Fluent Essays

1 About the author Eugene Burke’s career to date includes roles as a military psychologist for the Royal Air Force, United States Air Force and NATO, establishing the first occupational psychology unit for the London Fire Brigade, establishing his own consultancy as well as more recent leadership roles in SHL and CEB for R&D, product development, product management, consulting services and, most recently, in developing and applying solutions in talent analytics. His recent projects include the talents that drive innovation effectiveness, the future of the retail bank, improving the success of high- potential programmes, how organisations can use analytics to drive more effective investment in graduate recruitment, how HR can play a key role in managing risk for organisations, addressing the challenges to global assessment programmes, as well as unpacking myths around gender differences in leadership potential and what the differences between the generations mean for effective talent management. As well as scientific articles, book chapters and books, Eugene has published articles in Talent Management as well as in T+D Magazine, People Matters and the Harvard Business Review, and featured in articles for The Times, Financial Times, Forbes and the Wall Street Journal. Eugene has held leadership positions for professional bodies such as the Association of Test Publishers, the Association of Business Psychologists, the British Psychological Society, ISO and the International Test Commission. In 2014, Eugene was identified as one of the top 50 global influences in talent analytics in a LinkedIn poll. People and the creation of value Why organisations need to up their game on understanding, measuring and leveraging human capital Eugene Burke, Analytics Adviser to the CIPD What marks the competent organisation is its capability to create value through its people. This is hardly a new insight. People, whether they are leaders defining strategy, managers responsible for executing that strategy or employees committed to delivering on an organisation’s goals, have been and always will be an essential driver of value-creation. They are also a critical factor in whether value can be and is destroyed. What is new is the opportunity for organisations to marshal the wealth of data they hold on people, the tools now available to use that data to effect and the emergence of coherent ways of thinking about how the flow of value-creation is enabled, or not, through people investments. This is more than just a call to action for HR functions and HR professionals. It is an essential competency for leaders and managers in organisations because it speaks to the quality of decision-making in this information age. To build that organisational competency, decision-makers, whatever function they may sit in – including those in finance and HR – need to understand how the notion of value has changed and is changing. They need to understand how an investment in people links to value and be able to track and measure whether those people investments are delivering value today and can be expected to deliver value tomorrow. They need to be able to do that in two ways. First, they need to be able to answer the question of whether those investments are building the people capabilities the organisation needs – that is, is the organisation creating human capital today that will sustain it into the future? Second, they need to be able to demonstrate how people investments are delivering value, whether that is in the form of more-tangible financials or the more-intangible forms of value that are increasing in importance as current thinking about how to define value matures. 2 The changing nature of leadership quality While the pressures on organisations and their leaders have increased, so have our expectations about the quality of decisions that leaders make. Those pressures and our expectations for decision qualityi are framed by powerful forces in this information age (Table 1). Organisations are now more exposed than ever before. Social media, a 24/7/365 online news media as well as the arrival of companies that publish employee perceptions of their employers and their leaders1 may not have i Decision quality, or DQ, refers to the choices made under dynamic circumstances and the actions that follow from those choices. The quality of a decision can be judged by six characteristics: setting the right frame, considering alternatives, gathering meaningful data, clarifying values and trade-offs, the logic underpinning the evaluation of data and alternatives, and whether a decision results in a commitment to action. rendered organisations fully transparent, but they have made them considerably more translucent. From the outside, we may only as yet be able to see the shadows behind corporate walls, but those corporate walls are becoming considerably less opaque. As survey after survey shows, political and economic uncertainty has become the new normal.2,3,4 The issue for all stakeholders who depend on an organisation for employment and for the goods and services that the organisation provides is not so much that leaders are having to deal with uncertainty, but how effectively they are planning for and managing the potential impact of uncertainty on their organisations. Executives report that they feel the pace of change is increasing by virtue of globalisation5 and the technologies now embedded in our working and personal lives. This is a growing concern for all of us generally,6 so how do we know that those who lead organisations are keeping up with the pace of change and how is that reflected in the quality of decisions made about strategy, execution of that strategy and people? It would seem that there is something of a paradox around pace. On the one hand, while executives are struggling to keep