I think supervisors do not really expect to have a ROI figure on something like HR practices. Rather, like the findings suggested, they expect that there are other, non-numerical outcomes from HR practices. It seems that these outcomes could still be communicated through numerical ways. What are some ways HR and I/O's can prove their worth to companies? Must it always be about dollars and cents or even numbers for that matter? Aren't there some qualitative things HR should communicate to their organizations first?
The authors found that one of the major difficulties of utility analysis is in explaining the estimates to management. How can HR and I/O professionals collaborate with management to better explain the process and results of utility analyses? In addition, how can organizational cultures change to better integrate HR as a strategic player in organizational decision making processes?
•This article displayed the same issue of employers not requesting or seeing a need for evaluating and measuring training. I find this interesting and frustrating because this is obviously still an issue today in illustrating how we can help and benefit the company through these methods, of which we learn in our programs. I recall learning that the top management or executives need to have the understanding of the strategic and beneficial use of HR practices. How do we help those companies whose top executives lack this knowledge and appreciation of both HR and I/O skills? Is there something the graduate programs could be doing? Why do companies feel they don’t need utility and ROI analyses to begin with?
This was interesting survey research to compare how HR professionals and I/O psychologists actually have used utility analysis and what their perceptions of managers’ views about it are. Conclusions seem to be that better education of HR and I/O professionals could help them use utility analysis as one way to explain value of HR services; but also that presenting the estimates more realistically, with minimum and maximum values would be good. It also highlighted that for some managers other needs should be emphasized or at least utility could be expressed in other ways, other than SDof performance in dollars– i.e. % of improvement of productivity. Would the managers you know value knowing this? What are their most important criterion for evaluating HR activities?
As we have talked about, it is difficult to talk about the complex things we do (such as utility analysis) to people who do not have a background in our field. Do you think we should just go about using utility analyses and not be so worried about explaining it to others?
Macan made a couple of suggestions for improving the acceptance and use of utility analysis information by organizational decision-makers. One suggestion was to find out what information about a particular HR initiative decision-makers were interested in knowing in order to make their decision, because it may be that they are more interested in other utility criteria than in financial utility. What other criteria might they be interested in?
I think the authors really limited themselves on the number and types of variables that influence the use of utility analysis. What do you think are some contextual variables that might influence the use of utility analysis?
I think supervisors do not really expect to have a ROI figure on something like HR practices. Rather, like the findings suggested, they expect that there are other, non-numerical outcomes from HR practices. It seems that these outcomes could still be communicated through numerical ways. What are some ways HR and I/O's can prove their worth to companies? Must it always be about dollars and cents or even numbers for that matter? Aren't there some qualitative things HR should communicate to their organizations first?
ReplyDeleteThe authors found that one of the major difficulties of utility analysis is in explaining the estimates to management. How can HR and I/O professionals collaborate with management to better explain the process and results of utility analyses? In addition, how can organizational cultures change to better integrate HR as a strategic player in organizational decision making processes?
ReplyDelete•This article displayed the same issue of employers not requesting or seeing a need for evaluating and measuring training. I find this interesting and frustrating because this is obviously still an issue today in illustrating how we can help and benefit the company through these methods, of which we learn in our programs. I recall learning that the top management or executives need to have the understanding of the strategic and beneficial use of HR practices. How do we help those companies whose top executives lack this knowledge and appreciation of both HR and I/O skills? Is there something the graduate programs could be doing? Why do companies feel they don’t need utility and ROI analyses to begin with?
ReplyDeleteThis was interesting survey research to compare how HR professionals and I/O psychologists actually have used utility analysis and what their perceptions of managers’ views about it are. Conclusions seem to be that better education of HR and I/O professionals could help them use utility analysis as one way to explain value of HR services; but also that presenting the estimates more realistically, with minimum and maximum values would be good. It also highlighted that for some managers other needs should be emphasized or at least utility could be expressed in other ways, other than SDof performance in dollars– i.e. % of improvement of productivity. Would the managers you know value knowing this? What are their most important criterion for evaluating HR activities?
ReplyDeleteAs we have talked about, it is difficult to talk about the complex things we do (such as utility analysis) to people who do not have a background in our field. Do you think we should just go about using utility analyses and not be so worried about explaining it to others?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMacan made a couple of suggestions for improving the acceptance and use of utility analysis information by organizational decision-makers. One suggestion was to find out what information about a particular HR initiative decision-makers were interested in knowing in order to make their decision, because it may be that they are more interested in other utility criteria than in financial utility. What other criteria might they be interested in?
ReplyDeleteI think the authors really limited themselves on the number and types of variables that influence the use of utility analysis. What do you think are some contextual variables that might influence the use of utility analysis?
ReplyDelete