TNNB - Talent Management and Manpower Issues - Assignment Example

TNNB: Talent management and manpower issues and resolutions March 16, Word count: 2082 Introduction The role of human resources strategy (HRS) in supporting, or even driving, business strategy has gained increasing academic and practitioner interest and evidence for the past few decades (Lee et al., 2010, p.1351). HRS can support business strategy by ensuring that HR plans and models are helping companies attain their strategic aspirations (Wilton, 2011, p.64). The business strategy of TNNB is to design and sell electrohydraulic systems for different customers through a build-to-order approach using its project management system. It seeks to target a broad range of consumers through customised electrohydraulic products that fit specific client needs and budget. The HR strategy of the company aims to use project management system for HR configuration. The main problems of TNNB are in talent management and manpower planning and outcomes that do not support HR strategy because its HR strategy has not been designed to support business strategy. To resolve these problems, a best fit HR theory and holistic talent management approach are used in changing HR strategy because they can leverage talent management to ensure that manpower supports business strategy and HRS. Literature/Theories HR strategy refers to the total approach and means that an organisation takes to manage workers using formal and informal policies and practices (Wilton, 2011, p.58). HR strategy can also respond to specific emerging organisational issues that require HRM support and changes. An example is talent management issues that might require changes in performance management and talent development. Functional HR strategies correspond to the core areas of human resource management- resourcing, performance management, pay and conditions, employee relations, and development (Armstrong and Baron, 2002, p.149). Each aspect of HRM processes must be interconnected with the HR strategy. Business strategy defines organisational goals, where the organisation competes with, and how it is going to approach its attainment of goals (Lyneis, 2011, p.69). A company’s business strategy includes company goals, products and services to be offered, target markets, and competitive pricing (Lyneis, 2011, p.69). Business strategy also concerns matching internal skills, knowledge, and resources with opportunities and threats in the external environment (Grant, 2002, p.135). Strategy should not focus on market opportunities only, but address internal strengths and weaknesses and their proper management. Grant (2002) argued for the role of company resources in attaining competitiveness and profitability, as well as innovation at firm levels (p.135). He asserted that resources produce capabilities, capabilities shape competitive advantage, and competitive advantage drives business strategy (Grant, 2002, p.136). He explained the resource-based view of competitive advantage that is critical to business strategy formulation. HR strategy is important because its best fit with the business strategy enables HR to support and reinforce the latter (Wilton, 2011, p.64). According to the “Best Fit” theory, HR strategy that supports business strategy can improve business performance by reinforcing the direction of the company towards strategic endeavours (Wilton, 2011, p.64). HR helps mould and control behaviours that are required in attaining business strategies. In addition, HR strategy can be seen as what HR is doing to not only support business strategy, but to also drive it, where HR and business strategies are connected and aligned with each other. The “aligned process” asserts that HR and business strategies are formulated together and not separately (Armstrong and Baron, 2002, p.91). Talent management is an integration of processes, policies, programs, and practices that seek to attract, develop, deploy, and retain talent for the attainment of strategic objectives and future business needs (Silzer and Dowell, 2010, p.18). By this definition of TM, it seems to be synonymous with HRM, but it is not. Talent management does not include labour relations strategies, employee benefits, and organisational design, for instance (Silzer and Dowell, 2010, p.20). TM is important because it includes a systems management approach to managing talent and new ways of thinking, designing, and implementing policies and processes (Silzer and Dowell, 2010, p.22). Talent management can be a strategic resource and competitive advantage too (Silzer and Dowell, 2010, p.24). TM can be vertically aligned with business strategy by making it concentrate on developing organisational capabilities that support competitive advantage, where managers are aware of organisational capabilities and how they can be maximised (Truss et al., 2012, p.187). Manpower refers to the people needed to complete particular tasks, projects, or activities, or it can also refer to people who are already working in the company (Wilton, 2011, p.154). Manpower refers to present and future workforce needs and how they are aligned in light of dynamically changing internal