Just Enough HR

Everything that glitters is not gold

I took a break from not-blogging over the past few months. Wish I could say I consciously decided that there’s just too much information out there for me to compete with. That’s more true than not. Notice I said, “information” and not “content” – there’s a big difference – and that’s the subject of today’s entry.

Everything that glitters is not gold.

Just because some writer somewhere says you should be worried about something doesn’t mean you should. This sensationalism must stop, or I fear the end of the world is upon us. But seriously, can we stop with the scare tactics?

Like a lot of people, I've stopped watching any national news on TV. Some of you will argue for your particular source of TV news and I'm sure (ahem) there are some good ones out there. Most of us seek sources with whom we share values and aspirations. Nowadays, take that to the nth degree. Good headline writing, for the most part, has been replaced by "the sky is falling" or by a totally obvious slant.

One of the reasons I decided to create an outsourced HR service in 2010 is because I have seen so many people worried about the wrong things in their small-company jobs. When it comes to rules and regulations surrounding employees, there’s an entire cottage industry of fear mongers clawing for your attention just so they can scare you into buying a book, attending a seminar, or calling them for their solution.

We decided not to go that route, and it’s paying off. Most of the time, our Just Enough HR clients are worried about some of the right things and some of the wrong things. We help them to stop worrying about the wrong things and put their more accurate concerns into perspective. Going forward, we worry for them.

 

Just Say "No" to Loud Restaurants with Open Desks

Last Tuesday I scheduled two appointments far apart and at either end of the day, meaning I would be wasting a lot of time driving back and forth. So, at 9pm the night before I searched for a Starbucks or Panera Bread where I could spend about 4 hours between meetings.

Even if I could avoid the unnecessary driving, the problem with restaurants is noise and a lack of space to spread out. I had calls to make, but in the car or at a loud restaurant. Fortunately I remembered a much smarter alternative: Open Desks.

At 9pm on my phone, I was able to easily find an office with a door, a landline, coffee, and Internet halfway between my two meetings. The price was right and the process was simple. The next morning I breezed in, gave them my name, and they led me to my office. After they showed me where the coffee, the copier and the bathroom were, and I was working in under 5 minutes.

I didn’t have to do much to find a perfect place to spend 4 hours. Now that I know about this new “on-call office” in Malvern, PA, I actually look forward to being there - and avoiding down time. 

 

Why We Hate HR

Most in the HR profession remember the 2005 Fast Company article, “Why We Hate HR”. Needless to say, it inspired a huge response. I think it’s safe to say that most HR readers agreed with my sentiment that unfortunately, some of it is true. We don’t have to like it, but it’s there. And only we can change it.

Why do we hate HR? Let me count the ways. But it’s categorically unfair to lump all HR people and their HR empires together. Any profession can be loathed, take your pick.

To be sure, HR is in an unfortunate position in a number of ways, but some of the reasons for widespread resentment rest solely on the shoulders of those in HR. It’s not a popularity contest. It is supposed to facilitate organizational development. When it doesn’t, the natives get restless. And who can blame them?

Our legal system is another reason why HR is in a difficult position. Even if we see the reasoning behind certain heavy-handed legal requirements we don’t have to agree with them – we just have to enforce them.

And self-preservation is not popular in most contexts, and HR is no exception. Like unions, when things go too far most people cry foul: “they just want to protect their own jobs”.

Again, it’s totally unfair to lump all HR organizations together. Clearly some “get it” and some don’t.  In my opinion, the greatest compliment an HR professional can receive is when an operational executive says that we “get it”.

If You're Not Part of the Solution, You're Part of the Problem!

“If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem”. This simple adage is back en vogue with the economy sputtering and continual layoffs lurking around every corner. Many people in corporate America are worried. As one colleague put it, this is the new reality and people are just getting used to this uneasy feeling.

To make matters worse, lack of control over an evolving situation just adds to the stress. What will you do if someone 4 levels up decides to cut 10% from the expense line and you’re next to go?

We all want to control as much of our lives as possible. I’m not talking about over-controlling freaks, just the really important stuff. When you’re at the mercy of a quick budget cut, you are going to worry and sadly, be distracted. En masse, this is no small problem for a business.

The fear of being laid off and the distraction that causes only serves to increase the odds of a layoff.  Less productive employees (distracted by impending doom or the probability thereof) cause the company to underperform, thus worsening financial health even more.

Underperform and you’re more likely to move up on the layoff list. In reality, there’s little you can do about it. But there is one thing you can do: keep your skills sharp. Find ways to be as productive as possible and make contributions to your organization’s success. It’s not easy to do, but it’s absolutely critical if you want to give your superiors less of a reason to fire you. Coasting along makes you an easy target, so don’t be tempted to mimic a lackadaisical attitude in other employees as layoff rumors start to fly again. Rise above it and you’ll serve yourself better.

