Introspecting the HR Function - 2

Introspecting the HR  Function  -  2

n  What the HR Manager needs to do

A small clarification at the outset – when I say HR Manager in the sub-title, I am not referring to a person with that designation per se ; rather, the reference is to HR Functionaries whether described as HR Executive  right up to   Director /President – HR.

The previous article in this series, made a strong plea for not treating employees as a commodity, fashionably called “talent ;   rather they should be treated for what they truly are,  viz.,  individuals with each having his / her  own personality, idiosyncrasies and peculiarities - in other words,  individuality. Such individuality must be recognized, respected and all interventions must take into account this individual difference within an overall framework of Corporate HR Approach.

How is this to be done ?  Let us start from the very beginning.  Let HR managers work out a meaningful  “Induction Programme” for every new joinee or group of joinees (e.g. management / sales / engineer / diploma   trainees  etc.).  First and foremost, this induction programme must have an explicit “element of welcome”  conveying the organisation’s joy at having the new employee join them.  Can you just imagine with what enthusiasm the employee will go home and describe how he was treated on the first day ?  It can be a wonderful testimonial for the company. 

What happens in reality  today is quite the opposite :  the employee has to negotiate past the security guard and  the “couldn’t care less” receptionist to reach his boss, only to find that he is in a meeting. He doesn’t know where he should sit or wait since so one else in the department knows that he is joining today and thus guide him. Having somehow managed to pass the time till his boss arrives,  he has to again introduce himself to the boss who barely gives him a cursory hearing,  pushing him on to someone else (who is,  often,  junior to the person who is joining)  and asks that junior employee to explain  “about the work and the department”  to the new person !!  Thereafter,   a search begins for a table and chair which are always missing on the first day (!) after which the newcomer simply lounges here and there and somehow gets through the whole day,  eager to get back  home. 

Am I exaggerating ?  Of course, I am exaggerating, but  only exaggerating,  not imagining ;  a large part of what I have recounted keeps happening in many,  if not most organisations  (some of world class repute,  barring some notable exceptions which are few and far between).  I would delighted if some readers of this article can write to me letting me know the experience of their first day in their last two jobs  -- good or bad.  We can learn from both types of examples.

 

The welcome should also include a Welcome Board at the entrance and an  “Announcement Notice or e-mail” about the new person’s joining to all in the organisation but especially to all his department colleagues as well as HR, Admin, Accounts and Security Department. 

This should be  followed by  a quick, friendly  and efficient conclusion of joining formalities particularly related to HR / Admin & Accounts.  The way to ensure this is by  a) making sure that  all concerned Departments know in advance that a person is joining on that day,  (see Para on welcome announcement above)   b) keep the necessary set of forms ready  (one innovative and new way to ensure so  is to send such forms in advance to the new Joinee and request him/her to bring it duly filled for submission, leaving blank the sections that are not clear to him),  and  c) have him accompanied by a person from HR (or his own department) through each Department so that he is not at a  loss as to whom he has to approach, where he has to submit the form and where should he go next.

A small practice that we follow in our office,  I would like to recommend next. Ours is a small consultancy company with employee strength varying  between 5 to 8, at any given time. Whenever a  new person joins, he/she is taken out for lunch, on the first day,  by an existing employee,  at the company’s expense,  as we do not have any canteen.  This gives him  a tremendous sense of camaraderie,  helps him make friends with his lunch partner and relieves him of lunch worries on the first day when,  inevitably people don’t bring a lunch box from home.  In bigger organisations where staff canteens exist,  the new joinee should be accompanied by a pre-designated person so that the newcomer understands the lunch protocol (e.g. can he take a 2^nd helping, does he have to clear his tray from the table, where can he sit, where should he wash hands  etc.) ;  further,  having a known person next to him when he comes into a  room full of unknown faces is of great comfort on his very first day and makes the experience less daunting.

The next major responsibility for a good and effective HR manager is to connect with all employees.  How is this to be done ?  Not difficult,  but certainly requires effort and perseverance.  As a start,  he must spend a certain proportion of his time, every day,  to move around the premises meeting people in various departments, functions and locations merely to say “Hi ! How are you ? Anything we can do for you ? Need any help ?”  Just try to visualize the tremendous morale booster this will be for the average employee when an HR functionary personally comes  to his/her workplace and enquires after his /her welfare ?  Sadly,   very few (certainly less than 1 % in India)  HR. managers do this because of their false and unfortunate sense of importance that they are “Chamber Kings”  and it is the troubled employee who must come to them and not vice versa.  Also they derive a vicarious pleasure in keeping such employees (who come to meet them) waiting outside their room to demonstrate how busy they are and how they cannot be troubled by petty issues.   This is a grave mistake.  First of all, keeping someone waiting does not demonstrate your importance;  it merely exposes your rude and crude behavior.  Secondly,  your going up to the employee instead of wanting him to come to you does not lessen your importance ; rather it increases your approachability and visibility and gives you an inkling of brewing problems much faster and firsthand than otherwise.