and external environments. Manpower planning also is seen as succession planning, so that the right kind of people are prepared to do the right kind of job at the right time in the future. Talent management and manpower planning are suitable for HR strategy because they compose the fundamental building blocks for the latter (Wilton, 2011, p.154). Talent management ensures that manpower is available when the company needs them, and it also prepares people for future organisational employment needs. A holistic talent management approach links HR policies, processes, and programs with clear business and employee goals and motivations (Truss et al., 2012, p.187). Holistic TM acknowledges that without manpower, the company will not even operate and survive, but more than that, it uses manpower to ensure competitiveness, and not merely survival. Case Study- TNNB The business strategy of TNNB is to produce electrohydraulic systems for different customers through a build-to-order approach using its project management system (the role of the company). The main goal is to satisfy a broad range of consumers through customised electrohydraulic products that fit specific client needs and budget (Grant, 2002, p.135). Competitive pricing is based on ensuring that organisational resources are combined at the right place and time for proper efficiency attainment. TNNB believes that project management is a strategic approach to producing and offering its product and services, while it sees the importance of systems engineers in adding unique features to projects (Grant, 2002, p.135). The HRS of TNNB (its role) aims to have project managers who know how to do their jobs. The company’s clear policies are on their expectations for their project managers which are the following: to understand where the project is at the moment, to know where the project should be, and to ensure that gaps between target project stages and actual stages are reduced. Furthermore, the HRS intends to match HRS with business strategy. TNNB wants to be the leading producer of customised electrohydraulic systems and it believes that project management is a form of HR system that will help attain its business strategy. The HRS of TNNB is not following the “Best Fit” theory because its HRS is not actively linked with business strategy (Wilton, 2011, p.64). On the one hand, it uses project management in managing the workforce through providing autonomy to project managers in conducting their jobs. On the other hand, it lacks a clear performance management program because managers only checked the performance of project managers when they heard of problems with the projects. As for talent management, TNNB knows that its engineers are precious manpower, so it does not instantly layoff problematic personnel (Silzer and Dowell, 2010, p.18). The role of TM is to ensure that TNNB has competent project managers who can manage people and resources for the attainment of both HRS and business strategy (Silzer and Dowell, 2010, p.18). However, TNNB does not have a concrete training and development strategy for project managers. This can be inferred from the main systems engineer who feels “frustrated” because of the perceived incompetence of project managers. For him, the project managers did not have sufficient talent and skills to do their jobs. The two project managers further added that they were not properly prepared for their jobs. TNNB does not have a holistic model that is integrated with HR and business strategy (Wilton, 2011, p.154). It does not proactively develop employees for their complex roles and responsibilities, especially project managers who evidently have a disconnection between what their skills and knowledge should be as project managers and what they actually have (Silzer and Dowell, 2010, p.18). TNNB may also not be deploying the right people for the right jobs. It is possible that the project managers may also not fit their existing job positions, unless they are trained and developed appropriately for the latter (Wilton, 2011, p.154). In addition, TNNB does not have a talent retention strategy (Wilton, 2011, p.154). The systems engineers have problems with both mechanical design and service engineers and project managers that can lead to their future resignation. Furthermore, TNNB lacks a clear talent management measurement system (Hills, 2012, p.42). As a result, it is not clear to it how TM measurement drives HRS. Apart from talent management issues, TNNB is tackling manpower issues. The role of manpower goal for TNNB is that it has enough people to complete its projects. TNNB is trying to balance HRS and business strategy, but it does not have definite policies and practices to support manpower’s connection to HRS (Wilton, 2011, p.154). TNNB is at risk of losing talented employees because of low employee morale due to poor employee satisfaction with management-employee relations. If ever the company does lose employees, it does not have succession planning too. Manpower refers to the people needed to complete particular tasks, projects, or activities, or it can also refer to people who are already working in the company (Wilton, 2011, p.154), and