Barrier 3: You lack the figures to convince others
Does this sound familiar? You sense there’s a problem, but you can’t prove it
You’ve noticed that staff turnover is rising. Managers report that their teams are under pressure. Staff seem to be absent more often, and vacancies are taking longer to fill. But when you try to convince senior management to take action, you run into a problem.
You have indications. No evidence. “Staff turnover seems to be higher than before” sounds different from “staff turnover costs us €X annually in replacement costs, lost productivity and loss of knowledge.”
And that is precisely where the next hurdle arises. Strategic decisions are rarely made on the basis of a hunch. They are made on the basis of facts, figures and substantiated insights.
30 per cent of Belgian HR professionals state that data and analytics skills are among the most important competencies for success in HR.
For 21.3 per cent of Belgian organisations, a lack of data and analytics is a major barrier to HR having greater strategic influence.
Reality check: signs are not proof
Today, HR is increasingly faced with complex challenges. Talent shortages, retention, skills, wellbeing and changing employee expectations all call for well-considered decisions. This requires more than just experience. For instance, 30 per cent of Belgian HR professionals state that data and analytics skills are among the most important competencies for success in HR. At the same time, for 21.3 per cent of Belgian organisations, a lack of data and analytics is a major barrier to HR having greater strategic influence.
And that’s what we see in practice; too many HR decisions are still based on gut feelings:
- a manager requests additional staff;
- Recruiters are finding that vacancies are proving difficult to fill;
- Managers are concerned about staff turnover;
- Employees report that their workload is increasing.
These are valuable indicators. But they are not the same as evidence.
After all, high staff turnover can have various causes. An increasing workload does not automatically mean there are too few people. And a skills shortage does not always require additional recruitment.
A strong suspicion can spark a conversation. Evidence is what ultimately underpins a decision. Not to replace experience and expertise, but to reinforce them.
Evidence-based HR: turning signals into substantiated insights
Evidence-based HR is based on a simple idea: you don’t have to choose between experience and data. Strong HR decisions combine different sources of information.
When a manager indicates that employees are at risk of leaving, that is an important signal. But on its own, it does not tell the whole story. Evidence-based HR helps to cross-check that signal against other insights. This increases the likelihood that you will identify the correct cause and make the right decision.
Wat is evidence-based HR?
Systematically underpin HR decisions with the best available insights from various sources: data from within the organisation, scientific research, professional expertise and the experiences of employees and managers.
Four sources for better decisions
Evidence-based HR draws on four sources. These insights help to better understand the figures and reveal the context behind the data.
1. Organisational data
What do your own figures tell you? Consider:
- progress;
- absenteeism;
- staff costs;
- internal mobility;
- recruitment;
- productivity.
2. Research & benchmarks
What do we already know from scientific or sector-specific research? Not every HR challenge is unique. Often, research already exists on interventions that do or do not work.
Benchmark data (e.g. absenteeism, staff turnover, salaries, etc.) helps to put internal indicators into perspective. It not only shows what is happening within your organisation, but also how you are performing compared to the market.
3. Expertise
What insights do HR professionals, managers or external specialists contribute? Experience remains important. Evidence-based HR does not replace expertise, but places it in the right context.
4. Stakeholder insights
What do employees and managers have to say? Consider:
- employee surveys;
- exit interviews;
- focus groups.
The strength lies in the combination.
No single source provides the complete answer. Data shows what is happening. Research provides insight into what works. Expertise helps to interpret the information. And stakeholder insights shed light on the reality on the shop floor.
Only when different sources point in the same direction does a truly substantiated insight emerge.
However, this is usually where the problem lies. When an organisation is faced with a problem, the typical reflex is to turn to experts straight away. They hire a consultant, sometimes even consult stakeholders, … In the process, their own data is systematically overlooked, and external research is rarely considered at all. This isn’t down to a lack of willingness; it’s often simply because people analytics as a skill is still under-developed within HR departments.
Evidence-based HR: how to do it
Evidence-based HR isn’t about collecting more data. It’s about making better decisions.
Many HR issues start with a warning sign. A manager asks for extra staff. A vacancy remains unfilled for longer. Staff turnover is rising. Employees report that their workload is increasing.
The first instinct is often to look for a solution straight away. Recruit more staff. Organise training. Automate tasks. Or request extra capacity.
But a warning sign alone does not reveal the cause.
“Your initiative may be a good one, but it’s based on a gut feeling. Back it up with data first.”
Lien De Beer, COO at Planet Group
Case study: how Remondis moved from gut feeling to evidence
At Remondis, an international family-run waste management company with around 400 employees in Belgium, a high absenteeism rate had long been a cause for concern. The impact on day-to-day operations was significant, but there was a lack of sufficient insight to tackle the problem effectively.
Understand first, then decide
Instead of jumping straight to solutions, the company decided first to gain a better understanding of exactly what was happening.
Together with Mensura, Remondis developed a widely supported absence policy. At the same time, existing HR and payroll data were utilised more effectively to identify patterns and conduct discussions more objectively.
To maintain focus, Remondis deliberately opted for three key KPIs:
- absenteeism rate;
- absenteeism rate;
- zero absenteeism rate.
From insight to action
For the first time, HR, managers and senior management had access to the same facts. As a result, discussions about absenteeism were based less on gut feeling and more on objective insights.
“It’s no longer a case of ‘I feel’ or ‘I think’. It’s data-driven, and that makes the discussion much more robust.”
An Struyf, HR Manager at Remondis
