Pesquisa Estudos CompetêNcias Rh Por Dave Ulrich 2007

Human Resource Competency Study 1

Human Resource Competency Study

SHRM National Conference 26 June 2007

Dave Ulrich, Project Director, HRCSWayne Brockbank, Project Director, HRCS

Dani Johnson, Project Manager, HRCS


Special Thanks to our Regional Partners

SHRMNorth America

IAELatin America

IMIEurope

National HRD NetworkIndia

Tsinghua UniversityChina

AHRIAustralia


As a result of this session, you will be able to:• Appreciate the challenges facing the HR profession• Define the competencies required for HR professionals

to be personally successful and to help their business succeed

• Prepare action plans for improving the quality of HR work– For you as an individual– For your organization– For our profession

Conference Outcomes


Changes in Business

Global Business ChallengesGlobalization TechnologyEmployees CustomersInvestors Competitors

Organizational ResponsesTalent CollaborationSpeed of Change LearningShared mindset Leadership brandCulture or firm brand InnovationAccountability Strategic clarityEfficiency

HRPractices Department

People


HR Importance

HR practices are increasingly considered part of a firm’s competitive advantage. Intellectual capital, talent, intangibles, and capabilities all derive from people, their competence and commitment.

Tale

nt M

anag

emen

t

Line Management

HR

Pro

fess

iona

ls

Organization

2

3

4

1

2

1 3

4

Implications for HR


Growth

8,000Institute of People Management, South Africa5,000National HRD Network, India

MembershipOrganization

8,000Association of Brazil for Human Resources11,000National Institute of Personnel Management, India15,000Australian Human Resource Institute (AHRI)24,000Canadian Council of Human Resources Association

127,000Chartered Institute for Personnel Development (England and Europe)216,000Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)

• Literally hundreds of smaller national and local HR associations around the world.

• HR Centers in Universities (Cornell, Illinois, London Business School, Michigan, Rotterdam School of Management, Rutgers, University of South Carolina)

Implications for HR


Demands on HR increasing

• HR practices– Alignment with strategy (customers and investors)– Integration– Innovation

• HR department– Investors’ increased financial demands for organizational performance– Transaction work– Transformation work

• HR professionals– Require new competencies

Implications for HR


Why is the HRCS important?

To respond to the increased demands, HR professionals must define, delineate, assess, and improve their performance against a set of specific competencies. Wanting to contribute is not enough. HR professionals need to know how to contribute.


The HR Competency Study

• Genesis and history of the study

• Definitions

• Demographics of 2007 dataset

• Evolution of the model

• Competency Domains for 2007

• Findings

• Individual Domains


Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the Human Resource Competency Study was to find answers to the following two questions:

1. What are the competencies that distinguish HR professionals?

2. What are the capabilities needed by HR departments to help build the business?

HRCS


Background

• History– Conducted jointly by The RBL Group and the Ross School– Major data collection 5 times in the past 20 years

– Over the lifespan of the study, over 40,000 HR professionals and their line management associates have contributed

– Provides the most comprehensive empirical review of the HR field available

• Database Composition– Includes representation from small, medium, and large firms

– Includes representation from virtually all industries

– Applies a “360º” methodology • HR professionals evaluated themselves

• HR associates evaluated HR colleagues

• Non-associates (internal clients) evaluated HR professionals

HRCS


HRCS Definitions

10,063Total of all participants, HR associates, and non HR associates

All Respondents

3346All associate raters who work outside of HR and who completed the survey on behalf of an HR participant

Non HR Associates

All associate raters who work in HR and who completed the survey on behalf of an HR participant

HR participants completed the self-assessment, and nominated associates to complete on their behalf

