News out today (23 Feb) that Saba Software will acquire Halogen Software for $293 million. So what will the new “SAB-o-GEN” baby look like? What are the Common genes, the Unique genes, and who has the Dominant ones. If you are a current client should you be prepared for ‘baby sitting’ while the infant grows up? Time will tell.
Originally published by Inside HR
The opportunity is ripe for HR to broaden its performance management definition and join forces with other performance management system owners within their organisations to establish a complete workforce performance framework, writes Rob Scott
A few years ago, HR functions would have been acknowledged as the custodian and owners of performance management together with the supporting technology. And if you went searching for a new performance management solution, you would struggle to find anything outside the HR technology vendor community.
But many would argue that traditional performance management has been less than successful in improving employee performance and business value over the last 50 years, and at most it was an annual or bi-annual exercise in HR process compliance by line managers and their subordinates. This naturally gave rise to alternate performance management solutions outside the HR framework.
Another trigger for change has been the move to the digital era. Modern technology has allowed the workforce to be increasingly mobile to the extent that jobs and location can be decoupled. The structure and nature of the workplace and workforce are radically transforming while the definition of an employee is largely irrelevant as more and more forms of “peripheral” work engagements are used. Contingent workers, “giggers”, freelancers, autonomous self-directed teams, agency workers, and outsourced/insourced teams are now part of the workforce fabric.
“Performance management can no longer be done in a standardised way, rather it must cater for the specific type of engagement relationship”
Generally the HR function hasn’t included these peripheral workers on their performance management radar, mainly because they are not permanent employees, are not linked to career or succession plans, are often not hired onto the core HR system, the performance process doesn’t cater for short-term activity or teams, or HR has no control or authority over their appointment. Most HR technology vendors have focussed their recent performance management software updates around the shift from rigid annual reviews of goals and objectives to tools that facilitate ongoing communication, coaching and mentoring of permanent employees. What they haven’t done is deal with effective measurement of and feedback to peripheral workers.
But away from HR’s eye’s other software systems, typically owned by operations, finance, marketing or procurement, tools such as Workforce Management (WFM), Contingent Workforce Management (CWM), accounts payable, freelance platforms, industry talent pools, social engagement platforms, social media platforms and others are actively geared to track performance against goals, assess quality, track activity through Internet of Things connectivity, provide team, company or individual feedback, and inform “re-hire” decisions.
Over the next five years, the size of the peripheral workforce will continue its upward trajectory. Analysts generally expect this number to be as high as 40 per cent of the total workforce by 2020. Even today, most new jobs created in Australia are part-time. Irrespective of the employment type, managers still need to focus and align their workforce to achieve their organisational and business specific objectives in the most efficient way.
“Continuity, engagement, feedback, opportunity and development are the collective cornerstone of an employer value proposition”
Performance management can no longer be done in a standardised way, rather it must cater for the specific type of engagement relationship. Some employees will still require traditional cascading-goal performance management, others may need social goal-setting and peer review, while others simply need a star rating and re-hire indicator.
Performance management now has co-ownership. The opportunity is ripe for HR to broaden its performance management definition and join forces with other performance management system owners within their organisations to establish a complete workforce performance framework. Continuity, engagement, feedback, opportunity and development are the collective cornerstone of an employer value proposition – it will be hard to achieve or maintain this if close to half the workforce is not included in a performance framework.
5 key considerations for HR
- HR departments are no longer the sole custodians of performance management solutions.
- The shift towards the digital economy has given rise to a new type of workforce which is not bound by time, location or permanency. Their performance management needs are significantly different to permanent full-time employees.
- Modern operations management, procurement, financial and marketing software solutions cater for relevant forms of performance management and feedback.
- Organisations need a workforce performance framework which is underpinned by choice and appropriateness rather than a single standardised approach to management of performance.
- As the contingent labour force increases as a percentage of total workforce, greater urgency is needed to build strong relationships with these teams and individuals through new performance management approaches and tools.
