Dave
Ulrich and Udai Pareek: Agenda for Future of HR in India
T.
V. Rao
Recently I was asked by UNICEF to address their HR
Network in Emergencies on the Business Partner Model. Naturally the work one should talk about in
this is the work of Dave Ulrich and his team. Dave has done a marvellous job in
the last two decades in championing HR cause and gives it the dignity it
deserves. He lifted up the status of HR Function to very high levels by stating
in his Business Partner model HR as a strategic partner, HR as an employee
champion, change manager, leader and administrative efficiency holder and so
on.
In
one of his recent writings Dave has suggested that, “.the aim of the business partner model is to help HR professionals
integrate more thoroughly into business processes and to align their day-today
work with business outcomes”. Dave
further observed that “Business success today depends more
than ever on softer agendas such as talent and organisation capabilities. HR
professionals are centrally involved in providing the right people with the
right skills in the right job at the right time. The 'war' for talent rages and
will likely continue in an increasingly global knowledge economy. HR
professionals also partner with line managers to identify and create capabilities
such as speed to market, innovation, leadership, collaboration, fast change and
culture management. These less tangible business activities increasingly have
an impact on shareholder value and are top of mind among CEOs and general
managers” (http://www.hrmagazine.co.uk/hr/features/1014777/the-business-partner-model-lessons-learned).
Dave
further goes on to say that...” Effective HR professionals not only
work with business leaders to draft strategies, they also focus and collaborate
on how to make strategies happen. Talent and organisational issues become the
mechanisms to best deliver a strategy. Business leaders are increasingly attuned
to the importance of talent and organisation as a way to turn aspirations into
actions and strategic intent into business results as they co-ordinate closely
with their HR professionals”.
Dave shares a concern that some HR professionals cannot perform the work
of a business partner and cannot link their day-to-day work to business results.
He presents evidence from research that some successful HR professionals have
moved fast into these roles and have demonstrated their success by enhancing
their business knowledge and performing strategic roles. He further observes
that...” it is undoubtedly the case that some HR professionals may never become
business partners. They are mired in the past administrative HR roles where conceptually
or practically they cannot connect their work to business results”.
“Being a business partner requires HR professionals to have new
knowledge and skills. Traditionally, HR professionals have tended to focus on
negotiating and managing terms and conditions of work and administrative
transactions. The required HR skills focused on admin issues such as policy
setting and administration, union negotiation and managing employee
transactions. Today, the business partner model requires HR professionals also
to connect their work directly to the business. Some HR practitioners lack
these skills. If they fail to acquire them, their ability to function as
business partners is diminished. This strongly supports the business partner
model.”
Whatever Dave states seem to be very true with India. If any the
percentage of HR business Partners in my view is far below the 20 he assumes as
a part of 20-60-20 principle. I assume in India the principle perhaps is
10-20-70. For any 100 HR Professionals you will find 90% doing very traditional
HR roles and ensuing administrative efficiency and totally unable to rise to
the Business partner level. It will be
interesting to pick up the BT 500 companies and see the number of them who have
HR Leaders that are business partners. In fact we may find less than 10%. NHRDN or some of the Institutions that teach
HR may undertake this research. Unfortunately this may not happen as it has not
happened for 40 years since the time the first HR Department was introduced and
the role of HR function formulated.
When Udai Pareek formulated the principles in designing HR Function he clearly
outlines in the year 1977 most of the roles talked about by Dave in the last
decade and a half. For example in 1977 itself in the L&T consulting report (available
from AHRD, Ahmedabad) the following roles of HR function were envisaged:
1.
The main function of HR is to help the
company increase its “enabling capabilities”
2.
Integrate development of people with
organization development (similar to strategic partner)
3.
Balance adaptation to change and
changing organizational culture (akin to change manager of Dave)
4.
Ensuring responsibility for the
function (Udai talked about the credibility of the function)
5.
Balancing differentiation and
integration, specialisation and diffusion etc.
6.
Maximise individual autonomy through
increased responsibility
7.
Promote participative decision making
8.
And many more...
Almost 40 years ago when the first dedicated HRD department was
conceptualised and separated from the personnel function, the assumption was
that in India combining administrative role with development roles does not work.
Hence those who are to perform development roles should be given a separate mandate
to do so. Otherwise administrative roles interfere with developmental roles and
what suffers is development. In India Development waits and gives way to administrative
efficiencies. The current scenario in the country where there is a decision paralysis
is a good indicator. HR has suffered in most companies as they have not followed
the wisdom given several years ago by academics like Udai Pareek. In fact in many
organizations Udai Pareek recommended that Performance appraisal ratings be
delinked from rewards to give a development role to appraisals. L&T itself
found it difficult to follow as people in HR changed and administrative convenience
took over development for several years. Many organizations went in the reverse
direction and even started applying forced distribution to ratings- a totally
opposite of the spirit of HRD. Udai’s principles and thought were far ahead of
many others. Udai was not an aggressive person. He never promoted his thought
and research aggressively. Unfortunately India also is not an aggressive country
in promoting its thought and philosophy. We leave it for others to learn and
take it at their pace.
In spite of having such wonderful conceptualisation why has it not
worked? The reasons are not difficult to find. It is only after getting disappointed
with the slow movement of HRD we started the Centre for HRD at XLRI. When we
found that a centre in an academic Institute can only do some things and HRD
needs to be spread at faster speed we founded the National HRD Network. When
the Network is only doing conferences and not being able to generate enough research
and disseminate the same the Academy got started.
An examination of all these bodies (CHRD, NHRDN, and AHRD) and their
success and failure are symbolic of the success or failure of HRD and the HR
Function and the HR Professionals as Business Partners. I would have no opinion
but to say that In spite of Dave Ulrich, Udai Pareek and many other stalwarts
in HR in this part of the world we perhaps have less that 10% Business partners
and a significantly high percentage of administrative efficiency handlers and
routine HR managers.
The way forward is National-wide soul searching by all HR professionals and
Professional bodies why we failed to move as fast as we should shave when the
research based wisdom being given from the University of Michigan has been available
at the IIMA from mid seven ties and at XLRI and NHRDN from mid-eighties and
AHRD from early nineties?
Very true sir, but the astonishment is of the fact that most HR professionals even refrain from an in-depth analysis of HR role like above.........It is high time the books come to reality for the better benefit of the masses.
ReplyDelete