Does HR primarily look for 'sector specific experience' and if so, why?

In relation to recent posts here, it seems to be especially difficult to make such a lateral career move as from being an HR Advisor in the NHS to working as an HR Advisor for ASDA Supermarkets, although still slightly easier to go the other way around from the private sector to the public sector. Why is that? 

And more to the point, why is also that as thinking in terms of pure practicality and logic, HR experience is HR experience and the job role is the same. The only real difference is the employer and a slight change in the environment that you are working in. Whether or not you are an HRBP for TGI Friday's, BP, Stena Line, Amnesty International, West Midlands Police or Manchester City Council, you still need to perform the same functions, attend similar types of meetings and make similar types of decisions at the end of the day. 

Are the employers concerned being over selective, rigid, too picky and possibly unrealistic in their expectations, or do they essentially want the full package, the best possible experience match and fit, and primarily feel that one can come in, hit the ground running and perform the very best having done exactly the same type and level of job at an identikit organisation, just in a different location?    

What then happens if someone wishes to change from being an HR Advisor in the public sector to becoming an HRBP in a company such as The Boston Consulting Group, or an organisation such as Tearfund?

Impossible again with a capital 'I'?      

  

Parents
  • Many HR skills and competencies are eminently transferable across different sectors. Over the years I've worked in companies doing civil engineering and building, oil exploration, production and development, designing and running the Channel Tunnel, providing water (and waste) services to municipalities and countries, commodities trading, telecomms networks, building services (making the Shard run properly, for example), Liquified Natural Gas shipping, running nuclear, gas, hydro or wind power stations.........
    Provided you are able to understand the business model and how HR can add value to this, then the transfer is entirely achievable - you also need to be able to convince the management and recruiter on front of you that this is the case.......
    Equally, not everyone is suited to every business culture, and I would not have been fulfilled in an environment of heavy operational HR in a single country - equally, others would have been frustrated with my environment of office politics in major multinationals......
    Yes it's possible - but horses for courses!

  • I think Ray has summed it up in one line: Ability to understand the business model, and that includes the subtle but significant differences between how people relate to that model, and how (and why) they choose to work within it.

    We do not manage people; we manage HOW people are managed, and that "HOW" varies significantly from sector to sector, both in matters of practicality, and in areas of approach; so no matter how well qualified we are; no matter how many years of service we have (in sector or overall) it is we who have to adapt to the PEOPLE whose management we will be tailoring to fit both their functional relationships with the business, and their choices (to work in those occupations).

    HR is NOT a "one size fits all" mechanistic system and however impressive our academic understanding of its systematic practicalities and objectives, it is our ability to bring those to bear on the roles played "in context" by PEOPLE that will succeed, or fail, to impress.

    Put simply; if we cannot convince our interviewer that we have something relevant in situ to offer their business, their sector, and their people... (even if that means a different way of managing people and getting things done...) and instead are merely a new face offering the same old way of ticking the same old systematic boxes, then we will likely get no further (and rightly so).

    HR Management motivates and engages people to willingly offer their "productive effort" (the quantifiable "human resource" then applied by LMs to the businesses objectives) consistently, reliably and to the maximum available. That requires understanding of both what they need to function in their roles in practical terms (e.g. light, pay, and annual leave), and what drives them to do so in their individual roles and circumstances. The former factors are common to most occupations, the latter, very definitely not.

    At interview we have to convince that we can offer understanding of BOTH.

    P
Reply
  • I think Ray has summed it up in one line: Ability to understand the business model, and that includes the subtle but significant differences between how people relate to that model, and how (and why) they choose to work within it.

    We do not manage people; we manage HOW people are managed, and that "HOW" varies significantly from sector to sector, both in matters of practicality, and in areas of approach; so no matter how well qualified we are; no matter how many years of service we have (in sector or overall) it is we who have to adapt to the PEOPLE whose management we will be tailoring to fit both their functional relationships with the business, and their choices (to work in those occupations).

    HR is NOT a "one size fits all" mechanistic system and however impressive our academic understanding of its systematic practicalities and objectives, it is our ability to bring those to bear on the roles played "in context" by PEOPLE that will succeed, or fail, to impress.

    Put simply; if we cannot convince our interviewer that we have something relevant in situ to offer their business, their sector, and their people... (even if that means a different way of managing people and getting things done...) and instead are merely a new face offering the same old way of ticking the same old systematic boxes, then we will likely get no further (and rightly so).

    HR Management motivates and engages people to willingly offer their "productive effort" (the quantifiable "human resource" then applied by LMs to the businesses objectives) consistently, reliably and to the maximum available. That requires understanding of both what they need to function in their roles in practical terms (e.g. light, pay, and annual leave), and what drives them to do so in their individual roles and circumstances. The former factors are common to most occupations, the latter, very definitely not.

    At interview we have to convince that we can offer understanding of BOTH.

    P
Children
No Data