Wald W2D1 6635

Drgraham27

MakingthedecisiontoOutsource.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Management homework help >Wald W2D1 6635

Making the decision to outsource human resources

Jean Woodall Business School, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK

William Scott-Jackson Centre for Applied HR Research, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK

Timothy Newham Think Associates, Bristol, UK, and

Melanie Gurney Erinaceous Group, Croydon, UK

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore and describe how the decision to outsource human resources was made by 12 large and five small organisations.

Design/methodology/approach – Desk research and key informant interviews with senior HR staff who lead the decision to outsource human resources in a purposive sample of organisations identified through an initial search of the professional literature and nomination by an expert panel.

Findings – The research identifies a number of drivers that lead organisations to consider outsourcing their HR. In large organisations cost considerations are dominant, but other factors arise out of the organisational history and context, and very often, senior managers from outside the HR function are very influential. For most organisations, paradoxically, the decision to outsource appears not to be made on the basis of a thorough analysis of costs, with consequences for the quality of HR service offered to line managers, and also for the career paths and skill sets required from HR staff.

Research limitations/implications – This study focuses upon the perceptions and experiences of senior HR managers, but excludes the perceptions and experiences of all staff employed in the HR function. Also, while the use of a qualitative research design makes it possible to uncover the individual perceptions and motivations of the key informants in the sample, there are obvious limitations in respect of statistical generalisation.

Practical implications – The findings relate mainly to the future shape of the HR function in organisations where HR activity is outsourced, with consequent implications for the skill sets and career paths for HR professionals.

Originality/value – The views of HR directors and senior managers have provided a valuable insight into the strategic decision to outsource HR activity and will be of interest to those involved in the same field.

Keywords Subcontracting, Human resource management, Outsourcing, United Kingdom

Paper type Research paper

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0048-3486.htm

In addition to the thoughtful and constructive criticism provided by the anonymous reviewers, the authors would like to thank Professor Mark Saunders, Assistant Dean Business Research at Oxford Brookes University Business School, for his helpful feedback on earlier drafts of this paper.

PR 38,3

236

Received 27 February 2007 Revised March 2007 Accepted 14 March 2008

Personnel Review Vol. 38 No. 3, 2009 pp. 236-252 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0048-3486 DOI 10.1108/00483480910943313

Introduction Research into the management of the human resource function within organisations is based upon the assumption that it is a unitary function, operating in a single workplace or in a uniform manner across multiple workplaces within the organisation. How human resources might be managed and delivered strategically in a multidivisional company has been considered elsewhere (Purcell and Ahlstrand, 2004), but the discussion has assumed that all aspects of HR activity were controlled and delivered in-house. However, it has become increasingly common for organisations to subcontract specific services, including human resource activities. This is evident from the findings of the 2004 UK Workplace Employment Relations Survey (WERS) which revealed that 86 per cent of all workplaces employing ten or more employees had arrangements for subcontracting some activity, including (in descending order of importance) building maintenance and cleaning, computing services, security, payroll, transport and training, temporary employment, printing, catering, and general recruitment (Kersley et al., 2006, pp. 105-107). So, a number of HR activities (such as payroll, training and recruitment) have for some time been delivered by other agencies and consultancies for a number of organisations. That the professional human resource activity for an organisation might also be controlled and delivered elsewhere has only recently been considered.

This study seeks to explore the implications of this step change in arrangements to subcontract HR activity: HR outsourcing. It aims to identify the main drivers of the decision to outsource HRM, and to describe and analyse the outsourcing solutions adopted, and explore the implications for the management and delivery of HRM within 12 large and five small organisations drawn from a wide range of industries in the UK. A review of the existing literature on outsourcing will be followed by a consideration of the findings from an exploratory and descriptive study based upon desk research and interviews with a sample of HR directors and senior HR staff.

The shift from HR subcontracting to outsourcing A significant finding of the WERS survey (Kersley et al., 2006, pp. 105-7) was that a similar proportion of public (86 per cent) and private (85 per cent) sector workplaces in the UK had subcontracted services, and that 19 per cent of these reported that such services had been carried out by employees of the workplace or organisation five years previously – that is, they had been outsourced. The main difference between the public and the private sectors was that the public sector was more likely to employ former employees as subcontractors (38 per cent) than private sector workplaces (13 per cent). So, subcontracting is extensive, and a significant growth appears to have occurred as a consequence of employees being transferred to the contractor, namely the outsourcing of staff. For the majority of organisations and the majority of employees affected, this relates to work in low skilled occupations such as building maintenance, cleaning and catering. So, we have evidence of a significant growth in outsourced employment in the UK.

However, in addition to such low-skilled work, since the early 1990s large organisations, particularly in the USA and the UK, have begun to move from subcontracting to outsourcing various management functions (Kakabadse and Kakabadse, 2002). Starting initially with IT outsourcing, the practice has spread to include core business functions such as finance, marketing and human resources (Logan et al., 2004). Until recently, IT outsourcing (Lacity et al., 1995; Murray and

The decision to outsource human

resources

237

Kotabe, 1999) received most attention. By contrast, HR outsourcing (Lever, 1997; Shaw and Fairhurst, 1997; Switser, 1997; Woodall and Gourlay, 2002; Dickman and Tyson, 2005; Kosnik et al., 2006), has only recently received attention, and has been approached from a variety of perspectives, including employee relations in outsourced call centres (Kessler et al., 1999; Kinnie et al., 2000; Purcell and Purcell, 1998) and the impact of inter-organisational contracting on employee relationships (Rubery et al., 2002, 2003; Grugulis et al., 2003; Benson, 1998; Logan et al., 2004, and, on trust, Gainey and Klaas, 2005).

