Thursday, 28 May 2009

Risks and rewards in banking (continued)

 

   The Economist also notes that one reward / HR strategy that’s going to be more popular in banking is a focus on critical talent.

“Some banks will be more sophisticated still.  With costs and capital under so much pressure, the incentive for executives to identify those who add genuine value to a bank has rocketed…

Some employees really are worth lots of money.  Asked to defend levels of pay prior to the crisis, many in the industry would reach for the analogy of film or sport, two other industries where talented individuals are critical to success and are richly rewarded as a result.”

 

I’ve got no problem with this.  The proviso has to be that these individuals really do add value, ie not just in terms of revenue, but in risk-related, and longer-term returns.  I suspect that once these factors are included, the variance may be much less than is often thought.

However, the Economist continues…

“The trouble with this defence is that it was not just the big-name stars who got really rich in financial services; the extras did too.”

 

So a further criticism is that bankers’ pay structures inflated the compensation of everyone around them.  I think there’s a lot of truth in this, and that is has had a negative impact on the banks.

Take HR.  Now there are some great people working in HR in the City.   Some really great people.  But there are quite a few who still haven’t understood what strategic HR / HCM is all about.  In fact, I’ve often thought that despite the high salaries, there’s a higher proportion of these HR folk in the City than there is elsewhere.

City firms have paid higher salaries to HR people in the City than in other sectors for a number of reasons.  Firstly, because they could.  Secondly, to reduce any potential discontent due to the huge variance in compensation paid within these firms.  Thirdly, to make up for what have often been fairly unappealing cultures to work within.  And fourthly, to ensure they had some of the best HR people they could get.

But these high salaries often haven’t been accompanied by robust performance management / other HR processes.  So often, firms have ended up with decent but not stellar HR professionals who haven’t been able to afford to leave the sector.  Over time, this has often meant the quality of HR support within banking has deteriorated rather than improved.

Perhaps this is one reason that HR never tacked the ineffective and hugely damaging compensation programmes and cultures that have existed in the banks.

And perhaps it’s about time we see a change in those job ads that state “prior experience in investment banking is required”.  If ever there was a sector in which new blood is required, surely it is this?

Comments?

 

 

Picture: Massys, Quentin

 

  • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
  • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
  • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
  • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

    .

Monday, 25 May 2009

Talking HR: Krishna’s award

 

   There’s no Talking HR this week – the next episode will be aired on 8 June.

But I would like to congratulate my co-host, Krishna De for winning Best Business Podcaster in the Irish Internet Association’s NetVisionary Awards 2009.

As well as Talking HR, Krishna presents another Blogtalkradio show on marketing: BizGrowthLive and along with Anna Farmery and Heather Gorringe also co-hosts the definitive guide to social media: the Podcast Sisters.

Well done Krishna, and well deserved too.

 

 

  • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
  • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
  • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
  • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

    .

Wednesday, 20 May 2009

The revolution within – risks and rewards in banking

 

   Although MPs’ expenses have been the top news item in the UK for a few weeks now, bankers’ bonuses have retained a low hum in the background.

MPs in the Treasury Select Committee have recently turned their attention away from themselves to this other group of miscreants, placing blame for reckless and excessive risk taking on City bonuses.

This may seem an obvious conclusion, so much so that Management Today’s reaction is a simple ‘like, duh’!  However, it wasn’t that obvious at the time that all this risk taking was going on.  It wasn’t even that obvious last Autumn – I remember feeling that I had a minority view when I started linking bonuses to the gloomy environment.

Anyway, in this week’s special report on international banking, the Economist reports on the actions that the banks are starting to take to improve things:

“Banks will tie compensation more closely to performance and spread rewards over longer periods. It should be said that neither idea is foreign to the industry. Bonus pools based on profits (though not revenues, an indefensible practice) may be seen as a problem now but are clearly more closely tied to performance than a fixed base salary. Awards of shares were common within the industry before the crisis and caused employees, those of Lehman Brothers included, to suffer vast losses when share prices dropped. What the industry as a whole did not do well enough was to design pay so that it better reflected long-term risk.