I’ve upgraded my F3 employee attraction model to a brand new F5 version. I’ve now included ‘Fortune” and “Feedback” as part of the essential elements of employee attraction and retention. Go on give your employees BIG F’s !!
Photo credit: Wei Xuan Seow – flickr
I recently co-facilitated a discussion forum between a group of CFO’s and CHRO’s on the importance of their relationship in building business value. During a question on what skills each other should build to understand the other role, an attending CFO said “It would be easy for a CFO to learn HR, but not the reverse”.
There was stunned silence from the room as the heat rose from the attending CHRO’s – they weren’t sure if they had just been told they were less capable, less intelligent or simply would never be considered an “equal” to the power and status of a CFO.
Was the CFO correct?
|From the perspective of:||CFO right or wrong?|
|Education and qualifications: Both roles are considered specialist functions which have underlying professional adherence. The CFO learns to comply, manage and manipulate a set of globally defined rules to legally reflect the financial value of their organization. The CHRO complies with medical ethical standards related to psychology and social science practices. Both qualifications are professionally recognized and offer advanced degrees to support this.||WRONG|
|Complexity of the role. At the basic level, CFO’s take their guidance from GAAP and legislation in terms of how they execute the outcomes of their role. They are generally instrumental in guiding the organization in terms of maximising financial value, reducing and effectively managing cost, effective use of capital, maintaining investment community confidence through accurate reporting, analysing financial risk and proposing corrective actions. The CHRO has different complexities to deal with as “people” and society are well, people. Rules for people are less defined or prescriptive. CHRO’s who don’t operate as administrators can juggle 40+ different interrelated elements across people, process, organization, legislation, technology and governance to create business value through people.||WRONG|
|Perception: The CFO is typically regarded as highly important, particularly for listed companies – mainly because their outputs reflect the success of the CEO and other executives, and the consequences of anything untoward in financial outputs could result in serious organizational and personal ramifications. In many organizations, HR is often perceived as an Administrative function with little clout at the C-Level. This is often true when HR has low levels of Maturity and spend most of their time executing operational transactions. In most cases this would be easy to learn.||RIGHT|
So the CFO was both right and wrong, but we should be cautious to blame the CFO for his views. We can assume that in this case, the HR leaders the CFO has interacted with have probably been of a lower maturity level, more administratively focused and had executive leadership who have yet to realize the importance and value of Human Capital from a shareholder perspective.
For a CHRO or CFO to really learn each others jobs would not be easy. Yes, you could easily learn the stuff like administration and basic accounting, but the underlying knowledge is far more complex than meets the eye.
How does your CFO view HR?
PHOTO CREDIT: brahim elmokaouim, FLICKR
You’ll be forgiven for thinking Chatbots are new technology, they’ve been around since the 1960’s in fact, but have been given a new lease of life with the recent developments in machine learning and artificial intelligence.
The word itself gives some hints as to what it does. “Chat” implies a form of informal communication and “bot” indicates the presence of robotics. In reality they are small software applications that automate tasks on your behalf over the internet and interact with you in a human-like way. Many of these tasks tend to be basic, repetitive and gimmicky , however we are seeing the emergence of sophisticated business chatbots that learn and adjust their behaviour and response.
The way you interact with these bots is casual and in natural language.
Most of the major tech houses like Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Apple are actively developing these bots, and you’ve probably used some of them such as Siri (iPhone), or Cortana (Microsoft), Alexa (Amazon Echo) and a host of text based chatbots now found in tools like Skype and Slack. (On a side note let’s hope soon-to-be parents don’t start naming their babies with similar names – can you imagine the chaos in the home and future workplaces).
