Over the past two decades, network science has revealed that every complex system — including organizations — is structured as a network. In an organizational context, networks consist of individuals who are connected through flows of information, expertise, and influence. Unprecedented connectivity generates continuous information flows across individuals and departments. This creates both opportunities as well as complexities.

The prevailing recruitment challenge provides an example of the impact of information flows. Finding a new job has become easier than ever before with position openings appearing continuously on platforms like LinkedIn. This ease of connectivity and resulting visibility of various employment opportunities means organizations must work even harder to retain talent.

Talent retention is also closely tied to the strength of networks. Research reveals that 76 percent of employees who have close friends at work are more likely to stay with their employer. This underscores the importance of cultivating strong interpersonal connections throughout an organization.

When talent challenges like acquisition, development, and retention are rooted in network dynamics, the solutions to these issues must also address the current network traits.

Workplaces with a strategic focus on homegrown talent and employee development have been using coaching to support career transitions for decades.

For instance, executive coaching for an established line manager who is moved to lead a team of technical experts in a field she has relatively little expertise herself.

Coaching supports her transition through an uncomfortable time where new behaviours and ways of thinking need to be cultivated.

Coaching cuts the time it takes for that manager to be delivering effectively by creating a space for honest discussion of difficulties, discomfort and doubt and the generation of very specific actions she can take to become more proficient and at ease in the new space.

Back to employees returning to workplaces after an extended break.

It’s been a natural progression for high-performance cultures and those with a commitment to narrowing their gender pay gap to put return to work coaching – or ‘comeback coaching’ as I labelled it in 2012 – in place to ease the transition of women returning from maternity leave.

This is an arena I’ve been working in for twenty years and which has broadened into coaching for men returning from shared parental leave as well as both sexes returning from sick leave, sabbaticals and bereavement.

Last year I conducted research to understand the main effects and implications for the use of coaching to support employees returning to work after a break. 

Relatively little study has been done of ‘comeback coaching’ and what stood out from the data was the performance-enhancing effects all participants believed it to have.

Allowing employees to work remotely isn’t solely about trust. In many cases, it’s driven by cost savings or the realization that work continued successfully outside the office during the pandemic.

While organizations often proclaim, “We trust you, we don’t need to see you,” this message doesn’t always align with reality.
That’s the hook.

But it’s a lie and that’s because you can see people on platforms like Teams and you know if they are online or not. Tracking software has grown in use since 2021 and alongside this we are seeing cases of bullying and pressure from managers and leaders increase by more than 40% since the pandemic.

Trust is one of the biggest issues in organisations today, so something isn’t working.

Trust isn’t about surveillance, it’s about relationships. Organizations are made up of people working together toward a shared goal. Building trust requires a genuine commitment to fostering those relationships, not simply posting it as a corporate value.

Recruiters face complex challenges in hiring talent that reflects their diverse communities. Targeted ad placements on diversity-focused job boards offer a dual solution.

These strategic placements help organizations build teams that best serve their communities while streamlining recruiters’ workloads.

By focusing on specialized job boards, recruiters reach qualified candidates more efficiently.

This targeted approach reduces time spent sifting through unqualified applications. It also increases the likelihood of finding candidates with unique perspectives and experiences that match community needs.

Strategic ad placements also allow recruiters to manage their time more effectively. Instead of casting a wide net across generic job boards, they can concentrate efforts on platforms known to attract diverse, qualified talent.

This focused strategy often leads to higher-quality applicants and shorter time-to-hire metrics.

Basic job advertising strategies no longer work. HR professionals must adapt their advertising approaches to navigate this new terrain effectively.

Employees are looking for cues from leaders (as the people who many view as the ones who have “made it”) about what matters.

For example, when a leader decides to leave early from a meeting where people are sharing their perspectives on an important issue. Or the leader repeatedly checks their phone during a highly anticipated meeting.

What did they smile or frown about? Did they interrupt someone? What joke did they tell? Was that ambiguous sentence a message about the future of that team?

People can make mistaken assumptions about the meaning behind even the most innocent actions.

To give a real-life example, in one organization a leader was frustrated about an outcome that wasn’t achieved and ended up yelling at a couple of people in a larger group.

From his perspective, the message needed to be delivered, and he thought he needed to demonstrate a sense of urgency.

But this lack of awareness of his power was glaring. The message he was sending wasn’t about accountability or urgency, but instead was that if you make a mistake you will get in big trouble, publicly.

And the impact was real; not only were the recipients of his all too explicit message embarrassed, but they were also scared.

Unfortunately, this leader’s behavior was also directly in conflict with the organization’s aspirational values.

In one interaction, big messages were sent from the leader’s actions to the organization about what really mattered.

From my perspective, I completely understand why leaders want to take these kinds of actions.

It’s a hard and often frustrating job to lead an organization.

But that’s why leaders get paid a lot of money – to handle that pressure, not to haphazardly push that pressure on to other people.

Instead, this leader could have asked questions and determined what needed to change in the organization to get the results he was looking for and/or to make sure this same mistake didn’t happen again.