Assignment HRM LienBinh 1

MPM722 Human Resource Management

Assignment Topic 1

Human Resources Integration in CSIRO – A Critical Analysis

Lecturers

Dr Elsa UnderhillMr Michael Stewart

Students

Word Count : 5204

DISCLAIMER The information contained in this report may be confidential or privileged. Any use or disclosure requires valid authorisation from CSIRO. To the extent permitted by law, CSIRO does not represent, warrant and/or guarantee that the integrity of this communication has been maintained or that the communication is free of errors, interception or interference.

Table of Contents

Executive Summary..............................................................................................3Interviewees.......................................................................................................4

1. Introduction....................................................................................................52. CSIRO Strategic intentions............................................................................53. Literature Review of Strategic human resource management.......................84. The roles of Human Resources....................................................................12

4.1. The 2005 Ulrich & Brockbank’s Model..................................................124.2. Application of Ulrich and Brockbank’s model to CSIRO........................12

4.2.1. Employee Advocate.......................................................................134.2.2. Human Capital Developer..............................................................134.2.3. Strategic Partner............................................................................134.2.4. Functional Expert...........................................................................144.2.5. HR Leader......................................................................................14

4.3. Human Resources in CSIRO................................................................145. CSIRO Recruitment and Selection...............................................................15

5.1. Recruitment Process.............................................................................155.2. Recruitment Source..............................................................................155.3. Selection Process.................................................................................165.4. Employee Exit.......................................................................................17

6. Performance Management...........................................................................187. Human Resource Development...................................................................208. Diversity Management..................................................................................229. Conclusions:.................................................................................................2310. Recommendations....................................................................................24References..........................................................................................................25Appendix A..........................................................................................................27

A.1 Deb Miller..................................................................................................27A.2 Jay Sellahewa...........................................................................................50A.3 Mark Emerson...........................................................................................73

Appendix B..........................................................................................................94

Executive Summary

CSIRO’s key strategy is to be Australia’s leading organisation in bringing science and research to the public. It is predominantly funded by the Australian Federal Government and yet engages as a private enterprise. In its strategy CSIRO recognises that it needs its workforce to achieve its goals, however, it internally tries to strategically fit its workforce according to an Annual Science Investment cycle.

This report aims at evaluating the extent of integration of CSIRO’s Human Resources (HR) function with the organisation’s business strategy. In order to perform this analysis, three interviews were performed in three departments of the organisation including HR. The HR department is divided into two components: a strategic divisional component and an operational centralised component. Strategically, HR is ensuring that the policies governing HR are aligned to the direction of CSIRO. Operationally, HR is there to assist with employee’s difficulties, provide HR information to line management and drive the recruiting process.

When staffing, CSIRO contemplates its five year strategic plan to decide what is required. Operationally the recruitment section ensures that policies are adhered to and also analyses any trends such as departures. Policies related to recruitment and job design do not entirely match to increasing diversity within the workforce. An Annual Performance Agreement (APA) is conducted every year in CSIRO through a recently implemented electronic system. CSIRO’s workforce is developed both through a top down approach (training) as well as bottom up (career development). During their APA annual assessment the employee can propose the direction toward their career and management build on that.

Overall, even though HR is involved in the implementation and development of strategies as an active component of the management team, the annual budget cycle reduces the scope of HR planning. Some minor modifications to the HR structure would be of benefit. Mainly reintegrating operational components of HR into the various business units and thus providing a direct report to the HR manager from each business unit. Electronic APAs will assist HR in reporting and analysis of the workforce enabling better performance management and appraisal.

Interviewees

Deb Miller, HR Manager, AgribusinessEmail: [email protected]: 08 8303 8908Interview date: 08/12/2009 11:30 - 12:35

Mark Emerson, Project Manager, IMTEmail: [email protected]: 03 9731 3455Interview date: 09/12/2009 11:30 - 12:30

Jay Sellahewa, Group Leader, Food and Nutritional SciencesEmail: Jay. [email protected]: 02 9490 8383Interview date: 9/12/2009 17:30 -18:40

1. Introduction

This report focuses on investigating the Human Resources (HR) structure in a real organisation and on analysing how the HR function is integrated through the organisation. This was accomplished through interviews and then analysis of the interview transcripts (Appendix A) with relation to the theoretical models. Out of this analysis have come conclusions and recommendations on how the organisation could possibly have a more effective HR structure.

For the assignment the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) was chosen. CSIRO is Australia’s national science agency and one of the largest and most diverse research agencies in the world. With more than 6500 staff in 55 locations across Australia and the world, its size and depth of capability allows large-scale and multidisciplinary research, focused on major national challenges. During its 80 years of existence CSIRO has achieved equity shareholding in more than 20 companies and 161 active commercial licenses.

2. CSIRO Strategic intentions

CSIRO is the Australian national government statuary body for scientific research. It is responsible to the Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (DIISR). As a corporate body CSIRO also reports to its board. The organisation is lead by the CEO and their direct executive management team (ET). Each member of the ET leads a respective business unit as illustrated in Figure 1 CSIRO Organisational chart, which makes up a divisional type of structure (prospector; De Cieri et al., 2008; Wagner & Hollenbeck, 1992).

Figure 1 CSIRO Organisational chart

CSIRO’s strategy is based on its employees’ world class capability, working towards delivering relevant science and innovative solutions for the Australian industry, society and the environment. The strategic formulation is reflected in the SWOT and PESTEL analyses included in Appendix B.

Being an innovation driven organisation (Schuler & Jackson, 1987) CSIRO operates by differentiating itself in the market for both broad and narrow targets to keep its competitive advantage and sustainability (Porter, 1985). Due to the governmental nature of CSIRO, strategies will always be based around differentiation rather than cost. Being a government organisation, it is able to rely on long term planning, fitting into a defender type of model (Miles & Snow, 1984). However, in terms of self sustainability it fits into a prospector category (Miles & Snow, 1987) since each business unit relies on the interaction with industry through business development for technology transfer.

The Strategic roles for CSIRO are defined in Figure 2 The CSIRO Role House(CSIRO, 2007), which range from “advancing frontiers of science” to “assisting the community with science-based solutions” (CSIRO, 2007). The CSIRO Board and Governance is defined at the roof of the house and the Human Resources (HR) section sits at the floor of the house. HR through Research Support Services (RSS) is represented as a foundation or an enabling function of CSIRO to all other divisions to perform its core and satellite roles mainly related to the delivery of scientific research.

Figure 2 The CSIRO Role House (CSIRO, 2007)

3. Literature Review of Strategic human resource management

Strategic human resource management (SHRM) involves planning and delivers the execution of human resource objectives that are used in conjunction with strategic initiatives to enable an organisation to meet its identified goals (Ulrich, 1987).

As De Cieri et al. (2008, p. 56) explains, “strategic management is a process for analysing a company’s competitive situation, developing a company’s strategic goals and devising an action plan and allocating resources (physical, organisational and human)” which will therefore increase the likelihood of achieving those goals.

Largely, there are two broad schools of thought that include SHRM as an external market orientated approach: (a) HR practice choices are made to fit the external market, societal and organisational contexts and (b) HR focuses on resources as the underlying framework organisations require to best obtain and utilise the highest potential from the tools available as well as staff. The latter therefore focuses on people and culture which are difficult to replicate. This view deems technology and financial capabilities as replaceable however staff engagement and performance is key to achieving competitive advantage (De Cieri et al. 2008)

These schools of thought are supported by various theorists who have examined SHRM, hence creating much literature analysing the notion of gaining competitive advantage as central to the need for SHRM (Ulrich, 1987).

Schuler and Jackson (1987) have formed their view based on the need to focus on obtaining the highest potential from staff and the need for a strategic outlay from HRM to gain competitive advantage which includes the linkage/integration between competitive strategy and HRM practices. They assert that innovation strategy (differentiation of service/products), quality enhancement strategy and cost-reduction strategy coupled with the rationale for linkage being the needed role behaviours, increases competitive advantage (Schuler & Jackson, 1987).

According to Huselid, Jackson and Schuler (1997) strategic HRM activities are described as aligned to company strategy therefore preserving the individuality of human resources “...this is ensured if the firm’s staff add value essentially being unique in calibre and difficult to replace” (Huselid, Jackson & Schuler 1997, p. 173).

In addition, Huselid, Jackson and Schuler (1997) contend that SHRM involves designing and implementing a set of internally consistent policies and practices which develop and capture employee’s knowledge base including their skills and

abilities. HR professionals therefore add value to the organisation if an understanding of the business is achieved (Ulrich et al. 1995).

Gratton et al. (1999) also supports the same school of thought by contending that delivering continued and sustained competitive advantage in the short-term and long-term is a key challenge for most organisations and the ability to access this is strategic, which does not only involve capital but the people within the organisation and the key drivers that form the initiatives surrounding the organisation’s strategic policies and ideas.

Whilst examining Ulrich’s (1986) literature, it is evident that he sustains the importance of organisational capability, referring to the people of the organisation. Ulrich (1986) explains that there are various sources of competitive advantage which are economic capability, strategic capability, technological capability and the capability that overlaps all three is organisational capability. Organisational capability integrates and sustains the other three as it represents a critical aspect of the organisation. Here Ulrich (1986) defines what Schuler and Jackson (1987), Huselid, Jackson and Schuler (1997), and Gratton et al. (1999) have also referred to as necessary for competitive advantage, the need for using HRM to maintain the uniqueness of people and culture as organisational capability.

Ulrich (1986) further argues that “Human resource practices represent the policies, procedures, systems and activities used to shape, monitor and direct attention of people within the organisation...these HR practices underlie organisational capability” (Ulrich 1986, p.173). This creates a company’s culture which is irreplaceable. HR professionals are therefore required to be strategic business partners and thus play an active role in the decision making process of the company.

The strategic model defined by Miles and Snow (1984) examines the differences in HR strategies based on organisational/strategic types which fit into categories of ‘defender’, ‘prospector’, ’analyser’ and ‘reactor’ where each can be either proactive or reactive with respect to their environments. The fundamental concept explains how firms develop stable patterns of strategic behaviour to align with environmental conditions (Krishnan & Singh, 2004). This model therefore supports the notion of SHRM as an external market orientated approach whereby HR practice choices are made to fit the external market.

Miles and Snow (1984) provide a theoretical framework including a model of the adaptive process called the adaptive cycle, and a determined means of moving through the process which is the strategic typology. Miles and Snow (1978) contend “We believe that managers' ability to meet successfully environmental conditions of tomorrow revolves around their understanding of organisations as integrated and dynamic wholes” (Miles & Snow 1978, p. 561)

Another SHRM model Miles and Snow (1984) identify includes the core concept, of “fit” among an organisation’s strategy, structure and management processes. Essentially, HRM strategies and processes need to align with business strategies or “fit”. Delving into this concept further, reveals that successful organisations utilise design structures and management processes to achieve strategic fit within their external environment. In contrast, unsuccessful companies exert poor fit externally or internally (Miles & Snow 1984). Ahmad and Kazmi (2001) have taken various SHRM theories and developed their own theory that follows principles of different approaches to SHRM. They see four distinct approaches that are strategy-focused, decision focused, content focused and implementation focused. According to Ahmad and Kazmi (1991) “Business strategies are needed support via HRM systems for implementations which fulfill the competitive needs of the business” (Ahmad & Kazmi 2001, p. 139).

