What’s the Model?

On March 8, 2017, in HR Technology, HRExaminer, by John Sumser
2017-03-09-photo-img-cc0-via-pexels-photo-136352-by-george-becker-544x314px.jpg

 

Most HRTech is really a subset of employee communications. From Payroll to Talent Management, the tools keep records, monitor progress and document effectiveness evaluations. They are the institutional documentation of the company’s relationship with the employee from first contact to post-employment relationships.

Each phase of the employee’s relationship with and within the company has different cadences. Some are moment to moment and some have the expanse of an entire career. Some have to do with alignment with the organization’s direction. Other’s are about getting today’s work done.

But, I can’t seem to find any good work that describes all of the facets of the employee-company relationship. I am tempted to think that a comprehensive model of that relationship (and some method to prioritize it) would be the heart of the HR profession. It’s also likely to be the heart of effective technology procurement.

Without an overall picture, how can you tell what’s important?

 
  • If we were looking for a method for evaluating (and prioritizing) HR it would have these elements:

    It would focus on clear organisational objectives and thus intended outcomes, to ensure we are doing the right things (strategy and tactics, and the way we do the things we do, are all relevant here).

    It would evaluate performance on the basis of effectiveness, efficiency and economy (the three E’s), with a hat dip to Equity (maximizing all of your potential). A good performance auditor can show you how to do this.

    Finally we would be very clear about our intended audience (a corporate/board level focus works best here).

    eg HR metrics and measures: focus on metrics and measures that direct attention to evaluating: effectiveness, outcomes achieved and are relevant to the Board/CEO/Senior Management level.

    That clears the line of sight so that we focus on those things that really matter.

    Boards need to be reminded sometimes that before they focus on risk they need to define objectives (the goal posts specified in outcome terms).

    Dr Chris Andrews

  • Yuvarajah

    Chris, what you said resonates across the globe. Unfortunately, professional HR has not embraced the “audit” path to verify and validate it’s ROI oover it’s performance. I wrote a post at LI on “corporate Governance & HR, with specific reference to Malaysia’s Code of CG. I am not sure if people understood where I was coming from or heading to!. What’s your take on this CG and the Board’s accountability in ensuring stakeholders interests are not shortchanged. From Australia’s perspective, of course. Thanks

  • Yuvarajah,

    In Australia there is slow progress on both HR Standards and anything that specifically addresses Corporate Governance and HR. I have met one Corporate Governance specialist that also understood HR Standards and HR Auditing. That was Terry Booysen from the CGF Research Institute in South Africa. At the 3rd National HR Standards Conference (2015) he spoke on ‘Strategic Trends and HR’s role in Governance’.

Page 1 of 11
Read previous post:
HRExaminer Radio Executive Conversations Badge Podcast Logo
HRExaminer Radio – Executive Conversations: Episode #228: Mervyn Dinnen

Mervyn Dinnen is a Talent Acquisition Analyst collaborating with, and advising, Recruitment, HR, and technology businesses on the emerging trends...

Close