`Strategic HRM – “6C Model” A Comprehensive Framework
Revisiting Role of Human Resource Function
Abstract
Despite many talks of the Human Resource (HR) function becoming a Strategic Business Partner, Growth Driver, in reality it is still perceived far from being one. It is because of the varied and diverse expectations that the function faces; and its own dilemmas. Absence of comprehensive theoretical construct that could guide and direct HR professionals in their practices also adversely affect. At present role the HR function plays varies greatly across organizations depending upon the CEO / MD’s focus and / or competence of the HR head.
“6C Model” attempts to fill this gap by providing comprehensive framework. Its origin lies in redefining the role of the HR function as “Connecting Competence to Build Culture” and how HR professionals can make it happen. In order to define the comprehensive approach that an HR function needs to take, the “6C Model” draws on the Product – CAP (Core, Augmented, and Packaging) derived from Three Levels of Product concept by Philip Kotler.
The role of an HR function at the Core level is to ensure that basic practices (Policy Formulation, Sourcing, Performance Management, Training & Development, and Compensation & Benefits) are done effectively (not only efficiently), and kept current by continuously aligning these to present and future business needs. These are critical to sow the seeds of effective Talent Management, Building Performance Culture, and Communication Processes.
In order to germinate these (Talent Management, Performance Culture, and Transparent Communication), the HR function needs to augment its scope to include
Knowledge Management (to retain tacit knowledge when people leave),
Total Quality Management (continuously improve on processes & people competence to deliver what customer wants),
Counseling (keep connecting people to goals and avoid any disconnect due to professional / personal reasons), and
Giving Human touch to policies (keeps them current to business and people needs and avoids adhocism).
Further, to reap the benefits of all initiatives the HR function at Packaging level needs to effectively connect with people through building Communication Channels, Employee Support, Grievance Handling, and making workplace a “Happening Place”.
When HR professionals begin to practice HR-CAP in totality, HR function will be in a position to take the center stage of business that it rightly deserves. For moving from efficiency to efficacy, HR function needs to restructure as per “6C Model” i.e. Talent, Processes, Opportunity, Integration, Ethics, and Fun verticals rather than conventional structure of Sourcing, Training & Development, and Compensation & Benefits.
Introduction:
Human Resource Management (HRM) has always remained an important function at every progressive organization for its specific role in the effective management of people and their productivity linked to predetermined organization goals. It has gained in significance especially over the last decade due to factors such as hyper competitive era and changing needs of organizations on growth path. Top management at many organizations have reposed faith in HR to ensure smooth transition of growth from one stage to the next.
HR Head have been provided the necessary freedom to work on people development programs in a professional manner. The HR function has been touted as Strategic Business Partner and Growth Driver at various seminars and conferences. HRM is expected to
Reduce employment cost per unit value added,
Enhance employee’s business literacy / competence level,
Procure / poach talent,
Create work-life balance,
Manage employment relationship (Challenges of Achieve Japanese Results through American Systems under Indian Culture),
Create enabling work culture, and
Be a trusted partner of employees and management.
Numerous expectations may be summed up as “Dare All Bare All – Create, Nurture, and Destroy in time”. In a sense, it combines the responsibility of Lord Brahma, Vishnu, and Mahesh.
However, the function continues to remain at the center of much criticism. HRM is assailed at various critical forums and is also the recipient of many chain hate / sarcastic mails. One can hear many scathing statements like HR professionals
· Are good preachers and not practitioners;
· Usually lack the basic knowledge of other functions, in particular finance and overall business planning;
· Are not much comfortable to talk business language and crunch the numbers;
· Follow short-cuts to project achievements rather than building an organization for long term.
HRM as a function is perceived to be a matter of common sense dealing with fluffy stuff such as building of morale, team-work as well as motivation and creation of a cohesive work environment for people to excel in. The deliverables are deemed as being subjective. Many feel it is more of an administrative and bureaucratic function that can be handled with / without a set of rules and guidelines. It should therefore be outsourced to reduce the overall cost to the organization.
Finally the end product of the human resource function i.e. “Human Capital of the organization” often comprises of knowledgeable professionals with highly individualistic mindset and unrealistic aspirations. They expect employment security and preferences to internal job availability / postings. At the same time they exhibit limited / no loyalty to the organization. This is the population that is willing to break all rules / laws in the name of flexibility. They are often mixed-up with regard to their expectations and responsibility (American Rewards for Indian Results), and exhibits high degree of burnout by mid-age.
There is clearly a gap / disconnect with respect to expectations and perceptions about the role of the HR function. Hence, there is a need to examine HRM in today’s scenario and tomorrow’s context to determine the interventions needed to meet tomorrow’s challenges. For this we need to take a “dip” in the past as well as “peep” into the future.
