HR: An advocate for employees or an agent of the employer? No ... in support of profits.

I’ve been noticing a pattern of polarisation in parts of the HR world lately — especially among newer practitioners and some of the louder voices online. There seems to be a growing instinct to frame HR as either an advocate for employees or an agent of the employer. As if we’re supposed to pick a side. As if supporting one inherently means betraying the other.

It’s a false choice, and frankly, potentially damaging to our profession, because the obvious truth is that employees can only thrive in organisations that are financially healthy, competitive, and capable of long‑term success. And organisations can only achieve that when their people are supported, respected, and able to perform at their best. This isn’t ideology. It’s basic organisational physics.

The trap of short-term “wins”

There’s a particular mindset — again, more common among those newer to the labour market — that sees profit as inherently suspect. As if the very idea of a company making money is somehow exploitative. But profit isn’t a dirty word. It’s the mechanism that pays for wages, benefits, development, wellbeing programmes, and every initiative that makes work better.

When we push for improvements that make the employer uncompetitive on cost, it might feel like a win for employees in the moment. But if those decisions undermine long‑term viability, they’re not wins at all. They’re deferred losses — for everyone. A pay rise that contributes to a redundancy programme 18 months later isn’t a victory. It’s a warning sign that we’ve lost sight of the bigger picture.

The myth that “employee advocacy” and “employer advocacy” are opposites

Some HR teams lean heavily into employee advocacy, almost positioning themselves as a counterweight to leadership. Others swing the opposite way, focusing almost exclusively on protecting the organisation from risk, cost, or complexity. Neither approach works.

HR is at its best when it understands that employee success and employer success are interdependent. You don’t get one without the other. And you certainly don’t get sustainable outcomes by pretending they’re in competition.

The irony no one talks about: ESG, DEIA, clean tech, and social impact all rely on… profit

There’s also a broader misconception in the public conversation — that socially positive outcomes are somehow separate from, or even opposed to, the for‑profit world.

But look at where the bulk of ESG research, DEIA innovation, clean‑fuel development, and financial‑inclusion initiatives actually come from. They’re funded by asset owners — pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, institutional investors — who allocate capital to for‑profit companies precisely because those companies generate the returns that make this work possible.

The same people who criticise “corporate greed” often don’t realise that their own pensions, their own future financial security, and many of the social and environmental advances they care about are funded by the success of the very companies they distrust.

It’s not hypocrisy. It’s just a missing link in the narrative.

HR’s real job: hold the whole system in view

The HR profession is uniquely placed to bridge this gap in understanding. We see the whole system — the commercial pressures, the human realities, the cultural dynamics, the regulatory landscape, the investor expectations.

Our job isn’t to pick a side. It’s to create the conditions where both sides can win.

That means:

• pushing for fairness, dignity, and opportunity

• ensuring decisions are commercially sound and sustainable

• helping leaders understand the long‑term value of investing in people

• helping employees understand the commercial realities that shape their experience

• designing systems that reward capability, not identity or noise

• building cultures where performance and wellbeing reinforce each other

This is the work that actually moves organisations forward. Not the performative advocacy. Not the ideological purity tests. Not the false binaries.

Win–win isn’t naïve. It’s the only model that works.

If we want employees to be well‑supported, they need employers who are financially secure. If we want employers to be competitive, they need employees who are engaged, capable, and set up to succeed. If we want meaningful progress on DEIA, sustainability, and social impact, we need the for‑profit sector to thrive.

None of this is controversial when you step back and look at the whole picture.

But HR has a responsibility — and an opportunity — to help people see that picture more clearly.

Because when we stop pretending that advocacy is a zero‑sum game, we can finally get back to what HR is actually for: building organisations where people and performance reinforce each other, not compete.