Most CEOs like to run their fiefdoms unquestioned and they need help from people who can carry out their tasks - both pleasant and unpleasant - specifically with respect to other employees in the organisation. CEOs in more than 90% organisations (i dont claim to have done either radical research or being privy to extensive data as i write this) believe that HR is and should remain a recruitment resource. And a convenient alibi when performance evaluation time comes calling.
Ofcourse there are also those evaluation tools, effectiveness tests, assorted matrices and training programs that HR professionals invent, re-invent, do and re-do every year. It keeps them productively employed, and the disguise / mask perfectly in place.
So whats wrong?
The issue seems to be that HR teams are rarely interested interested in genuine skill upgradation and performance enhancement of employees. Most employees are seldom motivated to perform because of HR systems. Quite to the contrary, their performance is inspite of them !! HR guys are usually more content carrying out orders. Worse, at the best of times, they seem woefully out of sync with ground realities. In any poll of employees, they are most likely to emerge as the department that has contributed the least to organisation success.
Importantly, one of the aspects where HR professionals are expected to contribute the most is in the building of the "right culture" . This cd be a performance driven or customer centric or creativity driven culture. Most cultures grow and get established inspite of the HR professionals as it is actually the line Managers who perpetuate the culture and their immediate superiors who guide or correct them. HR play only a cosmetic role - like in pointing out aberrations, etc.
Also HR guys seldom fully understand the business and wouldnt possibly be able to run any core function within the organisation successfully. Unfortunately, we only hear them comment on others without any great insight or understanding. Instead one wishes that they wd go genuinely beyond mouthing cliches heard from the CEO and making politically correct statements.
In most organisations, HR usually tends to be a cleverly camoflouged mask for the CEO's vision / diktats and orders. HR Managers walk about the organisation, wearing this mask and looking around as a King wd survey his subjects. Being the CEO's confidante gives the HR team a sense of sadistic power, an unmistakable air of arrogance that comes from being the perfect hand in glove partner for all tasks that demand denying benefits, increments or promotions to employees ! and ofcourse being the CEO's Man Friday, they are the proverbial bull dog that can be unleashed on those that threaten to flinch, talk or say much too much. No wonder that employees rarely believe or confide in them.
I believe that it wd only be fair to call the HR function "the mask" or even a face in urgent need of corrective surgery!!
If this one function is removed from the organisation, my view is that no organisation would suffer. Instead it wd bring down overall costs - something that the rest of the organisation wd gladly welcome, with little remorse or guilt!
The one business house, where all of the above comments may not apply would perhaps be the Tata group - where sane practices have led to amazingly motivated employees. Who can imagine a culture where (hotel) employees are willing to sacrifice life and all - a result that wd surprise even HR managers themselves!
No comments:
Post a Comment