Why Human Processes in Companies Should Be Given Significance - Essay Example

Why Human Processes in Companies Should be Given Significance Running a company nowadays involves considering different steps and measures and ideasthat work depending on the area of field of expertise. One company can take side on the human processes being a more significant basis in its move and growth. This paper takes into consideration the validity of human processes being more important than operations processes. Systems in today's highly developed world may undeniably be said as efficient. Strategies are made to be more flexible to changes based on different market factors and equipment and technology designs are specially made to aid both customers and the company manage its different needs whether personal or official. It is therefore just right to expect that nowadays, when we talk of systems and strategies, it should define a good, reliable, and flexible process. But it should be understood that we can say that most systems are just ideal when it comes to design but not in the implementation. Who makes the design work for a company Who makes the non-living ideas move for the company Isn't the answer human processes Perhaps the reason is because no matter how we try to improve the system or the strategy design, it will forever fail to recognize the maker of the design. When we talk of human processes, what comes into our mind Human processes in simple terms refer to that process in one company or group that does not take for granted the significant factors like the individuals as the main mover in a company. This process involves human's knowledge, skills and intellectual ability to be the fuel of the running company. And if the operations process is considered as the forefront of a business, human processes can be considered as the root and trunk of an organization where the lifeblood of the company flows and grows (Peoplecube 2007). Now what is being argued in this paper is the advantage of human processes over the strategy and or operations processes. To understand this further, it is better to look into an account the idea human factor being a hindrance to a smooth company operation. This happens when errors in the system or operation is caused by human interventions and or human decision. During the Industrial Revolution, human factor appeared to be taken into great consideration and was even called a "full-fledged" discipline especially for the World War II. Humans at that time took control of technology in the form of design engineers. Companies considered human factor as an indispensable thing to be considered because that was the area that can either make or break a product's use. Through the design for example, a product can either benefit or pose a threat to the user. When an engineer designer makes a wrong move in his masterpiece, that product can annihilate group of individuals in just a snap of one's fingers. That was also the time when usability testing became part of certain processes. Usability testing enables the first hand users to test what is working and what is not to a certain product. This whole idea of human factor causing a glitch to the company's process maybe blamed for giving birth to the concept of processes becoming more significant than the processor. This can then lead us to thinking that perhaps, that's also the same reason why software was invented by scientists, perhaps to avoid the human factor defects (Usernomics 2005-2007). But then again, since we are talking about human processes as a thing of significance than that of operations processes, it is good for us to look at proper managing of human's knowledge and abilities to better see the benefits it could bring to an organization if it is trying to optimize its personnel's capabilities. Knowledge of the people is the house of new ideas and the bank of solutions to the different problems being encountered by the company. This is the reason why modern companies invest in trainings for their employees while others back or support their workers in finishing graduate degrees especially if the course is related to or similar to the field of expertise of the company (Asia Pacific Management Forum 2000). To properly manage the human potential, it is also important to have a good organization or company which according to Gary Tomlinson (2005) "will not force the horse to drink but will make the horse thirsty." Tomlinson's article entitled "Art of Business" suggests a driving force that will unleash the employees' potential. Tomlinson clarified that the water is everything the organization strives to be like corporate culture, profitability, policies and procedures. He claims that in order to have a productive company or organization, the focus should be on the people for them to be at their best all the time. As cited a while ago, investing in technology and strategies can also be good in the company, however, Tomlinson seconded the fact that these strategies or processes don't produce, but the people themselves. This, according to Tomlinson is because people feel, and they should be the ones to improve first before the processes. Larry Bossidy and Ram Charan (2002) on the other hand, backed up this claim but their idea is focused on finding the real leaders who know how to identify and develop the people from a certain company. In his article "Finding the Leaders Within," posted on November 7, 2002 on the web, he was strict in saying to get the people right to fulfill the potential of the business. He stretched out that since the people process is more important than decision-making and operations management processes, getting the good leader is a must. Bossidy and Charan's idea of 'leaders within' is concentrated on leaders being able to provide and identify the different types of leadership talent that the organization will need to implement their strengthened strategies. Bossidy and Charan claimed that some leaders do have a potential of leading the people but often fail to bring the business to the next level. This according to them can be seen through the mistakes that don't usually get corrected until the damage is seen. A case scenario below is given to illustrate the negative effect of putting the right person to do the job. "A one US-based company that ranked 3rd in its field, has done very well for its shareholders; over the past decades, its stock has commanded a 25 percent premium over the S&P 500. It's no coincidence that it also captures talent information on a global database. In 1997, it faced a critical people selection issue. Its performance in Europe had been disappointing. Each country was a barony unto itself, and the company's European strategy was unsuccessful summation of each country's strategy. The then current CEO of Europe was about to retire after failing to achieve any synergies among the baronies. Europe clearly needed a leader who could unite the business under a pan-European strategy and execute it with energy. The person who succeeded would be a prime candidate to run the whole company. o the criteria for the right person were rigorous: He or she would need breadth and depth, along with the ability to see external changes and link them with the business's activities, to build a new management fast and in depth, and to conceive and execute a vigorous strategy. Traditionally, the pool of people for this job came from the U.S. or to a lesser degree from Europe. There was nobody in this pool who met the criteria. But as the discussions evolved, the global database turned up an unlikely possibility. A leader in a developing company-born and raised there- had risen to head the country's operations and had