However, the definitions of outsourcing employed by such studies are often implicit, or where explicit, they are fairly elastic, stretching from the rather minimalist long-term subcontracting of HR service delivery to an external provider, to “spin-off” joint ventures or shared services, and finally a contract with a fully independent service organisation. More recently, the model of Business Process Outsourcing (Lacity et al., 2004) where the client organisation participates in a partnership with key suppliers to deliver “back office” services, adds further complication to any definition of outsourcing. Several authors have attempted to provide typologies of outsourcing (Adams, 1991; Elfring and Baven, 1994; Fitzgerald and Wilcocks, Reilly, 2000; Walton, 1999). Nonetheless, there is a lack of consensus on what is meant by “outsourcing” which can have implications for the validity of findings from the various surveys and case study analyses that form the basis of the research alluded to above. For the purpose of this research, we have taken the following definition:

The delegation of one or more business processes to an external provider, who then owns, manages, and administers the selected processes based on defined and measurable performance metrics (Gartner, 1995).

We have taken this definition of outsourcing because of its clarity, and because it distinguishes outsourcing from simple sub-contracting: the focus is upon “process” (rather than simple tasks) and upon pre-defined performance metrics. But even if we can arrive at such a simple definition, what actually happens in practice when a decision is taken to outsource human resource management?

The justification for outsourcing HR – a review of the literature Superficially, it would seem that the most obvious reason for outsourcing would be to make cost savings. However, the “make or buy” decision at the heart of outsourcing is often quite complex. While short-term cost savings are usually seen as the major reason for outsourcing, recent research has shown that they are not the only one. A desire to achieve “best practice”, to improve service quality, to focus upon the “core competences” of an organisation, and to utilise new technology are also prominent reasons offered by organisations (Kakabadse and Kakabadse, 2002). With respect to the outsourcing of HR activity, earlier studies (Klaas et al., 1999; Lever, 1997) have shown that organisations undertake outsourcing to reduce costs, gain access to HR expertise, achieve workforce flexibility, focus managerial resources on strategic matters and also to keep up with workplace regulation. So the first research question is to identify the main drivers for HR outsourcing.

The rationale for different drivers has received strong theoretical underpinning from economic theories of the firm - especially transaction cost economics (Williamson, 1975), and the resource based theory of the firm (Barney, 1991). Transaction cost

PR 38,3

238

economics was applied initially to analyse the outsourcing of information technology, and only more recently to HR outsourcing (Klaas et al., 1999, 2001; Woodall and Gourlay, 2002). According to this, the human resource activity most likely to be outsourced, was that which was most unlikely to incur high costs due to uncertainty, the threat of opportunism, asset specificity, frequency, and ease of measurement.

Turning to the resource based view (RBV) of the firm, this provides another perspective on what HR activities might be considered for outsourcing, and also whether outsourcing is necessarily of advantage to an organisation. According to the RBV, only those HR activities that could not meet the criteria of deliverability, inimitability, durability and non-substitutability should be outsourced (Barney, 1991; Boxall, 1998; Priem and Butler, 2001). The argument hinges upon the identification of what are called “core competences” that are intrinsic to that organisation. These attributes or qualities are to be nurtured and retained in-house. Lepak and Snell (1999) argue that externalisation can be a way of providing internal coherence, by allowing a concentration upon core competences. But by implication, this would mean that the selection of HR activity for outsourcing would be contingent upon sustaining the “core competences” of the organisation and in certain circumstances this might preclude a consideration of outsourcing.

Recent research (Dickman and Tyson, 2005) has summarised the empirical evidence from both Europe and the USA, and the activities most likely to be outsourced were outplacement, pre-employment testing, training, payroll administration, employee assistance, counselling and pension plans. The implication is that activities such as strategic HR policymaking, succession planning for key staff, employee relations, or diversity management would be less likely to be outsourced. This gives rise to the second research question: are the HR activities that are outsourced those which involve routine, clearly defined tasks which do not leave the organisation strategically vulnerable to a loss of control or uncertainty and confusion about responsibilities for managing specific HR activity?

However, it has been argued that if an organisation adopted a distinctive approach to the management of some or all of its HR activity, then it would be ill-advised to consider outsourcing (Klaas et al., 2001). In a similar vein Ulrich (1996) and Pfeffer (1997) have also expressed scepticism about HR outsourcing, arguing that it can limit the ability of firms to develop distinctive competencies within the workforce, and that it will also create inefficiencies because contractors are often unfamiliar with client organisation strategies and cultures. This is backed up by some evidence that outsourcing can change the nature of work, especially among professionals who lose discretion over their tasks as their work becomes deskilled in order to facilitate monitoring of output (Grugulis et al., 2003). Other research (Lawler and Mohrman, 2003) has shown that HR outsourcing can lead to problems of poor service, vendors with insufficient knowledge of the business, and therefore higher costs than anticipated. So as well as reinforcing the previous research questions, this argument leads to a third research question: do organisations encounter any potential inefficiency and ineffectiveness as a consequence of outsourcing?

The decision to outsource HR, also has implications for the way in which the HRM function is organised. Ulrich’s (1996) argument that in the changing business climate there are four ways of delivering HR “excellence” (as a strategic partner to the business, as a change agent, as a champion for employees, and as an administrative

The decision to outsource human

resources

239

expert) is relevant to outsourcing. The implication is that the delivery of the HR service can not be conducted in a uniform manner. There may well be “back office” activities, such as pay and benefits, recruitment and selection, that should be outsourced in order to concentrate “administrative expertise” in one place. The remaining HR staff could divide between those “embedded” in business units tasked with overseeing the delivery of the HR service as “champions for employees”, and those who could work as internal consultants or “change agents”, engaged in trouble shooting, and providing a range of development interventions. The senior HR team could then become “strategic partners” by integrating all these activities, but above all, by aligning themselves with general business needs. Again this raises a fourth research question: can the HR function neatly segment its activity following the implementation of HR outsourcing, and what does this mean for career paths in HR?

