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)
653I 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.