MEASURE FOR MEASURE

         "What gets measured , gets done " . We all know this maxim, but we have failed to utilize its power.
 Have we tried to measure the effectiveness of the HR department ?
 Other than the Performance Appraisal System , which is individual focussed, there is no other systematic process for measuring effectiveness of functional departments.
 This results in the incidence of "happiness in mediocrity" and  "stagnation" syndromes. Improvement remains a term in the mental vocabulary of the professional without translating into focussed action.
 On the other hand, if the effectiveness of the HR Department is measured in the form of an Index , the points of adequacies and Inadequacies can easily be identified. This would facilitate the improvement of the underlying HR processes,competencies , mental patterns and roles. Formulating such as Index , is not much of a problem.

    EX :
 Focus 1 :  HR Processes
   1.  The HR department is able to get an adequate number of selectable candidate for a  position.                                                                                                                                              SA     A       N      D      SD
   2.  In order to fill a vacant position , the candidates  called for selection are of the expected competency level.                                                                                                                                                    SA     A       N      D      SD

Focus : HR Competencies
1.  The current HR professionals are able to effectively facilitate in all one to one , one to many and  many to many interactions.                                                                                                                              SA     A       N      D   SD

2.  The HR department has played the role of a "fair mediator"in the case of  disputes.       SA     A       N      D  SD

Likert Scale:
            SA = Strongly Agree, A =Agree, N=Neither Agree nor Disagree, D=Disagree, SD=Strongly Disagree

         The lower the index , the greater the Internal Customer Satisfaction . The regular measurement of this index and its integration in the monthly organization review would create a structural push for enhancing effectiveness of  HR in a continuous basis. It is heartening to note that a major telecom MNC, "A" is taking its first tentative steps in this direction. This organization is planning to "Measure The effectiveness of HR",by collecting the responses of its Internal Customers , regarding the effectiveness of HR processes and competencies.
 An effective medium for collecting the requisite data is the organizational  intranet. The requisite format can be hosted on an intranet web site dedicated  to HR. This would significantly reduce the pain of collecting the  huge amount of data and the corresponding wastage of man-hours in analysing it.
 Picking up the thread from here , a lot of organizations have been extorting "Internal Customer Satisfaction" .         However , more often than not , it remains a mere slogan. In spite of a lot of lip service to the concept , no significant changes in the workplace have ensued.
         Citing  the example of a spinning unit "A" . In this unit, there was a continuous struggle of ego supremacy among the Production , IR and Personnel Functions. This problem remained in suspended animation , resulting in a lot of backbiting and bad mouthing among  departments. Finally , the E.D called a meeting of key departmental personnel and announced that , HR , IR , engineering and materials were service providers to "manufacturing" and "Marketing" .Though this action mitigated the problem for some time , it continued to exist under the surface.
          As we know that structure influences behaviour , some sort of a "measure"is required to trigger the search for better competencies and processes for enhancing "internal Customer satisfaction".An "Internal Customer Satisfaction Index" would suit the purpose. The process of measuring this"Internal Customer Satisfaction Index" is given below :

MEASUREMENT PROCESS  :

 Step 1 : Identification of the services provided by a functional team to other teams and mapping of the underlying processes and competencies.

 Step 2 : Identification of two key parameters of service expected by the internal customer, for each service  received.

 Step3 : Monthly feedback from internal customers regarding their level of  satisfaction  on each parameter identified.

 Step 4 : Calculation of the Internal customer satisfaction index at the team and at the organization level and its integration with the monthly review.

 Step 5 : Triggering of process changes whenever internal customer satisfaction ratings  are  low.

MEASUREMENT SCALES :

   a. Faces scale
   b. Likert scale

     The linkage of "Internal Customer Satisfaction Index " to the Departmental and Individual Performance would creatively align the functional Departments to internal customer requirements and expectations . More over , this would also tend to reduce the scourge of "Boss  Apple Polishing" in organizations.
     The Internal Customer Satisfaction Index would clearly specify the service parameters on which satisfaction is high and low. This should trigger "Improvement and Innovation" in the processes and competencies underlying the satisfaction parameters.
     In order to ensure that "Improvement and Innovation" happen , there is a requirement for the calculation of an " Innovation Index". The calculation of this Index for any department or team would take into consideration the Improvement in the Internal Customer Satisfaction Index , new Customer needs satisfied and new Paradigms integrated.

     Since Innovation , Internal Customer Satisfaction and Functional Effectiveness are crucial to the continuing success of an organization, I wonder why Indexes have not been created for measuring these. We continue to gauge the effectiveness of an organization on age - old parameters such as ROI , Turnover , Debt - Equity ratio etc.
     Though these parameters are still potent,new age horizons have created different and varying bases of competition. As the basis of competition change , the underlying processes and competencies have to change          Consequently , there is a requirement for new Indexes or Organizational Effectiveness Measures.
         The beginning of this trend is visible from the professed need by the HR head of a leading MNC ,Co. "B". In his words , " My major job is to act as a beacon and reduce blind spots". Therefore , if we can visibilize to a department that its innovation is at a level 2 (say)and the same Innovation level in another similar company is at level 3(say) , then the search for opportunities to innovate would begin to happen. This action pattern is a basic requirement for continual Innovation. "
         Thus the Innovation Index and the Internal Customer Satisfaction Index need to be amalgamated with the current organizational Performance Measures.
         There is a need for evolving a new set of Indexes for measuring organizational effectiveness and efficiency. The broad framework for the creation of these Indexes is given below :
 
        ICS : Internal Customer Satisfaction (Organizational Efficiency Indicator)
        ECS : External Customer Satisfaction (Organizational Effectiveness indicator )
       In order to make knowledge based decisions , organizational leaders need a clear profile of organization effectiveness , efficiency and health.
     For this purpose a family of measures , which reflect a balanced rather than a skewed perspective , is required. This would not only help the organization's leaders take decisions regarding operational costs , asset utilization , product - mix , profitability of distribution channels etc. , but would also :
     1. Mirror the vital aspects of the organization.
     2. Identify Intervention points.
     3. Simplify the communication of organization goals.
     4. Increase alignment in the organization.
     5. Track organization progress.
     6.  Trigger action for Improvement & Innovation ,where it is most required.