The Solution
This particular corporation continues to operate under the assumption that they are keeping costs down by paying the minimum compensation necessary to acquire an employee. They think that people should be happy to have the job in the first place. They believe that people aren’t worth their pay. On an individual basis this can be true, but they can exist at any level within an organization. They need to be removed from the workforce, because they are taking money from the real workers. Corporations are better off with fewer exceptional people all making more money than they should, than to have the same or lower payroll costs with more people. To emphasize, it is better to hire one exceptional person at $60,000 than two average people at $25,000 each.
The result of this shortsightedness was that they could not acquire the folks with the necessary levels of experience, education and skill levels they required for corporate expansion. They subsequently opted to hire many consultants (and contractors) to accomplish their goals and objectives. HR was left completely out of this decision. As if this were not enough, the company was still reticent to assist employees with career planning and the necessary follow on, quality training and additional responsibilities.
Human Resources Is Currently Failing to Fulfill Its Potential
Although HR should be at the core of workforce management, in many organizations they are not. HR Departments are typically staffed with people who do not have appropriate skills and are not given appropriate latitude to fulfill their objectives.
For the last thirty years, I changed jobs on average every two and a half to three years. Whenever I had an interview with a prospective employer, HR was always a roadblock, never an enabler. If I couldn’t get past the HR process to interview with the manager or supervisor I would be working with or for, I simply discounted the opportunity. And with good reason, I not once received a call back from any organization that allowed me to interview only with HR.
From the academic experience, it's very clear what role HR could and probably should play in a firm. But that led to the obvious question – why are they NOT in the leadership position in the areas that are HR’s responsibility?
I am not sure that I can prioritize these reasons, because I am looking from the outside in. If I had been a HR person for a number of years, I could probably present a more informed argument and prioritize the list with some authority.
Reputation
The first and foremost reason is the reputation that HR has acquired over the years for being bureaucratic and ineffective. The “roadblock” perception is so ingrained that even senior management is in tacit agreement. The result is that whenever senior management becomes aware of the importance of selecting the right person for a position, candidates are handled directly by the stakeholders in the position and HR is avoided as much as possible. Another result is that HR initiatives aimed at training, motivation and retention are seen as “fluff,” and are not given sufficient funding to be effectively implemented.
Wrong People
The next problem, related to the first, is that the “wrong” people tend to work in HR. Because of low wages and an underestimation of the importance of an HR role, staff members are generally barely a step above an 'entry level clerical' skill and training level. These people (in my experience) are not strong and assertive or willing to stand up for the right thing in the face of senior management. Also, they are not knowledgeable in the many diverse areas of expertise now required in most organizations. And, as a result, HR principles are unwilling to involve other supervisors and managers as subject matter experts for interview during the acquisition process.
Leadership Positioning
HR departments are not involved in the organization’s strategic and leadership initiatives as they should be. It appears (and seems very logical) that HR should also be heavily involved and very influential in policy decisions involving HR oriented areas such as workforce acquisition and retention, job satisfaction, security, compensation, and training programs. They should also be involved in appropriate and frequent measurement of the workforce. Finally, HR should provide flexibility with respect to the values of the new and different generations of workers. In my experience, HR is a department that is isolated, dictated to, and kept “out of the way” as much as possible, and seen as a necessary evil that merely serves to prevent the perception of lack of compliance with any employment laws.
These three areas, although very general and fairly high level, seem to be the essence of HR management. The areas, when managed effectively, should provide a competitive advantage. With technology spread across all industries, there are few areas where products and services can differentiate significantly. Quality within both the product and/or service is, in general, the last point of serious contention in the market. In companies that are driven by people, HR should be the organization that can make a difference.
In the companies that I have had the pleasure of dealing with HR, (note sarcasm) that department seemed to be hamstrung. They have no idea of what questions they should be asking me, except for a possible script provided by someone, and therefore don’t have an idea on how to evaluate my answers. I don’t have any idea how they deselected me – I never have found out.
HR Can Be Strategically Improved
In order for HR to meet its potential, the senior management of an organization needs to have an understanding of the potential of the HR role. They need to communicate those expectations to the entire company on a frequent and regular basis. Most importantly, they need to demonstrate that commitment by devoting the time and resources to finding HR personnel with appropriate skills, give them the latitude necessary to do their jobs, and accept nothing less than excellent results in hiring, training, motivating and retaining quality people for all positions.
Reputation
This can be repaired through immediate senior management attention, focus and trust. This obviously means that senior management will insure that the “right people” are or become responsible for HR. Then provide the necessary corporate direction, focus and then stand back and trust the HR folks to do their jobs. There will be some rough spots initially, but with some time, attention and support from senior management, these will be resolved.
The Right People
The most interesting facet of HR in a leadership role – what is the “right stuff,” the right background, education and skills necessary for the department that is typically staffed with “paper pushers?”
We start by following the same rules that we wish HR to follow throughout the corporation. We hire the best, brightest and attract and motivate them in the same ways. These things must obviously come from higher up in the organization. This should not be a problem in an organization that has provided HR with the direction we have discussed.
Leadership Positioning
Typically, one of the largest investments corporations have is personnel. With very little additional effort, and maybe some more investment in HR departments, as well as personnel, most corporations could have a world class workforce working for them.
This is the beginning of a world class workforce. By then investing heavily in the employees through proper compensation, and other job satisfiers, such as job security and extensive in-depth training programs, the corporation then has the basis for retaining the world class workforce through job satisfaction. Follow this approach with appropriate and frequent measurement of the workforce, while providing both a collaborative work environment and flexibility with the values of each of the successive generations of workers, and the workforce will attain personal growth and achievements beyond your wildest expectations. Although this may sound rather altruistic, I have seen various combinations of each of these attributes at work in different corporations – both large and small.
HR should be allowed, no, commanded to hire the absolute best people. Then set in place policies and procedures to attract, motivate, train and reward the best people. Then give the winners trust, independence, praise, freedom, and encouragement. Corporations that think they will save money by only hiring people they can afford will attain only mediocre results at best.
Corporate leaders – this includes HR as well, should know that people
make things happen. If the people in a corporation are supported, trusted
and respected based on performance, regardless of generation gaps; the
corporation will have a high propensity to exceed all expectations. HR
should have as part of its charter the wherewithal to ensure that these
things happen throughout the corporation.One can only imagine the possibilities
if these attributes were combined in one corporation.
