HR Resultsology!!!! The Corporate Traditional Human Resources Management Function is Old-Fashioned and Needs a Complete Overhaul or Even Abandonment

This is not a suggestion but a declaration! Traditional human resources must be completely overhauled or even abandoned not only because it is a tired horse but, more importantly, it is grossly inefficient compared to what has been discovered. The corporate world is notorious for its inability to keep pace with advances in knowledge and discoveries in theory and practice and is a master at remaining way behind the leading edge. The corporate world is a grandmaster at keep thousands of kilometres behind talk and action; it talks about being ahead of the curve but then adopts a culture and systems that keeps itself old-fashioned and close to the obsolete. It is therefore not surprising when workers in human potential assert that humans in general and organisations in particular only tap into twenty percent or less of their full potential. This gross underperformance is so common place that leaders and managers of organisations (most of them to be precise) never notice it and actual feel like they are utilising hundred percent of their human potential. The talk of talent among organisations is largely window dressing and motivational hype. Admittedly, there are excellent companies and organisations who have the seriousness and the ability to get past the twenty percent limit in utilising their human potential, but these are abnormal outliers in a galaxy of mediocrity. This all can be tracked back to the theory and practice in human resources management in organisations.

The Weird of the Human Resources Function in Organisations

People are at the centre of work in companies, organisations, businesses and economies. This means human resources must be the centre-pivot of every organisation and in that case the human resources function must be the epicentre of every organisation. Strangely, this is not the case in most of the companies. Instead, the human resources function is classified as “staff function” and is distinguished from what they call the “line function.” Study after study shows how the human resources department is taken very lightly in most organisations and with utter disdain in some of these organisations. For example, some experts in human resources have observed how the human resources department is often used as a dumping ground of “spent forces” that the organisations are not able to dismiss from the organisation. In addition, calling the human resources a “staff function” has the salient implication that the human resources department is in the thick of things in terms of making things happen in the organisation. It implies that this function is just a support function, a “spare wheel” so to speak. It also implies that there are some departments that are more important and deserve more and better attention than the human resources function. This mindset is problematic and is detrimental to organisations and is the chief cause of underperformance. It flies in the face of the common claim by many leaders and managers that people are their main assets.

While organisations are essentially built on people and while it is people who make amazing things happen, the human resources function seems to be restricted largely to mundane administrative activities and almost thoughtless, poor-performing template-based, performance management activities. ?

The lack of realisation that the human resources function must be the centre piece of the organisation cannot a result of ignorance by the board chairpersons, board members, chief executive officers and top executives. The problem rests squarely on the human resources practitioners themselves because they have, to date, failed to provide a solid case to prove why they human resources deserves to sit at the centre of the organisation and not at some obscure corner away from strategic vanguard of the organisation. Many human resources practitioners have accepted the traditional theory and education that defines the human resources largely in terms of staff affairs administration and not in terms of preparing the organisation for high performance. Second, many people in the human resources space are content using traditional models and methods they are handed in school and in the workplace; few are willing to critical question their theory and practice and invent or create different approaches or at least improve or overhaul what exists in their field.

The human resources function must not be an operational and tactical arm of any organisation; it must be the strategic performance epicentre.

Human Resources in CXO League

Research shows that some organisations have a chief human resources office that is part of the CXO ecosystem. While this is a positive development, the human resources officer is often still not given the same regard as her peers such as the Chief Finance Officer, The Chief Marketing Officer and the Chief IT Officer. This tag that that human resources is a “staff” function contributes to this notion.

Another major area relates to the standard job descriptions and mandates of the human resources office or function. For as long as the function remains skewed towards administration of staff affairs and generic and often vague, tactical and operational, tasks the human resources function will remain grossly underutilised.

Human Resources and The Chief Executive Officer Position

Many adverts for the position of Chief Executive Officer still prefer candidates with either an MBA or Finance even when no evidence has been unearthed to prove and correlation between possession of these degree and Chief Executive Officer suitability or performance potential. The traditional thinking about the Chief Executive Officer position seems to conveniently forget that the Chief Executive Officer position has a large component of human resources involvement since the Chief Executive Officer delivers a big junk of his or her mandate through people. Infact, the organisation is about people. Yet there is very little indication (especially when organisations look for Chief Executive Officers) that the world recognises that abilities or qualifications in human resources provide some significant advantages in the position of the Chief Executive Officer. It is rarely to find any job advert of the Chief Executive Officer that lists possessions of the Human Resources credentials or qualifications as preference together with the preference of MBA and Finance background. Again people must not misconstrue this to mean that people with MBA and Finance background must not be considered in the selection of candidates for the Chief Executive Officer position; I am simply saying that these two must not be used to as a screening tool to exclude potential candidates with other back grounds because there is no evidence that those who do not possess MBA or Finance qualifications cannot be good or great Chief Executive Officers. ?

In conclusion, the following are my views;

1.??????The human resources function deserves more importance than it is currently given

2.??????The human resources function must be view as a line function and not a so called staff function or support function.

3.??????The human resources function must be central even at the board level because ultimately humans drive performance humans are at the centre of all other functions including finance and ceoship.

4.??????The job descriptions of the human resources function need a complete overhaul

5.??????Administration of staff affairs must be a small function of the human resources department. More emphasis must be on human performance management.

Those in the human resources fraternity must do more raise awareness of the importance of the human resources function so that it is given the attention it deserves because it will lead to an increase in human productivity and to more success for companies, organisations, businesses and economies.

[email protected] ?+263-77-444-74-38

?Simon Bere 2023