Hi friends, this is Dilshad. Can anyone clarify the differences between designations like Executive HR & HR Executive, Manager HR & HR Manager, Executive Admin & HR - Admin & HR Executive, and so on...
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
ok... u r innocent. I am not goin to be harsh. Yes its not the right question. Clarify it or edit it by adding more "clarity" to wat u want to know.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
57From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Asha,
Dilshad's question is very simple. He wants to know if there is any difference between the designations HR Executive and Executive HR, as well as other designations he has mentioned.
I feel that HR Executive is above Executive HR. Can anyone clarify this?
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dilshad's question is very simple. He wants to know if there is any difference between the designations HR Executive and Executive HR, as well as other designations he has mentioned.
I feel that HR Executive is above Executive HR. Can anyone clarify this?
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
God... I thought only Dilshad was on the list. Don't tell me there are many others too.
NO, IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE:
It's like asking what's the difference between Mr. Anil Raj, Son of Mr. Raj, and Mr. Raj's son, Mr. Anil Raj. Got it! My goodness...
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
NO, IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE:
It's like asking what's the difference between Mr. Anil Raj, Son of Mr. Raj, and Mr. Raj's son, Mr. Anil Raj. Got it! My goodness...
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Dilshad,
You have great common sense and thinking ability. I appreciate it, and I want to suggest one thing: just check a dictionary or ask the person who holds the same designation in your company.
Cheers :p:p:p:p:p:p:p:p:-|
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You have great common sense and thinking ability. I appreciate it, and I want to suggest one thing: just check a dictionary or ask the person who holds the same designation in your company.
Cheers :p:p:p:p:p:p:p:p:-|
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
No, some organizations practice differently. As we mostly see, Indian organizations give very fancy designations. Therefore, to counter this more from an interpretation perspective, they have changed the designation before the role and after the role.
A. Product Manager or B. Manager - Product
A. Product defines the role; this could be an individual performer.
B. Here, product defines a group or team. But this defines a team as a whole or department.
Seems a bit confusing, but these are some standard practices that a few organizations make, especially those with an international presence in more than 50 countries because, as per international standards, a manager is one who has a team to manage, with specific organizational level priorities affecting bottom lines directly.
Hope this clears your doubt.
Regards,
Niks
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
A. Product Manager or B. Manager - Product
A. Product defines the role; this could be an individual performer.
B. Here, product defines a group or team. But this defines a team as a whole or department.
Seems a bit confusing, but these are some standard practices that a few organizations make, especially those with an international presence in more than 50 countries because, as per international standards, a manager is one who has a team to manage, with specific organizational level priorities affecting bottom lines directly.
Hope this clears your doubt.
Regards,
Niks
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
When In Absence Of Regular Hr Staff Other Deptt. Make The Alternate Of It Like That inchare - Hr For A Short Term Period That Called < Post > Hr
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi all,
No more differences... Aisha is correct, but in a professional manner, it should be like this:
Manager - HR
ABC LTD.
Don't use "HR Manager
ABC LTD." as I am thinking you are representing your department with such a designation, so your designation should come first. You can't say "I am HR," but you have to say "I am Manager - HR." I am interacting with all of you, and I know you are from the Human Resources department, but I don't know what your designation is. Therefore, your value is in your designation, not the department.
Hope I am correct.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
No more differences... Aisha is correct, but in a professional manner, it should be like this:
Manager - HR
ABC LTD.
Don't use "HR Manager
ABC LTD." as I am thinking you are representing your department with such a designation, so your designation should come first. You can't say "I am HR," but you have to say "I am Manager - HR." I am interacting with all of you, and I know you are from the Human Resources department, but I don't know what your designation is. Therefore, your value is in your designation, not the department.
Hope I am correct.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I think Executive HR means first he becomes an Executive in general and after gaining experience, he becomes HR. Therefore, Executive HR without formal educational MBA-HR qualification.
Secondly, an HR Executive is first a qualified MBA-HR who becomes an HR Executive.
How's that? 😉
Rashid
From Saudi Arabia
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Secondly, an HR Executive is first a qualified MBA-HR who becomes an HR Executive.
How's that? 😉
Rashid
From Saudi Arabia
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
ASHA and ABHI are perfect. There is no difference...... I think discussing this topic is waste of time. Sorry :icon13:
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
My friend, there is no difference between HR Executive and Executive HR. It depends on the company how they assign the designation. However, you will not find a designation called HR General Manager; it should be GM-HR. In top management, designations are standardized.
From India, Calcutta
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Calcutta
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In the big and old organizations, an employee is doing his job and with his experience, he achieves a certain status in the organization. The concept of specialization is very recent. Employees who join the organization remain in the organization for years and then start with job rotation or if the organization finds an employee capable of handling one function and needs him in another function to improve it. A designation is generally a combination of both a grade level and the function or the department.
So today if one employee is handling Administration and his grade is manager, his grade is not going to change but his department/function is. So he can be termed as Manager - Administration or Manager - HR. "HR manager" sounds as if we are using shortcuts. So "Manager - HR" is a more professional way of using it.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
So today if one employee is handling Administration and his grade is manager, his grade is not going to change but his department/function is. So he can be termed as Manager - Administration or Manager - HR. "HR manager" sounds as if we are using shortcuts. So "Manager - HR" is a more professional way of using it.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I dont think there is significant difference between these two. If such distinction exists it should be reflected in the Job description. Regards, Shijit.
From India, Kochi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Kochi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The difference between both would be there in the profile and in terms of grade of the individual rest i see no difference. Regards,
From India, Nagpur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Nagpur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello All,
I think only Anjali came closest to the truth. If you look at just the dictionary meaning, all are right - there's no difference between each of the two sets. But look at it from another perspective... who is deciding these? The management...right? So, in a way, it is a clear giveaway of the mental outlook of the ones at the top, reflecting their way of thinking and/or their focus towards life in general.
When it is "HR Manager," the focus is more on the function from the mental outlook of the management, meaning more function-oriented/business-like in the way they see the organization. When it is "Manager-HR," the focus is more on the designation, meaning more oriented towards the high-flying designations (an import from the USA, where designations like President, Vice-President, etc., are in vogue). I remember a joke regarding hiring some senior profiles (now don't think they don't give such things a lot of weightage - they do much more than lower staff) - give the guy the designation of a VP but with the job content of a senior exec... there are guys who don't mind.
