DDBA 8580 Week 1 Strategic HR Discussion Example

Week 1 Discussion: What the People Function Produces

Renamed More Than Changed: Arguing That the Strategic Partner Model Shifted What HR Is Expected to Produce, From Processed Transactions to Supplied Decisions, While the Evidence That It Now Supplies Them Remains Thin

The Claim

The output expected of HR has shifted from processing transactions to supplying decisions, but the evidence that most HR functions now supply those decisions is thinner than the vocabulary suggests.

The Case for the Shift

Ulrich (1997) sketched a function that partners on strategy, runs efficient administration, speaks for employees and leads change, and Ulrich wanted HR assessed on results it produces for the business, not on the volume of its activity. On his account, the strategic partner role means HR helps translate business strategy into people decisions, such as which capabilities to build, where to invest in talent and how to organize work. The model was widely adopted; many firms renamed HR generalists as business partners and moved transactions into shared service centers.

The Case Against

Lawler and Boudreau (2015) surveyed HR leaders repeatedly over two decades, asking how they divided their time among roles. Their surveys found that the share of time HR leaders reported spending as strategic business partners changed far less than the rhetoric of transformation would suggest, and that much of HR's effort still went to administrative and service work. If the role had truly shifted, time should have shifted with it.

Francis and Keegan (2006) added a further objection: in pursuing the business partner role, many HR functions neglected the employee champion role, so that employees lost an advocate without the business gaining much of a partner.

Where I Stand

I side with the skeptics on evidence but with Ulrich on expectations. The deliverable the business now expects from HR is a decision input, not a processed form. In my own organization, a regional food distributor with about 3,100 employees, the clearest example is the workforce plan for a new distribution center. Operations leadership expected HR to say how many drivers and warehouse associates the center would need by quarter, where they would come from and what it would cost. HR supplied hiring timelines and pay ranges, but the staffing numbers came from the operations vice president's model. HR processed the plan; operations decided it. The vocabulary had changed; the authority had not.

What Would Change My Mind

Evidence that HR leaders now spend most of their time on decision support, or that executives routinely adopt HR's workforce analyses, would move me toward Ulrich's view.

Why It Matters

If the vocabulary outruns the authority, executives will discount HR's advice when it matters most.

Question for Classmates

Name one decision your HR function supplies rather than processes. Who controls it?

Reply to Andre

Andre, you say your HR team is a strategic partner because the CHRO sits on the executive committee. Which decisions does the committee make differently because the CHRO is there?

Reply to Sofia

Sofia, you cite a consultancy survey showing most HR leaders consider themselves strategic. Does any peer-reviewed study measure what they actually do, rather than how they describe it?

References

Francis, H., & Keegan, A. (2006). The changing face of HRM: In search of balance. Human Resource Management Journal, 16(3), 231-249. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-8583.2006.00016.x

Lawler, E. E., III, & Boudreau, J. W. (2015). Global trends in human resource management: A twenty-year analysis. Stanford University Press.

Ulrich, D. (1997). Human resource champions: The next agenda for adding value and delivering results. Harvard Business School Press.