Do Human Resource Departments Act as Strategic Partners? Strategic Human Capital Management Adoption by County Governments

• DOI: 10.1177/0734371X13507158
• Date: 01 September 2014
• Published date: 01 September 2014
• Subject Matter: HR in Practice

507158ROP34310.1177/0734371X13507158Jacobson et al.Review of Public Personnel Administration
research-article2013
Jacobson et al.
HR in Practice
Review of Public Personnel Administration
2014, Vol. 34(3) 289 –301
Do Human Resource
© The Author(s) 2013
Reprints and permissions:
Departments Act as Strategic sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0734371X13507158
rop.sagepub.com
Partners? Strategic Human
Capital Management
Adoption by County
Governments
Willow S. Jacobson1, Jessica E. Sowa2,
and Kristina T. Lambright3
Abstract
Drawing on qualitative data from 40 counties in New York and North Carolina,
this article examines the adoption of strategic human capital management (SHCM)
principles and practices at the county level and presents a typology of five levels of
SHCM adoption. The level of SHCM implementation in a county depends on the
view of the HR function by executive county leadership, the capacity of the county
to engage in strategic planning and management, and the capacity of the HR director
to think strategically about the role of HR in the government. The article concludes
with recommendations for practice, which focus on educating a diverse set of actors
about SHCM, building executive-level support, developing HR skill and competencies,
and applying basic change management practices.
Keywords
SCHM, leadership, strategic thinking and organizational change
1The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA
2University of Colorado Denver, USA
3Binghamton University, USA
Corresponding Author:
Willow S. Jacobson, School of Government, MPA Program, The University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill, CB# 3330 Knapp-Sanders Building, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3330, USA.
Email: Jacobson@sog.unc.edu

---

290
Review of Public Personnel Administration 34(3)
Introduction
Since the advent of public administration as a discipline, researchers have tried to
identify the best strategies for managing government workforces (Condrey, 2010;
Dresang, 2009; Ingraham, 1995; Mosher, 1968; Riccucci & Naff, 2008; Van Riper,
1958). There is growing empirical evidence that human resource management (HRM)
practices have a direct impact on organizational performance (Lawler & Boudreau,
2009; Ulrich, Brockbank, Johnson, Sandholtz, & Younger, 2008). While scholars
have been arguing for a more strategic approach to the HR function in the public sector
for almost 20 years, in practice, the recognition and appreciation by practitioners that
HRM can impact the strategic direction and overall performance of public organiza-
tions has been a more recent shift (Crumpacker & Crumpacker, 2004; Daley, 2002;
Ospina, 1992; Perry, 1993, 2010; Selden, 2009).
The strategic approach to HRM, referred to as strategic human capital management
(SHCM),1 is based on the idea that “people, or the human capital of an organization,
can play a strategic role in the organization’s success” (Selden, 2009, p. 15). Studies
of public employment at the federal, state, and local levels in the United States consis-
tently advocate for the adoption of this approach and have documented particular pat-
terns of change in relation to strategic HRM in practice (Crumpacker & Crumpacker,
2004; Selden, 2009). Still, more research is required to understand the process of
changing HRM culture in public organizations to this more strategic approach.
Drawing on qualitative data from 40 counties in New York and North Carolina, the
extent to which local government HR professionals are playing a strategic leadership
role in the overall management of counties and implementing practices associated
with SHCM is examined. This research adds to knowledge about HRM managers’
leadership in SHCM implementation, revealing that the adoption of SHCM is an
ongoing process for county governments. The level of SHCM in a county depends on
the view of the HR function by executive county leadership, the capacity of the county
government to engage in strategic planning and management, and the capacity of the
HR director to think strategically about the role of HR in the government.
Based on the results, a deeper understanding of county HR practices is gained, a
level of government where there has been a call for greater research attention (Benton,
2005; Menzel et al., 1992; Rush & Kellough, 2011; Streib et al., 2007; Svara, 1996).
This research presents five models of SHCM implementation across these county gov-
ernments. While there has been increased scholarly interest in SHCM, the develop-
ment of a typology for classifying the different levels of SHCM represents an important
contribution to HR research and practice, as this typology provides insights into the
SHCM adoption process. This article concludes by discussing implications for
practice.
Strategic Human Capital Management
The SHCM approach to the HR function is a departure from previous methods of
managing people in government. The traditional civil-service system emphasizes rou-
tine and structure, creating a system of classified jobs where separation between

---

Jacobson et al.
291
positions is clear and positions are arranged in a strict hierarchy of authority (Condrey,
2010; Ingraham, 1995; Kellough, Nigro, & Brewer, 2010; Mosher, 1968; Van Riper,
1958). Although the traditional approach to managing people in government has some
benefits, the emphasis on administration of HR policies and regulation of the person-
nel function inhibits this system from fully viewing public employees as valuable
assets. Over the past two decades, there has been a call for a transition from traditional
personnel administration to SHCM, recognizing that HR should be a strategic partner
with management to achieve strategic and organizational goals (Daley, 2002; Perry,
1993, 2010; Pynes, 2009; Selden, 2009). Many HR departments have shifted from a
role focused primarily on administrative functions (such as payroll, compliance, and
record keeping) to a more operational role, and finally to a largely strategic role
(Daley, 2002; Nigro, Nigro, & Kellough, 2007; Perry, 2010; Selden, 2009; Selden &
Jacobson, 2003, 2007).
There may be variations depending on the government unit, but adopting SHCM
generally requires that agencies develop an overall strategic plan as well as a human
capital plan that integrates the workforce requirements with the goals identified in the
strategic plan. According to Tompkins (2002), the alignment of personnel policies and
practices with an organization’s strategic objectives is the core requirement of SHCM.
The general operational steps of this approach include (1) identifying the strategic
direction of the government unit, (2) analyzing workforce requirements to achieve this
strategic direction,2 and (3) developing action plans for the HR function that will help
achieve the overall strategic goals of the department.
SHCM requires a different way of thinking about the functional requirements of
the HR department. As departments or agencies take on more strategic roles, they
may need to relinquish other responsibilities and/or determine ways to balance tradi-
tional administrative functions with their new strategic role. HR departments will still
be involved with administrative functions such as payroll and record keeping,
responding to problems and requests, and developing new programs. However, they
may need to rethink how they manage these responsibilities when taking on new
leadership roles in the government as a whole, including using strategies such as
decentralization or contracting with other internal and external entities to fulfill core
functions. Under this model, the HR department focuses on examining what HRM
brings to the government as a whole separate from the administrative functions of the
department, adopting a more transformational role in addition to the traditional trans-
actional role of HRM.3
Little is known about the extent to which SHCM has been implemented by local
governments. Drawing on results from the evaluation of municipal, county, and state
government...