(Foreword: I wish to impress upon chief executives
regarding their accountability in managing manpower prudently. Few top
corporate leaders heed this vital aspect – the reason why most head honchos
fail to mould their respective organisation into pristine shape. A dynamic
chief cannot execute manpower optimisation (immaculate utilisation of personnel)
alone. He needs a very experienced human resource director as the complementing
bolster, working side by side to implement sound manpower policies that spur
effectiveness and efficiency in employees, i.e. doing the right things in the
right way to bring in the right results.)
One common leadership concept promulgates the onus of
providing guidance to a group of people by a key individual who takes charge
over them. That is quite correct albeit somewhat a narrow perception. Why do I
say so? Well, let me elaborate by citing the analogy of a revered world class football
team manager. Question: To start with, how does the manager form his successful
team? Simple answer: Contracting the right players for the right team
combination. Yes, placement of the right combination of players for the various
positions of play according to their respective specific prowess is the
formidable football team’s potency.
Likewise, a prolific business leader’s prime task is to form
a wholesome manpower combination in terms of outlining specific roles and
appointing befitting personnel to manifest those roles. Only by a corporate
leader’s efficacy to place the right people in the right jobs can vibrant group
results then materialise. Two key considerations: The roles must be essential;
the people assigned to handle their respective essential role must be fittingly
cut for the job functions.
Forming a potent manpower structure should be the primary
undertaking of a chief executive who covets to be a prolific leader. The
grooming part for personnel should assume the secondary (as sequel to the
primary undertaking) phase. And why do I say that? Simple logic: If the overall
group comprises inept employees at large, personal development efforts will not
make any difference to the group performance. It is like trying to groom lame
ducks with the hope of them evolving into agile swans. Reinforcement and
development programmes for employees should be the second phase after having
formulated a holistic manpower optimisation direction.
Executing the placement of the right people to the right
roles covers two-prong:
(1)
Determine the specific roles necessary for the
corporation concerned to thrive well. The initiative includes streamlining the
existing manpower size to ensure there is no overlapping of roles, redundancy,
or under-utilisation of any personnel. It calls for a comprehensive analysis in
this respect. Then, apt action plans for tweaking the overall manpower
composition toward an optimal structure come next. The exercise may warrant re-designating some incumbent
personnel to new roles, suggestions on re-training or further personal
development, and perhaps managing out the redundant baggage. It also entails the tabling of new roles in
line with new business innovation trends, for example recruiting experts in
artificial intelligence (AI) to match with aggressive incoming technological
demands.
Such drives are arduous, yet
inevitable if an enterprise desires to be an exalted brand name in the relevant
industry. Top management protagonists
who prefer not to rock the boat for fear of upsetting the morale of existing
employees may opt for gradual revamp in staggering phases. That is fine as long
as tailored according to a holistically spread out but yet timely schedule.
Redundant roles encompassing
tasks which overlap between two or more personnel incur avoidable excess manpower
expenses that eat into profits. What can be done by a single individual instead
of two could be revamped to expand into a merged role for one while re-deploying
the other to a different but meaningful position. Perhaps relevant training of
the re-deployed personnel on the new role may be needed if the individual has
the learning aptitude. However, if deemed untrainable to fit into other roles,
then he/she should be managed out “diplomatically”, via a mutual separation scheme
(with a negotiated compensation to the outgoing employee) or counselling the
affected employee to consider other jobs outside. In short, one perspective of
manpower optimisation thrust covers role expansion, re-designation,
re-training, managing redundancy and identifying new roles, at the same time
consolidating the overall employee structure.
(2)
Recruit new personnel who befit the job
requirements of essential vacant positions. An immaculately designed interview
format caters as the dexterous assessment tool for identifying and selecting
the right candidates. A standard procedural flow with a structured
questionnaire may allow flexible leeway for tweaking to suit the vacant
position concerned. For example, the questionnaire may flexibly pose more
questions pertaining to marketing techniques for a senior marketing role.
Unless a candidate is already very familiar to the hiring officer, detailed
assessment of the interviewee during interview ought to be done.
An efficacious interview process with “probing” questions
assists to arrive at conclusions regarding an interviewee’s job fit based on
the points below:
· * Is the interviewee imbued with the right knowledge
and practical work experience vis-à-vis the demands of the job? What is the assessed
rating out of a scale of 1 to 10 (10 for perfect fit), based on interviewee’s
elaborations to the questions besides the credentials?
· * Exhibits the right characteristics? – such as
level of resilience, extrovert or introvert, amiable or brash, attitude
inclination, aptitude level etc. For
example, if the vacancy involves frontline sales, is the candidate a sales
driver who likes fieldwork, with good interaction calibre and willing to accept
challenges?
