CEO to HR: "You are simply only here to advise me..."

It depends on the scenario. The Response of the CEO seems to be coming out from a frustration. It could be that the HR function is not providing solutions that are adding value to the business and not being understanding.
Another way the scenario could be looked at, is that the CEO has a big ego basically and does not respect the HR function. Either way, everyone needs to be respected and the level of response from a CEO level is not acceptable nor appreciated. If I am the HR Manager in that company, I would run away from that type of environment (no respect for people, and people opinions and voice are not heard).

I largely agree with David. However if this CEO thinks he runs the company he is wrong. Self employed one man bands run the company he has a community of staff that run it. HR has a contribution to make, not least of all avoiding legal action. mentally my response would be, I handle the human resources of this company you just make decisions and take the glory. I would handle him or her as any other employee, with respect and gentle nudging. Offer advice, ask them to share their decisions and how they used or ignored your advice, reflect back to them the impact of this, repeat. essentially maintain your professionalism and gently coach them. Seems the ego of this CEO needs to believe they are the most important, that's a them issue. It may also be a company issue and so keep looking for other opportunities whilst doing your role well.

Nothing 'simple' about advising a CEO (particularly one with that attitude), - 'advising' is about influencing and convincing. A key role of an effective HR professional is to be able to create the case for why we are advising the solution being presented and to do that in a compelling way. Good leaders will quickly see that a strong people strategy is essential to their success when they are trying to 'run the company' and the passion of their people expert is something to nurture and partner with, not to dismiss. However, if the CEO still decides he wants to be his own HR expert then in the end we are all CEO of our own career and that is our business not his.

Some very interesting responses here - thanks all for your input.

My initial thoughts were a mix of both - ultimately he is the CEO and he has the final say, but why employ HR experts to manage the HR functionality of the business if you aren't going to take their advice on HR matters into consideration?

The issue was (being vague here as not to share internal information readily on the internet for all to see) an issue arose which HR strongly insisted the company could not continue on the current plan of action as was a blatant breach of direct discrimination legislation and were opening ourselves right up for a tribunal claim.

I will admit that on this occasion HR were being stubborn on this (as opposed to usually, trying to influence, persuade and negotiate and then accepting if a different course of action was taken) which did increase frustration from the CEO, but this isn't typical in day to day.

Correct to a degree yes but very short sighted. I would be interested to know what industry you work in, the size of the company and what the context is. I have had to adapt to this, lets say ethos, in a medium sized construction company over the past five years. Its been a huge personal challenge for me. I've focussed on improving my relationship building (dealing with difficult people) and my influencing skills. I have also grown a tougher skin... It can be rough and demoralising; maintain your self value.

See my earlier comment above.

For the CEO to deliberately embark on a course of action he knows to be illegal is a breach of his fiduciary duties and ultimately a PID issue. See:

https://www.franciswilksandjones.co.uk/site/practice_areas/claims_against_directors/directors_fiduciary_duties/

For HR to go along with it, under protest or not, is a breach of our CoC and complicity in the breach of law.

If in doubt see the outcomes of the Construction industry's "blacklisting" of certain builders a few years ago. A similar scenario.

I hope someone from CIPD's professional standards division is following this thread, as I am sure they will be able to comment further, here or privately.

P

CEO of Persimmon?

No; this one against CEOs etc.. (The case against the companies started in 2014) www.theguardian.com/.../union-launches-new-legal-action-over-blacklisting-of-builders

A low in industrial relations history!