Human resources: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
(16 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Once known as [[personnel]] then, in the heady days before banking become an embarrassing career choice [[human capital management]], now usually known as [[human resources]], possibly the least resourceful group of humans to ever emerge from the dark ages of free enterprise.  
{{A|people|}}{{g}}If a name change is the best way to “reboot the franchise,” odds are the basics of the business are suspect. For better or worse, [[sales]] will forever be [[sales]]; [[trading]] resolutely [[trading]], and even dear old [[legal]] will always be [[legal]] <ref>Office of the [[General Counsel]] notwithstanding.</ref> —even [[marketing]], of all people, tend to stick with “[[marketing]]” — but the good people of [[personnel]] can't help re-branding themselves.  


They are more than just a parasite, of course. Some have claimed [[human resources]] are some kind of [[extended phenotype]] — an adaptation that we depend upon for our own survival. The better view is that ''we'' are an [[extended phenotype]] of ''theirs'' (in the same way it could be said that wheat domesticated homo sapiens and not vice versa).
In the heady days before [[investment banking]] become an embarrassing career choice they were “[[human capital management]]”; as the {{t|dogma}} of automation began to bite they became “[[human resources]]”; as that fad, ''inshall'ah'', blew itself out, they reinvented themselves once more as some kind “directorate of [[talent acquisition]]”. Have no doubt, the most fantastical [[LinkedIn]] [[job descriptions]] will be claimed by lifers from [[personnel]].  


In any case, a good portion of the [[Bullshit Jobs: A Theory - Book Review|bullshittery]] and pretty much all of the tedious [[virtue-signalling]] that is now such a feature of modern corporate life can be laid at the security controlled access to the HR department. For they who spent hundreds of thousands on back-to-work schemes for those who took career breaks to have kids where the same who spent the same period systematically making redundant those who decided to stay on.
Some say [[human resources]] departments are some kind of [[extended phenotype]] — an adaptation on the rest of us depend for our continued survival. The better view is that ''we'' are an [[extended phenotype]] of ''theirs'' (in the same way that ''wheat'' domesticated ''homo sapiens''<ref>Insight courtesy of [https://www.ynharari.com/topic/ecology/ Yuval Harari].</ref> and not ''vice versa'').
 
In any case, a good portion of the [[Bullshit Jobs: A Theory - Book Review|bullshittery]] and pretty much all of the tedious [[virtue-signalling]] that is now such a feature of modern corporate life can be laid at the security controlled access to the HR department. For the same people who modishly spend hundreds of thousands on back-to-work schemes for those who took career breaks to have kids — many of whom were from the [[HR]] department, naturally — are the same ones who spent the intervening period systematically [[Redundancy|laying off]] swathes of those who decided to stay on and hold the fort.


And who do you think is most (for which read “only”) enthusiastic proponent of the 360° [[performance appraisal]]? It, and the [[diver|dives]] and [[constructive dismissal]] claims it so brazenly solicits, keeps scores of [[HR]] folk employed every year.
And who do you think is most (for which read “only”) enthusiastic proponent of the 360° [[performance appraisal]]? It, and the [[diver|dives]] and [[constructive dismissal]] claims it so brazenly solicits, keeps scores of [[HR]] folk employed every year.


As a policy stance, [[HR]] will publicly deny but privately insist upon [[forced ranking]]. It will demand the hardest of disciplinary lines for those poor souls shunted into the bottom bucket — all of this in the interests of fairness and transparency and to minimise claims for [[constructive dismissal]] — but will then decline to permit the consequences (ie firing the poor sod) because of the risk of procedural unfairness in doing so.
As a policy stance, [[HR]] will publicly deny but privately insist upon [[forced ranking]]. It will demand the hardest of disciplinary lines for those poor souls shunted into the bottom bucket — all of this in the interests of fairness and transparency and to minimise claims for [[constructive dismissal]], you understand — but will then decline to permit the consequences (ie firing the poor sod) because of the risk of procedural unfairness in doing so.
 
'''Fears''':
'''Fears''':
*[[constructive dismissal]]
*[[constructive dismissal]]
*[[divers]]
*[[divers]]
*[[excuse pre-loader]]s (who are often [[divers]])


'''Loves''':
'''Loves''':
*[[performance appraisal]]
*[[performance appraisal]]
*[[nine-box talent charts]]
*[[nine-box talent charts]]
{{draft}}
{{draft}}
{{egg}}
{{egg}}
{{c|Metaphor}}
{{Ref}}

Navigation menu