I agree, "blow up" HR - then what?
The front cover of September's Harvard Business Review suggests that HR should be blown up; further investigations finds that to "solve" the HR problem the function needs to become more data-driven. It sounds so easy, "blow up" the function and rebuild it from the ground up. But, as we know, such transformation really isn't that simple. For starters, you need the "right" data - rubbish in-rubbish out!
I've advised HR teams in numerous organisations over the last 10 years (EU, Middle east and US) and the challenge around rebooting HR is so much more than data. The heart of the problem lies in a function that is fundamentally out of sync with its environment.
HR, as a profession, seems to find it difficult to shake the shackles of its past, especially in the UK; here I find the function to be far too entrenched in its Personnel Management roots and missing the need to take Strategic HRM principles into action.
HR practitioners can be far too traditionalist and, compounding the problem, core HR training organisations (e.g. CIPD) are not doing enough to prepare HR practitioners for the complex world they operate in. To be clear, I am talking about an understanding of organisational complexity (relating to VUCA environments) and the way in which HR professionals are being prepared by the mainstream professional development organisations to act as strategic/functional partners in such environments. In my opinion, having lectured on p/g CIPD courses at the University of Edinburgh and Swansea Business School, not enough is being done in this regard and the "governing" body for HR in the UK has a duty of care to step in and do more for its members in this area.
I'll try and explain using the context of data-driven HR. The crux of the problem is that too much of the current HR data is "traditional" and comes from the Resource Based (asset-led) View of the firm - rubbish in - rubbish out. Take a look at workforce planning for an example of what I mean here, where HR focuses far too much on "what" people do, missing "how" they do it. Does this fit with a talent-driven Knowledge Economy? On a practical level, have you ever wondered why so many organisations allow key personnel to leave during a downsizing exercise, only to hire them back as consultants six-months later? Better still, explore the costs associated with such decisions.
Go a step further, look at any downsizing exercise, can you name a HR team that risk assessed knowledge/competency (how people do things) loss over qualifications/position/length of service (what people do)? Today's organisations need to become more resilient, which starts with the capability of the individual - do HR even look at this?
I have worked with many organisations who craft wonderful strategy statements that speak of agility, resilience or knowledge flows/sharing, and yet in each case HR had not reviewed basic job descriptions for, on average, seven years - how can the recruitment and selection process then be aligned to strategy if the data/information used by HR to inform the process is flawed?
So, sure, go ahead, "blow up" HR, but make sure you rebuild the function in the a way that syncs with the wider organisational environment. This means revisiting the fundamental principles that govern the function and not just redeploying strategy. My recommendation before dropping this HR bomb, don't ask, how do we build a great HR function? Ask instead, what does a great HR function look like in this environment? Better questions will help to build better solutions. And CIPD, pull your finger out!
