IoT APPLIED TO HR

IoT will most likely impact the business landscape just as profoundly as the cloud. Although not yet quite as robust in its offerings to HR, IoT is predicted to provide undeniable benefits and spur new, ingenious applications. IoT is like a digital nervous system of mobile devices (including wearables) and sensors that connect devices with each other and with people. Because of this network of connectivity, IoT can collect a lot of data. 

IoT is and will be increasingly more useful to HR departments. Mobile phones and tablets can serve as central hubs in IoT because they provide easy access to people and their preferences. HR incorporation of IoT allows managers to provide continuous performance management by gathering performance data through IoT and providing immediate feedback. Employees will someday use IoT to identify the availability of flex workspaces because through IoT vacant rooms will be shown as “available.” Attendance and location IoT trackers can monitor employee alertness on the job or provide time tracking to capture time and attendance data. IoT has endless, as yet untapped possibilities.

Integrated vs. Separate HR and Payroll

rganisations often agonise over the best approach to running their HR and Payroll systems, with a common question being whether to have a fully integrated HR and Payroll system or to operate entirely separate systems. The arguments for and against each option are set out below: 

1.       Arguments for Integration 

In an integrated system, the core HR Management System and payroll modules sit on top of a common database, so all data about an employee such as their pay, conditions, cost centre, organisation, position and personal information are simultaneously available in every module. This has several advantages in terms of processes and workflow. For example, a newly hired employee can be set up in the system by an HR administrator, the employee can add personal data through self-service and pay details can be added by a payroll administrator using the same core data. There is no need for cross-referencing or waiting for data to flow through the system.

The biggest risk with separate (non-integrated) HR and Payroll systems is that the same core data is frequently needed by both, relying on either an electronic interface or even manual re-keying, requiring additional work to manage and validate the transfer. Both these methods almost always cause delays and potentially problems in reconciliation. From a business process perspective, it’s usually much easier to design a process based on a smooth flow of data between HR and payroll within the same system. Retaining all data within the same system also reinforces the idea that the HR module is the master source of data about people. If the two systems are not synchronised, it could lead to problems in performing certain calculations, for example, where pay calculations are based on position-related data that needs to refer to Terms & Conditions (held at the HR level) in order to work out overtime pay or calculate a pay increase. 

2.       Arguments for Separation 

In some cases, separate HR and Payroll systems may make good sense on cost grounds. For example, when implementing the payroll module of a large ERP module, it may not be economically viable to implement the payroll module to pay only a small part of the organisation, which may have its own pay rules. Paying a relatively small number of people (for example a country where only a few people are employed) involves many of the same set-up costs as those for a large population and it’s not uncommon for global implementations to feed separate, stand-alone payrolls or to outsource to a local provider. The ‘tipping point’ for these calculations will vary according to several factors such as payroll complexity, the availability of local providers and scale. In some organisations, the payroll system seems to be working well enough – people are paid the right amount every week or month and the view is that there is no point throwing something away that is fit for purpose - ‘If it’s not broken, don’t fix it’. When the same payroll system has been running for some time, it will probably have reached a point of maturity where the team responsible for it feels comfortable, knows it thoroughly and is reluctant to change. Staying with the same system means there is no need to set up new software and its operation will not require staff to be retrained. The current license period may not have expired, in which case the team may wish to let the contractual period naturally expire, saving cost. However, it’s important to recognise that introducing an HR system will inevitably have an impact on payroll process (as outlined in the pro-integration argument) because of the fundamental need to reconcile the systems. This may actually introduce more cost as the data will need to be passed to payroll by some means, either through re-keying or via an interface.

Why Companies Outsource the HR Function

While short-term cost savings are generally seen as the major reason for outsourcing, they are not the only reason. Academic research suggests the following drivers for HR Outsourcing  

❐ Influence from Elsewhere in the Business: Organisations often explore outsourcing as part of a business-wide exploration of service delivery options, together with several other internal functions. For example, the organisation may have a parent company that encourages or requires an outsourcing strategy. Indeed, research indicates that the decision to outsource is often not driven by the HR team alone – there is usually pressure from fellow directors or other internal forces. 