right now, the company has project managers who are not capable of doing their jobs efficiently and effectively. Manpower refers to present and future workforce needs, and TNNB does not have succession planning to prepare for these future workforce demands. TNNB only knows how hard it is to develop engineers, but it has no idea on how to develop and to retain them. Recommendations The recommendation is to fit HRS with business strategy by finding the best fit according to contingent resources and situations and creating a holistic TM strategy (Garavan, 2012, p.2432). The first step is for HRS to affect the strategic planning process through giving educational resources for strategy and core competency, with specific focus on project managers and related engineers, and analysing sources of competitive intelligence that can bind engineers and project managers into one team (Clardy, 2008, p.187). This promotes the best fit by making sure that HRS is made alongside business strategy (Wilton, 2011, p.154). The second step is determining and illustrating core competencies, where mapping and assessment of talent management and manpower are conducted through holistic TM theory (Clardy, 2008, p.187). The company must conduct an ethnographic study of competencies and informal learning processes and establish knowledge management practices and systems between project managers and other employees (Clardy, 2008, p.187). Informal learning practices must be institutionalised and integrated into HRS for the creation of teamwork culture where knowledge management practices and policies are identified, practiced, measured, and improved. The company must also improve social capital through “network promotion, rituals, identity, relationships, and reflective practices” to facilitate the creation of a culture that promotes innovation, entrepreneurship, risk-taking, and teamwork (Clardy, 2008, p.187). The third step is protecting core competencies through succession planning and connecting talent management with training and development and performance management (Clardy, 2008, p.187). The step includes applying ongoing skills upgrade and cultural maintenance practices, as well as ensuring the loyalty of employees through various organisational social and cultural symbols and practices (Clardy, 2008, p.187). These activities aim to promote feelings of oneness among engineers, so that they would stop seeing each other as disconnected members of their firm. These recommendations aim to turn TNNB from a fragmented company to a unified organisation with interconnected resources and manpower where teamwork is part of the organisational culture. Conclusion The main problem of TNNB is that it has an HRS that is not connected with its business strategy. As a result, the basic HR functions are fragmented within the contexts of both HRS and business strategies. The outcomes are poor talent management, disjointed thinking of engineers toward their roles and responsibilities, and impending manpower shortage issues. The resolution proposed follows the best fit theory and holistic TM perspective because limited resources and manpower necessitate a balanced HR-business strategy approach for TNNB. The recommendation combines knowledge management with HRS changes that develop all employees’ soft and hard abilities. The focus on career management and training and development can improve talent retention and effective succession planning. It also ensures that TNNB develops its personnel according to inner strengths and outside risks and opportunities. Reference List Armstrong, M. and Baron, A. (2002). Strategic HRM: The key to improved business performance. London: CIPD. Clardy, A. (2008). The strategic role of Human Resource Development in managing core competencies. Human Resource Development International, 11 (2), pp.183-197. Garavan, T.N. (2012). Global talent management in science-based firms: an exploratory investigation of the pharmaceutical industry during the global downturn. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(12), pp.2428-2449. Grant, R.M. (2002). The resource-based theory of competitive advantage. In: Faulkner, D. Strategy: Critical perspectives on business and management, volume 2. London: Routledge, pp.135-157. Hills, J. (2012). How firms define and execute talent strategy. People Management, pp.42-44. Lee, F., Lee, T., & Wu, W. (2010). The relationship between human resource management practices, business strategy and firm performance: evidence from steel industry in Taiwan. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 21(9), 1351-1372. Lyneis, J.M. (2011). Business policy and strategy, system dynamic applications to. In: Meyers, R.A. Complex systems in finance and econometrics. New York: SpringerScience, pp.69-92. Silzer, R. and Dowell, B.E. (2010). Strategic talent management matters. In: Strategy-driven talent management: a leadership imperative. California: John Wiley &Sons, pp.3-72. Truss, C., Mankin, D., and Kelliher, C. (2012). Strategic human resource management. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wilton, N. (2011). An introduction to human resource management. California: SAGE. Read More