I read with interest 'HR must restore value of transactional activities', outlining the debate at the recently held Personnel Today HR Directors Club Networking Dinner (Personnel Today, 12 June). Initially, I was somewhat dismayed at the continuing debate and introspection over what is/should be HR's role, but was then surprised to see that also being debated was whether HR should focus on getting transactional activities right first rather than focusing on transformational ones.
This clearly cannot be an either/or question. Accuracy and turnaround of response on basic HR deliverables must be a given. If, as a function, HR cannot get these basic things right, what hope is there of succeeding in delivering the more demanding, strategic and organisationally value-adding activities?
No wonder some of our finance colleagues call into question the value of their HR counterparts. Could you imagine a finance directors' networking dinner having a similar debate? "Let's not worry about the accuracy of our numbers in the annual financial report and accounts, and instead just focus on new ventures, M&A opportunities, etc. So what if the report and accounts are not filed on time?" Don't think so.
With ideas like that, no wonder our contribution is called into question.
Employee view is critical to success of coaching
One is that relatively few HR departments ever get asked to produce a return on investment (ROI) on this or any other activity.
It is taken for granted that it is a 'good and worthy' thing to do, but perhaps we have a very narrow view of what ROI means - what is the investment in, and what kind of return do we expect?
Your editorial comment asks the question: is it to do with better performance