“Innovation in HR Education: Reasons to Revamp.”

Theme: “Innovation in HR Education: Reasons to Revamp.”Agenda for Indian Institutions to align to Global curricula: Some thoughts
Prof. T. V. Rao

(Summary of the Points made at SHRM Conference “Velocity: Accelerating HR”SHRM India Annual Conference and Exposition on September 25^th, 2015, New Delhi by T. V. Rao)

HR in India:

HR Function in India when it evolved in  mid seventies included:  (i) HRD, (ii) Worker Affairs (Employee Relations and Industrial Relations called as Worker Affairs), and, Personnel Management or HR Administration (PM or HRA). See designing and Managing HR systems by Pareek and Rao, 1982. HRD as it originated in India meant: (i)  Competency Building + (ii) Commitment Building + (iii) Culture Building unlike in the west where it meant essentially Training and Development. Today in India with technology & other developments HRA getting Outsourceable while HRD and IR & ER are not. HR in India has its own unique context which needs to be understood. Indian mind is different in some aspects from the western mind and this needs to be appreciated in the application of any HR Education based on competency models evolved in the west.

What is HR Education?

We define HR education as all the knowledge, attitudes, skills, values, motivations, traits and qualities required to enhance competence, commitment and sustainable culture that enables people to: (i)  to spot, utilize, and develop talent (self or others), (ii) to enjoy work and make productive contributions, and (iii)  achieve the respective organizational, community, group or goals at the same time meeting personal aspirations.  

Who Needs HR Education?

All People Managers need HR education. These include: (i) HR Professionals or HR Facilitators, (ii) Line Managers & Supervisors, (iii) Employee Unions & Association Representatives, including workmen, filed level staff and grassroots level workers in the case of Government and NGOs (iv) CEOs. The targets of HR education  need to be extended to (i) corporate sector, (ii) Government, and (iii) NGOs and those working for charitable organizations and movements. These can be represented in a matrix from:

Focal Groups needing HR Education	Sectors
	Corporate	Government and Public services	NGOs and Voluntary action Groups
CEOs/ HODs/ Top Management	CEOs, MDs, Heads of Functions	Civil servants state & central level, IAS, IFS, IRS, etc. Secretaries, MDs of Public services	Presidents, Trustees, Office bearers, Founders, Secretaries treasurers
Line Managers & Supervisory staff	Junior, middle and senior managers in executive or managerial capacities 2nd and third line executives	Heads of Functions Project staff execution staff, Dy. Secretaries, Section officers, State, district and Taluka level functionaries	All supervisory staff
Workmen, Field level workers, Their Unions and Associations	Workmen, Operators, Pilots, teachers	Teachers, Health workers, filed level staff in villages, at  Blocks and d districts their employee organizations	Filed workers, volunteers
HR Facilitators or Professionals	CHROs, HR Managers, L&OD Managers, Talent Managers, OD managers and all other forms of HR facilitators	All HR Managers in Universities, Public utilities, community services etc. All  professionals with different titles and names	All R professionals with different titles and names
These can be further classified in terms of levels like entry level, juniors, middle level and seniors and Top levels

As the table reveals the focal points or the targets groups of HR education is vast.

HR Education for HR facilitators:

When HR Function was evolved in L&T in 1974 - HR Department was designed to be a facilitator of the 3 Cs (Competence commitment and culture building) and Line Managers were the implementers or users and beneficiaries of HR. In fact line managers were trained to plan their performance, review, coach, motivate their juniors learn to identify development needs, plan development and careers. In mid seventies itself the line managers trained as HR facilitators informally called themselves L&T University. The success of HR was envisaged to be on the day when the HRD department makes itself redundant by making every one a HR d Managers for self and the team. Over a period of time HR focused more on themselves and has not fully developed others to be taking care of their own HR. Hence the need for HR education of targets groups other than HR facilitators had become more crucial now than before.  

As far the HR education for HR facilitators in s concerned the issue is where do we focus? Competency building for HRA (Outsourceable HR) Or HRD (Intellectual capital Building HR)? Unfortunately HR education hitherto focused on HR Administration or outsourceable HR even for HR professionals. Good HR professionals see more opportunities as consultants and see less opportunities for implementing good HR in their corporation’s s they have reduced themselves over a period of time to HR administrations rather than builders of the 3 Cs.  

