Pesquisa Estudos CompetêNcias Rh Por Dave Ulrich 2007

Human Resource Competency Study

SHRM National Conference
26 June 2007

Dave Ulrich, Project Director, HRCS
Wayne Brockbank, Project Director, HRCS
Dani Johnson, Project Manager, HRCS

1

Special Thanks to our Regional Partners

IMI
SHRM IAE
Europe
North America Latin America

AHRI
Tsinghua University
National HRD Network
Australia
China
India

2

Conference Outcomes

As a result of this session, you will be able to:
• Appreciate the challenges facing the HR profession
• Define the competencies required for HR professionals
to be personally successful and to help their business
succeed
• Prepare action plans for improving the quality of HR
work
– For you as an individual
– For your organization
– For our profession

3

Changes in Business

Global Business Challenges
Globalization Technology
Employees Customers
Investors Competitors

Organizational Responses
Talent Collaboration
Speed of Change Learning
Shared mindset Leadership brand
Culture or firm brand Innovation
Accountability Strategic clarity
Efficiency

People

HR
Practices Department

4

Implications for HR

HR Importance

HR practices are increasingly considered part of a firm’s competitive
advantage. Intellectual capital, talent, intangibles, and capabilities all
derive from people, their competence and commitment.

Talent Management
HR Professionals

4
2 2 4

1 3 1 3
Line Management Organization
5

Implications for HR

Growth

Organization Membership
Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) 216,000
Chartered Institute for Personnel Development (England and Europe) 127,000
Canadian Council of Human Resources Association 24,000
Australian Human Resource Institute (AHRI) 15,000
National Institute of Personnel Management, India 11,000
Association of Brazil for Human Resources 8,000
Institute of People Management, South Africa 8,000
National HRD Network, India 5,000

• Literally hundreds of smaller national and local HR associations around the world.
• HR Centers in Universities (Cornell, Illinois, London Business School, Michigan,
Rotterdam School of Management, Rutgers, University of South Carolina)

6

Implications for HR

Demands on HR increasing

• HR practices
– Alignment with strategy (customers and investors)
– Integration
– Innovation

• HR department
– Investors’ increased financial demands for organizational performance
– Transaction work
– Transformation work

• HR professionals
– Require new competencies

7

Why is the HRCS important?

To respond to the increased demands, HR professionals
must define, delineate, assess, and improve their
performance against a set of specific competencies.
Wanting to contribute is not enough. HR professionals
need to know how to contribute.

8

The HR Competency Study

• Genesis and history of the study
• Definitions
• Demographics of 2007 dataset
• Evolution of the model
• Competency Domains for 2007
• Findings
• Individual Domains

9

HRCS

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the Human Resource Competency Study
was to find answers to the following two questions:

1. What are the competencies that distinguish HR
professionals?
2. What are the capabilities needed by HR departments to help
build the business?

10

HRCS

Background

• History
– Conducted jointly by The RBL Group and the Ross School
– Major data collection 5 times in the past 20 years
– Over the lifespan of the study, over 40,000 HR professionals and their line
management associates have contributed
– Provides the most comprehensive empirical review of the HR field available

• Database Composition
– Includes representation from small, medium, and large firms
– Includes representation from virtually all industries
– Applies a “360º” methodology
• HR professionals evaluated themselves
• HR associates evaluated HR colleagues
• Non-associates (internal clients) evaluated HR professionals

11

HRCS

HRCS Definitions

Respondent Group Definition N
Participants HR participants completed the self- 1,669
assessment, and nominated associates to
complete on their behalf
HR Associates All associate raters who work in HR and who 5048
completed the survey on behalf of an HR
participant
Non HR Associates All associate raters who work outside of HR 3346
and who completed the survey on behalf of
an HR participant
All Respondents Total of all participants, HR associates, and 10,063
non HR associates

