That was the basic question being discussed on LinkedIn under Answers. It is worth checking it out. 

I found the series of entries very interesting and thought provoking. Someone once told me that things in HR (back then it was Personnel) never really change. Different aspects of HR are focused on, people write books about those aspects, they get re-named and repackaged. If they are lucky the books sell well, they make a lot of money on the speaking tour, and then become highly paid consultants. But, has anything really changed? I guess the answer is 'It depends'.

When you look at what is really being done in most Talent Management functions, it is the combination of Staffing and Development, and sometimes just recruiting and training. The functions of compensation, benefits, employee relations, communications, and OD are still outside that new package.

The evolution of HR becomes significant when we focus less on the packaging and more on the substance, when we make things happen, not just do cute and politically correct programs (See my Blog entry "HR or PR"). Are we helping our organizations achieve strategic objectives? How? At what cost?

Human Resources Management may not be the right title. Who cares if it is HR or Talent Management? The leader who steps up, puts together a high performing team of talented professionals, and helps the organization achieve its objectives through the effective utilization of its human capital, should be able to name it whatever he/she wants.

Again, it is what Talent Management functions are and are not doing today that is the relevant topic. In 'Organizational Capability' Dave Ulrich identifies the areas that HR/Talent management needs to focus on. Organizational design, M&OD, building a positive and constructive work environment, have yet to be incorporated in what we see as Talent Management today. To be honest, many full function HR departments do not yet contribute in all these areas.

The question is, when you look at enhancing an organization's HR capability, is talent acquisition, development and retention enough, or is there a lot more to do?

For example, in Starbuck's rapid rise and aggressive growth, was there an HR capability around growth management that would have raised the warning signs and thereby mitigated the need for store closings and layoffs? And what about compensation schemes that drive behaviors in financial services that result in tens of thousands of people losing their jobs, and savings?

The evolution of HR needs to include a strategic talent management capability, but that evolution also needs to include a strategic alignment with the business, not just understanding the strategy, but being able to look at that strategy and argue, from the people and organization perspective, for appropriate and timely change in direction.

Think of what HR needs to become in a much broader context, and you find that however we package it, and regardless of our desire to be 'leading edge', the mission is to help our organizations achieve their objectives through maximizing people and organizational capability. Talent Management is a big part of that answer, but not the entire answer.

I would enjoy hearing your thoughts on this topic, and your ideas on moving HR forward in its evolution.

Thank you

Steve

Write a comment

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Comment: *