Who Is Or Is To Be Considered As HR Professional ???

Who is HR Personnel or who is to be considered as HR Professional or HR Personnel?

To be qualified as a HR Professional one should have either of the following:

1) Academic Qualification that is MBA or PG Diploma in HR or MSW or certificate course in HR

2) Should be a Certified HR Professional from SHRM or CIPD or other related Institutes

3) Should be a Qualified Trainer or Human Behavior Specialist

4) Should be working in HR Department

However, I don’t consider following people as HR Professionals:

1) Graduates, working in Administrative Department of the Company, there by taking care of Housekeeping, Security, Guest Hospitality or Maintaining the Travel Desk

2) Graduates, working as Recruiters. Searching Jobs on Job Portals and coordinating interviews with Clients is not considered as a HR Job, because such recruiters are not in a position to take functional interviews or negotiate salaries. They play hardly any role in the selection or rejection of the candidate. They are just coordinators and work on the guidelines of their Clients.

3) Practicing lawyers are also not considered as HR Professionals.

Looking forward to your comments and feedback

Regards

Regards

Sanjeev Sharma

(Blog: http://sanjeevhimachali.blogspot.com/)

Or ( <link outdated-removed> )

Hi Sanjeev,

In my opinion, human resource management is a much broader term than just setting up company policies, document templates, or figuring out compensation. I believe it encompasses everything to do with the management of people, their behavior, and motivation towards work - to assist them in enhancing areas related to work and personal development. HR professionals are responsible for organizing everything related to that.

Regards, CHR

Seriously, Sanjeev, I just cannot see any idea in this overall and not at all in connection with who can give their input on CiteHR. Some of the people that have helped me with templates on this site are often graduates, recruiters (that you do not think are HR), etc. So please, let's make space for everybody here on CiteHR instead of starting to discuss who is the "real" HR and who is not.

Kind regards, Randi

Randi, thank you for the inputs. I am not against anybody but just trying to distinguish. I think CiteHR should remain as CiteHR and should not become CiteManagement. That will actually defeat the purpose.

Most often, those who don't even know the ABC of HR ask very ridiculous queries. People don't know how to calculate attrition; they don't know the difference between KRAs and KPAs; they don't know how to calculate leaves. With all these, people are not able to grow. We are at the same level from where we have begun. Different people ask the same question in a different manner on different days.

We need to graduate to the next level such as Executive Coaching, Succession Planning, Organization Development, Aligning HR with Business, HR Metrics, Talent Management, Career Development, Performance Management, etc.

Here, I have seen people who don't know the difference between Performance Management and Performance Appraisal, between Talent Acquisition and Talent Management.

Anyways, thanks for the inputs.

Regards,

Sanjeev Sharma

Hi, Sanjeev,

Maybe one day I will be one of the ridiculous people, and perhaps another day you will be one of them!

Just because we work in the kind of HR that you define as "real" HR, we do not know everything. What I appreciate about CiteHR is that you can ask seemingly foolish questions (or at least what others may perceive as foolish), and you have the choice not to engage with questions that seem silly to you but could be valuable to others.

I work as an HR manager, but due to not having an Indian background, there are many legal aspects that I am unfamiliar with. Consequently, I may often sound ridiculous (and I am unsure about the distinction between KRAs and KPAs). Does this mean I should be prohibited from using CiteHR?

CiteHR operates on multiple levels - new members will join, and certain questions will be repeated, but you can opt to only engage with questions that interest you and respond to them (and kindly disregard the rest).

Remember, what you find ridiculous might be what I find intriguing, and vice versa.

Kind regards,

Randi

We need to graduate to the next level, such as Executive Coaching, Succession Planning, Organization Development, Aligning HR with Business, HR Metrics, Talent Management, Career Development, Performance Management, etc.

And by the way, Sanjeev, please do start a discussion on one of these issues. I believe there are many people on CiteHR who would love to hear about and discuss these subjects - at least I am very interested.

Kind regards,
Randi

Hi, Sanjeev,

Maybe one day, I will be one of the ridiculed people, and perhaps another day, you will be one of them! Just because we work in the kind of HR that you define as "real" HR, we do not know everything. What I like about CiteHR is that you can ask stupid questions (or at least what other people might think is stupid), and you can decide not to read the questions that you think are stupid but that other people might want to know more about.

Randi

Randi, I think you have not read the posting. I have mentioned that one should either be qualified to work as an HR Professional or be working in an HR Department. Graduates working as Recruiters with Recruitment Consultancies should not be considered as HR Professionals. Those who at least have subjective or functional knowledge about HR can be trained. That is my perception.

