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!