HR Strategies to Improve Leadership Behaviours of Team Leaders - Assignment Example

Running Head: HR STRATEGIES HR Strategies to improve leadership behaviours of team leaders s Table of Content HR Strategies to improve leadership behaviours of team leaders Introduction Over a span of 20 years or so, the topic of human resource management (HRM) has become one of the most documented in the management literature (a). Moreover, the increased level of globalization and internationalization of business, the growth of new markets (such as in Eastern Europe, China, India, South East Asia, and Latin America), growth of new international business blocs and an increased level of competition among firms at both national and international level has resulted in an increase in comparative HRM studies . Managers and policymakers now need to know how human resources (HR) are managed in different regions of the world and how their counterparts in different parts of the globe perceive or react to similar concepts and pressures. It is also important to have an understanding about the main determinants of HRM policies and practices in different regional and national settings. Academics have responded positively to meet the challenges raised by the globalization of business by investigating a number of issues and problems related to international business. They have attempted to examine management from a cross-national viewpoint. This comparison of HRM policies and practices at a national level helps to test the convergence-divergence thesis. The typical questions pursued by comparative researchers are: (1) how is HRM structured in individual countries. (2) What strategies are discussed (3) What is put into practice (4) What are the similarities and differences (5) What is the influence of national factors such as culture, government policy, and education systems Assumptions This paper assumes that the team members are not in close proximity to each other and the team leader might not always be in the same place as the team. The cross-cultural team consists of at least three different nationalities, with one member from the UK, one from South Asia and one from Eastern Europe. This paper also assumes that members of the team will differ in the three major values of power distance, uncertainty avoidance and human orientation. Strategies Both tangible and intangible dimensions of human resources are essential in developing a global competitive personnel profile that is unique, valuable, difficult to replicate, and provides the organization with a sustainable competitive advantage. Tangible human resource dimensions relate to the process, procedures, and systems established to identify, select, train, motivate, and retain the most competent personnel in the organization. Alternatively, intangible dimensions of human resources include the culture, learning capability, innovativeness, and collective action of the employees. Leveraging a firm's internal resources across its global network requires competent boundary-spanning managers developed within the firm's strategic global human resource management (SGHRM) system. Performance management requires managers to review regularly, with their teams and the individuals reporting to them, performance in relation to agreed objectives, the factors that have affected performance and the development and training needs that emerge from this analysis. Expatriates, having been socialized and developed in the headquarters, possess an intimate knowledge of the firm's internal resources, both in terms of their tangible and intangible dimensions, therefore, it is proposed: Proposition 1. If the firm's internal resources are critical for creating and sustaining a competitive advantage against rivals in a foreign market, then the global organization will assign management of that market to an expatriate manager. Proposition 2. If the firm's relational resources are critical for creating and sustaining a competitive advantage against rivals in a foreign market, then the global organization will assign management of that market to an inpatriate manager. Proposition 3. If both internal and relational firm resources are critical for creating and sustaining a competitive advantage against rivals in a foreign market, then the global organization will bundle expatriate and inpatriate managerial resources to manage that market. Proposition 4. The greater the organization's extent of globalization, the more salient inpatriation practice in the global organization is SGHRM. Discussion The resource-based view encompasses both firm internal resources emphasizing the capabilities of the intra-organizational network and the relational view (Dvir, Avolio & Shamir. 2002) of the global organization, which is focused on the resources emphasizing the inter-organizational capabilities of the network external to the firm. Just as internal processes, practices, and people are viewed as assets, so too are relational ones that integrate consumers and channels-of-distribution and other external assets. The relational view suggests that these types of assets must be cultivated, encouraged, and protected and are not simply the residual outcome of marketing actions (Harvey & Lusch, 1997; Hunt & Morgan, 1995). Relational perspective is a corollary to resource-based view in that both identify tangible and intangible assets as having value and uniqueness in creating/sustaining competitive advantage (Borman, 1997; Francesco & Gold, 2005). The extent of the firm's globalization of business activities reflects the share of its sales, employees and assets outside the borders of its home country (Howell & Avolio, 1993). As this extent increases, the firm's need for local social knowledge increases (Kirkman & Den, 2005). In other words, the global organization needs to integrate the local social knowledge across multiple country markets of specific, institutional and social environments. The multiplicity of local environments of varying cultural and economic level distance versus the home country increases the need for the firm's inclusion of inpatriation practice in its SGHRM system. Therefore, it is proposed: Successful companies must actively seek "creative destruction" of their existing competencies to retain competitive advantage in the marketplace (Barling, Weber, & Kelloway, 1996). Creative destruction in strategy is particularly important in complex, heterogeneous, rapidly changing (e.g., hyper-competitive) global markets. The process of continuous learning and the modification of resource bundles relative to the efficiency and effectiveness of strategies contribute to development of the firm's dynamic capabilities (Teece, 2000; Teece, Pisano, & Shuen, 