By Steve Ranger, 1 March 2006 13:00
NEWS
Only the HR department is more unloved than the IT organisation within businesses, according to a survey of senior executives.
A survey of 555 senior executives around the world found that the IT department was rated the second worst of all business functions.
But of all the parts of business reviewed HR faired the worst. The report, compiled by the Economist Intelligence Unit, said: "No other function not even the notoriously unlovable IT department came close to being this unappreciated."
Nearly a quarter (22 per cent) of respondents gave IT a poor rating when execs were asked to judge its performance, compared with 32 per cent for HR and 20 per cent for marketing/sales.
And only 37 per cent gave IT a top rating, compared with 53 per cent for the 'CEO favourite', the finance department.
The research sponsored by UK Trade & Investment, also found that organisations plan to prioritise international markets over domestic ones in the next three years.
CEOs responding to the survey said they expected to see an increase in the proportion of their revenue coming from overseas markets - by an average of one-third over the next three years.
Andrew Palmer, the report's author, said in a statement: "As overseas markets become ever more important, companies will grapple with a new set of management challenges.
"Successful firms have to be flexible enough to identify and take advantage of local opportunities, and strong enough to instil a recognisable set of global corporate values."
Comments
There are 3 comments. Join the discussion
1. anonymous
IT's not surprising really.
CEOs look at the bottom line and most see IT and HR as a big minus on the balance sheet.
Where as Finance should be a plus.
If they didn't have IT and HR departments then they'd soon realise the good jobs they are doing (well in most cases) and how much extra money they would have to pay out without them.
2. Simon
Once I worked for a company that had a Personnel department and a Personnel Manager. We were Persons in the big cog of industry.
The old management went, in came new (with US led ideas), and next we had an HR dept because we were now Human Resources, not Persons. I won't say what I think about the competency of the HR manager that replaced the Personnel manager !
I am not a resource, I am a Person !
Until management wake up to that simple fact then HR depts all over will stay in the gutter of peoples opinions.
BTW - I no longer work for that company !
3. Brian Catt
In general HR departments are as good as they are funded and empowered to be.
While they exist to cut personal costs, comply with National legislation on labour law and Health and Safety and have nothing to do with the performance of the business, as is mostly the case, they are simply a jobsworth overhead doing the compliance and hire and fire as directed by management.
Senior positions are filled by the CEOs pet headhunters who got them the job(and will get them their next one when they are found out) to get all the decsion makers/cronies w/o personal being involved. Most of these senior appointmemts are the same failed execs on the management merry go round charmed circle of BS merchants who get in w/o the due diligence which woulkd stop them if they were checked on by HR before appointment.
So what do we expect? Its what the people who run businessses create, so how can they complain? Is this really news - Scott Adams has covered it already in the way of the Weasel, its Catbert, the evil HR director
Brian