In over 3 decades of working with large corporates I have observed too many HR Departments/Functions, Partners .....whatever – stumbling around trying to be relevant and failing dismally, especially in the eyes of the core business managers.
This is often accompanied by despair and frustration:
The frustration is papered over by busyness, by new jargon, new programmes, new software – new “initiatives” that are really global fads – neither new nor showing any initiative.
Before you get all huffy and defensive. I’ve been there as an HR Manager and as a consultant I’ve spent many hours with people hearing of these experiences, again and again - I feel your pain.
I’ve spent more hours
with line managers
and heard their struggles
from “the other side”
So how does it look – a story all too common:
HR is seen as a necessary evil, there to help sort out labour problems: hire, pay, leave, discipline, fire.
Sometimes HR employees try hard to be more than the recipients of the management-created problems that are outsourced to them.
They double down on ideas and programmes and new systems that are far removed from the operational context and challenges of the business managers, in terms of relevance and language – and that appear to just create extra work.
They keep busy, the department grows to cope with all this work – and also because HR is a useful place for the business to carry people. That is very telling – the view that people cannot do too much damage from there.
Even if capable HR people do a good job of articulating key leadership, systems & culture issues, and solutions – the urgent (production and other pressures) beats the important every time – itself an indication of line management capability.
If HR gains some power they step into the management space where they should not tread. They have no accountability there and their input interferes with ability of line managers to really be accountable themselves.
This disease is not peculiar to HR, but they are perhaps more susceptible than others. I have seen a range of functions in large corporates grow to a state of ridiculous size and power… and of course cost and duplication, whilst adding significantly to noise and conflict in the business.
These functions are often stocked with people with little understanding of the core business and their KPIs are often unrelated to operational requirements.
There are many versions of this story. I’m sure y’all can share some.
So what?
These issues revolve around the work – always a good place to start. What is the purpose of the different types of work in organisations and where does it belong?
Firstly: business leaders need to understand that the way that people behave and work, and everything that influences this, is a key business challenge, having potential for major upsides or downsides.
As such it should not be shifted to one side.
Secondly: we need clarity about what the work is and whose work it is. I meet so many people, at different levels, who are confused about what their work is - largely this is driven by mixed messages coming at them everyday from a range of sources.
Managing the costs, the efficiencies, the production quantity and quality and safety are all part of the work of "Line Managers" - and so is the management of the people who do that work.
This is why anyone who has people reporting to them should have good leadership skills.
Each of those areas requires technical expertise and where appropriate specialised roles or whole functions to provide support, advice, services and good systems.
HR is where you (should) find the technical expertise to advise managers on their leadership work and to provide helpful systems where necessary. This is sometimes called OE.
In other parts of HR you find technical experts at providing essential services (payroll etc).
Neither of these sets of experts are there to do the work of leadership, but they really need to connect the relevance of their work to supporting that and supporting the business in general. This includes the work of looking after employee welfare.
The concept is well understood in production departments. You have work done and managed by the Production Managers, you have technical experts who advise on improvements and better systems for more efficient, better quality production, and you have technical experts who service equipment so it is available.
Thirdly: create systems that encourage and allow the right work to be done and facilitate productive workflow between people and teams. These include:
- systems of authority and accountability,
-measuring performance,
- selection,
-integrated planning for social, technical and commercial processes
If this last one, integration, is done well, the rest usually follow. If executives and managers clearly understand this and are required to integrate the technical and commercial work with the “social” work that is going to make it more likely that people will sustainably do that work well – they will make sure HR has its rightful place, with good people and systems support.
In some ways this is simple, but clearly businesses are still not finding it easy to get right.
At HBA we bring years of experience with exactly these issues to guide you. There are key principles, but the solution will be uniquely yours and it will be yours to sustain – the work never stops.
We can help the executive leadership develop a clear and shared view of the core work of leadership (sometimes called “people” work) in driving sustained business success.
We can help you establish the roles, structure, systems and culture where your HR people are effective and their work is truly integrated into the management of the business.
If you'd like to find out more about how we can help your business, please contact us.
info@hbaleadership.com
Comments