Human Resource Management at Free Malaysia Today - Case Study Example

?Human Resource Management Introduction The human resource department is a significant section in an organization. The management of which must beproperly held to sustain a competitive advantage in the industry. There are some notions that must be installed in administering the people of an organization, such as performance and rewards. This paper was conducted to depict a news report by Free Malaysia Today online news about human resource management. The paper focused on delineating two concepts--performance management and rewards. Each of which will be discussed, and their relevance to the workforce will be explained, as well. Also, a conclusion will be provided in the last section of the paper. 2. The Report Free Malaysia Today’s news report last March 4, 2013 by one of its staff James Pereira has delineated that Malaysian businesses are devoted to stipulate customers with a great service. However, Pereira inscribes that these employees are notably in minority clusters. He insists that for a firm to be recognized internationally, it must be inculcated with employees who are haunted with customer satisfaction. There is indeed a right approach to having an exceptional divergent type of employees, and for this panorama to be feasible, a scientific facet must be on hand. As such, a business to be dubbed as a predominant venture and become a successful world-class firm, it must be infused with a top-flight reputation, which can only be achieved through employees. The top-flight reputation runs the profitable aspects of a firm and the formula to attain this is: “Right Employee x Right Training x Right Performance x Right Reward = Right Profits” (Pereira, 2013). Notably, having been depicted as a formula of accumulating right profits, the latter is deemed as a paragon that becoming successful is infused with a scientific aspect. 3. Performance Management Right profits are quantified by four aspects, which include right performance (Pereira, 2013); therefore, performance should be managed well leading it to become right. Performance management can be perceived in a broad or narrow context. In the broader context, the administration will be viewed in the conduct of assessing the organizational performance--the measurement and evaluation of the administration of a firm (Pantouvakis, 2011, p.13) --while in the narrow context, the assessment will be held in the performance of every employee. The first step to managing the performance is through role profiling--where employees can be coming from external staffing and internal passages, and thereby synergy must also be instilled (Storey, 2007, pp.274-276). Integrating these employees to work together and establishing the right culture of the organization can help sustain an effective synergy. The concept of integration is very significant because only in integration will rise the dominant aspect of synergy (Moulesong, 2013). Employees will perceive parity of value and unity of direction. They will somehow fathom that every entity in the organization has his or her certain role, and it matches a huge fraction or part of the measures that can assist in achieving the organizational goals effectively. In the light of synergy, employees can become more effective as they integrate them as they work individually (Tanriverdi, 2006, p. 59). The next salient thing the firm must do is to decide the measures, which should be perceived as a succinct set of information that measures the future standards or targets of the firm. Furthermore, setting the standards does not just depict expecting of what has to be done, but implementing what must be done. Diversification is a dominant aspect here since achieving one target cannot be attained with a one-sized-fits-all aspect of business. Otherwise stated, employee diversification can also assist effectiveness and efficiency of operations because one of the competitive advantages of a firm is to have a diversified personnel (Ravichandran, et al., 2009, p.233). Reviewing the performance of the firm, especially the employees all throughout the year, will assist the company to decide what appropriate actions must be implemented. To summarize the flow of administering the performance, it should all commence from determining the objective of the firm, to improving the concept of cause and effect to analyze the drivers of change that affect the perceived objective, pondering about the tactics the organization must implement to attain the perceived objectives, and assessing the measures the company has set from the very beginning of the conduct (Mauboussin, 2012, pp.54-55). 