Foundational assumptions in selecting human capital metrics

M Com (Human Resources Management)The aim of this study was to explore and describe foundational assumptions in selection of human capital metrics, unpacked within three broad categories of meaning, namely: why?, what?, and how? we measure human capital. A literature study was conducted to demystify conceptual elements and to report on the status quo. A modernist qualitative research methodology, with purposive and snowball sampling to recruit a limited number of practitioner experts in the field of HC and HC measurement in South Africa, was employed. With the aid of computerised qualitative data analysis software, thematic analysis was inductively applied to data generated during unstructured, in-depth interviews. Twenty-four assumptions found and positioned within the three broad categories of meaning (why?, what?, and how?) provide some understanding of selection in human capital metrics. Significant clusters of findings are: the supply of decisionlevel specific human capital information (which originated heuristically and inferentially), the limited value attached by senior managers to transactional and compliance information, the systemic integration (vertical and horizontal) of the business strategy into the business value chain, supported by multiple and parallel value chains, and an emerging measurement framework within HR. These clusters are representative of two emerging and overarching paradigms, namely: the current and entrenched Performance Measurement Paradigm (transactional), and the aspiration towards the fruition of a Human Capital Contribution Paradigm. It is clear from this study that there is still conceptual confusion regarding the terms human capital and metrics as presented in literature and understood and applied in practice. Recommendations are offered to eradicate conceptual confusion and to assist HR in moving towards a Human Capital Contribution paradigm