The bonus/malus structure introduced by UBS in 2008, whereby a cash portion of a bonus award is held back at the end of a financial year and reduced if targets are not met in subsequent years, will also become more common as institutions seek to track and reward the performance of senior managers over time.

Other ideas in the vanguard of designing pay structures include “S-curves”, which pay less below a certain threshold of profit so as not to reward employees for market conditions and franchise value, but also pay out less above a certain threshold, to discourage excessive risk-taking. These types of thinking are likely to become more prevalent.”

 

This is all highly sensible.  However, it may not be as easy to implement as it appears.  As the Economist explains:

“Attempts to control pay in one area tend to inflate it in another. As bonuses fall, pressure on banks to increase basic pay is already rising. That pressure will grow as the industry recovers and competition for the best staff increases. ‘At some point in the next few years, the industry is going to have an absolutely stellar year,’ says a pay consultant who predicts that firms with clawback policies will have to offer more in upfront pay to attract recruits.”

 

This is why firms need me rather than a ‘pay consultant’!  We’re just not going to get anywhere if banks simply replace one flawed system with another.  The only way to do things differently, really differently (which is surely what’s required), is to replace the mindset that leads to the dysfunctional behaviour.  As I explained earlier:

“HR should never have let this situation develop.  And it's not just an issue of compensation design.  Some banks have refused to see their people as purely money motivated, but most have simply accepted their people are only engaged by high rewards, have offered these rewards, and have continued to recruit people who are motivated in this way.

But it hasn't had to be like this - there is no real reason why bankers need to be paid more that other sectors of the economy.  Not all talented people are money motivated and it's a shame that none of the banks ever looked outside this one stream of employees (leaving aside for a minute the question of whether they really needed talented people anyway ie whether less talented people may have taken more acceptable risks?).

The key for me, as I've posted before, is the banks' cultures.  Financial services firms need to offer their people a broad and balanced (financial and non-financial) EVP based on a compelling purpose (mojo) which is supported through HR practices including leadership development and succession planning etc.”

 

Of course, it’s going to take some guts to make this sort of change.  But at should at least be easier now than it was before – as the Economist reports:

“The traditional argument against changing pay structures has been that no institution could move unilaterally without competitors poaching its best people. Now, no bank can fail to alter its compensation policy without having its executives publicly humiliated by politicians and the news media, and frowned upon by regulators.”

 

The same argument applies to banks’ cultures / mindsets too.

 

 

Photo credit: Dennis Brown

 

 

  • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
  • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
  • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
  • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

    .

  • Friday, 15 May 2009

    Measuring Reward

     

    One of the things we mentioned several times in Globoforce’s webinar (recording here) yesterday was the role of measurement in reward and recognition.

    I also referred briefly to a new study conducted by Hay and WorldatWork which has found that companies are planning to link their measurement of reward programmes more towards employee engagement than the bottom line.

    Since the webinar, Ann Bares has posted on her views about the survey at CompensationForce.  Ann’s main concern is about the balance of lead (eg engagement) and lag (eg financial) metrics in measuring reward.

    I have a slightly different, although still similar concern.  To me, the critical issue associated with how you should measure your reward programme is that you need to be clear about your intended outcomes first.

    This can be demonstrated using Maslow’s pyramid – see the slide from Derek Irvine’s presentation (yes I know this isn’t really a hierarchy – I’ve said as much myself – but I’ve also said that I still use it when I think it’s helpful to do so – and this is one of those times! – I presume Derek will have a similar view):

     

     

    If you’re operating around the base of the pyramids, helping meet employees’ physiological and safety needs through cash and other payments, there’s very little point measuring engagement (more linked to self-actualisation, esteem and social needs), as this isn’t going to be what you’ll create.