Regards,
Sanjeev Sharma

Dear Sanjeev,

I have, for sure, read your comment and I will try, once and for all, to end this (at least from my side):

My opinion is:

1. that we, who work in HR or have the qualifications, can also ask stupid questions. This "ability" is not only confined to graduates, etc.

2. And that there needs to be room for anybody who has an interest in HR. I am just happy that so many graduates, recruiters, etc., are so interested that they are spending a lot of time on CiteHR sharing with everybody else.

Overall (and this we will probably never agree upon), there should be room for all kinds of people on CiteHR: those working with HR, those not working with what you define as "real" HR, and those just interested. Again, we all have the right to read the discussions we find interesting and ignore the rest.

I know you probably don't agree, but this is the way CiteHR works. There is no background check when you sign up, there is no clause stating that you need to be in "real" HR. So, there is no reason to talk harshly to graduates that you believe ask stupid questions - just learn to ignore and participate in the discussions that you believe are on your "level."

I will, for sure, "ignore" this issue for now - but I am looking forward to some of your discussions on Performance management, etc.

Kind regards,

Randi

Hi to everyone,

Let's calm down here - I myself am not an HR graduate, as a matter of fact, not even a management graduate. CiteHR is meant for anyone who wants to learn anything about HR or anything related to it. It's possible that many questions are repeated - perhaps a suggestion to search the site first can be added to the posting page. Like suggested on this thread - read the things which you find interesting - ignore the rest. If you find some topic interesting - start a thread on that.

Regards,
CHR

Hi,

One day, everybody is a learner, not a professional. After gaining experience and knowledge, one day, they become a professional. So, don't say that this is a site for professionals only. It is a site for all HR people who are still in the early stages of their careers. We are all here to help them out. If someone is asking what you consider "stupid" questions, it's because they don't know. Once they learn, they will become professionals in their field. This is where you, as senior professionals, step in to guide them in the right direction. Don't you think so?

Regards,
Manish

Hello Sanjeev,

I'm Yamini, currently pursuing an MBA from IMT Ghaziabad. So, according to your point of view, I should not hesitate to ask questions, even if they may seem stupid or ridiculous. However, how do I determine whether the questions I am asking are indeed foolish or absurd? If I am unaware of this, then those questions hold importance for me. In my opinion, CityHR represents the "college," where HR professionals act as teachers, and we are the "students." If teachers discourage students from asking silly questions, what happens? There are many individuals like me who are eager to learn more about HR. This attitude helps me understand HR better because theory plays a crucial role in HR studies.

You are correct in saying that "Most often...those who don't even know the ABC of HR...ask very ridiculous queries." However, Sanjeev, it is evident that individuals unfamiliar with the basics of HR will naturally ask basic questions to comprehend HR, the HR department, and its functions. After all, HR exists in organizations to assist and support people.

In my view, CityHR is not exclusively for HR professionals; it is for everyone, whether or not they work in HR. Nowadays, we are all directly or indirectly linked to HR, which justifies the existence of HR departments in large organizations.

I sincerely apologize if any of my views have offended you, and please let me know if I have.

Regarding the topics you mentioned:

- How to calculate attrition?
- Executive Coaching
- Succession Planning
- Organization Development
- Aligning HR with Business
- HR Metrics
- Talent Management
- Career Development
- Performance Management, etc.

Understanding these concepts will greatly benefit me. Thank you and best regards,

Yamini Sharma 😳

Hello Randi,

It's really nice that you answered very well. I'm Yamini, doing MBA from IMT Ghaziabad. Can you tell me the types of PF? I went to an interview, and they asked me this. Please let me know! :D And now stop this argument.

Thanks and regards,
Yamini Sharma

Hi all,

I am not sure on what context Sanjeev started this thread, and I have seen the responses from others, which seem a bit forward. We are not solely focused on what Sanjeev said; there is an element of truth and food for thought in his argument. The question of whether this site should be reserved for professionals, defining who is a professional, etc., is a separate matter. However, the crux of the point is that there should be a distinction between a professional and a non-professional.

In the Indian judicial system, you can plead your own case without any qualifications. Personally, I know several NGO leaders who outshine professional lawyers in the courtroom, but they are not allowed to enroll as lawyers until they obtain a degree.

Every profession has its own complexities and skills that must be learned and practiced to achieve proficiency. This is why it is referred to as a profession, and not every job carries that title.

I have also encountered people asking questions such as "What is performance appraisal?" and "What is performance management?" These are topics that anyone can understand by simply searching on any search engine.

When we participate on a science or math website, it is expected that we have a basic understanding of math and science. No one pursuing a BSc in mathematics would ask a question like "What is 2+2?"

Thank you.

