I wouldn't say HR is making me miserable because, as Alys says, we all have the option to leave if that is the case.

There are, however, a couple of common denominators to my most miserable points that I would love to see change:

- mismatch between the intention of leadership and the actions of leadership. I started a post a little while ago about how there are so many good intentions out there at the moment, for me I particularly see this around EDI, but the actions just don't back it up. I tend to try and "pick my battles" to ensure my influence remains impactful and I don't sound like a stuck record when raising something. That can result in tiny incremental gains, which is the way much sustainable cultural change happens - it just feels too slow and requires a lot of energy and introspection to manage. I find myself frequently reflecting on whether I used my voice effectively in situations, while simultaneously feeling that others never question themselves on this!

- secondly I feel that the CIPD need to decide who they are here for. Or perhaps I just need to reconcile myself with the CIPD not being what I thought they were. I thought the CIPD were a body for HR professionals - a body to advocate for us and raise our voices on a higher level. Looking out for the best interests of HR professionals, trying to influence change to make the HR job more straightforward.

But instead I feel that the CIPD straddle too many interests (appealing more to employees and workers) and sometimes even edge towards bashing us, rather than being for us. I see many articles come out from People Management that start "what should HR do about..." and the CIPD guidance is often heavily weighted towards bending over backwards for employees. Even the guidance is often geared towards line managers rather than HR professionals - great if we want to signpost line managers to it...but what's the guidance for us? This is where I find ACAS guidance far more useful.

Of course giving guidance on best practice above the legal minimum is important, but everything seems to be something that HR should be doing more on and very little about how the CIPD are using their voice to advocate for improved legislation or guidance, improved investment in management training, improved awareness of how you can be damned if you do and damned if you don't.

For me, the push to be seen as strategic partners, while also modelling excellent line management for line managers to copy (but make sure you don't actually do the do-ing, just show how it's done), and improve engagement and wellbeing initiatives, and keep companies safe working within changing and grey guidance, and have you thought about supporting employees through the cost of living? and don't forget working parents, and what did you do about menopause this month? and did you know engagement is an all-time low, don't forget about quiet quitting and quiet hiring, do you have a seat in the Boardroom yet? That makes me feel alone at times, especially when it comes from a body I thought was there to support me.

Sophie, this is an interesting piece. It's honest, bold and brave to share as well. Thank you. It has got me thinking. I'll start with the role of the CIPD.

Every year when membership renewal comes around I reflect on the value of membership. That's a good thing. I run my own business, it's a commercial cost and reviewing costs is part and parcel. I'm not alone, many of my community members - I run a global, free community for people folks who work independently- also do this and talk about it. Many have left.

I stay because I get value. I have to look for it sometimes and make the most of the resources that are produced. I contribute here to give back to the profession and learn and I've invested time in finding the gems in the membership, which might not be always visible or easy to find.

All that said I think the professional body struggles to work out what it's purpose, scope is, and communicate that, and involve the widest range of members and keep evolving. It's hard for it to cover the breadth of experience levels, disciplines within HR and size of businesses we work in.

I think People Management is a separate business arm, their training is separate too so I imagine the CIPD is trying to both deliver resources to us in our contexts and also trying to manage it's own business and the various parts of it some of which are not so much in 'their control' and are like sub companies. People Management also needs to get clicks and views, so some of their headlines and articles feel more tabloid than broadsheet to use a newspaper analogy. That said I can find gems in there if I get beyond the click bait.

Finally, I'd echo your sentiments about what leaders say and what they do. I find the companies that I love to work with and for, and where I thrive are where there is more alignment between what is said and what is done. Sometimes, my job, HR as a function and our professional body is about holding the mirror up - to businesses and to ourselves - to say we are not doing what we say we are doing and then do something about it.

I pretty much agree with all of this Sharon. There are reasons I still have my CIPD membership, despite feeling a bit dissatisfied. And I recognise the challenges of trying to serve such a wide breadth of professionals in terms of experience, sectors and needs.

Ultimately I think the CIPD are surviving on reputation and lack of competition at this stage - they have a bit of a monopoly on qualifications and memberships in this area (not uncommon for professional memberships). If an organisation popped up that gained as much "kudos" with employers and offered benefits, I think the competition would be beneficial for all because it would force the organisation to pick their USP, pick their purpose and perhaps streamline to do that bit really, really well, rather than doing lots of things averagely.

I do see snippets every now and then of the CIPD being aware of issues and wanting to improve - and have no doubt that there are some very hard-working people behind the scenes who are also feeling like they can't keep up with the rising tide of work and like their best is not good enough, because they're making changes but hearing the same complaints! And all the pressures I feel about what HR should be focusing on, well they can only be worse if you are the CIPD because you have to lead on it!

So perhaps my gripe really is with HR in general, or perhaps our national culture in general! Perhaps I just need a holiday :)

I pretty much agree with all of this Sharon. There are reasons I still have my CIPD membership, despite feeling a bit dissatisfied. And I recognise the challenges of trying to serve such a wide breadth of professionals in terms of experience, sectors and needs.

Ultimately I think the CIPD are surviving on reputation and lack of competition at this stage - they have a bit of a monopoly on qualifications and memberships in this area (not uncommon for professional memberships). If an organisation popped up that gained as much "kudos" with employers and offered benefits, I think the competition would be beneficial for all because it would force the organisation to pick their USP, pick their purpose and perhaps streamline to do that bit really, really well, rather than doing lots of things averagely.

I do see snippets every now and then of the CIPD being aware of issues and wanting to improve - and have no doubt that there are some very hard-working people behind the scenes who are also feeling like they can't keep up with the rising tide of work and like their best is not good enough, because they're making changes but hearing the same complaints! And all the pressures I feel about what HR should be focusing on, well they can only be worse if you are the CIPD because you have to lead on it!

So perhaps my gripe really is with HR in general, or perhaps our national culture in general! Perhaps I just need a holiday :)