example dissertation
DESCRIPTION
modelTRANSCRIPT
The Contribution of Human Resource Management to Operational Performance in the Police Service
ByStudent xxxx
A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
The University XXXXX
in partial fulfilment of the requirementsfor the degree of
MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
2007
1
A Dissertationentitled
The Contribution of Human Resource Management to Operational Performance in the Police Service
By
Student xxxxxxx
We hereby certify that this Dissertation submitted by Angela Roberts conforms to acceptable standards, and as such is fully adequate in scope and quality. It is therefore approved as the fulfilment of the Dissertation requirements for the degree of Master of Business Administration.
Approved:
Dissertation Advisor Date
The University XXXXXX2007
2
CERTIFICATION STATEMENT
I hereby certify that this paper constitutes my own product, that where the
language of others is set forth, quotation marks so indicate, and that appropriate
credit is given where I have used the language, ideas, expressions or writings
of another.
Signed Student xxxxxx
3
ABSTRACT
The Contribution of Human Resource Management to Operational Performance in the Police Service
by
Student xxxxx
This paper sets out the detail of a study of HR contribution to operational
performance in the police service, asking the question “is HR contributing to
operational performance?” In addressing this question two sub-questions have been
answered: “Is HR positioned to contribute?” and “Can a link between effective HR
and operational performance be identified?”
Although the importance of HR’s role is recognised with scarce resources available
for delivery of front line policing there is a need to demonstrate contribution to
organisational performance and a return on investment. In evaluating HR within the
police service where people are fundamental to the delivery of performance, four
areas have been identified from a review of published works: the role of HR, HR
measurement, service delivery and adding value, and HR integration, which it is
contended form the basis for HR to be positioned to effectively contribute and
demonstrate impact on operational performance. To investigate whether HR is
positioned to fully contribute and whether a link between effective HR and operational
performance could be established, a framework for evaluation has been developed
exploring operational managers’ perspective on the four areas.
4
Evidence was found to suggest progress has been made in integrating HR into the
business of policing and in developing HR to contribute to operational performance,
although there is still some way to go. HR within the police service needs to consider
its traditional role and further embrace not only the strategic partner role, but the
roles of employee advocate and human capital developer, identified by Ulrich and
Brockbank (2005a) moving away from the administrative policy developer role.
Perception of service delivery and added value was fair with areas for development
clearly identified, and the need for greater clarity in HR measurement and provision
of management information. Although a discernable link could be identified between
operational performance and effective HR, this needs to be further exploited with all
opportunity taken if there is a desire to turn this into improved operational
performance. Overall HR is contributing to operational performance but not as
effectively as it has the potential to do.
5
Acknowledgements
The undertaking of this study has been an extremely intense and time consuming
exercise, the completion of which could not have been achieved without the enduring
support of my husband Nick and two small but patient children who have been
without their mum for hours, days and seemingly months. I thank them for their love
and understanding. I would also like to thank Warwickshire Police and their many
staff who contributed to this study, along with the Directors of HR from Cheshire,
Dorset and Surrey for their time and excellent assistance. My thanks also extend to
some very busy national figures within the police service from whose time and
support I have greatly benefited and in particular the hospitality of the Metropolitan
Police. Finally my supervisor Elizabeth Shaw who has been there for me from the
start and whose feedback kept me on track.
6
Contents PageCONTENTS PAGE................................................................................................................................. 7
List of Tables............................................................................................................9List of Figures.........................................................................................................10Glossary of Terms..................................................................................................11
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................. 12
LITERATURE REVIEW........................................................................................................................ 17
Introduction............................................................................................................17Development of HR................................................................................................18HR Measurement...................................................................................................23HR Contribution......................................................................................................29HR Integration........................................................................................................33Conclusions and areas for research.......................................................................35
METHODOLOGY................................................................................................................................. 37
Introduction............................................................................................................37Research Design....................................................................................................37Methods chosen.....................................................................................................40Link with the literature review.................................................................................42Population investigated..........................................................................................43Reliability and validity.............................................................................................46Methodological weaknesses..................................................................................47Summary................................................................................................................49
PRESENTATION OF RESULTS..........................................................................................................51
Introduction............................................................................................................51The Role of HR.......................................................................................................52
Ulrich and Brockbank roles.................................................................................52HR competence..................................................................................................57HR’s role within Forces.......................................................................................58
HR Measurement...................................................................................................60HR Service Delivery and Added Value...................................................................66
HR Service Delivery............................................................................................66Added Value.......................................................................................................71
HR Integration........................................................................................................74Framework for evaluation of HR Contribution........................................................81
DISCUSSION....................................................................................................................................... 85
Is HR positioned to contribute?..............................................................................85Is there a link between effective HR and operational performance?......................94Is HR contributing to operational performance?.....................................................95
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................................96
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................... 102
APPENDICES.................................................................................................................................... 105
Appendix 1 Police Performance Assessment Framework.............................105Appendix 2 Chief Constable Questionnaire...................................................106Appendix 3 Directors/Heads of HR Questionnaire.........................................115Appendix 4 Observation Checklist – Force Performance Board....................128
7
Appendix 5 Letters to Chief Constables of forces included in the study.........129Appendix 6 E-mail to Directors of HR: Cheshire, Dorset, Surrey...................133Appendix 7 Interviews with Directors of HR: Cheshire, Dorset, Surrey..........134Appendix 8 Operational Managers Questionnaire.........................................136Appendix 9 Observation Checklist – Metropolitan Police HR Performance
Meeting.......................................................................................146Appendix 10 Interview Questions Home Office representative........................147Appendix 11 Interview Questions Her Majesty’s Inspector (HMI) Personnel,
Training and Diversity.................................................................150Appendix 12 Interview Questions: ACPO Perspective.....................................153Appendix 13 Interview Questions Chair of the Police Authority Warwickshire
Police..........................................................................................156Appendix 14 Interview Questions Chair of the Police Authority HR and Training
Panel – Warwickshire Police.......................................................158Appendix 15 Interview Chief Constable Warwickshire Police..........................160Appendix 16 Interview Questions operational managers Warwickshire Police 162Appendix 17 Focus Group – HR Contribution to operational policing..............164Appendix 18 Summary of Respondents to the study.......................................165Appendix 19 Ulrich’s five roles for HR Professionals.......................................167Appendix 20 HR competence in the five key areas..........................................168Appendix 21 Application of the multiplier to operational managers rating of
competence.................................................................................169Appendix 22 Ranking of importance placed by operational managers on seven
roles of HR..................................................................................170Appendix 23 Ranking of effectiveness placed by operational managers on seven
roles of HR..................................................................................171Appendix 24 HR Style of Delivery....................................................................172Appendix 25 Analysis of HMIC Baseline Assessment 2006............................173Appendix 26 Framework for evaluation of HR contribution to operational
performance – scoring grid..........................................................175Appendix 27 Evaluation Results of HR contribution to operational policing.....182
8
List of TablesTable 3.1:Managers’ response rate Table 4.1: Strategic Partner Table 4.2: Strategic Contribution Table 4.3: Delivery of Force Strategy Table 4.4: Human Capital Developer Table 4.5: Employee Advocate Table 4.6: Leadership Table 4.7: Managers’ rating of Competence Table 4.8: Rank Order of Importance Table 4.9: HR Measurement Table 4.10: Information used to benchmark Table 4.11: Measurement Table 4.12: Key Performance Indicators Table 4.13: Customer Satisfaction Table 4.14: Data provided by HR Table 4.15: HR Standards Table 4.16: Rank Order - Effectiveness Table 4.17: Style of Delivery – Importance Table 4.18: Style of Delivery – Effectiveness Table 4.19: Understanding of the Business Table 4.18: Link with customer expectations Table 4.21: Questioning of Impact Table 4.22: HR Strategy Development Table 4.23: Managers involvement in HR Strategy Table 4.24: Alignment of HR Strategy Table 4.25: Overall Delivery Table 4.26: Force HMIC ranking (out of 43) Table 4.27: Summary results Table 4.28: Evaluation of HR Performance
9
List of FiguresFigure 4.1: HR Roles Figure 4.2: HR competence Figure 4.3: Managers’ rating of HR. Figure 4.4: Importance of HR roles – managers Figure 4.5: Effectiveness of HR Figure 4.6: Comparison of Importance with Effectiveness Figure 4.7: Comparison of Importance and Effectiveness: Style of Delivery Figure 4.8: Improving staff performance Figure 4.9: Alignment with internal stakeholders Figure 4.10: Alignment with external stakeholders Figure 4.11: Force Ranking Figure 4.12: Average Scores
10
Glossary of Terms
ACC Assistant Chief Constable
ACPO Association of Chief Police Officers
APA Association of Police Authorities
APACs Assessment of Policing and Community Safety
BCU Basic Command Unit
BME Black and Minority Ethnic
CIPD Chartered Institute for Personnel and Development
HMI Her Majesty’s Inspector
HMIC Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary
HR Human Resources
HRM Human Resource Management
KPI Key Performance Indicator
PDR Performance Development Review
PPAF Police Performance and Assessment Framework
SLA Service Level Agreement
11
Introduction
This study aims to address the question: “is HR contributing to operational
performance in the police service?” by investigating whether HR is positioned to
contribute and evaluating whether there is a link between effective human resource
management and operational performance. This is an area of growing importance as
Fitz-enz and Davison (2002 p.298) express: “the entire human resources dynamic
has changed… at the end of the day, you’re going to be judged on how much your
HR organization contributed to the overall goals and profitability of the company.”
This rings true for the police service as forces face the challenge of freeing up
resources for front line service delivery.
This paper starts from the premise that effective human resource management has a
positive impact on organisational performance. As Armstrong (2006 p.20) states:
“The assumption underpinning the practice of HRM is that people are the
organization’s key resource and organizational performance largely depends on
them.” Armstrong acknowledges the connection between HR practices and
organisational performance needs to be made and there has been considerable
research into whether HR practices have a positive impact and if so how. Becker
and Gerhart (1996 p.797) concluded: “at multiple levels of analysis there is consistent
empirical support for the hypothesis that HR can make a meaningful difference to a
firm’s bottom line.”
In addressing the research question this study:
Explores academic and professional research and position on the contribution
of Human Resource Management to business performance.
12
Describes relevant developments in the police service, current provision of
HRM, and measurement of police performance.
Researches current thinking on HR contribution within the police at national
and force levels.
Compares the current position to theory on HR contribution.
Researches HR contribution in forces based on perception of key
stakeholders, developing a framework for evaluation of contribution to
determine whether there is a link between effective HR and operational
performance.
Makes recommendations on the future of HRM for improved contribution to
operational performance.
Over the past decade, police forces have become more performance driven, with
clear performance targets identified nationally for local delivery. Recently the police
service underwent a period of uncertainty with proposals for reform and
amalgamation of forces; currently on hold, leaving forces to find alternative ways of
delivering local policing, protective services, and efficient and effective support
services within current budgets.
Police performance is measured through the Police Performance and Assessment
Framework (PPAF) (Appendix 1), based on seven policing domains: Reducing
Crime, Investigating Crime, Promoting Safety, Providing Assistance, Citizen Focus,
Resource Use, and Local Policing, which could be argued form a balanced scorecard
of policing performance, although a concern would be that not all domains are as well
populated as others. Consultation on revision of PPAF is underway with plans for a
new framework APACS (Assessment of Policing and Community Safety) to be
13
introduced during 2007. It is fair to say that current thinking on performance
measurement and HR contribution is not fully developed, with the Resource Use
domain having only four indicators for HR performance: Black and Minority Ethnic
(BME) recruitment, Female Officer Strength, Police Officer, and Police Staff
Sickness.
In investigating HR contribution, attention has focussed on the delivery of policing
against the PPAF domains, considering linkage between the resource use domain
and the other domains to establish evidence of correlation. HMIC inspect forces
through a process of baseline assessment against an inspection protocol, which
takes a broader view than the PPAF indicators. The inspection of HR is based on
detailed assessment of documentation and processes, and takes account of impact
on the business. HR is therefore measured and benchmarked against other forces at
a national level. There is, however, little evidence that national performance
indicators for HR are sophisticated enough to link their achievement to improved
operational performance or to clearly demonstrate HR’s contribution. It is on this
basis posited that HR in the police service is still largely as Wright, Snell and
Jacobsen (2004) describe: HR-focused rather than business focused, although this
paper will show this is changing with HR professionals starting to consider business
outcomes, which Wright, Snell and Jacobsen (2004 p.43) state: “needs to be a
concern of every HR professional, regardless of the amount of control they possess
over the outcomes.”
Lawler, Levenson and Boudreau (2004) identify HR functions rarely collecting data
on the impact of their programmes and practices, which is recognisable within the
police service, leading to a gap in understanding of how HR contributes to
14
performance and HR to be viewed as back office, not directly effecting front line
delivery. With scarce resources available to deliver policing, there is a need to
quantify and justify HR’s contribution and ensure value for money. Gershon (2004
p.6) reporting on public sector efficiency identified efficiency gains of over £20 billion
in 2007-08 across the public sector, defining efficiency as: “making the best use of
the resources available for the provision of public services”. If HR is not shown to be
effectively contributing to operational performance, decisions could be taken without
fully exploring the potential for human resource management to drive business
performance through people.
Research has identified a connection between effective HR and organisational
performance, which it is argued holds true within the police service. This study sets
out to determine whether HR is positioned to contribute and whether a link between
effective HR and operational performance can be shown, so answering whether HR
is currently contributing.
Within the context outlined, this paper starts with a review of published research on
HR contribution which has provided a framework for study of HR within the police
service, and a basis from which to determine the research methodology. The
literature review chapter outlines the review carried out and how areas for detailed
study were determined. A description of the methodology used to address the
research question and two sub-questions, why particular methods were chosen and
how the survey population was identified, is provided in chapter three. Chapter four
presents the results of the study outlining the main findings in relation to HR’s role,
measurement, service delivery and added value, and HR integration. It is suggested
there is both a gap and a need within the police service for a more systematic
15
process for measuring HR’s contribution. As Lawler, Levenson and Boudreau (2004
p.28) state: “HR often falls short when it comes to providing metrics that assess HR
processes and practices from a strategic perspective. It also lacks analytic models
that show the relationship between HR practices and the effectiveness of the
organization.” A product of this study is therefore a framework for evaluation,
developed to enable the relationship between HR and operational performance to be
explored. Chapter five provides a discussion of the main findings, answering the
research question through the sub-questions. The final chapter contains conclusions
and recommendations for the future direction of HR within the police service.
16
Literature Review
IntroductionThis chapter documents a review of published works which add to understanding of
HR contribution to organisational performance, exploring HR contribution from four
perspectives:
The development of HR’s role, including strategic partner.
HR measurement, tracking development in thinking from the collection of basic
metrics measuring HR activity to the balanced scorecard approach.
Approaches to research seeking to establish HR’s contribution
Impact of the integration of HR on organisational performance.
Researchers have evidenced that HR does contribute to business performance, with
the link between individual HR activities and business performance identified from
the 1950s. A review of research from 1990 illustrates how thinking on HR
contribution has developed from establishing links between single HR practices such
as compensation (Gerhart and Milkovich, 1990), to combinations of policies and
practices (Arthur, 1994), the impact of the HR system (Becker and Gerhart, 1996),
and the importance of managing human resources in executing strategy (Koch and
McGarth, 1996). Kaplan and Norton’s (1992) balanced scorecard framework has
been developed as a tool to evaluate HR practices (Yeung and Berman, 1997),
Becker, Huselid and Ulrich’s (2001) HR Scorecard, and Ulrich and Brockbank’s
(2005b) HR value proposition, clearly advocating the role of HR practices,
departments and professionals in producing positive outcomes. In considering how
HR can best contribute, the importance of role within an organisation is clear, as is
17
measurement and demonstration of a link to business performance, perception of
managers is key and HR integration within the business crucial to maximising
potential for HR to contribute.
Development of HRFitz-enz and Davison (2002) provide a summary of the development of HR from the
industrial age with personnel departments formed to meet the need to recruit, initially
staffed by ‘line’ employees and becoming the ‘dumping ground’ for what they call the
‘organization’s casualties.’ Or as Groysberg, McLean and Reavis (2005) articulate;
‘a strictly administrative function’, which could be argued is the traditional role of HR,
not central to the business, a back office function providing an administrative service
increasingly having to justify itself as margins tighten and the need to contribute to
the bottom line becomes more pertinent. The need to justify contribution increased
as ‘Personnel’ became more sophisticated in the post war period, developing with
legislative intervention in the 1960s and 1970s, which coupled with social change
and postwar growth of organisations, led to a call for specialists. (Fitz-enz and
Davison) The need for specialists continued through the 1980s but with changes in
the economic environment specialists took on roles designed to enhance productivity
and quality, operating strategically as an integral part of the business. By the 1990s
employment legislation had become a complex area and HR had developed as a
profession, gaining in importance and starting to assert itself as a business player,
responsible for ensuring the organisation’s human resource needs were met, and
vital to the success of the organisation. The 1990s saw the development of the
resource-based view of the firm, building on the work of Barney (1991) who
emphasised the importance of a firm’s resources in gaining competitive advantage,
human resources being no less important than other resources. In the UK the
18
professional institute for HR, the Institute of Personnel and Development, gained
chartered status in 2000. In the police service the need for professional HR expertise
was recognised with forces starting to appoint qualified HR professionals to head the
function, although it was only after 1995 when Police Authorities become employers
of support staff that forces moved to integrated personnel departments dealing with
police and support staff. In 1998 with the support of the Director General of the CIPD
a police branch of CIPD was founded with the agreed mission: “to support and
enable policing through professional personnel and development practices.” (Smith
2002) This has proved fundamental in professionalising HR and establishing HR’s
importance within the service.
By the mid 1990s the main functions of HR Departments globally had been identified
and consideration was being given to how key HR activities (resource planning,
recruitment, and development) influence productivity. Koch and McGarth (1996
p.336) suggest a central objective of HR is to enhance firm’s competitive position
through “creating superior ‘human capital’ resources.” Wan, Kok and Ong (2002)
reinforce this; seeing strategic HRM as designing and implementing proactive polices
and practices that ensure human capital contributes to corporate objectives.
Groysberg, McLean and Reavis (2005) refer to the second wave of strategic HR in
which HR asserts a central role in implementing the firm’s strategy. This accords
with the current role identified by Fitz-enz and Davison (2002) which they see as
having developed further than suggested by Koch and McGarth, staffed by HR
professionals demanding inclusion in strategic planning and undertaking roles which
clearly affect company performance, with senior management listening to HR in
return for evidence of return on investment; HR becoming a value-adding function.
This view is reinforced by Ulrich (1997a) who in ‘Human Resource Champions’
19
focuses less on what HR professionals do and more on what they deliver: the
outcomes, guarantees and results of HR work. Expressing the link to organisational
performance Ulrich stresses the ‘role’ HR plays is key, with firms needing to move
their HR professionals beyond being policy police and regulatory watchdogs to
become partners, players, and pioneers in delivering value. The merit of this is clear,
however as Pfeffer and Sutton (2006 p.25) state: “the core activities that are in the
traditional domain of HRM – recruiting, determining rewards and recognition,
including financial compensation, training and development, and so forth – are far
from disappearing…” The increasing competitive challenges facing firms though is
not disputed and the key HR requirements identified by Ulrich (1997a p.21), are an
accepted development of the traditional role:
“See HR issues as part of the competitive business equation
Articulate why HR matters in business terms, starting with business value
Talk comfortably about how competitive challenges dictate HR activities”
Ulrich explains to create value and deliver results HR professionals must define the
deliverables of their work; not focus on HR activities. This is a fair point and has
validity in the police service, however it is suggested core HR activities cannot be
ignored.
Ulrich (1997a) defined four roles for HR: Strategic Partner, Administrative Expert,
Employee Champion and Change Agent, stressing each had to be undertaken for
HR to add value, which he saw being done in four ways: execution of strategy,
building infrastructure, ensuring employee contribution, and managing change.
Ulrich has developed his thinking, now proposing five roles: Strategic Partner,
Employee Advocate, Functional Expert, Human Capital Developer and HR leader.
The first four are an evolution from the original, the role of leader newly defined as:
20
“setting and enhancing the standards for strategic thinking, and ensuring corporate
governance.” (Ulrich and Brockbank 2005a p.26)
The necessity for HR to undertake various roles accords with Fitz-enz and Davison
(2002), who believe HR must deal effectively with administrative work to be given the
chance to provide strategic input. Although this is recognised, Beer (1997 p.51)
makes an important observation: “the administration and strategic role do not easily
coexist in the same function or the same person.”
Ulrich (1997a p.25) outlining the strategic role, highlights the starting point for
determining whether HR is empowered to effectively contribute to performance,
emphasising HR’s strategic role in “aligning HR strategies and practices with
business strategy.” and further “turning strategic statements into a set of
organizational actions.” (p.57). Thereby, as he identifies, assisting the business: in
adapting to change, meeting customer demands, and in achieving financial
performance in execution of strategy. This is supported by Lawler and Mohrman
(2003), who in a 2001 survey of HR’s progress to becoming a strategic partner, the
factors leading to this, and whether this leads to increased effectiveness of the HR
function, concluded that although compared to previous findings (1995 and 1998)
there had been no significant increase in strategic business partnering, there had
been an increase in HR involvement in the business strategy process. Interestingly
finding that HR is more likely to be a strategic partner when the Head of HR has an
HR background. This is pertinent to the police service where a recent HMIC survey
(2006) indicated that a number of forces do not have professional Heads of HR, less
than half were operating at Chief Officer/Director level, and only just over half of HR
leads were members of the most senior team, not all full members. Lawler and
21
Mohrman’s (2003) research showed that where HR is a full business partner there is
increased emphasis on HR’s role in organisational planning, design and
development, concluding the greatest benefits occur when HR is a strategic business
partner, fully participating in the development and implementation of strategy.
Further, that partnership requires increasing trust in line managers and transferring
HR accountability to them in areas where HR previously exercised control and
provided service. Teo and Crawford (2005) support this in a case study of an
Australian public sector transport company where a growing need was identified for
HR to be part of the top management team and engage in business partnership. The
success of the HR department in doing this was influenced by the extent it focused
on outcomes and involvement of senior HR in strategic decision-making, with the
requirement for line managers to accept HRM responsibilities identified as key to
success.
Ulrich and Brockbank (2005b) identify an important role for HR in building
organisational capability, putting organisational culture at the centre of HR strategy to
deliver the greatest impact on performance through key HR practices - flows of
people, performance management, information and work - designed to impact on
creating and sustaining the desired culture and behaviours. Ulrich and Brockbank
recognise this challenges HR leaders aspiring to be effective in aligning HR with their
organisations and in matching resources with business requirements. This challenge
is real in the police service where culture is recognised as key in delivering a citizen-
focused approach to policing, which requires forces to change how they operate, and
staff to change attitudes and behaviours. HR is fundamental to this from the way
people are recruited, led, empowered and developed, which must be integrated in a
business strategy designed to meet the expectations of the public.
22
HR MeasurementTo understand and assess HR’s contribution measurement is clearly needed,
however Fitz-enz and Davison (2002) cite the inability of HR to demonstrate a
quantitative and qualitative effect on the business, which they believe has added to
management’s view of HR as an administrative cost centre. Lawler, Levenson and
Boudreau (2004) conclude an important contributor to HR playing a strategic role is
having the right metrics and data, which many of the firms they studied did not. Their
research showed that HR organisations able to perform strategic analytics are most
likely to be positioned as strategic partners; analytical data about strategy and
organisational effectiveness being a powerful way to gain a seat at the table, whilst in
their view data about the operation of the HR function is not.
Thinking around appropriate measurement to demonstrate HR’s contribution has
developed and it is clear that measurement is key if HR is to demonstrate its
contribution and develop as a strategic partner exerting more influence. As Fitz-enz
and Davison (2002 p.17) state: “There is no question that performance measurement
is required of all people who choose to have an effect on their organizations.” This
clearly applies to HR, but getting HR professionals to accept this is a different matter;
Yeung and Berman (1997) refer to HR as less prepared than other functions to
quantify impact on business performance. Ulrich (1997b) cites a common weakness
of HR professionals as fear of quantitative, measurable results, and Fitz-enz and
Davison (2002) describe avoidance of connecting to business issues, burying heads
in individual jobs, blaming customers for not understanding the function and
heralding the difference of the function.