Dear All (Randi, Yamini, Manish et al),

Do we need to be a qualified lawyer to practice law? The answer is yes. Do we need to be a qualified doctor to practice medicine? The answer is yes. Do we need to be a qualified CA to work as a Chartered Accountant? The answer is yes. You should know how to act to work as an actor. You should know how to bat or bowl to be a cricketer. Not everyone can be a model; they also have parameters.

Why is it that anybody or everybody can be in HR? It is only in politics that we don't need any background or education. So, does that mean that HR and politics are the same? Think about it.

Regards,
Sanjeev Sharma

Hi All,

It was really very interesting to read all your comments. Just to add, I feel that terms like Executive Coaching, Succession Planning, Organization Development, Aligning HR with Business, HR Metrics, Talent Management, Career Development, and Performance Management can be studied, and a person can read and gain knowledge. However, to implement these ideas is a mixture of art, common sense, and experience.

So, please, can we stop the argument and let everyone have the knowledge and exposure towards HR activities? Success will depend on how the person implements this information in his/her professional life.

Regards, Meenakshi

Hi,

What you said is absolutely true. To work in the Accounts Dept., one should have a graduation in Commerce. To work in a lab, one needs a Science graduation. However, unfortunately, no such qualification is required to work as an HR professional. Though we have numerous PG courses and Diploma courses, none provide the required inputs. I have a colleague who has completed M.Com., coins phrases and words like Competency needs, etc., that he might have heard somewhere or read in books.

On the other side, it is much debatable whether HR itself is a specific subject/department. As we study, there are HRM and HRD. HRD speaks about what you are saying, whereas HRM (Human Resources Management) speaks about what you are saying plus HR Management, which includes selection, PF, ESI, compensation, etc.

In a way, what you said is right. There are very few - rather - we can count real HR specialists in India like the famous Prof TV Rao, Udai Pareek, etc., and some such professionals. However, many companies do not opt for such a higher HR side, and very few companies like Siemens and others go for Assessment Centres and Career Development, aligning HR and so on, where they have plenty of money, time, and vision.

It is a recent fashion where name boards of Personnel are changed with HR, and expectations are also changing. So, in essence, what you said is right. But such professionals or companies are rather countable, and what the industry really needs now is Personnel or HRM professionals rather than pure HRD professionals.

Most often, those who don't even know the ABC of HR ask very ridiculous queries. People don't know how to calculate attrition; they don't know the difference between KRA's and KPA's; they don't know how to calculate leaves. With all these, people are not able to grow. We are at the same level from where we have begun. Different people ask the same question in a different manner on different days.

We need to graduate to the next level such as Executive Coaching, Succession Planning, Organization Development, Aligning HR with Business, HR Metrics, Talent Management, Career Development, Performance Management, etc. Here, I have seen people who don't know the difference between Performance Management and Performance Appraisal, between Talent Acquisition and Talent Management.

Anyways, thanks for the inputs.

Regards,

Sanjeev Sharma

Dear Sanjeev,

You have raised two issues in this thread.

Issue 1: Who is an HR Professional? You contend that to be an HR professional, one needs to have a business/HR degree/certificate and/or a professional qualification from CIPD/SHRM and be working in the area of Human Resource Management/Development. I endorse your views to a great extent.

Issue 2: Whether this site is to be reserved for HR professionals? I feel that let citeHR be a forum for all. The "Professionals", the "not so professionals," and for everyone "interested in HR". The best way forward is as Randy, Kumarpvss, and citehr have expressed; read the things which you find interesting - ignore the rest. If you find some topic interesting - start a thread on that. Request all to keep the ball rolling. Citehr is a great place to be for the "Professionals," the "not so professionals," and for everyone "interested in HR".

Kind regards, Faizal Haque

Randi, Manish and Naik
If I need to explain KRA’s and KPA’s in few lines then
KRA or Key Result Areas is what is expected from an employee. Example for a recruiter, sourcing can be one of the KRA.
KPA or Key Performance Area is how to calculate the performance of an Employee. Like in the above mentioned case, time it took to close an open position and amount spend or saved in closing that position will be considered as One Such KPA.
One of the KRA of a trainer can be to Train an employee but it will be the effectiveness of that training which will be considered as his KPA.
One of the KRA for Employee Relations Team is to Interact with Employees, motivate them and solve their queries but how that affects the Attrition Rate that is KPA.
I hope I have given fair enough idea as what is a difference between KRA and KPA.
We can discuss about it...in detail on some other day at some other place.
Regards
Sanjeev Sharma

Dear Member,

The yardstick in HR is a qualification of MBA (HR), MHRM, and other associated degrees. Personnel who are associated with HR functions only can be recognized as administrative staff of the P&amp;A division of organizations. The strategies and other core functions and their implementations in organizations are only possible with accrued knowledge in studies. Individuals who have experience in returns may fulfill partial requirements of HR only. Hence, it is justified that a yardstick is required for identity.

