Human Capital Metrics - Who is Being Measured

Talking about Human Capital is about create value from human resources that we have. We can improve their contribution if we can measure. Measuring HR contribution is difficult enough and much bias. In HR measurement tool we know process measurement and impact measurement or result measurement. We have a tendency to use process measures rather than impact measures.

There are a lot of HR measurements. When we talk about process measurement we can use time to hire, training hours per employee, workload analysis, etc. But if we use impact measurement a lot of HR practitioner use like % people improved performance, %ROI on training, etc.

For HR practitioner that handle 200+ employee's, perhaps it is no difficult, but  if we had a lot of employee, 23000+ employee organization, who will we measure? If we use proportional population, we still have to measure a thousand employee. If we use talent management concept,  we believe that organization performance depends on 20% employee's organization. Based on Pareto diagram, we can see who is in the 20% bracket. And the we can begin to measure HR contribution and improve their performance to create value added to company.


What is your opinion?