    However if you’re using other elements of total rewards or of your EVP, and you are targeting the engagement of your people, then of course you’re going to want to measure this (as well as the financial impact of this engagement when you can).

     

    But anyway, in more general terms, I feel fairly positive about the survey.  Particularly when you consider I4CP’s recent findings that higher performing companies tend to be more apt to measure talent-related metrics (93% of higher performers measure employee engagement, compared to 79% of lower performers).

    I4CP’s conclusion from this is that "it most likely reflects the attitude that low-performing organisations see their employees a mere expense and not a source of competitive advantage."

    If Hay’s / WorldatWork’s survey is an indication of a further shift to seeing employees as sources of critical capability / human capital, then this really is good news.

     

     

    • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
    • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
    • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
    • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

      .

    MPs expenses and inauthenticity

     

          Readers outside of the UK may not about the UK’s current lead story: our political leaders have had their noses in the trough over the last few years, and the extent to which they have been gorging themselves is slowly becoming clear.

    Although MPs are now becoming aware of the extent of the public’s disgust, for many, it still has to sink in.  Placing blame on the system, and insisting that they still deserve respect, still takes precedence over expressing real regret and acknowledging their mistakes, or even their crimes (which for some MPs at least, these activities may be).

    My local MP, who insisted in our town’s paper only yesterday that has had done nothing wrong, has been sharing expenses with his wife, another MP, so that neither of them have had to pay any property related costs for the past eight to nine years.  His excuse: everything had been agreed before he claimed – so that’s OK then! Well no, it’s not, and it looks as if he and his wife are going to have to pay back several hundred thousand pounds.

    We’ve been here before of course, with bankers’ bonuses, as both groups have been enriching themselves at our expense.  But if anything, the current scandal is even bigger and more repugnant.  Fred Goodwin was at least leading what was at the time a private sector business, and it was up to investors in, and regulators of, this business to control him (a duty they spectacularly failed in implementing, but that’s another story).  As an ‘honourable MP’, Andrew MacKay works in a role in which there is no external control other than the public’s trust in his appropriate, ethical behaviour.

    I posted some time ago about Gordon Brown’s inauthenticity and our dislike in being led by a leader like this.  Our MPs need to wake up to the fact that it is their inauthentic behaviour that is causing the problem now.  They’ve positioned themselves as people who are serving a noble cause, as ‘honourable members’, but it is now quite clear that for many of them, the noble cause has been themselves.

     

    I’m posting about this on this blog, because I think the story does signal a warning for an HCM (or maybe just my own) approach. I tend to believe that, in any organisation, people come to work to the best job that they can.  I also believe most people are ethical and respond to being trusted, not controlled.  The MPs saga illustrates how a badly managed environment and especially inappropriate mindsets can result in widespread dysfunctional behaviour.

     

     

    Photo credit: titanium22

     

     

    • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
    • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
    • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
    • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

      .

    Thursday, 14 May 2009

    Recognition and the Employee Value Proposition (EVP)

     

    I’ve written about employee value propositions (EVPs) a couple of times before, and I mentioned it again, using the same model, in connection with employee recognition during today’s webinar on compensation and benefits during the recession, hosted by Globoforce (recording here):

     

     

    The interesting thing for me is how and where recognition fits into this model.  The obvious place for it is as part of ‘great rewards’, ie within the compensation and benefits areas.  But then, as Derek Irvine stressed, it’s much more than this, and it focuses on a different kind of benefit (psychic currency) altogether.

    To me, it’s not part of any of the areas of the model at all.  My rationale for proposing this is that whereas people may ask and expect certain areas of the EVP model to be offered and provided to them when they join and stay with an organisation, and employers also think of these areas when they’re planning what areas to offer and provide to employees, recognition typically isn’t something that’s included within either thought process.  (I’m referring to the simple, cheap but high impact forms of recognition like saying thank you, rather than the 2 month best salesperson trip to Hawaii – which I think would fall into the compensation & benefits areas.  What you referred to as meeting validation needs vs instrumental recognition, Chris.)

