In our research it is HR people whom offer up some of the most critical and negative feedback about the function. Many of the HR people I know well, are tired of being asked the same question, usually by HR and about HR.

The business landscape has changed. Downsizing, globalization, and social media, along with a multi-generational workforce, are requiring organizations to approach work in new ways. Talent management for example has been simplified from a level of “rocket science” to what matters in the shorter term, a more “street-wise” approach with a finger on the pulse for what is needed in the longer term. Our friend Nick Holley over at Henley commented in Personnel Today at the end of 2009: “One of the things I have noticed is that HR needs to be incredibly schizophrenic. If it does not respond to the short-term needs, it will have no voice and credibility.” At the same time, he believes the profession needs to ensure that the values and “moral compass” of the organisation are retained.

The question remains from my post last week on HR capability gaps, what skills and motivations are required to actually provide and drive results?

In Central and Eastern Europe, commercially focused HR education is close to non existent. Business schools see the blatant opportunities and are repeating / adopting similar practices to what other business schools across Western Europe adopted 5-10 years ago. Many HR Executives choose to travel to the UK (various & most popular), France (INSEAD & HEC) and Switzerland (IMD) as the most trendy business education destinations. In fact, from what HR education is available we confirmed in 2009 – 65% of HR functions suggested curriculum’s were not at the standard required and needed to be more “commercially focused”. Consider the UK as a simple litmus test for Western Europe, Dave Ulrich’s model “strategic business partner” has been around for near on 20 years - in practice less than 30% of survey respondents had introduced the model in full. A further 30% indicated that they had partially introduced the Ulrich model. I look to other functions to draw comparison, quality management for example. Quality control, processes, models and scorecards all quickly evolved so much so that they have been adopted by many other functions of the organisation. Organisations didn’t need 20 years to decide if ISO, Six Sigma, HACCP, etc would add value to their business. It was simple, do or die.

Besides the transformation HR has gone through why are there massive gaps? One would think it might not be so difficult looking from the outside in. There are more clubs, conferences, training, magazines, for HR than most other departments. HR Club Giants CIPD and SHRM never meet in Iceland to party together – I have this on good account from both sides! Across Europe there are country level HR Clubs whom all lead back to EAPM (European Association for Personnel Management). My point is there is no single “standard”/audit like ISO for HR. HR is disconnected.

Again this year HR will need to cope with the need to continuously downsize and restructure, further up-skill on the unfashionable albeit extremely dull areas of cost optimisation and learn to adapt and function with multi-generational global employees and clients. Like death and taxes, change is the current certainty in business. There are many, if not most HR people who are happy doing the functional work or are “implementers” at a local/international level …. recruiting, rewards, etc and feel they have little/zero room to manoeuvre from what corporate HR dictates. Here you will hear another abused cliché “Think local, act global”. Many who think they are strategic are not. They use HR programs and processes that add little value to the bottom line, but persist in doing so because they have no other approach. The reality is many are referring to those HR people not adding value, and its critics include a good percentage of those not adding value. CIPD, SHRM, etc continue to produce more and more workforce models/frameworks advertised as Next Generation HR, “Beyond HR”, overloading the minds and imaginations of Human Resources professionals globally.

Finding good “HR business partners” is proving difficult. Some research in the US concludes half of HR professionals lack the skill sets needed. In the UK, demand for, and salaries offered to, business partners have risen significantly. Strategic HR as a real business driver, one of the key’s to it’s own future is education (many HR departments fail to invest in their own). What helps people to grow at work is giving them what they need to be successful, making the organisation successful. Bad HR, like bad finance poisons organisations. Great HR, like great finance, can have massive impact – the opportunities are endless. Over the last decade hierarchical structures, with rigid frameworks and operating procedures have been replaced by flatter organisations, more flexible working hours, and increasing dependence on employees as part of the decision-making procedure.

USC’s Boudreau rightly points out; HR discovers things about the business through the lens of people and talent. That’s an opportunity for competitive advantage. In most companies, that opportunity is utterly wasted.

What do you think?