Competency Models

There are competency models for HR Professionals globally and in India. These include those by

(i)                            SHRM ( Nine competencies globally tested)

(ii)                          Dave Ulrich (six global competencies)

(iii)                        NHRDN –HRSCAPE in process (Eight plus four), and

(iv)                        TVRLS (ten competencies)

All these models are for HR professionals and models like the one by SHRM define the competency levels for each competency with indicators in some details. Competencies are contextual and all models have serious limitations in causing success in different settings. At best they can be good preparatory for success and lay foundation but they have to be contextualized to enable everyone to perform and achieve results. Thus as I have argued elsewhere competency models can be misleading unless we interpret them properly, treat them with respect and give them the importance they deserve and nothing more. No amount of details in competency models can substitute individual idiosyncrasies. For example competency models required for short term target oriented fast changing organizations like Google, Flipcart, Amazon, face book, long term investment and gestation period and high investment based manufacturing organizations in power sector, oils sector, renewable energies, steel, automobiles and the like. HR managers in these organizations need different types of competencies suitable to them and have to stay longer to implement any HR interventions. Similarly HR facilitators in MSMEs (Micro Medium and Small Enterprises) need  different competencies depending on the stage of evolution of the MSME. Competency models use one fit for all solutions. Hence they have limitations and need to be adapted. However the competency models do offer basic education required being successful in any setting and the contextualization is the job of respective sectors or organizations. Professional bodies,  educational institutions and consulting organizations have to work closely with the respective entities to contextualize the competencies.     

There are no Models yet for other categories in the matrix above: There is body of Knowledge in the form of  Organizational Behavior, OD, Self management, Personal and  Interpersonal competencies, Team management etc. taught in management schools without any systematic and integrated models and they have served some good purpose.

It was HR’s role to develop such models and make itself dispensable which it has not been able to do so far. As a result our M B A Programs remained lopsided. For example in most B-schools HR & OB courses don’t exceed 10% - 15% of content and time while all alumni of B-schools acknowledge the importance of people & Talent Management. Srikant Datar in his Harvard Business school study of top hiring companies in the US has indicated that what industry expects from MBA education is I filled with gaps in many areas. In fact the areas he outlined like leadership, change management, creativity and innovations, entrepreneurship, global understanding etc. are all filled with soft skills. The same has been found in another IIMA study by a group of faculty.

 HR has not done its job of Making “Line Managers” “People Managers”- failed in the 3 Cs. HR’s focus has been on those that give them “Direct Power” and not those that give them “Expert Power” or build Intellectual capital

Even within HR, Competency models are not culture and context sensitive

Lifting up HR Function: 7 Challenges of HR

If we follow the process of development of a competency model we will have interesting insights. A competency model is built on listing of critical competencies required to perform most roles in a function successfully. It starts with the purpose of the function, lists tasks and significant activities, lists knowledge attitudes and skills etc. required to perform them and then group them into levels depending on the level (junior, senior Manager, AGM, DGM, VP, and CEO Etc.) of the person performing the same as indicators. The most critical part of the competency mapping process is the activity or task list. Unfortunately once the competency framework is prepared by experts the task list id forgotten and thus the competency g frameworks deny the contextualisation to the user. For example we have defined at TVRLS while lifting up the HR function, the following new tasks to be the future as additional and critical tasks of all CHROs and HR managers:

1. Thinking ahead of their CEOs

2. Influencing the thinking of CEO or Business Heads

3. Restructuring their role or structuring it appropriately

4. Developing Leaders and Leadership Pipeline

5. Continuous learning and learning from juniors (Gen Y)

6. Making the corporation innovative and promoting innovations

7. Developing Intellectual capital through Culture and Values

Unfortunately these don’t figure out in many of the competency models.

This is to make a point that competency models need to be reviewed and updated continuously and contextualized continuously.

HRSCAPE: NHRDN

HRSCAPE consists of eight functional competencies (as shown in the outer periphery) and four behavioural competencies (shown in the inner circle).

Each also has sub-competencies. For instance, strategic HRM has four sub-competencies: understanding the business context, HR strategy, aligning HR architecture, and contribution in business strategy.