    Ie people don’t join or stay with an organisation because ‘they tell me how well I’m doing a lot’.

    They might say one reason is that ‘they tell me how I’m doing’ (calibration vs recognition), but even here, I think the benefit is a means to an end, rather than the end itself.  You wouldn’t say with an organisation just because they say ‘well done’ all the time.

    The reason people want recognition is that it cements the two sides of the deal around the EVP.  Ie, when they receive recognition, people understand that their contribution is being noticed and valued (the employee to employer side of the deal) and hence this raises expectations that the employer will deliver on its side of the deal too, ie the employee will receive all of the other benefits described within the relevant EVP.

    This is why recognition is so important. It’s not a single element of the EVP model, but reinforces each of these different elements by strengthening the deal.

    I’m not sure that I’ve expressed this point that clearly, but I’m fairly certain that the point is right.  What do you think?

     

     

    • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
    • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
    • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
    • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

      .

    Wednesday, 13 May 2009

    HR Carnival: 13 May 2009

     

        Susanna Cesar-Morton is hosting a random carnival of HR at Recruitment 2.0.

    Keeping the 2.0 theme, this carnival includes my own post on HR 2.0 strategy – just in case you’ve not seen this one before.  However, my favourite posts are:

     

    Go take a look!

     

    Technorati Tags: ,

    Photo credit: Oxxo

     

    • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
    • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
    • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
    • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

      .

    Monday, 11 May 2009

    Talking HR 017: HR 2.0 - with book review: Collaboration (show notes)

     

        One of the titles Krishna and I considered using for “Talking HR” when we were setting it up last Summer was “HR 2.0” and in this episode, we talk about what we and other people mean by this term.

    It’s clearly something to do with web 2.0 (which we discussed in episode 016).  But there’s also a potential link with management 2.0 which is explained in Gary Hamel’s recent book.  Referring back to his recent Bucharest presentation, Jon argues that the link is the social nature of the 2.0 tag (social media / more social management) and in fact, the differentiation between HR and HR 2.0 is the latter’s focus on producing social capital.

    We also hear from James Tastard, VP of Corporate HR at Aker Solutions in Houston, Texas, about his views on HR / management / web 2.0.  Thanks enormously for your contribution James!

     

    Krishna also talks about the new hiring network, Worky.  And Jon discusses recent CIPD findings on job satisfaction.

     

    And we review a new book, ‘Collaboration’.

     

    Resources:

     

    Listen to the podcast: you can download the podcast to your hard drive or play it streaming from the web.

     

    Talking HR is hosted by Krishna De and Jon Ingham and you can contact us with your thoughts and feedback about the show at talkinghrpodcast(at)gmail.com.

    Follow Krishna on Twitter @krishnade and connect with her on LinkedIn

    Follow Jon on Twitter @joningham and connect with him on LinkedIn

     

     

    • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
    • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
    • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
    • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

      .

    Friday, 8 May 2009

    Talking HR 016: Web 2.0 and HR - with book review: Reward Systems (show notes)

     

       In this show, we bring together previous discussions about individual social technologies to talk about web 2.0 as a whole.  Jon reviews Graeme Martin’s new report and session at the CIPD’s HRD conference, and previews his own presentation at a HR 2.0 conference in Romania.  And Krishna warns that social media may not always be appropriate.

    Given this show’s book review: Steve Kerr’s Reward Systems, we also consider the application of web 2.0 to reward (not the most obvious area of application).

    Jon also talks about the effect’s of the UK’s budget, and the new Equalities Bill, questioning whether its easier to introduce change when time is good, or more difficult.

    Krishna talks about swine flu and the need for HR to prepare for shocks like this.  She also recommends a new book: The Big Manifesto.

    And we also review another book: Reward Systems.

