Proven HR strategies that can have a real impact on organizational success This book demonstrates how some of the world′s most admired and prominent organizations are redefining HR leadership by using evidence–based change to inform human capital decisions that optimize efficiency, effectiveness and strategic impact. The authors present the five foundational principles to the new HR decision science: Logic–driven analytics, segmentation, risk leverage, synergy and integration and optimization. Includes practical suggestions and approaches to help executives put the book′s principles into action Contains insight based on the experiences of leading global organization such as PNC Bank, CME Group, Royal Bank of Scotland, Deutsche Telekom and Shanda Interactive Entertainment Features in–depth case studies of 6 international companies: Coca–Cola, Khazanah Nasional Berhad, IBM, Ameriprise Financial, Royal Bank of Canada and Royal Bank of Scotland This groundbreaking book reveals a new approach to deliver sustainable change and business results. It is enhanced with success stories from leading companies that engage leadership and involve employees in ways that make a lasting impact on their companies.
Transformative HR
and over 1.5 million other books are available for Amazon Kindle . Learn more
| |||||||||||||||
 Trade In this Item for up to £6.65
Trade in Transformative HR: How Great Companies Use Evidence-based Change for Sustainable Advantage for an Amazon.co.uk gift card of up to £6.65, which you can then spend on millions of items across the site. Trade-in values may vary (terms apply). Learn more
|
Book Description
Frequently Bought Together
Product details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
More About the Authors
Discover books, learn about writers, and more.
Product Description
From the Inside Flap
If companies are to stay competitive in the increasingly global marketplace, they must have the ability to make informed human capital decisions. This groundbreaking book offers a dynamic process for leaders who want their organizations to thrive. The evidence–based method outlined in this book refers to approaching HR processes and investments based on well–grounded evidence that relies on logic, strategic awareness, and savvy change management. Written by John Boudreau and Ravin Jesuthasan (two experts in the talent management field), Transformative HR demonstrates how some of the world′s most admired and prominent organizations are redefining HR leadership by using evidence–based change to optimize efficiency, effectiveness, and strategic impact. The authors reveal that organizations can achieve greater success and create a more engaging work environment by adopting the five principles of evidence–based change: logic–driven analytics, segmentation, risk leverage, synergy and integration, and optimization. In addition to offering an in–depth explanation of the five principles, Transformative HR includes practical suggestions and proven approaches that executives can put in place to help deliver sustainable change and business results. The book is filled with insight based on the experiences of leading global organizations such as PNC Bank, CME Group, Royal Bank of Scotland, Deutsche Telekom, and Shanda Interactive Entertainment, and features illustrative, in–depth case studies of six international companies: Coca–Cola, Khazanah Nasional Berhad, IBM, Ameriprise Financial, Royal Bank of Canada, and Royal Bank of Scotland. Transformative HR gives leaders the information and tools they need to create superior organizational performance through synergistic human capital decisions and investments that span the employment life cycle and organizational design decisions.
From the Back Cover
Praise for Transformative HR " Transformative HR is at once both strategic and tactical, and helps HR leaders and their colleagues make decisions that are grounded in evidence and avoid unintended consequences. Practical, compelling, real–world examples are included that help practitioners sharpen their impact in driving change." — Brian Schipper , chief human resources officer, Cisco Systems "Rapid global expansion and new ways of looking at work have made this a dynamic and challenging time for HR professionals. Transformative HR gives HR leaders new tools for a new era, allowing them to think more clearly about their talent priorities and execute their human capital strategies more effectively." — Lynn Tetrault , executive vice president of human resources and corporate affairs, AstraZeneca PLC; chairperson of the board, HR People and Strategy "In case after case, Transformative HR demonstrates how the principles of evidence–based change can prompt real and lasting organizational change in both good times and bad. Citing experiences from a range of companies and industries across the globe, these unique stories show how a commitment to data and analytics in HR can significantly increase our ability to understand our workforces, keep top talent, and motivate employees at every level." — Elaine Arden , group human resources director, The Royal Bank of Scotland Group "Forward–thinking and practical at the same time, Transformative HR delivers a crucial set of principles to HR executives who are managing today′s complex human capital challenges. Especially compelling is the principle of risk leverage, which encourages HR leaders to both understand the risks associated with today′s talent and approach them in a systematic way in order to reveal important opportunities. Transformative HR is creating a new HR mind–set." — David Farrant , senior managing director, Global Human Resources, Nomura Holdings Inc.
