A STUDY ON HR EXECUTIVES’

PERCEPTION ON HR SCORECARD

1

CHAPTER – I

INTRODUCTION

2

1.1 INTRODUCTION

HR practices are defined “as any practice that deals with enhancing competencies, commitment

and culture building can be considered as an HR practice”. The practice can take then form of a

system, a process, and an activity, norm, a rule or an accepted or expected habit. Today the HR

practices are aligned towards business results that make their performance measurable in all

aspects. The HR practices integrate the organizations goals with the individuals goals through

several measures like:

Financial incentives for excellent performance.

Work organization practices that motivate employee effort capture the benefits of know-

how and skill.

Talent acquisition and talent retention in the organization.

Leveraging competency models to map the right talent.

Fixing targets for the year and assessing the KRA (key result areas) accordingly.

Creating a learning organization, through extensive sharing of information with the

employees.

Enhancing employee involvement and empowerment practices.

Effective recruitment practices.

Measuring HR practices and policy implementation.

3

For Further Details Contact:

+91-9962179698

044-26821138

www.lacrosstechnologies.org

4

1.2 OBJECTIVES

To study the HR executives opinion on the HR scorecard as an effective performance

management system.

To study the HR executives views n HR initiatives as a result of the HR Scorecard.

5

1.3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research is an original contribution made to the existing stock of knowledge on the subjective

making for its advancement. It is the pursuit of the truth with the help of study, observation,

comparison and experiment. It is the search for knowledge through objective and systematic

methodology. The researcher has thus attempted to generalise and formulate a theory in this

research with the help of a standard methodology. The researcher has collected the data, analysed

them in an objective manner, in order to carry out a systematic research.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM:

The HR Scorecard, being a framework of measurement for the HR department in organizations

to measure the Return of investment of human capital is a successful practice that has been

implemented in various organisations, and hence chosen as a topic for study.

SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY:

The balanced scorecard that has specific measures fails to measure the HR practices and thus the

HR Scorecard clearly fills this gap by measuring the outcomes of the HR deliverables in

organisatons. This in turn makes the HR department in organizations a strategic partner in

business.

TITLE:

The title for research “HR executives perception on the HR Scorecard”.

6

OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS:

HR deliverables-

The outcomes of the HR architecture and system that serve to execute the firm’s

strategies are the HR deliverable. These deliverables include performance drivers

and enablers.

Strategic HR measurement system-

Developing strategic HR measurement system that includes a strategic and

operational HR measurement system that is measuring cost per hire activity and

maintaining a balance between financial and non-financial measures .

Measuring high –performance work system:

HR’s influence rests on the foundation of high –performing HR policies,

practices and processes.

Measuring HR system alignment:

The alignment here refers to the external and internal alignment of the HR

department with the organizations strategy.

Measuring HR efficiency –core versus strategic metrics:

Measuring HR efficiency by a wide range of benchmarks and cost standards. Core

efficiency measures HR expenditure that makes no direct contributions to the

firm’s strategy implementation. Strategic efficiency measures to assess the

efficiency of the HR activities and process designed to produce HR deliverables.

Leading change:

Change refers to the initiative that is brought out by the scorecard. This is done

through having sponsor who advocates the change like the head of the business

and the primary sponsor being the head HR who initiates a task force in

implementing the scorecard.

7

Creating a shared need for change:

Creating a shared need for change is the responsibility of the HR team to create

awareness among employees about the significance of the HR initiatives.

Shaping a vision:

The vision of the HR scorecard defines the desired outcomes of the scorecard,

states what will measured and describes the data-collection process, this leads to

shaping a vision for the organization.

Mobilizing commitment:

HR Scorecards initiative requires commitment from both line manager and

HR professionals this refers to the commitment mobilized for implementing of HR

initiatives.

Building enabling systems:

The company makes the financial, technological investments for the

implementing the HR initiatives in the organization this refers to building

enabling systems through the scorecard.

Monitoring and demonstrating progress:

The extent of implementing HR initiatives have to benchmarked during the

implementation process and after the results of the initiative being a bench-

marked to understand the impact of the HR initiatives.

Making it last:

Making the change last is the responsibility of the HR team, where the HR

initiatives are implemented and has become a practice in the organization.

8

RESEARCH DESIGN:

Research design is an important part of the study, as it helps in the systematic way of conducting

the research objectively. The methodology involved is mostly qualitative in nature producing

descriptive data. The research design followed is descriptive design.

UNIVERSE:

Universe is the totality of units from which the selected sample is selected or derived.

Here the universe refers to the HR departments in organizations that follow the scorecard

methodology .The following organizations were identified for research they include Tata

consultancy Services, Verizon, Future soft and LA Cross as the universe for research.

SAMPLING TECHNIQUE:

Since the universe was focused to certain organisations the sampling technique was a simple

random sampling technique.

SAMPLE SIZE:

The sample size chosen was 60 for the research.

PRE-TESTING:

The Pre-Testing was done to 10% of the sample size i.e. 6 respondents in December 2004 where

minor changes were made to the questionnaire.

FIELD OF STUDY:

The field of study chosen for the purpose of research is organisations that practice the HR

scorecard.

9

CRITERIA FOR SELECTION:

HR executives of organisations that follow the HR Scorecard were chosen for the purpose of

research.

SOURCE OF DATA COLLECTION :

Data was collected for this study from both Primary and Secondary sources.

PRIMARY DATA

The primary data refers to the collection of information directly from the field that is the HR

executives from organisations that follow this form of measurement.

SECONDARY DATA

This is the data that has been gathered from various books, journals, magazines and articles from

related websites about the HR Scorecard.

TOOLS OF DATA COLLECTION:

The questionnaire method as an appropriate tool of data collection for the study. This is useful to

collect objective and quantitative data. It is also useful to collect qualitative data. The

questionnaire is based on the likerts scale that is widely used for an opinion study. This tool was

based on the

Discussion with the research guide.

Elimination of bias from the researcher’s side.

Time saving

Administered in English

Components of the tool

10

HR deliverables

Strategic HR measurement

High performance work system

HR system alignment

HR efficiency

Leading change

Shared need for change

Shaping a vision

Mobilizing commitment

Building enabling systems

Monitoring and demonstrating progress

Making it last

Extent to which HR initiatives are deployed

Ranking of HR initiatives

ACTUAL COLLECTION OF DATA

Actual collection of data was during the month of January 2009 for the research.

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

The analysis was done using the statistical package for social sciences (SPSS).

LIMITATIONS:

Since the field of study has been restricted to organisations practicing the scorecard, it has been

difficult to find such organisations that follow this new form of measurement as it is a latest

method and is still in the experimental phase.

11

CHAPTER – II

REVIEW OF LITERATURTE

12

2.1 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

THE HR SCORECARD: LINKING PEOPLE, STRATEGY, AND PERFORMANCE

Introduction

Human capital has become the key element in creating and sustaining value in business. Yet

there is no consensus blueprint for recognizing, developing, managing, or measuring this

intangible asset. It is not enough for HR managers to be able to explain why and how they do

what they do. For human resources to transform to a truly strategic role, HR professionals must

be able to measure performance and to link HR’s contribution to the mission of the organization.

The HR Scorecard is a management system for filling the gap between what is usually measured

in HR and what is actually essential to the firm.

This is not a trendy pop business read about sixty-second solutions or lost cheese. It is a

research-driven analysis of HR, complete with detailed guidelines, a demonstration of in-depth

research, case studies, and a prescription for transforming a function long seen as irrelevant to

the success of the organization. Although the presentation is sometimes symptomatic of having

three authors, the through-line of the vision is consistent.

HR As A Strategic Partner

1. The economy is driven more by intellectual capital than physical capital, and HR must

show its contribution to the creation of value.

2. There must be a focus on the HR “architecture” - the sum of HR function, the broader HR

system, and the resulting HR behaviors - and how to measure the HR function in terms of

the value-creation process.

3. HR must move from a “bottom-up” perspective emphasizing compliance and

administrative support, to a “top-down” perspective stressing the implementation of

strategy. It must move from a focus on individual employees, jobs, and practices, to a

new source of competitive advantage.

13

4. The benefits of HR, like most intangible strategic assets, are not always visible; they are

known only when aligned with the firm’s strategy implementation system.

5. Linking performance measurement with strategy implementation communicates the

intangible value of the firm to financial analysts, thereby adding to the market value of

the firm.

6. The measurement of intangible assets, and their relationship to the overall strategy of a

firm, will transform traditional accounting procedures that are bases on tangible assets.

The alignment of HR to overall strategy and the HR contribution to profits is a key

intangible asset.

7. Current accounting methods cast HR as a cost center despite the view of investors and

analysts that intangible assets are the most important part of valuing firms.

8. Most firms can demonstrate proficiency in technical HR functions, but find it difficult to

develop HR as a strategic player.

9. The High-Performance Work System (HPWS) is a model for an HR systems link with the

firm’s strategic goals. Based on data from more than 2,800 corporations, the model

maximizes human capital.

10. HPWS firms typically emphasize recruiting, energize training, tie compensation to

performance, use teams extensively, have larger HR staffs, and are less likely to be

unionized.

11. HPWS firms have clear strategic intent effectively communicated to employees, and they

have developed comprehensive measurement systems.

12. The alignment of the HR system with the strategy implementation process will link

ultimate financial goals with employee competencies and behaviors throughout the firm.

The management of people will be geared toward those competencies and behaviors.

13. Rather than measure only ending financial results, managers must identify and be

involved with those strategic implementation elements that create those results.

14. Effective measurement systems guide decision-making and serve as a basis for

performance evaluation.

15. A measurement system should provide a clear view of how each employee contributes to

success, should force managers to focus only on what matters (no more than twenty-five

measures), and should express those few measures in terms everyone understands.

14

16. The book incorporates Kaplan and Norton’s Balanced Scorecard framework because it

measures the value-creation process rather than only the financial results event.

CREATING HR SCORECARD

1. The ideal scorecard for an HR measurement system will include four themes: identifying

the HR deliverables, identifying and measuring the High-Performance Work System

elements that generate those deliverables, developing a validated competency model that

will focus on outcomes, and identifying HR efficiency measures that link costs and

benefits.

2. In terms of architecture, the scorecard will include the leading indicators of HPWS and

HR system alignment, and the lagging indicators of HR efficiency and HR deliverables.

3. A measurement system must strike a balance between cost control and value creation,

and it is more important to understand the reasoning behind the scorecard than it is to

mimic any particular model.

4. HR doables are cost-focused with little opportunity to impact the bottom line; DR

deliverables are benefits-focused with a connection to the overall strategy. Both must be

measured, but the emphasis must be on the value creation of deliverables.

5. Measures of the High-Performance Work System reflect more of what should be rather

than what is.