12

HRCS—Demographics

Some Participating Business Units
3M - Mexico Comcast Cable Hospital Corporation of America Yongyou GROUP
ABB - Argentina Comerica Incorporated HuiZhou ShengHua Industry Co.Ltd SC Johnson & Son - Argentina
ActewAGL Continental Automotive Systems Hunan Chemistry Co.,Ltd. ShengHua electronic Apparatus Center
Aditya Birla -Business HR Covalence Specialty Materials Hunan Longxiang Group Sherwin Williams Argentina
Aeromexico CRH Plc Hutian Industry CO.,LTD Siemens - Colombia
Alimentos Capullo CRS Australia ICON Clinical Research SKF Australia Pty Ltd
Allied Irish Bank - Europe Cuscal ITC Limited SKF Sealing Solutions Americas
Amity Business School Dahan Holding GROUP Co.,Ltd JK ORGANIZATION-INDIA SodexhoPass
Anheuser Busch Dalmia Cement (Bharat )Limited John Deere Limited Staples - U.S. Retail
ARCOR Daqing oil field petroleum CO.,LTD KPMG - Nicaragua Sterling Commerce
Atento Argentina Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu La Caja de Ahorro y Seguro Sun Trust Banks, Inc.
Austin American-Statesman DESC Quimico Labor Ready, Inc Syngenta
Australia Post Dongguan Sanyouqi CO.,LTD Lincoln Sentry P/L TaiXin Real Estate Co,Ltd
Avantel Dow Chemical Lion Nathan Tata Sons, Group HR
BAE Systems Eastman - Voridian Lucent Human Resources TCL
Banco Central de Nicaragua Edesur Lyondell Chemicals Tecpetrol
Banco Itaú - Argentina Eembry Group CO.,LTD Manpower Telefonica de Argentina
Battelle, Pacific NW National Laboratory EG&G - ETS Maricopa Community College Telefonica del Peru S.A.A
Baxter-Europe Eli Lilly and Company McCain The Coca Cola Company
Bayer Emerson Heating Products McDonald's SLAD The YMCA of Greater Rochester
BCI Seguros EON-U.S. Molinos Río de la Plata Transener
Beiersdorf Australia and New Zealand ESB Monsanto - Brasil Transporte de Gas del Sur (TGS)
Boehringer Ingelheim - South America Essen Mountain America Credit Union Tyco Fire & Security Services Asia
Bon Secours Kentucky Health System Fairview Health Services Navistar Financial Corporation Tyco Healthcare
BP - Australia Fiserv Solutions, Inc. Newell Rubbermaid Unilever
Bristol-Myers Squibb Fonterra Nike Unisuper Managment Pty Ltd
Bryant University Ford Motor Company - México Novartis Unisys
BuBuGao Commerce Chain CO.,LTD Friedkin Business Services Novelis United Securities Co.,Ltd
C&C Group - Ireland GE - México NSF International UnitedHealthCare
Cablemás General Physics Corporation Oracle Latin America University of Melbourne
Cafe Soluble, S.A. Getronics Parker Hannifin UT-Battelle, LLC
Capital Glaxo Smith Kline Pfizer Vetco Gray de Venezuela, C.A.
Capital One Great West Casualty Company Philips Brasil VicForests
Cementos Bio Bio S.A. Grupo ADO Procter & Gamble VNU, Inc.
CEMEX Grupo Clarín RadioShack, Inc. Volkswagen Argentina
Central Romana Corporation Grupo Lupier Ranbaxy Limited Wal-Mart Argentina
Cervecería Quilmes Harland Financial Solutions Rio Tinto Iron Ore Water Corporation
Changde Cigarette Factory Harris Corporation Royal Dutch Shell plc Wells, Fargo & Company
Home Federal Bank Henan Taiji Co.,Ltd Rubbermaid Home Products Wesley Mission Brisbane
Hospira Hendrickson International Rust-Oleum Corporation Xiangjiao Group Company
China Railway Engineering Corpation Henkel Ryder Argentina S.A. Xiehe Wujin Factory
China Railway Hunan Filiale SAS Zhuzhou smelter Co.,Ltd Yangcheng Coal Transport Company
Citibank Argentina SAIC Yokogawa Corp. of America Zhonglian Heavy Industry Co.,Ltd.
13

HRCS—Demographics

Year by Year Comparison

1988 1992 1997 2002 2007
10,291 4,556 3,229 7,082 10,063
Individuals
1,200 441 678 692 413
Business Units

Respondent
8,884 3,805 2,565 5,890 8,414
Associate
1,407 751 664 1,192 1,671
Participant

Gender
77% 78% 70% 57% 46%
Male
23% 22% 30% 43% 54%
Female

14

HRCS—Demographics

Respondents by Region

US & Latin Australia/
Europe China India
Canada America Asia Pac.

2,773 2,127 1,553 2,110 1,235 263
# of Respondents

83 105 23 138 44 19
# of Business Units

India
Australia / S.E.
3%
Asia
US and
12%
Canada
28%

China
21%

Latin America
21%
Europe
15%

15

HRCS—Demographics

Region Comparisons
US & Latin Australia /
Total Europe China India

10,063 28% 21% 15% 21% 12% 3%
Total Respondents

Level of HR Participants
36% 32% 47% 59% 21% 25% 74%
Director of Managers / Top Manager
33 31 30 26 40 37 17
Manager of Individual Contributors
30 35 23 13 38 36 6
Individual Contributor

Primary HR Channel, Participant
Functional HR 21% 9% 25% 10% 46% 10% 10%
Centers of Expertise 21 18 20 13 30 17 24
Embedded HR 36 55 28 58 9 38 22
Service Center 6 5 9 2 9 1 2
E-HR 1 1 0 0 4 0 0
Corporate HR 15 13 18 17 1 33 43

Add definitions
16

HRCS—Demographics

Industries

Total Canada America Europe China Asia Pac. India
34% 25%
Services (incl. health and bus.) 18% 15% 10% 0% 19%