The implementation-focused approach is also supported by Miles and Snow (1984) who argue that the human resource structures increasingly display the importance of linking the two vital processes of strategic planning and human resource planning. Green et al (2006) also supports this notion, contending that “human resources, if properly aligned with corporate strategy, could serve as the basis for such competitive advantage” (Green et al. 2008, p. 561)

Furthermore, Simpkins (2008) argues the need for strategy to be driven through HRM therefore supporting the implementation-focused approach, he states that:

HR must proactively assure that they have access to key senior leaders, middle management, and operational personnel and be recognised, by various vertical and horizontal departments as an entity that can effectively and efficiently gather pertinent information. (Simpkins 2008, p. 47)

He also contends that “Aligning HR practices to support business objectives generally requires implementation of a SHRM approach” (Simpkins 2008, p. 561).

In contrast, Schuler and MacMillan (1984) describe the importance of SHRM in the formulation stage rather than the implementation stage, as they argue:

There appears to be a benefit from HRM considerations represented in the strategy formulation stage rather than in the implementation stage. Once the strategy is formulated and the appropriate HRM thrust identified, specific HRM practices need to be developed. (Schuler & MacMillan 1984, p. 241)

In addition they suggest how developing competitive advantage is done through a target/thrust matrix (Schuler & MacMillan, 1984).

It is evident that there are many models and theories to support varied views of SHRM and the way in which SHRM should operate. If SHRM is implemented or integrated through the business or the objectives are to ‘fit’ with the external market or the aim is to maintain ‘organisational capability’; the central goal of all companies alike have a common theme which always surrounds gaining competitive advantage. Therefore, whichever models and theories are used, the importance is in understanding the fact that SHRM will inevitably play a pivotal role in achieving the business objectives of all companies, thus to attain competitive advantage.

4. The roles of Human Resources.

The role of Human Resources (HR) varies from company to company, but essentially HR as an organisational wide view has generally received 5 distinct roles implemented by HR professionals, executive management, line managers and increasingly, the employees.

4.1. The 2005 Ulrich & Brockbank’s Model

The article by Ulrich & Brockbank (2005) describes these 5 roles:

Employee Advocate, dealing directly with employees. Human Capital Developer, developing the workforce. Strategic Partner, developing company strategies. Functional Expert, knowing the HR business. HR Leader, bringing all the roles together.

In more recent years, the authors in conjunction with other professionals from the RBL consulting group (Ulrich, Brockbank, Johnson & Younger, 2007) have modified the model but in essence, the 2005 model still holds.

4.2. Application of Ulrich and Brockbank’s model to CSIRO.

To help understand how the HR model applies to CSIRO, two issues must be clarified. CSIRO has centralised the primary HR department which directly reports to the CEO and only left a presence of HR within the various business units to assure strategic integration from each unit and to maintain some level of interaction with staff. The HR function is structured into two main components; first a strategic arm that sets group policies and the other is an operational or specialist services arm which assists implementing the policies among the various business units. The structure is illustrated in Figure 3 Structure of theCSIRO Human Resource function (CSIRO intranet). Secondly CSIRO is a public service so its primary customer is the government and the second source of revenue comes from industry research projects.

Figure 3 Structure of the CSIRO Human Resource function (CSIRO intranet).

4.2.1. Employee Advocate

Largely this role is played out by the line management in CSIRO. Due to the centralisation of HR the line managers are the first line to deal with employee concerns, business reality and voicing employee concerns up the organisation’s hierarchy. HR’s operational arm is mainly there to assist with difficult cases and help strategically flow the information through the organisation. This is a logical fit to a centralised HR model however interviewed line managers Jay Sellahewa (2009) and Mark Emerson (2009) expressed concerns with centralising HR as they feel HR has lost touch with the workforce.

4.2.2. Human Capital Developer

Within CSIRO the HR department plays a very strategic role in this. HR are analysing information primarily from the operational arm by the strategic arm to assist with high level succession plans and also developing policies surrounding employee development. From an operational view point the implementation of this is done primarily by line managers and employees themselves, nominating what they would like to pursue in their careers and general training.

4.2.3. Strategic Partner

CSIRO strategy is dictated by government grants pointing to making industrial revenue from internal projects for division self-sustainability. This means that the

core directions of CSIRO are a direct result of these grants. As such HR has fairly minimal input into the core business direction but rather plays a pivotal role in developing company wide policies to achieve the company directions. In many respects HR is strategically shaping to the workforce rather than using the workforce to shape the company direction. HR predominantly takes operational aspects of this role implementing and developing strategies, whereas the strategy behind the role and reasons for needing these strategies, is largely taken care of at the board level.

4.2.4. Functional Expert

This role is almost exclusively taken care of by the HR department in CSIRO and HR take on both the strategic and operational aspects of the role. Fitting with the centralised model, the view across the board at CSIRO is that this is the core function of HR professionals as they are meant to be experts in their own area at the service centre or in strategic support roles. Both arms of HR are equally involved in this. This is clearly shown in CSIRO HR organisational chart by the very name of specialist services. Jay Sellahewa (2009) also makes a very strong case in his question 5 response.

4.2.5. HR Leader

Strategically, leadership is given to CSIRO via the policies developed by HR. The workforce of CSIRO is essentially the only tool it has to achieve its directions so that HR is present and has a strong hold over pulling the policies together that ensure the workforce is aligned with company direction. However, operationally it is the responsibility of line management to enforce and abide by the policies set by HR. This is quite clearly demonstrated by Deb, Mark and Jay’s comments in the interviews, that detail who is accountable for achieving the end result.

4.3. Human Resources in CSIRO

Predominantly HR within CSIRO plays a strategic role while applying its centralised operational functions. However, due to the organisation being public, HR has little influence over the strategic direction of the company instead maintaining control over the strategic direction of its workforce. The key roles played out by HR are functional experts, strategic partners and to a lesser degree HR leadership and capital development. The other role of employee advocate is predominantly performed by line management but HR is there to assist when required.

5. CSIRO Recruitment and Selection

CSIRO currently uses both internal and external recruitment sources by advertising internally and by public advertisement. Recruitment is based around the strategic goals of CSIRO, as detailed in CSIRO Role House (Fig 1). As shown below, recruitment and selection is quite developed to accommodate changing needs, fitting into a prospector category (Miles and Snow, 1984).

5.1. Recruitment Process

At the moment CSIRO’s recruitment process is driven by an Annual Science Investment Process, which is driven by the Annual Budget Cycle. In other words, this policy creates an annual need to fit the plan within the budget, instead of being able to plan its capability to recruit people to grow new markets.

Research Group leaders identify what capabilities they need strategically for the next 5 years. (Jay Sellahewa, 2009). If the group realises that skills are lacking, or there are not enough full time employees to perform these capabilities, new staff is hired, or existing staff receive the required training. To initiate new staff recruitment, a recruitment request will be passed onto the HR Recruitment section (Fig. 3) to fulfil the vacancy.

In general, the HR Department screens the candidates’ resumes from the CSIRO database as well as new applications received through the CSIRO website or by advertising in other websites and consulting agencies if necessary. If it is a senior or professional position, CSIRO uses international head hunting companies.(Deb Miller, 2009)

5.2. Recruitment Source

External recruitment is the last option considered by Group Leaders. Firstly, Group leaders will try to find the right skills among staff within their group. Secondly a student is appointed for joint work with another university or research institution to integrate the external body’s capability into CSIRO. Thirdly, the science group looks for partnerships in main universities, which are the main research providers or across other divisions within CSIRO.

There are two main recruitment sources that CSIRO has used:

Internal source: the HR department advertises job vacancies on the internal communication channels within organisation such as internal Science Groups or public board announcement through internal newsletter announcements at divisional levels.

External sources: the HR department advertises the job vacancies on the Career Section of CSIRO’s website (http://www.csiro.au/people/Careers.html), rarely newspapers, specialised job search websites (such as www.jobsearch.gov.au; www.jobnet.com.au; www.mycareer.com.au); executive search agencies, social bookmarking networks such as facebook, digg, newsvine, and partnership with research provider, universities.

In many cases, CSIRO’s Recruitment gives priority to internal applicants who have worked within CSIRO. The advantage of considering internal applicants in HR recruitment is that they are well known to the organisation, relatively knowledgeable about the organisation’s vacancies, eventually less expensive, and faster to fill vacancies internally (De Cieri et al. 2008). Moreover, similarly to external staff, internal staff can be recruited through a competitive selection process. However, CSIRO also considers external applicants to make the selection process more competitive and a way of bringing new knowledge and skills to the organisation which may be more adequate for the position. (De Cieri et al. 2008).

5.3. Selection Process

CSIRO’s HR will screen candidates from the application forms by checking job description and job specification of each position.

Suitable candidates do the aptitude test during the interview. An interview with each candidate is held by a committee made up by the

line manager, the upper level manager, and the HR consultant from the recruitment department.

Performing a comparison between expected salary of the candidate and the salary structure of CSIRO (for example, special considerations for high quality level positions such as chief, theme leaders, or research scientists).

Salary and benefit offering and negotiation (the appropriate CSIRO Officer salary classification (CSOF level) defines salary range cited in the advertisement of the position. However, prevailing market salaries, CSIRO's obligations under the CSIRO Enterprise Agreement, internal salary relativities and the appointee's existing remuneration are considered within the recruitment policies. In appropriate circumstances, an appointee's commencing classification and salary may be above or below the advertised CSOF level(s) and later may be increased in the light of performance on the job and internal classification and salary relativities).

Physical check up (particularly for candidates coming from overseas such as research scientists and post doctoral researchers).

Recruitment decision

http://www.mycareer.com.au/

http://www.jobnet.com.au/

http://www.jobsearch.gov.au/

5.4. Employee Exit

The employees who leave CSIRO are expected to do the following: Fill an exit survey related to the reasons of their departure. Participate in an exit interview with the Chief of Division, line manager and

HR consultant that provides the reasons for leaving CSIRO. Return belongings and being reminded of their contractual obligation

related to protecting CSIRO’s Intellectual Property (IP).

As a result of the exit interview, information collected after a staff’s departure, enable the line manager and HR to point out useful data in formulating a suitable strategy to attract and retain good staff within CSIRO for the future. (Deb Miller, 2009)

6. Performance Management

Figure 4 Model of Performance Management in Organisations Source: De Cieri et al. 2008

The above figure states that individuals’ attributes such as skills and abilities, are the raw materials of performance which are changed into objective results through the staff’s behaviour. In addition, a performance management system would ensure that all activities support strategic goals of the organisation and that the situational constraints are always at work within the performance management system. These factors contribute to an employee performing effective work (De Cieri et al. 2008).