Regards,
Yandamuri

Hi to all,

I think whatever remarks have been made till now in this thread, Faisal has pointed out the right thing. A forum of knowledge should not be reserved for anybody. But why is it so easy to get into HR than any other field without appropriate qualifications, and what are the necessary steps that can be taken in this regard? Let's utilize this thread to answer this question.

Regards,
Saher

Hi Saher,

I agree with you. Nowadays, even graduates have the designation of AM - HR, though that person really doesn't know the ABCD of real HR. Just handling basic stuff like induction and joining formalities makes him/her feel that he is doing HR work, though I really don't think that comes under HR. To get into HR, you need to understand the people, their behavior, and their needs, etc.

Regards,
Sujata

Dear Sujata and Saher,

One possible way forward is certification for HR professionals on the lines of CIPD in the UK, which provides several routes and levels for the certification of HR professionals. However, in India, there is no such certification body or institution. It's time for the industry, HR professionals, and business professionals in India to come together and think about establishing a similar certification framework.

Regards,
Faizal Haque

Hi Sanjeev,

What you said makes sense. Of course, some people are asking questions for which they can find answers themselves. However, the main focus should be on not restricting this forum exclusively to HR professionals. I am currently a student pursuing an MBA. If I am not allowed access to this forum, how can I learn? What is the purpose of running this forum if it is only for those who already know everything? If everyone in the forum is already knowledgeable, there would be no need for discussions and postings. It would be better to shut down the forum in that case. Isn't recruitment an essential HR activity? Does it not fall under HR responsibilities?

Certainly, consultancies are hiring degree-qualified individuals as recruiters. So what? As someone suggested, you can choose not to respond to questions that you consider irrelevant. There is no obligation to respond. Whoever wishes to answer can do so; you are not compelled to respond.

Please avoid creating unnecessary differences without valid reasons. Everyone is not the same, equally intelligent, or knowledgeable about everything.

This platform can be beneficial for everyone.

Thank you.

Regards, Gowtam

Hi,

To add to the idea, i am putting hereunder a article on Executive Coaching:

Excerpted from "Executive Coaching Questions & Answers" published by WJM Associates, Inc

Executive Coaching is a one-on-one training and collaborative relationship between a coach and an executive interested in improving him or herself primarily in career or business related skills. The process typically lasts between three months and one year, depending on the type of intervention, and consists of face-to-face developmental discussions aimed at performance improvement or developing a particular competence. The coaching is meant to be practical and goal-focused and may concentrate on avoiding professional derailers or working through organizational issues or change initiatives.

The arrangement is an alternative to classroom-style training, and is individualized, focused, and tailored to a single individual. It is also different from “consulting”, which focuses more on results of a group within an organization or the organization as a whole.

At the heart of any effective coaching intervention lies a relationship of trust and honest, helpful feedback between the coach and coachee. Coaches provide executives with feedback they would normally never get from those they work with. Coaching should help people discover and embrace the truth about themselves, the good and the bad, so that they can change and grow. Too many people stay stuck and static in their personal and professional growth, repeating the same old patterns, because they have a distorted view of who they are, and in the case of work, how they are performing. Unless people have a realistic view of who they are, including their strengths and weaknesses, they can’t move to a new heights.

Once the executive has been made more aware of his or her personal style and areas of needed development, it is the coach’s job to create an emotional environment where positive things can happen. It is the coach’s job to collaborate with the coachee to set a limited number of well defined, performance related goals and then help the executive achieve them. The coaching should be targeted and practical.

Over sixty percent of the Global 100 companies around the world increasingly provide their most valuable executives with executive coaching to fast-track achievement and extend much-needed competencies. Executive coaching can assist an organization in achieving competitive success by translating its high performance vision into clear, actionable steps to be taken by its executives.

Executive coaching is typically used to address:

Development of high-potential leaders who are looking for improvement and/or feedback

On-boarding of new leaders

Merger or restructuring

Change in strategy

Change in required competencies or job skills

Change in management

Succession planning

Cultural alignment

Improvement of under performing executives

Managing relationships

Addressing breakdowns

Creating breakthroughs

Handling turnarounds, slow growth, stagnation, and hyper-growth

Initiating growth

Thinking outside the box

Surpassing perceived potential limits

Leadership effectiveness

More to follow.

Regards

Julie

Hi Sanjeev,

I have gone through your comments about who is an HR person and who is not. I firmly believe that what we need is a cat that catches the mouse. In other words, we need people who can deliver goods, who can work under pressure. Even if he/she happens to be a graduate, then I do not mind calling him/her an HR person.

