Illness, travel, vacation, kids, family, and other distractions have kept me from my blog. I apologize, if you have been checking in and I haven't been writing. I have let us both down.... HOWEVER.... I'm back and I'm focused. The Talent Myth Part IV was originally planned to be about the Industry Press. While there is a lot to say about the industry press, with recent events (Oracle - JD Edwards - Peoplesoft) I've decided to switch this installment's topic to be about the HR Technology Vendors. Actually this may be the next few installments.
Check back tomorrow, and let me know what you think.
Feedback? Questions? Comments? email me here
Tuesday, June 17, 2003
Sunday, March 02, 2003
Monday, January 20, 2003
The Talent Myth, Part III
Thank You for your continued patience and support for my blog. Your emails have been encouraging. I have no excuse for my lack of content here, other than the crazed pace I've had in my personal and work lives. This blog doesn't pay, you see, so sometimes other priorities prevail. I promise to be more attentive. Please keep your feedback coming, it really does motivate me and I do consider all of it in crafting my little corner of the web here.
So far in the The Talent Myth we've touched on the Corporate Executives (Part I) and their role in the myth. We've just begun to scratch the surface regarding Human Resource Executives and teams (Part II) and some attributes of theirs that contribute to the myth. Today, more on HR and their role....
In both Parts I and II I haven't painted the most complimentary of pictures regarding Human Resources. What you are about to read won't seem any more positive. My comments aren't intended to be negative, but really to define the state of the "market" as I see it. In many ways the Human Resources executives, leaders, and teams have been put in a no-win situation.
My view of the HR professional and the state of the market is not incredibly unique - I only intend it to be uniquely honest. My perspective has been developed over 15 years of experience in the market, and it has been refined and validated in conversations and dealings with a large part of the HR community in the Global 2000, with the consultants, writers, and analysts they trust, and the vendors they look to for help. My intent here is to be honest about the situation, and possibly offer some thoughts on navigating out of, or around, it. But before I get ahead of myself, on with Part III.
In Part II we left off talking about the consultants that the HR Professionals and Executives surround themselves with for that feeling of security when asked "Why is this our strategy?". When it comes to the Talent Management space, the consultants available are generally self-proclaimed experts with little in the way of pedigree or real consulting experience to offer the HR team. Now, I'm not referring to the Human Capital Management consulting firms like Watson Wyatt, Hewitt, Towers Perrin, or the HR practices at PWC, KPMG, and such... I'm talking about the handfull of small firms that have sprung up in the last few years claiming to help the HR and Staffing teams with Best Practice Process Design and Re-Engineering, Vendor Evaluation and Selection, Implementation, and ongoing advice in the way of Talent Management.
The HR Execs go to these firms for unbiased advice and broad industry expertise to help navigating through a surprisingly long list of narrowly differentiated vendors within this space. Unfortunately the HR Execs receive anything but what they are paying for from these firms. More on these firms in a forthcoming chapter. The advice these firms give the HR Exec is generally slanted towards the vendor they are either most comfortable with or the one offering the largest dollar amount with regard to a referral fee OR implementation dollars on the back end. Their industry experience tends to be very limited, specially with regard to the number of Talent Management systems they actually have experience with, never mind their experience in HR & Staffing in today's, or any, business climate.
HR Executives have to begin to realize that they are getting what they pay for when it comes to consulting. If you pay boutique dollars for consulting you get boutique advice. As I mentioned, more in an upcoming chapter on these consulting firms and the long term problems they are creating for HR Execs and their teams when it comes to Talent Management. We'll talk abouth their role in the state of the market later. Let's move on to another layer of the saftey blanket for the HR professional - The Analysts.
Like the consultants referenced above, there are a handfull of self-proclaimed Industry Experts and Analysts that have sprung up in the last few years. Somehow the price of being considered an Industry Expert or Analyst is now equivalent to the cost of hosting your own website and publishing some business cards (business cards optional). There are a number of individuals and websites that have appeared in the last few years, owned and operated by folks that decided they had an opinion to share. Unfortunately this opinion, in some cases, isn't based on any real Staffing or HR experience, but just an opportunistic approach on a market with a lack of consolidated information and a desire to capitalize on the HR Execs and Teams ongoing need for a safety blanket made up of third party advice. Equally disturbing are the Industry Experts and Analysts that are nothing but an extension of a vendor selling goods and services in the space (by ownership or by the fact that they are in a vendor's pocket). The conflict of interest here is incredibly obvious to anyone that follows the market, however there seem to be a number of HR Execs and Teams that don't seem to notice. I'm not willing to assume that the HR Execs and Teams don't care, that would be truly disappointing. I just don't think they know any better as unsophisticated buyers in this regard.
