Edward Lisoski 9:41am Jan 27 at 9:41am Manage Discussion...

Question

Edward Lisoski

9:41am
Jan 27 at 9:41am

Manage Discussion Entry

Good response. Current HR leaders clearly communicate what their functions focus is, and what it is not. However, like everything in life we have to earn respect, as it isn't freely given.
HR leaders in the 21st century must be strategic in their approach to their functional groups, doing due diligence in analyzing data effectively, and then using the information gleaned from such analysis to do two things:

First - recommend changes to the organization, with clear, quantitative data supporting the recommendations. and
Second - Lead the change initiative when the proposal is approved.
One miss I have seen occur repeatedly by HR strategic thinkers is they do the first step somewhat well, with a very well-designed PowerPoint presentation, but somewhat light on the analysis and quantitative trend analysis. But they stop at the strategy assessment, never wanting to be the responsible party to lead the change. When I asked several HR leaders over the years why they don't also do the tactical implementation following the strategy, their response was universally the same - HR's job is to assess and recommend strategic transformational changes. We are the visionaries. The mission of implementation is up to Operations.
The outcome of such an approach? Status quo. No change.
So, back to your post - for HR leaders to be viewed differently we need to act differently. Think strategically, and be tactical as well, leading the change efforts we deem necessary.
Thoughts?

Ed

Lauren Dobbins

Yesterday
Jan 26 at 7:37pm

Manage Discussion Entry

Before stating how HR can reach their full potential, it’s important to outline what exactly that would look like. What does HR's full potential actually look like? Per the definition by Youseff Morgan & Stark, that is effectively managing individual skills so they are optimally aligned with an organizations goal XXXXXXXXXXNow this is a great definition, however it leaves a lot of grey area and reaching success can be very difficult in certain situations. As discussed in Heathfield's article,it can be due to uneducated HR professionals, office politics or outright deception within the HR department XXXXXXXXXXThere can already be a lot of preconceived notions surrounding HR . Employees may not always agree with policies or procedures. Whereas companies may prioritize results over employees. Ultimately it is the responsibility of HR professionals to make those two-perspective work cohesively.

Maybe I’m a little bias but Hammond’s argument that HR professionals aren’t the smartest or considered a popular field is outdated. He claims that relatively ambitious college students aren’t going to want to toss up their cap and go into an HR profession. I think a lot of individuals are seeing the value of HR. According to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics it’s job outlook is expected to grow 8% faster than average XXXXXXXXXXHR is gradually making itself a competitive field for multiple reasons. First, more individuals moving into the labor market, requiring additional roles to help manage the influx. Also thru improvements in technology there can be heightened interest in the analytical aspect of identifying trends in recruitment efforts, retention and performance. I think within the next few years, HR will be a lot more coveted.

There are several advantages and disadvantages in having HR outsourced or not. Ultimately, I think employers should not outsource their HR department or needs. For the primary reason being, that outsourcing could draw apart the employment engagement portion of HR. In a good HR department, HR is entrusted to handle problems that can be very difficult for employees. Outsourcing could sever the connection and amount of time spent on employee engagement. It is one thing to receive an email from a third party saying “I’m here if you need anything” vs. being readily available and showing concern and interest in the moment. However, for those situations, that HR efforts are significantly lacking or even gross negligence of employees then an outside source would be necessary.

Bureau of Labor and Statistics. (8 September XXXXXXXXXXHuman Resources Specialist. Retrieved fromhttps://www.bls.gov/ooh/business-and-financial/human-resources-specialists.htmLinks to an external site.

Heathfield, S. (16 February XXXXXXXXXXReasons why employees hate HR.Liveabout. Retrieved fromhttps://www.liveabout.com/reasons-why-employees-hate-hr XXXXXXXXXXLinks to an external site.

Youseff-Morgan, C.M., & Stark. E XXXXXXXXXXStrategic human resource management: Concepts, controversies, and evidence-based applications.Media update.

Deblina · Accepted Answer

Response Post		                                                                                                               2
RESPONSE POST
Table of Contents
 
Response Post 1	3
Response Post 2	3
References	5
Response Post 1
I strongly agree to your viewpoint about the performance of the human resource leaders of the 21st century. It is contemplated with the fact that the changing scenario and the dynamics of the representation of the quantitative data is a more attractive and these can be quite relevant while proposing about the changes that are taking place in the organisation. In this connection I would like to mention that the individuals in the present context have become more practical and logical. Presenting the data in the most reliable manner can be quite effective for the organisation and the team members. This can also make the work of the leader of the HR in terms of tactical implementation of the strategies and the responses.

Edward Lisoski 9:41am Jan 27 at 9:41am Manage Discussion Entry Good response. Current HR leaders clearly communicate what their functions focus is,...

Edward Lisoski

Lauren Dobbins

Solution

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

Submit New Assignment