6. HR system alignment measures will link directly to specific deliverables in the scorecard.

They will prompt managers to routinely think about alignment issues.

7. Efficiency measures come in two categories: core items represent expenditures that are

important but do not contribute to strategy implementation, and strategic items that are

designed as investments that produce value.

8. Measures of HR deliverables identify the ways the HR system creates value; if a metric

cannot be tied to the strategy map, it should not be included on the scorecard. Measures

that describe HR deliverables only in terms of capabilities tend to miss the connection

with strategy. To be concrete, focus on HR drivers and enablers that represent the human

capital of the firm.

Avoid the temptation merely to fill in the boxes on the scorecard; the key is to ask what you want

the tool to do. Each item should:

15

Reinforce the distinction between doables and deliverables

Enable cost control and value creation

Measure leading indicators

Assess contribution to the bottom line

Let HR professionals effectively manage their strategic responsibilities

Encourage flexibility and change

Cost-Benefit Analyses for HR Interventions

1. An HR Scorecard measurement system identifies in quantitative terms the gap between

current and ideal HR architecture, and it provides data for either an operational or

strategic cost-benefit analysis.

2. Determining the return on investment (ROI) of specific HR interventions requires

knowledge of finance, accounting, and the process of capital budgeting.

3. To identify the most salient doable and deliverables, consider: strategic importance,

financial significance, widespread impact, linkage to a business element of considerable

variability, and focus on a key issue, problem, or decision facing line managers.

4. HR must take the view of other business disciplines in presenting its case in terms of

money – that is, the language of capital budgeting in the allocation of capital among

competing investments.

5. Identifying costs and benefits requires an understanding of fixed and variable costs, sunk

costs, and, the most difficult, the financial impact of employee performance.

6. Calculating benefits less costs in HR programs is difficult because the benefits unfold

over more than a single year. The calculation should use multiple time periods as well as

the time value of the money in terms of today’s dollars – an analysis known as net

present value (NPV).

7. Most firms do not routinely measure costs or benefits of HR, and therefore are not

focused on ROI. The few firms that do calculate HR costs and benefits, and do so on a

level that is objective and precise, are able to identify the programs that are providing

value and those that should be discarded.

8. Compared to HR Scorecards, cost-benefit analysis are narrower, more project focused,

provide only one specific answer, and are generally seen only by the managers involved.

16

Scorecards are developed to identify where the firm should be in the future, and ROI

analyses choose the most efficient way to get there.

Measuring HR Alignment

1. For HR to be a strategic asset, it must 1) align the HR system that produces deliverables

tied to the firm’s strategy implementation system, and 2) align the role expectations for

the HR function with the individual competencies to put the role into action.

2. A simple measure of internal alignment involves a survey of those who “live with” the

HR system and those whose behaviors the system is designed to influence. A short

survey of 100 employees and one or two focus groups can provide enough information.

The book contains a chart and case study that reveal the extent to which different HR

components fit or do not fit, and the values express the range of each relationship.

3. Internal misalignment can occur when there is too much emphasis on operational

efficiency and uniformity, or when there is too much emphasis on benchmarking to the

neglect of the specific needs of the firm’s own strategy. Practices are not commodities;

what works well in one firm will not necessarily work well in another.

4. Internal alignment flows from the extent to which the HR system is designed to

implement the firm’s strategy. This is the external alignment from which the internal is

constructed.

5. The first step in determining external alignment is to assess the fit between HR

deliverables and strategic performance drivers. Collect information from focus groups or

other cross sections of employees to determine the degree to which each deliverable

enables the appropriate driver. The focus should only be on the HR deliverables within

the strategy map.

6. The second step in determining external alignment is to measure the extent to which the

HR system produces the appropriate human performance required for the deliverables.

Again, data can be collected from focus groups, but the test comes from the experiences

and impressions of managers and employees outside HR. It does not matter that this

could be very subjective.

17

7. Strategic human focus is a function of three interrelated elements – skills, motivation, and

understanding of the link to strategy. These three elements must connect to the HR

system.

8. There are many interdependent factors within HR and between the HR system and the

firm’s strategy. Any adjustment can have unintended consequences. These can be

understood with what the authors call a Systems Alignment Map (SAM), which is a

higher form of measurement.

9. Although the Galileo method of measurement is too complex for this book review, this

strategy lets managers understand employees’ perceptions of alignment. The steps are:

identify the key strategic drivers, identify the key elements of the HR system expected to

enhance strategy implementation, and ask a representative sample of employees to

provide a list of paired “alignment” evaluations for all elements in the first two steps.

Regardless of individual misconceptions or biases, the aggregate will be balanced

through the correct use of those measurement techniques.

ROI: MODELS TO CONSIDER

To date there are no solid data or research indicating that an ROI model in global mobility

currently exists or is being used by multinationals. Whilst there is a growing body of

literature alluding to the importance of ROI, there are only two general HRM return-on-

investment models currently in circulation.

The first is the balanced scorecard developed by Kaplan and Norton (1992), which espouses

a performance measurement system linked to organisational strategy, and which some years

later was further developed into the “HR Scorecard” by Becker, Huselid and Ulrich (2001).

The second model is human performance benchmarking developed by Jac Fitz-enz, which

in later years has been developed into strategies for measuring ROI of human capital (Fitz-

enz 2000, 2002).

Neither of these models specifically relate to the measurement of ROI in expatriate

management although both clearly illustrate that ROI in international HR management is

not simply a financial transaction.

18

Both models clearly illustrate that the measurement of human performance and the value-

creation of human capital should be key components of any ROI model in HRM.

Model one: the HR balanced scorecard

The central concept behind the HR balanced scorecard is the realisation that HR’s strategic

potential lies within both tangible and intangible assets.

In other words, the measurement of ROI should include not only the financial transactions

that are readily available from the annual report (such as areas of profit and loss, PE ratios

and shareholder returns) but should also include the organization’s ability to retain a

committed and capable workforce who can sustain competitive advantage through

innovation and flexibility (Becker, Huselid and Ulrich 2001, p7).

One of the key components of this model is HR’s ability to apply different skills in the

measurement of intangible assets to those that would be used to measure tangible assets,

coupled with an acceptance that intangible assets can, and do, generate tangible (and

financially measurable) benefits (p8).

According to Becker et al, in general 35 percent of an investment analyst’s valuation model

is today made up of non-financial information, including variables such as “execution of

corporate strategy”, “management credibility”, “innovation”, and “research leadership”.

Whilst the concept of intangible assets does not originate from the Harvard Business School

(for example, see other research by Baruch Lev of the NYU/Stern Business School

investigating “Intangible Performance”), it is to date the most widely recognized and easily

applied model of its kind within the HRM field.

The measurement challenge faced with intangible assets is that traditional accounting

practices were not developed to capture and evaluate their value within the organization.

Intangible assets are not conventional assets; therefore, leveraging knowledge and investing

in human capital are not treated in the same way as money and equipment.

19

According to Becker et al, expenditure in the management of intangible assets is usually

seen as an expense rather than an investment, unlike buildings and machinery, which are

capitalized and depreciated.

The result is that organizations can, and often do, invest in physical assets rather than human

capital, in spite of the latter having the potential to generate more value, both financially and

strategically (p11). Thus the HR scorecard attempts to flip this strategy and instead focuses

on causation, links, competencies, matrices, metrics, and detailed cost-benefit analyses.

Model two: human performance benchmarking

The central concept behind human performance benchmarking is similar to the balanced

scorecard in that it recognizes that organisational wealth is leveraged from both tangible and

intangible assets.

The model differs in that it clearly defines the importance of both quantitative and

qualitative economics in ROI, but also develops clear and concise measurement ratios that

can be readily applied to the expatriate management scenario.

By comparison, the balanced scorecard tends to focus exclusively on a cost-benefit ratio.

Components of human performance benchmarking includes metrics such as Human Capital

Revenue Factor (HCRV), Human Economic Value Added (HEVA), Human Capital Cost

Factor (HCCF), Human Capital Value Added (HCVA), and Human Capital Return on

Investment (HCROI), to name a few.

The workability of this model lies in the ease with which non-financial components can be

integrated within traditional and conventional accounting practices.

For example, human capital expenses are comparable to revenue and expenses found on the

income statement, with the principal costs of human capital being

1. Pay and benefits for employees

2. Pay costs for contingents (non-employees, eg. temporary and contract staff),

3. The cost of absenteeism, and

20

The equations referred to earlier use one or more of these cost components to produce a

ratio indicating true returns on direct and indirect human capital expenditures (p37). The

result is workable ratios that add value within the financial statements because definite

relationships can be seen between human capital and productivity and profitability. In a

nutshell, the bottom line is affected.

So what should we measure?

As an ROI model in expatriate management does not currently exist, it is difficult to

ascertain what hard and soft issues are currently being measured and what should be

measured.

The hard issues in terms of “quantitative economics” such as labour and relocation costs

should be measured and are easily obtained from financial statements and annual reporting

procedures. According to Fitz-enz (2000) expatriate performance measures related to

increases in growth, profitability and market share should also be measured and can be

ascertained from performance reviews and income statements.

In terms of soft issues, the challenge is far greater in terms of justification for their inclusion

in an ROI model and how best to measure their benefit to the bottom line; this is largely due

to their intangible nature.

The case for the inclusion of repatriation and retention measures is supported by the

balanced scorecard model, which clearly illustrates that knowledge retention is a key factor

in continued organisational success. Similar acceptance is given to value-creation and brand

reputation, both of which can be strategically linked to financial performance measures

within traditional HRM functions.

THE EVOLVING PICTURE OF HR: From a professional to a strategic partner:

In the 1990s,a new emphasis on strategy and the importance of HR systems emerged.

Researchers and practioners alike began to recognize the impact of aligning those systems

21

with the company’s larger strategy implementation effort-and assessing the quality of that fit.

The following evolution of human resources as a strategic asset:

1. The personal perspective:

The firm hires and pays people but doesn’t focus on hiring the very best or

developing exceptional employees

2. The compensation perspective:

The firm uses bonuses, incentive pay and meaningful distinctions in pay to

reward high and low performers. This is a first step toward relying on people as a

source of competitive advantage, but it doesn’t fully exploit the benefits of HR as

a strategic asset.

3. The alignment perspective:

Senior managers see employees as strategic assets, but they don’t invest in

overhauling HR s capabilities. Therefore, the HR system can’t leverage

management’s perspective.

4. The high- performance perspective:

HR and other executives view HR as a system embedded within the larger

system of the firm’s strategy implementation. The firm manages and measures

the relationship between these two systems and firm performance.