Low Hanging Fruit - Your Workspace

We bring our previous experiences and expectations with us when we start a new job. So it’s inevitable, I suppose, that one day our employer will disappoint us along the way. Whether it’s the boss, the work, the benefits, the location or whatever, some people will always wish for something different.

A great place to focus is the workspace itself. It doesn’t necessarily require a ton of money to create an office environment that inspires people to give it their best. Happy employees are more productive employees; that’s been proven.

The workplace itself is a major component of your employer brand. During the dot com boom, it was cool to have a stocked kitchen, a ping pong table and an industrial feel to the space; the more creative the better.

Startups and small companies may not go all out anymore, but they still lead the way in the cool factor. I used to love the reactions of applicants, customers and partners when they saw Half.com.  The desks and chairs were good but not top-of-the-line. Everything was “modern practical”. What set it apart was the degree of personalization that was allowed encouraged.

eBay wanted the employees to search eBay.com for expressions of their personality. They would reimburse us $100 to decorate our workspace. You can imagine (or maybe you can’t) the quirky and colorful things people would buy. There was a huge inflatable Spider Man hanging from the rafters, movie posters, Pez Dispensers, every possible eBay/Half.com tchotchke, scooters, you name it. For the ultimate in personalization and fun check out Zappos.

I have friends and former co-workers who have worked at Google, Amazon, Apple, Yahoo!, PayPal, and Microsoft. They all say that personalization is the key. If you must, require people to maintain the kind of professionalism that your clients and customers expect. But you can still encourage personality.

By the way, people love ample supply closets too.

Not My Job

Over the years I've worked with hundreds of leaders at all levels. It's very gratifying to watch people I've coached and counseled develop into astute, effective and strong-willed leaders. I'm not taking the credit, just pleased to have helped.

In this there's a pattern:

First-time managers often ask for (and receive) a good deal of hand-holding. While it is time-intensive, it's time well spent. Eventually the young leader starts to adapt his or her thinking and style to match the objectives of the organization. Good questions they begin to ask include, "how do we normally handle something like that?", or "where are we trying to go as a company and does my action (or inaction) support/promote that?"

This is where HR comes in. Our broad perspective within our organizations allows us to provide invaluable context. This is one of our best opportunities to make a difference. But rather than creating overly dependent managers who seem to need hand-holding well beyond the time that they should, our goal should be to create independence.

My parents always told me that college is where "they teach you how to think". It took me a little while to understand the spirit of this message. But now that I get it, I see that this should be HR's goal in an organization: Teach leaders how to think for themselves. Push them away when we can, challenging them to develop their own answers and strategies rather than rely on HR for step-by-step guidance again and again.

During those "formative years" (humor intended), young leaders develop habits with regard to HR. Those who value it tend to show up early and often for guidance and sometimes just a sounding board. Those who stay away are a curious bunch. We always appreciate those who are self-sufficient. What we don't appreciate is leaders who ask HR to do their "dirty work".

They avoid communicating bad news to their employees. They defer questions to HR. They always seem to be too busy to take care of the 1:1 leadership responsibilities they have, preferring to push them off to HR. They're missing a tremendous opportunity to build relationships with their employees!

I have pushed back on occasion, turning employees away. I've sent them back to their manager for a decision because, as much as a I hate to say it, "it's not my job"!

 

 

Starts and Stops are Bad for Business - http://eepurl.com/dzImD

 

EEOC Complaints Spike

Claims rise in nation, Philadelphia area

Philadelphia Business Journal - by Jeff Blumenthal, Staff Writer

Date: Friday, March 11, 2011, 6:00am EST

The number of workplace discrimination complaints filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s Philadelphia district office jumped 32 percent in fiscal year 2010.

Employment lawyers said a major reason for the spike revolves around retaliation claims, which continued to grow nationally at a staggering clip and surpassed race as the largest source of discrimination claims for the first time.

Retaliation claims in Philadelphia rose by 28 percent in fiscal year 2010, which ran from Oct. 1, 2009, to Sept. 30, 2010. That represents an 89 percent increase from fiscal year 2008.

Read more: EEOC complaints spike | Philadelphia Business Journal

Just Enough HR™ can help you prevent this abhorrent behavior from happening in the first place. Give us a call at 877-968-5432.

