www.fastcompany.com: Several weeks ago, I was moderating a panel of chief people officers in San Francisco. The discussion spanned career paths, the future of work, diversity and inclusion, and a host of other topics germane to leading people teams in today’s world of work.
One of the more spirited exchanges was during a discussion about the term “human resources” (HR).
2 comments:
Personally I feel human resources could use a change but a name doesn't seem to be the issue. If you change the name and have the same system in place thing won't magically get better. If you want to change your perception in a company show it through action, Sure change the name, do whatever, but that cannot be the sole change. Recently I have heard of HR also being the resource for any discrimination concerns or workplace harassment, and personally I don;t know that much but if that truely is the case one thing I would not want it to be named is something along the lines of talent acquisition. Sure this can be a job, but not the employee issue handling person. I wonder if when considering these names they are naming the department of just people in the department, because to me that would have the greatest effect. Additionally with any name changes people must still be made aware of the resources the department affords them to be able to use them to their fullest extent.
Post a Comment