Tuesday, January 24, 2006

Let's get it started...

This marks my inaugural post here on Beyond HR. What is Beyond HR? It's a space that is dedicated to revolutionizing the human resources industry. In addition, I'll do my best to convey the latest HR trends, ideas, technologies, and tactics through as unique a lens as possible.

So what do I mean by "revolutionize HR?" It means...

...coming up with a new name for human resources. Some of you may say it's just semantics, but to me the "human resources department" just does not inspire. When's the last time you heard HR and excitement in the same sentence from someone OUTside the HR department? Changing the status quo sometimes means using different words to begin shifting people's perspective away from the old, and on to the new.

...destroying the way corporations think about HR. Rather than make HR into a paper pushing department concerned with tasks like benefits and payroll, I want to start seeing organizations utilize HR to "quarterback" the War for Talent.

...taking the War for Talent seriously. This phenomenon has been paid so much lip service over the last couple of years, but I have yet to see more than a handful of organizations put the money where their mouth is. We're witnessing a shift towards a New Age right now. What is it? The Age of Talent. I'm convinced that old tactics such as TQM (total quality management), CI (continuous improvement), and the balanced scorecard (as well as many others) will not be enough to help organizations thrive in the coming years. What does that mean? The sole differentiator between excellence and mediocrity in an industry will be Talent.

...redefining job descriptions and job requisitions. I hate both of them. The reason I hate both of them is the same reason I hate the "human resources" name. They don't inspire. They don't excite. They don't evoke passion. When's the last time that you met a Talented person who doesn't exhibit these three qualities? Then why do we insist on using tools that don't speak the same language?

...changing the way the HR industry "views" Talent. Some recruiters don't think every person has Talent. Some recruiters believe everyone has some ounce of Talent. At the very root of the issue is: WE HAVE NO CLUE WHAT TALENT IS. And it scares us as HR professionals. So we avoid the issue by concentrating on stuff like years of experience, knowledge acquired, and educational background. I want to see this industry begin taking measures to define what Talent means...how Talent will elevate your firm to unprecedented heights...how you will attract Talent...how you will develop Talent in-house...and most importantly, how you will retain Talent.

I could go on and on about what a revolution means. But I think you get the point. Besides, if I included everything from the get go, I'd have nothing to write about in the future. ;)

My hope is that some of the things I have just written resonated within you. And if they have...join me in trying to change the status quo...and start a revolution. It all starts here.


SSAWB said...

I think Recruiting needs to secede from HR. I have seen it done in a very few instances and it is liberating. Recruiting can fall under Marketing or it can be a stand-alone organization. Either way, without the constraints of being mired in the muck of HR, Recruiting can pursue Talent with a mind to cultivating relationships on behalf of the organization.

Question: Why does HR not want to lose Recruiting from under its umbrella?

Phillip said...

That's a very interesting question. I'd be very interested in hearing what others in the HR community think about this one.

One question that I have is, if recruiting were to secede from HR completely, what would that do to organizations trying to knock down the barriers between departments? It's fairly common (unfortunately) for the recruiting team and the rest of HR to not be on the best of terms. I wonder what would result if the two were permanently seperated?

ssawb said...

The reason HR doesn't want to lose recruiting is... Like most things: money. The vast majority of HR budgets fall in recruiting.

I think relationships between HR and other parts of HR are a factor of the individuals. Part of the problem is that recruiters tend to be more aggressive and business-minded and have some of the frustrations with HR people that line managers have.