23
Fitz-enz and Davison (2002) describe sixty ways to measure cost, time, quantity,
quality, and human reactions, but contend; the most important measure is
management’s satisfaction with HR. The importance of measurement to cost HR
interventions, time taken, quality etc is not disputed but it is suggested is only a
starting point in defining contribution. Appraisal of efficiency and effectiveness of the
HR function, as an indicator of departmental performance, does not in itself assess
the impact of HR on business performance. Fitz-enz and Davison consider in detail
the purpose and use of data in each area of HR, identifying valid ways of using
measurement in adding value: “Measurement is more than an exercise in collecting
data and reporting data. It can identify problems by type.” (2002 p.208) In reviewing
training evaluation they make a pertinent point in asking: “Can we discern a line-of-
sight connection between training and operational improvement.” (2002 p.187) It is
suggested this is relevant to all areas of HR and that there should be this line-of-sight
from all HR activity to operational performance.
Whilst accepting customer satisfaction levels are an important indication of whether
HR is meeting expectations and perceived to be adding value, it is apparent that this
in itself does not demonstrate contribution to performance. Customer satisfaction is
important in enhancing the credibility of HR thus enabling HR to contribute.
However, HR cannot always deliver exactly what the customer wants, which can lead
to tensions in service delivery. As Dalziel (2005 cited by Smethurst p.28) stated: “the
key to success is that strategic business partners are proactive and identify key
initiatives that will help the organisation, rather than react to manager’s HR needs.”
24
Ulrich (1997a) asserts that value should be defined by the receiver not the giver,
adding that value should be value to the business; shifting “focus from what is done
to what is delivered.” (1997a p.96) Whilst recognising the importance of HR
practices being aligned with the needs of internal customers, Ulrich sees alignment
with external customers as key. Ulrich and Brockbank (2005b) in developing the
concept of HR value being determined by the receiver (employees, line managers,
customers and investors), emphasise HR’s responsibility to understand who their key
stakeholders are and what is important to them, stressing that perceptions of what
adds value to stakeholders must be accurate. Another facet to this is that
perceptions of external customers of service are derived from the behaviour of
employees, thereby giving HR opportunity to contribute through understanding the
organisation’s customers. In the context of policing it is suggested alignment with
external customers is relevant to HR’s contribution, where the purpose of the
organisation is to protect and serve the public, understanding customer needs and
expectations is key to success. Ulrich (2005 cited in HR Focus p.6) emphasised the
importance of ‘external customers’: “HR professionals need to consider how to add
value, not just to employees and managers, but also to customers and investors…
The goal ….to do something that makes a difference to the business results.” This is
exactly what HR within the police service is rightly being called upon to do.
Accepting measurement is essential, it is important to consider whether HR’s
reluctance to measure has been overcome. Lawler, Levenson and Boudreau (2004)
outline how HR functions are still collecting data on their efficiency and effectiveness
rather than on the business impact of their programmes, which they state is
hampering progress towards becoming a strategic partner. As they outline, efficiency
25
of the HR function, i.e. how well the function performs in administrative tasks, is the
easiest to collect, but although worthwhile, does not address service quality and
impact on organisational effectiveness. Effectiveness measures looking at whether
HR programs and practices have their intended effect, of which customer satisfaction
surveys are part, they see as still focused on the HR function. Therefore defining a
third set of metrics, which demonstrate ‘impact’ as a means of expressing the link
between what HR does and tangible effects on the organisation’s ability to gain and
sustain competitive performance, as a powerful way for HR to add value.
The use of benchmarking to compare performance has been widely explored;
however, as Ulrich (1997a) states benchmarking can be a trap into looking at isolated
single practice areas when HR should be looking at the overall effect of HR practices.
Becker and Huselid (2003 p.56) also advise caution; pointing out that benchmarking
cannot be relied on to justify HR’s contribution to the organisation, stating: “no
published research supports a relationship between typical HR performance
benchmarks and ultimate firm performance.” Becker and Huselid believe
benchmarking fails to measure HR’s contribution to firm success, suggesting HR
professionals should judge their performance against the performance of their firm
rather than the HR efficiency of other organisations. This means, as they state: “the
measure of HR’s strategic performance must be focused internally on those unique,
strategically relevant contributions - not externally on non-strategic measures such as
cost per hire…” They add that adopting customised strategic performance measures
based on the firm’s strategy, is where HR can truly demonstrate its value. It is
suggested this will be a significant but necessary change for HR within the police
service, if sustainable operational performance is to be underpinned by effective HR
practice.
26
When considering measurement of organisational development Fitz-enz and Davison
(2002) start to highlight a link to business performance, identifying organisational
development as contributing to productivity, quality, service, responsiveness,
development and survival of the business, which is where HR should be measuring
to demonstrate contribution. They propose an HR value chain model, which provides
good examples of the outcome, impact and value-added implication of an HR
intervention, but is based on a single intervention and does not quite make the step
to identifying a consequence on operational performance, i.e. productivity. Fitz-enz
and Davison (2002) provide sound advice on demonstrating value: to ask what
difference your action or the outcome will make, and to keep asking until a visible
result appears. Ulrich (1997a p.10) makes a similar point, putting emphasis on HR
professionals whom he rightly states: “need to frame what they do in terms of the
capabilities they must create.”
A methodology for measurement of outcomes and link to business performance has
emerged with the development of the balanced scorecard approach. Yeung and
Berman (1997) built upon a balanced scorecard framework in a study which
addressed three questions central to establishing the relationship between HR and
business performance: whether HR practices make a difference in business results,
the way HR practices add value to business performance and most appropriate HR
measures to drive business performance. They argue for dramatic changes in HR
measures, away from HR-driven to business-driven measures, focusing on the entire
HR system not individual practices. By developing the right measures, they
concluded, HR would be able to demonstrate strategic relevance and firmly establish
its status as a strategic business partner, contributing to business success.
27
Ulrich (1997a p.58) also advocates adoption of a balanced scorecard approach
emphasising that to be true strategic partners, HR executives “need to be equally
accountable for all segments of the balanced scorecard, not just for the employee
dimension.” HR must: “master their business’s financial and customer issues and
recognize their contribution to the attainment of these goals.” Whilst accepting
overall accountability for the scorecard: “HR professionals should provide intellectual
leadership on the employee dimension.” In an article on ‘Measuring Human
Resources’ Ulrich (1997b) reinforced the importance of accurately measuring the
employee dimension as the basis for tracking the impact of HR, using measures of
productivity, people and process, coupled with audits of the HR department, including
processes, customer value and cost/benefit.
Becker, Huselid and Ulrich (2001) take a holistic approach to the HR system of
organisations with the HR balanced scorecard, focused on measuring HR in order to
understand whether, and if so by how much, HR architecture contributes to firm
success, importantly identifying HR deliverables that support global performance.
Ulrich and Brockbank (2005b) are clear that success of an HR initiative should be
measured on what it does for the organisation’s key stakeholders not on how well it
was designed.
Belcourt (2001) highlights a fundamental issue supporting measurement: the view of
many executives that unless HR can demonstrate impact on bottom line, it will
continue to be seen as an overhead. Belcourt believes HR’s contribution can be
measured and that this is imperative, pointing out that if contribution is not measured
it cannot be improved. Belcourt proposes a model for measuring contribution
emphasising the case for measuring HRM impact rather than the HR function. Her
28
‘5Cs of HR Effectiveness’; compliance, client satisfaction, culture management, cost
control and contribution, provide a framework for asking questions and a different
way of monitoring HR.
HR ContributionResearch seeking to establish HR’s contribution has provided evidence that effective
HR can add value and make a significant contribution to businesses. The research
outlined in this paper has considered HR contribution from different perspectives,
showing a development in thinking. Becker and Gerhart (1996 p.792) commented
that although studies had put forward a direct test of the relationship between HR
and firm financial performance there had been: “little insight into the process by
which this value was created,” finding little consensus on how to achieve the potential
of HR, other than to organise the firm’s HR system from a strategic perspective,
which it is suggested provides a starting point from which to develop the role and
delivery of HR, but needs further investigation to support the hypothesis that HR
makes a demonstrable contribution to business performance, and to establish what
HR does that makes that contribution. Gerhart and Milkovich’s (1990) research
based on the implications of compensation schemes on organisational performance
started to bring HR practices into focus as potential contributors to performance
looking at the effect of HR practices on organisational decisions and human
resources within the organisation, which is clearly an important area of research and
one that has contributed to the holistic approach to measuring HR contribution.
Arthur (1994), took a wider view of HRM, looking at groups of practices and the
contrast in effectiveness between different human resource systems -‘control’ or
‘commitment’ - on manufacturing performance, linking this with turnover, which he
29
hypothesised had a negative impact on performance. Arthur identified a gap in
literature on human resource systems at this time, citing his own earlier research
(1992) on applying cluster analysis techniques to groups of practices as one of the
first published.
Huselid’s (1995) work studying a broad range of industries and firm sizes, examining
the full range of HR practices for impact on both employment outcomes and
corporate financial performance, focused on the impact of what he called ‘high
performance work practices’ on three key areas: turnover, productivity and financial
performance, taking a strategic rather than functional perspective. Huselid
hypothesised that if as literature suggests employee behaviour, affected by HR
practices, impacts organisational performance, then turnover and productivity are
affected by effective HR practices, so providing a return on investment ultimately
impacting on financial performance.
Taking seven HR practices together Delaney and Huselid (1996) reviewed
application as a human resource system, which they identified as the appropriate
level at which to analyse impact on firm performance. Their findings indicate that
progressive practices (those affecting employee skills, motivation, and the structure
of work) did positively relate to firm performance. Wan, Kok and Ong (2002)
concluded that bundles of HR practices contribute more than individual HR
components, with effective implementation of key strategic HRM practices bringing
higher levels of organisational performance.
Evidence therefore suggests individual practices are unlikely to have the impact on
organisational performance that an effective HR system linked to organisational
30
goals can, if appropriately implemented. Becker and Gerhart (1996) recognise from
the work of Arthur (1994) that ‘rigid HRM systems’ potentially lead to less productive
environments, which is supported by Huselid and Becker (1995 cited in Becker and
Gerhart, 1996 p.784) who found bureaucratic HR can have: “economically and
statistically significant negative effects on firm profitability...” This is potentially an
issue within the police service where tension between national policies, initiatives and
regulations, and the need to align with force strategy, could have a negative impact
on HR’s ability to contribute.
Becker and Gerhart (1996 p.779) studying the impact of HRM, articulate a believe
that human resource management decisions: “are likely to have an important and
unique influence on organizational performance”, although recognising this needed
further research directly into the impact of HR decisions on performance outcomes,
such as stock performance, productivity, quality, etc. which they saw as meaningful
metrics against which to measure HR. Becker and Gerhart (1996) add weight to the
argument for HR to become a strategic partner, seeing this as HR going beyond its
traditional role, further recognising88 HR architecture rather than individual practices
supporting firm performance.
Yeung and Berman (1997) found evidence from their review of research that HR
practices do make a difference to business results and that ‘synergy and congruence’
among practices had an important impact. Their aim was to develop a conceptual
framework that outlined specific ways HR could exert an impact, leading them to
propose a framework, building on Kaplan and Norton’s balanced scorecard (1992)
and Ulrich and Lake’s (1990) strategic HR framework, for HR to develop the right
measures against which to determine overall impact on business performance.
31
The importance of joining up HR practices and aligning practices and the HR system
with organisational strategy appears to be key, as Youndt, Snell, Dean and Lepak
(1996) acknowledge from research evidencing HR activities as central to the link
between employee capabilities and performance, further adding to the debate by
outlining two perspectives on how this can be tracked: The universal or best practice
approach, which implies a direct relationship between particular approaches to
human resources and performance, and the contingency approach where the
organisation’s strategic posture is seen to either augment or diminish the impact of
HR practices. Youndt et al do not see these approaches as mutually exclusive,
seeing each adding value to the discussion, and utilising both in their study of
manufacturing plants, which found support for the hypothesis that an HR system
focused on enhancing human capital is valuable in strengthening operational
performance. As they summarise (p.853): “maximizing performance appears to
depend on properly aligning HR systems with manufacturing strategy.”
Research has shown HR does contribute to performance, and most effectively as a
strategic partner involved in development and implementation of strategy. If Becker
and Huselid (2003) are correct in their assertion that executing a firm's strategy
successfully has a six times greater impact on shareholder value than choice of
strategy, and in the role identified for HR as a strategic partner turning strategy into
implementation, the case for an HR strategy which underpins organisational strategy
is clear. Wright, Snell and Jacobson (2004) review approaches to HR strategy and
provide examples of ways firms can move from an HR-focused to a business-focused
strategy, concluding that although the link between HR strategies and business has
improved, significant progress is still needed. Wright Snell and Jacobson put forward
the inside-out versus outside-in approach to HR strategy development, outside-in
32
being the approach to strive for with HR strategy built from the starting point of the
business – taking account of the customer, competitor, and people issues faced, in
deriving the HR strategy. Citing the work of Golden and Ramanujam (1985) in
grouping HR strategy development into four models to assess the linkage between
HR and the business:
The administrative linkage: HR function completely divorced from the strategy
of the business.
The one-way linkage: top managers provide the HR function with the business
strategy, HR then develop practices and processes to help implement.
The two-way linkage: HR provide information to top management for
consideration in development of business strategy, business strategy is then
handed back to HR to help in implementation.
The ‘Integrative’ linkage: senior HR executive part of the top management
team, at the table, contributing during development of business strategy.
Wright, Snell and Jacobson (2004) sought to establish progress in strategy
development, concluding that HR functions through their strategies are better able to
add value by taking an outside-in approach. This accords with the view of other
writers in relation to the strategic role of HR, the importance of understanding
external customers and of linking HR strategy to business strategy.
HR Integration Ulrich and Brockbank (2005b p.6) advocate: HR “must align practices with the
requirements of internal and external stakeholders.” In line with the outside-in
approach, and perhaps providing the answer to ensuring HR contribution to
organisational performance. How alignment is achieved however is more complex.
33
Ulrich and Brockbank present five elements forming a blueprint for the HR value
proposition, as explained by Ulrich (2005 cited in HR Focus). Integration within the
business through: knowledge of external business realities; serving external and
internal stakeholders; crafting HR practices, (for people, performance, information
and work); building resources (HR organisation and strategy); and assuring HR
professionalism, via roles and competencies, providing a sound basis for HR to add
value and contribute to organisational performance. The importance of these
competencies enabling HR to contribute are outlined by Ulrich and Brockbank
(2005b), with strategic contribution identified as accounting for almost half of HR’s
total influence and therefore most critical to business success.
Sanifilippo’s (2006, cited in HR Focus) checklist approach to making HR
indispensable has some similarity with Ulrich and Brockbank's (2005b) approach:
‘positioning as a strategic partner, serving internal clients and adding value, staying
current, connected and competitive, promoting achievements and asking for support’.
Sanfilippo’s (p.7) advice: ask everyday: “How can I impact the performance of my
company?” An obvious question, challenging HR professionals to think and operate
in this way.
Advocating the role of strategic partner Ulrich (1997a) recognises in performing this
role HR professionals work with line managers to develop and manage a process,
which creates an organisation to meet business requirements. The importance of
aligning HR plans to business plans cannot be overstated, with integration leading to
a plan highlighting HR practices that are priorities for delivering business results,
reinforcing that HRM is integral to the strategic management of any business.
34
As Belcourt (2001) summarises, research has shown that HR practices can have an
impact on organisational performance in measurable ways, with the best studies
establishing that sophisticated and integrated HRM practices have a positive effect
on employee performance by increasing knowledge, skills and abilities, improving
motivation, reducing shirking and increasing retention of competent employees.
Integration was raised as a key issue by Becker and Gerhart (1996) who proposed
that HR systems only have a systematic impact on the bottom line when they are
embedded in a firm’s management infrastructure helping solve real business
problems, citing Stalk, Evans and Shulman (1992) as stating that a properly aligned
HR system would represent a core capability. Becker and Gerhart (1996 p.797)
conclude that both the HR system and the HR function “must have as their principal
focus a set of properly aligned HR policies that solve business problems and support
the firm’s operating and strategic initiatives.”
Conclusions and areas for researchIt is hypothesised that the ultimate role of HR is to ensure the organisation gets the
very best from its people resources and to do this effectively HR needs to be properly
positioned. Four enablers have been identified from the literature review as required
for HR to be positioned to effectively contribute: the role of HR, measurement of HR,
service delivery and added value, underpinned by integration of HR within the
business. If these four enablers are in place it is suggested a link between HR and
operational performance will be clearly discernable and HR will be effectively
contributing to operational performance. This provides a framework for the study of
HR contribution to operational performance in the police service. Investigating the
role of HR against the hypothesis that this has a number of facets with operating at a
strategic level essential. Considering whether HR measurement is designed to
35
demonstrate impact rather than efficiency and effectiveness, whether service delivery
is effective, business-focused and adding value leading to HR credibility, and
whether HR is integrated, with HR strategy aligned to business strategy. By
establishing whether HR is positioned to contribute and whether there is a link
between HR and operational performance it is suggested the question of whether HR
is contributing to operational performance will be answered.
36
Methodology
Introduction The driving factor in establishing an area for study was professional interest in
demonstrating how HR can positively contribute to organisational performance. The
police service is experiencing a period of change as forces rise to the challenge of
delivering improved performance with current resources. The police service has
become increasingly performance-focused in relation to operational policing, with
support departments seemingly lagging behind in development of performance
indicators forming an integrated part of performance management.
The method of study starts from the researcher’s assertion that HR within the police
service is acknowledged as important, but is neither as fully integrated into the
business, nor widely recognised as a contributor to operational performance. The
literature review provided direction on areas to be explored, addressing: “Is HR
contributing to operational performance?” through two sub-questions: “is HR
positioned to contribute?” and “is there a link between effective HR and operational
performance?” The areas identified for investigation were role, measurement,
service delivery and added value, and integration, which provided the basis for
design of the research. This chapter shows how these areas were explored with
participants included in the study.
Research DesignThe literature review provided an understanding of academic and professional
thinking on HR contribution to business performance, and directed design of primary
research, combining the main study areas which, it is asserted, address whether HR
37
is positioned to contribute and whether there is a link between effective HR and
operational performance, together answering whether HR is currently contributing.
Research has identified various roles for HR and considered how these contribute to
business performance, with the need for HR to operate strategically to fully contribute
being a clear theme. It was therefore important to understand HR’s role in the police
service, as was HR measurement and how this was linked to operational
performance, with the starting point of establishing whether measurement was in
place and on what basis, recognising the right measures are required to demonstrate
HR’s contribution. Customer perception of service delivery and adding value was
investigated by testing whether HR was meeting the needs of managers, perceived
as adding value and contributing, acknowledging perception of effectiveness leads to
greater opportunity to contribute. HR integration was identified as essential for HR to
make an effective contribution leading the research to be designed to consider how
well HR is integrated within forces. The research methodology and the methods
used were designed around these areas, in addressing the sub-questions to answer
the question of whether HR is contributing and to provide enough insight for
recommendations to be developed.
To fully explore the four areas, the research was designed to gain the views of a
range of stakeholders requiring different research methods focusing on both primary
and secondary sources, covering a number of perspectives gained from contact with
stakeholders identified as having influence on the direction of HR, along with as
many forces as possible and as many operational managers as achievable to gain a
representative perspective across the service.
38
Research design took cognisance of the definition provided by Johnson (1994 cited
in White 2005 p.21): “A focused and systemic enquiry that goes beyond generally
available knowledge to acquire specialised and detailed information, providing a
basis for analysis and elucidatory comment on the topic of enquiry.” With this in mind
research methodology was designed from the starting point of collection of
secondary data. Published data readily available including HMIC Baseline
Assessments and PPAF performance for all forces utilised, and reviewed for the
forces studied in detail.
To provide the depth and breadth of data required, obtaining both detailed views of
key stakeholders and comparative views, primary research was designed to use both
qualitative and quantitative techniques to address all aspects of the research
question. Qualitative research included semi-structured one-to-one interviews, a
focus group and observation data collection techniques designed to gather
perceptions and opinions and gain a detailed understanding of current practice.
Quantitative techniques were used in the form of questionnaire surveys, designed to
collect comparable data from a number of participants, which was both nominal (no
natural ordering) and ordinal (natural ordering) used to provide an overall evaluation
to rank and compare.
The study encompasses the police service in England and Wales, with all forty-three
forces included to gain a representative view. It was identified that study of how HR
operates within forces was required, with one force, Warwickshire, selected for
detailed primary research due to access of the researcher to operational
management and opportunity for participant observation. It was recognised that one
force would not necessarily be representative so additional forces were sought for
39
detailed study. As Bechhofer and Paterson (2000) state the decision on where to
carry out research and on whom to focus is at the heart of the research design. In
the police service, the population of forty-three forces was fixed; Warwickshire the
obvious choice for study, but there was choice in additional forces. To make the
research manageable within given timescales a limit to number of forces studied was
needed, leading to three additional forces being designed into the research, providing
a sample of nearly 10% so enabling a broader insight and understanding of HR
delivery, and findings to be compared.
It was recognised that key national stakeholders would provide an important
contribution to the aims of the study; these were identified as the Home Office,
ACPO, HMIC and the Association of Police Authorities (APA). Other opportunities for
information gathering to complement the study were built into the design including
observation of an HR performance meeting at the Metropolitan Police, the largest
force in the UK, included on the recommendation of the HMI as a good example of
HR integration with operational performance with an effective structure for monitoring
and a performance framework in place.
Methods chosenData gathering took a number of forms each designed to contribute to the research
objective in a systematic and structured way, building on the literature review and
collection of secondary data. The starting point for primary research was to collect
the views and opinions of key stakeholders to set the context of HR. Semi-structured
interviews were identified as a way of opening a detailed dialogue whilst ensuring
areas of specific interest to the research were addressed.
40
Questionnaire surveys of Chief Constables (Appendix 2) and Directors/Heads of HR
(Appendix 3) were an effective way to engage forces, taking into account the
geographical nature of the survey population. The potential for low response rates
was recognised and steps were taken to mitigate this with the significance of the
survey being outlined with a statement of support from HIMC. E-mail was identified
as the most effective way to distribute surveys, with alternative options for return built
in along with the opportunity to return anonymously. Follow up on non-return was
planned and extensively used.
The approach of researching one force in detail enabled the use of a range of
research techniques which combined to provide a picture of how HR operates within
a force, and enabled gaps in establishing the link between HR and operational
performance to be explored. Methods used included semi-structured interviews with
managers and a focus group. Participants were provided with areas for discussion in
advance and given a summary of the dissertation aims. The interviews and focus
group were designed to broaden the study’s representation and ensure all areas
were explored, providing the opportunity to talk in detail with managers and explore
from their ‘customer perspective’: HR’s role in contributing to operational
performance, perception of whether this currently happens, and whether they could
see or had thought of potential links, recognising that if customers do not see the
need for HR to contribute there will not be the demand for this to happen. The focus
group environment enabled managers to discuss ideas and views and to explore
experiences and issues in a structured way. Participant observation was carried out
at force performance meetings (Appendix 4) supported by collection of secondary
data including minutes of meetings, reports and published strategies and plans.
41
In meeting the aim of attaining a wider understanding of HR within forces, a plan for
study of the additional forces was developed aimed at identifying differences leading
to a greater or lesser contribution. Support of the forces was gained by formal
contact with Chief Constables (Appendix 5) and by formal and informal contact with
the respective HR Directors (Appendix 6). Methods used included collection of
secondary data (Force Strategy, HMIC Baseline report, HR Strategy and Plan, HR
performance framework) and semi-structured interviews with HR Directors to gather
detailed information and explore areas of practical application of HRM. Question
areas for interviews (Appendix 7) were provided in advance and included HMIC
grading, monitoring and measurement of HR performance, the role of HR,
involvement in force strategy, development of HR strategy and HR integration.
A questionnaire survey of operational managers within the four forces studied
(Appendix 8) was used to gather the perspective of managers across ranks so that a
comparison of how HR is perceived to operate and contribute could be made within
the evaluation framework.
An observation checklist (Appendix 9) was developed to effectively observe the
Metropolitan Police performance meeting. The detailed evaluation report provided
for the meeting was read in advance and advantage of opportunities to ask questions
before and after the meeting was taken.
Link with the literature reviewAreas for investigation identified from the literature review: role, measurement,
service delivery and added value, and integration, were explored with all participants
in the research. Each of the methods used to gather data followed these areas, with
42
detailed questions developed under each of headings, to gain the perspectives of key
stakeholders on each area.
