How many times have you not heard that human resources are the most precious resources the company has, that people are the most important? Have you ever had the feeling that they are just empty words? If so, it means the HR department would need a reform.
What is the credibility of HR?
A study by Roffey Park institutes interviewed by more than 1,000 managers and over 200 HR managers showed that only 24% of line managers believe the HR department in their company brings value to their organization,
Also, only 11% think their HR is customer-oriented.
Even HR managers have admitted 44% of their department does not bring value.
Perhaps we should better define what value added is because 75% of respondents have agreed that HR has an important influence on their company.
However, 81% of managers described HR as having a poor relationship with the rest of the organization and 57% believe that HR has a reactive behavior compared to only 24% who think HR is proactive.
Maybe relevant to general opinion is what Bob Lipp, Citigroup Cost Cutter said - "We want more people to sell instead of watching people sell" - "We would like more people to sell than to look at others how they sell"
How do general managers view HR activity?
I found another study, conducted by Deloitte with the Economist Intelligence Unit, which shows that the ability to gain competitive advantage through people is becoming more and more important in the executive agenda, with 60% of the interviewed general managers identifying people as vital for business performance and 90% saying that human resources will become even more important over the next 5 years.
However, only 5% of executives described the HR function of the company they manage as effective in addressing business needs, and only 3.4% said their organization is effective in managing people and HR.
Worryingly, managers ask whether their HR has the necessary skills to do their job - to implement a strategic vision in leadership, talent management, motivation, and organizational culture.
The study has shown that there is a discrepancy between what executive managers want and what HR is actually delivering.
Everyone agrees that greater importance should be given to HR, but managers do not trust the HR department.
Chris Roebuck, leader in leadership and organizational performance, nominated in 2011 by HR Magazine as one of the most influential HR theorists, came to the same conclusions:
"It's all about communication and credibility. HR directors need to think about what subject the CEO would like to deliver on, for example talent. They need to ask: "What can I say to the CEO that delivers something simple, fast and that's a win to boost my credibility?" - It's all about communication and credibility. HR directors should think about what subjects executives would like to be offered (eg talent management). He should ask himself: what could I tell the boss to make it simple and quick to implement and help me increase my credibility?
Another future for HR
If HR wants a future then he will have to create it. It must transform organizational rhetoric into action, transform the strategy into performance, transform paper writing into a living culture, transform human capital into people, encouraging employees to become more involved and changing rules so that hierarchies to turn into teams.
HR must have the courage to transform.
"HR is Dead, Long live HR," says David Ulrich, a professor of business administration at the University of Michigan, paraphrasing the famous phrase "King is dead, live the king."
This is a way of saying that the old HR department specialized in papermaking should not exist anymore. Mr. Ulrich shows that HR departments should be smaller, old HR roles should disappear, and new ones should appear in their place:
- CFO for HR - this person should be able to apply measurements that demonstrate the economic value of HR and analyze the cost effectiveness of different HR practices. For example - how much does a particular employee contribute to the company's profits, how much training for business growth helps? Which functions do not add value and should be removed?
- Internal Consultant. This person should help spread HR skills across the organization by giving line managers the power to recruit, interview, engage and retain the talent they need, while helping managers understand different legal issues in regarding HR (eg anti-discrimination laws, employees' rights etc.)
- Talent Manager. This person should be responsible for finding, developing and retaining the best employees to suit the needs of the organization. The talent manager should also make career, learning and development plans for potential employees.
- Purchasing Manager. This person should analyze which HR functions should be implemented in-house and which could be outsourced. For outsourced functions, they should find the most profitable services in terms of cost and quality, be aware of trends in the field, and build sustainable relationships with suppliers.
- Self-service manager. This person's responsibility should be to find automated tasks and build a portal / intranet with employees from the IT department or with external suppliers where employees can access these automated HR services (for example, a vacation plan , benefit plan, delegations, s.o.)