HIGHLIGHTS OF HR SCORECARD:

Dr. T.V.Rao in his book the “HRD AUDIT” throws light on the HR Scorecard,

where he brings out the major functions of the measuring system, they are as follows:

If the HR function cannot show that it adds value, it risks being outsourced- he

argues to say that it denies an opportunity for the Company to utilize its human

capital and runs the risk of wasting potential of a critical function.

The differences in market value of any company are largely reflections of the

nature of intellectual potential it has.

22

HR s strategic potential hinges on the increasingly central role played by the

intangible asset and intellectual capital in today’s economy.

The intangible assets listed are

Execution of corporate strategy

Management

Quality of corporate strategy

Innovation

Ability to attract and retain talented people

Management expertise

The HR practices of high performing organizations differ substantially from those

of the low performing organizations, as they devote considerable more resources to

recruitment, training, and use teams to a grater extent.

A SEVEN STEP MODEL, FOR HR TO EVOLVE -AS A STRATEGIC PARTNER:

The seven-step model is an alignment of HR to its firm strategy, it emphasizes on certain

key areas where HR practices can evolve as a strategy to the firm itself. It includes the

following:

STEP 1: Clearly define business strategy -stating the firm’s goals in such a way that

employees understand their roles and the organization knows how to measure its success in

achieving them.

STEP 2: Build a business case for HR as a strategic asset-a clear business case for why

and how HR can support the business strategy.

STEP 3: Creating a strategy map –Clarifying the firms strategy lays the foundation for

enabling a HR strategy.

STEP 4: Identifying HR deliverables within the strategy map-HR deliverables or the

outcomes of the HR practices are mapped with the strategy to check its alignment to the

business.

23

STEP 5: Align the HR architecture with HR deliverables –the HR function should be in

place to realise their outcomes.

STEP 6: Designing the strategic HR measurement system-to check results, a model to

check HR outcomes.

STEP 7: Implement management by measurement – in implementing integrated

measurement systems.

This is the foundation or the road map to establish the measuring system like the HR

scorecard.

AN EXAMPLE OF HR SCORECARD AT HI- TECH (R&D) FUNCTION:

24

HIGH PERFORMANCE WORK SYSTEM

* Extent to which a validated competency model serves as the basis for hiring, developing, managing, and rewarding employees * Percentage of the workforce that is regularly assessed via a formal performance appraisal.

HR SYSTEMALIGNMENT

In R&D* Percentage of selection decisions based on competency model* Percentage of hires made at “elite” level.* Extent to which appropriate retention policies have been developed and implemented* HR Alignment index above 80 percentIn Manufacturing

* Recruiting cycle time at or below 14 days.* HR Alignment Index above 80 percent.

HR DELIVERABLES

* Percentage of employees who have the requisite technical competencies* Percentage of turnover among his performing R&D scientists*Percentage of open job requisition in manufacturing

IMPACT

Lower R&D cycle timeHR EFFICIENCY

* Cost per hire

2.2 COMPANY PROFILE

LA CROSS, unique solution provider unprecedented DATA PROCESS serving

organization in the global DATA PROCESS service. LA CROSS specializing and developing

the data processing service from micro to macro level client for various process and applications.

LA CROSS Technologies provides superior DATA PROCESS services for managing and

implementing of Management Systems, serving both the domestic and international sectors. LA

CROSS brings a fresh and innovative approach to DATA PROCESS services, acting as liaison

between the end-users.  Our service exceed the expectations of every client by offering

outstanding DATA PROCESS service, which increase flexibility, and greater value, thus

optimizing system functionality and improving operation efficiency.  Our service team members

are distinguished by their functional and technical expertise combined with their hands-on

experience, thereby ensuring that our clients receive the most effective and professional service.

Today, the company has vast experience in various DATA PROCESS, product

development and production service. Now LA CROSS have emerged as leader in global

personnel, with a wide range of skills in the ITES of intelligent DATA PROCESS applications-

as well as the development of customized service and process solutions for BPO-Non voice

service.

We have differentiated our process service to every individual client and we develop a

new process plan to enhance the client success and also our service, it has leaded us to long term

coordinal relationship with client. Whereas our innovative plans had accomplished the projects

success, from there implemented fully to utilize our professional service to be long-lasting in the

market. Our

Systemized process plan complies as 180o to 360o service, comparing to the normal

operating service ranges of -40 to +80 degrees in the industry.

MISSION & VISION

Our mission is to be a valuable “Partner” for the Data Processing Industry global. To

accomplish our Mission, our vision will perform and deliver the cost effective and

25

comprehensive solutions in the Data Processing and Data Management service of the global

needs.

Our major principles are:-

Providing Client satisfaction

Giving the highest possible service and support

Offering an excellent price/performance ratio

To maintain these principles LA CROSS employ highly trained technical personnel who

have experience in, or immediate access to, all areas of the information Technology industry.

SERVICE

LA CROSS decided to establish a new standard in the Data Process Service. Our experience

and knowledge are alienated the service’s for the client’s conveniences, since it helps to prove

our efficiency and capability in the project. The services of LA CROSS have its title and small

descriptions are stated below;

Data Entry Services

Data entry from Paper/Books with highest accuracy and fast turn around time (TAT)

Data entry from Image file in any format

Business Transaction Data entry like sales / purchase / payroll.

Data entry of E-Books / Electronic Books

Data Entry : Yellow Pages / White Pages Keying

Data Entry and compilation from Web site

Data Capture / Collection

Business Card Data Entry into any Format

26

Data Entry from hardcopy/Printed Material into text or required format

Data Entry into Software Program and application

Receipt and Bill Data Entry

Catalog Data Entry.

Data Entry for Mailing List/Mailing Label.

Manu scripting typing in to word

Taped Transcription in to word.

Copy, Paste, Editing, Sorting, Indexing Data into required format etc.

Data Conversion Services

Conversion of data across various databases on different platforms

Data Conversion via Input / Output for various media.

Data Conversion for databases, word processors, spreadsheets, and many other

standard and custom-made software packages as per requirement.

Conversion from Page maker to PDF format.

Conversion from Ms-Word to HTML format

Conversion from Text to Word Perfect.

Conversion from Text to Word to HTML and Acrobat

Convert Raw Data into required MS Office formats.

Text to PDF and PDF to Word / Text / Doc

Data Compilation in PDF from Several Sources.

27

E-Book Conversion etc.

Scanning, OCR with Editing & Indexing Services

High speed Image-Scanning and Data capture services

High speed large volume scanning

OCR Data From Scanned page / image Scan & OCR paper Book in to CD.

ADOBE PDF Conversion Services.

Conversion from paper or e-file to various formats

Internet / Online / Web Research

Internet Search, Product Research, Market Research, Survey, Analysis.

Web and Mailing list research etc.

28

Project Acquisition:

Once a project was undertaken for data entry and data processing, we survey the time to

spent, for the project. The survey will have all detailed questions regarding the technical terms,

and when the starting time and the ending time, Team Size, Tools Budget of the particular on the

project.

LA CROSS Project Objective:

The project required high degree of accuracy, as any omission of data would lead to

misinterpretation of results. Which LA CROSS will not allow, take place on the project.

LA CROSS Role:

LA CROSS will provide to the clients with the highest degree of accuracy and a

comprehensive report on the project. The accurate details on the project of the client are most

preferred clearly recorded. LA CROSS will provide the almost of highly qualified skill pool and

faster adoption of well-defined business processes lead to higher productivity gains without

compromising on quality.

Benefits:

The various benefits to the client were high accuracy of data and Data interpretation and

it saved considerable amount of time by the company in interpreting these data.

Clients

The extensive service portfolio as well as the exact industry specific solutions has resulted in a

high-degree of customer acceptance and satisfaction. The extensive know-how of our business

partners ensures that we can offer a solution which matches customer requirements. With this

joint know-how we are able to completely fulfill individual customer requirements.

29

CHAPTER - III

ANALYSIS

30

1.1 RESPONDENTS BY THEIR ORGANISATION

The table illustrates the distribution of respondents according to their organization

TABLE –1

Particulars No of respondents Percentage

TCS 41 68

VERIZON 10 17

FUTURE SOFT 4 7

LA CROSS 5 8

TOTAL 60 100

Vast majority of the respondents are from TCS (68%) and nearly one-fifth of the respondents are

from Verizon.The minimum number of respondents being from La Cross (8%) and Future soft

(7%).

The maximum number of respondents from TCS can be attributed to the larger number of HR

executives in the organization. It can also be inferred that the majority of the respondents are

from the software industry.

31

1.2. RESPONDENTS BY DEPARTMENT

Every organisation consists of a number of departments according to its function. Here the HR

department has specific function of recruitment.

TABLE 2

Particulars No of respondents Percentage

General HR 55 92

HR Recruitment 5 8

Total 60 100

The above table shows the respondents according to their department, on their perception of the

HR Scorecard.

Almost all of the respondents (92%) belong to the general HR department .A little less then one

–tenth of the respondents (8%)belong to the HR –Recruitment department.

The maximum number of respondents belonging to the general HR department can be attributed

to the respondents not specifying their department.

32

1.3. RESPONDENTS BY AGE

Age can be expressed in terms of years, which represents the age of existence of respondents.

TABLE 3

Particulars No of respondents Percentage

Below 25 yrs 34 57

Above 25 yrs 26 43

Total

60 100

The above table illustrates the distribution of respondents according to their age.

Majority of the respondents, (57%) are below 25 years of age and more than two –fifth of the

respondents (42%)above 25 years of age

The majority of the respondents (57%) being below 25 years can be attributed to the availability

of these respondents at the time of data collection.

33

1.4. RESPONDENTS BY DESIGNATION

It is the level given to the individual based on the education qualification, experience or both.

TABLE 4

ParticularsNo of respondents Percentage

Executive 39 65

Manager 21 35

Total

60 100

The above table demonstrates the distribution of respondents according to their designation.

Vast majority of the respondents are executives (65%) and a little more than one –third of the

respondents (35%)are Managers.

The number of respondents (65%)can be attributed to the availability of executives as

compared to managers (35%) at the time of data collection.

34

1.5. RESPONDENTS BY THEIR YEARS OF EXPERIENCE

Experience may be explained as a year of service that the person has put in an organisation or a

field. In this context the years of experience refers to years of service the respondent has put in

the organisation

TABLE- 5

ParticularsNo of respondents Percentage

Below 3 yrs 34 57

Above 3 yrs 26 43

Total

60 100

The above table demonstrates the respondents according to their years of experience, on their

perception of the HR Scorecard.

Almost majority of the respondents (57%) have a work experience of below three years and little

less than half of the respondents (43%) have a work experience of above 3 years.

