My post on comparing HR and IT as service parts of the organization once again brought out the best in my readers.

“That has to be the stupidest statement that ever came out of McKinsey! I spent 25 years as a recruiter and another decade teaching line managers better hiring skills and in most instances HR has neither the knowledge nor the business acumen to detail staffing needs for any project, tech or not. HR’s preference for controlling staffing budgets has more to do with amassing organizational power than with its ability to translate strategic initiatives into action. Staffing needs and talent acquisition, motivation and retention is the province of line management at every level.”

As usual, she hit a home run that cleared the bases for Sensei at ActiveEngine to make an excellent point about how useful HR CAN be in the area of working with different cultures:

“Certainly HR has evolved away from the traditional approach of “helping employees fill out forms”. For companies going international HR is indispensable in regards to working with other cultures. Generally they become the focal point for training people how to communicate with new team members with not only different backgrounds but with different cultural frameworks.”

What is curious here is how an organization like McKinsey can move so far in one direction with it’s advice without considering the limitations inherent in the mission and capabilities of an area. Clearly the three of us have a pretty clear perception of HR’s role based directly on our experiences. Why is a major consulting firm so interested in pushing HR out of it’s box?

Does your HR department get involved in executing strateges? If so, which ones and what role do they play? Do you agree that HR should stay within the limits imposed in this post? I’d like to hear from some HR managers, directors and VPs!

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via EMAIL and RSS.

Post from: EveryJoe

HR’s Focus on Service and Culture Transitions

“In this particular case there was a PMO which acted as a mentor to a sales department charged with re-vamping their prospecting and acquisition processes and systems. The PMO, with the department head, reported to a subset of the executive committee. In fact, the PMO chose the consultants to augment the analysis portion of the project. It was one of the best executions I’ve seen in years as resources were aligned and the teams had to answer directly to the CFO.”

I asked him to share more about the roles and changes involved:

“As would luck have it, the VP of the PMO went on to be promoted to CAO so there it was a natural extension of the senior management team. Interestingly enough, one the consultants for the project assumed the role that the CAO left open after his promotion, so most of the synergy that stemmed from the analysis and project management style remained on staff.”

This sounds like a well functioning organization that uses a PMO to facilitate action on projects. The culture also seems to allow the PMO to function as an arbiter and key supportive element in executive decision making.

Do you use a PMO to enable or assist executive decision making on projects and use of outside consultants? If not, how do your executives engage on decisions of this sort? We’ve all experienced organizations that grind to a halt when executives seem frozen on next steps, what role does culture play in making high level decisions happen quickly? MORE EXAMPLES and YOUR EXPERIENCES please!

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via EMAIL or RSS.

Post from: EveryJoe

Facilitating Action Through a PMO