Over There Thursday — the United Kingdom
Bill Boorman and Jill Elswick at Recruitfest 2009
In this edition of Over There Thursday, we head from the Savage Truth of Australia to the United Kingdom.
This week, we have a guest post from a formidable English recruiter who crafted this post while flying from the United Kingdom to Canada where he was last seen chasing Maren Hogan through a park, if the tweets are to be believed.
According to the official bio on his web site, Bill Boorman is something of a veteran in the recruiting business despite starting at a tender young age. Bill must be stubborn, since he was told by his first employer that he would never have a successful career as a recruiter. Today, he IS a successful recruiter, an internet celebrity, and a world traveler.
This post is going up late on Thursday night because as Bill told me on Twitter, “he had to fit it in around #Recruitfest.” I appreciate you doing that Bill, and now my blog is yours! I hope you enjoy Bill and his pondering about the current state of HR in the UK.
The Role of Human Resources
I’ ve been sitting on a plane flying to Toronto for the last 6 hours travelling to #Recruitfest09. I’m excited about the trip which makes me a little giddy, and the tribe of children playing the kick the seat competition behind me are not helping me sleep.
I don’t know about you, but its at times like this that I start to ponder the big life and business issues that I don’t have the time or inclination to wonder about when I have a real life coming at me 100 miles an hour that I need to contend with.
Things like how the world governments are going to plug the financial hole of all of our cash “leant “ to the banks, if the same said banks were charged interest and fines when THEY exceeded their overdraft limit, (an unauthorised borrowing fee?).
Why there is always one sock left in the washing machine but never a pair?
Aand most puzzling of all, what exactly is it that people who work in HR do?
I’ve worked in and around third party recruiters for the last 27 years, it’s actually all I’ve ever done. During this time I have had a whole range of experiences working with and advising HR Managers, most recently in relation to Social Media Recruiting.
In terms of the relation and the role, it has undoubtedly changed each year.
In the old days when I started out, HR was seen as everyone’s favourite “aunt”, the place you went if you had an embarrassing problem or needed a cuddle. HR ran the payroll and other staff related but had little to do with what really got done.
Through the 80’s, the HR Managers became the keeper of the vacancies. You guarded them from the evil recruiter like me with a wooden stake and woe betide if I spoke to the line Manager.
The 80’s also brought with it change management, upsizing, downsizing and other labelled transactions. Business began to realise that actually people were quite important to the success of the business.
Perhaps there was a place to involve HR in the strategy and allow them both a voice and a brain. They could of course take responsibility when the innocent employees were restructured from employed to unemployment status. HR also became the bastion of the buzzword, what is permitted under corporate law, and what wasn’t.
And so to today.
” What does HR do?”
It seems to be an all encompassing role. HR has become a driver rather than a passenger in business strategy. The recognition that the most important thing in business success is the people has elevated those with responsibility for providing and keeping them.
The HR role now is a mix of planning, recruiting, maintenance, training and developing. It is as targeted as any other sales or recruiting role.
Good HR people think like recruiters and are the keepers of the employer brand.
It’s a huge role that’s hard to define, dictated by company/corporate size.
You have to hire, develop, keep and maintain the workforce, while ensuring no body sues you.
In conclusion, all HR Roles are different and are a special breed. Increasingly I would expect the role to be focussed on talent retention as well as talent finding.
HR need to partner with recruiters and other third party suppliers to get the best out of them.
Time to break down the walls and establish relationships. The role of HR is as the selector of the right partners, and to keep building the relationships for the benefit of the business. Because the role reaches in to so many areas, all HR professionals need a clear job specification with defined targets and objectives against expectation. Be very clear on what you do and review it often.
Enjoy the ride!
{ 3 trackbacks }
{ 13 comments… read them below or add one }
Twitter: lruettimann
September 26, 2009 at 12:11 am
I’ve been thinking about something, Bill. Tell me if I’m wrong. I think HR suffers from the fact that it’s been emasculated. It’s a profession filled with powerless women (for the most part). So if you want to add value in the human capital space, you disparage HR and try to build up another function — like recruiting — which most would argue is HR-lite.
This isn’t fleshed out very well, but there is a history of professional jobs (waiters, secretaries, government positions) that move from male-dominated roles to female-dominated roles and lose stature and influence.
Is the dislike of HR due to the fact that the department is staffed with powerless women?
Okay, I’m going to bed.
More from author
Twitter: MikeVanDervort
September 26, 2009 at 3:54 am
@Laurie
I have been thinking that HR has allowed itself to become like the yellow pages they keep dumping on my porch. People still pay to use it. People still get paid to make sure the the product is placed in the hands of the public. It’s just that the product being delivered is all that that useful in the form in which it is is now being delivered.
Also not fleshed out very well, but I just got up.
And I am going back to bed now as well.
More from author
well, not all HR women are powerless, is yellowpages.com progress (not), and I am ready for the ride. Wait, I may already be on it. Not fleshed out at all, just got up, can’t go back to bed. darn!
