Thomas asks whether this concerns us.
52 percent of companies don’t have a chief human resources officer or equivalent executive assigned to such people issues as developing a high-performance culture or meeting talent needs.
Deloitte and The Economist surveyed executives from 468 companies on several continents, including 104 HR leaders and 155 senior business executives.
Only 23 percent of corporate leaders see their HR departments as currently playing a crucial role in coming up with corporate strategy and having a significant impact on operating results.
Yes, it is a concern. However I'd argue that HR people shouldn't really wait for these 52% of companies to change - I guess they don't have HR leaders because they probably view people as 'costs' and have someone from the finance group or legal group look after HR functions. A bean counter who resists hiring until he/she can help it.
Good HR people would rather work with 23% of organizations that see their HR as crucial. Why waste your talent where one's value is not appreciated. Everyday the workforce tells us that, whether we are hiring people or conducting exit interviews.
HR can be a change agent. However, it's better to be a change agent where the CEO wants you to be a change agent. Have you seen great marketing people work for a place where marketing is not valued? Or great IT managers working in a firm that has no faith in technology?
Why should great HR talent work with organizations that don't believe in the importance of people?