Subscribe in a reader

Category: Strategic HR


Linking the Abstract to the Concrete: Make Your Business Case Count!

March 9th, 2010 — 6:51pm

One of the most persistent mistakes made by consultants and mid-level to senior leadership professionals is an inability to link abstract theoretical organizational interventions to concrete business activity and functions.  In working as a leadership and organizational development consultant and business practitioner for six years, and an HR professional for nearly 20 years, I have witnessed this first hand on more occasion than I care to admit. 

Allow me to present a story:  Once in a history not to distant, I was a supporting initiative project team leader and change management team member working on a fairly complex change management initiative.  This robust and aggressive inititiative involved the entire organization, its business units, core business functions, staff support functions,  and information systems.  Thus, in the organizational textbook sense of change management, it met the criteria of being both complex and essential to maintaining the advantage in the industry of which it was a part. 

The concept was Appreciative Inquiry (AI) and my core role during the exploration stages was to unearth practical utility prior to  implementation stages of supporting initiative projects.  The organizational leadership, rightfully, in my opinion, did not believe in abstract concepts unless empirical evidence supported cost and effort; in other words, could a quantitative and qualatative business case be built around workforce actions built into the operational and functional actions of employees. 

The resistance to the concept initially came from my inability to link AI (in this case) into observable actions.  And here is an important point: Professionals with whom I work usually have very little issue or challenge in developing and linking abstract entities and theoretical management concepts during the strategy planning and visioning phases.  However, there is a tendency to “fake it,” or at least hope someone will not notice when it comes to relating the concept to observable actions that can be empirically measured and assessed.  As it related to my experience,  the impression formed that AI was another fuzzy management concept with no practical utility.  It became a concept in which one accentuated the positive to perhaps reach states of the ideal working environment.  Bright (2009) states that a one-sided reception of AI hinders its organizational employment potential stating, “I am concerned that an understanding of Appreciate Inquiry as simply ‘a focus on the positive’ undermines its full potential to create sustainable change in organizations . . . researchers have helped us understand that organizations are most vibrant and alive when they embrace the tensions of the human condition” (p. 2).  My point quoting bring is that this can apply to most abstract organizational intervention (i.e. emotional intelligence, cognitive diversity, etc.)

Specific to my case, I felt that AI was more than just emotional and abstract strategic entity and intervention merely to be integrated with selected management methodologies such as performance management and its accompanying tools.  As related to AI, Bright (2009) points out the operational components of AI stating that AI “. . . refers to an increase in the value of capital. Operational appreciation usually refers to the value of financial assets.”  This was my intuitive “aha” moment that allowed the concept to gain traction.  When I approached AI from both connotations (the philosophical and operational), I not only received the necessary buy-in, I received support in the infamous stakeholder meetings in which every dollar toward project and their teams has to be accounted.  To put this in a tangible perspective, what I did was capture the ideal in theory and the practical in “real world” and linked those to the core functions, tasks, and outcomes to be achieved by the workforce – related to readiness, brand equity, profitability, and organizational citizenship.  As a result (and understand I am compressing for space sake), the mind-set shifted from “we are broken” to “we have done this before and we can do it again . . . even better . . . within the context we need to move forward.”  Again, this was intuitive at the time and have I had the benefit of additional experience and sound research, the learning curve may have not been so steep.

The lesson here: Abstract entities and notions must make sense from a business and organizational perspective.  My personal experiences tell me that until you link the concept to the concrete (what is real for the stakeholders, clients, workforce, etc.), organizational interventions, especially among senior level leaders, are merely theoretical rhetoric, which captivate scholars and consultants at the moment.  It is important to know the business and the concept. 

Further Reading/References:

Bright, D. (2009). Appreciative inquiry and positive organizational scholarship: A  philosophy of practice for turbulent times. OD Practitioner, 41(2), 2-7.

Comment » | HR Communication, Leadership, Strategic HR, change management

Ray Doesn’t Know the Business!

August 21st, 2009 — 11:54pm

The day was sunny and bright, and I was relaxing on the porch of a close friend when I overheard a conversation by two contractors working on a property for a local landlord. 

“Ray doesn’t know business.  He doesn’t know the business I am trying to build.  He is one of those HR types that runs background checks and specializes in recruiting.  But he knows nothing about shipping, distribution, required freight costs and packaging.  Let’s not even talk about working with suppliers.” 

I nearly fell out of my chair and I looked at my friend who just stared at me as to say, “What is with you?”  Breaking the silence, I asked him, “Did you catch that?”  Returning my stare with a matter-of-fact smile, he stated, “Yeah, that’s the perception of HR on my job.” 

But for me it wasn’t that simple.  There stood two guys that had a vision of starting a company; the shingle based contracting business was only the beginning.  Yet even more surprising, they expressed an opinion of my passion and livelihood that is shared by perhaps many others – more than I (or we) probably like to admit. 

