I am in the process of writing a new book (to be published by
Routledge at the end of this year) with the working title 'HR
Professional' - it will be my attempt at defining, and painting a
reasonably clear and accurate picture of, what anyone should look like
if they want to earn the title "HR professional". After 34 years
making my living as an HR practitioner I thought it might not be a bad
idea to offer at least a view on the difference between the
professionals and the non-professionals. Of course, there is
currently nothing to stop anyone earning a living by calling
themselves an HR professional and even if a professional (sic) body
such as,say SHRM or the CIPD, tried to have someone struck off it
would not be able to enforce it. Surely this cannot be right but the
starting point for remedying the situation has to be an assessment
process for professionalism that is based on evidence, not some
notional and abstract notion of 'best practice' or 'best research
evidence'.
I would hasten to add that, while the book focuses on the specific and
rather exceptional requirements for evidence-based human resource
management, it will certainly be looking to offer some generic
guidance on what being a professional evidence-based manager should
mean. Moreover, the book aims to combine the best of evidence-based
HR practice with the rigour of academic research and that is why I am
seeking any ideas or suggestions you might have. Its ultimate
objective is to offer a practical template for attaining a level of HR
professionalism that can be distinguished from those who should not be
allowed 'on the register' (including the L&D community). I am humble
enough to realise that no one person could set up such a register but
as none currently exists we have to start somewhere and there is no
sign of SHRM or CIPD having any serious inclination to do so (I wonder
why?).
If you do respond could you please let me know if you are happy, at
least in principle, to be quoted in the book - of course you would be
shown any draft insertions for your approval before publishing.
Here are some specific questions you might wish to consider in
addition to any other advice or guidance you might offer.
1. What would be your shortest and simplest definition of the term
'professional'
2. What would be your shortest and simplest definition of the term
'professional evidence-based manager'?
3. Would it be any different for those who work in HR?
4. Using a bell shaped curve approach - a. what measures would be on
the x axis and b. how would you determine the minimum standard
required to qualify as a professional EB (HR) manager?
5. If we start to define the requirements more clearly, what would a
professional EB Manager curriculum look like (I know we have debated
this here before but now I want to sharpen the focus) and what type of
body would be best suited to act as registrar and arbiter?
You can contact me offline if you wish - i...@paulkearns.co.uk
Paul, To participate in this dialogue, I am enclosing a manuscript that is under review which deals with the whole notion of evidence. A professional in this context is one who is formally trained to use appropriate evidence in appropriate ways. We as a community need to agree what is appropriate evidence; the curriculum should address what is the appropriate way to use it. An apprenticeship of sorts (as it is mandated in medicine, law, and to lesser extent in engineering) rounds out the professionalization. I am an engineer by training and as I gravitated toward management, I noticed the laxity in the interpretation of the term, profession, and in its enforcement. But as you point out we need a body with teeth to enforce those standards as medicine and law do. Subsequent to Rakesh Khurana's paper in HBR, there is some discussion on management as a profession which I attach as well. http://blogs.hbr.org/hbsfaculty/2010/07/why-management-must-be-a-prof... You may find that useful. Best. Baba
[mailto:evidence-based-management@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Kearns Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 6:32 AM To: Evidence-Based Management Subject: What would define a professional Evidence Based Manager?
Dear colleagues
I am in the process of writing a new book (to be published by Routledge at the end of this year) with the working title 'HR Professional' - it will be my attempt at defining, and painting a reasonably clear and accurate picture of, what anyone should look like if they want to earn the title "HR professional". After 34 years making my living as an HR practitioner I thought it might not be a bad idea to offer at least a view on the difference between the professionals and the non-professionals. Of course, there is currently nothing to stop anyone earning a living by calling themselves an HR professional and even if a professional (sic) body such as,say SHRM or the CIPD, tried to have someone struck off it would not be able to enforce it. Surely this cannot be right but the starting point for remedying the situation has to be an assessment process for professionalism that is based on evidence, not some notional and abstract notion of 'best practice' or 'best research evidence'.
I would hasten to add that, while the book focuses on the specific and rather exceptional requirements for evidence-based human resource management, it will certainly be looking to offer some generic guidance on what being a professional evidence-based manager should mean. Moreover, the book aims to combine the best of evidence-based HR practice with the rigour of academic research and that is why I am seeking any ideas or suggestions you might have. Its ultimate objective is to offer a practical template for attaining a level of HR professionalism that can be distinguished from those who should not be allowed 'on the register' (including the L&D community). I am humble enough to realise that no one person could set up such a register but as none currently exists we have to start somewhere and there is no sign of SHRM or CIPD having any serious inclination to do so (I wonder why?). If you do respond could you please let me know if you are happy, at least in principle, to be quoted in the book - of course you would be shown any draft insertions for your approval before publishing.
Here are some specific questions you might wish to consider in addition to any other advice or guidance you might offer.
1. What would be your shortest and simplest definition of the term 'professional' 2. What would be your shortest and simplest definition of the term 'professional evidence-based manager'? 3. Would it be any different for those who work in HR? 4. Using a bell shaped curve approach - a. what measures would be on the x axis and b. how would you determine the minimum standard required to qualify as a professional EB (HR) manager? 5. If we start to define the requirements more clearly, what would a professional EB Manager curriculum look like (I know we have debated this here before but now I want to sharpen the focus) and what type of body would be best suited to act as registrar and arbiter?
