Programs that strengthen relationships: here's a way to improve your relationships with other departments, supervisors and managers - interorganizational relations - Professional Development

You ask about our training needs as managers?" says a supervising project engineer with a $95-million budget and 550 subordinates. "Managing people is probably the most difficult part of my job. It's more complicated than ever nowadays, when everyone is concerned about their rights, and employee values are so different from what they were when I finished school 20 years ago. Our human resource department offers workshops and sends out handbooks, but it seems to have an unrealistic view of what it's like out here in the trenches trying to get the job done. All that ever matters is the rules and regulations."

"Our managers need more training in personnel management now than they ever have before," says a human resource specialist. "We have an increasing number of grievances and lawsuits, and our engineering line managers have got to better understand how to effectively use our personnel system. We want to help the managers, but they either don't know how or don't choose to use us very well."

As management consultants, we typically receive this type of feedback when conducting management-development programs for mid- to upper-level executives. A recent experience with one of our clients, a large state engineering organization, identified several strategies that will enable organizations to improve the relationship between the human resource department and line managers.

To design a program to improve relations, information must be gathered from the organization.

A meaningful program on human resource management must also be based on the organization's policies, procedures and philosophies for it to be relevant to managers in that organization.

As we asked the personnel specialists specific questions about how they functioned and how the organization operated, our role broadened to facilitating interactions among the personnel specialists and the line managers. Several things happened.

In response to our need to know how processes worked, the specialists put together a personnel management matrix. Along one axis, the matrix listed the personnel tasks that department managers could be required to accomplish (for example, hiring an employee, providing tuition reimbursements, conducting a performance appraisal). On the other axis, the various managerial positions (for example, immediate supervisor, department head, appointing authority, personnel representative, personnel manager) that might have responsibility for the tasks were listed. By completing the matrix, each individual's responsibilities for accomplishing the major personnel tasks were defined. Because developing the matrix was a group effort, communication among the various specialists about their roles and responsibilities was enhanced.

The personnel specialists began thinking more specifically about their interactions with employees and managers, and became more interested in being actively involved in the department's new management-development program. They began to realize that it would be difficult for us, organizational outsiders, to explain their ways of doing things to the managers they worked with on an ongoing basis. The line managers expressed their desire to explain their frustrations to the personnel specialists - their frustrations and problems with the personnel system and the perceived reluctance of personnel to support them or even to try to understand their jobs.

Through these discussions, it was evident how little personnel specialists and line managers really understood each other. While both groups were concerned about the same issues - effective management of human resources, avoidance of costly grievances and lawsuits, planning to meet challenges - each group tended to see the other as the source of obstacles in accomplishing tasks.

Based on these findings, we developed a half-day plus an evening session on HR management as part of a 12-day management-development program.

Key training elements

Interaction between human resource specialists and line managers. The organization's needs for updated information on personnel management could be best met if senior personnel specialists from the department participated in the program. We accomplished this by dividing the program session into several mini sessions. After we, as outside experts, gave a brief introduction to current issues and trends in human resource management, we scheduled four concurrent sessions covering selection/classification, employee discipline/grievance processes, employee development/performance appraisals, and affirmative action. These were identified in the earlier needs analysis efforts.

Each of these sessions was led by the personnel specialist most qualified in the topic area. Groups of seven to eight participants met with each specialist for 35 to 40 minutes, and then had the opportunity to move on to another concurrent session.

Opportunities for line managers to ask questions and express their views. The personnel specialists prepared brief presentations for their topics, but spent most of their time responding to the questions and concerns voiced by participant managers. Conducting the discussions on "neutral ground," away from the home offices of both parties, enhanced the flow of information. The immediate availability of authoritative answers to important questions also enhanced line managers' favorable responses to the session.

Opportunities for managers to focus on important human resource issues. In addition to the mini sessions, and with the help of HR staff, a comprehensive case study was developed illustrating current and emerging employee issues. The case setting depicted a hypothetical organization that closely matched the structure and environment of the managers' organization. Manager-participants worked in groups to complete a strategic human resource plan including hiring projections, training plans and dealing with potential problems such as age discrimination, sexual harassment, inappropriate use of performance appraisal and threats to the agency's public image.

