What’s good for the employee may not be good for the business. Recent examples are working from home. The Four Day week. Challenges  to the long hours culture. Relaxation of absence management policy to be more sensitive to mental wellbeing. The increase in the wages bill as a result of Equal pay for work of equal value.

Changes to the recruitment process as part of the strategy to have a more diverse and inclusive workforce (attract more candidates through reducing essential criteria but extends the time it takes to fill posts), interview panels balanced in-terms of gender and race ( takes longer to assemble an interview panel)

There are those in HR and management who argue that what is good for employees can also be good for business. That a happy workforce is a more productive workforce. That if the organisation is seeking to change working practices, introduce new technology or implement a reorganisation as part of improving efficiency and reducing costs such measures are much more likely to be successfully implemented if the workforce feels valued, respected and treated fairly.

That changes to the recruitment process will uncover new areas of previously untapped talent . That a more compassionate management style will make the organisation a more attractive employer and increase retention rates thus reducing recruitment costs.

In which case there is no HR paradox. It is possible to balance the needs of the employees and the needs of the organisation .So why do some remain unconvinced? Part of the answer is a tendency to see the work life balance, a concern for employee health and well-being, equal pay, and increased diversity in the workplace as nice little extras to do in the good times when budgets are not so tight and competition not so fierce. In the meantime increased efficiency and improved performance requires, changes in working practices and the introduction of new technology to be implemented as quickly as possible.

This is the contradiction, if you haven’t demonstrated to employees that you care about them they will distrust your proposed changes and be apprehensive about the introduction of new technology. Which is why research finding confirm that the majority of major change initiatives fail, in whole or part, to deliver the anticipated efficiencies and improved performance.