You can contact me offline if you wish - i...@paulkearns.co.uk
thank you very much for the very rapid response (should we make that a
mark of professionalism? - only joking) - very helpful references -
let's see how it develops from here
all the best
Paul
On Jan 26, 12:21 pm, "Vishwanath Baba" <b...@mcmaster.ca> wrote:
> Paul,
> To participate in this dialogue, I am enclosing a manuscript that is under
> review which deals with the whole notion of evidence. A professional in this
> context is one who is formally trained to use appropriate evidence in
> appropriate ways. We as a community need to agree what is appropriate
> evidence; the curriculum should address what is the appropriate way to use
> it. An apprenticeship of sorts (as it is mandated in medicine, law, and to
> lesser extent in engineering) rounds out the professionalization. I am an
> engineer by training and as I gravitated toward management, I noticed the
> laxity in the interpretation of the term, profession, and in its
> enforcement. But as you point out we need a body with teeth to enforce those
> standards as medicine and law do. Subsequent to Rakesh Khurana's paper in
> HBR, there is some discussion on management as a profession which I attach
> as well.http://blogs.hbr.org/hbsfaculty/2010/07/why-management-must-be-a-prof...
> You may find that useful. Best.
> Baba
> [mailto:evidence-based-management@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Kearns
> Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 6:32 AM
> To: Evidence-Based Management
> Subject: What would define a professional Evidence Based Manager?
> Dear colleagues
> I am in the process of writing a new book (to be published by Routledge at
> the end of this year) with the working title 'HR Professional' - it will be
> my attempt at defining, and painting a reasonably clear and accurate picture
> of, what anyone should look like if they want to earn the title "HR
> professional". After 34 years making my living as an HR practitioner I
> thought it might not be a bad idea to offer at least a view on the
> difference between the professionals and the non-professionals. Of course,
> there is currently nothing to stop anyone earning a living by calling
> themselves an HR professional and even if a professional (sic) body such
> as,say SHRM or the CIPD, tried to have someone struck off it would not be
> able to enforce it. Surely this cannot be right but the starting point for
> remedying the situation has to be an assessment process for professionalism
> that is based on evidence, not some notional and abstract notion of 'best
> practice' or 'best research evidence'.
> I would hasten to add that, while the book focuses on the specific and
> rather exceptional requirements for evidence-based human resource
> management, it will certainly be looking to offer some generic guidance on
> what being a professional evidence-based manager should mean. Moreover, the
> book aims to combine the best of evidence-based HR practice with the rigour
> of academic research and that is why I am seeking any ideas or suggestions
> you might have. Its ultimate objective is to offer a practical template for
> attaining a level of HR professionalism that can be distinguished from those
> who should not be allowed 'on the register' (including the L&D community). I
> am humble enough to realise that no one person could set up such a register
> but as none currently exists we have to start somewhere and there is no sign
> of SHRM or CIPD having any serious inclination to do so (I wonder why?).
> If you do respond could you please let me know if you are happy, at least in
> principle, to be quoted in the book - of course you would be shown any draft
> insertions for your approval before publishing.
> Here are some specific questions you might wish to consider in addition to
> any other advice or guidance you might offer.
> 1. What would be your shortest and simplest definition of the term
> 'professional'
> 2. What would be your shortest and simplest definition of the term
> 'professional evidence-based manager'?
> 3. Would it be any different for those who work in HR?
> 4. Using a bell shaped curve approach - a. what measures would be on the x
> axis and b. how would you determine the minimum standard required to qualify
> as a professional EB (HR) manager?
> 5. If we start to define the requirements more clearly, what would a
> professional EB Manager curriculum look like (I know we have debated this
> here before but now I want to sharpen the focus) and what type of body would
> be best suited to act as registrar and arbiter?
> You can contact me offline if you wish - i...@paulkearns.co.uk
Khurana has also done a book which has been highly recommended to me but I haven't read yet. I guess there's a wider question around what it means, if anything, to consider management more generally as a profession and the role of business schools in that. From Higher Aims to Hired Hands: The Social Transformation of American Business Schools and the Unfulfilled Promise of Management as a Profession http://www.amazon.com/Higher-Aims-Hired-Hands-ebook/dp/B002W8QX5E. My guess is this analysis of the role of business schools in the professionalization of management might be similar to your analysis.
And then there's broader stuff on how professions in general work by Andrew Abbott and others.
Cheers
Rob
Rob B Briner | Professor of Organizational Psychology | School of Management | University of Bath
> -----Original Message----- > From: evidence-based-management@googlegroups.com [mailto:evidence- > based-management@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Kearns > Sent: 26 January 2012 11:32 > To: Evidence-Based Management > Subject: What would define a professional Evidence Based Manager?
> Dear colleagues
> I am in the process of writing a new book (to be published by Routledge at > the end of this year) with the working title 'HR Professional' - it will be my > attempt at defining, and painting a reasonably clear and accurate picture of, > what anyone should look like if they want to earn the title "HR professional". > After 34 years making my living as an HR practitioner I thought it might not be > a bad idea to offer at least a view on the difference between the > professionals and the non-professionals. Of course, there is currently > nothing to stop anyone earning a living by calling themselves an HR > professional and even if a professional (sic) body such as,say SHRM or the > CIPD, tried to have someone struck off it would not be able to enforce it. > Surely this cannot be right but the starting point for remedying the situation > has to be an assessment process for professionalism that is based on > evidence, not some notional and abstract notion of 'best practice' or 'best > research evidence'.
