Benchmarking engagement and spans only is not strategic

Organizations, People, Systems|

Key insights:

  • Benchmarking employee engagement, survey data, and spans of control is not strategic
  • You have to embed that data in the larger context of work design and what drives organizational performance to truly understand what’s actionable and where you need more info to drive change in the right direction

Leaders love to benchmark, which is how they evaluate operational performance. So benchmark data play a central role in a lot of analytics carried out both in the business and by HR. (more…)

Read More →

Big data’s problems and potential: Beware statistical sirens

People|

Businesses worldwide are in the midst of a data feast and statistical Renaissance. Data scientists are being hired at a rapid clip, the likes of which haven’t been seen since the launch of the Internet and the frenzied search to hire anyone who could do HTML programming and build web sites. Based on reports from the front lines of business analysis, it would appear safe to conclude that the promise of Big Data is being realized daily. But is it? (more…)

Read More →

Strategic Analytics is a team sport

People, Systems|

Right now senior leadership in both the business and in HR are leaving value on the table. We have to end the “business as usual,” nonintegrated way enterprise analytics and human capital analytics are conducted.

The lack of coordination is understandable at first glance. People are very busy: dividing business and HR process management and the accompanying analytics up into separate domains makes it easier to tackle the tasks. That way the leadership of the business and the leadership of HR stick to what they know best, including the analytics needed to monitor and assess progress. But the divide-and-conquer approach is precisely where things go wrong. (more…)

Read More →

Choose impact, not process: Evaluate HR program intent, not just the design

People, Systems|

In my previous post I argued that HR needs to stop focusing on “best practices” and making its processes world class. A related problem happens when it comes to evaluating how HR is doing, and what criteria should be used. The problem is that HR too often focuses on the programs as designed, not whether they really address what the business needs. Three examples illustrate this point: compensation, leadership development and competency models, and training and development.

Compensation. A key issue in evaluating an HR program is whether you evaluate the program’s design or its intent. For example, merit raises are supposed to motivate people to perform. The design goal of the program is to differentiate compensation based on performance, which is one target measurement. The program’s intent—providing increased motivation to perform—is separate and much more difficult to measure. (more…)

Read More →

HR Perfect Processes are the Enemy of What’s Good for the Business

Organizations, People, Systems|

(a.k.a. Are You Helping to Improve Strategy Execution Where It’s Most Needed?)

For decades HR has been searching for the right ways to make strategic contributions to the business. I have my own opinions about how HR can do that, some of which are detailed below and in previous posts (for example, on HR scorecards and on measuring ROI). But even more important than what it should do is what it should not do. HR needs to stop obsessing over making HR processes world class.

(more…)

Read More →