❐ Cost Reduction: The most obvious benefit of outsourcing is the removal of cost from the HR operation, achieved by streamlining processes and the introduction of leading-edge technology to support new processes. Although in theory organisations could achieve much of the cost reduction through their own efforts, many lack the skills to bring about the transformation or do not have the right technology or scale to do so. For this reason, organisations often conclude that it is much more cost-effective to use an external provider that has an established infrastructure in place and can bring expertise and experience to their customers. Outsourcing providers deliver services to a wide range of customers and are able to spread costs over a large number of employees, enabling them to achieve extensive economies of scale that would not be available to individual organisations. Outsourcing also reduces the cost of overheads involved in providing the service, smoothing out peaks and troughs in workload to ensure consistency of service delivery. 

❐ Moving HR up the Value Chain: HR often sees administration as a barrier to working strategically – if the function can be freed from the burden of administrative work, there is more scope to operate at a higher level (this issue will be explored in subsequent chapters). Even in organisations where the HR Business Partner model has been introduced, evidence suggests that organisations experience difficulties in breaking away from administrative tasks and seek transformational approaches that enable HR to concentrate on other activities. For example, Business Partners often find themselves pre-occupied by operational issues and are unable to diagnose and develop strategic HR solutions, becoming ‘bogged down’ in detail.

❐ Risk Reduction: All organisations have a legal obligation to comply with the requirements of local and national employment legislation. Employment legislation continues to become more complex (especially in Europe) and non-compliance can ultimately lead to legal action. A report by BusinessHR and MORI, which looked at UK SMEs and their attitudes towards staff attraction, retention and motivation found that 43% of managing directors experience difficulty in keeping in keeping up with growing employment legislation. The risks are obvious – failure to comply with legislation can consume huge amounts of management time, while the cost to employers of defending a tribunal claim can be very high (in some cases, such as those linked to gender and disability discrimination there are unlimited penalties). Bad experience of employment claims is often the trigger for exploring outsourcing options. 

❐ Service Quality Improvement: Companies that want to improve the speed, quality and effectiveness of their HR operations face two barriers. Firstly, they lack knowledge of best practice processes and how to implement them and secondly, their HR teams are so entrenched in current ways of working that they find it difficult to make the transition to a customer-focused service centre approach. HR outsourcing service providers typically bring experience and knowledge of best practice processes, built through experience of working with a range of customers and technologies. 

❐ Increasing HR’s Capacity to Respond to Organisational Change: Outsourcing is a tool often used by smaller organisations during their early growth if they are not able or motivated to invest in an internal HR function. It can also be used by organisations that wish to transform HR but cannot see an effective way to change their service delivery structure without external intervention. Likewise, outsourcing is sometimes a response when one division of a company is sold (such as in the case of a management buy-out) leaving it with no HR infrastructure, as an alternative to establishing a new internal HR operation. 

Overview of the key steps in mapping HR processes

Overview of the key steps in mapping HR processes, summarising key actions and outputs.

Step	Activity	Tools	Output
Define the Target Process	Define key HR activities as processes Prioritise key processes Break processes into manageable chunks Identify and document key process variations Involve subject matter experts	Brainstorming, customer focus groups	Prioritise reengineering efforts
Develop 'As Is' Models	Conduct workflow analysis (who does what when, where, how) and identify handoffs Audit existing constraints in systems (e.g., compatibility, integrity, and consistency of data) Determine problems in current process from customer's and administrator's perspectives Identify key measurement related to process (e.g., cost, quality, time, rework, etc)	Workflow analysis, activity analysis, systems audit, focus groups, interviews	Flow map of existing processes and their performance in terms of cost and quality
Challenge underlying assumptions	Challenge each activity in the current process (why is it done, why is it done there, why is it done then, why does that person do it, why is it done this way etc) Challenge current policies, practices and philosophy Explore alternative delivery methods Cut across functional silos Incorporate and leverage information technology	Visioning, scenario building, brainstorming, critical thinking	Identify opportunities for radical improvement
Develop 'To be' Models — Identifying where and how technology will impact the process	Solicit information from broad base about alternatives Benchmark other companies Integrate separate processes Take detailed design of new information systems Draft new process flow Assess potential impact of new process (cost/benefit, risk etc)	Benchmarking, conflict resolution, issues resolution, simulation, consensus building	Design new processes, select best information technology to support process, determine impact of new processes
Implement, Roll out, Market	Implement incremental approach Conduct pilot testing Implement systems integration Market the programme, create curiosity, implement trial use Offer training to support users Manage resistance Anticipate and address morale problems	Marketing, communication, training, coaching, experimentation	Facilitate the smooth migration to new system and user's acceptance of the new processes
Measure BusinessImpact	Capture business impact of HR processes before and after reengineering Measure business impact, not just budget and milestones in programmes and activities Separate short- from long-term impact	Activity analysis, cost analysis, customer service survey, focus groups	Monitor progress and impact

