HR: Needed vs. NOT Needed

It is one the these things: you plan something and end up doing something else. My planned posting was inspired by a Millenial and was to be on Communication. And yesterday, I came across this big buzz generated by Best-Selling Author Bernard Marr,  in his LinkedIn posting on "Why We No Longer Need HR Departments." At the time on this writing, it has generated 4,645 readings and over 3,000 comments. Talk about a buzz!! It is interesting to see how people are passionate about HR.

There are those who disagree, such as Josh Bersin, with Besin by Deloitte, and who spell out why HR is still quite relevant. The article, "Why We Do Need the HR Department"  is scooped by Andrée Laforge in "Mesurer le Capital Humain," and has culminated to 24,789 views at this precise time! Wow!! The power of communication!
And of course, there are those who think that HR is redundant. Those are mostly the people who have most probably met an "evil HR" person. And I say "person" vs. professional because HR is all too often, and unfortunately, staffed through internal promotion of people who have been in administration or in HR. Not that there is anything wrong with internal  promotion. It is only wrong if it makes you reach your Peter's principle, and you lack self- awareness, or the person who promoted you had a personal agenda. And that agenda wouldn't certainly be the organization's success, much less yours. Frankly, I had exchanges with many colleagues, HR professionals, who have said "I do not know why such people remain at their positions". Sadly those last at their positions, and are, unknowingly, one of the causes of this type of heated debate. Suzanne Lucas has been stating her opinion on what she calls  "The Evil HR" myth in her personal introduction in her blog!

Myth or not, the image of HR, throughout the world, has not always been brilliant, and often for good reasons. The shift from the old fashioned Personnel Department to that of Human Resource Management, HRM,  has not been seamless. It is unfortunate. Today, we talk about Human Capital Management, HCM. We finally admit that metrics/analytics is relevant to HR. None of these makes HR irrelevant, on the contrary. It is only a matter of understanding of what HR should be or is about. I believe that SHRM, formerly American Society for Personnel Administration (ASPA),  is there to stay, whatever its name. And every organization has its own needs and means; the face of HR is going to vary from one organization to another.

I am not exaggerating when I say that it was decades ago that I made the argument on linkages between HR and metrics. Let's just say that it was not understood. Today, Bernard Marr argues that 1)  HRM is irrelevant and should be called otherwise, 2) Analytics and People Support are to be today's focus, and  3) "HR" administration should be outsourced.

HR is Evolving: Resistance is Futile!

My opinion? HR should be approached in a holistic fashion. There are several facets of HR that have been neglected. HR is an integral part of business management, such as Finances or Product. Very simply put, you need money and a product to do business. By the same token, you need people on both ends of the business - inflow and outflow-... unless you are going to have "borgs" do the work...

However, I do agree that we are evolving to the "Next Generation" of HR. And, yes, I have been championing for an integrated approach to HR. For HR to add full value, People, Communication, Research and Metrics are to be synched to contribute to business mission and goals. That's what HR is about.
Should we define HRM by what it is not? HRM is not administration, or compliance, or pure execution, or exclusively operations. It is that multifaceted quest for understanding of people - that is, all stakeholders - and business - i.e. internal and external environment -; and bringing all information, offering analysis, interpretation, and strategic and operational solutions as a contribution to business goals. And yes, there are different parts of that HR body; and changes will have to be made, slowly maybe but surely, as  I have already seen happening. "Traditional" HR is moving in and out of HR.

HR needs to have a vision. HR is evolving, and changing its name won't change the course. HR is to stay and evolve. It will remain People- and business-centric. Only the approach is evolving. We all need to embrace the change, no matter, and yes, Resistance is futile.

So, let's talk HR of the future, let's learn and partner.

En Synthèse...


En Synthèse...

Un vrai débat en effet à juger par les diverses, devrais-je dire innombrables réponses sur le sujet. Visitez aussi Sandrine Théard. Il y a tant à dire sur la "gestion des RH", ce super hero. Peu importe la dénomination: la fonction évolue. Elle est en cours de redéfinition, face à la technologie et à la redéfinition du contexte du monde du business. A chaque entreprise ses besoins particuliers.
Et RH n'exclue certainement pas l'analytique. Le bilan social en est le grand-parent. Qui se souvient d'avoir travaillé sur un bilan social? En tous cas, je me souviens d'avoir compilé les data et d'avoir participé à l’interprétation. C’était bien dans notre département RH. 

Bien évidemment, les metrics RH à considérer aujourd'hui doivent être plus élaborés que ceux qui doivent être dans le bilan social. L'approche est différente.
Mais en fin de comptes, tout est dans la définition "personnelle" (one's understanding) de la "gestion des RH" et de la valeur des apports en la matière. Ceci dit, la SHRM et le CRHA ont certainement leurs raisons d'être. Et ma foi, les professionnels RH comprennent que RH n'est pas seulement synonyme d'administration ou de partenaires sociaux. Nous ne sommes plus a l’ère de la Révolution Industrielle...  

Si aux USA 80% des RH sont maintenant à la Présidence de la compagnie, l’interprétation des  résultats est encore bien floue dans bien des cas, d’où des décisions stratégiques qui sont souvent révisées en peu de temps (non qu'il y ait du mal à cela, mais enfin avoir une information cohérente au départ ne fait pas du mal non plus). Eh non, les data ne déshumanisent en rien les RH. Nous devons seulement apprendre à les manipuler, les interpréter, et les présenter pour pouvoir aider le Capital Humain à contribuer plus efficacement aux objectifs d'entreprise. 

RH: Une Vision Intégrée

La fonction RH est ici pour rester mais elle évolue. Pour survivre, nous devons nous adapter au changement inéluctable de la profession. J'ai toujours été une avocate d'une approche globalisante de la gestion des RH: Communication, RH, Recherche et Analytique. En somme, savoir interpréter les données internes et externes du business et apporter sa contribution aux objectifs d'entreprise. Les RH, ce n'est pas un monde à part; C'est partie intégrante de la gestion du business, avec focus sur les partenaires humains. Allons-y pour une vision intégrée des RH! Moi, j'y crois fermement depuis toujours. 

Alors, que vous soyez dans les RH ou à l’extérieur i.e dans une fonction autre que RH , vous feriez mieux de vous habituer à cette idée, parce que l’évolution de la gestion des RH avance lentement mais sûrement vers un partenariat. Incontournable. 


Popular Articles

Rethinking HR : Resources are Human Beings with Needs and Personal Lives


UPDATED: Wrapping Up the Year to Open a New Tab for HR & Communication

Toxic Leadership, HR and Challenges

Bias, Looks and Outputs: For the Love of HR