why HR stinks (the latest report)

via kris dunn over at the HR capitalist, i was lead to the latest white paper on the role of HR in the age of talent at vurv.

vurv has a quote featured very prominently on their site. it reads: "leadership in HR does not have the respect of organizational leadership. until that is resolved, we are overhead." here's the thing. they're right. and many people in leadership positions in HR aren't aware of this, or don't really care. but what are some of the causes for this lack of HR-love?

1) too many HR folks spend too much time on things that really don't impact the business, and don't understand what is important to their company's leadership. we're hearing rising concern from the C-levels about talent -- attracting it, retaining it, managing it. but look at SHRM's home page today. what are the top "news items"? "new rule will alter background checks." and this gem: "few companies teach email skills" and an article about a british employee backlist. does that seem like a disconnect to you? (i truly hope you people still in HR out there are hiring people who know how to use email. i mean...really. that's kind of basic, isn't it?)

2) too many HR folks can't speak the CFO's language. there are entirely too many HR people who don't understand the financial side of the business. even among HR people who understand something as basic as the cost of turnover, too many of them are too busy trying to find ways not to count certain turnover in order to make their numbers look better. fudging numbers will not earn the same respect as actually understanding them, and finding solutions to make them better.

3) too many HR folks are all about the party planning. "i got into HR because i love people, and i'm all about employee engagement so i'm going to plan a picnic! yay!" believe it or not, i've seen organizations that had five events a year. everyone went to the christmas party. the rest of the events? it was the same 30 people. and most of those were the same 30 people who were the most vocal about being unhappy with their jobs and management. so what does the HR person who loves people do? starts adding give-aways to the parties, angering (again) the financial guys and showing no increase in 'employee engagement' or decrease in turnover or anything substantial. it's just "feels good."

4) too many HR folks are all about the politics. rather than being the place where people come for fairness, too often employees find that HR is the epicenter of politics in an organization. how can HR be a trusted business partner with a 'seat at the table' when you never know what will be politically best for them and which side they're going to come down on. (except that you do know that it'll be the best side for them personally.)

you may well be the exception to all this. there are, naturally, good HR people out there. but there's a lot of bad too. if you're all fluff and no substance, and the majority of what you do has little impact on your company, you'll never get the respect of the leadership and never really get that 'seat at the table' everyone's been talking about.

maybe these articles surface every so often because there's some truth to them. maybe it's time for some self-reflection and, as kris suggests, rather than get angry about it....get good.

all the best!
deb

Comments

[Career Encourager]

Interestingly I have always found that when I acknowledge that HR is overhead (also known as "investment") that business leaders start seeing me as a lot more strategic. It seems to reduce a lot of the politics that you mention above, and it also speaks a language the CFO can understand. The result is that they invite me to the table and reschedule meetings so I can be there.

[Natalie Cooper]

This is an interesting debate. HR is always asked to step up to the role of business partner, however, one of our filth columnists over on our site is arguing that HR directors should be no longer and instead be renamed corporate responsibility directors where corporate social responsibility should lay at the heart of every organisation to encompass its people including diversity, equal opportunities for all, and giving back to the community.

The filth columnist (TFC) believes that HR should be left to deal with the process, and the new corporate responsibility directors should be the way forward and become known as the new dynamic business leaders of the future. Join in the debate if you wish: www.changeboard.com/hrcircles/forums/t/1111.aspx

[Job Match Now]

I've found that whenever a department hits a stalemate like HR has, it's best to re-examine the process. It's too easy to fall back on old stalwarts like parties to bring the company together, team building and the like. It's better to re-engineer the paradigm from the root. What's the problems in the company that need be addressed to enhance productivity and in extension profitability? What is HR's role in that?

[Dan McCarthy]

Deb -
I just discovered you from the latest HR carnival - and I'm sorry it's taken so long! Good stuff - and nice playlist too. I've subscribed and added you to my blogroll, and look forward to reading more.