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
3 of 4 people found the following review helpful
Format:Hardcover|Amazon Verified Purchase
Book titles can be very misleading and we are all used to reading management books that never come close to delivering on what they promise but I think this book deserves a special award for - 'The Most Perverse use of Evidence'.
Its full title is "Transformative HR. How Great Companies Use Evidence-Based Change for Sustainable Advantage" and, by an amazing feat of inverse logic, offers the Royal Bank of Scotland as one of its 'great companies' - a company whose only 'sustainable advantage' is the fact that it is 80% owned by UK taxpayers because it collapsed in 2008.
Such stark evidence of failure is just brushed aside by the two authors who appear blinded by the need to get Towers Watson recognised in the burgeoning field of evidence-based HR before it is too late. This book actually succeeds in demonstrating the exact opposite - a complete lack of capability by the protagonists - but then Towers Watson (or at least Watson Wyatt as was) and the University of Southern California both have 'previous' in this area.
According to a 2001 Watson Wyatt survey of more than 400 US and Canada-based companies, in support of their Human capital Index product (which I could no longer find on their website) -
"there was a clear relationship between the effectiveness of a company's human capital and shareholder value creation. This relationship we found is so clear that a significant improvement in 30 key HR practices is associated with a 30% increase in market value."
This is typical correlation-speak passed off as causation but actuaries like Watson do know better so they had to admit, in a similar report they produced in Europe ("HCI - European Survey Report 2000"), that while their data in North America
"... demonstrates a very strong correlation between effective people practices and shareholder value, on its own it does not prove a causal link".
So don't be surprised if you get different answers from different people in the same firm. I guess they realised Europeans were not so easily fooled and so had to come clean; all the while hoping their HR clients were too disinterested or innumerate to notice their contradictions. If you visit Towers Watson's site today you will be treated to similar double-speak in a video from Ravin Jesuthasan himself.
Meanwhile, over in Southern California John Boudreau, who proves that the title 'professor' brings with it no guarantees of academic rigour, should still know better than to say RBS clarified (p.208) -
"...the causal connections between people data and business data"
when the evidence he presents does no such thing; but then he comes from the same 'misleading correlation' school as Ed Lawler III who happily offers his endorsement that these are-
"two of the most respected thinkers in HR"
- without, of course, offering any evidence to back up such an assertion.
Presumably they are respected by the sort of people who provide the other testimonials for the dust jacket? People like Stephen Corrone of Sara Lee, Brian Schipper of Cisco, Lynn Tetrault of AstraZeneca ("chairperson of the board, HR people and strategy" no less), Elaine Arden of Royal Bank of Scotland (do I detect a note of bias here?) and David Farrant of Nomura; all of whom don't seem to mind risking their careers by associating themselves, and their employers, with such obvious nonsense. Maybe they are just deluding themselves that this has something to do with evidence-based HR or possibly it is the sort of flannel that got them to where they are in the first place? Perhaps it is just what their CEO's want to hear: which is much more worrying.
CEO's of very large companies can be incredibly illogical and downright crass when it comes to strategic HR matters. Apparently the current CEO of RBS, Stephen Hester, is getting in on the act of using the wrong evidence for the wrong purpose (p.210) -
"A good deal of the communication about results of employee listening (sic) comes directly from Hester, the CEO. That sends a message to staff that RBS takes the information gathered from employees seriously."
Yes I think it does and it also tells them, and any investment analysts watching, that he has taken his eye off the ball of transforming the bank into one that can relieve UK taxpayers of their present burden. Even the CEOs of successful companies can make themselves look particularly stupid when desperately trying to be politically correct, rather than evidence-based. Here is a quote from CEO of Coca Cola, Muhtar Kent (pp 138-139) -
"I looked at who was buying our products and found that 70 percent of our shoppers were women. Then I looked at our workforce .... and saw a huge mismatch"
- such imperfect logic and superficial analysis led Coca Cola to create
"several programs to attract, retain and develop women leaders including the Women's Leadership Council".