> I would hasten to add that, while the book focuses on the specific and rather > exceptional requirements for evidence-based human resource > management, it will certainly be looking to offer some generic guidance on > what being a professional evidence-based manager should mean. > Moreover, the book aims to combine the best of evidence-based HR practice > with the rigour of academic research and that is why I am seeking any ideas > or suggestions you might have. Its ultimate objective is to offer a practical > template for attaining a level of HR professionalism that can be distinguished > from those who should not be allowed 'on the register' (including the L&D > community). I am humble enough to realise that no one person could set up > such a register but as none currently exists we have to start somewhere and > there is no sign of SHRM or CIPD having any serious inclination to do so (I > wonder why?). > If you do respond could you please let me know if you are happy, at least in > principle, to be quoted in the book - of course you would be shown any draft > insertions for your approval before publishing.
> Here are some specific questions you might wish to consider in addition to > any other advice or guidance you might offer.
> 1. What would be your shortest and simplest definition of the term > 'professional' > 2. What would be your shortest and simplest definition of the term > 'professional evidence-based manager'? > 3. Would it be any different for those who work in HR? > 4. Using a bell shaped curve approach - a. what measures would be on the x > axis and b. how would you determine the minimum standard required to > qualify as a professional EB (HR) manager? > 5. If we start to define the requirements more clearly, what would a > professional EB Manager curriculum look like (I know we have debated this > here before but now I want to sharpen the focus) and what type of body > would be best suited to act as registrar and arbiter?
> You can contact me offline if you wish - i...@paulkearns.co.uk
I've been following Khurana and Nohria's efforts at Harvard with great
interest for some time and recently posted this http://www.evidencebasedhr.com/?p=416
I'm glad you raised it because it prompts me to stoke the fires of
this debate - I think they both need to be clear what management (and
therefore management education) is all about - for me it is all about
value, not profit - the two are very different - one is inherently and
intrinsically ethical the other is not (despite what Milton Friedman
and others told us) and value applies to any organisation, profit
doesn't. By pursuing value we do not have to define what an ethical
manager looks like - that saves me a big philosophical discussion in
the book. I think this is particularly relevant to the current angst
and debates about Western capitalism. What better time than now to
finally determine what professional management actually means in both
theory and practice.
regards
Paul
On Jan 26, 1:01 pm, Rob Briner <rb...@management.bath.ac.uk> wrote:
> Khurana has also done a book which has been highly recommended to me but I haven't read yet. I guess there's a wider question around what it means, if anything, to consider management more generally as a profession and the role of business schools in that. From Higher Aims to Hired Hands: The Social Transformation of American Business Schools and the Unfulfilled Promise of Management as a Professionhttp://www.amazon.com/Higher-Aims-Hired-Hands-ebook/dp/B002W8QX5E. My guess is this analysis of the role of business schools in the professionalization of management might be similar to your analysis.
> And then there's broader stuff on how professions in general work by Andrew Abbott and others.
> Cheers
> Rob
> Rob B Briner | Professor of Organizational Psychology | School of Management | University of Bath
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: evidence-based-management@googlegroups.com [mailto:evidence-
> > based-management@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Kearns
> > Sent: 26 January 2012 11:32
> > To: Evidence-Based Management
> > Subject: What would define a professional Evidence Based Manager?
> > Dear colleagues
> > I am in the process of writing a new book (to be published by Routledge at
> > the end of this year) with the working title 'HR Professional' - it will be my
> > attempt at defining, and painting a reasonably clear and accurate picture of,
> > what anyone should look like if they want to earn the title "HR professional".
> > After 34 years making my living as an HR practitioner I thought it might not be
> > a bad idea to offer at least a view on the difference between the
> > professionals and the non-professionals. Of course, there is currently
> > nothing to stop anyone earning a living by calling themselves an HR
> > professional and even if a professional (sic) body such as,say SHRM or the
> > CIPD, tried to have someone struck off it would not be able to enforce it.
> > Surely this cannot be right but the starting point for remedying the situation
> > has to be an assessment process for professionalism that is based on
> > evidence, not some notional and abstract notion of 'best practice' or 'best
> > research evidence'.
> > I would hasten to add that, while the book focuses on the specific and rather
> > exceptional requirements for evidence-based human resource
> > management, it will certainly be looking to offer some generic guidance on
> > what being a professional evidence-based manager should mean.
> > Moreover, the book aims to combine the best of evidence-based HR practice
> > with the rigour of academic research and that is why I am seeking any ideas
> > or suggestions you might have. Its ultimate objective is to offer a practical
> > template for attaining a level of HR professionalism that can be distinguished
> > from those who should not be allowed 'on the register' (including the L&D
> > community). I am humble enough to realise that no one person could set up
> > such a register but as none currently exists we have to start somewhere and
> > there is no sign of SHRM or CIPD having any serious inclination to do so (I
> > wonder why?).
> > If you do respond could you please let me know if you are happy, at least in
> > principle, to be quoted in the book - of course you would be shown any draft
> > insertions for your approval before publishing.
> > Here are some specific questions you might wish to consider in addition to
> > any other advice or guidance you might offer.
> > 1. What would be your shortest and simplest definition of the term
> > 'professional'
> > 2. What would be your shortest and simplest definition of the term
> > 'professional evidence-based manager'?
> > 3. Would it be any different for those who work in HR?
> > 4. Using a bell shaped curve approach - a. what measures would be on the x
> > axis and b. how would you determine the minimum standard required to
> > qualify as a professional EB (HR) manager?
> > 5. If we start to define the requirements more clearly, what would a
> > professional EB Manager curriculum look like (I know we have debated this
> > here before but now I want to sharpen the focus) and what type of body
> > would be best suited to act as registrar and arbiter?