Not sure how many agree with me... 🤷🏻‍♂️
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I think only Anjali came closest to the truth. If you look at just the dictionary meaning, all are right - there's no difference between each of the two sets. But look at it from another perspective... who is deciding these? The management...right? So, in a way, it is a clear giveaway of the mental outlook of the ones at the top, reflecting their way of thinking and/or their focus towards life in general.
When it is "HR Manager," the focus is more on the function from the mental outlook of the management, meaning more function-oriented/business-like in the way they see the organization. When it is "Manager-HR," the focus is more on the designation, meaning more oriented towards the high-flying designations (an import from the USA, where designations like President, Vice-President, etc., are in vogue). I remember a joke regarding hiring some senior profiles (now don't think they don't give such things a lot of weightage - they do much more than lower staff) - give the guy the designation of a VP but with the job content of a senior exec... there are guys who don't mind.
Not sure how many agree with me... 🤷🏻‍♂️
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello All,
I think only Anjali came closest to the truth.
If you look at just the dictionary meaning, all are right - there's NO difference between each of the two sets. But look at it from another perspective....who is deciding these? The management...right? So, in a way, it is a CLEAR GIVEAWAY of the mental outlook of the ones at the top...reflects their way of thinking and/or their focus towards life in general.
When it is "HR Manager", the focus is MORE on the function from the mental outlook of the management......meaning more function-oriented/business-like in the way they see and run the organization. So, in a way, if you work for such a company, you can be sure that as long as you do your job well, minor fooling-around may be tolerated :p.
When it is "Manager-HR", the focus is more on the designation........meaning more oriented towards the high-flying designations (an import from the USA, where designations like President, Vice-President, etc. are the norm). I remember a joke regarding hiring some senior profiles (now don't think they don't give such things a lot of weightage - they do MUCH MORE than lower staff) - give the guy the designation of a VP but with the job content of a senior exec...there are guys who don't mind.
So, practically, you can make your choice of the company when you change your next job...depends on how YOU look at life and WHAT YOU WANT from the NEW job - and if the new company meets your perceptions.
Not sure how many agree with me...... 😐
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I think only Anjali came closest to the truth.
If you look at just the dictionary meaning, all are right - there's NO difference between each of the two sets. But look at it from another perspective....who is deciding these? The management...right? So, in a way, it is a CLEAR GIVEAWAY of the mental outlook of the ones at the top...reflects their way of thinking and/or their focus towards life in general.
When it is "HR Manager", the focus is MORE on the function from the mental outlook of the management......meaning more function-oriented/business-like in the way they see and run the organization. So, in a way, if you work for such a company, you can be sure that as long as you do your job well, minor fooling-around may be tolerated :p.
When it is "Manager-HR", the focus is more on the designation........meaning more oriented towards the high-flying designations (an import from the USA, where designations like President, Vice-President, etc. are the norm). I remember a joke regarding hiring some senior profiles (now don't think they don't give such things a lot of weightage - they do MUCH MORE than lower staff) - give the guy the designation of a VP but with the job content of a senior exec...there are guys who don't mind.
So, practically, you can make your choice of the company when you change your next job...depends on how YOU look at life and WHAT YOU WANT from the NEW job - and if the new company meets your perceptions.
Not sure how many agree with me...... 😐
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
No , Both the designations is same. You can write or spell it in any of the way but the meaning is same....
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Dilshad,
Not sure to what extent, but will try clarifying...
Executive HR is a term generally used to specify the varied functionalities of HRM and may or may not refer to an individual post/designation, whereas an HR Executive refers to an individual who has joined an organization and is at the base level of the HR Department.
Technically, there is not much of a difference between Manager HR and HR Manager, except that the former is used to address an individual with an emphasis on the designation he/she holds, while the latter is used with an emphasis on the department.
Executive Admin is someone who has joined the Admin department of an organization at the base level. HR Executive is someone who has joined the HR department of an organization at the base level.
HR-Admin might be someone who handles both HR and Admin at the base level either due to i) the nature of the organization or ii) the size of the organization.
Hope this satisfies the need for clarification. 😛
---
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Not sure to what extent, but will try clarifying...
Executive HR is a term generally used to specify the varied functionalities of HRM and may or may not refer to an individual post/designation, whereas an HR Executive refers to an individual who has joined an organization and is at the base level of the HR Department.
Technically, there is not much of a difference between Manager HR and HR Manager, except that the former is used to address an individual with an emphasis on the designation he/she holds, while the latter is used with an emphasis on the department.
Executive Admin is someone who has joined the Admin department of an organization at the base level. HR Executive is someone who has joined the HR department of an organization at the base level.
HR-Admin might be someone who handles both HR and Admin at the base level either due to i) the nature of the organization or ii) the size of the organization.
Hope this satisfies the need for clarification. 😛
---
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
ASHA and ABHI are perfect. There is no difference... But Asha Ji, I request you don't be harsh on anyone. We are all here for knowledge sharing. I respect your dedication and contribution to Cite-HR, but if a person does not know, we should help them out rather than using harsh words. Please do not take it otherwise.
From India, Indore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Indore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Akhilesh,
You need to understand that by doing so, you are not allowing the person to think. If tomorrow, he asks the same question to the management, he will only be considered "ignorant" (I used a better word here). It is sometimes okay to be harsh, provided the intention is not to insult. My message is "Think before you ask questions; never ask for the sake of asking."
If someone does not know, we have to help. But if someone does not even have a logical thinking process, we must teach them to do so.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You need to understand that by doing so, you are not allowing the person to think. If tomorrow, he asks the same question to the management, he will only be considered "ignorant" (I used a better word here). It is sometimes okay to be harsh, provided the intention is not to insult. My message is "Think before you ask questions; never ask for the sake of asking."
If someone does not know, we have to help. But if someone does not even have a logical thinking process, we must teach them to do so.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hey,
A very valid question. From a job content perspective, not much difference between the two. However, the difference may arise depending on how companies classify those jobs. So you may not see a difference within a company but may definitely see a difference among companies. The difference being visible more in the career progression chart, job hierarchy, and salary to some extent.
