How Not To Be A Strategic HR

An HR’s job has always been under a magnifying glass of a microscope. People have always wondered why there is a need of such a department in any organization. The work that is done in routine can always be done by somebody as a part time apart from handling other meaningful tasks. And what has remained in position ever since is the HR sample on the slide and the microscope. All that have come and left are the looking through set of eyes of scrutinizers. Nothing conducive has said to evolve in the species of HR until now that is over the past decade. A new stream of science has intertwined and has been showing a prosperous seat by the business class window of the management aircraft. Suddenly there’s a buzz called Strategic HR and everybody wants to be in the hot seat. Or they don’t?

Aspirations are many yet inputs and the processing levels are varied. For how many HR’s would go beyond the routine administrative work? Understanding business is not an easy task and certainly not a day’s job. There are always people with super smart rationale on all matters and though HR folks are said to be the ones who start the ball rolling for a change, yet the 8 hours job of rolling appointment letters, transfer orders seem to be the most lucrative task in hand. There still exist 70% of individuals for whom an HR’s job is said to be something that has nothing to do with what others do! Some of the best reasons why these certain 70% classify under the category ‘How Not to Be a Strategic HR’ is:

1. They say it’s not my job to keep a tab on other departments proceedings. For all that they may do throughout is be given a vacancy count from respective departments and an incessant search for the most suitable profile. This recruitment life cycle never ceases and as demands raise so do the supply without the blink of an eye.
2. For these certain people recruitments are the only domain that they associate with their inclination towards HR, so it’s all about playing this game of collecting the data bank, screening, short listing, and handing them over for final interviews. And it stops there to begin with the data bank stage all over again. It’s immaterial whether there was a final fit between the employers and the employee. Which many times lead to immediate exiting due to unstructured policies.
3. Unconcern to understand the nature of the industry they work with. Many a time’s saturation in one industry makes an individual drift towards the opposite. Say from an IT industry to a Manufacturing, where the cultures are juxtaposed. So policies that worked out previously in an excellent way in the IT industry may not move pillars in the Manufacturing. Or the inability to fit oneself in the climate of the organization posing severe threats to the future of the organization, if one occupies a decision making position.
4. The same genre of people who know the in and out of Human Resource yet fail to interlink the Marketing decision to theirs and their resourcefulness to the Finance folks.
5. They land up in sticky situations by not knowing the main product or service of their organization but relentlessly ramble underneath the PMS cloud and 360 degree appraisals. So much so they start viewing training and development needs and the budget for the organization as different articles. As long as HR is able to carry out it’s functions it’s immaterial to them whether recruiting costs are tipping the iceberg or unnecessary expenditure on whitewashing department are overbearing to the projects in hand.
6. When these folks are unable to comprehend the operation flow and cycle of product so much so they cannot make out the differences between two stages of completely different processes and do not leave a moment to smirk and flaunt their ignorance. With the added attitude that says “I’m an HR, why should I bother whether department X comes in process before department Y or not. It is for them to see the quality management. My work ends in satisfying their manpower needs.”
7. When policies aren’t structured to the organizations needs and are air lifted from elsewhere. Or best when the organization is said to be under the Zoo culture, where everybody is monkeying around and there is too much interference from everywhere such that the HR department loses its essence and authority over things.
8. When aptitude is marked by the ignorance of the obvious and one believes on running on the single track to achievement, where targets mean monthly realization of supply and demand and fear of the unknown makes them explore less on the shady sides of the organizations fumbles.
9. When routine work seems to be the best task that involves growing people within the organization by implying on the fact that HR folks are contributing in making work easier and serving the employees at their best in their smallest of the needs.

The list can get endless but the crux of the theme is, do we consider HR as a never changing sample, or a slowly evolving one which may take another decade to grow out of its skin or a new species very much modified and innovated in a new package of intellectuals who not just own the reins of the industry but know how to dig the underground lines at the right depths.