Industrial growth has moved through a series of phases, with each phase having one key driver. In the first phase it was awareness or know-how that took the driver’s seat. This was followed by technology and automation and then finance or material resources; It has now reached its natural culmination with human resource as the key driver. While, companies today try to remain efficient by sustaining competitive advantages in know-how, technology / automation, and infrastructural, financial, material resource and flow, they realize that success and indeed survival itself depends upon how they are able to graduate from efficiency to efficacy. It is in the live knowledge and intelligence vested in human capital that holds the key to this transition.
HR functionaries need to gear up their resources and ensure a categorical shift from efficiency to efficacy in the real sense. They have to play the role of a catalyst in this process of transformation, enabling people to move forward with greater preparedness and confidence. It is here that HRM can make a definite positive contribution without which the transformation from efficiency to efficacy and growth would at best remain a "dream without drive." HR thus has a definite role for its positive contributions towards organization growth. It must be clearly understood as a catalyst in transforming the organization and its people to pave the way with greater preparation and confidence.
Here, HR professionals face a number of dilemmas such as
· How to realize the full potential of people in a scenario that calls for balancing workplace issues with personal issues?
· How to be People as well as Business centric?
· How to offer adequate opportunities to keep pace with changing life style?
· Whether to be a End to end deliverer or Service provider or facilitator or internal consultant?
· Whether to be a strategic business partner or focus on core HR practices?
· Whether to be a “soaking pit” or have “strong teeth”?
It is obvious that an HR professional cannot adopt an either – or approach in regard to the above. The challenge is to be able to develop a comprehensive and holistic framework that would enable a realization of multiple (seemingly conflicting) objectives such as optimization of work – personal life; people v/s business centricity; balancing expectations. This would enable HRM to take its place as Strategic Business Partner and Growth Driver in the true sense of the term.
Thus the OBJECTIVE of this paper is to evolve a comprehensive HRM framework.
As a First Step towards meeting the Objective of the paper let us have a hard look at the present day approach / practices of HRM.
HR – A Review
HR professionals today are too eager to poach an employee from a competitor (a War Game) rather than working for Long Term Talent Development. Most of the companies barring a few with long term vision are more concerned with procuring talent rather than developing it. HR professionals are working as purchase managers in this regard. Thus organizational / cultural fit is compromised to meet the recruitment targets. An inappropriate choice of candidate is often made as availability has become the key criteria rather than the right candidate, since searching/developing such a person takes more time and efforts. This has already started creating problems in terms of sustainability and resilience and will only worsen as time progresses.
Many HR initiatives are picked up without any diagnostic tests (even the simple dip stick test), as a matter of common sense or as ‘me too” approach (since these are being done by next door company or competitor) overlooking their relevance, acceptance and likely result for the organization and its unique culture. This has lead to disappointment and non productive work.
Many HR professionals preach and proudly profess Formula 1-2-3 (Hire one, pay for two and get job of three) This is in total contrast to Formula 3-2-1 ("Hire three, pay for two, and get job of one) practiced in past, essentially in the PSU/unionized era. While in the past this created problems of poor resource productivity, today the problem stems from outcomes like high burnout which can result in low resource productivity in the future. This current practice could lead to a situation where we have a society of young and work-sick. This would also have an adverse impact on upbringing of the offspring and family values that have been critical to success of our society. Paradoxically HR professes work-life balance, whilst it is creating a society of young burnouts.
In current era, each one talks about flexibility and empowerment as the root source of satisfaction and retention. At times, flexibility and empowerment get stretched into a desire for creating individual fiefdoms. Very often, in the name of meeting individual specific needs, HR is resorting to adhocism, overlooking its cascading effect. Thus it is moving from crisis to crisis as fairness, transparency, and equality of rewards for given level of performance are the biggest debacles.
Many HR professionals feel that they are meant for higher and greater things and they take “core” level activities and interventions as mundane. In addition they take these activities for granted and look at them purely from a time & cost efficiency angle ignoring efficacy. This is adversely affecting Emotional Engagement with employees.
These have resulted in a large pool of "mobile workforce" (including that of HR professionals). Mobile not in terms of flexibility to work anywhere, but looking for alternate jobs within a span of anything between three months to two years. This is done on pretexts like "Do not want to get into comfort zone" or "longevity is no longer the need of the hour, it is delivery”, etc.
As a Second Step towards meeting the Objective of the paper, an attempt is made to redefine the role of HR and provide a theoretical construct that would help HR Professionals to achieve the higher level objective of becoming Strategic Partners and Growth Drivers.
HR Function – Revisiting the Role
In order to build stable human capital, HR Professionals need to
· Attract and develop talent through Organizational Strengths rather than buying them out;
· Evaluate relevance and returns of HR initiatives to the organization as a whole before implementing;
· Endeavor to establish the formula that can create a healthy work-life balance i.e. 1-1-1 (hire one-pay for one-get job of one);
· Practice flexibility with precision by evaluating every situation / requirement holistically for its horizontal, vertical, and diagonal consistency instead of deviating as and when situation arises / noise is heard;
· Keep policies and processes dynamically current and provide human touch to processes and policies.