Figure 1: Source— based on recognised models from a variety of consulting firms. 

Invest in HR Capability Development | Excellent Business Partnering

Without investment in ongoing capability development many HR professionals will be left knowing what they need to do differently but without the knowledge and skills to contribute differently.

Where possible, we strongly recommend that HR professionals achieve professional qualifications and accreditation through their relevant professional institute or governing body. This is important in building the credibility of HR, in ensuring professional standards and in developing a community of influential HR professionals. However, the acquisition of a formal professional qualification does not always address sufficiently the full range of capabilities that HR professionals need to acquire to operate as effectivebusiness partners.

A pre requisite must be to include a cost line for capability development in any business case for HR transformation or in the HR budget. There will be a one-off investment needed (particularly in the new capability areas). There will also be an on-going need to invest — to keep stretching people and to bring new joiners up to speed.

So, what are the approaches to capability development? In addition to the 'on-the-job' forms for development there are five main strands to consider:

1. Mandatory workshops
2. Optional workshops
3. Action learning groups
4. Coaching
5. Mentoring
6. Self-managed learning/on-the-job development

We have used combinations of each where we have supported capability development. Below we set out things to consider in broad terms for each strand followed by three case studies showing how organisations have blended these strands.

Mandatory Workshops

Typically workshops are offered to address the three new capability areas — although one of the case study organisations also made organisational design mandatory. These workshops are intended not just to deliver knowledge and skills, but also to deliver three additional benefits to HR:

• Create a common language
• Deliver a consistent approach and tool kit
• Create a network and community amongst HR professionals

In this way, even if some HR professionals have already acquired the requisite capabilities, there are benefits in their participating in mandatory workshops so that the additional benefits set out above are realised across the HR professional community. Additionally, more experienced members of the HR team should be encouraged to share their knowledge and experience.

Optional Workshops

Here, the workshops described above (or slight variations of these) are offered to HR professionals but are not mandatory. In addition, optional workshops have also been offered in areas such as 'Becoming a trusted advisor', 'Influencing skills', 'Facilitation skills' and 'Managing Conflict'.

The main advantage in this approach is that those HR professionals considered to be competent in a capability area need not repeat the training. The benefits of this approach are:

• Training is focused on identified need.
• Overall development costs are reduced (or spent on areas of identified need).
• Individuals considered competent in a particular capability area are motivated to address development gaps rather than attend workshops where they consider themselves skilled.

Action Learning Groups

Action learning groups typically comprise around 6-8 members, supported by an external facilitator, with the aim over time for the group to become self-managing. The approach is based on the group working on real business issues. Learning is achieved at two levels — applying the knowledge and experience of the group to the issue under discussion. Reflecting on the way the group works together as a learning experience in its own right.

This approach to HR capability development is used in two main ways:

1. Each participant brings his or her own 'live' issue or project to address with the group.
2. The group works on a 'live' business issue together over a period of meetings.

The first of these approaches places the onus on the individual to identify an issue and bring it to the group. In our experience, this approach has not always been successful with the main challenges being that people do not prepare sufficiently and they are not skilled in framing a problem or issue in a way the group can engage with quickly. However, where this approach has succeeded it has enabled participants to apply knowledge in the new capability areas very quickly and there is early pay back to the organisation on the investment made in development.