Definition

5048

1,669

N

HR Associates

Participants

Respondent Group

HRCS


Some Participating Business Units

Zhonglian Heavy Industry Co.,Ltd.Yokogawa Corp. of AmericaSAICCitibank ArgentinaYangcheng Coal Transport CompanyZhuzhou smelter Co.,LtdSASChina Railway Hunan FilialeXiehe Wujin FactoryRyder Argentina S.A.HenkelChina Railway Engineering CorpationXiangjiao Group CompanyRust-Oleum CorporationHendrickson InternationalHospiraWesley Mission BrisbaneRubbermaid Home ProductsHenan Taiji Co.,LtdHome Federal BankWells, Fargo & CompanyRoyal Dutch Shell plcHarris CorporationChangde Cigarette FactoryWater CorporationRio Tinto Iron OreHarland Financial SolutionsCervecería QuilmesWal-Mart ArgentinaRanbaxy LimitedGrupo LupierCentral Romana CorporationVolkswagen ArgentinaRadioShack, Inc.Grupo ClarínCEMEXVNU, Inc.Procter & GambleGrupo ADOCementos Bio Bio S.A.VicForestsPhilips BrasilGreat West Casualty CompanyCapital OneVetco Gray de Venezuela, C.A.Pfizer Glaxo Smith KlineCapitalUT-Battelle, LLCParker HannifinGetronicsCafe Soluble, S.A.University of MelbourneOracle Latin AmericaGeneral Physics CorporationCablemásUnitedHealthCareNSF InternationalGE - MéxicoC&C Group - IrelandUnited Securities Co.,LtdNovelisFriedkin Business ServicesBuBuGao Commerce Chain CO.,LTDUnisysNovartisFord Motor Company - MéxicoBryant UniversityUnisuper Managment Pty LtdNikeFonterraBristol-Myers SquibbUnileverNewell RubbermaidFiserv Solutions, Inc.BP - AustraliaTyco HealthcareNavistar Financial CorporationFairview Health ServicesBon Secours Kentucky Health SystemTyco Fire & Security Services AsiaMountain America Credit UnionEssenBoehringer Ingelheim - South AmericaTransporte de Gas del Sur (TGS)Monsanto - BrasilESBBeiersdorf Australia and New ZealandTransenerMolinos Río de la PlataEON-U.S.BCI SegurosThe YMCA of Greater RochesterMcDonald's SLADEmerson Heating ProductsBayerThe Coca Cola CompanyMcCainEli Lilly and CompanyBaxter-EuropeTelefonica del Peru S.A.AMaricopa Community CollegeEG&G - ETSBattelle, Pacific NW National LaboratoryTelefonica de ArgentinaManpowerEembry Group CO.,LTDBanco Itaú - ArgentinaTecpetrolLyondell ChemicalsEdesurBanco Central de NicaraguaTCL Lucent Human ResourcesEastman - VoridianBAE SystemsTata Sons, Group HRLion NathanDow ChemicalAvantelTaiXin Real Estate Co,LtdLincoln Sentry P/LDongguan Sanyouqi CO.,LTDAustralia PostSyngentaLabor Ready, IncDESC QuimicoAustin American-StatesmanSun Trust Banks, Inc.La Caja de Ahorro y SeguroDeloitte Touche TohmatsuAtento ArgentinaSterling CommerceKPMG - NicaraguaDaqing oil field petroleum CO.,LTDARCORStaples - U.S. RetailJohn Deere LimitedDalmia Cement (Bharat )LimitedAnheuser BuschSodexhoPassJK ORGANIZATION-INDIADahan Holding GROUP Co.,LtdAmity Business SchoolSKF Sealing Solutions AmericasITC LimitedCuscalAllied Irish Bank - EuropeSKF Australia Pty LtdICON Clinical ResearchCRS AustraliaAlimentos CapulloSiemens - ColombiaHutian Industry CO.,LTDCRH PlcAeromexicoSherwin Williams ArgentinaHunan Longxiang GroupCovalence Specialty MaterialsAditya Birla -Business HRShengHua electronic Apparatus CenterHunan Chemistry Co.,Ltd.Continental Automotive SystemsActewAGLSC Johnson & Son - ArgentinaHuiZhou ShengHua Industry Co.LtdComerica IncorporatedABB - ArgentinaYongyou GROUPHospital Corporation of AmericaComcast Cable3M - Mexico

HRCS—Demographics


Year by Year Comparison

20072002199719921988

57%

43%

5,890

1,192

692

7,082 10,0633,2294,55610,291Individuals

46%54%

70%

30%

78%

22%

77%

23%

GenderMale

Female

8,4141,671

2,565

664

3,805

751

8,884

1,407

Respondent Associate

Participant

4136784411,200Business Units

HRCS—Demographics


Respondents by Region

19

263

India

44

1,235

Australia/Asia Pac.

1382310583# of Business Units

2,1101,5532,1272,773# of Respondents

ChinaEuropeLatin America

US & Canada

HRCS—Demographics

US and Canada

28%

Latin America21%Europe

15%

China21%

Australia / S.E. Asia12%

India3%


Region Comparisons

10%

17

38

1

0

33

25%

37

36

12%

Australia / Asia Pac.

