The Mystery of 2 HRs part 3

Ok! By now you may be concerned because I compared the work of HR to that of a receptionist. If you feel this way I don’t blame you. The comparison suggests the HR function is of little merit. However, many jobs don’t offer immediate benefit and yet they are important and even necessary.

For example, I recently met with a nationally known economist who prided himself on the accuracy and objectivity of his observations. In fact, during his presentation he went out of his way to point out that he was not influenced by one political party over the other. Rather he let the facts speak for themselves and that was the basis of his opinions and recommendations.

Nevertheless, in a private conversation, he expressed frustration over the fact that both political parties as well as current and past government policy makers, consistently sought out his advice, but routinely failed to adopt his positions. Instead, they were attracted to different and misguided courses of action.

So, is this economist, who for arguments sake is correct, but not supported, of questionable worth? Probably not. He offers a point of view that is needed and respected, just not adapted. However, for him to add true value, his ideas would need to be implemented and followed.

This is the case for the typical Human Resource function. The work that the staff performs may be needed, but it does not distinguish or advance the business. This then is the first HR, the HR department dedicated to completing the tasks demanded by management. Any HR leader that is focused on the first HR will never understand how to embrace the second HR which, targets adding business value to the organization, not just completing tasks.

Next blog: How to solve the Mystery of the Two HRs