seven habits of dysfunctional hr organizations (submitted)
TRANSCRIPT
Seven Habits of Dysfunctional HR Organizations: How they Impede Analytics Impact &
How to Address Them
Mark BerryPeople Analytics 2016
• VP, HR – CGB Enterprises
• “HR Trendsetter” – HR Magazine (2015)
• Bersin “WhatWorks” Award for Innovation in Analytics (2014)
• Workforce.com Optimus Silver Award for Business Impact (2014)
• 20+ years as HR leader
• Past life as licensed professional clinical counselor
• MBA (operations mgt), MA & BA (psychology)
• Failed “trend setter”, “thought leader”, &“strategic business partner”
• Husband, dad, and aging ultra endurance athlete (and fading fast)
How – if possible –can you apply this to the subject
matter of today’s presentation?
Syn-‐op-‐sis: • Context: We are working to “build” analytics capabilities within HR
• Diagnosis: The “journey” – however – can be challenging; measurable outcomes & impact is constrained within many organizations
• Etiology: Cause is due – to a great degree – to “dysfunctions” within HR organizations
• Treatment: To succeed, we must acknowledge & address the dysfunctions
• Outcome: When we do so, we maximize analytics’ potential for impact on the organization
“a brief summary or general survey of something”
Why is Change So Difficult?• Experience as a clinical
counselor, practitioner, & consultant
• Change is often quite difficult & not related to the focus of change, but rather the “family” affected by these changes
• Failing to acknowledge, understand, and address these affects the long-‐term viability of our efforts
19th Annual Global CEO Survey (2016)(PwC)
• Most CEOs see data and analytics technologies (68%) as generating the greatest return for stakeholder engagement, far more than engagement (talent management – one of HR’s most common focus areas -‐ didn’t even appear on the list).
Harris CEO Survey (2015)
• 80% agreed that their company cannot succeed without an assertive, data driven CHRO, who use relevant facts to deliver an informed point of view.
• 74% agree that their company’s HR organization needs to be more data-‐driven (ie, fact based) in workforce decision making.
Human Capital Trends 2015 (Deloitte):
• 75% of companies surveyed believe that using people analytics is important, but just 8% believe their organization is strong in this area –almost the same percent as 2014.
CEOs are Not the Constraining Factor
Issue – It Seems – is HRHR Trends & Priorities for 2016 (McLean & Company)• Non-‐HR respondents were 1.8 times more likely than
HR respondents to see their HR department as tactical.
• HR spend is fully inverted – both respondent sets see HR strategy as most important function, but spending is lowest in this area.
• HR respondents view every HR function as more effective than non-‐HR respondents – in the case of HR strategy, the misalignment is 38% vs. 24% (more than 50%) – the least aligned function.
• Respondents rated metrics & analytics as the least effective HR areas.
• Providing flexibility in benefits and driving engagement were the most implemented trends –neither of which showed up as priority on any of the major CEO surveys.
Human Capital Trends 2016 (Deloitte)• Only 30% of business leaders believe HR has a
reputation for sound business decisions; only 28% feel HR is highly efficient; only 22% believe that HR is adapting to the changing needs of the workforce; & only 20% feel that HR can adequately plan for the company’s future talent needs. HR is not keeping pace!
Human Resources Cycle of Dysfunction1. CEO beliefs, values, & priorities
2. Business’ most pressing
needs
3. CHRO capabilities & orientation
4. Focus on activities (programs) vs. impact
5. Improper positioning of
analytics
6. Competition for resources
7. Politicization of outcomes
Diagnosis: “You know you have a dysfunctional HR organization if…”
1. …There is a disconnect between what your CEO & leadership team need & and what your HR organization has the capability or inclination to provide.
2. …Business focus is on traditional HR “programs” vs. strategically-‐focused impactful people initiatives.
3. …Your CHRO & HR leadership team lack the capabilities to translate legitimate business imperatives into impactful people initiatives or understand the importance of realizing measurable impacts.
4. …Your HR Centers of Expertise (CoE) are more focused on “programs” than “outcomes”, few or none of which measurably impact the business.
5. …Your HR analytics team reports to someone in HR other than the CHRO.
6. …Your centers of expertise –including analytics –compete for the same resources.
7. …Communication of outcomes is as much a political as an analytical exercise.
1. CEO beliefs, values, & priorities
2. Business’ most
pressing needs
3. CHRO capabilities
& orientation
4. Focus on activities (programs) vs. impact
5. Improper positioning of analytics
6. Competition for resources
7. Politicization of outcomes
A Few Qualifiers about My Dysfunctional Family
• Issue is not about “bad” CEOs or CHROs.
• Compulsion is to seek “comfort” or “change” – not necessarily evidence-‐based outcomes.
• Placement as “shared service” or “CoE” maintains status quo at expense of impact.
• Result is further constraining of limited resources, setting up “competition” vs. “collaboration”.
• “Politicization” of HR analytics is easy to understand -‐ but must be addressed for what it is.
• Outcome is self-‐fulfilling & self-‐perpetuating. Absence of impactful outcomes maintains HR’s place in credibility hierarchy.
Treating the Dysfunctional Organisation• CEO Bias & CHRO Capabilities: Is treatable to the degree that HR leaders establish credibility as
evidence-‐fueled business leaders who are “experts” in people levers of business success. We have to build capabilities – both in terms of business & people savvy – to win the credibility & respect of the CEO. “If we continue to do what we’ve always done…”
• Business Imperatives & HR Initiatives: HR programs must closely align with & support the outcomes from key business initiatives. Must avoid the tendency to focus on providing programs vs. realizing results. We must get past our partisanship, territoriality, and fear of evaluation. We need to embrace a mindset of doing what works. If it doesn’t work, we need to stop doing it, and do something different.
• Positioning of Analytics & Competition for Resources: Analytics programs should not compete with existing CoEs for limited resources, but rather be viewed akin to an “audit” function, evaluating the impact of existing programs & identifying opportunities to improve HR’s impact on business outcomes.
• Quantifying the Impact of People Initiatives & Avoiding the Politicization of HR Analytics: When we do these things & quantify the impact of HR’s efforts on key business outcomes, we help to reshape the CEO biases, redefine CHRO capabilities & credibility, & begin to disrupt the cycle of dysfunction.
• Recognize When You Find Yourself “Trying to Teach a Pig to Sing”: Some organizations – unfortunately –will not change. In those cases, your ability to address the above is severely affected.
1. Leverage leadership’s value of analytics.
2. Acknowledge & seek to solve for HR’s credibility gap.
3. Position HR analytics relative to the CHRO for mutual success.
4. Focus on business-relevant analytics opportunities.
5. Minimize perceived resource “competition” by creating “networks of expertise”.
6. Proactively address dysfunctional HR issues. But be realistic.
7. Demonstrate “functionality” through your initiatives & outcomes.
How Do We Get There?
