No surprise, I guess, but ‘(…) firms with a comprehensive approach to people management report higher profits per employee, profit margins and productivity.’
So states Management-Issues.com, a web site on management and HR issues (follow linked quote below).
HR starts swinging when it facilitates processes and practices which is both linked to a higher, organisational aim – enabling the corporation to improve performance in total through its employees – AND appearing useful in helping the local leader out with her daily challenges. Management-Issues comments upon a recently published research report carried out by think-tanks Work Foundation and the Institute for Employment Studies (in the UK):
This suggested that organisations that adopted a range of people management practices – from resourcing to employee engagement, skills development to job design – could achieve substantially stronger performance than employers that invested in just one area.
HR: Hallalujah or hell?
As a contrast to the above points of views, you may enjoy reading the quite frustrated, but truly entertaining post Why we hate HR at the Fast Company web site. Keith H. Hammonds, deputy editor at the FastCompany magazine, wrote the article in 2005. One of his claims back then was that a lot of HR tasks would be outsourced by 2008. Yep, I agree with him when it comes to salaries, but I’m more doubtful of whether that is actually taking place when it comes to the more strategic aspects of HR: training, leadership development, retaining and rewarding people.
Moreover, a recent post at the Bersin & Associates’ blog claims that the corporate universities are back again. I doubt this counts for our companies, but their analysis related to a bank in Mexico is nevertheless interesting as food for thought on where HR perhaps don’t need to travel: endless corporate training, centralised by the head office.