The best thing about refining our [management’s] alignment with the HRD
division was that they had flexibility. They, and we, were able to adjust our
expectations and requirements, and we [management] to theirs much easier
than with the other areas where the professional roles are more rigid. There
were still a lot of issues to wrestle with, but they [HRD] were, in many ways,
a lot easier to work with than our engineers—who are bound by a lot of job
specifications and professional engineering guidelines. Accountants and
lawyers bring a lot of rules to the table, things we need to know or
requirements we are held to as a company. The HRD group came looking for
shared outcomes and, once we [management team] got on board, we were
able to line-up our expectations more quickly. Through these interactions,
we came to better appreciate the professionalism and expertise of the HRD
division.
HRD practitioners in the organization had the flexibility to align their efforts
to work with the needs identified, and shared, with management. Management
did not want an “HRD Family Doctor” to write them a prescription. They, and
the HRD division, needed to partner in an attempt to leverage management
and HRD expertise toward desired outcomes. Through the alignment process, the
HRD division increased their credibility as specialized practitioners.