To measure and manage employees’ performance, Deb Miller (2009) stated in her interview, that “CSIRO has put in place an Annual Performance Agreement (APA) process, where the objectives are set together in key result areas with the performance indicators (or measures of success) around July/August. The objectives are reviewed semi-regularly during the year, and do a formal assessment in June when completing the financial year.” The APA includes sections on resources needed for performance, training and development, career discussions and contribution to safety, sustainability, corporate citizenship, and other special projects with intended value focus. This year CSIRO values were included in the APA. Starting July 2010, this section will need to be formally taken into account in relation to “people’s behaviour at work” so that the APA is in line with CSIRO values.

This year a new electronic system called eAPA is facilitating feedback and follow up discussions (between the line manager and employee, also involving the next level manager and HR) as well as data collection. Therefore, this new eAPA will help the HR department to more easily analyse and determine trends per Team or Group within the Division as well as better understanding the organisation’s behaviour. As a result, the eAPA system points out performance feedback to be at both individual or collective levels, allowing information retro feed and

identification for improvement needs (e.g., training needs, administrative, in the job practice, or structure changes). Hence, HR has developed a system to capture performance metrics and rapidly provide direction for improvement or strategic realignment in certain areas towards gaining competitive advantage; particularly by means of longer term adjustments driven by innovation (Schuler and Jackson, 1987). As more data will be collected, this provides more opportunities on which employees can add value and become more effective.

7. Human Resource Development

It is evident that Human Resources plays a pivotal role in the strategic objectives within CSIRO, as explained by the HR Manager at CSIRO, Deb Miller (2009) “In-business HR staff exists to support the strategies of each business unit”. HR is integrated within the business to ensure that there is a level of implementation to achieve the overall business objectives. However, CSIRO seem to focus on organisational capability as explained by Ulrich (1986), this is supported by further comments from Deb Miller (2009) “The core strategies of the HR section involve helping create the environment so that people enhance their creative spirit to deliver great science and innovative solutions (CSIRO’s unifying core purpose)”. CSIRO are thus focused on integrating HR within to business to primarily influence people and culture to create a workforce that is unique and therefore difficult to replicate.

Human Resource Development contributes to CSIRO’s strategic intentions as there is a need to retain staff and provide development to ensure that the people and culture of the organisation is unique. Deb Miller (2009) has stated that there is training and development programs for specific work objectives, through the APA (top down development). She also states that “In the longer development needs happen through Talent Discussions, Leadership pipeline, and so on. Staff also have their own responsibilities (bottom up development)” (Deb Miller, 2009).

On the intranet, employees can view various career management tools, to identify areas they feel there is a requirement to improve on and thus approach management for further career development initiatives and extended skill based learning. There are also secondments available for the objective of learning other roles, and gain experience in other facets of the industry. The way in which development is provided is required to integrate within the strategic direction of the business; this is supported by Deb Miller’s (2009) comments “The level of support we give to staff depends on the alignment to strategy. We generally support career development according to strategy.”

This is further explained by Jay Sellahewa (2009), Group Leader in the Food and Nutritional Sciences Division at CSIRO, “At a science Group level, development needs are determined based on capability development needs in response to Theme strategic requirements. It is common practice that the groups allot a certain amount (e.g., at least $1000 per year per scientist) for training into internal project budgets as part of the capability development” (Jay Sellahewa, 2009).

Jay also states that the HR development should be involved in the strategic planning of CSIRO as developing personnel enables the company to also obtain the strategic objectives, he provides an example of succession planning where

capabilities were required in individuals yet in this instance the development plan was created however unable to implement due to lack of funding.

As part of a psychological contract between CSIRO and the employee, the organisation actively encourages staff through HR development initiatives to further their career by providing training opportunities and the ability to benchmark capabilities via tools accessible within the organisation. The HR development plan is aligned with business strategy and there is an emphasis on the individual to take ownership of their own development as well as leadership to encourage staff to utilise the programs available to them.

8. Diversity Management

CSIRO have a range of policies relating to diversity which are prescribed by the organisation as necessary to adhere to. Deb Miller (2009) states that “We don’t discriminate when we recruit, when we develop, when we performance manage, but it also relates around policies on harassment and bullying” (Deb Miller, 2009). Education on diversity policies is provided to staff and leadership positions including the induction program for new employees.

Within the company, if an issue arises importance is placed on the situation however in terms of regularly promoting the policies there is more work to be done. The diversity policies are also embedded within the company values, thus playing an important role in creating an environment which enhances the culture of the organisation. CSIRO also provide staff representatives as a main point of contact for any breeches in diversity policies and then a formal investigation is conducted.

Diversity management at CSIRO is not an area that is dictated by the strategic intentions of the organisation as it is quite separate. Diversity is an area that cannot be bound by strategic direction, there is essentially one way and that is to provide equal employment opportunities and ensure everyone is treated with the same respect regardless of age, sex, race and sexual differences.

Mark Emerson, Project Manager IMT at CSIRO, states that “[he see’s]...no differences between people in terms of knowledge, abilities, or in their intellectual space” (Mark Emerson, 2009). Jay Sellahewa (2009) also reaffirms this by stating that he “would not change strategy or job descriptions to meet diversity needs” (Jay Sellahewa, 2009).

9. Conclusions:

CSIRO recognises that their staff are key in delivering its strategic objectives. As such, the HR Division has been centralised and integrated throughout the organisation including the upper management. This allows HR to be an integral part of setting strategic directions for CSIRO (Golden & Ramanujam, 1985).

CSIRO internally fits its workforce to the directions of government. It provides “internal growth” HR strategies that allow results-oriented achievements through research (De Cieri & Kramar, 2008). These practices strategically lead to HR management outcomes of high employee commitment (Guest, 1997). It is difficult to apply the Miles and Snow (1984) model of matching HRM to strategy in CSIRO. Due to the nature of its market it is a prospector but Government involvement puts some defender aspects on CSIRO.

From Schuler & Jackson (1987) CSIRO can be thought of as an innovative company, operating on a five year term focus. However, the innovative model does not fit CSIRO in that employment conditions are relatively fixed, partly due to the governmental nature of the organisation.

Ulrich (1986) argues that the focus of organisational capability needs to be in concrete policies and practices of the company which in turn establish the culture of the organisation. CSIRO promotes clear HR policies and practices and further ensures these are readily accessible to all employees. Using this model for SHRM, CSIRO therefore utilises Human Resources to represent the policies, practices, procedures, systems and activities used to enhance, mould and focus the attention of the people within the company through a ‘one way’ approach (Ulrich, 1986).

Other SHRM models that CSIRO appear to utilise are defined by Gratton et al. (1999) who describe the dimensions of linkage. It appears that CSIRO demonstrate vertical linkage as there is vertical linkage between business objectives, team performance, individual behaviour and company performance. Vertical linkage is ultimately gained through processes, policies and procedures which is central to CSIRO strategic human resource management.

Overall CSIRO policies and practices related to human resource development and diversity management are integrated along with most HR policies and practices, as CSIRO core values play an essential role in the initial formulation of these policies. They are derived from the central foundations of its business strategy and the way in which people and culture are developed and managed. However, policies related to recruitment and job design do not seem to be entirely matched to the increasing diversity within the workforce.

10. Recommendations

Through analysis it appears that CSIRO has a working HR structure. There are a few recommendations that could be made, such as adapting job design around diversity and salary packaging but the reality is that these adaptations will be difficult to implement in a government funded organisation. The only clear issue that the interviewees all mention or allude to for improvement is to integrate the operational arm of HR into the various business units so that HR professionals report to the business unit rather than to the centralised HR function. What this would achieve is a closer link between the employee’s divisional leaders, which would result in more relevant or adaptive HR strategies to achieve the business objectives. More specific performance indicators based on strategy at group or section level will be possible to be developed as a result of the recent introduction of the eAPAs and collection of annual data on performance, diversity, training and career development information.

References

CSIRO 2007, CSIRO Strategic Plan 2007-11. Building momentum and increasing impact, retrieved 16th December 2009, <www.csiro.au/resources/StratPlan07-11.html>

De Cieri, H. & Kramar, R 2008, Human Resource Management in Australia: Strategy, People, Performance, 3rd edn, McGraw Hill, Australia.

Golden, K. & Ramanujam, V 1985, ‘Between a dream and a nightmare: on the integration of the human resource function and the strategic business planning process’, Human Resource Management, vol. 24, no. 4pp. 429-451.

Gratton, L, Hope-Hailey, V, Stiles, P, & Truss, C 1999, ‘Linking Individual Performance to Business Strategy: The People Process Model’, Human Resource Management, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 17-31.

Green, KW, Wu, C, Whitten, D & Medlin, B 2006, ‘The impact of strategic human resource management on firm performance and HR professionals’ work attitude and work performance’, International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 559-579.

Guest, D. E 1997, ‘Human resource management and performance: a review and research agenda’, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 263-76.

Huselid, MA, Jackson, SE, Schuler, RS 1997, ‘Technical and Strategic Human

Resource Management Effectiveness as Determinants of Firm Performance’, The Academy of Management Journal, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 171-188.

Kazmi, A & Ahmad, F 2001, ‘Differing Approaches to Strategic Human Resource Management’, Journal of Management Research, vol. 1, no. 3, pp.133-140.

Krishnan, S & Singh, M 2004, Strategic Human Resource Management: Three-Stage Process and Influence of Organisational Factors, IIMA (Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad) Working Papers.

Miles, RE & Snow, CC 1984, ‘Designing strategic human resources systems’, Organisational Dynamics, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 36-52.

Miles, RE & Snow, CC 1984, ‘Fit, Failure And The Hall of Fame’, California Management Review, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 10-28.

http://www.csiro.au/resources/StratPlan07-11.html

Miles, RE, Snow, CC, Meyer, AD, Coleman Jr, HJ 1978, ‘Organisational Strategy, Structure and Process’, The Academy of Management Review, vol. 3, no. 3, pp.546-562.

Porter, M.E 1985, Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, Free Press, New York.

Schuler, RS & MacMillan, IC 1984, ‘Gaining Competitive Advantage through Human Resource Management Practices’, Human Resource Management, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 241-255.

Schuler, RS & Jackson, SE 1987, ‘Linking Competitive Strategies with Human Resource Management Practices’, The Academy of Management Executive, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 207-219.

Simpkins, RA 2008, ‘Bringing Human Resources Back into Strategic Planning’, Employee Relations Today, pp. 43-52.

Ulrich, D 1986, ‘Organisational Capability as a Competitive Advantage: Human Resource Professionals as Strategic Partners’, Human Resource Planning, vol. 10, no.4, pp. 169-184.

