Introspecting
the HR Function - 1
n An outsider’s view from the inside
Increasingly, any management seminar or workshop begins and ends with an exhortation that
people are the real assets of a company
and attracting and retaining good quality manpower is the need of the
hour.
While nobody can dispute this
exhortation and, indeed nobody does, the
fact remains that only lip service is paid to the idea. Let
us take up the first issue of attracting the right people. The first thing to note is that in the new lexicon of HR Managers,
people are no longer people, rather, they are “talent” ; not
unnaturally, they are taken to be and,
therefore, treated like any other
“input commodity or object,”. So today you hear phrases like “talent
acquisition”, “talent retention and
“talent development” ; the use of the word “people or employee” has
become an anathema – how stupid and old-fashioned it sounds. Rather, today’s champion HR Managers are busy
cutting their teeth on something much more superior and ethereal - talent !
Thus, the manager charged with attracting
“talent” address (and treats) the people as inanimate objects
rather than as the complex, interesting
an challenging human beings that they
are. This itself will explain a lot of the
disinterested, dehydrated and aloof approach that HR managers take today
towards incoming people in the organisation.
What exactly are the H.R.
Managers are doing about attracting talent ?
They are increasingly outsourcing the whole process. Consultants for recruitment are growing by the month, if
not by the day. Everybody is inundated with “urgent requests” (barring the recent
recession when there is a virtual bar on
recruitment). So, in the very first step of “attracting” people,
nay, talent, HR
Managers are washing their hands off, because they want to bring efficiency and cost
saving by outsourcing the functions to those who do it best viz. the
recruitment expert. In some exceptional cases,
HR Managers deign to look at people “themselves” by going to job sites. Of course, they do not do it personally (god
forbid), ; it is done by the latest
management trainee or junior-most employee who are given a skeletal requirement
and a couple of keywords to carry out the search.
There is clearly no serious effort applied in making this first short list. You can well imagine that if this is the
method for drawing up the list of recruits,
no matter what the subsequent selection process is, one
will still end up with suboptimal choices.
This is increasingly borne out by the rapidly growing number of cases of
people leaving or being asked to leave within a year of their being selected
for a new job.
Recruitment experts are
given recruitment assignments – because they
are experts in their area. Undeniably
true. However, it is also true that every recruitment expert
does not know the intricacies and the culture of the organisation that
requisition their services. In any
case, he is given very little
information about the organisation, its culture and work dynamics. Most enquiries are made by organisations through E-Mail and telephone and
the person speaking from the office side is a junior HR executive or the secretary of the HR Manager ;
can one really expect the “flavour of the organisation” to be conveyed
by such people?
If any question is asked
beyond the basic specifications (age, qualifications, designation, salary
etc.), the standard answer is they are looking for “good candidates”. How original,
and, indeed, how explanatory !
There is so much hullaballoo
today about the retention of managers.
How exactly should this be done ? While all and sundry argue, ad nauseum, at various public forums that retention is not
merely a function of the salary level, the
only issue that HR Managers address, discuss and plead for is “realistic salary
levels” in line with market realities.
What exactly is the expertise involved in attracting persons at a higher
salary than the current salary level, is
unfathomable.
Right from the time a person
joins an organisation he/she starts
judging it. How was he received ? Was he recognised or he did he have to
explain that he is a new person joining ?
Was his boss ready to receive him
or did he ask him to wait till his important morning meeting is finished ? Was his table kept ready for him with all
required standard paraphernalia? Did he
get any briefing from the HR Department regarding joining formalities ? Did the Accounts Department brief him
regarding salary/money matters? Was he
introduced to his immediate colleagues?
Was the circular issued prior to his joining about his coming? Was there any welcome note put up for him at
the entrance or in his department? Did
someone guide him as to where he will be served tea (or where he has to fetch
it from), where the washroom is, where can
he have lunch ?
Most readers will recognise
that a large number of the above steps
are not happening. The poor employee has to mostly fend for himself or, if he is lucky, a friendly colleague helps him out in this
matter.