To sum up, HR managers must leave their rooms and go where the action is –   be it the factory shop floor,  various departments /sections in the HO building,  Branches, Warehouses,  business workplaces, and such like.   How much time should be spent on such visits  ? Very difficult to give some exact number but roughly speaking our thumb rule is at least 1/3rd  of your time over a week must be at the employees’ workplace,  not your room or desk.

A natural question here might be,  if I spend so much time outside my department/desk,  how will I do my work ?   Good question,  because it leads to the more important question  -  what is your work after all ?  Is it your job to sit in your room to await the MD or your Boss’s call or is it your responsibility to see that your employees are happy and,  if they do have a problem,  you should find out about it at the earliest and solve it at the first instance before it grows and boils over into  a complaint or escalates into a major grievance ?  Think about this question and you will know why it is important for you to move out of your comfort zone into the scene of action.

The 3^rd major area of responsibility for the HR Manager is to  “sense what people are feeling”  even before it is explicitly expressed,  especially in the following cases :

a)    Possible reaction to certain policy changes under contemplation (new incentive scheme, working condition changes,  large number of impending transfers, closing down of some section or unit  etc.)

b)    Effect on Morale when some business downturn has been forecast or has been seen for sometime

c)    Persisting power cuts or RM procurement difficulties owing to problems at suppliers’  end

d)    Political  and /or environmental issues/ concerns of local populace which is likely to affect operations and may even lead to partial closure

e)    Brewing confrontation between management and union affecting work and work atmosphere

f)     Change in top management or even ownership that leads to speculation about “what next and what is going to happen ?”

How can this be done,  this sensing in advance  “the mood and thinking of the employees ?”  First and foremost,  the moving around and regular meeting with employees at their workplace will give you a credibility that will allow people to confide in you or even approach you with questions.  Indeed,  their very questions can be pointers to their thinking.

Secondly,  your willingness to listen and your ability to pick up non-verbal cues (facial expression, tone and tenor of their questions,  their smiles or the absence of it)  will give you a good idea of  “which way the wind is blowing”

Having sensed what is the likely mood and thinking on any given issue or day,  the next task of the HR Manager is to be pro-active and take advance corrective action so that the employees'  “worries”  are properly addressed and in good time.  This essentially involves continuous,  clear and credible communication,  be it through notices or letters,  small group discussions, formal meetings or informal chats with   key opinion makers in each group and location.

Such credibility in communication only comes if employees trust you and they will only trust you if  

a) they know you (which they will not,  if you keep yourself confined to your room and desk)   and

b) you have a good past record of being trustworthy. 

This can only happen if you have moved frequently and regularly amongst them,  have made genuine efforts to understand their problems and made sincere efforts to solve them  --  bringing us back to the initial recommendation of HR managers leaving their rooms/desks to spend at least 1/3^rd of their time with the employees at the latter’s  workplace.

The fourth area I would like to emphasize is  “workplace safety”.  Tragically,  this is not seen or acknowledged as an HR responsibility – in India it  has more of an Admin  or,  at best,  an IR connotation,  a rather mundane and “day-to-day”  matter with which the more esoteric tribe of  MBA – trained  HR managers cannot dirty their hands.    This is a great pity because nothing could be farther from the truth.  If you cannot assure  “workplace safety”,  no amount of glass and granite and air-conditioning is going to create  “good ambience and pleasant working conditions”.   So what exactly am I referring to ?  Are there slippery Floors ?  Is the Exit passage always kept free so that in case of Fire or any other crises people can exit quickly (the recent cases of stampede at temples and public places will immediately tell you why this is important) ?  Is the earthing proper on all electrical equipment ?  Are there any bare,  un-terminated “electrical wires”  hanging around,  to cause “electrical short-circuits”  and the resultant fire (a common occurrence in corporate India)  ?  Are any hazardous materials being stored on the premises and, if so,  what precautions have been taken to ensure protection to people working there ?  Are there any inflammable materials like LPG Cylinders, Petrol / Kerosene items  etc. being stored in non – permissible places (recall the ghastly AMRI Hospital Fire in October 2011 in Kolkata) ?  Is the path to Fire Fighting equipment and electrical switchboards free and without any encumbrance so that these items can be accessed instantly when required ?  There are many more such small things to be attended to and in the view of this writer, squarely the responsibility of the HR manager that things are absolutely OK on this front,  even though it may also be someone else’s job/task to do the actual checking and correction.   Once again,  the  way  such “workplace safety”  can be ensured is to have regular and frequent  “audit walks” around the premises (which means not merely the HO Building where most HR managers sit but also the factories, branches and warehouses).

Next,  the HR manager must tackle an area that he is routinely accused of  being ignorant  of :  viz.  How the company’s business runs.  Every HR workshop and seminar these days  espouses the need for  HR to integrate itself into the business of the company.  Unfortunately,  none of them give any practical or workable recommendation as to how exactly this is to be done.  Let me venture to do so.