Ulrich, D 1987,’Strategic Human Resource Planning: Why and How?’ Human Resource Planning, vol. 10, no. 1, pp.37-56.

Ulrich, D, Brockbank, W, Yeung, AK, Lake, DG 1995, ‘Human Resource Competencies: An Empirical Assessment’, Human Resource Management, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 473-495.

Ulrich, D & Brockbank, W 2005, ‘Roll Call’, People Management, vol. 11, no. 12, p. 28

Wagner, J.A. & Hollenbeck, J.R 1992, Organisational Behavior: Securing

Competitive Advantage, 3rd edn, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Appendix A

A.1 Deb Miller

20 Questions, 3 minutes per question.

Interviewer :__Pablo___________________ Interviewee :__Deb Miller________________Position :__HR Manager______________Date :___8/12/2009_______________Start Time :___11:30___________________Finish Time :___ 12:35__________________

Question 1: to allWhat is the strategic direction of your department/section and how are you using your staff to achieve this?

Scope Reference:Item 2, Strategic Intentions of the organisation

Objectives of the question:In general terms need to ascertain what the goals are of the particular section the person works for and how they are using the following list on their staff to achieve this.

Job descriptions Pay/rewards/incentives Career Development Outside resources Cultural change

Question Response:

Strategic roles for CSIRO are defined in the CSIRO Role House (Fig. 1), which includes roles that range from advancing frontiers of science to assisting the community with science-based solutions. The CSIRO Board and Governance is defined at the roof of the house and the Human Resource section sits at the floor of the house. HR is represented as a foundation or an enabling function of CSIRO to all other divisions to perform its core and satellite roles mainly related to the delivery of scientific research. The core strategies of the HR section involve helping create the environment so that people enhance their creative spirit to deliver great science and innovative solutions (CSIRO’s unifying core purpose).

A few years ago Research Support Service centre was created to provide services in a number of functional areas including operational HR taking care of payroll, commencement and cessations, etc. (others include finance, contract administration, legal services, commercialisation, property services, and records). Another central group is in recruitment (Fig. 2) and since then there is a few staff in divisions (i.e., in-business units). In-business HR staff exists to support the strategies of each business unit, which in turn coincide with the strategy of CSIRO. In Deb Miller’s particular case, her role is to support the strategy of the Food and Nutritional Sciences division within the Agribusiness Business Unit where she manages one staff to help her achieve this goal.

In parallel, each division has recently reviewed the HR structure to designate Group HR Managers who support each Group Executive (Fig. 3, in blue) and support strategic priorities of the group. For example, Deb Miller is the Group HR Manager to Joan Daly and is now part of the management team with the chief Agribusiness Division. The idea is to have a strong link from CSIRO Strategy, to Group Strategy, to Business strategy and HR is supporting these integrations as much as they can. In this way, HR is integrated to the core structure of the Executive Team that runs CSIRO, lead by Megan Clark (CSIRO’s CEO). However, it has no direct role in the CSIRO Board of Directors.

Within the last 5 years HR has been recognised as being able to provide strategic value and is now part of the management teams, where strategy is set and implemented.

Figure 1. The CSIRO Role House (CSIRO Strategic Plan 2007-2011).

Fig. 2. CSIRO HR Structure

Fig. 3 CSIRO Organisational chart

Question 2: to allDo the strategic directions of your department differ from the greater strategic direction of the CSIRO, if so why and are there any other differences?


Objectives of the question:In contrast to question 1 need to specifically determine if the fundamental goals of the section are different to the CSIRO corporate body and why the differences exist. Regardless of whether there is alignment, we need to determine if there are any other differences such as the implementation of strategies. Question Response:

Until 2008 the CSIRO Food and Nutritional Sciences Division used to be Food Science Australia, a joint venture between CSIRO and the Victorian Government. During this time it was very difficult to coordinate strategic directions as Food Science Australia was not completely aligned with CSIRO strategy since it was also aligned to DPIV. This is part of the reason why there were several culture issues when performing strategic investment planning to properly perform according to the organisation’s operational matrix. However, now that it is all integrated as a business unit in CSIRO, HR strategies are aligned from the top to support CSIRO’s business strategy. The intent is that the strategies are equally aligned across all business units, but that depends on the skills of the HR people or group manager designated for each business unit.

Question 3: to allWhat involvement do you have with directly dealing with staff and their day to day concerns and passing that through the CSIRO?

Scope Reference:Item 4, HR Roles

Objectives of the question:Need to determine what extent the manager directly interacts with employees, both to receive information from the employee and to give information about all things that are not job specific. This would be restructure, well being, peer conflicts, etc. Also need to know how they use the interaction to influence any directions or decisions in the organisations (operational executor?; employee advocate?)

Question Response:The expectation is that Deb has little interaction with people on a day to day basis as she is supporting division and business unit executive management. However, in practice, since there are few resources to look after each division, she does interact with personnel on a day to day basis since she is the only person at the Adelaide site. A lot of the operational work is passed on to the Service Centre. The CSIRO Self-Serve also saves a lot of time in interacting with people for personnel activities such as leave request, payment summary, bank accounts, Annual Performance Agreement, and directs information to the Service Centre or to the line manager for approval where applicable.

In more complex cases when there are interpersonal conflicts or grievances she and her HR support officer become quite involved and tries to coach line managers to try to resolve complex issues.

She is also very involved in the planning and restructuring at the management level and participates in communicating to staff and support them through those restructures (e.g., redundancies of positions or “spill and fill” situations).

Question 4: to allWhat is your influence on employee development?


Objectives of the question:Need to determine what extent the manager influence’s employee development. Does the manager plan development based on growth within a section or growth for a person’s career, who initiates career growth and who follows up on an employee’s career path (talent manager).

Question Response:

CSIRO has a talent management priority and a plan and various activities. Leadership pipelines and succession plans, etc..

She works very closely one on one with the Division’s CEO, deputy officer, and research program leaders and group leaders to determine what potential does staff have to take on higher level roles and what level of development is needed to achieve these higher level roles. She’s quite heavily involved in discussions on talent level roles. However, the development discussions themselves are meant to happen between the employee and their group and team leaders, who need to ensure that development happens. She regularly (at least annually) seeks follow up or feedback from the Group managers to determine what development is needed in order for the employee to undertake higher level roles. There is an annual review of the talent plan. Talent planning is a CSIRO activity, but Deb initiates this planning within her division (CFNS).

Question 5: to the HR manager

How does Human Resources keep up with the emerging trends to human resourcing and bring them into the organisation?


Objectives of the question:Need to determine what body of knowledge about the employee and policies the manager has at her disposal, where it predominantly comes from and how they increase and share that body of knowledge across the CSIRO (Functional expert?).

In addition, how CSIRO HR shares this body of knowledge and then processes it to shape up the culture according to strategy (Culture and change steward).

Question Response:Many of the HR personnel from CSIRO are members of the Australian Human Resources Institute (AHRI) and attend professional conferences to keep updated on the emerging trends on HR. CSIRO is a corporate member of the Corporate Leadership Council (international organisation), which does in depth research on HR issues across best practice organisations around the world. There are periodic communications with the Leadership Council to follow up on their latest research findings and for research regarding CSIRO’s issues. It has been a good resource for best practices in organisations around the world, in addition to the existing HR theory.

Within the CSIRO HR network there are some functional areas. Expectations are that the Recruitment team and L&D team are functional experts for good practice in that area. In business, HR support need to be generalists and cover many grounds, but efforts are focused on benefiting business strategy. CSIRO has a strategy and a goal of creating talent and multidisciplinary teams, and HR business support has to look around things that support that strategy. Hence, they prioritise on what they have to do research on and bring it back to implement it in CSIRO as long as it supports their strategy.

Question 6: to allWhen developing and implementing strategies, in what way do you consider employees?


Objectives of the question:Need to determine what considerations the manager has, if at all, when they make strategic decisions how that will affect their personnel. This would include collaboration with other sections, questioning decisions for the benefit of employees and getting the message out to employees (strategy architect/ business ally?).

Question Response:In the developing a strategy, HR is involved from its participation in the management team at all levels in CSIRO.

One of the clear benefits of HR being in the management table at all levels in CSIRO is that when strategic changes happen, HR tries to measure the impact on employees, how these changes are implemented or managed, participation in development of a communication plan.

For example, when staff cuts occur as a result of strategic decisions, they look into measuring how staff is affected and in what ways staff that is leaving and remaining will be supported to keep business viability. Another example is when the joint venture was brought back into a CSIRO division, a number of actions for communication, impact evaluation and training on CSIRO systems had to be put in place.

Question 7: to allHow are you leading your staff or other under your influence to ensure staff concerns, staff development, information and strategies are all headed in the same direction?


Objectives of the question:Need to determine what level of HR leadership the manager has and whether they are more of an operational leader or give strategic direction (Human Resource Leader?).

Question Response:It is important that when strategic decisions and changes within our division or business unit occur staff are briefed or informed. In particular, I make sure that my HR staff are briefed and ready to communicate to other staff how they will be supported and the extent of the impact. We also brief the Health and Safety Manager in for stress issues. There is a Staff Consultative Committee where the Division’s CEO, HR Manager (Deb), and selected staff form a team to receive feedback from staff and explain strategy to staff so they understand where we are heading. It is an opportunity for open challenge to management.

Question 8: to HR managerHow is staff planning performed?

Scope Reference:Item 5, Staffing

Objectives of the question:Need to determine what are the triggers to recruiting staff.

Fixed number of positions Project focused Business development focused Reinforcing or creating new skills for a team Strategic or operational focus. Contribution of forecasting

Question Response:We really need to be doing Workforce Planning, i.e., understanding the types of people, skills, positions and levels that will be needed in the future to do the kind of work that our strategy is leading us to. By understanding where we are at now and understanding the gaps in skills required to define what sort of recruitment or development is needed we can develop a workforce planning strategy. For example, age profiles indicate succession planning needed and forecasting the future based on strategies.

In reality at the moment CSIRO is very much driven by an Annual Science Investment, which in turn is driven by the annual budget cycle. This is creating an annual need to just fit planning within the budget, instead of being able to plan our capability to recruit people to grow where actually needed. This annual process is causing a lot of tension across CSIRO, because there is conflict between those who are asked to plan the research according to strategy and those who distribute the budget.

Recruitment is triggered by this annual process. Thus, recruitment at this point is more operational rather than strategic (e.g., needing a lab technician for a ongoing project rather than identifying keep players to fit to strategy). However, there is a lot of pushback to intend to grow capability without being able to sustain this economically.

Question 9: to the HR managerHow does HR participate in selection of internal and/or external recruitment? Is this in partnership with line managers?


Objectives of the question:Determine whether preference is given to internal candidates, how much information is given on CSIRO direction are employee benefits promoted, salary packaging, advertising in certain areas word of mouth tactics.

