How Do You Cope When Poor HR Knowledge in Organizations Holds You Back?

Hi all, most HR experts hold specialized training such as MBAs in HR, LLBs, etc. However, many organizations may have poor knowledge levels in general. Sometimes, these low knowledge levels within organizations can be frustrating and may restrict the benefits that an HR professional could provide.

Questions:

1. Have you ever found yourself performing at sub-optimal levels in organizations due to the poor knowledge levels about HR and HR practices?
2. In your opinion, how can one navigate this challenge effectively?

Please share your thoughts.

Challenges in HR Knowledge and Business Integration

First and foremost, please tell me when you relocated to the US. Now, coming to your post, poor knowledge levels exist across all departments and are not just restricted to HR. During my training, I came across many examples. Here are a few:

• An MNC specializing in animal health and animal nutrition has a total of 20 warehouses across India. None of these warehouses have a material slotting policy. Now, imagine the impact this lack of policy is causing: poor batch accuracy, excessive time spent on loading and unloading, time wasted searching for materials, and so on.

• A prominent garment manufacturer, with annual purchases worth INR 5 billion, has not conducted ABC Analysis of their inventory in the last 20 years nor established a dedicated procurement research cell. Imagine the potential losses they may have incurred due to procurement professionals working without sufficient market inputs.

• A significant IT company, with annual purchases of US$ 30 million, sees about 85% of their purchases as "out of turn" due to operations staff (software engineers) considering themselves superior and not cooperating with procurement professionals.

I could provide more examples like the ones above, but the fundamental issue with HR is their departmental obsession, hindering their understanding of the business challenges. The problems mentioned occurred due to HR operating at a sub-optimal level.

Another issue with HR is their failure to ensure that leadership training translates into improved operational efficiency. In my last 5-6 years, I have interacted with numerous HR professionals. Their primary concern about training is its interactivity or inclusion of games, overlooking the ultimate goal of enhancing business performance.

HR lacks sufficient business knowledge due to inadequate organizational research. Similar to the marketing department's dedicated "market research" team, HR should have an "organization research" team.

During my time in HR, I also operated at a sub-optimal level because business leaders failed to grasp the importance of HR. In India, HR is often viewed merely as an administrative function, reducing HR professionals to glorified clerks.

To address these challenges, we must enhance the HR curriculum in B-schools, educating students on HR's role in business development.

For instance, if a company decides to invest in HRIS with a total payout of INR 2.5 million, how many HR professionals can calculate IRR, ARR, or ROCE after five years? Those lacking analytical skills often end up in HR positions.

If HR functions below optimal levels, it indicates a failure not just on the HR side but also on the leadership's part. Why do business owners allow HR to operate below its potential? Why is this acceptable?

Approximately two years ago, the NHRD Bangalore Chapter celebrated its silver jubilee. During the event, esteemed HR expert Prof. TV Rao of TVRLMS lamented the poor understanding of HR among business owners, suggesting that HR be removed as a standalone function and integrated into management disciplines.

In the same lecture, Prof. TV Rao highlighted that even a company as reputed as Infosys converts barely two percent of human capital into market capital. If this is the case for Infosys, the situation in other companies may be worse.

Thank you for initiating this insightful discussion. My comments are focused on India.

Regards,
Dinesh V Divekar

Analysis of Knowledge Levels in HR and Other Functional Areas

Mr. Dinesh Divekar has provided a concise yet insightful analysis of the consequences of poor knowledge levels, not only in HR but across all functional areas. There is no shortage of qualified manpower, but there is a scarcity of talented and knowledgeable manpower. Thanks for raising such a thought-provoking issue.

Regards,
B. Saikumar
HR & Labour Law Advisor
Mumbai

Good examples, Dinesh and Sai. Our focus is on working around a situation where you feel you are operating sub-optimally. We are not debating education levels, talent, etc., as they naturally drive knowledge levels.

Improving curriculum, though necessary, has limited influence. Mainly because the 'subject,' viz. you (or any person experiencing it), has had the problem of sub-optimal performance.

