The Demise of Retail: Part II - HR Red Alert

To view my previous post on the subject, click here...

 While little is said about it, the service industry represents 80% of employment in the U.S. Economy (U.S. Department of Labor) with a large proportion in retail, hospitality and healthcare, and social services. At the time when the retail world - with its almost nine (9) million workers - is expected to  make roughly 25% of its total business, people feel generous and shop more online or in store. But end-of-the- year shopping is not all glamour: as businesses dress up in red decorum, customers and workers see equally red, as hiring will not meet the projected 3-4% increase in business over last year. This is a stressful time for any human element of the business, an HR stress test facing the demands of the chaotic season of the retail world.

A TRANSFORMED INDUSTRY: HIRING WHO AND FOR WHAT ROLES?

The determinant factor of business survival, that is, reaching its metrics goals versus previous year(s), depends on customer-buying and employee competency. Those two linked factors can be summed up into 'customer satisfaction' - very vague words with very broad meaning and implications. Would it then be a stretch to consider that the abysmal closing of Service businesses is heavily due to the business misinterpretation of the transformation of the Industry? Sure enough, transformation of the Service Industry relies on a customer-centric approach in service delivery. And sure enough also, the retail business finds itself entangled in a vicious circle of cutting corners to meet its goals. It does not always work out to its advantage. Click here for a different, yet converging insight on the industry struggle.  

•  In fact, changes have been introduced in holiday hiring this year: lack of transparency and adjustments in mid-season are an indication of uncertainty. Walmart held on seasonal hiring and Kohls did not disclose any numbers. On the other end, Target, Macy's and J.C. Penney have been mutating their pool of holiday hires from solely sales workforce to a combination of the former and distribution workforce: big change in the industry. Target hired 40% more than previous year, Macy's 7, 000 more than projected, and companies are still hiring in response to the usual flux of seasonal hires.

• There is also a clear shift in holiday roles/jobs, prompted by a changing shopping pattern. Online/telecommuting work, Fulfillment and Distribution centers are now growing trends.This shift is also an attempt to compensate for the loss of traffic in brick-and-mortar stores. The Service Industry of today is a technology business, and calls for a different set of skills than years ago.

HR as a Business Partner: A Hit or Miss in Retail

The idea of HR being a business partner (HRBP) is still relatively new to most. It is fair to say that many local/site executives have a hard time understanding or admitting the whole concept of HR "partnership". To many, HR is a toolbox, a rubber stamp, a necessary evil to get corporate approval on local initiatives. Many senior executives view HR as a stumbling block to implement their own policies and practices. While this is a reversal from the long-time understanding of HR being the hammer, Corporate "tool", the impact on the "disliked and misunderstood" HR is not much changed. Let's keep in mind that with the idea of decentralization of power came the (mis)understanding of " I (Local leadership) make the rules here". Consequently, for HR it's often a hit or miss. Local rules still need to fit into corporate strategy, and unfortunately not all roads lead to Rome. Local rules can be counterintuitive to real partnership with HR, and to "customer-centricity [that] will need to be valued ....also by all employees in the organization. It will need to become embedded in their daily task. ..." ( Niemier, Zocchi, and Catena). HR does not make the decision.  Who says consulting is easy? Local executives still associate HR at worst to the old concept of administration, at best to the one of compliance - and by that, understand risk/corporate reprimand avoidance. It is a system thinking issue. Employees are at loss and are at the mercy of fluctuating " adjustments". Efficiency and engagement can suffer as employees feel that they are a yo-yo game, and for HR it is still a hit or miss.

Retail in a Crunch: Cutting Corners in HR Process is a Brand and Engagement Killer...

...Branding is meaningful. This is the reason why Brands do sell.  In terms of HR it translates into a solid, reliable, stable, competent workforce: anything but volatility and high turnover. A badge, a dress code is not the defining factor. I would argue that if the employees behind those badges and company "uniforms" change on a constant basis, or worse, start projecting a negative demeanor, or reflect incompetence, the brand is actually no more, and customer-centricity evaporates. Quality of service is as crucial as quality of goods offered, and reflects the level of engagement. In retail, it is part of the goods. Need deeper insights on how to sync HR and Branding? Check out these five tips.

So, what should be behind the name or the badge? The value of the company should before all stand behind the badge. Let's flag a few stumbling blocks:

⚑ Employees' negative direct impact: they are not to represent and give their personal opinions. Certainly, they are not to "infuse" to the customer their perception of internal happenings. Unfortunately, such happens whenever companies cut corners, when internal politics take over and when processes are burnt ,or when employees and managers alike become too comfortable. HR cannot be a partner in curtailing processes, and while federal rules might not always be the issue, it is good practice to follow company policies and procedures, however urgent is the need for hiring or filing a vacated position. Let alone, it is a sure way to lower morale and inhibit engagement of an already over-stressed workforce. Communication and transparency are major components of internal branding in the Retail world. Like it or not, employee behavior is a mere reflection of internal dysfunction. 

