HR Management, Industrial Relations, and Personal Management - Essay Example

HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, AND PERSONAL MANAGEMENT and Human Resource Management, Industrial Relations, and Personal Management Human Resource Management, HRM For many years, organizations have always emphasized on human resources for the achievement of specific goals. The human being had and still being treated as significant resources that contribute immensely to the objectives of an organization. Many of us have seen organizations with the variety of workers/employees. Such employees are from a different background, with different qualifications, outlook, and understanding. As such, there is a need to emphasize on the development of employees or human resources if the business wants to achieve better in the future. Businesses can make it better and progress by creative efforts and abilities of their human resources (Price, 2011, p.3). Many businesses have a variety of functional areas. Some include production management, financial management, marketing management and human resources management. Our focus is on human resource HR or human resources management HRM. As mentioned above, human resource is essential to organizations. As such, human resources management in an organization has a number of functions in relation to human resources. They acquire human resources, develop and maintain it. In a simple explanation, HRM does staff recruitment, retention and development of the human resource (Zweig, 1991, p.3). Comparing HRM with past practices such as Industrial Relations (IR) and Personnel Management (PM) Industrial relations, personnel management, and HRM all simply represent the activity of managing people. They may have different methods but at the core are focused on the same principle of managing people which has developed throughout the years in order to help the workforce. Nevertheless, Personnel Management is too limited with a restricted focus on employees rather than strategic issues that concern business. HRM has, however, broadened the field of employee relations and has developed a strategic model that deals with business issues (Edwards, 2001, p. 1). Industrial relations Industrial relations IR study the core aspects of the employment relationships. IR has been described as employment relations due to its significances of non-industrial employment relationships. The main focus of IR is social justice done through decent work and fair employment. Many have differing views in regard to IR; some believe that IR is concern with labour unions. However, studies reveal that the main objective of IR is employees and managers in the workplace. Additionally, IR focuses on management strategy, workplace bargaining, job design, employee representation, skill development and other relevant activities. As such, IR professionals work for trade union that focuses on employees interests (Guest, 1987, p. 1). The interest of HRM and IR are similar to some extent. For example, the main tasks of the two are recruitment of staff, overseeing of employee contracts and conditions, dispute resolution, and performances management. HRM and IR also concern with training, the safety of staff, organizational structure and employee motivation (Guest, 1987, p. 1). According to Brewster (1995, p 396), both IR and HRM are not friendly to each other. However, the two fields are mutually exclusive. Many have debated the impact brought by HRM on IR. They believe that HRM is a greatest threat to IR. HRM is thought to be “IR” without unions, or it is modified to by-pass trade unions. Others describe HRM as anti-union or a strategy to be used to undermine the unions. Traditional industrial relations neglected certain issues within the workforce, which include the elimination of women for certain jobs within the workforce despite the growing numbers within the working population HRM. On the other hand, has emerged playing a larger role in organizations, dealing more proactively with the change in the makeup of workers and organizations. The feminization of work is partly down to the growing service sector and the decline of traditional industry. The changing workforce has meant that IR methods are viewed as out of touch that has led the way for HRM to acknowledge this and has created a more partisan system for all (Edwards, 2001, p.8). HRM unlike Personal Management and Industrial Relations, emphasizes the role of the individual this has created a focus on motivated and committed workers. Furthermore, the sense of involvement and commitment to the organization has been demanded through HRM. However, this may have consequences for the workforce because conflict is not part of the HRM philosophy. The rejection of conflict within an organization could leave individuals struggling to deal with a role within the firm which seems to have marginalized people. The workforce seems to have little power in business. This has been different to past managerial practices, which have been favourable to the workforce in a way that they have not been marginalized because conflict is expected and needed. This is because they had some power through representation by the trade unions. On the other hand trade unions are seen as a distraction and not needed within the HRM model (de Silva, 1997, p. 28). Human Resource