If you are interested in improving your HR maturity level visit IHRM - The Institute of HR Maturity
The Learning and HR Maturity Scales explored in Parts 1 and 2 only apply to organisations that really mean what they say about making the most of their people. They have been designed to offer such organisations a clear and coherent direction of travel towards a strategic, systemic and holistic approach to human capital management.
Of course some organisations, even if they understand the concept of organisational maturity, would not necessarily choose these particular models, which begs the question – what do they use instead? If no model is followed it is no wonder that so many HR functions are chaotic and reactive. Presumably some do have their own evolutionary and developmental continuum but where do they get their ideas from? These Maturity Scales have been developed from the very best organisations I have ever personally encountered (see The Top 10 in HCM); they were not conjured out of thin air and have been road-tested for well over 15 years.
The most obvious alternative candidate is the one that HR functions already suggest they follow, Dave Ulrich’s. For an introduction to what this looks like try viewing Ulrich’s “Master’s Class” (sic) presentation and note the date – March 2008 – and a question raised on slide number 4 under – “Your questions – HR” -
“What does he think of RBS’ HR model given its probably the truest representation of the Ulrich model in Scotland?”
One month later – April 2008 – RBS imploded, so I would be interested to hear what Ulrich said then and compare it to what he might say now. I wonder if it would prompt Ulrich (or his consultancy arm – RBL) to change a few of these slides, or possibly re-visit the basis of their theory?
Whilst speaking at a recent conference in Norway I had the opportunity to hear Ed Lawler III for the first time. Ed is held in some esteem in certain HR circles and declared Ulrich to be a good friend and collaborator. His own presentation consisted of his ‘research’ using, what appeared to be, unsupported correlations between HR and organisational performance. Ed did not raise the difficult question of causation and I didn’t see any reference to the collapse of RBS, or any other bank for that matter, and how that might influence future HR ‘research’.
Ed also remarked how PepsiCo had set out to produce the best HR people in the world. Some of these have washed up in the UK. Clare Chapman, ex-PepsiCo and Tesco, who flailed around aimlessly at the NHS, getting nowhere fast before moving on once again (a classic trait of the non-evidence-based).
These people are the epitome of immaturity – refusing to look at evidence, failing to learn and carrying on blindly rather than stopping for a moment to ask whether inflicting their dubious methods on unsuspecting (and unquestioning) victims has added any value or not.
I am sure PepsiCo is still a very ambitious and very successful business but one thing is for certain – they are very immature when it comes to strategic, human capital management. Arguably they have managed to produce some of the very worst HR people in the world who have left untold damage in their wake.
If you need help in assessing your organisation’s HR Maturity contact email@example.com