The second approach is more thematic. Some of the learning groups we have supported have tackled more strategic themes, examples being how to increase levels of engagement; the employee of the future; increasing line manager capability in people skills. With this approach, the learning groups decide how to approach the task and, with the support of the facilitator, take 'time outs' to reflect on how the group is working and to think about how to use tools and techniques related to the new capability areas. This approach builds deep bonds between group members and by the end of the process, groups are also self-managing.

In our experience this is a powerful way of learning as it not only engages theory and practice, but also gives organisations an immediate return on their investment. We anticipate that this approach to learning will gain ground in coming years linked also with virtual learning environments.

Coaching

Coaching has its place in the development repertoire and, in our work with organisations, has been used in two ways:

1. In its more conventional sense of an external coach working on a number of coaching objectives with an individual. Typically, this approach has been used with more senior members of the HR leadership team.
2. As part of the action learning group process — where individual coaching sessions are held between learning group meetings with two objectives: First, to help the individual reflect on the experience of the learning group and their contribution. Second, to address individual development goals that are inappropriate to be tackled at a learning group meeting.

This latter approach has been particularly powerful and has enabled individuals to accelerate the application of new capabilities.

Mentoring

Mentoring has been used in two different ways:

• Linking HR professionals with other HR professionals. For example, people who are at 'Mastery' in a given capability area with those who are developing that capability;
• Linking HR professionals with colleagues outside of HR primarily to build their knowledge of the business and to improve the way they influence the organisation.

Where possible, HR mentoring should be integrated into any organisational approach to mentoring.

Self-Managed Learning/On-the-Job Development

Individuals clearly need to take ownership for their development too. Most self-managed learning can be linked to general resources available to the wider management population — whether e-learning resources from business schools, library resources or links to external Web sites such as the CIPD.

On-the-job development can include work shadowing, work placements, project roles, temporary assignments, meeting/workshop facilitation, project team leadership.

In terms of HR partner capability, there is also a challenge to HR professionals to read more broadly — including publications like Financial Times, McKinsey Quarterly, HarvardBusiness Review, Sloan Management Review and The Economist. Each of these brings interesting insights from the world of Consultancy and Academia which HR professionals should be using with internal clients to change the conversations they hold and bring fresh thinking to the table.

In the following we set out three examples of how different organisations have tackled capability development.

---

Case Study — AXA UK

AXA has combined mandatory workshops, optional workshops and self-managed learning.

Mandatory workshops include (but are not limited to) consulting skills and organisational design. These were chosen because organisational design was considered to be a significant gap across the HR community and a strategic skill set. Consulting skills were also a significant gap and there was a strong need to build a common approach in the way HR professionals engaged with business colleagues.

A suite of optional workshops is available to HR professionals to sup-plement the mandatory workshops and to address areas such as project management.

E-learning and other learning resources are available through the organisation's Intranet to address specific individual development needs.

Development plans are agreed and monitored as part of the performance review process.

---

---

Case Study — National Grid

National Grid has engaged in HR capability development over some years now and has completed a number of 'waves' of development. Development has focused mainly on mandatory workshops, action learning groups, coaching and mentoring.

The first wave was to put all HR professionals (irrespective of organisational level) through mandatory workshops in the areas of strategy and change management, client relationship management and project management.

The second wave established action learning groups supported by coaching of learning group participants. These learning groups were thematic and coaching reinforced the learning group experience and addressed individual development needs that were inappropriate to address in a learning group context.

A third wave of development is in progress — partly to bring new joiners up to speed on new capabilities and partly to build HR capability in internally developed change management methodology.

As capability development covered all HR professionals, including the HR leadership team, it proved to be very effective:

• HR leaders were able to contribute their experience to more junior members of the team.
• A common language and tool kit were developed which could be reinforced through the line management structure.

---

---

Case Study — Global Telecoms Business

This organisation decided to roll out mandatory workshops for the bulk of the HR professional community and run learning groups supported by coaching for the HR leadership group.

