HR Roles and Responsibilities: The 2012 XpertHR Survey - Survey Analysis - Tools - XpertHR - Co.uk

27/07/2014 12:38 HR roles and responsibilities: the 2012 XpertHR survey | Survey analysis | Tools | XpertHR.co.
uk
Page 1 of 11 http://www.xperthr.co.uk/survey-analysis/hr-roles-and-responsibilities-the-2012-xperthr-survey/111996/
The full data from this survey is
available on XpertHR Benchmarking.
HR roles and responsibilities: the 2012 XpertHR survey
Author: Noelle Murphy
In its 10th year, our HR roles and responsibilities survey finds that HR, particularly within the public sector, is
facing ongoing challenges to cut costs while headcount contracts. Despite another challenging year across all
sectors, however, HR continues to grow in demand and influence within organisations.
Key points
Our 10th annual survey of HR roles and responsibilities finds that HR, overall, has performed well during
recent challenging times. Levels of influence continue to grow and effectiveness ratings are high among
our respondents.
Looking towards the next 12 months, there are contrasting priorities between the public and private
sectors; the public sector is feeling the squeeze and its HR function is being challenged in ways it has
previously never experienced.
While the private sector focuses on consolidating changes and reviewing reward and remuneration
packages, the public sector is almost exclusively focused on cutting costs, jobs and services.
The key characteristic of an effective HR function involves having a documented HR strategy in place,
developed as an integral part of an organisation's main strategy.
Our 10th annual survey of HR roles and responsibilities finds that the profession has different priorities, depending
on the sector. While the private sector continues to face the challenges of recovery and consolidating changes made,
the public sector is dealing with significant cost-cutting programmes as the HR function is coping with
significant change.
Despite this, the HR function is in good shape in terms of performance.
Among the 334 organisations that responded to our survey, almost
seven respondents in 10 (69.2%) rate their HR function's effectiveness
as above average or higher - roughly the same percentage as in 2011,
although this is not based on a matched sample.
Below, we analyse some of the findings of our research among 334
organisations, covering more than 360,000 employees. We have also examined the key characteristics of an effective
HR function.
Key characteristics of an effective HR function
Since we began researching the distinguishing characteristics of an HR function that rates itself above average or
higher in terms of effectiveness, a few key variables have emerged.
A documented HR strategy
More than half (52.2%) of those that rated their HR function as above average or higher have a documented HR
XpertHR.co.uk
27/07/2014 12:38 HR roles and responsibilities: the 2012 XpertHR survey | Survey analysis | Tools | XpertHR.co.uk
strategy. Almost three in five (57.6%) have a documented HR strategy, developed as an integral part of the
organisation's main strategy, in place. Of those organisations that do not rate HR's effectiveness as above average or
higher, just over one in three (37%) do not have a documented strategy.
Lower ratio of employees to HR staff
Those rating their HR function as operating above average or
higher in terms of effectiveness are also more likely to have a
lower ratio of employees to HR staff - the median (midpoint in the
range) ratio for this group is 75 employees to every one HR
practitioner. Those not rating themselves as effective have a
median ratio of 86 employees to every one HR practitioner.
Position of most senior HR manager
Our 2011 research revealed that having the most senior manager
with responsibility for HR at director level helps to raise the profile
of the HR department and the work it does. However, in terms of effectiveness, it seems that the reporting lines are
actually more important. More than seven in 10 (71.2%) of those rating their HR effectiveness above average or higher
report to either the chair, chief executive or managing director. This compares with 58.3% of those not rating
themselves as effective.
Also, we find that where HR staff are expected to hold formal qualifications, they are more likely to rate the function as
above average or higher. Seven in 10 (69.6%) of those with greater confidence in the effectiveness of their HR function
make it essential for HR staff to hold a formal qualification directly related to the tasks they perform. This compares
with fewer than three in five (58.7%) of those not rating themselves above average or higher.
Ratio of HR practitioners to employees
This survey looks at the size, shape and structure of the HR function. This enables us to lay down a series of
benchmarks that allows HR departments to compare themselves with other organisations.
Each year we also note that these benchmarks are not targets; rather, we hope the figures will make for debate within
your organisation as to how the HR function can operate at maximum efficiency.
We set out specific definitions to include when respondents are calculating HR headcount, to ensure the consistency of
our findings in this area.
Respondents are asked to provide HR headcount information, based on the following guidelines:
to include within the HR headcount staff dealing with training, recruitment, reward and organisational
development, together with the explicit addition of equal opportunities; but
to exclude staff dealing with payroll and pensions, occupational health, health and safety and purely
secretarial work.
We use the median as our default measure. This is preferred to the use of the average as this figure is not adversely
affected or skewed by a few exceptionally high figures. Alongside this, we quote the lower quartile - the figure for
organisations in the bottom 25% of the range - and the upper quartile, the figure for the organisations in the top 25% of
the range.
Charts 1 and 2 show that the median number of employees for each HR practitioner is 80. This continues the
downward trend in the number of HR practitioners as a proportion of overall staff, and compares with 2010's figure of
1:83. The upper quartile stands at 1:128, similar to 2010's figure of 1:129. The lower quartile stands at 1:50, the same

