Opinion: Stacking the evidence - are HR decisions backed up?

Now included as part of the redesigned MSc Human Resource Management programme at Robert Gordon University (RGU), lecturers Dr Susan Reid Elder and Dr Moira Nikodem explain what it is and how it can benefit across organisations…

Throughout working society we are seeing considerable unease, and in some sectors major discontent, which is leading to workers taking action. Whether that be high-profile industrial disputes, smaller scale strikes, or the more recent and subtle trend of ‘quiet quitting’, it’s clear that employees can take matters into their own hands when it comes to decreasing satisfaction levels.

Although recent strike action is heavily related to wider concerns around soaring inflation and the cost-of-living crisis, there is also heightened debate around working conditions and how the HR profession is helping organisations address these problems to improve engagement, wellbeing, and productivity of its workforce.

Having significant practical HR experience, as well as academic expertise, we understand that the HR remit is important and broad, including recruitment, training, reward, and diversity and inclusion.

One critical element of the HR role though is decision-making, both at a transactional and strategic level, and we’re now seeing decisions having to be made in an increasingly volatile and complex environment, characterised by a relentless pace of change.

So rather than relying on the latest trends, business books or consultant jargon, practical tools and skillsets are needed to help HR and leaders decipher and make sense of the vast amount of information dealt with to better serve employees. And this is where evidence-based practice (EBP) is becoming increasingly important.

Simply put, EBP involves systematic appraisal of the best available evidence to inform effective decisions. Rather than relying on one source of evidence, EBP involves a six-step process (asking, acquiring, appraising, aggregating, applying and assessing), underpinned by critical thinking, and the combination of four evidence sources: organisational data, stakeholder perspectives, expert opinion, and academic research.

It sounds straightforward and a natural system to implement, so why isn’t it wide spread?

We’ve been exploring EBP, or the lack of it, in organisations and still find that many introduce initiatives that are being promoted in books or reports without fully checking that the evidence is there to support the claims being made. Indeed, there is a body of research that highlights a significant gap between academic evidence and so-called ‘best practice’ in the workplace.

One particular example is mental health aid first aid training (MHFA). While it is being implemented with good intentions to solve a very real and important issue, the effectiveness of the intervention is questioned in some research. A report from the Health and Safety Executive suggests "there is limited evidence that MHFA training leads to sustained improvement in the ability of those trained to help colleagues experiencing mental ill‐health” and that that there’s “no evidence that the introduction of MHFA training has improved the organisational management of mental health in workplaces." Another report, this time from the Institute for Employment Studies, states that “the evidence to support MHFA remains weak”. This is because organisations are hastily implementing ‘solutions’ without working out what the root problem is.

We’ve also found that there’s mixed evidence of success in unconscious bias training (UBT). Many employers introduced UBT to proactively eliminate discrimination in the workplace. However following research, some organisations are moving away from it. For example, in 2020 many UK Government departments discontinued stand-alone UBT because their research found little evidence that it had positive impacts on behaviours or long-term attitudes.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission go further, suggesting that “there is potential for back-firing effects when UBT participants are exposed to information that suggests stereotypes and biases are unchangeable.” Such guidance on training courses may not only activate and reinforce unhelpful stereotypes, but also cause negative reactions and worsen biases.

While we’re not suggesting that good decision-making never takes place, we do believe that by applying EBP principles and being less reliant on a single evidence source that we can ensure managers make decisions that are more likely to have the desired final outcome. For now, many decisions are only ticking the first box of implementation.

At Aberdeen Business School, we’re teaching the next generation of HR practitioners the knowledge and skills to apply EBP in the workplace while simultaneously conducting research in the area to help improve knowledge. Our approach is pragmatic with a view to ensuring that research is of value to the HR community as well as organisations more widely.

By Dr Susan Reid Elder (R) and Dr Moira Nikodem (L), Lecturers in Human Resource Management at Aberdeen Business School, Robert Gordon University.