In my opinion (and I'm new to this world!) it hinges on three things:

1. Trust from the organisation.
2. The organisation actually wanting a bsusiness partner and taking what people professionals can do seriously.
3. The people proferssional actually understanding the business.

I think 3 was why I was successful in securing my first two pure HR jobs over candidates with good paper qualifications, I had extensive experience of my sector in a management role.

Hmm, this may be outside of the scope of your programme but I think a key factor is understanding cultural priorities and levers and some of this is ourselves as instruments in our environments. [I generalise massively below for the sake of illustration.]

For example, I worked in a small business owned by an MD. The only language he spoke was profit. He might have spared 30 seconds to listen to a risk based approach but that would be on a rare cautious day. He had no concern about reputational damage or ethics. He was fully prepared to go right to the extent of the law and in some cases beyond to save money or make money. It would have taken a very commercially minded and frankly unethical HR practitioner to execute all of his instructions.

In charities and not for profit sectors, particularly those with a social purpose, often the leaders are more interested in ethics and "common good". This can lead to an inconsistent or even paternal approach but there is more focus on being kind or minimising perceived harmful actions. Leaders in these environments can often be persuaded to decisions which are more focussed on individuals than organisations. Again, the HR roles in these places are probably more suited to those with this focus.

Having worked in a few different sectors over the years I've improved in observing what are the levers to test and which are not likely to have any impact. I've also made career decisions much more consciously about the roles and environments which suit me better and put me less in conflict with my own values and ethics.

In reply to Gemma:

I like your view on the charity/NfP sector, Gemma. The problem I am increasingly finding here is that hesitation to take action when needed because it might upset someone comes back to haunt the organisation in a big way further down the line.

The bulk of my workload for the last nine months has related to cases where some robust guidance and possibly short service dismissals would have saved a vast amount of management time and money paid to solicitors.

As an experienced HRBP, I think there are different styles of business partnering. It's not all about knowledge of HR policies and data packs. It is about presence, contracting, coaching and show don't tell. You are doing a good job as an HRBP but it can be hard to translate what you do when writing application forms.

In reply to Matthew:

Thanks Matthew, yes that can be a challenge for NFPs. I give the other leaders in my organisation a mini options appraisal for the decisions they find hard and they are getting better at weighing up all of the factors. I think they often find it trickiest when it's the "least worst option" scenario (i.e. one where no-one "wins) but sometimes even putting that label on it can help them.

You'd know you've made that shift to a business partner when you're able to connect every people conversation with the bottom line. That, in my experience is what always go the attention of my stakeholders and they would do whatever you advise so long as it will help them improve the business position. Think of it as you helping them to drive profitability through people. Anything outside that wouldn't influence them.

In reply to Esther Yinka-Babalola:

Exactly what I was doing as part of in interview process this morning. The candidate seemed to be not just highly technically competent but a real fit for our culture and values. However he would cost more than the budget allows.

I have now asked the HoD & Supervisor, who said that we could perhaps bring some services in house if we employed this individual, to quantify the savings made and also increased flexibility of not needing to work round a contactor's availability to we can present this to our Bursar.

A downside of working in education is that I'm involved in a lot more LM stuff than I should be, an upside is that I do get involved in LM stuff like interviewing (as I am safer recruitment trained) so can feed ideas like this into the process.

I have seen many HRBPs struggle not because the role is flawed, but because the capability mix is wrong. The title says business partner, but the skill set often says senior advisor. That gap matters most when decisions get political, fast, or emotional.

Dave Ulrich wrote that HRBPs must deliver value by understanding the business context as deeply as line leaders. In practice, many never make that shift. They stay anchored in policy, process, and risk framing. That earns trust early on, but it limits influence later. When the pressure is on, leaders listen to people who think like them.

I also think we recruit the wrong profiles into HR. We over index on technical depth and underweight commercial judgement, narrative skill, and personal courage. Edgar Schein described influence as a function of relationship, timing, and shared goals. Those are learned capabilities, not byproducts of experience.

The hardest shift is realising that being right is not enough. You have to sell the insight, read the room, and sometimes tolerate discomfort. Many HRBPs are surprised that logic fails when identity, power, or fear are involved. What often does not work is waiting to be invited in. Real partnering means stepping into the mess early, even when it feels unsafe.

So for me, the issue is not the HRBP model. It is how we define, recruit for, and develop the role

In reply to Keith:

I hope this is where my people career will benefit, Keith. I was an Army Officer, auditor, banker, charity worker, and contracting finance specialist for 20 + years before becoming a school bursar, then 12 years at that before moving into pure HR.

Of course working in schools means that a lot of the leadership aren't actually business people, but it's been refreshing that where I am now has appointed a bursar to oversee all support functions and she has a very strong background in other business before becoming a bursar elsewhere more than ten years ago!

In reply to Matthew:

Matthew That really comes through, and your path is a great example of what the business part of business partner can look like in practice. Depth outside HR builds judgement, confidence, and a shared language with leaders. It changes how and when you are heard.

I think we need to be much more intentional about reflecting the business element in HR business partners. Not just exposure, but real accountability, commercial thinking, and decision making experience. Schools are a good illustration. When leadership roles bring in people with wider business backgrounds, the conversation shifts. HR stops being an add on and becomes part of how the organisation actually runs. That feels like the direction we should be aiming for.