CaribHRForum

As a Human Resources (HR) professional who was born in the Caribbean, I have taken a keen interest in the evolution of the profession in the region.  Over the years there have been some very positive changes, but there is still much to be done in making the profession’s impact felt not only in the corporate settings, but also on a regional scale.

As you might have discerned from reading my previous blogs, I strongly believe that in the Caribbean HR professionals can’t afford to only use their skills to improve their respective corporations. Due to the region’s small geographic size and population, HR professionals must utilize their skills to benefit and elevate their various societies. The two sectors are intricately tied together and success in one area can’t be achieved without success in the other.

I usually begin each day by reading (online) a variety of newspapers from throughout the region. This gives me a perspective (biased perhaps) of some of the major events taking place in the region. From my review I am struck by how many of the problems taking place on the national levels can be attributed to an inadequate knowledge and/or implementation of HR practices. This is the case whether we are addressing, the selection of top public officials such as a Commissioner of Police, a less than adequate work ethic, failing educational and social systems, poor customer service, and a variety of other issues.

Political realities and considerations aside, these are essentially all human problems that can and should be addressed by HR professionals. Though there are times when special “foreign” know-how is needed to help solve some problems, we must be careful of becoming overly dependent on “outside” expertise in resolving all of our problems.

We must realize that some problems that occur in the region, regardless of how perplexing they might appear, can only be resolved by professionals in the region. This is the case because there are times when the “most appropriate” solution(s) can only be derived by those who are most familiar with the problems, and who understand the full context in which they occur. A sole reliance on outside help can lead to the region’s HR professionals doing the following:

•    Shifting the blame for problems and their solutions. This can lead to the relinquishing of ownership of the problem(s) and therefore the responsibility for the results.
•    Fostering a “dependency” model and thus failing to develop adequate skills for solving future problems.
•    Perpetuating the foreign is better than local mentality and relying on foreign “technologies” rather than developing and implementing their own solutions.

This brings us back to the subject of this blog. In the space remaining I would like to discuss a few ways in which HR professionals in the region can begin to meet some of the challenges that face them. What I am about to present will not be easy, but will take some degree of our time, our persistence and, of course, our commitment.

We have had the discussions, read the numerous blogs and articles, attended the seminars and workshops and now it is time for us to do something. We need to begin to act on what we already know. Discussions are useful, even necessary, but without the appropriate actions, they are useless. I believe it is time for HR professionals in the Caribbean to take action.

Where do we begin? What problem(s) should we work on? What are our priorities? What will be the vehicle(s) used to get us to our destination? What’s our final destination? These are some of the many important questions that need to be addressed. I believe that the HR profession in the region is mature and sufficiently knowledgeable to sort these issues out.  One thing is certain; no single person or entity among us has the wherewithal to resolve all of the various problems singlehandedly. Our problems and solutions require a united approach. Through such an approach we can learn from each other and compliment each other’s knowledge, strengths and practices.

To arrive at the point where we can come and work together for the greater good of all, we must overcome the following barriers:

•    The tendency to think that we know it all. Taken to the extreme this tendency can lead to an unwillingness to learn from others, which can result in isolated thinking and action. You might be doing well on your own, but think about how much better you can be doing with the help of others.

•    Thinking that we don’t have the time for such “extras”. We usually tend to make time for what we consider important and valuable. Making the time to improve the performance of our corporate entities and the well-being of our communities should already be high on our list. If they are not, we need to seriously reexamine our priorities.

•    We are too small to make a valuable contribution. The value and impact of our contribution should be the determining factors rather than the size.

•    Sharing of our ‘successes’ with others will allow them to become as successful as us. Fortunately, this belief is absolutely correct. A good reminder is that the universe is big enough to have more than one excellent entity at the same time.

•    Revealing our “weaknesses” to others will give them an advantage over us. Since we don’t live in a perfect or fair world some might choose to do this very thing. However, by discussing and coming to grips with our weaker areas will give us a better understanding of them and help us to correct them.

What vehicle should we use to foster our collaboration and sharing of ideas? This is an easy question to answer because of the labor of love undertaken some time ago by our colleague and friend Francis Wade. He had the vision and foresight to create the CaribHRForum, CaribHRNews and soon to be CaribHR.Radio, which are excellent platforms for us to use. Through these media and a monthly one (1) hour long teleconference (which is currently in the works and will be announced) we can begin to meet and exchange ideas that can be of value to the profession as well as the region.