> > You can contact me offline if you wish - i...@paulkearns.co.uk
I agree that HR is not regulated and quite far from being fully professionalized. However, from my perspective, SHRM is quite aware of this fact and is making (granted slow) progress. CIPD is also aware, and has managed to exert considerable control on higher education offerings by credentialing not just their members but programs as well.
SHRM's partnership with Human Resource Certification Institute (HRCI) is one initiative in this vein, and I haven't anyone mention it. HRCI provides 4 different professional certification tests, and such 'credentialing' is one characteristic of a profession. Granted, these tests are neither mandated nor required, but having the tests in place is one step in that direction.
These efforts have a long way to go, but they are an indication of concern about and momentum for addressing the issues it seems like you will be raising in your book.
Having worked with SHRM (at least at arms length) on some of these issues, and taken one of their certification tests, I think you raise a really important question with regard to your take on this issue. I wonder about the extent to which these professionalization efforts balance professional expertise and evidence-based findings. I would love to see your thoughts on this as the book progresses. Maybe you could make short excerpts available to interested readers?
Ken
~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Kenneth G. Brown, Ph.D., SPHR Associate Professor of Management & Organizations and Tippie Research Fellow Editor, Academy of Management Learning & Education Henry B. Tippie College of Business The University of Iowa Iowa City, IA 52242 Ph: 319.335.3812 Fx: 319.335.1957
> > -----Original Message----- > > From: evidence-based-management@googlegroups.com [mailto:evidence- > > based-management@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Kearns > > Sent: 26 January 2012 11:32 > > To: Evidence-Based Management > > Subject: What would define a professional Evidence Based Manager?
> > Dear colleagues
> > I am in the process of writing a new book (to be published by Routledge at > > the end of this year) with the working title 'HR Professional' - it will be my > > attempt at defining, and painting a reasonably clear and accurate picture of, > > what anyone should look like if they want to earn the title "HR professional". > > After 34 years making my living as an HR practitioner I thought it might not be > > a bad idea to offer at least a view on the difference between the > > professionals and the non-professionals. Of course, there is currently > > nothing to stop anyone earning a living by calling themselves an HR > > professional and even if a professional (sic) body such as,say SHRM or the > > CIPD, tried to have someone struck off it would not be able to enforce it. > > Surely this cannot be right but the starting point for remedying the situation > > has to be an assessment process for professionalism that is based on > > evidence, not some notional and abstract notion of 'best practice' or 'best > > research evidence'.
> > I would hasten to add that, while the book focuses on the specific and rather > > exceptional requirements for evidence-based human resource > > management, it will certainly be looking to offer some generic guidance on > > what being a professional evidence-based manager should mean. > > Moreover, the book aims to combine the best of evidence-based HR practice > > with the rigour of academic research and that is why I am seeking any ideas > > or suggestions you might have. Its ultimate objective is to offer a practical > > template for attaining a level of HR professionalism that can be distinguished > > from those who should not be allowed 'on the register' (including the L&D > > community). I am humble enough to realise that no one person could set up > > such a register but as none currently exists we have to start somewhere and > > there is no sign of SHRM or CIPD having any serious inclination to do so (I > > wonder why?). > > If you do respond could you please let me know if you are happy, at least in > > principle, to be quoted in the book - of course you would be shown any draft > > insertions for your approval before publishing.
> > Here are some specific questions you might wish to consider in addition to > > any other advice or guidance you might offer.
> > 1. What would be your shortest and simplest definition of the term > > 'professional' > > 2. What would be your shortest and simplest definition of the term > > 'professional evidence-based manager'? > > 3. Would it be any different for those who work in HR? > > 4. Using a bell shaped curve approach - a. what measures would be on the x > > axis and b. how would you determine the minimum standard required to > > qualify as a professional EB (HR) manager? > > 5. If we start to define the requirements more clearly, what would a > > professional EB Manager curriculum look like (I know we have debated this > > here before but now I want to sharpen the focus) and what type of body > > would be best suited to act as registrar and arbiter?
> > You can contact me offline if you wish - i...@paulkearns.co.uk
Yes I am aware of the developments you mention and was a member of
SHRM's Taskforce on HR standards but pulled out because I think they
are setting their sights too low - one of the first outcomes from one
of its many committees was a 45 page document on how to measure cost
per hire - admittedly it was constituted with that brief - but no one
thought to mention quality per hire or even performance per hire as
part of their discussions - which one would have thought should take
precedence. These types of measures are being submitted to ISO, via
ANSI (American National Standards Institute), to establish global HR
standards but if those standards are input rather than output related
it will just confirm HR as a purely administrative function (and say
nothing about its effectiveness) - yet the need for better human
capital management is evident everywhere I look. My book will be much
more ambitious because I think it needs to be to rise to the
challenges facing us all.
Accreditation and certification of programs have been around for a
long time and as you rightly point out this does not resolve the
'striking off' question but accreditation will not move us forward if
the content of those programs is not evidence based.
You might be aware of the CIPD's 'Next Generation HR' initiative - if
you look at the detail of this you will find it is heading in
precisely the opposite direction to EBM or EBHR with emphasis being
put on an 'insight' approach - whatever that means. One of their
participant companies has revealed to me what it means for them but it
certainly does not mean based on evidence.
I am working with the BSI (British Standards Institute) who, along
with other European quality institutes, are injecting views on HR
standards to ISO that are different to SHRM's. By the time of
publication I will make sure I will cover progress to date - but as
you intimate, I am not expecting there to be much to report on.
