If HR is to be taken more seriously as a key player and not just as a support role, then understanding the business is essential.
So Dave Ulrich taking time out from the PricewaterhouseCoopers HR summit in Rome recently to defend his business partnering model, following continued attacks on its usefulness in a changing world (Personneltoday.com, 28 January), is quite understandable.
Ulrich quite rightly points to the fact that his model is only about accepting the realities of corporate life – a way of engaging with the realities of business operations and relating HR to the bottom line. But engaging with the realities of people management and the impact that can have on the bottom line is not something business groups are so keen to do, it seems.
Following on from business secretary John Hutton’s limp argument that extending flexible working would ‘make life difficult’ for businesses (Personneltoday.com, 19 February), the CBI and the EEF have attacked a report highlighting employee concerns over the implementation of the existing right to request flexible working.
In one respect, they are right – some jobs would be very difficult manage if people worked flexibly, and businesses have to look after the bottom line. But that bottom line depends on people operating effectively. And if extending the right to request flexible working to all employees – as advocated by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development and the TUC – helps organisations keep their top talent, then it is surely a sensible thing to do.
If business leaders are to be taken seriously as key players in the 21st century, then clinging to outdated ways of working that result in massive carbon
footprints and an exodus of talent are clearly habits they need to kick.
But if HR is to make the argument for new ways of working, it needs to understand the business – which is where Ulrich came in more than 10 years ago.
Comments (1)
Your article brings to mind a recent incident at the company my partner works for, illustrating the WRONG way in which its HR people are trying to justify their continued existence... badly!
It appears that a single employee's timekeeping record left something to be desired (consistently coming in late). Instead of confronting the employee with their misdemeanor, they felt that it would be politically incorrect to do this so they analysed the timekeeping of all employees and called them ALL in for a berating.
My partner was called in and censured over the fact that she had come in late on two ocassions by 2 and 3 minutes over the past month... despite the fact that she worked 45 minutes late the previous evening for nothing... and not for the first time (since overtime does not kick in at her firm until you work a full hour). Apparently coming in late 'counts' but working late does not.
All support staff have now refused to work late (after all, it's not a contractual requirement), at great efficiency cost to the business. Raises the question: Just what use is an HR department?
Why not just shut the department down, save the company a lot of money and run a successful business based on common sense and mutual respect instead of all this PC nonsense and 'jobsworth' attitude
Posted by Peter Wognum | April 22, 2008 9:46 AM
Posted on April 22, 2008 09:46