Line managers' key role in HR

HR-SPEAK

There are four common errors that organisations make when trying out a new HR programme.

We are a 1,500 employee multi-location company. A couple of years ago, we instituted a brand new performance management programme, complete with the performance scorecard design, competency frameworks etc. As this was a prestigious project, we took care to get the best in class and modern practices for ourselves.

Besides, our top management gave the project team visible support. However, two years down the line I am quite disappointed that the programme has not quite delivered. We see no visible signs of improvement in performance. There is cynicism all round. Are we judging the programme too early? Where do you think we went wrong?

This situation you has been experienced by many other companies as well. HR programmes deliver the desired results when they are completely adopted by the line managers and the workforce or there are no gaps in programme design, or sometimes both.

There are four common errors that organisations make when trying out a new HR programme:

The HR programme is over-engineered, and hence does not practically reflect business needs. Companies, in their effort to be rigorous, build in all possible functionalities irrespective of whether these enable a substantially better chance of seeing desired workforce behaviours and making significantly higher quality workforce decisions.

One company tracked 15 performance measures for each employee, in addition to the applicable 12 behavioural and technical competencies and a complex formula to determine the final performance rating.

The employee never knew what specific behaviour allowed her to earn the rating and the reward. You can imagine what behaviours will be institutionalised in this organisation.

The HR programme may not meet the 'last mile' application, that is, adapted to the organisation's conditions. While one company managed to identify the appropriate set of performance measures, it did not have the supporting technology to measure the same for some employees.

Hence, there was always a lag in which performance could be measured for a sizable number of employees, while for the rest it was not a problem. Concerns about fairness started pervading the environment, until the organisation quickly resolved the issue.

The new HR programme is not in harmony with the existing HR programmes. That is, the company rewards employees for the same set of behaviours that they train for, set expectations for and measure.

A related situation that is also common is when each programme is at varying levels of maturity- a robust performance management programme akin to an automobile on a 6 cylinder engine supported by the promotions and rewards that are distributed on the basis of the archaic seniority basis of an underpowered 800 cc engine vehicle. Experience shows that employees feel most frustrated in such situations.

For example, a manufacturing company migrated to a broad-branding programme where they crunched 14 grade s to four. While employees became part of the new compensation band, they continued to be rewarded and promoted as per existing policies. Due to lack of adequate promotion opportunities and lack of clarity on career paths, the company faced a surge in employee attrition.

The HR programme has not become a habit. In my experience companies pay more attention, dedicate more organisational resources and give more senior management time at the stage when the HR programme is being designed, less so when itis implemented and probably the least to make sure it becomes a way of life.

The last two stages (implementation and institutionalisation) require more involvement of the line management. In my experience, the best implementation and institutionalisation of an HR programme happens when the organisation has a line manager leading the exercise.

On an ongoing basis, the HR function needs to keep a close ear on the concerns of line managers and the general workforce as well as periodically measure the impact on workforce behaviour and culture.

This will help the HR function to be constantly be in touch with the emerging issues and thus giving it an opportunity to address issues in a timely manner.

The author is Associate Director, PricewaterhouseCoopers. This column will appear once in four weeks, and readers may address their queries to: powerzone@business-standard.com . The answers will appear in the next instalment.