Colborn’s Corner: Just administrators?

Annie Hayes

Sift

Editor

Colborn’s Corner: Just administrators?

By Annie Hayes

’What’s the point of HR’, the latest article in this series stirred up quite a hornet’s nest of views; this week Quentin returns to the topic and looks as the assertion made by some that HR are just a bunch of administrators.

It was interesting to counter balance a few views and thoughts from the last article with a couple of opinions given on sister site, AccountingWEB. Here, a member had asked about the cost of HR. Now to my mind that’s a bit like the ‘length of a piece of string’ question but that’s another story. Amongst the accounting commentators were a veritable bunch who were clear that they wouldn’t ever let HR near their businesses, damning the profession as fulfilling a mere administrative function.

So is there any truth in this? Is our existence that heavily linked to paper-pushing? There’s no doubt that a lot of HR departments are swimming in a sea of administration but should they be the ones dealing with it? I think it’s interesting to look at where payroll sits. Some place it within HR, others within finance.

When speaking to HR people, there are some who are looking for control of activities such as payroll indeed some are even empire builders! I’m afraid I take a very different perspective. To my mind payroll is a purely administrative activity with great similarities to the Accounts Payable activity, so why do we want to hang on to it? At an even more basic level, everyone expects payroll to function smoothly and it is only noticed when things go wrong. On that basis who wants to manage an activity that is only visible when mistakes occur?

But what can HR add through administrative activity? I suspect very little if truth be told. What I believe we need to be much smarter at is distinguishing between processes and processing. The former is where our expertise should lie, understanding the law, employment contracts as well as how people tick and the way in which those processes impact on staff. But as for processing, why do we do it?

If we set the parameters and design the process, why do we have to carry it through? Is there any reason why line management cannot organise recruitment, if given the correct tools and guidance? Do HR people have to produce offer letters? It would be interesting to look across the country and see who exactly is doing things like producing employment contracts. I would be almost certain that in organisations that employ over, say 250 staff, someone within HR would do this. (And from my experience sitting in Tribunal, not always perfectly!) But what about smaller businesses? There are millions of employees who work for businesses that have no HR professional employed – yet they still get offer letters! My point here is that HR do not need to do all these things, we simply need to establish the processes.

What would happen if processing work were handed back to line managers rather than being done by HR? Of course there would be mistakes, although we are not always perfect ourselves. What would happen would be that the true cost of HR activity (which is different to what the HR team does) would be seen properly and, I anticipate, managed more carefully.

I’m firmly of the belief that we need to position HR further up the value chain and look to develop processes and strategies where we can add value. Processing, and linked to that administration, detracts from that position and takes away our energies from what we do best – helping organisations to make the best of what is truly their most valuable asset – their people.

Quentin Colborn is an independent consultant who helps organisations determine and develop their HR strategy. To contact him T: 01376 571360 or e-mail him at Quentin@qcpeople.co.uk

Colborn’s Corner: series articles