Most of the literature to date has been dominated by the extent to which HR practitioners are allowed to play a strategic versus an operational role in organisations. Many researchers have tested the original four-factor HR role model of Ulrich (1997) in various settings. According to this model, HR has four major roles to play, namely strategic partner, change agent (strategic roles), administrative expert and employee champion (operational roles). The activities of a strategic partner are aimed at developing an HR strategy that is aligned with the business strategy of the organisation. As change agents, HR practitioners focus on developing the capability of people and, consequently, the organisation. The role of an administrative expert focuses on the effective design and execution of HR processes, whereas the employee champion function deals with the daily needs and problems of employees.

In the light of the above model, Ulrich and Brockbank (2005) maintained that it is the role of the HR function to create value for investors and customers external to the organisation and to create value for line managers and employees inside the organisation. This value is created through the facilitation of HR practices that focus on:

Ulrich, Brockbank, Younger, and Ulrich (2013) recently revised the focus of the traditional model in order to adapt it to the changing business world. According to the revised model, HR practitioners as strategic business partners are ‘high-performing HR professionals’ who should understand the global context. The capacity-building role includes the ability of HR professionals to define and build organisational capabilities. HR, as a change agent, needs to assist organisations with effective change processes and structures, whereas the innovator and integrator roles require HR professionals to integrate HR business practices in order to support change initiatives.

The need for HR competence and professionalism is clearly highlighted in the revised roles proposed by Ulrich, Younger, Brockbank and Ulrich (2012). While the roles of HR have changed, the essential principles that guide HR (such as managing and developing the workforce) have remained unchanged (Boudreau & Lawler, 2014). HR professionals therefore need to move away from traditional HR practices andbring about much-needed change in HR competence, skills, strategic roles, and professionalism to mobilise human capital and help to achieve organisational strategies.

HR practitioners in developing countries are still fulfilling mainly operational roles (i.e. Tessema & Soeters, 2006), whereas most in developed countries are fulfilling more strategic roles (Du Plessis, Paine & Botha, 2012; Thill, Venegas & Groblshegg, 2014). In the South African context, Walters (2006) found that HR practitioners are mostly fulfilling the roles of administrative experts and employee champions, but are perceived as ineffective or incompetent in these roles. Steyn (2008) found similar results but discerned that some HR practitioners are moving towards fulfilling a more strategic role in organisations. A recent study by Abbott, Goosen and Coetzee (2013), however, pointed out that many HR practitioners in South Africa are still focusing on the role of employee advocate in the workplace without this role being extended.

The available research in the South African context points to a lack of HRM competence and subsequent poor practices being applied in the workplace. Schultz (2010) found that the HR department in a merged South African higher education institution displayed poor personal skills, HR business knowledge, and management skills. A study by van Wyk (2006) highlighted the lack of sufficient business knowledge among HR practitioners regarding a social responsibility issue such as HIV and AIDS. The HR practitioners, however, did acknowledge the importance of educating employees on social responsibility issues.

A study by Louw (2012) indicated that HR practitioners lack experience and competence in evaluating, executing, and reporting on HR interventions. As a result, HR practitioners cannot provide organisations with important data regarding the effectiveness of HR interventions (Field & Louw, 2012; Salie & Slechter, 2012). Furthermore, organisations are of the opinion that the data provided by HR practitioners are unreliable and lack integrity, and can therefore not be used (De Bruyn & Roodt, 2009).

The effective talent management of employees also remains an area of great concern. Several studies pointed out the lack of talent management as evinced by poor training and development opportunities, poor performance management, poor workforce planning and acquisition, and ineffective retention strategies (Barkhuizen, 2015). These findings can be explained by the fact that confusion still prevails as to who should take responsibility for talent management in organisations. Other factors include the lack of management commitment to managing talent, bureaucratic organisational structures, and the non-recognition of HR’s potential strategic value in a business partnership (SABPP, 2011).

Schutte (2015) recently developed and validated an HR competency model for the South African context. According to this model, HR professionals should be able to display HR competence in three domains: professional behaviour and leadership, service orientation and execution, and business intelligence. Professional behaviour and leadership refers to the suitability of HR professionals’ activities, whether intentionally or unintentionally, in effecting environmental changes or conditions that reflect on the qualities associated with HR leadership and professional responsibilities. HR service orientation and execution involves the ability of HR practitioners to analyse situations or problems, make timely and sound decisions, construct plans, and achieve optimal results in response to the changing demands of customers. HR business intelligence refers to the ability of HR professionals to position themselves as an essential value-adding department of the organisation through the use of information in order to gain a competitive edge over competitors (see Schutte, 2015). This model is used in this study to assess the current application of HR practices in South African workplaces. In the light of the preceding, the following hypothesis has been set:

Limited research currently exists on the interactive relationships between HR competencies and background variables such as home language, ethnicity, job level, and outlook. Regarding age, research has shown that generation Y (born between 1978 and 1990; (Weingarten, 2009) places emphasis on sound HRM practices regarding compensation and training and development (Barkhuizen, 2014). A study by Du Plessis and Barkhuizen (2012) on the personal-level factors of HR practitioners showed that individuals aged 45 years and older displayed higher levels of hope and confidence than their younger counterparts. Further results showed that the white ethnic group scored higher on hope and confidence than the black ethic group, whereas the latter group displayed higher levels of resilience. Final results showed that HR practitioners employed at top management level displayed higher levels of psychological capital (i.e. hope, confidence, optimism, and resilience) than those employed at lower levels in the organisation (Du Plessis & Barkhuizen, 2012).

