The Downfall of HR; Can HR Be Saved?

I’ve been a Human Resources person since Cyndi Lauper ruled the airwaves, when HR was just another department. Back then, HR people complained about being assigned to menial things like toting the watermelons to the company picnic. HR folks were the Party People. HR types would get together and groan about all the party planning we had to do. That was about the worst thing we had to worry about in those days.

We didn’t realize that we’d be looking back, twenty-five years later, and calling the early 1980s the Good Old Days for HR.

Now HR people are besieged. They are embattled. Employees hate them, management hates them, and jobseekers hate them most of all. It’s no fun being an HR person with many, many employers today. HR people are the bad guys. They make the rules and enforce them, they’re forced to take away perks and benefits and they lay people off on a regular basis. HR people still talk about Engaging Employees with the Mission, creating cultural Pixie Dust, and making their organizations Employers of Choice, but they don’t say it with as much force as they used to. If they did, their co-workers would laugh out loud or suck their teeth in disgust.

So what went wrong with HR?

Here’s my take. CEOs loved the rhetoric but they pooh-poohed the substance of what their HR leaders had to say. “Employees are our greatest asset” is much more comfortable as a slogan on the wall than it is as an operating principle.

The HR people I know hated outsourcing function after function, cutting salaries and benefits, tossing out skilled workers to make room for temps and newbies, and generally making terms like Employer of Choice and Great Corporate Culture in-house jokes.  They hated to become the Policy Police, too. They would much rather have spent their working hours creating change in their organizations, helping empowered employees innovate, collaborate and break down barriers. Those are the fun parts of HR, and the parts where HR people can change organizations for the better. I’m not talking about chair massages and lunchtime yoga classes (not that there’s anything wrong with those things). I’m talking about shifting organizations so that they can compete, by attracting and keeping the most talented people in their industries, opening channels for communication, and then stepping aside and letting those talented people move mountains.

One former HR VP friend of mine launched a recruiting firm when the air went out of the corporate-HR tires. “I got tired of explaining to my leadership team that people require at least as much care as photocopiers,” he said. Another former HR exec bought a franchise, and one more became an executive coach. “I can coach one executive at a time to believe in his people,” she said. “As an in-house HR leader, I felt like the guy pushing a rock up a hill, day after day.”

When fear rules the workplace, only toadies thrive, and there are plenty of those in the HR function. Their large numbers make it that much harder for those talented and dedicated HR leaders looking to build great organizations. When a company is comfortable with an HR chief who’s happy reviewing dental-plan enrollments and administering Forced Ranking systems, an HR change agent isn’t welcome.

After all, fear-based management has its advantages. It’s expedient. It doesn’t require a CEO to look in the mirror, or to take responsibility for his or her own hiring and leadership decisions. An HR chief who keeps silent about the emperor’s new clothes doesn’t need to worry too much about job security.

Occasionally a management team decides that it’s time to take employee concerns seriously, and a proactive and strategic new HR leader is sought. Six or twelve months later, you can spot the burnt-out change agent by the arrows in his back (or hers). Out s/he goes, and life returns to bureaucratic normal.

I look forward to the economic uptick that will lower unemployment and remind CEOs why they ever hired forward-looking HR people.  I can’t wait for the day when employers are fighting over talent, when sharp and human-focused HR leaders don’t despair for their profession. I’m eager to hear how innovative HR managers will spur collaboration, non-linear thinking and team-and-individual greatness in their shops.

That day can’t come soon enough! I just hope it comes soon enough for the exhausted employees who’ve had their fill of the can’t-help-you, fill-out-this-form, sorry-that’s-not-our-policy HR culture so much in evidence today.

Guest Blogger Liz Ryan is a member of the Glassdoor Clearview Collection and a former Fortune 500 HR executive; she is the Workplace Expert for Business Week Online and the Networking Expert for Hot Jobs. Liz’s advice columns reach 50 million readers per month. Ryan leads the 25,000-member Ask Liz Ryan online community, where she shares business, career and life advice with members every day. She authored the book: "Happy About Online Networking: the virtual-ly simple way to build professional relationships" and is a sought-after keynote speaker. She has addressed a wide range of audiences including the United Nations, CEOs, HR leaders, and entrepreneurs.