To summarise, this review of the literature has generated four research questions:

RQ1. What were the main drivers for outsourcing?

RQ2. What were the main HR activities outsourced, and were they principally those which involved routine, clearly defined tasks which did not leave the organisation’s “core competences” vulnerable to uncertainty and a loss of control?

RQ3. Were there any instances of the implementation of outsourcing leading to inefficiencies and ineffectiveness in the delivery of the HR service?

RQ4. What were the consequences for the organisation of the HR function and HR career paths?

The research design The research design adopted for this study was essentially exploratory and descriptive. As it was felt that there was little research that had examined how the decision to outsource was approached in specific organisational contexts, this provided the starting point for addressing the above research questions. The study was carried out while conducting an externally commissioned applied research project. The research design comprised three stages. The first involved desk research leading to the identification of a sample of around 80 organisations that were known to have considered outsourcing HR activity since 2000 (some of whom who had subsequently rejected it as an option, or have subsequently ceased to outsource HR)RH. This sample was arrived at by scrutinising reports and articles published in People Management (the professional journal of the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development) in order to identify organisations that had considered HR outsourcing. In addition, members of the Project Steering Group (a panel of experts drawn from a range of organisations that had adopted outsourcing, as well as a sample of major outsourcing providers) recommended other organisations to approach. Organisations were identified which represented a wide range of sectors, including ICT and telecommunications, financial services, engineering, energy, utilities, public services, retail, health, and general business services. Most employed over 500 staff, but a smaller number of organisations employing less than that were also considered.

This desk research was followed by telephone interviews with half the sample to make contact with the HR Director or senior HR managers involved in the decision to

PR 38,3

240

outsource human resources, and to assess their suitability for further interview. Finally on-site interviews were held with these and other key informants in a total of 17 organisations, twelve of which were large organisations. Two of the large organisations had decided not to outsource their HR, and a further one had revoked an outsourcing contract after three years). All the key informants were involved in making and implementing the decision to outsource HR activity, and most were HR Directors or else a senior member of the HR Team with responsibility for overseeing HR outsourcing. In some cases more than one interview was conducted, but all were tape recorded and transcribed. Informants were sent briefings in advance explaining the project, and the semi-structured interviews followed a schedule that explored a number of themes, addressing the main research questions. The transcripts were analysed thematically, and the key patterns of response, principally in respect of the larger organisations are reported on here.

Main findings The main drivers for outsourcing HR activity The research revealed that there were five major drivers. Earlier research (Kakabadse and Kakabadse, 2002; Klaas et al., 1999; Lever, 1997) had identified cost reduction, reducing risk and maintaining quality (including increasing the effectiveness of HR service delivery), and moving HR up the value chain. This project identified new drivers. These included pressure from elsewhere in the business and the prior experience of HR directors, and the management of overall HR capacity in response to organisational change. These will now be considered in turn.

1. Influence from elsewhere in the business and the prior experience of HR directors. It is, perhaps, unsurprising that the impetus to consider HR outsourcing, usually came from elsewhere in the business. It therefore follows that in most organisations there were other parties to the decision to outsource HRM besides the HR director. In the larger organisations this was usually a board level decision involving several members of the senior management team. The finance director and head of procurement (for example at Telecoms2 and EnergyCo2) often played a key role alongside the HR director. In the SMEs, the CEO or the finance director played a key role.

Second, a number of organisations had a US parent company which was extremely influential in the decision to outsource:

We were also part acquired by a US company who advised us to outsource HR (Managing Director, FinanceCo4).

We were purchased by a US organisation and we were their first acquisition outside the USA. They were very insistent that we have an HR function and that this be outsourced (Chief Executive, FinanceCo5).

Thus, the decision to outsource was not a discrete strategic decision made by the HR team alone, and there appeared to be a certain amount of path dependence in terms of how it was approached. This is because the option of outsourcing HR did not usually come as a “bolt out of the blue”. Several organisations had already experienced outsourcing of some other business function, most frequently ICT services, facilities management, or even financial services, and most had also already subcontracted some aspects of HR (often recruitment and selection, executive search, pay and benefits - but also substantial aspects of the design, development and delivery of training and

The decision to outsource human

resources

241

development). This applied to County Council, EnergyCo1, EngineeringCo, ITCo, FinanceCo3, and Telecom1. Furthermore, with EnergyCo2 where the incoming HR Director had come from running a regional financial service which had outsourced the back office, and County Council, where the incoming HR Director had previously been involved in compulsory competitive tendering, the prior experience of the HR director appeared to be very influential on the final decision.

So what does this tell us? While the HR Directors and other senior HR managers justified the decision to outsource HR in a strong strategic rhetoric, the overall impression is that the decision on whether and what to outsource was not driven by the HR teams. It certainly indicates that few HR directors had approached the decision to outsource HR activity unencumbered by pressure and influence from elsewhere in the business.

