Nowadays, whether to split HR has became a hot-debated topic among CEOs on the global stage. One of a convincing example is the Multinational Corporations.
The reason why CEOs are considering kick it out should be the ineffective cooperation between subordinates and superiors. Some higher-level managers inside the business complained their human resources department should be rewired because they miss the key value of their works. That is, although HR is good at the business fundamentals, they put a lot of time into talent architects, staff training as well as culture building. On the other hand, they think more about the staff compensation rather than costs, it is unrealistic. Just like the Libby Sartain said, who was a board member from ManpowerGroup.
HR leaders should deliver the business strategy to CEOs and help them better allocate the labour resources, but most of them are not doing these in the current situation. Which brings so many pressures to CEOs because it is difficult to meet their businesses’ performance goals without the guidance from HR people.
Ram Charan, a worldwide business advisor has a plan and solution to tackle this issue. He appeals the companies to eliminate the positions of Chief Human Resources Officer and then divide them into two strands: which is the HR-A and HR-LO. HR-A focus on the administration, helping the CEO manage the compensation and benefits and reporting the valuations to CFO directly, so that the CFO can judge weather the compensation is effective to staffs or not. The other one, HR-LO is designed to assess the staffs’ performance and find their potentials, those people would get chances of promotion after a long time observation and judgement.
References:
http://web.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=998d628d-5254-420b-b0cc-ac7a20966c8d%40sessionmgr115&vid=4&hid=127
http://hbr.org/2014/07/its-time-to-split-hr
http://www.dtssydney.com/blog/time_to_split_hr:_backlash_from_around_the_web