HRD summit 2011 people management   why organisations... dist vers
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

HRD summit 2011 people management why organisations... dist vers

  • 419 views
Uploaded on

N J Higgins presentation at HR Directors Summit 2011 on People Management

N J Higgins presentation at HR Directors Summit 2011 on People Management

More in: Business , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
419
On Slideshare
419
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
14
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. People Management: Why organisations(and HR) keep making the same mistakes andhow to put them right… [Expanded edition for distribution] People Science® 24th January 2011Nicholas J HigginsCEO, VaLUENTiS & Dean, Int’l School of Human Capital ManagementDrHCMI MSc Fin (LBS) MBA (OBS) MCMIHR Directors Summit 2011ICC Birmingham
  • 2. People S i P l Science® ® Analyse, Advise, Implement, Educate www.valuentis.com Professional Services‘Winners of World Finance100 award’ (www.WorldFinance100.com ) www.ISHCM.com ADDED INSERT
  • 3. Smart. Smarter. Smartest...Professional Services www.valuentis.com www valuentis com‘The leading humancapital management specialists’ ‘PEOPLE SCIENCE®’ Organisation Intelligence to improve organisation performance • Human Capital Management Evaluation • Employee Engagement • Talent Management • Workforce Productivity & Performance • Predictive Analytics • HC Forensics & Risk • HR Function ROI Analysis • Organisation Measurement • Management Education • Organisation Strategy SOLUTIONS ADDED INSERT
  • 4. ‘ISHCM’ Eight faculties: Enterprise Governance and Leadership Evidence‐based Management (EbM)  g ( ) Human Capital Management Human Capital Measurement Employee Engagement HR Leadership HR L d hi HR Operational Excellence Employment law... ...1 Masters HCMI practitioner qualification p q 4 executive programmes 6 practitioner programmes 80 short course modules Unlimited customised combinations... Unlimited customised combinations One outstanding value  proposition ADDED INSERT
  • 5. Fact 1“Organisations don t exist without people. Organisations don’t people.”
  • 6. Fact 2“Everything that happens within anorganisation is down to the people it employs past, present and future.”
  • 7. Fact 3“People are simultaneously ASSETS and“ l i l l dRESOURCES from an organisational gperformance perspective and potentialLIABILITIES from a risk perspective.” perspective.“This is t the heart of h“Thi i at th h t f human capital it lmanagement.”
  • 8. Fact 4“Organisations spend considerable sumseach year carrying out financial audits; but y y g ;spend very little in comparison on peoplemanagement effectiveness and/or HCMaudits/evaluations.”
  • 9. Overall factThus, the oft-misguided question of‘How valuable are our people to the p porganisation?’ is the wrong question.The question should be ‘How valuableare our people management practices?’and ‘How do we know?’ How know?
  • 10. About today today… “So today I’m going to talk about some common people management problems l t blencountered over the years and what to do about them” [Note that this is a very short shortlist for the workshop] ADDED INSERT
  • 11. What organisations (HR) keep getting wrong (this is a short ‘shortlist’)…1. Employee engagement: its concept and application p y g g p pp2. The use of employee surveys3.3 Evaluation/measurement of people management4. Performance management5. The ‘people competency’ of line management5 Th ‘ l t ’ f li t6. The role of HR (‘customer-agency dissonance’)
  • 12. What organisations (HR) keep getting wrong (shortlist)…1. Employee engagement: its concept and application p y g g p pp2. The use of employee surveys3.3 Evaluation/measurement of people management4. Performance management5. The ‘people competency’ of line management5 Th ‘ l t ’ f li t6. The role of HR (‘customer-agency dissonance’)
  • 13. 1. Employee engagement: its concept and application...common problems ... do differently ff• Lack of working definition g • Select or build• Inadequate definition • Understand the concept• Not measured adequately • Adopt design or construct• Management lack • Requires Communication, understanding of concept Education and or its impact Reinforcement (CER)• Little use of models to • Map operational ‘outcome support application systems’ (mensuration)• N t embedded as core Not b dd d • C Can only exist if other l i t th management practice problems overcome
