Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
(Post 73752)
Is it always so clear-cut that the job is generalist or specialist? Or is it just a false dichotomy? Can't a HR person be doing bits of both, i.e. general administration as well as analytical work. And if you are the head of a HR department, are you a generalist or a specialist. It probably doesn't matter right.
|
I have been in the HR line for over 15 years.
My general impression of this thread is there appears to be much information which while technically correct, is made to look as if this is the norm in HR.
Those fancy job descriptions and pay shared so far only apply to a rare minority (<5%) of the industry, the majority of HR practitioners are earning no where the levels that is shared here. And I'm talking about all HR regardless whether one is called a specialist or not.
The true specialist, i.e. those that are making the fantastic $$$ will not do operational level work as this is way below their pay grade, but then neitherare they as common as it is implied over here. Most of these people are very experienced >15 years in the field and hold at least regional if not global portfolios. Most of them are ranked higher than a typical Singapore or ASEAN HR Director. Also as a general rule, specialist are only found in large MNCs (i.e. Revenue > US$10 billion, FTE > 5000). Smaller companies do not have the scale nor support sophistication to hire proper specialist.
My advice for the majority of the newcomers or undergrads here who want to join HR is to avoid over analyzing things like whether you are specialist, generalist, analyst, consultant or whatever cr@p companies come out these days. Concentrate on your job and self development and continuously seek to improve your marketability. At a junior level your pay isn't going to be that much different between various sub-functions as the level of expertise is not there.
|