25% 60%
Manufacturing 15% 15% 16% 0% 9%

45%
Pharmaceutical / Chemical 15% 19% 14% 0% 1% 13%

Food 14% 13% 12% 5% 21% 18% 0%

49%
Mining / Petrochemicals 12% 0% 5% 3% 2% 0%

Utilities / Communications 7% 6% 14% 5% 0% 17% 4%

Agriculture 6% 1% 4% 0% 21% 1% 2%

Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate 5% 8% 6% 8% 0% 5% 0%

Construction 3% 0% 0% 0% 9% 8% 0%

Public Administration 2% 1% 1% 4% 0% 7% 2%

Retail Trade 2% 2% 3% 2% 0% 1% 0%

Wholesale Trade 1% 1% 0% 2% 0% 5% 0%

Green= High
17

HRCS Model: Evolution

HR Bus.
Business
Delivery Knowledge
Knowledge
Personal
Credibility
HR
Change Change
Delivery
1992
1987

Bus. Bus.
Knowledge Knowledge

Personal Personal Strategic
HR HR
Culture
Credibility Credibility Contribution
Delivery Delivery

HR
Change
2002
Technology
1997
18

HRCS 2007 Domains

Formation of the new Model

• Factor analysis was performed on 130 items to produce 6 domains
• Factor analysis was performed on the items within each of the 6
domains to produce 21 sub domains or factors

19

HRCS 2007 Domains

Naming of Domains and Factors

In naming domains and factors, the following were taken into account:

We wanted to be able to link the past rounds with the present
Historical
round, and therefore included similar words in the names where
precedent
possible.

Each domain is a role that is fulfilled by an effective HR
Roles
professional

Each sub domain or factor begins with an action verb. These are
Action
specific actions that, when rolled up, make that particular role
effective.

20

2007 HRCS Model

Culture & Strategy
Organization Talent Mgr
Change Architect
Org Designer
Capabilities Steward

Operational Business
Systems &

s
Executor Ally

es
Pe
Processes

sin
op

Bu
le

Credible
Relationships Activist

HR
Professionalism

21

HRCS Model: 2007

Culture &
Talent Mgr Strategy
Change
Org Designer Architect
Steward

• Ensuring today’s & tomorrow’s talent • Sustaining strategic agility
• Facilitating change
• Developing talent • Engaging customers
• Enacting culture
• Shaping organization • Crafting culture
• Fostering communication • Personalizing culture
• Designing rewards systems

Executor Ally

• Implementing workplace policies • Interpreting social context
• Advancing HR technology • Serving the value chain
• Articulating the value proposition
• Leveraging business technology

Credible
Activist

• Delivering results with integrity
• Sharing information
• Building relationships of trust
• Doing HR with an attitude

22

HRCS 2007 Domains

Differences in Perspective

Differences in factor analysis between entire dataset and non-HR
associate dataset resulted in two additional factors:

• Engaging customers
– Showed up in the last round as market-driven connectivity
– Seen by non-hr raters as an important competency of HR professionals, while
within HR, this was not shown to be significant.

– Showed up in the entire dataset as well as the non-hr rater dataset.
– In the entire dataset, these items showed up under ‘Operational Executor
– For the non-hr rater dataset it factored under Talent Manager / Organization
Designer.

23

HRCS Results

• Individual Performance
• Business Performance
• Factors of Domains
• HR Department

24

Individual Performance

Overall Perception of Competency

Dependent Variable:
Overall, compared with other Human Resource professionals whom you have known,
how does this participant compare?


2000
1834
1800
1628
1600
1314
1400
1203
1200

1000

800 692
579
600

400 264 260
159 136
200 79
38
32
22 22 21 25
14 16
10
0

Highest 5%
5% to 9%

10% to 14%

15% to 19%

20% to 24%

25% to 29%

30% to 34%

35% to 39%

40% to 44%

45% to 49%

50% to 54%

55% to 59%

60% to 64%

65% to 69%

70% to 74%

75% to 79%

80% to 84%

85% to 89%

90% to 94%
Lowest 5%

25

Overall Domain Averages

Domain Mean Scores

Table below shows average domain scores. Scores reflect averages for all items within a
given domain on a scale from 1 to 5, with 1 being “to a very little extent” and 5 being “to a
very large extent”

HR HR Non HR
Participants Associates Associates
Credible Activist 4.16 4.23 4.14
Culture and Change Steward 3.80 3.84 3.75
Talent Mgr. / Org. Designer 3.73 3.80 3.76
Strategy Architect 3.49 3.67 3.58
Operational Executor 3.47 3.58 3.63
Business Ally 3.39 3.55 3.48

26


Why Bivariate vs. Multiple Regression
Table indicates % variance is dependent upon the domain listed first when performing multiple
regression using 6 individual cases

Domain listed first in multiple regression
Culture &
Credible Change Talent Mgr. / Strategy Operational Business
Activist Steward Org. Designer Architect Executor Ally

Credible 93% 16% 20% 30% 47% 53%
Activist

Culture & Change 6% 79% 1% 2% 4% 4%
Steward

Talent Mgr. / 1% 4% 76% 1% 1% 1%
Org. Designer

0% 0% 4% 66% 0% 0%
Strategy Architect

Operational 0% 0% 0% 1% 37% 0%
Executor
Business
0% 0% 0% 0% 11% 42%
Ally

27


HR vs. Non HR Rater perspective comparison

Dependent Variable:

HR Non HR
All HR
Respondents Participants Associates Associates
Credible Activist 24% 23% 24% 23%
Culture and Change Steward 20% 19% 20% 20%
Talent Mgr/Org Designer 20% 23% 19% 19%
Strategy Architect 17% 17% 17% 16%
Operational Executor 9% 7% 9% 11%

