Centralized Versus Decentralized HR

Posted on by Leave a Comment

For companies with multiple, geographically distributed locations, deciding whether or not to centralize HR is a decision with broad operational and strategic implications. A centralized approach enables an organization to streamline departmental functions across a complex system. It also ensures that HR policies are applied consistently and that information is managed in a unified way.

Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain

On the other hand, different locations are typically subject to distinct human resources regulatory and payroll tax environments, not to mention unique recruiting cultures; which lends weight to the argument for decentralization.  

Multi-location companies that have grown through acquisition typically approach this question from a need to impose centralized control and consistency on an amalgam of diverse entities striving to become one.

To Centralize or Not

For these organizations, McKinsey & Company offers a decision making framework[1] based on their research and experience. The framework includes three questions that inform the decision to centralize or not to centralize.

  1. Is centralization mandated?The first question to answer, according to McKinsey’s framework, is whether or not the company has a choice. Perhaps centralizing certain functions, such as corporate finance, are required for legal compliance, while health and safety compliance can be managed at the division level, based on local regulations.
  2. Does centralization add significant value? If centralization is not mandated, it should be adopted only if it adds significant value. Since determining that value can be challenging, McKinsey & Company suggest asking: “Does the proposed initiative add 10 percent to the market capitalization or profits of the corporation?
  3. Are the risks low? There are risks associated with centralization—business rigidity, reduced motivation, bureaucracy, and distraction—which are often greater than the value created. McKinsey & Company suggest that centralization proposals should go forward only if the risks of these negative side effects are low.

In the final analysis, McKinsey & Company recommend that any centralization proposal that does not survive at least one of these three questions should be abandoned or redesigned.

An HR Perspective

Typically, the decision to centralize (or not) is an executive one, and may not even consider the HR perspective. Not surprisingly, the framework provided for CEOs by McKinsey & Company sheds light on many of the challenges associated with centralizing control in a multi-location company, but doesn’t address the cultural risks associated with remaining fragmented. Nor does the framework consider the potential added value (in productivity and employee satisfaction) of shared culture and consistent vision.

HR knows that one of the most difficult post-acquisition challenges is creating this coherent core and shared culture across the newly formed entity. While managing multi-jurisdictional regulatory environments, recruiting cultures and labor law can be a logistical nightmare; creating a sense of shared purpose and instilling shared values across multiple locations is an even bigger challenge and one that organizations ignore a their peril. 

“In a Bain survey of executives who have managed through mergers, that [culture clash] was the No. 1 reason for a deal’s failure to achieve the promised value. In a culture clash, the companies’ fundamental ways of working are so different and so easily misinterpreted that people feel frustrated and anxious, leading to demoralization and defections. Productivity flags, and no one seems to know how to fix it.[2]

At the same time, one of the most important contributors to employee satisfaction is the degree of ownership or autonomy[3] individuals have in doing their work. This applies to remote managers as much as it does to front line workers (if not more so). As such, imposing centralized control regardless of the unique characteristics of global divisions can run counter to any efforts to cultivate a unified high performance culture.

A Hybrid Approach

As organizations strive to determine which structure makes the most sense, inevitably the question arises: are centralized and decentralized approaches mutually exclusive? The answer, of course, is not necessarily. The human resources function in particular, may lend itself to a hybrid approach. This approach involves a network of corporate and local HR roles working together to deliver HR functions across the organization. Certain enterprise-wide aspects are managed centrally (e.g. HR information systems, core training and development programs, communication of corporate values, etc.), while local people perform HR functions that are better fulfilled locally (e.g. recruiting, individual development, site specific training). If your organization is considering a hybrid or “Federated HR”[4] model, here are some planning steps to help you get started.

  1. Work collaboratively with the corporate and local HR teams in developing your hybrid solution.
  2. Gain a clear understanding of the situation in each geographical location, including; culture, current HR practices and policies, regulatory environment, local labor law, technology and tools in use, incumbent HR staff, local workforce characteristics and recruiting processes, training and development practices, etc. 
  3. Determine which HR functions must be centralized to satisfy corporate and/or legal requirements.
  4. Identify any HR functions that would be more effectively fulfilled through outsourcing or automation.
  5. Determine any additional HR functions that should be centralized to support a unified corporate culture.
  6. Map out the HR functions that can be provided more effectively at a local level.
  7. Create the policies required to support your new HR structure.
  8. Document, communicate and implement your solution with appropriate change management support.

 

Multi-location HCM with a social foundation. Give your global organization the best of both with NetSuite TribeHR. Start your free trial today!


[2] Integrating cultures after a merger. http://www.bain.com/publications/articles/integrating-cultures-after-a-merger.aspx
[4] Bersin: A "federated model" has a small core team that manages some technology and corporate programs, and empowers business and functional units to run their own training programs.