Of prime importance is the need to give importance to efficacy over efficiency.
Therefore the role of HR function should be “Connecting Competence to build Culture”.
Connecting through Organizational Design and Communication
Competence through Talent Management and resource support
Culture through Employee Engagement
“Connecting” is aligning people to goals and overcoming fear and insecurity by building relationships and clarity at the workplace. It is achieved through organizational design and communication processes.
C.K.Prahlad, the famed Management Guru, in his landmark work on competency pointed out that individual competencies (the skill sets of individuals), become potent only when they are couched within a framework of organizational design and structure. Organizational design in a sense refers to the way people relate to their jobs and one another in the formal sense. It includes reporting, rules and protocols, flow of communication, goals and measures, all of which direct people in what and how of performance.
In many organizations, effectiveness gets crippled not so much because of an individual’s inability or unwillingness to perform but because of out moded organizational structures, processes, and rules which impede effective functioning.
Present day organization development interventions have sought to look at the way jobs are designed and the way people are organized in them. Interventions like job re-design quality teams and total quality management, cross functional teams, employee empowerment and autonomy, re-engineering of business processes are some of the attempts which have been carried out to make jobs more meaningful and effective. The focus today is not so much on individual activities but on optimizing the effectiveness of work process and of organizing people around processes.
To echo, Professor Sumantra Ghoshal’s adage: “from purpose to processes to people”. Organizations today need to build themselves around purposes. They need to design the right kind of processes which would fulfill purposes effectively and efficiently. They need to align people with processes. In erstwhile organizations, the pattern used to be to first get the people, find the jobs for them and purpose often ended up as an outcome of what people did. Organization development and organization design are however easier said than done. Typically the challenge is to get employees and their managers who have been attuned to work in set patterns and follow stereo type routines, to look at things afresh and leave the beaten track. What is more, they need to carry out these transformations without overly disrupting the task, work flow and revenue generation of the organization. In a word, the challenge is to change the horse even while one does not get out of the race. This calls for an enormous alignment of minds and thoughts as well as getting people ready to engage in meta work (look at one’s work even when one is at work).
Connecting is the term we use to denote not just formal organizational communication (like memos, circulars, etc) but the deeper process of communion in which we have a two way dialogue, sharing of experiences and emotions, collective building of values through mutual exploration, probing into relationships at work (both professionally and personally), overcoming fear and insecurity (what Walter Deming called ‘banishing fear from the work place’), and finally securing consensus and collective will to carry out the change process.
“Competence” is organizational competence in terms of human capital and support to them to enable deliver business specific results.
Human capital in an organization gets expressed in different ways. e.g. in a financial Services organization, there are some people who are good at crunching numbers, others who are good at working with systems and still others who are good at selling ideas to customers and still many more who are good at relating with people. Some are engaged in front end work while others are engaged in back office tasks. Each of these dispositions constitutes what we call a personal competence area. In each function there are distinct kinds of knowledge and skills which are specific to the individuals who possess these. These may be included in the domain that we call tacit knowledge.
Individual competences are meaningless unless they get expended in the form of appropriate roles where they serve the needs of specific customers (both internal and external). To enable organization personnel to perform their roles effectively, Management needs to build an appropriate structure for engaging them, which would enable them to contribute their mite effectively. In addition task of Management is to ensure that these individual skill sets and ideas which people bring into the organization get converted from tacit into an explicit state and become the competence of the organization as a whole.
Thus Competence:
· At individual level it is the sigma of all competencies, explicit and tacit Knowledge required for delivering role specific results.
· At the organization level it is competence of the organization to support human capital and enable it to deliver results. This essentially means organizational competence to build an enabling culture and provide functioning and infrastructural support needed for delivery.
Building Competence essentially involves two types of interventions:
1. Those designed to build on the specific competence and also to convert tacit into explicit knowledge and
2. Those designed to retain employees and their knowledge within the organization itself.
The above two type of interventions are achieved by appropriate Training and Development, Knowledge Management and Employee Retention strategies.
Training and Development have become important components of HR activities in almost every area. The process starts with the right kind of induction followed by other technical training programs, on the job training and mentorship with senior professionals, continuous refresher sessions.
Training need analysis has become a part of the employee review and development process. Few organizations have really gone beyond training initiatives to look more deeply at the way individuals and organizations learn. Developing appropriate learning interventions falls within the domain of what we call Knowledge Management. The latter concept has emerged as one of the most important tools for enabling organizations to achieve competence and efficacy in recent years. We must note here that there is a distinction between training interventions and knowledge management interventions. The former essentially involves inputs, which organizations offers to provide specific knowledge and skill sets; the latter involves design of systems, structures and processes to capture the enormous fund of knowledge, insights and experiences which people in the organization possess.
