Changing the DNA of HR people

How can they make a permanent impact in their semi-permanent roles?

The popular saying goes, “A rolling stone gathers no moss.” How true is it in today’s context?

Research indicates interesting facts about HR professional’s career span – less than 1.5 years at the junior level, less than three years at the middle level and up to 5 years at the senior level. Few organizations can boast of HR longevity. Is that a boon or a curse?

Someone might point out that when entire governments are run by short-term heads of states - clouds passing by - then why single our HR for short spans at a position?

A US president serves for 4 years. If lucky and elected again, it could be a maximum of 8 years. The story is the same in almost all parts of the world. Prime ministers hardly ever last for more than 5 years.

If such is the volatility in the larger space of governance, HR is a small player in a particular industry and should not be singled out for shorter life spans.

But there is an inherent paradox in case of HR people. On the one hand, they bat for the idea of retention, on the other hand they themselves have such short tenures.

It is therefore important that industries should reconcile to the rotating model and accept HR retention as a non-value add. They need to look at rotatable HR as a positive process for better value adds. Academic institutions training students for HR should focus on the art of making permanent impact in semi-permanent roles.

Another challenge for HR people is their ‘out’-standing contributions. Yes, their contribution is very high in the periphery - in public presentations and forums.

But when it comes to internal customers – be it line managers or business managers – HR people are seen as just gate-keepers.

They are considered a nuisance and their inclusion in business process is more for being politically correct rather than for any business value add. The general perception is that if they are not in the limelight, they become dangerous distracters.

The reason is that HR DNA is linked to power and powerlessness is unthinkable for the HR fraternity. Unless all that changes, there is no hope.

It is about time HR became ‘in’-standing rather than outstanding. HR professionals need to learn the art of

1. Co-creating.
2. Co-ownership.
3. Magnanimity.

HR needs to imbibe servant leadership, not as a spiritual journey but as a success tool for the right journey. The key ingredients of servant leadership are

 Be behind.
 Have ability to enable and empower.
 Let go.

These are high-end competencies which need strong nurturing. But then this nurturing will eventually change the nature (the very DNA of HR).

HR manager’s KRA should include tangibles in terms of the number of managers with multi-tasking, grass-root teams with multi-skilling and driving lean processes. Uptime on employee engagement should be the critical indicator in the HR score card.

When it comes to equipment, we talk of OEE (overall equipment effectiveness). When it comes to people, do we track their OPE (overall people effectiveness)? Can we bring in memorability to OPE?

In their semi-permanent roles, HR people need to become the custodian of “share and care”. Will they rise to the occasion?