The Introduction of SHRM at Organizations - Research Paper Example

Human Resource Management Q The best practice model emphasizes on the careful selection and the recruitment of personnel, increasing the use, and the effectiveness of communication; insists on the need for employee development through training, and emphasizes the importance of working cooperatively, based on a job design that allows for flexibility (O’Connor and Raber, 2001). The approach, further, holds that performers should be recognized through pay increases; responsibility should form a crucial component of decision- making, and that organizations should adapt structures that can change and adapt when necessary (Bollinger, 2005). The main features of the ‘best practice’ approach include strategy setting and planning, which places emphasis on management, regarding the need to set strategically designed organizational goals, then developing plans that will help the organization realize the strategic goals drawn to guide the organization (Bollinger, 2005). The second feature is risk management; where the feature directs that an organization should ensure that it develops and employs a system that will enable the management identify the risk facing the organization. The feature, further, insists on the need for assessing the risks as well as developing ways of treating the risks identified. A third feature is consultation, which emphasizes on the need for making consultations with involved parties, as well as other parties like the community of interest (O’Connor and Raber, 2001). The fourth feature is roles and responsibilities, which guides that the different members of the organization should perform their responsibilities and roles (Bollinger, 2005). The fifth feature is skills, independence and resources, which places emphasis on maintaining a balance between autonomy and control among members, so they can help reach organizational goals. The sixth feature is conduct and ethics, which emphasizes on the need for developing a mode of guiding interactions within and outside the organization. The seventh feature is job execution, where assessing the work of the board is given importance. The eighth feature is succession planning, which emphasizes on the need to develop a plan for the appointment of the successor of the overall manager. The ninth feature is financial and operational reporting, where emphasis is placed on the need to report operational and financial flows (Bollinger, 2005). The Best-fit approach to HRM holds that the practices of the human resources role should fit well with other functions and organizational aspects, if the organization is going to operate effectively. The approach, further, holds that the strategic placement of the organization may require a change of the practices to be taken (“Best Practice”, n.d). The model emphasizes on the need to make greater use of similar HR actions. These HR actions, when implemented consistently and cooperatively among all members of the organization will lead to increased performance (Clinton and Van Veldhoven, 2013). The approach, further, holds that any organization that adopts the practices included will benefit from the change. The approach holds that the strategy of the HR function becomes better when it is fashioned to meet the needs of its context or the business environment within the organization. The demerit of the approach is that it overlooks the interests of employees (“Best Practice”, n.d). From a review of the two approaches: best practice and best fit approach, a number of common grounds, which are shared among the two, could be identified. These include that the two place emphasis on strategic planning: best practice insists on strategic goal setting, while best fit insists on operational and marketing strategies (Clinton and Van Veldhoven, 2013). A second common ground is that the two approaches consider the risks facing the organization: best practices insist on risk management, including competition while best fit insists on studying the competitive strategy of the organization as a unit (“Best Practice”, n.d). The third common ground is that both approaches emphasize on the need for consultation, which fosters consistency across different practice areas. The fourth common ground is that the two approaches emphasize on the need to determine the roles and responsibilities of different members of the organization, which is stated as coherence of practices under the best-fit approach (Clinton and Van Veldhoven, 2013). The two approaches hold similar views on the need to reward the individual performance of different members. Lastly, there is a common ground implied in best-fit approach: the need to treat workers and similar groups in similar ways. According to best practices, this ground falls under succession planning, skills independence, and conduct and ethics (“Best Practice”, n.d). Q 2 A recruitment strategy is the process through which, the director of HR uses to identify and enforce the staffing needs of business strategies and the business plan of the organization. During this process, the HR director should consider the dynamics of the organizational environment, which renders traditional approaches of recruitment, obsolete (Arthur, 2001). For instance, when guided