To think that this is the best ever sign that the HR department has lost its way!

[OnlyTheDepthVaries]

DH works for a large company. Last week he had to email his HR department asking them to change some personal information. He received this as the automatic response:
"Thank you for contacting People Services. A Support Advisor will reach out to you shortly."

Reach out?? Reach out?? Are they completely mad?? What is wrong with "contact you "?
Should I expect The Four Tops to arrive singing on my doorstep?
Surely this is utter drivel at its best.
Incidentally, this was 4 days ago - they have yet to reach out to him. Good thing it wasn't that important

[parmalilac]

Awful. What was wrong with 'Personnel' anyway? Human Resources is a ridiculous name. Also hate it when utilities/banks/shops tell me that a 'colleague' will be with me soon - they are not MY colleagues. Why not just use that person's job title - admin assistant/customer service representative or whatever.
Lots of other cringeworthy words which seem to have come from the world of business are being used everywhere these days, my favourites are 'sourced' (=bought) and 'solutions' (= a service to do a specific job).

[vienna1981]

One if my former employers had a mission statement. I can't remember what it was all about which shows how much notice I took of it. I think mission statements were of their time. I'd be surprised if any recently founded companies have one.

[AugustaFinkNottle]

What if they're not part of the CRM team? The workshop is just the workshop - once you've identified the people who have a 'stake' or interest in the project, you need to call them something because you need to consult them periodically - what would that be?

They're a loosely defined group of people having different jobs and departments, the only thing they have in common is that they have a stake in a particular programme.

You can call them anything, it really doesn't matter. If you already have a CRM team, call it the CRM workshop. If you don't like that, call it the CRM project group, or the Business Development Group, or the Pink Elephant Group. Anything but bloody stakeholders.

[LassWiTheDelicateAir]

What if they're not part of the CRM team? The workshop is just the workshop - once you've identified the people who have a 'stake' or interest in the project, you need to call them something because you need to consult them periodically - what would that be?

They're a loosely defined group of people having different jobs and departments, the only thing they have in common is that they have a stake in a particular programme


Well aside from the fact I have no idea what a CRM team is, I'm still struggling to imagine any situation where I need to refer to any group of people who work with me or for me or to whom my team and I provide services as "stakeholders"

In the context of the clients I do actually provide services for and who pay my fees I think they would think I'd taken leave of my senses if I started talking like that.

[annandale]

One up on a past manager of mine (not in the management consultancy) who stood at the front of the whole staff meeting and said 'Of course you [contemptuous hand gesture] are all overhead.'

This was in a private healthcare organisation. I.e. an organisation that has no service to offer without, erm, some staff.

'Overhead Management' would be grim.

[bonnie1981]

our HR managers are 'talent managers'.

Every time I see their signatures, I picture Simon Cowell and his red buzzer telling an interviewee "I didn't like it, I loved it"

[annandale]

I thought the consultants were pretty cool actually, and they did have some good ideas, also the thought of walking into a strange organisation and telling their senior people what to do would have caused me to sh*t myself on a regular basis, but it seemed a shame when they would do the presentations and would have to stop talking like normal, intelligent, analytical people and start spouting all this stuff that didn't mean a lot.

[ABetaDad1]

annan - no need to apologise.

Our team of people that did all our presentation packs and documents were absolutely brilliant. By far and away the most crucial and underpaid staff in our building. If they had walked out the whole place would have stopped.

I went on to train management consultants and also work for myself as a management consultant and I always think the loyal staff lower down an organisation that make everything tick along are the place where value is created.

There really are some useless people in management positions all over the world.

No wonder we had a financial crisis.

[annandale]

Not me ABetaDad but I've been a project coordinator [i.e. glorified typist] for a management consultancy. When typing up the presentations and papers my eyes used to roll so much I looked like a fruit machine.

