Stephen Covey has classified the works written in the last 200 years about “success” under two main headings: Character Ethics and Personality Ethics. Character Ethics is based on the assumption that there are basic principles of effective living and that people can achieve true success and lasting happiness only if they adopt these principles and put them into practice. Personality Ethics, on the other hand, includes an approach focused on behavior rather than essence. Here, people use a number of techniques to make themselves liked and to create a positive impression on the people around them. While personality ethics are based on principles such as “honesty”, “loyalty”, “diligence” and “sincerity”, in character ethics “smiling makes more friends than frowning”, “calling people by name shows you value them”, “elegant appearance is the prerequisite for success”. applications such as
Although character ethics can be applied easily and gives quick results, its long-term effect is an important source of problems. Because people learn some techniques in order to make themselves liked by others, and they constantly try to appear related to the efforts of others, to draw a strong image, and to suppress negativities. As a result, many people who seem incredibly successful from the outside have to grapple with deep problems inside. For this reason, in order to be truly successful and effective, it is necessary to adopt personality ethics, that is, to initiate a process from the inside out. How Does?
During Gandhi’s talks with the public, a woman stated that her child consumes too much sugar and asks Gandhi to persuade her child to give up sugar. Gandhi asks the woman for 15 days. When 15 days are up, the woman comes back with her child. Gandhi talks to the boy and the boy stops eating too much sugar. The mother is satisfied with the situation but cannot stand it and asks Gandhi why she made him wait for 15 days. His answer is simple. “15 days ago I was consuming a lot of sugar too.”
The same is true for companies’ human resources practices. For example, the Turkish unit of many international companies places the “Employee Value Proposition” (EVP) used by the head company in the USA on their website without any revision. Although this application gives a strong image at first glance, failure to keep promises disappoints people and can cause irreparable damage to the image of the company. In addition, many HR professionals are busy distracting both the management and the employees with fashion management tools such as quality circle, “participatory management”, empowerment, instead of trying to solve the problems of the employees. But believe me, people can no longer tolerate them. According to a study conducted in the USA, 70% of executives see the HR department as one of the most important obstacles to development. The situation is even worse on the employee side. Now it’s time to attack the roots instead of pruning the problem tree. Of course, this requires a paradigm shift.
The success of Employer Brand Management studies, which is the main argument of the new HR, largely depends on this change. Just as you cannot create a strong brand with a bad product, you cannot build a strong employer brand without actually improving human resources practices. Libby Sartain and Mark Schumann explain in detail how this process should be run in their book “Brand from the Inside”. Accordingly, first of all, it is necessary to understand what the employer brand will bring to a business. The second step involves believing in the need for change from the inside out and, of course, getting the support of the top management on the issue. This is followed by analysis of the current situation (diagnosis), preparation (planning, forming teams, etc.), creating the employer brand (balancing the current situation and vision), implementation, marketing and development.
Although the process seems simple, if there are problems with HR practices in your company, you are likely to encounter two main problems. First of all, the changes you will make will confront you with many middle level managers. Second, many top managers are unaware of the problems experienced in the lower levels of the enterprise. Uncovering them can seriously give you a headache. However, if you can clearly demonstrate the benefits that a strong employer brand will bring to your business, you can easily overcome both problems.