I am sure the women of Coca Cola are not at all patronised (and the men not insulted) by such inane and misguided thinking about diversity and do not mind having their own council or being allowed to break through the glass ceiling by dint of the fact that `women buy Coke', rather than through their own efforts or abilities (presumably if women stop buying Coke this policy will go into reverse?).
The architect of all HR data gathering at RBS is one Greg Aitken, who was amassing meaningless HR data at RBS as far back as 2001 (at great cost but no doubt encouraged to do so by Watson Wyatt-type reports). People like Aitken, who are to the EB-HR movement what train-spotters are to rail companies, are to blame for the current obsession with so-called `HR analytics' that completely miss the point of EB-HR and spawn Mickey Mouse jobs for a new breed of HR-analytical nerd at respected companies like Walt Disney Studios (my apologies Disney for that awful pun but then you wrote the job advertisement).
This book is a travesty - especially for those of us who want to raise standards of professionalism in HR by basing our decisions on evidence of value. For anyone who falls into that category I do have one recommendation for you - buy a copy of this book and send it straight to your competitors, if they are gullible enough it will encourage them to waste valuable time and money while you steal a march putting proper evidence to good use.
Its full title is "Transformative HR. How Great Companies Use Evidence-Based Change for Sustainable Advantage" and, by an amazing feat of inverse logic, offers the Royal Bank of Scotland as one of its 'great companies' - a company whose only 'sustainable advantage' is the fact that it is 80% owned by UK taxpayers because it collapsed in 2008.
Such stark evidence of failure is just brushed aside by the two authors who appear blinded by the need to get Towers Watson recognised in the burgeoning field of evidence-based HR before it is too late. This book actually succeeds in demonstrating the exact opposite - a complete lack of capability by the protagonists - but then Towers Watson (or at least Watson Wyatt as was) and the University of Southern California both have 'previous' in this area.
According to a 2001 Watson Wyatt survey of more than 400 US and Canada-based companies, in support of their Human capital Index product (which I could no longer find on their website) -
"there was a clear relationship between the effectiveness of a company's human capital and shareholder value creation. This relationship we found is so clear that a significant improvement in 30 key HR practices is associated with a 30% increase in market value."
This is typical correlation-speak passed off as causation but actuaries like Watson do know better so they had to admit, in a similar report they produced in Europe ("HCI - European Survey Report 2000"), that while their data in North America
"... demonstrates a very strong correlation between effective people practices and shareholder value, on its own it does not prove a causal link".
So don't be surprised if you get different answers from different people in the same firm. I guess they realised Europeans were not so easily fooled and so had to come clean; all the while hoping their HR clients were too disinterested or innumerate to notice their contradictions. If you visit Towers Watson's site today you will be treated to similar double-speak in a video from Ravin Jesuthasan himself.
Meanwhile, over in Southern California John Boudreau, who proves that the title 'professor' brings with it no guarantees of academic rigour, should still know better than to say RBS clarified (p.208) -
"...the causal connections between people data and business data"
when the evidence he presents does no such thing; but then he comes from the same 'misleading correlation' school as Ed Lawler III who happily offers his endorsement that these are-
"two of the most respected thinkers in HR"
- without, of course, offering any evidence to back up such an assertion.
Presumably they are respected by the sort of people who provide the other testimonials for the dust jacket? People like Stephen Corrone of Sara Lee, Brian Schipper of Cisco, Lynn Tetrault of AstraZeneca ("chairperson of the board, HR people and strategy" no less), Elaine Arden of Royal Bank of Scotland (do I detect a note of bias here?) and David Farrant of Nomura; all of whom don't seem to mind risking their careers by associating themselves, and their employers, with such obvious nonsense. Maybe they are just deluding themselves that this has something to do with evidence-based HR or possibly it is the sort of flannel that got them to where they are in the first place? Perhaps it is just what their CEO's want to hear: which is much more worrying.