The competency framework provides for assessment at four levels: basic, competent, advanced, and expert.

TVRLS Competency List

1.     Business Knowledge

2.     Functional excellence

3.     Leadership and Change Management

4.     Strategic Thinking

5.     Personal credibility

6.     Technology Savvy

7.     Personnel Management and Admin skills

8.     Vision of the Function & Entrepreneurship

9.     Learning attitude and self management

10.                        Execution Skills

SHRM Competencies

1. Human Resource Technical Expertise and Practice
2. Relationship Management
3. Consultation
4. Organizational Leadership and Navigation
5. Communication
6. Global and Cultural Effectiveness
7. Ethical Practice
8. Critical Evaluation
9. Business Acumen

Ulrich Global Competencies

1. Strategic petitioners who understand evolving business contexts,
2. Credible activists who build relationships of trust.
3. Capability builders who define, audit and create organization capabilities
4. Change champions who initiate and sustain change 
5. HR innovators and integrators who look for new ways to do HR practices 
6. Technology proponents who use technology for efficiency to connect employees 

Which Model does Indian Institutions Follow?

Most institutions follow no model but their own curricula evolved on the basis of faculty and institutional competencies evolved over a period of time. Some of them who use practitioners as visiting faculty bring competencies that industry needs but this is done in an ad hoc way as practitioner faculty available. It is only in recent times thanks to SHRM institutions like the We school, NMIMS and professional bodies like the NIPM have in principle started using the SHRM competency models. XLRI started offering on line education programs.

What institutes need to do?

1. Review and develop “People Management Competency Models” (PMCMs) for other categories presented in the matrix earlier.
2. Develop curricula & Focus on Executive Education
3. Use professional bodies: SHRM, NIPM, ISTD, NHRDN, CII, FICCI, LMAs etc.
4. Collaborate first among themselves to learn from each other use each other resources to lift up the education jointly and then compete
5. Develop Faculty (FDPs with Professional bodies)
6. Use practitioners
7. Start Doctoral Level research Programs

How do we Adapt global competencies into the curriculum?

1. Cntextualise competencies and curricula to country and sector and target group requirements using the matrix presented above
2. Focus on Employee Categories: HR, Line, CEOs, Supervisors, Union leaders, filed workers, etc
3. Develop models after some research and research for Startups, MSMEs, Mid size corporate of the long gestation period and short gestation period entities
4. Separate models used for Large corporate: Public, private, MNVCs, Multi-locational etc.
5. Offer education packages according to contextualized competency requirements
6. Start Executive Development programs for all categories
7. Offer them level wise and category-wise
8. Use Technology and on line learning
9. Modify packages available at SHRM or Institutions like XLRI, Xavier University, TISS, NMIMS, We school, SCMHRD, Gitam University, Amity Business School, IIMs, IITs and all those how offer relevant education in HR

What does the HR Community need to do to make this change?

     

1. Recognize that HR is for all and not merely for HR professionals
2. Revisit the basics of HR
3. Redefine the role of HR
4. Redefine and reorient CEOs
5. There is enough of Body of Knowledge in current offerings of Institutes, professionals bodies and consulting organizations
6. Appreciate the Diversity & Complexity of the country and use existing resources

I thank SHRM for giving me this opportunity and Professor Dr. Wayne F. Cascio, (Distinguished Professor, University of Colorado, and Robert H. Reynolds Chair in Global Leadership, Academic Chair, CU Executive MBA Program of the Business School, University of Colorado Denver) for his talk on the global scenario and SHRM curricula.

tvrao@tvrao.com
www.tvrls.com

I reproduce belwo comments by Dr. Wayne Cascio on this post: 29-09-2015

 Your post covers a number of topics, but I wish to focus only on two of them. Regarding competency models, you note with respect to SHRM's competency model, that none of the competencies have been "globally tested." What do you mean by that? More than 32,000 HR professionals from 33 countries (including India) helped to develop the SHRM Competency model.  There is much content-oriented validity evidence to support the model. So I don't understand what you mean by the word "tested".

(This was due to an typo error in the first edition of the blog where the author typed none in place of nine and the error got corrected. Thanks to Wayne's reply.) 