  • 14. EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT:“Employee engagement is an ‘outcome-based’ concept. It isthe term used to describe the degree to which employeescan be ascribed as ‘aligned’ and ‘committed’ to anorganisation such that they are at their most productive.”VaLUENTiS International School of HCM
  • 15. Or another way to look at it it… Fully congruent Knows what to do/achieve but Fully Could do more unlikely to productive achieve it More likely to Less thanIndividual sIndividual’s have optimally degree of performance/ Job gets done productive - capability Could do more Alignment issues ‘well’ Likely to have More likely to performance, High have objective attitudinal probability of and/or and/or wasted effort/ ‘potential’ behavioural frustration Incongruent issues issues Continuance Degree of Affective Commitment © VaLUENTiS Ltd 2002-11
  • 16. Staff engagement: The challenge for organisations Fully congruent Knows what to do/achieve Could do Fully but unlikely to more productive achieve it “Only one box in nine reflects the constant ‘high More likely to Less than bar’ challenge forIndividual’s have Job gets optimally p y performance/ productive - organisations in i ti i degree of done capability Could do more optimising Alignment issues ‘well’ engagement across the Likely to have performance, More likely to High probability workforce on a attitudinal have objective of wasted daily basis” y and/or and/or ‘potential’ effort/ behavioural issues frustration Incongruent issues Continuance Degree of Affective Commitment © VaLUENTiS Ltd 2002-11
  • 17. When I talk about models and frameworks -here’s one as an examplehere s example… VaLUENTiS 5D Employee Engagement Framework Line-of-Sight Work Environment Organisation operating ti culture Reward (equity) ( q y) Development p © VaLUENTiS Ltd 2002-11
  • 18. Engagement is and always has been aMULTI DIMENSIONAL constructMULTI-DIMENSIONAL construct…. VaLUENTiS 5D Employee Engagement Framework [ p [expanded] ] Line-of-Sight Work Environment Objectives awareness Cultural elements Behaviour alignment Team dynamics Role ‘fit’ Organisation Communication Performance management Resources Feedback operating culture Local management Organisation design Capability Physical environment Performance/talent management ‘Corporate’ Leadership Remuneration equity Communication Career progression Bonus/incentives Decision rights g p Competencies Benefits Work values Succession planning Trust Role equity Job/ Role architecture Recognition Training/ Learning Promotional aspects Coaching/ Mentoring Reward (equity) Development © VaLUENTiS Ltd 2002-11
  • 19. A look back at The original Sears g model…“Arguably the simple model that set the engagement movement alight. Its now Arguably nearly 20 years old. Also note the (now) flawed use of employee satisfaction ” ( ) p y Employee Revenue Retention GrowthInternal Employee External Customer Customerservice Satisfaction Service Satisfaction Loyalty quality Value Employee Profitability Productivity Putting the Service-Profit chain to work Heskett, Jones, Loveman, Sasser Jr & Schlesinger , , , g Harvard Business Review Mar-Apr 1994
  • 20. Employee engagement and Organisation Performance today:We veWe’ve now moved on from the Sears model… model Example ‘Macro’ model NHS version 1.11Leadership Leadership Trust Shareholder Employer Employer && performance value brand brandggovernancegovernance Human Human Work values Safety Work values Portfolio mix Capital Capital External Patient Line-of-sight Clinical External Customer Quality of RevenuePractices Practices Line-of-sight X-selling Satisfaction treatment t eat e t Satisfaction services Growth Development Staff St ff Employee Individual/ Patient focus Development Individual/ Service Value Engagement Engagement team Value Reward Reward team Prompt service Portfolio mix Productivity Productivity Proposition Patient Work environment Work environment Environment Proposition Customer UseProfitability of Resources X-selling experience Loyalty Community Service Staff Employee Retention Retention Compliance Compliance ‘Local’ ‘Local’ Managementt Management M Cost control Cost control © VaLUENTiS VBM Analytics methodology 2008-11
  • 21. What organisations (HR) keep getting wrong (shortlist)…1. Employee engagement: its concept and application p y g g p pp2. The use of employee surveys3.3 Evaluation/measurement of people management4. Performance management5. The ‘people competency’ of line management5 Th ‘ l t ’ f li t6. The role of HR (‘customer-agency dissonance’)