up with what they see as the increasing pace of business, evidence shows that pace in the form of innovations, new product launches and successful company start-ups is slowing down.7 This paradox, real or otherwise, says something about the confidence we have that leaders and managers are focused on what is critical to drive and sustain performance in their organisations. Yet, in one recent industry study, only 50\% of organisations surveyed said they had confidence in their systems for monitoring the performance of their organisations.8 That raises the issue of how organisations demonstrate effective governance and whether boards and the C-suite have a clear line of sight on the people practices in their organisation. Informed leadership and management is a significant factor in gaining the buy-in of employees to executing organisational goals and meeting organisational targets, and here is where those softer people intangibles present a very tangible risk to organisational success. To compound the challenges faced by organisations, survey after survey show that organisations are failing to engage their Exposure The corporate fire wall protecting what happens inside organisations is becoming less opaque and more porous to news and social media. How effective an organisation is in managing and engaging employees is now more exposed to the outside world. Uncertainty Two of the most consistent concerns reported by CEO and executive surveys is ongoing uncertainty impacting on business performance. Globalisation and regulation are the two factors most frequently reported. Governance While governments have focused on the competence of boards, the issue of governance emerges among employee and customer surveys as reflected in their perceptions of management competence (employees) and quality of product and service delivery (customers). Trust Persistent lack of trust among employees and customers presents risks of customer disaffection and employee turnover with impacts on operational costs as well as brand reputation. Table 1: Five forces shaping decision quality 3 employees,9,10 a trend that raises a very tangible risk to organisations at a time when labour markets are becoming tighter and mobility in those labour markets is on the rise. That risk is high on the radar of leaders in the for-profit and not-for-profit sectors, with the retention of staff growing as a concern among organisations globally.11 The nature of organisational value So how do organisations make the intangible more tangible and strengthen decision quality? They start by articulating the value they intend to deliver and are delivering, and they develop methods for capturing the full value proposition they offer across stakeholders within and outside the organisation. That means they need to understand the full nature of value. They develop clearer articulations of capital, including human capital. For some, the term human capital may feel dehumanising. It isn’t. By developing a clearer shared understanding that people and people processes – whether that is through hiring or training or reward – should be seen as a form of investment, they are actually showing a concrete commitment to better organisational governance on behalf of all stakeholders, including employees. They develop insight into how people create value and where to invest in their people to sustain value-creation. To do that, they need to develop frameworks that enable them to understand the value-creation process and optimise their investments in people. Those frameworks enable them to marshal their data and apply more joined-up thinking to gain insights into what is working and what is not. One clear benefit of those frameworks is to surface assumptions and challenge the intuitions that have led organisations into trouble all too frequently. They are able to put a number on the value that people investments, alongside other investments, are delivering, explain how people sit within the flow of value-creation in their organisation, and how that flow of value-creation will be sustained into the future through the people investments being made today. And, all of this starts with an understanding of how the conception of value has changed and is changing. The way in which we judge the value created by organisations has changed. Take the valuation of publicly quoted companies and take those quoted on the S&P market index as an example (Figure 1). In 1975, 83\% of an S&P company’s market capitalisation was down to tangibles – the assets that can be more readily converted into cash. Figure 1: Components of S&P 500 market value (\%) 0 20 40 60 80 100 83 68 20 1632 17 32 80 8468 Intangible assets Tangible assets 1975 1985 1995 2005 2015* *Source Ocean Tomo, LLC 2015 Then the 1990s came along and the contribution of tangibles to company value had dropped to only 32\% and had halved again by 2015 to only 16\%. In short, and over just four decades, the contribution of tangibles to an S&P company’s valuation dropped from four-fifths to around one-sixth.12 This shift in what drives a publicly quoted company’s valuation raises a clear question: how do you put a value on intangibles because they are, by definition, intangible? Put a different way, how do you predict a company’s future performance and its potential to create sustainable value when much of that value will come from assets that are non-financial? Those in the finance and investment worlds are coming at this question by looking at how companies themselves define value and how they articulate the mechanisms through which they will convert the capital they have into value.13, 14 The six capitals of the modern economy Just as the notion of value has changed, so the notion of the types of capital needed to create value is changing. If intangibles are the dominant driver of a company’s valuation, financial