The research reviewed provided a premise that to fully contribute to business
performance, HR has to be engaged at a strategic level. Understanding the
viewpoint of Chief Constables and how they engaged HR within their forces was
therefore key. The wider HR perspective was sought to gain a perspective on the
role and integration of HR in forces, providing the rationale for Directors/Heads of HR
to be surveyed. An area of questioning specifically on HR measurement was
developed as part of the primary research, complimented with examples of
secondary data so providing evidence of current measurement areas. The
importance of customer perception was recognised leading to the survey of
managers, who could give their perspective on service provided, how this added
value to operational policing, and provide an insight into the view of managers on the
role and level of integration of HR into policing.
Population investigated To fully address the research question, in line with the aims of the study and
literature review, it was important to include a broad range of participants to the
extent achievable within available timeframes with the need to engage key
stakeholders in the development and delivery of HRM in the police service identified
at the outset. Interviews were carried out with representatives of the Home Office,
(Appendix 10) HMIC (Appendix 11) and the Association of Chief Police Officers
(ACPO) (Appendix 12), to understand the national perspective on HR contribution.
The APA was identified as a key stakeholder, Police Authorities being “the bridge
between local people and the police” (Williams, 2004). Two Police Authority
43
members were interviewed exploring their role, governance and scrutiny, and
understanding how they saw HR contributing to operational policing. For reasons of
accessibility, the Chair of the Police Authority and lead on HR for Warwickshire
Police were interviewed. (Appendices 13 and 14)
Taking on board advice provided by White (2005) that if the population is fifty or less,
the whole population should be used in the sample, all Chief Constables in England
and Wales (43) were included in the survey population to understand differences in
HR’s role within forces and contribution made, however it was disappointing that only
three Chief Constables responded to the survey.
A survey undertaken by HMIC in 2006 indicated that HR was not operating at the
most senior level in all forces, and showed a lack of consistency in terms of role and
level of the most senior HR practitioner with a mixture of Director and Head of HR job
titles, not all post incumbents seen as the HR lead, which in some cases was the
Assistant Chief Constable, or Director of Resources. For the purpose of this study
surveys were sent to individuals designated as Director or Head of HR (all referred to
in this study as HR Directors). Again with a population of forty-three a survey of all
forces, excluding Warwickshire where the researcher was the post incumbent, was
undertaken to understand how HR professionals saw their role and had developed
the function to contribute to operational performance. Twelve surveys were returned,
a response rate of 29%. The researcher did not complete a survey to avoid
influencing findings in line with the hypothesis.
The internal customer: managers, with direct responsibility for operational policing,
were important in understanding HR’s contribution to operational performance. 120
44
managers (30 from each force, as a statistically significant number) were surveyed;
aimed at exploring views of HR’s contribution in terms of role, service delivery,
adding value and integration. The process used for selection in Warwickshire was to
produce a list of managers (Sergeant to Chief Superintendent) in alphabetic order
and to select on the basis of every tenth name, ensuring representation at each rank.
The HR Directors from the other forces were asked to identify participants in a similar
way, which were then provided to the researcher. Survey return rates differed
between forces (Table 3.1), an overall response rate of 23.33% being achieved.
Table 3.1:Managers’ response rate
Research was conducted in Warwickshire for reasons of accessibility including
interviews with the Chief Constable (Appendix 15) and five operational managers
(Appendix 16). The Assistant Chief Constable (Territorial Operations) was selected
based on role and responsibility for delivery of operational policing. With two Basic
Command Units, responsible for performance in geographical areas, the Commander
from one and Operations Superintendent from the other were interviewed based on
availability. One District Chief Inspector and one Sector Inspector were randomly
selected. Warwickshire provided suitable logistics for a focus group, (Appendix 17)
with fourteen potential participants selected from the list of managers on the basis of
every twentieth name, having excluded those selected for interview or to receive a
questionnaire. In the event eight managers ranked Sergeant to Chief Inspector
attended.
45
The decision on additional forces to study was made in discussion with the Lead
Staff Officer to HMI (Personnel and Training), leading to Cheshire, Dorset and Surrey
being identified. The criteria for selection was forces demonstrating best practice in
HR, which was seen as crucial to meeting the aim of investigating the link between
effective HR and operational performance. When matched with overall force
performance it was evident that the four forces provided a spread across the
spectrum of performance.
A summary of respondents and response rates is provided in Appendix 18.
Reliability and validityTo ensure reliability and validity in the research design the original aims of the study
were considered and used throughout the design process with the research question
and sub-questions continually referred to. White (2005) explains that validity is about
ensuring the research design fully addresses the research questions and objectives
to be answered and achieved. The research questions and aims of the study were
relevant in selecting the survey population and in determining primary and secondary
data required. In identifying each participant, consideration was given to which aim
each supported and what they would contribute to the research question. In
preparation for each interview, the relevant aims were extracted and provided to the
participant along with questions developed to address specific elements of the
research. The research questions and areas for investigation were used to form the
basis of all questioning, with continual review to ensure these areas were being
thoroughly examined with regular appraisal to ensure the right quantity and quality of
data was being collected to address the research question, with supplementary
46
secondary data collected where appropriate, and to provide enough evidence to
develop conclusions and recommendations.
As White (2005 p.25) defines “reliability is about consistency and research, and
whether another researcher could use your design and obtain similar findings”. The
design of this research was planned to be as comprehensive as possible, enabling
data to be compared and analysed. Qualitative data was collected to identify themes
and trends in current practice and the position of HR within the service in relation to
performance delivery. Quantitative data was collected on HR and operational
performance already measured and available (PPAF) and from the surveys and
consolidated in a framework for evaluation of HR contribution. Quantitative and
qualitative research has been combined to look at the same issue – HR contribution
– from a number of viewpoints to verify the conclusions reached, through a number
of different approaches or method triangulation to provide a thorough understanding.
(White 2005) This has been developed and recorded to enable the same study to be
carried out again.
Methodological weaknesses.It was acknowledged, Warwickshire, although providing accessibility might not be
representative of the police service, and the role of the researcher within the force,
although having the benefit of understanding HR, could be a source of bias in
determining good practice. This was managed with the inclusion of additional forces
to provide a more representative study, and by the researcher taking an independent
perspective in development of the research methodology and a dispassionate
approach in undertaking the research.
47
The researcher working within the service facilitated access to stakeholders, but was
acknowledged as a potential source of bias in determining the survey population. It
was therefore important that participants were identified entirely on the basis of their
contribution not on personal contact. Advice was therefore sought from HMIC on
appropriate interviewees and forces for in-depth study with care taken to, as far as
possible, randomly select subjects for interview and survey completion. The
researcher was however still known to many of the participants, which meant
appropriate preparation in advance of contact and formal parameters and ground
rules for discussions was imperative. The researcher was careful to outline the
objectives of the research and to keep a line between general discussion and
personal opinion on topic areas and the formal questioning process. At times this
was difficult when participants raised questions which the researcher would in other
forums have answered.
Research was designed to investigate and evaluate the current contribution of HR it
was therefore important in designing questionnaires, interviewing and the focus
group that the researcher kept focus on current activity and perception rather than
what could or should be. To elicit a true account of their perception interviewees
were asked to be open and honest as if they were talking to someone unknown,
pointing out the aim to develop for the future so any ‘negative’ feedback would be
both valued and positively contributing.
Potential for bias was at the forefront of consideration throughout the research design
phase, whilst undertaking the research and in carrying out the analysis. At all times
the researcher was conscious of the need to remain dispassionate and not to allow
personal perceptions to influence the study. Equally, it was important not to allow
48
particular respondents to have more influence or their views to carry more weight
because of their role, the aim being to take a holistic view.
Questions were designed to be as open as possible to allow participants to fully
express their views, whilst permitting comparator analysis. Questionnaires were
therefore designed to allow comment and freestyle answers alongside multiple-
choice options. A weakness of questionnaires is the potential that questions will not
be clearly understood. To test ease of understanding and relevance of questions,
they were provided in advance to the three HR Directors included in the study. This
provided an opportunity to gain views on the questionnaires being sent to Chief
Constables and HR Directors and to ensure they were happy with the questions
being posed of managers within their force. Comments were received resulting in
the notable addition of the employment law section in the managers’ questionnaire.
The biggest concern within the methodology has been non-response bias, despite
considerable effort in chasing potential respondents, leading to analysis being based
on a less representative body of data than initially planned, making comparison
between forces potentially less meaningful.
SummaryThe methodology and methods used for completion of this research have been
developed in line with the original aims and specifically to answer the research
question: “Is HR contributing to operational performance in the police service?” The
methodology was expressly designed to investigate areas established from the
literature review, which it is hypothesised provide the platform for HR to be positioned
to contribute and effectively demonstrate the link to operational policing. It was
49
important to investigate the current position of HR and to ask the right questions to
enable a framework for evaluation of HR contribution to be developed whilst gaining
enough insight to make recommendations for the future.
50
Presentation of Results
IntroductionThis chapter outlines the main findings from data collected in addressing: “is HR
contributing to operational performance?” based on investigation into four areas
identified as fundamental in answering:
Is HR positioned to contribute to operational performance?
Is there a link between effective HR and operational performance?
The researcher’s stance in evaluating HR contribution is that to contribute, HR needs
to be properly positioned, which means performing the right role, having effective
measurement in place, delivering a service which is recognised by the receivers of
service as adding value, and being fully integrated into the business of the
organisation. The results therefore consider whether HR in the police service is
currently positioned in relation to these areas, taking evidence from across the
service. To determine whether there is a link between HR and operational
performance a framework for evaluation has been developed as an empirical tool for
determining contribution from the perspective of operational managers as receivers
of HR service in the four forces studied.
In line with the methodology outlined data has been gathered from both secondary
and primary sources, including interviews with national stakeholders: HMIC, ACPO,
APA and the Home Office, providing understanding of the wider context of HR within
the service; surveys of all forces; and detailed study of four forces. Response rates
have been lower in some areas than anticipated, however a broad range of views
has been obtained which has enabled this analysis to be completed. (Appendix 18)
51
These results lead to a conclusion on whether HR is positioned to contribute and
whether a link can be discerned in forces graded as ‘Good’ in HR, so answering
whether HR is currently contributing to operational performance.
The Role of HRThe literature review provided evidence that role is significant in maximising HR
contribution to organisational performance, highlighting the importance of operating
at a strategic level, now widely acknowledged as where HR should be positioned to
contribute fully.
HR’s role in the police service was considered from a number of angles with Ulrich
and Brockbank’s (2005a) five roles used within the questionnaires to establish
breadth of role and perception of competence. Direct questions were posed on level
of HR engagement, recognising the importance of operating at a strategic level. The
expectations of operational managers of HR’s role were explored, as were the
functional areas on which HR activity is focused. The views of senior managers and
HR practitioners were sought along with those of key national stakeholders, to assist
in understanding HR’s role and what constitutes effective HR in the police service.
Ulrich and Brockbank rolesFigure 4.1 shows the views of Chief Constables and HR Directors in the fifteen forces
responding to the survey. The question posed was the extent HR professionals take
on each role. Full results are presented in Appendix 19.
52
Figure 4.1: HR Roles
Strategic PartnerAccepting the importance of operating at a strategic level in positioning HR to
contribute, research aimed to determine arrangements in forces. Differences in HR
lead were recognised in the methodology, leading to respondents being asked to
provide their designation. Six stated Director of HR, one Director of Personnel, four
Head of HR, one Head of People and Organisational Development, and one Policy
and Planning Officer. 83% indicated they were full members of the most senior
decision-making team, which all Chief Constables stated was the case. This was not
however supported by answers on role and competence as a strategic partner:
Table 4.1: Strategic Partner
53
Results indicate that HR is seen to have a role as strategic partner, however
responses on competence identify this as an area for further development, borne out
when considering the response of managers in rating HR on strategic contribution:
Table 4.2: Strategic Contribution
If HR Directors are operating strategically, this should included contributing to
business planning and delivering force strategy. The role articulated by HR Directors
ranged from full involvement as a Chief Officer to tactical provision of people related
information to support the business plan; the importance of HR in business planning
clearly recognised. In delivering force strategy involvement focused on delivering the
people aspects of the strategy, which accords with the importance Ulrich (1997a)
gives to taking responsibility for the employee dimension of the balanced scorecard,
but in most cases this did not extend to HR being equally accountable for all
segments.
When asked what part HR played in the business planning process, 29% of
managers did not know. Those who provided an answer ranged from identifying the
HR Director as part of the Chief Officer team, to providing information on recruitment
and planning staff numbers. Some themes were identifiable in delivery of force
strategy; ensuring the right people with the right skills were in place, employee
relations, and training. Table 4.3 shows managers’ view of HR in delivering force
strategy.
54
Table 4.3: Delivery of Force Strategy
The HMI (Personnel and Training) was clear HR has a fundamental role in
contributing to strategic planning: “providing comment on whether the plan is doable
in relation to the people issues, and in scanning the horizon”. This view was clearly
understood and articulated by many of the HR Directors.
Functional ExpertThere was clear agreement on the role of functional expert with 92% of HR Directors
and all Chief Constables indicating this was always undertaken. As key stakeholders
in policing it was important to understand the views of Police Authority members on
HR’s role. One member interviewed saw HR responding to the policing plan in
relation to HR processes - delivering headcount requirements, retention, leading on
resourcing, management of sickness and provision of advice to managers. The other
saw HR as reactive, providing a service to management, doing the basics quietly and
well, and having a role in advising on policy and decision-making. It is argued both
align most closely with the functional expert role.
Human Capital DeveloperUlrich (1997a p.10) provides a clear role and purpose: “HR professionals need to
frame what they do in terms of the capabilities they must create. It is no longer
sufficient to hire, train, or reward individuals; these activities must now be undertaken
in the interest of creating a set of organizational capabilities.” It is difficult to disagree
55
if HR is to fully contribute. It was therefore important to assess whether HR was
undertaking this role, acknowledging that operating at a strategic level alone is not
enough, HR needs to take responsibility for identifying skill requirements and
developing the workforce to meet those requirements; in the police service leading
on workforce modernisation and succession planning. Responses indicated this was
not always happening:
Table 4.4: Human Capital Developer
The role of human capital developer matches the description provided by the Chief
Constable interviewed who outlined the importance of accurate record keeping
leading to organisational grip on people numbers and costs, with a clear
understanding of what that information means to future staffing needs, rank, skills,
diversity; using this to make the right interventions.
Employee AdvocateThe employee advocate role ensures: “the employer-employee relationship is one of
reciprocal value.” Ulrich and Brockbank (2005a p.24) and is therefore key:
Table 4.5: Employee Advocate
56
Leadership“HR leaders need to lead and value their own function. Before they can develop
other leaders, HR professionals must exhibit the leadership skills that they expect in
others." Ulrich and Brockbank (2005a p.27) Results suggest the need for
development:
Table 4.6: Leadership
HR competence Accepting the roles identified by Ulrich and Brockbank and that HR must operate in
them all, it follows HR need the competence to contribute to business performance.
Competence does not have to be vested in one person, but the function must ensure
it has the range of skills. It was therefore important to establish the position in the
police service. Chief Constables and HR Directors were asked how often HR
professionals demonstrated competence in each area, managers to rate HR against
each. (Appendix 20 contains a full breakdown of data).
Figure 4.2: HR competence
57
Figure 4.2 highlights a focus on HR delivery, comparable with the view of managers.
Figure 4.3: Managers’ rating of HR.
If a simple multiplier (excellent 3, good 2, fair 1, poor -1) is applied, (Appendix 21) HR
is rated highest in HR delivery (Table 4.7), although level of competence in all areas
is a concern, the mean scores not reaching good in any area:
Table 4.7: Managers’ rating of Competence
HR’s role within Forces Managers were asked to comment on the importance of roles identified by the
researcher as core HR activities within forces:
A: development of strategy for management and development of people
58
B: development of HR policies
C: putting in place HR practices which contribute to operational performance
D: developing and delivering a training plan
E: provision of HR advice
F: administration of HR processes
G: provision of management information
Figure 4.4: Importance of HR roles – managers
When a simple formula is applied (essential 3, value adding 2, nice to have 1,
irrelevant -1) to weight responses (Appendix 22), roles can be ranked in importance:
Table 4.8: Rank Order of Importance
Strategy and policy are clearly seen as important, and on average all roles identified,
other than management information, are rated higher than adding value.
The study focused on HR as a system, but did seek to identify key HR practices,
finding some commonality in views of Chief Constables, HR Directors and Police
EssentialValue AddingNice to haveI rrelevantNo opinion
Role of HR - importance of key roles
A B C D E F G
Frequ
en
cy
1816141210
86420
EssentialValue AddingNice to haveI rrelevantNo opinion
Role of HR - importance of key roles
59
Authority interviewees. Learning and development, attendance management, health
and safety, recruitment, and workforce planning being the main areas identified. This
was broadly in line with managers whose top five areas were recruitment, learning
and development, absence, health and welfare, and HR policy. Questioning also
aimed to establish role performed in terms of policy, decision-making,
communication, monitoring, and day-to-day management of systems and processes,
to understand how HR saw their role as leaders. HR Directors clearly saw their role
to set policy, communicate and monitor, with a slightly lower response on both
decision-making and day-to-day management.
Operational managers interviewed were asked if they believed HR had a role in
contributing to operational policing. All five believed they did, one outlined a view
that HR performance must be directly linked to service delivery. Another saw HR as
fundamental in raising standards and expectations of staff to deliver performance,
another HR as the foundation on which organisational capability is built; ensuring the
right people are in place with the right skills and ability to learn and develop, and
identifying HR’s role to ensure the right culture is in place to develop the right
attitudes, supporting managers to manage.
HR MeasurementIt was important to identify how HR was being measured and whether importance of
measurement was acknowledged, working from the premise if you don’t measure,
you can’t improve. As Pfeffer and Sutton (2006 p.25) articulate: “If HR professionals
are truly to make a difference to their organisations, they need to hear the truth, dig
out the data and act on it – not rely on hunches and hearsay.” The hypothesis is for
HR to be positioned to contribute it needs to know how it is contributing, with HR
60
activity underpinned by appropriate measurement. Questioning explored what was
being measured and whether HR performance measures were measuring impact on
operational performance; contending that measurement in itself is not sufficient, but
having the right metrics interpreted and leading to action demonstrates and improves
contribution.
There was clear evidence of measurement but further investigation was needed.
Chief Constables and HR Directors were asked how they measured and assessed
HR performance:
Table 4.9: HR Measurement
The survey specifically questioned benchmarking, as a starting point for comparing
and identifying good practice, although it is contended that HR integrated within the
business, developing the right outcome related measures against force strategy, and
measuring improvement against previous performance is more relevant. 80% said
they did benchmark, all against other forces, 75% with other organisations and 83%
against previous performance. Table 4.10 shows information used:
61
Table 4.10: Information used to benchmark
Uses of benchmarking ranged from quick comparison to review of HR service
delivery design. One force referred to assessment of cost effective delivery, with the
majority using benchmarking to identify areas of best practice and improve
performance.
Lawler, Levenson and Boudreau (2004) call for HR to demonstrate impact to gain a
strategic role. Performance indicators that measure HR impact are needed: metrics
that demonstrate the link between HR activity and organisational performance.
Consideration was given to whether HR metrics had progressed from efficiency and
effectiveness to impact. Forces were asked to indicate ‘primary’ purpose of HR
measurement (a number indicating more than one), and whether performance
indicators were HR or Business-Driven:
Table 4.11: Measurement
62
To explore type of measurement, HR Directors were asked for examples of data
collected under the headings of efficiency, effectiveness and impact. This provided a
mixed response on data measuring efficiency and effectiveness - sickness,
recruitment and training data figuring in both. Areas identified as measurement of
impact included: absence management, exit interviews, impact of policies, turnover,
performance trends, acting duties, and agency staff employed.
Questionnaires asked respondents to list key performance indicators for HR. Table
4.12 shows the top five from each survey illustrating consistency.
Table 4.12: Key Performance Indicators
Other areas identified by more than one HR Director were: effective use of
resources, resource availability, mix, and skills and customer satisfaction but only
one mentioned improving operational performance.
The performance indicators outlined by HMI were “workforce planning, understanding
and responding to demand management, ensuring HR is an integral part of the
63
performance management regime and developing people management indicators of
which effective PDR is key”.
Police Authority interviewees highlighted ensuring HR is providing a good service,
focusing on measurement of customer satisfaction, the importance of which was
recognised in relation to the internal customer, with 87% of Chief Constables/HR
Directors saying this was measured:
Table 4.13: Customer Satisfaction
Information was gathered formally through staff satisfaction surveys and informally
through seeking feedback.
Indication was given of HR performance data being used in managing the
organisation and improving performance, processes and procedures, proactively
discussed in force performance meetings, Police Authority HR committees and HR
management meetings, with local operational meetings also identified by Chief
Constables and HR Directors. Interestingly, only 53% of operational managers
stated they attended meetings where HR performance was discussed. The focus
group indicated general concerns on availability of performance data, how
measurement had become a stick, and difficulty in measuring important
softer/qualitative areas which because difficult did not get measured. Further that
64
performance measurement encourages silo working as managers strive to deliver
against their own performance measures.
Recognising the importance of identifying how data was being used and by whom,
managers were asked what data HR provided:
Table 4.14: Data provided by HR
It is suggested that if outcome-focused HR metrics are in place, HR performance will
automatically be integrated within force performance, positioning HR to contribute to
operational performance. All Chief Constables and HR Directors said HR
performance formed part of the force performance framework however only 53% of
managers said this was the case, 35% did not know and 12% said it was not.
Measures outlined as part of force performance frameworks included sickness,
diversity, turnover, PDR, course attendance, and recruitment.
The Police Authority’s role in monitoring HR performance was articulated, with
structures identified by all forces for Police Authority scrutiny, largely by HR
committees not within overall performance, which as one Police Authority interviewee
commented meant it was not joined up. On the whole the Police Authority appeared
to be looking more at HR effectiveness than impact with one interviewee not seeing
65
the Police Authority’s role to link HR performance to force performance, which is
disappointing, given the Police Authority are the interface with the external customer.
60% of Chief Constables/HR Directors said their HMIC grading was a fair indicator of
the contribution they believed HR was making to force performance. 53% of
managers agreed, 35% disagreed, 12% did not reply. The general view of HR
Directors on relevance of HMIC grading was that it was of value; comments included
the grading being relevant as ‘effective HR is key to delivering the business’, that ‘HR
grade should reflect the organisation as a whole’, and not being ‘convinced that there
is currently a link between HR grade and force performance’. The view of HMI was
that inspections had in the past focused on HR effectiveness and efficiency, but
aimed to be more proactive in looking at outcomes, recognising that making the link
between HR and operational policing is vital with service delivery so dependent on
the performance of people.
HR Service Delivery and Added ValueUlrich (1997a p.viii), introducing HR’s role in delivering organisational capability by
focusing on outcomes, stressed HR Departments need to: “move their HR
professionals beyond the roles of policy police and regulatory watchdogs to become
partners, players, and pioneers in delivering value.” Taking this on board,
questioning investigated how far HR had progressed from the perspective of
managers.
HR Service DeliveryThe main focus of research into service delivery was to gain the views of operational
managers, the receivers of service, recognising the importance placed by both Ulrich
66
and Fitz-enz on customer satisfaction, and Ulrich and Brockbank’s (2005b p.2) point:
“when others receive value from HR, HR will be credible, respected, and influence.”
The starting point was to establish whether forces had set standards for HR service
delivery: 60% said they had, 33% that they planned to. Evidence was provided of
these being monitored through formal performance meetings and/or service level
agreements, but little evidence of how the standards were measured was supplied.
Of the 29 managers responding to this question, 59% stated they believed standards
to be in place, 42% of whom were from a force where they were not, whereas 68%
who said they were not in place were from forces with defined standards. This lack
of clarity made it difficult to accurately assess whether standards were being met.
Table 4.15: HR Standards
Operational managers interviewed generally indicated satisfaction as customers of
HR, giving positive examples of HR providing support when needed and the link
between the training plan and the business of the force. Areas for improvement were
management information, and proactivity in supporting managers to manage poor
performance.
67
Managers were asked to comment on the effectiveness of HR in relation to roles
identified by the researcher, which they had rated on importance:
Figure 4.5: Effectiveness of HR
Overall the results were not encouraging: in only four roles were HR rated as
exceeding requirements and by low percentages. The findings showed HR to be
most effective in development of HR policies, followed by administration, with only
38% stating HR were meeting requirements in relation to strategy development.
