Toby the HR Manager

Paul in Cannon Beach

Toby the HR Manager on "the Office"

A positive portrayal of a diligent and savvy HR professional working in a challenging office environment or a passive wimp who reinforces negative stereotypes of HR as powerless administrators?

allsteaks

I haven't had a chance to watch The Office this season, but he's always appeared to be a wimp with no knowledge and no authority. But if he was any good the show wouldn't work!!!

Paul in Cannon Beach

True. There is no way the show could continue if Toby was paying more attention.

Do you worry that a whole generation of younger workers are being introduced to a very passive (albeit positive and likeable) HR person?

allsteaks

Now you're pulling on my philosophical side. I actually have an overall concern of how HR's role seems to be evolving back into a "form" position instead of a "function" position. It seems most of what we read in HR mags, etc., talk about programs and compliance issues and ignore the face to face and presence on the shop floor issues that we face every day. It's almost like an attempt to tie us back to staying in the office instead of getting out and learning what makes our business and employees tick. I could go on about this but hopefully you see my point.
Off soap box; carry on.

Paul in Cannon Beach

No, I would be interested to hear more about what you mean if you dont mind elaborating. I find this kind of topic interesting.

NaeNae55

Steaks:

Do you think it is all due to the move to have HR be higher up the ladder? Certifications require a lot of 'strategic' hours, and frequently you see classes on how to get a seat at the big table. Do you think the shift in focus is causing HR to be less hands-on? Are too many looking at the bottom line and how to please the CEO rather than productivity and morale?

Nae

allsteaks

Well said Nae, and I agree with most of what you've stated. Ray and I had a similar discussion several months ago about corporate HR folks focusing on form (or pleasing the boss with programs) instead of function (what actually happens in the workplace). Corp HR used to be a support function that provided material and intellectual supplies to the workplace as the field defined their needs. The field knew what they needed to be effective and what their employees needed. They knew because they spent significant time listening and then responding to their employees. In turn employees were open in expressing their concerns and what they perceived as problem areas.
It seems today that face to face communications with the workers has become an afterthought in defining an HR person's role. I know numerous people who have HR degrees and don't have a clue what goes on in their own workplaces (the actual labor itself). But their Corporate leadership also ignores the basic needs of the worker. The most successful HR Managers/Directors/VP's I know have clear communication paths to workers and have learned to listen and understand the language of the workplace.
Geez, I could write a whole article on this subject; think someone would pay for it??

Paul in Cannon Beach

Before I was in HR, I was a working supervisor in our food services department. Those three years were valuable experience and I am glad that I had that time "in the trenches" before moving into HR.

Our organization is small enough that I rub shoulders with our workforce regularly. I oversee 25 of the entry level workforce.

I can't say I "walk the shop floor" as often as I should but I regularly work along side them when we are short-staffed. In the past couple of weeks, I have waited tables in our dining room and cleaned rooms for our housekeeping department. I never fail to learn something valuable from these experiences.

Personally, I feel HR should understand:

- what product or service the organization produces
- the organizations heritage
- the basic workings of each department
- the general challenges of each department
- where the organization is heading