First and foremost,  the HR manager must make an honest effort to learn – he must go to the Accounts  Department and request the MIS head  or the VP Finance to explain to him what each of the Monthly statements means. Many of them are  self-evident but some contain terminologies or “ratios”  that the HR manager may not understand on his own.  Similarly,  he must go to the Marketing Head and request for a briefing on the nature of the “Product – Market”  Matrix,  the profile of the company’s customers,  the identity, size and nature of competition,  the company’s USP as well as its weak areas.  In the same spirit,  he must visit the factories for an understanding of the production process,  what are the major bottlenecks,  what are the company’s technological advantages or shortcomings,  what are the employee issues,  how is the absenteeism and safety record and suchlike ? 

This is easier said than done because when an HR manager embarks on this journey,  he is,  in effect,  publicly stating that he “doesn’t understand”  these things.  In an organizational context,  this requires a great deal of courage and this the  HR manager must muster.  At the same time, an honest declaration of ignorance (of knowledge) is not any commentary on the person’s intelligence and, in fact,  he will earn the respect of colleagues for his desire to learn and “understand the business”.  So, my unhesitant recommendation to HR managers is :  if you do not understand any part of your company’s business,  admit so and unashamedly ask to be educated on  what they are.  You will not only gain knowledge but also respect and, flowing from that,  a great degree of self-confidence that will always stand you in good stead.

The major gain from such an effort will not merely be “improved understanding of the business”  but even more important,  a much better and sharper understanding of how HR can contribute to improve the functioning through  HR interventions  be it by way of more focused training,  better discipline enforcement,  faster recruitment,  temporary contractual hiring etc.

 

To sum up,  the following are the broad areas that the HR manager must embark upon as part of his action plan to become more effective :

1.    Design and implement a structured and well – thought out induction  programme for new employees that is not merely an “introduction programme”  but a series of steps that help ease the new employee into the organisation in a way that makes him confortable and free from the  “rough edges”  of adjustment in a new work environment.

2.    Spend a certain minimum time  “outside”  his room/department,  personally meeting employees at all levels and locations -  HO, factory, branch or warehouse to establish a connect with them, get authentic and firsthand feedback of how employees are feeling or what is agitating  them

3.    Take pro-active action on issues that are top of the mind for employees and particularly make sure that issues that are agitating them or worrying them are properly addressed by continuous and well-designed communication in various forms – written, oral,  small group discussions, or town hall meetings

4.    Take personal charge of workplace safety and   review the same regularly. Take help of experts where necessary but ensure personally that the required audits are taking place,  the corrections or deficiencies pointed out have, indeed,  been addressed.  The test of course,  is the number of accident-free man-hours you can log up.  The bigger the number, the better.  Once again,  this is not merely an exercise for HO or the HR manager’s location but it is applicable throughout the organisation.

5.    Finally,  take concrete steps to integrate yourself into the business by first understanding what it is all about.  This can only be done by an honest attempt to “learn”  from each  major activity, as to how they function and what they expect or want from HR.

As a professional,   try to be known for your approachability, not  by your exclusivity.  Try to enlarge your accountability,  not your empire,  Aim to increase your influence, not your power or authority.  This is what will help you graduate from a manager to a leader.

Mumbai

October  20,  2013 

Introspecting the HR Function - 1

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

Good is better than best !

When you search or aspire for the best,  you are never sure that you have got it – because it is likely that,  somewhere,  there is better,  since you cannot possibly have looked everywhere.  If you acquire or aspire for what is universally acknowledged as the best,  there is always a chance that it will get bettered in the next few days --- what will you do then ? Go after the new best ?  And when and how will this search end ?

When iPhone came out,  it was the best phone and there was a mad rush for it  till, very soon,  its makers declared it obsolete and said i2 was the best phone and there was again a mad rush for it to be followed in quicker succession by  i3, i4 and now i5 – so what happened to the seeker of the “best’ – every time they got the best, they were nervously waiting for the next best.

Look at Gillette. They started with one blade protected in a plastic sheath saying this is the best (i.e. safest) razor for the closest shave.  Soon they obsoleted the buyer saying the twin blade gives the real close “bestest” shave. Then, they  went on to 3, then 4 and now 5 blades for doing what earlier they themselves claimed their single blade could do.

And how does the 5-blade shave prove is it is the best of the best ?  Have you ever been accosted by anyone who says, wow you have had a 5-blade shave, it shows. Or the reverse  -  oh man ! you have just had 3-blade shave  & it shows !

This is true,  ad nauseum,  for anything that you buy as the best   Unfortunately,  this obsession for the best  is affecting our personal lives too.  People are searching for the best marriage partner – so they want good looks,  nay the best looks, the best figure,  the best brains, the best dress sense,  the best voice,  the best bank account, the best conversationalist  and not finding all these best qualities in one, renew their search with doubled vigour for the elusive best.

Similarly there is the search for the best clothes, the best tailor, the best hair stylist, the best cook, the best house, the best linen, the best sofa set, the best paint, the best cutlery and so on for everything that forms a part of our life.

However,  when you look for the good there is no such confusion – because when you say I am happy with what is “good”  what you are saying is that you are happy with what is “good enough”.  This “good enough” is defined by you and is therefore  entirely in your control and up to you.