I'm pleased you manage to maintain an optimistic view Ken, maybe I'm
just getting grouchier or more cynical with age but I do not sense
that the people who run SHRM and CIPD, who are definitely not evidence-
based in my experience, will be welcoming anyone who is anytime soon.
If a register is ever formed many of them would have to be struck off
until reformed if it were to have any credibility.
In that vein, here are my first two candidates for coming up in front
of the 'General HR Council - Fitness to Practise Panel' -
http://www.evidencebasedhr.com/?p=432 - and they purport to be
following EBM principles - could you join me on the panel Ken to
assess John Boudreau's academic credentials please - they seem to be
highly questionable to me (we can include Ed Lawler III as well while
we are at it). So the academic world obviously has exactly the same
problem - what indicators form the bell curve and what do you do with
those who are at the bottom? Many do not have the stomach for this
thing we call 'maintaining professional standards' which is exactly
why there is a need for a general council.
Whenever I have described myself as an HR guy to operational managers
I have often had to take the ridicule and smirks that go with that.
People like Boudreau will create the same effect for serious HR
academics. As far as I can see Jesuthasan is not even an HR guy - but
this just bears out my point that anyone can jump on the HR bandwaggon
and there is no one with the responsibility or the means of assessment
to kick them off.
Can I finish by saying I invite being struck off myself - it will mean
I can retire having achieved my professional goal.
all the best
Paul
On Jan 26, 7:39 pm, "Brown, Kenneth G" <kenneth-g-br...@uiowa.edu>
wrote:
> I agree that HR is not regulated and quite far from being fully professionalized. However, from my perspective, SHRM is quite aware of this fact and is making (granted slow) progress. CIPD is also aware, and has managed to exert considerable control on higher education offerings by credentialing not just their members but programs as well.
> SHRM's partnership with Human Resource Certification Institute (HRCI) is one initiative in this vein, and I haven't anyone mention it. HRCI provides 4 different professional certification tests, and such 'credentialing' is one characteristic of a profession. Granted, these tests are neither mandated nor required, but having the tests in place is one step in that direction.
> These efforts have a long way to go, but they are an indication of concern about and momentum for addressing the issues it seems like you will be raising in your book.
> Having worked with SHRM (at least at arms length) on some of these issues, and taken one of their certification tests, I think you raise a really important question with regard to your take on this issue. I wonder about the extent to which these professionalization efforts balance professional expertise and evidence-based findings. I would love to see your thoughts on this as the book progresses. Maybe you could make short excerpts available to interested readers?
> Ken
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Kenneth G. Brown, Ph.D., SPHR
> Associate Professor of Management & Organizations and Tippie Research Fellow
> Editor, Academy of Management Learning & Education
> Henry B. Tippie College of Business
> The University of Iowa
> Iowa City, IA 52242
> Ph: 319.335.3812 Fx: 319.335.1957
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: evidence-based-management@googlegroups.com [mailto:evidence-
> > > based-management@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Kearns
> > > Sent: 26 January 2012 11:32
> > > To: Evidence-Based Management
> > > Subject: What would define a professional Evidence Based Manager?
> > > Dear colleagues
> > > I am in the process of writing a new book (to be published by Routledge at
> > > the end of this year) with the working title 'HR Professional' - it will be my
> > > attempt at defining, and painting a reasonably clear and accurate picture of,
> > > what anyone should look like if they want to earn the title "HR professional".
> > > After 34 years making my living as an HR practitioner I thought it might not be
> > > a bad idea to offer at least a view on the difference between the
> > > professionals and the non-professionals. Of course, there is currently
> > > nothing to stop anyone earning a living by calling themselves an HR
> > > professional and even if a professional (sic) body such as,say SHRM or the
> > > CIPD, tried to have someone struck off it would not be able to enforce it.
> > > Surely this cannot be right but the starting point for remedying the situation
> > > has to be an assessment process for professionalism that is based on
> > > evidence, not some notional and abstract notion of 'best practice' or 'best
> > > research evidence'.
> > > I would hasten to add that, while the book focuses on the specific and rather
> > > exceptional requirements for evidence-based human resource
> > > management, it will certainly be looking to offer some generic guidance on
> > > what being a professional evidence-based manager should mean.
> > > Moreover, the book aims to combine the best of evidence-based HR practice
> > > with the rigour of academic research and that is why I am seeking any ideas
> > > or suggestions you might have. Its ultimate objective is to offer a practical
> > > template for attaining a level of HR professionalism that can be distinguished
> > > from those who should not be allowed 'on the register' (including the L&D
> > > community). I am humble enough to realise that no one person could set up
> > > such a register but as none currently exists we have to start somewhere and
> > > there is no sign of SHRM or CIPD having any serious inclination to do so (I
> > > wonder why?).
> > > If you do respond could you please let me know if you are happy, at least in
> > > principle, to be quoted in the book - of course you would be shown any draft
> > > insertions for your approval before publishing.
> > > Here are some specific questions you might wish to consider in addition to
> > > any other advice or guidance you might offer.
> > > 1. What would be your shortest and simplest definition of the term
> > > 'professional'
> > > 2. What would be your shortest and simplest definition of the term
> > > 'professional evidence-based manager'?
> > > 3. Would it be any different for those who work in HR?
> > > 4. Using a bell shaped curve approach - a. what measures would be on the x
> > > axis and b. how would you determine the minimum standard required to
> > > qualify as a professional EB (HR) manager?