When a simple formula is applied (Appendix 23) to weight responses (Exceeds 3,
Meets 2, Sometimes meets 1, Rarely meets -1) perceived effectiveness is rated and
ranked:
Table 4.16: Rank Order - Effectiveness
A clear disparity is apparent between importance and perceived effectiveness,
particularly evident in relation to strategy and HR practices both ranking far higher in
1 - Exceeds2 - Meets3 - Sometimes Meets4 - Rarely Meetsx - No Opinion
HR Service Delivery - effectiveness in Key Roles
RolesA.1 B.1 C.1 D.1 E.1 F.1 G.1
Fre
qu
en
cy
2422201816141210
86420
1 - Exceeds2 - Meets3 - Sometimes Meets4 - Rarely Meetsx - No Opinion
HR Service Delivery - effectiveness in Key Roles
68
importance than effectiveness. Advice and administrative effectiveness were rated
higher than importance.
Figure 4.6: Comparison of Importance with Effectiveness
Ulrich (1997a) cites credibility of HR professionals as an important factor in
determining whether HR is positioned to contribute, acknowledging this, perceptions
of style of delivery were considered; establishing and comparing importance with
perception of effectiveness. Using the mean scores for each area, (Appendix 24) it
was possible to identify how HR was rated. Table 4.17 shows importance placed by
managers on each style, the range being 1.29 to 2.03, with a mean score of 1.66,
from which it is fair to deduct that importance of style of delivery is recognised as
more than value added.
69
Table 4.17: Style of Delivery – Importance
Table 4.18 shows effectiveness ranging from 2.21 to 3, the mean being 2.5 from
which it is evident that HR is meeting requirements more than sometimes, but not
consistently, despite the apparent level of importance placed by managers.
Table 4.18: Style of Delivery – Effectiveness
Figure 4.7: Comparison of Importance and Effectiveness: Style of Delivery
It is clear that importance is higher than effectiveness in all areas, interestingly with a
consistent credibility gap.
70
Added ValueIt is hypothesised that to add value HR must work with customers to understand and
deliver their expectations, aligning HR practices with internal and external
stakeholders and turning HR strategy into business goals, evidenced by use of
metrics measuring outcomes.
Adding value was measured by the extent HR professionals understood the
business, worked with managers to meet expectations, and provided them with
information required to deliver operational policing. This area of questioning was
explored with managers, Chief Constables and HR Directors, who were also asked
how they had positioned themselves to operate at a strategic level, developed the
HR function, and what they had done to align HR practices to stakeholder
requirements.
Table 4.19 outlines responses on HR understanding of the business, interestingly the
view of managers is in line with HR Directors.
Table 4.19: Understanding of the Business
To further explore this, questions were posed on to whether HR linked with
customers to understand their expectations. Table 4.20 outlines responses of HR
Directors and managers.
71
Table 4.18: Link with customer expectations
There was a clear disparity between the perception of HR Directors: 58% said their
teams always linked with managers to identify expectations, and managers, of whom
6% stated this was the case.
HR Directors were further asked about linking with employees and the community as
customers. Responses indicate that HR has taken some opportunity to link with
employees, but not to understand expectations of external customers.
Recognising the importance of measurement in facilitating HR’s contribution HR
Directors were asked for examples of data/metrics provided to managers to support
business delivery. Examples ranged from a comprehensive set of quarterly
performance data covering all aspects of HR performance, to nationally required
indicators. Data tended to be on sickness, recruitment, deployment/resourcing,
retention, PDR and training delivery, which broadly compared with data managers,
indicated they were provided with, (Table 4.14) although 18% stated none was
provided. When asked what they would like provided there was little consensus, with
only two areas requested by more than one manager – shift arrangements and
72
working time directive. 29% said they were happy with data currently received, 15%
did not respond and 18% did not know.
It is the researcher’s assertion that to add value the HR function must be developed
and organised from the perspective of contribution to operational performance. HR
Directors were asked whether they had been given the opportunity to develop the
function in this way; 67% said they had, 33% said partly. Barriers identified to
achievement included funding, tensions between the range of roles HR have to
perform, externally imposed barriers and current structures.
HR Directors were asked the extent to which their HR strategy process turned
business goals into HR priorities. 58% stated fully, this was the primary aim, 42%
partly, it had attempted to. All HR Directors indicated they were involved in the
strategic planning process, and therefore positioned to do this, with all stating they
had taken all opportunity to gain a seat at the strategic decision-making table;
however only 67% indicated they had been fully successful.
Operational managers interviewed were questioned on adding value, including an
open question on why HR was needed, which provided some positive responses
recognising HR’s contribution. One senior manager commented: ‘we need to get HR
processes right in order to deliver operational capability. HR has a significant
strategic role in shaping the organisation, as well as a day-to-day role in making it
happen’. Another saw HR having: ‘a key role in ensuring the right people were in the
right place with the right skills, as advocate for employment law, equity and diversity,
to support line managers to manage staff, and to assist the organisation in
developing and growing’.
73
When asked what HR adds, managers focused on supporting people development,
providing solutions and specialist knowledge of employment law without which one
felt the organisation would be vulnerable, another said he would not be able to run
the business. This is comparable with the survey response on employment
legislation. 71% of respondents said employment legislation had a positive impact
on operational policing, 82% that HR demonstrated a comprehensive understanding,
88% that HR did not apply legislation too strictly and 73% that HR corporacy did not
have a negative impact on operational delivery.
Operational managers were asked how they knew HR was contributing. Answers
ranged from provision of information on resourcing and effective delivery of HR
practice, to ensuring staff recruitment and deployment was in line with service
delivery and having clear strategies for tackling people issues such as sickness, and
good systems and processes for people management. One interviewee highlighting
the importance of understanding the external customer stated: “When HR remember
we are serving the public – and consider how best to deliver to the public”.
HR IntegrationFor HR to be positioned to maximise contribution it is argued it must be fully
integrated with the business. A number of questions were asked, which it was
believed would provide an indication of level of integration:
Is HR asking itself how it impacts on performance?
Is HR involved in strategic planning?
Are HR goals related to business goals?
How is HR strategy developed?
Is HR strategy aligned with force strategy?
74
Is HR aligned with internal and external customers?
How do managers view HR delivery in meeting force needs?
Responses of HR Directors on questioning impact on operational performance
indicated they recognised the importance of this and were regularly asking. The
context in which they were asking ranged from strategic planning to PDR.
Table 4.21: Questioning of Impact
Having identified involvement in strategic planning as key to HR’s contribution, it was
positive that all HR Directors stated they were involved as members of the Chief
Officer or Force Strategy Group. Chief Constable’s expectations of HR in
contributing to delivery of force strategy were seen as important in enabling HR to
contribute. All HR Directors said these had been clearly outlined, 83% that their
departments clearly understood them. It is contended that HR performance
indicators should directly relate to business goals: 58% stated this was the case,
42% partly. All Chief Constables said this was the case. The Chief Constable
interviewed expressed a view that the top-level performance indicators for HR should
be the same as for the force with attention paid to making a coherent link between
HR activity - the role of HR being to deliver the people interventions required to
deliver force strategy.
75
How HR strategy was developed provided a perspective from which to consider HR
integration. Research carried out by Golden and Ramanujam (1985 cited in Wright,
Snell and Jacobson 2004) to assess linkage between HR and the business,
described four types of linkage: administrative, one-way, two-way, and ‘integrative’.
This was tested within the questionnaires; respondents asked to indicate which most
closely reflected their force’s approach to HR strategy development:
Table 4.22: HR Strategy Development
It is argued to fully align HR strategy managers should be involved in strategy
development assisting the process of turning business goals into HR priorities by
providing depth of business knowledge and understanding of the external
environment. There was a difference of opinion on involvement:
Table 4.23: Managers involvement in HR Strategy
Only 35% of managers said they believed they should be involved, which is
disappointing considering the efforts outlined by HR Directors in working with internal
stakeholders to align HR practices. Examples included an HR Forum, consultation
processes, working closely with managers, involvement with area management
76
teams, and specific design of practices with the end user in mind. HR Directors on
the whole gave less positive answers on alignment with external stakeholders,
although it was clear that importance was recognised and some good practice was
developing.
For HR strategy to be fully owned it is contended it should be signed off at executive
level and fully communicated onwards. All Chief Constable’s and 92% of HR
Directors said it was signed off at executive level. Communication of strategy was
not so positive, managers indicating a seemingly high reliance on use of the intranet
rather than active dissemination, the majority of respondents identifying this as the
main means, with e-mail the second highest. Only five managers stated that it was
part of the policing plan and only one mentioned management meetings. HR
Directors and Chief Constables although indicating some effort to cascade to local
teams, did not articulate a much more proactive approach.
A key determinant of HR integration is how well HR strategy is integrated with force
strategy; asked in all questionnaires:
Table 4.24: Alignment of HR Strategy
The perception of managers did not provide good evidence of integration, particularly
as the 35% who said completely were from one force. Perhaps this is not
surprisingly in light of the concerns around communication. Although responses of
77
Chief Constables and HR Directors were positive it raises concern in relation to
operation of the strategy when compared to the views of managers. It was however
clear from the focus group and interviews that HR strategy should be aligned with
force strategy and delivery of operational policing.
If HR strategy is central to HR’s contribution then it should be evaluated in this
context. Questionnaires asked how HR strategy was evaluated; responses
suggested a piecemeal approach, with some positive responses on the Police
Authority’s role, and good examples of evaluation against performance indicators at
force performance meetings. There was however limited mention of HR being fully
integrated within a corporate performance framework or joined up with force strategy.
Despite a positive response on whether HR measurement was HR or business-
driven, answers on evaluation on the whole tended to be more HR than business-
focused, with the notable exception of one force who indicated: ‘annual review
against strategic priorities for the coming year leading to the development of a
service plan monitored quarterly at strategic and operational levels’. All Chief
Constables and HR Directors said HR performance was part of the force
performance framework compared with 53% of managers, 85% of whom said they
believed it should be.
In considering the importance of HR integration it is suggested that to maximise
contribution, HR practices must focus on improving staff performance, and be aligned
with the requirements of internal and external stakeholders. All survey respondents
were asked to comment on these areas. It was clear senior managers and deliverers
of service were far more confident than the receivers in all three areas.
78
Figure 4.8: Improving staff performance
Disappointingly only 6% of managers stated HR practices fully focused on improving
staff performance.
Figure 4.9: Alignment with internal stakeholders
It was disappointing that 50% of managers indicated ‘a little’ or ‘not at all’ particularly
compared with responses of HR Directors, although this was also disappointing.
79
Figure 4.10: Alignment with external stakeholders
Alignment with external stakeholders was clearly an area for development.
Managers were asked to rate overall delivery of HR in meeting the needs of force in
relation to: force strategy/direction, assisting managers to deliver performance
through people, and setting appropriate culture:
Table 4.25: Overall Delivery
The importance of HR integration within policing was recognised by all respondents,
including national stakeholders and Police Authority members who saw this as an
area for development.
80
Framework for evaluation of HR ContributionIn addressing: ‘Is HR contributing to operational performance?’ the sub-question: “is
a link between effective HR and operational performance?” was key. Reviewing
HMIC Baseline assessments for 2006, a spread of forces graded as ‘Good’ for HR
from the top performing force to the force positioned 42nd was evident. It was
therefore clear that ‘Good’ HR alone did not deliver operational performance. Further
analysis provided evidence of a relationship between effectiveness in resource use
and overall performance and the grading for HR and Training. Of the top ten forces
only one had less than ‘Good’ for HR, no force in the bottom seventeen had ‘Good’
for both HR and Training, only eight had ‘Good’ in either HR or Training.
Figure 4.11 shows the top five performing forces and demonstrates the relationship.
Lancashire ranked as top-performing force is also first for resource use and although
third for HR and Training the interval is limited with only eight points are available,
Lancashire having six (‘Good’ HR and ‘Good’ Training), only two forces ranked above
them each with seven points, both ‘Excellent’ for Training and ‘Good’ for HR.
(Appendix 25 provides a full summary of analysis)
Figure 4.11: Force Ranking
81
Analysis of HMIC baseline alone was not enough to fully demonstrate a link, resulting
in the more detailed framework being developed, from the enablers identified for HR
to be positioned to fully contribute to operational policing. The role of HR seen as
key, HR measurement required and used by managers; perception of managers of
service delivery needing to be high with HR perceived as adding value, integrated
within the business, and operating strategically. These areas have been evaluated
within the framework developed from analysis of the questionnaires completed by
managers from the four forces studied in detail. Key questions within the
questionnaire were identified and a scoring mechanism developed for answers
provided (Appendix 26). Full results are presented in Appendix 27. The results were
matched against force ranking against the seven PPAF domains used within the
HMIC baseline.
All four forces had an HMIC grading of ‘Good’ for HR, but there was clear disparity in
overall force performance:
Table 4.26: Force HMIC ranking (out of 43)
The aim of the evaluation process was to identify which force was most effective in
HR from the perspective of managers and match this against the forces’ overall
performance, to establish whether there was a link between HR and force
performance. Table 4.27 provides a summary of the results of evaluation against the
framework.
82
Table 4.27: Summary results
The results show a rank order of the forces in relation to HR. It can be seen that this
is slightly out of line with force HMIC Baseline ranking, with Dorset and Surrey
changing position, however these two forces are close in terms of overall force
position.
The framework provides evidence to support the hypothesis that effective HR leads
to improved operational performance, with a demonstrable correlation between HR
and operational performance. Considered with the results of the investigation of
whether HR is positioned to contribute the scores achieved show that HR is not as
well positioned as it could be even in the forces rated by managers as performing
best, the average score for Dorset being 62.5%:
Table 4.28: Evaluation of HR Performance
83
Figure 4.12 plots the relationship between each of the forces against the areas
investigated. It is illustrated that forces scored better on role and service delivery
than on added value and integration, which are clear areas on which to focus.
Figure 4.12: Average Scores
A wealth of data and information has been collected from a range of sources across
the police service which has provided a valuable insight into whether HR is
contributing to operational performance. The following chapter provides a discussion
of the main findings in answering the research question.
84
Discussion
This chapter discusses the main findings in answering: ‘Is HR contributing to
operational performance in the police service?’ through addressing: “Is HR positioned
to contribute? and “Is there a link between effective HR and operational
performance?” which have been investigated from the perspective of HR’s role,
measurement, service delivery and added value, and integration. The case is
presented for HR to be positioned to fully contribute and outlines progress made by
forces although concluding that further development is required for HR to be
positioned across the service. The study of four forces and evaluation framework
indicated that effective HR does impact on operational performance but highlighted
areas for improvement for this to be fully exploited.
Is HR positioned to contribute?In addressing whether HR is positioned to contribute; role, measurement, service
delivery and added value, and integration were studied. Evidence gathered on role
suggested the value of HR operating at a strategic level was acknowledged however
it was evident that this was not practiced in all forces. Perception of competence to
operate strategically highlighted this as an area for improvement, more respondents
stating they were undertaking the role than indicating they were fully competent. It is
argued that operating as a strategic partner includes full involvement in decision-
making, which evidence suggested was not the case in the majority of forces. There
was, however, an indication of business knowledge developing, which it is
hypothesised is required for HR to develop its strategic perspective and influence
strategy, relevant if the human capital developer role is to be embraced and essential
to HR integration; enabling contribution to operational policing.
85
A tendency to concentrate on the functional expert role was evident with perception
of competence in HR delivery highest, which is perhaps understandable considering
HR’s development in the police service and evolution to professional HR leads, as a
response to the need for experts in this field. A disappointingly low number of
respondents indicated undertaking the human capital developer role; however
evidence suggested recognition of this role developing, which matches HMI’s view of
where HR should be leading: “a proactive approach in ensuring HR processes and
skills are in place through workforce planning and performance management.’”
Importance of the employee advocate role was not recognised with the potential
benefits of creating value through bringing together employee perspectives with
organisational expectations therefore not being fully realised. This could result from
HR’s desire to move away from the traditional people-centred welfare/employee
relations role in favour of a more strategic input, however it is argued this role is
central for HR to fully contribute to operational performance, understanding people
implications and turning those into workable strategies and plans which enhance
employee motivation and performance. As Ulrich and Brockbank (2005a p.26) state:
“building the human infrastructure from which everything in the organisation flows.”
Only 33% of HR Directors indicated they were ‘always’ taking on the role of leader
which suggests they are not fully operating at a strategic level. It is argued by
demonstrating leadership HR can better position itself to contribute. Ability to lead is
impacted by personal credibility and competence; taking on board Ulrich and
Brockbank’s (2005b p.2) point: “when others receive value from HR, HR will be
credible respected, and influence.” Managers’ rating of HR competence was not
86
positive with HR rated on average just above fair in strategic contribution, HR
delivery, business knowledge and personal credibility, and poor in HR technology.
Review of HR roles within forces provided similar findings. Results were positive in
perception of importance, but poor on delivery with a significant gap between
importance and effectiveness identified, particularly evident in strategy and HR
practices. Perceived effectiveness in strategy development was concerning
considering HR’s role as a strategic partner, results suggesting HR was not
delivering. If the aim of HR, as human capital developer, is to build capability to
deliver operational performance perception of effectiveness in developing HR
practices was unsatisfactory. Provision of advice and administration were rated
higher in effectiveness than importance providing an opportunity for HR to refocus
activity. Recognition of importance of management information was disappointing
considering the relevance of measurement to demonstrate impact on operational
performance and need for information to direct performance. Despite this, limited
indication of additional requirements for HR data was provided; perhaps in line with
importance placed.
In seeking to identify key HR practices, some consistency was found in responses,
the main aim though was to understand expectations of HR in relation to these
practices, hoping to observe a clear role for HR in decision-making and a lesser one
in day-to-day management, with the role of managers in taking responsibility for HRM
articulated, HR positioning itself away from transactional activity in line with the HMI’s
view that HR: “should fight shy of wanting to be involved in the transactional end..”
On the whole this did not transpire.
87
Interviews with HR Directors provided evidence of HR professionals working to the
business objectives of their forces and developing HR strategies to underpin these.
In these forces recognised as having ‘Good’ HR it appears the role played by HR and
the level of the most senior HR professional affects level of HR integration, enabling
HR to create organisational capabilities from a broader organisational perspective.
This matched the HMI’s view of HR’s role: “to lead on ensuring HR processes and
HR skills are as they should be to meet operational needs, to lead on input into the
planning process and on developing a partnership between HR and the operations
side of the business, being proactive in meeting operational needs.”
The study provided evidence that in terms of role, HR is positioned to contribute in
some forces, positioning itself in others, but not universally across all forces, where
recognition of the value of HR in contributing to operational performance was not
developed.
HR measurement was clearly in place and positively all respondents stated they
measured performance against HR Strategy/Plan, which if effectively linked to force
strategy, and as Becker and Huselid (2003) advocate, focused on “unique,
strategically relevant contributions”, is where HR should be measuring. Accepting
customer satisfaction as an indicator of HR performance, it was positive that the
majority used internal customer satisfaction surveys; however only a quarter used
service level agreements to measure service delivery against, which indicates
provider/customer relationships are not fully developed, perhaps limiting HR’s ability
to contribute.
88
Although 75% of HR Directors indicated measuring contribution to operational
policing, detail of how this was being measured was not apparent from responses to
further questions; performance indicators outlined provided little evidence of this, the
majority being PPAF measures or provided in annual data returns with limited
evidence of specific performance indicators relating to force strategies. Likewise,
benchmarking was taking place, but overall appeared focused on external
comparison rather than on what Becker and Huselid (2003) refer to as ‘customised
performance measures’ directly related to the organisation’s performance.
There would not seem from responses, to be a clear direction in purpose of
measurement which appears to be of single issues seen as important. The
importance of viewing HR as a system was clear from the literature review, however,
from this study, it was evident many forces remained focused on single practices.
There was a sense that although areas of HR activity which impact on performance
are being measured, for example attendance, the link is not always clearly made
between HR activity and operational performance. Even at the Metropolitan Police
where managers were clearly taking responsibility for HR performance the link to
operational performance was not clearly explored.
Many of the metrics used were appropriate for determining outcomes and evidencing
HR’s contribution, but the level of sophistication in use was preventing HR from fully
demonstrating contribution, with emphasis placed on the performance indicators
rather than what they show. Some forces were more advanced in recognising the
contribution of HR activity but in many the opportunity to demonstrate the link had not
been fully grasped. It is accepted questioning may not have been specific enough to
fully challenge this, however observation of performance meetings as part of this
89
research suggested links were not always fully explored. Some good practice was
articulated in interviews with HR Directors evidenced within their HR strategies and
performance frameworks, which they clearly recognised as important and were
developing with far greater sophistication than current PPAF indicators, supporting a
contention that this is more successful where there is an effective performance
framework and the HR Director is part of the top team.
Largely it would appear HR has developed from striving to demonstrate efficiency to
demonstrating effectiveness and in a number of forces developing measurement to
demonstrate impact, although a lack of clarity on appropriate measures of HR impact
was apparent. It could be argued that HR is in transition from measuring
effectiveness of the function to a position where impact on the business is the aim of
HR measurement, and therefore to becoming better positioned to contribute.
Responses on whether HR service delivery standards were in place and being met
were not positive. However it is recognised that this could be flawed due to what is
understood by standards of service delivery, which could be interpreted as anything
from a list of standards to a service level agreement. Accepting the importance of
service delivery in positioning HR to contribute, it is contended that standards should
be clearly defined and communicated to ensure HR is appropriately focused on the
business and effectively delivering. Communication was identified as an issue, and it
is possible that rather than a lack of developed standards, communication of those
had not been effective. Pertinently, based on these results HR is more likely to be
perceived as meeting standards when they are defined than when managers develop
their own expectations.
90
From the review of effectiveness in different roles and activities, clear areas for
improvement in service delivery were identified, particularly in relation to strategy and
development of HR practices to support policing. Style of delivery provided a similar
picture with a clear disparity between importance and perceived effectiveness in all
areas considered.
Understanding customer expectations was regarded as essential to service delivery
and for HR to add value. In relation to the internal customer there was clear disparity
between the perception of HR Directors, and managers as to whether this was
happening which is concerning considering the importance of working with customers
to understand what they value to be able to add value. Responses suggested HR
had taken some opportunity to link with employees, but it was evident that
understanding and linking with external customers is yet to be fully explored to
ensure HR is making the right interventions to contribute to operational performance.
To put this in context, understanding customer expectations is still developing in the
police service in delivering ‘citizen focused’ policing.
Responses on application of employment law and corporacy were far more positive
than anticipated, the expectation being that HR bureaucracy would be seen as
having a negative impact with potential for the HR system to be seen as rigid as
identified by Becker and Gerhart (1996). However improving service delivery by
working to define ‘customers’ needs is required to increase HR credibility and so
better position to contribute. This was evident in the four forces studied illustrated by
the evaluation framework with the highest rated force achieving only 65% for service
delivery with 44% the highest score on added value.
91
For HR to be positioned to contribute it is contended, HR must be fully integrated into
the business and involved in strategic planning. Although this was acknowledged,
different levels of involvement were evident across forces. HR Directors recognised
the importance of impacting on operational performance and indicated that they were
questioning this, however measurement of impact was not clearly evidenced.
Respondents stated that HR performance indicators directly or at least partly related
to business goals, but this was not fully evidenced with a clear link to operational
performance, or indication of a defined line-of-sight between HR activities and force
performance indicators, which it is suggested needs to be much more defined.
Results on HR strategy development were positive and it would seem considerable
progress has been made towards the outside-in approach advocated by Wright, Snell
and Jacobson (2004), where HR strategy is built from the perspective of the business
and so better able to add value. However this needs further development with
involvement of managers; engaged to ensure strategy is aligned with internal
customers, acknowledging managers’ poor view of alignment currently. If HR
strategy is designed to deliver the policing plan, so contributing to operational
policing, managers need to be aware, and working to it in the context of their
leadership and development of people to deliver performance. Survey results did not
indicate the level of awareness to enable this to happen with communication of HR
strategy a key issue in ensuring alignment with force strategy and HR integration. A
need for greater understanding of the external environment in development of HR
strategy was identified.
It is asserted that HR strategy is central to HR’s contribution and that measurement
of performance against it within force performance frameworks is fundamental.