There are incredibly reputable Analyst firms like IDC, Gartner, The Meta Group, Yankee, etc. that offer truly well documented industry reports and analysis. This information costs more than what is offered by the armchair analysts and experts that have sprung up in our little market here, but is far more valuable and unbiased than what the HR Exec seems to be currently paying for. Even a self-executed survey of industry peers would give you better data and input than the opinions being cast out on an ongoing basis by the SO CALLED analysts the HR Exec and teams seem to follow so blindly.
The armchair consultants and analysts in this space keep this market from realizing it's full potential and stifle it into remaining the Cottage Industry that it is viewed as by so many reputable sources in the Technology Industry as a whole. The HR Exec must begin to take increasing their level of sophistication as a buyer seriously, by working with credible industry and market players, and gets away from the incestuous world of Provincial analysts and consultants they are currently wasting their time with. Unless this happens, they will continue to perpetuate the problems they are facing in the market and go down a spiraling cycle of re-engineering themselves on an ongoing basis based on the sub-par guidance received from these sources.
Could it be any worse? Well, it gets worse when you look at the quality, or lack thereof, of the industry press and writers covering our space. Now you know about the next installment of The Talent Myth. Part IV is about the Industry Press. See you then....
Feedback? talentblog@hotmail.com
Thank You for your continued patience and support for my blog. Your emails have been encouraging. I have no excuse for my lack of content here, other than the crazed pace I've had in my personal and work lives. This blog doesn't pay, you see, so sometimes other priorities prevail. I promise to be more attentive. Please keep your feedback coming, it really does motivate me and I do consider all of it in crafting my little corner of the web here.
So far in the The Talent Myth we've touched on the Corporate Executives (Part I) and their role in the myth. We've just begun to scratch the surface regarding Human Resource Executives and teams (Part II) and some attributes of theirs that contribute to the myth. Today, more on HR and their role....
In both Parts I and II I haven't painted the most complimentary of pictures regarding Human Resources. What you are about to read won't seem any more positive. My comments aren't intended to be negative, but really to define the state of the "market" as I see it. In many ways the Human Resources executives, leaders, and teams have been put in a no-win situation.
My view of the HR professional and the state of the market is not incredibly unique - I only intend it to be uniquely honest. My perspective has been developed over 15 years of experience in the market, and it has been refined and validated in conversations and dealings with a large part of the HR community in the Global 2000, with the consultants, writers, and analysts they trust, and the vendors they look to for help. My intent here is to be honest about the situation, and possibly offer some thoughts on navigating out of, or around, it. But before I get ahead of myself, on with Part III.
In Part II we left off talking about the consultants that the HR Professionals and Executives surround themselves with for that feeling of security when asked "Why is this our strategy?". When it comes to the Talent Management space, the consultants available are generally self-proclaimed experts with little in the way of pedigree or real consulting experience to offer the HR team. Now, I'm not referring to the Human Capital Management consulting firms like Watson Wyatt, Hewitt, Towers Perrin, or the HR practices at PWC, KPMG, and such... I'm talking about the handfull of small firms that have sprung up in the last few years claiming to help the HR and Staffing teams with Best Practice Process Design and Re-Engineering, Vendor Evaluation and Selection, Implementation, and ongoing advice in the way of Talent Management.
The HR Execs go to these firms for unbiased advice and broad industry expertise to help navigating through a surprisingly long list of narrowly differentiated vendors within this space. Unfortunately the HR Execs receive anything but what they are paying for from these firms. More on these firms in a forthcoming chapter. The advice these firms give the HR Exec is generally slanted towards the vendor they are either most comfortable with or the one offering the largest dollar amount with regard to a referral fee OR implementation dollars on the back end. Their industry experience tends to be very limited, specially with regard to the number of Talent Management systems they actually have experience with, never mind their experience in HR & Staffing in today's, or any, business climate.
HR Executives have to begin to realize that they are getting what they pay for when it comes to consulting. If you pay boutique dollars for consulting you get boutique advice. As I mentioned, more in an upcoming chapter on these consulting firms and the long term problems they are creating for HR Execs and their teams when it comes to Talent Management. We'll talk abouth their role in the state of the market later. Let's move on to another layer of the saftey blanket for the HR professional - The Analysts.