  • amberlink

    After EVERY single HR person I've ever met rants on and on about Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, they pretty much are useless drones.

    Most people forget, HR is there to protect the COMPANY not the employee. They go out of their way to make sure that they stick to ever single policy out htere. THEY ARE COMPLETELY USELESS. Every single interaction I've EVER had with ANY HR person has been the following;

    ME: “Can you give me information about XYZ?”
    HR: “No, I have no idea where that information is.”
    ME: “You said in orientation that if we had any questions, we should come to you regarding XYZ.”
    HR: “Oh, well, I don't know where that information is, I'll have to get back to you.”

    Pretty much after this, if you follow-up with the HR person FOR XYZ information, they get pissy at you and tell you that they're very busy. DOING WHAT?

    They should be relegated to bringing watermelons to the company picnic. In my opinion, THEY ARE USELESS. ALWAYS WILL BE, ALWAYS HAVE BEEN.

  • yanirisdiaz

    Excellent! Very well said. About time somebody had the guts to express it so eloquently…

  • Jim

    Would disagree – I've been doing HR since Mick Jagger ruled the airwaves.Yes it is different now but nothing stays the same.

    HR is what you make it and how you train your management team and treat your employees. We are about setting the strategic future for the company – growing the assets that make the company work, make it valuable and make it productive. You have to be in your management's face all the time – be their conscience. You have to maintain the value proposition for your employees – HR owns it as much as the management team. Forms and mechanical things can and probably should be outsourced if you don't do it well.

    It takes effort but that is what makes HR cool, a challenge and fun. If you just think HR is what it was when Cindi was rocking, you've missed the whole point of a world in motion – you need to move and change with the times.

  • http://www.RegnaHR.com/ Becky Regan

    Liz,

    Great post! There are so many burned out corporate HR people who know what they don't want to do anymore. And it isn't doing more of the same for a CEO who doesn't “walk the walk.” I agree that the last couple of years have tested those in the profession like never before. And it looks to me like it'll be at least another 12 to 18 months before the job market begins to improve.

  • Mark

    Going to HR with a question is a waste of time. The only time they have an answer is if someone is not doing “X” according to policy, but they can not make clear all the rules up front. It is like playing a game with a 6 year old who is changing the rules as you play to be sure they win. If you ask HR a question you get a lot of vague answers, if you tell them what you did you get a memo to file to correct the behavior. ???? And that is how they treat talented, aggressive, forward thinking leaders in the company. So what are they doing to the company – driving the communication down. If dealing with people (the art of HR) was black and white, then HR would be doing the perfect job. But I thought we were all supposed to embrace diversity. Doesn't that require doing things a little different than the text book says every now and then?

  • doug

    This is an excellent article–articulate and astonishingly honest.

  • Ryan Lee

    Part of the problem with HR is the lack of talent compared to other depts. I would be genuinely shocked if talented college grads told me that they wanted to go into HR. People seem relegated to HR because they are not cut out for depts that hold their employees responsible for performance.

    I think companies could benefit from having leaders from other depts serve time in HR. I have noticed that Facebook has had HR leaders who have not been in HR their whole lives. I wonder if it benefited from bringing outsiders to HR.

  • Vic

    Can it be saved? I certainly hope not. A view from the trenches: HR has become a corporate dumping ground for the simple and simple-minded who turn nouns into verbs, verbs into nouns, and obfuscate any explanation of any policy. Biggest job in HR? The competition of who can use the most words to say the simplest thing. Second biggest job: making sure employees stay confused about policy, so the managers can change it to suit whatever strikes their fancy on any particular day. Third job: making sure the collective corporate management a$$ is covered from any possible lies, cheats, SEC violations, and other fraudulent practices. Finding good people and NOT just warm bodies to fill a cubicle farm has been relegated to mythology.

    Used to be (back in the dark ages) HR was available. Stop by anytime, there was always coffee if you had to wait, and that wait was never longer than a minute or two. Someone was happy to help and find an answer- and if they didn't have one at hand, they'd get it within a couple of hours. Sure, they planned parties and events, and made cookbooks (I still have one), and carried watermelons. That was part of the job. Before HR got full of itself and self-important and overblown and overstaffed and over-specialized.