Regards,
likethatmel
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
A very valid question. From a job content perspective, not much difference between the two. However, the difference may arise depending on how companies classify those jobs. So you may not see a difference within a company but may definitely see a difference among companies. The difference being visible more in the career progression chart, job hierarchy, and salary to some extent.
Regards,
likethatmel
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
May be Executive-HR is used in official records and communication. Generally people introduce/refer to as HR executive like saying Rama’s son instead of saying son of Rama.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Based on my knowledge, one of our seniors mentioned that "Executive - HR" is a slightly higher designation than "HR Executive," similar to other cases such as "Manager - HR" being above "HR Manager" and "Manager - Fin & A/c" being higher than "Accounts Manager" and so on.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hey Dilshad,
To be blunt, your senior is either taking you for a ride - a solid one at that - or he doesn't know the answer but doesn't want to admit his ignorance in front of his junior. Like many guys on this earth, they don't know but want to put up a show of know-it-all.
What do you say, Asha?
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
To be blunt, your senior is either taking you for a ride - a solid one at that - or he doesn't know the answer but doesn't want to admit his ignorance in front of his junior. Like many guys on this earth, they don't know but want to put up a show of know-it-all.
What do you say, Asha?
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello,
I believe that when we are using "The Manager - HR" in some emails, letters, or applications instead of "The HR Manager," it sounds more professional and respectful. The same goes for other designations, but the meaning will always remain the same.
Regards,
Swati Ahuja
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I believe that when we are using "The Manager - HR" in some emails, letters, or applications instead of "The HR Manager," it sounds more professional and respectful. The same goes for other designations, but the meaning will always remain the same.
Regards,
Swati Ahuja
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Mr. Dilshad,
I appreciate your efforts in asking creative questions. As far as my knowledge is concerned, both the designations seem to be okay. But a professional way of designating a person is "Manager - HR," which means stating your level of function and then the department.
However, the way Asha answered you is good. She wants to be assertive rather than harsh.
Regards,
Sreenivas
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I appreciate your efforts in asking creative questions. As far as my knowledge is concerned, both the designations seem to be okay. But a professional way of designating a person is "Manager - HR," which means stating your level of function and then the department.
However, the way Asha answered you is good. She wants to be assertive rather than harsh.
Regards,
Sreenivas
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Well its all depend up on wht title criteria is at org floor. In recent times the practice of being using the title & then dept name to distinguish titles of respective departmental hierarchy.
From Pakistan, Karachi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From Pakistan, Karachi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The position is that of executive level.It does not matter whether you write HR executive or executive HR.It means same as level is same.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
It is very sad if someone asks a question but instead of answering, you treat them like a fool. It is better not to answer. This happens in school too. When a teacher asks a student if they have any questions about what was taught that day, it should be appreciated and answered. However, sometimes when a student does ask a question, the teacher responds by asking where their attention was during the lesson. This kind of behavior can be discouraging and demoralizing.
So, it's important not to harass people when they ask questions, as it may lead them to stop asking altogether and feel demoralized.
Bye,
Indu
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
It is very sad if someone asks a question but instead of answering, you treat them like a fool. It is better not to answer. This happens in school too. When a teacher asks a student if they have any questions about what was taught that day, it should be appreciated and answered. However, sometimes when a student does ask a question, the teacher responds by asking where their attention was during the lesson. This kind of behavior can be discouraging and demoralizing.
So, it's important not to harass people when they ask questions, as it may lead them to stop asking altogether and feel demoralized.
Bye,
Indu
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Both look similar, but the designation "Manager- HR" implies he has a team of HR professionals, and he is managing that team. Whereas "HR Manager" is one who is a human resources manager all by himself. However, this cannot be generalized. Much depends on the organization's culture and practices.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hey its teh same thnig, there is no diffrence as such but if you go by words break up it may seems bit confusing.:-|
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Well! A good question. Every organization has its own designation path. Sometimes they define it as HR Assistant, and sometimes it is called Assistant HR. I agree with Niks' comments about the question. Currently, I am working as an HR Assistant here, and my job description is purely focused on HR activities and assisting my supervisor. That is what I had in mind.
Regards,
Jamal
From Pakistan, Karachi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Regards,
Jamal
From Pakistan, Karachi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
the diffrence is not in designation it s all about howz an orgs define it structure. simply it depends ho company define its designations
From Pakistan, Lahore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From Pakistan, Lahore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Nikusingh, Thanks a lot for your guidance. Just to clear one more time. HR Executive - Junior Executive Human Resources - Senior Please confirm this. Thank you.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Asha,
Looking at your reply, I instantly recollected a quote which says, "[Whenever you feel like criticizing anyone...just remember that all the people in this world haven't had the advantages that you've had.]" - F. Scott Fitzgerald
Similarly, what Dilshad asked was a seemingly simple question. The answer should have been "there's no difference whatsoever."
Asha, nobody is forcing you to answer or post comments to any thread. So please learn to give respect to people who are either new to this forum or new to this function. Moreover, you need not exaggerate so much using exclamations like "God," etc. I don't think that was required over there. You went a bit overboard, I guess. Feel free to revert in case you want to give any justification.
And by the way, thanks for reading this ;)
Regards,
Prashant
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Looking at your reply, I instantly recollected a quote which says, "[Whenever you feel like criticizing anyone...just remember that all the people in this world haven't had the advantages that you've had.]" - F. Scott Fitzgerald
Similarly, what Dilshad asked was a seemingly simple question. The answer should have been "there's no difference whatsoever."
Asha, nobody is forcing you to answer or post comments to any thread. So please learn to give respect to people who are either new to this forum or new to this function. Moreover, you need not exaggerate so much using exclamations like "God," etc. I don't think that was required over there. You went a bit overboard, I guess. Feel free to revert in case you want to give any justification.
And by the way, thanks for reading this ;)
Regards,
Prashant
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I think there is not much difference. It is different method of expression of the same thing.
