Of obvious importance, but with little coherence among the many perspectives, HR is a difficult subject. This issue of the Review approaches the topic from several directions, but avoids the traditional coverage policy and procedure. We also evade the legal issues, both inherited and engendered by HR, that permeate the field. Perhaps these omissions can contribute to a subsequent issue of the Review.
People, not departments, are human resources, and they are interested human resources. Employees have immediate interest in for their own career progress. With managerial duties they are directly involved in the productivity and development of others. Executives and stockholders see payroll as a major budget item whose size secures of itself neither profit nor employee loyalty.
My experiences in industry and academe indicate a particular challenge for engineers. As educated and employed they center on the development of things, not people. When career experiences lack broad business perspective the employee is vulnerable to a common trap. Opinions and attitudes can follow that are respectively narrow and negative. This is detrimental when management deems such views as uninformed and unconstructive. Of course organizations can have their own narrow views as well. The question is not one of right and wrong, but of what can be done. We seldom hold sway over organizational views, but we alone control our actions and attitudes. The articles featured in this issue seek to offer perspectives of strategic relevance regarding employees as resources at every level.
Mixed Message
Human Resources: the term is often used obversely from its nice sound. For example, is it an impersonal processing-cattle calls really-that serves more to constrain behavior than to nurture development? HR issues always seem to have two sides: corporate and individual, subordinate and supervisory, legal and illegal, or me and them. Why? The answer is in what is required of HR departments. They must deal with problem employees, administer downsizings, and avoid employment-related litigation. This suggests mutual exclusion, competition, and even adversity. "One gains at the expense of another" is a pervading misconception that impedes mutual trust, professional development, and the vigorous pursuit of strategic initiatives-exactly what teams need.
What About Procedures and Practices?
Companies must reliably do some things well. Employees and job applicants are to be treated equally and fairly. The need for work-related litigation ought to be avoided. Employee benefits must be administered-maximized benefit, minimized for cost. New hires need to be uniformly acquainted with policy and practice. These duties are sufficient to keep a large organization busy but they need not distract from the pursuit of greater gains. That problems arise and opportunities are missed in no way signifies malice. At issue is whether proactive initiatives are a sufficient component of total efforts. Quality programs encourage it, good leaders can propagate it, and individual employees can do it. Consider an example of individual initiative.
Getting Jobs, Getting Promotions: Which is Easier?
Firms usually promote more people than they hire, and their access to job applicants generally exceeds staff size. Raw probabilities favor getting promotions over getting jobs. We understand this when we seek employment. We align all of our resources toward the task of completing the search successfully. We network to find new leads. Introspection helps us recognize our accomplishments abilities and clarify our viable career objectives. Good communications help others in understanding our relevance to their needs. For example, we present our relevant qualities on a single sheet of paper- perfectly, hopefully. We consider the perspectives and needs of prospective employers because we want to understand our target. We want to relate to them so they can relate with us. After all, the needs we can meet are more important than what we can do when it comes to contracts of employment. Our efforts are mission-oriented because we have a vision of what we want.
The Vision of Businesses
Businesses need vision. When the firm understands itself, knows its markets, sees realistic growth opportunities, and has a good plan, their vision is good. Stakeholders (e.g., customers, employees, suppliers, and owners) want a believable vision because they want to participate in success and stability. Stakeholders will align with realistic goals and objectives. Done right, business visions are self-fulfilling because they are a frame of reference for all business efforts and decisions.
What About Employees?
"My objective? Don't need one, I've got a job." People often lose focus when the job search is complete. They regress into a reactive work mode and, as a result, lose control over their career paths. Building a career requires as much focus as finding a job, although needs may not seem as immediate. Networking, good communications, self-appraisal, and the understanding of organizational needs are prerequisites to professional growth. For me, these initiatives have made work stimulating and fulfilling. They have generated a personally surprising range of career-related experiences.
Individuals who aspire to success need a vision too. Setting and realizing personal objectives is a mark of individual success, but aspiring to success requires a defining vision. Individual objectives benefit from ability, accomplishment, and desire. When companies share objectives with an individual, then any gain is mutual. This is proactive career management.
Vital Vita
I have updated my vita annually for years. I do it for me and for my management, seldom because of any job possibilities. Initially this was done so my qualifications could be appended with others onto the outgoing proposals of an engineering services organization. Other benefits became evident and I other encourage others to redo their vita with some regularity. Here are the benefits:
There are many conflicting sources of information for preparing a vita. My views (Managing Your First Years in Industry) differ from some of the usual advice. For example, I dislike the emphasis on action verbs-they don't often help the reader decide whether to read a given line. Instead, I suggest a functional approach where topical lead words are highlighted. Lead words under experience might include topical headings like Design, Project Management, Field Engineering, Programming, Sales, and Systems Integration. The lead word ought to be followed by a brief description and, whenever possible, a comment on successes achieved.
Great Scott
The formation of this issue benefited greatly from the help of Scott Willett, a former graduate student. Scott worked with me on a number of personally interesting challenges in areas related to professional staff development. I am deeply indebted to him for his persisting enthusiasm and effectiveness in these tasks. He recently completed his degree efforts and has rejoined industry with IBM. Congratulations.