The personnel specialists participated in the group discussion and offered their perspectives on how the "system" could be used to effectively deal with the employee problems brought up in the case study. Having the HR specialists available during the discussion further opened communication between the groups in a nonthreatening context, while still addressing real issues.

Opportunities for managers to hear colleagues' approaches to human resource issues. The small group, participative format used for both the concurrent sessions and the case discussion encouraged managers to share their experiences and opinions with each other and with the personnel staff. This sharing of perspectives, establishing communication links among the managers and among line managers and senior personnel staff, was probably the most important program outcome. Managers learned that human resource problems are often too complex to be resolved with a "straight" answer or simple decision. Learning how to think them through, to recognize the role of others in the organization, to identify what organizational resources are available, and to practice appropriate skills are important results.

Outcomes

There are several indicators that our approach to training was effective: * As a result of discussions during this program, a department-wide drug-testing policy was created. * Personnel specialists and manager participants rated the session favorably (Ninety percent of participants rated the session as good or excellent.) * Participation was very active during the program, as evidenced by the managers' desire for more time, the large number of questions and the high level of activity in case and minisession discussions. * Personnel staff reported that the sessions gave them a better understanding of line managers and their needs, and line managers felt that personnel staff members were willing to respond to their concerns and would be more approachable in the future. * For up to two years after program participation, personnel specialists reported receiving calls from manager-participants in which some reference to the management-development presentation was made.

Conclusions

Our experiences provide several ways to strengthen the relationship between centralized HR departments and line managers:

Facilitate the interaction between line and staff. We did not give the agency we worked with what it originally had asked for. We did not design a program to train managers how to effectively manage personnel. Instead, the questions we asked helped the HR experts think through their roles and realize that their expertise was needed. We helped to create a context for fruitful discussion. We helped them better understand line managers' perspectives and perceptions of the human resource function. Such interaction is essential if human resource managers are to become respected members of the management team.

Personnel specialists are experts who are valuable to their organizations. Organizations often worry about how to provide the training and development employee require, but many times it is easy to overlook some very simple, relatively easy-to-meet needs. For instance, the personnel specialists expressed surprise at the limited personnel-specific information the line managers had. The managers lacked understanding of basic personnel policies despite numerous workshops, written materials and other previous efforts to "get the word out." Managers and employees, however, are often extremely busy handling the day-to-day responsibilities and cannot have the expertise that an HR specialist possesses.

In most organizations, most employees will appreciate and benefit from periodic opportunities to hear about organizational issues, to ask questions and to express their views. Specialists benefit too, as they update themselves on the perspectives, experiences and needs of those who are "customers" of their expertise and advice.

Roles strain relationships, but interaction strengthens relationships. There is no reason to feel inadequate or shocked if the HR staff doesn't consistently see eye to eye with line managers, or if the managers don't fully appreciate what personnel specialists have to offer. Organizations force individuals into roles that inevitably shape their unique perspectives and needs. It is a manager's job to try to keep his or her operation running with minimal disruption, and it is the human resource manager's job to ensure that organizational values of equity, human relations and government regulations are followed.

While managers must focus on day-to-day problems, the organization counts on the human resource staff to anticipate and formulate guidelines on emerging employee issues and concerns. These differences in perspective may be inevitable, but they detract from organizational effectiveness only if there is no interaction and appreciation for what each group has to offer. We found that providing opportunities for sharing and interaction was more important than the actual content of a training program.

Don't wait for a program, just do it! Consultants can be effective at setting up the opportunities and structuring the processes described in this article, but organizations can implement a similar program without the help or cost of a consultant. HR specialists can improve their effectiveness and offer a needed program by offering their time and responsiveness to managers in the organizations.

James A. McCambridge, assistant professor of management at Colorado State University, has a Ph.D. in industrial/organizational psychology from Colorado State. He is the program director for three executive and supervisory-management education programs in the transportation industry.

Vicki S. Kaman is an associate professor of management in the College of Business at Colorado State University. She has a Ph.D. in industrial/organizational psychology from Colorado State.

COPYRIGHT 1992 Society for Human Resource Management
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group