The mandatory workshops in all three new capability areas (strategy & change management, consulting skills and project management) were extremely successful and went a long way to creating a common language and toolkit. Although the HR leadership team thought they already had the capability covered by mandatory workshops, this was not the case.

In this instance the approach taken to learning groups was for each person to bring along his or her own 'live' issue. We experienced two problems — first, people did not prepare adequately for the learning group, and second, they did not have the requisite knowledge in the new capability areas and more time was spent in covering ground addressed in workshops than on the 'live' issues.

The main learning here was that adopting a dual approach for the HR leadership team/the rest of HR was ineffective as the HR leadership did not have the foundation tools and techniques they thought they had which meant they played 'catch up' and were unable to provide the coaching and support to team members that would have been beneficial.

Whilst aspects of this capability development approach were successful, the dual approach adopted falls into the 'How not to' category and we do not recommend it.

Clarify HR's Contribution

It is important that there is a dialogue with business colleagues about the contribution needed from HR and that contribution should be anchored in the critical issues faced by the organisation.

We use a number of techniques to gain clarity on HR's contribution and here we explain two techniques that have proved to be particularly helpful:

1. 'Strawman' discussion document,
2. 'Accountability Workshop'.

Strawman Discussion Document

For those of you unfamiliar with the term 'strawman' — this is a proposal put up for discussion that is robust enough to stand up to critique (i.e., it has substance), but not so robust that the proposals cannot be taken apart and re-worked. It is therefore different from a draft document where the expectation is that the proposals are well formed.

This document typically sets out the responsibilities and accountabilities for employees, managers, HR generalists, HR specialists, HR shared services (transactional and advisory), outsourcers, etc. as a basis for discussion. An example of how this approach has been used is presented in the case study below.

---

Case Study — Global Telecoms Business

A four-page discussion document was written setting out the capability shift required in HR professionals and options to address this capability gap. This 'strawman' paper was then discussed one to one with the global HR leadership team and other key stakeholders elsewhere in the business. Feedback enabled a firm proposal to be developed which was then signed off through the HR transformation governance structure without any substantive change. This approach was quick and effective in building a coalition of support for the final proposal and in clarifying the contribution needed from HR professionals.

---

Accountability Workshop

As a precursor to organisational design, we have found it helpful to combine the work on HR delivery channels and the scope of HR services that are delivered through these channels to ascertain where accountability for HR service delivery will lie. Our suggested forum to complete this work is through an Accountability Workshop.

This type of workshop brings together HR and stakeholders from other parts of the business to work through changes in people management accountabilities. Typically statements of the scope of people-related activities are used to stimulate discussion (irrespective of whether these activities are performed by line managers, different members of the HR team or outsourced service delivery channels).

The Accountability Workshop then focuses on identifying, for each activity area, accountabilities for managers, HR and outsourcers, and whether the impact of HR transformation makes these accountabilities stronger, neutral or weaker.

In preparing for the workshop, focus on completing two strawman templates, one template showing the 'as is' and another presenting the known accountabilities in the 'to be' delivery model. Through desk research and interviews, it should be possible to develop a very robust picture of the 'as is' and a good starting point for the 'to be'. What this preparation work is likely to highlight are inconsistencies in accountabilities across the organisation. These templates can be tested in advance with participants and any outstanding issues can be presented for discussion/resolution at the workshop.

The reason for completing both the 'as is and a 'to be' template is to be able to manage implementation more effectively. Knowing how HR transformation will impact different organisational roles will enable communication to be tailored and subsequent interventions to be structured to secure stakeholder buy-in.

We have found that an accountabilities workshop works well when participants are drawn from the HR function and the line and comprise typically around 15–20 people. Participants do not necessarily need to be the most senior people, but should have a grasp between them of the full range of HR services. In the workshop, the aim is to validate the 'as is' template and to finalise a 'to be' template. The balance of time should be spent on considering the 'to be' template.