Knowledge Management focuses on specific areas like capture of knowledge, insights, views and experiences of employees throughout the organization, codifying and developing it in a form which is accessible to everyone throughout the organization and engaging individuals throughout to debate on the inputs that they receive. In other words it involves converting the work place into a kind of 24x7 University. In a world where strategic management is no longer the domain of a few experts sitting in ivory cubicles but has become the responsibility of everyone in the work place, these processes of building a learning organization have become a way of engaging the minds and hearts of everyone towards the organizational performance.
In order to build the long term knowledge base of the organization, Training and Development, and Knowledge Management should be dynamically interlinked and interdependent i.e. knowledge management needs to draw from training and development initiatives to build the long term knowledge base of the organization and training and development initiatives need to draw from knowledge management to carry organizational learning to more and more and newer people in the organization.
If Learning initiatives are to be effective and contribute to organizational effectiveness, need to be built upon the foundation of employees who stay long enough on the job and contribute. One of the biggest challenges in promoting organizational learning in fact has been the problem of job attrition and securing the hearts and minds of skilled and knowledgeable professionals who are not prepared to share their hearts and minds with the organization.
At every level there are people who do their jobs silently, work to create systems processes and continuously work to improve upon them. These individuals may not be seen or heard, but they are the bedrock on which organizations are built. Companies flounder and collapse when management ignores or does not take sufficient cognizance of these individuals but instead concentrate on the few “high flyers” that are seen to contribute the most at present.
Talent management calls for an inclusive approach that not only takes care of the very talented but also of the “not so talented”. After all talent is a mater of subjective assessment moving on a continuum from zero to infinity. Like the statement “Beauty lies in beholder’s eyes” it can be said that talent / potential lies in the assessor’s mind. The level of talent changes from time to time.
“Culture” is way of thinking, expressing, acting, and interacting at conscious & subconscious level i.e. the way of doing things and finding meaning at work place. It is built through Employee Engagement.
What is an organization? Is it merely a set of people organized around jobs, reporting relationships, systems and procedures, rules ……………………..
What is it that keeps people ticking for more than half their life times (9 – 12 hours a day at the work place)? It is ultimately their beliefs, their values, their evaluations, and a sense of purpose which they derive at the workplace. In erstwhile days it was believed that one could get people to work and contribute so long as one paid them adequately, or one was nice to them, or gave them adequate autonomy and empowerment or offered them career aspirations, etc.
Expected return for delivering the desired work by people has moved up from pay to encouragement and finally will reach the stage of being provided meaning to their life. The stages on this continuum covered so far are pay – being nice – meeting career aspirations – providing autonomy and being involved / encouraged. The new generations of job workers who are entering organizations today are no longer enamored by these. There is a deep sense of alienation, meaninglessness and fear which combine to create highly efficient but dehumanized individuals.
Therefore we shall define culture as a process of people finding a human identity for themselves at the work place. At its core it involves discovering an overriding set of values and percepts which can bind people and help them find meaning in what they do. Tom Peters and Bob Waterman in their path breaking work “In search of Excellence” have stated that shared values are the most important dimension in the seven S frame work. Building values and making those values alive at the work place is precisely what the culture building is all about. It is the thread, which would make “connecting” effective.
6C Model – A Comprehensive Framework for Strategic HRM
To deliver this (Connecting Competence to build Culture), we need to focus on the three "C's" i.e. Connecting, Competence, and Culture. In an HR perspective this could be addressed as – Connecting through organizational design and communication processes; Competence through Talent Management; and Culture through employee engagement.
The impact of managing “3Cs” effectively is given below.
Competence, when it is built and connected across the organizations in a uniform and effective manner, contributes to enhancing both productivity and organizational effectiveness. In the days of the smokestack society, bigger and more with less meant better. Over the years however automation has reduced the role of human labor, information processing has reduced the role and significance of mental work a great deal. Competition and globalization have made it imperative for organizations to focus on areas like innovation and speed to market, customization and marketing to “a million markets of one”.
In sum, the way to reduce cost and get profits today is not just to be viewed in terms of less (input) for more (output) but in terms of redeploying and leveraging inputs to create entirely new output. While at the same time reducing cost, these imperatives have been proved to be beyond the abilities of management or management sign. It calls for enormous leveraging of the human capital which is present throughout the organization. HRM should give way to human resource leveraging. Management is a dead word in the 21st century.
Thus we can see that when Competence is practiced and connected across uniformly and effectively it improves productivity / profits considerably (which we define in terms of reduction in COST of employment per unit value add)
When culture gets internalized and enshrined in the psyche of the organization through powerful mechanisms of connecting, it builds what we can call CULT. To know what a cult means, we only need to look at numerous messianic political and religious movements. Whether it be the Indian freedom struggle which was built around the value of Ahimsa or the Christian Church which was build around the value of love or Islam which means surrender to divine. Each of these represents powerful organizations which have endured for years and have drawn millions into their fold. Few commercial organizations perhaps have been able to translate this idea into a business landscape and that is what HR should aim at.