Almost majority of the respondents (57%)belong to the category of having work experience of

below 3 years which can be attributed to the availability of respondents at the time of data

collection

35

2. HR DELIVERABLES THROUGH THE HR SCORECARD

2.0. RESPONDENTS OPINION ON HR DELIVERABLES

HR deliverables

HR deliverables are the different aspects given to the results of the HR function .The HR

deliverables through the scorecard can be understood by the HR understanding the strategies

used by HR for organisation success. The next aspect of the HR deliverables is the ability of the

HR department is to link the job performance to organisation success to assess the success of the

HR department. These aspects make the organisation perceive the HR department as a value

added service.

TABLE 6

* The values in the bracket represent the percentage

The above table illustrates the distribution of respondents on “HR deliverables being met

through the HR Scorecard ’’.

Understanding HR strategies through the scorecard

The scorecard helps in interpreting HR strategies through the scorecard to link it to organisations

strategy in quantifying the success of the HR department.

36

HR Deliverables Through

HR Score Card

Strongly

Agree

Agree DisagreeTotal

Understanding HR strategies 26

(43)

33

(55)

1

(2)

60

(100)

Linking job performance &

organization success

16

(27)

44

(73)

0 60

(100)

A value added service 18

(30)

40

(67)

2

(3)

60

(100)

Almost all the respondents (98%) agree to the statement that HR strategies can be understood

through the scorecard, out of which almost two-fifth strongly agree to the statement .

2.1 HR Scorecard linking job performance and organization success.

The scorecard helps in linking job performance of the individuals in organisations to the extent

of success or failure of the organisation.

Almost all the respondents (100%) agree to HR Scorecard linking job performance and

organization success, out of which a little more than one –fourth of the respondents

(27%)strongly agree to the statement.

2.2 HR department being perceived as a value added service in their organization

The HR scorecard makes the HR department measure intangibles and hence the organisation

perceives HR as a value added service.

Except a negligible amount of respondents less than one –tenth (3%) disagree to HR being a

value added service where as almost all respondents (97%) agree to the statement out of which

nearly one –third (30%) of respondents strongly agree to HR being perceived as a value added

service by the organisation.

The above table illustrates that the respondents agree that the HR deliverables is being met

through the HR Scorecard whereas only an insignificant number of respondents have disagreed

on the same. It can also be inferred that among the three HR deliverables the most favoured

deliverable is “HR Scorecard linking job performance and organization success ”. This can

be attributed to the framework of the HR Scorecard metrics that ensures HR deliverables at every

juncture in all HR processes.

37

3. STRATEGIC HR MEASUREMENT THROUGH THE HR SCORECARD

3.0. RESPONDENTS OPINION ON STRATEGIC HR MEASUREMENT

Strategic HR measurement

Strategic HR measurement is the significant aspect of the scorecard, which makes the HR

department a strategic partner in business. This can be understood through the three aspects of

HR linking itself to individual performance with compensation, by balancing financial and non-

financial rewards and HR ‘s contribution to the business.

TABLE –7

*The values in the bracket represent the percentage.

The above table illustrates the respondents opinion on “Strategic HR measurement being

linked through the HR Scorecard”.

3.1. HR Scorecard linking individual performance with compensation

Linking individual performance with compensation is the primary aspect of strategic HR

measurement where the employee’s performance is benchmarked with organisations success.

38

Strategic HR Measurement Strongly

Agree

Agree Disagree Strongly

Disagree

Total

Linking Individual performance

with compensation 18

(30)

41

(68)

1

(2)

0 60

100

Balancing financial measures

and non-financial rewards

24

(40)

34

(56)

1

(2)

1

(2)

60

100

The HR strategies measures HR

‘s contribution to the business

19

(31)

39

(65)

1

(2)

1

(2)

60

100

Almost all the respondents (96%) agree to HR Scorecard linking job performance with

compensation, out of which nearly one –third of the respondents (30%)strongly agree to the

statement and only negligible amount less than one –tenth of respondents (2%) disagree to HR

Scorecard linking job performance with compensation.

3.2. HR Scorecard balancing financial and non –financial rewards

The scorecard makes the HR department strategic to a great extent by balancing financial and

non-financial rewards; here the strategic measurement of HR is in replacing the traditional

methods of measurement with new value based forms of measurement for employees.

Almost all the respondents (96%) agree to HR Scorecard balancing financial and non –financial

rewards, out of which two –fifth of the respondents (40%)strongly agree to the statement and

only negligible amount less than one –tenth of respondents (4%) disagree to HR Scorecard

balancing financial and non –financial rewards.

3.3. HR Strategies drawn from the HR Scorecard measuring HR’s contribution to business.

HR’s contribution to business can be assessed through the HR strategies drawn by the scorecard

is linked to meet the business goals of the organisation.

Almost all the respondents (96%) agree to HR Strategies drawn from the HR Scorecard

measuring HR’s contribution to business, out of which more than one–fourth of the respondents

(31%)strongly agree to the statement and only negligible amount less than one –tenth of

respondents (4%) disagree to HR Strategies drawn from the HR Scorecard measuring HR’s

contribution to business.

From the above table it can be understood that respondents agree that the HR Scorecard makes

the HR department strategic by linking the HR strategies to the business as the number of

respondents who disagree on the same are negligible. Among the three factors for strategic HR

measurement the most favoured is the “HR Scorecard linking individual performance with

compensation”. This can be attributed to respondents considering HR as a strategic business

partner due its alignment with the organizations strategy.

39

4. HIGH PERFORMANCE WORK SYSTEM THROUGH THE HR SCORE CARD

4.0. RESPONDENTS OPINION ON HIGH PERFORMANCE WORK SYSTEM

High performance work system

The high performance work system is a significant attribute of the HR Scorecard where the

practice of a validated competency model is required to enhance the working of the HR

department in all aspects. The competency model is a framework that helps in validating the key

HR processes of recruitment and in defining roles for the organisation.

TABLE –8

High Performance

work system

No of

respondentsPercent

Strongly agree 16 26

Agree 42 70

Disagree 1 2

Strongly Disagree 1 2

TOTAL 60 100

The above table illustrates the distribution of respondent’s opinion on HR Scorecard adopting a

validated competency model for the HR function in their organisation

Except negligible amount of respondents less than one –tenth (4%) disagree on HR Scorecard

adopting a validated competency model for the HR function in their organisation, almost all

respondents (96%) agree out of which a little more than one –fourth of respondents (26%)

strongly agree on the HR Scorecard adopting a validated competency model for the HR function

in their organisation.

From the above table it can be understood that the respondents agree to the adoption of the

validated competency model to the HR function through the Scorecard as only an significant

number of respondents disagree on the same. This can be attributed to the nature of the

scorecard, which makes the HR function adopt a high performance work system in the

organisation.

40

5. HR SYSTEM ALIGNMENT THROUGH THE HR SCORECARD

5.0. RESPONDENTS OPINION ON HR SYSTEM ALIGNMENT

The HR system alignment is another component of the scorecard that aligns HR and its sub –

systems towards the organisations strategy. This creates a synergetic HR department where HR

deliverables are looped to organisations goals ensuring HR deliverability.

TABLE – 9

HR System

Alignment

Strongly

Agree

Agree Disagree Total

HR system with

organization

17

(28)

42

(70)

1

(2)

60

(100)

HR subsystems to the

organization

22

(37)

36

(60)

2

(3)

60

(100)

*The values in the bracket represent the percentage

The above table illustrates the respondent’s opinion on “HR System Alignment through the

HR Scorecard”

5.1. HR system alignment through the HR Scorecard

The alignment of the HR department towards business is done through the scorecard and the

system alignment leads to HR being able to be linked to business through the scorecard.

As far as HR systems alignment with organization is considered almost all respondents (98%)

agree that the system is aligned with the organization out of which a little more than one –fourth

(28%)of the respondents strongly agree to the alignment of HR towards its business through the

scorecard.

41

5.2. HR Scorecard aligning the HR subsystems to the organisation.

The HR Scorecard aligns the HR subsystem or the specific functions of the HR department to the

organisation goals to enable the deliverability of the HR services.

Almost all the respondents (97%) agree to, HR Scorecard aligning the HR subsystems to the

organisation, out of which more than one–third of the respondents (31%)strongly agree to the

statement

From the above table it can be understood that the respondents agree to the alignment of the HR

and its subsystems to the organisation through the scorecard as only a negligible amount of

respondents have disagreed. This can be attributed to the respondents experience in aligning the

HR department to the organisations strategy through the scorecard.

42

6. MEASURING HR EFFICIENCY THROUGH THE HR SCORECARD

6.0 RESPONDENTS OPINION ON MEASURING HR EFFICIENCY

HR efficiency –core versus strategic metric

The HR Scorecard is known for measuring the intangibles and creating value to the organisation.

This is made possible by measuring the two important aspects of the tangibles and the

intangibles. The ability to quantify the expenditures of the HR department falls under the

category of the tangibles that can be measured and the intangibles like measuring cycle time for

HR processes is a strategic metric which is also assessed through the scorecard.

TABLE -10

Measuring HR efficiencyStrongly

AgreeAgree Disagree

Strongly

DisagreeTotal

Quantifying the expenditures

incurred by the HR department

8

(13)

50

(83)

1

(2)

1

(2)

60

(100)

Measuring cycle time for HR

processes in the HR department

18

(30)

42

(70)

0 0 60

(100)

*The values in the bracket represent the percentage

The above table illustrates the distribution of respondent’s opinion on “Measuring HR

efficiency through the HR Scorecard’’.

6.1 HR Scorecard Quantifying the expenditures incurred by the HR department

The scorecard quantifies expenditures incurred by the HR department as a tangible asset and

hence HR efficiency is measured as a core HR metrics.

43

Almost all the respondents (96%) agree to, HR Scorecard Quantifying the expenditures incurred

by the HR department out of which little more than one–tenth (13.3%) of the respondents

strongly agree to the statement.

6.2 Measuring cycle time for HR processes in the HR department

This is the strategic metrics of the HR scorecard that measures the intangibles in the HR

department and hence creates value in the organisation.

All the respondents (100%) agree to, HR Scorecard measuring cycle time for HR processes in

the HR department out of which little more than one–fourth (30%) of the respondents strongly

agree to the statement.

From the above table it can be understood that the respondents agree on the HR scorecard

measuring HR quantitatively and as strategic HR measurement for HR process as only an

insignificant amount of respondents have disagreed on the same. Among the two aspects on

measuring HR efficiency, the favoured measure of efficiency is the HR Scorecard ‘s ability to

“Measuring cycle time for HR processes in the HR department.” This can be attributed to

the respondents practicing the strategic form of measurement in their organizations.