In the light of the preceding the following hypothesis has been set:

The respondents were HR officers and managers from various organisations in the private and public sectors who had knowledge of HRM processes in the workplace. The study employed purposive convenience sampling in which respondents were chosen based on their availability to participate and provide the desired information. A total of 800 questionnaires were distributed and 483 were returned. A total of 481 questionnaires were usable for analysis. This represented a 60.13% response rate. The demographic characteristics of the respondents in this sample, reported on in Table 1 below, are as follows: 55.1% were women, 70.5% spoke indigenous languages, and 76.9% were black Africans. A total of 29.5% of the respondents were aged 30–39 years, 35.8% held a bachelor’s degree as their highest level of educational qualification, and 31.1% were employed at middle management level. Of the respondents, 37.8% had six to 15 years’ work experience, 83.8% had been employed in their job for 0–10 years and 64.0% had been employed by their current organisation for 0–10 years.

A Human Resource Management (HRM) Professional Competence Questionnaire (Schutte, 2015) was used in this study. This questionnaire consist of three sections and measures three core HR competency domains, namely, ‘professional behaviour and leadership’, ‘service orientation and execution’, and ‘business intelligence’. The professional behaviour and leadership competency consists of four sub-competencies, namely, leadership and personal credibility (8 items), solution creation (4 items), interpersonal communication (7 items), and innovation (6 items). The service orientation and execution competency consists of four sub-competencies, namely, talent management (9 items), HR risk (5 items), HR metrics (6 items), and HR service delivery (6 items). The business intelligence competency consists of four sub-competencies, namely, strategic impact (11 items), HR business knowledge (10 items), business acumen (6 items), and HR technology (3 items).

Responses were measured on a five-point Likert scale ranging from ‘Never’ (1) to ‘Always’ (5). The questionnaire has been validated for the South African context, and showed excellent reliabilities of above 0.90 for the underlying factors (Schutte, 2015).

Data were analysed with the aid of SPSS Inc. (2015). Exploratory factor analyses were used to determine the underlying factor structure. Descriptive statistics (i.e. means, standard deviation, and kurtosis) were used to analyse the data. Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used to determine the significance of differences between the dimensions of the HRM Professional Competence Model for the demographic groups. MANOVA tests whether mean differences among groups in a combination of dependent variables are likely to have occurred by chance (Field, 2009). When an effect was significant in MANOVA, one-way Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to discover which dependent variables had been affected. T-tests were done to assess the differences between the groups in the sample. For purposes of the present research, we used Cohen’ s (1988, p. 283) guidelines for the interpretation of effect sizes: 0.0099 constitutes a small effect, 0.0588 a medium effect, and 0.1379 is a large effect.

Exploratory factor analyses, using principal component analyses, were done on the 25 items of the ‘Professional behaviour and leadership’ section of the questionnaire. The initial analyses revealed that four factors could be extracted, based on the eigenvalues. A subsequent factor analysis with direct Oblimin rotation revealed four underlying factors, which explained 82.020% of the variance. Four items were deleted because of problematic loadings. The factors were labelled: ‘interpersonal communication’ (Factor 1), ‘leadership and personal credibility’ (Factor 2), ‘solution creation and implementation’ (Factor 3), and ‘innovation’ (Factor 4). The items showed acceptable loadings.

An exploratory factor analysis, using principal component analyses, was done on the 26 items of the ‘Service orientation and execution’ section of the questionnaire. The initial analyses revealed that four factors could be extracted, based on the eigenvalues. A subsequent principal component factor analysis, using varimax rotation, was done to specify the four underlying factors. Six items were deleted due to problematic loadings. The four factors explained 81.636% of the variance for the measure. The factors were labelled ‘talent management’ (Factor 1), ‘HR service delivery’ (Factor 2), ‘HR metrics’ (Factor 3), and ‘HR risk’ (Factor, 4). The items showed acceptable loadings.

An exploratory factors analysis, using principal component analyses, was done on the 30 items of the ‘Business intelligence’ section of the questionnaire. The initial analyses revealed that four factors could be extracted, based on the eigenvalues. A subsequent principal component factor analysis, using varimax rotation, was done to specify the four underlying factors. The four factors explained 74.417% of the variance. Two items were deleted because of problematic loadings. The factors were labelled as follows: ‘HR business knowledge’ (Factor 1), ‘strategic impact’ (Factor 2), ‘business acumen’ (Factor 3) and ‘HR technology’ (Factor 4). The items showed acceptable loadings.

