Changing from HR to People

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?

  • I remain sceptical about the fundamental impact of "name games" in an organisation. Ultimately people in jobs are judged and regarded by what they do. A good "HR business partner" person will always earn more credibility than a weak "people partner". A rose by any other name...

    As a parallel sanity check I ask myself what the reaction would be if we suggested to our Chief Financial Officers that they perhaps should be called "Chief Money Officers".
  • Hi Ray

    That is exactly what I was thinking. I will call my department the People Team the day that Finance becomes the Money Team. I seriously doubt anyone in Finance is spending time thinking about what they ought to be called, and I would speculate that comes from a fundamental confidence in their utility to the organisation. You don't get FD's writing pages about winning a seat at the top table because they are already there, so the lesson for us is to concentrate on doing such a cracking job that we are seen as an essential partner in running the business and that something ivital is lacking if we aren't in the conversation.

    There is a trend for initials to replace full names and for the full names to be writen out of the picture. Who calls H&M Hennes & Mauritz nowadays? I noticed this a few years ago when I asked a black cab driver to drop me near British Home Stores and completely flummoxed him - it wasn't British Home Stores, it was BHS. Marks & Spencer has not got all the way to being purely M&S yet, but they are sliding towards it. Has any one of us referred to the Information Technology Department in the past 5 years? 10 years? I plan to stick with HR, but if I were going to change, I'd opt for Talent Management.
  • :-)@Elizabeth

    Other interesting monikers could be

    • "Chief Storytelling Officer" for the Communications Director (or Chief B*S* Officer)
    • "Chief Cartesian Arguments Officer" for General Counsel
    • "Chief Corporate Governance Officer" for Company Secretary
    • "Chief Technical Ideas Officer" for R&D Director
    • "Accounts Receivable Manager" could be the "Rake-in-the-money" Manager

    Keep 'em rolling!

  • On a serious note Sarah is looking for our experiences and some companies have done okay with the term People. I have found that with the managers I support and coach being a People person has helped me more than being a HR Manager which sounds very officious. But equally being a HR Manager has been great. For the HR community it also depends on your journey in the profession - you may be promoted or land a new job as a HRBP or a People Director - in the end your title should denote your standing in the particular organisation you work in and if HRBP gets you the ear of the senior management team and a place on the table who cares what you are called. It`s easier if you work as a consultant and you are not constrained by titles, however if you work in an organisation you are not the only one who has an opinion on what the HR team should be called.
  • Steve, It does take time to embed the benefits of using People has helped us in rebrand our company and our HR function. Working with the term People in rebranding exercises ie new handbook, learning and development and engagement to name but a few has been really easy and is well received by our employees. Sarah if you need any advice please contact me.
  • Hi Ray, You are right we can be called many things - you may be interested in this poem I found some years ago and I added to it. See what you think :- You are HR
    You are psychologist, psychiatrist and therapist. You are corporate machine personified. You are a closed door confidant.
    You are baby announcer and obituary writer. You are Kleenex distributor. You are safe.
    You are problem solver, mediator, arbitrator and lawyer. You are judge, jury and executioner. You are court reporter and record keeper.
    You are timekeeper and clock watcher. You are attendance taker and holiday planner. You are sick days. You are holidays.
    You are technologist and purchasing manager. You are requirements definer, tire kicker, systems tester and disaster recoverer. You are procurement and communications officer.
    You are call center person and case manager. You are in-sourced, outsourced and internally sourced.
    You enforce the law and are a risk mitigator. You are representative and influencer. You are policy maker and employee relations negotiator.
    You are party planner, florist and caterer. You are allergist and bartender. You are cake cutter and designated driver.
    You are fashion police and dress coder. You are smell detector. You are a touch preventer.
    You are fire marshal and safety officer. You are ergonomic engineer and desk adjustor.
    You are a doctor, a nurse and a pharmacist. You are drug tester and weight watcher. You are fundraiser, vaccinator and hand sanitizer.
    You are banker and financial advisor. You are broker and estate planner. You are retirement calculator and cost estimator. You are pre-tax. You are post-tax.
    You are graphic designer, author, editor and publisher. You are brand manager and enforcer. You are sign maker and hanger.
    You are local and global. You are interpreter and customs officer. You are cultural attaché and welcoming committee.
    You are head hunter, recruiter and assessment centre organiser. You are advertiser, interviewer, deal maker and offeror.
    You are trainer, teacher and developer. You are registrar and course cataloger.
    You are mother, father, sister, brother and agony aunt
    You are clairvoyant, forecaster, nursemaid and medical advisor
    You are diplomat, knowledgeable in all things and resilient
    You are police, expert in law enforcement
    You are a law and policy maker. You are a map reader and tourist guide
    You are job profiler and performance monitor
    You are a behaviouralist and counsellor and mental health advisor
    You are a pregnant mum advisor and a flexible working expert
    You are a family friendly expert
    You are an event planner and caterer
    You are personal dresser and fashion designer
    You are a CSI and barrister
    You are an expert in employee terms and conditions
    You are payroll
    You are letter writer, loss adjuster and health and safety inspector
    You are a presenter and talent manager
    You are all races, colors, religions, disabilities, sexual orientations and ages.
    You are misunderstood and much maligned. You are often feared and ill-defined.
    You are human. You are resourceful. You are HR.
  • Caroline, I love this! Especially being a generalist in an SME - would you mind if I shared this?!
  • What a great set of comments and actually very reflective of many of the issues we have been discussing internally.

    'People' as a team name has actually been adopted very quickly in our organisation (albeit with some initial amusement from our Finance colleagues who did joke about becoming the 'money' team) and as a knowledge-based organisation, sits much better culturally than 'human resources' which as Steve says, doesn't actually sound that 'human' when you reflect on it. As we move to a model of employment which is increasingly flexible and personalised, thinking of individuals as 'people' rather than 'resources' is definitely an approach that seems to be making sense and working well for us. It seems to be a much better reflection of the approach and experience we want people to have when they join the organisation (for example we don't have probationary periods any more and only very minimal policies and procedures and we want people to bring their own judgement and ideas to work rather than operating just as a resource within closely defined boundaries). The challenge though is that the term 'People' just doesn't work well when you start going down to the individual job title level so its been really helpful to see your various comments and suggestions on this - thank you.

    The irony in all of this, is that the term that would in fact work best to resolve all of these issues just from a naming perspective, is actually 'Personnel' - not something I thought I would be saying a few years ago when we were all busy rebranding ourselves!
  • Thanks for starting this off, Sarah... and welcome again :)