HR and risk departments may both be seeking to protect employees from conflict overseas, but must beware the conflict among themselves
We’ve all heard the phrase ‘too many cooks spoil the broth’ and this is never truer than in business. If too many people or departments are trying to manage the same task, it could lead to conflict and disagreements, if roles and responsibilities are not clearly defined.
One area where this problem can crop up is when managing the risks associated with business travel. By its very nature, this is an issue that tends to involve various departments, including (but not limited to) risk managers, HR departments, security teams and IT.
The myriad functions involved often have different goals and objectives, and this can lead to conflicts around deciding how situations should be managed.
For instance, a HR director may have been tasked with bringing down the costs of business travel, perhaps by booking less expensive hotels or travel arrangements, while a risk manager’s remit is to minimise the risks associated with business travel, which could lead to costlier accommodation or flights.
Emmanuel Fabin, insurance manager for TSB, adds: “At a high-level view, HR and risk are both looking at resource management. [But] HR is looking at principally management of human resource and risk managers are looking at broader management of financial, physical and human resources.”
Julia Graham deputy chief executive and technical director at Airmic adds: “This conflict can lead to accumulation risk, which is about having more than two c-suite members on the same aircraft or a whole team on the same coach or train.
“You have to consider risk and risk accumulation with your colleagues in HR. Ask them ‘do you realise that on insurance cover you could be invalidating or diluting the organisation’s cover by not considering risk and risk aggregation.”
Time to compromise
It is important, therefore, to understand the different roles and responsibilities that each department may have and where the conflicts may lie. Otherwise, organisations may end up exposing business travellers to unnecessary risks. And, as Graham pointed out, this can have far reaching consequences.
She adds: “If you do not exercise duty of care for people travelling and they are harmed you could incur liabilities.”
But bringing together the varying views of several stakeholders will be tricky and the success of this depends on how sophisticated an organisation is.
At a high-level view, HR and risk are both looking at resource management. But HR is looking at principally management of human resource and risk managers are looking at broader management of financial, physical and human resource
Sarah Sandbrook, head of talent consulting and initiatives at Deutsche Telekom, has had experience aligning the HR view with the risk manager’s view.
“I think the traditional HR view has always been about workplace risks,” she says. “So most [risks] have been office-based issues, such as trips and falls, etc.”
“But now, the sorts of [risks] you have to think about have evolved. For instance, a few years ago, aircrafts were grounded because of the Icelandic ash cloud. Suddenly HRs had to consider: who’s stuck, have they got enough money, what’s the risk to them as individuals and us as a business.”
Overcoming the potential conflicts requires businesses to break down the silos between the different departments.
Graham says that how you frame the conversation can make a huge difference in getting different departments to work together more effectively.
She says: “My route is to avoid saying that this is my job and instead focus on the need to work as a team.
“We need to keep the board, the c-suite, employees, people’s families and others we are responsible for safe. Say to HR: ‘you know the company policy but we know how to put it in into practice’.”
Sarah Sandbrook, head of talent consulting and initiatives at Deutsche Telekom, has had experience aligning the HR view with the risk manager’s view.
“I think the traditional HR view has always been about workplace risks,” she says. “So most [risks] have been office-based issues, such as trips and falls, etc.”
“But now, the sorts of [risks] you have to think about have evolved. For instance, a few years ago, aircrafts were grounded because of the Icelandic ash cloud. Suddenly HRs had to consider: who’s stuck, have they got enough money, what’s the risk to them as individuals and us as a business.”
Overcoming the potential conflicts requires businesses to break down the silos between the different departments.
Graham says that how you frame the conversation can make a huge difference in getting different departments to work together more effectively.
She says: “My route is to avoid saying that this is my job and instead focus on the need to work as a team.
“We need to keep the board, the c-suite, employees, people’s families and others we are responsible for safe. Say to HR: ‘you know the company policy but we know how to put it in into practice’.”
Channels of communication
Communication is critical here. Fabin says: “There can be differences in approach to business travel-related risks within the same organisation but these differences become an issue when there isn’t clarity, transparency and awareness. Simply put, you can’t resolve what you don’t understand or know exists.”
Joseph Frederik, EMEA operations manager for security risk management consultancy, A2 Global Risk, adds: “There is always this risk, and this is largely down to issues with communication and direction. One way a company can avoid these issues is to centralise the overall risk function and have proper and dedicated representation at board level.”
“A former colleague of mine, who worked for a global apparel firm, had a project that could have caused some friction with the HR department. A decision was made to change the access control system at one of their facilities, and this project fell under the security department. This colleague felt compelled to notify HR about this but was questioned by his supervisor as to the need.
“It was very simple. How would you feel if you showed up to work one day and your access card did not work? You may feel that you had lost your job for no given reason. Multiply this by 200 employees, and you will have an HR issue on your hands.”
Indeed, a centralised policy is critical in defining business travel procedures before travel and if an incident occurs on an international assignment – it should be good practice in any business environment.
She concludes: “Have one travel policy for the organisation not several. To the employees, the differing roles and responsibilities between HR and risk management should be irrelevant. They don’t care who wrote what as long as they know what they should do and where they can go and there’s a procedure in place for if something goes wrong.”