92
Responses indicated agreement with this and that this was happening, which implies
managers see the importance of HR performance, and provides an opportunity for
HR. However, this depends on the quality of the framework and how it is used to
influence performance – a concern articulated by the focus group. Although
responses indicated HR data was discussed and part of the framework, for most
forces integration appeared to be on the level of HR data being contained within the
policing plan, with the majority of indicators outlined standard HR metrics, with little
evidence of how they impact on operational performance. Evidence collected did not
give confidence that HR performance was fully embedded within an integrated
framework in all cases and HR therefore fully positioned to contribute. Considering
the extent policing is performance-driven, managers should it is suggested
understand the performance framework, know whether HR indicators are included
and be actively using those indicators. The fact that 35% said they did not know
whether HR data was included and12% said it was not, was not a positive indication
of integration of HR.
It is argued that integration enables HR to maximise contribution by ensuring HR
practices focus on improving staff performance, and are aligned with the
requirements of internal and external stakeholders. It was therefore disappointing
that only 6% of managers stated HR practices fully focused on improving staff
performance, which to maximise HR contribution should be the primary aim of any
HR practice. This does tie in with the low rating of effectiveness perceived by
managers on putting in place HR practices which contribute to operational
performance. In terms of overall delivery it was clear progress is being made but
more is needed for HR to be fully integrated and positioned to maximise contribution.
93
In conclusion, although good progress has been made in development of HR’s role
and there is evidence of this contributing to operational performance with some good
examples of HR metrics used to ensure HR is aligned to force strategy in some
forces, this needs further development. Service delivery needs to be improved to
enhance HR credibility and perception of adding value, leading to greater integration,
which is still an issue in most forces.
Is there a link between effective HR and operational performance?The development of a framework to evaluate HR contribution was designed to
determine whether there was link between effective HR and operational
performance. The framework was developed to evaluate the areas identified as
enablers for HR to contribute, and the basis of this study. These were considered
within the framework from the perspective of operational managers in four forces
graded by HMIC as having ‘Good’ HR.
It was clear from review of baseline assessments for the four forces that HMIC had
identified areas of good practice directly related and designed to contribute to
operational policing, with HMIC looking at whether HR strategy was linked to force
strategy. However review of grading alone was not specific enough to firmly
establish a link as it did not differentiate forces to the required level of detail. The
results provided through the evaluation framework separated the forces and in doing
so provided an indication of a link between effective HR and operational
performance, HR performance seemingly translating into good operational
performance with the two best performing forces operationally, rated highest by
managers against the enablers to HR contribution. The force rated lowest in this
evaluation of HR, and fairing particularly badly on integration, was the force with the
94
poorest overall performance, providing validity to the framework. Clear areas for
improvement were evident in all four forces in all areas assessed but particularly in
added value and integration with the best-rated force only achieving 44% for added
value and 52% for integration.
It is accepted that the unequal number of respondents and low numbers from two
forces could have skewed the data however use of percentages mitigated this. For
the hypothesis to be fully tested using the framework a wider range of forces would
be required, including those in the top five for overall performance and forces not
graded by HMIC as having ‘good’ HR.
Is HR contributing to operational performance?The results indicate that HR is contributing to operational performance in forces
where HR is best positioned to do so in relation to the four enablers identified from
the literature review with evidence suggesting that effective HR makes a difference,
the best evidence of HR contribution found in forces performing better operationally.
95
Conclusions and Recommendations
In undertaking this study, a review of literature on HR contribution to organisational
performance, was undertaken, leading to the identification of four areas for research:
HR’s role, measurement, service delivery and added value and HR integration,
considering HR as a system, in addressing: ‘Is HR contributing to operational
performance?’ which was answered by addressing two sub-questions through
investigation of the four enablers. Answering whether HR is positioned to contribute
and ascertaining whether there is a link between effective HR and operational
performance provided the answer to whether HR is contributing. Research
methodology was designed to review HR across the police service with questioning
designed to address the enablers within the context of operational policing. Analysis
and discussion of the findings and framework for evaluating HR’s contribution has
been undertaken leading to the following conclusions and recommendations.
Although a link has been established between effective HR and operational
performance, HR was not found to be positioned to fully contribute in all forces. In
forces where HR was best positioned to contribute there were still clear areas for
development for greater integration and to improve managers’ perception of service
delivery and adding value.
The literature review emphasised that role was key in positioning HR to fully
contribute, HR needing to be engaged and operating at a strategic level. This was
acknowledged within the police service with progress being made to achieving this in
many forces, and it is suggested with this the role of HR leader will develop. The role
of functional expert was still the core role with limited attention paid to the employee
96
advocate role and an identified need for development as human capital developers,
which it is argued are both essential to support operational policing and should be
developed. Developing managers to take responsibility for managing and developing
people needs to be a priority, allowing HR to move away from transactional
interventions to concentrate on these other key roles, thereby adding greater value.
It was clear that HR’s role makes a difference to ability to contribute and that HR is
better positioned where the HR Director is operating at a strategic level, fully involved
in the business, developing strategy, policy and practices which underpin force
strategy.
The study demonstrated that HR measurement is taking place, but emphasised that
measuring alone is not enough. HR metrics need to be meaningful to managers,
provided and discussed in order to influence operational decision-making. There
was evidence of measurement for measurement’s sake in some areas, with too
many performance indicators being developed with limited consistency across the
service, and processes for meaningful analysis not always in place or leading to
action as part of an overall performance framework. There was evidence of
measurement becoming more sophisticated, with some examples of good practice,
but it was clear effort is required to develop coherent HR performance frameworks
forming part of force performance frameworks. HR performance should be judged
against the performance of the force with HR performance indicators outcome-
focused and designed to look at overall effect of HR activity, with greater clarity in
developing indicators which are specific to the delivery of force strategy and
operational policing.
The importance of customer satisfaction was recognised, with the majority of forces
measuring satisfaction levels and developing standards for service delivery, however
97
this was focused on the internal customer. It is recommended that attention is paid
to understanding expectations of external customers as Armstrong (2007, cited by
Phillips p.15) emphasises: “As HR people we ought to know our market better than
our marketing colleagues, better than our chief executives. We ought to be
researching what customers think of us, what would make customers think ‘wow’
from their relationship with us.”
A review of HR activities revealed recognition of the importance of policy, strategy,
practices and training to support operational policing, but was not matched with a
comparable rating of effectiveness. The disparity between importance and perceived
level of effectiveness presented clear areas for development to bring HR closer to the
business at both strategic and operational levels. HR needs to progress from the
role of guardian of policy and administration to a more proactive employee-centred
role, understanding the business and providing practical solutions which impact on
individual and therefore organisational performance for which provision of high
quality management information is key. Provision of management information was
underrated but it is suggested is needed for HR to be able to contribute to decision-
making and demonstrate a return on investment, with the effective use of IT systems
to improve information and the development of analytical capability being required.
On the whole managers appreciated the value of HR’s contribution and provided
evidence of where they believed HR added value, with little evidence of HR seen as
rigid or a barrier to performance. However responses overall did not give confidence
that HR was fully integrated, and therefore positioned to maximise contribution,
although there was evidence of a greater clarity developing in terms of HR’s impact
and of relating HR goals to business goals. Good evidence was provided of HR
98
strategy being developed in line with the ‘integrated’ approach, but there was a clear
need for involvement of managers, more effective communication of strategy and of
HR’s role in supporting operational policing along with development of clear
standards for HR delivery.
A high level of understanding was discernable across the service of what needs to be
in place for HR to be positioned to fully contribute to operational policing and of this
happening in forces recognised as ‘Good’ by HMIC, with examples found which
demonstrated contribution; better developed and communicated in some forces than
others. It was however clear further progress is needed for HR contribution to be
maximised. It is recommended that a national strategy to underpin the role and
direction of HR within forces is required, whilst providing the flexibility for local
interpretation and action in relation to force priorities.
The results of the evaluation framework for HR contribution established evidence to
suggest effective HR does impact on operational performance. It was evident that
against the four enablers identified as required for HR to contribute, there is a
discrepancy between HMIC rating of ‘Good’ and HR performance as perceived by
the ‘receivers’ of HR service. It is therefore recommended that the enablers be
considered by HMIC as a tool against which to assess HR in the future.
National stakeholders need to champion the potential for HR to impact on operational
performance and proactively set direction and standards across the service within a
framework which enables forces to focus on the requirements of operational policing.
Forces need to ensure HR is positioned to fully contribute, which it is argued will lead
to improved performance, striking a strategic posture which augments the impact of
99
HR practices. (Youndt et al 1996) HR professionals need to consider their own
current positioning and it is suggested could utilise the operational managers survey
within their forces to review current perceptions as the basis for development of the
function.
It is recognised that this study is based on the responses of a limited number of
forces, although the range of forces responding, it is argued, make it representative
of the service. The relevance of the study would however be considerably enhanced
by detailed study of a greater number of forces, and by specifically including forces at
the top end of operational performance and those rated ’fair’ or ‘poor’ by HMIC so
providing a wider spectrum of performance levels for comparison and analysis.
The debate on HR contribution needs to continue, although research by eminent
academics and professionals has proved the case, there is still a perceived gap
between believing this and taking steps to ensure it happens within the police
service. This study found more evidence of the acknowledgement of HR’s
contribution than action to position HR to make that contribution. HR still has work to
do to position itself to effectively contribute; Snell (2007, cited by Pickard p.46)
believes HR are playing a more strategic role and grasping that they must help their
organisations to add value, but he does not believe this evolution is complete
believing HR “need to spend more time looking at human resources and less on
systems.” It is argued that this emphasises the importance of both the employee
advocate and human capital developer which need to be fully embraced. To enable
HR in the police service to advance HR technology needs to be further developed to
underpin HR activity, there needs to be a cultural shift in managers recognising their
role and taking responsibility for the management and development of their staff and
100
HR needs to be freed from administrative burden, moving away from transactional
HR and exploring shared service options, which will improve service delivery and
allow HR to concentrate on activities which demonstrably add value.
101
References
Anonymous (2005) ‘Value Considerations to Help you with Next Year’s HR Plan’ HR Focus New York Dec 2005 vol. 82 Iss. 12: pg, 2 pgs.
Armstrong, M., (2006) Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice (10th Edition) London, GBR: Kogan Page, Limited.
Arthur, J., (1994) ‘Effects of Human Resource Systems on Manufacturing Performance and Turnover’ The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 37, No. 3. (Jun., 1994), pp. 670-687.
Barney, J. B. (1991b). “The Resource Based View of Strategy: Origins, Implications, and Prospects.” Editor of Special Theory Forum in Journal of Management, 17, pp. 97-211.
Becker, B., & Gerhart, B., (1996) ‘The Impact of Human Resource Management on Organizational Performance: Progress and Prospects’ The Academy of Management Journal Vol. 39, No. 4 pp. 779-801
Becker, B., & Huselid, M., (2003) ‘Measuring HR?’ HR Magazine Vol. 48, Iss. 12; pg.56 [Online] Available from:
Becker, B.E., Huselid, M. A., & Ulrich, D., (2001) The HR Scorecard Linking People, Strategy, and Performance Harvard Business School Press
Bechhofer, F., Paterson, L., (2000) Principles of Research Design in the Social Sciences Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2001
Belcourt, M., (2001) ‘Measuring and managing the HR function: A guide for boards’ Ivey Business Journal Vol, 65, Iss. 3; pg 35 [Online] Available from:
Beer, M. (1997) ‘The Transformation of the Human Resource Function: Resolving the tension between traditional administrative and a new strategic role.’ Human Resource Management (1986-1998) Spring 1997, 36, 1, ABI/Inform Global pg. 49
Delaney, J.T., & Huselid, M., A. (1996) ‘The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Perceptions of Organizational Performance’ The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 39, No. 4. (Aug., 1996), pp. 949-969.
Fitz-enz, J., Davison B., (2002) How to Measure Human Resources Management Third Edition McGraw Hill USA
Gerhart B., Milkovich. G.T., (1990) ‘Organizational Differences in Managerial Compensation and Financial Performance’ The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 33, No. 4. (Dec., 1990), pp. 663-691.
102
Gershon, P., (2004) Releasing resources to the front line Independent Review of Public Sector Efficiency
Groysberg B., McLean, A.N., Reavis, C., (2005) ‘Delivering Strategic Human Resource Management’ Harvard Business School
Home Office, Police Performance Assessment Framework (PPAF)
Huselid, M. A., (1995) ‘The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Turnover, Productivity, and Corporate Financial Performance’ The Academy of Management Journal, Vol, 38, No. 3. (jun., 1995), pp. 635-672
Kirkpatrick, D., L., (1994) ‘Evaluating training programs: the four levels’. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler
Koch, M. J., McGarth, R. G., (1996) ‘Improving Labor Productivity: Human Resource Management Policies do matter’ Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17, 335-354
Lawler III, E. E., Mohrman, S.A., ‘HR as a strategic partner: What does it take to make it happen?’ Human Resource Planning New York: Vol. 26, Iss. 3; p. 15
Lawler III, E. E., Levenson, A., Boudreau. J. W., (2004) ‘HR Metrics and Analytics: Use and Impact’ Human Resource Planning New York: Vol. 27, Iss. 4; p. 27
Pickard, J., (2007) ‘Go with the flow’ People Management vol. 13 no.8 19 April 2007
Phillips, L., (2007) ‘Customer focus ‘key to future’ People Management vol. 13 no.8 19 April 2007
Pfeffer, J., Sutton, R. I., (2006) ‘A Matter of Fact’ People Management vol. 12 no.19 28 September 2006
Smethurst, S., (2005) ‘the Long and Winding Road’ People Management vol. 11 no.15 28 July 2005
Smith, G., (2002) ‘Review of the Personnel Function’ Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary
Teo, S. T. T., Crawford, J., (2005) ‘Indicators of Strategic HRM Effectiveness: A Case Study of an Australian Public Sector Agency During Commercialization’ Public Personnel Management Spring 2005, Vol 34 Iss. 1 pg. 1
Ulrich, D., (1997a) Human Resource Champions: The Next Agenda for adding value and delivering results. Harvard Business School Press Boston, Massachusetts
Ulrich, D., (1997b) ‘Measuring Human Resources: An overview of practice and a prescription for results’ Human Resource Management Vol 36, Iss. 3 pg. 303
Ulrich, D., Brockbank, W., (2005a) ‘Role Call’ People Management vol 11 no.12 16 June 2005
103
Ulrich, D., Brockbank, W., (2005b) The HR Value Proposition Harvard Business School Press Boston, Massachusetts
Wan, D., Kok, V., Ong, C. H., (2002) ‘Strategic human resource management and organizational performance in Singapore’ Compensation and Benefits Review Saranac Lake: Jul/Aug 2002 Vol. 34, Iss. 4; pg.33
White, B., (2005) Dissertation Skills for Business and Management Students Thomson Learning, High Holborn House, 50-51 Bedford Row, London WC1R 4LR ISBN 0-8264-6788-1
Williams, L.A. (2004) ‘Involving Communities in police learning and development: a guide’ Association of Police Authorities www.apa.police.uk
Wright, P. M., Snell, S.A., Jacobsen, P.H.H., (2004) ‘Current Approaches to HR Strategies: Inside-Out versus Outside-In’ Human Resource Planning New York Vo.27, Iss.4 pg 36
Yeung, A., K., Berman, B. (1997) ‘Adding value through human resources: Reorienting human resource management to drive business performance’ Human Resource Management, Fall 1997, Vol.36, No.3, Pp.321-335
Youndt, M. A., Snell, S. A., Dean jr, J. W., Lepak, D. P., (1996) ‘Human Resource Management, Manufacturing Strategy, and Firm Performance’ The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 39, No. (Aug 1996) pp. 836-866
104
Appendices
Appendix 1
Appendix 1 Police Performance Assessment Framework
105
Appendix 2
Appendix 2 Chief Constable Questionnaire
The Contribution of HR to Operational Performance in the Police Service
This survey is being undertaken as primary research into the ‘Contribution of HR to operational policing in England and Wales’ as part of an MBA dissertation project, which is being supported by Warwickshire Police.
Please complete all questions set out below, as fully as possible.
The questionnaire should be returned to Angela Roberts, Head of Human Resources at Warwickshire Police by 31 December 2006
Your personal views and comments will not be shared with anyone else, however the combined results will be incorporated within the dissertation, a copy of which will be provided to HMIC.
Questionnaire completed by
Name:
Designation:
Force:
Section A: HR Measurement
A1. How do you measure and assess the performance of the HR function?(Please mark all that are relevant)
a) PPAF
b) HMIC Baseline
c) Service Level Agreement
d) Internal customer satisfaction survey
e) Delivery of HR Strategy or Plan
f) Contribution to operational performance
g) Other please specify ………………………………
106
A2. What do you see as the key performance indicators for HR?
A3 Do you have clearly defined standards for HR service delivery? 1 Yes2 No
A3 (i) If yes, how are these measured and monitored?
A3 (ii) If no, does your force have any plans to develop these?
A4. Does your force use ‘customer satisfaction’ as a measure of how the HR department is performing?1 Yes2 No
A4 (i) If yes, how is the data gathered on customer satisfaction?
A4 (ii) From which customers is data gathered?(Please mark all that are relevant)
a) Employeesb) Managersc) Police Authorityd) The Publice) Other please specify ……………………………
A4 (iii) If your force does not currently measure customer satisfaction in relation to HR performance, is this planned for in the future?1 Yes2 No
107
A5. At which force meetings is HR performance data discussed?
A6. Does HR performance form a part of the overall force performance framework?1 Yes2 No
A6 (i) If yes, please can you describe, which measures and how this is integrated?
A6 (ii) If no, are there any plans to incorporate HR performance?
A7. Does your Police Authority have a role in monitoring/scrutinising HR performance? 1 Yes2 No
A7 (i) If yes, what do the Police Authority monitor and in what forum?
A8. Is HR performance benchmarked in your force?1 Yes2 No
If no go to A9
A8 (i) If yes, is this against: (Please mark all that are relevant)
a) Other forcesb) Other organisationsc) Previous performanced) Other please specify ……….
108
A8 (ii) What information is used to benchmark/compare?(Please mark all that are relevant)
a) PPAFb) HMIC Gradingsc) Local KPIsd) Benchmarking Clubse) Other please specify. …….
A8 (iii) How is this benchmarking used?
A9. Overall would you say measurement of HR in your force is primarily to measure:
a) HR efficiencyb) HR effectivenessc) The impact of HRd) Other please specify ……..
A10. Overall would you say your HR performance indicators are more:
a) HR Drivenb) Business Driven
A11. Does the 2006 HMIC grading for HR (6a) fairly reflect the contribution you believe HR to be making to delivering performance in the force?1 Yes2 No
A11 (i) Please comment on the relevance of the HMIC grading of HR to the performance of the force?
109
Section B: The Role of HR
B1. What are the key areas the HR Department leads on in your force? (Please give the top 3 to 5 areas)
1.2.3.4.5.
B1 (i) In each of the areas identified above, please indicate whether the HR Department leads in the following respects?
a) To set policy1.2.3.4.5.
b) Decision Making1.2.3.4.5.
c) Communication1.2.3.4.5.
d) Monitoring1.2.3.4.5.
e) Day to Day Management of systems and processes1.2.3.4.5.
110
B2. What do you see as the role of HR in contributing to the business planning process?
B3. What do you see as the role of HR in delivering the force strategy?
B4. Extensive research has been carried out on the role HR should play within organisations if the function is to effectively contribute to business performance. A leading writer in this area is Dave Ulrich, who has identified 5 roles for HR professionals:
To what extent do HR professionals in your force take on each of the 5 HR roles?(1 Always, 2 Partly, 3 Rarely, 4 Never, X No Opinion)
a) Employee Advocate 1 2 3 4 Xb) Human Capital Developer 1 2 3 4 Xc) Functional Expert 1 2 3 4 Xd) Strategic Partner 1 2 3 4 Xe) Leadership 1 2 3 4 X
B5. To what extent do the HR professionals in your force demonstrate competence in the areas outlined below?(1 Always, 2 Partly, 3 Rarely, 4 Never, X No Opinion)
a) Strategic contribution 1 2 3 4 Xb) HR delivery 1 2 3 4 Xc) Business Knowledge 1 2 3 4 Xd) Personal Credibility 1 2 3 4 Xe) HR technology 1 2 3 4 X
B6. Is your Director/Head of HR a full member of the most senior decision making team in the force?1 Yes2 No
111
Section C HR integration
C1. How often do you ask this question of your Director/Head of HR: “How is the HR Department impacting on operational performance?”
1 Daily2 Weekly3 Monthly4 Quarterly5 Annually6 Never
C1a In what context is this question asked? (Please mark all that are relevant)
a) Strategic Planning, b) Force Performance Meetings, c) Senior Management Team,d) Departmental Meetingse) PDR, f) Other please specify……………………….
C2. Is your Director/Head of HR involved in the strategic planning process and the development of force strategy? 1 Yes2 No
C2a If yes, please describe that involvement.
C3. How is the HR Strategy developed in your force – please indicate which sentence most closely reflects your force’s approach?
a) Developed by the HR function separate from the force strategy
b) Force Strategy provided to the HR function from which they develop the HR strategy, practices and processes to help implement the force strategy.
c) The HR function provides information for the development of force strategy, HR then develop a strategy to support implementation.
d) The HR Director, as part of the top management team, is fully involved in the development of force strategy.
112
C4. Are senior operational managers involved in the development of HR strategy? 1 Fully2 To an extent 3 No
C5. Does the top executive team approve the HR strategy?1 Yes2 No
C6. How is the HR strategy communicated to the force?
C7. How closely do you believe the HR Strategy/Plan is aligned with the Force Strategy?
a) Completelyb) Partlyc) Not at Alld) Not previously considered this
C8. How is the HR strategy evaluated?
C9. Have you as Chief Constable clearly outlined your expectations of HR in contributing to delivery of the Force Strategy?1 Yes2 No
C10. Do annual HR Performance Indicators relate directly to the business goals and strategies of the force? 1 Yes2 No
C11. To what extent do HR practices within your force focus on improving staff performance? (1 Fully, 2 Mostly, 3 A little, 4 Not at all, X Not previously considered)
1 2 3 4 X
113
C12. How aligned are HR practices with the requirements of internal stakeholders (1 Fully, 2 Mostly, 3 A little, 4 Not at all, X Not previously considered)
1 2 3 4 X
C13. How aligned are HR practices with the requirements of external stakeholders – the public? (1 Fully, 2 Mostly, 3 A little, 4 Not at all, X Not previously considered)
1 2 3 4 X
Section D Additional Information
D1. Please add any further comments that you would like to make that you feel would be relevant to this research?
Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire. Your input to this research is appreciated and valued.
Angela RobertsHead of Human ResourcesWarwickshire PolicePolice HeadquartersLeek WoottonWarwickCV35 7QB
Email [email protected]
Tel. 01926 415015Fax 01926 415390
114
Appendix 3
Appendix 3 Directors/Heads of HR Questionnaire
The Contribution of HR to Operational Performance in the Police Service
This survey is being undertaken as primary research into the ‘Contribution of HR to operational policing in England and Wales’ as part of an MBA dissertation project, which is being supported by Warwickshire Police.
Please complete all questions set out below, as fully as possible.
The questionnaire should be returned to Angela Roberts, Head of Human Resources at Warwickshire Police by 31 December 2006
Your personal views and comments will not be shared with anyone else, however the combined results will be incorporated within the dissertation, a copy of which will be provided to HMIC.
Questionnaire completed by
Name:
Designation:
Force:
Section A: HR Measurement
A1. How do you measure and assess the performance of the HR function?(Please mark all that are relevant)
a) PPAF
b) HMIC Baseline
c) Service Level Agreement
d) Internal customer satisfaction survey
e) Delivery of HR Strategy or Plan
f) Contribution to operational performance
g) Other please specify ………………………………
115
A2. What do you see as the key performance indicators for HR?
A3. Do you have clearly defined standards for HR service delivery? 1 Yes2 No
A3 (i) If yes, how are these measured and monitored?
A3 (ii) If no, do you have any plans to develop these?
A4. Do you use ‘customer satisfaction’ as a measure of how the HR department is performing?1 Yes2 No
A4 (i) If yes, how do you gather data on customer satisfaction?
A4 (ii) From which customers do you gather data?(Please mark all that are relevant)
a) Employeesb) Managersc) Police Authorityd) The Publice) Other please specify ……………………………
A4 (iii) If you do not currently measure customer satisfaction, do you plan to in the future?1 1Yes2 2No
116
A5. At which force meetings is HR performance data discussed?