Regards,
Sundar Jayram

I'm not sure how this thread has taken the turn of the 'standard of questions raised' on CiteHR, but in a way, I am glad that it has. This gives me a chance to raise a concern that I have had for some time now. It's regarding the number of 'Humour' postings as well as the 'tragic love stories' that have been posted and reposted on this site to death.

People, please think it over in regards to:
- What is the purpose of this forum?
- Are we using this forum for HR discussions or what?

Trivia is fun to exchange, but use the appropriate forums or personal mail IDs for it. I leave it up to the moderator to make a call on this, but to move to the next stage in Cite HR, all of us need to show a level of maturity in the quality of posting we make here.

Regards,
Prachi

Thanks, everybody for sharing your views and thoughts.

The purpose to start this discussion is not to belittle anybody but to standardize the "Role of HR" and identify prerequisites required to work in this profession.

We are living in the era of certifications and standardization of processes and procedures to fulfill the expectations of our customers and clients. Having CMM Levels, Six Sigma, PCMM, COPC, etc., is a must. So, it is just obvious to have similar standards in HR as well.

I have seen people working as Recruitment Managers who are not able to explain the Business of their company, even the job profile to a consultant.

I have seen Training Managers, for whom training is nothing more than grouping a certain number of people and showing them a nice presentation, without even making an attempt to identify the impact of that training.

I think, in India, the time is right and ripe enough to standardize the role of HR and let HR Professionals go for Certification.

Kindly share your views.

Regards,

Sanjeev Sharma

Hi,

I do want to understand at first whether HR is about the wellbeing of humans or for the person who takes it as a profession. If the first is true, then the first thing is we need a human face. If all the rest is true, I will accept that MBAs are required to become HR professionals.

This is not the first article I have found where someone is expressing regret about non-MBAs in the HR profession. I would like to tell these people that there are a lot of top HR professionals who are basically graduates with 15 to 20+ years of experience in multiple functions.

To shed light on the subject, Mr. Mohandas Pai, who was a CFO with Infosys, has taken over the HR department. I would like to know your comment on this. This is just one case, and I have seen at least a few dozen like this.

We at Chennai networked through CiteHR, and we are happy to share with you that we have learned a lot, and everyone in the network is trying to help each other rather than pulling each other down. We want this to spread out to Delhi and other places as well.

I would recommend the moderator to warn people who post such hurtful comments.

Let's make this a place to learn and not for the display of egos, please.

Thanks and regards,

Vijay

Hi,

I do want to understand at first whether HR is about the wellbeing of humans or for the person who takes it as a profession. If the first is true, then the first thing is we need a human face. If all the rest is true, I will accept that MBAs are required to become an HR.

This is not the first article where I find someone expressing their regrets about non-MBAs in the HR profession. I would like to tell these people that there are a lot of top HR professionals who are basically graduates with 15 and 20+ years of experience in multiple functions.

To shed light on the subject, Mr. Mohandas Pai, who was a CFO with Infosys, has taken over the HR department. I would like to know your comment on this. This is one case I have seen at least a few dozen times like this.

We at Chennai networked through cite HR, and we are happy to share with you that we have learned a lot, and everyone in the network is trying to help each other rather than pulling each other down. We want this to spread out as in Delhi and other places as well.

I would recommend the moderator to warn the people who place such hurtful comments. Let's make this a place to learn and not for the display of EGO, please.

Thanks and regards,
Vijay

Vijay, I don't know what you are referring to. If discussing a "Professional Approach"... if increasing the level of thinking is EGO, then yes, it is. There is no EGO involved in this posting and discussion points. It is just a difference of opinion and perception. Kindly highlight those sentences or phrases that you think show the EGO.

Regards,
Sanjeev Sharma

Hi Vijay and everyone,

I think I agree with Sanjeev in what he is saying - in today's world, certifications and theoretical knowledge of things are extremely necessary if you want to provide quality service to your clients. I don't think Sanjeev brought it up as an "ego" issue. He is right in saying that certifications will only help HR professionals improve in what they are doing.

For example, I also worked as a recruiter for some time - although I didn't have any HR certification, my knowledge of IT was handy in helping choose the right people for the final interview with our big boss. Of course, if someone had asked me to design the compensation & benefits policy, I would've had a really hard time - it doesn't mean I am incapable of doing it - it just means I'm not equipped with the knowledge necessary to do the job well. So yes, I agree with Sanjeev that every HR professional should be looking to improve their knowledge through such courses - it'll help them grow in their profession.

Regards,

CHR

Hi Everyone,

The arguments are logical. Undoubtedly, Citehr is open to all, whether students, freshers, or experienced professionals.