At the workshop, a process we have found that works well is to:

• Create a large version of the template strawman (sheets of brown paper work well).
• Organise participants into five small groups.
• Introduce the task, setting out the aims of HR transformation, givens, assumptions etc.
• Allocate a heading per group.
• Ask each small group to complete their template, identifying where they believe accountability will lie.
• Rotate groups to comment on the work of their colleagues (a sticky dot can be placed alongside a statement requiring clarification or which needs to be challenged; anything missing can be written on a Post-it™ note).
• Work through each of the templates and reach agreement where issues have been flagged (with dots and Post-it™ notes).

Typically, an Accountability Workshop takes a couple of days to work through all the issues. This is, however, an extremely good investment of time as the output will have been created jointly between HR and other business colleagues and the output also provides a clear statement of role expectations. If there is any ambiguity about what strategic contribution the business needs from HR, this type of workshop helps to bring clarity to this area. The outputs from this workshop will then need to be discussed with key stakeholders.

We have found that the workshop outputs are helpful in framing a number of interventions that need to be undertaken as part of the HR transformation process. For example:

• high-level activity analysis (supporting analysis of future resource needs);
• HR process mapping;
• accountability mapping and role definitions;
• capability identification and development requirements for different roles;
• stakeholder communications;
• structure design.

Architectural Design Decisions in Relation to Business Partners and HR Specialists

In truth, this varies from organisation to organisation and the shades of HR organisational design are many. A number of themes emerge and include the following:

• The primacy of the business partner role in managing the client interface. This is a significant change and shifts power within many HR functions away from the specialist to the business partner. As such, it is both a substantive and a symbolic change representing a cultural shift to a more client-centred approach. For many HR functions, this change has involved a difficult transition for specialists and can be a significant point of resistance during the early stages of HR transformation. We have found that this is particularly true of training and development areas, which may have previously had account management posts and may have been organisationally distinct from HR.
• The specialist role is being increasingly provided externally through outsourcers, consultancy and specialist providers.
• Areas previously staffed by HR specialists (e.g., HR policy) are increasingly being led by HR business partners. For example, in one organisation the development of new HR policy will be led by an HR business partner and run as a project involving a variety of stakeholders on the project team. In another organisation, HR business partners may have responsibility for leading an HR process or policy area, for example, resourcing, performance management and diversity.
• Whether HR professionals report through a business unit or the HR function, there is a need to develop an HR community — for development, networking, knowledge sharing and learning.

Case Example Illustrating Aspects of the Model

This Oil and Energy Services company had grown both organically and through acquisition into a global organisation employing 64,000 staffs in 80 countries. To create high levels of customer service it depended on high levels of international team working and knowledge sharing. This reliance on knowledge and technology caused them to describe themselves not only as a leading oilfield services provider but also as information systems specialists, who could support their customers by translating data into useful information, and then transform this information into knowledge for improved decision making around the globe. Given their strategy of creativity, collaboration, and high levels of customer intimacy, the levels of understanding of customers' needs, managing international diversity and knowledge sharing required a great deal of international teamwork.

HR Strategy

The HR function was seen as pivotal to the development of international team-working and knowledge sharing. The HR function had a crucial role in developing culturally sensitive management and in so doing was required to shed its administrative workload to concentrate on culture management and change issues. The HR function was being gradually transformed into a more strategically oriented function, in which HR staff worked more closely with managers in the new operating structure.

To achieve this, the HR function was first divided into the now common shared services and business partner model. Shared services provided administrative and policy support with HR business partners providing direct support to business-facing managers in the field. Second, shared services adopted a global HRIS to allow it to become more efficient and effective in providing globally available data for all service lines and all business groups from the same database. This allowed consistency and integration of performance management and other HR practices and policies throughout the company. Third, Web-based HR was introduced to improve service delivery by opening up the access to the HRIS using manager and employee self-service applications.

HR Service Goals

Thus, the HR service goals were primarily concerned with improving service quality and freeing up time for HR staff to address more strategic issues.