When a housewife goes shopping for vegetables,  she doesn't search for the best vegetable – she looks for what is good enough.  She doesn't look for the best tomato but is satisfied with what will serve her purpose – e.g. even if she comes across slightly soft tomatoes , she will still buy it if she is going to use it for making soup or Pau Bhaji,  rather than keep looking for the best tomato – red, firm and large.

You know what is “good enough”  when you know what is your purpose – and this is the nub of the matter.  Those seeking and satisfied with “good”  know what their purpose is  -- those seeking the best,  do not.  Hence the best seekers remain forever “seekers”  in their lives but never arrive and that is why they are always a dissatisfied lot – because they are never sure that what they have is the best and are always scared that there is a “bester” out there which they do not have.

The  "good"  seeker simply says -- this is good enough for me and that is the end of the matter.

Saying  "this is good enough"  requires courage,  for it involves making a commitment,  and making a decision which most of today’s  younger generation are incapable of,  having been fed on the fiction of best, which always allows them to postpone making a commitment or making a decision and allows them to,  perennially, pretend that they have such high standards that ordinary things and  ordinary mortals cannot match it."

Does this mean that I am suggesting that one  should not strive for the best ?  Does this mean that I am suggesting that one should remain satisfied with whatever is one’s present condition and not try to improve ?  No, absolutely not. 

My thesis is,  strive for the best, but do not pine for the best.  Always look to make your performance the best possible ;  however do not get engrossed in trying to “acquire” the best available.  

Improving your performance, challenging your own standards to climb higher, run faster, last longer is a journey towards excellence and must always be pursued,  as this is the path to improvement.  However,  getting entangled in always trying to  acquire  the “best possible”  or the “best available”  is a sure step towards dissatisfaction and misery,  since such “best” has no end and you are never sure that you have actually got the best.

The best is illusory and temporal ; the good is real and long - lasting.  The seekers of the best are always unsure and insecure and,  therefore,  more often than not, rather  an unhappy lot.  Those that are satisfied with good have no such doubts or insecurities and are, generally,  a more satisfied and happier lot.

The truth is -- there is no best,  for there is always better.  However,  there is always "good" because it is encapsuled in "good enough", which is a matter of decision.  If only we learnt to be happy with what is good,  there is always a chance of making it better and never be worried about the best.

Mumbai

August  22, 2013 

HR Professionals - are they ?

May  1, 2003


After a chase of almost 5 years (!), I was finally able to deliver an Introductory Talk on 5S for HR at the NIPM, Mumbai Chapter Premises at Prabhadevi, Mumbai  on April 30, 2013.

It was sometime in December 2008 that we had proposed to the then Hony Secretary, NIPM, Mumbai Chapter that I would like to deliver a talk to their members on 5S and how HR can use it as a powerful intervention tool for changing Organisational Culture and building teamwork within the organisation.

The idea was greeted warmly, but nothing happened. We followed up in January 2009 but there was simply no response to our e-mail reminder  My colleague, Mr. Subroto Mukherjee also made some telephonic reminders but it was to no avail.  We finally gave up -- naturally, status quo won.

Last year in November I attended an evening lecture at NIPM.  I came across Mr. Ulhas Deshpande who struck me as  an interested and devoted member, open to some new ideas and thoughts.  I broached the topic with him and finally my talk materialsed yesterday.

I simply fail to understand the  attitude of HR Professionals in refusing to show or have any interest in acquiring new knowledge or learning new ideas. How can they ever grow ?  In this case, though  5S   originated from the shop floor,  it is also a  powerful HR intervention tool which is what I had wanted to show them. It would help HR managers show a direct contribution to the bottom line and improvement in the working environment and earn plaudits for them from their organisation.  But they appeared to be least interested in any such new learning.  How can they call themselves professional, if they are just not interested in increasing or enriching their knowledge ?

And this is not the end of the story.  Ulhas wrote to me a few days before my talk that I should feel free to invite my friends and colleagues.  

Accordingly I wrote to some 110 HR Heads in various organisations.  Of these, about 20-25  were personally known to me while the rest were contacts / connections  on LinkedIn (the Web Platform for Professionals).  Not a single person turned up  !

Of the NIPM Members in Mumbai,  who were all invited by NIPM through their Mailer,   a grand total of 9 persons turned up, none of whom were HR functionaries (barring two young girls who were junior HR executives from a company where they had joined less than 2 years back). I was saved the  blushes because one of the NIPM Office Assistants also joined the audience,  making it a respectable double-digit attendance of 10 persons !!!

No office bearer of NIPM Mumbai turned up except for the The President  who  came 1 1/2 hours after starting time and just 15 minutes before the whole session ended.

I felt very unhappy, not only because my whole preparation and effort could only reach this sparse audience,  but much more because it reflected the sad and ugly truth of HR managers being the least interested in updating their knowledge with anything new.  

How can they make any contribution to their organisations if they have such closed minds,  or worse still,   such a supercilious attitude that "they already know everything"  and therefore there is nothing new to learn.