 

Paycards Versus Paychecks

Posted on by Leave a Comment

There’s been a lot of controversy lately over the use of payroll cards instead of paychecks for delivering employee compensation. The practice of using paycards was implemented by employers as a convenient way to pay employees who don’t maintain a traditional bank account. With many employers now processing payroll by direct deposit via electronic funds transfer (EFT), paycards offer a convenient alternative for paying employees who can’t receive their pay via EFT. More recently, some organizations have expanded their use of payroll cards. For example, MacDonald's has allowed individual franchise owners to decide …

Achieving Fair Pay Regardless of Gender

Posted on by Leave a Comment

Recently we shared some of our own efforts to increase the diversity of our workforce, especially with respect to gender balance. Like most software development firms, we typically receive many more resumes and inquiries from male candidates, especially for software engineers and other technical roles. Recently, we’ve had some great success sourcing qualified female candidates through a local job fair, although we’re still not sure what caused the unusual skew in that instance. In addition to being a software development company, we’re also an HR company, by virtue of the fact that we develop …

Two Approaches to Calculating Bonuses

Posted on by Leave a Comment

There are a lot of traditions surrounding the distribution of bonuses ranging from timing to eligibility, from merit to patronage, from celebration to stomach ulcers. The less pleasant traditions are usually a result of poorly defined structure or “bias bonuses” that reward people based on favoritism and politics rather than contribution. Photo by Frédéric Bisson, Flickr To ensure that bonus time creates a positive tradition in your organization, here are two vastly different approaches that strive to address common bonus time inequities. The Standard Approach The annual bonus is a common approach used by …

Creating a Path for Growth

Posted on by Leave a Comment

 Photo Credit: Nicholas A. Tonelli, Flikr Research shows that one of the most important attractors in a job search (and one of the strongest incentives for existing employees to stay with an organization), is the availability of growth opportunities. At the same time, company structures are becoming flatter, with fewer levels of management and less hierarchy. These increasingly horizontal organizational structures have resulted in more lateral movement and “cross training” to support career development aspirations. Some people find scaling the “career lattice” more satisfying than the traditional approach to climbing the corporate ladder. But there …

Forget Global: What Happens When the Workforce Goes Galactic?

Posted on by Leave a Comment

If we’ve learned one thing in HR during the past decade, it’s that change is upon us. And there is no reason to expect things to move at a slower pace going forward. Even as we grapple with the reality of an increasingly global workforce, a number of recent news items are triggering an even more fantastical train of thought—what happens when the workforce goes galactic? Mars Orbit Undocking by SpaceGuy5, Wikimedia Commons Who cares, you say? That’s so far in the future it can’t possibly impact us.   …

Soccer by Any Other Name: The Workplace and the World Cup

Posted on by Leave a Comment

World Cup 2014 by Thomas, Wikimedia Commons Whether you call it soccer, football or the beautiful game, it has unquestionably united the sentiments of millions of people around the globe. In fact, the FIFA World Cup is the biggest single-event sporting competition in the world and the most watched sporting event on the planet. So much so, that one week into the competition, advertisers had already benefited from over 1.2 billion minutes of TV and online ad viewing by a voracious global fan-base. The patriotism and passion the sport evokes is legendary. For the people of participating nations, the World Cup represents …

When an Employee Feels Underpaid

Posted on by Leave a Comment

Overworked, underpaid and under-appreciated is the current mood of many workers across the country. According to a survey conducted by employment site, Glassdoor.com, 39 percent of people do not feel they are being compensated fairly in their current jobs. Women still bear the brunt of this, with 42% of women who responded feeling they’re unfairly paid, compared to one third of the men who answered the survey. Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain The disparity between CEO’s compensation and that of front-line workers is also a constant source of tension, especially in larger corporations. According to the AFL-CIO[1], …

Get Engaged With A Globalized Workforce

Posted on by Leave a Comment

The Internet is arguably the greatest communications and technological achievement society has so far attained. If technology were to fail us, as it does in the post-apocalyptic future J. J. Abrams creates in the NBC series, Revolution, we would look back on the first two decades of the 21st-century and marvel at the incredible power each of us had at our disposal. Earth by Azcolvin429, Wikimedia Commons Thanks to the Internet, we are perpetually connected and no one is constrained by geography anymore. When it comes to sourcing staff, this creates an enormous opportunity—one we have never been …

Why HR Should Toss the Annual Compensation Review

Posted on by Leave a Comment

Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain Most of us are familiar with the annual performance review process (whether we like it or not!). In addition to annual performance reviews, some companies also implement an annual compensation review process. Sometimes the compensation review is linked to the performance review process, and sometimes it’s not. But regardless of how it’s positioned, the annual compensation review is one potentially destructive practice. What Drives Annual Compensation Reviews? When a company chooses to review compensation on an annual basis, the decision is generally driven by a Finance process rather than an HR process. …

Next Page

Experience TribeHR for Yourself
Contact us to schedule a demo of TribeHR.

Book A Demo
The Latest from Workplace Tribes
Excessive Business Travel is Unhealthy October 17, 2014
Centralized Versus Decentralized HR October 15, 2014
A Tale of Two Thanksgivings October 13, 2014
What Happened to Work Ethic? October 10, 2014
Keeping Remote Workers Motivated October 08, 2014
 
Continuously Improving Onboarding October 06, 2014
Who is the Customer? October 03, 2014
I’m in HR and I Need a Laugh October 01, 2014
Paycards Versus Paychecks September 29, 2014
Who Wants to Be a Leader? September 26, 2014