     

    Resources:

     

    Listen to the podcast: you can download the podcast to your hard drive or play it streaming from the web.


    Talking HR
    is hosted by Krishna De and Jon Ingham and you can contact us with your thoughts and feedback about the show at talkinghrpodcast(at)gmail.com.

    Follow Krishna on Twitter @krishnade and connect with her on LinkedIn

    Follow me on Twitter @joningham and connect with me on LinkedIn

     

     

    • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
    • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
    • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
    • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

      .

    Thursday, 7 May 2009

    HCM in the recession

     

        I’ve been thinking about anonymous’ comments, particularly in connection with my presentation next week on Globoforce’s webinar looking at using HCM, compensation & benefits, and employee recognition to drive positive change in the recession.  (Not that I think my thoughts can have as much impact as anonymous’ comments seem to infer!)

    Actually, there’s not that much I can think of to add to some previous posts, so I thought that instead of redoing this from scratch, I’d simply refer to and link together some previous posts.

    However, I will say that at the moment, I’m feeling a lot more cheerful than I have been – there’s a growing amount of good news about – even Robert Peston is seeing signs of green shoots of recovery!  But then everyone also seems to think that the next decade is going to be much harder than the last, so I would suggest the posts I link to below are likely to apply for some time to come.

    The first thing to note is that it’s very difficult to predict exactly what is going to happen from this point on.  So the use of scenarios is probably an appropriate approach.  I think, to a large extent, which of these scenarios emerge will depend upon upon how much peoples’ attitudes, the role of business, or even of capitalism itself, changes within what has been called the global reset.

    But no matter what happens, there seems to be two key roles for HR / HCM.   The first role is about managing through the downturn, responding to the impact of the recession.  This includes making layoffs and managing survivors, but also avoiding redundancies by, for example, introducing salary reductions.

    The second role then is about navigating a way out of the recession - particularly as a lot of innovation tends to occur in difficult times.  Linked to this is taking advantage of the slack in the system (I know it may not feel as if there is) to increase the capability and the impact of HR.

    Anonymous, I hope that helps!

     

    Technorati Tags: ,,

     

    • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
    • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
    • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
    • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

      .

    Wednesday, 6 May 2009

    Strategic Dynamics in the recession

     

        I haven’t felt much impact from the recession till now.  Well, I’ve had a few workshops cancelled, quite a bit of work delayed, and some exceptionally long waits to be be paid.  And I suppose the nature of my work has changed in that the recession is now a major backdrop to just about everything I do.  So I suppose things have changed quite a bit.  But, I’ve not noticed any noticeable declines in the amount of work I’m getting.  That is until now.  May is not looking good.  I’m hoping it’s only a blip, and actually I’ve already got a couple of weeks work booked for June, which is a lot for me (I don’t need or plan to be that heavily utilised to provide a decent level of revenue).  So my discomfort is more about a short-term lack of client contact than it is about anything else.

    Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that if you want some support over the next 2 weeks, I can do you a good deal.  You read my blog, you know the sort of stuff I care about, and you appreciate the impact these sorts of interventions can make.  So how about it?

    You still want some ideas?  How about:

     

    For any of these areas, one day on site plus some further work off-line, including a feedback report, is going to give you a good idea of where you need to go.  And for the next two weeks only, I won’t charge for either the work I do off-line or my travel time.  Even if you’re in Australia (although I may take advantage of the opportunity to stay out there for a few more days).

    So you just pay for the one day, you get lots of value, all documented in a short report.  Of course, my day rates aren’t cheap, but I think you’ll find them well worthwhile.

     

    Alternatively, I just give you a hand with whatever’s on your plate.

    Jon Ingham

    Strategic Dynamics Consultancy Services

    jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

    +44 1344 420 512

    Tuesday, 5 May 2009

    HR 2.0 consulting

     

       In my last post, I described a process for developing an HR 2.0 / social capital strategy.

