HR: Actions Should Trump Words

A column in "Tableau Economique" (Malaysia) appeared in a major US H.R. Newslisting -- and reminded me so much of similar arguments that it's worth noting. The article began with the statement: "If I had my way, we would all stop using the term human resource develoment and start speaking about people potential development instead."

Not sure what I want to say about the "people potential" term -- but the whole thing immediately struck me as an argument I've seen and heard too often. Let's get rid of the term employee relations; let's get rid of the term personnel, let's get rid of human resources, let's get rid of training, let's get rid... The world (yes, not just HR) has gotten way too concerned with "inflating" the language in a way that fails to reflect the humor of Victor Borge's famous "inflationary language" routine, that changes "tennis" to "elevenis" or "forefathers" to "fivefathers." In HR, we became dissatisfied with "canning" people, so we decided to "fire" them until that was to cruel, then we started "terminating" them (that's kinder!) and we "RIF" them. Or my favorite from a Fortune 500 Communictions firm, we "free up their future."

Comment: Maybe with a few exceptions, it will never be the terms used that define the results it will the the "actions." The focus must be on best practice, solid foundations (yes -- and that means valid connections to theoretical concepts), and continuous improvement. If those are the underlying cultural elements of the model, it won't matter if that department is called "training," "education", "development," or "people potential."