> > > 5. If we start to define the requirements more clearly, what would a
> > > professional EB Manager curriculum look like (I know we have debated this
> > > here before but now I want to sharpen the focus) and what type of body
> > > would be best suited to act as registrar and arbiter?
> > > You can contact me offline if you wish - i...@paulkearns.co.uk
Really pleased that you have right up front "Actively managing
professional decisions is a key aspect of EBHR" - will definitely be
referenced in the book.
best regards
Paul
On Jan 27, 10:25 am, Eric Barends <e.bare...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Your note is very helpful. I now see that you've been involved in these efforts, in fact much more than I, and I appreciate learning more from you. I also can see why you've gotten frustrated. The efforts are slow and seem driven by political interests more than an interest in commissioning or unearthing high quality research.
As for Boudreau and Lawler, their academic credentials are actually quite good, and each has produced excellent scholarship in his career. I have not read Transformative HR, so I can't speak to that piece of work directly, but given what you've written in your review, I can see why you've raised concerns.
One academic whom I admire for continuing rigorous work in strategic HR is Pat Wright. His work can be a painful read because he demonstrates precisely what we don't want to hear including that the causal direction of the HR-performance link is stronger in the reverse direction. This supports the concern about causality that you raise in your review of Transformative HR.
Wright, P., Gardner, T., Moynihan, L. & Allen, M. (2005). The HR - performance relationship: Examining causal direction. Personnel Psychology. 58, 409-446.
I look forward to hearing more about your book as you develop it. There is a real need for it!
Ken
~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Kenneth G. Brown, Ph.D., SPHR Associate Professor of Management & Organizations and Tippie Research Fellow Editor, Academy of Management Learning & Education Henry B. Tippie College of Business The University of Iowa Iowa City, IA 52242 Ph: 319.335.3812 Fx: 319.335.1957
-----Original Message----- From: evidence-based-management@googlegroups.com [mailto:evidence-based-management@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Kearns Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012 3:10 AM To: Evidence-Based Management Subject: Re: What would define a professional Evidence Based Manager?
Hi Ken
thank you for your thoughts and comments.
Yes I am aware of the developments you mention and was a member of SHRM's Taskforce on HR standards but pulled out because I think they are setting their sights too low - one of the first outcomes from one of its many committees was a 45 page document on how to measure cost per hire - admittedly it was constituted with that brief - but no one thought to mention quality per hire or even performance per hire as part of their discussions - which one would have thought should take precedence. These types of measures are being submitted to ISO, via ANSI (American National Standards Institute), to establish global HR standards but if those standards are input rather than output related it will just confirm HR as a purely administrative function (and say nothing about its effectiveness) - yet the need for better human capital management is evident everywhere I look. My book will be much more ambitious because I think it needs to be to rise to the challenges facing us all.
Accreditation and certification of programs have been around for a long time and as you rightly point out this does not resolve the 'striking off' question but accreditation will not move us forward if the content of those programs is not evidence based.
You might be aware of the CIPD's 'Next Generation HR' initiative - if you look at the detail of this you will find it is heading in precisely the opposite direction to EBM or EBHR with emphasis being put on an 'insight' approach - whatever that means. One of their participant companies has revealed to me what it means for them but it certainly does not mean based on evidence.
I am working with the BSI (British Standards Institute) who, along with other European quality institutes, are injecting views on HR standards to ISO that are different to SHRM's. By the time of publication I will make sure I will cover progress to date - but as you intimate, I am not expecting there to be much to report on.
I'm pleased you manage to maintain an optimistic view Ken, maybe I'm just getting grouchier or more cynical with age but I do not sense that the people who run SHRM and CIPD, who are definitely not evidence- based in my experience, will be welcoming anyone who is anytime soon. If a register is ever formed many of them would have to be struck off until reformed if it were to have any credibility.
In that vein, here are my first two candidates for coming up in front of the 'General HR Council - Fitness to Practise Panel' - http://www.evidencebasedhr.com/?p=432 - and they purport to be following EBM principles - could you join me on the panel Ken to assess John Boudreau's academic credentials please - they seem to be highly questionable to me (we can include Ed Lawler III as well while we are at it). So the academic world obviously has exactly the same problem - what indicators form the bell curve and what do you do with those who are at the bottom? Many do not have the stomach for this thing we call 'maintaining professional standards' which is exactly why there is a need for a general council.
Whenever I have described myself as an HR guy to operational managers I have often had to take the ridicule and smirks that go with that. People like Boudreau will create the same effect for serious HR academics. As far as I can see Jesuthasan is not even an HR guy - but this just bears out my point that anyone can jump on the HR bandwaggon and there is no one with the responsibility or the means of assessment to kick them off.
Can I finish by saying I invite being struck off myself - it will mean I can retire having achieved my professional goal.
all the best
Paul
On Jan 26, 7:39 pm, "Brown, Kenneth G" <kenneth-g-br...@uiowa.edu> wrote: > Paul,
> I agree that HR is not regulated and quite far from being fully professionalized. However, from my perspective, SHRM is quite aware of this fact and is making (granted slow) progress. CIPD is also aware, and has managed to exert considerable control on higher education offerings by credentialing not just their members but programs as well.
> SHRM's partnership with Human Resource Certification Institute (HRCI) is one initiative in this vein, and I haven't anyone mention it. HRCI provides 4 different professional certification tests, and such 'credentialing' is one characteristic of a profession. Granted, these tests are neither mandated nor required, but having the tests in place is one step in that direction.