When Cultural aspects are practiced and connected across uniformly and effectively it builds strong team – a CULT
Business organizations ultimately are not run for charity. They involve creating hard value to customers through production and service, generating revenue and making profits. We have already seen that building and connecting competence is the way to achieve growth and prosperity in the 21st century. Ultimately making profits is the core purpose of any commercial organization.
One of the greatest challenges facing organizations today is to align individual mindsets, values and aspirations with the organizational purpose, as part of its pursuit of profits. Without revenues (moolah) organizations will not last and “people in organizations” become a meaningless catchword. The culture of a business organization is thus different from the culture of a religious body or an association of artists or musicians. It must necessarily sub serve the purpose of making profits. The role of HR as a change agent and facilitator is thus not just to make life in the work place more meaningful and joyous but also ultimately to make it productive. Only then can employment, career aspirations and growth and actualization on the job become a reality. Because all these ideals require a modicum of comfort.
Thus when Competence is practiced as a culture it creates Satisfaction amongst members – leading to a high level of COMFORT in the organization.
We can see that an HR manager’s role goes far beyond that of managing a set of HR systems or processes. He/she in a sense also becomes a kind of high priest, a teacher, and a servant leader.
The task is to ensure that we connect competence to build culture that gives us a cult which is both comfortable and cost effective. For this we need to ensure that HR as profession is practiced comprehensively. To explain what we mean by comprehensive HR, we may draw upon “CAP concept of a product”. According to this concept any product could be seen at three levels 1) Core – the basic features without which it won’t be useful or effective; 2) Augmented – Additional features which it provides to enhance its utility / effectiveness; 3) Packaging – How it appears, look and feel at first sight. Similarly we may view HR profession as involving three levels viz core; augmented; and packaging (HR-CAP) in each of which it needs to be practiced effectively.
Core includes basic HR practices i.e. Policy framework; Sourcing; Training & Development; Performance Management; Compensation & Benefits. If we shy away from these key requirements nothing effective can be built. These are not static activities / initiatives i.e. developed once in the life time of the organization or once a decade. These are to be done dynamically i.e. aligned and realigned to business needs, market expectations, and prevalent socio-economic conditions. That is where you need combination of HR specialists and generalists who can constantly understand and customize practices to realign with specific organizational environment.
Augmented are the value added activities of the profession without which it would not be able to keep pace with the requirements of the organization. They comprise of Counseling; Human touch to policies & processes i.e. flexibility with precision; Knowledge Management; and Total Quality Management. Once HR starts facilitating these activities / initiatives, it would be seen as key value adding function / strategic partner / growth driver rather than group of bureaucrats with fluffy stuff about job satisfaction and motivation.
Packaging is essentially the face that interacts and builds perceptions at first site. It provides touch and feel. Key requirement is to build assurance of clarity & comfort. This comprises of Communication; Employee Support; Grievance Handling; creating Happening Place.
Only a comprehensive model (Diagram 6) can address the complex issues HR faces. HR needs to focus on People to Build Competitive Organization. It needs to integrate People and Processes for Business Performance for being truly Strategic Partners in Business. In order to become a value adding and driving function HR need to perform various activities like Reporting; Administrative; Conceptualizing; and Operationalising as a whole and not in isolation.
Reporting + Administrative + Conceptualizing + Operationalising = Driving
And for being GROWTH oriented HR needs to be guiding & revitalizing through orienting & operationalising work practices timely and holistically (at all levels & parts of the business)
Thus if we follow HR-CAP to Build Culture through Connecting Competence we would have achieved the “Bare All Dare All” (BADA = Big) expectations from HR Function.
If these are the expectations and deliverables then can HR be any less than any other function of the organization. Rather I would say HR plays the role that is sigma or sum total of the roles played by CEO; CFO; CIO; CTO; COO; CPO. Let us see this equation and its real meaning
HR = CEO + CFO + CIO + CTO + COO + CPO
CEO = Chief Ethics Officer: Create culture of Fairness & Transparency; flexibility with precision
CFO = Chief Fun Officer: Make it “happening place” where employee love to come
CIO = Chief Integration Officer: Integrate People goals with the organization’s goals and develop team spirit
CTO = Chief Talent Officer: Source, Develop & Manage Talent for Current & Future needs
COO = Chief Opportunity Officer: Create opportunities for all employees
CPO = Chief Processes Officer: Develop processes for higher productivity & people comfort
HR interventions – the Indian scenario:
Building the comprehensive framework of HR involves intervention at 3 levels:
(i) HR process and activities which constitute its core functions,
(ii) HR interventions, which are designed to develop advance competencies, promote learning and enhance organizational effectiveness.
(iii) Interventions to build a culture and share values.