Also determine HR interaction with other divisions in promotion of internal or external staff (considering external staff can range from visiting scientists (local and overseas), students, temporary employees (postdocs), and full time employee) this question can be a challenge).

Question Response:The Recruitment Team (Figure 2), a functional team within HR, handles selection and recruitment in partnership with the line manager. This is outside Deb’s section at the Agribusiness unit. They work out the job description and help with interview process, selection process, referee, checks, etc. The RT has a good idea about the business, are supporting, and in partner with the line manager understand the business constraints and opportunities. In the past, this was done from within the CFNS division (formerly Food Science Australia). This new set up works in some areas, but not in all areas, because there are a number of junior recruitment consultants who do not necessarily have the background and ability to work with the line manager closely. There’s different levels of assistance per division due to differences in experience across recruitment consultants in different regions, some being more assertive than others.

Preference is given to internal candidates.

Question 10: to the HR managerHow does the organisation evaluate the success of recruitment and selection decisions (costs/benefits)?


Objectives of the question:Determine whether preference is given to internal candidates, what role does reference checks, medical, background checks, resume, interview, and any other testing have on who is ultimately selected. Are there any other considerations such as candidates compatibility within an existing team

Determine if there is appraisal of the recruitment process.

Question Response:

Really not sure of that…

The manager of the Recruitment Unit does various measures of how long it took to recruit (timeliness, cost, etc.) and do follow up surveys with the line managers that they have helped around or the recruitment consultant. The assessment of the quality of the recruited person is not being assessed very well.

There is very little newspaper advertisement done, but do publicity in specialised websites, and executive search agencies for senior jobs. Also there are links to social networks such as facebook, diggers, etc.

Question 11: allWhat do you do when an employee leaves, whether to an external body or internal movement?


Objectives of the question:Determine if an exit interview or review is done, does this information feed back for future strategies or influence over recruitment. Who acts on this information.

Question Response:

The line manager of a departing employee gets a list of actions to do before the employee leaves. That includes an exit interview. We get varied information from exit interviews. The critical part of an exit interview is around IP and line managers remind the leaving employee about IP obligations before they depart. Why are you leaving, what could we’ve done better, Is there anything we could have done to make you stay…questions are not done very well by line managers. The departing employee receives an exit survey that they can fill in if the want to including questions related to the reasons of their departure in the conditions of departure (resigning, retiring, transferring etc.) to be filled in confidentially. This data is transferred to a central HR unit, which is accumulated and reviewed once a year. This HR unit prepares a report to HR managers and Chiefs indicating turnovers, reasons for turnovers, identifying any pockets or sections where higher turnovers may appear (outstanding from other sections). We get this information to feed into our various strategies around talent, around development, recruitment, around giving feedback to management and so on.

Question 12: allHow do you set or define an employee’s performance criteria and how often?

Scope Reference:Item 5, Performance Management

Objectives of the question:Determine how the criteria is set, whether it is based around the employee’s personal development within the section or as a career, aligning the employee with strategic goals, HR policies, is this a time to provide feedback.

Define how to manage unsatisfactory performance (there is a policy for that).

Question Response:We have the APA process, which is an annual cycle. We are meant to set the objectives and performance criteria in July/August, review it semi regularly during the year, and do a formal assessment in June the following year. There are sections of personal development, career discussions and so on. This year we have started introducing CSIRO values on the APA. From next year, we will be formalizing it a bit more about “people’s behaviour at work” so that it’s in line with CSIRO values.

The CSIRO annual goals are established in the Operational Plan determine the priorities for the HR section overall for the year. In discussion with my manager and the chief of division who is my prime client, I set my own objectives, which are in line with the operational plan, and then I set my team’s objectives. It’s a flow through driven by strategy. The priorities for HR are driven by strategy, therefore my priorities for my time of this year is directly linked to strategy.

In theory, all managers should be linking their priorities to strategies. You get your staff to do your things that will achieve your goals to your area. It will create the outcomes from the project.What will achieve the goals that each individual’s performance, which creates the business group, which creates the divisions goals.

There is an in depth policy around the process of management of unsatisfactory performance. However, the APA is the first point of call. If you’re not meeting your objectives, then why? What happens? what can we do?

The biggest problem in any given organisation, not only in this one, is the skill and the will of the manager to actually manage that performance. So you can set in place the most expert performance policy and process ever, but if a manager can’t sit down to sit down face to face with their staff member and say “we’ve got a problem”, then that’s not gonna happen.

Question 13: to HR managerWhat metrics determine employee and team/group performance according to strategies and goals (e.g., identification of staffing or training needs)?


Objectives of the question:Determine what measurement tactics are employed. Are these based around policies, feedback, management discretion. Is a review panel used and if so who is on it?

Determine whether HR is collecting performance data and having a way of measuring individual and collective performance.

Determine what aspects of performance are assessed.

Understand whether or not managers evaluate performance according to strategy.

Question Response:

Each capability group in CFNS has some metrics around a Science Review Assessment, which occurs every three or four years, and recommendations around a set of metrics that each capability group was assessed on, is formally looked at.

Other metrics are linked to the APA, whether the staff has completed the APA, if there’s developing coming out of it. However, we do not accumulate APA data into a group or team level. This is reliant on the line manager to do the linking with their group’s strategy, then direct the team’s strategy, then direct the staff. This year the eAPA has been introduced, instead of having paper forms. Then next year APAs will be able to be more easily analysed to determine trends per team or groups within the division.

Question 14: to all How do you remove the subjectivity of performance management?


Objectives of the question:Determine what policies are in place to protect managers and employees, how this is implemented, does this link back to the formulation of performance measurement or setting performance standards?

Question Response:You can’t ever remove it totally. Subjectivity is just a nature of whenever you have humans interacting. By introducing the “next level manager review”…

*if it is managing underperformance, then various other people are involved to ensure it’s not just a personality conflict between manager and staff member*for promotions there is a panel review to try to ensure that there is a level of objectivity and consistency across the organisation *we’ve got competency standards at different levels, and show that you met the organisation level to achieve a pay rise

There’s policies and practices set up to remove subjectivity as much as possible.

Panel review is part of a policy

In promotion cases to provide competencies criteria is complexity (level of judgment in problem solving), level of independence (how often does the manager have to give direction), and impact (processing time savings, and reflect on strategy). For example, if publications are outside the area, then

The review panel also acts on an employee advocate role to determine when a staff member has been doing a number of tasks he is not meant to be doing (and performing well). In this case the panel evaluates the upper level manager before penalizing an individual. It’s most commonly seen with senior staff finishing their career.

In the panel there is a staff representative to demonstrate openness and objectivity to staff and that it is not just management making close door decisions.

Question 15: to allHow do you decide what training/development your employees receive?

Scope Reference:Item 6, Human Resource Development

Objectives of the question:Need to determine whether training is focused on an employee’s career, reinforcing skills within a section, expanding skills sets of a section, building on weaknesses, enhancing strengths or is policy driven.

Determine how training and development needs are identified.

Determine whether or not this decision is based on strategies.

Question Response:There’s two aspects.

Through the APA, there is an immediate training and development achievement for specific work objectives.( top down development)

In the longer development needs happen through Talent Discussions, Leadership pipeline, and so on.

Staff also have their own responsibilities (bottom up development)

There’s a whole range of career management tools in the intranet, where staff can look at their own strengths and weakness and initiate their discussions with their management to determine development according to personal objectives and vision about their career.

Question 16: to all What process and criteria do you use in succession planning for your entire team including yourself?


Objectives of the question:Need to determine if succession planning is done and by who, is there a policy governing this, if so what is it, how do they identify potential successors, what do they do about potential successors?

Question Response:

In the RSS environment it is difficult because before there used to be more senior staff, but now it is difficult to find an “equivalent” within my team for substitution. More junior staff goes into other division to learn some new skills to develop themselves. Across the network there could be someone senior to step in to do succession of my role.

If there’s a group manager, with 30 people, and no succession plan, or potential people who can step in, then there is a problem.

Secondments are organised when people go on maternity leave for example. There’s people that second them to learn more skills. A staff can also be seconded to work in industry for a period as a way of development and increase their potential to fill other roles.

Question 17: to allWhat opportunities does your staff have to develop themselves and what role do you play in this?


Objectives of the question:Need to determine if employees have any power to drive their own career, how input from their manager affects this, what is done about difference of opinions and is this supported and for what reasons?

Also helps in identifying the HR role in personnel strategic training (Item 4, HR roles)

Question Response:

We have the CMP career management portfolio with a number of tools where people can analyze their ambitions, strength and weaknesses, and signing on according to managers agreement. If there’s difference of opinions around the manager’s view about the staff member abilities. Here honesty between management and staff is crucial.

The level of support we give to staff depends on the alignment to strategy. We generally support career development according to strategy.

Question 18: to all

What policies do you have regarding diversity and how are they relayed to staff?

Scope Reference:Item 6, Diversity

Objectives of the question:Need to determine what policies exist and why, how these messages are put out to staff and what in the process does staff have to notify someone of a breech?

Question Response:In the diversity area we have a range of policies, covering all aspects of working in the organisation. We don’t discriminate when we recruit, when we develop, when we performance manage, but it also relates around policies on harassment and bullying. We educate managers and staff around their responsibility in this area. New staff and students receive induction when starting.

We don’t spend enough time in this area unless something in this line happen. Then, an investigation goes on.

Issues within diversity is embedded within CSIRO values. We reinforce treating everyone with respect.

Unlike many American companies, we don’t have quotas, where we have a certain ratio of women, non-english speaking, etc. As far processes go, people shall not discriminate for any reason.

We have equity contact officers, which are “staff reps” on each site to be contacted if there is a breech. The union, HR people, an informal issue run through a very formal investigation. Often staff don’t want to report it, but it is about reminding managers about their responsibility as well.

Question 19: to all

How do you manage diversity amongst your staff?


Objectives of the question:Does the manager change strategy, job descriptions or other conditions to meet diversity needs or are staff required to conform to a large degree?

Identify the approach of different managers/sections in following diversity issues.

Question Response:

Question 20: The objective of the interview was to obtain a reasonably good overview of how human resources operates in the CSIRO and what role HR plays in setting and developing CSIRO strategies. Is there anything else you feel we have missed or unique to the CSIRO that would be important to obtaining this objective?

Scope Reference:All

Objectives of the question:Capture anything else the interviewee feels is important in understanding the role/function of HR in the CSIRO.

Question Response:

HR as a partner of the business is my personal goal and of many in the HR area. The only way we can demonstrate that we play a valuable role in developing the strategies is to understand the business. It’s important to people like me to not only talk about HR, but also to be able to participate in discussions in all aspects of the business. Provide input to, even if it is not HR. A really important distinction for me, is not just being able to developing HR strategies but also being part of the team to develop business strategies. It was a big step change in my career when I finally could participate at the management level and have my opinion sought in issues, not just HR and add value to the business.