Is there any induction
programme for him? We regularly ask
companies about their induction programme.
Everybody confirms that they have one.
When we ask how long is the
induction programme for, the answer
ranges from a casual “one” to a proud “three
days.” When we probe further as to what is done in the induction
programme, we discover that essentially it is nothing but an introduction
programme.
A newcomer is introduced to
various people/functions, where the introduction does not go beyond
mentioning the name and informing the
designation/department in which the new comer is to join. The manager to whom he is introduced
(particularly those that are senior to him), treat this activity as an
interruption in their work, rarely look
up from the desk while the introduction is being done, never ask the new comer to sit down for
having a chat and display their widest smile when he is about to leave the room
! How inspired and comfortable should a newcomer
feel at this ceremony !
In our consulting
assignments where we a drawing up the organisation’s “Personnel Policy Manual” whenever,
we have tried to introduce a detailed and sufficiently long induction
programme, we have faced tremendous
resistance, the argument being – we
cannot afford to “waste” so much time on
“induction” programmes – the employee must be put to work immediately.
Having thus dispensed with induction/introduction,
the new employee is put to work – the only difficulty is that he is rarely told
“what his work is.” “What is there to
tell ?” is the first reaction we get
from most HR Managers ; “if he is a
sales manager, he is supposed to sell,
if he is a production manage he is supposed to produce,” and so on.
In other words, designation becomes a substitute for Job
Responsibilities ! So for the first few
days, the new employee is totally lost
as to how he has to spend all eight hours.
Thereafter, as the tasks are assigned to him and he starts
carrying them out, he discovers that “the way of working” here is quite
different from that of his previous organisation. But nobody specifically guides him on “the
way of working here”; as a result he bumbles along, making some lucky guesses,
but mostly fouling up till he realises himself or somebody instructs him –
don't you know how this is done?
Gradually, this person settles down and learns the ropes, but clearly
since nobody has told him or guided him, he does not know every twist and turn
of the rope and naturally, therefore, many
times, gets entangled in it. Very soon he discovers that he has mastered
(reasonably well, the way of working
here). He is now comfortable and more
assured and finds that he is doing well what he is supposed to do since he is
experienced in this area, which is why he was selected for the first place and
further learns how to do these things as
per the new organisation’s style.
It is only after some time
that the realisation dawns on him that he is only doing more of the same – the same
that he was doing earlier. The
organisation could be least bothered because it only wanted him to do the same thing which was done by the
previous incumbent. So much for “talent” development !
In such circumstances, youngsters get impatient quickly and if they
do not find that they are learning something new, they immediately start
thinking of leaving and eventually do.
Older employees cannot leave so easily, primarily because of lack of economic mobility and family constraints and, hence, start
getting bored, frustrated and eventually
depressed. What exactly is the HR
Manager doing all this while ?
He does not do recruitment
because he has efficiently outsourced it.
He does not do management development because there is no need for
it. He does not do counselling or
grievance redressal because it is best not to ask people what are their
difficulties as they will make an
endless list. With these mundane matters
of attracting, retaining and developing people (o, sorry, talent) disposed, off the HR Manager is free to build his own
empire. He dangles carrots and also
threatens employees with the performance
redressal system and continuously interacts with professional colleagues in
other companies regarding salary levels and tax saving perquisites. Whenever he
is free from this, which really takes up
very little time, he continuously searches
for a new job for himself !. Is it any
surprise, therefore,
that the HR Manager is not exactly a popular person in his
organisation?
It is for HR Managers to
honestly and conscientiously reflect about what they are really doing to develop Human
Resources in their organisation and see that they discharge this responsibility
in their organisation by making a change of priority in the work “that they actually do” vis-à-vis “what they
are supposed to do.”
I would therefore urge the
HR Managers to carry out an honest introspection and address this issue, since it is
axiomatic that people (not talent) are the true assets of any organisation.
It is necessary that we consider them as such and act accordingly.
hemendra k.
varma
mumbai
Sep 9, 2013