Second, I do not agree, particularly with respect in the context of certification, that the lack of contextual cues diminishes the usefulness of any assessment of global competencies. I agree that context is highly important in any selection context,  but SHRM's competency model is intended to be used in the context of certification. This is quite different. Consider the CPA exam, for example. It is a certification test, but does not test contextual accounting knowledge in, for example, oil and gas accounting, or currency-hedging accounting. That is the responsibility of the hiring organization. It can provide context based on a host of variables, such as industry, stage of evolution of the firm, size of the firm, or span of operations.

That said, I believe that it has been demonstrated clearly in the research literature that situational judgment items designed to assess behavioral competencies predict subsequent success in a variety of settings. Video-based, international situational judgment items that demonstrate culture fairness have been developed, as indicated in the following study: "Putting Judging Situations Into Situational Judgment Tests: Evidence From Intercultural Multimedia SJTs," by Thomas Rockstuhl, Soon Ang, and Kok-Yee Ng (Nanyang Technological University); Filip Lievens (Ghent University), and  Linn Van Dyne (Michigan State University). Citation: Journal of Applied Psychology, 2015, Vol. 100, No. 2, 464–480.

I believe that this is an important development, and that global HR competencies can be assessed in a culture-fair manner. In my view, they clearly have a place in HR certification.

It was a pleasure to meet you and to present with you at the SHRM-India conference last week.

Best wishes,

Wayne

Wayne F. Cascio, Ph.D.

Sept.-Dec. 2015: Distinguished Visiting Scholar

Foster School of Business

University of Washington, Seattle, WA

Distinguished Professor, University of Colorado, and
Robert H. Reynolds Chair in Global Leadership
Academic Chair, CU Executive MBA Program
The Business School,  University of Colorado Denver
Email: Wayne.Cascio@ucdenver.edu

Reply from Dr. Rao 29-09-2015
Dear Wayne:

Many thanks for your comments. It is so nice of you to have taken time to read and comment on my blog.  

I fully agree with your comments. I am aware of the work done by SHRM. In the blog there is a typo. The sentence SHRM (nine globally tested competencies) was typed as (None tested competencies) what a difference it makes if an "i" is replaced by an "o" in a word. Sorry that I should have read it more carefully before I posted. 

The second set of observations on assessment- In indian context a lot of facking is possible on situational tests measuring attitudes and personality. We have consistently maintained that for  promotion and recruitment purposes such tests should be cautiously used. We have enough evidence to say that what people say they will do they may not do. Actual behaviours are better indicators of the competence as the McClelland's school of thought implies. In fact the entire competency movement came from the finding that competencies are to be inferred from what people have done. Having said that I am not against testing for certification at all. We use a lot of them for development centers. 

Enjoyed reading your comments and may I have your permission to reproduce then in the blog as your comments? Warm regards

TV  

Further Comments by Dr. Wayne 29-09-2015

Thanks for your  insightful comments TV. I agree that actual behaviors are the ultimate indicator of what a person actually will do with respect to any given competency. In selection contexts, hiring managers typically focus on background checks or work-sample tests (e.g., making a sales call in an interview for a sales position) or assessment centers. With respect to situational judgment tests,  a recent meta-analysis, based on 134 validity coefficients and 28,494 individuals, found the following average  levels of validity for various types of skills: teamwork (0.38), leadership (0.28), interpersonal skills (0.25), and job knowledge and skills (0.19). In each of these skill domains, video-based SJTs had stronger relationships with job performance than paper-and-pencil SJTs. Source: Christian, Edwards, & Bradley (2010). Situational judgment tests: Constructs assessed and meta-analysis of their criterion-related validities. Personnel Psychology, 63, pp. 83-117.

 Perhaps more important, SJTs have been shown to make the prediction of job performance more accurate above and beyond job knowledge, cognitive ability, job experience, and conscientiousness, while showing less adverse impact based on ethnicity as compared with general cognitive ability tests. Source: McDaniel & Nguyen (2001). Situational judgment tests: A review of practice and constructs assessed.International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, pp. 103-113. 

In short, the validity of situational judgment tests is fairly well established. They DO predict subsequent behavior in a variety of contexts, albeit far from perfectly. I don't think we disagree overall, but people need to be aware of the research literature regarding the validity of these measures of competencies.

You certainly have my permission to publish my comments on your blog. 

Best wishes,

Wayne