So when we looked at it we realised that in order to do that we had to take off a lot of the administrative load from the HR function in each of the groups and let them focus much more on people and then…work with one another around people issues because that's the cultural driver and let all the support stuff be taken care of somewhere else. 
(UK HR Director)

HR Service Architectures

First, these goals were to be achieved through the development of a common HR portal, through which all online services could be accessed. The intention of this portal was also to help HR to create a greater sense of corporate identity among employees in the extended enterprise using an internal employer branding strategy. Second, the company implemented a global HRIS, comprising a set of basic information systems and the first set of Web-based HR tools. These technologies were a combination of out-of-the-box applications, derived from the global HRIS, combined with bespoke tools, many of which were developed in-house'.

The parent company's internal analyses had shown that

There is a cost saving …but that cost saving does not offset the cost of implementation and investment cost. It might do in the long term but if you're looking at sort of two/three year returns it doesn't work. (UK HR Director)

The real benefit being sought was an improvement in HR service quality, providing more accurate and reliable data and enabling more informed management decisions. The company, however, had a longer term transformational goal of introducing ICT to improve human capital management through the development and introduction of a bespoke global 'career centre'.

Service centres were established to handle transactional enquiries from line managers and employees. The emphasis was on the internal sourcing of HR technologies, unless a compelling case could be made for outsourcing of services. As the HR Director explained:

I think outsourcing overall is quite dangerous because outsourcing is … in many cases it's cost driven and if it's cost driven why should another organisation be able to take some cost out which you can't?

HR Service Outcomes

A mix of intended and unintended outcomes emerged. On the positive side, managers were satisfied overall with the level of transactional support provided by the shared service centre and the quality of data available via employee and manager self-service tools. There were issues, however, with some Web-based HR applications, in particular the 'career centre' which was supposed to enhance opportunities for international mobility but failed to live up to its promise. Managers also reported problems with 'service ambiguity', in the sense that they were not always sure what services to reasonably expect from different parts of HR, citing potential conflicts and overlaps between specialists and business partners.

This example, supported by the framework described earlier, points to a number of important points for practitioners to be aware of when considering different HR service delivery approaches:

• Consider carefully the specific HR services goals that define the purpose of the investment in the project(s)
• Design an architecture which is appropriate for the defined goals
• Implement the solution with a determination to achieve positive, intended outcomes which reflect the defined project goals
• Check carefully that a 'line of sight' has been established between HR strategy, goals, architectures and intended outcomes

Some of these architectural design decisions are now examined in some detail, as these are often a source of anxiety and confusion for HR professionals.

Produce HR Transformation Roadmap

The transformation roadmap is a single high-level view of the key activities that are required to deliver an HR transformation programme. The purpose of the roadmap is to define the key milestones that are required to bridge the gap from current to future HR. There are many different approaches to producing transformation maps;presents two potential options.

An example of a transformation roadmap that was developed to support an HR transformation is provided in Figure 1. The challenge facing HR within the company was how to communicate the aims, objectives and key changes that would be introduced by its transformation programme to staff from a variety of professions and backgrounds. The transformation programme found that it had a large number of traditional project plans with considerable detail and high-level presentations but it had nothing that could communicate to staff and senior stakeholders what HR transformation would deliver to them, their managers and their employees.

Figure 1: HR transformation roadmap.

The company, therefore, developed a transformation roadmap which is divided into:

• streams such as skills, performance, change, structures, process and technology. However, the map could also be divided into the organisational levers, that is, technology, structure, processes and people/culture;
• timeline which can be divided into 90-day periods or years and in every period there are specific milestones for each stream;
• objectives for the programme which are located in the top right-hand corner.

This map satisfied three important objectives for the company:

• a picture of key activities and deliverables for the different work streams within the programme to provide the programme management team with a tool for viewing and controlling what would happen and when;
• a communication tool that could be used to engage with stakeholders from across the company, including trade unions, to explain the impact of the transformation programme.
• an overview of the HR transformation programme that could be used to link into other transformation programmes taking place.

HR transformation programmes will have interdependencies with other programmes and initiatives within the organisation and these can be integrated into the transformation map. Examples of common interdependencies include those shown in the table below:

Interdependency area	Description
Technology	Linkages to programmes that upgrade network capacity and PCs
Interfaces	Systems interfaces with other core systems, for example, finance, procurement (especially workflow/organisation structure)
Change programmes	Change projects in other functional areas

The above transformation can, however, also be expressed in an alternative format, as demonstrated by Figure 2. 