And guess who really appreciated and applauded my talk ?  Of course, there was the customary applause and Vote of Thanks ; however,  it was when I was leaving the premises that one person rushed to me, stopped me and said "Sir,  I really liked your talk ; I am a very small person, I work here at the NIPM Office (yes, it was the NIPM Office Assistant) and my head is spinning as your talk made me realise in what a shabby condition our office is and how badly organised we are at the workplace.  I promise you,  the next time you come,  you will find a much better workplace."

This man, Gopal,  made my day and restored my faith that, perhaps,  all is not yet lost.

  

Journey towards Organisational Excellence

Excellence means what ? The book that made the word “excellence” famous (if at all it required fame ?!) was Waterman and Peters’ book of the mid – 1980s “In Search of Excellence” That would be a good starting point as any to understand the meaning of Excellence.

According to the Authors, their qualifier for “excellence;’ was the following : “…. We reasoned that no matter what prestige these companies had in the eyes of the rest of the business world, the companies were not truly excellent unless their financial performance supported their halo of esteem (emphasis mine). Consequently, we chose and imposed six measures of long-term superiority. The six are : (1) Compound asset growth from 1961 to 1980, (2) Compound equity growth from 1961 to 1980, (3) Average ratio of market value to book as on Dec 31, 1961 to 1980, (4) Average return on total capital from 1960 to 1980 (5) Average return on equity from 1960 to 1980 and (6) Average return on sales from 1960 to 1980

Let us also look at a more recent book “Good to Great” by Jim Collins published in 2001. Here too, as part of identifying the “great companies” Collins applied the following criteria : “We launched a six-month “death march of financial analysis (emphasis mine),” looking for companies that showed the following basic pattern : fifteen-year cumulative stock returns at or below the general stock market, punctuated by a transition point, then cumulative returns at least three times the market over the next fifteen years.

As you can see, the focus is primarily financial or “result – oriented”. What is wrong with being result – oriented, one may well ask. After all this is not a charitable organisation ? (It is a separate matter of course that every business and industrial establishment begs for charity from the government, be it in land rates, tax and duty exemptions, tax rate reduction, non-application of prescribed penalties for non-fulfillment of statutory obligations, write-offs on unpaid loans and dues (now given a respectable cloak and called innovative financial re-structuring !!).

The objection is not to being result – oriented. The greater question, in my view, is “what do you call results ?” Is the financial result of the organisation the only result to be reckoned, measured and evaluated ?

Suppose, as a result of the company’s operations, the sub-soil water gets contaminated as was alleged to have happened with Coca Cola in Kerala, is this a result not to be considered in evaluating the organisation’s performance and/or its excellence ?

Suppose as a result of the organisation’s employment policy, many children take to work, as has happened in so many of our quarries and garment manufacturing units, which is a violation of the child labour act, is that not a result to be considered ?

Suppose as result of the business usurping, at throw-away prices, huge tracts of land to build SEZs, a large part of the indigenous population has lost its traditional and life-long means of livelihood, is it not a result to be considered ?

Suppose the installation of an industrial unit caused tremendous air and water pollution as has been caused by tanneries, breweries, cement and power generating units, is it not a result to be considered ?

The point being made is that unless we clarify and determine what is the parameter for judging excellence, we may well label something excellent on a narrow yardstick but which is criminal on another wider framework.

A classic example is Enron which won accolades for its financial performance as typified by its share prices and ROI but, subsequently, almost the entire management was labelled and eventually determined to be guilty of criminal infractions. There are many such examples in our country but I am afraid to name them for being the small person I am. May I submit, therefore that the “confinement” of excellence to figures and numbers is the first step towards its abandonment.

Organisations today are only focusing on their body - viz., financial health ; as a result, they have lost their soul ; it is the latter that I wish to focus on as an important objective in the journey towards organisational excellence.

Looking after your body can only bring about sustenance ; it is only the nurturing of the soul that can bring about excellence.

Some will argue that without financial health one cannot do anything else ; hence “financial health” or, very simply, profits or ROI can and must be the first, if not the sole objective of any organisation.

I hold that there is some confusion here as to which comes first. Proponents of the above view treat financial health as an a priori requirement for any organisation to survive and grow - I beg to differ because, in my view, financial health is not a “causal factor” but rather a resultant factor or an effect of the “other things that you do”. As somebody put it very succinctly, “The objective of business is not profits ; the objective of business is customer satisfaction, profit is a result.”

So if we are talking of the soul of the organisation, how does the soul of an organisation manifest itself ? According to me, it is reflected in the following :


• Fairness
• Politeness
• Responsiveness
• Respect for Laws
• Care for the Environment
• Contribution to Society



Fairness

What does fairness mean and fairness about what and to whom ?

I understand fairness as

• doing what you are supposed to do,
• not doing what you are not supposed to and
• making full disclosures about both so that the other side can take an informed decision about going along with you or not.




I will discuss this in respect of three major partners or associates of any organisational unit viz., employees, vendors/suppliers and customers.