10%

24

22

2

0

43

46%

30

9

9

4

1

10%

13

58

2

0

17

25%

20

28

9

0

18

9%

18

55

5

1

13

21%

21

36

6

1

15

Primary HR Channel, ParticipantFunctional HR

Centers of Expertise

Embedded HR

Service Center

E-HR

Corporate HR

74%

17

6

21%

40

38

59%

26

13

47%

30

23

32%

31

35

36%

33

30

Level of HR ParticipantsDirector of Managers / Top Manager

Manager of Individual Contributors

Individual Contributor

3%21%15%21%28%10,063Total Respondents

IndiaChinaEuropeLatin

AmericaUS &

CanadaTotal

HRCS—Demographics

Add definitions


Industries

0%5%0%2%0%1%1%Wholesale Trade

0%1%0%2%3%2%2%Retail Trade

2%7%0%4%1%1%2%Public Administration

0%8%9%0%0%0%3%Construction

0%5%0%8%6%8%5%Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate

2%1%21%0%4%1%6%Agriculture

4%17%0%5%14%6%7%Utilities / Communications

0%2%49%3%5%0%12%Mining / Petrochemicals

0%18%21%5%12%13%14%Food

13%1%0%45%14%19%15%Pharmaceutical / Chemical

60%9%0%16%25%15%15%Manufacturing

19%25%0%10%15%34%18%Services (incl. health and bus.)

IndiaAustralia/Asia Pac.ChinaEurope

LatinAmerica

US &CanadaTotal

HRCS—Demographics

Green= High


HRCS Model: Evolution

BusinessKnowledge

HR Delivery

Change

1987

Personal Credibility

HR DeliveryChange

Bus. Knowledge

1992

Bus. Knowledge

HRDelivery

Change

Culture Personal Credibility

1997

Bus. Knowledge

HR Delivery

HR Technology

PersonalCredibility

Strategic Contribution

2002


Formation of the new Model

• Factor analysis was performed on 130 items to produce 6 domains • Factor analysis was performed on the items within each of the 6

domains to produce 21 sub domains or factors

HRCS 2007 Domains


Naming of Domains and Factors

In naming domains and factors, the following were taken into account:

Each sub domain or factor begins with an action verb. These arespecific actions that, when rolled up, make that particular roleeffective.

Action

Each domain is a role that is fulfilled by an effective HR professional

Roles

We wanted to be able to link the past rounds with the present round, and therefore included similar words in the names where possible.

Historical precedent

HRCS 2007 Domains


2007 HRCS Model

Talent MgrOrg Designer

Strategy Architect

Culture & ChangeSteward

Business Ally

Operational Executor

Credible ActivistRelationships

Systems &Processes

OrganizationCapabilities

Busi

nessPeople

HR Professionalism


HRCS Model: 2007

• Facilitating change• Enacting culture• Crafting culture• Personalizing culture

• Ensuring today’s & tomorrow’s talent• Developing talent• Shaping organization• Fostering communication• Designing rewards systems

• Sustaining strategic agility• Engaging customers

• Implementing workplace policies• Advancing HR technology

• Interpreting social context• Serving the value chain• Articulating the value proposition• Leveraging business technology


Strategy Architect


Business Ally


Credible Activist

• Delivering results with integrity• Sharing information• Building relationships of trust• Doing HR with an attitude


Differences in Perspective

• Engaging customers– Showed up in the last round as market-driven connectivity – Seen by non-hr raters as an important competency of HR professionals, while

within HR, this was not shown to be significant.

• Designing rewards systems– Showed up in the entire dataset as well as the non-hr rater dataset.– In the entire dataset, these items showed up under ‘Operational Executor– For the non-hr rater dataset it factored under Talent Manager / Organization

Designer.

Differences in factor analysis between entire dataset and non-HR associate dataset resulted in two additional factors:

HRCS 2007 Domains


HRCS Results

• Individual Performance

• Business Performance

• Factors of Domains

• HR Department


Overall Perception of Competency

Individual Performance


10 14 22 16 22 21 32 25 38 79159 136

264 260

579692

12031314

1834

1628

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

Low

est 5

%

5% to

9%

10%

to 1

4%

15%

to 1

9%

20%

to 2

4%

25%

to 2

9%

30%

to 3

4%

35%

to 3

9%

40%

to 4

4%

45%

to 4

9%

50%

to 5

4%

55%

to 5

9%

60%

to 6

4%

65%

to 6

9%

70%

to 7

4%

75%

to 7

9%

80%

to 8

4%

85%

to 8

9%

90%

to 9

4%

Hig

hest

5%

Dependent Variable:Overall, compared with other Human Resource professionals whom you have known, how does this participant compare?