It is good to say "Old Wine" in a "New Bottle." Likewise, Personnel Management nowadays has changed to HR Management.

In my opinion, there are three elements. One is Personnel Management, the second is Human Resource Management, and the third is Administration. In most of the companies, all three are combined and headed by one individual.

In my opinion, HRD stands for Human Resource Development, and it is not a function. In ancient times, it was the function of the saints and the kings to develop people all around. It is the pure function of the government to provide resources to develop people because people are the assets of the nation.

In industries, we develop people to achieve set targets. In organizations, there is Human Resource Management instead of Human Resource Development.

There are always new ideas and research in every field. We should recognize and analyze the new ideas of newcomers. It is always good to give a chance to new professionals because they have more energy and new ideas.

No one professional is perfect. I have seen HR professionals who know the different latest systems of HR but are not aware of the legal points or statutory compliances. Should we call them HR professionals? Or those who do not have knowledge of the latest HR systems, are they now HR professionals?

It is good to discuss things rather than argue.

Regards,

L.C. Pal

I totally agree with Sanjeev and CHR moderator.

Knowledge of HR comes with experience. However, to do the job well, the courses and qualifications are necessary.

I'm only 3 years into HR, but I am capable of setting HR policies, conducting market research on compensation & benefits, handling payroll, managing performance, conducting performance appraisals, setting KPIs, managing recruitment, overseeing training & development, and retaining talent... you name it.

However, I will have to read a lot. Nowadays, HR is evolving into a business partner role, requiring a deep understanding of the business as well. I am currently reading extensively on business strategy and how to align HR with the organization's business goals, which ultimately aim to drive profitability.

My current knowledge in HR is sufficient for me to handle my daily tasks. However, it is not adequate for me to significantly add value to the organization. Learning is an ongoing process.

I already hold an advanced diploma in Business Management, and I plan to pursue a degree in HR in the near future. However, one HR consultant mentioned to me that having a degree in HR may not necessarily make a difference; it is the skills and knowledge that truly contribute to organizational growth. Continuous learning through reading is essential for staying relevant and growing along with the market.

Regards,

Ashley

Hi,

Though I am new to CiteHR and the field of professionals, I would like to comment on the argument. As said by Sanjeev, "whom to consider in HR and whom not to," it's a very subjective question, and the debate should continue for our better understanding. But as far as his intentions are concerned, I am not very happy about it.

Before I continue, a bit about myself&mdash;I am a Commerce with Computers graduate from IP University Delhi, and then I completed my postgrad in Management Innovation and Change from the University of Aberdeen (Dec 2006).

The reason for my intro is that Change Management is an integral part of HR, and so is Management of Innovation. But still, I don't know much about types of PFs and not much about performance analysis. So, am I not an HR person? Or if you, an HR professional, don't know about change management, are you not an HR person?

There is no specialist for the whole of HR. HR is not a function but a practice with lots of subfunctions in it. Here is a list of the most common ones:

- Labour and Employee Relations
- Diversity/Affirmative Action
- Safety/Security and Health
- Benefits (only)/Compensation (only) and Benefits and Compensation
- Shared Services/Policies/HRIS
- Learning
- Management/Leadership Development/Career Development
- Training
- Technical Training
- Recruiting/Staffing/Talent Acquisition
- Talent Management
- Organizational Development

Some emerging ones:

- Knowledge Management (institutionalization)
- Change Management - Organizational Change/Cultural Change/Behavioral Change
- Information Management

Loads, right?

So, Sanjeev, be honest and analyze in how many fields you are specialized. You cannot be specialized in all; maybe just a few.

Knowledge about all fields cannot make you a good HR person, but specialization in one can!

The reasons for dividing HR into so many fields are not because one can't learn about all (we do it in school and then in college). The reason for so many subfunctions is that you become an expert by not just knowing about them but by starting to think in one particular way. For example, a person in the ethics department can never be a sales or marketing person because their nature of thinking is for the benefit of others, for society. Whereas that of a salesperson is for the benefit of the company and finally for themselves. Similarly, a person dealing with talent management, benefits, and employee safety cannot perform very well in change management.

Similarly, people working as tele-recruiters are also HR professionals, and people working in training and development come under HR.

I am not too sure if my point makes sense to you all.

Let me know if it does or if it doesn't.

Thanks,

Bipul

Dear Bipul,

I don't quite agree with the remarks above.

I was a specialist in Compensation & Benefits. However, that couldn't get me very far. The possibility was I might become an HR Specialist in Comp & Ben. But, I would not be able to go as far as an HR General Manager. To equip myself for the next level, I needed to pursue HR in general. That was the reason I gave up the position in Comp & Ben. Instead, I joined this company 8 months ago to be an HR generalist, in charge of setting up the HR Department for the company. I call myself an HR practitioner, rather than an HR specialist or professional, because I practice HR.