2. Reducing cost. Cost considerations appeared to be paramount with a desire for drastic reduction in the HR staff overhead and to move them from a fixed to a variable cost. Almost all the large organisations wished to cut their HR headcount. For example, EngineeringCo faced the need to integrate two separate HR teams after a merger, and ended up transferring 70 per cent of its HR staff to the outsourcing provider:

It was a necessary business decision as the company had recently merged with another, and there was a key driver to reduce costs and eliminate duplication of departments and roles, whilst maintaining levels of service (HR Director, EngineeringCo).

The global reach of its banking business also promoted FinanceCo3 to consider the cost implications:

We needed to cut costs by 50 per cent, deliver the service proposition, and e-enable HR (HR Director, FinanceCo3).

However, as mentioned earlier, the sample included organisations which, after reviewing the options available, had made an explicit decision not to outsource their HR activity as they did not anticipate there would be cost savings. One of these was a large energy company:

We have a growing feeling from both informal and formal benchmarking that outsourcing provides a quick win – whereas we are in it for the longer-term and would rather get it right internally, take longer, and hang on to the savings that we make ourselves (HR Director EnergyCo3).

Cost savings were made most frequently by means of component outsourcing. Component outsourcing to different suppliers was selected by most organisations, and a good example is CountyCouncil (on the grounds that the two-tiered nature of local government required different types of personnel service). Telecom2 also adopted a component outsourcing approach, which they continually adjusted on an incremental basis, and claimed to monitor regularly since they had started outsourcing in 2000. Next, internal shared service functions were set up nationally by RetailCo, and regionally by FinanceCo3. ITCo also outsourced recruitment and also set up their own shared service centre for pay and HR administration. FinanceCo2 bought into the wider group central services in 2004.

3. Moving HR up the value chain and gaining a commercial return from HR resources. A desire to “move HR up the value chain” was prominent for several organisations (with the inevitable rider of cost savings): For CountyCouncil,

PR 38,3

242

outsourcing of HR arose out of a need to review and improve HR provision, as a direct result of UK government insistence on providing best value to the tax payer:

We wanted to free up HR staff to work at a more strategic level, providing added value to the organisation (HR Director CountyCouncil).

Although they already had 30 per cent of recruitment and over 50 per cent of training and development externally supplied, CountyCouncil decided to move these areas to a more complete outsourced arrangement. A similar motivation applied to FinanceCo1 and Telecom2:

We want to concentrate on “core” business activities (HR Director FinanceCo1).

We started looking at it because of what other [leading] companies were doing. . .it would remove distractions and allow strategic thinking and direction. There would also be cost savings (Head of HR Operations Telecom2).

Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) was adopted by EngineeringCo through their joint venture with a major outsourcing consultancy in 2000. BPO involves transforming “high cost, low performing back offices into commercial enterprises by partnering with key suppliers [. . .] [who] typically centralise, standardise and web-enable.” (Lacity et al., 2004). In this case the HR service charged organisational business units for its services.

4. Reducing risk and maintaining quality. While cost reduction and the commercial performance of HR were important for most organisations, there were also other considerations. The reduction of risk and the improvement of quality were important for a major IT services company providing consulting, systems integration, and managed services to organisations across different industry sectors. The complex UK legislation on the employment of IT contractors (the IR35 regulation) meant that in this case outsourcing was a reassuring way of buying in expertise and minimising risk:

We also want to get better quality of service and service level agreements [. . .] There are also reasons now around risk [. . .] employment law IR35 agency and conduct regulations and contractor regulations – a specialist supplier will have better capability and knowledge, be more innovative, have better management information and bring cost savings (Procurement Manager ITCo).

Similarly, Telecom2 wanted to cut risks around contractor recruitment, and a small company, FinanceCo5, decided to outsource the entire UK HR function so as to avoid having to train them in employment law. Unsurprisingly, ensuring the provision of a full higher quality HR service, was also a common reason among the small organisations:

After a management buy out we were left with 70 people and no HR function(Managing Director, FinanceCo4).

There was a strong legal requirement to have a robust function as we are ourselves an outsourced company and have to engage with TUPE requirements (IT Director, IT FacilitiesCo).

5. HR capacity management in response to organisational change. Outsourcing HR was also considered in the context of managing both organisational contraction and growth. Telecom1 was a global organisation that found the nature of its business had changed so much that it had shrunk drastically in size:

Cost was, of course, a consideration and we really wanted to standardise and reduce duplication after a series of acquisitions. However, our focus was on transformation and

The decision to outsource human

resources

243

e-enabling the organisation [. . .] Cost pressures on our business were accelerating and big losses were looming. We needed to downsize our HR staff by more than half after five mergers in the UK (Senior HR Manager Telecom1).

Conversely among the smaller organisations outsourcing also offered a way of coping with growth. ProfessionalServicesCo grew from 69 to 160 staff in a year and faced a serious capacity problem in terms of HR staff:

The decision to outsource was driven by the collapse of the old payroll system due to overload. Our initial thoughts were just around outsourcing payroll, then as we looked at it, we saw the other bits fit around this and decided to outsource administration, We then thought if we are outsourcing most of it, we might as well outsource it all (UK and Ireland Operations Director Professional ServicesCo).

Among the smaller organisations, takeover and management buy-outs were often cited as a major reason for outsourcing HR. Cost was also a major consideration for the SMEs, but again they were concerned to ensure that they had access to a broad range of quality HR service and to minimise risk as was the case in FinanceCo4 and FinanceCo5 management, where complex matters of compliance with employment law on a global scale needed to be addressed:

However, there were two organisations that decided not to outsource their human resources on the grounds that they could not identify any improvements in effectiveness. They were both large organisations in the petrochemicals and energy supply industry, and were convinced that the existing way they currently delivered their HR activity was effective. R, or else saw the complexity of their HR processes as unsuitable for an outsourced solution:

Outsourcing was a logical option to consider as it is a “well trodden path” [. . .] [we had] a feeling that significant savings with outsourcing come particularly from moving from expensive to less expensive places. We are very comfortable with this as we do this constantly with our business and therefore have the internal expertise. So, we don’t need an external partner to do this (HR Director EnergyCo3).