Like the consultants referenced above, there are a handfull of self-proclaimed Industry Experts and Analysts that have sprung up in the last few years. Somehow the price of being considered an Industry Expert or Analyst is now equivalent to the cost of hosting your own website and publishing some business cards (business cards optional). There are a number of individuals and websites that have appeared in the last few years, owned and operated by folks that decided they had an opinion to share. Unfortunately this opinion, in some cases, isn't based on any real Staffing or HR experience, but just an opportunistic approach on a market with a lack of consolidated information and a desire to capitalize on the HR Execs and Teams ongoing need for a safety blanket made up of third party advice. Equally disturbing are the Industry Experts and Analysts that are nothing but an extension of a vendor selling goods and services in the space (by ownership or by the fact that they are in a vendor's pocket). The conflict of interest here is incredibly obvious to anyone that follows the market, however there seem to be a number of HR Execs and Teams that don't seem to notice. I'm not willing to assume that the HR Execs and Teams don't care, that would be truly disappointing. I just don't think they know any better as unsophisticated buyers in this regard.
There are incredibly reputable Analyst firms like IDC, Gartner, The Meta Group, Yankee, etc. that offer truly well documented industry reports and analysis. This information costs more than what is offered by the armchair analysts and experts that have sprung up in our little market here, but is far more valuable and unbiased than what the HR Exec seems to be currently paying for. Even a self-executed survey of industry peers would give you better data and input than the opinions being cast out on an ongoing basis by the SO CALLED analysts the HR Exec and teams seem to follow so blindly.
The armchair consultants and analysts in this space keep this market from realizing it's full potential and stifle it into remaining the Cottage Industry that it is viewed as by so many reputable sources in the Technology Industry as a whole. The HR Exec must begin to take increasing their level of sophistication as a buyer seriously, by working with credible industry and market players, and gets away from the incestuous world of Provincial analysts and consultants they are currently wasting their time with. Unless this happens, they will continue to perpetuate the problems they are facing in the market and go down a spiraling cycle of re-engineering themselves on an ongoing basis based on the sub-par guidance received from these sources.
Could it be any worse? Well, it gets worse when you look at the quality, or lack thereof, of the industry press and writers covering our space. Now you know about the next installment of The Talent Myth. Part IV is about the Industry Press. See you then....
Feedback? talentblog@hotmail.com
Thursday, January 16, 2003
Part III of The Talent Myth is on it's way, but for now another question for you to consider:
How do you demonstrate your value on a daily basis? even over a month, quarter, or year?
If you are in Corporate HR or Staffing I would love to get your perspective on that.
If you're in HR you might need a little nudge so here goes: How do you demonstrate on an ongoing basis that you are: lowering a companies costs, or helping to increase top-line revenues? getting the product out the door more quickly? getting the company more presence in the market? helping the brand? etc.
As much as my question is rhetorical, it's asked very selfishly. Your feedback will be very helpful for The Talent Myth.
Check back for Part III....
Feedback? talentblog@hotmail.com
How do you demonstrate your value on a daily basis? even over a month, quarter, or year?
If you are in Corporate HR or Staffing I would love to get your perspective on that.
If you're in HR you might need a little nudge so here goes: How do you demonstrate on an ongoing basis that you are: lowering a companies costs, or helping to increase top-line revenues? getting the product out the door more quickly? getting the company more presence in the market? helping the brand? etc.
As much as my question is rhetorical, it's asked very selfishly. Your feedback will be very helpful for The Talent Myth.
Check back for Part III....
Feedback? talentblog@hotmail.com
Wednesday, January 15, 2003
I apologize, to myself mostly, but I do apologize. I have not been paying attention to my blog. The holidays, business travel, family, and friends have kept me away from continuing The Talent Myth. I am getting ready to publish Part III! It will go up this week!
In the mean time here is a question I've been pondering. All the buzz in the market about outsourcing in Human Resources has me wondering if HR executives, professionals, and vendors had found a way in the last 20 years to empower the profession into a more strategic place would the market forecast for outsourcing of HR services be approaching $80B as it is today, or would it be much less? Are you (we) responsible for creating the wave that puts your job at risk?
Stay tuned for Part III....
