I shy a way from reading anything sarcastic, because it does not offer a point of view that works. I was disappointed to read this voice of sarcasm and it did in my mind stir the pot, because it is asking that people stand up and think about HR.

How an organization approaches the management of human capital ultimately depends on size, industry, business plan and strategy of a core group how the social network surrounding the company interacts with that strategy.

The article made me think once again, how would I describe HR? Everything I originally learned about HR, I learned as a line manager in health care where I designed a pay for performance team environment.

So once again, my thinking after reading this article was no different than what I write about along with others, who contribute to WorkEcology. Managing human capital is very different than managing the operation, administration of systems for payroll, compensation and benefits.

Managing human capital is about leadership and how leadership is exercised. If leadership is mechanistic, you get a dead organization. If leadership encourages and sustains imagination you create human capital and attract talent.

When this happens — the function, the system, the operation and how the various functions are sourced is consciously designed by the leadership of an entity and rewards, benefits, thought leadership emerge from that conversation.

What’s interesting is that when I reflect on the various individuals in my 25 year career in HR who really hated HR, interestingly enough they GENERALLY were inept leaders who either left body bags in their wake, or they individuals with sour grapes due to some decision by HR.

Robert Cenek
Cenek Company
http://www.cenekreport.com

Interesting that you should mention the vacation policy portion of the Hammonds interview. Vacation policy has long been a rage-inducing hot-button for me.

Terry