In this version of the roadmap, initial high-level milestones are broken down to the next level of detail. The headings of process, people and technology are used to segment the roadmap horizontally so that in every 90-day period there are specific milestones for the process, people and technology elements of the programme. Further views of the roadmap can also be developed. For example, a view that defines when the different elements of the new HR service delivery model will be delivered from a senior management, line manager, employee and HR practitioner perspective for each 90-day period provides a tangible plan by which expectations can be set across each of those groups. Through creating these different views, the roadmap becomes an important communications tool in engaging people in the programme.

Figure 2: Ninety-day milestones—key steps to HR transformation.

In the first part of the roadmap, it is often preferable to split this into individual months for the first 3 months of the roadmap in order to provide month-by-month clarity over that period. Similarly, for the later parts half-yearly periods may be more appropriate. After the business case has been approved and the roadmap becomes a working plan, keeping the first part at an individual month level of detail for a rolling 3-month period is very effective for managing expectations across the business and the programme team.

In the first parts of the roadmap, the delivery will typically be around 'quick wins' or 'early implementations'. Quick wins typically begin to put the new process and people elements in place supported by existing technology that has been tuned and modified ahead of the longer-term, enduring technology implementation (if this is what is planned). This provides the opportunity to deliver benefits early, build the credibility of the programme and encourage behaviour change throughout the life of the programme rather than in a 'big bang' at the end.

Getting the Most from Web 2.0

These points are elaborated in the model shown in Figure 1, which links Web-based user inputs with HR outputs.

 

Figure 1: The Web 2.0 system and people management

Some Web-based user inputs will be familiar to readers, such as online text, images, video and instant messaging; other inputs may be less familiar, for example, podcasting, video, online voting, social book-marking, tagging and subscribing to RSS feeds. The important point to understand about these user inputs is that collectively they create value for organisations through network effects. Network effects describe how early adopter individuals and organisations rely on other users to build up online 'traffic' and turn them into a standard form of communications. The more people are drawn into using these technologies, or are compelled to use them, the more viable the system becomes for all. This is how email and the Internet developed into a standard system of communicating among two-thirds of the total American workforce that have been labelled 'networked workers' . It is also what is behind the thinking in some of the case study examples shown in Box 1, which seek to build on the power of online discussion forums, wikis and blogs.

Box 1: Case illustration: Discussions forums, online chat and message boards in three UK government departments

---

UK government departments have a number of Web 2.0 and Enterprise 2.0 applications, the most widely used of which are chat and message boards, online conversations, management blogs and podcasts. Given their relative success, other departments are planning to use these technologies. Three good examples are the Department of Communities and Local Government's Director General and Ministers Monthly Staff Webchat, the Department for Work and Pensions Online 'Staffroom' Forum and Display Space and HR Revenue and Customs (HRMC) Suggestions Scheme and Online Discussion Forum.

The Department of Communities and Local Government's Director General and Ministers Monthly Staff Webchat is chaired by a Director General. Staff can ask questions directly to Board Executive members in an asynchronous chatroom. The online chatroom has a formal agenda, and transcripts and action points are fed back to Board members. The Webchat is marketed internally through various channels of communication and usually attracts over a hundred discussion postings a month.

The Department for Work and Pensions Online 'Staffroom' Forum and Display Space is slightly different in providing feedback to senior civil servants on a range of issues in which employees can 'Have a Say' on any issue they wish to bring up. It also has a 'Hall of Fame' for celebrating success in the Department.

HMRC's online discussion forum is an important channel for employee contributions to the corporate suggestion scheme, 'Angels and Demons'. Suggestions are being sought on how to improve work organisation and processes, and on culture change, along the lines of the BBC's Dragon's Den. According to the Web site, more than 12,000 HRMC employees had registered by October 2007, 8000 had contributed to online discussions on specific themes and 500 innovative business ideas had been logged. The online discussion forum had not required propriety software but had been developed using open source tools.