At the CIPD Annual Conference I went to a talk where one of the speakers, a senior leader in the NHS, changed his traditional HR-related job title to VP of People as part of the ongoing HR transformation designed to build employee engagement, employee voice etc. It was interesting as it was the first thing he did upon entering the organisation - he obviously felt that employees would perceive him as less 'on their side' if he had a generic HR title.
Had a quick look online and some of these job titles jumped out:
Chief People Officer
Chief Happiness Officer
VP of People
VP of Talent
I'm wondering what everyone thinks about whether traditional HR titles do give off the wrong impression and that it's time we codified - in job titles - the commitment of the HR department to look after staff.
I guess this leads into a wider discussion about what we should be calling the HR department nowadays. I spoke to a few people at the CIPD conference who said that calling people 'human resources' is old-fashioned and sends the wrong message. 'The People Department' was highlighted as a potential replacement.