capital provides too narrow a view of what the organisation has available to it or needs to create value. That view, a need for broader understanding of different types of capital, is growing and maturing. Take the six capitals model offered by the Institute of Integrated Reporting (IIR).15 This 4 model extends the notion of capital beyond the financial to include natural capital, manufactured capital, intellectual capital, social (and relationship capital) and human capital (Table 2). Financial Capital The pool of funds available to an organisation for use in the production of goods or the provision of services obtained through financing, such as debt, equity or grants, or generated through operations or investments Manufactured Capital Manufactured physical objects (as distinct from natural physical objects) that are available to an organisation for use in the production of goods or the provision of service, including buildings, equipment and infrastructure (such as roads, ports, bridges, and waste and water treatment plants) Intellectuals Capital Organisational, knowledge-based intangibles including intellectual property, such as patents, copyrights, software, rights and licences: ‘organisational capital’ such as tacit knowledge, systems, procedures and protocols, and intangibles associated with the brand and reputation that an organisation has developed Human Capital People’s competencies, capabilities and experience, and their motivations to innovate, including their alignment with and support for an organisation’s governance framework, risk management approach and ethical values such as recognition of human rights; ability to understand, develop and implement an organisation’s strategy; and loyalties and motivations for improving processes, goods and services, including their ability to lead, manage and collaborate Social & Relationship Capital The institutions and relationships established within and between each community, group of stakeholders and other networks (and an ability to share information) to enhance individual and collective well-being. Social and relationship capital includes shared norms, and common values and behaviours; key relationships, and the trust and willingness to engage that an organisation has developed and strives to build and protect with customers, suppliers, business partners, and other external stakeholders; and an organisation’s social licence to operate Natural Capital All renewable and non-renewable environmental stocks that provide goods and services that support the current and future prosperity of an organisation. It includes air, water, land, forests and minerals as well as biodiversity and ecosystem health Table 2: How the notion of capital has grown beyond the financial This extension of the notion of capital speaks as much to organisations in the public and not-for- profit sectors as it does to for-profit organisations. As the public purse has tightened in response to recent financial crises and economic uncertainty, debates about the merits of fiscal and monetary policy are essentially debates about the maintenance or erosion of social capital in the quality of services delivered, and in intellectual and human capital stock available to support ongoing economic growth. Think of health and education as two of many possible examples. They have finite resources in the form of finance as well as plant and equipment. Those are the tangibles. The challenge that both sectors face is how to leverage those tangibles and meet the expectations of stakeholders – that is, us – in terms of the quality of life enjoyed today and that can be expected in the future. In the charity sector, actions to raise funds have come into question largely because of the negative impacts reported on social capital – essentially, the trust and comfort donors have in the charity organisations that rely on those donations. But, to have impact, the notion of capital has to go beyond a set of definitions. There is a subtle yet important characteristic of capital as defined in economics where capital serves as the means to produce goods 5 and services. In contrast to the more inert notions of resources and assets, capital is a dynamic entity that is expected to change and grow as organisations convert it into value. Simply put, judgements of value are founded on the expectation that an asset or a resource has been recognised by the organisation as a form of ‘capital’, and that the organisation has a plan for how it will grow those capitals and add value to them. Human capital and breaking the productivity puzzle That puts the focus squarely on the quality of the decisions made by organisations at a time when productivity is sluggish. Productivity trends in recent years have led to a spirited debate among economists and those in finance. The Bank of England has called it the ‘productivity puzzle’, and one symptom of this puzzle is that, while employment has been going up, the quantity of goods and services produced per unit of labour has been going down. To quote... ‘Even six years after the initial downturn, the level of productivity lies around 4\% below its pre-crisis peak.’16 This puzzle has prompted the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to undertake an extensive analysis of the factors influencing productivity, noting that: ‘Productivity is the ultimate engine of growth in the global economy. Raising productivity is therefore a fundamental challenge for countries going forward. This new OECD report … shows that we are not running out of ideas. In fact, the growth of the globally most productive firms has remained robust in the 21st century. However, the gap between those global leaders and the rest has increased over time, and especially so in the services sector … there is much scope to boost productivity and reduce inequality simply