The general perception of the HR department/division, and of the function itself, is that it is arrogant. Since the inherent quality of the HR function is to deal with ‘people’, it is difficult for it to create a positive façade for itself. As the differing needs of a variety of people cannot be met to the satisfaction of each one of them, there is always heartburn for the HR manager and all those associated with the function. HR managers also cannot afford to run a popularity contest within the institution.

From the board’s and CEO’s perspective, the HR function is the most critical lynchpin upon which the future growth and success of the enterprise depend. Onboarding and retention of quality workers are the job of efficient HR management. I hold the view, which I practised without compromise, that as CEO the two most important colleagues for me were the CFO (Chief Financial Officer) and the CHRO (Chief Human Resources Officer), who had to be met/interacted with every morning — the right and left hands of the CEO.

Inherently, the function gives authority to HR personnel. Since they deal with hiring, retention and employee wellbeing, many managers misread this authority — instead of being of service to the staff, they think they can lord it over the employees. As every unit has to willy-nilly interact with HR personnel for issues such as leave, travel, medical compensation, education allowances, etc., they remain subservient to the idiosyncrasies of the entire HR team.

Career planning and progression are other most important functions of HR.........

© The Nation