Just about every HR executive wants to be in the innermost circle of top management,
yet few of them are. Yes, they may have a title—executive vice president or senior
vice president—that puts them on par with their counterparts in strategy, finance
and marketing, but that doesn’t necessarily make them the CEO’s and other executive
team members’ confidant.
In too many organizations, HR is still viewed as a necessary
evil—the benefits administrators and watchdogs over hiring, promotions, compensation
and other people practices. Seldom is HR a significant player in shaping the company’s
strategy.
That’s beginning to change, particularly as more HR executives
see their calling as chief talent recruitment officers. But getting top talent in
the door is not the only "strategic" role the HR head can fill. Even more critical
is getting talent to stay and perform at extraordinary levels, not just at good
or acceptable levels. This is about generating commitment of employees to the firm’s
strategy—an environment of strategic commitment, as we refer to it.
While skills transfer very quickly, the will to perform at
extraordinary levels for an organization does not. An organization with mediocre
talent can rise to unimagined levels if it has the commitment to execute the plan
to its fullest. Think sports (the 1980 U.S. Olympic hockey team’s win over the heavily
favored Soviet Union, and the 2004 Boston Red Sox). Think military (the British
in World War II and the Israelis in the Six-Day War).
HR executives today can play a much more important role at
the top of their companies if they view their roles as being more than securing
the right skills.
"Hiring the best talent to fuel our growth is definitely critical,"
says Marilyn Miller, an HR director at Cisco Systems Inc., the $28 billion San Jose,
California-based networking technology firm whose revenue has jumped 50 percent
since 2002. "However, as an HR leader I cannot only focus on getting talent in the
door. My job is also to ensure that senior management creates an environment that
helps our people achieve exceptional performance."
HR leaders like Miller are playing powerful roles in their
companies. Call them "commitment coaches," if you will. This commitment coach role
can happen even in companies with the most toxic of corporate cultures—if the HR
executive understands what buttons to push of which executives and when. We’ve seen
it play out in a number of companies during the past 20 years, including Cisco and
financial services powerhouse Capital One Financial Corp.
Why being the chief talent acquisition officer is
not enough
The best recruiting in the world will quickly go for naught if employee commitment
wanes or drops off quickly. Commitment can deflate in weeks or months in an environment
in which top executives (especially the CEO) ignore it, fool themselves that they
have it or minimize its importance. Commitment is at least as important as talent—if
not more so—because it drives talent to new levels.
But commitment is lacking in many organizations. Gallup’s
poll on employee engagement annually shows that two-thirds to three-quarters of
U.S. employees are not engaged in their jobs. A lack of engagement or commitment
is not just in the lower levels of the organization—it is often missing in the top
executive team.
If you believe, as we do, that commitment is critical to corporate
success, you should be heartened to hear that HR managers can play a critical role
in increasing it. In fact, we believe they must. It won’t be easy or without risk.
But from our experience in helping a number of HR executives play this role, we
know it can be done.
The first step for HR is to assess whether there indeed is
a commitment problem in the organization. People are not likely to admit they aren’t
committed to the company’s success, so examine their behavior, which will speak
volumes.
Do executives speak up and push back on the CEO in top management
meetings? Or is the conversation mainly one-directional and conciliatory?
If the latter is true, there’s likely to be a commitment problem—unknown
to the CEO, most likely. Do managers and employees have continual hallway conversations
in which they complain that the company’s strategy is unwise, unclear, unnecessary
or all three? Or do they spend their time talking about how things are not their
fault or how another department or level is to blame for sub-optimal results? For
sure, these are signs of a commitment problem.
If there is a commitment problem, the place for the HR executive
to start addressing it is at the top—the CEO or business unit head of his division.
The CEO must be told that his strategy, however "right" it seems to him, will likely
be adopted slowly and half-heartedly, given the lack of commitment in the organization.
The HR executive must also coach the CEO not to take this
feedback personally. If he reacts badly, he will in fact only make it worse. The
commitment problem can be fixed relatively quickly, but only if he and his management
team can trace the roots back to themselves, acknowledge it and are willing to fix
it.
Once the CEO owns the commitment problem, the HR executive
must also coach her peers on the executive team in the same manner. Often, this
is more challenging than coaching her boss, the CEO. She can be perceived as trying
to get ahead or position herself with the CEO. Therefore, the risk of politics and
being marginalized are quite high. "The HR leader must tread a fine line of being
the coach for the entire team and on no one’s side—neither the executive’s nor his
or her direct reports," Cisco’s Miller says.
To help solve the commitment issue, the HR executive must
facilitate a process—starting with the executive team—in which the real issues facing
the organization are honestly and effectively expressed, heard and addressed. Everyone
must be permitted to vent their perceptions about others. Criticisms about the CEO,
if warranted, must also be voiced. The HR executive must help the CEO create a safe
environment in which no retribution will come to those who speak up—especially about
the CEO’s behavior.
This process can be uncomfortable and emotional. But it will
always be liberating and productive when done effectively. Until executives can
be truly honest with one another about their perceptions and where they may be falling
short, they won’t ever click. Frustrations and resentments will continue to undermine
alignment, trust and partnership. The executive team members will fulfill their
professional responsibilities but won’t go to extraordinary lengths to do so.
This is particularly true for organizations that have to execute
a major improvement initiative. As it set off to develop a major new information
system in 2004, Capital One realized it needed the exceptional commitment of thousands
of employees who would build the system to have it delivered on time and on target.
John Powenski, an HR executive at the $8 billion McLean, Virginia-based company,
took on the "commitment coach" role. "Initiatives like this require the leaders
of a company to step up," he says. "They have to get people on board, keep them
focused over several years, and orchestrate a complex web of interdependent projects.
Without high levels of commitment of people in the trenches, an initiative like
this is bound to go off the rails."
Capital One knew that no matter how well it planned the project,
it would face the inevitable breakdowns. Gaining the commitment of workers to overcome
the breakdowns would be crucial. Says Powenski: "No matter how superior your planning
is, you will always have bumps in executing it. The resolve of your project team
at all levels to overcome the flaws makes all the difference between success and
failure."
Powenski helped the Capital One managers leading the project
to measure the commitment of project workers all along the way. They regularly sent
out a "pulse" survey to measure how project workers felt things were going, their
confidence in the executive team, what they needed to complete their tasks, and
other issues. All the attention to generating, monitoring and maintaining the commitment
of project workers paid off. The project team delivered the system this year on
time and on target, ushering in a wave of major productivity improvements at the
company.
Once the executive team has broken the commitment barrier,
the HR manager can then help those managers cascade the process to the next level
in the organization and the level below that. Over weeks and months, managers and
employees at all levels will begin to believe that top executives are listening
and truly want to capture their hearts and minds.
From our experience, the HR executives who have adopted and
played the "commitment coach" role well have greatly increased their impact on company
success. As Powenski says, HR’s "sweet spot" should be helping senior management
generate employee commitment to the firm’s strategy. HR managers like Miller and
Powenski who have done so have also substantially increased the value and stature
of HR, as well as their personal passion for their role.
But let’s be realistic. HR executives need to muster significant
courage to rise above the typical posturing and corporate politics and truly coach
their peers and boss (the CEO) to exude higher levels of honesty, trust, alignment
and communication. Yet HR executives who have dared to cross the line tell us it
is the most powerful and rewarding part of their job.
Workforce Management Online, August 2007 -- Register Now!
= Member Only