Domain Mean Scores

Table below shows average domain scores. Scores reflect averages for all items within a given domain on a scale from 1 to 5, with 1 being “to a very little extent” and 5 being “to a very large extent”

Overall Domain Averages

3.633.583.47Operational Executor

3.483.553.39Business Ally

3.583.673.49Strategy Architect

3.763.803.73Talent Mgr. / Org. Designer

3.753.843.80Culture and Change Steward

4.144.234.16Credible Activist

Non HR Associates

HR Associates

HR Participants


Why Bivariate vs. Multiple Regression

Domain listed first in multiple regression

42%11%0%0%0%0%Business

Ally

0%37%1%0%0%0%Operational Executor

0%0%66%4%0%0%Strategy Architect

1%1%1%76%4%1%Talent Mgr. / Org. Designer

4%4%2%1%79%6%Culture & Change Steward

53%47%30%20%16%93%Credible Activist

Business Ally


Strategy Architect

Talent Mgr. / Org. Designer

Culture & Change Steward

Credible Activist


Table indicates % variance is dependent upon the domain listed first when performing multiple regression using 6 individual cases


HR vs. Non HR Rater perspective comparison


.391

11%

9%

17%

20%

20%

24%

All Respondents

11%9%7%Operational Executor

.473.419.186Multiple Regression R2

10%11%10%Business Ally

16%17%17%Strategy Architect

19%19%23%Talent Mgr/Org Designer

20%20%19%Culture and Change Steward

23%24%23%Credible Activist

Non HR Associates

HR Associates

HR Participants


NOTE: scores are scaled to 100 points based on R2


Region Comparison

12%12%14%10%11%9%Business Ally

13%10%16%5%13%9%Operational Executor

21%

20%

18%

16%

India

17%

19%

20%

24%

Australia/Asia Pac.

18%

19%

21%

27%

Europe

16%

19%

18%

23%

Latin America

17%

19%

21%

25%

US & Canada

17%Strategy Architect

18%Talent Mgr/Org Designer

18%Culture and Change Steward

18%Credible Activist

China





Management Level Comparison


9%10%10%Operational Executor

.455.428.423Multiple Regression R2

11%10%11%Business Ally

18%15%17%Strategy Architect

20%20%18%Talent Mgr/Org Designer

20%21%20%Culture and Change Steward

23%24%24%Credible Activist

Directors of Managers

Managers of Ind. Contributors

Individual Contributors




Business Unit Size Comparison




10%9%11%9%11%13%11%Business Ally

9%7%8%9%13%12%15%Operational Executor

17%16%18%17%16%16%13%Strategy Architect

20%19%19%19%19%19%19%Talent Mgr. / Org. Designer

20%20%20%20%20%20%20%Culture and Change Steward

24%29%23%25%20%21%22%Credible Activist

25,000+10000 to 24999

5000 to 9999

1000 to 4999

500 to 999100 to 4990 to 99


Business Performance Scores

Business performance shown by summing 4 variables:

–Meeting customer requirements

–Meeting owner / shareholder requirements

–Being competitive

–Financial management

Business Performance Raw Scores

0200400600800

10001200140016001800

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Business Performance

Business Performance aggregated to business unit

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20


HR vs. Non HR perspective comparison

.208

13%

13%

12%

19%

20%

22%

All Respondents

13%12%Operational Executor

.207.207Multiple Regression R2

14%15%Business Ally

18%17%Strategy Architect

17%15%Talent Mgr/Org Designer

19%18%Culture and Change Steward

19%22%Credible Activist

Non HR Associates

HR Associates


• Being competitive• Financial management

• Meeting customer requirements• Meeting owner / shareholder requirements

Dependent Variable: Average of the following 4 business measures:


HR Channel Comparison

17%20%8%19%12%Business Ally

Multiple Regression R2

16%0%27%15%10%Operational Executor

13%

31%

8%

16%

Corporate HR

8%

10%

24%

23%

Embedded HR

17%

22%

16%

11%


9%

20%

23%

25%

Functional HR





Service Centers






6 Domains to become a successful HR professional


Strategy Architect


Business Ally


Credible Activist


Credible Activist

The HR professional is both credible (respected, admired, listened to) and active (offers a point of view, takes a position, challenges assumptions). Some have called this HR with an attitude.

HR professionals who are credible but not activists are admired, but do not have much impact. Those who are activists but not credible may have ideas but will not be listened to.

Credible Activist

24%26%3.99Doing HR with an attitude

25%24%4.23Sharing Information

22%

23%

29%

Business

24%

19%

31%

Individual

Overall

4.07Building relationships of trust

4.27Delivering results with integrity

MeanFactor


Credible Activist Factors

– Express effective written communication

– Express effective verbal communicationSharing information

– Have effective interpersonal skills

– Have “chemistry” with key internal stakeholders

– Have “chemistry” with key external stakeholders

Building relationships of trust

– Take appropriate risks

– Provide candid observations

– Influence others

Doing HR with attitude

– Meets commitments– Have track record of results– Respond quickly to internal constituents

Delivering results with integrity

Sample ItemsFactor

Credible Activist


How do you become a Credible Activist?

Credible Activist

Development: Now what?

• Job Experience

• Training

• Life Experience

Case Study: Who does it?

Implications: So What?Factors: What is?• Delivering results with integrity

• Sharing information

• Building relationships of trust

• Doing HR with an attitude


Culture and Change Steward

The HR professional recognizes, articulates, and helps shape a company’s culture. Culture is a pattern of activities more than a single event. Ideally this culture starts with clarity around external customer expectations (firm identity or brand), then translates these expectations into internal employee and organization behaviors.

As stewards of culture, HR professionals respect the past culture and also can help to shape a new culture. They understand and can apply the tools of organization change, which always has cultural implications. They coach managers on how their actions reflect and drive culture; they weave the cultural standards into HR practices and processes; and they make culture real to employees


22%21%3.68Personalizing culture

28%30%3.88Crafting culture

28%29%3.83Facilitating change

22%21%3.57Enacting culture

20%

Business

20%

Individual

Overall

MeanFactor


Culture and Change Steward Factors

– Design and deliver HR practices that create and maintain the desired culture

– Share knowledge across organizational boundaries

– Make culture management a business priority

Crafting culture

– Help employees find purpose and meaning in their work

– Manage work/life balance within the organization

– Ensure that the culture of your business is recognized in the mind of the external stakeholders

Personalizing culture

– Frame culture that engages employees

– Translate culture into management practices

– Make whole of the organization more than the sum of its parts

Enacting culture

– Align individual behavior and organizational goals

– Identify and engage people who make change happen

– Sustain change through HR practices

Facilitating change

Sample ItemsFactor



How do you become a Culture and Change Steward?


• Job Experience

• Training

• Life


Implications: So what?Factors: What is?• Facilitating change

• Crafting culture

• Enacting culture

• Personalizing culture



Talent Mgr. / Org. Designer

The HR professional masters theory, research, and practice in both talent management and organization design. Talent management focuses on how individuals enter, move up, across, or out of the organization. Organization design focuses on the structure, governance, and processes that shape how an organization works.These organizational actions form an organization’s capabilities, or what the organization is good at and known for. HR professionals should bring relevant and proven concepts and tools to these HR practice areas. HR is not just about talent or organization, but about the two of them together. Good talent without a supporting organization will not be sustained and a good organization will not operate without good talent.

Talent Mgr / Org Designer

24%20%3.86Fostering communication

10%10%3.40Designing rewards systems

19%20%Overall

29%28%3.91Ensuring today’s & tomorrow’s talent

18%21%3.75Shaping organization

19%22%3.74Developing talent

BusinessIndividualMeanFactor


Talent Mgr / Org Designer Factors

– Facilitate design of internal communication processes

– Work with managers to send clear and consistent messages

– Develop a comprehensive internal communication strategy and plan

Fostering communication

– Design non-financial rewards systems

– Design performance-based compensation systems

– Design measurement systems that distinguish high-performing individuals from low performing individuals

Designing rewards systems

– Offer training programs

– Design developmental work experiences

– Follow up and reinforce personal change

Developing Talent

– Organizational design

– Help establish reporting relationships

– Facilitate the design of organizational structure

Shaping organization

– Assess key talent

– Manage workforce diversity

– Establish standards for required talent

Ensuring today’s and tomorrow’s talent

Sample ItemsFactor



How do you become a Talent Mgr / Org Designer


• Job Experience

• Training

• Life


Implications: So what?Factors: What is?• Ensuring today’s and tomorrow’s talent

• Developing talent

• Shaping organization

• Fostering communication

• Designing rewards systems



Strategy Architect

The HR professional knows how to influence and implement business strategy. In particular, the HR professional is able to link internal organization practices to external customer expectations.

This helps make customer-driven business strategies real to the employees of the company.To align with strategic direction, the HR professional facilitates an understanding and application of the processes required to make change happen. HR professionals facilitate strategic alignment change by turning what needs to be done into what is actually done.

Strategy Architect

64%62%3.65• Sustaining strategic agility

36%38%3.43• Engaging customers

12%17%Overall



Strategy Architect Factors

– Help establish the business strategy

– Have a vision of the future for your business

– Translate business strategy into annual business initiatives

Sustaining strategic agility

– Facilitate dissemination of customer information

– Contribute to building the brand of the company with customers, shareholders, and employees

– Facilitate the integration of different business functions

Engaging customers

Sample ItemsFactor

Strategy Architect


How do you become a Strategy Architect?

Actions: Now what?

• Job Experience

• Training

• Life


Implications: So what?Factors: What is?• Sustaining strategic agility

• Engaging customers

Strategy Architect



The HR professional administers the day-to-day work of managing people inside an organization. Policies need to be drafted, adapted, and implemented. Employees also have many administrative needs (e.g., to be paid, relocated, hired, trained, etc.)

HR professionals ensure that these basic needs are efficiently dealt with through technology, shared services, and/or outsourcing. This day-to-day work of HR ensures credibility if executed flawlessly and grounded in the consistent application of policies.


51%51%3.61Advancing HR technology

49%49%3.50Implementing workplace policies

13%9%Overall



Operational Executor Factors

– Labor legislation

– Manage the arrangement of physical space and workplace environment

– Design flexible work schedules

Implementing workplace policies

– Leverage information technology for HR practices

– Use technology to facilitate organizational transformation

– Leverage HR information systems to make better decisions

Advancing HR technology

Sample ItemsFactor



How do you become a Operational Executor?

Actions

• Job Experience

• Training

• Life

Case StudyWho does this well?

ImplicationsFactors• Implementing Workplace Policies

• Advancing HR Technology



Business Ally

The HR professional contributes to the success of the business. Businesses work to succeed by setting goals and objectives that allow them to respond to external conditions. HR professionals contribute to the success of a business by knowing the social context or setting in which a business operates.

They also know how the business makes money: the value chain of the business (who customers are, why they buy the company’s products or services). A related area of knowledge is the value proposition of the business: how the business organizes resources to make money.

Business Ally

40%32%3.68Interpreting social context

20%22%3.50Serving the value chain

23%21%3.42Articulating the value proposition

17%25%3.40Leveraging business technology

13%11%Overall



Business Ally Factors

– Competitor analysis

– Managing customer relationships

– Requirements of external customers

Serving the value chain

– Computer information systems

– Production or manufacturing processes

– Research & Development

– E-Commerce

Leveraging business technology

– Knowing how your business makes money

– Financial statements (balance sheet, income statement)

– Requirements of shareholders and owners

Articulating the value proposition

– Globalization of business

– External political environment

– Design of work processes

– Demographic trends that influence your business

Interpreting social context

Sample ItemsFactor

Business Ally


How do you become a Business Ally?

Actions: Now what?

• Job Experience

• Training

• Life

Case Study: Who does it?Who does this well?

Implications: So what?Factors: What is?• Interpreting social context

• Serving the value chain

• Articulating the value proposition

• Leveraging business technology

Business Ally


Conclusion of Domain Conclusions


HR Department Performance

.279Value Added

R Square*Department Grouping

.203Multiple Regression, all Domains

.250HR Focus

.226Stakeholders

*Scores using associate rater data only

HR Department





Stakeholders

HR Dept.

Customer

InvestorCommunity

Employee Line Manager


Stakeholders

20%0.170Employees Average

.226Stakeholder Multiple Regression

Line Managers

Communities Average

Investor Average

External Customer Average

Stakeholder

20%0.168

21%0.176

21%0.180

19%0.162

%R Square

HR Department


Stakeholders: Build

0.225Multiple regression

29%0.155Build an employee value proposition that lays out what is expected from employees and what they get in return

2%0.012Build organizational capabilities that help line managers turn strategy into action

29%0.157Build HR practices that add value to the communities

32%0.172Build organizational capabilities that investors value (or those who provide capital)

8%0.045Build HR practices that add value to external customers

%BetaBuild Items

HR Department


Stakeholders: Involve

0.185Multiple regression

18%0.094Involve employees in design and delivery of HR practices that increase their abilities

37%0.186Involve line managers in the design and delivery of HR practices

16%0.080Involve communities in the design and delivery of HR practices

9%0.045Involve investors (or those who provide capital) in the design and delivery of HR practices that create value for them

21%0.105Involve Customers in the design and delivery of HR practices%BetaInvolve Items

HR Department


Factor Regressions: HR focus

.149

.182

.227

R2 %Factor

27%Capability of Dept–Manage external vendors of outsourced HR activities–Ensure that HR is a cultural role model for the rest of the org–Build the capability of the HR department to add greater value–Invest in training and dev of HR professionals

33%Measures–Measure impact of HR practices on business results–Use empirical research to identify best HR practices–Create a workforce scorecard–Track employee engagement

41%Strategy and Structure–Ensure that HR strategy turns business goals into HR priorities–Have an HR strategy that links HR practices to business strategy–Ensure that org structure of HR is consistent with the business strategy–Align org structure of HR with the org structure of the business

HR Department


Factor Regressions: Value add activities

.152

.252

.197

R2 %Factor

25%Administrative Practices–HR technology

–Workplace policies

42%Organization Practices–Rewards

–Internal communication

–Organization structure

–Coaching

–Work process design

33%Talent Practices–Talent assessment

–Staffing

–Training and development

–Performance appraisal

HR Department


Overall conclusions

• Implications for HR professionals

• Implications for HR departments


Individual vs. Department

HR Department Capabilities

HR

Indi

vidu

al C

ompe

tenc

ies

41

2 3


Backup slides


Common Profiling Questions

• Some of the questions in the survey do not apply to my job and industry. What do I do about them?

• My associates did not know how to answer all the questions

• Is this information valid? This is only a one-shot assessment and my associates work with me for a long time

• What about all the competencies that are not measured on this instrument?


Do’s and Don’ts to reacting to data

• Do:– Learn from the instrument

– Be open to feedback

– Be willing to undergo self-examination

– Be willing to accept faults

– Read with a marker

• Don’t– Blame the instrument

– Be closed to new ideas


Common problems with profiling

• Over-reaction

• Under-reaction

• Focus on the person not the process as the source of the problem

• Look only at time 1 data and don’t see the value of ongoing assessment

• Afraid of change


Findings

• Culture Steward– In the past, HR was subsumed under ‘strategic contribution’ or management of change. – HR’s ability to define, create, manage, and change culture has become a unique source of

competence– May indicate a bit of a shift in how HR is viewed

• Rewards– HR professionals see reward activities into the day to day tactical items while non HR

associate raters see reward systems as connected to HR practices of talent manager and org developer

• Customer views of HR– Non HR associates believe that the external customer can and should be brought into the

HR work; HR associates and participants did not perceive this;– HR professionals need to pay more attention to the real, external customer and find ways to

bring them into the organization

• HR professionals more credible than they are business literate– Business literacy continues to lag other domains; even after all of the talk about being

business contributors, HR professionals are not there yet

Changing Business Context


Findings (continued)

• Talent Manager / Organization Designer– Talent and organization are different but need to be connected.– It is not enough to get good people (ergo a danger of moving to human capital) without

organization that sustains it

• Stakeholders– HR departments know to involve stakeholders (employees, customers, investors,

communities, line managers) in their work more than they do it.– Investors and communities are the least involved in shaping HR

• Strategy and HR vs. Empirical HR practices– The more empirical HR practices (workforce scorecard, empirical research) are less well-

done than other HR areas.– HR strategy and strategic HR are being done. – When we began this work 20 years ago, we had to help companies come up with an HR

strategy and teach them how to do strategic HR

• HR practices that add value– Talent management practices are adding more value than compensation (consistent with

findings above


Responses from HR

• Growing profession and number of HR professionals• Shifts in HR practices: Talent and organization, not just talent

– Talent: staffing, development, performance management, communication

– Organization: policies, governance, structure, processes, physical setting

• Shift in HR departments– Outsourced– Insourced: professional service firm model

• Shifts in expectations for HR professionals: now we’re “at the table” what do we do?

• Shifts in expectations for HR Departments


Align our HR organization

Increase Differentiation

Implications for HR


HR Professionals

Education of Participants

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

<HighSchool

HighSchool

+1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 +7

• ~25% of HR participants have 7+ years of education post high school

HRCS—Demographics


HR Professionals

• ~74% of HR participants have 10+ years of professional experience

• ~51% of HR participants have at least 10 years in HR

Total years, Professional Experience

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Less than2

3 - 5 6 - 9 10 - 14 15 - 19 20 - 24 25 - 29 30+

Total Years in HR

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Less than 2 3 - 5 6 - 9 10 - 14 15 - 19 20 - 24 25 - 29 30+

HRCS—Demographics


Business Size

HR Professionals in Business

050

100150200250300350400450

1 2 - 4 5 - 9 10 - 39 40 - 79 80 - 199 200 - 399 400 - 599 600 - 899

Business Size: Employees

050

100150200250300350400450500

0 - 99 100 - 499 500 - 999 1000 - 4999 5000 - 9999 10000 - 24999 25000 - 49000 50000 - 74999 75000 - 99999 100000+

HRCS—Demographics


HR professionals: Education by Region

Education by Region

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

US & Canada (N=413)

Latin America (N=351)

Europe (N=203)

China (N=310)

Australia (N=192)

India (N=47)

1 yr. post high school 2 years 3 years 4 years 5 years 6 years 7 years

HRCS—Demographics


Hints for turning data into action

• Ask: What does it say?– Understand the question being asked– Look for things that stand out– Try to find patterns in the data– Look for differences in the data

• Ask: what does it mean?– See the implications in the data– Ask who would use this data for what decisions

• How could I use the data?– Determine next steps based on the data– Build an accountability system to track progress


Domain Mean Scores by Region (all associate raters)


