Still Elusive but Within Reach? Effective GBS Business Relationship Management | Blog

Finally, GBS organizations have woken up to the reality that it’s not what you deliver, it’s how your stakeholders feel about what you are delivering. Yet because it’s considered “soft stuff,” too difficult to manage, or better yet, left to the vagaries of individual GBS managers to sort out, GBS organizations suboptimize the relationships they have with the business. And that negatively impacts brand, the ability to scale, and even the sustainability of the GBS model itself. How many GBS organizations met their deconstruction, or even their demise, because business relationship management got short shrift?

Today, many of my conversations center around the quality of GBS’s relationship with the businesses they partner with. They go something like this: why doesn’t the business “get” GBS? How do we change the tenor of the relationship in order to scale? This business (or function) doesn’t line up.

Why is good business relationship management or BRM elusive for the majority of GBS organizations? I think there are a number of causes:

• Seeing  BRM as a role, not a way of working: Often, GBS organizations think anointing team members to manage relationships is the right way to approach what is a vital component of the model. It’s a flawed construct; in a model that is very much an ensemble act, everyone takes some level of responsibility for BRM. It’s a process that underpins everything GBS does.
• Ill-defined responsibility: What is the goal? Defining customer strategy? Preparation of quarterly business reviews? Tracking stakeholder health? Playing postman? Who does what? For many, BRM’s responsibility is not clear.
• Poor definition of the customer: Now, this may seem elementary, but if the GBS organization can’t define with whom they must forge effective relationships, how can they possibly manage them? Is it the leaders of the functions? The business? Both? Everyone with equal weight?
• Too many customers: In a multi-function GBS, the customer map is complex. However, we tend to over-index on quantity rather than impact. A slot on an org chart does not automatically merit a tight, ongoing relationship with GBS.
• No success measures: How do GBS organizations accurately gauge the outcomes of a full-on BRM program? Is it down to noise reduction? High net promoter scores, which have their own biases? A “feeling” that a relationship is supportive? And what’s the economic value of the investment?
• Siloed GBS organization structures: When GBS is a collection of functional shared services that more or less operate independently, the focus of relationship health is on the parts, not the sum. When finance thinks that only finance stakeholders matter, or HR works for the CHRO and their henchmen, it is difficult to design and implement a program that considers enterprise—as opposed to functional—stakeholders.
• Assignment to junior staff:  Business relationship management requires a deep knowledge of the business, some level of functional knowledge, an ability to determine cause and effect, and finely honed relationship skills. When junior staff are anointed to manage relationships (all too often as a side hustle in enabling processes such as program management or solution development), they become nothing but letter carriers.
• Lack of trust: Telling a leadership team that another, usually more junior team will take primacy in business relationship management is a sure recipe for dysfunction. It’s impossible to isolate BRM from the responsibilities of top management.
• Belief that it can be fixed with a silver bullet: Suddenly putting on a temporary full-court press of love and attention by assigning someone to play point with or over-communicating with the business never works. Relationships take time to nurture or repair.

What should GBS leaders do to implement a more effective business relationship management program?