Becoming a Business Partner

Of all the functions in business today, HR is more often tagged “business partner”. I’m wondering what exactly that means and more importantly why HR seems to be one of the only departments with those titles. I have theories, but would love to hear yours. Leave a comment.

Until the late 1980’s HR was called “personnel”. I never really thought that was a bad name, but no one asked me. Then one day, it became chic to be called “human resources”. At first I thought this was mere corporate-speak and wouldn’t last, but it did.

Now I’m seeing titles like “HR Business Partner” assigned to the same personnel managers who still struggle for influence in their organizations. Perhaps this is an aspirational label, designed to encourage incumbents to think more like business-people and less like administrative support professionals?

This is not to say that all HR professionals act like administrative support staff, because they don’t. But people getting into HR these days do so for the same reasons they did eons ago: because they want to help people solve problems. Admirable to be sure, but in my opinion this is only half of the HR mission.

The missing half is preventing problems in the first place. Ask any VP of Sales, Marketing, Production, Operations or Business Development and you’re likely to hear a bit of negativity about HR. A common complaint sounds like, “HR won’t let us" do this or that, or “for some reason HR didn’t like that”.

It is true that someone needs to be the keeper of the corporate rulebook; much like Finance is responsible for monitoring budget compliance, evaluating the financial aspects of deals, and reporting on financial performance. One can only imagine what would happen if there were no Finance people.

But is HR the same? In some ways, they are. For example, in matters of fairness and consistency or compliance with employment rules and regulations, HR plays a critical check-and-balance role. But for CEO’s and non-HR V-P’s, the problems begin when HR itself can’t explain why a certain rule or process exists beyond, “that’s the way we’ve always done it.”

Unfortunately the motivation behind the most frustrating HR “rules” is deference to precedent or consistency – even if the past practice no longer makes sense. The other equally baffling justification is convenience. HR departments are always skeleton crews struggling to keep up with an increasing workload flex through major organizational changes. The role is traditionally “support” after all.

Modern thinking in the HR department should shift away from “consistency” and more towards “fairness” and what makes the most sense. If HR is in the way and there is low or no risk to the business in following an original approach or solution, then I say get out of the way and let the organization move forward.

There isn’t enough experimentation. The employees who complain loudest about inconsistency are not likely to be the ones who lead the business to prosperity. They avoid conflict and shun risk. They’d rather do nothing or say “no” than take a bold step and see how it turns out. The most progressive HR leaders I know are good at figuring out when to get out of the way and let the business run a little closer to the edge. They know which risks are acceptable and which ones are not. They pick their battles and focus on ways they can support their constituents. This is the future of "HR" or "Talented Capital" or "Personnel" or whatever we want to call it in 2020.

The Changing Face of HR Management

This week a lot of articles about the changing nature of HR management have arrived in my in box. This isn't really new news is it? HR has been evolving for at least the past twenty years, so why are we still seeing so much press about it?

In my opinion, HR has a bit of an identity crisis going on. Back in the day it was "Personnel" and included such exciting responsibilities as keeping employee files, answering routine questions, coaching managers, counseling employees, and making sure everyone filled out the mountain of forms they needed to complete.

Wait a minute - doesn't HR still do all that stuff? Sure, there are great new technologies and employee self-service systems that make a lot of the routine stuff quicker and more manageable. But HR will always be responsible for record-keeping and maintenance; if not HR, then who?

It's a reputation problem. If operational executives think of HR as the Personnel Department, then that's how it will function. It's a bit of a vicious cycle though. With no opportunities to make more meaningful contributions, some HR departments are permanently relegated to an administrative role. And who wants to do that?

What will it take for HR to rise above its historical limitations? Hire some renegades? Force its way into important strategy meetings? Actually yes. But there's more.

New age HR people need to think like business owners. If they are to keep track of the organization's most valuable asset, (those "human resources"), then they need to find ways to l-e-v-e-r-a-g-e them. HR needs to ask itself the following questions in order to earn the seat the table it wants - and eventually should have:

1. Are we utilizing every single employee to his greatest potential, (and do we know for certain where these strengths lie in our companies)?
2. Are we driving productivity in any way? What about cost cutting?
3. Are we an employer of choice - do talented people want to work here?
4. Do talented people stay with us and if not why - and what can we do about it?
5. Do our leaders understand what it takes to attract and retain top talent and are they managing people for maximum productivity?

HR can positively impact an organization in every one of these ways. If we think of ourselves as active participants in our company's success just like the folks who bring in sales, manage customers, make our products and so on, we will earn a more important role. If we prefer to stand on the sidelines and watch what happened, being gatekeepers who prefer the "safe" answer, then we will always be doomed to "overhead". That's somewhere talented people don't want to be.