From India, Kollam
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Kollam
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Dilshad,
I agree with Mr. Ahmed. The difference is not in designation; it's all about how an organization defines its structure. Simply put, it depends on how a company defines its designations.
Depending on the size and structure of an organization, let us take it as where an organization has small teams and executives or managers carrying out different functions may designate them as Executive-HR, Executive-Accounts, Manager-HR, Manager-Finance, etc. Similarly, based on the size and structure of an organization having individual departments and a large number of teams for each function may designate their teams like HR-Manager, HR-executive, Finance-Manager, Finance-executive, etc., based on the level of hierarchy.
Hope the above may also clarify someone's question about adding suffix Junior/Senior as below:
HR Executive - Junior
Executive Human Resources - Senior
To conclude, the designation is more appropriate and professional when said with "ROLE with function or department." That is to say Executive-HR, Manager-HR, etc.
Thanks,
Uma
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I agree with Mr. Ahmed. The difference is not in designation; it's all about how an organization defines its structure. Simply put, it depends on how a company defines its designations.
Depending on the size and structure of an organization, let us take it as where an organization has small teams and executives or managers carrying out different functions may designate them as Executive-HR, Executive-Accounts, Manager-HR, Manager-Finance, etc. Similarly, based on the size and structure of an organization having individual departments and a large number of teams for each function may designate their teams like HR-Manager, HR-executive, Finance-Manager, Finance-executive, etc., based on the level of hierarchy.
Hope the above may also clarify someone's question about adding suffix Junior/Senior as below:
HR Executive - Junior
Executive Human Resources - Senior
To conclude, the designation is more appropriate and professional when said with "ROLE with function or department." That is to say Executive-HR, Manager-HR, etc.
Thanks,
Uma
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Prashant,
If you want no criticism...
DO nothing, say nothing, and be nothing.
You must have read that also??? Good!
Sometimes, that learning comes with a blunt statement.
Please understand - sometimes it's a harsh statement that is required to make the person understand and undo his way of thinking.
I don't want to justify what I said... whether it's right or wrong, it's left for the reader to interpret. And definitely - I don't want to justify my comments with you. Why would I give you a chance to defend yourself again ;-) ? You felt it was harsh - but it was not meant to insult him.
Dilshad requires some logical thinking. He also defended himself in the posts, saying his senior made that statement. So what do you say about this?
And yes, I feel bad about it - "God!!!" Why did he just ask without thinking. Ask, there is nothing wrong. But ask the right question. Do you know that many people ask just for the sake of asking?
You can pat someone who is learning... but sometimes you need to pat hard if he is sleeping while thinking.
And about the "so-called exaggeration," let me tell you... that was a much shorter message after I really typed out what I wanted to say. :neutral: And after all, I called God... is that bad, honey ;-) ? Chill... You seem to have overly understood... when there was not much pain required to interpret that!
And the part that made me laugh at you was - you are suggesting me to answer the way you want? "The answer should have been 'there's no difference whatsoever'." Please - breathe some life! He is not a kid anymore... he has to see a lot of serious issues. Don't break his thinking process... don't spoon-feed.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If you want no criticism...
DO nothing, say nothing, and be nothing.
You must have read that also??? Good!
Sometimes, that learning comes with a blunt statement.
Please understand - sometimes it's a harsh statement that is required to make the person understand and undo his way of thinking.
I don't want to justify what I said... whether it's right or wrong, it's left for the reader to interpret. And definitely - I don't want to justify my comments with you. Why would I give you a chance to defend yourself again ;-) ? You felt it was harsh - but it was not meant to insult him.
Dilshad requires some logical thinking. He also defended himself in the posts, saying his senior made that statement. So what do you say about this?
And yes, I feel bad about it - "God!!!" Why did he just ask without thinking. Ask, there is nothing wrong. But ask the right question. Do you know that many people ask just for the sake of asking?
You can pat someone who is learning... but sometimes you need to pat hard if he is sleeping while thinking.
And about the "so-called exaggeration," let me tell you... that was a much shorter message after I really typed out what I wanted to say. :neutral: And after all, I called God... is that bad, honey ;-) ? Chill... You seem to have overly understood... when there was not much pain required to interpret that!
And the part that made me laugh at you was - you are suggesting me to answer the way you want? "The answer should have been 'there's no difference whatsoever'." Please - breathe some life! He is not a kid anymore... he has to see a lot of serious issues. Don't break his thinking process... don't spoon-feed.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Well said Vijay... Sometimes it takes a lot of pain and time to explain that this question needs more thinking b4 asking. Which would have ultimately led to "no asking"
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hey everyone,
I think this is becoming a serious out-of-topic debate. If Dilshad has it right, should we also consider others who deserve some attention? Kya Dilshad bhai, did you get the inputs you wanted? Let's be fair to others too.
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I think this is becoming a serious out-of-topic debate. If Dilshad has it right, should we also consider others who deserve some attention? Kya Dilshad bhai, did you get the inputs you wanted? Let's be fair to others too.
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I thank all of you,
First of all I would like to clarify that I’m ‘she’ not ‘he’ J
Actually I new for this forum
Ash you made many comments on this topic,
Can you clarify that how any one can measure which one is right question or not. This question may be useless/silly for you, but not for others.
You said that “Dilshad requires some logical thinking. He also defended himself in the posts saying his senior made that statement. So what say abt this?”
I have around 10 yrs experience in Admin, I also think logically. I too know that there is no difference between these designations. One day my Management asked the same question with me, (because now I’m also handling the HR duties) I told the same thing there is no difference between these designations. But my boss told that there is a slight difference between these designations and made a comment on me that you not even know this?
I was into dilemma really is there any difference between these designations ??? So I did not hesitate and thought it is a right place where I can interact with many HR persons and can clarify my doubt.
I agree with Prashant, Sujata and others
if you think its not a good question or its irrelevant then simply leave it (it saves our precious time also). the person will automatically understand the thing but giving comments on any ones intellect is not good (at least for HR person)
If it is a reaction for posting a question, others may not come forward to posting questions. In my opinion it should a place where we can share our knowledge with out any hesitations.
I request you all do not waste your precious time on unnecessary debates.
Thank you once again.
