Readers have strong opinions, especially when you get into the debate over the strategic value of HR and getting a “seat at the table.” I recently devoted one of my Last Word columns (titled “HR ‘Hate’ Endures”) to a new study by Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu and The Economist Intelligence Unit on the same subject. Here are some of the comments:

From a business and executive coach in Indianapolis:
“I read the Fast Company article when it originally came out. To tell the truth, it hit the nail on the noggin. Our profession seems more like social work and transactional HR voodoo than anything that will help the business fulfill on its strategic agenda and we seem happy as clams about it. Meanwhile, HR doesn’t have a ‘seat at the table’ and gets its resources slashed or outsourced. And we wonder why. Poor us. On the other hand, I keep seeing executives selecting pals from production, sales and other departments to be their ‘HR guys’ rather than selecting people who can translate the business’ strategic goals into a people strategy that works. I’ve seen HR professionals hire ‘people people’ (still don’t know what that means), thinking that on-the-job training will take care of everything that’s missing. We did (and continue to do) it to ourselves.”

From Barbara (no city given):
“Almost 25 years ago, I remember a midlevel sales manager telling me that ‘HR can’t do anything.’ Since she was talking about my chosen profession, I defended against her remark, but, as you can tell, I never forgot it. Why? Because I suspected there was a lot of truth to it. Of course, there are HR folks who have had and continue to have impact. But for the most part, HR practitioners are bureaucrats, administering policies and ensuring procedures are followed. … I think the HR profession is ripe for major overhaul, and it’ll probably come from outside the profession. What that will look like, I’ll not venture to guess, but it will probably be very, very different from anything we’ve ever imagined.”

From Meg in New York:
I question how a publication whose prime readership is the very group Mr. Hollon has chastised on repeated occasions allows such drivel. More disheartening is Mr. Hollon’s total lack of respect for the HR profession, supported by his latest fear that, again, no one will speak up and help HR professionals. Quite condemning and quite irresponsible, especially in light of the Jeff Schwartz interview which offered a fairer assessment, to which Mr. Hollon chose to paraphrase in his one-sided perspective. … Your ‘HR “hate” endures’ is completely inappropriate and likely a tagline for nothing more than the shock value. … Shame on you for disrespecting your readership, yet once again.”