Why is HR always a Corporate poser ?

Human Resources Management (HR), in Corporates, many say, is a Conundrum, which is at best ignored. It’s a ‘social’ practice which is eufunctional, often generating rituals yet cannot be fully uprooted. It feeds on the system and only sometimes the system is able to feed on it.

A sort of saprophyte? Well, those are indeed opinions and everyone knows what opinions are; yes that part of an animal being. Jokes apart, opinions can be dangerous too. Its said, ..Opinions can be mixed in with facts to add an element that cannot be proven.

For long, management thinkers, educationists and practitioners have struggled to find a real justification for HR’s existence. However, irrespective of it being so despicable to so many, it’s existence is queerly comforting, especially during crisis. If for nothing else, just for its blameworthiness! The existential dilemma on HR has been going on for aeons.

It has recently once again picked up heat in certain sectors. This has been caused due to a debate on the selection of CMDs in PSEs. PESB having specifically excluded HR experience from the qualifications criteria for CMDs has kicked up a furor. Aspiring HR candidates, finding themselves eliminated, have become increasingly restive. Many have even, privately expressed, that the move is totally unjust.

And now, it appears, that the stringent clamor could no longer be ignored and DG SCOPE vide letter dated 09.05.2025 and NIPM vide letter dated 12.05.2025 have written to Chairperson PESB and Secretary (P) DOPT respectively for reconsidering the eligibility criterion of exclusion of HR domain. NewsIP has in past , opined that HR practice in organizations should be given its due recognition. Additionally, legitimate aspirations of senior HR executives to be on the Board and if found suitable, even head it, should be honored. In fact, many readers will recall that HR professionals like, Dr. Santrupt B. Misra, Chief Executive Officer, Birla Carbon, in the private sector and Mrs Alka Mittal, Chairman ONGC, a PSU who successfully headed companies were cited as examples. Of course , in some ways, it’s heartening to find that NewsIp views are being echoed by many august bodies who are writing to DOPT/PESB.

While the adage – ‘Management is nothing but Man Management’, may look great on paper or in a CEO’s speech but to actually practice it, is another ball game. Another reality which cannot be overlooked is that most organizations have lobbies which are often based on shared beliefs within a few chosen often glamorous disciplines. Interdisciplinary groups are almost nonexistent, unless formally broght together.

It’s also true, in most organizations, HR is looked upon as a kind of an add on with low demonstrable achievements. The latter is especially true when a numerical framework of reference is applied. Also, the most impacted discipline which AI is admittedly going to address. HR, as a discipline, may no longer exist in any body corporate of future since the element it deals with will either be totally eliminated or drastically reduced. It can, at best be outsourced, or amalgamated with other disciplines. Obviously, therefore, current HR practitioners are a highly sensitive lot.

They have been protecting their turf for long but now it seems apocalyptic. This may well have prompted their present outpourings, resulting in the questioning. Though for organized HR bodies to take up the matter of HR career progressions, in a formal lobbying effort, is something which is not quite usual.To address the issue with a little more clarity, let us examine the sectors where the call for allowing HR professionals to head Corporates has been made. Primarily, we find it is Oil & Gas, Power, Coal etc. and obviously in the Public Sector. Most of these sectors employ a very high element of technology. This requires leaders to inculcate & master specialized technical knowledge and skills.

The fact that at times, especially say in a crisis, expertise in the specifics of technology is a sine qua non, cannot be denied. These sectors require years of Tech Intensive academic learning, on the job training, tinkering for optimal outputs and field trouble shooting for becoming masters, before one can even aspire for a Board Level or CEO position. In most instances, only first hand exposure, can develop the required skills and competency. Merely saying that one has spent a certain number of years, say 5 years, in a senior non technical position, would be sufficient may not actually be doing justice to the rigorous demands of a Board or CEO position. Funnily enough, even questions can be raised on say in a matter of fixing responsibility, that the selection was itself flawed and therefore the person should be condoned by giving benefit of doubt.Technical companies, need to be therefore, headed by technically competent people, is the general refrain. Wel,l questions are also bound to arise in case of another non technical disciplne which has been permitted by PESB, ie Finance. Interestingly, Finance as a disciplne, has been permitted as a criterion for selection as CEO.

Many tech companies, even today, are run successfully by Finance professionals, both in Private as well as Public Sector. While in private sector, it has been a practice for long but in PSUs it is more of a recent phenomenon. This fact may have prompted other non tech professionals to aspire for positions of CEOs in PSU tech companies. Although, disciplines like pure IT, Materials, Marketing, S&D etc. have yet to stake their claims for the position of CEO in PSUs. The Finance slant, has led some to quip, in a tendering process, only two Departments usually get involved: the Technical and the Finance, similarly for the CEO race also it’s the same. In theory, the higher one goes in an organization a person has to exercise more of conceptual skills than mere technical skills. This may be true but exceptional leadership qualities often require a technical foundation. Ask any IIT or IIM Professor or potential Employer, they will vouch for a technology driven incumbent, rather than a generic one, for a successful career in corporates.

Many will keenly await the outcome of the whole issue of demand of HR for a shot at the PSU CEO’s post. In the meanwhile, NewsIP having interacted with many senior management professsinals, has come to a conclusion, that although strictly speaking, selection to a CEO’s position, may not be entirely egalitarian, a modicum of parity amongst the disciplines should be maintained. If for nothing, its good optics! So what is the solution? A simple but workable model could be of getting the Generic Professionals of viz HR & Finance to mandatorily be rotated to Technical Positions early in their career, to learn and hone the necessary Technical Skills, of the particular vertical the Corporate operates in.

This will enable them to be reasonably equipped to deal with the rigours of the CEOs position in a Tech.Company.The details of training, years of posting, passing the grades etc. can be formulated by DoPT and circulated to PSUs for needful. NIPM can also chip in with their inputs. To be impartial, a similar exposure for Technical professionals to Non Technical areas can also be contemplated.

The Rule Makers and Powers to be have to rise upto the challenges of the times. No one believes that the future of Corporates is going to be easy. While private players can swiftly react to challenges, its high time PSUs also gear up, to avoid annihiliation by competition or obsolesence. Let all be reminded of what Denning LJ had held…..In the absence of it, when a defect appears a judge cannot simply fold his hands and blame the draftsman.

He must set to work on the constructive task of finding the intention of Parliament, and he must do this not only from the language of the statute, but also from a consideration of the social conditions which gave rise to it, and of the mischief which it was passed to remedy, and then he must supplement the written word so as to give “force and life” to the intention of the legislature…. Today DoPT and PESB have to play the role of a judge.