Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Taking the human out of human resources

REBECCA DUBE

From Monday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 12:00 AM EDT 05/03/08

A new wave of "talent management software" allows companies to identify stars and slackers with the ease of a Google search ...Read the full article

This conversation is semi-moderated What is moderation? | How do I report a comment?

  1. Curious G from Canada writes: I love technology, and I champion its incorporation into daily working and personal life insofar as efficiency gains are realizable. However - are we really going to try and take the "human" out of performance evaluation and promotion? By extension, we might as well have a computer algorithm sift through resumes and make hiring decisions too.

    The concept of "culture", "behaviour", "attitude", can only ever be marginally quanitifed in one of those oh so loved human resource surveys that applicants are required to take. Those same surveys that change as often as the seasons depending on who's theory gets more popular. The human element in human resource should never be supplanted by artificial analysis.
  2. Bill Needle from Canada writes: Move along, nothing new to see here.

    Any organization that believes it can develop talent by searching a database is doomed.

    This is just another incarnation of other crap software that has been promoted by IBM and other shysters and consultants in the past.

    Either an organization has a culture of learning or it doesn't. Leadership provides and develops it; software doesn't.
  3. David Spaetzel from Port Elgin, Canada writes: This looks like it should probably be the last thing that should be left up to computers. I assume the software only assists real human beings by sorting through mountains of data that is already recorded.
  4. Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: Couldn't be worse than the flunkies currently populating HR departments.
  5. J S from Toronto, Canada writes: More and more we're taking the human out of human resources. I was fired last year for missing too much work when I took a disability leave to deal with depression. The disability was approved by the insurance company but my old boss just couldn't forgive me for the absence. I know with data mining tests like these, my future is extremely limited since people don't talk to people anymore and on paper, I probably look like broken goods...
  6. M Trimble from Saskatoon, Canada writes: This story misses the point - humans still have to enter the data.
  7. David K from Guelph, Canada writes: Sadly companies tend to look at human resources the same way they look at natural resources, something to be utilized then thrown away when worn out. Remember when we were personnel? That at least felt a little more human.
  8. Eric the Red from Uzbekistan writes: Using software to search for people?

    How much more lazy can HR get?
  9. Sylvester McMonkey McBean from Ottawa, Canada writes: Relax - it's just a tool. It reduces the numbers of applications that people have to look at to manageable levels. Anyway, a large proportion of jobs will still be filled the old-fashioned way. J S - have you tried a little volunteer work for a political party? Either of the two big ones will do - each is as dirty as the other.
  10. Carl White from Canada writes: Sounds like we're moving toward a society where your fate is decided before you're born.
  11. mighty conan from Calgary, Canada writes: Sounds like it might help, but I doubt it. Human behavior is far more complex than any small set of indicators would be able to show...
  12. cryp- tic from Canada writes: On one hand - Kudos to the software developers picking up on a market need.

    On the other hand - it's a case of poorly disciplined managers who do not know how to communicate their expectations, don't spend the time to coach and reward their people, don't grade on a curve and have the guts to unload the dead wood, and can't use Excel...
  13. John Doucette from Manotick, Canada writes: "Taking the human out of human resources." Where you been Rebecca? The human part actually disappeared 30 years ago when the word resources replaced personnel.
  14. D K from Canada writes: Since when did HR ever have any influence on career development? I have yet to see any contribution from those folks.
  15. Bill Smith from The wilds of the GTA, Canada writes: Another reason to bypass human resources and try and connect with the hiring manager.
  16. John Hinkley from Thornhill, ON, Canada writes: Two prior comments say it all:

    "M Trimble from Saskatoon, Canada writes: This story misses the point - humans still have to enter the data."

    "Bill Smith from The wilds of the GTA, Canada writes: Another reason to bypass human resources and try and connect with the hiring manager."
  17. Andrea Timmons from Kingston, Canada writes: If I read & understood the article, the performance reviews are still done by human supervisors, it is only the results of these reviews, which are filed by computer rather than on paper.
    Paper or computer files, what's the beef?
    If an employee isn't satisfied with their files, then they can still grieve their implimentation on their permanent records.
  18. Sam Snead from Canada writes: HR has little influence once you already have the job and for a lot of jobs HR has little influence even before hiring, except for resume scanning. The article suggest HR are making recommendations for promotions based on collected performance review data ... that rarely happens.

    It can be useful when managers change, to track previous performance reviews, electronically. It can be useful to more easily track consistent under/over performers that are not being addressed correctly.

    Unfortunately, historical performance means little ... what have you done for me lately ... carries more weight. Depending where you are on the ladder, "lately" varies between 3 months and 1 week. There isn't a double standard here, both employees and employers, use this metric.

    Most people, on either side, follow this rule ... if it ain't what you want it to be in 6 months, it will never be. The last 3 months of that 6 months is usually spent figuring out how to fire someone or looking for a new job.
  19. A C from Albertario, Canada writes:
    As a nine year old once remarked to me, "remember that half of all analysis is anal."

    Case in point:
    I know a fellow who had 27 years experience with a firm and, as a result, was assigned to work on a global innovation project to develop new businesses.
    He did a great job, and he helped come up with some ideas and ways to implement them that have earned the company millions (and millions) of dollars. The project lasted over nine months and was fully exhausting, but worth every moment.
    However, because the HR reporting system had no statistical evidence of his performance on his day job (his former position) while he was on this innovation project he was deemed to have failed at hitting his previously established performance targets. In turn, his position was rationalized; that is, he was summarily fired.
    27 years in and he was fired because of a statistical error. That's not simply taking the human out of things, that's taking the meaning out.

    I wish I were making this story up, but it's sadly, tragically true.

    .
  20. Older and Wiser from Winnipeg, Canada writes: You have my vote Alistair...99.999% of the HR people are a disgrace to the profession (and you all know who you are!).

Join the Conversation, Leave a Comment

This conversation is semi-moderated What is moderation? | How do I report a comment?

You must be logged-in to submit a comment — login now!

Not registered with globeandmail.com? Register now. It is quick and free.

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top