A common theme within the HR world is the ability, or inability to effectively garner executive and line manager buy-in for HR decisions. The sad fact about Human Resources is that it should be the strategic receptacle for driving the job satisfaction and employee productivity, and often is not. It should be communicating troubling trends within the organisation, such as an ageing workforce or high degrees of absence, and it can’t. It employs the employees, pays the pay and exterminates the extras.
The muffle has been placed over HR, but by whom?
Well for one, HR itself.
When it comes to approaching executives or managers from areas such as Finance and IT, the choice of language is paramount. How often have we come back from a conference to say about an inspiring presenter “they really called a spade a spade, it was great!” Yet we call our employees “team members”, performance reviews “appraisals”, and terminations “resignations”. One reason for this is that working in HR can be a legal minefield with potentially disastrous repercussions.
To call a spade a spade is not so clear a proposition.
These language barriers are not restricted to HR however. The background and sector in which a department or organisation operates can vastly change language. IT or Engineers might call a spade a dirt collection and redistribution device. Or Finance might call it a necessary cost to business productivity.
Executives would call it a shovel.
HR on the other hand would refer to it as a device for improving the effectiveness of employee skill sets. This person-focus can exacerbate the language barriers. Humans are complex, unstructured, difficult to comprehend, and..well…soft. They don’t have the grit and clear cut lines of a dollar, the simple outcomes of a machine. They have personal issues; they need motivation, job satisfaction, and learning. They don’t always perform at maximum capacity, and when they don’t, you can’t send them to the shop for a touch-up. So HR tries to break things down into job categories, competencies, skills sets, each with their own definable measures. But even then the most important factor can be hardest to prove; return on investment. How do happier, higher performing employees make more money?
In the end the proof in the pudding can come more from the presentation than the flavour. If the language we choose to use is more in line with what is familiar to the audience then they may take more than just a taste. The value in HR cannot be understated… to HR professionals, but it needs to be stated long and loud in the right way to line managers and business executives.
If people are too complex, then focus on outcomes. If it seems too soft, make it harder. An ageing workforce leading to a loss in skilled labour may sound like a “so what”, but a loss in a $20 million revenue profit due to the inability to deliver on targets in 2 years time sells a different story. After the “what?” comes a “why?” and then “how can we fix it?”.
Language however is not really enough. With the introduction of HR measures and analytics, HR professionals have the engine to drive their long march up the steep hill to a seat at the executive table. The emergence of these capabilities certainly adds greater credibility to HR’s case. In the end the most difficult part will be to gain buy-in so the executives actually recognise how impactful these insights really are. Just make sure it tastes as good as it looks.