Is Human Resources the Culprit?
DH | Jan 08, 2009 | Comments 5
At the recent Changing Times conference I attended in Europe, there were many conversations over lunch and in the evenings about careers. And, I heard a troubling concern among the young adult professionals from Europe, America and the Middle East – how to find a job of value where they can make a difference, work with a dedicated team, and actually bring passion to their workplace each day.
What they were saying is that their dreams are not permitted to match up with reality.
They, like so many others, read the job postings but they become disillusioned at the lack of distinction. What these young adults – with degrees from places like MIT and Oxford – see is not a description for a career but rather a boilerplate of human resources gobbledegook to simply find someone to fill a slot.
The problem seems endemic to the United States. Here’s an example of what they were talking about. It’s for a mid-level position in communications for Sodexo USA, but the oblique language has become standard, regardless of the position:
In this role, you will:
- Create strategy for internal (multi-directional – multi media) communications which serve as a key driver/enabler of corporate strategy
- Segment communication by targeted audience (including senior management to front line) through management of communication channels (i.e. intranet, face to face meetings, webinars, video conference, etc.)
- Create and implement a strategy to evolve the intranet into a knowledge management tool for all management
- Lead the design and development of creative publications/presentations for all levels of management
- Coach senior management and their teams on effective communications that will support their business objectives
- Manage communication projects and materials, e.g., articles, brochures, newsletters, collateral material
- Analyze thematic company-wide issues and create and implement communication strategies to address them
- Assure company-wide communications/messages are uniform and consistent with corporate brand strategy
- Direct and advise on the most appropriate media and strategies for various types of communication and business objectives
This isn’t a vision for a career; it’s an unattainable checklist, given the position level.
How can you counsel someone who has an intimidating IQ and more achievements by the age of 25 than most people achieve by 40 about a job that has unrealistic mediocrity written all over it? While the descriptions are grand to read, corporate realities are different.
How can business and organizations find the best and brightest if all the HR people are able to do is cut and paste together essentially meaningless language for job announcements, and then rely on computer programs to search for keywords in resumes to find possible matches?
My old friend, Dr. Bill Charland, wrote a book called “Life-Work: A Career Guide for Idealists” while a professor at the University of Denver. He took a sort of utopian approach that bright people should only strive for and accept work that fulfills their personal quests and dreams, and never accept a job that inanely just fills a slot because that will never bring happiness.
So, even though he lives in New Mexico now and didn’t know it, Bill’s idealism was guiding me when I counseled those amazing future leaders to be wary of and avoid HR gobbledegook, perhaps the greatest impediment to leadership.
What the world needs, instead, is their intelligence … and their dreams.
Filed Under: Featured • Leadership • Leadership Principles






Directly on point, and on target could not be stated better, period.
Thank you
Eric
Agree, David, well put. The HR point is extremely well taken; your post also illuminates in my mind the larger evil of corporate-speak as a whole and how it’s systematically destroying the English language, one bad metaphor at a time. After 20 years of discussing ideas that hunt, putting moose (mooses?) on the table, locking and loading and asking how high is up, I can say with confidence (and sorrow) that I’m fluent. Is there hope for plain English in the halls of corporate America?
David, what a great piece. As a young professional myself I fully agree with you and with that things where different.
thanks for writing about this.
I work (part-time) in Human Resources in the UK. Perhaps you will expect me to say something different, but I completely agree with you. I am often embarrassed by this profession into which I have stumbled. (I’ve developed my own role into something slightly outside the mainstream, that I enjoy and that I use to fund my real interests.)
However… organisations get the HR teams they deserve.
Question One an organisation should ask:
Do they need an HR function? Could they train visionary managers and leaders with great people skills, and employ a small team of fantastic administrators and a good lawyer instead?
Question Two:
If they need an HR function, what should it do? Should it be primarily administrative and record-keeping, in which case should it be called something else? Management Information, or something?
Or should an HR function develop strategy, training, and/or something else? What?
If organisations want the best and the brightest, they must employ the best and the brightest HR people, not the sort of folk who write the soul-destroying stuff you quote.
In the UK, it’s a vicious circle. HR is not respected (in fact is a bit of a joke), so doesn’t attract good people, so is seen as bureacratic and not respected… Maybe it’s time to throw in the towel!
@Tess,
Dear Tess,
Wow, thank you both for your comment and your candor. Great question – If they need an HR function, what should it do? Truly gets to the core of whether HR is an outdated function.
David