Interviews from HR Innovator magazine

No Excuses, Total Commitment

David Russo
Chief People Officer
PeopleClick
Raleigh , NC

It's unspeakably unfair, but it also stands to reason. When executives break the law, the employees suffer the most. They lose parity. They lose their jobs. They lose their retirement. Some even lose their freedom. And it's only among the dedicated HR watchers that the question gets asked: "Where was HR in all this?" And it's only among the most dedicated HR watchers that the following question is asked: "What does this say about the power of HR as profession to lead?"

However, very few people are looking at the other side of this coin: "What does this say about the chances for lifelong HR careerists to actually find companies that are aligned with their personal values and principles?" In the beginning of this summer, one major HR leader was quoted in national newspapers as saying, "Well, I tried to tell them, but they wouldn't listen." (We're paraphrasing here.)

To a "no excuses" HR professional like David Russo, that kind of response to public scrutiny begs the question: So why were you still working there if no one was listening to you? Having the courage to take a stand in favor on one's principles, Russo says, is not only good citizenship (keeping you on the outside of minimum security prisons), but it's also an essential element in career management.

As the HR leader for SAS Institute for 19 years, David Russo grew the company's celebrated people culture from the time the world's largest privately held software company had only 50 employees to its present size of almost 10,000 employees. Under his direction, SAS Institute was named in Fortune magazine's Top Ten Best Companies to Work For for four consecutive years, and it placed 10 times on the Working Mother magazine's list of 100 Best Companies for Working Mothers. As a result of its outstanding people-oriented workplace environment, SAS Institute was featured positively on 60 Minutes in 2003.

In this interview, David Russo, who is now the chief people officer of Peopleclick, speaks about the must-have accomplishment on every HR resume: Absolute commitment to doing the right thing - regardless of the personal cost.

You spent 19 years leading the HR function at SAS Institute, a company celebrated for its fundamental decency and sustained consistency in its people philosophy and practices. Was this career just plain old good luck? Or was that by design?

I was lucky that a company like SAS existed when it did. But I certainly would not have gone to SAS had it not had those elements. So I would say it's a mixed bag of good fortunate and good planning. I planned to work for an organization that had the same philosophical approach toward valuing people that I had established for myself.

I had already worked at some organizations that were, in my way of thinking, either arrogant, or ethically unsound, or philosophically flawed or didn't care much for people. They saw people as chattel to be manipulated and exploited for financial results, either for shareholders or high-level executive stakeholders. When I was offered the opportunity to work for SAS, I made certain that the principles and philosophies were genuine, and not some type of smoke and mirrors routine. Because I went through the due diligence, I was convinced that this was the right thing to do.

What would you say to someone who says, "I know the company means well, and I know they say they mean well, but I keep seeing them cut corners. I'm powerless to do anything about it and I'm stuck?"

Can a company be philosophically true to values and vision and have leadership that does not demonstrate or practice those values and vision? I don't think so. So if an HR person is working for a company that says all the right things and does none of them, then he or she is in a double-bind.

The situation of some of the storied companies in the last few years brings up the same question: "Where were the HR folks?" Those organizations might have had terrific HR programs and terrific HR processes that were very supportive of people. But maybe HR never actually touched the soul of the corporation. If HR can't touch the soul they're not really at the core of the business.

If HR is not in a position to influence and to nurture the soul and philosophical perspective of leadership about doing the right thing, then it doesn't really matter what else it does. At every turn the leadership will cut a corner, backslide; make an arbitrary decision that will besmirch all the stuff that HR is doing. And there's not enough time or good programming and policy or even PR that will make that up.

If HR leaders are courting favor in the broadest scope and allowing these things to slide in an effort to be a 'player' at the table, are they really just blowing smoke at themselves and on a corporate ego trip? That's the issue. Good HR folks who believe in valuing people and the types of corporate vision and values espoused by the best companies - have to be willing to walk away, or to be fired for not being willing sit quietly and give tacit approval.