A6. Does HR performance form a part of the overall force performance framework?1 Yes2 No
A6 (i) If yes, please can you describe, which measures and how this is integrated?
A6 (ii) If no, are there any plans to incorporate HR performance?
A7. Does your Police Authority have a role in monitoring/scrutinising HR performance? 1 Yes2 No
A7 (i) If yes, what do the Police Authority monitor and in what forum?
A8. Do you benchmark HR performance?1 Yes2 No
If no go to A9
117
A8 (i) If yes, is this against: (Please mark all that are relevant)
a) Other forcesb) Other organisationsc) Previous performanced) Other please specify ……….
A8 (ii) What information do you use to benchmark/compare?(Please mark all that are relevant)
a) PPAFb) HMIC Gradingsc) Local KPIsd) Benchmarking Clubse) Other please specify. …….
A8 (iii) How do you use this benchmarking?
A9. Overall would you say measurement of HR in your force is primarily to measure:
a) HR efficiencyb) HR effectivenessc) The impact of HRd) Other please specify…………….
A10. Overall would you say your HR performance indicators are more:
b) HR Drivenc) Business Driven
A11. Does the 2006 HMIC grading for HR (6a) fairly reflect the contribution you believe HR to be making to delivering performance in the force?1 Yes2 No
A11 (i) Please comment on your view of the relevance of the HMIC grading of HR to the performance of the force?
118
Section B: The Role of HR
B1. What are the key areas the HR Department leads on in your force? (Please give the top 3 to 5 areas)
1.2.3.4.5.
B1 (i) In each of the areas identified above, please indicate whether the HR Department leads in the following respects?
a) To set policy1.2.3.4.5.
b) Decision Making1.2.3.4.5.
c) Communication1.2.3.4.5.
d) Monitoring1.2.3.4.5.
e) Day to Day Management of systems and processes1.2.3.4.5.
119
B2. What do you see as the role of HR in contributing to the business planning process?
B3. What do you see as the role of HR in delivering the force strategy?
B4. Extensive research has been carried out on the role HR should play within organisations if the function is to effectively contribute to business performance. A leading writer in this area is Dave Ulrich, who has identified 5 roles for HR professionals:
To what extent do HR professionals in your force take on each of the 5 HR roles?(1 Always, 2 Partly, 3 Rarely, 4 Never, X No Opinion)
a) Employee Advocate 1 2 3 4 Xb) Human Capital Developer 1 2 3 4 Xc) Functional Expert 1 2 3 4 Xd) Strategic Partner 1 2 3 4 Xe) Leadership 1 2 3 4 X
B5. To what extent do the HR professionals in your force demonstrate competence in the areas outlined below? (1 Always, 2 Partly, 3 Rarely, 4 Never, X No Opinion)
a) Strategic contribution 1 2 3 4 Xb) HR delivery 1 2 3 4 Xc) Business Knowledge 1 2 3 4 Xd) Personal Credibility 1 2 3 4 Xe) HR technology 1 2 3 4 X
B6. Are you a full member of the most senior decision making team in the force? 1 Yes2 No
120
Section C HR integration
C1. How often do you ask the question: “How can I impact on operational performance?”
2 1Daily2 Weekly3 Monthly4 Quarterly5 Annually6 Never.
C2. How often are you asked this question of the your HR team?
1 Daily2 Weekly3 Monthly4 Quarterly5 Annually6 Never
C2a In what context is this question asked? (Please mark all that are relevant)
a) Strategic Planning, b) Force Performance Meetings, c) Senior Management Team,d) Departmental Meetingse) PDR, f) Other please specify……………………….
C3. Are you involved in the strategic planning process and the development of force strategy? 3 Yes1 No
C3a If yes, please describe that involvement.
121
C4. How is the HR Strategy developed in your force – please indicate which sentence most closely reflects your force’s approach.
a) Developed by the HR function separate from the force strategy
b) Force Strategy provided to the HR function from which they develop the HR strategy, practices and processes to help implement the force strategy.
d) The HR function provides information for the development of force strategy, HR then develop a strategy to support implementation.
e) The HR Director, as part of the top management team, is fully involved in the development of force strategy.
C5. Are senior operational managers involved in the development of HR strategy? 1 Fully2 To an extent3 No
C6. Does the top executive team approve the HR strategy?1 Yes2 No
C7. How is the HR strategy communicated to the force?
C8. How closely do you believe the HR Strategy/Plan are aligned with the Force Strategy?
a) Completelyb) Partlyc) Not at Alld) Not previously considered this
C9. How is the HR strategy evaluated?
122
C10. Have the Chief Constable’s expectations of HR in contributing to delivery of the Force Strategy been clearly outlined to you? 1 Yes2 No
C10 (i) Do all members of your department fully understand these expectations? 1 Yes2 Partly3 No
C11. Do annual HR Performance Indicators relate directly to the business goals and strategies of the force? 1 Yes2 Partly3 No
C12. To what extent do HR practices within your force focus on improving staff performance? (1 Fully, 2 Mostly, 3 A little, 4 Not at all, X Not previously considered)
1 2 3 4 X
C13. How aligned are HR practices with the requirements of internal stakeholders? (1 Fully, 2 Mostly, 3 A little, 4 Not at all, X Not previously considered)
1 2 3 4 X
C14. How aligned are HR practices with the requirements of external stakeholders – the public? (1 Fully, 2 Mostly, 3 A little, 4 Not at all, X Not previously considered)
1 2 3 4 X
123
Section D - Adding value
D1. To what extent do the HR professionals in your Department understand the business of policing? (1 Fully, 2 Partly, 3 Not at all, 4 Not sure, X Not considered the need).
1 2 3 4 X
D2. Does your HR team link with customers to identify their expectations of HR and what they see as adding value? (1 Always, 2 Sometimes, 3 Rarely, 4 Never, 5 Not sure, X Not considered the need).
a) Managers 1 2 3 4 5 X
b) Employees 1 2 3 4 5 X
c) The community 1 2 3 4 5 X
D3. To what extent does your HR strategy process turn business goals into HR priorities? (1 Fully – it is the primary aim, 2 Partly – it has attempted to do so, 3 Does not, 4 Not sure, X Not considered)
1 2 3 4 X
D4. Do you believe you have you taken all opportunities to gain a seat at the strategic decision making table? 1 Yes2 No
D4 (i) How successful have you been in achieving this?(1 Fully, 2 Partly, 3 Not at all, 4 Not sure)
1 2 3 4
D4 (ii) What more could you do in the future?
124
D5. Have you been given the opportunity to develop the HR function in a way that clearly contributes to operational performance? 1 Yes2 Partly3 No
Please explain
D5 (i) What barriers to achieving this, if any, have you encountered?
D6. What have you done to align HR practices with the requirements of internal stakeholders?
D7. What have you done to align your HR practices with external stakeholders?
125
D8. Please give some examples of data/metrics you collect and use to determine the efficiency, effectiveness and impact of HR practices and processes in your force?
a) Efficiency
b) Effectiveness
c) Impact
D8 (i) How do you use these metrics?
D8 (ii) In what forums are they discussed?
D9. What data/metrics do you provide to managers to support delivery of the business? Please give three to five examples of the most important data
1.2.3.4.5.
D10. How do you engage and involve senior management in development and delivery of the HR strategy to support operational policing?
126
Section E Additional Information
E1. Please provide any further comments you would like to make that you feel would be relevant to this research?
Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire. Your input to this research is appreciated and valued.
Angela RobertsHead of Human ResourcesWarwickshire PolicePolice HeadquartersLeek WoottonWarwickCV35 7QB
Email [email protected]
Tel. 01926 415015Fax 01926 415390
127
Appendix 4
Appendix 4 Observation Checklist – Force Performance Board
Attendees
Format of the meeting
Key Performance Indicators being discussed
Process of the meeting
HR input?
Looking at HR in terms of Efficiency? Effectiveness? Impact?
Indicators relating to HR: HR or Business Driven?
How integrated is HR with operational performance considerations?
Clear line of sight between HR PIs and delivery of operational performance?
Understanding of HRM roles and responsibilities.
Clear accountability?
128
Appendix 5
Appendix 5 Letters to Chief Constables of forces included in the study
1st November 2006
The Chief Constable Cheshire ConstabularyClemonds HeyOakmere RoadWinsfordCW7 2UA
Dear Chief Constable Fahy
I write to formally introduce myself and ask for the support and involvement of your force in research I am undertaking for my MBA dissertation, which has been supported by Warwickshire Police. I have been Head of Human Resources at Warwickshire Police for 4½ years, prior to which I had experience in both the public and private sectors. I am very interested in how HR contributes to the delivery of performance within organisations and am undertaking my dissertation on: “The HR contribution to operational policing in the modern police service.”
The dissertation will look at current perceptions of HR contribution across the service, taking into account the views of ACPO, HMIC, the Home Office and the CIPD forum; looking at how HR should be contributing and whether in reality this is the case. To this end I will be writing to you separately along with all Chief Constables with a request to complete a short survey.
I would like to focus on three forces other than Warwickshire, in order to get a good sample of views and experience across the service. This would include using PPAF data, reviewing strategies and plans, carrying out interviews with HR Directors and a questionnaire of a sample of senior operational managers. In identifying the forces I have taken advice from HMIC as to which forces are performing well in Human Resource Management and I delighted to note that Cheshire is regarded as one of these. I have spoken to Christine Barton who has agreed to take part in the study, however as a matter of courtesy I would like to gain your formal approval before contacting other members of the force.
Please could you confirm that you are happy for Cheshire to be included in the study.
Yours faithfully
Angela RobertsHead of Human Resources & Training
129
1st November 2006 The Chief Constable Dorset PoliceWinfrithDorchesterDorsetDT2 8DZ
Dear Chief Constable Baker
I write to formally introduce myself and ask for the support and involvement of your force in research I am undertaking for my MBA dissertation, which has been supported by Warwickshire Police. I have been Head of Human Resources at Warwickshire Police for 4½ years, prior to which I had experience in both the public and private sectors. I am very interested in how HR contributes to the delivery of performance within organisations and am undertaking my dissertation on: “The HR contribution to operational policing in the modern police service.”
The dissertation will look at current perceptions of HR contribution across the service, taking into account the views of ACPO, HMIC, the Home Office and the CIPD forum; looking at how HR should be contributing and whether in reality this is the case. To this end I will be writing to you separately along with all Chief Constables with a request to complete a short survey.
I would like to focus on three forces other than Warwickshire, in order to get a good sample of views and experience across the service. This would include using PPAF data, reviewing strategies and plans, carrying out interviews with HR Directors and a questionnaire of a sample of senior operational managers. In identifying the forces I have taken advice from HMIC as to which forces are performing well in Human Resource Management and I delighted to note that Dorset is regarded as one of these. I have spoken to Graham Smith who has agreed to take part in the study, however as a matter of courtesy I would like to gain your formal approval before contacting other members of the force.
Please could you confirm that you are happy for to Dorset to be included in the study.
Yours faithfully
Angela RobertsHead of Human Resources & Training
130
1st November 2006 The Chief Constable Surrey PoliceMount BrowneSandy LaneGuildfordSurreyGU3 1HG
Dear Chief Constable Quick
I write to formally introduce myself and ask for the support and involvement of your force in research I am undertaking for my MBA dissertation, which has been supported by Warwickshire Police. I have been Head of Human Resources at Warwickshire Police for 4½ years, prior to which I had experience in both the public and private sectors. I am very interested in how HR contributes to the delivery of performance within organisations and am undertaking my dissertation on: “The HR contribution to operational policing in the modern police service.”
The dissertation will look at current perceptions of HR contribution across the service, taking into account the views of ACPO, HMIC, the Home Office and the CIPD forum; looking at how HR should be contributing and whether in reality this is the case. To this end I will be writing to you separately along with all Chief Constables with a request to complete a short survey.
I would like to focus on three forces other than Warwickshire, in order to get a good sample of views and experience across the service. This would include using PPAF data, reviewing strategies and plans, carrying out interviews with HR Directors and a questionnaire of a sample of senior operational managers. In identifying the forces I have taken advice from HMIC as to which forces are performing well in Human Resource Management and I delighted to note that Surrey is regarded as one of these. I have spoken to Paul McElroy who has agreed to take part in the study, however as a matter of courtesy I would like to gain your formal approval before contacting other members of the force.
Please could you confirm that you are happy for to Surrey to be included in the study.
Yours faithfully
Angela RobertsHead of Human Resources & Training
131
Letter to Chief Constable Warwickshire Police – Keith Bristow 16 September 2006
Dear Keith,
As you are aware I am currently undertaking an MBA and I think I have mentioned that I have now reached the dissertation stage. My initial topic proposal has been accepted and I am now working up the formal proposal. I would like to undertake the following investigation: “The HR Contribution to operational policing in the modern police service.” I have attempted to find a topic which is pertinent to both the force and my day job as I believe much of what I establish will be useful to the force as we review and develop over the next few years and I hope to the service as a whole. I have talked briefly to Simon about this so he is aware.
Having got this far I think it is important now to gain your formal approval for me to proceed. I would like to use Warwickshire as my main source of data, which will involve reviewing data on force performance, minutes of meetings, observation at performance management meetings, interviews, questionnaires and focus groups with key members of senior and middle management.
If you are agreeable, I would in the first instance like to undertake a detail interview with yourself.
I am intending my research to be based on the current position of HR within the police service (not what HR should be doing – what we are doing), so I will be looking to undertake a survey of perceptions of HR contribution across the service at Chief Constable level.
I also plan to pull together current thinking on HR contribution from key stakeholders such as ACPO, HMIC, Home Office and the CIPD forum nationally. I think I have most of the key contacts myself, but would welcome your support on this aspect of the project in terms of agreeing that I am doing this. Please let me know if you have any reservations.
My plan is as stated to focus in detail on Warwickshire but to include, 3 or 4 other forces in my research – this would include using their PPAF data, strategies and plans, interviews with Heads of HR and questionnaire of a sample of senior operational managers. I have some ideas of appropriate forces myself but would welcome your insight and views on what might be most useful to Warwickshire.
Apologies for the length of this, but I thought it appropriate that you had a good idea of what I was planning to do and because I am very keen to ensure what I do does contribute to the development of the force.
Best Regards,
Angela Roberts
132
Appendix 6
Appendix 6 E-mail to Directors of HR: Cheshire, Dorset, Surrey
26 September 2006Dear Christine/Graham/Paul I am writing to you to request your help with some research I am currently carrying out, which I hope will be of benefit to the Police Service nationally. I don't know whether I have mentioned but I am currently doing an MBA and finally after nine gruelling modules, I have got to the dissertation stage. I have chosen to do my dissertation on an HR related subject and am currently getting my proposal agreed. The topic area I am looking at is: "The HR contribution to operational performance in the police service." My plan is to focus on Warwickshire in the main, but I would like to look at three other forces for comparison purposes and to get a wider picture of good practice across the service. Having discussed this with HMIC, who are supportive of the study and have agreed to review the findings, and reviewed the 2005 gradings for HR, your force has clearly been identified as one of the best and a good force to look at for this purpose. So if you agree to assist, what does it mean? Attached is the first draft of a letter I would like to send to your Chief Constable. I will be writing to all CCs and Directors/Heads of HR separately as part of my data collection asking basic questions about the role of HR in the force and how HR operates and links in with performance management. For your force though this would include a more detailed interview with yourself and a questionnaire of a sample of senior operational managers, who I would ask you to identify for me. A review of PPAF data, and the latest HMIC report, and reviewing your HR strategies and plans. In terms of timescales - I need to get all my surveys etc out early November and would look to meet with you by mid December at the latest. I wanted to touch base tentatively with you before I go any further and hope to see you at the CIPD forum on Friday where I will be happy to answer any questions. Please could you confirm your agreement to take part by the end of next week at the latest. Thanking you in advance, with very best regards, Angela
Angela Roberts Head of Human Resources and Training Warwickshire Police 01926 415015
133
Appendix 7
Appendix 7 Interviews with Directors of HR: Cheshire, Dorset, Surrey
Background Information
Dissertation Proposal –SummaryAim: to investigate and evaluate the contribution of the Human Resource function to performance delivery in police service and to establish whether there is a link between effective HRM and operational performance.
Starting from the premise that effective human resource management should have a positive impact on the performance of an organisation, I will undertake a study of four HR departments in four forces in England, rated as having ‘Good’ HR, to establish whether this can be demonstrated to have an impact on the operational performance of the force. I will seek to establish whether HR adds value.
The dissertation will:
Describe relevant developments in the police service, the current provision of human resource management, and how police performance is measured.
Explore academic and professional research and position on the contribution of Human Resource Management to business performance.
Research current thinking within the police service at both national and individual force level on the contribution of HR.
Evaluate the current contribution of HR in forces based on perception of key stakeholders.
To determine whether there is a link between the contribution of the HR Department and operational performance based on research evidence.
Develop a model, which can be used to establish the quantitative contribution. Compare the current actual position to theory on the contribution of HR. Make recommendations in relation to the role and delivery of HRM for
improved contribution to operational performance.
There is a considerable wealth of the literature available in the area of HR contribution but very little study of HR in policing. The aim is to look specifically at HRM within policing in the UK, focusing on operational performance.
There is a need within the police service for more systematic process for measuring contribution of HR. I believe there is a link between HR and performance but that the HR community is not good at demonstrating or even articulating this, with the importance of HR not fully recognised, in some forces.
Research Methodology in relation to the four forcesThe four forces to be studied:Warwickshire, Cheshire, Dorset and Surrey
The four forces will be surveyed in detailed in order to determine whether there are any differences in HR delivery which lead to a greater or lesser contribution, and
134
establish best practice, and determine whether the achievement of a good grading from HMIC in HR impacts on operational performance.
This will include: Interviews with the Director of HR. A questionnaire survey of senior operational managers (30) within each force. Collection of secondary information – HR Strategy and Plan, Force Strategy,
HMIC Baseline Reports 2005 and 2006, PPAF grades
A comparison of approaches between forces will be evaluated to establish any trends and good practice.
Interview with Directors of HR (semi structured format)Areas for Discussion
1. Measurement of the contribution of HR to operational policing,
PPAF indicators – use of
Force Performance Framework
2. The role of HR in delivering force strategy, involvement in development of force strategy
3. How integrated the HR strategy is with force strategy,
4. How HR strategy is developed - process and engagement of senior management.
5 Resource Usage section of the HMIC Baseline report 2006
6 The role of HR within the force.
7 The responsibility of managers for human resource management
135
Appendix 8
Appendix 8 Operational Managers Questionnaire
The Contribution of HR to Operational Performance in the Police Service
This survey is being undertaken as primary research for an MBA dissertation on the Contribution of HR to Operational Performance in the Police Service.
The project is supported by HMIC, your Chief Constable and Director of Human Resources who are fully aware that you have been asked to be involved in this research. I appreciate your support in completing it.
Please complete all the questions set out below, as fully as possible. The questionnaire should be returned to Angela Roberts, Head of Human Resources at Warwickshire Police by 31 December 2006.
Your personal views and comments will not be shared with anyone else, however the combined results will be incorporated within the dissertation, a copy of which will be provided to HMIC.
Completed by:
Name (optional)
Role and Rank
Area/Department
Force
Section A: The Role of HR in your force
A1. What are the key areas the HR Department leads on in your force? (Please give the top 3 to 5 areas)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
136
A2. What part does the HR Department in your force play in contributing to the business planning process?
A2 (i) Does this meet with what you would expect? 1 Yes2 No
A3. What do you see as the role of HR in delivering the force strategy?
A3 (i) Does this match with what happens in practice? 1 Yes2 Partly3 No
A4. How would you rate the HR Department in your force in relation to the following areas?
(1 Excellent, 2 Good, 3 Fair, 4 Poor, X No Opinion)
a) Strategic contribution 1 2 3 4 Xb) HR delivery 1 2 3 4 Xc) Business Knowledge 1 2 3 4 Xd) Personal Credibility 1 2 3 4 Xe) HR technology 1 2 3 4 X
A5. Please rate the importance of the following roles carried out by HR.
1 Essential (to operational performance), 2 Value Adding (some contribution to operational performance), 3 Nice to have, (may add some value)4 irrelevant, (no measurable value)X no opinion
a) Develop a strategy for the management and development of people.
1 2 3 4 X
b) Develop HR policies in response to legislation and good practice.
1 2 3 4 X
137
c) Put in place HR practices which contribute to operational performance.
1 2 3 4 X
d) Develop and deliver the force Training Plan.
1 2 3 4 X
e) Provide advice and guidance to support managers in managing and developing people.
1 2 3 4 X
f) Administration of HR processes – e.g. PDR, Training courses, the recruitment process.
1 2 3 4 X
g) Provide management information, which assists in managing operational performance.
1 2 3 4 X
Section B: HR Service Delivery
B1. Does your force have clearly defined standards for HR service delivery? 1 Yes2 No
B1 (i) If yes, overall how well does the HR Department in your force meet these?(1 Exceeds, 2 Meets, 3 Partly Meets, 4 Fails to Meet X No opinion)
1 2 3 4 X
B1 (ii) If no, how would you rate the HR Department in your force in terms of your own expectations for HR service delivery?(1 Exceeds, 2 Meets, 3 Partly Meets, 4 Fails to Meet X No opinion)
1 2 3 4 X
138
B2. Please rate the Effectiveness of HR in carrying out the following roles in your force.
1 Exceeds requirements 2 Meets requirements 3 Sometimes meets requirements4 Rarely if ever meets requirementsX No opinion
a) Develop a strategy for the management and development of people.
1 2 3 4 X
b) Develop HR policies in response to legislation and good practice.
1 2 3 4 X
c) Put in place HR practices which contribute to operational performance.
1 2 3 4 X
d) Develop and deliver the force Training Plan.
1 2 3 4 X
e) Provide advice and guidance to support managers in managing and developing people.
1 2 3 4 X
f) Administration of HR processes – e.g. PDR, Training courses, the recruitment process.
1 2 3 4 X
g) Provide management information, which assists in managing operational performance.
1 2 3 4 X
139
B3. Please comment on the style of service delivery of the HR Department in your force, in terms of importance and effectiveness:
Please score importance on the basis of: 1 Essential, 2 Value Added, 3 Nice to have, 4 Irrelevant, X No opinion
Please score effectiveness on the basis of:1 Exceeds requirements, 2 Meets requirements, 3 Sometimes meets requirements, 4 Rarely, if ever, meets requirements, X No opinion
Characteristic Example IMP EFF
Responsive Respond promptly to requests and actively listen and fully answer questions
Professional Staff have the knowledge to answer(knowledge) questions fully
Breadth of view Staff are able to take all issuesinto account in providing advice.
Problem Adopt a problem solving approachsolving
Facilitating Able to translate customer serviceissues into relevant support
Corporate Uphold corporate values in theValue longer-term interests of the force.
B4 (i) Employment LegislationDo you view employment legislation as having a negative or positive impact on operational policing?
1 Positive2 Negative
B4 (ii) In your view does the HR Department demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of employment legislation?
1 Yes2 No
B4 (iii) Do you believe that the HR Department apply legislation too strictly? 1 Yes2 No
If yes, please give an example.
140
B4 (iv)Do you believe that corporacy in terms of issues such as pay policy and discrimination has a negative impact on operational delivery?1 Yes2 No
If yes, how do you think such matters should be dealt with?
Section C - Adding value
C1. To what extent do you believe HR professionals in your force understand the business of policing?(1 Fully, 2 Partly, 3 Not at all, 4 Not sure, X Don’t need to)
1 2 3 4 X
C2. To what extent do members of the HR Department in your force work with you to identify your expectations of HR and what you see as adding value? (1 Always, 2 Sometimes, 3 Rarely, 4 Never, 5 Not sure, X Not needed).
1 2 3 4 5 X
C3. What data/metrics are provided to you by the HR Department to support delivery of the business? Please give three to five examples of the most important data you are currently provided with.
1.2.3.4.5.
C4. What additional data (if any) would you like to see provided in future to support you in making operational decisions? Please list three to five most important.1.2.3.4.5.OR X – I am happy that I am provided with all data I need. (please indicate)
141
C5. Are you involved in development and delivery of the HR strategy? 1 Yes2 Partly3 No
C5 (i) Do you believe you should be? 1 Yes2 No3 No opinion
Section D: HR integration
D1. Do you attend meetings where HR performance data is discussed? 1 Yes2 No
If yes, please list these meetings.1.2.3.4.