**** good experience on first question itself !!!!
Dilshad
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
First of all I would like to clarify that I’m ‘she’ not ‘he’ J
Actually I new for this forum
Ash you made many comments on this topic,
Can you clarify that how any one can measure which one is right question or not. This question may be useless/silly for you, but not for others.
You said that “Dilshad requires some logical thinking. He also defended himself in the posts saying his senior made that statement. So what say abt this?”
I have around 10 yrs experience in Admin, I also think logically. I too know that there is no difference between these designations. One day my Management asked the same question with me, (because now I’m also handling the HR duties) I told the same thing there is no difference between these designations. But my boss told that there is a slight difference between these designations and made a comment on me that you not even know this?
I was into dilemma really is there any difference between these designations ??? So I did not hesitate and thought it is a right place where I can interact with many HR persons and can clarify my doubt.
I agree with Prashant, Sujata and others
if you think its not a good question or its irrelevant then simply leave it (it saves our precious time also). the person will automatically understand the thing but giving comments on any ones intellect is not good (at least for HR person)
If it is a reaction for posting a question, others may not come forward to posting questions. In my opinion it should a place where we can share our knowledge with out any hesitations.
I request you all do not waste your precious time on unnecessary debates.
Thank you once again.
**** good experience on first question itself !!!!
Dilshad
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Ms. Dilshad:
Experience in years will be of no use if not used properly. You are supposed to be confident in your views, not your seniors' views (the first mistake you made). Please don't defend yourself. Again, it's not about sharing knowledge without hesitation; it's about telling you to think logically. Your explanation of someone else's or your boss's comment holds no importance. You posted it; don't doubt yourself for such "questions."
I am sorry, but I have to say it - I thought you were a fresher - and still took the time to answer you and say there is no difference, but knowing that you have 10 years of experience - it's painful. Please don't avoid criticisms. I have received a number of them. It will only help. At least I am sure next time you will think twice before posting. No offense!
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Experience in years will be of no use if not used properly. You are supposed to be confident in your views, not your seniors' views (the first mistake you made). Please don't defend yourself. Again, it's not about sharing knowledge without hesitation; it's about telling you to think logically. Your explanation of someone else's or your boss's comment holds no importance. You posted it; don't doubt yourself for such "questions."
I am sorry, but I have to say it - I thought you were a fresher - and still took the time to answer you and say there is no difference, but knowing that you have 10 years of experience - it's painful. Please don't avoid criticisms. I have received a number of them. It will only help. At least I am sure next time you will think twice before posting. No offense!
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
hello sir, You have the choice to put your initial either infront of your name or after your name. Isn’t it? I hope you got the answer.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi All, Pls dont fyt ...enjoy the topic........be coolllllllllllll Prashant and asha and dilshad.........
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello Ms. Dilshad,
Please don't blame anyone else - including me, since I addressed you as 'Bhai' once - for calling you Mr. and NOT Ms. You never clarified this aspect even once since you posted this thread on 12th April. Please accept my apologies regarding this aspect.
Coming to your response/reaction (frankly, I don't know what to call it), to others' postings, may I ask you one thing?
You mentioned: "But my boss told that there is a slight difference between these designations and made a comment on me that you not even know this? Can you please ask him the differences and inform all of us on this forum? There is a reason why I am asking this... I do hope you will take it in the right spirit. Maybe there's some justification to the age-old proverb: Look for something lost where you lost it.
I will let you and others know the reason why I am asking you as soon as I see your response.
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Please don't blame anyone else - including me, since I addressed you as 'Bhai' once - for calling you Mr. and NOT Ms. You never clarified this aspect even once since you posted this thread on 12th April. Please accept my apologies regarding this aspect.
Coming to your response/reaction (frankly, I don't know what to call it), to others' postings, may I ask you one thing?
You mentioned: "But my boss told that there is a slight difference between these designations and made a comment on me that you not even know this? Can you please ask him the differences and inform all of us on this forum? There is a reason why I am asking this... I do hope you will take it in the right spirit. Maybe there's some justification to the age-old proverb: Look for something lost where you lost it.
I will let you and others know the reason why I am asking you as soon as I see your response.
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Ash
I think you don't like criticism. Though I am not from HR stream still I learn lot of thing from this form. I am a business person. I don't think people in this form are insensible. This is not a chat room where people say any dam thing. Defiantly if someone is asking a question he/she want assure him/herself whether they are thinking right either they are on wrong side. Even I consult my friends on some topic when I am taking decision on serious issue.
But I have seen and experience, Once I asked some question on a form, one of fellow gave me answer first you learn English than ask question though my question was not about language. May be my grammar is not good but I have nothing do with that I am a successful business person. I felt very bad.
Simple thing I wanted to say don’t discourage people, if you think someone is asking wrong question don’t waste your time by answering him/her.
Bye
Indu
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I think you don't like criticism. Though I am not from HR stream still I learn lot of thing from this form. I am a business person. I don't think people in this form are insensible. This is not a chat room where people say any dam thing. Defiantly if someone is asking a question he/she want assure him/herself whether they are thinking right either they are on wrong side. Even I consult my friends on some topic when I am taking decision on serious issue.
But I have seen and experience, Once I asked some question on a form, one of fellow gave me answer first you learn English than ask question though my question was not about language. May be my grammar is not good but I have nothing do with that I am a successful business person. I felt very bad.
Simple thing I wanted to say don’t discourage people, if you think someone is asking wrong question don’t waste your time by answering him/her.
Bye
Indu
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Friend,
You seem to be getting confused. An HR executive and an Executive HR are one and the same. Normally, in your organization, there should be designated roles or a hierarchy followed by departments. It would be beneficial to finalize the designations and grades first. This will make it easier for you or anyone else to work on compensation and benefits, career progression, comparison, and grouping. Therefore, it would be better to designate the role as Executive - HR only.
The table below may provide you with some ideas on designations and grouping:
Designation Proposed Group
Senior Vice President G-6
Vice President
General Manager G-5
Deputy General Manager
Assistant General Manager
Senior Manager
Manager
Deputy Manager
Assistant Manager
Senior Executive G-3
Executive
Officer G-1
Junior Officer
If you have technicians, operators, assistants in various departments, you may consider adding another grade as Technician/Assistant. Even though they are technicians, you can designate them as Junior Officer - Technical/HR/Accounts/Purchase/Admin/Liaison, etc. The designation of Officer/Executive/Manager/GM/VP should be followed by the department.