1997). Applying dynamic capabilities to SGHRM has two core components: (1) dynamic--developing systemic global coherence while recognizing the unique features of each country's environment to facilitate customization of individual country strategies; (2) capabilities--focuses attention on the key role of managers in the adaptation, integration, and reconfiguring of both internal and relational resources to match the opportunities in the global and local marketplaces (Dierickx & Cool, 2001; Teece et al., 1997). The firm's internal and relational resources enable disaggregation and dispersion of its global activities across its global network (Ghorpade, 2000). These activities distributed across country markets are implemented through the mechanisms of hard (bureaucratic) and soft (personnel) control. The degree of global integration of the firm's dispersed activities depends upon the firm's needs to preserve local responsiveness to individual country markets (Snape, Thompson & Redman, 1998). The variables that capture this degree include: (1) extent of globalization in the firm's business activities; (2) heterogeneity of the firm's modes of entry across its global network; and (3) the level of horizontal interdependence among subsidiaries influencing the firm's strategic trust (Athanassiou & Nigh, 2003). In effect, these variables influence the depth of the internal control mechanisms in the global organization and thus the salience of inpatriation policy and practice in the firm's SGHRM. The firm's modes of entry are heterogeneous across countries and subsidiaries in terms of modes of governance (exporting, licensing, franchising, joint ventures, and wholly owned subsidiaries). The modes with a controlling equity position are hierarchical modes of governance; the contractual modes are quasi-market modes of governance; and 50/50 joint ventures are a hybrid form. Subsidiaries with a hierarchical mode of governance are more likely to be involved in value-adding activities and, therefore, are assigned to a centralized control by expatriates and inpatriates. If such subsidiaries are located in emerging, culturally and economically different countries, the firm's need for local social knowledge increases thus increasing the need for inpatriation practice in the global organization's SGHRM system. Bass et al., (2003) point out that there is very little research, which has dealt with the performance management aspect of HRM in UK, based organizations. What HR managers do know is that performance appraisal practices in UK based organizations tend to be informal and continuous and often used for monitoring and control rather than development purposes. This can occur through the owner-manager working alongside employees or locating him or herself in the same workspace so staff can be directly observed. Conclusion and Recommendation Despite the recognition of the importance of HRM to small, growing and entrepreneurial firms, there is very little research in the area, there is even less research that explores the strategic nature of HRM in UK based organizations. The HRM literature suggests human resources are a source of sustained competitive advantage because value, rareness, inimitability and non-substitutability are derived from the ambiguity, intrinsic heterogeneity, and complexity of these resources and the conditions under which they are deployed. Therefore, I suggest that this view should be applied equally to UK based organizations as large firms, particularly in the understanding of small fast growing and entrepreneurial firm performance were human resources issues are identified as a barrier to growth. Henceforth, it can be concluded that SHRM provides us with an underlying theory that demonstrates the value of a firm's human resources and the unique ways in which they are managed in order to achieve organizational goals. References Athanassiou, N., & Nigh, D. (2003). Investigating the use of emergent strategic human resource management activity in the UK based organization. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development. Strategic Management Journal, 20(1), 83-92. Barling, J., Weber, T., & Kelloway, E. K. (1996). Effects of transformational leadership training on attitudinal and financial outcomes: A field experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 827-832. Bass, B. M., Avolio, B. J., Jung, D. I., & Berson, Y. (2003). Predicting unit performance by assessing transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 207-218. Borman, W. C. (1997). 360-degree ratings: An analysis of assumptions and a research agenda for evaluating their validity. Human Resource Management Review, 7, 299-315. Dierickx, I., & Cool, K. (2001). Human resource management in smaller firms: A contradiction in terms. Human Resource Management Review, 35(12), 1504-1511. Dvir, T., Eden, D., Avolio, B. J., & Shamir, B. (2002). Impact of transformational leadership on follower development and performance: A field experiment. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 735-756. Francesco, A. M., & Gold, B. A. (2005). International organizational behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. (International Human Resource Management) Ghorpade, J. (2000). Managing five paradoxes of 360-degree feedback. Academy of Management Executive, 14, 140-150. Harvey, M., & Lusch, R. (1997). High performance work systems and intermediate indicators of firm performance within the British small business sector; European Management Journal, 15(4), 370-380. Howell, J. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Transformational leadership, transactional leadership, locus of control, and support for innovation: Key predictors of consolidated-business-unit performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 891-902. Hunt, S., & Morgan, R. (1995). The competitive advantage theory of competition. Journal of Marketing, 58, (April), 1-15. Kirkman, B. L., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2005). Performance management in global teams. In J. S. Osland, M. E. Turner, D. A. Kolb, & I. M. Rubin (Eds.), The organizational behavior reader. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Snape, E., Thompson, D., Yan, F., & Redman, T. (1998). Performance appraisal and culture: Practice and attitudes in Hong Kong and Great Britain. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 9, 841-861. Teece, D. (2000). Technological change and the nature of the firm. In G. Dosi, C. Freeman, R. Nelson, G. Silverberg, & I. Soete (Eds.), Technology change and economic theory (pp. 256-281). New York: Pinter Publications. Teece, D., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533. Read More