44

7. LEADING CHANGE THROUGH THE HR SCOREARD

7.0 RESPONDENTS OPINION ON LEADING CHANGE

Leading change

Leading change is the extent of which the HR initiative is implemented in the organisation,

through the scorecard. The scorecard facilitates the alignment of HR initiative to HR strategy,

through a leader who champions the initiative and a primary sponsor who implements the

initiative. It also focuses on, the various department heads recognizing these HR initiatives.

TABLE -11

*The values in the bracket represent the percentage.

The above table illustrates the respondent’s opinion on “HR initiatives implemented as leading

change in the organisation through the HR scorecard.”

45

Leading Change Strongly

Agree

AgreeDisagree

Total

Aligning HR initiatives to HR

strategy through the Scorecard

20

(33)

39

(65)

1

(2)

60

(100)

Facilitating a leader who owns

and champions the HR initiative

19

(32)

41

(68)

0 60

(100)

Facilitating a primary sponsor

in implementing these

initiatives

12

(20)

48

(80)

0 60

(100)

The departments recognizing

the HR initiatives through the

scorecard

16

(27)

44

(73)

0 60

100

7.1 Success of HR initiatives is in aligning the HR strategy with the organizations strategy.

The success of HR initiatives is in aligning the HR strategy with organisations strategy though

the structure of the scorecard that aligns the HR system and sub systems to the organisation.

Almost all the respondents (95%) agree to, success of HR initiatives in aligning the HR strategy

with the organizations strategy, out of which one–third (33%) of the respondents strongly agree

to the statement.

7.2 HR Scorecard facilitating a leader who champions the HR initiative

The scorecard facilitates a leader who champions the cause for implementing the HR initiatives

in the organisation.

All the respondents (100%) agree that, the HR Scorecard facilitates a leader who champions the

HR initiative out of which nearly one–third (31%) of the respondents strongly agree to the

statement.

7.3HR Scorecard facilitating a primary sponsor who owns and champions the HR initiative

The primary sponsor is the head HR who organizes a task force in implementing the initiative

through out the organisation.

All the respondents (100%) agree to, HR Scorecard facilitating a primary sponsor who owns and

champions the HR initiative, out of which one–fifth (20%) of the respondents strongly agree to

the statement. The ratios between agree and strongly agree being 4:1 respectively.

46

7.4 HR Scorecard encouraging department heads in recognizing HR initiatives in the

organisation.

The department heads in organisations form the next layer of support in implementing HR

initiatives in the organisation and the scorecard encourages them in realising the significance of

the initiatives in the organisation.

All the respondents (100%) agree that, the HR Scorecard encourages department heads in

recognizing HR initiatives in the organisation, out of which nearly more than one–fourth (26%)

of the respondents strongly agree to the statement.

From the above tables it can be understood that the respondents agree that the HR scorecard has

facilitated in bringing out a leading change in organisation through a specialized task force in

implementing HR initiatives, through the encouragement of the department heads in the

organisation. When the factors related to leading change are studied, it can be inferred that all

the three factors are favoured compared to the first factor which is the aspect of the “success of

HR initiatives is in aligning the HR strategy with the organizations strategy”. As the respondents

who disagreed or strongly disagreed are negligible it can be inferred that the scorecard

spearheads change through initiatives.

47

8. CREATING A SHARED NEED FOR CHANGE THROUGH THE HR SCORECARD

8.0 RESPONDENTS OPINION ON CREATING A SHARED NEED FOR CHANGE

Shared need for change

Any change should be shared to ensure that the change is implemented in the organisation. The

HR Scorecard facilitates a shared need to implement initiatives in the organisation by creating

awareness about the initiatives among employees and ensuring their co-operation in

implementing these HR initiatives.

TABLE –12

Shared Need for change Number of respondents Percentage

Strongly Agree 12 20

Agree 44 73

Strongly Disagree 4 7

TOTAL 60 100

The above table illustrates the respondent’s opinion on “Creating a Shared need for change

through the HR Scorecard”.

Almost all the respondents (93%) agree to, creating a Shared need for change through the HR

Scorecard, out of which one–fifth of the of the respondents (20%) strongly agree to the

statement.

From the above table it can be understood that the respondents agree to the Scorecard creating

awareness among employees about the HR initiatives in the organisation as only an insignificant

number of respondents have disagreed on creating a shared need for change. This can be

attributed to the nature of the respondents in actually implementing these initiatives in the

organisation by creating awareness to employees about HR initiatives and its significance in the

organisation.

48

9. THE HR SCORECARD SHAPING A VISION FOR THE ORGANISATION

9.0 RESPONDENTS OPINION ON SHAPING A VISION

Shaping a vision

The vision for an HR Scorecard defines the desired outcomes of the scorecard, states what will

be measured, these desired outcomes are to make informed HR investment choices, to

accomplish business goals though HR thus shaping a vision for the organisation.

TABLE -13

Shaping a vision Number of respondents Percentage

Strongly Agree 16 26

Agree 30 50

Disagree 13 22

Strongly Disagree 1 2

TOTAL 60 100

The above table illustrates the respondent’s opinion on “Shaping a vision for the organisation

through the HR Scorecard”

A little more than three –fourth of the respondents (76%)agree that the HR Scorecard shapes a

vision for the organisation, out of which more than one fourth of respondents (26%)strongly

agree .It is also interesting to note that nearly one –fifth of the respondents (20%)disagree to the

statement.

From the above table it can be understood that the respondents agree to the Scorecard shaping a

vision for the organisation as only an insignificant number of respondents have disagreed. This

can be comprehended as the respondents differ in their opinion of the HR Scorecard not being

the only way to shape the vision of the organisation.

49

10. MOBILISING COMMITMENT THROUGH THE HR SCORECARD

10.0 RESPONDENTS OPINION ON MOBILISING COMMITMENT

HR Scorecard mobilizing commitment for implementing HR initiatives by forming a

coalition of support in the organisation .

Change is more effective when those affected by the change are committed to it. Commitment

comes when these individuals have information about the changing process, participates in

shaping the process and behaves as if they are committed. HR Scorecards require commitment

from both line managers and HR professionals.

TABLE- 14

Mobilizing Commitment Number of respondents Percentage

Strongly Agree 6 10

Agree 47 78

Disagree 7 12

TOTAL 60 100

The above table illustrates the respondent’s opinion on “HR Scorecard mobilizing

commitment for implementing HR initiative ”

Most of the respondents (88%) have agreed on the HR Scorecard creating a shared,

concentrated effort in implementing initiatives in the organisation out of which one- tenth of the

respondents (10%) have strongly agreed on the statement. It is very interesting to note that nearly

one –fifth of respondents (11.7%) disagree to the scorecard mobilizing commitment.

From the above table it can be understood that the respondents agree to the Scorecard mobilizing

a support team for implementing these initiatives the organisation as only a negligible amount of

respondents have disagreed on the same. This can be attributed to the respondents’ role in

mobilizing support for the implementation of these initiatives in their organisation.

50

11. BUILDING ENABLING SYSTEMS THROUGH THE HR SCORECARD

11.0. RESPONDENTS OPINION ON BUILDING ENABLING SYSTEMS

HR Scorecard building enabling systems to sustain the change in the HR system.

Change is more likely to happen when a company makes the financial, technological and HR

investments required to support the change. It also means that the results of the scorecard need to

be communicated widely throughout the business and it also means helping to communicate the

firm’s strategy map to the work force.

TABLE- 15

Building Enabling

Systems

Number of respondents Percentage

Strongly Agree 6 10

Agree 49 82

Disagree 5 8

TOTAL 60 100

The above table illustrates the respondent’s opinion on “HR Scorecard building enabling

systems to sustain the change in the HR system.’’

Almost all respondents (92%) have agreed on the HR Scorecard building-enabling systems to

sustain the change introduced by the initiatives in the HR System out of which One- tenth of the

respondents (10%) have strongly agreed on the statement

From the above table it can be understood that respondents agree to the HR scorecard creating or

building an enabling system to sustain and cope with the changes that comes from the initiative

as only an inconsequential amount of respondents disagree on the same. This can be attributed to

the effort of the respondents in their organizations in building support for these HR initiatives.

51

12. MONITORING AND DEMONSTRATING PROGRESS THROUGH THE HR

SCORECARD

12.0. RESPONDENTS OPINION ON MAPPING PROGRESS OF THE INITIATIVE

Monitoring and demonstrating progress through the HR Scorecard

Change is more likely to happen when a firm monitors progress toward the change. Monitoring

the progress at each stage of implementing the initiatives ensures the progress of the initiative.

This process leads to benchmarking of progress on two aspects, on the results of the initiative

and on implementing these initiatives.

TABLE -16

*The values in the bracket represent the percentage

The above table illustrates the respondent’s opinion on “Monitoring and demonstrating

progress through the HR Scorecard”

52

Monitoring & demonstrating

Progress

Strongly

Agree

Agree Disagree Total

HR team benchmarking

progress team on the results of

the HR initiative

11

(18)

48

(80)

1

(2)

60

100

HR team benchmarking

progress on implementing

the initiative

15

(25)

45

(75)

0 60

100

12.1. HR team benchmarking progress team on the results of the HR initiative

The HR team benchmarking progress on the results of the initiative is to understand the progress

of the initiative in terms of the success of the initiative in line with the organizations goals.

Almost all respondents (98%) have agreed on the HR team benchmarking progress team on the

results of the HR initiative out of which a little more than one- tenth of the respondents (18%)

have strongly agreed on the statement.

12.2. HR team benchmarking progress on implementing the initiative

The HR team benchmarking progress on implementing initiatives monitors progress in terms of

the effectiveness of the initiative and the extent of implementing the initiative.

All respondents (98%) have agreed on the HR team benchmarking progress on implementing

the initiative, out of which a little more than one- fourth of the respondents (25%) have strongly

agreed on the statement.

From the above table it can be understood that the respondents agree to the Scorecard monitoring

and demonstrating progress on the results of HR initiative and the implementation of the

initiative as none of the respondents have disagreed on the same. It can be inferred that out of the

two initiatives “HR team benchmarking progress on implementing the initiative ’’ has

been favoured by the majority. It can be attributed to the respondents’ effort in effectively

evaluating initiatives in their organisation.

53

13. MAKING THE CHANGE LAST THROUGH THE HR SCORECARD

13.0. RESPONDENTS OPINION ON MAKING THE CHANGE LAST

HR initiatives sustaining because of the HR Scorecard

Change is more likely to happen when a change effort garners early success builds in continuous

learning about what is working and what is not, adapts to changing conditions, celebrates

progress, and can be integrated with other work. Ensuring early successes of the initiative,

integrating the initiative of the scorecard with all dimensions are all methods of making these

initiative last in the organisation.