(i) Looking at the Indian scenario, it is seen that most organizations in India, when they conceive of HR, have in mind only core functions. In most SMEs and even some larger organizations, HR activities are typically carried out by a personnel manager / administrator aided by a small staff. The functions largely constitute staffing, administration of compensation and some welfare activities. Aspects like performance appraisal and career management are largely taken care of by the line managers. In many organizations the personnel management function has been re-designated as HR, but without any significant change in its role or purview. Some companies have meanwhile instituted more vigorous processes like performance appraisal (for example development oriented performance appraisal, KRAs etc.,). They have also put in place systems for in-house training, counseling and mentorship by seniors, job rotation and succession planning. But all these are largely within the frame of personal administration activities geared to fulfill the needs of the organization for staffing its various positions.
(ii) A number of Indian organizations have at the same time drawn their cues from the worldwide menu of theory and best practice and have sought to implement interventions geared to build competencies and promote organizational effectiveness. For example Japanese Management, has provided us with a concepts and practices like Kaizen, Kanban and Quality Circle. European models like job re-design to improve QWL (Quality of work life) have also found expression. Many organizations have also toyed with TQM (of the Juran and Malcolm Balridge variety).
Still others have forayed into more current practices like organizational learning, business process re-engineering and balanced score card. The problem is that many of these interventions started as a result of somebody in top management being enamored with a concept and acting as sponsor for implementation in-house. In most of the cases it is doubtful whether these were carefully assimilated and internalized into the organization’s culture after careful understanding its entire people, their beliefs, their state of mind, etc. Thus, while the hardware (the systems, procedures, rules, etc) may have been implemented they have typically been adopted from a context of compliance rather than commitment. Again, many of these were in the form of one off interventions which were not integrated with other processes, as part of a wider multi-prone frame work of transformation. The result is that many such interventions failed to deliver or were stymied once the initial impetus had worn off. Thus at the beginning of the 21st century we find that many organizations who have already implemented a host of such practices are still struggling as to find their feet in the emerging competition.
(iii) Very few organizations in India have perhaps gone to the 3rd dimension namely of building a deep rooted and thorough cultural transformation that could lead to organizational effectiveness. As a result organizations in general have not been able to fully leverage the potential of the human capital. This 3rd dimension is likely to engage the minds and skills of HR practitioners a great deal in years to come. It may well be the key to achieve efficacy in the other two areas.
Case Study – Large Indian PSU
The case is that of a large and well-known public sector organization. In this case the “people function” was mainly carried out through a department of personnel and industrial relations. Main functions performed were recruitment, induction and refresher training, promotions and posting, job rotation, manpower planning and staff allocation. The personal function was also responsible for vigilance as well as for enquiry proceedings and punishment for various kinds of defaults, demeanor, and negotiations with unions over wages and other matters etc.,
At a certain point in its development a massive decentralized process was instituted which called for making the decentralized units into profit and growth sectors (akin to SBUs).
Decentralization involved delegating administrative decision making to much lower levels in the organization and also the institution of planning and performance budgeting to grass root levels. It was felt necessary to develop certain HR interventions to promote sensitivity to customers and the emerging milieu of competition and also improve the role efficacy of individual managers.
Consequently a rigorous performance appraisal system was sought to be instituted which was development oriented, as a replacement to the erstwhile confidential reporting system. The problem was that a performance appraisal system involving both assessor and assessee (superior and subordinate) calls for a high degree of responsibility and transparency from both sides. The assessee has to set his own goals after due consultation with the assessor and must be able to review and analyze his performance and variances thereof. The assessor on the other hand needs to be fully transparent in his approach and should be able to provide a fair and correct review of work performance. The fact is that performance appraisal and management to be really effective, calls for a cultural environment that promotes openness, shared values, fairness and deep responsibility for one another.
As the waves of competition hit Indian shores, this organization also realized that it would need to gear up its people and practices to meet the demands of the customer for better service, it would need to reduce its costs and operational inefficiencies and would also need to fully utilize the large pool of surplus manpower which had been recruited over the years but had been rendered redundant by technology and changes in work processes. These issues were sought to be addressed through a number of interventions that specifically sought to work on improvement of work processes, customer relationship management and sensitization about costs and other considerations.
Even though the specific results of each of these interventions may be difficult to access, the fact remains that they were ushered during a period when the work force within the organization was itself getting sensitized to various social pressures of the environment. These processes were also aided by the employees unions who sought to present image of responsible citizens in the service of people. Both management interventions and the social pressure of the environment combined to generate a sense of urgency to improve work practices while a culture of oneness evolved as members realized that they were in a race of survival vis-à-vis. other private sector organizations.
Conclusion
“6C Model” of Comprehensive HR would help in meeting future challenges where HR function would be called upon to
· Defy bell curve of standard distribution and would be expected to develop people so that curve is compressed. Essentially gap between top and bottom performers will have to be reduced to improve overall productivity.