Business Ally 11% 10% 11% 10%
2
Multiple Regression R .391 .186 .419 .473

NOTE: scores are scaled to 100 points based on R2
28


Region Comparison

Dependent Variable:

Europe China India
Credible Activist 25% 23% 27% 18% 24% 16%
Culture and Change Steward 21% 18% 21% 18% 20% 18%
Talent Mgr/Org Designer 19% 19% 19% 18% 19% 20%
Strategy Architect 17% 16% 18% 17% 17% 21%
Operational Executor 9% 13% 5% 16% 10% 13%
Business Ally 9% 11% 10% 14% 12% 12%

29


Management Level Comparison

Dependent Variable:

Directors of
Individual Managers of Ind.
Contributors Contributors Managers
Credible Activist 24% 24% 23%
Culture and Change Steward 20% 21% 20%
Talent Mgr/Org Designer 18% 20% 20%
Strategy Architect 17% 15% 18%
Operational Executor 10% 10% 9%
Business Ally 11% 10% 11%
2
Multiple Regression R .423 .428 .455

30


Business Unit Size Comparison

Dependent Variable:

500 to 1000 to 5000 to 10000 to
0 to 99 100 to 499 999 4999 9999 24999 25,000+

Credible Activist 22% 21% 20% 25% 23% 29% 24%

Culture and Change Steward 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20%

Talent Mgr. / Org. Designer 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 20%

Strategy Architect 13% 16% 16% 17% 18% 16% 17%

Operational Executor 15% 12% 13% 9% 8% 7% 9%

Business Ally 11% 13% 11% 9% 11% 9% 10%

31

Business Performance

Business Performance Scores
Business Performance Raw Scores

1800
1600
1400
1200
Business performance shown by 1000
800
summing 4 variables: 600
400
– Meeting customer requirements 200
0
– Meeting owner / shareholder requirements 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

– Being competitive
Business Performance aggregated to business unit
– Financial management
120

100

80

60

40

20

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

32


HR vs. Non HR perspective comparison

Dependent Variable:
Average of the following 4 business measures:

• Meeting customer requirements • Being competitive
• Meeting owner / shareholder requirements • Financial management

All HR Non HR
Respondents Associates Associates
Credible Activist 22% 22% 19%
Culture and Change Steward 20% 18% 19%
Talent Mgr/Org Designer 19% 15% 17%

Strategy Architect 12% 17% 18%
Operational Executor 13% 12% 13%
Business Ally 13% 15% 14%
2
.208 .207 .207
Multiple Regression R

33


HR Channel Comparison

Dependent Variable:


Functional Centers of Embedded Service Corporate
HR Expertise HR Centers HR

Credible Activist 25% 11% 23% 52% 16%

Culture and Change Steward 23% 16% 24% 17% 8%

Talent Mgr/Org Designer 20% 22% 10% 4% 31%

Strategy Architect 9% 17% 8% 6% 13%

Operational Executor 10% 15% 27% 0% 16%

Business Ally 12% 19% 8% 20% 17%
2
Multiple Regression R

34

6 Domains to become a successful HR professional

Culture & Strategy
Talent Mgr
Change Architect
Org Designer
Steward

Executor Ally

Credible
Activist

35

Credible Activist

Credible Activist

The HR professional is both credible (respected, admired, listened to) and active (offers a point
of view, takes a position, challenges assumptions). Some have called this HR with an attitude.
HR professionals who are credible but not activists are admired, but do not have much impact.
Those who are activists but not credible may have ideas but will not be listened to.

Factor Mean Individual Business

Delivering results with integrity 4.27 31% 29%

Sharing Information 4.23 24% 25%

Building relationships of trust 4.07 19% 23%

Doing HR with an attitude 3.99 26% 24%

Overall 24% 22%

36

Credible Activist

Credible Activist Factors

Factor Sample Items
– Meets commitments
Delivering results with integrity
– Have track record of results
– Respond quickly to internal constituents

Sharing information – Express effective written communication
– Express effective verbal communication

Building relationships of trust – Have effective interpersonal skills
– Have “chemistry” with key internal stakeholders
– Have “chemistry” with key external stakeholders

Doing HR with attitude – Take appropriate risks
– Provide candid observations
– Influence others

37

Credible Activist

How do you become a Credible Activist?