TABLE -17

Making the change

last

Number of

respondents

Percentage

Strongly Agree 10 17

Agree 41 68

Disagree 9 15

TOTAL 60 100

The above table illustrates the respondent’s opinion on “Making the change last through the

score card”

Most of the respondents (85%) have agreed on the making the change last through the scorecard

out of which a little more than one –tenth of the respondents (16.7%) strongly agree to the

statement.

From the above table it can be understood that the respondents agree to the HR Scorecard

making the initiative last through the HR Scorecard where as none of the respondents have

disagreed on the same. This can be attributed to HR initiatives lasting by their efforts in the

organisation.

54

14. RESPONDENTS OPINION ON THE EXTENT TO WHICH HR INITIATIVES

HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED

The HR initiatives have to be studied to understand the extent of application of the initiatives in

organisations. For this purpose commonly listed HR initiatives were and Were marked to assess

the extent of implementing these initiatives in organisations

TABLE –18

INITIATIVESVERY

LOWLOW HIGH

VERY

HIGHTOTAL

Improving delivery of HR services 2

(3)

17

(29)

40

(66)

1

(2)

60

100

Improving adaptability of the business to

new opportunities

0 16

(27)

43

(71)

1

(2)

60

100

Facilitating organization change 1

(2)

13

(21)

45

(75)

1

(2)

60

100

Improving employee engagement 0 17

(28)

35

(59)

8

(13)

60

100

Competency based recruitment 0 18

(30)

33

(55)

9

(15)

60

100

Employer branding initiative 2

(3)

13

(22)

40

(66)

5

(9)

60

100

Diversity initiative program 1

(2)

16

(27)

41

(68)

2

(3)

60

100

Organization Communication 1

(2)

17

(28)

38

(63)

4

(7)

60

100

Aligning learning strategies with business

goals

23

(38)

33

(55)

0 4

(7)

60

100

Improving the efficiency of training

operations

0 19

(32)

39

(65)

2

(3)

60

100

55

Enhancing work life balance 0 18

(30)

38

(63)

4

(7)

60

100

Reducing cycle time for HR processes 0 11

(18)

40

(67)

9

(15)

60

100

Creating awareness on appraisal 0 13

(21)

43

(72)

4

(7)

60

100

Bench marking against using PCMM/ISO 0 16

(26)

37

(62)

7

(12)

60

100

Conducting employee satisfaction survey 0 17

(28)

36

(60)

7

(12)

60

100

*The values in the bracket represent the percentage

The above table illustrates the respondents’ opinion on the extent of HR initiatives deployed

in their organisation.

14.1. Improving delivery of HR services

The HR initiative on improving delivery of HR services is significant as it is the most common

out-come of the HR Scorecard

Nearly three-fourths of the respondents (66%)are of the opinion that this initiative is high where

as an inconsequential number of respondents a little less than one-third (28.3%) of the

respondents are of the opinion that this initiative is low.

14.2. Improving adaptability of the business to new opportunities

This HR initiative signifies the extent of flexibility the HR team has with respect to new business

opportunities with regard to mergers, acqustions or any other technological change in the

organisation.

Nearly three-fifth of the respondents (68%) are of the opinion that improving adaptability of the

business to new opportunities is high where as a negligible amount of respondents a little less

56

than one-third (32%) of the respondents are of the opinion that the initiative is low in their

oraganisations.

14.3. Facilitating organization change

The HR initiative in spear heading organisation change is the outcome of implementation of any

initiative that brings out change in the organisation and makes a lasting impression on the

organisation.

Almost three –fourth of the respondents (73%) are of the opinion that facilitating organization

change initiative is high where as an insignificant number of respondents a little less than one-

fourth of the respondents (27%) feel that the initiative is low in their organizations.

14.4. Improving employee engagement

The HR initiative on Employee engagement is common practice in HR Teams in organisations to

increase levels of motivation thereby creating value to the organisation.

Almost three- fourth (71%) are of the opinion that improving employee engagement initiative is

high where as a little less than one-third of the respondents (29%) are of the opinion that

initiative is low in the organizations.

14.5. Competency based recruitment

This HR initiative is related to the practice of a validated competency model, which ensures the

right fit to the organisation.

Almost three- fourth of the respondents (70%) are of the competency based recruitment opinion

that this initiative is high and a little less than one-third of the respondents (30%) are of the

opinion that the initiative is low in organisations.

57

14.6. Employer branding initiative

The employer branding initiative is the HR initiative that shapes the face of the organisation to

attract fresh talent in organisations.

More than three- fourth of the respondents (76%) are of the opinion that Employer branding

initiative this initiative is high and a little less than one-fourth of the respondents (21.7%) are of

the opinion that the initiative is low in organisations.

14.7. Diversity initiative program

In the globalised era the diversity initiative is significant as the role of HR is to integrate the

people into the organisation during mergers and acquisition.

Nearly three – fourths of the respondents (71%) are of the opinion that diversity initiative

program this initiative is high where as a little less than one-third of the respondents (29%) are of

the opinion that the initiative is low in organisations.

14.8. Organization Communication

The HR initiative in enhancing organisation communication enhances the knowledge sharing

process in the organisation.

Nearly a three –fourth of the respondents (70%) are of the opinion organization Communication

that this initiative is high where as a little less than one-third of the respondents (30%) are of the

opinion that the initiative is low in organization.

14.9. Aligning learning strategies with business goals

The HR initiative in aligning learning strategies with business goals is to ensure holistic

organisation growth.

58

It is interesting to note that almost all (93%) is considered aligning learning strategies to business

goals as an initiative that is low compared to less than one –tenth (7%)who have considered it to

be high in their organisations.

14.10. Improving the efficiency of training operations

This HR initiative ensures the deliverability of the HR department as it measures the out –come

of the HR process thereby adding value to the organisation.

A vast majority of the respondents (68%) are of the opinion that improving the efficiency of

training operations initiative is high where as a little less than one-third of the respondents

(32%) are of the opinion that initiative is low in their organisations.

14.11. Enhancing work life balance initiative

Enhancing work –life balance is a HR initiative to strike a balance between the two quadrants of

life that need equal amount of importance in today’s organisation.

Almost three-fourth of the respondents (70%) are of the opinion that enhancing work life

balance initiative is high where as a little less than one-third of the respondents (30%) are of

the opinion that this initiative is low in their organisations.

14.12. Reducing cycle time for HR processes

This strategic HR initiative enhances the quality of the HR department leading to business

excellence.

Most of the respondents (82%) are of the opinion that reducing cycle time for HR processes

initiative is high where as one-fifth of the respondents (18%) are of the opinion that the initiative

is low in their organisations.

59

14.13. Bench marking against using PCMM/ISO

The initiative in bench – marking against quality frame works would enhance HR ‘s role in the

business.

Almost three –fourth (74%) of the respondents are of the opinion that bench marking against

using PCMM/ISO initiative is high where as a little less than one-fourth of the respondents

(26%) are of the opinion initiative is low in their organisations.

14.14. Conducting employee satisfaction survey

The HR initiative in conducting employee satisfaction survey is to assess the needs of employees

at regular intervals in organisations and take corrective action accordingly.

Almost three –fourth (72%) of the respondents are of the opinion that conducting employee

satisfaction survey initiative is high where as a little less than one-third of the respondents (28%)

are of the opinion that initiative is low in their organisations.

From the above table it can be inferred that out of the fifteen HR initiative that is high according

to most of the respondents (82%) is “Reducing cycle time for HR processes’’ where as the HR

initiative that has been ranked as low by almost all respondents (93%) is “Aligning learning

strategies with business goals.”

This can be attributed to the respondents’ opinion on the HR initiative reducing cycle time for

HR processes as it adds value to the HR department in organisations and measures the

intangibles making HR a strategic partner in business. The initiative on aligning learning

strategies with business goals takes the lowest place as the respondents’ opinion on the initiative

not being responsible for growth strategies in organisations.

60

15. RESPONDENTS OPINION ON EXTENT OF IMPLEMENTING HR INITIATIVES

IN ORGANISATIONS

The HR initiatives were taken to measure the extent to which it was implemented in

organizations. For this purpose fifteen commonly practiced initiatives (please refer

table 18) for were listed and respondents were asked to mark the extent of implementing these

initiatives in their organisation. The extent of implementing these initiatives were studied to

understand the level of HR initiatives practiced in the organisation.

TABLE –19

Extent of implementing

initiativesNumber of Respondents Percentage

HIGH 18 30

LOW 42 70

TOTAL 60 100

The above table elucidates the distribution of respondents on their opinion on the extent

implementing HR initiatives in organisations.

A little less than half of the respondents (70%)are of the opinion that the HR initiatives are low

in their organisations and nearly one –third of the respondents (30%) are of the opinion that the

HR initiatives because of the HR Scorecard are high

The overall opinion of the respondents is that the extent of implementing HR initiatives are low

in organisations. This can be attributed to the respondents not being able to drive these initiatives

and the lack of support for the initiatives through out the organization

61

16. ORGANISATION VS HR INITIATIVES

The purpose of this cross tabulation is to find out to what extent HR initiatives have been

implemented in organisations.

TABLE- 20

Organisation HR Initiatives

TotalHigh Low

TCS 3

(7)

38

(93)

41

(100)

VERIZON 10

(100)

- 10

(100)

FUTURE SOFT - 4

(100)

4

(100)

LA CROSS 5

(100)

- 5

(100)

TOTAL

18

(30)

42

(70)

60

(100)

*The values in the bracket represent the percentage

The above table elucidates the respondents according to the company and their opinion on

the extent of implementing HR initiatives because of the HR scorecard.

Almost all the respondents (93%) from TCS are of the opinion that the initiatives are low in

their organisations and one –tenth (7%)are of the opinion that the initiatives are high

It is very interesting to note that all respondents from Verizon and La Cross (100%) are of the

opinion that the HR initiatives are high in the organisation.

62

It is also very interesting to note that all the respondents (100%)from Future soft are of the

opinion that the HR initiatives driven by the scorecard are low in the organisation.

From the above table it can be inferred that almost all the respondents (93%) from TCS are of the

opinion that the initiatives are low where as nearly all respondents from La Cross and Verizon

(100%) are of the opinion that the HR initiatives are high in their organisations.

17. AGE VS HR INITIATIVES

The purpose of this cross tabulation is to find out if age of the respondents influence extent of

implementing HR initiatives.

TABLE –21

Age HR Initiatives

TotalHigh Low

Below 25 yrs 9

(27)

25

(73)

34

(100)

Above 25 yrs 9

(34)

15

(66)

24

(100)

TOTAL

18

(30)

42

(70)

60

(100)

*The values in the bracket represent the percentage

Calculated Chi Square value is 1.702

The degree of freedom is 1

The above table elucidates the respondents according to their age and their opinion on the

extent of implementing HR initiatives because of the HR scorecard.

