Human resources: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

Human resources (view source)

Revision as of 08:47, 1 August 2023

475 bytes removed , 1 August 2023

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,853

edits

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{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.
+{{A|hr|{{image|bb|jpg|}}}}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.
-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 the heady days before [[investment banking]] become an embarrassing career choice they were “[[human capital management]]” — we are not so persuaded about the management, but “[[human capital]]” is a useful way of thinking about valuable employees — 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]].
 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]]?
-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.
+===Irresistible object===
+Now any multinational organisation will be shot through with pointless, petty and counter-productive [[Policy|policies]]. Well all know that: the [[Jason Fried]]s, [[Ohno sensei|Ohno-sensei]]s and [[W. Edwards Deming]]s of the world have helpfully explained the peril, and folly, of management by policy over decades. But most policies — even those articulating matters of deep religious faith — with enough willpower, a long enough run-up and a good, low, centre of gravity, can be worked around, patched, traversed, traduced, or for practical intents and purposes undermined, for the greater good of the organisation.
-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.
+This is not true of [[HR]] policies. They are utterly resistant to change.
+{{sa}}
-'''Fears''':
+*[[System redundancy]]
-*[[constructive dismissal]]
+*[[Reduction in force]]
-*[[divers]]
-*[[excuse pre-loader]]s (who are often [[divers]])
-'''Loves''':
-*[[performance appraisal]]
-*[[nine-box talent charts]]
-{{draft}}
-{{egg}}
 {{c|Metaphor}}
 {{Ref}}