  • 22. 2. 2 The use of employee surveys...common problems ... do differently• Viewed as a reactive • Adopt more pro-active, single event integrated application• Response rate over-focus • Focus on ‘end’ perspective• Inadequate and/or • Understand your HCM unbalanced questioning ‘model’ and ‘QS’ design• Overly PR based • It’s about your staff It s• Management • Too many B-players complacency requiring ‘baseball bat’(!) baseball bat (!)• Failure in follow-up • Adopt clear inclusive actioning/comms process through ‘line’ [Added note: QS = Question-statement – technical term for questionnaire response item]
  • 23. Remember (?) The Employee survey expertise model HIGH uman capital management MYOPIC 20/20 foresight tise m expert c BLIND UNFOCUSEDHu LOW HIGH Survey design & measurement expertise © ISHCM 2006
  • 24. HIGH 20/20 MYOPIC foresight tise uman capital management expert Result: organisation has Result: sufficient in- misleading oor depth, robust erroneous knowledge to act interpretation upon p BLIND UNFOCUSED Limited insight Result: end up due to c with ‘garbage limitations of in-garbage out’ HCM syndrome knowledgeHu LOW HIGH Survey design & measurement expertise © ISHCM 2006
  • 25. HIGH MYOPIC 20/20 foresight tise uman capital management expert 16% 8% 51% 25% Hu c BLIND UNFOCUSED LOW Survey design & measurement expertise HIGHSample: 147 employee surveys. All organisations with over 750 employees. ISHCM research team. Study carried out 2006-7
  • 26. Employee surveys and engagement: Ten Best practices from the field...(I)View or apply employee surveys:1. As part of a wider enterprise driven focus on people management2. With the appropriate importance (not as a tick-box exercise)3. As organisational feedback/diagnostics as opposed to just garnering opinion, using a robust engagement framework in the process4. As an embedded annual/quarterly process not as one-off interventions5.5 With the importance of science in understanding the data and the various systemic relationships that provide greater understanding and drive more sustainable interventions Source: Employee Engagement: Factors of Successful Implementation Journal Of Applied Human Capital Management, Volume 2 Number 1 2008
  • 27. Employee surveys and engagement: Ten Best practices from the field...(II)View or apply the employee survey process:6. As a ‘means to an end’ and not the other way around7. With emphasis on post-survey practice/intervention8. NOT as a means of just benchmarking externally (but they see the advantages of benchmarking internally)9. In NOT over-focusing on the response ratio recognising that it’s just one element10.As mandatory, i.e. don’t postpone the process just because something negative may have recently happened, i.e. it’s not about internal or external PR Source: Employee Engagement: Factors of Successful Implementation Journal Of Applied Human Capital Management, Volume 2 Number 1 2008
  • 28. What organisations (HR) keep getting wrong (shortlist)…1. Employee engagement: its concept and application p y g g p pp2. The use of employee surveys3.3 Evaluation/measurement of people management4. Performance management5. The ‘people competency’ of line management5 Th ‘ l t ’ f li t6. The role of HR (‘customer-agency dissonance’)
  • 29. One for the road..... road“If you cannot measure it, you cannotimprove it.”Original source attributed to Lord Kelvin 1824-1907, pioneer g pof physics and thermodynamics, first UK scientist appointedto the House of Lords.Since used by many to illustrate the same point in differentways, i.e. substitute ‘improve’ with ‘manage’.
  • 30. 3. Evaluation/measurement of people management...common problems ... do differently• Managers have patchy • Introduce DCLR understanding of HCM g programme g• Lack of in-situ design • Apply HCM elements to operational models p operational situations p• Default to single • Need to use blended dimension benchmarking QUAL QUANT QUAL-QUANT framework• Over-focus on data • Measurement must be collation rather than its outcome focused rather use than input focused• Lack of internal expertise • Get ‘external’ help external [Added note: DCLR = shorthand for Design, Communicate, Learn, Reinforce]
  • 31. 3. Evaluation/measurement of people management“But h t d“B t what do we mean when we talk of h t lk f ‘people management’?”[whilst acknowledging the employee engagement elements shown earlier] ADDED INSERT
  • 32. HUMAN CAPITAL MANAGEMENT:“Human capital management is the term which is used todescribe an organisation’s multi-disciplined and integratedapproach to optimising the capabilities and performance ofits management and employees.”VaLUENTiS International School of HCM