63

Three –fourth of the respondents (73 %) below twenty-five years are of the opinion that the

initiatives are low and nearly one –fourth (26%)are of the opinion that the initiatives are high in

their organisations.

A vast majority of the respondents (62%) above twenty-five years are of the opinion that the

initiatives are low and nearly two-fifth (37.5%)are of the opinion that the initiatives are high in

their organisations.

From the above table it can be understood that the respondents below twenty –five years of age

nearly three-fourth of the respondents (73.5%) are of the opinion that initiatives are low where as

respondents above twenty-five years nearly two-fifth (37.5%)are of the opinion that the

initiatives are high.

18. EXPERIENCE VS HR INITIATIVE

The purpose of this cross tabulation is to find out if the years of experience of respondents

influence on the extent of implementing HR initiatives.

TABLE –22

*The values in the bracket represent the percentage

64

Age HR Initiatives

TotalHigh Low

Below 3 yrs 11

(38)

18

(62)

29

(100)

Above 3 yrs 7

(27)

24

(92)

31

(100)

TOTAL

18

(30)

42

(70)

60

(100)

Calculated Chi Square value is 0.772

The degree of freedom is 1

The above table elucidates the respondents according to their years of experience and their

opinion on the extent of implementing HR initiatives because of the HR scorecard.

Among the respondents below three years of experience a vast majority of the respondents

(62%)are of the opinion that the initiatives are low and remaining one –third (38%)are of the

opinion that the initiatives are high in their organisations .

At the same time a little more than three –fourth of the respondents (77%) above three years are

of the opinion that the initiatives are low and nearly a little more than one–fourth (23%)are of the

opinion that the initiatives are high in their organisations.

From the above table it can be understood that high level of low - level of initiatives are felt by

respondents above three years of experience and low level of high level initiatives are felt by

respondents below three years of experience.

The above table also shows that since the calculated chi-value is less than tabulated chi-value

there is no statistical significance between years of experience and the extent of implementing

HR initiatives. Hence it can be understood that years of experience does not influence the

respondents’ opinion on extent of implementing HR initiatives.

65

19. DESIGNATION VS HR INITIATIVES

The purpose of this cross tabulation is find out if there is influence of designation of respondents

on the extent of implementing HR initiatives.

TABLE –23

DesignationHR Initiatives

TotalHigh Low

EXECUTIVE 14

(36)

25

(64)

39

(100)

MANAGER 4

(22)

17

(40)

21

(100)

TOTAL 18

(30)

42

(70)

60

(100)

*The values in the bracket represent the percentage

Calculated Chi Square value is 1.13 with Yates Correction.

The degree of freedom is 1

The above table elucidates the respondents according to their designation and their opinion

on the extent of implementing HR initiatives because of the HR scorecard.

Nearly a vast majority of the executives (64%)are of the opinion that the initiatives are low and a

little more than one –third (36%) executives are of the opinion that the initiatives are high.

Among managers most of the respondents (82%)are of the opinion that the initiatives are low

and the remaining one–fifth (17.6%) of the managers are of the opinion that the initiatives are

high in their organisations.

66

From the above table it can be understood that high level of low - level of initiatives are felt by

executives and low level of high level initiatives are felt by managers in their organisations.

The above table also shows that since the calculated chi-value is less than tabulated chi-value

there is no statistical significance between designation and the extent of implementing HR

initiatives. Hence it can be understood that designation does not influence the respondents’

opinion on extent of implementing HR initiatives.

67

19. DEPARTMENT VS HR INITIATIVES

The purpose of this cross tabulation is find out if there is an influence over the department of the

respondents and extent of implementing HR initiatives.

TABLE –24

DepartmentHR Initiatives

TotalHigh Low

GENERAL

HR

16

(29)

39

(70)

55

(100)

HR-REC2

(20)

5

(80)

5

(100)

TOTAL18

(30)

42

(70)

60

(100)

*The values in the bracket represent the percentage

The above table elucidates the respondents according to their department and their opinion

on the extent of implementing HR initiatives because of the HR scorecard.

Nearly three –fourth of the general HR department (70%)are of the opinion that the initiatives

are low and a little less than one –third (29%) of the general HR department are of the opinion

that the initiatives are high

Most of the respondents of the HR –recruitment department (80%)are of the opinion that the

initiatives are low and one–fifth (20%) of the respondents are of the opinion that the initiatives

are high.

68

Most of the respondents of the HR – recruitment department (80%)are of the opinion that the

initiatives are low and nearly one –third (29%) of the general HR department are of the opinion

that the initiatives are high.

20. OVERALL RANKING OF THE HR INITIATIVES IN ORGANISATIONS BY

RESPONDENTS

The HR initiatives have been ranked by the respondents to understand the HR initiatives that are

important in organisations with respect to their order of priority. The total scores indicate

individual scores of these initiatives on which it has been ranked accordingly. The ranks have

been categorized into three categories of priority (first order of priority, the second order of

priority and the last order of priority) that indicate the level of significance it has in organisations

according to the respondents.

69

TABLE -25

70

INITIATIVES RANKTOTAL

SCORES

Improving delivery of HR services 2 637

Improving adaptability of the business to new opportunities 1 930

Facilitating organization change 7 501

Improving employee engagement 4 546

Competency based recruitment 3 590

Employer branding initiative 8 471

Diversity initiative program 9 439

Organization Communication 14 380

Aligning learning strategies with business goals 5 541

Improving the efficiency of training operations 13 390

Enhancing work life balance 15 297

Reducing cycle time for HR processes 6 525

Creating awareness on appraisal 12 407

Bench marking against using PCMM/ISO 11 445

Conducting employee satisfaction survey 10 456

The above table elucidates the respondents ranking of the HR initiatives in the order of priority

from 1 to 15 as a result of HR Scorecard deployment in their organizations.

The HR initiatives that ranks in the first order of priority are

1. Improving adaptability of the business to new opportunities

2. Improving delivery of HR services

3. Competency based recruitment

4. Improving employee engagement

5. Aligning learning strategies with business goals

The HR initiatives that ranks in the second order of priority are

6. Reducing cycle time for HR processes

7. Facilitating organization change

8. Employer branding initiative

9. Diversity initiative program

10. Conducting employee satisfaction survey

The HR initiatives that ranks in the last order of priority are

71

2

1

711

3

89

14

5

13

15

6

1210

4

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000Improving deliveryof HR services

Improvingadaptability of thebusiness to newopportunities

Facilitatingorganizationchange

Bench markingagainst usingPCMM/ISO

Competency basedrecruitment

Employer brandinginitiative

RANKS

11. Bench marking against using PCMM/ISO

12. Creating awareness on appraisal

13. Improving the efficiency of training operations

14. Organization Communications

15. Enhancing work life balance

From the above table it can be inferred that the HR initiative ranked in the order of priority as

the first rank is the initiative in improving adaptability of the business to new opportunities.

The HR initiative that ranks the lowest the fifteenth in the order of priority is the Enhancing

work life balance initiative. This can be attributed to the respondents’ opinion on the general

trends in the booming industry where focus is given to achieving business objectives over

personal goals.

OVERALL RANKING OF HR INITIATIVES

72

73

CHAPTER –IV

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

74

4.1 FINDINGS

The maximum number of respondents from TCS can be attributed to the larger number of

HR executives in the organization. It can also be inferred that the majority of the

respondents are from the software industry. The maximum number of respondents

belonging to the general HR department can be attributed to the respondents not

specifying their department.

The majority of the respondents (57%) being below 25 years can be attributed to the

availability of these respondents at the time of data collection.

The number of respondents (65%)can be attributed to the availability of executives as

compared to managers (35%) at the time of data collection.

All the respondents (100%) were found to be post graduates, in MBA and MSW

specilising in HR.

Almost majority of the respondents (57%)belong to the category of having work

experience of below 3 years which can be attributed to the availability of respondents at

the time of data collection

HR DELIVERABLES

Nearly all respondents (98%) agree that the HR deliverables is being met through the HR

Scorecard whereas only an insignificant number of respondents have disagreed on

the same.

It can also be inferred that among the three HR deliverables the most favoured

deliverable is “HR Scorecard linking job performance and organization success

”. This can be attributed to the framework of the HR Scorecard metrics that ensures

HR deliverables at every juncture in all HR processes.

75

STRATEGIC HR MEASUREMENT

Almost all respondents (96%) agree that the HR Scorecard makes the HR department

strategic by linking the HR strategies to the business as the number of respondents who

disagree on the same are negligible .

Among the three factors for strategic HR measurement the most favoured is the “HR

Scorecard linking individual performance with compensation”. This can be attributed

to respondents considering HR as a strategic business partner due its alignment with the

organizations strategy.

HIGH PERFORMANCE WORK SYSTEM

Nearly all respondents (96%) agree to the adoption of the validated competency model

to the HR function through the Scorecard as only a significant number of respondents

disagree on the same.

This can be attributed to the nature of the scorecard, which makes the HR function adopt

a high performance work system in the organisation.

HR SYSTEM ALIGNMENT

Almost all the respondents (98%) agree to the alignment of the HR and its subsystems to

the organisation through the scorecard.

Only a negligible amount of respondents have disagreed on the same.

This can be attributed to the respondents experience in aligning the HR department to the

organisations strategy through the scorecard.

76

MEASURING HR EFFICIENCY –CORE VERSUS STRATEGIC METRIC

All respondents (100%) agree on the HR scorecard measuring HR quantitatively and as

strategic HR measurement for HR process as only an insignificant amount of respondents

have disagreed on the same.

Among the two aspects on measuring HR efficiency, the favoured measure of efficiency

is the HR Scorecard ‘s ability to “Measuring cycle time for HR processes in the HR

department.”

This can be attributed to the respondents practicing the strategic form of measurement in

their organizations.

LEADING CHANGE

All the respondents (100%) agree that the HR scorecard has facilitated in bringing out a

leading change in organisation through a specialized task force in implementing HR

initiatives, through the encouragement of the department heads in the organisation.

When the factors related to leading change are studied, it can be inferred that all the

three factors are favoured compared to the first factor that is the aspect of the

“success of HR initiatives is in aligning the HR strategy with the organizations

strategy”.

As the respondents who disagreed or strongly disagreed are negligible it can be inferred

that the scorecard spearheads change through initiatives.

A SHARED NEED FOR CHANGE

Almost all the respondents (93%) agree to the Scorecard creating awareness among

employees about the HR initiatives in the organisation.

77

Only an insignificant number of respondents have disagreed on creating a shared need for

change.

This can be attributed to the nature of the respondents in actually implementing these

initiatives in the organisation by creating awareness to employees about HR initiatives

and its significance in the organisation.

SHAPING A VISION

Almost more than three-fourth (76%)the respondents agree to the Scorecard shaping a

vision for the organisation

Only an insignificant number of respondents have disagreed.