Because the business is moving so quickly in terms of growth, markets and new geography [. . .] an outsourcing organisation could not keep up unless they were based with the company on a full-time basis which defeats the object [. . .] It is an ambiguous business and very project led with a very high proportion of ex-pats moving worldwide yearly [. . .] People are not similar within the company in terms of role or global standardisation, and we feel that allowing this flexibility gives us a competitive edge (Head of Talent Management, EnergyCo1).

What HR activity gets outsourced – routine, clearly defined tasks? But what HR activity was affected by outsourcing? The HR Directors provided a clear rhetorical justification for their choice of “transactional” work:

Things that can be repeated again and again to a high level of satisfaction (HR Director, EnergyCo2).

[the main rationale for selecting which activities to outsource was] non-value adding, non-strategic, cost savings potential (HR Director FinanceCo3).

Yet the outcome was quite variable, as illustrated in Table I. As expected the more “transactional” HR activities such as HR administration and record keeping, recruitment, selection, training programme design, the development of training

PR 38,3

244

O rg

a n

is a ti

o n

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 1 0

1 1

1 2

1 3

1 4

1 5

1 6

1 7

1 8

1 9

2 0

2 1

E n

er g

y C

o 1

E n

er g

y C

o 2

£ £

£ E

n er

g y

C o 3

E n

g in

ee ri

n g

C o

£ £

£ F

in a n

ce C

o 1

£ £

F in

a n

ce C

o 2

£ £

£ F

in a n

ce C

o 3

£ £

£ R

et a il

C o

£ £

C o u

n ty

C o u

n ci

l £

£ £

T el

ec o m

1 £

£ £

T el

ec o m

2 £

£ £

IT C

o £

£ £

£ D

a ta

m a n

a g

em en

t C

o £

£ £

P ro

fe ss

io n

a l

se rv

ic es

C o

£ £

£ IT

F a ci

li ti

es C

o £

£ £

F in

a n

ce C

o 4

£ £

£ F

in a n

ce C

o 5

£ £

N o te s :

1 ¼

re cr

u it

m en

t; 2 ¼

se le

ct io

n ;

3 ¼

p a y

ro ll

a d

m in

is tr

a ti

o n

; 4 ¼

b en

ef it

s; 5 ¼

em p

lo y

ee re

la ti

o n

s; 6 ¼

em p

lo y

m en

t la

w a d

v ic

e; 7 ¼

in te

rn a l

co m

m u

n ic

a ti

o n

s; 8 ¼

tr a in

in g

n ee

d s

a n

a ly

si s;

9 ¼

tr a in

in g

p ro

g ra

m m

e d

es ig

n ;

1 0 ¼

d ev

el o p

m en

t o f

tr a in

in g

m a te

ri a ls

; 1 1 ¼

d el

iv er

y o f

tr a in

in g

a n

d le

a rn

in g

; 1 2 ¼

ev a lu

a ti

o n

o f

tr a in

in g

a n

d le

a rn

in g

; 1 3 ¼

st a ff

a p

p ra

is a l

a n

d p

er fo

rm a n

ce m

a n

a g

em en

t; 1 4 ¼

id en

ti fy

in g

a n

d d

ev el

o p

in g

to p

ta le

n t;

1 5 ¼

o rg

a n

is a ti

o n

a l

ch a n

g e

a n

d d

ev el

o p

m en

t; 1 6 ¼

em p

lo y

ee a ss

is ta

n ce

a n

d o u

tp la

ce m

en t;

1 7 ¼

eq u

a l

o p

p o rt

u n

it y

a n

d d

iv er

si ty

m a n

a g

em en

t; 1 8 ¼

o cc

u p

a ti

o n

a l

h ea

lt h

a n

d w

el lb

ei n

g ;

1 9 ¼

H R

a d

m in

is tr

a ti

o n

a n

d re

co rd

k ee

p in

g ;

2 0 ¼

st ra

te g

ic H

R p

o li

cy m

a k

in g

; 2 1 ¼

re g

u la

to ry

co m

p li

a n

ce tr

a in

in g

Table I. Human resource

activities that were outsourced

The decision to outsource human

resources

245

materials and the delivery of training were commonly cited. In contrast, strategic HR policy-making, identifying and developing top talent, and organisational change and development were much less likely to be outsourced. Indeed, those activities most likely to be outsourced bore a striking resemblance to many of those most commonly sub-contracted in the past. The main difference appeared to be the numbers of staff involved in HR administration who were transferred to the outsourcing partner organisation (see below). There was, however, a striking difference between the larger and the smaller organisations. The latter consisted of the bottom five organisations listed in Table I, who were overall much more likely to outsource the whole or the majority of their HR activity. In summary, the larger organisations were most likely to opt for a mixed economy of HR outsourcing focusing primarily on the more routine “transactional” work (with the exception of EnergyCo1 and EnergyCo3 who rejected outsourcing totally, and EnergyCo 2 who initially outsourced everything, but abandoned this after three years). So these findings reinforce those of Dickman and Tyson (2005) in respect of the larger organisations, but the evidence for smaller organisations shows that the pattern of outsourced activity is very different.