D2. In your view should HR performance form a part of the overall force performance framework?1 Yes2 No
D2a) Is HR performance part the of overall performance framework in your force? 1 Yes2 No3 Don’t Know
D3. What do you see as the key performance indicators for HR?1.2.3.4.
D4. In your view does your force 2006 HMIC grading for HR (6a) Good, fairly reflect the contribution you believe HR to be making to delivering performance in the force?1 Yes2 No
142
D5. How often is the HR Department in your force asked: “How the HR Department is impacting on operational performance?”
1 Daily2 Weekly3 Monthly4 Quarterly5 Annually6 Never7 Don’t know
D6. How is the HR Strategy developed in your force – please indicate which sentence most closely reflects your perception/knowledge of your force’s approach?
b) Developed by the HR function separate from the force strategy
c) Force Strategy provided to the HR function from which they develop the HR strategy, practices and processes to help implement the force strategy.
d) The HR function provides information for the development of force strategy, HR then develop a strategy to support implementation.
e) The HR Director, as part of the top management team, is fully involved in the development of force strategy.
x) Not able to answer
D7. Are you as an operational manager involved in the development of HR strategy? 1 Yes2 Partly3 No
D7a Please describe your involvement.
D8. How is the HR strategy communicated to the force?
143
D9. How closely do you believe the HR Strategy/Plan is aligned with the Force Strategy?
1 Completely2 Partly3 Not at All4 Don’t know
D10. To what extent do HR practices within your force focus on improving staff performance? (1 Fully, 2 Mostly, 3 A little, 4 Not at all, X Not previously considered)
1 2 3 4 X
D11. In your opinion how aligned are HR practices with your requirements as an operational manager (1 Fully, 2 Mostly, 3 A little, 4 Not at all, X Not previously considered)
1 2 3 4 X
D12. In your opinion how aligned are HR practices with the requirements of the public? (1 Fully, 2 Mostly, 3 A little, 4 Not at all, X Not previously considered)
1 2 3 4 X
D13. Overall in your opinion the current delivery of HR in your force meets the needs of the organisation:
(1 Strongly Agree, 2 Agree, 3 Disagree, 4 Strongly Disagree, X No Opinion)
a) In relation to force/strategy direction. 1 2 3 4 X
b) Assisting you to deliver performance through people 1 2 3 4 X
c) Setting an appropriate culture for the force 1 2 3 4 X
Please give any examples to support your views
144
Section E: Any other commentsE1. Please add any further comments that you feel would be relevant to this research
Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire, your input to this research is appreciated and valued. Please return by 31 December 2006.
Angela RobertsHead of Human ResourcesWarwickshire PolicePolice HeadquartersLeek WoottonWarwickCV35 7QB
Email [email protected]
Tel. 01926 415015Fax 01926 415390
145
Appendix 9
Appendix 9 Observation Checklist – Metropolitan Police HR Performance Meeting
5 February 2007
Attendees
Format of the meeting
Key Performance Indicators being discussed
Process of the meeting
Mainly Looking at HR Efficiency. HR Effectiveness. HR Impact?
Indicators HR or Business Driven?
How integrated with operational performance considerations?
Clear line of sight between HR PIs and delivery of operational performance?
Role played by Director of HR
Role played by operational managers
Understanding of HRM roles and responsibilities.
Clear accountability?
146
Appendix 10
Appendix 10 Interview Questions Home Office representative
Interviewee Mick Pepper 1 December 2006 – Interviewer Angela Roberts
Dissertation Proposal –SummaryAim: to investigate and evaluate the contribution of the Human Resource function to performance delivery in the modern police service and to establish whether there is a link between effective HRM and operational performance.
Starting from the premise that effective human resource management should have a positive impact on the performance of an organisation, I will undertake a study of four HR departments in four forces in England, rated as having ‘Good’ HR, to establish whether this can be demonstrated to have an impact on the operational performance of the force. I will seek to establish whether HR adds value.
The dissertation will:
Describe relevant developments in the police service, the current provision of human resource management, and how police performance is measured.
Explore academic and professional research and position on the contribution of Human Resource Management to business performance.
Research current thinking within the police service at both national and individual force level on the contribution of HR.
Evaluate the current contribution of HR in forces based on perception of key stakeholders.
To determine whether there is a link between the contribution of the HR Department and operational performance based on research evidence.
Develop a model, which can be used to establish the quantitative contribution.
Compare the current actual position to theory on the contribution of HR. Make recommendations in relation to the role and delivery of HRM for
improved contribution to operational performance.
Much of the literature in the area of HR contribution is general and relates to strategy, with relatively few studies of specific industries, and very little study of HR in policing. The aim is to look specifically at HRM within policing in the UK, focusing on operational performance. Police operational performance is measured through the Police Performance and Assessment Framework Within each of the domains there are performance indicators, which is the level I will focus in seeking to determine how HR contributes to operational performance. If from my investigations I find HR is not directly contributing to operational performance I will investigate whether that is because HR is not fully engaged/contributing at strategy level.
Aim of the interview: to assist in addressing four elements of the dissertation.
“Describe relevant developments in the police service, the current provision of human resource management, and how police performance is measured.”
147
“Research current thinking in the Police Service at both national and individual force level on the contribution of HR”
“Evaluate the current contribution of HR in forces based on perception of key stakeholders.”
“To determine whether there is a link between the contribution of the HR Department and operational performance based on research evidence.”
Interview Questions:
HR Measurement
1. What is the role of the Home Office in measuring HR performance within forces?
2. What do the Home Office see as the key performance measures for HR?
3. Do the Home Office consider ‘customer satisfaction’ as a measure of how the HR departments are performing?
4. How does the Home Office link HR performance to PPAF?
5. How does the Home Office see the link between effective HR and operational performance?
6. What are the main elements of Human Resource Management that the Home Office are looking for when considering HMIC’s assessment of Good or Excellent?
Role of HR
7. How do the Home Office see the role of HR in contributing to the business planning process?
8. What are the key areas do the Home Office advocate that HR departments should lead on in forces?
9. What are the expectations of the Home Office expectations of HR departments in leading in these areas?
a) Set policy
b) Decision Making
c) Communication
d) Monitoring
e) Day to Day Management of systems and processes
148
HR integration
10. How should HRM be integrated into performance management within forces?
11. How do the Home Office evaluate the role and contribution HR is making to organisational performance?
12. Does the Home Office look at whether and how annual HR goals relate to the business goals and strategies? If yes, in your experience is this the case in forces currently?
13. In your experience is HR seen in forces to be fully integrated and adding value?
14. What is the role of the Home Office in setting policy and strategy to develop effective HRM within the police service?
Developments for the Future
14. How can HR better contribute to delivering operational performance in the future and what is the Home Office’s role in facilitating this?
15. What can HR Departments do to ensure they are adding value and are seen to be adding value to the organisation?
Any other comments?
149
Appendix 11
Appendix 11 Interview Questions Her Majesty’s Inspector (HMI) Personnel, Training and Diversity.
Interviewee Robin Field-Smith Interviewer Angela Roberts 3rd November 2006
“Robin Field-Smith MBE MA Chartered FCIPD FCMI
Robin Field-Smith graduated from Liverpool University and Churchill College, Cambridge. He served in the Regular Army from 1971 until 2000, and had a variety of posts as an instructor, education officer, and training adviser, as well as responsibilities on the staff and in command, ending his service as the senior Army member of the Defence Training Review Team.
His role as HMI is to act as an expert advisor on personnel, training, education and development and diversity issues as they relate to the police service; to carry out HMIC inspections; and to assist other inspection teams by giving detailed advice on matters connected with police personnel, training, education and development and diversity.
He is currently leading inspection of areas of specialist training, promotion processes for federated ranks, the HR function in PSNI, and implementation of the race equality duty, as well as advising ministers, chief constables and police authorities on the HR implication of restructuring and workforce modernisation.” (http://inspectorates.homeoffice.gov.uk/hmic/personnel-training/robin-field-smith2.html?version=1)
Aim of the interview: to assist in addressing four elements of the dissertation.
“Describe relevant developments in the police service, the current provision of human resource management, and how police performance is measured.”
“Research current thinking in the Police Service at both national and individual force level on the contribution of HR”
“Evaluate the current contribution of HR in forces based on perception of key stakeholders.”
“To determine whether there is a link between the contribution of the HR Department and operational performance based on research evidence.”
HR Measurement
2. What is the role of HMIC in measuring HR performance within forces? Reference to the Inspection Protocol for Human Resource Management (2006) http://inspectorates.homeoffice.gov.uk/hmic/docs/hrmanagement.pdf?view=Binary
150
2. What do you see as the key performance measures for HR?
3. Do HMIC use ‘customer satisfaction’ as a measure of how the HR departments are performing?
7. How does HMIC link HR performance to PPAF?
8. How does HMIC see the link between effective HR and operational performance?
9. What are the main elements of Human Resource Management that HMIC are looking for in making an assessment of Good or Excellent?
Role of HR
7. What do you see as the role of HR in contributing to the business planning process?
8. What are the key areas that you believe HR departments should lead on in forces?
9. What are your expectations of HR departments in leading in these areas?
a) Set policy
b) Decision Making
c) Communication
d) Monitoring
f) Day to Day Management of systems and processes
HR integration
10. How should the areas HR lead on be integrated into performance management within forces?
11. How do HMIC inspections evaluate the contribution HR is making to organisational performance?
16. Does HMIC look at whether and how annual HR goals relate to the business goals and strategies? If yes, in your experience is this the case in forces currently?
17. In your experience is HR seen in forces to be fully integrated and adding value?
Developments for the Future
151
18. How can HR better contribute to delivering operational performance in the future?
19. What can HR Departments do to ensure they are adding value and are seen to be adding value to the organisation?
Any other comments.
References
Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary/Home/Personnel, Training and Diversity http://inspectorates.homeoffice.gov.uk/hmic/personnel-training/robin-field-smith2.html?version=1 (Accessed 30 October 2006)Inspection Protocol for Human Resource Management 2006 (Author Unknown) http://inspectorates.homeoffice.gov.uk/hmic/docs/hrmanagement.pdf?view=Binary (Accessed 30 October 2006)
152
Appendix 12
Appendix 12 Interview Questions: ACPO Perspective
Interviewee Steve Corkerton, Interviewer Angela Roberts 15 February 2007
Background Information
Dissertation Proposal –SummaryAim: to investigate and evaluate the contribution of the Human Resource function to performance delivery in the police service and to establish whether there is a link between effective HRM and operational performance.
Methodology: Starting from the premise that effective human resource management should have a positive impact on the performance of an organisation, a survey will be undertaken of Chief Constables and Directors of HR in 43 forces in England and Wales. A detailed study of four forces in England, rated as having ‘Good’ HR, is being undertaken to establish whether this can be demonstrated to have an impact on the operational performance of the force. This includes semi-structured interviews with the Directors of HR, information gathering and review (HR Strategy, Force Strategy, HMIC Baseline etc) and survey of 30 operational managers in each force.
The dissertation will:
Describe relevant developments in the police service, the current provision of human resource management, and how police performance is measured.
Explore academic and professional research and position on the contribution of Human Resource Management to business performance.
Research current thinking within the police service at both national and individual force level on the contribution of HR.
Evaluate the current contribution of HR in forces based on perception of key stakeholders.
To determine whether there is a link between the contribution of the HR Department and operational performance based on research evidence.
Develop a model, which can be used to establish the quantitative contribution. Compare the current actual position to theory on the contribution of HR. Make recommendations in relation to the role and delivery of HRM for
improved contribution to operational performance.
Format of the InterviewThe format of the interview is intended to be unstructured, the aim of the interviewer being to direct a discussion around a number of key topic areas, identified below and provided in advance for consideration.
Aims of the Interview:To gain the views of ACPO in relation to how HR can and should contribute to operational policing.
To directly assist with primary research in addressing four elements of the dissertation.
153
“Research current thinking in the Police Service at both national and individual force level on the contribution of HR”
“To determine whether there is a link between the contribution of the HR Department and operational performance based on research evidence.”
“To assist in the development of a model, which can be used to establish the quantitative contribution.”
“Make recommendations in relation to the role and delivery of HRM for improved contribution to operational performance.”
Areas for Discussion:1. ACPO perspective on the role of HR within a force in relation to delivering
operational performance?
The essential things HR must deliver
The key areas ACPO expect HR departments to lead on in forces?
The main ways HR can add value
Key ways in which HR can contribute to operational performance
2. ACPO perspective on measuring and assessing whether HR is making an effective contribution?
The key performance indicators
The mechanisms required for monitoring and evaluating HR performance
The mechanisms required to make the link between HR performance and operational performance
What is looked for in evaluating HR performance in relation to operational performance?
3. The role of HR in delivering force strategy, how to integrate the HR strategy?
The role of HR in contributing to the business planning process?
How should HRM be integrated into performance management within forces?
4. ACPO view of the relevance of HR 6a grading in the assessment of whether HR is contributing to operational performance?
5. How can HR better contribute to delivering operational performance in the future and what is ACPO’s role in facilitating this?
154
6. What can HR Departments do to ensure they are adding value and are seen to be adding value to the organisation?
7. Any examples of best practice in relation to HR contribution to operational performance?
155
Appendix 13
Appendix 13 Interview Questions Chair of the Police Authority Warwickshire Police
Interviewee Phil Blundell, Interviewer Angela Roberts 9 January 2007
Aim of the interview: to address two elements of the dissertation.
“Research current thinking in the Police Service at both national and individual force level on the contribution of HR”
“Evaluate the current contribution of HR in forces based on perception of key stakeholders.”
HR Measurement
1. What is the role of the police authority in measuring HR performance?
2. What do you see as the key performance measures for HR?
3. Do the police authority use ‘customer satisfaction’ as a measure of how the HR department is performing?
4. Does the Police Authority link HR performance to PPAF?
Role of HR
5. a) What do you see as the role of HR in contributing to the business planning process?
b) How well is this happening in Warwickshire?
6. a) What are the key areas that you believe the HR department should lead on across the force?
b) How well is this happening in Warwickshire?
7. What are your expectations of the HR department in leading in the areas identified above?
a) Set policy
b) Decision Making
c) Communication
d) Monitoring
156
e) Day to Day Management of systems and processesHow would you rate each of the above?
HR integration
7. How are the areas HR lead on integrated into performance management within the force?
8. How do you evaluate the contribution HR is making to organisational performance?
9. Do annual HR goals relate directly to the business goals and strategies?
10. Does the 2006 HMIC grading for HR (6a etc) fairly reflect the contribution you believe HR to be making to delivering performance in the force?
157
Appendix 14
Appendix 14 Interview Questions Chair of the Police Authority HR and Training Panel – Warwickshire Police
Interviewee Mike Edwards, Interviewer Angela Roberts 6 November 2006
Aim of the interview: to address two elements of the dissertation.
“Research current thinking in the Police Service at both national and individual force level on the contribution of HR”
“Evaluate the current contribution of HR in forces based on perception of key stakeholders.”
HR Measurement
1. What is the role of the police authority in measuring HR performance?
2. What do you see as the key performance measures for HR?
3. Do the police authority use ‘customer satisfaction’ as a measure of how the HR department is performing?
4. Does the Police Authority link HR performance to PPAF?
Role of HR
8. What do you see as the role of HR in contributing to the business planning process?
9. What are the key areas that you believe the HR department should lead on across the force?
7. What are your expectations of the HR department in leading in these areas?
a) Set policy
b) Decision Making
c) Communication
d) Monitoring
e) Day to Day Management of systems and processes
HR integration
10. How are the areas HR lead on integrated into performance management within the force?
158
11. How do you evaluate the contribution HR is making to organisational performance?
12. Do annual HR goals relate directly to the business goals and strategies?
13. Does the 2006 HMIC grading for HR (6a etc) fairly reflect the contribution you believe HR to be making to delivering performance in the force?
159
Appendix 15
Appendix 15 Interview Chief Constable Warwickshire Police
Interviewee Keith Bristow 24 November 2006 Interviewer – Angela Roberts
Background Information
Dissertation Proposal –SummaryAim: to investigate and evaluate the contribution of the Human Resource function to performance delivery in the police service and to establish whether there is a link between effective HRM and operational performance.
Methodology: Starting from the premise that effective human resource management should have a positive impact on the performance of an organisation, a survey will be undertaken of Chief Constables and Directors of HR in 43 forces in England and Wales. A detailed study of four forces in England, rated as having ‘Good’ HR, is being undertaken to establish whether this can be demonstrated to have an impact on the operational performance of the force. This includes semi-structured interviews with the Directors of HR, information gathering and review (HR Strategy, Force Strategy, HMIC Baseline etc) and survey of 30 operational managers in each force.
The dissertation will:
Describe relevant developments in the police service, the current provision of human resource management, and how police performance is measured.
Explore academic and professional research and position on the contribution of Human Resource Management to business performance.
Research current thinking within the police service at both national and individual force level on the contribution of HR.
Evaluate the current contribution of HR in forces based on perception of key stakeholders.
To determine whether there is a link between the contribution of the HR Department and operational performance based on research evidence.
Develop a model, which can be used to establish the quantitative contribution. Compare the current actual position to theory on the contribution of HR. Make recommendations in relation to the role and delivery of HRM for
improved contribution to operational performance.
Format of the InterviewThe format of the interview is intended to be unstructured, the aim of the interviewer being to direct a discussion around a number of key topic areas, identified below and provided in advance for consideration.
Aims of the Interview:To gain the views of a Chief Constable in relation to how HR can and should contribute to operational policing.
To directly assist with primary research in addressing four elements of the dissertation.
160
“Research current thinking in the Police Service at both national and individual force level on the contribution of HR”
“To determine whether there is a link between the contribution of the HR Department and operational performance based on research evidence.”
“To assist in the development of a model, which can be used to establish the quantitative contribution.”
“Make recommendations in relation to the role and delivery of HRM for improved contribution to operational performance.”
Areas for Discussion:1. The role of HR within a force in relation to delivering operational performance?
The essential things HR must deliver
The main ways HR can add value
Key ways in which HR can contribute to operational performance
2. How you know whether HR is making that contribution?
The key performance indicators to look for
The mechanisms that need to be in place for monitoring and evaluating HR performance
The mechanisms that need to be in place to make the link between HR performance and operational performance
What to look for in evaluating HR performance in relation to operational performance?
3. The role of HR in delivering force strategy, how to integrate the HR strategy?
4. Examples of best practice in relation to HR from experience within the service and in a number of forces.
161
Appendix 16
Appendix 16 Interview Questions operational managers Warwickshire Police
Interviewees: ACC Bill Holland, Chief Superintendent Richard Sear, Superintendent Neil Hewison, Chief Inspector Martin Samuel, Inspector Faz Chishty
Background information
Dissertation Proposal –SummaryAim: to investigate and evaluate the contribution of the Human Resource function to performance delivery in the police service and to establish whether there is a link between effective HRM and operational performance.
Methodology: Starting from the premise that effective human resource management should have a positive impact on the performance of an organisation, a survey will be undertaken of Chief Constables and Directors of HR in 43 forces in England and Wales. A detailed study of four forces in England, rated as having ‘Good’ HR, is being undertaken to establish whether this can be demonstrated to have an impact on the operational performance of the force. This includes semi-structured interviews with the Directors of HR, information gathering and review (HR Strategy, Force Strategy, HMIC Baseline etc) and survey of 30 operational managers in each force.
The dissertation will:
Describe relevant developments in the police service, the current provision of human resource management, and how police performance is measured.
Explore academic and professional research and position on the contribution of Human Resource Management to business performance.
Research current thinking within the police service at both national and individual force level on the contribution of HR.
Evaluate the current contribution of HR in forces based on perception of key stakeholders.
To determine whether there is a link between the contribution of the HR Department and operational performance based on research evidence.
Develop a model, which can be used to establish the quantitative contribution. Compare the current actual position to theory on the contribution of HR. Make recommendations in relation to the role and delivery of HRM for
improved contribution to operational performance.
Methodology - Interviews with operational managers
Aim of the interviews: (i) To explore in detail with a sample of five key operational managers within the force, how they believe the HR department supports them in delivering operational performance. How do they see HR. What is the role of HR in supporting them to deliver performance. At what levels does HR have a role in contributing to this – strategy, policy, facilitating, support and advice, day to day management of people
162
issues, administrative service. Current views on the level of service received, what improvements.
(ii) To directly assist with primary research in addressing three elements of the dissertation.
“To determine whether there is a link between the contribution of the HR Department and operational performance based on research evidence.”
“To assist in the development of a model, which can be used to establish the quantitative contribution.”
“Make recommendations in relation to the role and delivery of HRM for improved contribution to operational performance.”
Operational Managers identified: ACC Operations, Chief Supt (BCU Commander), Operations Supt (BCU), District Chief Inspector, Sector Inspector.
Format of the InterviewThe format of the interview is intended to be unstructured, the aim of the interviewer being to direct a discussion around a number of key topic areas, identified below and provided in advance for consideration.
Key areas to be explored:
1. View of the role of HR in relation to delivery of the operational policing Do HR have a role to play? Why do we need HR? How do we know whether HR is contributing?
2. View of the role of HR in supporting them as operational managers.
Their expectations of HR Their involvement with HR What do HR add
3. Satisfaction levels as customers of HR Do HR meet their expectations How do they measure this What more should HR be doing to support them
4. How to we get HR more integrated into the business of policing. At what levels should HR be contributing In what ways should HR be contributing Strategy, policy, support and advice etc How to measure the impact of HR
163
Appendix 17 Focus Group – HR Contribution to operational policing
Warwickshire Police – 8th December 2006
Aim of the focus group:
To explore the links between what HR do in the organisation and front line delivery of operational performance.
Four key areas to be explored:
Focus on operational performance and try to establish the links back to HR.
Understanding of the role of HR and individual HR processes
How to measure contribution and what it would be like without HR?
What can HR do to contribute more effectively - HR priorities?
Outline of the session
1. Introductions and explanation - AR
2. Discussion Areas:
Current operational performance measurement - Discussion
Can we make the links between HR and operational performance?
Can we see a clear line from what HR does to front line delivery?
Understanding of role of HR in the force.
Individual HR processes and practices – how important are these? How effective are these?
How do we measure what HR contributes?
What would we do if there was no HR?
How can we make better links between what HR does and delivering operational policing to the benefit of operational policing?
What should HR’s priorities be, to better support operational policing?
3. Summary and Close
164
Appendix 18
Appendix 18 Summary of Respondents to the study
Method Used:Survey Interviews Information
gathering Focus Group
Respondents
No. Sent
No of respondents
Return Rate %
No. Interviewed
Attendees
Chief Constables
43 3 (CC reps) 7% 1
HR Directors 42* 12 28.6% 3**Warwickshire Operational Managers
30 11 36.7% 5 7
Cheshire Operational Managers
30 2 6.7% 0
Dorset Operational Managers
30 6 20% 0
Surrey Operational Managers
30 15 50% 0
Total Survey 205 49 23.9%Police Authority
2
HMIC 1Home Office 1ACPO 1Metropolitan Police HR Evaluation Meeting
Seven Borough CommandersHR and Business Managers.
Other 2***Total respondents
69 Total Interviews: 14
* Warwickshire not included.** also returned survey, discounted in total respondents*** HMIC Staff Officer, Warwickshire Force Performance Manager
165
Forces including in the analysis
Chief Constable RespondentsGwentSouth YorkshireStaffordshire
Director/Head of HR RespondentsCheshireClevelandDorsetEssexLincolnshireNorfolkNorthamptonshireNorth WalesSuffolkSurreyThames ValleyWest Midlands
Operational Manager RespondentsCheshireDorsetSurreyWarwickshire
166
Appendix 19
Appendix 19 Ulrich’s five roles for HR Professionals
Role Chief Constable
HR Lead
Total % of respondents
Employee Advocate
Always 1 1 2 13.33Partly 1 8 9 60.00Rarely 1 3 4 26.67Never No Opinion
Human Capital Developer
Always 2 2 4 26.67Partly 1 8 9 60.00Rarely 2 2 13.33Never No Opinion
Functional Expert
Always 3 11 14 93.33Partly 1 1 6.67Rarely Never No Opinion
Strategic Partner
Always 3 4 7 46.67Partly 6 6 40.00Rarely 2 2 13.33Never No Opinion
Leadership Always 1 4 5 33.33Partly 2 7 9 60.00Rarely 1 1 6.67Never No Opinion 13.33
167
Appendix 20
Appendix 20 HR competence in the five key areas Competence Chief
ConstableHR Lead
Operational Managers Rating
To what extent to HR professionals demonstrate competence?Number or respondents
How would you rate the HR Dept in relation to the following?Number of respondents
Strategic Contribution
Always 3 Excellent 2Partly 2 6 Good 11Rarely 2 Fair 12Never Poor 2No Opinion
1 No Opinion 6
HR Delivery Always 2 9 Excellent 10Partly 1 1 Good 12Rarely 1 Fair 19Never Poor 0No Opinion
1 No Opinion 2
Business Knowledge
Always 5 Excellent 3Partly 3 6 Good 11Rarely Fair 11Never Poor 2No Opinion
1 No Opinion 6
Personal Credibility
Always 3 4 Excellent 1Partly 7 Good 8Rarely Fair 17Never Poor 5No Opinion
1 No Opinion 2
HR Technology Always 1 4 Excellent 2Partly 2 6 Good 8Rarely 1 Fair 13Never 0 Poor 7No Opinion
1 No Opinion 3
168
Appendix 21
Appendix 21 Application of the multiplier to operational managers rating of competence
Competence Operational Managers -RatingHow would you rate the HR Dept in relation to the following?