by more effectively allocating human talent to jobs.’17 The OECD research shows that productivity of the average firm masks higher productivity among firms operating at what the OECD calls the global productivity frontier (see Figure 2). In manufacturing, firms on the frontier grew at double the rate of the average manufacturing firm over the same period, while frontier firms in the services sector grew at 5\% in contrast to an average growth rate of 0.3\% – a difference of 17 times in the rate of productivity growth.18 What characterises firms at the productivity frontier? Access to financial capital is key, but so is the adoption of operational best practices through which the innovations that drive productivity are diffused through the firm and across a sector. A separate but related series of research studies provides a surprising contrast in the impact on productivity from effective management of human capital compared with other investments. Figure 2: The productivity gaps between frontier firms and the rest (\%) ‘Frontier’ firms Everyone else 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 Manufacturing Services -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 ‘Frontier’ firms Everyone else 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 6 Exploring the management practices and performance of over 4,000 manufacturing firms in Europe, the US and Asia, researchers at Stanford, the London School of Economics and McKinsey19 have identified 18 management practices that distinguish high- performing firms. The startling contrast that this research unearthed is that a one-point shift in the quality of management practices had the same impact on output (effectively productivity) as a 25\% increase in labour employed (that is, adding to the cost of the workforce employed) and a 65\% increase in capital investment (that is, plant, machinery and technology; see Figure 3). As the authors comment: ‘For companies, this research is good news, suggesting that they have access to dramatic improvements in performance simply by adopting good practices used elsewhere. For policy makers, it lays down a challenge. The overall performance of most countries is determined not by the performance of its leading companies, but by the size of its “tail” of poor performers. By developing environments that promote good management practices across all firms and by devoting as much attention to the followers as to the leaders, governments can drive the competitiveness of their entire economies.’ While the fact that well-managed firms perform more strongly isn’t that surprising, the extent to which management practices impact on productivity shows that many firms would be better off investing in their human capital to strengthen manager performance than simply adding further cost in new labour or new technologies and expecting those investments to somehow yield and sustain higher productivity levels. But that is exactly what many in the long tail of poorer managed firms appear to be doing. Those management practices also have a significant impact on the quality of talent that organisations attract and the willingness of that talent to perform. This can be seen in one sector – higher education – that is critical to the development of intellectual capital. In a separate application of the Stanford-LSE-McKinsey research just described, researchers at the University of Bristol found significant variations in effective management practices within and across UK universities. Those variations in management practices were also found to have a significant impact on the ability of those universities to attract and retain stronger teaching and research talent which, in turn, had significant impacts on student satisfaction.20 Among the management behaviours having a negative impact on university performance were tolerance of poor performance and a lack of clear alignment between compensation, rewards and individual contribution. At a time when universities are receiving lower funding from government, these findings have substantial implications for UK universities in maintaining their reputation for teaching and research, and for retaining a competitive position globally for student income. Figure 3: The relative impact of investments on firm output 65\% increase in investment capital A one-point shift in management practices... 21 ... has the same impact on productivity as a... 25\% increase in the labour force 7 Delivering on leadership through better decision-making Another area to be considered is the quality of the decisions which leaders make. Decision quality is also under scrutiny at a time when employee engagement is in a slump. Just as research is now quantifying the impact of management practices on firm productivity, research is also quantifying the impact of employee satisfaction and engagementii on the financial returns and market valuation of companies.iii Drawing on 100,000 employee ratings of their employers published on glassdoor ratings published on Glassdoor,iv researchers in the finance faculty at the University of Kansas21 found that those ratings predicted firm profitability and market valuation to the extent that a one-point positive shift in the star rating of an employer was associated with a 52\% difference in profitability and an 8\% difference in market valuationv (Figure 4). This is one example of a growing stream of research showing that softer people factors have a material impact on harder financial metrics of value.22 ii Employee satisfaction and engagement are not the same thing, but low satisfaction with an employer is a driver of low employee engagement. iii A curious feature of these research efforts is that they are coming out of the finance and econometrics faculties of universities who might be expected to be less biased towards proving the value of human capital. iv Glassdoor, www.glassdoor.co.uk/Reviews/index. htm?