The question of purpose: what is the role of an HR department? Do we even know what we are and what we (should) stand for? Is the new name „People & Culture“ intended to distract from the pressing issues?
Past and present
Let’s take a closer look at the names that have been used in the past and what they mean:
The personnel office
It all started with the classic personnel office/personnel department. When employees went there, they knew they would receive information on the following:
- Employment contracts & changes
- Absences
- Payroll
- Employment law issues, etc.
In this context, the personnel office was the administrative expert and responsible for correctly implementing various requests. Strategic design was not a priority, the focus was on the operational handling of personnel matters. Strategic resource planning was still a foreign concept at that time.
Human resources
Then the term „human resources“ came into being – people as a resource for the company. This can be viewed in two ways: either as a valuable resource or bluntly, as means of achieving economic business goals. It’s a double-edged sword. I always had my problems with this term because I often perceived it as the latter. My goal was to evolve from administrative expert into strategic business partner for management. This would involve understanding the company and its processes and developing personnel strategies in partnership with management. The term quickly caught on, but its implementation was not always effective. Just because a gift has new packaging does not mean that the contents have changed… You know what I mean 😉 While the business partner model certainly does not one suits every corporate culture or size, but aspects of it can be implemented anywhere.
Separating operational and strategic HR agendas and devloping experts makes sense. Why? A clear set of tasks leads to better results.
People & Culture
The term People & Culture is a recent addition. From now on, employees should be motivated to recognise changes and help shape them and thus brining about further development in the company. The big question that arises for me is – how? And above all, who?
The People (& Culture) Manager is a manager – so why has HR been given this title? The planned wishful thinking of further development applies to everyone, especially managers. #LeadingByExample
Culture, i.e. corporate culture, is a similar topic. We can (perhaps) influence this area if we have the right support from the company – but ultimately, of course, everyone is responsible for themselves. So what culture do we exemplify, how do we want to interact with each other and how do we live this out in our internal and external dealings?
The topic of culture affects all departments. What about marketing & culture, finance & culture or legal & culture? Corporate culture is a topic that is far too big for just one department.
It seems like that HR’s remit has been expanded in order to address issues more efficiently and effectively. As a department, we are still lagging behind in terms of digitalisation and automation, but the first positive developments are already visible. Only then will we be able to devote ourselves fully to the topic of people and corporate culture.
I’m not sure whether People & Culture is the right term for this. I seems unrealistic to me that one department should be responsible for such a global issue.
Moving away from HR and People and Culture towards Human Relations
Human Relations
In my opinion, the relationship approach is absolutely correct, but I think the term „human relations“ would be much more appropriate.
It is far more relevant to focus on relationships with people and cooperation, rather than on „using resources“. As an HR professional, if you manage to build good relationships with new candidates, existing employees and those who are leaving, then you have done everything right. If we could achieve the positive employee/candidate experience that everyone always talks about, we could proactively counteract the labour shortages.
Of course, as a department, we need to be contemporary and modern. You don’t always have to reinvent the wheel to achieve that. In my experience, every job title in a company should be chosen carefully and not every trend should be followed unthinkingly. I feel strongly about this topic because it seems to me that too many companies are trying to distract themselves with the new department labels to gloss over issues instead of tackling them head-on and making a real difference.
My conclusion
simply by giving the child a new name will not improve employee/candidate satisfaction. We need to actively address the underlying issues. Companies must finally recognise the importance of human relationships as a strength in a holistic sense, not just in the area of human resources.
However, the HR department is not solely responsible for this. Taking employees‘ needs and potential seriously and promoting them – yes. Concealing poor working conditions and grievances with a new name? No!
If a new name is necessary to drive this change, then let’s move away from the meaningless „People & Culture“ and towards Human Relations.