Consequences for the efficiency and effectiveness of HR As we saw above, there were two organisations that had considered outsourcing, but rejected it as an option. However, the majority of the key informants were very confident of the benefits. At the same time it was quite surprising to learn that several were quite frank about their failure to anticipate problems – especially the cost implications. Very few respondents admitted that they had a good understanding of the cost of delivery of their HR service to the rest of the business, and only FinanceCo1 felt confident that they were aware of this prior to outsourcing. Yet, paradoxically, a good understanding of the cost of the HR function was a necessary pre-requisite for successful outsourcing, as well as being a desired outcome. So it was not surprising to learn that a number of organisations had experienced problems in this respect:

[. . .] [a big weakness was] not “base-lining” our own service before we started (Telecom1).

No cost evaluation was made against internal or external providers – this would be a weakness (HR Director, FinanceCo2).

Most HR directors only understand 75 per cent of their cost base [. . .] Outsourcing can be like picking up spaghetti (EnergyCo2).

Don’t outsource what you don’t understand (HR Director, FinanceCo3).

Given that the primary driver for the decision to outsource is based upon cost savings, this is quite remarkable. Furthermore, the arguments derived from Transaction Cost Economics and the Resource Based View of the firm, would have led us to expect that outsourcing would have enhanced the “core competences” of the HR team and not left them vulnerable to a loss of control and quality, and to uncertainty and confusion over the responsibilities for delivering the HR service. This was clearly not the case.

For example, one unintended consequence was the disappearance of in-house HR expertise. This was due to the effect of the downsizing that appears to have accompanied the outsourcing of HR in many organisations. Predictably, the radical change brought by outsourcing left problems in terms of knowledge management and corporate memory. These findings accord with the scepticism expressed by Ulrich (1996) Pfeffer (1997) and

PR 38,3

246

Lawler and Mohrman (2003) about the likely limitations and inefficiencies of HR outsourcing. This is illustrated by RetailCo where the creation of the shared service centre was accompanied by the departure of many senior staff who were vital to pass on background historical knowledge, creating problems managing the knowledge transfer to the shared service centre. Also, while it might appear logical to separate out the transactional from the higher value-added HR activity, this created problems at the human level of knowledge management, as was acknowledged by one respondent:

If you are transferring experienced and knowledgeable people, then you need to embed this knowledge into the systems in order to replace [them] with more junior staff. It is difficult to get the HR added-value with call centre level people (HR Director Telecom1).

Paradoxically, the above examples indicate that the exercise of HR outsourcing may have actually increased costs for the HR function in terms of the need for further development or replacement of retained HR staff, and also the need to deal with attendant problems of morale and motivation. Sometimes the outcome was a higher spend on HR activity than before.

With the smaller organisations, the outcome was that there was often nobody left within the organisation responsible for HR administration (ITFacilitiesCo, FinanceCo4, DataManagementCo) or occasionally just an administrator (ProfessionalServicesCo). There were frequent complaints from the SMEs about various aspects of the service from the outsourcing provider, such as speed of delivery (FinanceCo4); supplier invoicing (DataManagementCo); and getting customised JDs (FinanceCo5). In effect, their lack of control over HR service delivery left them vulnerable.

In consequence there was much evidence that HR professionals were facing more difficulty in managing stakeholder expectations and in maintaining the credibility of the HR function in relation to line managers. With the basic personnel administration carried out by the outsourcing provider, there was a need to convince line managers, that this did not present a dilution of the standard of HR service delivery:

There have been some instances where employees do not know whom to contact, and some occasions where no-one was available to answer the phone (Senior Manager ITFacilitiesCo).

HR professionals should be particularly aware that they cannot walk away from line support, even if there is an alternative provision in place. There are still some very difficult cases which HR should intervene in and support managers – they [these actions]should be considered as “loss leaders” – if no support is given, local HR will lose all credibility (HR Director FinanceCo2).

[. . .] some of this has now been brought back in-house – especially recruitment, as all credibility had been lost through the outsourced solution (Senior HR Manager, Telecom1).

Again, this reinforces the arguments of Ulrich (1996), Pfeffer (1997), Grugulis et al. (2003) and Lawler and Mohrman (2003).

The impact upon the HR function and HR career paths The prescription that the HR function can easily segment into four ways of delivering HR services: as a strategic partner to the business, as a change agent, as a champion for employees and as an administrative expert was not entirely evident from the responses of the HR directors and senior managers. Indeed, the key informants expressed some unease about their capacity to deliver their HR service in this way. First, the tendency

The decision to outsource human

resources

247

of the large organisations to outsource mainly “transactional” HR activity meant that work normally carried out by junior HR administrators would in future be done by the outsourcing services provider. As a consequence, it was quite clear that in all of the large organisations, this had resulted in substantial staff reductions within the HR team, drawn mainly from those carrying out this so-called “transactional” HR activity. Yet this was a term that was not always defined clearly by the key informants and could refer to both “back office” HR administration, and also service delivery by professionals in specialist HR roles such as HRD or Employment Law. In many cases, a large number of staff were “TUPE’d” (transferred under UK employment law with acquired rights) to the provider. For example, 70 per cent EngineeringCo staff, and 40 per cent EnergyCo2 staff went to the outsourcing provider; and of the remainder, many switched to non HR roles, and other HR staff were “embedded” in the business. At FinanceCo1 the aim was to reduce the HR staff headcount from 90 to 60, but in the end only 15 remained in the head office. Even where a shared services solution was adopted, corporate HR employee headcount was reduced dramatically, (by 50 per cent down to 145 in RetailCo; and by 85 per cent at FinanceCo1). Yet occasionally the outcome was unexpected: at ITCo only six staff left, and only slight reductions in HR staff were experienced at CountyCouncil.

