True and painful story, probably only the tip of the iceberg. But looking at some root causes avoids shooting the piano player.
This story is an ecxellent example of how goal oriented behavior is blokced by a system barrier: a department with a misson to force people into a set of procedures, based on the idea: treat everybody the same way. (underlying vision: prevent people from cheating)
In my experience not only the HR department works along this principle. What to think about the accounting department and the controlling department? Most of these departments work in a control an command mode -based on a fundamental mistrust towards human beings - and put the system before the person.
The consequences for improvement project are dramatic. More and more CEO's see a major role for HR as change agent and they are theoretically right. But it is fundamentally impossible to combine a role of gatekeeper with a role of change agent. It requires not only a goal oriented way of working, but a new set of values that goes 180° the other direction. You can't change that over night. Let alone supporting you organization to evolve in that direction. So blaming the people in HR is not the entire story.
@Labovitz: This is so true...its always how the business(boss) and business partner (HR) want to deal with together...but some times it also is a person specific issue, the culture is right, the business is open for suggestions and idea exchange but HR personnel doesn't understand the strategy...
The department of "no" might well be created by the boss of the department of "no". Is the he culture of the organizationon of silos, too big or to communicate or relate to the "average worker?".
Fear to talk about new stuff--if that's what is is- can be fixed. On the other hand, if its a pain in the a... HR person,. time to look for new.
Although there is an undertone within your posting, I must agree with the sentiments. HR (or Human Remains) as they are some times known do have the potential (within the correct culture) to make staff flurish and grow. Usually they are a department of growing number and can not always justify their value. They create barriers to ensure their status and importance but this should not be the case.
I endorse your view. HR should be turned on its head and serve the people and not the other way around.
Gary Arcus
October 9, 2011 at 2:07amI totally agree but think the issue is with the CEO passing their responsibility away to the HR department. Why should HR be responsible for staff turnover and meeting the payroll budget? That is the responsibility of the business manager and CEO. In my view HR should not be evaluating business cases or strategy - as I have seen several times. Rather they should be facilitating business managers to achieve their aims when the business decision has been made. The business managers should be managing their turnover and staffing budget, not opting out by making it the responsibility of HR.