Factors: What is? Implications: So What?
• Delivering results with integrity
• Sharing information
• Building relationships of trust
• Doing HR with an attitude

Case Study: Who does it? Development: Now what?
• Job Experience

• Training

• Life Experience

38

Culture and Change Steward


The HR professional recognizes, articulates, and helps shape a company’s culture. Culture is
a pattern of activities more than a single event. Ideally this culture starts with clarity around
external customer expectations (firm identity or brand), then translates these expectations into
internal employee and organization behaviors.
As stewards of culture, HR professionals respect the past culture and also can help to shape a
new culture. They understand and can apply the tools of organization change, which always
has cultural implications. They coach managers on how their actions reflect and drive culture;
they weave the cultural standards into HR practices and processes; and they make culture real
to employees

Crafting culture 3.88 30% 28%
Facilitating change 3.83 29% 28%
Personalizing culture 3.68 21% 22%
Enacting culture 3.57 21% 22%
Overall 20% 20%

39


Culture and Change Steward Factors

Factor Sample Items
Facilitating change – Align individual behavior and organizational goals
– Identify and engage people who make change happen
– Sustain change through HR practices

Crafting culture – Design and deliver HR practices that create and maintain the
desired culture
– Share knowledge across organizational boundaries
– Make culture management a business priority

Enacting culture – Frame culture that engages employees
– Translate culture into management practices
– Make whole of the organization more than the sum of its parts

Personalizing culture – Help employees find purpose and meaning in their work
– Manage work/life balance within the organization
– Ensure that the culture of your business is recognized in the mind of
the external stakeholders

40


How do you become a Culture and Change Steward?

Factors: What is? Implications: So what?
• Facilitating change
• Crafting culture
• Enacting culture
• Personalizing culture

• Job Experience

• Training

• Life

41

Talent Mgr / Org Designer

Talent Mgr. / Org. Designer
The HR professional masters theory, research, and practice in both talent management and
organization design. Talent management focuses on how individuals enter, move up, across,
or out of the organization. Organization design focuses on the structure, governance, and
processes that shape how an organization works.
These organizational actions form an organization’s capabilities, or what the organization is
good at and known for. HR professionals should bring relevant and proven concepts and tools
to these HR practice areas. HR is not just about talent or organization, but about the two of
them together. Good talent without a supporting organization will not be sustained and a good
organization will not operate without good talent.


Ensuring today’s & tomorrow’s talent 3.91 28% 29%

Fostering communication 3.86 20% 24%

Shaping organization 3.75 21% 18%

Developing talent 3.74 22% 19%

Designing rewards systems 3.40 10% 10%

Overall 20% 19%

42


Talent Mgr / Org Designer Factors
Factor Sample Items
Ensuring today’s and – Assess key talent
tomorrow’s talent – Manage workforce diversity
– Establish standards for required talent

Developing Talent – Offer training programs
– Design developmental work experiences
– Follow up and reinforce personal change

Shaping organization – Organizational design
– Help establish reporting relationships
– Facilitate the design of organizational structure

Fostering communication – Facilitate design of internal communication processes
– Work with managers to send clear and consistent messages
– Develop a comprehensive internal communication strategy and plan

Designing rewards systems – Design non-financial rewards systems
– Design performance-based compensation systems
– Design measurement systems that distinguish high-performing
individuals from low performing individuals
43


How do you become a Talent Mgr / Org Designer

• Ensuring today’s and tomorrow’s talent
• Developing talent
• Shaping organization
• Fostering communication

• Job Experience

• Training

• Life

44

Strategy Architect

Strategy Architect

The HR professional knows how to influence and implement business strategy. In particular,
the HR professional is able to link internal organization practices to external customer
expectations.
This helps make customer-driven business strategies real to the employees of the company.
To align with strategic direction, the HR professional facilitates an understanding and
application of the processes required to make change happen. HR professionals facilitate
strategic alignment change by turning what needs to be done into what is actually done.


• Sustaining strategic agility 3.65 62% 64%

• Engaging customers 3.43 38% 36%

Overall 17% 12%

45

Strategy Architect

Strategy Architect Factors

Factor Sample Items
– Help establish the business strategy
Sustaining strategic agility
– Have a vision of the future for your business
– Translate business strategy into annual business initiatives

Engaging customers – Facilitate dissemination of customer information
– Contribute to building the brand of the company with
customers, shareholders, and employees
– Facilitate the integration of different business functions

46

Strategy Architect

How do you become a Strategy Architect?

• Sustaining strategic agility
• Engaging customers

Case Study: Who does it? Actions: Now what?
• Job Experience

• Training

• Life

47

Operational Executor


The HR professional administers the day-to-day work of managing people inside an
organization. Policies need to be drafted, adapted, and implemented. Employees
also have many administrative needs (e.g., to be paid, relocated, hired, trained,
etc.)
HR professionals ensure that these basic needs are efficiently dealt with through
technology, shared services, and/or outsourcing. This day-to-day work of HR
ensures credibility if executed flawlessly and grounded in the consistent application
of policies.


Advancing HR technology 3.61 51% 51%

Implementing workplace policies 3.50 49% 49%

Overall 9% 13%

48


Operational Executor Factors

Factor Sample Items
– Labor legislation
Implementing workplace policies
– Manage the arrangement of physical space and
workplace environment
– Design flexible work schedules

Advancing HR technology – Leverage information technology for HR practices
– Use technology to facilitate organizational
transformation
– Leverage HR information systems to make better
decisions

49


How do you become a Operational Executor?

Factors Implications
• Implementing Workplace Policies
• Advancing HR Technology

Case Study Actions
Who does this well?
• Job Experience

• Training

• Life

50

Business Ally

Business Ally

The HR professional contributes to the success of the business. Businesses work to succeed
by setting goals and objectives that allow them to respond to external conditions. HR
professionals contribute to the success of a business by knowing the social context or setting in
which a business operates.
They also know how the business makes money: the value chain of the business (who
customers are, why they buy the company’s products or services). A related area of
knowledge is the value proposition of the business: how the business organizes resources to
make money.