If you believe that the soul of the organization is in need of HR influence, then you have to be willing to demand high standards for behaviors and choices throughout the company. If you don't get that, then you have to say, "What's the better career decision? To hang around here and be a part of this sham and coming implosion? Or to leave with my head held high and carry my principles with me? HR in many cases has been asleep at that particular switch."

What do you have to say to those HR leaders we have read about in the newspapers lately who say they tried to tell leadership to change their ways but they wouldn't listen?

If you were in the top HR seat and your company's leaders don't listen to you, you're just a big hat with no cattle. And it's very important to recognize that fact and leave quickly.

But if you're simply sending them that message as a personal or corporate risk management measure, then you're just as phony as they are. I don't know any of these folks who have been in the newspapers well enough to sit in judgment of them. But I can tell you right now, to be the lead HR person in an organization that has been exposed as cavalier with compliance or ethical issues, or disingenuous about valuing people, and continue to accept a large paycheck and stock options, then you're just feeding at the trough, as far as I'm concerned.

You have two choices: Get the hell out of there as quickly as you can. Or stay and be complicitous.

The sad thing is that what we see in the newspapers is apparent evidence that HR makes the second choice. I'm only surprised that we haven't seen more HR people not only being led around in handcuffs but also being called to task in the public forum. But then, the fact that HR has been conspicuously absent from any of the public discussion or charges tells me that they weren't ever involved in the process. They had no meaningful influence in the organization at all - for good or evil.

What about just day-to-day experience? Is it realistic to expect to be able to find a values match with a possible new employer?

Sure. Not every company out there has as strong a people mandate that SAS Institute does, but I'm sure there are a lot of companies out there that want to do the right thing. For example, Southwest Airlines has said, "We hire for fit." Well, why not look for a job in HR based on fit?

Ask yourself: "Do I fit there?" "Is this me?" "How much of myself do I have to give up to be successful here?" Or "how much of myself can I integrate into the organization to make it better?"

So it may be unrealistic to expect that you're going to find a company that's already perfect. But it is realistic to expect that there are a lot of companies with potential out there that would be receptive to your influence and rise to your challenges for excellence?

I think there are some companies that have stumbled into the doing the right thing -although maybe not as many as companies that have stumbled into doing the wrong thing. The wrong thing is apparently the path of least resistance. With some good guidance from experienced HR people, that potential new employer could be a stellar opportunity.

So what would you say to someone who is a mid-level HR professional who says, "Every time I come home at the end of the day, I wonder why I'm in HR?"

Then they have to do a realistic environmental scan. Is there an opportunity here to make a difference? If you feel there is an opportunity, then specifically identify that opportunity. And once you identify that opportunity, work hard and be satisfied with incremental success. If you have incremental successes and you are good at building relationships, you'll get opportunities to do more and more. Hey! Line management really likes HR that makes them successful. And, when all is said and done your real accountability is to help your organization gain competitive advantage through people. You can reduce that mission into a lot of tasks that are spiritual, that focus on compliance and procedure, and that are tactical actions. But if you can effectively communicate with and help line management succeed and build competitive advantage through the things that you do, it will become the best kind of work situation - both meaningful and personally satisfying.

All that said, if you have leadership that doesn't care, then you have to come home and spend time in a search for another job.

Is there any excuse for the top HR person not to know that there such things as pay discrimination happening in his or her company?

No. If you're that far removed from the reality of the organization, then you're not truly the top HR person. You may be the top representative of HR on the org chart, but you're either a showpiece, a figurehead, or a politician. You're not an HR person. If you don't know that these things are going on, you may not be responsible but you're absolutely accountable. If you're accountable, you better have lines of communication open so you know what's going on. If your subordinates are shielding you from that stuff, then you're not in control. They are.

So your approach is fundamentally, "no excuses."

There can't be. You take the money, the perqs. How can you have an excuse for not knowing this stuff?

It is disheartening every time one of these scandals happen. Where the heck are we? We keep saying we want a seat at the table, but we're letting the company, the stockholders and the employees down. The seat at the table is not an anointed chair. It's a bigger opportunity to serve, not a bigger opportunity to be served.