Is there a profession in the UK more consistently maligned than human resources? Those of you busy getting on with the day-to-day business of working in HR could be forgiven for burying your head in your hands and wondering why you bother.
It seems doing down the profession is in vogue, as reported in last week’s Personnel Today, and now business leaders are queuing up to have a pop.
Whilst there is nothing wrong with some constructive criticism – I’m sure those working in HR would be the first to admit that sometimes the profession doesn’t cover itself in glory – an out-and-out assault seems a tad unnecessary.
The latest perpetrator is Luke Johnson, head of private equity firm Risk Capital Partners and chairman of Channel 4.
He used his column in last Wednesday’s Financial Times to launch into the HR function, seemingly apropos of nothing.
My colleague Jo Faragher has already given her views on what Johnson had to say right here on The Editors' Blog; I'd like to add to them.
Comparing the power of HR to that of the CIA and Mossad no doubt made entertaining copy, but are his words based on anything resembling fact? The problem, as I see it, is that it doesn’t really matter whether Johnson speaks the truth.
When you have a respected businessman writing in a respected newspaper read by thousands of other respected business people, the stereotype perpetuates.
So HR continues to be perceived by business chiefs as a necessary evil, an “amorphous support service”, as Johnson so eloquently phrased it. Unfortunately, it’s difficult to escape the notion that HR is just an agent of legislative compliance, as he suggested, when the profession has new employment law and EU directives coming at it left, right and centre.
Interestingly enough, in response to the piece, the FT chose to print a letter from a consultant at The Work Foundation rather than one penned by CIPD chief Geoff Armstrong. What does that tell us about HR’s standing?
Comments (1)
I think Luke Johnson's flimsy argument is illustrated by some of the comments in the forum on the FT site.
There are sound analyses of what Johnson has said. One asks Johnson to explain how business was better with fewer HR people, suggesting that only a private equity type could really come to that conclusion.
David Ulrich chips in to defend HR, as do numerous others.
But then Kal appears on the forum to agree with Luke and to share a little joke with everyone:
'Luke is absolutely right. We call HR "Human Remains." '
And that is about as clever as this whole FT debacle gets. Kal has I feel brought this 'debate' to close.
Posted by Rob Moss | February 4, 2008 2:00 PM
Posted on February 4, 2008 14:00