by a traditional approach, the director will enumerate staff planning as part of the annual planning of the business of the entire organization (Alrichs, 2000). Most times, the business planning process requires the managers of the organization to estimate the future needs of the organization for a given duration, which they define in terms of employee numbers and not the capabilities required from different employees. For these reasons, a recruitment strategy director should consider the option of recruiting staffs in a manner that meets the labour needs of the organization in question (Guest, 2002). The HR director should ensure that they recruit in a manner, which is tailor-made for each process and issues across the organization. This would include developing recruitment, which is administered from a proactive point of view and one that is implemented from a planning point of view (Alrichs, 2000). Based on this consideration, the directors should not be guided by the assumption that the staffs needed are available and can be quickly hired, developed, and organized at the workplace. Based on this consideration during the recruitment process, the director will ensure that they hire enough individuals with the skills required for the job in question, which may be critical in realizing organizational goals. During the recruitment process, it is crucial for the HR director to focus on the job positions in question and not all positions within an organization as a whole. In this case, they should not develop a staffing strategy that considers all job positions to be filled from a strategic point of view (Arthur, 2001). For instance, it is often not necessary to draw a long-term staffing strategy for a job position, which can be filled quickly, from the available staffs within the organization or through getting a recruit from a pool that is readily available. Further, development of properly functional staffing strategies entails more resources and work (Alrichs, 2000). This makes it irrational to enumerate all job positions and in the analysis for a recruitment process. In developing the recruitment strategy, the HR director should focus on the following: the critical need to maintain the proactive nature of the organization and the need to offer a time-span, during which the organization can respond to changes. In developing a recruitment strategy, the HR director should define the different issues related to the organization as well as the recruitment process on an ongoing basis. This is the case as strategic recruiting and staffing should define and address the recruiting implications of change. Therefore, there should be an allowance for the discussion of the implications of the recruiting process, whenever change has taken place or it is anticipated. For instance, in case the organization in question considers and discusses the changes in its business strategies and plans after a year, developing a recruiting strategy for a year would be realistic (Guest, 2002). However, in case the organization considers and discusses and where necessary, implements changes throughout the year, an annual recruitment strategy would be grossly insufficient. In such a case, the implications of staffing should be discussed anytime change has been explored or is expected – and not at a given time (Alrichs, 2000). During the development of a recruitment strategy, the HR Director is supposed to consider focusing on planning, which is succeeded by acting and not reporting. This is the case as many organizations spend extremely little resources and time developing reports, listings and tables on the areas of current staffing, staff turnover, and other staffing-related areas. The issue is that most of the data reported is not that, which affects decision making in a considerable manner; therefore, it is imperative that the development of the recruitment strategy of an organization should focus more on providing the managers of the organization with more information as opposed to giving data: the information offered should be that, which enriches their processes of decision making (Alrichs, 2000). For instance, through the information given to the managers, they are likely to use it as the basis for formulating future staffing needs, which reflects the need to change certain areas as well as maintain the balance in others (Guest, 2002). Q 3 Strategic Human Resource Management forms a component of Human Resource Management, which centres on developing the link between human resources and objectives and organizational goals. The goal of SHRM is to foster business performance, and enhance an organizational culture that promotes flexibility, innovation and the increment of competitive advantage. In an organizational set up, SHRM implies the adoption of the HR function as a guide to strategic development, during the implementation and the formulation of the strategies of a company throughout the HR roles of recruitment, training, selecting and personnel remuneration. According to the views of Boxall and Purcell (2008, p.124) strategic human resource management places focus on HR programs with long-term goals, instead of focusing on internal HR issues, which affect the employees more directly. Therefore, it shifts focus to solving problems and addressing