Center for Leadership Research and Development: CLRD: Reforming HR or Replacing HR

Reforming HR or Replacing HR: Reforming HR or Replacing HR? T. V. Rao Recently I was asked to join a team of US Based Management Organization Development (OD) Consultants...

Reforming HR or Replacing HR

Reforming HR or Replacing HR?

T. V. Rao

Recently I was asked to join a team of US Based Management Organization Development (OD) Consultants for a series of Seminars in Malaysia. I sent them my presentation on OD in India which included a series of HRD interventions used for bringing about change in corporations besides some details of OD interventions. I mentioned there that when the HRD Department was conceptualised in mid seventies OD was treated as one of the functions of the department. Dr D. F. Pereira an ISABSian made a few OD interventions to turn around not so well doing units and also to bring change. HRD itself was a change management tool. Promptly I got a reply suggesting that I should not use HR as most people are averse to talking about HR. HR has not made an impact and if any negative impact. It is too unbelievable as I just returned from a trip to Malaysia a few months ago where we trained a group of Trainers to be HR Auditors and they did not mention anything like that. As I was wondering it suddenly crossed my mind that the people whom we trained re all HR Managers and that they are not likely to know the popular perception. I of course felt a little stupid to go fully believe this suggestion as OD had the same affect in the NGOs in mid nineties. When the Academy of HRD started an OD project for which EZE Germany had given a lot of funds, we initiated training internal facilitators in NGOs for initiating change. Promptly we got the suggestion from EZE Germany that their tour across Indian indicated that NGOS don’t like the term OD and they are averse to it and it has to be changed. We had to re-title the project as “Self renewal of NGOs” which was more accepted and then we went ahead with the same.

We may say some times what is in the name or the acronym or title? I am not sure if it is correct to raise this question. The original HRD design which goes well with creating competencies, commitment and culture and values in organizations through human resources is totally diluted by a variety of factors.    I strongly believe even most CEOs in India don’t know what real HRD is and What HR Departments should do to add value to the company. Most HR Managers are perhaps not capable of educating the CEOs or their Boards by demonstrating what HR can do.  I reproduce below some of the thoughts I expressed just a year ago in the preface to the second edition of my book “The HRD Missionary” (originally written in 1990 for promoting National HRD Network) in 2010 (published by TVRLS, Ahmedabad).

As I hear these comments from Malaysians I feel so sad. Fortunately some of the HR Directors and managers have done a marvellous job in the last few years in facilitating the process of transformation in several organizations including those in the Tata and Birla groups and in organizations like Dr. Reddy’s, Mahindra Satyam and so on. A professor from Udaipur University (Prof. Rajeshwari) is trying to document the stories of such transformation and I hope it will be out soon. Unless we spread good stories of HRD as a value adding function and as a tool for accelerating transformation, a time may come to either replace HR or rename the same.

Already “Human Capital Management”, “Talent Management”  and such other substitutes have started emerging and the number is increasing day by day.

Preface to Second Edition of HRD Missionary (published by TVRLS, 2010)

In a recent article titled “Why We Hate HR? Keith Haymmonds pointed out the following reasons:

1. HR people are n’t the brightest lot while the function requires bright people with business acumen. The best and the brightest don’t go to HR. HR doesn’t tend to hire a lot of independent thinkers or people who stand up as moral compasses. HR people may not even know answers to basic questions like: who is their company’s core customer? What challenges do they face? Who are the competitors? What do they do well and what they don’t? Who are we? What do they do well and not so well in their own company in relation to competitors and customers?

2. HR pursues efficiency in lieu of value. They are more activity and target driven than out- come and value driven.  HR people can readily provide the number they hired, the percentage of performance evaluations they completed, the extent to which employees are satisfied with their benefits, and the number of man-hours of training imparted etc. They rarely link any of these with business performance.

3. HR is not working for the employees but often to protect the organization against their own employees by ensuring that data are collected to help organization meet labour regulations and standards.  HR people pursue uniform policies against people who are heterogeneous and complex. HR departments’ bench-mark salaries department-by-department or function-by-function and job-by-job against industry standards, keeping pay -- even that of stars-- within a narrow band determined by competitors. They are un-willing to acknowledge accomplishments that merit more than 4% companywide increase and bounce performance appraisals back to managers.

4.  HR people do not get the ear of the top management for strategic issues. Whenever they bring strategic issues they are ignored and are used for hiring, firing, organizing picnics, celebrations, etc. According to one survey a number of organizations are likely to expand their outsourcing of HR activities like learning and development, payroll, recruiting, health, welfare and global mobility.

The article concluded: “the problem, if you‘re an HR person is this: The tasks companies are outsourcing—the adminsitrivia—tend to be what you’re good at. And what is left isn’t exactly your strong suit.” 

The above observations are similar to those made  15 years before the above article appeared  w lead to the book “HRD Missionary” In his Foreword to the book, Mr. M.R.R Nair observed “The HRD departments are happy doing “traditional” functions which get relegated as “Clerical or “Fire fighting”  tasks.” There are however shining examples of organizations adopting clear HRD philosophies.... and contributing to organizational growth and revival.

In a recent survey by TVRLS, line managers from different organizations assessed the effectiveness of the HRD function. The survey results when compared with a similar survey results done in 1991 indicated a definite decline in the effective performance of various roles. This study indicated a definite decline in the perceptions of the effectiveness with which the various HRD functions are being performed as perceived by the line managers. There was a definite decline in the effectiveness with which the HRD roles are being performed as compared to a decade and a half ago. The study concluded that, this is perhaps an indication of the raising expectation of line managers from the HRD managers as well as a reflection of the falling standards of performance of various HR Development activities. Monitoring HRD implementation and conducting Human process research are the two poorly performed functions across most organizations.  Creating a development motivation among line managers by organizing visits to other organizations for them was one of the least attended activities. OD and self renewal activities were also among the least effectively performed activities.  The study concluded that:  1. HRD Managers need to recognize the stake holder expectations and understand the overall business and strategic context of their function. As the expectations from HRD function are changing and they are expected to perform more value adding functions and activities. 2. The HRD function should focus on intellectual capital generation activities and at the same time ensure a good ROI on training and other interventions rather than merely facilitating in-house training activities. 3. The HRD practitioners need to equip themselves with capacity and competencies needed to build the HRD function as hands on, proactive strategic partner with practical contributions to organizational goals and performance effectiveness. 4. The HRD practitioners need to strengthen their partnership and credibility with their stake holders by involving them in policy making and communicating constantly.

Those who read the first edition of the HRD Missionary written nearly twenty years ago would have realised that these were anticipated in the book. The book argued for a missionary approach to implementing HRD.  I began writing this book while I was on a consulting assignment with Voltas and was working simultaneously with the Ministry of HRD to review NIEPA (now NUEPA). I noticed during many of my consulting assignments the new role of HRD created a decade and a half before the nineties was already getting to be either routinised or politicised and was enjoying power. Part of the complication came as these roles and departments were carved out of the Personnel Departments and fell into the traps explained in the book. A few of them like today were doing a marvellous job.  I felt strongly at that time that HRD has many difficulties: CEOs don’t understand how to use HRD, HRD Managers themselves did not understand what they are expected to do and many of them lacked even professional preparation to do right things. This book along with another jointly edited by Mr. M R R Nair, Director HR of SAIL and me (Excellence though HRD published by Tata McGrawHill)  were to serve as guides for those who wanted to become HRD managers.

Since the time the first edition of the HRD missionary was written went years ago a lot of things have happened in this country and worldwide.  In India, opening up of the economy and liberalisation, creation of the new economic environment, upcoming of IT and other services, emergence of many young entrepreneurs in various fields etc. are some of the highlights. Indian Industry has come a long way in the last two decades and Indian Industry has also become a worldwide noticeable industry. Unlike the earlier years Indian products and services got global prominence as all of them started competing in making quality products and offer globally competitive services. There is a sea change in the country. Speed became the order of the day as World Wide Web provided all information and services at the door step. Many organizations started downsizing in nineties and stabilising subsequently in terms of costs, speed, service quality and other parameters. The last one decade has seen two unexpected experiences (the dot com burst and the new economic crisis or worldwide recession experienced in 2008-2009), have come out of it and continued to do business as usual. Competition has become global. Technology has become cheaper and accessible to many. Finances are available in plenty most of the time as there are investors for good ideas and risk takers too. Talent had become more scarce and expensive and hence become a strategic variable. HRD has come under focus in the last one decade much more than before and competent and committed HRD managers have become scarce.  The emergence a large number of consultants and consulting firms and management schools specialising in HR are indictors of this HR boom in the last decade. Most CEOs have recognised the importance of the spotting, procuring, nurturing, retaining and d developing talent. HRD Managers had the difficult and challenging task.

 However as the opportunities grew HRD Managers also started job hopping. This has affected partly the HRD profession. HRD profession ended up as having two images-one in the eyes of themselves and the CEOs and another in the eyes of the other employees. Employees depended on HRD for their growth and maintenance. While HR administration was predictable and any one can do well with little training the more difficult and challenging task of nurturing and developing talent and creating a culture for effective utilisation of talent is complex, long drawn, needs  expert hep and sustained effort.  It is easy to arrange transport and visas and create good physical work conditions and predictable benefit schemes, it needs different skills base to plan, manage and develop performance, and motivate people, get their commitment to stay with the company, get them to enjoy work and show commitment and at the same time grow in the company. It is here professional expertise of HRD Managers and their sustained effort was required.

In many ways though the HRD Missionary was written before the new economic environment it seems to have anticipated the issues well. What has been said in this book remained truer in the new economic Environment. There has been great appreciation of this book from many quarters. Whenever I attempted to review it for re-writing it, I found that there is very little I could add. There was not much new happening that was not anticipated or explained in the first edition. So there was no need for a second edition for almost twenty years.

When I began to prepare the second edition now, I felt that many things remain the same and if any the situation of HRD Managers in those days exists with same intensity. In fact his seems to be the case all over the world as indicated by the article “Why We Hate HR?” written from across the borders.  The book therefore needed only an update as the issues remain the same. The need for HRD Missionaries if any has only increased as the number of non-performing HRD Managers has gone up as indicated by the study by TVRLS. I have updated the same by adding a few more to the list of HRD Interventions: 360 degree Feedback, Assessment and Development Centres, HRD Audit, HRD Score card, Employee Engagement surveys. The argument that HRD Managers should work with Missionary zeal and spirit remains the same. If any it has become more necessary than before. CEOs still do not fully understand the potential use of good HRD Managers. While they speak of Strategic HR and strategic thinking, they seem to put HRD Managers to very little of strategic use. It needs a higher degree of understanding, expectations on the part of the CEOs as well as HRD Managers on what a good HRD Manager can do to transform an organization. To do this HRD Managers need knowledge, commitment, and professional competence.

I hope this book will continue to inspire the new generation of HRD Managers and enables them to do right things and things right. I have dropped the second part of the HRD Missionary that gave a number of questionnaires as there are number of them and are available in more detail from other sources like the HRD Score Card 2500 (Sage, Response Books, 2008) and Training Instruments in HRD and OD (by Udai Pareek, Tata McGraw-Hill) etc.

In all my efforts to pursue HRD, Dr Udai Pareek has been a constant source of encouragement, and a companion. It was Udai who involved me in the L&T assignment at IIMA which lead to the conceptualisation of HRD Function and department. I continue to dedicate the second edition of this book to Udai.

T. V. Rao

January 21, 2010 

(P.S.:  I had the good fortune to present a copy of this book to Udai just a few weeks before he left us)

Center for Leadership Research and Development: CLRD: YOU CAN BE A LEADER

Center for Leadership Research and Development: CLRD: YOU CAN BE A LEADER: You can be a Leader: You Just Have to Start Thinking, Talking or Doing - Ahead of Others T. V. Rao During the last forty years of my i...

YOU CAN BE A LEADER

You can be a Leader: You Just Have to Start Thinking, Talking or Doing - Ahead of Others

T. V. Rao

During the last forty years of my interactions with managers and others I have come across different types of leaders and managers. I have classified managers in my book on “Managers who make a difference” into four categories: The Doers, Achievers, Visionaries and Missionaries. What distinguishes a manager from a leader is that a manager manages what some others have given him. These are the managers I called as “Doers”. Those who do more that what they are asked to do are already leaders. I.e. in my definition “Achievers” are leaders. The achievers are those who do more than what they are asked to do, or do things faster than before (speed leadership), or excel their own past performance (self leadership), do it more cost effectively than before (cost leadership), or differently than before (another form of self leadership), or better than other by surpassing some bench marks (leadership benchmark), or do it better in quality than before or than anyone else (quality leadership) etc. They would like to complete fast, achieve fast and distinguish themselves as faster or smarter or cost effective etc. The “Achievers” are the first category of leaders. Most people and particularly those who appear for competitive examinations (IIMS, IITs, NITs, Civil service and other competitive examinations for any places) to get admitted into Institutions of their choice are trying to be “Achievers”.

In the next category are the Visionaries and these are the people who identify new opportunities, create a new vision and or break new path ways. Most entrepreneurs are leaders in this category. Entrepreneurs have got to be leaders as they take risks and do things others have not done until then. They not only do better always and try to achieve new land marks, but they create new opportunities and convert problems into opportunities. Employees who come up with new ways of doing things and create new methodologies or new areas of business etc. are all visionaries. They lead by thinking ahead of others and thinking in multiple directions. They do a number of other things than what   they are asked to do or required to do.

The fourth category of managers are missionaries and they devote their entire life for one cause like Dr Kurien devoted his life time to diary industry and cooperative movement; Dr. Abdul Kalam to science education and mother Theresa for taking care of the abandoned.

Most often when I interact with senior managers and particularly those in their fifties and working as general managers and so on, I have often come across a comment saying that “it is too late for them to be leaders”, not much can be done unless you change their culture in the company or heir dominating bosses etc. I believe that more than anything it is this feeling that they cannot change and it is too late that makes it difficult to changes. I would like to give good news to all these people that leadership is not such a difficult thing.

I would like to start by saying that you can be one of the following types of leaders: leader in thought, leadership by word and leadership by action.

Leadership in thought: Anyone who thinks ahead of others is a leader. Thinking is the first step for action. By generating new ideas, by suggesting new methods, procedures, and processes one is indicating thought leadership or leadership in thought. Such people are leaders by ideas and thought. We can call them thought leaders or Leaders in thought. Such leaders can be there in any profession or organization. In any difficult situation of you can think of a solution you are already a thought leader. Most of us are thought leaders but we do not express our thinking and limit it to ourselves. How many times you and I when we heard our seniors or top management or policy makers in our state or country took decision, it could work better if only... Most of our thought leadership gets buried in our own minds and never gets to see the light of the day. Most organizations recruit leaders who passed many competitive examinations and unknowingly prevent them from developing their thought leadership. Sometimes we ourselves kill our leadership thought by giving up soon as our organizations find it difficult to implement or we are unable to get across our thoughts to any significant person who can pursue it. All of us keep getting new ideas but most of us don’t express the same and a few of us have given up thinking after repeated experience that it is easy to dream and difficult to implement. With passage of time some amount of cynicism develops and people start feeling that there is no point dreaming. Such pessimism over a period of time kills our thought leadership. I have noticed many leaders who have excellent thought processes and have given them up as they grew.

Lesson: continue to cultivate your thought leadership even if it cannot be implemented. If you are giving up thought leadership you have already given up an opportunity to be leader. For example  if you have thoughts and ideas about anything be it on corruption or on improved method of doing the work assigned to you or your team don’t give up. Express and cultivate your thought leadership. Don’t assume that there is no use dreaming unless you find someone who takes them seriously. Practice sharing your thoughts or writing your thoughts. Some one somewhere some time will use it. Don’t think thought leaders are greater than you. They were also like you. So think and think ahead of others and be a thought leader in your work, department, organization or even outside.

Leadership in Action: This category of leaders lead by example and doing things fast. They are good at action and implementation. They lead by action and execution. They are restless until they demonstrate their work by example. They lead by doing.

Lesson: If you have an idea and not accustomed to talk much, act now. Do not wait! Sometimes actions teach a lot of lessons.

Talk Leadership: These are the people who lead in their talk. They may have few ideas or they may borrow others ideas but keep sharing and talking their thoughts or others ideas and thoughts. They take lead in getting the lime light by impressing others with their talk. I like to call them “Word Leaders”. Word leaders lead by their word. Dr PP Gupta CMD of CMC in eighties, used to say “Preach even if you don’t practice”. Once when we confronted him and asked him why he is saying so, as it is contrary to popular saying “Practice what you preach”. He remarked, “Professor if you have to speak, you should have something to speak. You need an idea, a vision, or an alternate way of doing things etc. Most people don’t have any such thing. They need to acquire the same if they have to speak. If you have something to speak, one day you will start believing in what you speak and also start practicing. If for some reason you don’t practice it, don’t worry someone will point out if you are practicing what you preach”. Word leadership is leadership by talking. Most preachers and teachers exhibit talk or word leadership and thought leadership.

Lesson: Have a point of view. Develop the same. Start talking about your view point on any issue of significance to any part of the society. Share your thoughts. Write and speak. Find out what you like in other leaders and start talking about your views and lessons we all should learn from them. Be a talk leader.

Integrated leadership is a combination of all the above three. The person leads by his/her thoughts, speeches and also in action. This is the higher from of leadership. To reach this stage one has to start with thought leadership and graduate to word or talk leadership and then to demonstrate by action. Profit and loss are not indicators of leadership qualities. In failure also there are many leadership lessons. Leadership is to be judged by the nature of thought, words or speech and deeds. Leadership means to lead and that is to think ahead, say before others say, and do ahead of others. Leaders are always ahead of others. How many others is a matter of context. The context is to be defined by the person and not necessarily the outside world.

Self concept an important role in leadership. If you cannot think ahead of others or think that you can’t think ahead of others, speak ahead of others by borrowing others’ thoughts (of course acknowledging). If you can’t think ahead of others or speak ahead of others, act ahead of others to establish your leadership competence. So you can be one of the above types of leaders: Leader in thought, leader in talk, or a leader in action. However remember leadership cannot be seen or felt unless you have character and through it credibility.

 Honesty, integrity, and values are critical foundations for leadership. Those who lack these cannot be leaders and even if they do by chance it becomes short term. Unethical and over selfish behaviour with greed gets noticed and such people are sure to lose their leadership status. Similarly if you are inefficient and ineffective in your role you are bound to lose your credibility and leadership status. You need to be doing your job efficiently, effectively and ethically. If character is lost everything is lost. 

T V Rao