Rabbit Holes and Elephants are Pointing to Changes in HR
For years now, we have talked about the HR function and speculated how it may change going forward. Talent acquisition (TA) is a good example of an area of HR that will likely change a lot going forward because it has several tedious and repeatable (automate-able) work steps. If the primary role of TA is to meet headcount objectives, then the time-consuming aspects of TA could be automated or outsourced. Our research indicates that about 25% of HR’s existing functions could be performed by automation (machine learning, etc.) by 2023. (TA represents about 40% of the automation opportunity.)
The Elephant in the room is that change is coming to HR and the function must reinvent itself to stay relevant.
The good news that HR is fully capable of transforming into a strategic business function. The rabbit hole is also in the room. HR can be the function that delivers increase business performance from the organization’s use of talent. Instead of just being a service to the BU’s, HR can also be responsible for optimizing the talent to achieve the revenue forecast. Why HR? Like Finance, HR is cross functional and is the only function where the hiring, developing, and retaining talent are core responsibilities.
In order to own the business performance from use of talent, HR needs new capabilities that are relatively easy to develop. First is understanding and managing the use of talent. To do so, HR needs to know (with data) what the talent is doing (the work) and how the work aligns with workers’ talent capabilities. For example, our research shows that top talent on average is only doing 30% top talent work. So, the first step for HR should be to help the BUs increase top talent work per top talent worker from 30% to 50%. The result is an increase in value creation and most likely a reduction is new headcount needed.
Secondly, HR needs to be able to establish and support value-based objectives inside the BUs. Like Finance uses budgets to control costs and minimize waste of financial resources, HR could use new tools and data to create talent “budgets” to ensure that talent is used efficiently. Current HR tools such as assessments, pulse-surveys, OKRs, and performance reviews focus on individual employees and their engagement. While important, there is no hard correlation between actual value produced and worker engagement. In order to drive workforce margin contribution, HR needs to establish objectives and provide services to the BUs that measure and correlate the use of talent with margin contribution to the company.
CollabWorks provides important capabilities needed to HR to become a strategic business function.
Our focus at DisruptHR SF is to present new ideas, innovation, and thought leadership that will help HR leaders transform HR into a strategic business function. We need your support and talent as executives, thought leaders, and innovators! Please apply to be a speaker. And please join our DisruptHR SF community and participate at our October 15 event.
Is your company’s Culture a Performance Oriented Culture
Fred Wilson is an iconic venture capitalist at New York City-based Union Square Ventures (https://www.usv.com/about/fred-wilson). Union Square’s investments include Coinbase, Etsy, Flurry, Indeed, LendingClub, MongoDB, Tacoda, Tumblr, Twilio, Twitter, Zynga, and the list goes on.
In a recent post Fred exhorts companies “to have performance oriented cultures where there are frequent checkins between managers and team members, with feedback going both ways, and where non-performance results in changes. These changes could be restructuring of teams, changes in management, or departures of employees. Companies that do not actively manage performance are likely to have lower morale and toxic issues like resting and vesting” (1). Though Fred’s post was responding to a question about “golden handcuffs”, his response addresses the more significant topic of culture and accountability.
FrameWork is a simple-to-use tool that algorithmically determines the most valuable work performed by your team members. For instance, FrameWork identifies tasks that may have been relevant when your product was first released but are irrelevant now. FrameWork’s elegant mathematics are industry agnostic and work as well for the CEO and line worker of a Fortune 200 semiconductor manufacturer as the CEO and line worker of an SMB plating company.
As your team updates FrameWork, the tool continually identifies the work of greatest value encouraging the next cycle of innovative initiatives with a concomitant increase of discussions between manager and the team. Inherently, engagement increases within the team and throughout the layers of the enterprise. The value of FrameWork is observed in this virtuous cycle of employee engagement, productivity, and personal achievement.
High performance/high valuation Silicon Valley companies such as Google and Pinterest have internally and independently developed dashboards similar to FrameWork. FrameWork is the commercially-available tool that facilitates performance oriented cultures.
How do you Justify Your Hiring Plan?
The Harvard Business Review published, “What to Do if Your Team is Too Busy to Take On New Work” (1), an article written by Pinterest’s Global Head of Customer Operations, Dutta Satadip. Dutta laments the annual business planning cycle where every manager pleads for additional resources without analytical justification. Dutta proposes a data-driven three-step process where each person describes their key activities, the amount of weekly time allocated to these activities, and other activities that are outside the sphere of core job functions. The resulting activity allocation map presents opportunities for management to reduce/eliminate less productive workload through things such as strategic planning as well as other management resources, thus increasing productivity. A business with increased productivity and positive output will have a better chance at thriving within their sector and going on to have many years building and adapting their company as time changes.
Dutta’s article describes how his teams discovered legacy processes that were now redundant and customer-protocols that required significant employee interaction when easily implemented automation tools would have reduced if not eliminated employee contact. This exercise allowed Dutta’s team to do more with less and achieve the scale necessary to meet customer needs and investor expectations.
What Dutta internally did at Pinterest and Google emulates one of the tools in CollabWork’s FrameWork Application. FrameWork’s patented algorithms objectively rank an employee’s tasks by value while Dutta’s managers utilized both objective and subjective assessments. FrameWork’s determination of the most valuable work gives employees a head-start in meeting their goals and increases their engagement, satisfaction, and professional growth.
Why CEOs Should Pay Attention to Talent Use
As CEOs we often worry about talent. Can we achieve our objectives? Why are employees turning over? How competitive are we? Yes, talent is critical. But, the use of talent is what delivers value.
Why does talent use matter? Low Hanging Fruit to Improve Margins.