Number of respondents
Multiplier
Total Total/Rank
Strategic Contribution
Excellent 2 X3 6 383rdGood 11 X2 22
Fair 12 X1 12Poor 2 X-1 -2No Opinion 6
HR Delivery Excellent 1 X3 3 461stGood 12 X2 24
Fair 19 X1 19Poor 0 X-1 0No Opinion 2
Business Knowledge
Excellent 3 X3 9 402ndGood 11 X2 22
Fair 11 X1 11Poor 2 X-1 -2No Opinion 6
Personal Credibility
Excellent 1 X3 3 31 4thGood 8 X2 16
Fair 17 X1 17Poor 5 X-1 -5No Opinion 2
HR Technology Excellent 2 X3 6 28 5thGood 8 X2 16
Fair 13 X1 13Poor 7 X-1 -7No Opinion 3
169
Appendix 22
Appendix 22 Ranking of importance placed by operational managers on seven roles of HR
Response Rate
Response Rate
Response Rate
Response Rate
Response Rate
Multiplier Essential X3Value Adding X2
Nice to have X1Irrelevant X-1
Total score
Rank No opinion
Strategy 53% 1.59 38% 0.76 6% 0.06 3% 0.03 2.38 2 0
Policies 56% 1.68 41% 0.82 3% 0.03 0% 0 2.53 1 0
Practices 41% 1.23 44% 0.88 15% 0.15 0% 0 2.26 3 0
Training 50% 1.5 38% 0.76 6% 0.06 6% 0.06 2.26 3 0
Advice 50% 1.5 26% 0.52 21% 0.21 3% 0.03 2.2 5 0
Admin 35% 1.05 47% 0.94 15% 0.15 3% 0.03 2.11 6 0
Mgmt Info 24% 0.72 38% 0.76 35% 0.35 3% 0.03 1.8 7 0
170
Appendix 23
Appendix 23 Ranking of effectiveness placed by operational managers on seven roles of HR
Exceeds 3 Meets 2 Sometimes
Meets
1 Rarely
meets
-1 No
Opinion Total Rank
Strategy 0% 0.00 38% 0.76 50% 0.50 12% -0.12 0% 1.14 5
Policy 9% 0.27 74% 1.48 18% 0.18 0% 0.00 0% 1.93 1
Practices 0% 0.00 29% 0.58 59% 0.59 9% -0.09 3% 1.08 6
Training Plan 12% 0.36 24% 0.48 50% 0.50 12% -0.12 3% 1.22 4
Advice 9% 0.27 29% 0.58 50% 0.50 12% -0.12 0% 1.23 3
Administration 0% 0.00 53% 1.06 35% 0.35 12% -0.12 0% 1.29 2
Management
Information 3% 0.09 32% 0.64 44% 0.44 21% -0.21 0% 0.96 7
171
Appendix 24
Appendix 24 HR Style of Delivery
HR Style of Delivery - importance v effectiveness. Breadth of View Corporate Value FacilitatingImportance Effective Importance Effective Importance EffectiveNo. of responses Mean
No. of responsesMean
No. of responses Mean
No. of responsesMean
No. of responses Mean
No. of responsesMean
1 18 18 1 1 14 14 3 3 12 12 0 02 10 20 20 40 17 34 19 38 13 10 203 6 18 12 36 3 9 10 30 7 21 18 544 0 0 1 4 0 0 1 4 0 0 2 8X 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 2 10 4 20
Total 34 56 34 81 34 57 34 80 34 69 34 102Mean 1 1.65 1 2.38 1 1.68 1.00 2.35 1.00 2.03 1.00 3.00
HR Style of Delivery - importance v effectiveness. Problem Solving Professional ResponsiveImportance Effective Importance Effective MeanImportance EffectiveNo. of responses Mean
No. of responsesMean
No. of responses Mean
No. of responses
No. of responses Mean
No. of responsesMean
1 11 11 1 1 25 25 4 4 21 21 2 22 20 40 15 30 8 16 20 40 12 24 16 323 1 3 13 39 1 3 9 27 1 3 14 424 0 0 2 8 0 0 1 4 0 0 2 8X 2 10 3 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 34 64 34 93 34 44 34 75 34 48 34 84Mean 1.00 1.88 1.00 2.74 1.00 1.29 1.00 2.21 1.00 1.41 1.00 2.47
Importance: 1 Essential, 2 Value Added, 3 Nice to have, 4 Irrelevant, X No opinion
Effectiveness:1 Exceeds requirements, 2 Meets requirements, 3 Sometimes meets requirements, 4 Rarely, if ever, meets requirements, X No opinion
172
Appendix 25
Appendix 25 Analysis of HMIC Baseline Assessment 2006
For each rating of Excellent 4 points has been awardedFor Good 3 points, Fair 2 and Poor 1
Force
Total
points
Overall
forceRank
Total minusResour
ceUse
Rank minus Resource Use
Total Resource Use
Rank Resource Use
HR and
Training
Rank HR and
Training
Total minus HR andTrainin
g
Rank minus
HR and Trainin
g1 Lancashire 77 1 56 1 21 1 6 3 71 12 West
Midlands 73 2 54 2 19 4 6 3 67 23 West
Yorkshire 72 3 53 3 19 4 6 3 66 34 Staffordshire 72 3 52 5 20 2 7 1 65 45 Northumbria 71 5 53 3 18 6 6 3 65 46 North Wales 69 6 52 5 17 13 5 21 64 67 Surrey 67 7 49 7 18 6 6 3 61 78 West Mercia 67 7 49 7 18 6 6 3 61 79 Kent 66 9 45 15 21 1 6 3 60 910 Hertfordshire 65 10 47 9 18 6 6 3 59 1011 Sussex 61 17 47 9 14 33 2 43 59 1012 Dorset 64 11 47 9 17 13 6 3 58 1213 MPS 64 11 47 9 17 13 6 3 58 1214 GMP 63 13 45 15 18 6 6 3 57 1415 Merseyside 62 15 46 13 16 20 5 21 57 1416
North Yorkshire 63 13 45 15 18 6 7 1 56 16
17
City of London 62 15 46 13 16 20 6 3 56 16
18
South Yorkshire 60 21 45 15 15 27 4 33 56 16
19 Essex 61 17 44 20 17 13 6 3 55 1920 Hampshire 61 17 43 22 18 6 6 3 55 1921
Thames Valley 61 17 44 20 17 13 6 3 55 19
22 Derbyshire 60 21 45 15 15 27 5 21 55 1923 Dyfed Powys 60 21 43 22 17 13 5 21 55 1924 Norfolk 59 24 43 22 16 20 6 3 53 24
173
25 Cheshire 58 25 41 28 17 13 6 3 52 2526 Durham 58 25 42 25 16 20 6 3 52 2527
Avon and Somerset 57 27 41 28 16 20 5 21 52 25
28 Leicestershire 57 27 41 28 16 20 5 21 52 2529
Gloucestershire 56 29 41 28 15 27 5 21 51 29
30 Bedfordshire 55 30 40 34 15 27 4 33 51 2931 South Wales 55 30 42 25 13 37 4 33 51 2932
Devon and Cornwall 54 32 41 28 13 37 3 40 51 29
33
Cambridgeshire 54 32 42 25 12 42 4 33 50 33
34 Gwent 53 34 40 34 13 37 4 33 49 3435 Suffolk 53 34 39 36 14 33 4 33 49 3436 Cleveland 52 37 39 36 13 37 3 40 49 3437 Cumbria 52 37 41 28 11 43 3 40 49 3438
Nottinghamshire 53 34 38 38 15 27 5 21 48 38
39 Lincolnshire 52 39 38 38 14 33 5 21 47 3940 Wiltshire 52 39 38 38 14 33 5 21 47 3941
Northamptonshire 50 41 34 41 16 20 5 21 45 41
42 Warwickshire 49 42 34 41 15 27 5 21 44 4243 Humberside 44 43 31 43 13 37 4 33 40 43
174
Appendix 26
Appendix 26 Framework for evaluation of HR contribution to operational performance – scoring grid
Section A: The Role of HR
A2. What part does the HR Department in your force play in contributing to the business planning process?
Rated on basis of positive or negative role identified by operational managers.
View of the manager ScorePositive role articulated 3Role articulated 2Very limited role articulated 1No role articulated or question not answered 0
A2 (i) Does this meet with what you would expect? 3 Yes 4 No
Rated on basis of answer provided in A2
View of the manager ScoreYes and positive role articulated in A2 3Yes and role articulated in A2 2Yes and very limited role articulated in A2 1No and very limited role articulated in A2 1No and positive role articulated/role articulated in A2 0
A3. What do you see as the role of HR in delivering the force strategy?
View of the manager ScorePositive role articulated 2Some role articulated 1Unknown or no role articulated 0
A3 (i) Does this match with what happens in practice?
View of the manager ScoreYes and positive role articulated in A3 3Partly and positive role articulated in A3 1Yes and some role articulated in A3 1
175
A4. How would you rate the HR Department in your force in relation to the following areas? (1 Excellent, 2 Good, 3 Fair, 4 Poor, X No Opinion)
View of the manager ScoreStrategic Contribution Excellent 3
Good 2Fair 1
HR Delivery Excellent 3Good 2Fair 1
Business Knowledge Excellent 3Good 2Fair 1
Personal Credibility Excellent 3Good 2Fair 1
HR Technology Excellent 3Good 2Fair 1
Total: Out of a maximum of 15
A5. Please rate the importance of the following roles carried out by HR.
1 Essential (to operational performance), 2 Value Adding (some contribution to operational performance), 3 Nice to have (may add some value), 4 Irrelevant, (no measurable value), X no opinion
Importance of HR’s Role View of the manager ScoreDevelop Strategy for the management and development of people
Essential 3
Value Adding 2
Nice to Have 1
Develop HR policies in response to legislation and good practice
Essential 3
Value Adding 2
Nice to Have 1
Put in place HR practices which contribute to operational performance
Essential 3
Value Adding 2
Nice to Have 1
Develop and deliver the force Training Plan
Essential 3
Value Adding 2
Nice to Have 1
Provide advice/guidance to support in managing and developing people
Essential 3
Value Adding 2
Nice to Have 1
Administration of processes e.g. PDR, Training courses, recruitment
Essential 3
Value Adding 2
Nice to Have 1
Provide management information
Essential 3
Value Adding 2
Nice to Have 1
Total: Out of a maximum of 21
176
Section B: HR Service Delivery
B1. Does your force have clearly defined standards for HR service delivery?
View of the manager ScoreYes 2No 0
B1 (i) If yes, overall how well does the HR Department in your force meet these? (1 Exceeds, 2 Meets, 3 Partly Meets, 4 Fails to Meet, X No opinion)
View of the manager ScoreExceeds 3Meets 2Partly Meets 1
OR
B1 (ii) If no, how would you rate the HR Department in your force in terms of your own expectations for HR service delivery?(1 Exceeds, 2 Meets, 3 Partly Meets, 4 Fails to Meet, X No opinion)
View of the manager ScoreExceeds 3Meets 2Partly Meets 1
B2. Please rate the Effectiveness of HR in carrying out the following roles in your force.
1 Exceeds requirements, 2 Meets requirements, 3 Sometimes meets requirements, 4 Rarely if ever meets requirements, X No opinion
Effectiveness of HR View of the manager ScoreDevelop Strategy for the management and development of people
Exceeds requirements 3Meets requirements 2Sometimes meets requirements 1
Develop HR policies in response to legislation and good practice
Exceeds requirements 3Meets requirements 2Sometimes meets requirements 1
Put in place HR practices which contribute to operational performance
Exceeds requirements 3Meets requirements 2Sometimes meets requirements 1
Develop and deliver the force Training Plan
Exceeds requirements 3Meets requirements 2Sometimes meets requirements 1
Provide advice/guidance to support in managing and developing people
Exceeds requirements 3Meets requirements 2Sometimes meets requirements 1
Administration of processes e.g. Exceeds requirements 3
177
PDR, Training courses, recruitment
Meets requirements 2Sometimes meets requirements 1
Provide management information Exceeds requirements 3Meets requirements 2Sometimes meets requirements 1
Total: Out of a maximum of 21
B3. Please comment on the style of service delivery of the HR Department in your force, in terms of importance and effectiveness:
Please score importance on the basis of: 1 Essential, 2 Value Added, 3 Nice to have, 4 Irrelevant, X No opinion
Please score effectiveness on the basis of:1 Exceeds requirements, 2 Meets requirements, 3 Sometimes meets requirements, 4 Rarely, if ever, meets requirements, X No opinion
Characteristic View of the manager Importance Score
EffectivenessScore
Responsive Exceeds requirements 3 3Meets requirements 2 2Sometimes meets requirements 1 1
Professional (Knowledge)
Exceeds requirements 3 3Meets requirements 2 2Sometimes meets requirements 1 1
Breadth of View
Exceeds requirements 3 3Meets requirements 2 2Sometimes meets requirements 1 1
Problem Solving
Exceeds requirements 3 3Meets requirements 2 2Sometimes meets requirements 1 1
Facilitating Exceeds requirements 3 3Meets requirements 2 2Sometimes meets requirements 1 1
Corporate Value
Exceeds requirements 3 3Meets requirements 2 2Sometimes meets requirements 1 1
Total: Out of a maximum of 36
B4 (ii) In your view does the HR Department demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of employment legislation?
View of the manager ScoreYes 2No 0
B4 (iii) Do you believe that the HR Department apply legislation too strictly?
178
View of the manager ScoreYes 2No 0
Section C - Adding value
C1. To what extent do you believe HR professionals in your force understand the business of policing?(1 Fully, 2 Partly, 3 Not at all, 4 Not sure, X Don’t need to)
C2. To what extent do members of the HR Department in your force work with you to identify your expectations of HR and what you see as adding value? (1 Always, 2 Sometimes, 3 Rarely, 4 Never, 5 Not sure, X Not needed).
Adding Value View of the Manager ScoreUnderstanding of policing Fully 3
Partly 2Identify managers expectations of HR Always 3
Sometimes 2Rarely 1
C5. Are you involved in development and delivery of the HR strategy?
View of the manager ScoreYes 2Partly 1No 0
Section D: HR integration
D1. Do you attend meetings where HR performance data is discussed?
View of the manager ScoreYes 2No 0
D2a) Is HR performance part the of overall performance framework in your force?
View of the manager ScoreYes 3No 0Don’t Know 0D8. How is the HR strategy communicated to the force?
179
View of the manager ScorePositive Response 2Answer 1
D9. How closely do you believe the HR Strategy/Plan is aligned with the Force Strategy?
View of the manager ScoreCompletely 5Partly 2Not at all 0Don’t Know 0
D10. To what extent do HR practices within your force focus on improving staff performance? (1 Fully, 2 Mostly, 3 A little, 4 Not at all, X Not previously considered)
D11. In your opinion how aligned are HR practices with your requirements as an operational manager? (1 Fully, 2 Mostly, 3 A little, 4 Not at all, X Not previously considered)
D12. In your opinion how aligned are HR practices with the requirements of the public? (1 Fully, 2 Mostly, 3 A little, 4 Not at all, X Not previously considered)
Alignment of HR View of the manager ScoreExtent to which HR practices focus on improving staff performance
Fully 3Mostly 2A Little 1
How aligned are HR practices with requirements as operational managers
Fully 3Mostly 2A Little 1
How aligned are HR practices with requirements of the public
Fully 3Mostly 2A Little 1
180
D13. Overall in your opinion the current delivery of HR in your force meets the needs of the organisation: (1 Strongly Agree, 2 Agree, 3 Disagree, 4 Strongly Disagree, X No Opinion)
Service Delivery View of the manager ScoreForce/strategy direction Strongly Agree 3
Agree 2Assisting to deliver performance through people
Strongly Agree 3Agree 2
Setting appropriate culture for the force
Strongly Agree 3Agree 2
181
Appendix 27
Appendix 27 Evaluation Results of HR contribution to operational policing
Maximum 3 3 2 3 15 21 2 3 21 36 2 2 3 3 2
ROLE OF HR HR SERVICE DELIVERY ADDING VALUERespondent No. A2 A2(I) A3 A3(I) A4 A5 B1
B(I)/B(ii) B2 B3 B4(ii) B4(iii) C1 C2 C5
C7 1 1 2 1 5 14 0 1 7 22 0 2 1 1 0
C30 2 2 2 1 7 20 2 1 6 26 2 2 2 0 0Total Cheshire 3 3 4 2 12 34 2 2 13 48 2 4 3 1 0
Average 1.5 1.5 2 1 6 17 1 1 6.5 24 1 2 1.5 0.5 0
D2 2 2 2 1 8 14 2 1 14 21 2 2 2 0 1
D3 0 0 2 1 6 19 2 1 11 19 2 2 2 1 0
D27 3 3 2 1 10 21 2 2 14 30 2 2 2 1 1
D31 0 0 2 3 14 17 2 2 16 30 2 2 2 1 1
D32 2 2 2 3 11 19 2 2 15 23 2 2 2 1 0
D33 1 0 1 0 6 14 2 0 8 15 2 0 2 1 0Total Dorset 8 7 11 9 55 104 12 8 78 138 12 10 12 5 3
Average 1.33 1.17 1.83 1.50 9.17 17.33 2.00 1.33 13.00 23.00 2.00 1.67 2.00 0.83 0.50
S12 3 3 2 1 4 16 0 1 7 24 2 0 3 2 1
S13 2 2 2 1 6 14 2 2 13 21 2 2 2 0 0
S14 3 0 2 3 8 15 2 2 16 34 2 2 2 2 0
S15 0 0 2 1 7 14 2 2 12 22 2 2 2 0 0
S16 2 2 2 1 4 18 2 1 10 18 2 2 2 0 1
S17 3 3 2 1 3 16 0 0 4 15 2 2 1 1 1
S18 1 1 0 0 4 15 0 0 7 19 0 2 0 0 0
S19 0 0 2 1 1 15 0 0 5 17 2 2 2 1 0
S20 3 3 2 1 6 19 2 2 10 22 2 2 2 1 0
S21 0 0 1 1 7 15 2 2 14 27 2 2 2 2 0
S22 0 0 2 2 7 13 0 1 10 25 2 2 2 3 0
S23 2 2 2 2 6 20 2 2 10 26 0 2 2 0 1
S24 0 1 2 0 1 16 0 0 8 27 2 2 1 0 0
S25 1 1 2 0 4 21 0 1 5 21 2 2 0 1 0
S26 0 0 0 0 4 17 2 1 10 23 2 2 2 1 0Total Surrey 20 18 25 15 72 244 16 17 141 341 26 28 25 14 4
Average 1.33 1.20 1.67 1.00 4.80 16.27 1.07 1.13 9.40 22.73 1.73 1.87 1.67 0.93 0.27
W1 2 2 1 0 5 17 0 1 8 29 2 2 2 2 0
W4 1 1 1 0 3 3 0 0 3 18 2 2 0 1 0
W5 2 2 2 1 8 15 0 1 10 25 2 0 2 1 1
W6 2 2 2 1 8 13 0 2 12 26 0 2 2 2 2
W8 3 3 2 1 7 18 2 1 10 26 2 2 2 2 1
W9 0 0 2 1 4 9 0 0 9 24 2 2 0 0 0
W10 2 2 1 1 8 15 0 2 8 26 2 2 2 2 0
W11 2 2 0 0 5 17 0 0 7 26 2 2 2 1 0
W13 0 0 2 2 0 20 0 1 5 13 0 2 2 2 1
ROLE OF HR HR SERVICE DELIVERY ADDING VALUE
W29 2 2 2 1 7 11 2 2 12 24 2 0 2 1 0
W34 1 1 2 1 6 13 0 1 10 25 2 2 2 2 0
182
Total Warks 17 17 17 9 61 151 4 11 94 262 18 18 18 16 5
Average 1.55 1.55 1.55 0.82 5.55 13.73 0.36 1.00 8.55 23.82 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.45 0.45
Maximum 2 3 2 5 3 3 3 9 151%OF TOTAL
Total A Total B
Total C Total D
HR INTEGRATION A B C DRespondent No. D1 D2a D8 D9 D10 D11 D12 D13 Total
C7 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 64 42.4 24 32 2 6
C30 0 3 1 5 2 2 2 6 96 63.6 34 39 2 21
Total Cheshire 2 3 1 5 2 3 3 8 160 58 71 4 27
Average 1 1.5 0.5 2.5 1 1.5 1.5 4 80 53.0 29 35.5 2 13.5
D2 2 3 1 0 2 2 0 2 86 57.0 29 42 3 12
D3 0 3 2 2 2 1 0 2 80 53.0 28 37 3 12
D27 2 3 2 5 2 2 2 6 120 79.5 40 52 4 24
D31 2 0 0 0 1 1 1 7 106 70.2 36 54 4 12
D32 2 3 1 5 3 3 2 8 115 76.2 39 46 3 27
D33 0 3 1 0 1 1 1 0 59 39.1 22 27 3 7
Total Dorset 8 15 7 12 11 10 6 25 566 194 258 20 94
Average 1.33 2.50 1.172.0
0 1.83 1.67 1.00 4.17 94.3 62.47 32.33 43.00 3.33 15.67
S12 2 3 2 5 2 2 2 4 91 60.3 29 34 6 22
S13 0 0 1 5 2 2 2 7 90 59.6 27 42 2 19
S14 2 0 2 5 2 2 2 7 115 76.2 31 58 4 22
S15 0 3 1 2 2 1 2 6 85 56.3 24 42 2 17
S16 2 3 2 2 1 1 1 6 85 56.3 29 35 3 18
S17 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 58 38.4 28 23 3 4
S18 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 50 33.1 21 28 0 1
S19 2 0 1 2 1 1 0 0 55 36.4 19 26 3 7
S20 2 3 1 5 2 1 1 5 97 64.2 34 40 3 20
S21 0 3 0 5 3 3 2 7 100 66.2 24 49 4 23
S22 2 3 0 5 1 2 0 4 86 57.0 24 40 5 17
S23 0 3 2 5 2 1 0 5 97 64.2 34 42 3 18
S24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 39.7 20 39 1 0
S25 0 0 1 2 1 1 1 2 69 45.7 29 31 1 8
S26 2 3 2 5 1 2 0 6 85 56.3 21 40 3 21
Total Surrey 14 24 16 48 22 21 13 59 1223 394 569 43 217
Average 0.93 1.60 1.073.2
0 1.47 1.40 0.87 3.93 81.5 54.00 26.27 37.93 2.87 14.47
W1 2 0 1 2 1 1 1 2 83 55.0 27 42 4 10
W4 0 3 1 0 1 1 1 0 42 27.8 9 25 1 7
W5 2 3 0 0 2 2 1 6 88 58.3 30 38 4 16
W6 2 2 2 5 1 2 1 6 97 64.2 28 42 6 21
W8 2 3 1 2 1 1 1 4 97 64.2 34 43 5 15
W9 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 6 61 40.4 16 37 0 8
W10 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 79 52.3 29 40 4 6
W11 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 72 47.7 26 37 3 6
W13 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 0 55 36.4 24 21 5 5
W29 0 0 1 0 2 1 1 4 79 52.3 25 42 3 9
W34 2 3 1 0 1 2 1 0 78 51.7 24 40 4 10Total Warks 14 14 8 9 14 14 8 32 831 272 407 39 113
Average 1.27 1.27 0.730.8
2 1.27 1.27 0.73 2.91 68 50.03 24.73 37.00 3.55 10.27
183
184