    Put away the bullshite. Get rid of the 'proactive, growing the assets, owning the process' platitudes that grace walls of HR offices. Get back to basics. Pare down the corporate BS manual of policies to ten basics that everyone can live up to. Pare down the wording in hiring contracts that require a team of lawyers to interpret. Stop looking for employees that can “stop the corporate pain” and find some that are willing to do an honest days work for an honest salary. Force managers to define needs and goals in simple terms.

    HR has become the Guidance Counselors of the corporate world. Relegated there when everything else has become too difficult. If HR wants to return to whatever usefulness it once had, then it needs to change and go back to basics. Take it's collective head out of the collective butt and really look at how they have become part of the problem.

  • Extraorganize

    While this article does have some valid points, I am quite surprised with the negative tone it takes. HR is so much more than what you describe. I have been involved with benefits administration, employee engagement and OD for the past 10 years, and I have had to change methods and practices of how I do my job over time because that is just the nature of the beast. In fact, HR is becoming better than any of us can imagine.

    Can it be saved? Sure it can. The haydays of HR had its own golden moments, and now it is evolving into a more mature field that many are embracing in many different ways. Ever check out the new HRIS programs and how much technology plays a role? What about the new ways of recruiting and talent management? The many unconferences and tweetups that HR folks are now tapping into? Twitter and SHRM have both been truly valuable and supportive resources for those of us in the field. Stay tuned, there is so much more to come in HR.

  • amberlink

    All of those organizations are simply there to protect the fact that HR doesn't do anything, barely has two ideas about what they're supposed to do, and hides behind a veil of legitimacy.

    More people than not have had nothing but bad experiences with do-nothing HR types who sit there brain dead and marking time until the next paycheck.

  • http://twitter.com/TLColson Tammy Colson

    WOW. The “I hate HR” responses are truly sad to see. As someone who has been in the field for 15 years, and has done the operations side as well, it saddens me that folks have this type of experience. There are bad customer service stories in any profession, I suppose.

    One of the things that I have noticed over the years is that the “tone” in the HR office is a direct reflection of the “tone” from senior management. If HR is the bad guy, it is because that is what the culture/management style of the C-suite has determined it needs to be.

    I am here to assist with employment related issues. That means all the things where you and the company intersect. I'm not your mama, your girlfriend, or your confessor. I don't care what color the stuff was, or what body part it came from. Unless it happened at work. Sometimes employees have to advocate for themselves, versus expecting the HR department to solve their problems for them. I try to coach my employees so that they are empowered to solve issues, find solutions, and make the workplace better for themselves, as productive adults in the company.

    With my clients, I work to simplify policies, get rid of babysitter style “rules' – and generally treat employees like the adults they are. However, many companies have those inane policies in place because its perceived to be tougher to manage based on the exceptions. (Think about the warnings on irons that say “Do not iron clothes while wearing them”.)

    I'm sorry that you find your HR people “Useless” and a “waste of time”. Have any of you said that to their faces? What would your reaction be if someone said that to you about your performance? I think you'd be running to HR to get them to fix it.

  • jonathanhyland

    Vic makes a good point, and what I believe to be the problem with HR: “HR has become a corporate dumping ground for the simple and simple-minded…” Someone else here has pointed out that the people in HR aren't exactly specialized when it comes to HR knowledge. The HR Coordinator who was great a filing papers earned a promotion to HR Assistant, and then the HR Manager quit, so then the HR Assistant became HR Manager… and so on. My point being: people who get into HR often don't have the requisite knowledge to do effective HR. Hence the quandary we now face.

    For the most part, I agree with this article. HR has become, largely, an extension and an agent of management. Their purpose is largely to shield management from employee ire and from external issues (e.g., the SEC, EEOC, etc.) What HR has to become is an agent of the employees. HR should serve as an agent of change, a liaison (not a protector) between the employee and senior management.