&countryRedirect=true, offers the strap line ‘Look inside any company!’ It gathers and publishes star ratings using data gathered from current and former employees, including overall satisfaction with the company, career development, compensation and benefits, work–life balance, senior management and CEO approval. v Profitability was measured through return on assets (ROA), and market valuation was measured through Tobin’s q market to book ratio. Engagement surveys have become de rigueur across organisations and yet there is something of a contradiction in the way those surveys are commonly used. On the one hand, they are cited as the most commonly used strategic check on the pulse of employee sentiment and commitment. That reflects a concern that low engagement will result in lower productivity, lower employee retention and a higher premium in attracting and hiring new employees. On the other hand, engagement data are frequently underutilised as an input to forward strategic thinking and business planning. Research on leading companies found that only 1 in 20 of those companies leveraged engagement data for broader decision-making.23 That tendency to exclude people data in business planning was related to three failures: • not knowing the strategic options that engagement data offer despite the frequent claims for engagement data providing a strategic pulse-check on the mood and intentions of employees • not knowing how to segment engagement data in the right way to enable that data to be factored into decision-making and in a way that non-HR leaders understand the value of doing so • focusing on improving engagement scores rather than using engagement data to evaluate risks to their business plans – in other words, engagement surveys become a purpose unto themselves, with the focus being on how to improve the survey rather Note that these figures are proportional to the averages of the companies in the study. The median Market to Book (Tobin’s q) was 1.47 with an interquartile range of 1.11 to 2.11, and the median ROA was 0.001 or 1\% with an interquartile range of 0.00 to 0.03 +8\% higher market valuation +52\% higher profitability A one- point shift in satisfaction ratings of employees is associated with a... Figure 4: Putting a value on employee satisfaction 1 2 8 than on how to address engagement issues and risks to organisational performance. How can engagement data talk to organisational risk? It is a reasonable expectation that evaluating any business plan’s likely success would include an evaluation of the key execution steps in that plan. It is also a reasonable expectation that would, in turn, be followed by an evaluation of the key talent segments, the people, involved in each of those steps. Here is where engagement data can play a valuable role in rounding out the assessment of risk by answering the question of how willing those critical talent segments are to committing to the proposed plan, and whether they are likely to stay with the organisation long enough for the plan to have a reasonable chance of success. Low engagement scores for key talent segments would suggest that the success of that business plan depends on addressing engagement risks or in adapting the plan to accommodate and to monitor those risks. It might mean a delay in implementing that plan. Either way, this is one example of how data on people can and should be factored into broader decision-making to test and evaluate plans, to understand what the barriers to execution are and how to address them. Valuing your talent: why the time has come for organisations to better measure their human capital Why are organisations struggling to join up the dots on how to build and leverage human capital? Data isn’t the problem. Organisations are rich in data on their people.24 And the problem is not with the means to analyse that data. Data science and analytics have seen a boom in growth across organisations.25 What has been missing, and to borrow from the wisdom of Albert Einstein, is the means to make something as complex as organisations and their people simple enough for the flow of value through people to be understood. That gap is now being closed through the emergence of human capital frameworks. An example of how the importance of these frameworks has been recognised is the partnership between the CIPD, the Chartered Institute of Management Accounting (CIMA), the Chartered Management Institute (CMI) and the UK Commission for Employment and Skills (UKCES). This partnership is a clear statement that understanding the flow of value through people is not just an issue for the HR function. The Valuing your Talent (VyT)26 framework lays out the flow of value through people and people investments by treating various elements of human capital as inputs to people processes which, in turn, create outputs that support organisational outcomes (see Figure 5). This provides a tangible organising structure for marshalling people data and people measurements, and linking that data and those measurements to organisational outcomes. Workforce composition and diversity Regulatory compliance Attraction and recruitment Workforce costs Workforce potential Performance … Tutor Support Session 1 5HRF Tutor: Vanesa Serafini 1 Agenda Overview of unit Questions & Criteria explained Do’s and Don’ts Format & Submission Questions Overview of the unit (objectives) Understand the purpose and key objectives of the HR function in contemporary organisations Understand how HR objectives are delivered in different organisations Understand how the HR function can be evaluated in terms of value added and organisational performance Understand the relationship between organisational performance and effective HR management and development Evidence to be produced: A written