  • 33. Evaluating People management in yourorganisation: Our HCM ‘radar/clock’ (you’ve seen radar/clock (you vethis before, right?) TRAINING & DIVERSITY DEVELOPMENT TALENT EMPLOYEE MANAGEMENT 813 CENTRICITY EMPLOYER REWARD BRAND 674 599 416 657 615 HR RETENTION GOVERNANCE 742 431 684 487 HR RESOURCING 642 OPERATIONAL 603 594 EXCELLENCE 628 ‘Out-performing’ ‘O t f i ’ (world class) ‘Out-performing’ PERFORMANCE LEADERSHIP (peer) ORIENTATION Comparable ‘Comparable’ 796 (peer) ORGANISATION ORGANISATION ‘Under-performing’ DESIGN CLIMATE (peer) ORGANISATION COMMUNICATIONS
  • 34. 3. Evaluation/measurement of people management“This ll t t d“Thi all started way back with a challenge b k ith h llset by one of our earliest clients – could we report a people management (aka HCM) construct on one page?” p g ADDED INSERT
  • 35. And then we did things like The HCR Standards (GHCRS2006) HC Productivity Statement CONTRACTED RESOURCE ye 31st Dec 2005 ye 31st Dec 2004 Total number of FTE days contracted in year 3,530,340 3,401,289 Total number of FTE vacation days taken in 336,987 333,144 year TOTAL NUMBER OF CONTRACTED FTE 3,193,353 3,068,145 Human Capital Operating Statement DAYS AVAILABLE WORK RESOURCE ADJUSTMENT FTE days gained through recorded overtime 61,932 65,371 work (+) FTE days lost to illness (-) 18,431 19,016 FTE days lost to work-related illness/injury (-) 2,773 2,816 FTE days lost to industrial action (-) ye 31st Dec 249 2005 ye 31st 167 2004 Dec OPERATING INCOME as lost under miscellaneous FTE days recorded 763 % 1,075 (-) Revenue (£000s) 1,057,016 1,015,020 ACTUAL NUMBER OF CONTRACTED FTE 3,233,069 3,110,442 FTEs DAYS WORKED 16,352 16,047GH RS2 6 HCR 2006 PeopleFlow® Statement p Revenue per FTE 64,641 63,253 PRODUCTIVITY OPERATING COSTS FTE day (optimal) HCI*Revenue per £192.96 £185.42 Total operating costs (£000s) (actual) HCI*Revenue per FTE day £190.59 904,371 £182.90 815,094 A Guide to the Human Capital People HCI*Revenue per FTE day differential costs (£000s) STAFFING Human Capital Intensity (HCI) EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATED INDICES 532,181£2.37 ye 31st Dec 2005 58.85 % £2.52 464,317 ye 31st Dec 2004 56.96 Employee engagement index No of full-time staff at start of year 69.2 14,011 68.5 13,865 Reporting Standards OPERATING INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE Employer brand index TO Number of part-time staff at start of year (FTE HC (HCIR per FTE) eqv) 38,041 1,932 71.3 36,029 71.0 1,491 Number of CAPITALtMANAGEMENT eqv) N HUMANother at start of year (FTEINDEX b f th t t f ) 104 175 (GHCRS2006) FullVB-HR Rating time equivalents (FTEs) at start of year Performance HC ANCILLARY PEOPLE COSTS (APC) £ BB-BB-R 16,047 Sustaining + % £ BB-B-R 15,531 Sustaining + % Training & Development costs (£000s) STAFFING MOVEMENT 8,176 % 7,342 £ % Recruitment costs (£000s) in period (+) Number of FTEs recruited 2,314 1,427 2,954 1,874 Health & Safety costs (£000s) during period (+) Number of acquisitioned FTEs 740 - 691 - HR functional and related costs (£000s) 6,254 1,427 1,874 6,879 Outplacement voluntary leavers (FTE) in period (-) Number of costs (£000s) 256 996 1,065 53 Number of FTEs made redundant or outplaced 35 217 in period (-) Total 17,740 17,919 Number of FTE retirements in period (-) 91 76 1st Edition Number of FTEs outsourced in period (-) HC LEVERAGE (HCIR/APC per FTE) 35.06 - 32.26 2006 Full time equivalents (FTEs) at end of year STAFFING MISCELLANEOUS 16,352 16,047 Mean tenure (years) 5.2 52 5.3 53 Mean age of workforce 34 34 Retirement population 5,391 5,304
  • 36. And eventually the full HCIntel suite suite... HC “We really have moved on from some Measurement HR benchmarking metrics.” Human capital HC Productivity Statement reporting CONTRACTED RESOURCE Total number of FTE days contracted in year ye 31st Dec 2005 3,530,340 ye 31st Dec 2004 3,401,289 •Absenteeism Measurement pyramid Total number of FTE vacation days taken in 336,987 333,144 5.2% year TOTAL NUMBER OF CONTRACTED FTE 3,193,353 3,068,145 •Turnover (voluntary) 8.6% Human Capital Operating Statement DAYS AVAILABLE •Turnover (involuntary) 1.8% VB-HR™ Rating WORK RESOURCE ADJUSTMENT •Recruitment cost per FTE £12,569 FTE days gained through recorded overtime 61,932 65,371 Human Capital Management work (+) •Time to fill 38 days FTE days lost to illness (-) 18,431 19,016 •VB-HR™ AAA AA rmin FTE days lost to work-related illness/injury (-) 2,773 2,816 •Training days per FTE 3.5 Rating A BBB BB r R Overall FTE days lost to industrial action (-) ye 31st Dec 249 2005 ye 31st 167 2004 Dec •Training spend per FTE £871 •HC Performance OPERATING INCOME as lost under miscellaneous FTE days recorded 763 % 1,075 B CCC CC B B R RR ranking (-) Revenue (£000s) 1,057,016 1,015,020 •Revenue per FTE £365,121 C RRR ACTUAL NUMBER