    I thought, if you don’t mind too much, that I’d give you an outline of the sort of consulting I do within this area as well.

    This includes:

    • Facilitation through the whole strategy development process
    • Generation of potential ideas for your organisational capability
    • Development of 2.0 strategy maps and scorecards
    • Social network analysis
    • Updating HR and management processes
    • Planning and project managing changes to the line manager role (management 2.0)
    • Advising on appropriate social media tools (web 2.0 / social networking)
    • Training on the use of web 2.0 / individual tools
    • Advising and supporting on change management requirements.

     

    I travel anywhere in the world (or use social media so I don’t have to), and you’d love working with me even more than you like reading this blog.

    I’m still learning about this area myself of course, but I think I know as much as I need to in order to help.  And I do seriously believe that work in the HR 2.0 area can result in real, solid improvements in business results.  Particularly in a recession when you’re looking to achieve the same or more (ie planning for the upturn while you’re still managing the down) with less people.  So you need each person to be as effective as possible.  But you need to manage the relationships and conversations (ie social capital!) between your people as well.

     

     

    • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
    • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
    • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
    • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

      .

    Monday, 4 May 2009

    HR 2.0 strategy

     

    Sunghwa Moon asked in his recent comment on this blog about what would be a ‘consulting methodology’ for HR 2.0.  This is what I use, although I’d describe it as a process rather than a methodology, as I’d only ever use it as a guide and would be unlikely to ever follow this exact flow.  And I’d see it as something that an organisation can use itself, rather than needing a consultant to support (albeit I believe that the right consultant would be extremely useful in advising and supporting on this).

     

     

    The process starts with identifying the required organisational capability, ie what sort of social, as well as human and organisational capital, is the business (or public sector organisation) trying to create?  Based upon this required state, and a gap analysis of the current state, a strategy can be developed.  This also needs to be aligned with (informed by, but also informing ie both adding and creating value) the business strategy.  And because web 2.0 is likely to play a significant role in supporting the HR 2.0 strategy, I include the IT strategy here too.

    Because the HR 2.0 strategy is all about people, and people are different, I include a step here to think about the different talent groups or other segmentations that exist and need to be treated differently.

    At this point, a strategy map and scorecard can be developed to support the strategy, outlining the strategy’s objectives and measures, and how these relate across activity, outcome (ie social capital) and business results.  Various measurement tools, for example social network analysis, may be required to support this stage as well.

    Onto implementation.  Here, I identify six main areas of focus:

    • People.  I believe any HR strategy needs to touch on the key people in an organisation, not just on the processes that support them.  And I also advise that HR should have a hands-on role, not just a back-office one.  I think these two points are particularly important under a HR 2.0 approach, and therefore suggest that the strategy identify the key people (perhaps those who are key to social connecting in the organisation, eg brokers, mavens etc) and what actions are going to be taken to provide direct support to these individuals?
    • Organisation.  What design changes in terms of structure, process etc would support the development of social capital in this organisation.  Also, particularly importantly, what OD interventions can be made to directly impact on the way people are connecting with and building relationships with each other?
    • HR and management processes.  What changes need to be made to support a more open, collaborative approach?
    • Web 2.0 and other technology.  How should these processes be best enabled?  What sort of tools would fit best?
    • HR function capability and transformation.  What internal changes within the HR (and learning, communication etc) function need to be made to ensure HR is able to effectively implement and support the new strategy?
    • Role of the manager.  This is often the biggest piece of this sort of project.  How can management itself be redesigned to operate in a completely new and empowering way?

     

    Note that web 2.0 plays only a very small part of this process.  I absolutely agree that this can be a huge enabler to the sort of changes that HR 2.0 will bring, but I believe HR 2.0 is much bigger than this as well.

    Comments?

     

    Previous posts on HR 2.0:

     

     

    • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
    • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
    • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
    • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

      .

    Friday, 1 May 2009

    What is HR really for?