• Be clear about what the GBS business relationship is, does, and should achieve and how it works with and within other GBS functions. Is the prime focus managing day-to-day relationships? Effective escalations? Providing input to strategy or solutions? How does it collaborate with the transformation team? The vendor management team? The change management team? Top leadership? Remember that BRM is not a standalone endeavor. Set the guidelines and the guardrails.
• Ask the business! We usually design our interaction models in a vacuum, for the convenience of GBS, or because one of our peers says their model is a best practice, so we adopt it. Why not ask the business how they’d like to approach governance? How best to work within their existing communication channels? Which routines would be most valuable to them? Co-creation will go a long way to developing more effective relationships.
• Decide who matters. If your GBS is designed to support the functions, your primary relationship, like it or not, is the function. If you directly serve the business, you still have to liaise with the function. Enough said. However, neither can be ignored nor can the GBS team develop constructive relationships with everyone. Take the time to examine GBS’s relationships, segmenting them into primary, secondary, and tertiary along such factors as scale of relationship, risk, potential for growth, influence, and others.
• Focus on process first. Refrain from slotting business relationship management roles into your operating model until BRM as a process is established. Identify the relationship lifecycle. Determine who within GBS interacts at any given time. Deploy journey map methodology to identify the most common relationship scenarios. Design for dynamism as the business goes in and out of transformation, transition, and silent running. Tie escalation management into a relationship management regime. Document, document, document. And don’t forget to socialize within your GBS team and the business to get buy-in.
• Determine what the interaction model should be—before you develop job descriptions. If BRM is seen as a process as opposed to a function, the implications on the org chart will change from role to responsibility. While defined roles may be effective, they should result from a thoughtful process. Play with the org chart and JDs last to fill gaps in BRM.
• Add B-sat (business relationship satisfaction) to your performance evaluation criteria. Rarely are satisfaction measures part of the GBS team’s evaluation criteria. Work to align satisfaction measures to individual job performance.
• Consider making business relationship management the prime task of site for regional leaders. All too often, these folks’ roles are relegated to managing the delivery team, not playing a vital role in engaging with the business. Take the opportunity to rethink how GBS can harness its proximity to create better business intimacy.
• Decide who is on first, second, and third. Thoughtfully assign responsibility to your leadership team and their direct reports. Develop decision rights and implement communication regimes. Drive to develop trust amongst team members.
• Align communications and change. Too often, they focus on parallel universes without the same priorities. Comms and change management are vital components of BRM; they work together as a unit.

Implementing BRM as a process. Aligning the team. Making it a component of performance. Identifying business journeys. All of these—and more—are critical to improving GBS’s relationships with the business.

However, one change underpins all this hard work—disabusing team members that they “personally” own business relationships. GBS has a relationship with the business; individuals collectively foster and nurture the relationships by interacting with individual stakeholders. When we realize that it’s a team effort, GBS’s success and sustainability are definitely within reach.

From Headshakers to Institutionalists: Exploring GBS Change Management Personas | Blog

Understanding your change management approach and experience level can improve decision-making and enhance transformative practices. Our research has identified four change management personas that GBS organizations typically fall under. To find out which persona best fits your organization, read on.  

Change management is necessary within Global Business Services (GBS) organizations. But finding the right approach for effective execution – from implementation to management and measurement – can be challenging, even for more mature GBS organizations.

Moving to a GBS platform sets off a chain reaction of transformations for businesses. At its core, the GBS’ mission is to create and sustain business operation change by consolidating, standardizing, streamlining, and creating more value. The GBS model’s nature lies in bringing change through new ways of working, distributed operating models, elevated service levels, enhanced experience, and digitization, enabling the enterprise to experience higher levels of innovation.

Since constant transitions within the GBS model are expected, change management should be viewed as a continuous process and not a one-off fix until the next shift occurs. Effective change management can enable GBS organizations to identify new opportunities, mitigate risks, and create a culture that embraces innovation and continuous improvement, ultimately leading to long-term success and growth.

So, what’s the path to successful change management? To begin, assess where your organization falls on the adoption scale that ranges from those who have not yet prioritized change management to leaders who seamlessly embed it into all aspects of GBS operations.

Understanding the four change management personas 

In our recent report, State of Play in GBS Change Management, we conducted in-depth interviews with 58 leading GBS organizations across the globe to understand how GBS organizations approach change management.

As we compiled the data, we discovered the way GBS organizations implement change management is influenced by various factors such as the change management imperative, scope, talent model, and funding.

These elements can determine a GBS organization’s change management persona. Our research identified a range of generalized organizational profiles that we categorize as headshakers, crawlers, gamechangers, and institutionalists.

Let’s define these typical change management personas:

Headshakers

A GBS organization that falls into the headshaker category hasn’t yet established change management competency and, unfortunately, does not perceive it as crucial. At this starting level, the organization may approach change by communicating transformation on a case-by-case or ad hoc basis. While ensuring that information is relayed throughout the enterprise at the outset of periods of change is indeed essential, this approach often lacks a comprehensive strategy, monitoring mechanisms, and effective change management engagement practices.

Headshakers tend to place change management primarily as a communications function with sporadic support for other activities. Additionally, these GBS organizations do not invest in dedicated talent resources specifically focused on implementing and overseeing successful change initiatives.

