A bit confusing that this article starts out stating that HR is flawed fundamentally and irretrievably because of the nature of its inherent purpose, and then g

A bit confusing that this article starts out stating that HR is flawed fundamentally and irretrievably because of the nature of its inherent purpose, and then goes on to suggest ways to reform HR. Can you reform something (and also, why bother reforming something) that has, as its purpose, something diametrically opposed to all of your supposed reforms?