⚑ HR as a function is most of the time aloof, and as guidelines, never considered a priority. Although it is understood that the retail world had to consolidate HR positions, it nevertheless remains that communication to employees fails even more. The lack of physical presence is compounded by the lack of internal communication and therefore, increased lack of understanding of organizational structure. How many  managers say that they do not know what their new form of HR entails? Consequently, employees do not feel as being a matter of importance in any way. Often times, the question is: " where is HR?", and the answers are: " HR cannot do anything " or worse " HR is no use". In fact, HR people know that it is a generalized situation: business owners, local executives, leaders would make their decision regardless of, or before seeking HR input. Decentralization of HR sounds like an attractive business model, provided uphill training and cooperation from managers and local leaders exist, let alone a prevailing micromanagement style - if not culture - in the service world. The HR function is quite undermined, its impact misunderstood.

⚑ Change is paperwork and execution: a mere "facelift", rather than true implementation of strategy. Maybe the problem of the service industry has been moving from an old business model of management and strategy to a new one, along with the same people who couldn't let go of their executives/managerial habits. The makeover did not work because there were no deep changes.  Promotion from within is good, as long as a) a minimum percentage of new blood is added, b) training is effective and adequate, c) a strategy of communication  is put in place before changes are implemented, and d) follow-up on executives is effective. This later requires that strategy is understood and changes really embraced. We have heard about a slew of CEO changes in large retail corporations, but inertia, if not outpaced management models, along with inadequate employee profile in an increasingly, technologically-dependent system,  remains at the bottom line - front line! -  of the business. Change must be across the board.

⚑ HR and predictive analytics for molding company culture is still a long shot in service business, for many reasons. Engagement surveys are meaningless because answers are mostly prudent: employees in retail do not believe in privacy and fear retaliation. More realistically and worse on the business side: if HR is not in real sync with the business in all this conflicting world of local micromanagement/decentralization of power and corporate planning, its input is merely an endorsement, justification of process without actually being part of the process; It is rubber stamping. There is a discrepancy or a misalignment between Operations strong predictive analytics and HR in the Retail world. But again, this could be another discussion.

⚑ An inadequate workforce in a fast-changing, technology-reliant business is a HR and Branding concern. Indeed, and for a glimpse of hope for the "forgotten" retail sector, the name and image of the company will profoundly reflect in its talent acquisition, especially during this holiday season. Corporate branding would have done a monumental part of the job.  The rest is up to HR, so that the sector attracts, develops, and maintains the needed talent - a different talent profile - in order to retain and boost the much needed business. Such relates to, and heavily relies on local hiring practices, hiring power, and  decisions.

HR shared responsibility in the so-called "death of retail" lies behind the fact that HR still struggles with a wavering strategy, the effectiveness of business partnering, and the lack of support and commitment within the companies themselves. In sum, HR remains the misunderstood factor.

En Synthèse...

La Décadence du Marché de Détail ...

Co_HRComatrix_RetailXmas

...ce n'est mème pas de la blague. Pourtant, selon l’équivalent du Ministère du Travail ((U.S. Department of Labor) ce  marché englobe 80% des emplois aux U.S.A.! Friser les 10 millions d'emplois (les stats varient d'une source à une autre), ce n'est tout de même pas negligable. Le probleme? C'est une question de fonctionnement et d'entendement. Pour beaucoup, cela ne compte pas. La vérité est que vous allez acheter un pull, faire les conserves, ou manger au resto, vous ne pensez pas nécessairement aux conditions de travail des gens - peu importe la fonction - qui font fonctionner ces établissements, grands ou petits. Et la vérité est qu'ils sont méconnus sinon méprisés. Je vais faire exception des employés de Apple: en général, on les respecte a cause de l'aura de leur éétablissement et de leurs genies... Remarquez, de nos jours, pour travailler dans le secteur de service, il faut desormais savoir manipuler des ordinateurs (mobiles ou pas), et comprendre les data. Eh oui, c'est un emploi qui à changé au fil du temps, surtout ces dernières années!

Mais si génie il ne se trouve pas dans le business de détail ou du service en général, du moins il y a recherche et travail, parfois insurmontable. Aussi, tout bouge si vite! Zoom!! C'est la course pour anticiper les demandes et la concurrence, et les chiffres d'affaires - les goals ou metrics si vous voulez -. Et croyez-le ou pas, les RH existent aussi dans ce milieu! Alors, que font les RH dans ce secteur? 

