The Wannabe Business Partner

Over the years the Human Resources Department has transitioned itself through any number of “latest thinking” management concepts and corresponding “buzz phrases” – from “matrix management” to “broadbanding” to “onboarding” and “headwinds" and whatever this week brings.  Each new approach started as the brainchild of management consultants seeking to encourage so-called creative thinking and the latest strategies to improve the human factor.

Lately though a persistent theme has settled in that HR should become a “Business Partner” of the organization, to enhance the value-added contribution of its programs and be taken seriously by senior management.

 So what exactly is an HR business partner?  Several criteria have been used as descriptors:

• Diagnose business needs

• Develop management’s capability to address HR issues

• Provide advice and a particular point of view

• A focus on driving the business forward

Do these describe your HR function?  Is HR considered a business partner?

Your Father’s Personnel Department

Today most would chuckle at memories of the “old” Personnel department, whose primary responsibilities were recruiting, record keeping, arranging blood drives and safety shoe programs and running the annual picnic / Christmas party.  The Head of Personnel was rarely considered a “player” at management meetings.  Some believed that the department was only a necessary evil.

Personnel was the department focused on the interests of the employees.  Its management was staffed by employee relations generalists, was sensitized by the needs of employees and left the running of the business to operations management.  Personnel dealt with people.

Today, companies expect less transactional administration and more strategic thinking.  Being labeled a “people person” is now considered a negative, a source of humor among recruiters.

Tell-tale signs that HR is a true business partner:

• Direct report to the President / CEO and listed as a member of the Senior Team

• Able to speak with credibility and respect at the management table

• Able to advance the value of HR to those holding negative biases

• Consulted by senior management on human factor issues

• Initiate major decision-making affecting employees

As a newly designated business partner-wannabe, Human Resources in many companies has transitioned away from the traditional role of representing the employees.  It has focused instead on utilizing the human capital to assist management in achieving objectives and driving business success.  However, the more successful HR has become as a business partner the greater the danger that employees will lose trust and confidence in HR, exactly because the focus has moved away from employees. 

As HR has developed a new stratagem, some might say a new identity, what part of itself has been lost while chasing to transform itself?

Danger Signs

Have a care that you don’t lose the heart and soul of HR – its caring connection about employees.  Don’t start looking at employees as merely numbers on a spreadsheet or boxes on an organization chart.  There are other departments who already do that very well.

Is the HR function served or harmed by leaders “counting the chairs” on their way up the hierarchy?  These are typically fast-trackers who are not HR-trained, but temporary visitors to the department for a “broadening” of their management experience.  Why is that acceptable for HR, but wouldn’t be tolerated in IT, Finance, Marketing, Engineering or Manufacturing?  Is the head of any other function something less than a seasoned expert in that profession? 

These other functions are already considered business partners.  Only HR faces remains the newbie, on probation at best, at worst one step away from getting the coffee.

Even while sitting at the Senior Management table negative biases from the old days often remain:

• Remember the blood drives and Christmas party? It’s hard to be taken seriously after so many years focusing on administration.  Does HR manage important issues today?

• If the head of HR has only been appointed to gain experience toward their ultimate loftier goal, how serious can we take a temporary worker who is only passing through?

• HR is still perceived of as the gatekeeper of corporate policies. Being an advocate of policy doesn’t win friends.

From the employee’s perspective it's important to consider HR as the advocate of fair and equitable treatment, compliance with employee-oriented regulations, and their representative among senior management.

What if senior management doesn’t feel that way?  What if they want HR to become a partner focused primarily on the bottom line - to the exclusion of the human factor?

Have a care that we get what we want – Business Partner – and then our employees choke on it as we lose our way.

 Chuck Csizmar CCP is founder and Principal of CMC Compensation Group, providing global compensation consulting services to a wide variety of industries and non-profit organizations.  He is also associated with several HR Consulting firms as a contributing consultant.  Chuck is a broad based subject matter expert with a specialty in international and expatriate compensation.  He lives in Central Florida (near The Mouse) and enjoys growing fruit and managing (?) a clowder of cats.

Creative Commons image,"Friends," by S Baker

Comments

[E. James (Jim) Brennan]

Excellent retrospective observations, Chuck. You bring back many memories, such as the aberrational supreme status Labor Relations still holds when relevant and the historical kerfuffle over transitioning the category title of "Personnel" into "Human Resources." Also stimulate many thoughts about the explosive mines floating under the placid surface of our profession.

[Trevor]

Hi Chuck, I don't think the two perspective are mutually exclusive. We have to be able to talk in business terms and frame recommendations in terms they understand. If they want HR to become a partner focused primarily on the bottom line then you have to reframe the discussion. "You can pay less than the going rate and save $x but that will cost you $xx in higher turnover, training costs and lower performing hires." If you can't explain how doing right by the employees benefits the business then you may not be looking deep enough or it may not be the right direction.

I think the days of being the employee advocate without being able to present a business case to back it up are over.