CEO's of very large companies can be incredibly illogical and downright crass when it comes to strategic HR matters. Apparently the current CEO of RBS, Stephen Hester, is getting in on the act of using the wrong evidence for the wrong purpose (p.210) -
"A good deal of the communication about results of employee listening (sic) comes directly from Hester, the CEO. That sends a message to staff that RBS takes the information gathered from employees seriously."
Yes I think it does and it also tells them, and any investment analysts watching, that he has taken his eye off the ball of transforming the bank into one that can relieve UK taxpayers of their present burden. Even the CEOs of successful companies can make themselves look particularly stupid when desperately trying to be politically correct, rather than evidence-based. Here is a quote from CEO of Coca Cola, Muhtar Kent (pp 138-139) -
"I looked at who was buying our products and found that 70 percent of our shoppers were women. Then I looked at our workforce .... and saw a huge mismatch"
- such imperfect logic and superficial analysis led Coca Cola to create
"several programs to attract, retain and develop women leaders including the Women's Leadership Council".
I am sure the women of Coca Cola are not at all patronised (and the men not insulted) by such inane and misguided thinking about diversity and do not mind having their own council or being allowed to break through the glass ceiling by dint of the fact that `women buy Coke', rather than through their own efforts or abilities (presumably if women stop buying Coke this policy will go into reverse?).
The architect of all HR data gathering at RBS is one Greg Aitken, who was amassing meaningless HR data at RBS as far back as 2001 (at great cost but no doubt encouraged to do so by Watson Wyatt-type reports). People like Aitken, who are to the EB-HR movement what train-spotters are to rail companies, are to blame for the current obsession with so-called `HR analytics' that completely miss the point of EB-HR and spawn Mickey Mouse jobs for a new breed of HR-analytical nerd at respected companies like Walt Disney Studios (my apologies Disney for that awful pun but then you wrote the job advertisement).
This book is a travesty - especially for those of us who want to raise standards of professionalism in HR by basing our decisions on evidence of value. For anyone who falls into that category I do have one recommendation for you - buy a copy of this book and send it straight to your competitors, if they are gullible enough it will encourage them to waste valuable time and money while you steal a march putting proper evidence to good use.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews on Amazon.com (beta)
Amazon.com:
3.0 out of 5 stars
2 reviews
9 of 13 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars
A travesty of Evidence-based Management Principles
24 Jan 2012
By Cynical Idealist
- Published on Amazon.com
Format:Hardcover
Book titles can be very misleading and we are all used to reading management books that never come close to delivering on what they promise but I think this book deserves a special award - for 'The Most Perverse use of Evidence'.
Its full title is "Transformative HR. How Great Companies Use Evidence-Based Change for Sustainable Advantage" which, by an amazing feat of inverse logic, offers the Royal Bank of Scotland as one of its 'great companies' - a company whose only 'sustainable advantage' is the fact that it is 80% owned by UK taxpayers because it collapsed in 2008.
Such stark evidence of failure is just brushed aside by the two authors who appear blinded by the need to get Towers Watson recognised in the burgeoning field of evidence-based HR before it is too late. This book actually succeeds in demonstrating the exact opposite - a complete lack of capability by the protagonists - but then Towers Watson (or at least Watson Wyatt as was) and the University of Southern California both have 'previous' in this area.
According to a 2001 Watson Wyatt survey of more than 400 US and Canada-based companies, in support of their Human capital Index product (which I could no longer find on their website) -
"there was a clear relationship between the effectiveness of a company's human capital and shareholder value creation. This relationship we found is so clear that a significant improvement in 30 key HR practices is associated with a 30% increase in market value."
This is typical correlation-speak presented as causation but actuaries, like Watson, know better so they had to admit, in a similar report they produced in Europe ("HCI - European Survey Report 2000"), that while their data in North America
"... demonstrates a very strong correlation between effective people practices and shareholder value on its own it does not prove a causal link".