My challenge to my Caribbean HR colleagues is to give these ideas a fair chance. We need each other to make this amazing project work. There will be lots of opportunities for your contributions as well as participation. I believe that together we can develop and enhance HR models that will be of tremendous benefit to the region and the world as a whole.

H. Nathan Charles, Ph.D.
 Email This Post

To determine the level of customer disservice provided by you and/or your organization, honestly evaluate how many of the following apply to your situation.

1. View customers as the enemy. Since they are the enemy approach and treat them in an adversarial manner. The goal is to get them before they get you. Remember that customers exist solely to make your life miserable. Life would be more peaceful and definitely less complicated if you did not have to deal with customers on a regular basis.

2. Ignore customer complaints. Customers love to complain and will do so at every opportunity. To deal with this “irritation” simply ignore them, and their complaining will quickly go away. Listening to continual complaining can give us a skewed perspective of your customers. If ignoring complaints does not eradicate them, try the following strategy. Blame the customers for the predicaments that they are currently experiencing and place the responsibility of solving their “issues” squarely on their shoulders. This will show them where the problems really reside and get you off the hook.

3. Quit treating customers as though they are always right. Everyone knows that it is not humanly possible to always be right. Customers are no exception to this rule. In fact, the kindest thing you can do is show customers when they are wrong so they can learn from their mistakes.

4. Arrange your staff schedules to suit your needs rather than those of your customers. Making shift changes during peak service times and allowing most of your staff to be away during the regular lunch hour only create minor inconveniences to customers. Why should you be bothered by customers who are insensitive to the needs of your organization? Customers would be better off planning their schedules around yours rather than around themselves. They should quit being so selfish and inconsiderate.

5. Design and install phone systems that drive customers crazy. Having fewer lines is always better and more cost efficient than having more lines. In the event of an upsurge in calls customers can at times be placed on hold (with the appropriate music, of course) to await their turn for service. If customers can’t wait, they can always call back during regular business hours. For those customers who have the tenacity to hold and get through, in the interest of your time efficiency, pass them electronically around various entities until they find the correct one to address their concern.

6. Don’t take any nonsense from customers. Put and keep them in their “place” and if they really get annoying, remind them that they have the choice of going elsewhere with their business. This will teach them not to mess with you.

7. Don’t waste time and other precious resources on trying to get customer feedback on the quality of your service. Such input is not really beneficial because customers do not really know what they need. You are in a better position to determine customer needs, hence the reason they came to you in the first place. In fact, you have your own quality experts who take care of such matters. Attempting to get customer feedback can undermine customers’ trust and confidence in your ability to best serve them.

8. Forget about developing “customer loyalty”. We all know that most customers are only loyal to themselves. They will do whatever is in their own best interest and there is nothing that we can do about that fact. If we lose a few customers it is not a big deal, we can always replace them with some of the many who we know are out there. As long as there is a need for the products or services that we provide, there will always be an abundance of customers at our doorsteps.

9. Stop trying to exceed customers’ expectations. This is a pipe dream and sets us up for failure. Why would you ever want to take someone to a place that they don’t even know exists? It is more respectful to give customers exactly what they requested and they will be forever grateful to us. Doing anything more could be viewed as our not trusting their judgment, or them not knowing what they needed.

10. Service after the initial sale is not our problem. Customers should remember that we are the agents/distributors and not the manufacturer of the products. Therefore, it is unfair for customers to hold us responsible in any way for any defective or malfunctioning products. The best that we can do in the event of problems is to refer customers to the manufacturer and allow them to deal with the problem. We must get customers to understand that it’s not our problem!

Score yourself and see how you did:

6 -10 – You are definitely delivering exceptional customer disservice.
3 – 5 – You are delivering good customer disservice.
< 2 – You are probably not delivering customer disservice.

H. Nathan Charles, Ph.D.
 Email This Post

The longer I practice HR the clearer a few things appear to me. Over the years, one of the things that has become patently clear to me is that many (to say all might sound a bit too presumptuous) of the problems currently experienced in companies can be traced to poor or inadequate hiring practices. Failure to address and correct hiring issues is not only creating countless problems for companies, but is also seriously preventing them and their various staffs from achieving their fullest potential.