Let us take the case of employees first. They are the most exploited lot today, particularly the managerial or the non-unionized category.

Employees are routinely made to work 12 to 16 hours a day, days on end ? Is this fair ? When a person is selected, it is for an “unstated” but legally and traditionally understood engagement of 8 hours of working (this is what was supposed to be contribution of enlightened management that hours of work should be shortened and regulated). How can the organisation then make him work longer than 8 hours every day or almost every day ? Once in a while a crunch situation demands working long or odd hours ; nobody can or does object to that ? But making it a regular routine - can that be called fair ? Not only he/she is not paid for that extra work, organisations do not even have the courtesy or the heart to offer tea/coffee or dinner for these long hours ; as a result the employees eat very late, or do not eat at all, resulting in complete breakdown of their digestive system and health. Is this fair ? The banking, finance, advertising, entertainment and, in a number of cases, even the manufacturing industries are the biggest culprits in such “unfair practices”

When I posed these questions to some such employers, their response has been --- we pay them well, in fact we overpay them so there is no reason for them to crib if they have to work extra hours ? The question is certainly not how much they are paid -- the “fairness” question is were they told that they are being paid more because they are expected to work ‘unreasonably” long hours ?


*



Next, what is this style of working resulting into ? Distraught and overworked employees with their work-life balance totally skewed, their health shattered (acidity is rampant), a disconnect with family members who rarely see him/her during waking hours. Is this the hallmark of an excellent organisation which may be showing excellent working results because of this blatant exploitation of its employees ?

Making false promises to employees at the time of selection and recruitment is another common practice amongst ‘aggressive and dynamic” companies. This was brought home to me years ago when we were doing an organisation climate survey for a company. One of the employees had written in his response sheet that he didn’t trust the company. When I quizzed him during the personal discussion he explained that at the time of the interview, after the salary matter was discussed and agreed, he enquire about other facilities and benefits. He was told they are all standard as in other companies.

“On joining,” he said, “I found that this company had a six day week whereas I was coming from a 5 day working week organisation ; if I had known this I would either not have joined or asked for a proportionately higher salary. I also learnt that PF paid here was at 8. 33 % whereas I was getting at 10 %. This also they did not disclose to me. The super-annuation here is payable only if you complete 5 years of service whereas there was no such restrictive rule in my previous organization.”

His main grouse was not they had different or more stringent rules ; his point was why did they not tell him clearly and completely so that he could have taken a decision yes or no, taking all these factors into account.



Let us now turn to Vendors/suppliers.

This area hardly needs much elaboration as most readers will be familiar with how their company exploits and squeezes this class of business associates, common amongst which is delaying payments (to show improved cash flow or manage your own cash crunches), squeezing for un-remunerative prices to show your own purchasing efficiency, making the vendor make ten visits and go-around various departments to get a payment that is legitimately due to him, making arbitrary deductions on his bill just because you have the size and power to do so. The organization must ask itself the question, is it fair ?

Let us now turn to the holy of the holies, the customer in whose name all swearing is done, all visions envisioned and all missions undertaken !

Cheat the customer through the fine print is an old and well-honed technique mastered by various companies paying fat fees to lawyers to protect them on this front.

Suspend service to the customer for minor or alleged infractions so that he comes running back to you for restoration of service at which time you can extract your pound of flesh e.g. mobile phone companies, TV cable connection, electricity companies, equipment manufacturing companies for spares or service etc.

Cheat by doing creative billing. I have a mobile internet connection. Whenever they send a bill which has paise in the amount, they round it off – perfectly understandable. What is not understandable nor acceptable is that they round it off to the next higher rupee,; so whether the bill is for Rs. 810.37 or Rs. 810.76 paise, both are rounded off to Rs. 812/- ? Is this fair ? Is this right ? Is this legal ?

Any child who has done elementary mathematics knows that rounding off is done to the nearest Rupee and not the next higher rupee. Now, where the customer base runs into lakhs, such “unfair” rounding off means wrongful extortion of huge sums of monies from the customer ? Is this what you call a customer – focussed organisation ? The same technique is used by telecom companies and credit card companies in the “extra charges” they levy.

And if the above examples smack of unfairness then can an organization that indulges in them be called “excellent” even if it meets the “excellence” standards of the financial analysts ?



Politeness

What does politeness in an “organisational context” mean ? Exactly what it means in any other context. The major elements to keep in mind are welcome, greeting, courtesy and care.

Do you welcome them ? Do you greet your visitors ? The test of organisational excellence or maturity (if I may call it that) in this context is evident from the way the Security watchman or the receptionist treats you when you enter the office or the way the telephone operator talks to you when you call up the company.

Unfortunately, these are simply not factors that occupy the minds of the “dynamic, MBA mangers” who staff all companies and work 16 hours a day to change and conquer the world. None of them, may I repeat, not one of them, consider it necessary or even relevant to train their watchmen of receptionist or telephone operators on the elementary aspects of greeting and welcoming a visitor or a caller.

The result is every visitor is a victim of the company’s first line staff’s mood of the day !!