Yes, I agree with you there are lots of functions in HR other than recruiting, training, and compensation & benefits. We also need someone who specializes in these areas to help set up an HR Department.

I am still learning how to be a good HR person, as learning never stops in the HR profession.

Specializing in one area couldn't make one a good HR person either. Like me. I did not know anything that you mentioned in the list. I was only a specialist in Comp & Ben. But that did not make me a good HR person. Because I did not have knowledge in other fields, that made me less marketable. But now, look where I am. 8 months into this company already earned me an HR generalist place, and the HR Manager position is waiting for me.

I am now good at recruiting, training, retaining talented employees, setting up a performance management system, KPIs, leadership, setting up HR policies, restructuring the organization structure, setting up a whole new career path for employees, reviewing the benefits, getting the safety & health policy in place, dismissals, industrial relations, workplace surveys, managing the impact of changes... What made me proud was recently an employee got dismissed and I handled it very well, which I never did before. I've received compliments from both my superior and the consultant.

I have knowledge of all these, am I still not a good HR person?

It's the perception that we have that makes us different. You may still perceive I am still not a good HR person, but there are still other people out there who might think I am already doing a good job.

Guess what is my career goal? To step up as a CEO. Many might ask, how could an HR person become a CEO. Well, there is a possibility. It is only whether you want to achieve it. Since nowadays HR is a business partner to the organization, HR needs to understand the business goals more than others. CEO? Why not? Ambitious? Why not? I'm reading a lot now on business and strategic planning. I need to be a business person too to help the organization better and add more value to it.

Guess my sharing has gone completely out of the topic, apologize for that. It is only for the purpose of sharing. Sorry if you are offended in any way.

Best regards,

Ashley

P/S: Let's make friends, not foes. :)

Hi Ashley,

I agree with all you said, and I appreciate your frank opinion. But I wonder, where do we stand differently?

I kept my opinion in the forum because I felt that anyone involved in recruiting, compensation and benefits, or change management are all HR people. You don't need to know everything to be an HR person. In fact, no one can know everything. So, those who are in recruiting, staffing, consultancy business, or services are also HR people (while arguing with Sanjeev's point).

When I said that a compensation manager can't fit into another department, I didn't mean that he can't perform, but I wanted to say he won't be the best-suited person (exceptions are always there). It's because of the working nature we all develop. For example, a sales executive is very aggressive yet polite. They develop a behavior to sell, sell, sell no matter what. They can give all the reasons to prove that their product is better than others. Whereas, a sales advisor would explain all the pros and cons of the product compared to other products as well (very calm in nature, not very eager to sell but to make the customer aware and satisfied).

People do shift from one kind of job to another, and in most cases, they start learning from the beginning (not in terms of designation but in learning).

Similarly, a person dealing with one subfunction of Human Resources might have knowledge of other functions as well but can't be a specialist in all. One needs to perform as per his/her job requirements, and all functions vary in it. I think for PF, compensation, and policies, a person from a finance background would be most suited, but all can perform it as well. See the difference? Can do and do very well! Though this difference helps initially the most because in the long run, all would be the same.

Take the simple example - for MBA, students with a commerce background enjoy the most initially, whereas students from an engineering background need to struggle with marketing and management concepts. But at the end of 4 semesters, everyone develops the same taste and attitude!

Ashley, you are at a very senior level of HR, and I have started working one and a half months before, and that too, I could find a good HR job, so I'm working as a research analyst for a consultancy firm. Please correct me if I am wrong anywhere or everywhere.

Your suggestions could make a big difference in my perceptions.

Thanks,

Bipul

Hi,

I tried to write earlier as well, but I'm not sure if my message was posted properly or not, so I'm trying one more time.

Though I am new to CiteHR and the field of professionals, I would like to comment on the argument. As Sanjeev mentioned "whom to consider in HR and whom not to," it's a very subjective question, and the debate should continue for better understanding. However, regarding his intentions, I am not very happy about it.

Before I proceed, a bit about myself - I am a commerce with computers graduate from IP University Delhi, and then I completed my postgrad in Management Innovation and Change from the University of Aberdeen (Dec 2006).

The reason for my intro is - Change management is an integral part of HR, as is Management of Innovation. However, I don't know much about types of PFs and not much about performance analysis stuff. So, am I not an HR person? If you are an HR professional and don't know about change management, are you not an HR person?