More from author
Interesting post. I think you’ve done a good job summing up some of the history and transformation over time in HR.
My definition of HR today is pretty simple. It’s providing the organization and its leaders with advice, guidance and programs on all things people.
I also agree with Laurie that there is some degree of minimizing the role of HR due to it being the one business profession that is dominated by women. I don’t agree though that the departments are filled with powerless women. Instead I think it’s the perception by some of the old boys in senior management positions . Some still have no idea on the bottom line enhancing guidance that their own HR division can provide.
I once heard that there is a perception by most that professional women are either competent or nice — but not both. If that is true then there are a lot of Execs (male and female) that believe they have a bunch of nice but not competent people sitting in their HR department.
But these women of HR aren’t powerless. They simply have to stop waiting to be asked for their help. HR women (and men) need to get in there and contribute on all-things-people whether they are asked or not.
More from author
Very interesting point from Laurie. I’m an HR Recruiter in the UK and would agreee that there does seem to be a far greater number of women than men in the profession, particularly at Manager and Business Partner level (it’s quite telling that it’s not really the case at Director level).
What I have noticed though is that over the last 5 years or so HR teams seem to have grown in size. For example I have spoken to companies who, pre-recession, may have had 8 or 10 people within an HR team, but may only have 800‑1000 employees. It doesn’t seem uncommon to have an HRD, 2 Managers, 2 Officers, an Assistant, a Recruitment Manager (often sits within HR in SMEs), L&D Manager, ER Consultant, and often an interim is called in for special projects.
Makes me wonder if some HR teams have become too inward looking, building from the top down, maybe too concerned with structure, systems and process with not enough time spent on strategy.
Just a theory…intertested to hear your thoughts.
More from author
Twitter: MikeVanDervort
September 26, 2009 at 11:22 am
@Mervyn — You have nailed one the main causes for the “downfall” of HR. The HR leadership at too many companies tends to focus on these like prevention and risk avoidance rther than expending energy and resources on things that will improve their service delivery or expand their value proposition as an organization, like doing more for the employees.
More from author
Has HR become the way it is because of the Company or is it because of our Society? Isn’t part of the reason many HR areas are the way they are today because of society and culture.
Those days as Bill said when HR was a place to go when you needed a hug or talk to someone about an embarrassing problem have long gone. They have now become a place where people are afraid to give advice or put their arm on someone’s shoulder and say don’t worry kid or don’t worry Paul or Mary just do your job and things will work out. Why, because of fear of being sued or that if they go back to the Manager and they question their authority about what is happening in an area it get blown out of portion, escalated up to their boss and all of a sudden what the HR person thought was a let’s see if we can resolve this matter is now a let’s see who has more power battle. We live in time when you are guilty until you are proven innocent. People suing Companies and Coworkers have become a norm; people don’t feel comfortable disclosing issues for fear of repercussions. Corporations have HR employees attend classes on how to avoid conflicts in the workplace yet reprimand HR when they don’t step in and stop a conflict from happening.
HR Generalist in many companies have become Workplace Coördinators who have less responsibilities and smaller salaries. Recruiting in many Companies is an area unto itself and no longer considered part of HR.
HR outsourcing has become something many companies started to move towards where in an effort to save money people have now become SS#’s for someone in a call center in a foreign country who don’t know you from the next caller but has all your personal information.
Society and how people have responded to the change in our society today is making matters harder for HR. Many HR professionals have built a wall around themselves and let no one in. In this time when the internet has become the easiest way to communicate people no longer pick up a phone and say hello they either ask you to leave a voicemail message or send them an e-mail, tweet or text message.
I remember working for a company who had a staff of about 450 employees and everyone knew one another and would look out for each other as they expanded to be a leader in their industry they later merged with another company. It was obvious the clash of personalities was going to be a problem. After a couple of months it began to happen and HR was being inundated with complaints to a point that one day when I came to work there was a lock on the entrance to the HR Department and you could only get in if buzzed in by security. How sad that the department where people would go and talk about their problems or seek advice became a place where no one wanted to listen anymore.
I speak to many HR Professional who are part of my Social Network and through SHRM, many of whom are unemployed and they can’t understand why they are having a hard time finding work as are many others but sometimes I wonder if it will take some of these HR people longer to find a job because perhaps they were that person who whenever a Recruiter would call to try and get a contract or a employee would need to speak with someone they were that person who never had the time or didn’t need outside recruiters helping them do their job but now they need them to find one. Like I said the other day on Twitter” HR is a large Industry but a small world” people remember how they were treated.
So while Employers have had a lot to do with the change in HR looking at them as the place to lay the blame when Corporate Mishaps occurs. Society and it’s perception of HR has in my opinion is the biggest contributor. After all has anyone not ever heard a Hiring Manager say that HR has never done anything for them?
BB: “What does HR do?”
FZ: Whatever the business strategy requires, my dear boy.
