By Christian Codrington, CHRP

To be a ‘fly on the wall’ listening to an argument between two individuals can be an insightful peek into the human psyche.  When individuals want to make or defend a point, often the arguments supporting their request or conclusion can be overtly emotional while ignoring or overemphasizing relevant information and key data.

Big data is a term increasingly being used to capture the emerging industry practice of analyzing multiple databases to help business leaders make decisions and become better future forecasters.

Not a Ready-Made Solution
The challenge for the HR leader is to wade through the noise to find the signal—and big data has been touted as the solution for two basic reasons: 1) big data can help business leaders make decisions and predictions; and 2) HR is sitting on mounds of big data.

As a result, many conclude that HR need only make use of what is already at it’s disposal and be more data driven. The problem is that the conclusion is derived from faulty premises. There are times when HR doesn’t necessarily have the relevant data. Even with strong supporting data, HR’s efforts can be nullified within organizations where the culture of intuition alone is still driving the decision-making process.

Better Business Builds Upon Intuition
The onus is on the organization and HR alike to find a working solution involving big data and the human touch alike. Of key importance, organizations must identify the problem they are attempting to solve before joining the big data bonanza and then determine how that data or evidence can be of assistance.

HR and business leaders in general can take a lesson from the evidence-based decision making experiences in health care. For centuries, medical practice has been based primarily on the experience and judgment of its practitioners. However, with the growth of biomedical science, the development of evaluative clinical sciences and advances in both communications and IT, evidence-based decisions-making has grown to meet a number of health care challenges.

There is an evident parallel with greater numbers of HR professionals augmenting their intuition with the use of cognitive abilities tests in selection decisions, rigour and structure in compensation systems and the use of HRIS and applicant tracking systems. In light of faster and more interconnected communication networks all operating within a complex legislative web of human rights, employment/labour law and occupational health and safety regulations, HR is already using data.

As more sources are developed, HR needs to ensure that data is being used effectively, efficiently and wisely. Evidence-based decision-making and ‘big data’ can build a case for a preferred solution, inform or identify an unanticipated solution, or be ignored altogether.

Tingling and Brydon 1. Suggest a convenient framework for conceptualizing the role data and evidence can play—to make, inform or support a decision.

Make a Decision
On one end of the spectrum is the purely evidenced based decision-making. Qualitative and non-quantifiable data do not have a place at this end of the decision-making continuum. These decisions can be reduced to algorithmic exercise like a new facility location or vendor selection, where facts and evidence can be assigned a weighting. The largest risk in making decisions based solely on hard evidence is that the evidence may be incomplete or misleading. The challenge for leaders is to get enough relevant information within reasonable time frames to move the organization forward. If any premise is faulty, the decision is compromised.

Inform a Decision
When objective data and evidence informs a decision, it is combined with intuition and experiences. Negotiating a collective agreement, a selection decision combining test scores, performance during an interview and previous job performance are examples of this dynamic. One of the challenges in this balancing act emerges when different stakeholders exercise power in ways that gives their subjective impressions inappropriate weight. Organizations need leaders that have the courage to identify and call out such dynamics.

Support a Decision
Evidence and data is often gathered “for the sole purpose of lending legitimacy to a decision that has already been made2.” At first glance, this sort of data collection to justify a decision may not sit well; however, this dynamic has its place.

Consider the motivation to build an attendance management program and pursuant data collection related to absences, frequency and costs and habitual abusers. In such a case, programs, policies and benefit programs are often developed or altered after the data confirms the original position.

However, transparency remains key in building organizational support. Gathering data to support a decision can also devalue the role of analysts, recruiters, and other specialists, as well as alienate others who may be needed in the implementation.

Data, Diligence and HR
Data is simply becoming more available to decision makers. Leaders in any area of an organization are tasked with the effective use of judgment and discretion to accomplish goals and maintain the commitment of their staff. HR professionals utilizing all tools at their disposal including big data, in the appropriate manner can help ensure decisions fit the problems they hope to solve.

References
1 Tingling, Peter M., Brydon, Michael J., Is Decision-Based Evidence Making Necessarily Bad? MIT Sloan Management Review, Summer 2010 Vol 51 No. 4
2 Ibid

Christian Codrington, CHRP is senior manager, professional practice for the British Columbia Human Resources Association.

(PeopleTalk Spring 2014)