CSIRO isn’t as unique as we’d like to think we are. We are fundamentally a federal government organisation. We can’t always work as a private company would probably work. We can’t always put in place strategies that a private company would. For instance, when making people redundant, HR is bound by certain things that the federal government expects as well as the union, which are different from what a private company would do. We’re not unique around the public sector, but managers expectations are that HR behaves as if it were a private company. HR has some public accountability that HR has to achieve and demonstrate.

There is an international conference every year that is about research agencies with different streams (BD, HR, Finance). I have seen that in some areas we are leading and in some others were have more to learn. We are comparable to similar organisations.

A.2 Jay Sellahewa


Interviewer :____Pablo__________________ Interviewee :___Jay Sellahewa____________Position :Group Leader, Food and Nutritional SciencesDate :________9/12/2009__________Start Time :__________17:30____________Finish Time :__________18:40____________





Question Response:

When calling a “section” or “department” I will refer about the group that I am responsible for, which is the Food Process Engineering Science Group, which in an nutshell its capability is a combination of process engineering and science. The goal of the group is aligned to a number of themes, primarily the Transformational Food Manufacturing Theme and one of the themes in the Food Futures Flagship (Food Materials Science and Ingredients Theme) and a few others themes. These Themes are looking to get capability from a number of groups including the Group that I am looking after. So I have to make sure that the capabilities that we develop in a strategic sense are aligned to the overall expected outcomes of our key internal clients, which are mainly these two themes and external food companies. And these two themes, through whom we get most of our internal funds, have their goals aligned to CSIRO’s goals. So, in an indirect way our goals are aligned to CSIRO’s goals. If our alignment is not there we won’t be able to “sell” our capability to the Theme leaders.

Theme leaders have to develop a Strategic Investment Plan, which tells what their planning to do for the next three years. They have to demonstrate how the put in place goals are aligned to the CSIRO’s strategic plans. They can’t ask for funds unless the outcomes they are expecting are aligned to CSIRO. Then they try to identify what capabilities they need and they purchase those capabilities. So they have to have a good dialogue with the Group Leaders to ensure that those Group Leaders develop the capabilities in a strategic way. In my case, I have to ask my Theme Leaders what capabilities the will need in two to five years time.

How do I use staff to achieve this?

Strategic goals are firstly achieved through staff that have certain skills, secondly through equipment, and thirdly through partnerships. What the group leaders try to do is to find the right skills within staff. If they don’t have these skills they try to develop partnerships with main research providers, mainly universities or across the organisation divisions, as well as determining if they find the right equipment to complement other staff skills. If there is a particular capability that theme leaders want that needs to be developed and if can’t develop partnerships, then we have to think about recruitment, and then we have to get this capability to outside and that should be linked to the HR plan.



Objectives of the question:In contrast to question 1 need to specifically determine if the fundamental goals of the section are different to the CSIRO corporate body and why the differences exist. Regardless of whether there is alignment, we need to determine if there are any other differences such as the implementation of strategies. Question Response:If it is different we shouldn’t be doing it. They way CSIRO works is a buying and selling situation. You have capability development (left hand side) and on the right hand side the themes leaders have funds and they buy that capability. If we develop capability that nobody wants, then it will be surplus and have staff whose time will not be utilised. That will have financial implications. Thus, we’ll never do anything that nobody wants. Hence, there are no differences in strategic direction.



Objectives of the question:Need to determine what extent the manager directly interacts with employees, both to receive information from the employee and to give information about all things that are not job specific. This would be restructure, well being, peer conflicts, etc. Also need to know how they use the interaction to influence any directions or decisions in the organisations (operational executor?)

Question Response:

The group is organised with a group leader and within the group there are team leaders. The staff is divided into teams and the team leaders report to the group leader. Generally, the day to day interactions is a first level line manager, so the staff report to the line manager (team leader) and the line manager reports to the group leader. I interact with my team leaders regularly (not every day). At the same time I report to the Research Program Leader who coordinates all the Food Technology research capabilities within this division.

I do interact with staff in quite often and particularly try to get information about any difficulties or any concerns that team leaders have with their staff. I discuss these issues with the HR manager of with my line manager (Research Program Leader) or if it is relevant with the appropriate team leader.

I rely on the line managers to communicate with me at the right time and at the right level of urgency to take appropriate action and then I get involved with them directly.



Objectives of the question:Need to determine to what extent the manager influence’s employee development. Does the manager plan development based on growth within a section or growth for a person’s career, who initiates career growth and who follows up on an employee’s career path (talent manager).

Question Response:I take employee development very seriously. I have it as one of my APA objectives, and I have encouraged team leaders to put this as on of their objectives. And I have encouraged all staff to put these are their self development objectives. Because I believe that this is one way to motivate staff and they become productive and it is good for the organisation and will make full use of them.

Relevant (strategic) employee development is another way of retaining staff by getting self fulfillment on their career development. If the employee can contribute their skills back to the job we have a very productive and highly motivated work force.

Yes I do influence and encourage my team leaders and individuals to take it seriously. When we have our group meeting I have an agenda item for training and development.

Question 5: to line managerWhat do you do if you need information about human resource issues, how often do you need to do this and how do you use this information?


Objectives of the question:Need to determine what body of knowledge about the employee, policies? the manager has at their disposal, where it predominantly comes from and how they increase and share that body of knowledge across the CSIRO. (Functional Expert?)

In addition, how CSIRO HR shares this body of knowledge and then processes it to shape up the culture according to strategy (Culture and Change Steward?)

Question Response:

During my time in the organisation I have seen different models.

The way HR worked before, when we were Food Science Australia, we had a traditional model where the HR manager was on site. In this model you could make a relationship with that person, expert in that area, and get support.

Now the new HR model is more centralised but at the same time remote. The same thing is happening with finance and IT and you ring a number and you talk to a person you don’t know, that is an expert in that area. Some examples include recruitment, staff conflict or reductions. In the particular case of HR I feel it is a big mistake because we are missing the opportunity to have this onsite support in cases of conflict where the HR person will know the realities of the site. We need HR staff to provide and explain the processes and procedures. Another way CSIRO gives this information is through the intranet…but there is too much information to actually get the right answers in a short time; this information changes all the time. I’d rather go to someone and ask for advice as the systems keep changing, together with the external environment, policies, and procedures. For example, since the implementation of SAP we are doing things differently, and I would rather have someone to assist me in this process.

Before HR redundancies occurred, I was in and out of the HR consultant office every day. Although I haven’t been trained about all HR practises I have to know what are my and staff rights, where do I get the information, how do I support a staff member. Now when I have any issues with HR I contact our business unit HR consultant and invite her to our regular meetings and get her involved in our decisions related to staff (procedures, leadership and training, rewards, APAs, recruitment, redundancies).

The body of knowledge are all the policies and procedures are all in the intranet. Line managers are not experts in that area and the role of HR is to guide us through these policies. I use the intranet more for leadership and training but other examples as payment are useful but we also have to use people.




Question Response:I do believe in consultation. Before introducing our group’s capability plans to the CEO of FNS or for the external science review I consult with the entire group and asked for input. Without imposing strategies from top to down, or whatever the group plans are, it is important to get ownership from all the staff. There should not be any hidden agendas with people and people should be able to comment on the objectives. If people are not consulted they will not feel part of it, irrespective of the fact that the final call will be given by the program leader, the deputy officer, or the CEO. This also allows to collect problems that I cannot see in the every day operations of each team member. If I hear a consistent message from each individual in the group I have to take it onboard. At the end of the day, managers have to be accountable for their decisions, as this is what they are being paid for.




Question Response:

The group objectives and group capabilities have to be linked to team objectives which are linked to CSIRO’s objectives. Capabilities are based on staffing and their relationships, which is linked to staff development. Through proper alignment and consultation and then implementation this objective would be met, staff will be involved and will be relevant.

Question 8: to line manager How do you identify that a new position is required?




Question Response:

We identify what capabilities we need strategically for the next 5 years, from the requirements of the teams. Then we look at what capabilities we have in terms of people, equipment and partnerships. If we find there’s a gap between what is required strategically and what we have now, and what we might have by developing collaborations, then we look at the requirements for recruitment.

Once you identify the gaps you have to identify a plan to bridge those gaps. One option is to develop new partnerships with groups that may have complementary capability. For example, to understand the relationship of food processing and nutrition (managed by another group). We are trying to appoint students for joint work between the groups to launch this collaborative work and develop synergies.

However, if you don’t have these synergies internally then you have to find partnerships in the universities and develop joint supervision by offering scholarships to students.

If that fails, then the third option is recruitment. If we realise we don’t have the skills, or we have the skills but we don’t have enough FTEs to perform these capabilities you try to hire new staff to being trained.

We need to identify how many people we need to make sure that our group is sustainable. One thing we have to take into account is succession planning, as we must make sure that we don’t rely on a single person or two to hold this expertise and that we have a plan to hand over this capability to somebody else. Part of my responsibility is to make sure that capability is not loss. We need to develop plans to have capabilities developed in the past and no longer being researched (e.g., food extrusion technology that took 15 years to develop and

staff was reduced to only one person) to make this capability is easily revived if this becomes a strategic requirement. This needs to be part of the HR plan. However, this HR plan has been developed but cannot be implemented because we don’t have enough funds for capability development.

Triggers to recruit staff is outcome related needed by Themes. There are two outcomes required: 1) to develop new knowledge with internal money within five years to be offered our external clients and stake holders and 2) to transfer technology, transferring knowledge we already have and generating external revenue. We need both of this to be sustainable. The former involves publishing the work to get our credibility and to differentiate ourselves from other service providers and to have new knowledge that we can transfer to industry in the future (Horizon 3). The second outcome is generating the technology transfer right now (Horizons 1 and 2) so that we can generate external income and be able to pay bills. For example, developing capability in the sustainability area will lead to attracting external funds through various government grounds and get internal funds through the CSIRO flagships. This leads to recruit staff or divert staff from one area to another to be ready and become experts in innovative areas.

This when the portfolio analysis comes in, where you wind down certain areas and gear up other new areas. This is continuously changing and review once a year and enhance external work which is essentially where the money comes from. In an nutshell the “trigger” is money. We should develop a capability in areas which is a group area in terms of revenue generation and wind down areas that are not being externally attracted.

Question 9: to line managerOnce the need for a new position has been identified, how do you attract candidates for this new position?




Question Response:

One approach is to demonstrate career development opportunities in CSIRO. It depends on which stage of the career the person is. If you want to get the young scientists you need to get them in postdoc packages that offer career development opportunities offering training, travel, conference attendance, publishing, interacting with the food industry and companies.

In addition, part of the attraction package is good salary (generally highest at postdoc level compared to universities) with company car, good superannuation, including organisation prestige and reputation. Another important factor is job security, and whether you are on contract (term appointment) or become a full time employee (indefinite appointment). Our facilities are part of what attract employees (good laboratories, good pilot plants, laptops changed every year).