· * Mental frame – whether of macro or micro view
span? If the position concerned requires sound views and recommending
suggestions for consideration by the top management, does the interviewee
possess sufficient analytical cum advisory experience? To a simulation test
question, was the response holistic or otherwise?
· * Work culture exposure – matching with the corporate
culture in respect of prevailing practices and management philosophy of your
(the hiring) company? For example, those presently exposed over many years to a
culture of tight supervision by superiors or to regional office control may not
fit into a new job that grants some form of autonomy in decision making and
execution.
· * Of the right age range, physique and health
status suiting the overall requirements of the job? For example, roles that
entail a great deal of outdoor activities (like teambuilding exercises) definitely
prefer a physically energetic candidate.
· * Any family commitments that hinder focus on work
commitment? If the job entails frequent travels, can the candidate be free of
family encumbrances in that respect? Able to stay back in the office for longer
hours to meet urgent task completion deadlines without concerns about any
family commitment?
· * Lifestyles and interests – keen to socialise,
attend social functions, networking? Or prefers academic type of interests like
reading and research? Illustration: The marketing head of a wine brand must
personally be a connoisseur (both wine and food) in order to fit into the
job……right?
I would agree if you say manpower optimisation is not easy
to attain, particularly in the aspect of restructuring roles and size of
existing personnel. The revamp needs prudent execution to avoid dampening of
morale and work ambience, which if not prudently managed, will ultimately
trigger backlash. Moreover, revamping existing manpower is an intricate
exercise that entails some time drags. No doubt the element of empathy cannot
be ignored too, so it is up to corporate leaders to apply holistic discernment
– provide further training to those who have potentials for development -
whether for an enhanced capacity or changed role, and to encourage the mismatch
ones to opt for separation for their own good. Notwithstanding the arduousness
of revamping existing personnel, the top echelon in a corporation could first start
off to institute a concrete recruitment module that helps to select the right
candidates to fill up vacancies of necessary roles.
Like it or not, manpower “re-modelling” in any industry is
inevitable with the advent of AI. It is going to be a mixed composition of humans
versus “intelligent” machines landscape from henceforth. For example, at the
time of my scribing now, a prominent life insurance conglomerate in Singapore
had already placed two robots at its customer service office. A humanoid (robot
with human looks) handles interactive policy services with customers. The
other, resembling R2-D2 of the Star Wars movie, engages in simple enquiries and
directs customers to the right service personnel. Evidently, human manpower
role profiles are undergoing progressive changes; the horizon for manpower optimisation
will thus be subjected to varying scopes continually in phases as time moves on.
Nadine, the interactive humanoid customer service officer
Pepper, directing a customer to the right service counter.
Operations and cost efficiency in any business represents one of the bastions for business thrift and thrive. A wholesome manpower optimisation upholds this bastion. This is where the top leadership echelon should come into play by way of implementation. As rife competitions set into the new business era, sustenance of any enterprise will invariably depend on both effectiveness (doing the right things) and efficiency (doing things the right way) of manpower side so that wholesomeness can be attained by them doing the right things in the right way......all the way.
Concluding Statement:
A company may still make profits without optimising its prevailing
manpower. But if more profits can be made by optimising, why not do it?
Concluding Reminder: First,
design a workable plan for manpower optimisation before designing a programme
for further manpower grooming.
Quotes:
# What is important is for employees to always re-skill and
up-skill, especially in trying to work along with technologies (Datuk
Shamsuddin Bardan, Malaysian Employers Federation Executive Director, in The
Star daily of 9 August 2019).
# To ensure you have someone who can successfully manage
your company, keep a stream of strong candidates flowing into every position.
But sometimes you may need to hire from outside (The Star daily, 7 September
2018).
# Another important consideration is whether or not an
applicant fits into your company’s culture (Sir Richard Branson, as published
by The Star daily).
# An overwhelming body of research shows that mental ability
tests and structured interview based on a good job analysis are the most valid
methods for predicting how somebody is likely to perform in the workplace
(Scott Ruhfus, Managing Director of Saville Consulting Asia Pacific).
# I believe that one of the greatest failures of an
enterprise is the inability to make a turnaround by keeping employees who do
not deliver but good in giving excuses (unknown source).
# It is important to bring in the right people. Equally
important, or more so, is to manage out the wrong ones (unknown source).
#Whichever business a company is in, in reality the company
delves in “people business” as its priority, because only the right set of people
deployed to do the vital jobs can avert failures (my self- composed quote).
# The accountant’s role will not become obsolete but will
transition to a more strategic role by focusing on growth and better ways to
invest and spend, based on the robot’s daily duties and real-time reporting…..PwC’s
findings suggest AI’s role in finance will evolve. It’s argued that companies will
think of the robot as the accountant’s automated assistant, not a replacement
(https://www.avidxchange.com).