Where HR staff are expected to hold
formal qualifications, they are more likely
to rate the function as above average or
higher.
Audio: HR roles and
responsibilities
Listen to
XpertHR's employment
relations editor Noelle
Murphy discuss the findings
of the HR roles and
responsibilities survey.
This is taken from an episode
of the XpertHR Weekly
podcast.
as the ratio in 2010.
Ratios by size and sector
By size, economies of scale account for the increase in the number of
employees per HR practitioner according to the size of the organisation. There
will be instances where the same amount of HR effort is required - for example,
drawing up a new policy or developing a procedure dealing with grievances and
disciplinaries - irrespective of the number of employees to be covered by the
policies.
Figures for 2011 are holding steady with those from the year before. For
employers with between 1 and 249 employees, the median ratio of HR to
employees is 1:57, compared with 2010's figure of 1:56.
Once again, it is in the public sector that we can see the most significant change
in numbers. In 2009, the median figure was one member of the HR team for
every 84 employees in this sector. In 2010, this figure had jumped to 1:103. The
trend continues this year, and we have seen an increase to one member of HR
for every 120 employees.
Manufacturing has also seen a shift this year, with the median standing at 1:106,
compared with 2010's figure of 1:94. It is clear that both these sectors are still under considerable pressure and have
been cutting support staff wherever possible.
Changes in HR staffing numbers
The 334 responding organisations employ a total of 3,150 people in the HR function. However, two years ago (in 2009)
this figure stood at 4,258 and there were, on average, 13 members in an HR team or serving an HR function. In 2011,
this figure stands at nine.
By sector, we can see a drop in the average across the board. In the private sector, the mean figure stood at 11; this
year that figure is nine. The public sector employed an average of 25 people in the HR function two years
ago - now the average stands at 19. Among manufacturing and production, the numbers have tumbled from an
average of 13 two years ago to the current rate of five.
Reasons for change in HR staffing
The changes and restructuring that have become common within organisations over the past few years continue
to affect employee numbers. One respondent in three (34%) has increased the number of HR staff in order to service a
growing HR workload (see chart 3). This figure increases to two in five (38%) among private sector services
organisations.
Restructuring HR departments was the reason for changes in staff numbers in more than one organisation in three
(34%). This is most likely to be the case within the public sector, where this figure rises to six respondents in 10 (59%).
Efficiency drives are still prevalent in 2011 with almost three respondents in 10 (27%) seeing changes for this reason.
This was, again, most likely to be the case among the public sector - more than half (55%) have seen numbers change
to improve efficiency. Our ratio metrics above bear this out, with the median ratio of HR staff to employees falling in this
sector.
There has been a decline in the number of compulsory redundancy programmes that have directly affected the HR
function - although a significant number (17%) have had ongoing redundancy programmes in place over 2010-2011.
Assessing HR effectiveness
Despite the challenges, cutbacks and cost-cutting, our respondents feel that HR has reacted well and performed
effectively overall. This year, seven respondents in 10 (69.2%) rate their HR function's effectiveness as above average
or higher - roughly the same percentage as in 2010, although this is not based on a matched sample. It seems that
tough times bring out the best in the HR function, allowing it to demonstrate its worth across the business as a whole.
HR in private sector services organisations seems to be least satisfied with its performance - 65.4% of our respondents
in this sector rate their effectiveness as above average or higher. This compares with 77.2% in the public sector and
75% in manufacturing and production organisations. Given that there continues to be higher levels of rationalisation in
both these sectors, it may be that these changes give HR the chance to be more active on a strategic level, policing
and supporting job cuts, redundancies and changes to terms and conditions in order to save costs.
To assess the effectiveness of the HR function, almost seven respondents in 10 (68.3%) use formal or informal
measures - see chart 4 for a list of the measures used. Of this group, nearly half (45%) formally measure the
effectiveness of the HR function. On average, our respondents employ seven measures to assess HR effectiveness.
Level of HR representation
Each year we ask about the level of HR representation within organisations and the function's ability to influence top-
level strategic decisions. We have seen a shift in HR representation over the decade since we first conducted this
survey, with more HR directors now sitting on the main board. This year, nearly one employer in four (22.5%)
reports that it has a director responsible solely for HR on the main board and a further one in five (19.8%) has a
director on the main board who is responsible for HR and other areas.
We asked respondents about the number of practitioners working at various levels in the HR department. The following