· Build a psychological contract between employee and employer
· Build Innovative compensation management practices including a contingent portion
· Practice Excessive sharing of information and share knowledge across organizational boundaries
· Develop durable, sustainable, competitive advantage through people processes
· Set the direction for change – by identifying problems critical to the business success, take a proactive role in bringing about change, and build commitment to strategic directions
· Organize into self managed teams and decentralize decision making
In order to operationalise “6C Model”, HR function could be restructured as per 6 arms of the hexagon i.e. Talent, Processes, Opportunity, Integration, Ethics, and Fun verticals rather than conventional structure of Sourcing, Training & Development, and Compensation & Benefits.
Proposed “6C Model” of Comprehensive HRM would enable / facilitate Strategic HRM for shaping the workforce and culture needed by the organization. This would also raise the image of HR function beyond recruitment and administering employee benefit programs.
Finally, there are no “keys to the gates of heaven”, one needs to work his / her way up. And Management is too complicated to be reduced into few steps or things to do. One needs to work his way by being BACK TO BASICS i.e. being Honest; Frugal; & Prepared (Tim Hindle, Survey: Management; The Economist Print Edition, 7th March 2002)
******
References:
Knowledge Management A state of Art guide; Gamble Paul R, Blackwell John, Kogan page, 2001
Competing for the Future; Hamel, Gary, and C.K. Prahalad. 1994a.; Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Marketing Management; Kotler Philip; 5th Edition
The Individualized Corporation: A Fundamentally New Approach to Management; Sumantra Ghoshal, Christopher A. Bartlett
Banish fear from the workplace; William Edwards Deming
In Search of Excellence: Lessons from Americas Best Run Companies; Jr., Robert H Waterman, Thomas J Peters, Tom Peters, Robert Waterman;
Back to Basics; Tim Hindle, Survey: Management; The Economist Print Edition, 7th March 2002
If these are the expectations and deliverables then can HR be any less than any other function of the organization. Rather I would say HR plays the role that is sigma or sum total of the roles played by CEO; CFO; CIO; CTO; COO; CPO. Let us see this equation and its real meaning
HR = CEO + CFO + CIO + CTO + COO + CPO
CEO = Chief Ethics Officer: Create culture of Fairness & Transparency; flexibility with precision
CFO = Chief Fun Officer: Make it “happening place” where employee love to come
CIO = Chief Integration Officer: Integrate People goals with the organization’s goals and develop team spirit
CTO = Chief Talent Officer: Source, Develop & Manage Talent for Current & Future needs
COO = Chief Opportunity Officer: Create opportunities for all employees
CPO = Chief Processes Officer: Develop processes for higher productivity & people comfort
HR interventions – the Indian scenario:
Building the comprehensive framework of HR involves intervention at 3 levels:
(i) HR process and activities which constitute its core functions,
(ii) HR interventions, which are designed to develop advance competencies, promote learning and enhance organizational effectiveness.
(iii) Interventions to build a culture and share values.
(i) Looking at the Indian scenario, it is seen that most organizations in India, when they conceive of HR, have in mind only core functions. In most SMEs and even some larger organizations, HR activities are typically carried out by a personnel manager / administrator aided by a small staff. The functions largely constitute staffing, administration of compensation and some welfare activities. Aspects like performance appraisal and career management are largely taken care of by the line managers. In many organizations the personnel management function has been re-designated as HR, but without any significant change in its role or purview. Some companies have meanwhile instituted more vigorous processes like performance appraisal (for example development oriented performance appraisal, KRAs etc.,). They have also put in place systems for in-house training, counseling and mentorship by seniors, job rotation and succession planning. But all these are largely within the frame of personal administration activities geared to fulfill the needs of the organization for staffing its various positions.
(ii) A number of Indian organizations have at the same time drawn their cues from the worldwide menu of theory and best practice and have sought to implement interventions geared to build competencies and promote organizational effectiveness. For example Japanese Management, has provided us with a concepts and practices like Kaizen, Kanban and Quality Circle. European models like job re-design to improve QWL (Quality of work life) have also found expression. Many organizations have also toyed with TQM (of the Juran and Malcolm Balridge variety).
Still others have forayed into more current practices like organizational learning, business process re-engineering and balanced score card. The problem is that many of these interventions started as a result of somebody in top management being enamored with a concept and acting as sponsor for implementation in-house. In most of the cases it is doubtful whether these were carefully assimilated and internalized into the organization’s culture after careful understanding its entire people, their beliefs, their state of mind, etc. Thus, while the hardware (the systems, procedures, rules, etc) may have been implemented they have typically been adopted from a context of compliance rather than commitment. Again, many of these were in the form of one off interventions which were not integrated with other processes, as part of a wider multi-prone frame work of transformation. The result is that many such interventions failed to deliver or were stymied once the initial impetus had worn off. Thus at the beginning of the 21st century we find that many organizations who have already implemented a host of such practices are still struggling as to find their feet in the emerging competition.
