Business Partnering

This subject is a well known pet-peeve of mine. During my years as chief human resources officer, I did not let a single opportunity go by without my pilloring the misuse of the terminology.

HR, as a function, started a sobering revival in the early '90's. Academics and consultants provided intriguing tools for diagnosing the current state of the function relative to the expectations of senior management. The tools built on the seminal work identifying the four levels of HR work: administration, advocacy, development, and partnering. Together these four levels represent the four floors of the HR pyramid from the basics to the more esoteric.

The administrative functions of staffing, compensation, payroll, HR policy and work place services constitute the foundation -- or first floor of the four-floor HR building. The second floor is occupied by advocacy on behalf of the employee, on one hand, and advocacy on behalf of management on the other. The third floor houses development, both at the individual and organizational level. The fourth floor is the business partner floor where the HR function sits at the executive table, so to speak.

Needless to say, the fourth floor is where the honey is -- inclusion, power, recognition, whole picture view. That is why I call it the "wannabe place". In my view, you get there by doing a good job at the lower floors, and you cannot leapfrog to the top, but you can earn your place there. Business partner is not a job title but the payoff for outstanding professional work. It is not what you call yourself, but how internal clients view you as an HR professional. It is in the eye of the beholder -- the internal client ---that one finds the answer.

In the mid 1990's the consulting firm I was associated with conducted a study of some 60 organizations, of varying size, most if not all in the State of California. We asked the CEOs of these companies to complete a questionnaire containing 48 items surveying elements of the four-story HR model discussed above. We also sampled the chief human resources persons in these organizations as well as their direct reports. We found that 85% of the CEOs did not regard their HR function as a business partner at all; most viewed it as an administrative and employee relations function. A few recognized HR contribution to development and business problem solving. Most chief human resources persons, on the contrary, saw themselves, by and large as full-fledged business partners to senior management. Their staff saw reality more as a mixed bag. Big gap between the "what is" versus the "want to be"!

Some interesting field-based observations about the business partner model:

1. Under tough economic conditions, the HR function, unless perceived to be a real business partner, is downsized to the basics, the first floor. When this happens, one realizes that in the eyes of senior management the upper floors are seen as luxury and the lower floors as necessity.

2. When the model collapses, it collapses in a pancake fashion, by getting back to the basic minimum of staffing, compensation, payroll, employee services, and regulatory reporting.

3. Each floor has two components. The first floor has hygiene and regulatory. The second floor has concern for employees as well as concern for the organization. The third floor has concern for individual development as well as the development of the organization. The top floor includes being a resource to management on matters of HR expertise as well as a partner in the strategic management of the organization.

Experience teaches us that it is difficult for most HR professionals to be excellent in all four floors, let alone in both elements within each floor. For example, some HR folks are very good at articulating the employees' concerns to management, but they are incapable of articulating management's concerns to the employees. Some HR folks are great at making rules, but they are incapable of creating a productive and attractive workplace. Some HR folks are great at building teams, but they are incapable of building communities.

HR has a reputation problem. It is often not seen as adding value, to be a drag on the decision making wheel. This criticism is well founded. HR has deep and well known roots. It has an administrative and legal pedigree -- bureaucratic and legalistic genes, so to speak. It has a history for foot-dragging, slow to change, concerned with rules and regulations, and as a gate keeper. Although not all HR departments fall into this dismal category, there is enough history that helps perpetuate the perception.

The advent of the organization development field pumped life in HR's clogged arteries by shifting our direction to a client-centered reality. The rise of the customer satisfaction movement increased the awareness of HR's responsibility towards its clients and users.

But the job is not yet done. Much more remains to be done. Governments certainly do not make things easier by introducing complex legislation for HR departments with which to contend.

If you are calling yourself a "business partner", I suggest you get business cards that are more representative of how senior management assesses your performance. Meanwhile, continue to refine your approach, try to be the best you can be, meet your clients needs. They are the ultimate arbiters for your performance.