So don't be surprised if you get different answers from different people in the same organisation. I guess they thought us Europeans were not so easily fooled and so had to come clean, all the while hoping their HR clients were too disinterested to notice. If you visit their site today you will be treated to similar double speak in a video from Ravin Jesuthasan himself.
Meanwhile, over in Southern California, John Boudreau, an academic who has earned the title of professor, should also know better than to say RBS clarified (p.208) -
"...the causal connections between people data and business data"
when the evidence presented does no such thing; but then he comes from the same 'misleading correlation' school as Ed Lawler III who happily offers his endorsement that these are-
"two of the most respected thinkers in HR"
- without, of course, offering any evidence to back up such an assertion. I presume they are respected by the sort of people who provide the other testimonials for the dust jacket? People like Stephen Corrone of Sara Lee, Brian Schipper of Cisco, Lynn Tetrault of AstraZeneca (chair of the HR people strategy Board no less), Elaine Arden of Royal Bank of Scotland (do I detect a note of bias here?) and David Farrant of Nomura, all of whom don't seem to mind endangering their reputations and careers by associating themselves, and their employers, with such obvious nonsense. Maybe they are just deluding themselves that this has something to do with evidence-based HR or possibly it is just the sort of unsubstantiated hype that got them to where they are in the first place? Perhaps it is just what their CEO's want to hear: which is much more worrying.
We should not be too surprised at how illogical and crass the CEO's of very large companies can be when it comes to strategic HR matters. Apparently the current CEO of RBS, Stephen Hester, is getting in on the act (p.210) -
"A good deal of the communication about results of employee listening (sic) comes directly from Hester, the CEO. That sends a message to staff that RBS takes the information gathered from employees seriously."
Yes I think it does and it also tells them, and any investment analysts watching, that he has taken his eye off the ball of transforming the bank into one that can relieve UK taxpayers of their present burden. Yet even the CEOs of highly successful companies can make themselves look particularly stupid when trying to be politically correct, rather than evidence-based. Here is a quote from CEO of Coca Cola, Muhtar Kent (pp 138-139) -
"I looked at who was buying our products and found that 70 percent of our shoppers were women. Then I looked at our workforce .... and saw a huge mismatch"
- it was such imperfect logic and superficial analysis that led Coca Cola to create
"several programs to attract, retain and develop women leaders including the Women's Leadership Council".
I am sure the women of Coca Cola are not at all patronised by such inane and misguided thinking about diversity and do not mind having their own council or being allowed to break through the glass ceiling by dint of the fact that `women buy Coke', rather than through their own efforts or abilities.
The architect of all HR data gathering at RBS is one Greg Aitken, who was amassing meaningless HR data at RBS as far back as 2001 (at great cost but no doubt encouraged to do so Watson Wyatt-type reports). People like Aitken, who are to the EB-HR movement what train-spotters are to rail companies, are to blame for the current obsession with so-called `HR analytics' that has completely missed the point of EB-HR and is spawning Mickey Mouse jobs, for a new breed of HR-analytical nerd, at respected companies like Walt Disney Studios (apologies for that awful pun but then it is your own advertisement).
This book is a travesty - especially for those of us who base our HR decisions on evidence of value. I do have one recommendation for you though - buy a copy and send it to your competitors, in the hope they are gullible enough to waste their time and money while you steal a march putting proper evidence to good use.
Its full title is "Transformative HR. How Great Companies Use Evidence-Based Change for Sustainable Advantage" which, by an amazing feat of inverse logic, offers the Royal Bank of Scotland as one of its 'great companies' - a company whose only 'sustainable advantage' is the fact that it is 80% owned by UK taxpayers because it collapsed in 2008.
Such stark evidence of failure is just brushed aside by the two authors who appear blinded by the need to get Towers Watson recognised in the burgeoning field of evidence-based HR before it is too late. This book actually succeeds in demonstrating the exact opposite - a complete lack of capability by the protagonists - but then Towers Watson (or at least Watson Wyatt as was) and the University of Southern California both have 'previous' in this area.
