One of the issues with HR metrics and measurement is that there is no agreed upon body of knowledge that defines the area.  To what extent is this holding us back?  Should there be an attempt to define a single discipline of HR metrics and measurement?

To a large extent, HR metrics and measurement are still bound by functional silos.  Recruitment and selection have developed their own approach to metrics and measurement, and so have training, program evaluation, and Organizational Development.  Each of these functions has evolved their own measurement traditions, their own terminology, and their own specific ways of looking at measurement.  So the first step would be to cut across functional silos with HR.

As well, any ´discipline´ needs to have a reasonably well-accepted common body of knowledge.  This may also prove to be a challenge.  Of course there are a few touchstones here.  Our reading lists would all include some of Jac Fitz-Enz contributions, The Human Resources Scorecard and The Workforce Scorecard by Mark A. Huselid, Brian E. Becker, and colleagues, HR Metrics by John Sullivan, and The Human Resources Scorecard by Jack Phillips and colleagues.  But after that, would there be much agreement?  How many would include, for instance, the Principles for the Validation and Use of Personnel Selection Procedures (SIOP, 2003) or Personnel Economics (Lazear, 1995)?  One person´s core reading in HR metrics and measurement may well be totally unknown to the next person.

Then there is the plethora of whitepapers, PowerPoint presentations, and sundry articles that come from all sources, especially the Internet.  Of course, the issue here is that these Internet resources don´t quite establish a ´core´ for discipline.  Rather than bringing things together in a reasonably coherent whole, the Internet tends to be divergent as the heterogeneity of the results of any Internet search will demonstrate.  Some great information, but the Internet is hardly a tool that will help an emerging discipline to define itself.

Does it make sense to look at HR metrics and measurement as a discipline that cuts across HR functional silos?  If we were to try to define the core components of an ´HR metrics and measurement´ discipline, what should be included?  Let me know what you think.