4. Reward Right profits can only be achieved through the four elements, including right reward (Pereira, 2013). Rewards are the things the personnel perceive with value given by the organization as the result of excessive activity or surpassing the right performance (Hulkko-Nyman, et al., 2012, p.26). With this on hand, an organization can control the behavior of their personnel in such a way that can benefit the business operations (Milkovich & Newman, 2002 cited in Peltokorpi, 2011, p.2507). As such, this will be the cause for personnel to be motivated and to perform at the highest notch (Huselid, 1995 cited in Peltokorpi, 2011, p.2507). However, literature depicts that personnel’s extrinsic motivation can be tapered when the organization uses external rewards or punishment; the employees may perceive the reward to be governing and their urge to work hard and perform well will be mitigated (Azuranin & Stuart, 2012, p.2). With this on hand, it can be depicted that personnel’s motivation is grounded by a manifold aspects of rewards (Deci, 1980, Deci & Ryan, 1985 cited in Melancon, S. M. Noble & C. H. Noble, 2011, p.342). Moreover, total rewards can be either in pecuniary terms or not. Total rewards’ frameworks are perceived as one approach of both getting the attention of new personnel and upholding the corporate effectiveness and personnel’s welfare in the work environment (Heneman & Judge, 2000, Muse, et al., 2008 cited in Hulkko-Nyman, et al., 2012, p.26). Furthermore, teams are significant when it comes to working in organizations. This is because organizations delve into seeking employee groups to stipulate solutions to whatever problems that may arise in the workplace (cited in Chen, Williamson, & Zhou, 2012, p.1886). It must be fathomed by the organization that one of the salient approaches in determining a specific problem is through evaluating a group setting (Thompson & Choi, 2006 cited in Chen, Williamson, & Zhou, 2012, p.1888). As the result, the organizations attempt to assess organizational performance and reward framework to boost group creativity (Kaplan & Norton, 1996 cited in Chen, Williamson, & Zhou, 2012, p.1886). This group setting can be perceived as a team. The firm must remember that synergy can only present through teamwork, and it must determine and value team success. As part of enforcing incremental changes in the organization, such team success should be rewarded, either in the standard or nonstandard form (Moulesong, 2013). Further, promotion is a form of reward wherein the personnel perceive seniority as a factor to be taken over career developments; therefore, retention is an aspect in the perception of employees that promotion can be held possible (Peltokorpi, 2011, p.2509). When the organization knows how to retain the right people, then a right training should be given to them, and through evaluating their performance, the company can decide whether to reward or not the employees (Brakke, 2013; Pereira, 2013). 5. Relevance and Interrelation of Two Concepts Profitability or “value capture” is a notion that exists when an organization concentrates on the effective and efficient use of time and resources, wherein the organization determines the locus where it can best attain profitability developments (Collins, 2012, p.58). This is the main concept of this paper, which focuses on two predominant issues, including performance and right rewards. These are two of the four elements of attaining organization’s right profits; the other elements are the right people and right training (Pereira, 2013). To have the right people or right staffing, an organization should concentrate on prodding effort and attracting the artisans (cited in Zenger, 1992, p.200), which inception is pounded during the recruitment process. Performance management will always be tapped with reward systems because organizational performance can be tainted with motivational factors. Reward systems are the direct factors that lie behind every employee’s performance (Melancon, S. M. Noble & C. H. Noble, 2011, p.342). To gauge performance, the organization should commence on measuring its goals, to reviewing its previous operations, to quantifying such information for analysis, to evaluating such information through the further utilization of quantitative approach, and sticking to what has been deemed as a direct response to the problem (Likierman, 2009, pp.99-101). However, the most common mistake when it comes to reviewing the performance of the organization is the reluctance of the firm to evaluate the current information that is tangible in the workforce, which can be succinctly depicted by the personnel themselves (Ivancevich, 1983, p.465). From the very beginning, the firm should establish its goals and instill it with reward frameworks to motivate personnel and achieve an effective organizational performance (March & Simon, 1960, Cyert & March, 1963 cited in Peters, 1972, p.663). Personal problems may always arise, which are deemed as barriers to achieve effective employee performance (Kolb, Rubin, & MacKenzie, 1971 cited in Peters, 1972, p.663); therefore, integration should be implemented in the workforce for personnel to work together as a team (Moulesong, 2013). The dominant aspect to achieve synergy in the workplace is through integration (Tanriverdi, 2006, p.59). Dismally, pundits in the past have depicted that diversification and reward framework had been detrimental for the organization, but such judgment was unfounded because organizations might have a dearth of skill to find the right people and fully integrate these divergent personnel with sole purpose and right reward systems (Wageman, 1995 cited in Beersma, et al., 2003, p.586). However, contrasting literature also depicts that if team success is instilled with reward systems, the projection of having an effective group performance or teamwork will deem necessary to achieve the organizational goals; thus, effective group performance that is motivated by reward systems can enhance organizational performance (Gerhart & Milkovich, 1992, Jones & Kato, 1995, Kruse 1993 cited in Zenger & Marshall, 2000, p.149). Generally, human resource management practices create a very significant effect on personnel’s behavior (Guest, 1997, Paauwe & Richardson, 1997 cited in Chin-Ju, Edwards, & Sengupta, 2010, p. 15); therefore, the act of the recruitment process should result to hiring the right people, providing the right training, evaluating the right performance, and compensating a right reward (Pereira, 2013). 