HR Transformation at Pfizer and Intel: A Comparative Study

Introduction

The case studies examined here are those of Pfizer and Intel. The two cases are closely related in that both are founded on the principle of improving organizational capability through better HR practices. They demonstrate that HR practices are essential to ensuring organizational success and driving better performance. As noted by Ulrich et al. (2009), the case studies illustrate the importance of thinking about organizational capability and HR practices together — and how they impact performance — rather than the other way around. The case studies also highlight organizational capability as a source of competitive advantage, showing that viewing the organization from an inside-out perspective, rather than an outside-in perspective, is key to ensuring the sustainability of change and grounding that change in effective reasoning (Zhang, 2010).

In the case of Pfizer, the organization's capabilities are reflected in how it structures its business for optimal delivery of products and services, and how the outputs of various business units are coordinated to achieve improved results. The HR strategy adopted by Pfizer does not merely enable business success — it actively drives it. This is evident in the company's emphasis on linking business performance achievements to the fulfillment of its mission, vision, and values. The company also demonstrates a strong commitment to attracting and retaining the best talent by offering growth opportunities, as detailed in its approach to talent development and competitive remuneration (Ulrich et al., 2009).

Intel's case study presents a picture of fast-paced innovation being matched by efforts to attract and retain top talent and foster proactive collaboration. In the company's HR strategy, the most prominent elements were the reduction of complexity in tactical delivery and the development of an HR competency strategy. These initiatives were designed to complement the company's culture and support employees in making the most of their opportunity with Intel (Ulrich et al., 2009).

The two case studies are success stories, but in order to identify the missing link between the two organizations' approaches to transformation, it is important to revisit the challenges each faced at the outset. The two companies faced different challenges initially, which may appear to explain the divergence in their transformation strategies. However, a deeper examination reveals that the underlying challenges were quite similar. Both companies had issues managing their human resources, including difficulties with documentation and with attracting and retaining their workforces. Cost was also a major concern, as both companies were spending heavily on their employees, making cost reduction a central aspect of both transformation strategies.

The way the two companies chose to address these shared challenges differed, which can be attributed to the need to contextualize problems within each organization's unique setting. The key contextual difference is that the two companies operate in different industries — Pfizer is a pharmaceutical company while Intel is a chip manufacturer. Pfizer's issues centered on changing its hiring requirements, leadership development, employee development, promotion, and knowledge-sharing strategies, while Intel's challenges were more broadly related to HR strategy implementation. A notable similarity is that both companies experienced significant growth in the 2000s, which brought substantial increases in their workforces. This rapid, unexpected growth is considered the primary source of both companies' HR challenges.