Posted in Human Resources Articles, Total Reads: 774
, Published on 04 February 2017
Times are a-changing in the HR landscape. Gone are the days when employees would spend all their lives bound loyally to one organisation. This decade is all about the here and now - and job hopping is becoming more and more common. Employees do not hesitate to move from one company to another, looking out for the best benefits, the biggest value add they can get - the most personal learning that their role will incorporate.
No wonder then that come placement season, "where do you see yourself 10 years from now?", has become one of the most dreaded questions on MBA campuses across the country. "With things changing at this pace, how would I know?", you ask yourself. And if you're one of those daring few who is looking to set sail for new shores on the entrepreneur-ship (pun-intended), then this question will challenge you the most. "How can I tell them I plan to move on in a few years to strike out on my own?", you wonder. And that, my friends, is when you brace yourself to blithely lie through your teeth.
So when there's a good chance that most employees you recruit will exit the organisation within a five-year span, why will CEOs and boards in this not-so-exhilarating economy, invest in employee development, much less in HR Heads themselves? A case in point is the recent unexpected turbulence in HR circles across the country. In the last year alone, over 15 HR Heads of corporate biggies have made shifts to other enterprises. HR heads might move out in search of bigger brands or more challenging roles.
Another reason is the inability of HR professionals to adjust to the work environment. Surprising, right? On the surface, this might seem a straightforward a reason, but dig a little deeper and the findings are disturbing : research suggests that the incidence of top management HR personnel quitting is much higher in promoter-driven companies, where the culture has been set over many decades by the promoter-family. As a result, when HRs enter the organisation expecting to revolutionize the workplace, the top management is not exactly receptive to change. This leads to demotivation, conflict and in many cases, eventual exit of the HR.
A lot of times, we see HR heads drawing flak for the sub-par performance of the workforce. I feel that while yes, the HR department is accountable for the performance of the employees, so is the immediate manager. But too often, managers have taken the easy way out, using high levels of bureaucracy as a shield to pass the blame to the HR department. Fact is, the very definition of manager implies responsibility for the organization’s human capital.
According to a recently published article in the Harvard Business Review, the CEO, CFO and CHRO form the crucial leadership triangle for any organisation. If this trio is competent and highly aligned with one another, the company's prospects are decidedly bright. It's time for the big corporates to wipe out the stale attitude towards the Human Resources department and start afresh. HR as we know it is becoming obsolete. Companies across the globe are embracing the new age human capital approach by giving their HR departments what they need to create true impact: freedom to innovate, openness to change and much less bureaucracy. Younger companies already have a headstart in this area, and the Vodafones, Dells and Reliances of the world would do well to follow suit - they certainly have miles to go. "So buck up big corporates", says the HR department. "Help us help you better."
This article has been authored by Meghana Kanisetti from SIBM Bengaluru
If you are interested in writing articles for us, Submit Here