|
April 24, 2005
"Everyone wants to be important."
Is there something degrading about ordinary job titles? You know, the kind which have been around for years? I can remember when companies had personnel departments, but someone didn't like that so they're now called "Human Resources." Why? I don't honestly know. I did find this explanation: The human resource management or personnel function of an organisation covers a variety of activities. The term "human resource management" has largely replaced the old-fashioned word "personnel", which was used in the past. The type of work covered in the human resource function might include policy making role, welfare role, supporting role, bargaining and negotiating role, administrative role and educational and development role.And that's all there is to it. The word "personnel" died because it was "old fashioned." Anyway, the latest trend (actually, 3674 hits make it more of a done deal) is to do away with "receptionists." The position is now to be called "Director of First Impressions": She used to be known as the receptionist.That was in February. Since then, the term "Director of First Impresions" has caught on -- to the point where not only is George F. Will (henceforth the nation's Stodginess Czar) complaining about it, but its appearing on official government forms like this. (Of course, there are "Director of First Impressions" training seminars too.) Once George F. Will and the government forms agree on something, I'd say we're stuck with it. Regardless of first impressions. Back to the lowly receptionist with a new title. She likes it: As for Levine, Scottsdale's Director of First Impressions, she loves her new title. Maybe that's the problem. In other, totally unrelated news, I finally found a working definition (with emphasis on the word "working") of "professional journalist": Professional journalists are defined as those who receive at least 50% of their income from journalistic activity, either freelance or employed by a news organization.I guess that means that if you're not being paid, you're either unimportant, or self important. Don't look at me; I don't make these rules and I could never make them up. posted by Eric on 04.24.05 at 08:30 AM
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/2239 Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "Everyone wants to be important.":
» Just call me the S.E.E.E.R.D.* from Practical Penumbra
One of the reasons I enjoy reading Eric of Classical Values is his impatience with all the silly trappings of the politically correct. This post on more ego-massaging titles for jobs (think "sanitation engineer") made me realize how out of step we are ... [Read More] Tracked on April 24, 2005 11:21 AM |
|
March 2007
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
March 2007
February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
War For Profit
How trying to prevent genocide becomes genocide I Have Not Yet Begun To Fight Wind Boom Isaiah Washington, victim Hippie Shirts A cunning exercise in liberation linguistics? Sometimes unprincipled demagogues are better than principled activists PETA agrees -- with me! The high pitched squeal of small carbon footprints
Links
Site Credits
|
|
I actually think that the change from "personnel" to "human resources" is more of an indication of a dehumanizing of the workforce. Personnel are no longer people, they are merely resources of the human kind, just like equipment resources, capital resources, etc. And thus easier to "manage" by way of reducing headcount, etc.
I'm no lefty, believe me. But I really don't think this stems from self-importance of the personnel dept. as much as top-down short term management by the bean counters.