3.803.753.603.783.783.87Overall Item Average

3.693.473.473.513.543.55Business Ally

3.663.523.633.483.713.59Operational Executor

3.673.583.533.673.593.73Strategy Architect

3.853.763.593.833.803.89Talent Mgr / Org. Designer

3.763.813.553.813.843.94Culture and Change Steward

4.144.233.964.224.154.38Credible Activist

IndiaAustralia /Asia Pac.ChinaEurope

Latin America

US and Canada


Domain Mean Scores by Industry

Green=High Red = Low


3.523.583.653.813.844.25Public Administration

3.603.663.733.873.934.33Services

3.473.593.593.803.874.30Banking and Real Estate

3.523.663.713.893.944.31Utilities & Communications

3.483.573.613.783.834.26Wholesale / Retail Trade

3.513.603.603.793.784.20Manufacturing

3.573.623.703.913.894.27Pharmaceuticals / Chemicals

3.443.483.593.713.734.11Food

3.453.573.413.553.493.96Construction

3.523.633.603.693.674.06Mining

3.503.573.553.683.613.97Agriculture

BusinessAlly


Strategy Architect

Talent Mgr / Org. Design

Culture & Change Steward

Credible Activist


Hints for turning data into action

• Ask: What does it say?– Understand the question being asked– Look for things that stand out– Try to find patterns in the data– Look for differences in the data

• Ask: what does it mean?– See the implications in the data– Ask who would use this data for what decisions

• How could I use the data?– Determine next steps based on the data– Build an accountability system to track progress


2%.07Business Ally

-6%-.19Operational Executor

3%.08Talent Mgr and Org Designer

21%.69Strategy Architect

18%.57Culture and Change Steward

62%2.01Credible Activist

%BetaDomain


Why Bivariate vs. Multiple Regression

Beta weights for multiple regression model


Regressions: HR Channel


11%10%9%11%13%Business Ally

.482.370.404.495.420Multiple Regression R2

9%15%8%10%12%Operational Executor

17%

20%

20%

24%

Corporate HR

17%

20%

20%

25%

Embedded HR

17%

19%

20%

24%


16%

19%

19%

21%

Functional HR





Service Centers




HR Department: Stakeholders

To what extent does your HR department have the capability to do the following?

HR Department

Mean%Item

3.5610%• Involve employees in design and delivery of HR practices that increase their abilities

3.7911%• Build an employee value proposition that lays out what is expected from employees and what they get in return

3.7311%• Involve line managers in the design and delivery of HR practices

3.7911%• Build organizational capabilities that help line managers turn strategy into action

3.068%• Involve communities in the design and delivery of HR practices

3.5011%• Build HR practices that add value to the communities

3.067%• Involve investors (or those who provide capital) in the design and delivery of HR practices that create value for them

3.4912%• Build organizational capabilities that investors value (or those who provide capital)

3.329%• Involve Customers in the design and delivery of HR practices

3.5811%• Build HR practices that add value to external customers


HR Department: HR focus

To what extent are the following true of your HR department?

HR Department

Mean%Item

3.737%Invest in training and development of HR professionals

3.747%Build the capability of the HR department to add greater value

3.646%Ensure that HR is a cultural role model for the rest of the organization

3.486%Manage external vendors of outsourced HR activities

3.587%Track employee engagement

3.275%Create a workforce scorecard

3.398%Use empirical research to identify best HR practices

3.419%Measure the impact of HR practices on business results

3.8313%Align organizational structure of HR with the organizational structure of the business

3.8113%Ensure that organizational structure of HR is consistent with the business strategy

3.8311%Have an HR strategy that links HR practices to business strategy

3.829%Ensure that HR strategy turns business goals into HR priorities


HR Department: Value add activities

To what extent do the following HR practices designed and delivered by your HR department add value to the business?

HR Department

Mean%Item

3.414%Work process design3.6511%Coaching3.8410%Workplace policies3.478%HR technology3.7013%Organization structure3.679%Internal communication3.726%Rewards3.9111%Performance appraisal3.906%Training and development3.9410%Staffing3.8512%Talent assessment


HR Professionals: Experience by Region

Years of Professional Experience

0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%

US & Canada N=455

Latin America N=375

Europe N=220

China N=205

Australia N=354

India N=53

Less than 2 3 to 5 6 to 9 10 to 14 15 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 29 30+

Years in HR

0%

5%

10%

15%20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

US and CanadaN=455

Latin AmericaN=375

EuropeN=220

ChinaN=340

AustraliaN=205

IndiaN=53

Less than 2 3 to 5 6 to 9 10 to 14 15 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 29 30+

HRCS—Demographics

Pesquisa Estudos CompetêNcias Rh Por Dave Ulrich 2007

Business

Transcript of Pesquisa Estudos CompetêNcias Rh Por Dave Ulrich 2007