issues that impair the management of people management programs, within the long term, and most times from a global point of view. Therefore, this approach leads to the view that the role of SHRM is increasing the productivity of employees, through addressing the business obstacles that impair productivity, outside of human resources (Mintzberg, Lampel, Quinn and Ghoshal, 2002). From the in-depth definition of the coverage of SHRM, it is clear that it shifts the attention of management from the areas that could be limiting productivity among workers, to emphasize on the business obstacles that impair more productivity. From the coverage, it is evident that it does not pay attention to the welfare of employees, for instance matching the increase in productivity with increasing pay rates, but merely focuses on the stimulation of productivity (Bach, 2005). The process of addressing the business obstacles limiting productivity, further, fails to address the issues of developing the competence of the employee, as that would form a basic way of increasing organizational productivity. Another area, which is disregarded by the approach, which is likely to depict that SHRM works against the welfare of employees, is that it does not explore the areas that could limit their productivity, as opposed to placing all the focus on the areas that affect the productivity of the business. SHRM places emphasis on connecting HR policy with the overall aims of the organization and the organizational environment, this emphasis, in essence, shows that it requires the HR officials of an organization to tighten the policies and practices of the HR department, which are supposed to guide the functionality of employees, to ensure that they push the human resources available at the particular organization. The core aim of this approach is that the employees are pushed to adjust to the new policies and practices as that helps the organization as a whole get closer to the realization of the strategic aims of the organization, with regard to the environment offered within the organizations premises (Bratton and Gold, 2003). Therefore, exploring this correlation critically, it is clear that the organization human resources (employees) are the only component of the matrix, which is not explored to check whether they can deliver the expected outcomes (Bach, 2005). Therefore, an organization is likely to impose HR practices and policies, which are not favourable for the welfare of the employees. The organization may also set strategic aims that are grossly non-realizable, as well as alter the organizational environment in a manner that does not guarantee the expected changes (Legge, 2005). As a result, the HR function of the particular organization will end up exploiting the employees or overworking them as it did not explore the changes of the human resource-base that would have enabled it realize the set organizational expectations. Therefore, it is conclusive that the core aim of SHRM is exploiting the full potential of the employee-base, without increasing other determinants of productivity increase. The components explored by SHRM, in maximizing the output of employees include the following: the internalization of market integration; the imposition of the free market ideology, which leads to increased competition – local, national, or international; the uptake of technological innovations, and the development of new concepts in general and line management (Bach, 2005). Other areas that are explored within the context of SHRM are continuously changing ownerships of organizations and the corporate climates developed; cross-cultural focus and issues, and increasing the focus of production from developed to developing nations. Among all these aspects linked to SHRM, none favours the welfare of employees directly and in the long term (Mintzberg, Lampel, Quinn and Ghoshal, 2002). In the area of the internalization of market integration, there are a number of aspects, including foreign investment, and the removal of government limitations on capital movement. These two examples of the options available to an organization adopting SHRM are fully, not likely to improve the welfare of the employee within the particular organization. For instance, through investing in foreign markets, the employees of the organization will lose their employment to foreign people. Through the liberalization of capital movement, organizations are likely to invest in markets that foster higher profitability. As a result, the employees working from the areas that are not favoured by the difference will lose their employment (Kazmi and Ahmad, 2002). Through SHRM, some of the new concepts of management that are developed include the outsourcing of labor or services. Outsourcing within the context of an organization, implies the part-time commissioning of the services of outside labour, to offer certain services or to complete a component of the production process (Bach, 2005). Organizations turn to outsourcing after realizing that they can save some costs, in case they get certain parts of the production process done from outside the organization, or certain services offered by outside parties. Following the move to outsource production or services, employees working full-time at