    Liz does hit the nail on the head, though: most senior management is better at spewing feel-good messages than, perhaps, living by them. As some other commentators have noted, they fought the good fight and management just didn't get it. This happens. AS to why, I have a theory: management is sometimes so far removed from their employees that they think, “why do I have to care?” After all, they're making the money they want, they believe (erroneously) that everyone can be replaced, and life will go on. Unfortunately, in an age now where people can easily voice their job frustrations, that old way of thinking could spell damage to the company's image.

  • http://twitter.com/KARoden Kimberly Roden

    I have been an HR professional for 23 years and Tammy has hit it on the head. Who do you folks (the “HR is useless” comment) think the HR person reports to? Do you think HR has grand autonomy to integrate massive change management initiatives without support? If you're not happy with your HR person, look at the org chart. When the CEO and ALL of senior management is not walking the walk regarding innovation, change and improvement, HR will become the stereotypical pencil pusher and policy enforcer. I've been there and when I interview for HR positions, my FIRST question is: “How does the senior management team view HR and what are their visions of how HR will take the organization to the next level?”

    If I had a dollar for every poor manager I've worked with, I'd be rich! If you (the employee) knew how many times a manager came to me and asked me to “get rid” of someone, you'd be shocked. When senior management is condoning this behavior, it's poison throughout the organization.

    So folks, don't be crybabies… authority under a poor manager can only go so far. Not fair to generalize and put all HR folks into the same bucket.

  • amberlink

    I'm sorry, this is nonsense as far as a response. HR has become irrelevant. Most times they have no clue what anyone does except to quote some impractical platitudes they learned at their last SHRM (and yes, it's pronounced Shroom and I think most HR types are on them) feel good waste of time.

    I remember one very vivid conversation I had with an HR person at a company I was with a while ago:

    ME: “There is a poster for a discount for cellphone costs in the break room, can you please let me know if it's valid?”
    HR: “I have no clue, it's been up there for a long time.”

    Turns out the discount was not only invalid, it had never actually been good in the first place, yet, at the bottom of the notice was the woman's name and signature as approving its posting.

    Why do the job if you can't even do it half-baked? What exactly is the job? Obfuscating company rules and making sure that you are surly as possible if anyone asks you a question? HR is irrelevant except to companies who need to figure out more ways to keep employees from actually finding out how things work. HR in most cases makes matters worse, NOT better. They're useless and irrelevant.

    No one is stating we “hate” HR, We ARE saying that it's that they don't DO anything useful.

  • Kathleen

    I once had the great privilege to work for a “major North American tire manufacturer” doing employee communications at a manufacturing facility. In my case, the position reported through HR, and then to OD and Corporate Communications at HQ. It was a dream job!

    The company had gone through a major culture shift when it realized that it couldn't compete as a command-and-control organization; employees had to be considered a major part of the organization's success, and it was up to us on the HR team to make that mandate come through.

    Therefore, we were employee advocates, and as a result, our facility was tops in quality, employee satisfaction and cost-per-unit, along with other measures. I actually cried the day I left! (I got married and moved out of state.)

    Fast-forward 20 years later, and the HR landscape, in my experience, is just as Liz describes. Where I work now, HR actually has way too much power (the company's owners seem to have abdicated their responsibilities in this area and have let HR drive things). This does not bode well; no one where I work feels like they could go to HR with an issue or problem; they'd just be marked as troublemakers and eventually pushed out the door.

    From what I have seen over the past decade or so, I no longer have any desire to work in employee communications, especially if it reports through HR — the business ethics are just no longer there.

    Very sad.

  • judywhitesphrgphrhcs

    Liz – thank you for contributing your perspective in an authentic manner. Your transparency is refreshing. I especially value the feedback from others and their views of HR ~ the good, the bad, the ugly. Although, some valid points have been made, I am sorry to read that so many employees have not experienced the excitement and energy that comes when an organization values all business stakeholders (employees, leaders, customers and HR) while upholding the highest standards of excellence, ethics, integrity and respect.

    I am deeply excited about the transformation that is underway with many forward thinking organizations and leaders.

    Allow me to please offer that every now and then if we’re lucky, we have an opportunity to participate in a once-in-a lifetime event. The decade ahead will be like no other decade. Regardless of our industries, each one of us has an opportunity to write a piece of history. As employees, associates, business leaders, workplace champions and HR, ~ how we choose to contribute value toward the next decade in the making will vary of course. Often times when addressing the day-to-day and the experiences that come with it, we may lose sight of the significant impact we play now and on the future.