     

         I know some people (Kris Dunn, for example) suggest that we should ignore the endless rants against the HR profession.  I tend to disagree.  One, these allow us the opportunity to restate our side of the case.  And two, I worry that if we’re not up to speed on these attacks, it further reduces our credibility: (CEO: “You’ve never come across ‘Why we hate HR’???? You must be kidding, right?” [thinks: these HR people don’t even know what’s going on in their own world, never mind mine!]).

    So here’s a heads-up on a new shot across the bows from Stefan Stern in Management Today.  Stern argues that HR is still in danger of becoming a bureaucratic pariah and suggests a way forward for HR professionals - ‘if we are bold enough’.

    Stern doesn’t make his view about the path towards HR’s ‘glorious future’ as clear as it might be, but it seems to be a combination of two things:

    • ‘HR professionals need to be real business people, with a grasp of profit-and-loss realities’
    • ‘Once some of that precious credibility has been (re-)established, there is an open corporate door for HR professionals to push at. And the prize is large.’

     

    Regular readers may remember I’ve recently proposed very much the same thing myself.  So while I don’t like the tone of the article, I agree with the main recommendations.

     

    The report refers to several pieces of research which support the above conclusions, and which HR practitioners should be familiar with as well:

    • Boston Consulting Group’s research for the European Association for People Management: Creating People Advantage in Times of Crisis (a bit too prescribed for my tastes, and too focused on activities verses outcomes eg focusing on strategic workforce planning vs having insight into how the workforce is likely to change and therefore what can be done to support this)
    • Tomorrow Company’s report: Tomorrow’s Global Talent – How will leading companies create value through people? (I like this one more)
    • The Corporate Research Forum’s report: Configuring HR for Tomorrow’s Challenges (I haven’t seen this one, but I like the conclusions eg to focus on organisational effectiveness and to create a high performance work environment)
    • Communications Management’s research on the use of social networking (again, I haven’t seen this, but I’m surprised with the finding that 80% of HR managers are using social networking to some extent.  And I don’t believe more use of web 2.0 is the answer to HR’s problems, although it can form an important part of HR 2.0),

     

     

    My favourite lines from the article are those at the end of the report:

    “Undoubtedly, the HR profession has brought upon itself a lot of the ridicule that it has had to endure - through pedantry, an obsession with process, an inability to see the bigger picture, and a lack of courage to stick up for what is right.

    But it doesn't have to be that way. With the financial and business worlds in turmoil, and with so many of our other preconceptions being shattered, why can't HR arise gleaming and reborn from the wreckage? Why shouldn't the 'people people' step forward to assert their right to speak up? Have the past 10 years of Enron, Tyco, WorldCom and the splendours of the now largely defunct investment banking industry turned out to be a glorious advertisement for the old way of doing things, for 'business as usual'?

    Something had better change, and perhaps now is the right time for HR to take a lead.”

     

    If you want a leg up in changing your HR function, and its impact on your business, get in touch!  Or is Stern right about the lack of courage in HR?

     

    jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

    +44 1344 420 512

     

    Strategic HCM: top 50 HR blog

     

    The-Top-50-HR-Blogs-To-Watch-In-2009

     

    I’m delighted that Strategic HCM (or ‘HR to HR 2.0 and HCM’) has been selected as a top 50 HR blog by Evan Carmichael* (at #19).

    It’s a great list of blogs, some of which I wasn’t previously aware of – so take a look.

     

    Technorati Tags: ,

    * Evan’s site, EvanCarmichael.com, is the Internet’s #1 resource for small business motivation and strategy. The site has over 385,000 visitors each month, 3,750 contributing authors, and 60,000 pages of content.

     

    • Consulting - Research - Speaking  - Training -  Writing
    • Strategy  -  Talent  -  Engagement  -  Change and OD
    • Contact  me to  create more  value for  your business
    • jon  [dot] ingham [at] strategic [dash] hcm [dot] com

      .