Interpreting social context 3.68 32% 40%

Serving the value chain 3.50 22% 20%

Articulating the value proposition 3.42 21% 23%

Leveraging business technology 3.40 25% 17%

Overall 11% 13%

51

Business Ally

Business Ally Factors

Factor Sample Items
– Competitor analysis
Serving the value chain
– Managing customer relationships
– Requirements of external customers
Interpreting social context – Globalization of business
– External political environment
– Design of work processes
– Demographic trends that influence your business
Articulating the value proposition – Knowing how your business makes money
– Financial statements (balance sheet, income statement)
– Requirements of shareholders and owners
Leveraging business technology – Computer information systems
– Production or manufacturing processes
– Research & Development
– E-Commerce

52

Business Ally

How do you become a Business Ally?

• Interpreting social context
• Serving the value chain
• Articulating the value proposition
• Leveraging business technology

Case Study: Who does it? Actions: Now what?
Who does this well?
• Job Experience

• Training

• Life

53

Conclusion of Domain Conclusions

54

HR Department

HR Department Performance

Dependent Variable:

Department Grouping R Square*

Stakeholders .226

HR Focus .250

Value Added .279

Multiple Regression, all Domains .203

*Scores using associate rater data only

55

Stakeholders

Customer

Investor
Community

HR Dept.

Employee Line Manager

56

HR Department

Stakeholders

Stakeholder R Square %

External Customer Average 0.162 19%

Investor Average 0.180 21%

Communities Average 0.176 21%

Line Managers 0.168 20%

Employees Average 0.170 20%

Stakeholder Multiple Regression .226

57

HR Department

Stakeholders: Build

Build Items Beta %
Build HR practices that add value to external customers 0.045 8%

Build organizational capabilities that investors value (or 0.172 32%
those who provide capital)

Build HR practices that add value to the communities 0.157 29%

Build organizational capabilities that help line managers turn 0.012 2%
strategy into action

Build an employee value proposition that lays out what is 0.155 29%
expected from employees and what they get in return
Multiple regression 0.225

58

HR Department

Stakeholders: Involve

Involve Items Beta %
Involve Customers in the design and delivery of HR practices 0.105 21%

Involve investors (or those who provide capital) in the design and 0.045 9%
delivery of HR practices that create value for them

Involve communities in the design and delivery of HR practices 0.080 16%

Involve line managers in the design and delivery of HR 0.186 37%
practices
Involve employees in design and delivery of HR practices that 0.094 18%
increase their abilities

Multiple regression 0.185

59

HR Department

Factor Regressions: HR focus

Factor R2 %

Strategy and Structure .227 41%
–Ensure that HR strategy turns business goals into HR priorities
–Have an HR strategy that links HR practices to business strategy
–Ensure that org structure of HR is consistent with the business strategy
–Align org structure of HR with the org structure of the business

Measures .182 33%
–Measure impact of HR practices on business results
–Use empirical research to identify best HR practices
–Create a workforce scorecard
–Track employee engagement

Capability of Dept .149 27%
–Manage external vendors of outsourced HR activities
–Ensure that HR is a cultural role model for the rest of the org
–Build the capability of the HR department to add greater value
–Invest in training and dev of HR professionals

60

HR Department

Factor Regressions: Value add activities

R2
Factor %
Talent Practices .197 33%
–Talent assessment
–Staffing
–Training and development
–Performance appraisal

Organization Practices .252 42%
–Rewards
–Internal communication
–Organization structure
–Coaching
–Work process design

Administrative Practices .152 25%
–HR technology
–Workplace policies

61

Overall conclusions

• Implications for HR professionals

• Implications for HR departments

62

Individual vs. Department

HR Individual Competencies
4
1

3
2

HR Department Capabilities

63

Backup slides

64

Common Profiling Questions

• Some of the questions in the survey do not apply to my
job and industry. What do I do about them?
• My associates did not know how to answer all the
questions
• Is this information valid? This is only a one-shot
assessment and my associates work with me for a long
time
• What about all the competencies that are not measured
on this instrument?

65

Do’s and Don’ts to reacting to data

• Do: • Don’t
– Learn from the instrument – Blame the instrument
– Be open to feedback – Be closed to new ideas
– Be willing to undergo self-
examination
– Be willing to accept faults
– Read with a marker

66

Common problems with profiling

• Over-reaction
• Under-reaction
• Focus on the person not the process as the source of
the problem
• Look only at time 1 data and don’t see the value of
ongoing assessment
• Afraid of change

67

Changing Business Context

Findings
• Culture Steward
– In the past, HR was subsumed under ‘strategic contribution’ or management of change.
– HR’s ability to define, create, manage, and change culture has become a unique source of
competence
– May indicate a bit of a shift in how HR is viewed
• Rewards
– HR professionals see reward activities into the day to day tactical items while non HR
associate raters see reward systems as connected to HR practices of talent manager and
org developer
• Customer views of HR
– Non HR associates believe that the external customer can and should be brought into the
HR work; HR associates and participants did not perceive this;
– HR professionals need to pay more attention to the real, external customer and find ways to
bring them into the organization
• HR professionals more credible than they are business literate
– Business literacy continues to lag other domains; even after all of the talk about being
business contributors, HR professionals are not there yet