IMPACTS FOR HR TECHNOLOGY
The HR environment is a perfect breeding ground for chatbots. Many of the transactions and data requests performed by managers and employees are simple. A well-developed chatbot could remove the need to access the HR solution directly, replaced with a simple voice request or a text message or email to carry out the task on behalf of the employee. It could be quicker than logging into the ESS/MSS app and broaden the means of interacting with the HR system. Here are a few examples:
- VOICE: “Hey Siri, what is my leave balance”
- VOICE: “Hey Alexa, let my boss know I’m feeling unwell”
- VOICE: “Hey Bob, mail me a list of team members due to attend safety training”
- TEXT: Send my Feb py advice
- MAIL: Approve John’s training expenses for May
The above are examples of simple requests that would typically interrogate the HR system as if it were the real user. Things like security profiles and data access would be applied to the bot in the same fashion as the human user. In all likelihood these simple request would include logical follow-up questions based on the in-built artificial intelligence:
- “You have 11.3 days of annual leave. You haven’t had any time off for 7 months, do you want to put in a request?”
- “I’m sorry to hear you are not well…as it’s a Monday please ensure you obtain a doctors certificate”
- “I’ve mailed you a list of team members attending safety training. Check in with Peter Smith, his record shows he doesn’t arrive 36% of the time”
RAMCO the Indian based Enterprise Software Vendor is providing their HR clients with e-mail communication to its HR system, citing speed as a primary motivator. They have a number of other tools in their other non-HR modules of similar ilk. Other vendors like ADP are building bots that automate HR tasks such as sending a job to a prospective hire and alerting employees to use up their annual leave.
The other likelihood is that Chatbots will be developed outside of the vendor products. There are a number of specialist platforms such as Kore who provide tools for bot self-development and others who provide existing libraries to commonly used systems.
Chatbots are unlikely to replace the need for slick end-user interfaces in the short term, but they are potential big cost savers from a vendor development perspective as well as for software licencing.
As chatbots become more proficient and operate like real assistants or concierge services, people will want to use them, creating a demand. Hopefully vendors and developers have their ears to the ground.
This seems somewhat of an odd statement to make in todays technology obsessed world – surely HR technology has allowed People practitioners to greatly improve efficiency by reducing manual and paper-based activities, improving data access & reporting, reducing errors, helping employees make better decisions and ensuring compliance to policy and procedure.
This is of course true at a transaction level, but herein lies the problem. The way vendors have generally designed HR technology is not an accurate reflection of how professional HR and Talent managers think, nor does it signal an understanding of the complexities in Professional HR Management. In fact the slicing-up of HR into different software modules along ‘logic’ and ‘transaction’ lines of thinking has created and perpetuates the view that HR is simply a set of somewhat loosely interrelated basic transactions.
And surely that can’t be too difficult to get right! ah, yeah! But yet time and time again we see HR functions under attack for poor performance and low value contribution. With these perceptions abound, no wonder there is doubt among some C-levels that HR is needed.
If only HR Management was so simple and logical. But it isn’t. There are a significant amount of people dimensions used by HR professionals which are not logically inclined or lend themselves to be developed into a ‘transaction’, let alone a software module. Think about important people management facets such as ‘Ethics’ , ‘Style’, ‘Diversity’ and ‘Values’ – these are key HR influences in achieving particular strategic business outcomes, and they are fundamentally intertwined into such things as learning, performance, development, communication and knowledge sharing. But they are ‘non-existing pieces’ in the HR software puzzle.
This is not a jibe at HR Software vendors. In fact some vendors clearly understand the impact of these gaps and are working hard to address them. Particularly those vendors who are focused on superior technical integration between modules.
They realize that while they have in many cases reduced HR to modular transactions to make it easy for end users, they also understand that the all-important ‘HR complexity value factor’ is partly resolved when effective and seamless integration across these modules occurs. The combination of modular interaction offers some support in achieving strategic HR objectives. Keep going vendors, there is lots more to do in this space!
HR Technology has inadvertently contributed to a weakening of professional HR outputs, but the finger should however point directly at the HR leader who has allowed the function to be reduced to a set of modules and transactions.
It’s an easy way out for poor performing HR leaders, and provides an opportunity to shift the blame onto technology. Professional HR management is not an easy job, in fact it is highly complex, with over 40 major elements or activities being continuously juggled to produce desired business outputs. Those that are successful also understand how HR technology should be used and positioned to enable people to achieve great things.
Do you have an opinion on this?
that’s the whole blog 🙂