In recent months, I've spoken to many HR professionals about employee relations (ER).
The challenging nature of the role for those in ER was a common theme.
The role of ER has never been more valuable to Australian employers, whose workplaces have never been more regulated.
Yes, compliance is a must, but meeting business objectives is also necessary.
ER is at the pointy end of keeping a business out of trouble and getting things done.
The passion with which some very experienced HR leaders spoke inspired our paper Navigating Employee Relations: The Advisor's Role. That paper is based on that feedback.
It's built on four themes: mastery, judgement, strategy, and influence. We will publish a series of five blogs in five weeks based on these themes.
So, here's our first blog of our '5 of 5 series' in which I provide an overview of the four themes.
Mastery
The role of an ER Professional is demanding and nuanced, requiring a depth of expertise akin to that of a specialist workplace lawyer. The role encompasses a wide range of responsibilities and skills, including, but not limited to, understanding complex legal frameworks and acting as a coach, mediator, and risk manager. It also requires balancing detailed analysis with strategic thinking.
Mastery is achieved through finding ways to learn, consistent practice, and reflection. "Maps" of knowledge are developed and deepened over time as new experiences create new opportunities to learn and grow. It's not an easy journey, so passion for the subject matter is critical. Mentors are also crucial, as with any field of endeavour. Good mentors provide pathways and shortcuts.
A strong and diverse network of professionals also significantly contributes to success.
Judgement
For an ER Professional, judgement starts with gathering, assessing, and weighing facts, often in situations where conflicting stories emerge, such as during workplace investigations.
Judgement calls for balancing strategy with risk. Invariably, a preferred path carries risk. So, understanding risk is key. There are short-term and long-term risks, with the more immediate risks often overestimated and the longer-term risks underestimated, given the human tendency to say, "We will cross that bridge when we get there."
Judgement is also required in the 'how' of advising internal stakeholders.
Strategy
Judgement and strategic thinking are closely intertwined, with strategic input adding significant value to decision-making by focusing on optimal solutions beyond immediate concerns.
Observations on strategy and strategic decision-making are ubiquitous. Formulas abound, and they are very much context-driven. A fair reading of the various takes on strategy reveals some core elements: where you are, where you want to be, and how you will get there.
Being "strategic" is often synonymous with "big picture" thinking. It's the ability to see patterns, themes, or connections. It's the ability to ask: is this a trend, or what can we be doing to guard against this in the future? It's factoring in company-wide implications for the issue at hand. It's balancing the long term with the short term. It's also about ensuring that a problem is examined from various perspectives. It's about looking ahead.
Influence
You can have the best advice, but it's useless if it doesn't land. Unclear advice can lead to frustration or even risk.
It's hard advising someone you barely know. It's like advising in a vacuum. So, a degree of connection is required. Let's call it rapport. Indeed, professional coaches are trained in the need for rapport before advancing a client discussion. This can take time to develop. At its heart, rapport has two ingredients: likeability (people like to work with people they like, and usually, this is people like them) and trust (credibility + reliability).
Advisors need to explore what's below the surface. There are, or may be, various contexts that you cannot afford to miss: emotional, political, environmental, and situational. There are needs and motivations at play. So, "dig deep" by flexing your curiosity muscle. A manager frustrated with a direct report's performance demands your understanding. They deal with the employee day to day. They or others in the team are picking up the slack. As you are being told this, it's natural to start playing the tape in your mind about "valid reason," "procedural fairness," "unfair dismissal," "warnings," etc. Launch at your peril, especially if you raise the legal hurdles (as is inevitable) without empathy. If the manager feels you need to understand the depth of the issue, your advice will be easily dismissed as not appreciating the gravity of the situation. The advice someone doesn't want to hear (it's 'too hard to dismiss now') is better received in an atmosphere of understanding and empathy.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.