According to a 2001 Watson Wyatt survey of more than 400 US and Canada-based companies, in support of their Human capital Index product (which I could no longer find on their website) -
"there was a clear relationship between the effectiveness of a company's human capital and shareholder value creation. This relationship we found is so clear that a significant improvement in 30 key HR practices is associated with a 30% increase in market value."
This is typical correlation-speak presented as causation but actuaries, like Watson, know better so they had to admit, in a similar report they produced in Europe ("HCI - European Survey Report 2000"), that while their data in North America
"... demonstrates a very strong correlation between effective people practices and shareholder value on its own it does not prove a causal link".
So don't be surprised if you get different answers from different people in the same organisation. I guess they thought us Europeans were not so easily fooled and so had to come clean, all the while hoping their HR clients were too disinterested to notice. If you visit their site today you will be treated to similar double speak in a video from Ravin Jesuthasan himself.
Meanwhile, over in Southern California, John Boudreau, an academic who has earned the title of professor, should also know better than to say RBS clarified (p.208) -
"...the causal connections between people data and business data"
when the evidence presented does no such thing; but then he comes from the same 'misleading correlation' school as Ed Lawler III who happily offers his endorsement that these are-
"two of the most respected thinkers in HR"
- without, of course, offering any evidence to back up such an assertion. I presume they are respected by the sort of people who provide the other testimonials for the dust jacket? People like Stephen Corrone of Sara Lee, Brian Schipper of Cisco, Lynn Tetrault of AstraZeneca (chair of the HR people strategy Board no less), Elaine Arden of Royal Bank of Scotland (do I detect a note of bias here?) and David Farrant of Nomura, all of whom don't seem to mind endangering their reputations and careers by associating themselves, and their employers, with such obvious nonsense. Maybe they are just deluding themselves that this has something to do with evidence-based HR or possibly it is just the sort of unsubstantiated hype that got them to where they are in the first place? Perhaps it is just what their CEO's want to hear: which is much more worrying.
We should not be too surprised at how illogical and crass the CEO's of very large companies can be when it comes to strategic HR matters. Apparently the current CEO of RBS, Stephen Hester, is getting in on the act (p.210) -
"A good deal of the communication about results of employee listening (sic) comes directly from Hester, the CEO. That sends a message to staff that RBS takes the information gathered from employees seriously."
Yes I think it does and it also tells them, and any investment analysts watching, that he has taken his eye off the ball of transforming the bank into one that can relieve UK taxpayers of their present burden. Yet even the CEOs of highly successful companies can make themselves look particularly stupid when trying to be politically correct, rather than evidence-based. Here is a quote from CEO of Coca Cola, Muhtar Kent (pp 138-139) -
"I looked at who was buying our products and found that 70 percent of our shoppers were women. Then I looked at our workforce .... and saw a huge mismatch"
- it was such imperfect logic and superficial analysis that led Coca Cola to create
"several programs to attract, retain and develop women leaders including the Women's Leadership Council".
I am sure the women of Coca Cola are not at all patronised by such inane and misguided thinking about diversity and do not mind having their own council or being allowed to break through the glass ceiling by dint of the fact that `women buy Coke', rather than through their own efforts or abilities.
The architect of all HR data gathering at RBS is one Greg Aitken, who was amassing meaningless HR data at RBS as far back as 2001 (at great cost but no doubt encouraged to do so Watson Wyatt-type reports). People like Aitken, who are to the EB-HR movement what train-spotters are to rail companies, are to blame for the current obsession with so-called `HR analytics' that has completely missed the point of EB-HR and is spawning Mickey Mouse jobs, for a new breed of HR-analytical nerd, at respected companies like Walt Disney Studios (apologies for that awful pun but then it is your own advertisement).
This book is a travesty - especially for those of us who base our HR decisions on evidence of value. I do have one recommendation for you though - buy a copy and send it to your competitors, in the hope they are gullible enough to waste their time and money while you steal a march putting proper evidence to good use.