The managers of the company never know anything about it because the staff dare not treat them casually and the victimized visitor more often than not never complains about it. But an organisation that is striving to be excellent must necessarily be pro-active on this front and take its own initiative to train its people, to test how they actually behave with “outsiders” and counsel them wherever and whenever necessary.

What about courtesy ? An absolutely non-existent feature of any conventionally denoted “excellent” organisation. Such organisations are proud of their excellent performance, so there is no need to be a courteous, they feel. Indeed “arrogance” is what suits their personality better and they display it with a vengeance.

Call up any manager in such a company ; it will take you several attempts and many days to be able to speak to him, if you are lucky. Else, you will have to settle for getting an appointment only through his secretary or assistant. Once you arrive on the appointed day for the meeting, you are kept waiting, without any explanation, or told after a long interval that it is no longer possible to meet today because “the concerned manager” is going off to another meeting or as it also happens, you are told on arrival that the concerned manager is out of station !

If a person can’t keep his appointment, he probably cannot keep his word. Surely such a person, or an organisation where such people work, cannot claim the crown of “excellence”



Responsiveness

What does responsiveness mean ? It means Acknowledging, Listening, Replying, Resolving. It means acknowledging the presence of the “other person”, listening to what he/she has to say or show, replying to his/her queries doubts and most importantly resolving – to his satisfaction -- the problem that he has come to you with.

Most organizations fail the test in the first stage itself. Telephone any organisation -- they simply do not acknowledge your presence on the line. Almost 60 to 70 % have a machine answering you, guiding you through complicated buttons on your instrument, exhorting you to stay on the line because you are important to them but doing nothing to connect you to the person you wish to speak to.

Those that do employ human beings to answer your telephone calls behave in the most inhuman manner -- they will transfer you to an instrument that keeps on ringing ; when you are brought back to the operator and you mention that nobody is picking up the telephone they inform you with great perspicacity and insight that it means that the person is not on his seat and before you can say Hey presto, they will disconnect. You try again and repeat your problem and ask the person to locate the person you are looking for, they refuse to do so or put you on hold till you lose your patience and disconnect.

In the course of our work, we deal a lot with the HR function ; almost none -- of course there are some honourable exceptions -- of such worthies can be ever accused of replying to a letter, e-mail or telephone call that we make !! HR people never return a call, they never answer an e-mail. Which dimension of excellence does this behaviour demonstrate ?

Finally, we come to the issue of resolving the problem that the customer has brought to you. Whether it is the salesman in a retail shop or the Manager in a Hotel or an official in the Purchase or QC or Accounts Department, they are least bothered or concerned about satisfactorily resolving your problem. All that they will stubbornly quote is company policy that does not allow them to do what you are asking for, or simply express their inability to help you ; some are even more helpful -- they simply walk away or put down the telephone.



Respect for Laws


Laws are made by governments to codify “sanctioned behaviour” identify “unacceptable behaviour” and clarify the “grey areas”. They are made by our elected representatives and therefore need to be scrupulously respected, and adhered to. Every dynamic manager’s constant refrain is that but for these laws, and the restrictions they place on us, we would be doing so much better. What kind of thinking is this ?

Are you above the law or outside it ?

No, what I mean is, laws are good but they should not apply to me – I am so dynamic and after all I am not doing this for myself, I am doing this for my company so that it can become excellent by breaking the laws !

If you want to be termed excellent you must show your prowess in the “given circumstances” that apply to all players and not attempt to win by tilting the table. That is not excellence, it is pure and simple cheating.

Organisations that want to achieve excellence must have it as part of their explicitly declared mandate and equally scrupulously observed behavior that they will follow the law of the land or attempt to change it if they feel it is a millstone, but they must never circumvent it or try to violate it with the help of “excellent” lawyers gifted with devilish articulation.



Care for Environment

With the scientists warning us every day about the impending environmental crises be it the melting of Himalayan glaciers or the rise in sea level or the looming ware shortage leading eventually food shortage or the carbon dioxide emissions, it will be a tragedy if it has to be argued and proved that organisations owe it to the entire community as well as to themselves to “take care of the environment” ; unfortunately intransigent and powerful companies like soft drink manufacturers, various petroleum companies, breweries, tanneries, chemical plants etc just do not accept their responsibilities in this regard and once again make the time-worn clichéd arguments about how “their profits will be affected” if they were to adhere to all the laws regulating pollution and environmental hazards !

Organisations that aim for excellence must necessarily acknowledge their duty to preserve, protect and improve the environment in the areas of their operation. This means, essentially,

•controlling all “eco-damaging” discharge emanating from their production process, and adhering to all laws laid down in this regard

•avoiding excess or overdrawing of natural resources, particularly water,

•stopping manufacture of all petrol/diesel guzzling vehicles (even if it means stopping the offering of large and fashionable cars, just because somebody is willing to pay for it)

•Reducing noise in their operations,

•Removing debris and cleaning up the neighboring areas whenever they complete their construction/building work

•Ensuring that their is no choking or drains, nullahs and rivers because of their dumping garbage/rubbish etc. in the same



Contribution to Society


It is not the business of business to “contribute to society” or do any social work ; these are the duties of the government. We are in business to make profits ; what is wrong with that ?

