Question

Please use an original response.

The need for HR to be a strategic partner to sustain competitive advantage is widely espoused, but appears to be less often enacted. IT, Finance and even Marketing are all facing similar challenges.

1. What is it about these functions that lend themselves to this criticism?
2. Is it deserved, or simply a result of the fact that they are not part of “operations” end of the business? Why?

Answer 1

The HR, IT, Finance, and Marketing functions are criticized for a couple of reasons.

Indeed, one reason comes from the way that they are not part of operations end of the business as it stands now. These functions are considered to be cost centers and not profit centers.

Another reason is that these functions have still not been seen for their actual potential inside an association. For example, Marketing is considered only to incur costs on promotional stunts and Finance is considered just to provide summarized costs and profits reports after a financial quarter or year gets completed. IT, on the other hand is considered only to provide the technological hardware and resolution of issues related to the same. Similarly, HR has been seen as a progression of tedious authoritative obligations and not for its key arranging abilities.

These functions and their importance can be understood only when we change our perspective of how we look at these functions. These functions need to be viewed from the Outside-In approach, that is, from an external stakeholder’s viewpoint in order to understand there utilities efficiently.

The workplace all in all is changing and so are the functions mentioned as cost centers. Whenever used legitimately, they can help move any business through these advances all the more effectively.

With the end goal for organizations to develop and support their internal and external stakeholders, these functions must be seen something beyond an element of another more "operations" focused division. These functions should be more client driven implying that it ought to thrive as much outwardly of the business as it does inside the walls of the organization.

Answer 2

1: Why are these functions criticized?

Disconnected from business strategy: These departments sometimes fail to fully understand the company's overall strategic goals, resulting in their work not being closely integrated with the company's long-term development plan. For example, the IT department may not take into account the actual needs of the business department and the company's strategic priorities when promoting digital transformation, resulting in waste of resources or project failure.

Lack of business orientation: Some functional departments are too focused on their own professional work and ignore the actual needs of the business. For example, the finance department may overemphasize cost control and fail to fully consider support for business development, resulting in some potential business projects being unable to be carried out due to funding constraints.

Poor communication and collaboration: There are obstacles to communication and collaboration between these departments and other departments. The marketing department may have disagreements with the IT department on the use and analysis of customer data, or conflicts with the finance department on the allocation and use of marketing budgets, affecting work efficiency and effectiveness.

Slow response to change: When faced with market changes and company business adjustments, these departments cannot make corresponding adjustments and changes in a timely manner. For example, when the company decides to expand into a new market area, the human resources department may not be able to quickly adjust its recruitment and training strategies to meet the talent needs of the new business.

2: Do they deserve this? Or is it just because they don’t belong to the company’s “operation” department? Why?

Some of them deserve it, but not all: These departments do have some problems of their own, such as the aforementioned disconnection from business strategy and lack of business orientation. These problems have caused them to not fully play their role as strategic partners to a certain extent, so it is reasonable to be criticized.

Not just because they don’t belong to the “operation” department: Although these departments do not belong to the traditional “operation” department and may have relatively weak direct connection with the business, this is not the only reason they are criticized. Even non-operation departments can create value for the company and become excellent strategic partners as long as they can clarify their role in the company’s strategy, actively communicate and collaborate with the operation department, and work with a business orientation. For example, the IT departments of some companies have provided strong technical support to the operation department by actively promoting digital innovation, thereby enhancing the company’s overall competitiveness. On the contrary, some operation departments may also have problems such as inconsistency with the company’s strategy and poor communication and collaboration, and will also be criticized. Therefore, we cannot simply attribute the cause to whether it belongs to the "operations" department, but should conduct a comprehensive assessment from multiple aspects such as the department's own work philosophy, methods and results.