3 of 9 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars
Tranformative HR & Mentoring
31 Oct 2011
By Elizabeth Pearce
- Published on Amazon.com
Format:Hardcover
Mentor Resources recently had an opportunity to talk Ravin Jesuthasan, a thought-leader in evidence-based human resources. Mr. Jesuthasan is co-author of the book, Transformative HR. Within Towers Watson's Talent Management Practice, Mr. Jesuthasan is a Managing Director and a Global Practice Leader in the Chicago office.
Mentor Resources: Evidence-based medicine is now practiced within most hospital, because certain behaviors have demonstrated an impact on secondary infections and other diseases. Could you explain Evidence-Based in the context of Human Resources?
Mr. Jesuthasan: In both medicine and Human Resources you have skilled practitioners who make decisions upon their prior experience, anecdotes and existing paradigms. As a result, there is a tendency to skip over the unique nuances of the patient or situation. In HR, this tends to occur more often than in other business disciplines, because of our life experience.
For example, if you ask ten CEOs for a definition of Free Cash Flow and the impactful levers on their cash flow, you get the same definition and similar answers. Ask the same ten CEOs for a definition of Employee Engagement or the levers for Retention, and you will probably get more than ten answers, based upon their experiences and observations.
Finance and Marketing have gone down a road to the development of clear definitions and measurable results, and Human Resources is now moving along a similar pathway. Evidence-based HR planning and decision making is part of this passage to greater rigor and impact.
Mentor Resources: We have seen an increase in quantitative measurements for Human Resource management. Could you give me an example of evidence-based HR?
Mr. Jesuthasan: An evidence-based approach helped Coca-Cola articulate an economically and globally relevant diversity goal, which was impactful to their Women and Leadership Initiative.
Evidence-based thinking helped Coca-Cola sidestep political correctness and hiring quotas. With operations in over 200 countries, diversity can be a complex topic. The team started by noting the purchasing power of women in countries where they do business, was greater than the GDP of the US, China and India, combined.
Evidence-based thinking and the economic imperative focused the organization on the talent lifecycle. Diversity efforts were not limited to hiring, but included deployment, rewards, engagement and talent development. Metrics were developed around each to track multiple variables and with a goal of creating a sustainable pipeline though out the talent lifecycle.
Transformative HR has more examples, from Ameriprise Financial, IBM, RBS, and others, but the essential message is that evidence-based human resources is an important way to convey the story behind the numbers. The message to managers should motivate them towards action and impact the metrics. The goal is for business leaders to understanding the human resource issues the same way they understand their supply chain or their marketing value proposition.
Mentor Resources: That's powerful. Will this impact risk metrics, as well as human capital decisions?
Mr. Jesuthasan: Mentoring becomes a central tool in controlling human capital risk.
All businesses take risks, but there are risks they should avoid. Many that can and should be avoided relate to having a pipeline of managers capable of stepping up to pivotal roles as needed.
Approximately 20% of externally-hired CEOs succeed, one example of human capital risk. Needing to go outside the firm for a CEO, or head of R&D, or President of a division is a risk to execution of the business that can be avoided. Without mentoring or training to ensure a pipeline of talent, companies are at risk of being unable to continue successful programs.
Mentoring is a way of ensuring there is a pipeline of people who know how to get things done in that firms' culture.
Mentoring becomes a way to speed up readiness. It is a faster way to transfer the cultural skills related to getting things done in a specific environment. Companies can't afford the risk that they don't have managers ready to step up to those pivotal Roles. In the current environment, where corporations are cost cutting and reducing spending on training, mentoring becomes even more important.
Mentor Resources: We call this Sharing What Works. Sharing through mentoring the tacit knowledge that can only come from experience. Can you share your final thoughts?
Mr. Jesuthasan: Evidence-based Human Resources is transformative and has demonstrated its usefulness as a tool for motivating managers across functions and business lines.
Keep in mind, that in the same way that most of a corporation's financial decisions are made by line managers, rather than the finance department, most of the firm's human resource decision are not made by the Human Resources department. Evidence-based HR is about making the human capital goals part of the day to day functioning of operations, by conveying the story behind the HR metrics.