    Although, I can empathize with the frustration expressed in this blog and by readers,
    it sparks thought!

    I am reminded by the powerful comments made by Jack Welch, former CEO, GE when speaking about HR, he mentioned if you’re not able to create the kind of impact you’re looking to make; move on! If you are working hard to become the kind of leader others respect and your influence is still having difficulty creating impact, move on! Forward thinking organizations and their Boards are very clear on the essential value HR brings to the table.

    The stakes are far too great for workers, families, organizations and communities.

    Perhaps with all of our collective learning experiences of the past we can gain fresh insights into the learning it provided and embrace our new realities with resilience, relentless commitment and determination to collaborate, innovate, and transform with others who understand the future of work is changing.

    Let’s stay encouraged. Doing the tough work takes time. Making progress and committing to it over time – isn’t the problem – that may just be our solution!

    Onward……

    Judy White, SPHR GPHR HCS
    The Infusion Group™ LLC
    wwwtheinfusiongroupllccom
    where tomorrow's great workplaces connect

  • amberlink

    This entire response is what is endemically wrong with HR. never actually address a real issue, just fill us full of plattitudes and quote from the very people that protect the usless department in the first place.

    Every time I hear anyone from HR speak, I usually get the same glassy-eyed look over my face. They're completely borg-like in their cheerleader attitude.

    Does anything the previous person wrote actually matter in the real world or is it nothing more than rah-rah let's ignore reality cheerleading?

  • judywhitesphrgphrhcs

    Dear Amberlink,
    I am sincerely sorry that you've been let down by HR in the past and have not experienced the value that can come when leaders adopt and model a culture of respect, integrity and dignity of all employees. Over the course of my professional career, I've had the opportunity to work in environments where there was strong leadership and also less than effective leadership and highly toxic environments. What we choose to learn or gain from those experiences is our own choice. We can influence the CEO and leaders, but we can't change them. The reality is that the organizations that resist making the changes necessary to move forward, will be left behind.
    In the meantime, if we can be of assistance to you, please let us know.

  • amberlink

    Not to be all-negative here, but what are you actually saying? I mean in any understandable HUMAN speech pattern, are you actually saying anything at all that makes any difference? HR types over and over again say this doublespeak that makes me wonder if you all don't take classes in obfuscation. Every single thing that anyone has pointed out, including myself, are specifics in the fact that HR people don't know what they are doing and instead make life more difficult for employees since they're just lackeys for management.

    Not once is that addressed by a single HR person who has responded. Instead there are quotes and platitudes and cheerleader-type responses.

    What kind of training does an HR person take? I mean honestly, you ask them about a single form and they usually give you the “I'll get back to you” which is akin to “get out and I have no intention of answreing your question.” How many employees have met the ineffectual HR person (not the persona of change and culture of leaders and respect, none of which MEANS anything in the real world of simply wanting to know what does this benefit cost or how do I check my 401k statement) who simply just treats them like they're nothing more than something they've encountered under their shoe?

    “The reality is that the organizations that resist making the changes necessary to move forward, will be left behind. In the meantime, if we can be of assistance to you, please let us know.”

    What does this MEAN? It's nothing more than orwellian doublespeak. Do you even KNOW what you are attempting to tell anyone anymore or does this sort of nonsensical alice-in-wonderland type speech proliferate into your daily life as well?

    i don't understand a single thing that the Maslow-quoting HR types say after they tell me about benefits. Every person in a company has a role, from the person who cleans the bathroom to the CEO, yet, HR seems to be that morass of a bog that just sits there and smiles its deadly smile at the rest of us and no one actually KNOWS what they do.

  • alex_land

    Well…this post pretty well validates Ms. Ryan's position.

  • amberlink

    “You have to maintain the value proposition for your employees – HR owns it as much as the management team.”

    What does this mean? I mean seriously? Beyond being HR doublespeak, what does it even mean? Not only does this sound like something written and invented by HR types, but probably quoted so often it means nothing more than “We'll look into it.”