Question 10: to line managerHow do you or the HR department shortlist and ultimately decide upon a candidate for a position?




Question Response:

We write the job position and well defined selection criteria, defining the type of person we want very accurately. Then when looking at CVs, it is very quickly that we can make a short list because some candidates generally do not fulfill any criteria. In our case our search is open for international candidates in specialised cases such as postdocs and scientist positions.

Question 11: to allWhat do you do when an employee leaves, whether to an external body or internal movement?


Objectives of the question:Determine if an exit interview or review is done, does this information feed back for future strategies or influence over recruitment. Who acts on this information?

Question Response:First of all find why they leave and then discuss this with my manager and then with HR. Because if we find that a number of staff that leave for a similar reason (reasons to leave: dissatisfaction with the organisation (direction), lack of strategy, job insecurity, no satisfaction out of the job, salary not competitive with the market rate, personal reasons, career development, retirement, going overseas or out of state, leaving for change, received a job offer, etc.). If they’re people we don’t want to leave, we will try to within reason, do something about it.

Usually the employee has exit interviews with the CEO of the business unit.

HR will be involved all the time and are the ones who hopefully will act on the information provided by the employee with my line manager and my assistance.

Question 12: to allHow do you set or define an employee’s performance criteria and how often?




Question Response:We have a well defined process to do it called the Annual Performance Agreement. At the beginning of the financial year the employee has to set some objectives and put some performance indicators on how the objective will be met. These have to be agreed between the line managers, who have to receive approval advice from the project leader, the stream leader, and the theme leader depending on how much money is available. Once this is agreed between the employee and line manager, this then receives approval from the next level manager.

With the new system we have, eAPAs, this system is easier for follow up discussions.

This is an ongoing process where throughout the year the line manager has regular discussions to make sure they are performing to the agreed plan and if not provide directions for modifying the objectives or adding more objectives /indicators. And the line manager has a responsibility to ensure this process is taken seriously.

In my APA I have as one of the objectives to ensure that all APAs are delivered on time.

About performance indicators against each objective, for example, to have two publications submitted to journals by the end of the financial year. I don’t think we should take these indicators of performance in a very clinical fashion because there are other tangible ways of measuring performance. Getting feedback from project leaders and stream leaders on people’s performance. In many cases these comments are included in each APA at the end of the annual review. The line managers comments have to take into account the comments from other key people directly interacting with the employee.

Question 13: to line managerHow do you measure an employee’s performance and how often?






Question Response:

See question 12

Question 14: to all How do you remove the subjectivity of performance management



Question Response:By talking to other people. If I may be prejudiced, but if I consult other people and get their advice too, then that will help me take the subjectivity out.

Usually you get a consistent message and the good people stand out.

I disagree sometimes with very clinical systems where the assessment is ranked according to performance standards. In most cases people get ranked in the middle and sometimes the rankings do not make any sense. This type of system is not implemented any more and we have a more common sense type of approach. Get advice from people and look at the objective and performance indicator.

(examples mentioned)






Question Response:

At a science Group level, development needs are determined based on capability development needs in response to Theme strategic requirements. It is common practice that the groups allot a certain amount (e.g., $2000 per year per scientist) for training into internal project budgets as part of the capability development.




Question Response:

from above….

We need to identify how many people we need to make sure that our group is sustainable. One thing we have to take into account is succession planning, as we must make sure that we don’t rely on a single person or two to hold this expertise and that we have a plan to hand over this capability to somebody else. Part of my responsibility is to make sure that capability is not loss. We need to develop plans to have capabilities developed in the past and no longer being

researched (e.g., food extrusion technology that took 15 years to develop and staff was reduced to only one person) to make this capability is easily revived if this becomes a strategic requirement. This needs to be part of the HR plan. However, this HR plan has been developed but cannot be implemented because we don’t have enough funds for capability development.





Question Response:

See above

I believe in training and I encourage individual staff and team leaders to put training in their APA. I should also emphasise that I also put a lot of responsibility on the individuals. I can encourage them that every person receives at least $1000 for training. However, I cannot make people do it. That responsibility is relayed to staff and team leaders. People have to take the initiative to do their courses and to plan their own development. If this training has been established as an objective but other project priorities have impeded this training this is considered as well.

Question 18: to allWhat policies do you have regarding diversity and how are they relayed to staff?


Objectives of the question:Need to determine what policies exist and why, how these messages are put out to staff and what in the process do staff have to notify someone of a breech?

Question Response:

CSIRO has policies on…*Opportunities for aboriginal (positive discrimination)*EEO policies*Harrasment and Bullying

***

Australia is a land of diverse people, similar to London, where one third of the population is not from London. Immigration is global now, as much as the way people are exposed to other cultures through TV and travel. International people at school levels are well respected and schools recognise the contribution they can make in terms of varieties of thinking.

If you take that to CSIRO, you can see that colleagues are treated by who they are not for their cultural background, sex, religion, etc. and are respected by their professional knowledge and their individual attitudes. CSIRO contributes to diversity by organizing international luncheons and cultural biodiversity day. We follow those principles without necessarily realizing there is a policy behind this but in general we instinctively do the right thing.

In terms of relaying it to staff we make sure we provide Equal Employment Opportunities. I know that if there are any issues (sexual differences, to age, to sex, to race) where staff is treated unfairly or offended in some sort of way I take action very quickly, initially seeking advice by discussing with HR.

Question 19: to all





Question Response:

Team leaders have their own responsibility to treat these issues with as much importance as OHNS issues. Equal employment is also very serious.

We have to treat these issues with the confidentially and level of care that it deserves.

I would not change strategy or job descriptions to meet diversity needs. Selecting a person because he/she would fall into the category of positive discrimination would be the wrong thing to do, as much as not hiring someone because he/she is “less conventional” while meeting all requirements of the job.

A good example of CSIRO doing good practices on discrimination in related to gender is that fact that our Agribusiness unit Chief (Joan Daly) and CSIRO’s CEO (Megan Clark) is a woman. However, we should not hire people to tick a box and balance statistics on diversity.

Question 20: The objective of the interview was for me to obtain a reasonably good overview of how human resources operates in the CSIRO and what role HR plays in setting and developing CSIRO strategies. Is there anything else you feel we have missed or unique to the CSIRO that would be important to obtaining this objective?

Scope Reference:All


Question Response:

1. We have discussed about centralised HR (current) vs Local HR (past)2. The importance of HR – HR is crucial because what we are is due to our

people and therefore we have to constantly understand processes and procedures, legal systems, rights about recruitment, training, about hiring/firing staff, and all units rely on the advice provided from HR to do the right thing and correctly follow procedures.

3. We must keep bureaucracy to a minimum…In CSIRO you have to go through a panel, and need to follow a number of forms and makes the reclassification process very frustrating and takes a lot of time from people and especially management. Even though this will take care of fairness and follow procedures and policies.

4. I think HR in CSIRO is good but it is taking a full lot of time to come to all policies and follow changes.

A.3 Mark Emerson


Interviewer :____Pablo__________________ Interviewee :___Mark Emerson____________Position :_________Project Manager, IMTDate :________9/12/2009__________Start Time :__________11:30____________Finish Time :__________12:30____________





Question Response:

At this point in time the organisation has a strategic plan for IMT. Project management is no longer a focus for IMT, in such a way that there has been a reduction in project managers from 14 into 2, Mark being the most senior. Many of them were contractors.

Strategic changes include devolving the provision of project management as a service from IT as a separate function into other business section. In the past there was a project office in IT, which provided project resources to sections (project managers, project controllers, financial assistance, etc.) and they would be assigned a project from a business area and those resources would go to the project. Now this has changed in a way that the Business Units now have to run that project themselves and have to get their own project management and resources elsewhere.

Now IMT has turned into a more operational activity unit. This has an effect in concealing the costs of doing projects. Now IMT has a very strong research focus, as they’re trying to align to science direction by making operation activities falling into the background. Now some of these activities will do outsourcing.

Even internally, now I am effectively contracted to a business unit. I am still line manager reporting to IT, but everything I do happens within the business unit not within IT. The ability to have common standard procedures, business practice, body of knowledge, is gone because there is no more corporate body of IT. Only the professional skills of the individual working with the business and what the business need from this professional is left.



Objectives of the question:In contrast to question 1 need to specifically determine if the fundamental goals of the section are different to the CSIRO corporate body and why the differences exist. Regardless of whether there is alignment, we need to determine if there are any other differences such as the implementation of strategies. Question Response:

It differs very strongly, clearly and dramatically. There’s the science (business) and administration functions in CSIRO. On the admin side there’s finance, HR, contract, legal, and IT and on the science side you’ve got different units and divisions. There’s an admin component that supports the science side that is Project Support Office that is support to provide direct admin management support to the science groups. That’s all changing right now as the way that the PSO is providing support to science will change. Strategically, CSIRO is supporting science project leaders by connecting them with PSO support infrastructure. This is in contrast to the administrative side of the organisation that still has projects, but these projects do not receive the same professional support, leadership, management in technology transfer, science IP, or serious administrative system or projects. Hence, there’s a clear divide between the administration (and staff that seems irrelevant to the administration, which can be outsourced) and the science staff who are unique as the organisation, as the most important thing is science.

Examples of projects for IMT are…design a new software application, modify an existing one, modification to existing programs, some of them involved changing the organisation structure (million-dollar projects), business process building, policies, procedures. These projects are similar in scale to science projects and methodology, although there is not an immediate connection to the client within the infrastructure. We should be doing project management across all divisions in the same.



Objectives of the question:Need to determine what extent the manager directly interacts with employees, both to receive information from the employee and to give information about all things that are not job specific. This would be restructure, well being, peer conflicts, etc. Also need to know how they use the interaction to influence any directions or decisions in the organisations (operational executor?)

Question Response:

In my role, as project manager, I have line staff that comes from other division or groups, mostly group managers. My role, as their line manager for the purpose of the project, is to make sure that project management disciplines are in still, any issues they’ve got about the project, and where is going, escalate it to the steering team, manage, communicate it to the project. Facilitate, mediate, keep the focus…I have an APA to myself and their duties to the projects are in their APAs. My contact with HR is very removed…I would have to go through the project structure to report on issues.

It’s more functional related rather than related on group and touch on departmental.



Objectives of the question:Need to determine to what extent the manager influence’s employee development. Does the manager plan development based on growth within a section or growth for a person’s career, who initiates career growth and who follows up on an employee’s career path (talent manager).

Question Response:In a project level, I have a very direct role in increasing the skills of the team (whoever they are) in applying project management disciplines. I take very seriously the role of ensuring that staff comes into a project life cycle where you deal with risks and issues, keep the registers and all normal things going. Then, integration of technology with the project activities comes into place. I have a very direct role on influencing them on their development (on the job training) but not in their careers.

Question 5: to line managerWhat do you do if you need information about human resource issues, how often do you need to do this and how do you use this information?


