The Ides of April
Once again I have had an opportunity to do some reading and a lot of thinking. A while back I had the opportunity to participate in a survey/study on what makes Human Resources an effective business partner. I just got the results and they weren't terribly surprising to me. The authors wisely pointed out that many of the suggestions regarding HR as a function related to other "staff" functions as well. The big three certainly do:
- Your function needs to exist in the context of the larger organization. Great HR systems, accounting systems, etc do not exist in a vacuum. They need to be integrated into the business. For those of you in an agency or not for profit the business is achieving the organizational mission. The fact that the objective is not a return to shareholders doesn't give us an excuse not to perform effectively and efficiently.
- You need to be value added. It is easy to hide behind compliance or other rules and regulations to explain to our customers why they can't do what they believe they need and want to do. If it was always easy they wouldn't need us. I like to think that when I was involved as an internal HR practitioner I saw myself as a consultant. My job was to provide technical expertise and facilitation to my "clients". When I say facilitation that's what I mean as well. Human resources is a function not a department. We should be sure that management and leadership of our organization both possesses and demonstrates core competency in things like setting expectations, giving feedback, and even administering compensation. Those are tools we should be providing to them, not doing for them.
- Own your space. By this I mean that you need to see yourself as an organizational peer and make sure you have the credibility to pull it off. That means that as well as competency in your discipline you need to be competent about your business. You don't get a seat at the table by either waiting to be invited or by not being able to contribute as a thought partner when you are invited to play.
I also had an opportunity to read a blog post by Stanley Bing on BNET. Like Jeffrey Pfeffer, Bing takes the "mba's" to task. He points out that much of our graduate business education is based on theoretical statistical models and systems; many of which he believes and I agree got us where we are today. We love systems and technology in the U.S. and they are valuable tools if they are used to empower people. Too often they are not, they are vehicles to reduce headcount or costs.
It was interesting, I was having a discussion with my son the other day about our current economic situation with a focus on Detroit. He informed me that a big part of the issue was the lack of personal accountability for the work performed by individuals and protected by the unions. I remember being his age and believing that as well; until I had an opportunity to work in a collective bargaining environment that fully embraced the philosophy of capitalism and Frederick W. Taylor. For those of you that don't remember, Taylor was the "father" of scientific management, the concept that managers manage and workers do what they are told. Add to that the Calvinist concept of pre-destination and you have a kind of industrial elitism that still exists in many industries and organizations.
I am not an apologist for the UAW, but our history of not so benevolent autocracy contribute significantly to the history of labor relations in America.
I think it is telling that we still call the skills surrounding understanding behavior and people "soft" skills while managing machines, systems, and numbers are "hard" skills.
You have heard me and others talk about the return on investment from creating truly engaged organizations. It would seem many of the skills required to do this are "soft" skills.
For those of you that are in the HR profession or other related areas that would be interested in the results of my colleagues study, drop me an email and I would be glad to forward you the summary.
As always your comments and thoughts appreciated.
Labels: clarity, engagement, HR, labor, Leadership, management, MBA, soft skills, unions