  • Jim

    You seem to be be quite critical yet not well researched. If you don't know what your employer's value proposition is to it's customers. or the employee value proposition is, I'd suggest you do your homework. You obviously don't know why you work where you work or why customers come to your place of employment. Try researching a bit.

  • amberlink

    The only reason phrases such as these were even invented out of thin air was simply to add credence to what HR does. I don't collect garbage, I'm a maintenance engineer. I'm not short, I'm height challenged.

    Once again, proving my point, the only people who even know these phrases are the ones who throw them around since they don't really KNOW what anyone else at the company does (including themselves).

  • Jim

    Sounds like you need to go to HR for some training.

    Because you are ignorant about something does not prove a point. That would be illogical.

  • amberlink

    If you can't defend the concept, make sure you attack the person, excellent example of how HR types work, self-defense when they really have nothing to say. Or, could it be you've been spewing this stuff for so long even you don't know what it means any more?

    What was the expression, when you have nothing to say, dress it up with color?

  • Jim

    If you don't understand something, don't attack the person that does or treat them as if is nothing.

  • amberlink

    Jim, if you can't explain it, why get upset, you're in the perfect occupation for it. No one need know what exactly you do. No worries.

    Have a nice day.

  • Jim

    Who is upset? I'm chuckling that there are so many people who lack the ability to learn and research and all they do is criticize others about things that know not. I could explain it to you but you know the adage, you can give a man a fish…

    We could easily write an article such as this one about Finance, IT, Engineering, Sales, Manufacturing – all these “professions” are being outsourced and depending upon your view within the organization, they are as useless as HR is made out to be in this article. It is a slanted article. Scott Adams has made a career out of showing the uselessness of most jobs and the frailty of the American worker.

  • madison

    Jim by what criterion is amberlink “ignorant?” As i understand amberlink's argument, she/he, like probably all of us, is an employee of a company that has an HR department. That makes her a customer of HR. And i think that she and a fair percentage of the posters here are upset about is that HR fails to serve its customers–HR fails when their performance is assessed against its own mission statement (what they claim to do). Criticism from a customer always has a special authority, and it's unwise to ignore it. I am a programmer. If users of the software i create tell me that it's difficult to use, i listen to them. I don't respond by calling them ignorant and telling them that they don't know anything about how to write software, because that's pretty much irrelevant.

  • Jim

    Good question – if you follow the discussion you'll see that HR people use words that amberlink is not familiar with nor will research on his/her own – the simple course is to criticize those who use the words. I call that ignorant – if you won't take the time to understand what is being said, simply attacking the users of words and concepts they fail to know or understand. Think about in terms of your own profession – if you talked in language I failed to understand because you are a programmer, would it serve any purpose to demean you or criticize you as just someone speaking non-nonsensical IT speak? Or would the proper path be to try to research what you are saying and make a logical argument?

  • http://twitter.com/TLColson Tammy Colson

    Amberlink,

    I recommend in your next job move to interview your HR representative. If they cannot answer your questions, then do not go to work there. If that is still a problem, might I recommend self-employment, and then you can be your own HR department.

    If the mission here is to say “every HR professional I've ever met is a useless sack of shit” – we get it. But 6 people have tried to respond to you in a professional way, and you have rejected each and every response, mostly with some variation of “you don't make any sense”. The only common denominator here is you.

    I do need to ask, if you don't understand the engineers or the IT department or the sales department in your company, do you speak to and of them with such derision when you don't get the answer you want to hear?

    Most people who have risen in the ranks of Human Resources have bachelors degrees, many have MBA's and many more hold certifications in various specialties within human resources.

    Personally, I am educated in 2 fields (neither is HR, but both allowed me to start my career in the field), and I was a United States Marine.

    The organization you deride so vehemently is pronounced “sherm”.

    Have a tiny bit of respect for people that you don't know from adam's housecat, and perhaps those same people will find a way to continue to have respect for you.

    I'd place a bet that what HR does most days in your company is find ways to manage pissed off employees and pissed off managers who have no intention, desire or skills to talk to each other. It makes for a miserable environment.