essay of 4000 words +/- 10\% All referenced sources should be acknowledged using Harvard-style referencing, and a bibliography provided where appropriate (these should be excluded from the word count) 3 Assessment Question Week Number Approx Word Count Analyse how the HR function varies between organisations. Include a comparison of HR delivery in different sectors and organisations of different sizes. Three 500 Provide three examples of organisational objectives that the HR function is responsible for delivering and briefly explain how these have evolved over time One and Three 500 HR objectives can be delivered in many ways. Explain two significant methods Two 500 Evaluate the business case for managing HR in a professional, ethical and just manner Two 500 Provide a short description of at least two major theories of change management. Briefly describe an example of change in the organisation and apply one of the theories, including some evaluation of the process, outcome and impact. Two 500 You are planning to produce an evidential report highlighting the HR function’s contribution to organisation success and development. Provide a brief summary of the criteria and organisational data that could be included and how it would be analysed. Six 500 Read the article provided: It identifies and evaluates research evidence linking HR practices with positive organisational outcomes. Briefly summarise the findings and evaluate its validity, reliability and persuasiveness. Four and Five 500 Explain how high-performance working and investment in human capital can impact on organisational success and performance. Does the article support this? Four and Five 500 Assessment Criteria AC2.2 AC1.1 AC2.1 AC1.3 AC1.2 AC3.1 AC4.1 AC4.2 4000 Words +/- 10\% 4 2.2 Analyse how the HR function varies between organisations. Include a comparison of HR delivery in different sectors and organisations of different sizes. Organisation X Provide a brief introduction to your chosen organisation (short paragraph) Describe the HR function within your organisation related to model e.g., Ulrich (1-2 paragraphs) How does it run? What is the structure? What are the main duties/pressures? Organisation Y A different organisation related to model e.g., centralised HR: MUST BE DIFFERENT SECTOR AND SIZE eg: Private vs Public sector (NHS, Civil Service, local and national govt ) Local vs Global Large vs Small Third Sector ( local and national charities and not for profit orgs like CIPD) You can include a comparison paragraph comparing both to add more depth if required. You should use examples of specific organisations and compare how the HR functions VARY between these organisations using models and theories. Organisation one – small private sector organisation (centralised) compare to large public sector organisation (Ulrich). How are their HR functions different? VLC Info: Wk. 3 2.2 - Comparing Organisations and Models HR Public Sector - Large Private Sector - Small NHS (Ulrich) https://www.peoplemanagement.co.uk/experts/advice/business-partner-needs-boost 4 COM Centralised HR Metropolitan Police (Ulrich adapted) https://www.hrmagazine.co.uk/article-details/martin-tiplady-hr-director-at-the-metropolitan-police-service-gives-his-views-on-hr Small Recruitment company – HR generalist with some outsourcing? Ministry of Defence https://www.peoplemanagement.co.uk/long-reads/articles/street-smart Local Vets/Solicitors? HR generalised or centralised or outsourcing? Private Sector - Large Third Sector - Small Tesco https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292607732_The_role_of_Strategic_Human_Resource_Management_within_Tesco_plc CHAS Charity Hospice – HR generalist Marks and Spencer https://www.hrzone.com/perform/business/ms-hr-business-partners-getting-the-balance-right etc etc etc OR CIPD Changing Models CIPD Report https://www.cipd.co.uk/Images/changing-operating-models_tcm18-10976.pdf 6 AC 1.1 What are some of the organisational objectives the HR function is responsible for delivering? 1.1 Summarise the organisational objectives that the HR function is responsible for delivering and how these are evolving in contemporary organisations. Summarise three key objectives that your HR function has main responsibility for, for example; - Workforce Planning - Learning and Development - Employee Relations - Building capability through people & performance - Contributing to change Within your descriptions you MUST provide an overview of HR’s role in the success of this. Consider how these have evolved or are evolving within the organisation, for example; Manpower planning has evolved into workforce planning Training has evolved into learning and development Industrial relations has evolved into employee relations. Administrative approach to dynamic approach Equal opportunities has evolved into diversity management Strategic Partner Business Partnering AC 1.1 VLC Info: Wk. 1 1.1 Summarise the organisational objectives that the HR function is responsible for delivering and how these are evolving in contemporary organisations. AC 1.1 - Requires you to describe three key objectives that your HR function has main responsibility for. For example, if an objective of the organisation is to improve absence rates, you would provide an overview of HR’s role in the success of this. You also need consider how these have evolved/are evolving in the organisation. AC 2.1 is more general and requires you to explain at least two different ways that HR objectives can be delivered. Consider the advantages/disadvantages of examples such as shared services, outsourcing or HRBP.” 2.1 Explain the different ways in which HR objectives can be delivered in organisations. *This part of question 2 is far more general* Explain two different ways in which HR objectives can be delivered in organisations. Possible examples include: Can