HR

Deny everything! HR responds to criticism.

Posted on by Blog

If you work in HR, you’re probably aware of Lucy Adams and her performance in front of the Public Accounts Committee. You may also be aware of the article written by Louisa Peacock for the Daily Telegraph. And if you’re on Twitter, you might have seen the debacle that unfolded on the publication of the article.

So Louisa makes some slightly tenuous points. The final nail in the coffin? I don’t think we will see the demise any time soon. HR is pointless and does little for the bottom line? That hardly reflects well on all those CEOs who clearly turn a blind eye to a huge drain on their profits and their bonuses. HR Directors are becoming the new estate agents? I think we have journalists ahead of us in the queue…..just.

But that isn’t the point, she is writing to provoke a reaction and drive debate, I get that. It shouldn’t detract from the key points of the article that actually ring true. HR doesn’t have a good perception, I’ve written about that before after a piece in the Guardian. And the Lucy Adams fiasco is another high-profile blow to a profession that has only just put their collective teeth back in, ready to once again be kicked.

The thing that really gets my goat, however, is the reaction of people to the article and especially the CIPD. I could almost see the arms and legs flailing in CIPD towers as various people ran to find their smart phones and take to Twitter as Thunderbirds met Derek Faye, the shrieks of “How very dare you!” echoing out across a rainy Wimbledon Broadway.

Amongst other things there were claims of misogyny. Now that is a pretty strong call in my opinion. The article re-reported the use of the nickname “The Wicked Witch” for Adams. It also suggested that women (who form most of the profession) would be better off looking for a career elsewhere in a profession with more respect. Now, I don’t know how either of these points are misogynistic.

If you argued that women should look above the profession of nursing and set their aspirations on being doctors, you’d hardly be accused of misogyny – more likely of supporting women’s rights. And were the people who reported about “Fred the Shred” accused of misandry? It’s just a stupid, over sensitive, over earnest, knee jerk reaction. If anything, you can accuse Louisa of a hatred of HR. I don’t know what the term for that is? Sanity?

For me, that’s just a big fat smoking red herring. I’d prefer my professional body not to adopt the Baldrick defence and “deny everything”. Peacock’s article outlined many of the arguments that you can find in the previous posts on this blog and on many other blogs and in articles by other journalists. They aren’t new, they’re just placed in the context of a particularly embarrassing case that happens to be about a woman. With seventy percent of our profession being women, guess what? 70% of the bad ones are likely to be women too! Whether that includes Adams, well that I’ll just have to leave to you.

But regardless, as a profession we should showcase good performance and role models AND we should hold bad practise to account. It isn’t a weakness to admit that HR is a profession in need of improvement, it’s a strength. And when we do, when we show the critical skills of self-analysis, you know what? We make people take us a whole lot more seriously.

Censoring blog comments

Posted on by Blog

I’ve been blogging for nearly five years now and I’d like to think that I’ve seen and handled most things. As a blogger you’ll always get the odd weird comment coming in to moderation and you need to work out whether to publish or not. In most cases I say “yes”.

I’ve had my fair share of anonymous comments. I’ve had my fair share of abuse. I’ve also seen my fair share of controversy.

That’s the way it rolls.  You can’t try to provoke debate and then avoid it.

But this Saturday morning, I woke up to find a comment made in the very early hours that made me question my approach.

It was made by an employee.

Now that on its own isn’t really a big deal. I don’t hide the fact that I’m a blogger or on Twitter. But at the same time, I don’t write about my own work or organisation.  I try to keep the two things relatively separate.

But it was also both anonymous and using the anonymous email service www.sharklasers.com. And it made comments about work and specifically someone at work, albeit vaguely in the context of the original post about inter generational issues.

And so I didn’t publish it.

Was I right? I don’t know. I took the decision because I thought the approach was a little cowardly, but also because it just didn’t feel right to do so. And I tend to trust my instincts.

I’m all in favour of two way communication, I’m in favour of feedback, I’m in favour of being open and honest. But to do that, you need to be both open and honest.

