INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE


company, and if we don’t do that, we have no reason to exist. We need some solutions, and need help with that.” Relationships between HR and global mobility specialists and


their suppliers seemed to be edging closer to a more strategic partnership. This could only be good for both parties, good for businesses, and good for the employees and families they were moving. Where the management of talent was concerned, it was felt there


was the textbook approach and there was reality. Ultimately, the HR objective was to get the assignee or business traveller from A to B with as few problems as possible. Certainly, there was a need to provide information and data to


help manage talent, but most of HR felt they were already at the decision-making table. There was a call not only for everyone in the relocation and global mobility industry to take responsibility for the move from A to B, but also for suppliers to be strategic, because that was wanted.


Reimagining relocation Oakwood Worldwide, one of the leaders in the serviced apartment sector, showed the way by facilitating a session to reimagine relocation, led by Kevin Brown, director of account strategy. The session was well attended, and its approach, as a blue-sky canvas to open minds and envisage the future of relocation, must be highly commended, even though the topic could only be touched on in such a limited time. A practical exercise broke the ice. The audience was urged to


challenge the norm through the learning that “if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem”. To move forward, the global mobility profession must relinquish


some of its technical role, take the ‘helicopter approach’ and lead strategically, because that is what is needed, now more than ever before, as the US comes to terms with a new government with a different style, the UK negotiates Brexit, Europe faces the challenges of the growing populism movement and the backlash against authority, and emerging economies jostle for position and surge ahead in global markets. Interesting times for a new approach. With 50 years of responding


to change, Worldwide ERC should be in a good position to support organisations and their members as they feel their way forward. The session reinforced the view that something had to change


to get different outcomes. If delegates felt a step closer to being empowered to be pioneers and explore what that meant in their particular sector, it was been a job well done. Kevin Brown provided plenty of background reading and guidance for his audience to take back to their organisations.


Developing Millennials During the conference, I heard the comment, “We’ve talked about Millennials long enough, and they’re not so different. It’s time to stop compartmentalising.” However, an excellent session on the topic proved that there was still plenty to learn. The session provided an interesting take on the Millennial


perspective. Chris Johnson, MD of ACS International Schools, spoke to Morgan Wilcox Crosby, VP of advisory services for international research at AIRINC, Becky Woods, director of HR operations at News Corp, Gina Rhee, Americas mobility reporting supervising associate at Ernst & Young LLP, and Sophie Montgomery, a student at Georgetown University and an ex-pupil of ACS in the UK. It was good to hear how someone with recent experience of


school and university reacted to the employer viewpoint. This young woman spoke eloquently about her family’s experience of


relocating from the US to the UK. She admitted that her mother and the children had been more hesitant to move than her father, who was taking up the assignment. However, on arriving at ACS International School, she had found a culturally diverse environment and a student body filled with young people who had two or three passports and spoke two or three languages. Sophie Montgomery felt the open-mindedness found at ACS


helped pupils to excel both inside and outside the classroom and fostered a desire to take up the opportunity to travel and work abroad. Her experience at the school had awakened an interest in international relations and the desire to study the subject at Georgetown University in her native US. Asked what her needs were likely to be in a future global role, she


responded that she felt the appreciation of diversity and experience of mobility set her peer group apart. There were both challenges and benefits. Having already experienced relationships with different people


and places helped to build up resilience, Sophie Montgomery said. Her peers and Millennials adapted to change and sought it. This was different from her parents’ generation. Millennials were eager to move and adapt to cultural transition. Millennial students and their values in many ways epitomised the global and connected world. Sophie Montgomery felt her generation wouldn’t need much


hands-on support, having been “built to do a lot for themselves”. They had experience of moving but also access through smartphones and the internet to instant information, and this made the need for general information much smaller. This generation would be looking for a more flexible support


system, to include housing, search and travel. However, she was emphatic that they would not just want to rely on apps. Gina Rhee, of Ernst & Young, confirmed that Millennials were


a hot topic in her organisation, as three-quarters of the workforce was of that generation. Millennials were willing to relocate for a different career experience. Ernst & Young offered Millennials different types of programme,


she explained. There were two programmes specifically open to volunteers – from relatively junior levels to middle managers. For example, an employee might want to go to Brazil for couple of months because it intrigued them, not necessarily because it was relevant to their career. This approach meant that Millennials could continue to grow in their careers and have ease of access to travel and the global experience they desired, while Ernst & Young was able to retain and nurture their talent.


Roundtable discussion - benchmarking


48 | Re:locate | Winter 2016/17


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68