This is what is wrong with this unabashed assertion of “profit being the only sensible, valid and acceptable” objective of any business. Let us start from the basics. How, and why, does any business start ? It starts with the identification of a need in the society/geographical area the business intends to serve. Thereupon a search ensues for a suitable location, keeping in mind RM proximity and Customer (market) proximity or access.

Thereafter people are sourced to “run the business” be it at the level of operatives or senior managers --- thus the entire business owes its genesis and existence to the society -- be it in terms of land, raw material, employees or customers. To then argue that we have no duty to society or the welfare of well-being of the society in which we are located, our only motive and “rational objective” is and can be to plunder society so tat the company makes profits is puerile, to say the least.

The issue is -- is an organisation bigger than the society which nurtures it (through RM supplies, people supply, commercial facilities and finally consumption of its products and services) ?

To argue that “company interest” comes above society interest is not only incorrect and laughable but also, to put it mildly, plain stupid.

Contributing to society, (beyond the employment you generate and the taxes you pay) should be seen as a Duty, and not the first “quid” of any quid – pro – quid arrangement with the government and authorities.

Hence, clearly one dimension of organisational excellence is, or should be, according to this author, the organisation’s planned and conscious contribution to society in which it is located, as well as those physical areas and communities from which it draws sustenance, by way of raw material supplies, workforce, vendors/suppliers and customers.

What can be this contribution ? It could be in various areas like, maintenance of and improvement in the environmental climate -- cleaner roads and drains, observation of pollution related laws and restrictions, school facilities for the community, parks and recreation grounds, support to community activities (sports, drama, music, health-care).

Wherever the local government or municipality is unable to (for any reason whatsoever) take care of the infrastructure, organisations in those areas must come together to do so -- particularly for things like, drainage cleaning or repair (to avoid flooding or spread of water-borne diseases and contaminated water flow), widening of roads (for which they should readily draw-back their boundary walls, instead of employing highly-paid lawyers to assert why their land cannot be taken up for road widening !).

In fact, one simple way, we propose, of doing this is for organisations to draw a circle of 100m radius around their location and then strive to make that circle “the best” on all infrastructure parameters like roads, drains, trees, gardens, parks, maintenance of public monuments & tourist interest areas, provision of public Amenities etc.

If this is widely adopted then there will be a visible upliftment of local area’s standards which benefit will rub off on the industries themselves by way of faster vehicular movement, less accidents, a more sophisticated workforce as also appreciation in value of the land and buildings in that area.

I know that many readers who have come up this point of this article will be still arguing – this is not our job, this is the government’s. Let us concede for a moment that your above formulation is correct. So what ? The government which is supposed to do all that is not doing it or is unable to do it. Mostly governments plead lack of funds for doing so. How do you think the government is going to solve this problem ? Simple, by way of levying taxes to collect funds to be able to do the above. These taxes will then be a permanent liability for you.

Is it not better that you do some (certainly not all) of these things yourself, using the obviously talented people you employ, who can do these tasks far more efficiently and cheaply and thus pre-empt the government’s tendency to increase taxes ?

However, there is a rider to all this ? What is the rider ? The important and non-negotiable rider is that you should do it without claiming any banner or acknowledgement hoarding ?

How will people know we have done it and why shouldn’t we get mileage for the community work we do ? The answer is simple. Once banners and hoardings declaring who has done what are permitted, not only will they make the entire project ugly, it will set off competing claims amongst organisations for size of acknowledgement etc.

This may ultimately result in many organisations trying to even grab that physical area as their own (as has so wantonly happened in case of public parks and open spaces taken up by Private clubs for maintenance in Mumbai ) and then treated as their personal fiefdom, denying access to the very public for whose benefit they were allotted such public place to maintain.

What about the question of getting mileage for our work ? How will the community know how much sacrifice we have made for them ? Of course they will know. Proclaim it though your media Ads ; announce it in your AGMs. Send mailers to your customers and shareholders. But do not plant boards. In any case, when you do projects of the above nature, everybody knows who is doing it and you will get the benefits of community appreciation, if the job is well done.

To summarise, the Journey towards excellence must take a broader view of “excellence” than mere financial performance – be it profit % age, dividend rate or number of bonus share issues. The “ignored dimensions” that should form the hallmark of any excellence journey, are the following :

I would like to term this as the “Excellence Star”. It is my postulate that if the above “excellence dimensions” are consciously striven to be achieved, (financial) performance will axiomatically result ; however, the reverse is not necessarily true. You can be a profit-making company using “unfair means”, violating various laws, destroying the environment and contributing nothing to the society.

It is for the managers to decide which dimension or dimensions of excellence they wish to focus on and attempt to achieve. Today it is a choice – tomorrow there will be none and those that miss out on their responsibilities,  will not only go missing, they will not even be missed.



Mumbai
June 10, 2008