Feedback? talentblog@hotmail.com
In the mean time here is a question I've been pondering. All the buzz in the market about outsourcing in Human Resources has me wondering if HR executives, professionals, and vendors had found a way in the last 20 years to empower the profession into a more strategic place would the market forecast for outsourcing of HR services be approaching $80B as it is today, or would it be much less? Are you (we) responsible for creating the wave that puts your job at risk?
Stay tuned for Part III....
Feedback? talentblog@hotmail.com
Tuesday, December 10, 2002
The Talent Myth, Part II
In Part I we explored the part of the Talent Myth owned by Corporation's Chief Executives - It's important to keep in mind as we explore Human Resources and their part in the Talent Myth.
First things first, let's understand who we're talking about. When you look at the Global 2000 and their HR teams, the bulk of the people on the "team" have come up through the administrative ranks. Surprisingly, so have the executives running HR. The exception is sometimes found in the Staffing area where many individuals have migrated from the classic Staffing industry (permanent and contingent agencies). This says a lot about what we are dealing with in HR. In a climate where HR is being asked to be more and more strategic - those being asked really don't have much to fall back on when it comes to strategy. There may be exceptions, in individuals on any given HR team, but let's face it - this is the norm. The result is a profile of the HR and Staffing professional that has a very large impact on decisions made in HR.
Today's HR professional is not a decision maker - they are a consensus builder. When large projects are initiated they are usually supported by large committees. It is very rare that you will find an HR Executive or Manager that will make a business decision based on it's own merits without without building consensus across a large number of individuals.
The HR professional is technology averse. After years and years of being on the low end of the IT support totem pole - the result is an HR professional that is scared of technology. Being afraid of technology doesn't lend itself to developing a great understanding of how it can be used effectively. Simple, basic concepts and applications that are taken for granted by most professionals are foreign concepts to the HR professional.
Technology aversion & lack of decision making skills leads to a dependency on consultants. Today's HR professional surrounds themselves with consultants and
other outside resources that can offer the HR team a false sense of security. This one creates an interesting dilemma. The consultants are paid based on how much work they do, normally by the hour. The consultants aren't necessarily motivated to streamline a process.
More coming in tomorrow's update...
In Part I we explored the part of the Talent Myth owned by Corporation's Chief Executives - It's important to keep in mind as we explore Human Resources and their part in the Talent Myth.
First things first, let's understand who we're talking about. When you look at the Global 2000 and their HR teams, the bulk of the people on the "team" have come up through the administrative ranks. Surprisingly, so have the executives running HR. The exception is sometimes found in the Staffing area where many individuals have migrated from the classic Staffing industry (permanent and contingent agencies). This says a lot about what we are dealing with in HR. In a climate where HR is being asked to be more and more strategic - those being asked really don't have much to fall back on when it comes to strategy. There may be exceptions, in individuals on any given HR team, but let's face it - this is the norm. The result is a profile of the HR and Staffing professional that has a very large impact on decisions made in HR.
Today's HR professional is not a decision maker - they are a consensus builder. When large projects are initiated they are usually supported by large committees. It is very rare that you will find an HR Executive or Manager that will make a business decision based on it's own merits without without building consensus across a large number of individuals.
The HR professional is technology averse. After years and years of being on the low end of the IT support totem pole - the result is an HR professional that is scared of technology. Being afraid of technology doesn't lend itself to developing a great understanding of how it can be used effectively. Simple, basic concepts and applications that are taken for granted by most professionals are foreign concepts to the HR professional.
Technology aversion & lack of decision making skills leads to a dependency on consultants. Today's HR professional surrounds themselves with consultants and
other outside resources that can offer the HR team a false sense of security. This one creates an interesting dilemma. The consultants are paid based on how much work they do, normally by the hour. The consultants aren't necessarily motivated to streamline a process.
More coming in tomorrow's update...
Tuesday, December 03, 2002
The Talent Myth, Part I
Before I can define the Talent Myth, let me set the stage.
A small industry came alive over the last 15 years. The Talent Market, The Staffing Markets, The People Market, The Human Capital market, whatever you want to call it. It mushroomed in growth along with the "e-economy" bubble. The so-called "War for Talent" or "Talent Shortage" put an increasing focus on the importance of attraction and retention of staff. The human resource processes, practices, and technologies that surround talent issues were increasingly under the microscope. Human Resources professionals found themselves the providers and retainers of a very valuable commodity: talent. Companies found themselves looking to HR with an unusual sense of urgency: strategic urgency - based on the growing pressure of a diminishing supply of talent against a great growing demand. Consulting firms (large, boutique, and independent) flourished assisting the HR departments with the processes, practices, and technologies- staffing firms seemed like they were printing money - and with the emergence of the Internet and Web, technology vendors brought their vision and their vapor to the table in the form of websites, applications, and service offerings - arm chair analysts and marginal journalists bacame market pundits and gurus spinning their opinions while their pocket were lined for their trouble with speaking engagements, consulting gigs, and advertising dollars . It took this circle of co-dependent parties to fuel the growth in this Talent Market. It took this co-dependent circle to create The Talent Myth. They may have created it with the best of intentions, or even unknowingly but it seems it's here to stay. But, let's not get ahead of ourselves. Now that the table is set, we need to look more closely at those sitting at the table, the players in the circle, the co-dependents themselves.
Let's start at the top. The companies that need the talent and the executives that run the companies. "Our people are our most valuable asset." How many times have you heard this from a CEO or top executive? It's normally followed with a CEO's commitment to Human Resources processes, practices, or innovation. This is the part of the myth that the corporations and their execs own. I'm here to tell you that there are people that are considered a most valuable asset, but it does not extend across a company in most top executives minds. When it comes to an executive's mentality, if you don't build it, market it, sell it, or service it (whatever it is that the company offers) and if you're not in the top 10% in the management ranks you are far from a most valuable asset. This extends to HR, unfortunately. For all of Human Resources desire and efforts to become strategic - they just aren't there. Very very few corporate leaders truly practice what they are forced to preach out of political correctness.
We all hate to admit it, but HR is a cost center and it hasn't made any visible progress across the board in becoming something more strategic. Payroll, benefits, and staffing are what most executives look to HR for at the end of the day. It's unfortunate but it's true. This is the first reality we need to come to grips with in order to understand the talent myth.
We'll end here for now. The next topic is around understanding the HR professionals that make up the market. It requires it's own space. There is a lot to write about.
Until next time....
Before I can define the Talent Myth, let me set the stage.
A small industry came alive over the last 15 years. The Talent Market, The Staffing Markets, The People Market, The Human Capital market, whatever you want to call it. It mushroomed in growth along with the "e-economy" bubble. The so-called "War for Talent" or "Talent Shortage" put an increasing focus on the importance of attraction and retention of staff. The human resource processes, practices, and technologies that surround talent issues were increasingly under the microscope. Human Resources professionals found themselves the providers and retainers of a very valuable commodity: talent. Companies found themselves looking to HR with an unusual sense of urgency: strategic urgency - based on the growing pressure of a diminishing supply of talent against a great growing demand. Consulting firms (large, boutique, and independent) flourished assisting the HR departments with the processes, practices, and technologies- staffing firms seemed like they were printing money - and with the emergence of the Internet and Web, technology vendors brought their vision and their vapor to the table in the form of websites, applications, and service offerings - arm chair analysts and marginal journalists bacame market pundits and gurus spinning their opinions while their pocket were lined for their trouble with speaking engagements, consulting gigs, and advertising dollars . It took this circle of co-dependent parties to fuel the growth in this Talent Market. It took this co-dependent circle to create The Talent Myth. They may have created it with the best of intentions, or even unknowingly but it seems it's here to stay. But, let's not get ahead of ourselves. Now that the table is set, we need to look more closely at those sitting at the table, the players in the circle, the co-dependents themselves.
Let's start at the top. The companies that need the talent and the executives that run the companies. "Our people are our most valuable asset." How many times have you heard this from a CEO or top executive? It's normally followed with a CEO's commitment to Human Resources processes, practices, or innovation. This is the part of the myth that the corporations and their execs own. I'm here to tell you that there are people that are considered a most valuable asset, but it does not extend across a company in most top executives minds. When it comes to an executive's mentality, if you don't build it, market it, sell it, or service it (whatever it is that the company offers) and if you're not in the top 10% in the management ranks you are far from a most valuable asset. This extends to HR, unfortunately. For all of Human Resources desire and efforts to become strategic - they just aren't there. Very very few corporate leaders truly practice what they are forced to preach out of political correctness.
We all hate to admit it, but HR is a cost center and it hasn't made any visible progress across the board in becoming something more strategic. Payroll, benefits, and staffing are what most executives look to HR for at the end of the day. It's unfortunate but it's true. This is the first reality we need to come to grips with in order to understand the talent myth.
We'll end here for now. The next topic is around understanding the HR professionals that make up the market. It requires it's own space. There is a lot to write about.
Until next time....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)