Many HR friends are paying attention to human efficiency, but the way everyone pays attention to human efficiency is generally very limited, which is nothing more than calculating various human efficiency indicators of their own enterprises, and then comparing them with their own historical level. The results of the comparison are also easy to explain: if the human efficiency is improved, it must be a good business or a good human resources job; If the human efficiency is reduced, it must be that the current business development difficulties are encountered, and the human resources department must be given greater management authority.
Frankly, more than 90% of the companies we meet (and maybe I'm a little conservative) use this way to present and explain their human effectiveness. At the end of the statement, a sentence is usually added: "We have carried out human efficiency management work for a long time, and our human efficiency is very good." "When we hear something like this, we usually laugh and don't continue the conversation. Why? Because everyone's "coordinates" are different, there is no way to discuss them.
If you want to talk about human efficiency, you must have benchmarking data, not just look at your own data. If you look at yourself behind closed doors, you can describe yourself as good, but that kind of self-congratulatory is meaningless.
If an enterprise wants to objectively evaluate human efficiency, industry data must be referenced. Here, we generally take the top companies by market capitalization, they represent advanced productivity, and their data is more meaningful. On the one hand, it is obviously unrealistic to include the whole industry sample, and on the other hand, the advanced benchmarking is the driving force for the development of the industry.
The following industry data are of reference significance:
1. What is the static level of human efficiency of industry benchmark enterprises, and what is the distribution structure of high, medium and low human efficiency? If we think that human efficiency represents the competitiveness of the enterprise, then, please calculate the human efficiency of your enterprise and compare it in the industry to see if you are at the head and whether you have met the requirements of basic competitiveness.
2. The overall trend of the dynamic level of human efficiency of industry benchmark enterprises is whether human efficiency is improving or decreasing. Some companies say that the decline in their human efficiency is an industry factor, no, the industry as a whole has not declined, or the industry has fallen by 10%, and your company has decreased by 30%, can this be called an industry factor?
3. Among the industry benchmarking enterprises, which human efficiency indicators have opened the gap in competitiveness. Pulling out the distribution structure of indicators such as per capita revenue, per capita profit, labor cost production ratio, and labor cost rate of return, we can easily find that in different industries, some indicators are not much different from everyone, but some indicators are very different. There must be a head in an industry, and the head enterprises are unable to open the index gap, which is likely to indicate that this is the status quo of the industry and is difficult to overcome. It doesn't make much sense to pay attention to such human performance indicators, and it is enough to keep them from falling behind. However, some indicators are easy to widen the gap, which is the key to the efficiency of enterprises, and must be paid attention to as key human efficiency indicators. In comparison, many companies have calculated a series of human efficiency indicators and selected the best ones to present, isn't this self-deception?
4. The human efficiency development path of key benchmarking enterprises. The reason why key benchmarking enterprises have become benchmarks means that their development history is representative, and their human efficiency development process is naturally representative. In other words, if you do other people's exam papers again, you may not be able to get other people's results. Therefore, what mistakes people have made and what experience they have had can be analyzed in depth, and then used as a reference for their own implementation of human efficiency management.
5. Financial efficiency indicators of industry benchmarking enterprises. Many HR people don't understand that human efficiency indicators are not isolated, they affect financial efficiency indicators and are also affected by financial efficiency indicators. Therefore, to analyze human efficiency, we can't just look at human efficiency, the production ratio of an enterprise in sales, management, research and development and other expenses greatly reveals the prospect of human efficiency. Human efficiency management is tailor-made, and the goals set should make people "jump up and touch". If the financial efficiency level of the enterprise is originally the downstream of the industry, but it still forcibly requires the human efficiency level to reach the upstream of the industry, to be honest, this is a bit nonsensical.
Musheng Consulting has always focused on the field of human efficiency management, and we also know that data is the soul of human efficiency. Human efficiency has become the first theme of the current human resources work, and it is an indisputable fact that HR with professional pursuit must master human efficiency data.