[sumitrocks]

Faced with a choice between an MBA in HR and a general MBA, I had to ask myself a lot of questions. In addition, peers who were in similar situations helped me by discussing their queries, and helping me answer mine. I am trying to reproduce my answers to some questions here, hoping they'll be useful to some of the readers.

Disclaimer: All these questions were asked to me or my friends by peers, colleagues or seniors at sometime or the other. Please do not be offended by any of them. The idea is not to malign any college/career/gender/person but to answer some questions.

Myth 1: HR is for people who are 'good at interacting with others.'
Reality: Any profession needs people who are good at interacting with others. Can you be a successful football player, if you can't 'interact' with others? A salesperson? An advertising guy? Whatever! The core responsibility of an HR person is to maximise the returns on the money spent in hiring/retaining human resources. Of course, this needs to be done fairly, and within certain legal boundaries. HR has vast scope, and is broadly divided into:
1) Recruitment - includes strategic planning, forecasting, hiring, and selection
2) Learning and Development - training, learning management and administration, career enhancement
3) Performance Evaluation - appraisals and promotions
4) Industrial Relations - mainly for blue-collared jobs
5) Consulting

Now, think about it. Would just being an extrovert, and having a liking for 'talking and interacting with people' qualify you for a job in any of these fields? No, right? You'd have to work just as hard as any other professional, to do well.

Myth 2: No one picks HR. It's only because they have no other choice, that they do an HR course.
Reality: Whoever told you that! In the little circle of people that I know, I can count at least 5 people, who have opted for HR over marketing/finance/operations. And mind you, all the colleges that called them were sterling institutes. But, if you are clear in your mind that HR is your calling, go for it, then!

Myth 3: HR is a women's profession.
Reality: That's been a case because HR was perceived as a 'softer' profession earlier, but not any more. HR is as competitive as any other stream of management today. There are tough targets in hiring, selection, training, appraisals, consulting etc. Men and women are on equal footing. For example, in my 6 years of workex, I've seen a fair gender mix amongst HR professionals. So, have no worries on that front.

P.S. I'll be back with more. I don't claim to be an expert or a 'know it all'. These are just my opinions augmented with some research and interaction with HR gurus in my organization. Please feel free to add on, agree, disagree with me. Also, please post further queries and I'll try getting answers from some senior HR folks I know.

Acknowledgments: Thanks to nidhi_rawal, skeptic, bugs bunny, harshadk, and diva12 for enriching discussions and opinions.

[amitm4686]

heyyy...tht was a really helpful post..nicely put everythn in one place....well cud u throw some light on what are the growth prospects in HR..like from where does one start...say straight of XLRI...wat are the various posts held?

[sumitrocks]

Question: I've never heard of a CEO with an HR background. If I take an HR course, will I ever become a CEO?

Ans. I'm not a fortune teller, but I can answer this one without gazing into a crystal ball. My take is that if you have the right skills, attitude, and direction, you can very well become a CEO with an HR background. And if you lack on these fronts, even with a top-notch MBA degree, you won't go too far up that ladder.

Some cases in point: (You can click their names to view their profiles)

1. James Strong: ex-CEO of Qantas - majored in Industrial Relations

2. Anne Sherry: CEO of Westpac

3. Geoff Plummer: MD and CEO of OneSteel

Some experts feel that it is actually easier for HR folks to move into a CEO's role.

1. There’s no reason that the HR director of a large company could not step into the role of CEO if they have that full understanding of the business.
2. Being a HR practitioner can provide useful insights into being a CEO because of the knowledge gained around how the people in the organisation really work and the processes around it.
3. An HR person applying for the CEO position can make an ordinary business really successful business through understanding what motivates people.

To quote James Strong, "The biggest task for any CEO is to build a team of people around them because I think we all know that you’re not going to be able to do everything yourself at any stage. So it’s about building a terrific team of people. And if you’ve been a HR specialist, that should be something that you’re very familiar with – watching people, evaluating people, identifying the qualities that you think are outstanding or vital.”

Of course, it's a faraway destination from our current positions to CEO, but I looked up the net, and made this post just to put things into better perspective. I hope it reassures everyone about HR.