Talent is what delivers value and talent use is the efficiency of delivering that value. Wasting or misusing talent directly affects business value. We depend on managers to identify and allocate talent. We don’t do a great job of talent use because our headcount planning and allocation methods are crude, and we don’t have a reliable way of measuring talent use. Net profit (and cash flow) is directly correlated to talent use. The less talent needed to achieve the same revenue then greater the profit margin. As indicated, just a two percent improvement in revenue/labor will improve margin contribution (EBITDA) by 1-2%. If the planning process continues to improve talent use over current methods, then the margin contribution is cumulative! For example, 3 years of 2% revenue/labor improvement will produce a 5% gain in EBITDA. In addition to the financial benefits, effective talent use produces improved talent motivation and engagement.
What is the use of talent why alignment matters? Headcount Planning is Wastes Talent.
We define talent use as talent performing work. We relate talent value to the value of the work produced. For example, we pay more for an airline pilot than a stewardess because pilots require more talent and produces more value. Airlines optimize their whole routing system to optimize talent use. The problem with the headcount-based financial model is that there is no clear quantifiable data regarding the use of talent. Job titles, roles, and compensation are not connected to talent use unless the work is highly defined, and the talent use is highly structured. Assembly lines for example. For nearly all knowledge workers, it is the alignment of the right talent to the right work that optimizes talent use and margin contribution.
Use case: An engineering group increased top talent use. 15% gain in margin contribution.
A very high-performance technology group was experiencing frustration and turnover from their top talent. Why? They were required to perform work that lower level talent could perform, and they were required to interrupt their development to attend useless meetings.

As shown, the group using the CollabWorks management FrameWork identified their current use of talent and then executed on several management sponsored improvements that yielded a 15% increase in top talent use after 15 months. Since top talent work is considered high margin contribution per employee, then the management estimated an improvement in margin contribution of 55%.
Does size matter? No. The earlier you develop best practices the bigger and quicker the pay off.

When organizations are small it is easier to correlate the use of talent with achieving financial outcomes. As organizations scale we depend more on financial modeling and budgets to allocate talent and the effectiveness of talent use becomes opaque and talent waste and misuse grow. Even early round venture funded startups can yield poor talent use as intense demands on management leaves little time to focus on talent use. Developing early talent use best practices will pay off in business performance for both management and the investors. As shown, a D round investment can improve investor return by 19% by adding just 85% of the planned labor to achieve the same revenue.
The Impact of 5% in improved profit margin is strategic. Early adopters win, laggards lose. Times change, and we evolve. Most of us had not heard of Design Thinking 10 years ago. Now it is the new normal. The ability to manage and measure talent use is now available and will become standard management practices. The benefits over time are huge, yielding an unfair advantage for early adopters.

Recent Comments