Question on Sub-Optimal Performance

The question is: Sub-optimal performance can be due to several reasons. One of them is the poor knowledge level in the organization. If you have faced a situation where poor knowledge levels in the organization drove sub-optimality, then we can reflect on 'strategies at the individual level' better.

So, how should one work around this factor in an organization at the first-hand level? The education parameter is a long-term and global one (and not something for the individual). In other words, could you control and bring out optimal performance from yourself in an environment caused by poor knowledge levels? If yes, how?

Hope that clarifies the question.

This has a lot of repercussions on many HR practices at the individual level and can cause significant long-term damage to any company/economy. Hence, I feel it is pertinent to understand this in a little more detail.

Regards,

Please don't misunderstand me, but let's focus on individual-level initiatives at first. These can later be used to implement organizational initiatives. I think the stumbling blocks are more at the individual level than the organizational level in this case.

Regards,

Nice to see another thought-provoking thread from you after quite some time. To begin, I wish to "REPEAT" Dinesh's comment—when did you relocate to the US?—since you haven't answered it :-)

Core Topic: Poor Knowledge Levels in General

I think a LOT depends on one's definition of "knowledge." For an HR professional, it can vary from the knowledge of HR philosophy to practices to theoretical base... and so on to the broader/larger picture of the organization.

To take the hiring function, many (if not all/most) recruiters focus on the keywords of the positions they receive from the line managers for filling up. How many would give thought to "why is the manager asking for this skillset combination and why not another for this position"? Not many, I guess. That attitude of probing/analyzing the inputs they receive comes ONLY if he/she keeps the larger/broader organizational perspective in mind AND works to make his/her personal/individual contribution to the WHOLE process.

I have had quite a few experiences where we end up writing the job descriptions on behalf of the recruiters (MNCs included) and suggest they get clearances from the tech group before WE begin our candidate sourcing. It's as though the 'learning process' for such recruiters just stops once they join a job. The standard response from most such recruiters would be: I am very busy to think of such aspects.

Now, from the perspective of the technical groups or management, would such a recruiter command/invite any professional respect?

Core HR Functions: Policies and Compliance

Many HR executives recommend within the company to adopt a particular policy since others in the industry follow it—without much thought to 'would this suit our company (with the given set of limitations and strengths, different from other companies)?' And when would he/she be able to do such an exercise—or at least a semblance of it? ONLY if he/she has some idea of the LARGER/BIGGER context in which their organization operates—for which some effort from his/her end is DEFINITELY imperative, but lacking, in a general context. In such a situation, why or how would the management give weightage to that HR person—presumed 'due' but very often ignores the 'deserving/undeserving' aspect of the relationship.

I recollect a saying here: "When you point one finger @ others, remember that the other 3 fingers are pointing @ you."

In short, I guess it's more of an opportunity for self-introspection than castigating or deflecting @ others. This is NOT to say that there wouldn't be exceptions—there would be companies that may not give 'due' respect or credit to HR, however much he/she keeps the larger perspective before suggesting anything for the company's benefit. But, that's life, I guess.

Not sure how many would agree with this view of the topic.

Regards,
TS

I am still in India! The database renewal took the older info and has posted it to my profile! Taj, when I mentioned "Poor Knowledge Levels in Organizations," it actually meant good knowledge of the HR pro, yet poor knowledge in the rest of the company causing sub-optimal delivery. Your example speaks of poor knowledge of the HR pro itself. Well, that doesn't quite cause a 'feeling' of sub-optimal performance. Hope that clarifies the question.

Analogy: "The one-eyed man in the country of the blind should be the king"???

Regards,

Understanding Sub-Optimal Performance in HR

What I understand from your clarifications explaining the meaning of sub-optimal performance is how poor knowledge levels prevailing elsewhere in an organization may induce sub-optimal performance in HR. In my view, knowledge is the ability to apply the information in one's possession (about facts/skills/procedures, etc.) to a situation to produce a desired result. If a person lacks such ability, we can say he is only informative but not knowledgeable. Supposing an automobile engineer could only find out that the engine broke down due to some problem in the circuit but could not know how to rectify it, he can be said to be only informative but not knowledgeable.