I hope this clarifies things for you.
Thanks and regards,
Kameswarao
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You seem to be getting confused. An HR executive and an Executive HR are one and the same. Normally, in your organization, there should be designated roles or a hierarchy followed by departments. It would be beneficial to finalize the designations and grades first. This will make it easier for you or anyone else to work on compensation and benefits, career progression, comparison, and grouping. Therefore, it would be better to designate the role as Executive - HR only.
The table below may provide you with some ideas on designations and grouping:
Designation Proposed Group
Senior Vice President G-6
Vice President
General Manager G-5
Deputy General Manager
Assistant General Manager
Senior Manager
Manager
Deputy Manager
Assistant Manager
Senior Executive G-3
Executive
Officer G-1
Junior Officer
If you have technicians, operators, assistants in various departments, you may consider adding another grade as Technician/Assistant. Even though they are technicians, you can designate them as Junior Officer - Technical/HR/Accounts/Purchase/Admin/Liaison, etc. The designation of Officer/Executive/Manager/GM/VP should be followed by the department.
I hope this clarifies things for you.
Thanks and regards,
Kameswarao
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
HR Executive means, a person who is designated as executive Executive - HR means, a person who is, himself an executive in his life beside HR By Marlia
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Asha/Nitu,
I am sorry to tell you that here, most of the people are here to learn things. If they have doubts, they just want to clarify the same, and seniors like you, if interested, can answer them.
Actually, I don't know the name of the person who posted. I request to specify their names for those who need help. To be frank, a few months back, I also had doubts on the same issue.
Even now, in some organizations, there are two designations - Executive HR and HR Executive. I hope most people are aware of Arvind Mills; they are following the same designations. For junior personnel, they are called HR Executive, and those equal to a manager are called Executive HR. I am sharing the practice followed in the Arvind Group.
Do you think this question is unfair? If it is, what can we say about a well-known organization?
I am not supporting anybody in this matter but just expressing the facts.
Hope this does not hurt anybody.
Jeeva
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am sorry to tell you that here, most of the people are here to learn things. If they have doubts, they just want to clarify the same, and seniors like you, if interested, can answer them.
Actually, I don't know the name of the person who posted. I request to specify their names for those who need help. To be frank, a few months back, I also had doubts on the same issue.
Even now, in some organizations, there are two designations - Executive HR and HR Executive. I hope most people are aware of Arvind Mills; they are following the same designations. For junior personnel, they are called HR Executive, and those equal to a manager are called Executive HR. I am sharing the practice followed in the Arvind Group.
Do you think this question is unfair? If it is, what can we say about a well-known organization?
I am not supporting anybody in this matter but just expressing the facts.
Hope this does not hurt anybody.
Jeeva
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Jeeva, are you from Arvind Mills? Please don't take me wrong, but even great people tend to make mistakes (I am sure you agree). So in the same way, if Arvind is doing such a thing, kindly advise them that it makes no difference. I have interviewed candidates from Arvind Mills for HR roles, but I have never come across such statements though.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
No, Asha,
I am not from Arvind, but I do have some idea about their designations. One of my cousins is working there in the production department. A long time ago, I applied for an Admin job but didn't receive a call from them.
Jeeva
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am not from Arvind, but I do have some idea about their designations. One of my cousins is working there in the production department. A long time ago, I applied for an Admin job but didn't receive a call from them.
Jeeva
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Asha,
I agree with your point that even great people tend to make mistakes. I have personally faced such mistakes and experienced their effects. Making mistakes is part of human nature and should be accepted once it is proven to be a mistake.
Jeeva
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I agree with your point that even great people tend to make mistakes. I have personally faced such mistakes and experienced their effects. Making mistakes is part of human nature and should be accepted once it is proven to be a mistake.
Jeeva
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear All,
Sorry to say, but I would like to correct and update you all that some companies are practicing exactly what Mr. Dilshad has mentioned. Especially in the hotel industry, you can see such types of designations. In these companies, the HR Manager holds a senior level position compared to the Manager-HR. Similarly, the HR Executive is considered more senior than the Executive HR, and so forth. The logic behind this is that in "HR Manager," the department name (HR) precedes the word "Manager," emphasizing the HR aspect. On the other hand, in "Manager HR," the primary focus is on being a manager. That's why this difference exists.
If you still have any misunderstandings, please feel free to contact me at rajesh85_sharma@hotmail.com.
Thank you,
Rajesh Sharma
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Sorry to say, but I would like to correct and update you all that some companies are practicing exactly what Mr. Dilshad has mentioned. Especially in the hotel industry, you can see such types of designations. In these companies, the HR Manager holds a senior level position compared to the Manager-HR. Similarly, the HR Executive is considered more senior than the Executive HR, and so forth. The logic behind this is that in "HR Manager," the department name (HR) precedes the word "Manager," emphasizing the HR aspect. On the other hand, in "Manager HR," the primary focus is on being a manager. That's why this difference exists.
If you still have any misunderstandings, please feel free to contact me at rajesh85_sharma@hotmail.com.
Thank you,
Rajesh Sharma
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear User,
Hi friends,
By chance, while browsing, I came across this thread. INTERESTING! 😊
Even after five months, the query has not been resolved satisfactorily and conclusively. 🤔
Dear Dilshad,
You had posted this query in the "Talk to Seniors" section, and you did receive some answers. Are you satisfied with those? Or do you still have your query unanswered?
Did you ask, as a member suggested, your boss what he meant by - there is a difference and that you don't even know that?
I am sure you are feeling bad at being criticized severely. There is a quote: "Any fool can ask a question, for which the wisest have no answer." But your case is different - Your query is not meaningless, and it has an answer. In fact, I compliment you on asking this unique basic question, on which some aspects of Organization Theory and Organization Design rest!
