• Replies 6 replies
  • Subscribers 9 subscribers
  • Views 4645 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

Employee Personas

Helen

Hi


We are looking to create employee personas within our organisation that we can then use to more effectively target segments of our population in terms of engagement, benefits, L&D, performance management etc

I wondered if anyone had already done this and would be willing to share their outcomes as an example?

Thanks

Helen

Parents
  • Hi Helen - we do this, but as others said mainly when linked to communicating a change or engaging on something e.g. a process/system change, organisational change etc. So I think different to how you propose. I work for a multinational with 70,000+ employees globally.

    It's a useful tool to help ensure you're considering different perspectives, e.g. when we rolled out a new performance management process, what a 'manager' needed to know/feel/do was different to an 'employee' and mapping against a persona helps to break down information into the relevant/critical parts and identify what will change for them. Obviously for most things, some people will fall into more than one persona but the point is really about what is communicated to who and why. In my opinion, the recipient shouldn't feel they've been put in a box but rather that they've received what is relevant to them.

    In terms of personas, we keep them fairly broad, usually:
    - Employee
    - Manager
    - Senior Executive

    So e.g. a Senior Executive would also be a manager and employee, but they would also be expected to provide more leadership around a change and be expected to e.g. articulate how it supports the business strategy for example. So how and when we engage them would be earlier and with different content to e.g. the employees.

    Depending on the topic we may also include the below, as some communications will be tailored differently for our operational assets:
    - Operational worker
    - Frontline Supervisor
Reply
  • Hi Helen - we do this, but as others said mainly when linked to communicating a change or engaging on something e.g. a process/system change, organisational change etc. So I think different to how you propose. I work for a multinational with 70,000+ employees globally.

    It's a useful tool to help ensure you're considering different perspectives, e.g. when we rolled out a new performance management process, what a 'manager' needed to know/feel/do was different to an 'employee' and mapping against a persona helps to break down information into the relevant/critical parts and identify what will change for them. Obviously for most things, some people will fall into more than one persona but the point is really about what is communicated to who and why. In my opinion, the recipient shouldn't feel they've been put in a box but rather that they've received what is relevant to them.

    In terms of personas, we keep them fairly broad, usually:
    - Employee
    - Manager
    - Senior Executive

    So e.g. a Senior Executive would also be a manager and employee, but they would also be expected to provide more leadership around a change and be expected to e.g. articulate how it supports the business strategy for example. So how and when we engage them would be earlier and with different content to e.g. the employees.

    Depending on the topic we may also include the below, as some communications will be tailored differently for our operational assets:
    - Operational worker
    - Frontline Supervisor
Children
No Data