8u0QSGM4L

Edwin,I appreciate your cotnmems. I will reinforce some of what you wrote. You are correct my point was not that HR is just about this but I also don't believe HR should be about that either. HR is about performance, productivity and profitability just like any other business function.When I see a company spend money the obvious question is always. What is the ROI on the expense? Sometimes the response is not everything has an ROI. To that I like to quote my Grandfather Balderdash. If it doesn't have an ROI to the company then why is it being done? The fact remains that unless it is some legal compliance imperative it better have an ROI or it should not be done. Therein lies the jist of my statement. Most HR people I have experienced in the 30+ years I have been doing this cannot calculate a real ROI. They do not understand the difference between hard and soft dollars and they do not understand the difference between a cost reduction/savings and a direct contribution to the bottom line. Ever heard an HR person talk about how they saved millions of dollars from lawsuits that were never filed because of what they had done? That is an example of a meaningless unqualified statement without factual substance. Yet I don't have enough digits on my body, yours and a dozen other peoples to count the times I have heard that.As to the commentary regarding “social engineering, social experiments, social welfare” . Why is that a corporate responsibility? Understand I am not saying it should not be, and certainly unless that is the mission of an organization should never be a priority for the company. But why should the company do that? Is ensuring a local community has better goods and services the real reason a company does something or is that an added effect of what the company does? Does Anheuser develop into a nation to improve its culture or is it to sell beverages? What is the difference?Until HR, not the clerical administrative HR but the HR that has a legitimate business impact on the organization, understands how to describe its actions in business terms; meaning finance, it will never be able to express its real value. Work-life balance, engagement, etc those are words that mean almost nothing in reality today. With technology and constant connectivity it is more about managing time and improving performance and productivity than it is about balancing your work and your life. Modern culture shows those two blurred at best and becoming one. Engagement? What does that really mean and express it it terms of real dollars to the organization. Is it fewer mistakes? A happy workforce (I chuckle when I hear some claim it is the employers job to make workers happy), workers that believe what they do matters? All of those? None of those? And if I as a business owner am going to do those things how do I justify the activity and related costs to my investors? HR needs to be able to answer that with something other than well, we know it will but we can't prove it.Sadly, and to its detriment, too many in HR see this profession, and more importantly this business function, as a cause to better mankind. That may well be a minor side effect but its primary purpose is to improve the organizations performance, productivity and profitability through its workforce. The sooner the function and those who practice it embrace it, the sooner its greater impact can be realized and oh by the way perhaps some of those nice things regarding bettering people can be realized too.We may well be seeking the same goal.