Topic Paper 1
Paige Norris Topic Paper One Sep 2, 2014
In the Hammonds article, the author hates HR for two reasons. The first reason is because Hammonds believes that it enforces nonsensical rules, resists creativity, and impedes constructive change. Hammonds also believes that HR is a corporate function with the most potential and most often under delivers.
According to the Weber and Feintzeig article, some companies are reacting to HR as a weakness by completely eliminating it as a department. If a company decides to proceed without dedicated HR professionals they are accepting financial and strategic risk. Since most managers’ lack specialized knowledge, like the latest laws and rules, it is very risky to not have HR professionals.
According to the authors of all three of the articles, HR should be adding value and causing a good business flow by being a business partner to an organization. HR professionals should be pin-pointing critical points of the business where the strategy succeeds or fails, and providing relevant talent solutions. HR should be a business partner to a company and not just a department.
According to Hammonds, there are four reasons why HR is “uniquely unsuited” to do what it should be doing. First, HR doesn’t tend to hire a lot of independent thinkers interested in business or people who stand up as moral compasses. Second, HR has a tendency to measure amount of input, but not output. For example, they know the amount of training that each employee has but do not know how that training has positively influenced the business decisions of that employee. Third, HR forfeits long-term value for short-term cost efficiency. Lastly, HR does not have its ear to top management. According to Mundy, HR can be more impactful within organizations by simply asking ‘does it cause friction in the business or does it create flow?’
Hammond believes
In the Hammonds article, the author hates HR for two reasons. The first reason is because Hammonds believes that it enforces nonsensical rules, resists creativity, and impedes constructive change. Hammonds also believes that HR is a corporate function with the most potential and most often under delivers.
According to the Weber and Feintzeig article, some companies are reacting to HR as a weakness by completely eliminating it as a department. If a company decides to proceed without dedicated HR professionals they are accepting financial and strategic risk. Since most managers’ lack specialized knowledge, like the latest laws and rules, it is very risky to not have HR professionals.
According to the authors of all three of the articles, HR should be adding value and causing a good business flow by being a business partner to an organization. HR professionals should be pin-pointing critical points of the business where the strategy succeeds or fails, and providing relevant talent solutions. HR should be a business partner to a company and not just a department.
According to Hammonds, there are four reasons why HR is “uniquely unsuited” to do what it should be doing. First, HR doesn’t tend to hire a lot of independent thinkers interested in business or people who stand up as moral compasses. Second, HR has a tendency to measure amount of input, but not output. For example, they know the amount of training that each employee has but do not know how that training has positively influenced the business decisions of that employee. Third, HR forfeits long-term value for short-term cost efficiency. Lastly, HR does not have its ear to top management. According to Mundy, HR can be more impactful within organizations by simply asking ‘does it cause friction in the business or does it create flow?’
Hammond believes