OF CONTRACTED FTE 3 233 069 3,233,069 3 110 442 3,110,442 FTEs 16,352 16,047 HR Strategy DAYS WORKED •Profit per FTE £67,119 •HC leverage PeopleFlow® Statement Revenue per FTE 64,641 63,253 •HCIR per FTE PRODUCTIVITY •HR FTE: FTE 1:112 •HC Investment ratio HR Functional OPERATING COSTS FTE day (optimal) HCI*Revenue per £192.96 £185.42 •Employee costs per FTE £27,469 •Employee engagement Total operating costs (£000s) (actual) HCI*Revenue per FTE day £190.59 904,371 £182.90 815,094 B B R Capital People HCI*Revenue per FTE day differential costs (£000s) 532,181£2.37 £2.52 464,317 •HR costs per FTE £1356 •Voluntary turnover1 STAFFING ye 31st Dec 2005 ye 31st Dec 2004 Human Capital Intensity (HCI) 58.85 56.96 •% females in senior management roles 23% •Absenteeism1 EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATED INDICES % BB Employee engagement index 69.2 68.5 •Accident/injury rate No of full-time staff at start of year 14,011 13,865 OPERATING INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE OrganisationalHCM Human CCC CCC R Employer brand index 38,041 1,932 71.3 36,029 71.0 TO Number of part-time staff at start of year (FTE HC (HCIR per FTE) 1,491 Capital Capital HR Procurement eqv) Basic Number of other at start of year (FTEINDEX HUMAN CAPITAL MANAGEMENT eqv) 104 175 •HR spend per FTE £ % £ % FullVB-HR Rating time equivalents (FTEs) at start of BB-BB-R 16,047 BB-B-R 15,531 BB year Performance (adjusted using standard template) HC Sustaining + Sustaining + BB BB BB BB B B R ANCILLARY PEOPLE COSTS (APC) •Formal job offer success metrics CCC CCC R B CCC R B B R B CCC R HR Capability Training & Development costs (£000s) STAFFING MOVEMENT 8,176 % 7,342 £ % Plus portfolio of tertiary indicators which are more Employee Workforce HCM Management Employees Recruitment costs (£000s) in period (+) Number of FTEs recruited 2,314 1,427 1,874 2,954 Intelligence Architecture context/organisation specific Health & Safety costs (£000s) during period (+) Number of acquisitioned FTEs 740 - 691 - BB HR functional and related costs (£000s) 6,254 1,427 1,874 6,879 B B R BB Outplacement voluntary leavers (FTE) in period (-) Number of costs (£000s) 256 996 1,065 53 engagement EFFECTIVENESS HR Customer- •HCI (used with revenue per FTE to calculate HCIR per FTE) agency Number of FTEs made redundant or outplaced 35 217 BB MAINTENANCE in period (-) •HR budget (adjusted using standard template) Total 17,740 17 740 17,919 17 919 •MD spend MD d R RISK Number of FTE retirements in period (-) 91 76 Number of FTEs outsourced in period (-) - •Internal/external management position fill ratio HC LEVERAGE (HCIR/APC per FTE) 35.06 32.26 •No of industrial tribunals •% union membership Full time equivalents (FTEs) at end of year 16,352 16,047 •HR service delivery (IT mix) Plus portfolio of tertiary indicators which are more context/organisation specific The VB-HR™ Employee Engagement Framework STAFFING MISCELLANEOUS Mean tenure (years) 5.2 5.3 Mean age of workforce 34 34 Line-of-Sight Work Environment Retirement population 5,391 5,304 People Business objectives awareness Cultural elements 14.2 Role ‘fit’ 16.1 Leadership Performance management Communication Feedback Organisational Resources 13.7 Capability Architecture 14.3 Local management Science Physical environment PERFORMANCE EMPLOYEE EMPLOYEE HRIS & Organisation design HRGOVERNANCE ORGANISATION RESOURCING TRAINING & DESIGN (TALENT) DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REWARD RELATIONS HEALTH & MEASURE- PAYROLL Performance management 14.6 6 & COMMS SAFETY MENT 2.1 8.1 system Rewards system Organisationa 5.1 1.1 Employer l Design/ 3.1 Workforce 4.1 Performance 6.1 Total Reward 7.1 Employee Risk Management/ 9.1 10.1 Base salary Career progression Capability Needs (Talent) Payroll Decision rights brand Planning Programme Communications Regulatory HRIS Strategy Planning – Assessment Management Competencies Business Unit Level Assessment Compliance/ Security 12.8 Bonus/incentives Work values 14.5 13.0 HR delivery 2.2 Organisationa 3.2 4.2 General 5.2 6.2 8.2 10.2 Employee/ Benefits Succession planning HCIntel® 1.2 l Design/ Performance Wage And 7.2 9.2 Candidate Training Risk Manager HR Value Capability (Talent) Salary Benefits HRIS Proposition Planning – Identification Services Design, Development Management Management Assessment Planning Interaction/ Problem Shares Job/ Role architecture Multi-country Development and Delivery Resolution Level Recognition Training/ Learning 2.3 Organisationa 3.3 6.3 7.3 8.3 13.1 12.9 and 4.3 5.3 Bonus/Incenti Attendance/ 10.3 1.3 l Design/ Job Profile Accident HR Delivery Capability