• Replies 19 replies
  • Subscribers 12 subscribers
  • Views 26656 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

Changing from HR to People

Sarah

We have changed our group name from HR to the People team and whilst we would like to reflect that in the HRBP team too, we are struggling to come up with an appropriate title.  A 'People Business Partner' just sounds a bit odd and many combinations of 'people' and 'partnering' risk us sounding like a dating agency!   Has anyone else has made this switch and come up with any creative solutions to this?

Parents
  • I wonder if any of our veteran members could remember how long it took for "personnel" to give way to "human resources".

    The motivation behind the shift away from "HR" (which seems to be gathering steam, as far as I can tell) seems to be a laudable desire at the highest levels to move away from seeing "humans" as "resources" but rather to see them as people or - in the other popular alternative - talent. The problem is that such changes can be seen (reasonably in many cases) as window dressing or, in the worst examples, re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

    So what should come first: a change in practice and our relationship with the workforce (hindered by a negative perception associated with "HR") or a change in name (hindered by the impression of window dressing unsatisfactory practices)?

    Professionally and ethically, we should always pursue practical change first. So by the time we do decide to stop being "HR" and become something else, people (including us) should be wondering why we bother.

    Going back to the OP, then, there are plenty of options. "Business partnership" isn't exclusive to HR and you can have Business Partners in finance, marketing and logistics as easily as you can in HR, so a Business Partner (People) is perfectly reasonable. But if you want to see yourselves in a transition away from "HR" towards a more personalized approach, then why not retain the familiar HRBP title within the "People" team until, perhaps, the model reaches the point at which HRBPs are no longer the mot du jour in HR job titles. Then change.
Reply
  • I wonder if any of our veteran members could remember how long it took for "personnel" to give way to "human resources".

    The motivation behind the shift away from "HR" (which seems to be gathering steam, as far as I can tell) seems to be a laudable desire at the highest levels to move away from seeing "humans" as "resources" but rather to see them as people or - in the other popular alternative - talent. The problem is that such changes can be seen (reasonably in many cases) as window dressing or, in the worst examples, re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

    So what should come first: a change in practice and our relationship with the workforce (hindered by a negative perception associated with "HR") or a change in name (hindered by the impression of window dressing unsatisfactory practices)?

    Professionally and ethically, we should always pursue practical change first. So by the time we do decide to stop being "HR" and become something else, people (including us) should be wondering why we bother.

    Going back to the OP, then, there are plenty of options. "Business partnership" isn't exclusive to HR and you can have Business Partners in finance, marketing and logistics as easily as you can in HR, so a Business Partner (People) is perfectly reasonable. But if you want to see yourselves in a transition away from "HR" towards a more personalized approach, then why not retain the familiar HRBP title within the "People" team until, perhaps, the model reaches the point at which HRBPs are no longer the mot du jour in HR job titles. Then change.
Children
No Data