68

Changing Business Context

Findings
• Culture Steward
– In the past, HR was subsumed under ‘strategic contribution’ or management of change.
– HR’s ability to define, create, manage, and change culture has become a unique source of
competence
– May indicate a bit of a shift in how HR is viewed
• Rewards
– HR professionals see reward activities into the day to day tactical items while non HR
associate raters see reward systems as connected to HR practices of talent manager and
org developer
• Customer views of HR
– Non HR associates believe that the external customer can and should be brought into the
HR work; HR associates and participants did not perceive this;
– HR professionals need to pay more attention to the real, external customer and find ways to
bring them into the organization
• HR professionals more credible than they are business literate
– Business literacy continues to lag other domains; even after all of the talk about being
business contributors, HR professionals are not there yet

69

Findings (continued)
• Talent Manager / Organization Designer
– Talent and organization are different but need to be connected.
– It is not enough to get good people (ergo a danger of moving to human capital) without
organization that sustains it
• Stakeholders
– HR departments know to involve stakeholders (employees, customers, investors,
communities, line managers) in their work more than they do it.
– Investors and communities are the least involved in shaping HR
• Strategy and HR vs. Empirical HR practices
– The more empirical HR practices (workforce scorecard, empirical research) are less well-
done than other HR areas.
– HR strategy and strategic HR are being done.
– When we began this work 20 years ago, we had to help companies come up with an HR
strategy and teach them how to do strategic HR
• HR practices that add value
– Talent management practices are adding more value than compensation (consistent with
findings above

70

Responses from HR
• Growing profession and number of HR professionals
• Shifts in HR practices: Talent and organization, not just talent
– Talent: staffing, development, performance management,
communication
– Organization: policies, governance, structure, processes, physical
setting
• Shift in HR departments
– Outsourced
– Insourced: professional service firm model
• Shifts in expectations for HR professionals: now we’re “at the
table” what do we do?
• Shifts in expectations for HR Departments

71

Implications for HR

Increase Differentiation

Align our HR organization

72

HRCS—Demographics

HR Professionals

Education of Participants
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
<High High +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 +7
School School

• ~25% of HR participants have 7+ years of education post high
school

73

HRCS—Demographics

HR Professionals
Total years, Professional Experience
400

• ~74% of HR participants
350
300

have 10+ years of
250
200

professional experience
150
100
50
0
Les s than 3-5 6-9 10 - 14 15 - 19 20 - 24 25 - 29 30+
2

Total Years in HR
• ~51% of HR participants
400

350
have at least 10 years in
300

HR
250

200

150

100

50

0
Less than 2 3-5 6-9 10 - 14 15 - 19 20 - 24 25 - 29 30+

74

HRCS—Demographics

Business Size

Business Size: Employees

500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 - 99 100 - 499 500 - 999 1000 - 4999 5000 - 9999 10000 - 24999 25000 - 49000 50000 - 74999 75000 - 99999 100000+

HR Professionals in Business

450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
1 2-4 5-9 10 - 39 40 - 79 80 - 199 200 - 399 400 - 599 600 - 899

75

HRCS—Demographics

HR professionals: Education by Region

Education by Region
80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%
0%
US & Canada Latin America Europe China Australia India
(N=413) (N=351) (N=203) (N=310) (N=192) (N=47)

1 yr. post high school 2 years 3 years 4 years 5 years 6 years 7 years

76

Hints for turning data into action

• Ask: What does it say?
– Understand the question being asked
– Look for things that stand out
– Try to find patterns in the data
– Look for differences in the data

• Ask: what does it mean?
– See the implications in the data
– Ask who would use this data for what decisions

• How could I use the data?
– Determine next steps based on the data
– Build an accountability system to track progress

77


Domain Mean Scores by Region (all associate raters)

US and Latin Australia /
Canada America Europe China Asia Pac. India

Credible Activist 4.38 4.15 4.22 3.96 4.23 4.14

Culture and Change Steward 3.94 3.84 3.81 3.55 3.81 3.76

Talent Mgr / Org. Designer 3.89 3.80 3.83 3.59 3.76 3.85

Strategy Architect 3.73 3.59 3.67 3.53 3.58 3.67

Operational Executor 3.59 3.71 3.48 3.63 3.52 3.66

Business Ally 3.55 3.54 3.51 3.47 3.47 3.69

Overall Item Average 3.87 3.78 3.78 3.60 3.75 3.80

78


Domain Mean Scores by Industry

Culture &
Credible Change Talent Mgr / Strategy Operational Business
Activist Steward Org. Design Architect Executor Ally