As an HR professional, my predominant functional area was in industrial relations, and therefore, I can relate to an experience in this field. Here is an instance where an HR officer chargesheeted a workman for indulging in riotous acts, and as he was found guilty in the domestic inquiry, he prepared a draft order of dismissal. Since industrial relations issues have legal implications and as per the practice prevailing in the organization, he sent the draft to the Legal Department for their clearance so that there will not be any legal complications for the company in the future when the employee is dismissed. The Legal Department cleared the draft penalty order, and accordingly, the employee was dismissed. The HR officer heaved a sigh of relief at getting rid of a troublesome element.

After a lapse of one month, the HR officer received a notice from the Labour Court as to why the workman shall not be reinstated as the company failed to obtain approval of the Labour Court, which was adjudicating an industrial dispute about the justifiability of a strike in which the workman was concerned. Sec.33 of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 bars an employer from dismissing a workman who is involved in an industrial dispute pending before a Labour Court/conciliation officer without taking approval from the concerned authority. The Legal Department might be ignorant of this procedure or, even if aware, might not have the required legal acumen to understand the subtle legal nuances with which it should have analyzed the issue. The result is that the workman came back to work with back wages and more emboldened, much to the embarrassment of the management. That's how a poor knowledge level in the organization might induce sub-optimal performance of HR.

Similarly, the faulty forecasts of business projections by the Marketing or Business Development Departments may send the manpower planning exercise of HR for a toss. In many cases, HR hires the BEST (based on qualifications and resumes) but not the RIGHT because of the clamor for candidates from certain institutes or wrong description of job profiles communicated by functional departments.

Steps to Overcome Sub-Optimal Performance

In my view, the individual efforts to overcome this sub-optimal performance because of poor knowledge levels in the organization can include the following:

1) To read literature and material concerning one's field regularly to keep oneself abreast of developments.

2) To interact with peers from other organizations to exchange each other's knowledge and experiences for mutual benefit. This can be done by joining professionals' clubs or communities or circles.

3) To attend external workshops and seminars where the individual can have exposure to knowledge and experiences of peers/seniors across a wide spectrum of industries.

4) To develop one's research and development on the subjects he is dealing with.

Regards,
B. Saikumar
HR & Labour Law Advisor
Mumbai

Sai,
Thanks for the response. We are bang-on-target now  Do you truly think that these measures will truly solve the situation at hand? I don't see how it would work.
For example:
1) To read literature and material concerning one's field regularly to keep oneself abreast of developments.
In my humble opinion, this will increase the knowledge gap rather than reduce it. That may not solve the problem that is caused due to the poor knowledge levels in the company. It might only amplify the problem and might cause frustration!!!

Regards

The strategies I suggested will be relevant and limited to the industrial relations area in which I worked, where some knowledge of labor laws is necessary for the efficient functioning of the industrial relations (I.R.) department. As a Senior Manager in charge of the industrial relations function in my organization, I used to subscribe to law journals that published practical cases explaining how gaps in knowledge of legal procedures gave rise to disputes. These cases provided valuable insights about precautions to be taken by the management to ensure its actions are fool-proof regarding industrial relations, whether it involves entering into settlements, employing individuals for office work, or engaging unions in collective bargaining. Reading these cases immensely benefitted me and helped me effectively deal with disputes at the conciliation and adjudication stages.

However, I cannot guarantee that the same strategy would work for other functional areas of HR, such as performance management, talent management, or recognition policies. It largely depends on the nature of the literature you engage with. There is no point in reading volumes of theoretical literature, as you mentioned; it may create more doubts than it can answer due to the significant gap between theory and practice. Instead, reading case studies—whether live or simulated—may, in my view, help bridge knowledge gaps. Furthermore, interacting with peers and seniors from other industries at both formal and informal gatherings can also assist HR professionals in enhancing their knowledge at an individual level.