The matter then becomes one of identifying the problems associated with hiring and seeking appropriate measures to rectify them. The good news in all of this for HR is that improving the hiring process is an area in which HR can undoubtedly take the lead and create substantial value for a corporate entity. HR has found itself in this enviable position because in many instances HR is the initiator and/or driver of the hiring process. In many instances, if HR is not in complete control of the hiring process, it is in at least a strategic position to exert a significant degree of influence on it.

This article will review a few processes that can lead to “poor hiring” decisions and suggest ways in which they can be rectified. All things being equal, I believe it is safe to say that “it takes excellent people to create excellent companies”. If this is the case, why are we finding it so difficult to find “excellent” people to fill positions within our various companies?  The answer I believe resides in the way we conduct our selection process. Here are some measures that HR can undertake to correct some of the deficiencies in the hiring process.

Understand the Corporate Culture

It is impossible to hire correctly without fully understanding the corporate cultural milieu in which one operates. Those of us who have experienced or lived in a different culture can well remember the often awkward, even embarrassing episodes we perhaps faced when we first encountered the new culture. Our “unfamiliarity” with the new culture negatively impacted our “normal” performance. In many ways we felt like ducks out of water. The more familiar we were with the new culture before encountering it, the easier or even quicker was our adjustment to it. The same is true in corporate settings. A person’s “cultural fit” with an organization can have a profound impact on that person’s performance.

In hiring, HR needs to ensure that there is a better “cultural fit” between people being considered for employment and the corporate culture that they are entering. The closer one gets to the “ideal” match the quicker and easier will be the person’s adjustment. An excellent case in point of this principle is demonstrated by Southwest Airlines (one of the world’s most profitable and successful airlines), where they understand the unique nature of their corporate culture. They understand that it takes a certain type of employee to be successful in their fun-loving, even irreverent corporate environment. Therefore Southwest’s hiring mantra has been “hire for attitude, train for skills”.

Southwest is in no way disregarding skills, but they are acknowledging that in the larger scheme of things, having the correct attitude trumps skills.  Not having the right attitude makes it difficult for a potential employee to adjust or even survive in their corporate environment. Failure to adjust to one’s environment can affect an employee’s present and future job performance.

Understand the Nature of the Position

Another major pitfall that HR can easily succumb to is trying to fill an open employment position while not fully understanding all of the requirements that go along with that position. Having an in-depth knowledge of a position before attempting to fill it should be a no-brainer, but more often than not this step is done rather shoddily, or not at all. To fill a position adequately, one must know all the details and requirements of that position. What characteristics a person would need to be successful or, for that matter unsuccessful, should be understood and addressed. The ultimate goal of HR should be to “fill positions” and not simply to “place people”. The emphasis first and foremost should be on the position. Focusing on the position will ensure that it will be filled with the most suitable candidate.

Another distraction can arise by the way HR chooses to review an applicant’s qualifications for a position. Many critical and important questions can crop up as HR seeks to address this issue. What constitutes an applicant meeting the requirements for a particular position? Are there minimum and maximum requirements for the position? Do the requirements need to be achieved formally (e.g. through some type of schooling), or informally (e.g. gained through practical experience)? What tools should be used to assess whether or not an applicant has the necessary requirements? These questions all need to be adequately addressed by HR to make certain that hiring decisions make an impact on the organization.

Minimum Vs Maximum Requirements:

In reviewing the list of job-related requirements HR is often faced with several choices. Should HR choose applicants with some, most or all of the identified job requirements in order to make a good hire? In my opinion, simply having to choose between low, medium or high skill levels is not the appropriate route or method to pursue.  A more appropriate route is deciding what skills are absolutely needed by anyone to be adequately functional in the targeted position. In other words, we are establishing a minimum or threshold level, below which we are not prepared or willing to accept any applicant.

By taking this position we are doing two things, (1) making a clear statement that to be considered seriously for an available position all applicants must have a basic level of skills and (2) recognizing that if applicants don’t have the basic skills they will not be able to immediately function adequately in the position.

What do we do with those applicants who have skill levels above the designated threshold? This is an excellent question and a wonderful position for any corporate body to find itself in.  If this is the case, there are several decisions HR can make depending on financial resources.