Services/ Training & Development Performance Reviews ve/ Stock Options Leave Of Absence/ Exit Prevention 9.3 HRIS Support Time Reporting Promotional aspects Coaching/ Mentoring Structure Planning – Requisition and Training Management Compensatio Interviews Global Level Processing Programmes n 1.4 2.4 Job 3.4 4.4 Technical/ 5.4 6.4 Senior/ 7.4 Return-To- 8.4 9.4 10.4 Special Pay, Reward (equity) Development Functional/ Succession Work and Job Employee HC Reporting Classification/ Candidate Executive Health/Medica Adjustments operational Policy & (Talent) Accommodati Research & Evaluation Selection Compensatio l Programmes And Procedure Management on Modelling n Deductions Training 10.5 Payroll 2.5 3.5 7.5 1.5 Organisation Temporary 4.5 Employee 5.5 Attendance 6.5 Expatriate Company 8.5 Incident 9.5 Accounting/ Recon/ TRAINING & HR Capability Restructure/ Change/ and Contractor Induction/ Orientation Management Compensatio n Policies And Procedures Tracking and Reporting Benchmarkin g Manual Calculations DIVERSITY Development Staffing DEVELOPMENT risk & Disbursement 2.6 4.6 7.6 8.6 1.6 Acquisition/ 3.6 Competencies 5.6 6.6 Compensatio Collective Managing 9.6 10.6 TALENT EMPLOYEE HR Policy Divestiture/ Start-up Due Diligence/ General Employment Services / Skills Model Development And Employee Coaching n Analysis/Pay review Bargaining/ Negotiating/ Consultative External Consultants/ Outsource Measurement and Reporting Tax Reporting/ Audit MANAGEMENT 81.3 CENTRICITY Modelling analytics linking anal tics Support Assessment Processes Providers 1.7 17 2.7 Managing 4.7 5.7 Employee 6.7 Healthcare/ 7.7 Work 9.7 Employee 10.7 + HR Welfare/ External 3.7 Leadership/ Counselling/ Practices For Records/Case Employee Performance/ Statutory/ Consultants/ Relocation Management Case Represented management/ Reimburseme Strategy Other Benefit Outsource Development management Employees Data nt Review/ Audit Programmes Providers Maintenance performance to human capital 1.8 Managing External 3.8 4.8 5.8 PM 6.8 Pension 7.8 Conflict and 9.8 10.8 Statutory 67.4 EMPLOYER Consultants/ Outsource Outplacement Services Executive Development Compliance Support Management Issue Resolution Reporting/ Interfaces Benefits/ Miscellaneous REWARD BRAND Providers 6.9 Admin + 59.9 41.6 5.9 Retirement 7.9 9.9 Consulting To Planning/ (management) 3.9 4.9 Corporate/ Managing 10.9 Line Counselling Employment Career Community ASP/software/ Reporting/ Managers On And Law Services Development Social Outsource Interfaces Performance Administratio 65.7 Responsibility Providers Issues n 3.10 Consulting Line 4.10 Consulting On 5.10 Managing ASP/ERP/ 6.10 Managing External 7.10 Government/ 10.10 Managing 61.5 Managers On Staffing Managerial Issues Software Providers Consultants/ Outsource Legislative Issues Outsource Providers HR Issues Providers RETENTION GOVERNANCE 3.11 Managing 4.11 Managing 7.11 Managing 74.2 43.1 + ASP/software/ ASP/ERP/soft External Leadership Leadership Shareholder Shareholder Outsource Providers ware/Outsour ce Providers Consultants Employer Employer && value value brand brand governance 68.4 48.7 Management governance HR Human RESOURCING 64.2 Human Work values Work values OPERATIONAL Pathfinder Capital l 59.4 59 4 Capital C it Practices Line-of-sight Line-of-sight Customer Customer Revenue Revenue 60.3 60 3 62.8 EXCELLENCE Practices Satisfaction Satisfaction Growth Growth Development Development Employee Employee Individual/ Individual/ Portfolio mix Portfolio mix External External + Engagement Engagement team X-selling Value Reward team X-selling Value (OE indicators) Reward Productivity Productivity Service Proposition Proposition Customer Work environment Work environment Service Customer Profitability Loyalty Profitability Loyalty PERFORMANCE LEADERSHIP ORIENTATION ‘RADAR’ Employee Employee 79.6 Retention Retention + ORGANISATION ORGANISATION Compliance Compliance ‘Local’ DESIGN ORGANISATION CLIMATE ‘Local’ Management Management COMMUNICATIONS Cost control Cost control37
  • 37. What organisations (HR) keep getting wrong (shortlist)…1. Employee engagement: its concept and application p y g g p pp2. The use of employee surveys3.3 Evaluation/measurement of people management4. Performance management5. The ‘people competency’ of line management5 Th ‘ l t ’ f li t6. The role of HR (‘customer-agency dissonance’)