The descriptive statistics of the factors are reported on in Table 2.

The findings, provided in Table 2, showed acceptable to excellent reliabilities for all the dimensions of the HRM Professional Competence Model. The respondents indicated that most of the dimensions are applied moderately. The competencies that were indicated as having the poorest application were talent management, HR metrics, HR business knowledge, and innovation.

Next, a gap analysis was performed to determine whether significant differences existed between the importance and the current application of the HRM dimensions. The results, provided in Table 3, showed no significant differences between the current applications versus the importance of HRM competencies.

Next, the findings of the MANOVA of the differences between the current application of the HRM professional dimensions (i.e. professional behaviour and leadership; service orientation and delivery; business intelligence) and demographics groups are reported.

The findings in Table 4 show that the respondents differed significantly regarding the current application of HR competencies, according to the variables home language, ethnicity, and job level. Further post hoc analyses showed no significant differences related to the variables home language and ethnicity. The remainder of the findings of the post hoc analyses are reported below.

Wilks’s lambda for the variable home language was 0.936 [F _{(1, 481)} = 8.090; p ≤ 0.05]. Analysis of each dependent variable, using a Bonferroni adjusted alpha level of 0.025, showed that the groups differed regarding leadership and personal credibility [F_{(3, 481)} = 6.565; p ≤ 0.05; partial η² = 0.026], solution creation [F_{(3, 481)} = 16.859; p ≤ 0.05; partial η² = 0.023], interpersonal communication [F_{(3, 481)} = 3.972; p ≤ 0.05; partial η² = 0.062], and innovation [F_{(3, 481)} = 8.203; p ≤ 0.05; partial η² = 0.029). The English-language group were of the view that HR practitioners display the leadership competencies solution creation, interpersonal communication, and innovation less effectively, compared to respondents from the indigenous languages group. The effects were small.

Wilks’s lambda for the variable ethnicity was 0.933 [F_(1, 481) = 2.067; p ≤ 0.05]. Analysis of each dependent variable, using a Bonferroni adjusted alpha level of 0.025, showed that the groups differed in terms of leadership and personal credibility [F_{(3, 481)} = 3.699; p ≤ 0.05; partial η² = 0.030], solution creation [F_{(3, 481)} = 3.783; p ≤ 0.05; partial η² = 0.031], and innovation [F_{(3, 481)} = 3.296; p ≤ 0.05; partial η² = 0.027]. The black African ethnic group rated HR practitioners’ display of the leadership competencies solution creation and innovation as more effective than the white ethnic group did. The effects were small.

The findings, provided in Table 5, show that the respondents differed significantly regarding the current application of HR competencies, according to the variables home language, age, qualifications, and job level. Further post hoc analyses showed no significant differences according to age and job level. The remainder of the findings of the post hoc analyses is reported below.

Wilks’s Lambda for home language was 0.953 [F_{(1, 481)} = 5.879; p ≤ 0.05]. Analysis of each dependent variable, using a Bonferroni adjusted alpha level of 0.025, showed that the groups differed regarding talent management [F_{(3, 481)} = 8.416; p ≤ 0.05; partial η² = 0.017], HR risk [F_{(3, 481)} = 21.816; p ≤ 0.05; partial η² = 0.044], HR metrics [F_{(3, 481)} = 13.836; p ≤ 0.05; partial η² = 0.028], and HR service delivery [F_{(3, 481)} = 6.194; p ≤ 0.05; partial η² = 0.013]. The English-language group indicated that HR practitioners display the competencies talent management, HR risk, HR metrics, and HR service delivery less effectively, compared to the indigenous languages group. The effects were small.

The findings, provided in Table 6, show that the respondents differed significantly regarding the current application of business intelligence, based on the variables home language and age. Further post hoc analyses showed no significant differences according to the variable age. The remainder of the findings of the post hoc analyses is reported below.

Wilks’s Lambda for home language was 0.957 [F_{(3, 481)} = 5.322; p ≤ 0.05]. Analysis of each dependent variable, using a Bonferroni adjusted alpha level of 0.025, showed that the groups differed regarding strategic impact [F_{(3, 481)} = 7.749; p ≤ 0.05; partial η² = 0.024], HR business knowledge [F_{(3, 481)} = 17.002; p ≤ 0.05; partial η² = 0.041], business acumen [F_{(3, 481)} = 8.978; p ≤ 0.05; partial η² = 0.021], and HR technology [F_{(3, 481)} = 8.934; p ≤ 0.05; partial η² = 0.018]. The English-language group indicated that HR practitioners display the competencies strategic impact, HR business knowledge, business acumen, and HR technology less effectively, compared to the indigenous languages group. The effects were small.