these organizations are likely to lose their employment. Alternatively, they could be required to work for salaries that are not worthy of the work, or services they offer to the company. Therefore, from a wider perspective, SHRM works in favour of organizations, but is likely to derail the welfare of employees (Mintzberg, Lampel, Quinn and Ghoshal, 2002). Through HSRM, there is also a series of change in the ownership of organizations, as well as the new corporate climates created at the particular organization. Through this change of ownership and corporate climate, employees may be required to work under more pressure, or under unfavourable conditions (Mintzberg, Lampel, Quinn and Ghoshal, 2002). This case results from the change of ownership, where the managerial outlook of the new owner may not blend to the values developed by the older ownership. As a result, the different aspects of the changes that come with SHRM, especially at its wider level, work against the interests of the employees, whether in the short or the long term (Guest, 2002). SHRM comes with changes in the view of staffs, where internal career ladders are introduced at the workplace. With the introduction of this career ladder model, the rewards offered to employees are tied to the ladder system; therefore, those that perform best are paid the most. As a result, this situation is likely to work against the welfare of the employee’s working at organizations, in case their performance cannot be easily evaluated (Kathy and McMackin, 2001). Further, the approach limits the rewards of new entrants within the organization, as they are likely to earn little while they undergo training, so they can match the performance of others. For this reason, the introduction of SHRM at the workplace does not work in the interest of the employees, as it creates wage disparities, which may discourage employee performance, despite the organizational expectation that their performance should be increasing (Beardwell, Holden and Claydon, 2004). Therefore, with the introduction of SHRM at organizations, often, the need for formal training is created. However, most times, the work environment will not offer a good environment, for the training and the learning of the different employees. This is particularly the case, in the constantly changing work environment, where almost all that is done at the workplace requires adaptation and further training (Mintzberg, Lampel, Quinn and Ghoshal, 2002). However, most times, many organizations will expect to see the changes and the development of their employees, despite the fact that they disregard the essential nature of training the employees, regarding the changes that come with the shift to SHRM (Kathy and McMackin, 2001). For instance, most times, SHRM will lead to the substitution of manual work with automated production models. As a result, the need of training is left to the employees, which significantly disfavours their welfare at the particular organization. From the review of the different literatures on the impact created by strategic human resource management on the employee, despite the immense benefits it brings to organizations, there is a need to check the welfare of employees further. This is the case, as the move towards SHRM takes employees closer to increased risk of employment loss and subjection to abuse from employers (Mintzberg, Lampel, Quinn and Ghoshal, 2002). Bibliography Alrichs, N. 2000. Competing for Talent: Key Recruitment and Retention Strategies for Becoming an Employer of Choice. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing. Arthur, D. 2001. The Employee Recruitment and Retention Handbook, 1st Edition. Saranac Lake, NY: Amacom Books. Bach, S. 2005. (Ed). Managing Human Resources, 4th edition. Oxford: Blackwell. Beardwell, I., Holden, L., and Claydon, T. 2004. Human Resource Management: A Contemporary Approach. Harlow: Prentice Hall. Best Practice V. best Fit: How do we know what an appropriate HR model is for a firm? [Online] Available at: http://mbatools.co.uk/Revision%20Sheets/OMP/BEST%20PRACTICE.pdf [Accessed Jan 19, 2013]. Bollinger, M., 2005. From fads to best practice, Strategic Finance, 87(5), pp.25 Boxall, P., and Purcell, J., 2008. Strategy & Human Resource Management. Palgrave. Bratton, J., and Gold, J., 2003. Human Resource Management: Theory and Practice. 3rd edition. Macmillan. Clinton, M., and Van Veldhoven, M., 2013. HRM & Well-being. In Bach, S. &Edwards, M. (Eds) Managing Human Resources. Oxford: Blackwell. Guest, D., 2002. ‘Human Resource Management, Corporate Performance and Employee Wellbeing: Building the Worker into HRM.’ Journal of Industrial Relations, 44(3), pp. 335. Kathy, M., and McMackin, J., 2001. Designing and aligning an HR system. Human Resource Management, 11(2), pp. 57–59. Kazmi, A., and Ahmad, F., 2002, Differening Approach to Strategic Human Resource Management, Journal of Management Research, 3, pp. 133. Legge, K., 2005. HRM: Rhetorics and Realities. Basingstoke: Macmillan. Mintzberg, H., Lampel, J., Quinn, J., and., Ghoshal, S., 2002. The Strategy Process: Concepts, Context, Cases, 4th edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. O’Connor, J., and Raber, R., 2001. ‘The best of both worlds,’ Association Management, 53(5), pp. 28-29. Read More