  • 38. 4. 4 Performance management...common problems ... do differently• Trying to use ‘one size • Standard platform with fits all’ system tiered customisation• Competing objectives • Ensure PM objectives causing confusion clarified and understood• Variable quality of face- • Need to ensure constant time, feedback and rating , g MC maintenance• Still viewed as onerous • Evaluate the PMS and tas task identify ‘neg’ drivers de t y eg d e s• Too often defaults into • Requires constant negative perception monitoring [Added note: MC = Management Competency; PMS = Performance Management System (N.B. this is not just software)]
  • 39. 3. 3 Performance management“For today as an illustration, I’d just like to“F t d ill t ti j t lik t show you output from a real example of a multi-divisional organisation who hadpproblems ggetting an effective PMS to work” g ADDED INSERT
  • 40. VALUE-ADD Note the spread • Focus on coaching 4 style • Normally linked to along the ‘curve’ well-defined Performance Leadership scorecard for clear LOS Very little awareness of performance • Formal process Any reviews done in (inc 360 degree) unstructured ad hoc 3 supported with manner continual Informal, no formal documentation PM ‘Maturity Performance documentation Management • Value adding in Value destroying Curve’ J geometric way practice 2 I G H1 Performance • Evaluative with EVOLUTION F Appraisal E focus onPerformance D performance against C role objectives Awareness B • Joint-ownedA • Seen as administrative- administrative p process with two- based task way communication • Mainly one-way, usually • Done semi-annually associated with poor with formal p performance monitoring g documentation • Normally done on • If conducted by annual basis management well • Management have should be value- limited understanding adding and tends still to be value negative A = business unitVALUE-NEGATIVE © VaLUENTiS Ltd
  • 41. VALUE-ADD • Minimum of twice-annual review (event-driven) • 360° feedback • Forced ranking • Objectives based on role • Ranking linked to reward, management of under- performance and development needs 3 • Continuous on-line collation of formal on line documentation Type 3 Embedded PM ‘Multi BU Multi 2 tiered 1 Type 2 Integrated PM solution’ l ti ’ Type 1 Core Platform EVOLUTION • Twice-annual review • 180° feedback • Annual review • Forced ranking • 90° feedback • Objectives based on • Forced ranking competencies • Objectives based on Obj i b d • Ranking linked to role reward, management of • Ranking linked to under-performance and reward and management development needs of under-performance under performance • On-line collation of On line • Manual collation of formal documentation formal documentationVALUE-NEGATIVE © VaLUENTiS Ltd
  • 42. VALUE-ADD • Minimum of twice-annual review (event-driven) • 360° f db k feedback • Forced ranking • Objectives based on role • Ranking linked to reward, management of under- performance and development needs 3 • Continuous on-line collation of formal documentation Type 3 Embedded PM BU mapping to 2 tiered solution – 1 Type 2 J [note ‘the journey’] the journey ] Integrated PM I G H Type 1 EVOLUTION E F Platform Core • Twice-annual review T i l i D • 180° feedback C B • Annual review • Forced ranking • 90° feedback • Objectives based onA competencies • Forced ranking • Objectives based on • Ranking linked to role reward, management of • Ranking linked to under-performance and reward and management development needs of under-performance • On-line collation of • Manual collation of formal documentation formal documentationVALUE-NEGATIVE © VaLUENTiS Ltd
  • 43. What organisations (HR) keep getting wrong (shortlist)…1. Employee engagement: its concept and application p y g g p pp2. The use of employee surveys3.3 Evaluation/measurement of people management4. Performance management5. The ‘people competency’ of line management5 Th ‘ l t ’ f li t6. The role of HR (‘customer-agency dissonance’)
  • 44. 5. The ‘people competency’ of line management.........common problems ...do differently• Lack of understanding as • Clear HCM framework to what people with blended learning management actually programmes and involves measurement• Varied mix of line • Standard MC platform managers with assessments• No set bar to becoming • Adopt ‘license to manage’ line ‘people manager’ hurdles• Too many ‘B’-players • Requires exit routepaths• HR role compensation • Role definition review [Added note: MC = Management Competency]
  • 45. 3. The ‘people competency’ of line management......“Another small ill t ti“A th ll illustration for t d f today, h here’s ’an output from a management development project looking at manager’s desire for learning type and duration – a veryimportant component for getting ‘buy-in’ to MD programmes programmes. Note the difference with the standard output of so many MD programmes seen” ADDED INSERT