are full-time-equivalent HR staff within our responding organisations:
HR director: 134 employed in 131 organisations;
senior function head: 219 employed in 138 organisations;
function head: 199 employed in 92 organisations;
department manager: 237 employed in 117 organisations;
section manager: 157 employed in 53 organisations;
section leader: 99 employed in 33 organisations;
senior HR/personnel officer: 537 employed in 140 organisations;
HR/personnel officer: 731 employed in 178 organisations;
HR/personnel assistant: 540 employed in 188 organisations;
assistant/trainee: 171 in 50 organisations; and
junior clerical: 334 in 31 organisations.
HR's influence throughout the organisation
Alongside representation, we have seen steady growth in the influence of the HR function within organisations. This
year, six respondents in 10 (59.9%) told us that they believe the influence of the HR function throughout the
organisation has grown over the past two years. Just 3% - 11 organisations - feel that their influence has decreased.
The biggest overall decrease in influence comes in the public sector, where one in 10 (11.4%) believes that HR's
influence has decreased.
This demonstrates again the difficult time that HR is having in the public sector. Not only is it dealing with organisation-
wide cuts and changes, we can see from the metrics above that the HR function in its own right is going through
restructuring.
HR issues and initiatives, by sector
We asked our respondents to give us an insight into what was on their radar right now and for the year ahead. Once
again, the difference between the public and private sector is stark, and demonstrates the contrasting priorities for
each sector.
Private-sector services
The top three priorities for private sector services respondents are:
updating, changing and implementing policies and procedures;
training and development; and
reward and remuneration.
In 2010, we saw a focus on employee engagement and staff morale, but this year, perhaps as a natural progression,
HR in this sector is focusing its attentions on updating and implementing policies and procedures. Training and
development is also a key priority - respondents tell us that work needs to be done on overall organisational
development and leadership training. Such an approach is not unexpected within an organisation that has been
through some difficult times, has perhaps restructured, and is now aiming to consolidate the changes.
Reward and remuneration is now firmly on the agenda. Again, this is unsurprising given the flat period of pay
settlements during the past two years. Alongside pay, many organisations mentioned assessing the benefits that they
had on offer, and many made specific reference to pensions.
The changes are not over within this sector, however, and a significant proportion mention dealing with change and
change management as their priorities.
Below, we present our private sector services respondents' concerns and priorities as a word cloud. The size
of the word relates to the frequency of its use by our respondents.
Manufacturing and production
The top three priorities for manufacturing and production HR respondents are:
change management;
training and development; and
policies and procedures.
It is clear from the priorities listed that employers in this sector are undergoing continuous change programmes.
Respondents tell us that they feel the need to implement organisational development programmes and specific training
programmes for members of staff.
Below, we present our manufacturing and production respondents' concerns and priorities as a word cloud.
The size of the word relates to the frequency of its use by our respondents.
Public sector
The top three priorities for public sector HR respondents are:
organisational change;
cost cutting; and
Reed Business Information Ltd
job evaluations, workforce planning and redundancy.
The pressure to cut costs in the public sector continues. Overwhelmingly, respondents' priorities in this sector centre
on making changes in order to cut costs. This is unsurprising given the Comprehensive Spending Review and the
reports that 771,000 public sector jobs will be lost over the next five years.
Below, we present our public sector respondents' concerns and priorities as a word cloud. The size of the
word relates to the frequency of its use by our respondents.
Our research
This report is based on original research by Noelle Murphy, Katey Ward and Ed Cronin, conducted in November 2011.
The research obtained information from 334 HR practitioners, covering more than 360,000 employees.
The breakdown by economic sector of the employers is as follows: 64% are private sector services organisations; 25%
are manufacturing and production organisations; and 11% are public sector organisations.
Broken down by workforce size, the employers comprise: 49% that have between one and 249 employees and are
classed as small and medium-sized enterprises; 33% that have between 250 and 999 employees and can be
considered as large employers; and 18% that have 1,000 or more employees and can be considered very large
employers.

HR Roles and Responsibilities: The 2012 XpertHR Survey - Survey Analysis - Tools - XpertHR - Co.uk

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

HR Roles and Responsibilities: The 2012 XpertHR Survey - Survey Analysis - Tools - XpertHR - Co.uk

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

27/07/2014 12:38 HR roles and responsibilities: the 2012 XpertHR survey | Survey analysis | Tools | XpertHR.co.

You might also like