There is no specialist for the whole of HR. HR is not just a function but a practice with many subfunctions. Here is a list of the most common ones:

- Labour and Employee Relations
- Diversity/Affirmative Action
- Safety/security and health
- Benefit (only)/Compensation (only) and benefits and compensation
- Shared Services/Policies/HRIS
- Learning
- Management/Leadership Dev/Career dev
- Training
- Technical training
- Recruiting/Staffing/Talent Acquisition
- Talent Management
- Org Development

Some emerging ones:

- Knowledge Management (institutionalization)
- Change Management - Organizational Change/Cultural Change/Behavioral Change
- Information Management

Loads, right?

So Sanjeev, be honest and analyze in how many fields you are specialized. You cannot be specialized in all, maybe only a few.

Knowledge about all cannot make you a good HR person, but specialization in one can!

The reasons for dividing HR into so many fields is not because one can't read about all (we do it in school and then in college). The reason for so many subfunctions is that you become an expert in it not just by knowing about them, but by starting to think in one particular way. For example, a person in the ethics department can never be a sales or marketing person because their nature of thinking is for the benefit of others, for society, whereas that of a salesperson is for the benefit of the company and finally for themselves. Similarly, a person dealing with talent management, benefits, and employee safety may not excel in change management.

Similarly, people working as tele-recruiters are also HR professionals, and people working in training and development come under HR.

I am not too sure if my point makes sense to all of you. Let me know if it does or if it doesn't.

Thank you,
Bipul

Bipul, you're most welcome.

For your information, I am not at a very senior level in HR. In fact, I have only been practicing HR for 3 years. I am also only 8 months into setting up an HR department on my own. Well, not entirely on my own, as I had a consultant to help me. I am grateful for the opportunity as otherwise, I would still be specializing in just one area of HR.

Let's work hard together to become the best HR practitioners we can be.

Good luck and best wishes in all your future undertakings.

Cheers,
Ashley

Hi,

It was a good argument, and I totally support Randi on this. What sounds stupid for one person may be valuable information to another person. I have never posted any questions on this site, but I love to go through each and every question and answer to confirm whether my understanding of the topic is right or wrong (e.g., how to calculate the attrition rate?).

Sanjeev: If you consider these questions to be irrelevant, you can ask your doubts (like succession planning or performance appraisal) and ignore the others. I'm sure there will be some Citehr group members who would respond to your question. But keep in mind that there will be a group of people who would consider your question to be stupid. HR activities are a broader aspect and cannot be restricted to the topics mentioned by you.

Regards,
Citehr Member

Hi Sanjeev,

If you are into HR and experienced now, but there are a lot of newcomers who have just entered and need to learn. HR always requires patience; this is one example, as you mentioned there are many repetitions as they don't know all this. No one knows everything; they are only learning through experience. This site is for all HR professionals; try to help them. I didn't oppose what you said; it's true that sometimes, as you mentioned, anyone can be in HR. However, being in HR is not easy; it means managing not just one person but many, each with different characters and behaviors.

Everyone needs a job, and sometimes they get into consulting, which leads them to become recruiters, which is quite common.

Hi everyone,

I honestly agree with all viewpoints even though I am an MBA HR FRESHER. I learned most of my subjects only through CITEHR after my third semester, which was my project. Now, I am promoting this site among all my friends as I feel it's easier for freshers like us to understand and has loads of information under one roof. Even though I am a member of HR.com and other sites, I still find CITEHR simple and easy to approach. The typical HR person is one who has a passion to win/excel. An MBA, MHRM, or other graduation is just an entry tool, but what is more important is to thrive in the field you choose. Most people enter the field without knowing the practical happenings, but they try to accommodate the situation with updated knowledge and the aspiration to excel. So, seniors, you are doing a great job for freshers like us. Please continue helping all our CITEHR members.

From all our CITEHR members, a big thanks to all of you who are helping us learn.

Thanks,
ajithaa

Mr. Sanjeev,

I beg to differ on the point where you don't consider recruiters to be HR professionals. I myself am a recruiter and an engineer too. I have been doing recruiting for the past 2.5 years and have a name for myself with my clients. They discuss and confide a lot in me; I manage their problems to the best of my ability. A few of my clients who are at the pinnacle in their sectors even let me decide the salaries (in short, even my recruiting fees). And here you are saying that recruiters are not HR professionals.

Please don't start such topics without thinking of the implications, and never underestimate someone. These recruiters can surely teach a lot of real HR professionals a few tricks of their own trade.

Regards,
Abhishek Bhatara

Please note, I would really be interested in seeing posts from you on Competency Mapping; Executive Coaching; Succession Planning; Organization Development; Aligning HR with Business; HR Metrics; Talent Management; Career Development; Performance Management, etc., rather than such useless posts.

In these clients of mine, even take my help to check attrition and other recruitment-related business......