We have already noted that it was frequently claimed that the disposal of much “transactional” work freed-up the remaining HR staff to carry out more “higher value-added” work. Indeed, this would have been expected in the light of the rhetoric around “business partnering,” and had clearly been anticipated by a number of HR directors and senior managers:

HR staff need to be up-skilled to work as HR Business Partners and form part of the leadership team (HR Director, Telecom1).

More staff have been transferred to change management and consultancy roles [. . .] There was a development programme put in place to teach HR staff change management and consultancy skill (HR Director CountyCouncil).

All of these roles have increased in seniority, pay, responsibility and value of delivery [. . .] I feel they have moved a considerable way from a purely transactional role 18 months ago. HR now focuses upon learning, management development and governance and standards – not HR rules (HR Director, FinanceCo2).

What this might involve was often unclear and variable. In some cases there are even hints that HR staff faced deskilling, and in others that the outcome was job enlargement for those entrusted with this “higher value-added work”. Some key informants also reported problems around the quality of strategic advice, organisation development and consultancy skills available in the legacy HR team. The implication was that it was not easy to move HR staff into the higher level work of “change agent” and “business partner”, and there were indications that the remaining staff had yet to acquire the skills needed for this higher level work, as illustrated in the following selective quotations:

The remaining HR staff are more generalist and tend to get involved at one level down from previously (Telecom1).

We would like to think that it frees up internal staff for higher value activities, but in reality, staff reductions are the most common outcome (FinanceCo3).

PR 38,3

248

It was quite clear that the introduction of outsourcing meant that the claim to be a business partner delivering service excellence was proving difficult for HR directors and senior managers to sustain. While they themselves might be able to assume the mantle of “strategic partner”, the ability of the remaining HR professionals to display the advanced project management, customer relationship management, and organisation development skills required of change agents was questionable. The drastic cuts in HR staff engaged in basic administrative roles, had also added to problems of morale and motivation. The difficulty of managing stakeholder expectations of line managers also indicated that the role of “employee champion” was perceived to be a difficult and uncomfortable one for many HR staff.

Discussion and conclusion This article has established that outsourcing represents a step change beyond simple sub-contracting, and is now extensively used in respect of a range of low skilled work throughout UK workplaces. However, it has also established that the outsourcing of core management functions such as HRM is a growing area that has only just begun to receive attention. To address this, the research explored and described the main drivers influencing the decision to outsource HR activity in a sample of 17 organisations. It also examined the outcomes in terms of what activity gets outsourced and the implications for the delivery of HR services, and the perceived consequences for the HR function. As the main data source was semi structured interviews with key informants who had taken a major role in considering and leading the introduction of outsourcing, it was natural to expect that responses might be cloaked in a rhetoric that provided a post hoc justification of the actions taken. However, the frankness of the interview participants was quite surprising. They openly acknowledged the pressures they faced that drove them to consider outsourcing, and also acknowledged the problems they encountered.

The pragmatism that led them to consider HR outsourcing could be explained by the pressures that these HR directors and other senior HR staff experienced. For those in large organisations, the decision to outsource was not theirs’ alone, and was often “exported” to HR based upon experience elsewhere in the business including the influence of (often US) parent companies, and usually justified in terms of cost control and risk management. Only two organisations that explicitly rejected outsourcing as unlikely to improve their effectiveness in delivering HR offered a challenge to this logic. Therefore, unsurprisingly, many of the HR staff interviewed felt themselves to be junior partners rather than business partners to decisions that were taken elsewhere. This reinforces the argument of Dickman and Tyson (2005) that there are a substantial number of other outsourcing motivations besides reasons of cost, risk and quality – especially political and historical reasons.

Yet while it was clear that cost was the dominant consideration, as we have seen, for several organisations assigning a cost to HR activity was an intractable problem – “like picking up spaghetti”. Unsurprisingly therefore, hidden costs of outsourcing soon became apparent, especially in terms of the capacity of the legacy HR teams in large organisations to manage the relationships both with the outsourcing service provider and with the internal clients – the line managers. There was little evidence that the selection of HR activity for outsourcing had contributed to an enhancement of the “core competence” of the HR team or of the wider organisation. To the contrary, the HR team

The decision to outsource human

resources

249

was often in a more vulnerable position with a loss of control over quality and attendant uncertainty and confusion.

So, if the response of these senior HR staff was pragmatic, then it was not without anxiety over the future of their HR teams. Vastly reduced HR staffing, a shortage of capacity to fill the more demanding HR roles, the challenge of managing the expectations of line managers, and problems with assuring quality in the delivery of the HR service, all preoccupied those interviewed in the larger organisations. Despite the rhetoric of being a strategic business partner, for many organisations, the inability to deliver a quality service clearly presented difficulties for the future credibility and integrity of their HR function.

The consequences of HR outsourcing for the future of organisational HR functions are therefore quite serious. This research revealed that it was often difficult to reassign the HR staff that remained within the organisation to “higher value-added” work. De-skilling, job-enlargement, new skill shortages and the disappearance of expertise presented problems that could only be resolved by increasing the HR budget. Furthermore, the disruption that outsourcing brought to the internal labour market for HR staff has serious implications for both succession planning, and also for individual career planning within organisations. In future, from where within organisations, will experienced HR staff come to fill the new roles of “change agent” and “business partner”? Conversely, what will motivate early career entrants aspiring to a professional career in HR to consider starting as “administrative experts” in a call centre? In any case, where outsourcing is adopted, the skills that are acquired and developed in the course of a traditional professional HR career may need to be supplemented not just by those of leadership and change management, but also by those of project management, customer relationship management, and management accounting. A question therefore arises about the adequacy of traditional initial professional training in HR. Is it preparing HR professionals for this new world of outsourcing, customer services management and stratified careers?