also choose: HR Consultancy, HR Generalists/Specialists or Line Manger Supported by HR You can use a table but you MUST provide summary narrative underneath: Explain the advantages and disadvantages of the two approaches you have selected …… ensure you are explaining You MUST provide narrative and include: Models and theory to underpin your explanations, for example; Ulrich, Harvard, Warwick etc and how these are used to deliver HR objectives HR Business Partner (Ulrich) Outsourcing HR Shared Services (Ulrich) VLC Info: Wk. 3 2.1 Explain the different ways in which HR objectives can be delivered in organisations. Some things to consider in your explanation: VLC Info: Wk. 3 Advantages Disadvantages Outsourcing Skills and knowledge Increased legislative compliance  Efficiency  Reduced costs . Saving management time Giving up control  Impersonal  Distance Shared services Improved credibility of function HR becoming more strategic Improved service quality Responsive customer service Boundary disputes Gaps in service provision Communication difficulties Customer complaints over service Objections within HR HRBP React quickly to the needs of the business Accustomed with the services offered Work closely with business leaders Improves efficiency Breadth of experience Conflicting views of responsibility of tasks Can become tied down to administrative tasks Capability shortfalls AC 1.1 Why should HR be managed in a professional, ethical and just manner? 1.3 Evaluate the business case for managing HR in a professional, ethical and just manner. Provide a brief introduction (3-4 sentences) You could have 3 sub headings of Ethical, Professional and Just Manner Explain how HR is involved in/responsible for ensuring ethical business practice and what impact does this have on the organisation if done well/badly Explain how and why HR should act professional, fair and just at all times, you could consider the following examples; - Acting fairly to avoid discrimination - Credibility within the organisation - Encouraging recruitment & retention - Diversity & Dignity at work In your discussions it would be good practice to include some work place examples and also include the following: - Reference to the CIPD Profession Map - Code of conduct/ethics Evaluate – make judgements on why this is important for the HR professional? Useful links: https://www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/culture/ethics/role-hr-factsheet https://www.hrmagazine.co.uk/article-details/what-is-hrs-role-in-ethics-1 https://peopleprofession.cipd.org/profession-map/core-behaviours/ethical-practice VLC Week 2 1.2 Explain the major theories of effective change management and how these are implemented and evaluated. Select and explain two major theories of change management, examples include: Evaluate one of the theories and illustrate it in a practical sense by application to either a workplace example or a hypothetical example In your evaluation of your chosen model include: Advantages & Disadvantages Overview of outcome Overall impact Lewin’s three-phase model (Traditional) Kotter’s eight-stage model (Modern) VLC Info: Wk. 2 3.1 Discuss the main criteria and methods used to evaluate the contribution of the HR function Brief Introduction (3-4 sentences) You need to consider how you can evidence HR’s contribution to success Provide a summary of at least 2 different types of information (organisational criteria/data) you could select that would evidence HR’s contribution to success, for example; - Balanced scorecard - Benchmarking (internal/external) - SLA’s - KPI’s - Engagement surveys You need to discuss how they are/would be presented and analysed. How these methods help assess how the HR function is contributing? You could use the following areas to focus on: - Recruitment and selection data - Learning and Development data - Employee Engagement VLC Info: Wk. 6 4.1 Identify and evaluate research evidence linking HR practices with positive organisational outcomes. I would recommend that you structure your response to AC 4.1 like your 5UIN literature review: (500 words is a recommended approximate word count for this section) Overview of article: Briefly introduce the author and what the article is about….   Key Findings: Discuss some of the key findings – what does the author “Burke” say about … Human capital High-performance working effectiveness HR services Building organisational capability What does the article say about HR practices and positive organisational outcomes You can write this in a good few paragraphs about what the article suggests. For instance investing in human capital is key because it impacts productivity and profitability. Burke discusses that investing in its employees through training, and career plans which supports organisational outcomes. Quality of the article: Discuss how valid and reliable the article is – you can draw on the date the article was written, is the research valid and reliable that is used in the article? Is the article persuasive in its approach to the points made? LOOK IN: Week 4, 5 & Assessment Week VLC Info: Wk. 4 & 5 Article link can be found in Assessment Week 4.2 Explain how high-performance working and investment in human capital impact on organisational practice Provide an introduction/overview of High Performance Working and Human Capital (could include definition of each – there are many definitions) Belt and Giles (2009: 3) define HPW as ‘a general approach to managing organisations that aims to stimulate more effective employee involvement and commitment in order to achieve high levels of performance’ Thomas et al (2013, p3) define Human Capital as the ‘people, their performance and their potential in the organisation’ Provide a clear explanation of how high-performance working and investment in human capital can impact on organisational practice