(Fun place to work though - sorry if it was you I was typing for )

[wasonthelist]

Ours, I kid you not, is "Human Capital". Which is almost as though they tried to think of the most dehumanising thing they could call it

Over the years I have been fighting a losing battle against people being called resources instead of people. eg " can we get a resource to do this?" and
"we'll need at least 4 resources for this job"

[WicketWoo]

Oh Empress, I work where there's Human Capital too. Do you work for a (large) accountancy firm? I hate it and will always refer to them as HR (though thinking it though I'm not sure that's better!)

[ABetaDad1]

I blame management consultants for the rise of corporate speak.

Hands up who has been a management consultant!?

[Wizzles]

LunaLongbottom my DH is violently opposed to "workshop" too. Every time I have to attend one he asks if there were tools lying around and nudie calendars on the walls.

[Wizzles]

Can I throw "key deliverables" into the mix?

[ABetaDad1]

origami - ah yes "Talent"

There is a widely used phrase now called the "War For Talent".

This is used as a justification for paying a small number of male employees an extortionate amount of money to turn up and apparently run the business although nobody knows what they actually do.

The rest of the employees are not in the War For Talent because apparently they are useless drones who add little value, can be replaced by almost anyone who cares to turn up for a slightly lower wage and who ideally would work 24/7 without complaint.

[LunaLongbottom]

Where I work we regularly reach out to stakeholders to leverage their skills moving forward... Oh, and when I'm asked to do something, I "action" it.


Hate hate HATE this sort of bullshit. It seems so far removed from anything real or practical that needs doing in life.... the world has gone mad. (No wonder I'm unemployed).

But I am quite extreme as can't even stand the word "workshop" .

[origamiwarrior]

Surprised no one has mentioned 'Talent' yet....

[BayLeaves]

Where I work we regularly reach out to stakeholders to leverage their skills moving forward... Oh, and when I'm asked to do something, I "action" it.

I literally feel like screaming THIS IS BULLSHIT at every meeting I go to but I'm being paid reasonably well and nice part time hours so I'm kind of obliged to keep playing along with all the coporate bollocks for the forseeable future.

Is there a way to rebel against all this without getting fired?!

[AppleSetsSail]

If you are organising a workshop to, let's say, start requirements gathering for a new CRM installation - how would you describe that group?

The (insert name of project) group or team. I would never use "stakeholder"

The CRM group. Or the CRM workshop. Under no circumstances would it be "the CRM stakeholders".

What if they're not part of the CRM team? The workshop is just the workshop - once you've identified the people who have a 'stake' or interest in the project, you need to call them something because you need to consult them periodically - what would that be?

They're a loosely defined group of people having different jobs and departments, the only thing they have in common is that they have a stake in a particular programme.

[Thumbcat]

I had to stop watching Elementary because of the over use of the term 'reach out'. It's just so horribly touchy feely.

[OublietteBravo]

I've come across the job title of 'Deal Architect' at work. I've no idea what such people are supposed to do though...

[Chewbecca]

Reaching out is very common in my huge organisation now too. I think people think it sounds softer and less demanding than just to ask someone for some info.

I do think stakeholders has a place though. It's not just about me/my team. It makes you consider who are all the interested people in the project/issue/change etc, you need to make sure everyone relevant is aware/on board or whatever you need. So to recognise the list of stakeholders is a good thing I think.

[ABetaDad1]

"Reach Out"

This has to be an American company. I watch US business TV lot and they use it a lot.

I have always firmly believed HR departments should stick to payroll, sending out employment contracts and dealing with sundry admin. Its a clerical job.

[skankingpiglet]

I know someone whose job title used to be 'Regional People Person'. They seemed to have to deal with a lot of redundancies, so not really a person of the people! (albeit because of their job and company, they are actually lovely) The 'regional' part was accurate though.

[SwedishEdith]

At least Human Capital is straight to the point about what you/we are to them.

I'm surprised no-one's a curator yet.

Do HR teams ever get smaller?