_____________________________________________________________________________________________
70% of total cost of doing business is people cost
80% of the value of a company is not found on the balance sheet
Why are people only an expense post on the income statement?
Today: Profitable companies see their people as a necessary cost of doing business.
Tomorrow: The economy goes in cycles and the cost of doing business quickly becomes a big problem when companies face problems continue to grow or even maintaining the top line. So people go from being a cost to becoming a problem. I thought this is an important reminder right now with some indications of the US and world economy moving into slower growth and potentially a recession. Are your people becoming a problem that you will deal with?
Talkers: Some organizations talk about their people as their greatest asset but what they typically mean is that they actually understand that people also belong on the balance sheet and refer to people as means of production. That is a great industrial factory floor viewpoint of people. They are a means of production as is raw materials and capital. However they don’t need to write of this asset. It is also a pretty stale view assuming a constant value of this asset.
Walkers: Modern organizations should see their people not only as a cost but also as a capital investment. There is however a fundamental difference between a dead asset and a person. An asset will depreciate over time. Of course to various degrees depending on what it is and how it is being used and maintained. A person’s value will increase over time in terms of the ability to deliver value to customers. This additional value contribution potential springs from experience, network, knowledge, skills and courage. The more this type of asset is being used the more it appreciates (of course within human capacity). Ongoing growth and learning should make an individual more capable of dealing with broader and more complex issues at a faster pace. Nothing new here and I think that this viewpoint is greatly illustrated by Larry Bossidy while explaining the turnaround of AlliedSignal (The Job No CEO Should Delegate, Bossidy, HBR, 2001). However if companies only pay lip service to this they are selling them self short in terms of limiting growth, harvesting productivity gains and ultimately creating shareholder return. Growing the greatest asset will grow the company and set it part from competitors.
Dr Kirk Hallowell from PDI and I are working on a more in depth paper looking into the right metrics to measure and and manage people as assets. We will present our findings in a webinar end of January. Our goal is to show how greater people practices pays of financially and introduce some specific metrics that we suggest organizations start using to achieve real results.
I have a monthly eZine that goes out to business owners and employers of 50-500 employees. I’d like to use Erik Berggren’s article on my next issue as a featured article.
If I include his name, tittle, company, and link to http://www.successfactors.com Can I use this article?
David Robertson
Dear Sir,
The human factor has been not recognized properly, it has been seen very often that it is looked as a burden and cost factor, may a times the top management is least bothered about the upgradation of human capital. As you rightly mentioned that Walkers are the only firms, which will be successful in future.
As we are moving towards globalization and the complexities of the business is growing by leaps and bound the talent retention and continuous value addition to the existing employees are needed. Nurturing talents and grooming talents will be the biggest challenges for the corporates for tomorrows survival and profitability.
Ultimate assets will be the human assets.
With Warm Regards,
Debashish Bramha