Human resources are currently undergoing a fascinating debate. The debate centres on whether or not to split the human resource function. It involves whether to split the human resources function. Several prominent HR thought leaders, including Ramcharan and Dave Ulrich, have addressed this topic. Josh Bersin and John Boudreau.
It doesn’t matter your opinion; it’s an interesting conversation. It’s a healthy discussion about the profession and its future.
While reading articles on splitting HR, I realized that the profession was changing. Although it may not be as rapid as people would like, the profession is evolving because the business world and the workforce are changing.
Adam Rogers, chief technology officer, shared his findings at this year’s Ultimate Software Connections Conference. He said that 52% have gone since 2000. Some of this can be attributed to the Great Recession, but others are due to the changing nature of work. The business landscape is changing through mergers, acquisitions and disruptive innovation.
The new generation of workers is another shift in the business world. This does not mean that I am referring to a particular age group. This new workforce is ready to work wherever and whenever. They make up 30% of the global workforce. They are likely to use at least three technology devices per day.
It is not the same thing to manage and onboard this workforce. To make employees succeed, we need new tools. Dan Pink, the author of “Drive”, discusses the three things employees desire in their professional lives.
Autonomy is having complete control over one’s work
Mastery – Learning opportunities to grow professionally and personally
Purpose: To be able to connect with your work
The reality is that these “anywhere and anytime workers” are overwhelmed. Complexity can kill productivity, creativity and innovation. Complexity can be seen as being too connected through technology and meetings. If we use technology too often, the thing that makes us efficient and effective can have the opposite effect.
Simplicity is the key. To engage employees, companies must be simple. They will be able to see great results if they do. Research shows that shareholder returns for companies with engaged employees are 24%, compared to 9%.
This is where I think some discussion about changing human resources comes from. It’s the need to streamline human resources processes to increase employee engagement. Human resources would be able to spend more time identifying and developing talented people if they can reduce the process.
One of the traditional HR processes must be simplified. Instead of focusing on events in an employee’s life, the traditional employee cycle focuses on how the employee discovers, unlocks, and fulfils their potential. Employee engagement is created by the person-centred life cycle. It focuses on:
- Development. No more linear process. This cycle is ongoing.
- Performance. It doesn’t matter where an employee is in the process. It is about what they are doing.
- Relationships. Employees and the company must understand each other’s simplicity to concentrate on employee success.
The most interesting aspect of the person-centred cycle is its impact on human resource departments. It emphasizes the right places.
Talent – Employees are the key to a company’s success. Finding good talent is becoming increasingly difficult. Quality experiences are what consumers expect. This strategy focuses on talent acquisition and development to support the business’ goals.
Time: There is not enough of it. Organizations must be able to save time dealing with customers, candidates, or employees.
Transparency – Companies realize today that being transparent and open to their work gives them a competitive advantage. This is not only for customers but also for the battle for talent.
In today’s labour market, candidates pick companies just as much as companies choose candidates. Candidates are looking for organizations that will develop and appreciate their potential. Companies seek to hire people willing to work hard and achieve their full potential.