The HR analytics cycle: a seven-step process for building evidence-based and ethical HR analytics capabilities

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of the paper is to explore the meaning of HR analytics and introduce the HR analytics cycle as a proactive and systematic process for ethically gathering, analyzing, communicating and using evidence-based HR research and analytical insights to help organizations achieve their strategic objectives.Design/methodology/approachConceptual review of the current state and meaning of HR analytics. Using the HR analytics cycle as a framework, the authors describe a seven-step process for building evidence-based and ethical HR analytics capabilities.FindingsHR analytics is a nascent discipline and there are a multitude of monikers and competing definitions. With few exceptions, these definitions lack emphasis on evidence-based practice (i.e. the use of scientific research findings in adopting HR practices), ethical practice (i.e. ethically gathering and using HR data and insights) and the role of broader HR research and experimentation. More importantly, there are no practical models or frameworks available to help guide HR leaders and practitioners in doing HR analytics work.Practical implicationsThe HR analytics cycle encompasses a broader range of HR analytics practices and data sources including HR research and experimentation in the context of social, behavioral and organizational science.Originality/valueThis paper introduces the HR analytics cycle as a practical seven-step approach for making HR analytics work in organizations.

The dark sides of people analytics: reviewing the perils for organisations and employees

“…Prior integrative literature reviews have primarily focused on what people analytics is and how it operates (Falletta & Combs, 2020;Marler & Boudreau, 2017), how it should be implemented (Angrave et al, 2016;Boudreau & Cascio, 2017;Fernandez & Gallardo-Gallardo, 2020), the value proposition it offers (Tursunbayeva et al, 2018;van den Heuvel & Bondarouk, 2017;Werkhoven, 2017a), and how it can influence performance (Aral et al, 2012;Peeters et al, 2020;Sharma & Sharma, 2017). Most of the prior integrating literature took a functional approach to people analytics (Peeters et al, 2020;van der Togt & Rasmussen, 2017), converging on how it can help improve firms' effectiveness, but paying less attention to this approach's ethical challenges, possible consequences, and risks (for exceptions, see conceptual papers, Gal et al, 2020;Leicht-Deobald et al, 2019).…”

“…People analytics' computational power and its underlying algorithms far exceed human cognitive resources in terms of speed, efficiency, and consistency (Gal et al, 2017;Jabagi et al, 2020;Kryscynski et al, 2018). As a result, people analytics is said to increase the quality of decisions and to support organisations in making more efficient, accurate and informed HR decisions (Bodie et al, 2016;Falletta & Combs, 2020).…”

“…Firstly, compared to analytics applications in other business domains, applying analytics and algorithms in analysing, evaluating, controlling and managing employees invokes ethical and moral challenges with far-reaching implications (Falletta & Combs, 2020;Gal et al, 2017). For instance, in other areas, using business analytics to demonstrate business processes' inefficiency and then cutting costs on such a basis, is widely accepted and not frowned upon (Appelbaum et al, 2017;Khan & Tang, 2017).…”

“…Because human behaviour is much more complex and much less predictable than that of machinery or other tangible assets, reducing complex human characteristics and behaviour for representation by data points and numbers is problematic (Gal et al, 2017;King, 2016;Newman et al, 2020). Therefore, directly transferring and extending analytics to organisational areas traditionally handled on the basis of human judgment and expertise, may fail to consider human complexity; moreover, significant misinterpretation, miscalculation, and costly strategic mistakes are likely (Falletta & Combs, 2020;King, 2016;Nocker & Sena, 2019). Thirdly, compared to other forms of business analytics, people analytics is more invasive to employees, also in interfering with the individual's way of working and living in several ways (Bodie et al, 2016;Gal et al, 2017;Khan & Tang, 2017):…”

“…The data collected for people analytics tend by their nature to be very sensitive, granular and personal. As such, the data allows organisations deep individualtarget insight (and inter-reference) in employee's personal life, as well as in their psychological disposition (Falletta & Combs, 2020;Nocker & Sena, 2019;Schafheitle et al, 2019). By contrast, humans are not the immediate subject of analysis for most other forms of business analytics (e.g., in analysing goods, money flows, key financial figures, etc.…”