Defining Right Consciousness

To be right conscious is an easy task, for no boundaries or lines are defined that would differentiate what could be a right conscious decision, action, thought or what could form the basis of being unethical at the workplace. To pick up one and place him under the white cloud of appreciation is difficult as much as it is to place one under the black cloud of reprimand. These issues arise because an individual seems to show streaks of all personalities and behaviour, so much so that they can be physically viewed simultaneously in minutes of separation.

One such conflicting behaviour is exhibited by many individuals who realise the problems of the organization from an eagle’s point of view. Not only are they sharp eyed, they can also critically examine all the dimensions leading to the growth and failure of the organization’s strategies and policies. If given a chance they have scores of opinions and suggestions to sound to a willing ear. They even have self made strategies in place which if given a direction may result to better outcomes. They are those individuals who are high performers in the jobs bestowed upon them and have earned quite a reputation for being blatant. And the top management likes them too.

However they sport a bad body language when it comes to interacting with new people, specially the one’s appointed in powerful positions. The new head honchos bring new policies that are framed within a matter of time, where a feedback is necessary to begin with. Here is the place where these high performers start behaving unexpectedly in a split second. They may give go ahead nods to the directives or plans, and tow in to the idea but frequently disregarding the hierarchy of the opponent and challenging the effects of the implementation do not go unnoticed. They even indulge in ganging up for soft mockery of ideas and brushing off new methodologies from the ones long established by numerous trial and error techniques. For once that can be counted as defensive mechanism to the already existing policies; however in the long run they show high levels of instability and insecurity. They may be once ruling the roost but a change brings about a reshuffle in the structure and the processes. So despite being a high performer the constant fear of being redundant aligns them towards a behaviour that is counted negative. Upon being questioned as to why they have ideas that do not reach day light, they believe in blaming the system for the inefficiency all over. And the dullness and lackadaisical environment that doesn’t provide opportunities for initiatives. Any new thought is welcomed by a ‘not possible’ or ‘cannot be done’ or ‘you’ll have to do it all by yourself’ attitude. These people on the other hand do not stop being ethical at their work, however end up being the cribbing geese of the coop, who believe in preaching every moment; yet shift no bones to develop a dying idea or improve a situation that has no direct dealing with them.

Are organizations to be blamed for such people being bred within themselves? Is the top management brass to be blamed for not being able to reach out to those at the lowest or middle level branches of the tree? Is change the root cause of all insecurity developing of getting redundant? Or is it human nature not to welcome great ideas from relatively new people who’ve just taken baby steps and not grown along with the organization? Or is it just about being vocally right conscious?

I Delegated Authorities, But Oh I'm Ignorant

Delegation of authority is said to be a growth path for all those subordinates whose shoulders bear the files and notes of work. For the person delegating his authority and responsibility on others, the process is a clear sign of not holding all important work to himself, and believing in his team and entrusting upon them important work and the power to make decisions.

However after so much of delegation of responsibilities there are certain times and moments of oh-ah when the person himself ends being ignorant of many of the processes that were passed down the line of hierarchy. He may have been the source at one point of time, but now that he has made his subordinate the SPOC of the entire process, little comes his way but a mere feedback once a fortnight or maybe never as long as the flow is there. Along come sticky situations at times, when the super-boss decides to query on matters or clients (employees for the HR) want some information, and the beholder of the post has no answers to the queries. He requires some moments to himself and some minutes from the subordinate to receive a briefing. All this while he was comfortable being ignorant, or had other pressing issues under his consideration.

However the responsibilities if delegated to such minutest of the levels, many a times cause more of a problem than just being helpful where follow-up is not considered as necessary as getting things just done. So it’s not just about getting efficient, reducing one’s work load and channelizing it to proper direction; it's about following it up and digging deeper in times of movement of information; than just wait for the river to take its course and when rains come lashing  down, a desperate look to find the basin.