Management developed as a response to global capitalism and increased competition around the 1980s. It resulted partly due to a perceived failure of industrial relations in this field. HRM is a fundamental part of a business strategy; this is not like previous practices which have been seen as marginalized parts of businesses and different functions added when needed in an unprepared manner. With HRM being integrated rather than marginalized it allows the business to be able to have clear strategies that are clearly defined and operated throughout the firm (Stredwick, 2005, p. 12). Industrial relations is said to have been one of the first management practices in the area of employment relationships. It is characterized by the creation of free labour markets and large-scale industrial organizations with many wage workers. Labour problems arose from society struggling with these new and extensive economic and social changes (Kaufman, 2001, p. 341). Human resource management is a description of activities that takes place in an organization in relation to the workforce and employers. On the other hand, the industrial relation is the concern with the relationship at the workplace. It considers the decisions by organizations, individuals, groups, and institutions and decides on the employment relationship between management and labour. Human resource management has a great difference from the past practices as it involves only two parties that are the employee and the employer. The past practices that involved many parties such as employee, employer, trade unions and government which is more hectic and procedural. Human resource management has an added advantage as it formulates the ideas, policies, techniques and programs of HR and implements them while the industrial relation is the results of implementations of these human resource policies. Apart from formulating these policies HRM also reformulates them in case of industrial conflicts resulting from unsound relation conflicts (Deb, 2009, p. 529). According to Kaufman (2001, p. 341) IR was seen as having two subdivisions. One part of IR dealt with labour while the other part was the concern with a method of employee governance and collective bargaining. It was also previously called personal administration or personal management. Based on its name, personal management oversees the study of work and employment from the employer’s point of view. It deals with the main objectives of employers, the strategies used by employers to fascinate, retain, inspire and develop the labour input of employees. In this case, the IR consider workers and as a means to an end. In other words, workers are the only means of maximizing profits and effectiveness of the organization. Previously in 1930s, the IR was considered as labour relations. As pointed above, the IR approached employment from employer’s point of view. In this case, the IR emphasized more on the objectives and the requirements of workers. Labour relation also considers the problems and issues common in the workplace globally. The industrial relation also identifies and advocates on ways of dealing with employees and employers through the trade union. Human Resources and Personal Management There has been a debate regarding the difference between HRM and personal management. Some researchers think that there is no difference between the two fields. Others believe that difference is noted in traditional personal management and HRM. Despite the argument by researchers concerning HRM and personal management, the two fields differ to some extent (Doaei & Najminia, n.d., 161). HRM is a distinct way to employment management that seeks competitive advantage through the development of dedicated and skilled workforce by utilizing an array of structure, and personal performance. On the other hand, personal management deals with the relationship existing between workers and employers in the workplace. Analysis of the two definition shows that there are features make the two differ. According to the authors, personal management is a management activity aimed at non-managers. The point is that personal management is mostly performed with the assistance of the management team. Nonetheless, HRM shows the significance of employee development but, the main focus is not only that, they consider the development of management team (Doaei & Najminia, n.d., 162). In conclusion, it can be explained that personal management focuses on non-managers while human resources management is concern with management team though its objective is less clear. Another aspect the shows the difference between the two are the management role that appears in the two. For example, personal management underline management as the main subject but it focuses on the different objective. It shows that all managers manage people. In this case, it indicates that managers’ objectives are personal management. Conversely, indication of HRM models shows that HRM is entrusted with line management as organizations’ managers take the responsibility for directing and coordinating all resources in the business unit to attain the bottom line result. As such, the bottom line is more specific than in the case of personal management models. Studies also indicate that the HRM models affect the quality of product and services (Doaei & Najminia, n.d., 