P.S. To sum it up, I'd say that HR folks do become CEOs, if they choose to take that path. Even if not many go in that direction, so what? Gives us the chance to be trendsetters, doesn't it? Like I'm quoting Mr. Strong, someone could be quoting your words here, 15 years hence. Amen!!

[freakinbubu]

Superb post Sumit....u addressed all the doubts I had regarding HR.......I always had felt an inclination towards HR since the day I started having the feeling that an MBA was the true calling for me but then I always had doubts......and I also have heard that HR people are paid less than other MBAs.....thats the thing that still haunts me :new_bat_angel::new_bat_angel:

[PSL]

Originally Posted by freakinbubu

Superb post Sumit....u addressed all the doubts I had regarding HR.......I always had felt an inclination towards HR since the day I started having the feeling that an MBA was the true calling for me but then I always had doubts......and I also have heard that HR people are paid less than other MBAs.....thats the thing that still haunts me :new_bat_angel::new_bat_angel:

hey...
thats another myth sumit needs to take care of ...

and even if HR folks were to be paid less than investment bankers, would you not get into HR?? inspite of your inclination towards it..

As Frank would have asked, "Are you only in it for the money?"


cheers..

[monsterkartik]

[quote=sumitrocks;1101797]Faced with a choice between an MBA in HR and a general MBA, I had to ask myself a lot of questions. In addition, peers who were in similar situations helped me by discussing their queries, and helping me answer mine. I am trying to reproduce my answers to some questions here, hoping they'll be useful to some of the readers.

Thanx Sumit..

A good initiative

But wat i feel here is u have only give the pros for joining HR course..

For making an informed decision we shall look into the pros n cons of the course before making a decision...

Having Worked for last 3.5 years, the negatives (pratical issues) what i have seen

HR function has always looked upon as Cost Center of the company - which does not generate any revenue for the company.

There would be other negatives also (which are there for any course ) and hence would request you to research on them also and give detailed analysis - smthing like a SWOT analysis

Cheers

MK

[sumitrocks]

Originally Posted by freakinbubu

Superb post Sumit....u addressed all the doubts I had regarding HR.......I always had felt an inclination towards HR since the day I started having the feeling that an MBA was the true calling for me but then I always had doubts......and I also have heard that HR people are paid less than other MBAs.....thats the thing that still haunts me :new_bat_angel::new_bat_angel:

Thanks bubu and monsty for raising a pertinent question. Let me try answering it.

Question: I have heard that HR managers are paid less than Marketing or Finance managers.

Ans. Traditionally, that has been the case. Broadly, organizations split functions into two categories - cost functions and revenue functions. Revenue functions earn money for the organization and improve the bottom line. However, cost functions are a drain on resources, and are given 'stepmotherly' treatment.

HR used to be considered a cost function earlier, and still is considered one, by many organizations. However, due to a change in policies, many organizations have converted it into a revenue function.

For example, in my current organization, there are two kinds of HR - corporate HR and line HR. Each department of the organization has an HR wing, that takes care of appraisals, employee relations, hiring etc. They have a tough life, coz they are cost functions.

However, corporate HR, includes strategic planning, recruitment planning, hiring, policy-making, training and development. These folks earn a lot of revenue by billing other departments. Essentially, by training say 5 people for another department, they're adding on to the productivity of those people. Hence, that department can be billed by HR, and thus the .

Yes, there are pros and cons of an HR profile. Being in a cost center can feel thankless and unrewarding sometimes. But then, if you like being in the frontline, and being blue-eyed boys/girls, there is no dearth of dream jobs. Also, not all cost center jobs involve drudgery.

Salaries are important, no doubt. The initial start that you get may be lower than peers in other 'important' functions, but as you get closer to the top, things do balance out.

Personal opinion: I don't mind compromising a bit on the salary factor, as long as I'm doing something that I love doing.

P.S. Please don't get me wrong. The idea is not to glorify HR, but to move people from a mindset of 'Why HR' to 'Why not HR?'

[coolashu]

ya friend ! This thread is moving in right direction with righ inputs and discussions!

Thanks Sumit for this initiative ... me too am under going this trauma of deciding on Offer of HR COURSE.
wud like to throw up few questions which i asked myself .

1. What do i look from a job after MBA degree, would the HR PGDM also give the same feel ?? that Yess ! i am a manager ? the feel of making decisions in crunch situations and showing results , moving company ahead with those .. and i found out after analysis that yes it would really do so .. so Why crumble under other's myth towards HR ??

2. Is HR job a monotonous job ?
I feel every job can be termed monotonous or interesting with your outlook towards it !
being an IT guy with Engg Background ,at times i felt it was a pathetic place to work with silly job but with time moving i realised its not bad at all as soon as my attitude changed.
engg graduates with tons of Exp in PSUs work on tenders and requirements, in domains they never worked before like commercial dept etc ,mech guy who worked thru life in thermal plant being put into Hydro incharge all of a sudden with promotion ! and doing wonders there !!! etc etc..
so why not an IT guy in HR ?? lets contribute our acumen in this field too ..

And i need to move ahead with additions of skills ... so why not HR ??

Yup !! moving ahead !

the Questions above are open to comments and suggestions !

[estranged_gnrs]

Ummm...my post may be bit Off-topic. But being part of a start-up and looking at HR from a perspective which is not-so-oh-corporatish I guess I can bring in few of my perspectives.

This post is more intended for the people who want to build teams based upon the requirements of different departments in their organization.If you are interested in hiring people so that you can get your work done and then pay them some $$$ and move on, please do no waste your time in reading this post.

I do not agree with the term HR. You cant treat humans as resources. My be this post will clarify my perspective.

I will suggest every person interested in this field should read cPanel® and The Seven Day Weekend by the same author , Ricardo Semler

For the sake of brevity, let me call HR as EWM - Employee Welfare Manager.

My experience of working with corporates till now is that HR only comes into the picture in only these scenarios -
1> Hiring
2> Intra-company events
3> Compensation/Salary issues
4> Resignation/Exit Process
5> Coordinating with different departments about requirements and listing them out via different avenues.


Please add if I have missed on any of the functions.

Now, my question is, what if a person genuinely loves doing all this , but he wants to assemble a team which works in long run for him."Retention" becomes the key factor , rather than getting the projects done.I have met few MBAs in HR in my life, and I have always seen them bound by process and lacking in new ideas of EWM.
IMHO, i would rather have a person who loves doing all this but his brainwave is not bound by what he has learned during his course in MBA -HR.

If anyone, can explain me, how a person equipped with MBA-HR degree , can be helpful for a startup like us or various many others floating around?
This is a question, which has been there in my mind for a long time, and solutions to this will be highly appreciated.

Also, if people here can enlighten me and others, case of few remarkable people in HR field in India, who did bring a turnaround in the way they managed HRM in their companies.

If am off-topic here, pls let me know, will edit the post.

Cheers,
Rohit

[betanumber1_2000]

Great thread Sumit:idea:

Here's my take on this topic:

No field of management is less or more important than others. In a successful organization, all depts like HR, Fin, Mktg etc. come together, complement one another and work in harmony to produce a firm that works like a well-oiled machine, 24X7.

I'd like to strengthen my argument by giving a couple of examples:

1. Mohandas Pai, Head of HR, Infosys
This former CFO, who's known to be a financial whiz, voluntarily remitted the office of CFO to lead efforts in the areas of Human Resources and Education & Research. Pai, who's also a member of the Infy board, obviously recognized the importance of HR in a people-intensive industry like IT. This loquacious leader has risen the ranks at Infy fairly quickly, and remember: he is not one of the founders. A future CEO in the making perhaps?

2. Peter F Drucker
Drucker started his career as a financial reporter, and then worked as a securities analyst at an insurance firm in London. In of his essays in "Essential Drucker", he talks about how he was sick of the Investment Banking fraternity, whose sole purpose was to mint money. Which is why he shifted base from Finance to Human resources. He completely dedicated the latter part of his career in studying and analyzing organizations, how to improve the effectiveness of employees and coined the term "knowledge worker".

A few days back I was discussing with my HR manager as to why he got into HR. His response perhaps said it all...he said "You gotta have the passion for it".