It’s not you, it’s us (but it really is you)

Organizational Fit

What does this really mean? It’s a well-known paradox around the HR table.
I’ve considered many angles to explain it, and have yet to come up with a trajectory that doesn’t violate some logic or moral principle. In my view, it’s a term that can take on so many meanings that to use it at all can, in some circumstances, be irresponsible. Organizational Fit can be suitably used in a professional context, only it’s best done so when all the variables are considered, and certainly never as a blanket term for why an employee doesn’t belong.

If a company looks to hire someone, quite often they will wade through dozens of interviews, only to determine that none of the candidates make for a good “fit”. Why is this? Have the specifications been set so narrowly that the candidate bank is run dry of a suitable sample?
Or perhaps the bar was placed so high that nobody appears to reach it, making the job description into a lofty wishlist.
It could be that the company is highly risk averse and unwilling to invest in new talent unless it is guaranteed to provide a sizeable return.
It is for these reasons, and many more, that even when recruiters go about using scientific methods, determining the required KSA’s, education and so forth that should yield the dream employee, the daily catch often fails to meet all expectations.
After all, at the end of the day, it will be future coworkers filling that slot. What if they turn out to be awful? Maybe it’s the daunting potential of working with someone who whistles the Flinstones tune all day long, or sitting next to someone who loves burritos (and then “hums” a different type of melody).
Perhaps the mountain of articles profiling the pitfalls of a “bad hire” have management spooked. In fact, I’ve witnessed this term (org fit) used as a way of “gently” letting an employee go.
Whatever the case, citing a bad “org fit” as a reason for not hiring someone is the relationship equivalent of “it’s not you it’s me”. It rings a rather hollow bell.
Rejecting an employee with this reasoning will ultimately harm the company brand, and fails to create a sense of goodwill. If said organization works in a tight industry, the employee in question may one day be a supplier, or worse, a potential customer. Moreover, people talk, and with social media spreading news faster than ever, a sketchy talent acquisition strategy could be why quality employees aren’t forthcoming. It’s better to lock down a lawyer approved disclaimer preventing any lawsuits, which someone receiving feedback can sign in exchange for personal feedback than leaving that person struggling to find answers, and what they could have done differently.

Beyond that, this long outdated buzzword can be redefined, in which case it would be entirely appropriate. Organizational fit is the flip side of workplace culture. It’s something an organization should work towards, and create with carefully placed perks, goals, values, policies and anecdotal stories.
In doing so, management can carve out a place for new employees to sit, and mold them into the culture; Change management, succession planning, strategic networking. These are the factors that will shape a company, and the employees, new and old, along with it.
Naturally, if a company’s defined culture is contrary to someone’s personality type, then they will likely not succeed in that given role. On the other hand, when a candidate’s character is a near match, it should be up to the organization to pursue it further. No candidate is perfect, and unfortunately, there is no airbrush equivalent. Thus, any skill or knowledge gaps can nearly always be addressed with training and investment in building a profitable long term relationship. After all, leveraging employee strengths vs their weaknesses in a teamwork environment is often what sets a company apart.
Otherwise, as George Costanza puts it… “You’ll never know”


HR is a Chameleon

Hello All!! Thank you for checking out my blog. What are your thoughts on HR? check out mine below!

What IS Human Resources??
Many people out there have no idea.  Don’t worry, if I was on the outside looking in, I would be confused as well! It isn’t clear cut like most other departments.
Accounting balances books, marketing promotes, and Human Resources coordinates the biggest asset of all, the employees.  No pressure! (Right??)
HR is dynamic, and fluid, binding an organization in ways that could otherwise allow circumstances to quickly unravel.
What makes it impossible to define is that each organization is an entity shaped by hundreds of factors, each with unique needs; Employees, industry, size and setting… for starters.
Moreover, they all have specific mission statements with various levels of strategic involvement and each one draws from other areas within the company.  HR “is” accounting, and marketing, and business development, only from a people perspective. A figurative spider web seen from all angles.
Thus… describing HR in a relatable way? First, there are a dozen aspects of HR that need attention.  It goes beyond mere paper pushing, meetings filled with jargon and chipper attitudes (although the latter is certainly helpful).
In fact, I’ll bet that many out there don’t know, there are three levels of HR!
The most basic, of course, is your standard business practice; Payroll, benefits, onboarding etc… The essentials.
Next up are the compartmentalized facets that businesses have officially adopted in the last decade or two:
Recruitment– finding the right people to make your company into a five star machine. Recruiters coordinate with compensation, training, and marketing experts. After all, branding isn’t just for the customers, but candidates as well.
Training & Development– assisting employees in tuning their stellar skills. Trainers assess gaps the organization might otherwise not notice, often doubling efficiency.
Labour/Employee Relations– mediating miscommunications and enforcing policies. The internal side of public relations.
Compensation & Benefits– organizing pay structures, both direct and indirect. Tenure, budget, strategy, and policy are balanced for optimal remuneration.
Health and Safety/Wellness– keeping employees healthy and supporting those who need it while maintaining a hazard free environment.
Other HR hats are often thrown in the ring, such as compliance, engagement, diversity/equity, charity and generally any other issue which impacts an employee’s ability to work effectively.
Finally, there is the often overlooked component of Strategy, which HR falls under the umbrella of and considers all of the above to assist executives in leading a successful company. In a standard SWOT analysis, HR offers pivotal information. For example, a positive work culture would show as a strength (S) whereas market conditions such as average wage increases would represent a threat (T).
Finally, these factors are pooled to determine the most effective alignment of goals in key areas (HR, Marketing, Finance etc) so that short and long term plans  can be devised and fed back into the strategy. Like a wheel spinning on it’s own momentum, if there is synergy between all components of an organization, it will thrive with few internal barriers. After all, what better way is there to face competitors than with a unified front?
In short, HR is shaped by the values and mission of an organization; It’s whatever an organization requires, within the scope of people management. That is… if they are doing it right!