In reply to Johanna:

Hi Johanna

Thanks for sharing this data, I'd not seen this before, but I must confess my surprise at the female/male ratio - based on data I've seen elsewhere (including the CIPD membership split being closer to 80/20) and my own personal experience across numerous companies (I appreciate anecdote has limited value) I must confess I am struggling with the figure of 40% of the HR profession being male. How reliable is this data set?

Thanks

Joe

In reply to Joe :

I think the distinction (as its often with stats) is in the detail. Its the difference between people who work in HR departments and those in Professional roles (both senior and other)

From the report Johanna quotes there is this picture which demonstrates it

So both stats are true it just depends on what question you are asking

In reply to Keith:

Thanks Keith, and agree, the devil is in the detail

What I think I'm still struggling with is the term 'people profession' - is this relating just to HR professionals, or if this is broader than HR, who is covered under this category?

Johanna, are you able to clarify this?

Thanks
Joe

In reply to Joe :

I would "assume" its people working in broad HR (including T&D etc)

In reply to Joe :

Hi Joe, sorry only just seen your question, I've asked one of my research colleagues who was closer to the data so I should have an answer for you soon!

In reply to Joe :

Hi Joe- Johanna has pointed me to your queries, all great questions! I hope the info below helps:

- On the gender split and data source. This is from the Annual Population Survey. The overall sample is 300k  and allows us to capture a good sample of people professionals. As others have said, the overall gender split is 60/40 but does differ a lot by type of role. The gender split in administrator roles is 91% female, 9% male for example. 

-On the question of 'who', we’ve used the SOC (Standard Occupational Code) system to identify people professionals. It’s the classification used by the ONS generally and we use it on our Good Work Index to identify someone's occupation. We’ve included four SOC codes in the analysis, which I'll link below if you'd like to see more detail. In short, these groups are broad, so should capture much of the profession. There are some caveats of course-this doesn't include people professionals who aren't working currently or are retired, and there are some roles that may not be captured. For example, a management consultant who specialises in HR would typically wouldn't be included. 

• 1135 Human resource managers and directors 
• 3562 Human resources and industrial relations officers 
• 3563 Vocational and industrial trainers and instructors
• 4138 Human resources administrative occupations 

In reply to Keith:

Hi Keith- that's right, we've used broad occupational codes to capture people professionals. More details further down this page if you'd like to see details!

In reply to Johanna:

One of the things I have noticed about HR "seniority" is something in fact touched on in another current thread here on site. It seems that many male HR managers at a Senior level have "transferred" into HR from other Management and Senior Management roles as the "people factors" involved in operational efficiency have become more obvious to them, and/or drawn their attention and interest more. In my experience (albeit very limited in detail in this area, to my own children's and my own career choices) "HR" tends to be presented at a School careers-counselling level as almost an "also ran" semi-managerial administrative choice, rather then a true stand-alone profession with a significant part to play in business efficiency.

(Indeed, in the same manner many businesses still see it).

This might possibly have something to do with the imbalances at higher levels, i.e. in addition to the already well documented imbalances between male/female seniority and reward existing throughout organisations and activities on a wider scale.

Just a thought....

P

In reply to Melanie:

Many thanks for clarifying Melanie, much appreciated (and thanks Johanna for following this up).

Joe