Consider what the article says from 4.1 Apply wider reading and research to underpin Useful Links: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/promoting-high-performance-working https://www.cipd.co.uk/news-views/news-articles/performance-productivity-learning https://www.employment-studies.co.uk/system/files/resources/files/mp36.pdf https://www.cipd.co.uk/Images/human-capital-analytics-and-reporting_tcm18-22281.pdf https://www.cipd.co.uk/Images/human-capital-theory-assessing-the-evidence_tcm18-22292.pdf VLC Info: Wk. 4&5 Layout Question Analyse how the HR function varies between organisations. Include a comparison of HR delivery in different sectors and organisations of different sizes. Provide three examples of organisational objectives that the HR function is responsible for delivering and briefly explain how these have evolved over time HR objectives can be delivered in many ways. Explain two significant methods Evaluate the business case for managing HR in a professional, ethical and just manner Provide a short description of at least two major theories of change management. Briefly describe an example of change in the organisation and apply one of the theories, including some evaluation of the process, outcome and impact. You are planning to produce an evidential report highlighting the HR function’s contribution to organisation success and development. Provide a brief summary of the criteria and organisational data that could be included and how it would be analysed. Read the article provided on the VLC: It identifies and evaluates research evidence linking HR practices with positive organisational outcomes. Briefly summarise the findings and evaluate its validity, reliability and persuasiveness. Explain how high-performance working and investment in human capital can impact on organisational success and performance. Does the article support this? Assessment Criteria AC2.2 AC1.1 AC2.1 AC1.3 AC1.2 AC3.1 AC4.1 AC4.2 What needs to be included? 18 Specific to 5HRF: Upload one Word document Include clear headings and sub-headings Word limit – 4000 words +/- 10\% General: Coversheet – include name, cohort, unit, tutor and word count Diagrams and tables should be numbered. Harvard Referencing (resources in Getting Started) Assessment & Format Useful Links: The HR function, models and theories https://www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/fundamentals/people/hr https://www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/strategy/hr https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/how-hr-has-evolved/ https://www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/fundamentals/people/hr/shared-services-factsheet https://www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/fundamentals/people/hr/business-partnering-factsheet https://www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/fundamentals/people/hr/outsourcing-factsheet https://www.thedigitaltransformationpeople.com/channels/people-and-change/updating-the-ulrich-conceptual-outcomes-model-part-1/ HR and Ethics https://www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/culture/ethics/role-hr-factsheet https://www.hrmagazine.co.uk/article-details/what-is-hrs-role-in-ethics-1 https://peopleprofession.cipd.org/profession-map/core-behaviours/ethical-practice Change Management https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newPPM_94.htm https://www.change-management-coach.com/change-management-models.html https://www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/strategy/change/management-factsheet https://www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/strategy/change Evaluating the HR function https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/how-can-hr-prove-it-really-adds-value/ https://www.analyticsinhr.com/blog/human-resources-key-performance-indicators-hr-kpis/ High Performance Working and Human Capital https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/promoting-high-performance-working https://www.cipd.co.uk/news-views/news-articles/performance-productivity-learning https://www.employment-studies.co.uk/system/files/resources/files/mp36.pdf https://www.cipd.co.uk/Images/human-capital-analytics-and-reporting_tcm18-22281.pdf https://www.cipd.co.uk/Images/human-capital-theory-assessing-the-evidence_tcm18-22292.pdf 5DVP AC 3.3 PDP & Reflection : For those who still need to submit their 3.3 PDP & Reflection Unit 5DVP => ASSESSMENT WEEK => 5DVP assessment submission (Assessment criterion 3.3 – Reflection) 5DVP AC 3.3 PDP & Reflection ONE SINGLE DOCUMENT (word or PDF) divided in TWO DISTINCTIVE SECTIONS: SECTION 1: Revised and amended PDP – copy the PDP you submitted with your 5DVP assignment and IN A DIFFERENT COLOUR provide some updates of what you managed to accomplish, new deadlines, new objective you wish to include, any old one you wish to delete because it is not relevant, etc. There is no right or wrong answer here. * You could include a new column in the PDP with some key points of your progress/development SECTION 2: Write a reflection (approx. 500 words) including reasons for changes to your PDP and reflection on what you did do. Think about the development activities in your PDP (book, mentoring, conversation, website, training, job role etc What did you learn from it? How can you/did you apply it and how valuable is it for your role and career? What have you done well? Areas you could improve? Remember this is about your own CPD (Continued Professional Development) and the units you have studied so far on this course. It is a requirement of the CIPD Code of Professional Conduct to keep your knowledge up to date, and the maintenance of your PDPs as live documents is a great way of planning and recording this. Unit 5DVP => ASSESSMENT WEEK => 5DVP assessment submission (Assessment criterion 3.3 – Reflection) Thank you