Objectives of the question:Need to determine what body of knowledge about the employee, policies? the manager has at their disposal, where it predominantly comes from and how they increase and share that body of knowledge across the CSIRO. (Functional Expert?)

In addition, how CSIRO HR shares this body of knowledge and then processes it to shape up the culture according to strategy (Culture and Change Steward?)

Question Response:

From a project perspective I need resources, but in my particular case, I do not need to deal with HR issues from the team unless these are project related issues. Since most of them are group managers, if they have issues they would have them resolved with their line management. As well as I would deal with my line management for conflicting issues, then HR, then Employee Access Program provided by CSIRO to provide counseling services.




Question Response:HR strategies from a project’s perspective are not quite relevant. However, in reality, when you are resourcing a project you need to consider the HR issues, human skills (interaction, team work skills) apart from technical, of the people that you need work on a project. Typically, I get a package of people, and then I have to analyze who they are and how they will work together. I have to develop strategies within the project management space, which are more localised strategies rather than corporate strategies.




Question Response:

That happens through regular meetings (plenary) and one-on-ones (individual). It also happens through analyzing the output of all their work. Then you can see their performance through multiple avenues to see if you are heading in the right direction. I use “collaboration” technology to force individuals to engage with the project individually and as a team and makes very transparent whether or not their performing well. There’s things they have to do to keep up to date with the whole team.

Given that people I have to manage are typically senior (“older”), technology is a way of making sure that they get trained and do what they need to do to adapt to new technological practices. This fits into the role of “culture steward” which is driving a certain culture into an operational more technology related culture which allows ways of putting together information and create databases from different groups.

Question 8: to line manager How do you identify that a new position is required?




Question Response:I would seek resources to a project and negotiate that through the project sponsor to get those resources on the team. I will support this need for a new staff by means of financial or other project reports. However, that person will be recruited through other department once justified.

On the other hand, I have put up short term contracts with focus on the project. Once a need for short term skills and capability are identified then contractors hired and report to me and represent an operational expense within the project.

Question 9: to line managerOnce the need for a new position has been identified, how do you attract candidates for this new position?




Question Response:

In my case, there are contracting agencies, to which I provide the specification for the work to be done, duration, skills set (capability), location, etc.

Preference to internal candidates depends on how the organisation wants to fund the project. The line would decide this for other reasons besides a short term project. Bringing FTEs implies a long term investment and expenses and require another process or standard procedure where HR participates by drawing up a job description. Since these projects are typically short term, this generally doesn’t happen.

In most cases you need the resource immediately. However, the same applies to acquiring contractors. You need make sure you purchase the right resource and be very clear about the job description for the project, activities. Then you need to provide induction, and getting him into the system as any other new employee. You spend three weeks getting staff ready, and sometimes it’s a bit frustrating because they just stay for between four and six months.

In the previous IT structure, part of the program office, we had permanent project managers, contract managers, project support staff, and we all contributed our time to the Project Management Development Program and that was all for internal staff. This gave a lot of opportunity for cross pollination for technology transfer.

In the current structure, in terms of recruiting someone onto the team internally, is done through the reference group, steering team, the project sponsor and owner, and that would go out to the line to decide releasing somebody like IT released me.

Question 10: to line managerHow do you or the HR department shortlist and ultimately decide upon a candidate for a position?




Question Response:

You need to be very clear about what specifically is required in the new position (specific tasks, their ultimate goal, quality statements about what needs to be done, period of time, particular cost structure, and the particular intangible attributes that a person brings to that).

Since they will report to me directly I am part of the interview process and then the contractor generally works independently. I go to contracting agencies with a very clear specification of the position. The first screening is to go through the CVs provided by the agencies, then the selection interview. I always go through the same type of questions in the interviews. I invite HR to be part of these interviews and anybody else that might be required depending on the position.

I like behavioural questions, along with technical questions, so that the candidate describes about something they have actually did and how did they solve a certain problem in their life. When I have a lot of candidates and positions I create a spreadsheet, all the attributes and weighing them to help me to make decisions.

Question 11: to allWhat do you do when an employee leaves, whether to an external body or internal movement?


Objectives of the question:Determine if an exit interview or review is done, does this information feed back for future strategies or influence over recruitment. Who acts on this information?

Question Response:

For contractors….There is project personnel action review, which is a process that includes the reclamation of records, the close off of any confidentiality issues, transfer back to the area and handing back and revoking access to the areas. Then the contract is terminated…

At the end of the contract (or project life) I do a post implementation review surveys to collect basic data of whole range of attributes of the project life cycle (management, reporting, clarity of communication, system set up, reporting, etc.). This feedback goes as part of my APA during the review process at the end of the financial year. Generally, feedback is not applied into the next activity. I rarely use the business IP that comes out of each activity. Something to be implemented.

Question 12: to allHow do you set or define an employee’s performance criteria and how often?




Question Response:Being clear about what you expect, reasonable and achievable goals/objectives and deadlines, negotiation and openness about it…team members bring experiences to the table and that then defines the particular performance you expect from people.

Question 13: to line managerHow do you measure an employee’s performance and how often?






Question Response:Anyone working on the project should have an APA feedback mechanism to them. Because their line is released to be working on the project. So while their away they have to report to their line manager wants to know. Part of my job is to provide feedback to their line about their tasks. That is more or less formalised by the ability of the organisation to understand its obligation in the way it sets up his projects. So the problem of IT breaking down these disciplines are not there. So it’s up to the project management to make sure it’s going to happen that way…whereas the science has more

Question 14: to all How do you remove the subjectivity of performance management



Question Response:It is almost impossible to remove subjectivity. My method of removing subjectivity is through book record keeping. I keep my phone log, and I write down what I discussed. It enables me seeing the trend of a problem and in a sense helps removing subjectivity and have regular meetings and keep open and honest.

There are policies around that allow you to demonstrate your objectivity.






Question Response:I talk to them about what they know. What skills they’ve got in the technology that they need to use and see if they’re open to training on deficiences.

For example, there is a mistmatch between the assumption of the organisation that group leaders know how to use Meeting Place and the fact that many of them do not actually know. HR does report who needs this sort of training.

HR through Learning and Development has set up an elearning website for people to train about Meeting Place. HR should report on has not done this training online. There is no action from HR to make sure that everybody is getting a hold of that training.




Question Response:

In the previous structure there was succession planning, but not in this new one.





Question Response:

I have a great role on delivering technology training to staff. There is no career development relationship to my position in staff working under me. There is a career management planning tool and it is up to you to fill that in. The organisation provides time to do that and is it up to you to complete that tool and to access the training resources. I do expect that my line manager to be seen my skills and abilities in the strategic gap that they might have and help me to find out if there is a plan for you. I don’t believe in the organisation looking into developing my career.

Question 18: to allWhat policies do you have regarding diversity and how are they relayed to staff?


Objectives of the question:Need to determine what policies exist and why, how these messages are put out to staff and what in the process do staff have to notify someone of a breech?

Question Response:There are no separate policies but the policies of the organisation. CSIRO has very clear cultural, religion diversity and non discrimination policies and EEO. And there’s ways of working around them.

Question 19: to all





Question Response:There’s different individuals that approach technology or share information or do their work in different ways. I try to provide different platforms or avenues for them to be able to work in their space to achieve their work. (E.g., lot’s that you can do with sharepoint). I generally spend my extra time looking at new tools and on how they can fit to different individuals to use these tools in getting some activities done in an easier way.

I see no differences between people in terms of knowledge, abilities, or in their intellectual space.

Question 20: The objective of the interview was for me to obtain a reasonably good overview of how human resources operates in the CSIRO and what role HR plays in setting and developing CSIRO strategies. Is there anything else you feel we have missed or unique to the CSIRO that would be important to obtaining this objective?

Scope Reference:All


Question Response:

Strategic changes of project support

I can’t see that there is not a requirement for the business to have project management, across the whole business. And perhaps HR should have a better role in supporting that aspect.

A major problem is the role of the PSO in the science side…major issues in science project management that PSO cannot properly assist them, there’s an HR role behind fixing the right people in the right place

Having HR and line management assisting project managers/leaders to develop their own skill set to meet the cultural nature if this organisation. Project management is a discipline but the way you implement can be different according to the culture of the organisation.

Appendix B

Internal analysis External AnalysisSTRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

World class research organisation

Recognised by Australian industry community at all levels

Diversity of research fields

Great research facilities with ultimate technology

Strong industrial relations

Sites sharing similar expertise distributed across Australia

High level of bureaucracy due to public accountability

Climate change creating research needs and opportunities for action

Considered by universities and other research centers around the world as a valued partner

Government funds

Industries’ research challenges

Economic downturn

Lower Government investment

Divisions not being sustainable (wrong investments)

Lack of industry support and uptake due to incorrect alignment to “real” needs or directions

Stretching strategies without focus

SWOT analysis for CSIRO strategy

SWOT analysis for CSIRO’s HR strategy (based on feedback from the Interview)Internal analysis External Analysis

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS Diversity of

research expertise

Career management portfolio (budget for training with technical or leadership focus)

HR participation at management level

Incentives (promotion, accelerated advancement, rewards) based on performance

Established HR policies

Lack of funding to hire new staff *

Succession planning*

Lower relevance given to administration project management (IT, finance, HR, etc; not treated in the same way as science project management)**

No operational HR staff assigned to Divisions (only strategic)*

Administrative operational staff distributed across Australia***

Sites sharing similar expertise distributed across Australia ***

Globalisation enhancing attracting world class experts in applied sciences and technology

Outsourcing of Information Technology personnel and other services

Fostering One-CSIRO (dissolution of joint ventures)

Sustain CSIRO’s image

Downsizing Loss of key

personnel Government

bureaucracy into “private-driven” culture

Repeated restructuring (within divisions or between divisions merging or transforming within CSIRO) causing motivational and engagement issues

Political change of chiefs of division, or business units

Job security

*Jay Sellahewa, Personal Communication**Mark Emerson, Personal Communication***Deb Miller, Personal Communication

PESTEL analysis for CSIRO

Political/legal Economic factors

Socio-cultural factors

Technologi-cal

Environmental Legal

Government priorities for research investment

Government policies applied to employees (e.g., dealing with redundancies; government accountability)

Economic downturn and impact on industry investment on research

Available funds from government and industry groups (competitiveness for funds)

Diverse mass of employees (sex, religion, nationality, age range, race, full time vs temporary vs part time)

CSIRO’s reputation in front of industry and consumers

Availability of highly specialised staff in different science areas of expertise

Technology driven challenges to create science

New equipment allowing advancing science

New software that facilitate administration management, personnel communication, training, appraisal

Availability of computers

Climate change creating new research opportunities

CSIRO’s internal environmental policies not sustainable

Policies bound by Australian government (slow delivery for internal clients in terms of contracts at all administrative levels)

Assignment HRM LienBinh 1

Documents

Transcript of Assignment HRM LienBinh 1