A client, let’s call him David, works for a multinational. This company’s core HR processes, post-SAP, were redesigned to maximise efficiencies and drive out non-conformances arising from human error. In short, HR has, in effect, been replaced by systems, standards, key performance indicators and managerial learning and development refocused on technical rather than soft skills.

David, by his own admission, is a relatively old-school line-and-customer-service-focused manager. He’s a believer in sustaining relationships and in resolving interpersonal differences before they become formal issues (often over a coffee or a beer). He has worked for his company for two decades and has received awards for his work on a number of occasions.

Recently David encountered issues in his personal life that compromised his 8am-9pm working routine. As pressure built, he started to struggle and turned to his recently appointed executive line managers for support. They responded by citing due process, changed his reporting line from 1:1 to 2:1 and offered him the option of submitting formal grievances and visiting occupational health if he had a problem. They also placed this loyal middle manager on a series of performance contracts when they believed his standards (loosely defined) started to slip. Unlike David, they documented every conversation.

Sleepless nights led to longer hours; stress led to psoriasis and eventually to depression and medication and now to extended absence on health grounds. He eventually submitted a grievance but the 2:1 and sometimes 3:1 micro-management has seen the organisation close ranks. He now faces the invidious choice of turning on his own company via tribunal or falling on his own sword.

David is passionate about the organisation and his job. He has the experience and people skills that customer and staff surveys suggest are needed to help turn the organisation around. Yet David, and many of his contemporaries as it turns out, has become the victim of “due process”.

The growing number of Davids remain voiceless despite the town hall meetings and surveys. The CEO may understand the need for culture change but what’s to become of these invisible FTEs in the meantime when the HR offices are empty and the day-to-day processes don’t have ears?