension. But hold on. We can all debate how generous the pension system should be. Yet there is no justification for making the 60-somethings work until they drop to finance a profligate state that can no longer control its spending. If you are already looking forward to retirement, think again. The Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall has announced a 'review' of the state retirement age, three years early. It is already 66, and it is set to rise to 67 between 2026 and 2028. In some other universe, perhaps a new commission would decide that, with booming growth, and AI stream-lining the state, we could reduce it to 65 or even 64. Unfortunately, not in this one. Instead, we can all guess what is going to happen. It will push the age at which you can start collecting your state pension up to 68 or even 69. True, that will make the public finances look a lot better. Every year you add knocks a big chunk off the £125 billion the state pension currently costs us. It will make the Office for Budget Responsibility's long-term forecasts look a lot better. It may even give Rachel Reeves enough fiscal space to limit the tax rises she has to impose in her autumn Budget. And in fairness, we have to think hard, and have a genuine public debate, about what kind of state pension system the country can afford given that the birth rate is in decline and life expectancy is around 80. But we can all suspect what is really driving the decision. It is not generational fairness, or the long-term affordability of the system. It is that the Government is desperately short of money. Ever since Labour came to power, it has showered money on public sector salaries, poured cash into the NHS with no expectation of productivity improvements, and is 'investing' billions in vanity projects such as Great British Energy and renationalising the railways. It complacently assumed it could finance that with taxes on the 'rich', and that 'stability' would automatically boost growth, bringing in lots of extra tax revenue. It hasn't worked. The 'rich' have decided they prefer not to be taxed into oblivion, while after punishing rises in employers' NI growth has evaporated. So the Government is looking around for someone else to pay the bills. And it has decided that the people approaching retirement age are the perfect target. It is going to face a fierce backlash. If you thought the Waspi women were angry about the changes to their pension you have not seen anything yet. After all, where is the justification for being asked to work longer, in order to finance a state which refuses to retrain spending, where the welfare bills are rising all the time, where the public sector is protected from any cuts, where mass immigration makes decent services unaffordable? It is completely unfair – and it costs the Government what little support it has left it will only have itself to blame.
