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 angela.roberts@warwickshire.pnn.police.uk

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 angela.roberts@warwickshire.pnn.police.uk

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 angela.roberts@warwickshire.pnn.police.uk

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