Crawlers

Organizations categorized as crawlers may notice that the GBS organization is gradually moving toward establishing a GBS change management competency and views change management as somewhat critical. The organization might allocate resources to address change management needs for specific transition and transformation projects. Crawler organizations also tend to emphasize communications to ensure leadership alignment and prioritize change impact assessments to better understand the nature of the change and where it will occur.

Crawlers typically lack the in-house talent to lead their change management initiatives and instead rely on external consultants or contractors. The change management team’s size is usually contingent on the available funding and project requirements. Like headshakers, crawlers operate on an ad hoc basis, but they may incorporate certain enhancements, such as Centers of Excellence (CoEs), to equip employees with the necessary tools and training to support change initiatives.

Gamechangers

Gamechangers are generally younger GBS entities that have reached a respectable level of maturity in their change management journey. These organizations are actively taking steps to establish change management practices, recognizing its necessity. Gamechangers readily invest in change management for both transitional and ongoing changes. Their approach to change management is comprehensive, playing a strategic role in driving business transformation. Gamechangers go beyond mere communication methods to take on stakeholder and transition management, methodologies and tools development, and conduct change risk assessments to ensure successful change implementation.

Gamechangers typically have a dedicated team consisting of both in-house and contractor employees devoted to the specific needs of each project. These initiatives are regularly funded as part of the annual transition budget, demonstrating the organization’s commitment to this crucial aspect of GBS operations.

For gamechangers, change management becomes firmly established when the enterprise transitions to a GBS model or undergoes any significant transformation.

Institutionalists

Institutionalists firmly believe in change management and have invested substantially in building a robust GBS change management competency, recognizing its value as a strategic capability. Change management is implemented from the start of GBS model adoption and is funded annually. A consistent and systemic commitment to change management exists, with a focus on both maintaining business operations and driving business transformation. It is embedded and managed as a critical component of all GBS initiatives.

With this approach, the organization carries out the full scope of activities, including change champion network management, training and learning programs, organizational change readiness, and customer experience monitoring. A dedicated team of employees focuses specifically on change management and may be supported by contractors.

By incorporating change management as part of the overall GBS governance, stakeholders can easily understand, adopt, and embrace transitions – solidifying the organization’s ability to adapt and evolve.

Are you ready to make a change?

Change management is an important yet frequently misunderstood topic that plays a pivotal role in empowering GBS organizations to generate and maintain sustainable value.

Identifying which of the change management personas best characterizes your current approach is essential to gaining deeper insights into change management and its impact on your GBS organization.

Whether you are a headshaker, crawler, gamechanger, or institutionalist, recognizing your organization’s current position will empower you to make informed decisions and strategically enhance your change management practices.

• Take our quick, five-minute quiz to find out how well you know GBS change management.
• Gain more insights and uncover effective change management practices in our webinar, Why GBS Change Management is the Key to Added Value and ROI.

To learn more about change management personas and how to incorporate change management across your organization, reach out to Rohitashwa Aggarwal, [email protected], or Arushi Gupta, [email protected].

Discover the Strategies Top GBS Organizations Use to Create Superior Employer Brand Perception | Blog

Positive employer brand perception is crucial to attract and retain top talent in today’s dynamic environment. How current and potential employees view the organization’s brand is critical to business success. Gain insights from our research on best practices by leading Global Business Services (GBS) organizations who have created a superior employer brand perception in this blog.

Why brand perception matters for GBS organizations

In today’s competitive landscape with constant change and evolving workforce needs, having a strong employer brand isn’t just a benefit but an essential asset that can propel GBS organizations toward exceptional growth. For employees and job seekers, perception is reality.

Having a superior employer brand perception is a magnet that attracts and encourages top talent who want to align with the organization’s values. GBS organizations increasingly are recognizing the importance of building and maintaining a distinctive employer brand perception.

Creating a strong employer brand perception is a challenging and intricate task that requires consistent efforts across various fronts. Understanding the complexities involved is important to succeed in this effort.

By drawing on insights and best practices from leading GBS employers that stand out for their employer brand perceptions, organizations can enhance their ability to create a compelling one. Let’s explore the findings from the latest edition of our case study report to learn more.