Ah! Ils sont tout aussi méprisés et méconnus que leurs collègues qui facent le client! La différence? Ils ont des clients internes et externes, et des collègues qui ne les comprennent pas et qui ne veulent rien savoir des RH bien entendu. Le hic? Dans ce secteur, les RH sont maintenant décentralisés! Entendons par cela que les chefs de départements sont supposés gérer leur personnel de A a Z. Ah! Espérons toujours... L'on peut esperer qu'un de ces jours, les collègues en question comprendront que les RH c'est aussi une fonction qui évolue à part faire la paie et la paix! Quant au monde RH, comme partout ailleurs, ils ont encore du mal à se faire entendre: "nous sommes les RH -partenaires de travail - , tout aussi importants que ceux qui font le design et les operations." 

Mais alors, pourquoi, c'est parfois pire dans le secteur du service? Pour une chose, l'on rencontre plus souvent des patrons (chefs d’établissements) narcissiques et autocratiques: "Je suis le plus grand, le plus fort, vous faites comme je dis.." Mais tout chemin ne mène pas a Rome en RH et exécution du travail "sur chantier" pour ainsi dire. Les décisions ou directives sont souvent à contre courant de tout ce qui s'appelle RH. 

Aussi, l'on notera cinq flags: 

1. ⚑ Vous ne communiquez pas suffisamment au personnel, ils communiqueront de travers aux clients! Ils parleront de leur vie privée (actions privées - conversations personnelles en face du client ("oh! je vous sers Madame ou Monsieur, mais il est plus important pour moi de parler a ma collègue à propos du rôti que je vais cuire avec du miel et des poivres et combien c'est super bon!") , de la vie d'entreprise ("Ah! Ils nous donnent des bonus si l'on fait ceci ou cela"). Les RH ne devraient jamais négliger l'aspect communication et internal branding. 
2. ⚑ Les RH ? bof ! c'est RH ! Pas d'importance, pas de consequences, peu importe leurs instructions... C'est en general ce qui se dit doucement et se pense fort. Si les RH ne peuvent pas se faire entendre et se faire respecter, peut-etre que l'on peut et doit pallier à ce  malentendu...
3. ⚑ Le Changement? Seulement sur papier! Sur terrain: du maquillage mais pas l’exécution de la vraie stratégie. C'est la sempiternelle dualité entre les "penseurs" et "exécuteurs". Franchement, il suffit parfois de se mettre un peu dans la peau l'un de l'autre pour comprendre et faire rouler la machine comme il faudrait. Toute stratégie n'est pas négative, chefs d'établissement et chefs de départements. Mais à qui la faute? Les RH ne devraient pas voir cela et éduquer en conséquence? Parce que c'est seulement rien qu'une question de méconnaissance. Les RH devraient bouger le doigt pour pallier à cela.
   
4. Les RH et l'analyse predictive pour forger la culture interne:  un long chemin a parcourir dans le secteur du service. Pour un fait, les recrutements se font souvent à la va-vite. Le taux de turnover est si élevé (et pour cause) que les remplacements se font non seulement au volet, mais souvent aussi selon le bon vouloir ou desiderata des patrons. Alors, allez savoir, RH! Mais n'est-ce-pas une raison de plus pour les RH pour se faire entendre et changer les choses? Il est temps de faire comprendre par tous que si certaines actions entraînent certaines conséquences dans le domaine operationnel , il est en de meme pour les RH. En fait, sans employees, pas d'Operations, alors, cela ne va plus sans dire.
5. ⚑ Le secteur de Service change rapidement et desormais repose sur la technologie. 
   

Autres temps, autres moeurs, autre profil d'employés : Les RH et le Branding, c'est important. La technologue dans le secteur de service frappe les USA un peu en plein fouet. Si en France, l'on anticipait de tels changement 30 ans de cela, aux USA, c'est arrivé dare-dare sans que la majorité semble y avoir pensé, vraiment. Mais toujours est-il, avec Amazon et consorts, et le nouveau mode de vie base sur la technologie, force est de s'adapter. Désormais, l'employé du secteur de service est un techno du genre. L'on voit et doit prévoir un changement certain en termes de population employés. Le rôle des RH est de comprendre que le nouveau profil à recruter est changé pour de bon. 

Alors, la décadence  du secteur de Service? Oui, des questions de changement de Société, mais c'est quoi les RH? Ressources? Humaines? Cela sonne Société, people, gens, employés... Peut-être que les RH n'avaient pas vu ce changement venir....Mais aussi, ils luttent à contre courant de l’exécution de la Stratégie, de réticents partenaires internes, et des changements internes de la profession RH .