  • 46. MC programme: Learning channel preference Duration and technique preferences – Central Support 100% PSCI CS 75% AL Action Learning eference PS S C Coaching AL PS OTJ CI Critical Incident C C C S S CS Case Study hnique pre CS ALSG P S CS AL OTJ OTJ 50% DG Discussion Group M CS CI P CI M Mentoring SG PS AL DG DG P Panel Tech M RP RP M DG P SG PS Problem Solving OTJ On the job learning 25% RP RP Role Playing P S Simulation RP SG Structured Games 2 hours or less ½ day 1 day 2 days Duration
  • 47. What organisations (HR) keep getting wrong (shortlist)…1. Employee engagement: its concept and application p y g g p pp2. The use of employee surveys3.3 Evaluation/measurement of people management4. Performance management5. The ‘people competency’ of line management5 Th ‘ l t ’ f li t6. The role of HR (‘customer-agency dissonance’)
  • 48. HR FUNCTIONS FUNCTIONS: THECUSTOMER AGENCYCUSTOMER-AGENCY PROBLEM
  • 49. 3. The role of HR (‘customer-agency dissonance’) “As I have said repeatedly on manyoccasions, the HR f i h function suffers f i ff from the h customer-agency p g y problem; having g‘customers’ (to serve) on the one hand and‘agents’ (to influence/enforce upon) on the agents other. This is a subject that has rarely beenbroached and yet affects daily life if you’re you rein HR and has wider consequences for the organisation” i ti ” ADDED INSERT
  • 50. Ten common areasHCM function of HR improvement.....7... 2016 Personnel 2016 20 2015 2015 2014 2014 2013 2013 2012 2012 2011 2011 ‘Splitting the core’: The reality choice for HR functions
  • 51. 3. The role of HR (‘customer-agency dissonance’) “In a soon to be released article ‘Splitting The Core: The break-up of HR’ I advocatethat there i an i h h is increasing probability of this i b bili f hi occurring with some empirical evidence already appearing” ADDED INSERT
  • 52. 6. The role of HR: ‘Splitting the core’ - implicationsSplit core PERSONNEL HC MANAGEMENT Traditional admin support Strategic and operationalRole function interaction Organisation behaviour andExpert focus Due process performanceCustomer-agency Organisation as customers Organisation as agents Various ‘narrow’ technician Wide career managementStaffing backgrounds throughput Mainly single-dimension Comprehensive andMeasurement efficiency benchmarking y g sophisticated 3D applications p ppReporting to Finance/Operations Director HC Director/CEOOutsourcingprobability High Low
  • 53. 3. The role of HR (‘customer-agency dissonance’)“And when it comes to understanding and And positioning with regards to Value Based HR… HR [the next three slides back by popular demand] ” ADDED INSERT
  • 54. Value-based HR: HR as a portfolio of service & compliance activities High Simplified Corporate Governance Value Add Illustration Services Professional & Advisory Services Nature of Activity Employment Services Transaction ServicesMarginalValue Added Complexity of Interaction High Low
  • 55. The real ‘HR Value Curve’ HR Curve Valuecontribution (per unit) HR ‘Activity’ (The ’93’ as defined by VB-HR™ Profiler)
  • 56. HR and Line ‘value dissonance’ value dissonance Valuecontribution (per unit) ‘Value dissonance’ Means that HR can close the expectation gap... HR ‘Activity’ (The ’93’ as defined by VB-HR™ Profiler)
  • 57. Remembering (arguably the most incisive quote ever)...Management is doingthings right;Leadership is doing theright thi i ht things. Peter F Drucker (November 19th 1909 - November 11th 2005)
  • 58. And finally, finally“Have you met DES”
  • 59. DES… DES“DES is not an individual but a collectiveembodiment of organisational elements b di f i i l l of…” ADDED INSERT
  • 60. ‘DYSFUNCTIONAL EQUILIBRIUM SYNDROME’
  • 61. DES… DES “DES is where everyday organisational DES interactions/engagements have become ‘dysfunctional’ but have also reached an dysfunctional‘equilibrium’ between the various players, and thus nothing (of any significance) d th thi ( f i ifi ) changes.However,However armed with your 3D DES specs DES-specs you can see them all around. Here’s a few…” f ” ADDED INSERT
  • 62. DES: some common examples involving people…• HR compensating for line management ‘people p g g p p management’ inadequacies• Board meetings which swap information instead of decision-making• Performance management systems that don’t don t manage performance (or indeed poor performers)• Reward mechanisms that reward the wrong behaviours• Organisation with a ‘talent management strategy’ but staff don’t know how to get promoted (which is a common finding)• ‘Groupthink’
  • 63. Thank you… you“But more on DES next time… ut o e o S e tt e ‘Same time, same channel.’ ‘S i h l’ THANKYOU”