(iii) Very few organizations in India have perhaps gone to the 3rd dimension namely of building a deep rooted and thorough cultural transformation that could lead to organizational effectiveness. As a result organizations in general have not been able to fully leverage the potential of the human capital. This 3rd dimension is likely to engage the minds and skills of HR practitioners a great deal in years to come. It may well be the key to achieve efficacy in the other two areas.
Case Study – Large Indian PSU
The case is that of a large and well-known public sector organization. In this case the “people function” was mainly carried out through a department of personnel and industrial relations. Main functions performed were recruitment, induction and refresher training, promotions and posting, job rotation, manpower planning and staff allocation. The personal function was also responsible for vigilance as well as for enquiry proceedings and punishment for various kinds of defaults, demeanor, and negotiations with unions over wages and other matters etc.,
At a certain point in its development a massive decentralized process was instituted which called for making the decentralized units into profit and growth sectors (akin to SBUs).
Decentralization involved delegating administrative decision making to much lower levels in the organization and also the institution of planning and performance budgeting to grass root levels. It was felt necessary to develop certain HR interventions to promote sensitivity to customers and the emerging milieu of competition and also improve the role efficacy of individual managers.
Consequently a rigorous performance appraisal system was sought to be instituted which was development oriented, as a replacement to the erstwhile confidential reporting system. The problem was that a performance appraisal system involving both assessor and assessee (superior and subordinate) calls for a high degree of responsibility and transparency from both sides. The assessee has to set his own goals after due consultation with the assessor and must be able to review and analyze his performance and variances thereof. The assessor on the other hand needs to be fully transparent in his approach and should be able to provide a fair and correct review of work performance. The fact is that performance appraisal and management to be really effective, calls for a cultural environment that promotes openness, shared values, fairness and deep responsibility for one another.
As the waves of competition hit Indian shores, this organization also realized that it would need to gear up its people and practices to meet the demands of the customer for better service, it would need to reduce its costs and operational inefficiencies and would also need to fully utilize the large pool of surplus manpower which had been recruited over the years but had been rendered redundant by technology and changes in work processes. These issues were sought to be addressed through a number of interventions that specifically sought to work on improvement of work processes, customer relationship management and sensitization about costs and other considerations.
Even though the specific results of each of these interventions may be difficult to access, the fact remains that they were ushered during a period when the work force within the organization was itself getting sensitized to various social pressures of the environment. These processes were also aided by the employees unions who sought to present image of responsible citizens in the service of people. Both management interventions and the social pressure of the environment combined to generate a sense of urgency to improve work practices while a culture of oneness evolved as members realized that they were in a race of survival vis-à-vis. other private sector organizations.
Conclusion
“6C Model” of Comprehensive HR would help in meeting future challenges where HR function would be called upon to
· Defy bell curve of standard distribution and would be expected to develop people so that curve is compressed. Essentially gap between top and bottom performers will have to be reduced to improve overall productivity.
· Build a psychological contract between employee and employer
· Build Innovative compensation management practices including a contingent portion
· Practice Excessive sharing of information and share knowledge across organizational boundaries
· Develop durable, sustainable, competitive advantage through people processes
· Set the direction for change – by identifying problems critical to the business success, take a proactive role in bringing about change, and build commitment to strategic directions
· Organize into self managed teams and decentralize decision making
In order to operationalise “6C Model”, HR function could be restructured as per 6 arms of the hexagon i.e. Talent, Processes, Opportunity, Integration, Ethics, and Fun verticals rather than conventional structure of Sourcing, Training & Development, and Compensation & Benefits.
Proposed “6C Model” of Comprehensive HRM would enable / facilitate Strategic HRM for shaping the workforce and culture needed by the organization. This would also raise the image of HR function beyond recruitment and administering employee benefit programs.
Finally, there are no “keys to the gates of heaven”, one needs to work his / her way up. And Management is too complicated to be reduced into few steps or things to do. One needs to work his way by being BACK TO BASICS i.e. being Honest; Frugal; & Prepared (Tim Hindle, Survey: Management; The Economist Print Edition, 7th March 2002)
******
References:
Knowledge Management A state of Art guide; Gamble Paul R, Blackwell John, Kogan page, 2001
Competing for the Future; Hamel, Gary, and C.K. Prahalad. 1994a.; Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Marketing Management; Kotler Philip; 5th Edition
The Individualized Corporation: A Fundamentally New Approach to Management; Sumantra Ghoshal, Christopher A. Bartlett
Banish fear from the workplace; William Edwards Deming
In Search of Excellence: Lessons from Americas Best Run Companies; Jr., Robert H Waterman, Thomas J Peters, Tom Peters, Robert Waterman;
Back to Basics; Tim Hindle, Survey: Management; The Economist Print Edition, 7th March 2002