succeeded over the previous three years eyond anybody's anticipation. In many if not most companies, this man wouldn't even have been on the radar screen- they would have gone scouting for an outside candidate. But after through consideration, he was tapped for the European job. He succeeded there, too, and as of early 2002, was a strong candidate to become the company's CEO (Bossidy and Charan 2002, The People Process, page 144-145)." After getting the right leader, it is also good to know how to get the right person. Patrick Howard (2007) who wrote about Georgia Grabyn, HR Manager for Heidelberg Australia and New Zealand, through the article "Getting the Right People is Essential for Success, talked about knowing and hiring good people who will not just do great job but also will stay in the company for life. Grabyn through the article, mentioned the rise of global competition saying that it gave birth to many possible choices for employees to choose from. This seemed to be considered as a threat to employees' loyalty to the company. She also identified the different ages namely the Baby Boomers, Generation X, and Generation Y. The Baby Boomers according to her are the ones aged between 43 and 58 years, Generation X is 28 - 42 years and Generation Y 28 years and below. The first generation comprising perhaps our fathers and mothers are the co-called 'loyal' ones because according to Grabyn, they stick to the idea of longer retention to the company where they started working and that promotion is according to seniority. Generation X was described to be the ones who seek stability through proper benefits according to experience and performance which means that it is more probable for this group to look for a company that can give them what they need based on their abilities. The last group, generation Y was described to be 'Technology savvy' who expect much from their leaders or coaches and who also demand flexibility in their jobs. In this kind of atmosphere, it is then advised for a company to be competent enough by answering the changing call of time and must not rely on the traditional way of managing its pool of productive people. Grabyn said that in their case at Heidelberg, they are not just into attracting people but also in the retention of their high performers to maintain productivity and attain continuous success. And since they consider human force as one of the most important element towards success, they made sure to equip themselves with greater understanding of the "new age" and alongside this is the upgrading of skills and proper leadership management. The MTU Aero Engines Company also has proven true that the human processes through its human resources group has given rise to well-developed and well-shaped aero engine maker. The 95-year history of MTU and its predecessor companies have made them excel in the different phases in the development of aviation. Its independence started when they separated from the well-known DaimlerChrysler Group in 2004. This so-called "big change," according to MTU was followed by the recreating of the different processes and the existing structures which was faced bravely by their human resources department. So everything seemed to be like a start from scratch, if that's the way to describe its status. Many changes were made and some were already done. However tough and hard, the excellent human ways and processes excelled through and this can be seen in the organized means that they have adopted from the time they got separated to the mentioned mother company (MTU Aero Engines 2005-2006) . MTU's identity and corporate culture owe its name to the hard-working human resources department. This is something that they are proud of. And while other companies boast of their excellent technologies that change with time, MTU boasts of their pool of reliable work force that makes every goal achievable. MTU traditionally has specialized in what they call unique and high-end kind of developments for aviation engines and its maintenance where quality is the center. Not long before this culture relying on quality has transformed into a series and continuous expectations for the processes of the company. This, according to MTU is the reason for their success. Technical processes being one of the factors of course is part of their growth but it is clear that the constant effort of each employee to maintain "quality" work remains to be the measurement and the bridge to connect the modern equipment and technical process to ideas that fuel the company to make a leap towards success. To quote the exact words mentioned by MTU's Human Resources Senior Vice President in the report journal for 2005-2006: "We can fulfill this quality standard in our human resources organization only if we work with tools and applications that have the same high level of quality that we consider to be a matter of course in the technological area. Only then can we succeed in maintaining and expanding our market position as we face shrinking pools of young talent coupled with growing competition. Last year, we took an important step in this direction by pooling and expanding our previous activities in human resources development and by aligning them specifically to the requirements of MTU. In the coming years, human resources development will help all of us improve our performance further. This is of central importance for our management. It is their task to create opportunities for continuous improvement of their employees in their areas of responsibility. They carry out a very visible function as daily models even in difficult times." . And to further add to statements by known companies as to prove the significance of humans as company's prime resources, an article authored by Fred Luthans and Carolyn M. Youssef (2004) entitled "Investing in People for Competitive Advantage" mentioned a line from Carly Fiorina Hewlett-Packard Co. saying "the most magical, and tangible and ultimately the most important ingredient in the transformed landscape is people." This perhaps is the reason why no matter how advanced the technology has become and no matter how modern the strategies of management have changed, still it is not enough to equate human processes to that of the strategies because they will forever be governed and moved by the human hands and mind. If only what the mentioned facts and truths above can be followed, the quality of human business for the modern times will be kept. And if only businesses around the world will focus their investments to people, a better kind of business that is human-centered will be achieved and fair and or beneficial businesses will be created. SOURCES 1. Asia Pacific Management Forum. "Knowledge Management and Intellectual Capital. 2. Barrett, R. Seven Liberating the Corporate Soul: Building a Visionary Organization. Butterworth-Heinerman. Boston. Chapter 4.55-72 3. Bossidy & Charan . "Finding the Leaders Within." Nov. 7, 2002. 4. Collins, J., 2001. Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap. New York: Harper Business 5. Holbeche, L., 2001. Aligning Human resources and Business Strategy. Oxford: Butterworth. 6. Howard, P. "Getting the Right People is Essential for Success." March & April 2007 7. MTU Aero Engines. The Driving Force Behind a Company. Human Resources Report 2005/2006. 8. Peoplecube. "Human Process Management: The Next Generation of Business Process Management." 9. Senge, P., 1990. The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday. 10. Tomlinson, G. "Art of Business: Setting You Up for Success." August 20, 2007. 11. Usernomics. "Human Factors- User Interface Design- Usability." < http://www.usernomics.com/human-factors.html> Read More