That casual comment has been on my mind now for almost two weeks with the words, “Ray doesn’t know the business” echoing in my head.  A statement so easily accepted by my friend that he barely even acknowledged that the statement had been made.  There I was with an undefined feeling that could only be described as a mixture of fury, embarrassment, and determination.  The question of ”What am I and my fellow HR professionals doing to change this perception?” looped in my conscience; loops in my conscience.    Continue reading »

Comment » | HR Entreprener, HR Methodologies, HR Thoughts, Strategic HR

What Are We Going After?

August 4th, 2009 — 3:11pm

Recently, I had a conversation with a group of business executives who were hired with the sole purpose of turning the business around.  As we discussed the range and perceived intensity of the problems and issues, I quickly discovered that a deep understanding of the root causes that revealed a turnaround was even required was missing.

For example, one executive stated that he needed skill development/technical training.  My questions to him were How much was the training going to cost?  What kind of training (specifically) was needed?  And, How did would he know that training being provided was effective?  In particular, what led him and the organization to come to the conclusion that  more training was needed:  Was it market position, defect rate, employee satisfaction feedback, customer satisfaction feedback, accident rates, or lost time?  Was it a combination of all of these measures – or did you even measure at all?

The second executive stated to me that he needed to have his particular SBU performance on par with the other SBU.  He also stated that because his product/service line was new that he was under much scrutiny.  My questions continued.  How do you know that the other SBU has it right? How is your SBU performing among industry competitors (locally, nationally, internationally)?  When do you know (or will you know?) you have gotten to where you need to be when two different markets are being served? Continue reading »

Comment » | HR Communication, HR Methodologies, HR Thoughts, Strategic HR, change management

On-Boarding – Your Organization’s First 100 Days!

May 17th, 2009 — 6:47pm

The on-boarding process is the initial training experience that a new employee will have with your organization.  This process is accompanied by bundled expectations; expectations initiated from the time that your new hire inquired into the position (passively or actively), continued during the recruitment-selection processes, and continues with what should be the first glimpse into your training and organizational assimilation processes.

On-boarding is real and though cost reductions have been made in many key HR areas, many organizations are finding it necessary to either implement or improve its existing on-boarding processes.  You have two arguably equal goals in the on-boarding process.

  • Reduce the time to productivity
  • Increase retention

That’s it.  It’s that simple and everything else either supports the two aforementioned goals or is background music (this includes the theoretical engagement and talent management arguments) . Continue reading »

Comment » | On-boarding, Strategic HR, Talent Management, Training and Development

Don’t Believe the Hype – Give HR Credit for Getting it Right!

April 21st, 2009 — 3:01am

When respected and known HR consultant/blogger/speaker, Jon Ingham recently wrote about the “Future of HR (more proactive support function or real driver of competitive advantage)” in his HCM blog, I immediately thought to myself – Jon makes some good points – very good points.  However (not but) there are some things that HR is doing right (Note: Jon’s argument is not about what we are doing “wrong” or “right” as you will see, but instead formulates an argument of the (or what) role HR must play and how it must contribute to competitive advantage to be viewed as a key business “player” within organizations – thus my post is more of an inspiration vice a rebuttal).

In addition to what we are getting right, there are businesses that KNOW that a key differentiator from a good business (or a business at all) to a great business is to recognize, embrace, and implement key effective HR practices – that directly contribute to the bottom line.

Furthermore, businesses both large and small, make it point to focus on the bottom-line contributions that HR brings.  HR Magazine (September 2006) states that “Small businesses that invest in formal employee selection, management and retention strategies see direct, quantifiable results on the bottom line.” This insightful article concludes with a powerful quote by Christopher Collins, associate professor at Cornell University and conductor of the study: “. . . we’ve proven that specific human resources strategies have a meaningful, and statistically significant impact on small business financial performance.”

One of my favorite works, “The HR Scorecard” (Becker, Huselid, Ulrich) – the almost timeless classic – unearth findings still relevant today, seven years after its publication.  This formal study provided a framework for companies to implement bottom line HR strategies by highlighting the studied companies financial performance (those that got it right and those that didn’t), making the case for implementing the right mix and relevant HR strategies, which have proven to play an invaluable role in their financial success. Continue reading »

Comment » | HR Communication, HR Goals, HR Methodologies, HR Thoughts, Strategic HR

Succession-Career Planning 2.0 for the ‘New Economy’

March 24th, 2009 — 12:03am

Like it or not, we are in a ‘New Economy’ and your workplace may become impacted as a result.  Like many HR professionals, I am witnessing former middle and senior managers take what is being termed by the mainstream media and business press as “survival jobs.”  The challenge for us is how to handle these professionals, their goals, and their aspirations.

The complexities of managing this emerging, dynamic workforce and the accompanying labor pool are the diverse needs and aspirations of the people behind the numbers.  I predict that many will find happiness in their new roles and will want to grow with your organization.  Others are already working on consulting projects and/or planning new businesses during their spare time.  There will be others that will try to find happiness in both worlds (with your organization and on their own).  The result will be something more complex than just managing across generations and inherent skill sets; it will mean finding the right plan and approach down to the individual level. Continue reading »

Comment » | Benefits, Diversity, Employee Development, HR Methodologies, Strategic HR, Talent Management, change management

Back to top