Used
with permission of the author:
Author: Jay Shepherd
jay@shepherdlawgroup.com
CEO — Attorney
Shepherd Law Group
Boston, Massachusetts, USA
www.shepherdlawgroup.com
25 May 2007
The following article originally appeared in "Gruntled
Employees" at
www.gruntledemployees.com
Back to ... Workinfo.com Human Resources Magazine Volume 1 Issue
11, 2007
Most companies have a handful of executives who report directly
to the CEO: the Chief Operating Officer, the Chief Financial
Officer, the Chief Information Officer, the Chief Marketing
Officer, and the Chief Legal Officer (usually called the General
Counsel). But rare is the company that has its head of human
resources sitting in the "C suite."
This makes no sense. Every company depends upon having the best
people — the best talent — it possibly can to
succeed. Without top talent, who actually does the
operations, finances, technology, marketing, or legal stuff? Why
do most companies relegate the recruiting and managing of talent
to an administrative position that usually reports to the CFO?
Even the term "human resources" — itself a euphemism
for the drab "personnel" — demeans the role and its
importance. HR professionals often decry not having "a seat
at the table," and for good reason. Most companies fail to
recognize the strategic role that HR should play.
Top business guru Tom Peters beats the drum for elevating HR to
its rightful place in his excellent book Re-imagine! Business
Excellence in a Disruptive Age. On page 256 of the
hardcover edition, Tom advocates for changing the name of HR to
"Talent Department." (Or even the slightly more
exuberant "Seriously Cool People who Recruit & Develop
Seriously Cool People.") He writes:
I have long believed that human resources people should sit at
the Head Table. I'm a fan of HR. It is ... after all... an Age
of Talent.
Problem: All too often "HR folks" are viewed (all
too) correctly as "mechanics." Not as ... Master
Architects ... who aim too ... Quarterback the Great War for
Talent.
(Tom loves ellipses and capital letters nearly as much as he
loves exclamation points.) Tom blames all this on a "failure
of imagination." And he's right. You could do worse than to
read Tom's chapter on Talent and implement half of his ideas for
building HR into a strategic arm of the company, with a Chief
Talent Officer reporting directly to the CEO. (Also, you should
subscribe to his blog.)
Most companies say that their employees are their most
important assets. If that's true, they should put the person in
charge of developing them at the right altitude: at C level.
Step 2 — Outsource the "personnel stuff"
The next step in saving HR is to get rid of the nickel-and-dime
stuff.
There's a reason why many companies and their employees lack
sufficient respect for their HR professionals. They spend too much
of their time dealing with what I call "personnel
stuff": I-9 forms, dress-code exceptions, sick-day tracking,
floating-holiday calculation, progressive-discipline rules,
snow-day cancellations, dental-plan waiting periods. This
administrivia is the tail wagging the dog of HR. Even the most
forward-thinking, strategy-minded HR chief has no time left to do
the important work — developing and implementing the company's
talent strategy — after dealing with all the personnel stuff.
Get rid of it.
Outsource it. Send it to India. Offload it to companies who
provide these services as an "outside personnel
department." Clear your desk of the nickel-and-dime stuff.
Then you can focus on developing, managing, and retaining the best
talent your company can get.
Step 3 — Avoid the knucklehead stuff
Quick recap:
The first step in saving HR — establishing a Talent Department
run by the Chief Talent Officer.
The second
step is to get rid of the nickel-and-dime stuff — the
traditional, unimportant, uninspiring personnel administrivia.
Step Three is just as important: getting rid of the knucklehead
stuff — the often-well-intentioned but inadvertently
small-minded rules that accomplish nothing except giving HR a bad
name.
An example, straight from the I-swear-I'm-not-making-this-up
department:
A friend of mine just started a new job. With the holiday
season around the corner, she was delighted to learn that the
employer had an annual holiday party that was always a fun affair.
Spouses were welcome. Even boyfriends and girlfriends. That is, if
you had been dating for eight weeks. Otherwise, sorry. HR rules.
It's nice that the company wants to reward its employees with a
little Festivus action at the end of the year. And it's even nicer
to spend the extra dough to include the missus or mister at the
fancy dinner. And it's further even nicer to extend that holiday
cheer to the unmarried but reasonably committed. But you can just
imagine the brow-furrowing that went on to decide where to draw
the line. It might have gone something like this:
HR rulemaker: "We can't limit it to married couples.
That could be discriminatory. What if the couple isn't married
because they're gay? Or commitophobic?"
Other HR rulemaker (looking anguished): "But we can't
just open the doors to a couple that just met yesterday! That
wouldn't do."
"Good point. How about one months?"
"Too short. Could go either way. How about six
months?"
"Two. They've probably met the parents by then."
"Sold!"
OK: we kid because we love. But there had to be some thought
that went into this, and it led to the ridiculous eight-week rule
at my friend's company. And this is part of the reason why HR
often lacks the respect they otherwise deserve. Well-intentioned
rules that end up being silly.
Have the party — great! Let the employees bring dates —
fine. But stay out of the business of qualifying those dates.
That's just knucklehead stuff.
Jay Shepherd
has been protecting employers in and out of court for a dozen
years, and he's defeated some of the largest law firms in the USA.
He's nationally known for his expertise in noncompete lawsuits and
related business-employment litigation. Jay has defended employers
large and small in discrimination cases in state and federal
courts, and has helped management solve many labor-relations
problems. He has taught seminars to thousands of employees,
managers, and other lawyers on employment-law topics from sexual
harassment to wage litigation. Jay's married to an employment
lawyer at another Boston firm and has two young daughters (who are
not employment lawyers). Jay's written a 700-page draft of a legal
thriller, which someday he may have time to finish editing. Check
out Jay's award-winning employer blog, Gruntled
Employees, recently named Best HR Law site by Human
Resource Executive magazine. He can be contacted at jay@shepherdlawgroup.com.
Short summary:
For HR to stay relevant to business today, it needs to see to
changes in the workplace - get a seat on the "C suite",
outsource the "personnel stuff" and avoid the
"knucklehead stuff."
Key words and related phrases:
Executive board, personnel, HR policy, HR practice, talent, talent
management.
Back to ... Workinfo.com Human Resources Magazine Volume 1 Issue
11, 2007
|
Member
Content 
