Are your HR folks deemed Approachable?

One of the 'must-do', challenging and yet important activity of HR function is -  planning for employee separation. I am sure many of my fellow HR folks would resonate with this sentiment. On one such occasion, as a process mandate, I was having an exit discussion with an employee who had decided to part ways with the organization. While the insights out of an exit interview are key to identifying and analyzing problem areas, this one was an 'eye-opener' and literally shook me up. The discussion had just begun with the employee reasoning the decision to move when tears filled her beaming eyes. The words echoed - 

"My prominent reason to move has been the 'non-recognition of effort' and 'constant nagging' by my manager."

My immediate inquiry was - "Why didn't you get in touch with the HR folks earlier?"

To this the reply was - "I was not sure if HR could help."

This made me brood over - 

1. The management cliched - "Employees leave managers and not organizations."

2. Daring Question - "Do your employees rest trust and consider the HR department approachable/dependable?"

My immediate next action was to ensure that I meet each member of the organization's BU I was handling personally and know their sentiments while inculcating the feeling of trust. This was followed by an anonymous 'Employee Delight Survey' to garner each project manager's feedback and any otherwise with-held views that the members may have.While, this may not always be feasible, meeting in small groups and conversing with your employees can definitely help.

Technology while is a great enabler, the communication that HR folks these days have with their employees is mostly over emails. Emails don't build confidence nor do they make you more approachable by the employees. The personal touch cannot be imbibed while sending 'mass-mailers'. Building trust is important for us as HR folks to be deemed approachable and most importantly providing solutions will restore that faith for recurring connect. The first step to HR process improvement and enhancing experience for employees at work place shall begin with 'earning' their confidence. I did take a step and am striving - How about you?

Objectivity in Performance Appraisal - Myth or Reality?

It was a week back. The setup and the occasion were just perfect.  The end of the FY was a month away and it was time for the ceremonial quarterly meeting with the management team. While there were several glaring issues to be tabled, we the facilitators decided to revolve the discussion on the kernel of People Management – Performance Management. Thus began the discussion on the purpose of the appraisal exercise, proposed design and methodology. The debate primarily gyrated around performance metrics and guidelines for objectively rating the performance of the members. That is when one of the members quipped, “Objectivity in Performance Appraisals is impossible”. This statement struck me and kept me thinking for several days. This also questioned the very philosophy of effective performance management systems.

Performance Management has always been amongst the prime challenges and key result areas of HR folks. As goes the clichéd – “What can’t be measured can’t be managed”, measuring performance of employees across the organization continues to be the challenge facing HR professionals not because performance metrics are not laid out but because of the perpetual and systemic conflict between objectivity and subjectivity. While measuring and apprising employees of their performance, we ensure that each appraiser is educated on how to be objective. Several performance appraisal techniques like BARS (Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale), MBO (Management by Objectives), (90+X)’ Feedback and others have been introduced to minimize the subjectivity or the bias factor and enhance the overall objectivity of the appraisal system. However, none of these systems can ensure 100% objectivity even with their bias-reduction focused designs. The concern or issue is not with the objective or design of these systems but with folks handling these. Systems themselves cannot speak for themselves and say – ‘Hey, you are not rating your employee objectively and in an unbiased manner’. Also, because systems are not handled by systems but by humans who are inherently subject to bias. Another shortcoming is that we don’t tend to rate the ‘Absolute Best’ but the ‘Relative Best’ because the definition of ‘Absolute Best’ can vary.

The thought is not to portray a pessimist and grim picture of performance appraisal mechanisms but accepting the limitations and doing every bit to win over them. Today, I can lay guidelines for my project managers and say – ‘Buddy, this is how you should rate your employees and this is what each performance measure means’ but still can’t be sure of a bias/error free system. Even the best of scientific instruments have a defined ‘margin of error’. Here we are talking of humans with a set of notions, perceptions, interactions, emotions and interpretations which influence their judgments. We cannot ask people to keep their set of emotions, individuality and perceptions aside in a basket or ask them to take an ‘oath to be fair and true’ and then single mindedly rate the employees.

Objectivity in performance management is the ultimate goal but can we still be sure that we can eliminate subjectivity. Being a hardcore HR professional, I would like to negate and question each person’s mindset who thinks like the member mentioned earlier. However, it makes me think if doing that would be really objective or it’s a one-off subjective thought or perception and must be brushed off. The focus should however be to propel objectivity while minimizing subjectivity.

I would like to believe that we can strive and do our bit to reduce subjectivity but we cannot nullify it till there are inherent factors –emotional, social, and behavioral, etc., affecting people decisions. As HR folks, the focus should be on enabling and empowering managers with tools, techniques and training for effectively managing employee performance. Whatever the limitations, the destination should be clear. Pave the way and Lead. 

Last thoughts…

Achieving objectivity in performance appraisals is not a Myth; however we are still far from Reality.

Engaging the Engagers!

My discussions on this blog stem from the many observations and conversations that my profession as an HR enables me to have with wide diaspora of people. On a certain day, I was having an informal conversation with one of my colleagues. Then sprung a series of topics and activities related to HR. Suddenly he quipped, " We need to take care of the world's engagement (employee engagement he meant) but who takes care of our engagement?" His question provoked a lot of thoughts but no instant reaction or answer.

There is a lot of enshrouded truth in what my friend mentioned. I have come across a lot of HR professionals who are low on motivation. And if that is the case, how can a disengaged employee take the onus of keeping other employees engaged? While this thought presents a serious concern, extremely critical is the question - 

Whose baby is the 'Engagement of HR Folks'?

There is no contention to the fact that successful HR professionals are highly self motivated individuals and have internal locus of control.However, motivation is like a fuel which drives ability to achieve goals. And like any other fuel, this fuel is also not perpetual. Sometimes the sense of accomplishment in terms of thrusting business results drives motivation and at other times building employee capabilities crusades the will to keep going. But, coming back to the original concern - Who is necessarily responsible for HR's motivation? Deriving out of my experience so far, CEOs in any organization play an important role in motivating the HR team. It is CEOs vision of the organization which moulds HR as a function which then moulds the organization.Besides, reverse recognition (from employees) also acts as a latent engagement driver.

While keeping the HR team engaged is off the books in several organizations, it can have severe repercussions for the organizations in the times to come. HR acts as a central node for building the workforce capabilities and thereby synthesizing organization.Failure of this node can lead to organizational catastrophe. The idea is not to paint out an apprehensive picture but present a perspective that a veiled systemic concern is being ignored and needs to be acted upon.I, in my capacity ensure that relevant stakeholders are informed on the engagement levels of the members of our HR team and proactive measures are taken. I see this aspect finding mention as a KRA not only in manager's performance matrix but also of the CEOs.

Would love your inputs and insights on this topic and any programs commenced in your organizations to Engage HR Teams.