Kim Wise & Elizabeth Pearce, Mentor Resources
Originally posted on Mentorguru.wordpress.com
Mentor Resources: Evidence-based medicine is now practiced within most hospital, because certain behaviors have demonstrated an impact on secondary infections and other diseases. Could you explain Evidence-Based in the context of Human Resources?
Mr. Jesuthasan: In both medicine and Human Resources you have skilled practitioners who make decisions upon their prior experience, anecdotes and existing paradigms. As a result, there is a tendency to skip over the unique nuances of the patient or situation. In HR, this tends to occur more often than in other business disciplines, because of our life experience.
For example, if you ask ten CEOs for a definition of Free Cash Flow and the impactful levers on their cash flow, you get the same definition and similar answers. Ask the same ten CEOs for a definition of Employee Engagement or the levers for Retention, and you will probably get more than ten answers, based upon their experiences and observations.
Finance and Marketing have gone down a road to the development of clear definitions and measurable results, and Human Resources is now moving along a similar pathway. Evidence-based HR planning and decision making is part of this passage to greater rigor and impact.
Mentor Resources: We have seen an increase in quantitative measurements for Human Resource management. Could you give me an example of evidence-based HR?
Mr. Jesuthasan: An evidence-based approach helped Coca-Cola articulate an economically and globally relevant diversity goal, which was impactful to their Women and Leadership Initiative.
Evidence-based thinking helped Coca-Cola sidestep political correctness and hiring quotas. With operations in over 200 countries, diversity can be a complex topic. The team started by noting the purchasing power of women in countries where they do business, was greater than the GDP of the US, China and India, combined.
Evidence-based thinking and the economic imperative focused the organization on the talent lifecycle. Diversity efforts were not limited to hiring, but included deployment, rewards, engagement and talent development. Metrics were developed around each to track multiple variables and with a goal of creating a sustainable pipeline though out the talent lifecycle.
Transformative HR has more examples, from Ameriprise Financial, IBM, RBS, and others, but the essential message is that evidence-based human resources is an important way to convey the story behind the numbers. The message to managers should motivate them towards action and impact the metrics. The goal is for business leaders to understanding the human resource issues the same way they understand their supply chain or their marketing value proposition.
Mentor Resources: That's powerful. Will this impact risk metrics, as well as human capital decisions?
Mr. Jesuthasan: Mentoring becomes a central tool in controlling human capital risk.
All businesses take risks, but there are risks they should avoid. Many that can and should be avoided relate to having a pipeline of managers capable of stepping up to pivotal roles as needed.
Approximately 20% of externally-hired CEOs succeed, one example of human capital risk. Needing to go outside the firm for a CEO, or head of R&D, or President of a division is a risk to execution of the business that can be avoided. Without mentoring or training to ensure a pipeline of talent, companies are at risk of being unable to continue successful programs.
Mentoring is a way of ensuring there is a pipeline of people who know how to get things done in that firms' culture.
Mentoring becomes a way to speed up readiness. It is a faster way to transfer the cultural skills related to getting things done in a specific environment. Companies can't afford the risk that they don't have managers ready to step up to those pivotal Roles. In the current environment, where corporations are cost cutting and reducing spending on training, mentoring becomes even more important.
Mentor Resources: We call this Sharing What Works. Sharing through mentoring the tacit knowledge that can only come from experience. Can you share your final thoughts?
Mr. Jesuthasan: Evidence-based Human Resources is transformative and has demonstrated its usefulness as a tool for motivating managers across functions and business lines.
Keep in mind, that in the same way that most of a corporation's financial decisions are made by line managers, rather than the finance department, most of the firm's human resource decision are not made by the Human Resources department. Evidence-based HR is about making the human capital goals part of the day to day functioning of operations, by conveying the story behind the HR metrics.
Kim Wise & Elizabeth Pearce, Mentor Resources
Originally posted on Mentorguru.wordpress.com
›
Go to Amazon.com to see both reviews
3.0 out of 5 stars
Were these reviews helpful?
Let us know
Listmania!
Look for similar items by category
Feedback
- Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
- I am the Author, and I want to comment on my book.
- I am the Publisher, and I want to comment on this book.
|