So to “disappointedemployee” I’d say this. Drop me an email, come and see me, let’s talk. We’re very open as an organisation, we can talk about anything and I’m happy to explain any decision that I’ve made. Or if you don’t feel able to, you can speak to your employee representative, your Trade Union representative or use the “Whistleblowing line” too.

We can even agree to disagree. That’s ok.

But let’s keep it at work and keep it above the line. That seems the right place for it.

Ignore generational trends at your peril

Posted on by Blog

I know the are a lot of people out there who are adverse to the idea of any generational comparisons. I get that, The Generation Y piece is the neglected Bank Holiday barbecue sausage of a topic, cooked to within an inch of its life, unpalatable to fairly much all and a shadow of its intended state. But as a profession, we need to be curious about the macro environment, we need to be interested in demographics and we need to look at the generational factors that may be impacting on our supply chain: the workforce.

Generalising from the specific is never a good idea, but trying to disprove trends by raising anomalies is also foolish. We should be better at analysis than that, we should be more questioning and we should be more thoughtful. Because there is something going on with the current generation of job seekers and we should be aware of this as employers.

I was sat last Thursday having dinner with five French people in their seventies, all now retired. Two had worked their own farm, one had worked in accountancy and two were (what we now call) serial entrepreneurs. Like any conversation in the euro zone at the moment, it wasn’t long before it turned to the economy and specifically employment. The views of the current generation of jobless were, at best, damning. Not about their skills, their abilities but their willingness to take opportunities. I heard time and time again, “the jobs are there, they just don’t want to do them”. Coincidentally this came on the same day that Jamie Oliver made his comments about UK employees and their attitudes to work.

But is this coincidence? Or something else?

I first wrote about this topic in 2010 and recounted a conversation that I’d had two years earlier when I was being lectured to about the needs of GenerationY. My response, over six years ago now, was that we’d witness a massive economic downturn, the labour market would toughen and that the winners would be from the less advantaged countries, who were willing to work harder and start at the bottom. It was a bit of a throwaway comment at the time, but true words spoken in jest and all that.

I know that there are hardworking young people out there, I see and meet with them all the time. I know that there are lazy work shy, feckless septuagenarians too. But I don’t think we should overlook a body of anecdotal and empirical evidence that suggests that we have are witnessing a mismatch in expectations (and I’m not just talking about these two occurrences) that is leading to an employment gap.

Do we need to prepare ourselves for a lost generation? Do we let market forces take their course and allow the next generation to right the wrong? Do we need to do more as employers? Or do we write this off as generational nonsense and bury our heads back in the sand?

The CIPD launched a brilliant piece of research earlier this year “Employers are from Mars, young people are from Venus”, which if you haven’t read, I’d implore you to do so. It explores a number of these issues.

As for the answer, well I’m not sure. But one thing I’ve learnt over the years, is that when you see a dripping tap, or a crack in the wall, you’re better off inspecting it and looking at the root cause, rather than turning a blind eye and pretending it doesn’t exist.

Acting is happy agony

Posted on by Blog

No-one remembers the 32nd person to climb the Berlin Wall.

Or the 7th person to step on the moon.

We don’t hold the 26th person to cross the marathon line in more esteem than the 400th.

And the 40th person to stand up against oppression, is a statistic like the 43rd .

There are leaders and there are followers. There are doers and there are repeaters. There are thinkers and there are those that regurgitate.

We know the difference, we see the difference, we feel the difference. And yet at the same time, we seldom call it out when we do.

Regardless of what we do, each week provides a million opportunities to lead, to step to the front, to put our necks on the line. We have the chance to change things, to say things, to do thing, to become things.

And yet we wait, we hesitate, we defer, we absolve ourselves of responsibility and we look to a darkened horizon to provide the hope and the inspiration that we each hold within us.

We have the ability to act. We just don’t have the courage.

I don’t believe in an after life, I don’t believe in resurrection or absolution. I believe in the here, the now, the moment and the challenge. We have a chance every day to be something that makes a difference. We have a chance to be leaders of ourselves and of others.

Be brave, step out, and leave your legacy today. Tomorrow is there for the forgotten.