This can be comprehended as the respondents differ in their opinion of the HR Scorecard

not being the only way to shape the vision of the organisation.

MOBILISING COMMITMENT

Most of the respondents (88%)that the respondents agree to the Scorecard mobilizing a

support team for implementing these initiatives the organisation

Only a negligible amount of respondents have disagreed on the same.

This can be attributed to the respondents’ role in mobilizing support for the

implementation of these initiatives in their organisation.

BUILDING ENABLING SYSTEMS

Almost all the respondents (92%)agree to the HR scorecard creating or building an

enabling system to sustain and cope with the changes that comes from the initiative.

78

Only an inconsequential amount of respondents disagree on the same.

This can be attributed to the effort of the respondents in their organizations in building

support for these HR initiatives.

MONITORING AND DEMONSTRATING PROGRESS

Nearly all respondents (98%) agree to the Scorecard monitoring and demonstrating

progress on the results of HR initiative and the implementation of the initiative.

None of the respondents have disagreed on the same.

It can be inferred that out of the two initiatives “HR team benchmarking progress on

implementing the initiative ’’ has been favoured by the majority. It can be attributed to

the respondents’ effort in effectively evaluating initiatives in their organisation.

MAKING THE CHANGE LAST

Most of the respondents (85%) agree to the HR Scorecard making the initiative last

through the HR Scorecard where as

None of the respondents have disagreed on the same.

This can be attributed to HR initiatives lasting by their efforts in the organisation.

IMPLEMENTING HR INITIATIVES IN ORGANISATIONS

Out of the fifteen HR initiatives, the extent to which these are implemented as, high

according to most of the respondents (82%) is “Reducing cycle time for HR

processes’’

79

The HR initiative that has been ranked as low by almost all respondents (93%) is

“Aligning learning strategies with business goals.”

This can be attributed to the respondents’ opinion on the HR initiative reducing cycle

time for HR processes as it adds value to the HR department in organisations and

measures the intangibles making HR a strategic partner in business.

The initiative on aligning learning strategies with business goals takes the lowest place as

the respondents’ opinion on the initiative not being responsible for growth strategies in

organisations

The overall opinions of the respondents on the extent of implementing HR initiatives are

low in organisations. This can be attributed to the respondents not being able to drive

these initiatives and the lack of support for the initiatives through out the organization

ORGANISATION VS HR INITIATIVES

Almost all the respondents (93%) from TCS are of the opinion that the initiatives are low.

Nearly all respondents from LA Cross and Verizon (100%) are of the opinion that the HR

initiatives are high in their organizations.

AGE VS HR INITIATIVES

The respondents below twenty –five years of age nearly three-fourth of the respondents

(73.5%) are of the opinion that initiatives are low.

As respondents above twenty-five years nearly two-fifth (37.5%)are of the opinion that

the initiatives are high.

The calculated chi-value is less than tabulated chi-value there is no statistical significance

between age and the extent of implementing HR initiatives. Hence it can be understood

80

that age does not influence the respondents’ opinion on extent of implementing HR

initiatives.

EXPERIENCE VS HR INITIATIVE

High level of low - level of initiatives are felt by respondents above three years of

experience in their organisations.

Respondents below three years of experience feel low levels of high-level initiatives in

their organisations.

The calculated chi-value is less than tabulated chi-value there is no statistical significance

between years of experience and the extent of implementing HR initiatives. Hence it can

be understood that years of experience does not influence the respondents’ opinion on

extent of implementing HR initiatives.

EDUCATIONAL QUALFICATION VS HR INITIATIVE

As all respondents are post –graduates in MBA and MSW specializing in HR from their

organizations and do not influence extent of implementation of HR initiative.

DESIGNATION VS HR INITIATIVES

Executives feel high managers in their organisations feel levels of low - level of

initiatives are practiced in their organisations.

Managers feel that low levels of high-level initiatives are practiced in their organisations.

Calculated chi-value is less than tabulated chi-value there is no statistical significance

between designation and the extent of implementing HR initiatives. Hence it can be

understood that designation does not influence the respondents’ opinion on extent of

implementing HR initiatives.

81

DEPARTMENT VS HR INITIATIVES

Most of the respondents of the HR – recruitment department (80%) are of the opinion

that the initiatives are low

Nearly one –third (29%) of the general HR department are of the opinion that the

initiatives are high.

RANKING OF THE HR INITIATIVES IN ORGANISATIONS

The HR initiative ranked in the order of priority as the first rank is the initiative in

improving adaptability of the business to new opportunities.

The HR initiative that ranks the lowest the fifteenth in the order of priority is the

Enhancing work life balance initiative.

This can be attributed to the respondents’ opinion on the general trends in the booming

industry where focus is given to achieving business objectives over personal goals.

82

4.2 SUGGESTIONS

It can be studied that the scorecard has been effective in their organizations but the extent of

initiatives have been low this tells us that if the HR Scorecard is implemented then the there has

to be :

A coalition of support to ensure that the scorecard is implemented in organisatons.

Organizations support to match the scorecard framework

To implement the HR scorecard in the organization by creating awareness among

employees about the scorecard.

To benchmark results of the HR initiative.

To understand the significant results of the scorecard.

To create HR deliverables that can be measured at each step

To align the HR strategy with the organization strategy in clear terms to ensure outcomes.

83

4.3 CONCLUSION

“The Human –Resource performance –measurement system plays a key role in

determining HR’s place in your organization including securing HR ‘s credibility…it

influences organizations credibility to capitalize on HR as a strategic asset…”

Brian Becker

Developing a world class performance measurement system hinges on a clear understanding of

the firms competitive strategy and operational goals and a definitive statement of the employee

competencies and behaviors required to achieve the firms strategy. The HR system internal and

external alignment creates a true competitive advantage. Measurement systems for the firm as a

whole or for the HR functions can create value only when they are carefully matched with the

organizations strategy and operational goals.

84

BIBLIOGRAPHY

85

REFERENCES

Books

Brian. E Becker HR Scorecard 2001 Harvard Business School, press, Boston

Massachusetts

Robert S. Kaplan The Balanced scorecard1996 Harvard Business School, press, Boston

Massachusetts

T.V. Rao HRD Audit 1999 Response books A division of

sage publication New Delhi

Websites

www.personneltoday.com

www.hrfolks.com

www.hrinovators.com

www.google.com

86

QUESTIONNAIRE

This questionnaire has been prepared to study the HR executives perception on the HR

Score card. I request your assistance in completing the questionnaire

1.COMPANY:

2.DEPARTMENT 3.AGE: 4.DESIGNATION:  5.EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATION:

6. YEARS OF EXPERIENCE:

  HR DELIVERABLES:  7) Our HR strategies are understood, through HR Scorecard across the organization

  STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE   

8)The HR Scorecard makes us understand the relationship between our job performance and organizations success 

 

STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE  

9) The HR Scorecard has made the senior management, perceive the HR Department, as a value added service in your organization.

    STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE

87

STRATEGIC HR MEASUREMENT:    10) In our organization, an individual’s performance is linked with compensation.

  STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE 

 11) In our organization, financial measures and non-financial rewards are balanced.

  STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE 

   12) Our HR strategies, also measures, HR’s contribution to the business.

   STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE 13) Our HR policies are linked with the organization performance. 

   STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE

HIGH PERFORMANCE WORK SYSTEM:  14) Our organization has adopted a validated competency model as a basis for HR functions.

   STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE 

88

HR SYSTEM ALIGNMENT:  15) Our HR Scorecard has aligned the HR system with the organization strategy.

  STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE 16) Our HR Scorecard has aligned the various HR subsystems to the organization.  

   STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE

MEASURING HR EFFICIENCY-CORE VERSUS STRATEGIC METRICS

17) The HR Scorecard, quantifies the expenditures, incurred by the HR Department annually.

 STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE

 18) The HR Scorecard, measures cycle time for, HR processes in the HR Department. 

   STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE

 LEADING CHANGE: 

19) Do you agree that, the success of HR initiatives is in aligning the HR strategy, with the organization strategy.

89

 STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE

20) The HR Scorecard facilitates a leader who owns and champions the initiative in our organization.

 STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE

21) The HR Scorecard facilitates a primary sponsor, (head HR), who assigns a task force to implement these initiatives in our organization.

 STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE

22) The HR Scorecard, has encouraged our department heads, in recognizing the HR initiatives in our organization.

 STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE

CREATING A SHARED NEED FOR CHANGE:   23) HR Scorecard has created an awareness among employees about the HR initiatives in our organization..

  STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE

  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE 

SHAPING A VISION:   24) Do you agree that the HR Scorecard is the only way to shape the vision of your organization.  

90

  STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE 

MOBILISING COMMITMENT:   25) The HR Scorecard has created a coalition between HR and other department heads for implementing HR initiatives. 

  STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE 

BUILDING ENABLING SYSTEMS:  26) The HR Scorecard, tought us how to sustain the change by modifying HR system.   

STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE 

MONITORING AND DEMONSTRATING PROGRESS:  27) Do you agree that the HR team benchmarks progress on the results of the HR initiatives    STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE

28) The HR team, benchmarks the progress based on the implementation process of the initiative. 

    STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE

91

  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE

MAKING IT LAST:

29) Do you agree that the HR initiatives sustain because of the HR scorecard.

   STRONGLY AGREEE AGREE  DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE 

30. To what extent have the HR initiatives been deployed in the Organization?

SNO INITATIVESVERY LOW

LOW HIGHVERY HIGH

a Improving delivery of HR services        

bImproving adaptability of the business to new opportunities        

c Facilitating organization change        d Improving employee engagement        e competency based recruitment        f Employer branding imitative        g Diversity imitative program        h Organization communication        

IAliening learning strategies with business goals        

jImproving the efficiency of training operations        

k enhancing work life balance        l Reducing cycle time for HR processes        m Creating awareness on appraisal        n Bench marking against using PCMM/ISO        o Conducting employee satisfaction survey        

92

HR INITIATIVES

31. Please rank from 1 to 15 the following HR initiatives ( in order of priority) that

have been taken up as a result of HR Scorecard deployment?

SNO INITATIVES RANK

a Improving delivery of HR services  

bImproving adaptability of the business to new oppurtunities  

c Facilitating organisation change  

d Improving employee engagement  

e competency based recruitment  

f Employer branding imitative  

g Diversity imitative program  

h Organization communication  

I Aliening learning strategies with business goals  

j Improving the efficiency of training operations  

k enhancing work life balance  

l Reducing cycle time for HR processes  

m Creating awareness on appraisal  

n Bench marking against using PCMM/ISO  

o Conducting employee satisfaction survey  

93