This post has sparked a lot of strong reactions, and honestly, it raises a fair discussion point, not a final truth.

At face value, the criticism comes from a real place. Many employees experience HR mainly as:

• Policy enforcers

• Compliance gatekeepers

• Representatives of management, not employees

From that lens, it can feel like HR adds friction, not value especially when morale issues, layoffs, or unfair decisions aren’t addressed transparently.

But here’s the other side. HR doesn’t exist to generate revenue directly, just like finance, legal, or operations support functions. Its value shows up in:

• Hiring the right people

• Preventing costly legal and compliance issues

• Building systems for performance, culture, and leadership

The real problem isn’t that HR is useless it’s that HR impact is uneven. In some companies, HR is strategic and people-focused. In others, it’s reduced to paperwork and damage control.

So maybe the real question isn’t “Do we need HR?”
It’s “What kind of HR does a company choose to build?”