HR might want to go with the applicant with the basic skills set and compensate that individual at the lower end of the position’s pay range. This scenario is plausible if the position in question is changing at a slow enough pace to allow the incumbent sufficient time to acquire additional skills and grow with the job.

However, if the position exists in a more dynamic environment and requires any new hire to hit the ground running and always be a bit ahead of the skills curve, then HR might want to go initially with an applicant with more advanced skills. In this case HR will have to compensate the applicant at the mid section or higher end of the position’s pay range.

The skills level HR chooses to fill a position will also have an impact on HR’s training budget. There is usually an inverse relationship between the level of skills that one has and the level and degree of training needed.

Credentials Vs Experience:

There is often the issue of whether to fill a position with someone who has undergone formal training (e.g. a degree or equivalent) or with someone without a degree but who has amassed a great deal of experience on the job. HR must appreciate the fact that learning occurs in places other than the classroom. Learning takes place in all aspects of life and the results are just as valid as the classroom.  The question, then, should not be focused on where the learning took place, but rather on whether or not an individual can demonstrate the competencies that exhibit that learning did in fact take place. This is not to deny or ignore the fact that there are some positions (due to government or other regulatory concerns) that do require some type of formalized training.

The question then becomes is the applicant capable of demonstrating the competencies required by the position. If an applicant can do this, then the applicant should be given a shot at the position, regardless of where or how he/she got his/her training. I am afraid that if we continue to ignore people who “came up through the ranks” we might be overlooking a valuable source of excellent talent.

Many of us can recall at least one situation where someone successfully “acted” in a position, but was denied an appointment to that position because they did not have the right “formal” credentials. This not only borders on the ridiculous, but it makes a mockery of any performance evaluation process that is in place. Think about it, we are removing someone who is satisfactorily performing in a position (they are not credentialed), to replace them with someone (who is credentialed) whose track record might be unknown and we are hoping, no betting, that they will perform satisfactorily in the position.

Understand the Selection Process

A process is often only as good as the tools it uses. Using the appropriate tools will increase the probability of a successful outcome. It is no different with the hiring process. The use of appropriate hiring tools will increase the probability of selecting excellent hires. A couple of tools I would like to briefly discuss include HR planning and the interview process.
HR Planning:

Actively looking for people only when you need them is a big mistake. The closest analogy I can use to describe such a process is one where we eat only when we were hungry. If we were to do this we would more than likely do ourselves nutritional harm by only choosing the foods that are readily available and not what’s healthy for us. We are all aware of and perhaps have practiced at some point panic or “warm body” hiring. When we engaged in these practices we are less likely to go after and select quality applicants.

Proper HR planning should remove some of the personnel surprises and eliminate or at least reduce the need for “panic hiring”.  Personnel needs should not come as a surprise to HR if past, current and future corporate trends are monitored closely. To support this effort, adequate replacement and succession plans ought to be in place to take care of any unexpected or short term vacancies.  A good gauge of how well HR is doing in the area of planning is to ask a few simple questions. What is our corporate turnover rate? Where is our most employment churn coming from? What events during the year place the greatest demands on the use of our human capital? What would HR do if there were an unexpected (increase/decrease) demand for our products/services? The answers to these questions will reveal HR readiness to account for and adequately manage personnel movements.

Interviewing:

There is not a tool that is as frequently used and equally abused as the interview. The interview should be more than a casual chat with an applicant. A good interview should give the interviewer the necessary information about an applicant in order to make a good hiring decision.  Anything less is irrelevant and quite frankly a waste of the interviewee’s and/or interviewer’s time.

One way HR can improve on this process is to use a behavioral approach when interviewing. This particular approach seeks to do two things (1) identify the job competencies required for performance in the current position and (2) determine whether or not the applicant has demonstrated the use of these competencies in the past. The purpose of the interview should be to determine whether or not the applicant has the required skills needed to do the job. If HR is not using some type of behavioral interview to select employees, it remains questionable whether or not that they are selecting the best candidates.

Conclusion

The hiring process is still more of an art than a science.  Therefore, to expect perfection in the hiring process is unrealistic.  However, we do know that there is much that can be done to improve the existing system in order to increase the quality of hires. This increase in quality should lead to higher productivity that will benefit both the corporation and its employees.

H. Nathan Charles, Ph.D.
 Email This Post