Regards,
B. Saikumar
Mumbai

Thanks for that. Yes, I agree... If we restrict our question, your strategy advocated compensating for the legal department inefficiencies through your own reading. In other words, you ended up 'doing the work of others' in some sense. Does that qualify as a reasonable conclusion from what you have described? Please let me know if I understood it right.

Regards,

I look at it from a different perspective: raising my individual performance to the optimum level, strengthening my knowledge relevant to my area of functioning to serve the interests of the organization well, and achieving considerable freedom of action by reducing my dependence on other support functionaries like legal. The cumulative effect of my individual efforts was to make my job significantly effective, enabling me to deal with issues/unions from a position of strength and ultimately insulating my department from the adverse effects of poor knowledge levels elsewhere. In the ultimate analysis, I worked for myself and my department, rather than for some other department.

Regards,
B. Saikumar
HR & Labour Law Advisor
Mumbai

Thanks for the clarification, and it is in line with my remarks (whether we like it or not!). So, that is one way of working around it. Like you rightly stated, this may not work for other functions.

Alternative Strategies

So, can we think of any other strategies to use in this situation?

Regards,
Nikhil

I have gone through all the comments once again. Overall, it emerges that poor performance or sub-optimal performance pervades across all the functions, and HR is no exception. This is where solutions of "Knowledge Management" come into the picture.

Let me repeat the thought propounded by Socrates. He said that "Human wisdom begins with the recognition of one's own ignorance." Today, the number one trouble with humankind is that "we don't know what we don't know." Errors happen because we grope in the dark.

In the Mahabharata, Yaksha asks questions to Yudhishthira - "the entire world is filled with what?" Yudhishthira replies, "the entire world is filled with ignorance."

In the business context, the theory of knowledge management should be propounded with even greater earnestness. However, after the recession, it has taken a back seat. Knowledge management practices help prevent the repetition of past mistakes or mistakes committed by other companies. If we avoid the repetition of mistakes, this in itself is a big achievement.

Thanks,

DVD

Understanding Ignorance in Organizations

Taking Dinesh's comments further on ignorance, I, during my career, came across the following kinds of ignorance which contributed to poor knowledge levels in the organization.

• There are people, as Dinesh rightly said, who do not know that they do not know and end up giving wrong directions and decisions.

• There are also people who do not know that they know and end up giving wrong directions and decisions.

• There are people who do not know but pretend to know and end up giving wrong directions and decisions.

Probably one of the reasons for such poor knowledge levels in the organization lies in hiring the wrong candidates by HR. This, again, is attributable to the ignorance of operational managers about the scope of the jobs in their department and the knowledge, traits, and skills required to perform the job. I used to hear from the HR fraternity, with whom I interacted at workshops and seminars, that operational managers, because of their poor knowledge about job requirements, used to hand down improper job descriptions/profiles. As a result, when they want a workhorse, they end up getting a "cute hare," which is more for ornamental and entertainment value. Due to these inadequacies of knowledge in operational staff, HR might hire the "BEST" candidate but not the "RIGHT" candidate. This, again, contributes to poor knowledge levels in the organization.

Strategies for HR to Prevent Recruitment Mishaps

The strategy of an individual HR officer/HR Department to prevent such recruitment mishaps will be to keep asking questions to get at the core requirements of the job so that they can hire the "RIGHT" candidate. In a knowledge-based industry/business, which the modern industry unmistakably is, "asking questions" is considered one of the strategies to enhance one's knowledge or to supplement the shortage of it in others.

Regards,
B. Saikumar
HR & Labor Law Advisor
Mumbai

Thank you, DVD and Sai. DVD, our discussion is restricted to individual strategies and not organizational ones. Sai, the points are excellent. Kudos. Asking questions is a great strategy, provided the other person is willing to play the game! On one hand, the other person might feel exposed, and it could turn out to be a nasty political minefield. However, it might be possible to play the cards well.

Exploring Additional Strategies

So, now we have two strategies. Are there any more strategies to consider? Let us try to understand this further.

Regards