> These efforts have a long way to go, but they are an indication of concern about and momentum for addressing the issues it seems like you will be raising in your book.
> Having worked with SHRM (at least at arms length) on some of these issues, and taken one of their certification tests, I think you raise a really important question with regard to your take on this issue. I wonder about the extent to which these professionalization efforts balance professional expertise and evidence-based findings. I would love to see your thoughts on this as the book progresses. Maybe you could make short excerpts available to interested readers?
> Ken
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Kenneth G. Brown, Ph.D., SPHR > Associate Professor of Management & Organizations and Tippie Research Fellow > Editor, Academy of Management Learning & Education > Henry B. Tippie College of Business > The University of Iowa > Iowa City, IA 52242 > Ph: 319.335.3812 Fx: 319.335.1957
> > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: evidence-based-management@googlegroups.com [mailto:evidence- > > > based-management@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Kearns > > > Sent: 26 January 2012 11:32 > > > To: Evidence-Based Management > > > Subject: What would define a professional Evidence Based Manager?
> > > Dear colleagues
> > > I am in the process of writing a new book (to be published by Routledge at > > > the end of this year) with the working title 'HR Professional' - it will be my > > > attempt at defining, and painting a reasonably clear and accurate picture of, > > > what anyone should look like if they want to earn the title "HR professional". > > > After 34 years making my living as an HR practitioner I thought it might not be > > > a bad idea to offer at least a view on the difference between the > > > professionals and the non-professionals. Of course, there is currently > > > nothing to stop anyone earning a living by calling themselves an HR > > > professional and even if a professional (sic) body such as,say SHRM or the > > > CIPD, tried to have someone struck off it would not be able to enforce it. > > > Surely this cannot be right but the starting point for remedying the situation > > > has to be an assessment process for professionalism that is based on > > > evidence, not some notional and abstract notion of 'best practice' or 'best > > > research evidence'.
> > > I would hasten to add that, while the book focuses on the specific and rather > > > exceptional requirements for evidence-based human resource > > > management, it will certainly be looking to offer some generic guidance on > > > what being a professional evidence-based manager should mean. > > > Moreover, the book aims to combine the best of evidence-based HR practice > > > with the rigour of academic research and that is why I am seeking any ideas > > > or suggestions you might have. Its ultimate objective is to offer a practical > > > template for attaining a level of HR professionalism that can be distinguished > > > from those who should not be allowed 'on the register' (including the L&D > > > community). I am humble enough to realise that no one person could set up > > > such a register but as none currently exists we have to start somewhere and > > > there is no sign of SHRM or CIPD having any serious inclination to do so (I > > > wonder why?). > > > If you do
yes I am involved in many different strands of this subject,
particularly around the crossover between the research and practice
and this is one thing that concerns me. EBM, particularly the EBHR
variant, is starting to gain much more attention, even traction, so
the bandwagon effect is happening already without any consensus as to
definition or methodology for implementation. This was precisely my
point about Towers Watson’s involvement (see earlier link) – for them
it is just another commercial product opportunity but one that needs
academic kudos, which Boudreau provides. I’m happy to accept your
assurance that Boudreau’s academic credentials are sound but that is
not the same as saying his research can be successfully translated
into practice. There is no evidence in the ‘Transformative HR ‘ book
to suggest it has.
Causation, as we all know, is always problematic in the field of
management research and can be a significant stumbling block. I’m
with Pat Wright (thanks for the link) – good business models tend to
result in engaged people – not the other way round - and some HR
practices damage businesses (I have plenty of evidence of that). I am
sure Boudreau knows the difference between correlation and causation -
but causation is specifically excluded from the framework Towers
Watson are selling through their book. Boudreau might be a
professional academic but this is not professional HR.
Most practitioners would not bat an eyelid about this because they do
not see that it has much bearing on their normal practice of
delivering HR products (engagement surveys et al) regardless of
context and without any evidence of business need or business impact.
In my book I am going to use this disconnect as the key differentiator
between existing HR practitioners and proper, evidence-based HR
professionals. Now you can see why my critique is so apposite and why
it had to be so forceful. I think the academic community needs to
address this issue from its side of the fence as well as a matter of
urgency but it will need a coordinated and combined challenge to those
who want to pervert EBM to their own ends.
In case anyone thinks this is an over-reaction - Rob Briner recently
alerted us all to a new journal on EBHRM that appears to have sprung
up from nowhere; I was asked to speak to members of a new practitioner
group called the EB-HR Exchange in the US just last week; I was also
asked if I wanted to contribute to a new online practitioner site
going up here in the UK soon on the growth in interest in ‘HR
analytics’ – another product spawned out of those jumping on the
evidence bandwaggon. Before you know it EBM will be so disjointed and
fragmented, with so many pretenders and me-too wannabes, that it will
be a lost cause – and also a huge, missed opportunity.
Thanks for the encouragement Ken – it’s very much appreciated - it
will keep the grouch in me away.
Have a great weekend - I intend to
all the best
Paul
On Jan 27, 3:51 pm, "Brown, Kenneth G" <kenneth-g-br...@uiowa.edu>
wrote:
> Your note is very helpful. I now see that you've been involved in these efforts, in fact much more than I, and I appreciate learning more from you. I also can see why you've gotten frustrated. The efforts are slow and seem driven by political interests more than an interest in commissioning or unearthing high quality research.
> As for Boudreau and Lawler, their academic credentials are actually quite good, and each has produced excellent scholarship in his career. I have not read Transformative HR, so I can't speak to that piece of work directly, but given what you've written in your review, I can see why you've raised concerns.