Certain business strategies and cycles require HR to be innovative. By using progressive methods and tools to attract, retain, and develop human capital within the organization, HR can be a key contributor to the growth of any enterprise.
Conversely, other business strategies and cycles require HR to be “steady state”, protector of the realm, mitigator of risk, and defender of the corporate honor. A qualified employment attorney always helps in this mode.
Yet other business strategies and cycles may require a composite of various competencies, tasks, and objectives. Imagine heading HR whilst acquiring a like-sized firm and being given the mandate to trim headcount by 20% in order to finance the transaction. This would require HR to successfully balance growth, protection, and reduction all in one strategy/cycle.
You correctly point out that HR has changed considerably over the past generation. I believe successful organizations through this time period (read Good to Great by Jim Collins) demonstrate adaptability of HR, and thus adaptability of the entire organization. Taking this thought further, we may progress the inquiry from “What does HR do?” to how does HR do it?
It is interesting that some of the professions that are male-dominated (hard sciences, engineering) see a constant stream of initiatives aimed at increasing the participation of females in the related educational programs. These of course try to effect the gender balance in the professional ranks of the discipline. But has anyone ever seen a program for increasing the number of men in HR? Does society place a higher value on science and technology, and thus promoting more women into those professions can be generally seen as important, and beneficial for everyone?
Why are there no calls from educators or national HR organizations to ‘Get more men in HR’? Is it more of a societal issue that we consistently de-value what are perceived to be ‘soft’ skills that make up most of the HR function?
More from author
HR is very much right now in a transformational period and growing division where there are haves and have nots. The haves are strategic thinkers who are business-minded and focused on creating revenue generating growth to the business through recruiting, retention, training and development, and leveraging social media. The have nots are biting their nails over dress code policy and planning employee anniversary and birthday parties. Until the have nots get the hint, the industry will never be taken seriously as a strategic business partner.
It is important for HR to become an leader and emerging function of the business and must do this by moving beyond their desk and understanding the business and building relationships with leading professionals both inside and beyond the HR industry.
Jessica Miller-Merrell, SPHR
@blogging4jobs
http://www.blogging4jobs.com
More from author
Twitter: MikeVanDervort
September 27, 2009 at 7:26 am
Wow, I wish @BillBoorman were here to write the replies!
@Lisa — let me know when you flesh it out. You know you will!
@Beth — I agree. You are already at the table. Act like it!
@Mervyn — already replied to you. Look forward to seeing your blog posts!
@Paul — Soylent Green is people. People are HR. HR looks and acts like people. We need to be better if we are the leaders and influencers of people.
@FrankZupan — You have hit the nail, as they say, dear boy. HR by its very role is compelled to be the servant of all, the master of none. Unfortunately, that doesn’t work. And when you lead by mastery and create nothing, people see you as useless bureaucracy. That needs to change.
@Steve — C’mon, in the real man’s world, men make things or tell people what to do and stuff like that. Men who can’t do that obviously go into the more “nurturing” departments where they will fit in better!
@Jessica — Building relationships never hurts
More from author
Wow,
Not the responses i was expecting but interesting just the same, not been called “My dear boy” for some time. (Since i was a boy in fact, some 30 or so years ago!).
When i wrote this post i had not considered the political arguments, the man/women imbalance or political corectness. Maybe this is the problem. the HR fraternity is spending too much time and energy on the politics and justification of purpose and not enough on definition. I was interested to note that there was little written about what HR do for the employees — current and future. To me, this should be the essence of the HR Role. I think the role will be different in every organisation but essentialy this should be the focus from strategy through to delivery. HR should encompass all things people rather than all things political. Those in an HR Role should define what they think their role is and how far responsibilities (and accountability) should reach to identify what you should be delivering. Once this is identified you can then plan and deliver as the link between the company and the employee. The bigger the company, the more roles will be needed such as dedicated recruiting. To me, this is still HR under a different name, co-ordinated by a head of HR who has some teeth at senior level.
One real challenge HR does face (and i was very familiar with this in corporate life) is that in perception terms it is often the case of HR as the messenger of the can do, and can’t do, and as the messenger getting shot! You need to be clear that you are communicating THE law not YOUR law! There is a part of the role as a bastion of protecting the company from littigation. HR Depts will be judged by how many times the company fails in a law suit, and as such you are the protectors and the educators. This will never make you popular.
HR needs deffinition in the organisation and you should be a part of that deffinition process. At the moment it seems very vague to an outsider.
Shoot me down then!
@BillBoorman
More from author
Twitter: MikeVanDervort
September 27, 2009 at 5:20 pm
Bill, my dear boy.…you should be able to bottle and sell this!
Maybe this is the problem. the HR fraternity is spending too much time and energy on the politics and justification of purpose and not enough on definition. I was interested to note that there was little written about what HR do for the employees – current and future. To me, this should be the essence of the HR Role. I think the role will be different in every organisation but essentialy this should be the focus from strategy through to delivery. HR should encompass all things people rather than all things political.
More from author