About the Top GBS Employers™ 2023 Report

To better understand the true differentiating factors that help create a superior employer brand perception, we analyzed the success stories of some of the top GBS employers from our recently published Top GBS Employers^™ 2023 Report.

We collaborated with GBS entities of Experian, GSK, and Sun Life in India; Henkel and Northern Trust in the Philippines; and Takeda in Poland to understand nuances of their journeys to elevate employer brand perception to new heights.

In the case study compilation report, How GBS Organizations Build Differentiated Employer Brand Perception, we uncovered how all these organizations adjusted to constantly changing employee needs and fostered a strong sense of camaraderie within the organization.

The study provides profound insights on:

• The key factors that make the top GBS employers stand out in terms of brand perception
• The key initiatives, actions, and practices that create a strong employee value proposition for top GBS employers
• How top GBS employers adjust to the evolving employee needs
• Ways GBS employers can future-proof the employer brand perception

Insights from the report

Every organization’s secret sauce is unique. Our research found that each company adopted a different approach to building a strong employer brand when navigating through specific challenges.

Here are some insights from our analysis:

• Experian’s success can be attributed to its thriving culture, where employees have the autonomy, flexibility, and resources to build their career paths. Experian further bolstered its value proposition by improving the quality of work, offering unparalleled learning and development opportunities, and building a diverse, inclusive, and collaborative work culture

• GSK emphasizes an organizational culture that allows people to thrive and contribute to their fullest potential. This philosophy underpins its efforts that are centered around these five key themes:
  • Fostering the GSK culture
  • Building an inclusive organization
  • Driving impact through performance using data, digital, and an innovation   mindset
  • Investing in talent and leadership needs and development
  • Creating a learning environment for future skills

• Henkel has always prioritized employee needs and fostered a culture of enabling employees. This approach helps it stay ahead of the curve in addressing evolving employee expectations

• Northern Trust believes that collaborative efforts among management, employees, and other key stakeholders build a great workforce. The company believes in ensuring its five key promises:
  • A culture of care and collaboration
  • A focus on individual career development and growth
  • An opportunity to innovate
  • Dedication to a more diverse, equitable, and inclusive workplace
  • The chance to have a meaningful impact

• Sun Life believes in planning for the future and has created a plethora of learning and development and career progression programs. The financial services company has been nimble in understanding and adjusting to evolving employee needs, earning its position as a top GBS employer in India for the second consecutive year

• Takeda Business Solutions (TBS) is dedicated to being and remaining a best-in-class GBS organization. It continually evolves its captive delivery strategy and ways of working to reflect the evolving business and workforce. This commitment is demonstrated through:
  • Creating an exceptional people experience
  • Unleashing the power of data and digital
  • Investing in and future-proofing the capabilities of its people

These examples show that no one formula exists for creating a strong employer brand perception. The key to creating a desirable image lies in the individuality and distinct character of each organization.

Although every organization’s journey is different, the paths are connected by common threads. By unlocking the workings of the top GBS organizations, we found they each:

• Not only understand but act quickly to address employee needs: With rapidly evolving employee requirements, GBS organization needs to be flexible and autonomous to act with agility
• Provide employee growth opportunities: Offering holistic professional development beyond compensation is valued. Employees are not only looking for compensation but career paths, professional guidance, upskilling opportunities, and challenging and meaningful work assignments
• Align the enterprise culture with local value systems: By integrating local needs and perspectives of employees to foster individual growth, GBS organizations can make a greater impact and significantly improve employer brand perception

From these findings, it’s clear that highly skilled individuals today want more than just a job. They are seeking to work for organizations that value their contributions and encourage collaboration, purposefulness, and achievement. GBS employers who are seen as having a reputation that aligns with these aspirations are likely to succeed in recruiting and retaining top talent.

To uncover the details of each organization’s journey to create a superior employer brand perception, read the report How GBS Organizations Build Differentiated Employer Brand Perception. The report was developed by collaborating with GBS organizations of Experian, GSK, Henkel, Northern Trust, Sun Life, and Takeda.

To learn more about employer brand perception and talent management strategies, reach out to [email protected], [email protected], or [email protected].