A Sad State of Affairs

Are you surprised that when dealing with someone in Human Resources you are sometimes not treated with common courtesy and respect?  Have you ever been the victim of bureaucratic confusion, inadequate or careless responses to your need for assistance, or perhaps have been the recipient of an attitude that you’re bothering busy and important people?

Me too.  Isn’t it sad though, that many of us are no longer surprised when receiving such treatment from those whose role it is to represent us, the employees?  Those who should be looking out for our interests.  The ones who should be speaking up on our behalf.  Aren't they supposed to be the "people persons"?

All too often the behavioral element that seems to be missing is a professionalism that we had expected was our due.  Aren't they there to help us?

Today it seems that being a business “partner” is aligning yourself with management and not with employees.

Expect Too Much?

What does the word “professional” mean to you?  It seems such an easy designation to claim, many times assumed through the title being used.

To me the word means someone who stands a notch above, providing a raised standard of performance, coupled with a higher level of knowledge and experience, of having a greater sense of workplace ethics.  This is the “go-to” person when you’re in trouble and need help.  The professional is someone to put your faith in, someone to help get you out of a jam.

So, how do you feel when someone you have mentally elevated to that rank, or has claimed that designation, instead misrepresents themselves by not following through in an appropriate manner?

Makes you mad, doesn’t it?  If you're in a customer situation, it may well convince you never to return.  You might never do business with “them” again, as they have broken your trust.

In Human Resources the term “Professional” is a designation that is easy to claim, yet for some a rather difficult standard to live up to.  And once lost, that aura of “better than thou” is difficult to recoup.  For example, being suddenly anointed as a “manager” conveys to the outside world that you must be a “professional” – yet the knowledge and experience that brought you this far won’t be enough to maintain that veneer, unless you start to behave like one.

So why are some HR "professionals" perceived as acting as anything but?  Some examples:

• Overusing the "it's the policy" answer when turning away employee requests, without providing an explanation
• Treating employees with either rudeness (no time for you) or condescension (they are doing you a favor)
• Providing an answer that depends on who is asking
• Treating the core value of personal ethics as a moving target, subject to periodic and varying degrees of interpretation – like a politician without a moral compass
• Failure to treat employees with the courtesy and respect due to fellow team members; forgetting that the organization is composed of “we”, not “you vs. me”
• Simple missteps, like failing to respond to colleagues who have contacted you.  No one appreciates being ignored.

Likely you have your own examples.

Don’t Be a Fraud

Often I’ve heard it said that being a professional, aside from having letters after your name, means that you profess to stand for something.   If you don’t, or only do so when it’s convenient, then all the certifications and official papers “suitable for framing” won’t truly describe who and what you are.

So why do some HR professionals treat us this way?  Likely it’s a combination of internal and external pressures:

• Reduced staff levels force them to do more with less
• Lack of management training leaves them ill-prepared to deal with the growing number and diversity of employee problems
• There are bad apples in every bushel: Those who put ambition ahead of ethics and fair treatment, and those who curry favor with their boss, at any cost
• Those who use HR only as a career steppingstone can be suspected of not being fully engaged. Their actions are often calculated.
• Let's face it; some in HR are not "people persons" at all.

The impact of this “treatment” problem can be serious and far-reaching; lower employee morale, disengaged workers (occupying the chair, but there’s no one home), increased turnover of key talent and high performers, company reputation suffering via word of mouth, etc.  Each of these symptoms, when left uncorrected can result in negative financial implications for the company.  This is serious stuff.

What can be done?  I have no call to action, no rallying cry for getting HR professionals to wake up tomorrow renewed and reinvigorated.  There's no “easy pill” that with a glass of water is guaranteed to change behavior.

But I do ask each of us to look ourselves in the mirror tomorrow morning and ask if we can identify those core behavioral traits that we do stand for, that are expected of us, and whether we've been walking the talk or skating along.

If you don’t like what you see, you can change it.  You can start by dealing with others as you would like others to deal with you.  It’s as simple as that.  The employees in your organization deserve better.  They deserve a professionalism that comes from the heart as well as the head.

Chuck Csizmar CCP is the founder and Principal of CMC Compensation Group, providing global compensation consulting services to a wide variety of industries and non-profit organizations.  He is also associated with several HR Consulting firms as a contributing consultant.  Chuck is a broad-based subject matter expert with a specialty in international and expatriate compensation.  He lives in Central Florida (near The Mouse) and enjoys growing fruit and managing (?) a clowder of cats.

Creative Commons image "Focus," by Ann Kakay

Comments

[E. James (Jim) Brennan]

Interesting, to see "management" associated with rudeness, arrogance, condescension, and other non-professional behaviors. Guess the world of work has changed for the worse.

Personally, I generally consider "management" to be a function sometimes performed well but often merely indifferently or occasionally flat-out badly. Those who are called "members of management" are tasked with the duty to lead their organizations.

A role with such serious responsibilities should be performed with grace, wisdom, humility and (if leading people) humanity. Competence in the relevant technical skill set also helps, although that is more easily learned than the behavioral requirements. Managers should not be considered masters or rulers and subordinates should not be treated as slaves or minions.

The worst characteristics of the least professional managers should not be imputed to all management members. It would be equally improper to brand all employees with the flaws and faults of the worst workers.

Knowing Chuck as well as I do, he obviously had no such intention and I trust he will forgive my typical quibbling. I just flinch at any statement that could possibly be misconstrued in this place of serious trade-craft discussion. Mostly, because I've done it so often, myself!