HR Isn’t Your Only Option for Managing Workplace Challenges

When challenged by difficult workplace situations, the message we often receive, explicitly or implicitly, is that human resources, “HR,” is our sole avenue of support. But is this true?

Undue dependence on HR may leave us disappointed and jaded, believing HR isn’t our friend and is only concerned about defending the institution, even though HR’s fundamental obligation to represent the institution usually means supporting employees as well.

To be clear, HR in some institutions has work to do to improve its support for employees. HR and management consultant, Sue Bingham, says traditional HR policies are “overly restrictive [and] often convoluted and overly paternal, and attempt to control the behavior of regular people through rules designed to rein in the ‘bad apples.'” According to HR and workplace consultant Liz Ryan, progressive discipline “is a way for employers to set up a power-based, parent/child relationship with their employees.” Managers who discipline employees “often prefer not to look in the mirror [and] want to blame someone when something goes wrong” rather than view mistakes as learning experiences.

HR’s handling of formal employee complaints also raises concerns. A recent study found that filing discrimination and harassment claims is often counterproductive, subjects complainers to retaliation, leaves them worse off with respect to career options and mental health challenges, and results in limited punitive consequences for discriminatory managers and alleged harassers. David Liddle, author of Managing Conflict: A Practical Guide to Resolution in the Workplace, states the traditional employee grievance process “creates a culture that is extraordinarily damaging [and] kills the working relationship. Dead.” The problem is “HR teams have become so obsessed with applying increasingly complex and cumbersome policies and procedures that they have lost sight of the fundamentals of how to manage conflict, change, crisis and controversy effectively.”

Whether or not this is your experience, HR will be involved on matters of formal complaint, such as by you alleging unfair treatment, or against you such as formal discipline from your supervisor or alleged misconduct from another employee. But there are innumerable issues that aren’t strictly within HR’s compliance purview, can be addressed in earlier stages before they escalate and require HR’s attention, or can be addressed in partnership with HR without reliance on policy-driven responses.

I previously discussed Self-Help Measures for Addressing Workplace Challenges (That Don’t Require HR). But we can also benefit from institutional resources outside formal HR structures for assistance. Let’s explore a few:

Ombuds. Many institutions have an organizational ombuds to help the organization’s constituents address concerns in an informal, confidential manner outside standard procedural frameworks. This affords constituents the opportunity to be heard and engage in problem-solving without making a “federal case,” in contrast to HR that is often bound by law and policy to make such concerns “of record.” Ombuds do not represent employees, but advocate for processes to ensure employees are fairly heard and treated. Ombuds often serve as informal coaches, advisors, and organizational experts to help employees navigate the system and identify resources and responses that will help them. Because the role usually resides outside an organization’s traditional hierarchical framework, the ombuds may be the ideal function to provide informal support compared to HR, which can’t ensure absolute confidentiality due to its obligations to management. Organizational ombuds are generally guided by the Standards of Practice and Code of Ethics of the International Ombuds Association, which call for facilitating consultation processes that are confidential, informal, impartial, and independent — standards HR cannot always ensure.

Mediation services. Many colleges and universities utilize informal mediation to address workplace conflicts. Mediation provides an avenue through which work-related conflicts can be addressed at the lowest, least invasive level. Beyond resolving conflict, the process of engaging in mediation can teach students, faculty, and staff problem-solving, leadership, and “soft” skills and provide opportunities for resolution that avoid the harsh consequences of formal discipline.

Mediators use different approaches to help parties address conflicts. The most common are referred to as evaluative, facilitative, and transformative. Evaluative mediation is common in court-connected mediations where the mediator takes a directive approach to encourage settlement and avoid further adjudication. This limited goal minimizes opportunities for addressing parties’ ongoing relationship and is, therefore, not ideal for workplace conflicts. This approach also often uses caucusing where the mediator meets separately with parties, further limiting their ability to communicate directly and work through their differences. Facilitative mediation is more common for workplace settings where the mediator helps the parties, in the room together, communicate and understand one another and make mutually agreeable decisions to help them move forward productively. Some mediators use instead, or blend with the facilitative approach, a transformative approach that helps parties dig deeper into the root causes of their conflict — a useful approach in some situations, but not when parties seek simply to establish a cooperative working relationship and are not inclined to explore the deeper interpersonal dynamics of their relationship.

If you are experiencing a workplace conflict, inquire from HR and other administrative offices whether mediation support is available. Some organizations employ external mediators to address employee conflicts. A well-documented example is the USPS REDRESS mediation program, which utilizes external mediators as a step in the employee complaint process. Though effective, such programs generally involve the formal filing of a complaint to trigger use of mediation. The cost of utilizing external mediators may also be prohibitive for many institutions and, therefore, likely not available for disputes that don’t involve a formal complaint or employees in higher-level positions. In contrast, as noted in a previous article, many institutions develop programs that train and utilize professionals from various administrative offices, including HR, to help mediate informal workplace disputes, often before and to avoid the filing of a formal complaint.

The institution’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) unit. Some employees from traditionally underrepresented and marginalized groups find HR support problematic, as it is often unsympathetic, unbelieving, or simply ignorant about their experiences working within the majority culture. Traditional HR also often requires definitive proof of wrongdoing, such as evidence of discrimination or harassment, whereas many incidents of bias and unfavorable treatment are more subtle and difficult to substantiate based on legal elements of proof. Creating positive, inclusive, safe, and welcoming workplace cultures shouldn’t depend on waiting to receive “evidence” of poor treatment before the institution becomes involved. Institutions continue to support the development of system-wide offices, functions, and professionals to help create such cultures. Professionals in these fields, many who have experienced the insidious mosquito bites of microaggressions, discrimination, and harassment, are sensitive to these issues and can help employees navigate these issues more informally than HR.

Employee assistance programs. Many employees don’t realize the wide range of services that employee assistance programs provide. They may perceive EAP as only available for more personal emotional and psychological support without considering how workplace conflicts and related challenges fit this category. Many EAP programs are available not just for the most serious issues, but for common everyday challenges impacting employee wellbeing. Confidential consultations with licensed EAP counselors are typically of limited duration, leading to referral to other resources if needed. Engaging EAP won’t typically lead to direct intervention but can serve as another source of support to help employees identify for themselves the next steps for managing their challenges.

While HR in the “worst case” continues to implement harsh policies and practices, many institutions are more progressive in their HR practices. Both the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), the leading professional association for HR professionals, and the College and University Professional Association for Human Resources (CUPA-HR), the leading HR association for higher education, advocate for more progressive approaches in their knowledge base, commitment to diversity, and learning programs and frameworks. Progressive HR will more often encourage and partner with these alternative avenues to support employees and avoid, whenever possible, requirements for “going to HR” to pursue formal processes.