Just finished my first module for the postgraduate diploma in strategic human resource management – Learning and Change. To be frank, I was a little hesitant in sharing that I am taking this course initially. The last time I shared that I have completed my other postgraduate programme, I was told: “Great, now you have more time for work.” I find that to be a ridiculous statement since I have never used company time for my personal learning. On the contrary, I have used what I have learned outside of work, paid with my own money, to benefit my organisation. This simple sharing illustrates how sometimes our attitude at workplace can influence employee’s decision in taking up courses and developing themselves, even if it is just a mindless comment. And coincidentally, the topic “Learning and Change” precisely covers that.
Thinking back on my own self development journey, I have been proactively developing myself for many years. In fact, I have quite a few credentials. Not as much as some others I meet, but still substantial. I am careful with what I pursue because I agree with what some of our senior leaders have mentioned – It is not an education arms race. With what the government advocate on “Skills, not paper qualifications“, I cannot help but wonder what does this really mean. After all, aren’t these paper qualifications and training supposed to bring us skills? On a personal note, it also makes me wonder why am I still paid the same, or even lower than someone else who perhaps don’t have as many skills as I do. I guess on top of advocacy, what is needed is a framework where whatever we advocate can be actualised and actually benefit those who follows these advocacies. Else, whatever we try to advocate seem to be empty promises.
This brings to mind another experience I had. I have completed my ACTA, Basic Sport Science and Sport Theory Level One a long time ago when I was running my own firm. When I join another organisation, I was told that these are not recognised – it does not help me in securing a higher salary than my peers. Some time down the road, this particular organisation decided to send all staff to attend one of the training which I have mentioned. I was told to return back to work since I already have the credential. It is unfortunate that this experience seems to tell me that in a way, I have disadvantaged myself by being faster than my peers, but even so, I would still continue my journey of self development because ultimately, the education and exposure is something that no one can take away from me.
HR has always been something like black box to me. During my diploma days, I did a module on HRM, which I remember doing well in. Even so, that was many years ago and HR is a big topic. Then, as a SME owner, I had to manage my staff’s performance, recruitment and almost the entire lifecycle of human resource management. But I have never been in a team of HR professionals, working as a HR specialist as my core job. Hence, taking this course is also an attempt to help me understand some of the concurrent principles behind HR, the ideologies and the thinking process and culture of HR teams. I thought it will be helpful for me be it as an employee or running my own firm.
My sentiments and reflection today is that whatever that is taught in formal training seems to be progressive and ideal. But what is disappointing is that I still see many unprogressive HR practices in modern times, especially during my career transitions, where I was able to experience it first hand. For instance, I was once asked about my experience in National Service (NS), which I thought was an irrelevant question. When I steer the topic to the fact that I hold a leadership position in the military at the time of the interview and this was in fact closer in timeline and more relevant, the questioner insisted that I talk about NS in detail which puzzled me, on top of annoying me because it was asked in a condecendingly tone. Futhermore, this was asked by a lady who have never served NS and seem to be in her twenties. I was so tempted to ask her what she did when she was in secondary school since she felt something more than a decade ago is relevant to the topic.
I am quite annoyed when some hirers felt entitled to ask all kinds of ridiculous and irrelevant question. It is even more annoying when some of these people are junior in position and have relatively little working experience, yet feeling empowered because they are sitting at the other side of the table. I think it is important for us to do away from the sense of superiority and conduct interviews based on mutual respect motivated by the desire to improve an organisation. Organisations should also ensure that whoever that is part of the recruitment process are qualified to do it. For instance, one common problem I see is that for organisations that previously only hires fresh graduates, it may be sufficient to get someone who is 5 years on the job to be part of recruitment. But if this organisation have shifted to include mid-careerist as part of their pool, then it might not be a good idea to get someone who is junior to screen through a highly experienced candidate.
Earlier, when I share with a friend that I refused to provide my salary details when asked, I was cautioned that I might be seen as uncoorperative before I was even hired. Such fears and beliefs continue to drive unprogressive HR practices. There are plentiful reasons why we should not provide our past salaries. You mean if my former company underpays me, you are going to do the same? Or if they have overpaid me, you are going to match that? Furthermore, when the roles are different, why does it matter how much I am being paid? I see this again as an abuse of the hiring process, where one make use of the fact that someone is looking for a job and leverage upon that to get information that is otherwise privileged. Do share your perspective if you think I am wrong.
Personally, I thought it would be quite a pity if an empolyee who could potentially make good contribution in an organisation is being rejected because of some personal bias of whoever that is making the decision, with more concern over protecting their rice bowl instead of considering if an employee would benefit an organisation. Or perhaps because a potential new entrant holds a different perspective as compared to whoever that is making that hiring decision. I always felt that it is important to hire people who think alike but people who think different as well. That said, I think it is important that values are aligned, especially for important ones like integrity. My postulation is that one is seldom congratulated for hiring a right candidate, but when a wrong one comes through the door, whoever that is part of the hiring process will be questioned. Hence, it won’t be surprising if hiring team adopts a risk adverse approach. And that unfortunately, seems to be the case in Singapore, where we err on the side of caution for many things. Even for those organisations that claims to seek diversity, I sometimes find it quite hard to believe they actually mean what they say.
Writing this article perhaps will not do good for me as well, since it shows that I actually have a mind of my own, which can sometimes be frowned upon in organisations. I won’t be surprised if this article surface some time down the road and affect my chances of getting employed. Some companies just want people who don’t think too much and get their job done. On a positive note, I do noticed some good example in the hiring process in recent years. One of which I would like to highlight is a public agency asking if one has been investigated for disciplinary issue in their life but stating that whever that has happened before one turns 18 need not be declared. This is progressive to me because in many other applications involving uniformed personnel or public agency, candidates are being asked to declare everything. If ex-criminals who commited minor crime can declare that they have not commited any crime after five years, why am I being asked if I was a naughty boy when I was in secondary school?
Leave a Reply