Blog EntryKill the ‘HR Speak’Feb 26, '08 12:42 PM
for everyone

Kill the ‘HR Speak’
The bewildering array of meaningless terms builds a language wall between human resources and the rest of the business. 


     I can’t stand no longer to any “HR speak,” that convoluted language that HR consultants, vendors and professors love to create and use. Whether you call it HR speak, or HR blah blah or HR babble, once you bring up the term among executives, almost everyone immediately knows what you’re talking about. 
     The HR profession has managed to create a bewildering array of meaningless terms. When you’re in the realm of HR strategy, it is nearly impossible to read an article or view a PowerPoint that isn’t littered with terms like “business partner,” “seat at the table,” “organizational alignment” or “balanced scorecard.” 
     The organizational development function really seems to excel at making up words that follow the fad of the month. In fact, the
term organizational development itself probably qualifies as one of the most impossible-to-define terms. In recent years, OD wordsmiths have enshrined themselves in the HR Speak Hall of Fame with terms like “engagement,” “corporate culture” and “360-degree performance review.” They are not alone, however. Training and development also excels at confusing managers and employees with terms like “learning organization,” “performance coaching,” “distance learning” and my all-time favorite, "competency management.”
     Every function within the HR profession deserves some level of credit for creating confusion. These terms often emerge when corporate leaders are fed up and want something different, a situation that can lead HR leaders to rebrand the same old approaches and tools under a different name: “talent management” becomes “human capital management,” for example.
     I’m very sure that I am not the first to accuse HR of using confusing jargon. A simple Google search can easily brings up thousands of comments from individuals complaining about HR speak and wanting to know what HR really means when it uses such phrases.
     Why is the proliferation of HR speak a problem? To begin with, it builds a language wall between us and the rest of the business. If you’ve ever sat with a CEO during executive committee meetings, you’ll note that most executives have a relatively limited vocabulary. It often includes “hard” and easily measurable words like “profit,” “stock price,” “ROI” and “market share.”
      Executives also use a quantifiable language, one which is primarily made up of numbers and dollars. HR practitioners, in contrast, use in their presentations and conversations “soft” terminology like “emotional intelligence,” “work/life balance” and “empowerment.” These are almost totally devoid of numbers and dollars. 

     And because it so often amounts to Orwellian doublespeak, HR speak causes a great deal of anxiety and confusion among both managers and employees. Ask anyone who has ever been told by HR that the company was about to be “right-sized.” 
     The proliferation of such jargon not only affects those whom HR serves, but also causes HR professionals to waste an inordinate amount of time just trying to reach agreement on what these terms actually mean. Can anyone agree on what distinguishes a “human capital management” approach from that of a traditional HR approach? Further, what differentiates the activities of “talent management” functions from traditional recruiting, staffing and talent development functions? 
     The solution to this linguistic problem is pretty simple. First of all, we in HR need to make a conscious effort to use business terms exclusively. If we can’t find a word in an annual report or a financial statement, we shouldn’t use it, period. Next, we need to make every attempt to use not the most complex word, but instead, the most understandable word when dealing with managers and employees. So instead of saying “competencies,” we should simply say “skills.” 
     We should aggressively challenge HR professionals who use HR speak, or demand that they clearly and measurably define each term. 
     Finally, because the root of all these words is some kind of HR fad, HR professionals need to realize that their job is to increase the productivity, capability and innovation of the workforce. They should focus on the basics that contribute to these goals. When a vendor, consultant, speaker or professor from any renown universities and colleges tries to tell you that they have a “new” approach with a fancy new name, you should immediately stand up and walk out. Let them bounce their empty terms off an equally empty room.


rezaantonius wrote on Feb 26
wow... there are two things... first, maybe because human is a complex entity, so we need complex words to describe them accurately.... second, maybe because the HR staff wanted to secure their position and role in the office, so they manipulate the words, and make them look smarter than they actually are... just my thought...
andreasap wrote on Feb 26
Or, may those HR persons merely too often over valued theirselves by being too fancy with their own words...
hotlipsnola wrote on Feb 26
KISS.... keep it simple stupid.
andreasap wrote on Feb 27
KISS.... keep it simple stupid.
Perhaps, this is their way to show that they just hate of being always stupid along the time. Hehehehe
Add a Comment
   
© 2008 Multiply, Inc.    About · Blog · Terms · Privacy · Corp Info · Contact Us · Help