> One academic whom I admire for continuing rigorous work in strategic HR is Pat Wright. His work can be a painful read because he demonstrates precisely what we don't want to hear including that the causal direction of the HR-performance link is stronger in the reverse direction. This supports the concern about causality that you raise in your review of Transformative HR.
> Wright, P., Gardner, T., Moynihan, L. & Allen, M. (2005). The HR - performance relationship: Examining causal direction. Personnel Psychology. 58, 409-446.
> I look forward to hearing more about your book as you develop it. There is a real need for it!
> Ken
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Kenneth G. Brown, Ph.D., SPHR
> Associate Professor of Management & Organizations and Tippie Research Fellow
> Editor, Academy of Management Learning & Education
> Henry B. Tippie College of Business
> The University of Iowa
> Iowa City, IA 52242
> Ph: 319.335.3812 Fx: 319.335.1957
> -----Original Message-----
> From: evidence-based-management@googlegroups.com [mailto:evidence-based-management@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Kearns
> Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012 3:10 AM
> To: Evidence-Based Management
> Subject: Re: What would define a professional Evidence Based Manager?
> Hi Ken
> thank you for your thoughts and comments.
> Yes I am aware of the developments you mention and was a member of
> SHRM's Taskforce on HR standards but pulled out because I think they
> are setting their sights too low - one of the first outcomes from one
> of its many committees was a 45 page document on how to measure cost
> per hire - admittedly it was constituted with that brief - but no one
> thought to mention quality per hire or even performance per hire as
> part of their discussions - which one would have thought should take
> precedence. These types of measures are being submitted to ISO, via
> ANSI (American National Standards Institute), to establish global HR
> standards but if those standards are input rather than output related
> it will just confirm HR as a purely administrative function (and say
> nothing about its effectiveness) - yet the need for better human
> capital management is evident everywhere I look. My book will be much
> more ambitious because I think it needs to be to rise to the
> challenges facing us all.
> Accreditation and certification of programs have been around for a
> long time and as you rightly point out this does not resolve the
> 'striking off' question but accreditation will not move us forward if
> the content of those programs is not evidence based.
> You might be aware of the CIPD's 'Next Generation HR' initiative - if
> you look at the detail of this you will find it is heading in
> precisely the opposite direction to EBM or EBHR with emphasis being
> put on an 'insight' approach - whatever that means. One of their
> participant companies has revealed to me what it means for them but it
> certainly does not mean based on evidence.
> I am working with the BSI (British Standards Institute) who, along
> with other European quality institutes, are injecting views on HR
> standards to ISO that are different to SHRM's. By the time of
> publication I will make sure I will cover progress to date - but as
> you intimate, I am not expecting there to be much to report on.
> I'm pleased you manage to maintain an optimistic view Ken, maybe I'm
> just getting grouchier or more cynical with age but I do not sense
> that the people who run SHRM and CIPD, who are definitely not evidence-
> based in my experience, will be welcoming anyone who is anytime soon.
> If a register is ever formed many of them would have to be struck off
> until reformed if it were to have any credibility.
> In that vein, here are my first two candidates for coming up in front
> of the 'General HR Council - Fitness to Practise Panel' -http://www.evidencebasedhr.com/?p=432- and they purport to be
> following EBM principles - could you join me on the panel Ken to
> assess John Boudreau's academic credentials please - they seem to be
> highly questionable to me (we can include Ed Lawler III as well while
> we are at it). So the academic world obviously has exactly the same
> problem - what indicators form the bell curve and what do you do with
> those who are at the bottom? Many do not have the stomach for this
> thing we call 'maintaining professional standards' which is exactly
> why there is a need for a general council.
> Whenever I have described myself as an HR guy to operational managers
> I have often had to take the ridicule and smirks that go with that.
> People like Boudreau will create the same effect for serious HR
> academics. As far as I can see Jesuthasan is not even an HR guy - but
> this just bears out my point that anyone can jump on the HR bandwaggon
> and there is no one with the responsibility or the means of assessment
> to kick them off.
> Can I finish by saying I invite being struck off myself - it will mean
> I can retire having achieved my professional goal.
> all the best
> Paul
> On Jan 26, 7:39 pm, "Brown, Kenneth G" <kenneth-g-br...@uiowa.edu>
> wrote:
> > Paul,
> > I agree that HR is not regulated and quite far from being fully professionalized. However, from my perspective, SHRM is quite aware of this fact and is making (granted slow) progress. CIPD is also aware, and has managed to exert considerable control on higher education offerings by credentialing not just their members but programs as well.
> > SHRM's partnership with Human Resource Certification Institute (HRCI) is one initiative in this vein, and I haven't anyone mention it. HRCI provides 4 different professional certification tests, and such 'credentialing' is one characteristic of a profession. Granted, these tests are neither mandated nor required, but having the tests in place is one step in that direction.
After sending an email that I did NOT intend to send yesterday :(, I thought I'd try to make up for it by sending one that has something to do with the topic of this group.
The new issue of AMLE (Dec. 2011) has an article by Tim Baldwin & colleagues called "The Elusiveness of Applied Management Knowledge: A Critical Challenge for Management Educators." I attach the pre-published version of the paper from the AMLE website, as it is not yet up on Web of Science.
Also, a bit off topic but still of great interest to me (and, I know, to some other members of this group): There is also an article in the same issue by Wang, Malhotra & Murnighan called "Economics Education and Greed." The results are, sadly, as one might expect.
