Don't treat your human capital as a resource

There are many companies that day by day lose leadership and competitiveness in the market, due to the fact that they have deficient or obsolete organizations that generate a drag on their profitability and at the same time a negative impact on the development and motivation of the people who make it up.

Increased this, by Directors or Managers who only seek their own benefit and development, not caring about the organization or their Human Capital, generating discrimination and conflicts with rules and demands for others in a coercive and punitive way. However, they exonerate themselves from them and, to top it all, they promote their compliance with others, seeking to impose their formal authority and treat their collaborators as a disposable resource that only serves to exploit and achieve their personal goals.

They do not understand that Human Capital, misnamed Human Resource, is the most important thing in an organization since it is its vital nerve. A company may have the best infrastructure, technology, industrial plant or the most modern equipment but it will not be enough to continue and have a guarantee of success in the market. Only people with their knowledge, skills, attitudes and aptitudes are capable of driving or destroying an organization, therefore, its significance is invaluable.

“Managers and administration researchers have long assumed that the goals of the organization are unattainable, unless there is a permanent commitment from the members of the organization. Motivation is a characteristic of human psychology that contributes to the degree of commitment of the person. «

Let's see, according to the dictionary, what Resources: pl means. Goods, means or wealth. Set of means available to solve a need or carry out a business. Natural, hydraulic, forest, economic, human resources.

So, when the company considers humans as resources, it is considering them in the same way as its assets, its belongings (wealth) or as a means to achieve its personal goals.

Like any resource, human resources are capable of being accounted for, measured, weighed, controlled and used like any other good or medium of the company, that is to say in a rational, objective and impersonal way.

Peter Senge, the creator of the Fifth Discipline and well-known organizational learning guru, became immensely popular thanks to a groundbreaking work that the Harvard Business Review chose, in 1997, as one of the most influential texts of the last two decades: The Fifth Discipline (1990).

In this book you will not find the ten recipes to be a good executive. On the contrary, it offers a new way (and a new language) to think about organizations. Before, organizations were thought of as machines made up of parts that could be isolated from one another. The phenomena were studied in an isolated and partial way.

Senge, who introduced the concepts of "systems thinking", "intelligent organization" and "organization open to learning", defines himself as an "anti-human resources" and defines as "carcinogenic" the current policy followed by companies and declares that entrepreneurs must include investments in the environment and society as part of their value chain. Senge stated: - I never considered the term 'human resources' to be correct. It is not very significant, since people are not resources of the organization, they are "the" organization. For example, you are not a "resource" in your family, but a member of it. If it were just a resource, your family members would see it as a source of money or something else. In short, "resource" is something very limited. -

Taking this into account, professionals know that resources have a cost, profitability, are usable and subject to economic calculations such as financial, technical and material resources of the company.

Don't let anyone say something is too competitive. Once the people who don't work very hard and the people who aren't as good as you diminish, your competition drops dramatically. " (Maggie Mason).

Therefore, considering humans as resources leads us to consider our relationship with them from a legal point of view, and not a moral or a real one, and we know that they are two points of view that are not always the same, or similar.

«In all the universe of God there are not two equal souls. No two have the same job in their lives. No two talents are rivals, or in conflict. This thought should put an end to the envy of life once and for all. Each human soul can say that it is unique, in all the world in all ages, there never was nor will there be anyone like me ».

Being resources, then humans do not feel, do not have opinions, are not motivated, do not develop, or consider themselves; they are goods, means used to achieve our ends or objectives. For me, this approach has a serious taste of obsolete, post-Taylorism, yes or no? The question arises as to whether those named by some, employees or workers of today's companies, identify or feel as a means at the service of the objectives of managers or industrial owners.

The story goes that Marco Tulio Cicero when the commoners segregated themselves from the patricians and took refuge in the Roman Palatine Hill, he told them the story of the limbs and the stomach. He explained that the stomach would die if the members stopped collecting and bringing food to it, but that the members would also die if the stomach did not transform these foods into energy. Cicero showed them interdependence and symbiotic relationships, in which no one can develop without the existence of the other. To be more illustrative, I mention them:

The stomach and the limbs in the fight of the body

One day the left hand said confidentially to the right hand:

Look, we work all day, while the stomach does nothing.
The legs listened and said: He's right, we too are tired walking all day to buy food for his stomach and he just eats without doing anything to get it.

The right hand shouted:

Let's go on strike, let's not feed the stomach. Let him manage if he wants.

Then the stomach spoke:

Friends, you are thinking wrong. Our jobs and skills are very different, but the truth is that we are very dependent on each other.

Suddenly his arms screamed at him:

Shut up. Those are the arguments of a bum. From now on you are not going to eat anything, absolutely nothing.

A few days passed.

Oh, how weak I feel! –Complained one arm to the other. Me too, you don't know how tired I feel…

The legs complained:

We can barely move.

And all parts of the body said the same thing. They all felt faint.

Then the stomach spoke:

I also feel weak. If you feed me I can work again and you and I will feel better. Well, it's worth a try, ”said the right hand.

And the legs with great difficulty carried the body to the table, the hands cooperated and put the food in the mouth.

In a little while the hands exclaimed:

We already feel better.

All the members of the body said the same thing.

Then they understood that all members of the body must cooperate if they want to remain in good health. And the stomach understood that he depends on the work of the members and that he must share everything that comes to him equally with the members.

The story, for readers who wish it, is found in the Chosen Moral Fables of Jean de La Fontaine.

The value of people is irreplaceable and its impact on companies is transcendental. Nowadays when a company, be it public or private, talks about its Human Resources, it must call it its Human Capital, its strategic partner and if not, they urgently need a modern Cicero, who could irrefutably argue that corporate ownership and employees are actually partners in the business. The capital that we can call an analogy to the stomach needs both all the collaborating members and their interaction, as is true the reciprocal relationship and dependence.

Let us bear in mind that people are not an instrument of the organization, but rather they form the organization. The organization does not have people, but is made up of people.

No… Beware… Respect your Human Capital

Focusing on this change in perspective, a new name for the function should be formalized. We could stop erroneously calling Human Resources, we should talk about Human Affairs or Human Management and this, in turn, would lead us to rethink whether the title of Director or Human Resources Manager is correct. I leave you 2 questions: