I define my job as a programmer responsible for service development, but because service development covers a wide area, I also work on things like hiring. Because of that, I sometimes gather information and think about hiring and development. I had been thinking about people and talent, so I am writing those thoughts down here.

About the words “human resources” and “human assets”

In the past, when hiring, I used the word “human assets.” The reason was simple: rather than treating people like materials, I thought it would be better to describe them as something more important. It sounds a bit like wordplay, but there are people who use “human assets” because people are important assets for a company. I judged that “human assets” felt better than “human resources.”

On the other hand, what I think recently is: is it really right to treat people in the same way as money? As a company, there are probably cases where the financial condition of the whole company matters more than one individual. But if someone said, “the company’s finances matter more than you,” that would not feel right. People do not exist like accumulated assets. Each person exists as a unique individual. That diversity has to be maintained.

Furthermore, personally, I think a company should exist around its product. Even if its financial condition is good, if it does not have a good product, I do not feel much value in that company. And products, especially software products, cannot keep existing without the people involved in them.

There are situations where the word is needed, such as managing performance indicators in hiring. But outside those situations, I think it is a word we should handle carefully. It is not enough to simply pile up people.

Changes in the people business

I will write a little about the people business. SES and recruiting agencies have also been changing recently. You could say it is a movement to correct the mistake of treating engineers as cost or inventory. Because large business schemes have already been built, changing them may not be easy, but you can see the trend by looking at movements away from SES and toward referral hiring.

What I think we need to be careful about here is treating ourselves like “human resources.” A transition has already begun, so we should not be pulled back into old mechanisms.

There will be moments in companies and business schemes where we are handled as part of something larger. On the other hand, there are also moments when we handle ourselves. Whether in hiring, sales, or sending a PR, I think it is better to communicate proposals and thoughts as a unique individual, rather than treating yourself like material.

Have your own value standards

Recognize the value of systems while respecting the value of each individual who makes up those systems. Build teams based on respect for individuals, and use teams to develop and improve systems. These things can coexist, and we should not depend too much on either one. For that reason, I think it is important to have firm value standards of your own. Individual value standards can be unique. In fact, it is better if they are not all the same.

Personally, I think social change is more valuable than business, and I think of business as something used for social change. Society is made up of individual people, and change is triggered by the discomfort, hope, or unhappiness of those individuals. That is why I place great importance on the seeds of those changes, and when it comes to which discomfort I can empathize with, I often differ from other people.

In any case, to keep your originality from being swallowed by systems, it is important to hold your own value standards firmly. That becomes even more important for people who are trying to build systems.