Sign In

Kendra Haberkorn

Fractional Chief People Officer

Kendra Haberkorn is a Fractional Chief People Officer and Executive Search consultant based in Steamboat Springs, Colorado.1 She has been working with her consultancy, the moderneer, since January 2017.1 In this role, she consults with startups and small businesses to build strong People Ops and Talent functions, hire exceptional team members, and solve diverse cultural, team, and operational challenges during periods of growth and transformation.1

Kendra has an extensive background in talent management and people operations:

  1. She served as VP People at Guild Education from February 2017 to September 2018, leading the Talent and People Ops functions from Series A to post Series C.1
  2. Prior to that, she was VP People at Craftsy (later acquired by NBCUniversal) from April 2013 to September 2016.1
  3. She has also held positions at Newmont Mining Corporation, Sports Authority, McKinsey & Company, and Accenture.1

In addition to her consulting work, Kendra has other professional endeavors:

  • She is the creator of Pickleball Jobs, a site launched in August 2023 that highlights job opportunities in the growing pickleball industry.1
  • Kendra serves as Head of Talent for Range Ventures, an early-stage venture capital firm, where she advises portfolio companies on talent strategy and people operations.1

Kendra is also an author, having written a book titled "Ask Me This Instead: Flip the Interview to Land Your Dream Job".1 Her expertise in talent management and organizational development is evident from her diverse experiences and the positions she has held throughout her career.12

Highlights

Apr 5 · linkedin

New! SURGE SALARIES: a dynamic compensation model in which wages are temporarily increased based on market conditions, business priorities, and employee retention requirements. Incentivizing employees when productivity, urgency, and outcomes are key to business success has been shown to increase revenue by 15% relative to similar periods without incentives.

I made all that up. But what if?

We’re used to dynamic pricing for airline and concert tickets, ride shares, amusement parks, and amazon products. I can imagine chart-filled slides sent by consultants to leaders across industries pitching the benefits:

✅ Stay competitive and maximize revenue!  ✅ Increase engagement and loyalty via personalization! ✅ Align with market conditions! ✅ Optimize resource allocation!

Employees (other than as resources to optimize) are mostly left out. Asked to “go above and beyond,” many rise to the occasion because they care and want to see the outcomes. Realistically, they also do it because they believe it will pay off.

But, while companies increase revenue during peak demand, holiday periods, and natural disasters(?), employees supporting operations and customer satisfaction rarely see extra dollars reflected in their paychecks. As a result, resentment and disengagement grow, and employees give less while looking for a new job where their efforts will be appreciated (well, one can hope).

With surge salaries companies could:

✴ proactively plan for real-time increases during strategic, make-or-break moments when expectations are high and performance really matters ✴ accrue for unexpected situations where team members step up to solve problems, drive innovation and results, or take on expanded responsibilities when the team is short-handed

Yes, raising pay during these periods will cost more, but the investment will yield more in return. These are the moments when you need the best from your team. You also want them to stick around for what’s next.

As an HR leader, I’ve watched people change the course of a business and then leave because they didn’t feel valued or supported in return. As a recruiter and career coach, I’ve listened while folks told me the reasoning behind their desire to find something new. Often, it comes down to an imbalance of the value (perceived and actual) exchanged during these work periods.

Turnover, burnout, and disengagement are not easy to calculate but very expensive. Lower quality outcomes, a slower pace, and reputational damage as a culture that fails to reward are costs we don’t add to the budget that impact longer-term results.

A bump during a high-intensity, high-stakes period could motivate and align teams in ways that 3% raises 9 months after the fact could never (but high performers should get raises then, too!).

There are other considerations to think through to bring this concept to life. This is an opportunity where I think the exercise would be worthwhile. If you’re interested in exploring it, lmk.

Mar 22 · linkedin

HR has a product and marketing problem. If we don't change, views like those shared on a podcast advocating for the function's dissolution will be more prevalent. I don't agree with everything (or anything) those individuals say on certain topics. Still, they represent an influential and growing group of business and investing leaders. 

✳ We can’t defend the function by pointing out everything we do. Every function has visible and invisible work. The cumulative impact of HR work should be a better experience and outcomes for employees and the business. Explicitly. If activities are unnoticed, unappreciated, or fail to move the needle, we should question them.

✳ Many (myself included) have talked about bringing a product mindset to HR. Broad, high-impact action on this dimension is missing. We can't speak about productizing without re-engineering the product itself. We can't just slap a new "brand" on an existing program, launch a tool, or talk about a persistent problem with product-oriented language and expect outcomes and beliefs to evolve if the changes are superficial. Research, customer needs, and data drive product decisions. Too often, anecdotes drive HR's.

✳ We have to own our role in business decisions, including those that lead to overgrowth, inefficiency, and tough calls to reduce. Leaders may have poorly designed their orgs, but where were we when they did? Did we support hiring and onboarding? If other teams did that work, would they question the growth in ways we have not? Our teams are often hit first and deepest–we make similar mistakes.

✳ We need to exit the echo chamber. Our audience is not other HR leaders but business leaders (and often investors). Having peers to connect with and learn from is great, but we need to gain influence elsewhere. If someone questions HR's existence, we should find nuggets of truth and adapt. There is more technology and opportunity to do so than ever before.

✳ Business leaders need to own their role in HR's failure as well. This includes resisting changes proposed by innovative HR leaders to maintain a comfortable status quo, pointing fingers when a collective decision doesn't work out, and asking for more, better, and different when everything else must remain the same.

HR plays a critical role in company success. I embrace the need for meaningful change. Letting go of ego and the status quo will benefit us all.

This post was inspired by a comment made by Josh Scott, among the smartest people I've worked for, who empowered and pushed me to look at what we were doing and question whether it worked and was worthwhile. Realizing that those challenges weren't a reflection of my potential or talent meant I could experiment, change, or admit errors and issues more freely and focus on efforts that would get results.

What if HR leaders saw incoming challenges as a similar opportunity?

Related Questions

What inspired Kendra Haberkorn to start the moderneer?
How does Kendra Haberkorn approach talent acquisition in startups?
What are some key challenges Kendra Haberkorn has faced in her career?
How does Kendra Haberkorn's experience at Guild Education influence her current work?
What unique strategies does Kendra Haberkorn use in her role as a Fractional Chief People Officer?
Kendra Haberkorn
Kendra Haberkorn, photo 1
Kendra Haberkorn, photo 2
Add to my network

Location

Steamboat Springs, Colorado, United States