In fact, I consider it a WONDERFUL question! You can ask any professors in the relevant discipline (especially Org. Theory/Design) at any IIM, and they will give you full marks for good CP - Class Participation! 😊
Unfortunately, HR practice is based on ad-hocism, and there are no regulatory bodies (like CAs, Cost Accountants, Doctors, Lawyers, etc.), no practices, no standards, etc. As such, the distinction is neither understood nor implemented.
So one can have any designations whatsoever, as long as the Management does not oppose it or support it. But your case is different - in fact, you have a good, smart boss who understands that there is a difference. On a lighter note - Isn't there a difference between Delhi-Howrah Mail and Howrah-Delhi Mail? 😉
Before I go on explaining (it takes a good deal of effort to convince those who are 'reluctant'), I would like to quote some of the good answers. If you combine all these judiciously, you will be convinced that there is, indeed, a difference. A very big difference, known to all Management consultants who specialize in Organizational Change/Design, BPR, Succession planning, etc.
Anjalic said, "In the big and old organizations, an employee is doing his job and with his experience, he achieves a certain status in the organization. The concept of specialization is very recent. Employees who join the organization remain in the organization for years and then started with the job rotation or if the organization finds an employee capable of handling one function and needs him in another function to improve it. A designation is generally a combination of both a grade level and the function or the department. So today if one employee is handling Administration and his grade is manager, his grade is not going to change but his department/function is. So he can be termed as Manager - Administration or Manager - HR. HR manager sounds as if we are using the shortcuts.
So Manager - HR is a more professional way of using it."
Tajsateesh said, "Hello All,
I think only Anjali came closest to the truth. If you look at just the Dictionary meaning, all are right - there's NO difference between each of the two sets. But look at it from another perspective....who is deciding these? The management...right? So, in a way, it is a CLEAR GIVEAWAY of the mental outlook of the ones at the top...reflects their way of thinking and/or their focus towards life in general.
When it is "HR Manager," the focus is MORE on the function from the mental outlook of the management......meaning more function-oriented/business-like in the way they see & run the organization. So, in a way, if you work for such a company, you can be sure that as long as you do your job well, minor fooling-around may be tolerated.
When it is "Manager-HR," the focus is more on the designation........meaning more oriented towards the high-flying designations [an import from the USA, where designations like President, Vice-President, etc. are the norm].
Not sure how many agree with me."
Rajesh85_sharma said, "Dear All,
Sorry to say, but I would like to correct and update you all, that some companies are practicing exactly what Mr. Dilshad has mentioned. Especially in the Hotel industry, you can see such type of designation. In these companies, HR Manager is a senior level than Manager-HR. HR Executive is senior than Executive HR and so on. The logic behind this is that in HR MANAGER, the department name (HR) is coming before the MANAGER word, and that's why emphasis is on HR and in MANAGER HR, anybody first is a manager. That's why this difference exists."
Uma Manorama said, "Dear Dilshad,
I agree with Mr. Ahmed. The difference is not in designation; it's all about how an organization defines its structure. Simply, it depends on how the company defines its designations.
Depending on the size and structure of an organization, let us take it as where an organization has small teams and executives or managers carrying different functions may designate them as Executive-HR, Executive-Accounts, Manager-HR, Manager-Finance, etc.....Similarly, based on the size and structure of the organization having individual departments and a large number of teams for each function may designate their teams like HR-Manager, HR-executive, Finance-Manager, Finance-executive, etc.....based on the level of hierarchy.
To say finally, the designation is more appropriate and professional when said with "ROLE with function or department." That is to say Executive-HR, Manager-HR, etc.
Hope, to some extent, you have got your answer!
If you still need further information, and how these designations evolved; or what is the difference between Executive HR and HR Executive.
By the way, to be correct and proper, it is written as "Executive - HR" and not 'Executive HR'. Remember the following:
- There is always a hyphen between the two words when we write the designation first; e.g., Manager - Internal Audit, Senior Manager - R&D.
- But it is never hyphenated if you write the function first; e.g., it's Finance manager and never "Finance - manager"; it's Product manager and never "Product - Manager".
- There are few exceptions where the designations have become generic, due to usage. Such as Store-keeper;
- Conversely, some designations which are generic in nature and profession since ages are never hyphenated. Such as Watchman/watchmen; Babysitter, etc.
Who says there is no difference? And your question is "foolish"?
Do keep asking such questions, which "clear the fundas".
So here's a supplementary question for you:
What is the difference if one writes "HR manager" or "HR Manager"?
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi friends,
By chance, while browsing, I came across this thread. INTERESTING! 😊
Even after five months, the query has not been resolved satisfactorily and conclusively. 🤔
Dear Dilshad,
You had posted this query in the "Talk to Seniors" section, and you did receive some answers. Are you satisfied with those? Or do you still have your query unanswered?
Did you ask, as a member suggested, your boss what he meant by - there is a difference and that you don't even know that?
I am sure you are feeling bad at being criticized severely. There is a quote: "Any fool can ask a question, for which the wisest have no answer." But your case is different - Your query is not meaningless, and it has an answer. In fact, I compliment you on asking this unique basic question, on which some aspects of Organization Theory and Organization Design rest!
In fact, I consider it a WONDERFUL question! You can ask any professors in the relevant discipline (especially Org. Theory/Design) at any IIM, and they will give you full marks for good CP - Class Participation! 😊
Unfortunately, HR practice is based on ad-hocism, and there are no regulatory bodies (like CAs, Cost Accountants, Doctors, Lawyers, etc.), no practices, no standards, etc. As such, the distinction is neither understood nor implemented.
So one can have any designations whatsoever, as long as the Management does not oppose it or support it. But your case is different - in fact, you have a good, smart boss who understands that there is a difference. On a lighter note - Isn't there a difference between Delhi-Howrah Mail and Howrah-Delhi Mail? 😉
Before I go on explaining (it takes a good deal of effort to convince those who are 'reluctant'), I would like to quote some of the good answers. If you combine all these judiciously, you will be convinced that there is, indeed, a difference. A very big difference, known to all Management consultants who specialize in Organizational Change/Design, BPR, Succession planning, etc.