6. Conclusion Performance management must be held by an organization that wishes to sustain its competitive advantage in the industry. Performance alone, as a concept, is not enough, it should be specific--right performance. An organization should delve into finding the right performance so as to meet the objectives of the organization. Performance management is the key answer to finding the right performance. With this on hand, after recognizing the right performance, the organization can now set its standards and provide a reward system so as to motivate its people. People are so motivated by many factors. Teamwork success with associated rewards, as well, is a significant facet to motivate employees to work together and achieve organizational goals. It is up to the organization on how they perceive the advantage because not all organizations have the same workforce; this is the reason why performance management is likely a salient errand in identifying the stimulus of these people to perform well. References Azuranin, A. & Stuart, N., 2012. The effect of tangible and intangible noncash rewards on performance and satisfaction in a production setting. Management Accounting Quarterly, 13 (4), pp.1-9. Beersma, B., Hollenbeck, J. R., Humphrey, S. E., Moon, H., Conlon, D. E. & Ilgen, D. R., 2003. Cooperation, competition, and team performance: toward a contingency approach. Academy of Management Journal, 46 (5), pp.572-590. Brakke, T., 2013. The other side of your practice. Investment News, [internet] 3 March. Available at: http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20130303/REG/303039984 [Accessed 4 March 2013]. Chen, C. X., Williamson, M. G. & Zhou, F. H., 2012. Reward systems design and group creativity: an experimental investigation. Accounting Review, 87 (6), pp.1885-1911. Chin-Ju, T., Edwards, P. & Sengupta, S., 2010. The associations between organizational performance, employee attitudes and human resource management practices. Journal of General Management, 36 (1), pp.1-20. Collins, K., 2012. Total profitability management: a powerful framework. Financial Executive, 28 (7), pp.58-61. Hulkko-Nyman, K., Sarti, D., Hakonen, A. & Sweins, C., 2012. Total rewards perceptions and work engagement in elder-care organizations. International Studies Management & Organization, 42 (1), pp. 24-49. Ivancevich, J. M., 1983. Contrast effects in performance evaluation and reward practices. Academy of Management Journal, 26 (3), pp.465-476. Likierman, A., 2009. The five straps of performance measurement. Harvard Business Review, 87 (7), pp.96-101. Mauboussin, M. J., 2012. The true measures of success. Harvard Business Review, 90 (10), pp. 46-56. Melancon, J. P., Noble, S. M. & Noble, C. H., 2011. Managing rewards to enhance relational worth. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39 (3), pp.341-362. Moulesong, B., 2013. Team culture crucial to implementing work teams. Nwitimes.com, [internet] 3 March. Available at: http://www.nwitimes.com/business/jobs-and-employment/team-culture-crucial-to-implementing-work-teams/ article_f40178ec-2604-5f3e-9287-2cdb8e8378c4.html [Accessed 4 March 2013]. Pantouvakis, A., 2011. Internal service quality and job satisfaction synergies for performance improvement: some evidence from a b2b environment. Journal of targeting, Measurement & Analysis for Marketing, 19 (6), pp.11-22. Peltokorpi, V., 2011. Performance-related reward systems (PRRS) in Japan: practices and preferences in Nordic Subsidiaries. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22 (12), pp.2507-2521. Peters, D. H., 1972. Reward functions to reinforce a goal-based management process. Management Science, 18 (12), pp.663-675. Pereira, J., 2013. Will our companies ever be world class? Free Malaysia Today, [internet] 4 March. Available at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2013/03/04/ will-our-companies-ever-be-world-class/ [Accessed 4 March 2013]. Ravichandran, T., Liu, Y., Han, S. & Hasan, I., 2009. Diversification and firm performance: exploring the moderating effects information technology spending. Journal of Management Information Systems, 25 (4), pp.205-240. Storey, J., 2007. Human resource management: a critical text. London: Thompson Learning. Tanriverdi, H., 2006. Performance effects of information technology synergies in multibusiness firms. MIS Quarterly, 30 (1), pp.57-77. Zenger, T. R. & Marshall, C. R., 2000. Determinants of incentive intensity in group-based rewards. Academy of Management Journal, 43 (2), pp.149-163. Zenger, T. R., 1992. Why do employers only reward extreme performance? Examining the relationships among performance, pay, and turnover. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37 (2), pp.198-219. Read More