A case for human resources managers/directors

What comes to mind when the title Human Resources Manager/ Director (HRM/D) is mentioned; an ugly old warthog, the red-eyed brute, man/woman with a stick who makes life miserable or the “man driver” whose job is to dismiss employees? It is hard to talk to your HRM/D. The HR Unit is an annex to the Directorate of Finance. The Head of your Institution seeks advice from your Director of Finances on matters regarding Employees. Your HRM is not in position to stand in for the DG. You do not really trust the HRM’s ability to make independent decisions. The moment you are invited to HR office you know trouble is brewing. The HRM/D and DG once in a while stand at the entrance to your place of work to see who comes in late and leaves early and supervise a people sign the attendance register. The DG blames the HRM/D in the presence of other people. When the DG says something the HRM/D can not offer a different opinion. The HRM/D “actually fears” the DG. The HRM/D quite often can be heard in his/her office disparaging an unfortunate employee from across the hallway. The HRM/D is a person to avoid. If the above applies to your place of work, walk out and find another job no matter how hard it is to find it! Of all factors of production none is as important as Employees who have the unique Human Resources such as initiative, creativity, ingenuity and motivation to put go the “extra mile” or that extra hour and effort needed to utilise the other factors of production. Whereas Personnel Managers managed people in terms of attendance and accomplishment of tasks particularly in case of daily wage labourers assigned peace works Human Resources Managers manage the resourcefulness of Personnel; for example it is a sign of archaic people management to stand at the gate to see who comes late in the morning because it is no longer important to see when an employee arrived and left the place of wok; it is the productivity of that employee that matters at the end of the day. What does it help an organisation to have employees come early to the place of work and spend the whole brooding or horse-playing? Managing the Human resources calls for tacit, an eye for detail, good judgement, patience and business acumen. That is why in the absence of DGs the HRM/D acts; he/she knows where the Institution is, where it wants to go, how it will reach there and knows how to spur the people to make it happen. HRM/Ds are privy to all strategic and operational decisions in an organisation for they are the consultants to both Management and employees who implement those decisions. They advise management on implementation of new policies and strategies and guide and answer all questions raised by employees. HRM/Ds encourage and align employee mindsets to organisational goals and objective and act as focal persons and the first point of reference for employees. When Operations managers, like unreasoning zombies demand results, Marketing managers are puffed up in guesswork, Finances people, the fools, are saying “ purosedire” and the DG is “floating” in his/her chair the HRM/D remains a point of reference reminding, guiding and answering questions. HRM/Ds do not dismiss employees, because they know the cost of acquiring, inducting, training and aligning new employees to Institutional values both in terms of monetary and time resources; Employees reject advice and warnings. HRM/Ds act like big brothers who advise, encourage, motivate and counsel employees not only in work related issues but social, economic and community because an employee who spends the day fretting about her husband’s repeated physical assaults or a children’s sickness will be half productive. For employees to have the trust and confidence in them, HRM/Ds should be dignified, respected and self respecting. HRM/Ds should not be extensions to the directorates of finances because Finance Officers/Directors do not have the brains to lead them. The stupid DOFs and FOs like victims of psycho-bi-polar disorders can not “think outside the box”, they were taught that a balance sheet has two parts: the debit and credit and none of them has ever thought of adding “what should not have been credited” and “what should have been debited”. Such people can not manage people whose needs and wants are always dynamic unlike the balance sheets with “two” parts. When an employee needs audience for an urgent matter they will say “respect purosedire”. HRM/D should be a fully fledged department reporting to the head of the Institution who consults it from time to time. DGs of substance do not order HRM/Ds; they seek their counsel and advice on matters pertaining to employees and management in General. If you work in a place where the DG shouts commands to the HRM/D like “fire him, dismiss him, get him out of my office, I will dismiss you”, unless such a person is a criminal and Police is involved, sorry for you, you are led by dimwits. DGs have great respect for HRM/DGs because they what it takes to move the Institution forward through managing employees who are the major resources of any Institution. HRM/Ds are not reactive to what has happened; they are proactive they anticipate problems and take initiative to find solutions. Any good Manager utilises the skills and acumen of HRM/D because it will need Human Resources to fix those problems. When people are fully aware of the tasks ahead, the urgency and the implications to their source of livelihood nothing can stand in their way for the quest for a solution. Many Institutions have changed the title of people who manage employees at the place of work; however, in many cases it was simply a change of title from Personnel Manager/Officer to Human Resources Manager/Officer, a case of old wine in new wineskins. You will find those old fellows peering behind very thick glasses on the bridge of their noses (if the bridge is there), they think that the best way to manage people is to make them fear you. They shout at employees and have fixed days when they give audiences to employees and will not change no matter the urgency of the issue at hand. Their minds are fixated to what they saw colonialists do for example they demand that you put on a tie, tuck in your shirt and you must never put on jeans at the place of work, they demand that you must come on time and sign the attendance on time, they are eager to suspend employees, they believe in spying on the employees and insist on regulations and procedures. They are full of ‘do not do this, do not do that’….and they prefer punishing others than counselling, they prefer cliques to teams, they are resistant to new methods and ideas, they restrict innovations and will always say, ‘son, this is how we have always done it, we keep the tradition’ even when the tradition keeps the Institution static or outcompeted. They want everyone to know they are bosses and then when the boss of bosses (the DG) comes along they humble themselves like they saw African colonial chiefs do in-front of colonial Masters. Ends