Agriculture 3.97 3.61 3.68 3.55 3.57 3.50

Mining 4.06 3.67 3.69 3.60 3.63 3.52

Construction 3.96 3.49 3.55 3.41 3.57 3.45

Food 4.11 3.73 3.71 3.59 3.48 3.44

Pharmaceuticals /
4.27 3.89 3.91 3.70 3.62 3.57
Chemicals

Manufacturing 4.20 3.78 3.79 3.60 3.60 3.51

Wholesale / Retail Trade 4.26 3.83 3.78 3.61 3.57 3.48

Utilities & Communications 4.31 3.94 3.89 3.71 3.66 3.52

Banking and Real Estate 4.30 3.87 3.80 3.59 3.59 3.47

Services 4.33 3.93 3.87 3.73 3.66 3.60

Public Administration 4.25 3.84 3.81 3.65 3.58 3.52

Green=High Red = Low 79

Hints for turning data into action

• Ask: What does it say?
– Understand the question being asked
– Look for things that stand out
– Try to find patterns in the data
– Look for differences in the data

• Ask: what does it mean?
– See the implications in the data
– Ask who would use this data for what decisions

• How could I use the data?
– Determine next steps based on the data
– Build an accountability system to track progress
80


Why Bivariate vs. Multiple Regression

Beta weights for multiple regression model

Domain Beta %
Credible Activist 2.01 62%
Culture and Change Steward .57 18%
Strategy Architect .69 21%
Talent Mgr and Org Designer .08 3%
Operational Executor -.19 -6%
Business Ally .07 2%

81


Regressions: HR Channel

Dependent Variable:
Functional Centers of Embedded Service Corporate
HR Expertise HR Centers HR

Credible Activist 21% 24% 25% 25% 24%

Culture and Change Steward 19% 20% 20% 21% 20%

Talent Mgr/Org Designer 19% 19% 20% 15% 20%

Strategy Architect 16% 17% 17% 14% 17%

Operational Executor 12% 10% 8% 15% 9%

Business Ally 13% 11% 9% 10% 11%

Multiple Regression R2 .420 .495 .404 .370 .482

82

HR Department

HR Department: Stakeholders

To what extent does your HR department have the capability to do the following?
Item % Mean
• Build HR practices that add value to external customers 11% 3.58
• Involve Customers in the design and delivery of HR practices 9% 3.32
• Build organizational capabilities that investors value (or those who provide 12% 3.49
capital)
• Involve investors (or those who provide capital) in the design and delivery 7% 3.06
of HR practices that create value for them
• Build HR practices that add value to the communities 11% 3.50
• Involve communities in the design and delivery of HR practices 8% 3.06
• Build organizational capabilities that help line managers turn strategy into 11% 3.79
action
• Involve line managers in the design and delivery of HR practices 11% 3.73

• Build an employee value proposition that lays out what is expected from 11% 3.79
employees and what they get in return
• Involve employees in design and delivery of HR practices that increase 10% 3.56
their abilities
83

HR Department

HR Department: HR focus

To what extent are the following true of your HR department?
Item % Mean
Ensure that HR strategy turns business goals into HR priorities 9% 3.82
Have an HR strategy that links HR practices to business strategy 11% 3.83
Ensure that organizational structure of HR is consistent with the business 13% 3.81
strategy
Align organizational structure of HR with the organizational structure of the 13% 3.83
business
Measure the impact of HR practices on business results 9% 3.41
Use empirical research to identify best HR practices 8% 3.39
Create a workforce scorecard 5% 3.27
Track employee engagement 7% 3.58
Manage external vendors of outsourced HR activities 6% 3.48
Ensure that HR is a cultural role model for the rest of the organization 6% 3.64
Build the capability of the HR department to add greater value 7% 3.74
Invest in training and development of HR professionals 7% 3.73

84

HR Department

HR Department: Value add activities

To what extent do the following HR practices designed and delivered by your HR
department add value to the business?

Item % Mean
Talent assessment 12% 3.85
Staffing 10% 3.94
Training and development 6% 3.90
Performance appraisal 11% 3.91
Rewards 6% 3.72
Internal communication 9% 3.67
Organization structure 13% 3.70
HR technology 8% 3.47
Workplace policies 10% 3.84
Coaching 11% 3.65
Work process design 4% 3.41

85

HRCS—Demographics

HR Professionals: Experience by Region
Years of Professional Experience
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
US & Canada Latin America Europe China Australia India
N=455 N=375 N=220 N=205 N=354 N=53

Less than 2 3 to 5 6 to 9 10 to 14 15 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 29 30+

Years in HR
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
US and Canada Latin America Europe China Australia India
N=455 N=375 N=220 N=340 N=205 N=53

Less than 2 3 to 5 6 to 9 10 to 14 15 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 29 30+

86

Pesquisa Estudos CompetêNcias Rh Por Dave Ulrich 2007

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (19)

Destaque

Destaque (6)

Semelhante a Pesquisa Estudos CompetêNcias Rh Por Dave Ulrich 2007

Semelhante a Pesquisa Estudos CompetêNcias Rh Por Dave Ulrich 2007 (20)

Mais de Luciana Bernadete Felix

Mais de Luciana Bernadete Felix (6)

Último

Último (20)

Pesquisa Estudos CompetêNcias Rh Por Dave Ulrich 2007