    Maybe that will help. And if it doesn't I can't say I didn't try…. twice… along with all of the other people (in HR and not) who answered your comments. And I didn't bring up Maslow once in any answer I've ever given anyone ever in my career… until now.

  • Ernesto

    I got curious and looked it up (Wikipedia, where else?):
    “Employee Value Proposition (EVP) is a term used to denote the balance of the rewards and benefits that are received by employees in return for their performance at the workplace”
    Maintaining EVP means minimizing pay/performance ratio. In other words, “I would like to make you an EVP that you can't refuse”.

  • Jim

    Nice try, but no cigar. The Wiki is not the greatest source of wisdom but it does say:

    “Employee Value Proposition (EVP) is a term used to denote the balance of the rewards and benefits that are received by employees in return for their performance at the workplace.[1]. It has become closely related to the concept of employer branding, in terms of the term EVP being used to define the underlying 'offer' on which an organization's employer brand marketing and management activities are based. In this context, the EVP is often referred to as the Employer Brand Proposition. [2]

    Minchington (2005) defines an EVP as a set of associations and offerings that characterizes an employer or position and differentiates it from its competitors. An EVP must be unique, relevant and compelling if it is to act as a key driver of talent attraction, engagement and retention.

    Personal job satisfaction is driven by far more than financial factors such as salary and benefits. An organization's EVP has thus been described as “critical to attracting, retaining and engaging quality people”.[3]

    Other key factors influencing how an individual may choose to balance his or her career path in an organization are relocation services, salary, perquisites, career development, location, and so on.”

  • lizryan

    My take is that if we are HR people working a company where senior managers don't value talent and don't allow us or encourage us to treat employees well, we need to quit. It's unethical to stay and take a paycheck in that situation.

  • lizryan

    This is my point Kimberly — we only report to people we choose to report to. If we aren't able to do HR in the most ethical and human-centered way, we have to leave the job.

  • lizryan

    I'm not sure how to say this so that it doesn't sound awful, but the comments here make me feel as though the problem is worse than I had thought when I wrote the story. If 'civilians' don't view HR the way HR people do, is that the observers' fault? HR people: perception is reality. If our customers don't see our value, that's a huge problem. I can't believe that the answer is to feed them variations on the message “If you don't understand it, don't criticize it.” People know what they've experienced. The defensiveness I'm seeing here is alarming.

  • amberlink

    liz,

    What most people believe and I'll be the first to say it, as I've been the most vocal about it, is that HR is irrelevant to most people who encounter its practitioners. As others and myself have pointed out, HR types are the ones relegated to giving false or erroneous information or just being surly when asked to provide basic information. While you and others who have responded may be the exception and not the rule. Unfortunately a stereotype is based on a person's interaction with a majority, in this case, unfortunately, represented by a minority.

    Most HR types most of us (and I'm taking liberties here by saying “us) have encountered, are automatons who do no more than look at ways to do very little, look very busy doing it, and otherwise pretend that their role is respected.

    In an organization, I can tell you exactly what a developer does, a project manager does, even what an administrative assistant does. HR on the other hand has a shrouded task that they seem to share no information about and instead live in a Merlin-like world of smoke and mirrors.

  • lizryan

    Thanks, Amber. I agree with you. What I tell people who worry about 'umbrella branding' that affects them individually — for example, the common and negative perceptions of used-car salespeople, recruiters, lawyers and real estate agents, for example — is that if we as individuals don't fit those stereotypes, we can say so. So, for example, we can say “Maybe most HR people are bureaucratic and unhelpful, but I'm not that way.” We can brand ourselves in opposition to the stereotype, if the stereotype doesn't fit us. What doesn't work, and what ticks people off and is generally ineffective as a communication strategy, is to get angry about the fact that the stereotype exists in the first place. It exists because a zillion people had bad experiences with recruiters, used-car salespeople, real estate agents, lawyers and HR people, and they told their friends about those experiences. What those people experienced is real. Many years ago, I stopped defending HR as a profession, and started asking HR people to look closely at how well the stereotypes fit them. After all, if HR is the function responsible for the employees' impressions of the employer and their experiences working there, shouldn't we be open to feedback about how our work and our value is viewed by the employees we serve?