In conclusion, while a full consideration of the perceptions and experiences of all employed in the HR function within these organisations has not been possible through this research, the views of HR directors and senior managers has provided a valuable insight into the strategic decision to outsource HR activity.

References

Adams, K. (1991), “Externalisations vs specialisation: what is happening to personnel?”, Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 40-54.

Barney, J. (1991), “Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage”, Journal of Management, Vol. 17, pp. 99-120.

Benson, J. (1998), “Dual commitment: contract workers in Australian manufacturing enterprises”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 355-75.

Boxall, P. (1998), “Achieving competitive advantage through human resource strategy: towards a theory of industry dynamics”, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 8, pp. 265-88.

Dickman, M. and Tyson, S. (2005), “Outsourcing payroll: beyond transaction cost economics”, Personnel Review, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 451-67.

Elfring, T. and Baven, G. (1994), “Outsourcing technical services: stages of development”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 42-51.

PR 38,3

250

Gainey, T.W. and Klaas, B.S. (2005), “Outsourcing relationships between firms and their training providers”, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 7-26.

Gartner, I. (1995), “Outsourcing – 14 critical success factors”, Business Issues, February.

Grugulis, I., Vincent, S. and Hebson, G. (2003), “The rise of the network organisation and the decline of discretion”, Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 45-59.

Kakabadse, A. and Kakabadse, N. (2002), “Trends in outsourcing: contrasting USA and Europe”, European Management Journal, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 189-98.

Kersley, B., Alpin, C., Forth, J., Bryson, A., Bewley, H., Dix, G. and Oxenbridge, S. (2006), Inside the Workplace: Findings from the 2004 Workplace Employment Relations Survey, Routledge, London.

Kessler, I., Coyle-Shapiro, J. and Purcell, J. (1999), “Outsourcing and the employee perspective”, Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 5-19.

Kinnie, N., Purcell, J. and Hurchinson, S. (2000), “Managing the employment relationship in telephone call centres”, in Purcell, K. (Ed.), Changing Boundaries in Employment, Bristol Academic Press, Bristol.

Klaas, B.S., McLendon, J.A. and Gainey, T.W. (1999), “HR outsourcing and its impact: the role of transaction costs”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 113-36.

Klaas, B.S., McLendon, J.A. and Gainey, T.W. (2001), “Outsourcing HR: the impact of organisational characteristics”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 125-38.

Kosnik, T., Wmg-Migli, D.J. and Hooever, K. (2006), “Outsourcing vs insourcing in the human resource supply chain: a comparison of five generic models”, Personnel Review, Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 671-83.

Lacity, M.C., Willcocks, L. and Feeny, D. (2004), “Commercializing the back office at Lloyds of London: outsourcing and strategic partnerships revisited”, European Management Journal, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 127-40.

Lacity, M.C., Willcocks, L.P. and Feeny, D.F. (1995), “IT outsourcing maximises flexibility and control”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 73 No. 3, pp. 84-93.

Lawler, E.E. and Mohrman, S.A (2003), Creating a Strategic Human Resources Organisation, Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, CA.

Lepak, D.P. and Snell, S.A. (1999), “The human resource architecture: towards a theory of human capital allocation and development”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 31-48.

Lever, S. (1997), “An analysis of managerial motivations behind outsourcing practices in human resources”, Human Resource Planning, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 37-47.

Logan, M.S., Faught, K. and Ganster, D.G. (2004), “Outsourcing a satisfied and committed workforce: a trucking industry case study”, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 147-62.

Murray, J.Y. and Kotabe, M. (1999), “Sourcing strategies of US service companies: a modified transaction cost analysis”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 20 No. 9, pp. 791-809.

Pfeffer, J. (1997), New Directions for Organization Theory: Problems and Prospects, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Priem, R. and Butler, J. (2001), “Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for strategic management research?”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 22-40.

Purcell, J. and Ahlstrand, B. (2004), Human Resource Management in the Multi-Divisional Company, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

The decision to outsource human

resources

251

Purcell, J. and Purcell, K. (1998), “Insourcing, outsourcing and the growth of contingent labour as evidence of flexible employment strategies (UK)”, European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 163-81.

Reilly, P. (2000), “HR shared service and the realignment of HR”, Institute of Employment Studies, Report No. 368, Brighton.

Rubery, J., Cooke, F.L., Earnshaw, J. and Marchington, M. (2003), “Inter-organizational relations and employment in a multi-employer environment”, British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 265-89.

Rubery, J., Earnshaw, J., Marchington, M., Cooke, F.L. and Vincent, S. (2002), “Changing organisational forms and the employment relationship”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 39, pp. 645-72.

Shaw, S. and Fairhurst, D. (1997), “Outsourcing the HR function – personal threat or valuable opportunity?”, Strategic Change, Vol. 6, pp. 459-68.

Switser, J. (1997), “Trends in human resource outsourcing”, Management Accounting, Vol. 79, November, pp. 22-4.

Ulrich, D. (1996), Human Capital Champions, Harvard University Press, Boston, MA.

Walton, J. (1999), Strategic Human Resource Development, Financial Times/Prentice Hall, Harlow.

Williamson, O. (1975), Markets and Hierarchies, Free Press, New York, NY.

Woodall, J. and Gourlay, S. (2002), “Trends in outsourcing HRD in the UK: the implications for strategic HRD”, International Journal Human Resources Development and Management, Vol. 2 Nos 1/2, pp. 50-63.