Anjalic said, "In the big and old organizations, an employee is doing his job and with his experience, he achieves a certain status in the organization. The concept of specialization is very recent. Employees who join the organization remain in the organization for years and then started with the job rotation or if the organization finds an employee capable of handling one function and needs him in another function to improve it. A designation is generally a combination of both a grade level and the function or the department. So today if one employee is handling Administration and his grade is manager, his grade is not going to change but his department/function is. So he can be termed as Manager - Administration or Manager - HR. HR manager sounds as if we are using the shortcuts.
So Manager - HR is a more professional way of using it."
Tajsateesh said, "Hello All,
I think only Anjali came closest to the truth. If you look at just the Dictionary meaning, all are right - there's NO difference between each of the two sets. But look at it from another perspective....who is deciding these? The management...right? So, in a way, it is a CLEAR GIVEAWAY of the mental outlook of the ones at the top...reflects their way of thinking and/or their focus towards life in general.
When it is "HR Manager," the focus is MORE on the function from the mental outlook of the management......meaning more function-oriented/business-like in the way they see & run the organization. So, in a way, if you work for such a company, you can be sure that as long as you do your job well, minor fooling-around may be tolerated.
When it is "Manager-HR," the focus is more on the designation........meaning more oriented towards the high-flying designations [an import from the USA, where designations like President, Vice-President, etc. are the norm].
Not sure how many agree with me."
Rajesh85_sharma said, "Dear All,
Sorry to say, but I would like to correct and update you all, that some companies are practicing exactly what Mr. Dilshad has mentioned. Especially in the Hotel industry, you can see such type of designation. In these companies, HR Manager is a senior level than Manager-HR. HR Executive is senior than Executive HR and so on. The logic behind this is that in HR MANAGER, the department name (HR) is coming before the MANAGER word, and that's why emphasis is on HR and in MANAGER HR, anybody first is a manager. That's why this difference exists."
Uma Manorama said, "Dear Dilshad,
I agree with Mr. Ahmed. The difference is not in designation; it's all about how an organization defines its structure. Simply, it depends on how the company defines its designations.
Depending on the size and structure of an organization, let us take it as where an organization has small teams and executives or managers carrying different functions may designate them as Executive-HR, Executive-Accounts, Manager-HR, Manager-Finance, etc.....Similarly, based on the size and structure of the organization having individual departments and a large number of teams for each function may designate their teams like HR-Manager, HR-executive, Finance-Manager, Finance-executive, etc.....based on the level of hierarchy.
To say finally, the designation is more appropriate and professional when said with "ROLE with function or department." That is to say Executive-HR, Manager-HR, etc.
Hope, to some extent, you have got your answer!
If you still need further information, and how these designations evolved; or what is the difference between Executive HR and HR Executive.
By the way, to be correct and proper, it is written as "Executive - HR" and not 'Executive HR'. Remember the following:
- There is always a hyphen between the two words when we write the designation first; e.g., Manager - Internal Audit, Senior Manager - R&D.
- But it is never hyphenated if you write the function first; e.g., it's Finance manager and never "Finance - manager"; it's Product manager and never "Product - Manager".
- There are few exceptions where the designations have become generic, due to usage. Such as Store-keeper;
- Conversely, some designations which are generic in nature and profession since ages are never hyphenated. Such as Watchman/watchmen; Babysitter, etc.
Who says there is no difference? And your question is "foolish"?
Do keep asking such questions, which "clear the fundas".
So here's a supplementary question for you:
What is the difference if one writes "HR manager" or "HR Manager"?
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear All,
Sorry in advance if somebody wants to know why people are shouting. Dear all terms are the same. The difference lies in the His/Her profile. An HR executive will work in the HR division. If he or she also has some profile or work in Admin, then we can refer to them as HR & Admin.
Don't think badly if someone gives you a silly answer. A simple answer: Grab it from here or grab it from there; it's all the same, right?
So, enjoy!
Regards,
Anish Sharma
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Sorry in advance if somebody wants to know why people are shouting. Dear all terms are the same. The difference lies in the His/Her profile. An HR executive will work in the HR division. If he or she also has some profile or work in Admin, then we can refer to them as HR & Admin.
Don't think badly if someone gives you a silly answer. A simple answer: Grab it from here or grab it from there; it's all the same, right?
So, enjoy!
Regards,
Anish Sharma
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Yes, the difference lies.
Executive means you already have power in a superlative sense. For example, if you say "Director, XYZ company," it means that XYZ company has one director. On the other hand, "XYZ Company, Director" implies that you are a member of the director board.
Starting with the word "executive" signifies more control and power over the department. However, when it comes later in the sentence, you are the executive of the functions falling under the department.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Executive means you already have power in a superlative sense. For example, if you say "Director, XYZ company," it means that XYZ company has one director. On the other hand, "XYZ Company, Director" implies that you are a member of the director board.
Starting with the word "executive" signifies more control and power over the department. However, when it comes later in the sentence, you are the executive of the functions falling under the department.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Although, in general, there is no difference, I also second Niks as this is also a fact that many MNCs are practicing. They follow different hierarchical structures and cadres. For example, senior executives and executive managers have some differences in their roles in the organization.
Regards,
Furqan SAEED
HR Manager
From Pakistan, Karachi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Regards,
Furqan SAEED
HR Manager
From Pakistan, Karachi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I don’t thing so you are going with the correct reply. But may be u r right. Regards Sudhir
From India, Faridabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Faridabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi All,
If we are discussing in terms of Human Resources, then the designations HR-Executive and Executive-HR are accurate. There is no need to differentiate between the two designations. It seems sufficient to just use the term Executive. So, to determine the functional area along with the designation Executive, HR-Executive or Executive-HR are both accurate. I hope this explanation seems correct.
Warm regards,
Sudhir
From India, Faridabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If we are discussing in terms of Human Resources, then the designations HR-Executive and Executive-HR are accurate. There is no need to differentiate between the two designations. It seems sufficient to just use the term Executive. So, to determine the functional area along with the designation Executive, HR-Executive or Executive-HR are both accurate. I hope this explanation seems correct.
Warm regards,
Sudhir
From India, Faridabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.
A NEW HR EXECUTIVE HAND BOOK.pdf
JD Chavda-Executiv e-HR.xls