161). Similarities, however, does exist between the three, HRM, IR and personal management. The relationship between the people in an organization and the organization is one of the main objectives of the three facets. HRM and IR are closely related to the fact that the staff members must be trustworthy, provide reliable information and must be available whenever they are needed. Both IR and HRM deals with many individuals in an organization, however, their main objective is to improve the profitability of an organization. As such, they are hoping to be more competitive so as to merge with changes in market and technology advancement. Additionally, the IR and HRM make decisions that sometimes affect their lives and the staff members. Such decisions include deployment of employees on various departments and in the end the workers find themselves in bad relation with HRM (Brewster, 1995, p. 396). Emerging challenges are significant to every organization and, in this case, the management has various ways to address such challenges. One among the strategies formed to deal with the case mentioned is customer orientation. Customer orientation increases customer services. Management team in an organization focuses on the skills of employers. The main objective is to ensure that the good from the company meets the required standards. Additionally, due to increasing technology and globalization goods must be acceptable in global markets. Globalization has brought many challenges to the government. Some include the failure by the state to control the inflow of technology, information and capital to the respective country. Globalization has also led to the creation of global companies and global web pages. The economy has also improved significantly in many countries as a result of globalization. High competition in the market is also a result of globalization. As such there is a need to have qualified workers in an organization so as to produce high-quality products. In any enterprise experiencing market pressures, it is very important to include some goals in order to become successful. The objectives include improved quality and productivity to cope with competitiveness, and there is also need for greater flexibility due to changing market and environmental factors. Continuous innovation is also a key in any enterprise to move with the changing and advanced technology. Apart from all this, there is also need for ability to respond rapidly in order to meet the needs and demands (Kokkaew, 2012, p.11). Human resource management has evolved from the past practices since its issues are integrated into decision-making which allows the business to be proactive in the way that it deals with employees problems. With HRM issues being an integral part of an organization, it has created the need for the specialist which is not only obvious but imperative. This is in contrast to previous managerial practices such as Industrial Relations, which didnt require specialist due to its marginalized role, because it was not considered a key role in the running of the business at that time (Kokkaew, 2012, p. 3). A fundamental difference between HRM and past managerial practices is a focus on different types of employee relationships. HRM focuses on a unitary relationship whereas Industrial Relation and Personal Management focus on a Pluralist outlook in their application of strategy. The Unitary belief is that there is no need for trade unions or collective bargaining. This is because it is believed that this would lead to conflict within the workplace this is a view that is supposed to be shared by organizational management and employees. Employees may be able to hide their individual interests to achieve what they jointly value. The Pluralist outlook sees conflict as inevitable. This is because the organization is perceived as being made up of various sub-groups with each having its loyalties and with their set of objectives and leaders (De Silva 1997). References Brewster, C 1995, Industrial relation and human resources management, De Silva, SR 1997, Human Resource Management, Industrial Relations And Achieving Management Objectives, International Labour Organisation, ACT/EMP. Deb, T 2009, Managing Human Resource And Industrial Relations, Excel Books India, New Delhi. Doaei, HA, & Najmini, R n.d, ‘How Far Does Hrm Differ From Pm,’ European Scientific Journal, Vol. 8, No. 13, Pp. 161-171. Edwards, P 2009, Industrial Relations: Theory and Practice, John Wiley & Sons, Malden. Guest, D 1987, ‘Human resource management and industrial relations’, Journal of Management Studies, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 503-521. Kaufman, BE 2001, ‘The theory and practice of strategic HRM and participative management Antecedents in early industrial relations,’ Human Resource Management Review, vol. 11, pp. 505–533 Kokkaew, N 2012, ‘Current Practices of Human Resource Management (HRM) in Thai Construction Industry: A Risk and Opportunity Perspective,’ Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res, Vol 1, no. 1, pp. 1-14. Price, A 2011, Human Resource Management, Cengage Learning, Ohio. Stredwick, J 2005, An Introduction to Human Resource Management, Elsevier Ltd, Great Britain. Zweig, MC 1991, Human Resources Management: The Complete Guidebook for Design Firms, John Wiley & Sons, New York. Read More