Human Resource Development and Strategic Human Resource Development Models - Coursework Example

Human Resource Development (HRD) and Strategic Human Resource Development (SHRD) Human Resource Development (HRD) and Strategic Human Resource Development (SHRD) Introduction There have been increasing literature works and theories that examine and evaluate the role of professions of the Human Resource Development in institutions or organisations. The focus has mainly been on how in the environment that is so volatile, the professions of HRD strategically contribute to the success of organisations. This is mainly through the development of the employees’ potential. In fact the function of HRD has significantly experienced several changes in the recent past. This essay besides examining the models of Garavan (1991) and McCracken & Wallace with focus on HRD and corporate strategy being the focus of organisations, also examines the extent to which HRD has been changing. Organisations have more often incorporated the concept of Human Resource Development (HRD) and SHRD (Strategic Human Resource Development) in their operations. SHRD incorporates the concept of HRD though its application in reality tends to be more complex than the theoretical aspects. The SHRD mainly encompasses the development of individual skills where learning and training becomes the heart of the operations of the organizations. Since the concept of HRD emanates from HRD, there are theories that attempt to explain HRD such as the economic theory, the system theory and the psychological theory. On the other hand, the Garavan (1991) model illustrates the concept of SHRD in a different way in comparison to that of the McCracken & Wallace (2000). McLean (2001) extrapolates that there are several drivers of SHRD such as the advancement and introduction of new technology and competitive forces among others. Garavan (1991) model focuses on the integration of the mission and goals of organisations. The integration of these factors is very vital for the organisations. The emergence of SHRD is perceived to be the central for the life of organisations and firms. The development through learning and training insinuate the possibility of technicians of an organization becoming the chief executive in the following year. According to Heraty & Morley (2000), practitioners encounter the challenge of harnessing the aspirations in a way that makes HRD not only proactive but also to be highly regarded partner of the business in an organization. Comparison and contrast of Garava (1991) and McCracken & Wallace Model (2000) The McCracken & Wallace (2000) model was redefined from the Garavan (1991) which was the earlier model that attempted to explain the concept of SHRD. The underlying differences between the above two models are quite distinct in their operations and practice. However, in reality, most organisations rarely incorporate the theories behind the SHRD in practice as it tends to be more complex. Grieves (2003) explains that Strategic Human Resource Development (SHRD) lays a lot of emphasis on the development of personal or individual skills, as well as, learning in a bid to accomplish personal learning and organizational learning. Garavan (1991) on the other hand describes that SHRD encompasses the management of the learning for a long period of time by incorporating corporate strategies that are explicit. Moreover, it focuses on the alignment of the corporate strategy and the HRD strategy (Swanson, 2001). HRD encompasses the following components: development of career; organizational development; and training and development. Swanson (2001) highlights that there are theories that explain the concept of HRD such as the psychological theory, system theory, and economic theory. The psychological theory encompasses the captures the aspects of human, as well as, the social techniques of HRD. On the other hand, the system theory entails the dynamics and complex nature of the environmental interaction, the processes of work in the organization, and the variability of individuals. However, the economic theory entails the effectiveness and efficiency of the utilization of resources. Walton (1990) argues that SHRD involves processes in an organisation that facilitates learning. Moreover, the learning process is exercised through appropriate stewardship. This provides the direction for the core competence of the firm which is enhanced through the learning process. Core competence in this context refers to the uniqueness processes that are difficult to imitate and their relations are complex thus providing the competitive leverage. Mc Cracken & Wallace (2000) supports by illuminating that it involves creation of culture for learning within a range of not only training but also strategies in learning and development. It responds to strategies of the corporate as well as influence and shape the corporate. It’s a representation of a particular HRD model. It involves the process of development and utilisation of expertise with the aim of improving the individual and teamwork processes inclusive of the systems of the organization. Human Resource Development HRD in this context refers to the development of in reference to personal skills and organisations skills. In addition, HRD encompasses the development of knowledge, as well as, abilities with the sole aim of bettering the synchronisations of work and learning. The following are perceived to be the drivers of Strategic Human Development: the influence of technology especially new technology; the changing structures in an organisation; competitive forces; the changing market for labour; quality being the most fundamental value of an organisation; and the rapid increase in changes in the global arena. The knowledge of technological development and integration of these developments into the organisation can help the organisation to flourish. It consists of the techniques of obtaining, maintaining, and adopting technology to the operations of orgainisation in order to optimize performance. According to Garavan (1991), one of the features of the SHRD is the integration of the mission and goals of an organisation. Garavan (1991) argues that this integration onto the planning of the business contributes to not only the goals of the corporate but also the awareness of the corporate mission. Maxwell, Watson & Quail (2004) support that SHRD encompasses the development processes of both the objectives and goals that are aligned with the strategies of the company. The proactive roles of SHRD are the processes of training and learning which aids in the formulation of strategy; shaping of strategy; serving as a channel of the implementation of the corporate strategy as well as a means of achieving change. In fact, the SHRD should influence and shape these goals and missions. The second characteristic is the support to the top management which consists of centrality and control of resources. The participation and support of the top management are vital ingredients for the SHRD development. The support is in the form of the points of view of personal development and operational roles. The HRD should be led instead of just the support from the top management. However, such support can only be earned only if the professionals of HRD have the potential of demonstrating strategic capabilities which is vital for the planners acquire analytical, personal, and conceptual skills. The next characteristic is the environmental scanning which entails the knowledge of the internal and external environment. The external environment is in regards to the business threats and opportunities for the HRD which is crucial for SHRD to thrive. The managers inclusive of the HRD professionals have the task of collecting or rather gathering information concerning the environment. The SHRD considers the implications of the HRD in terms of the changes in the external and internal environment (Mankin, 2001). The next characteristic is the policies and plans of the HRD. Garavan (1991) suggests that the strategic focus of HRD is one that formulates the policies and plans that are integrated with the plans and policies of the business. Strategy in discussion in this case refers to the chosen root out of the available options for the purpose of the achievement of the goals of the business. Moreover, it’s an action guide that provides the avenue within which the policies can be implemented after the agreement. It gives the organisation the direction not only for the present operations but also the future directions (Harrison, 2002). The fifth feature is the commitment and involvement of the line management which is vital for the SHRD. The HRD needs should be clear besides the HRD staff clarifying to the shareholders the expected kind of support and needs. However, the line management supports inclusive of the involvement are not sufficient for the SHRD. Garavan (1991) also illuminates the existences of activities of HRD as complementary and that the function of SHRD requires innovative trainers, as well as consultants. Moreover, SHRD recognises culture and focuses on evaluation. There are several models that attempt to provide insights into the SHRD. Some of these models are the Arshridge model (1987), the Garavan (1991) model, and the Mc Cracken & Wallace (2000) model. Barnharm, et al (1987) points out that the Arshridge model focuses on the conditions in the environment that demand customer orientation, the organisations flexibility and international focus. In the model, the role of managers tends to changes at all levels. In addition, more emphasis is channeled towards leadership instead of control of the organisation. It also encompasses the need for horizontal relationship and neglects that of the vertical. Besides, a lot of emphasis is laid on the development of employees in terms of nurturing their potential. Mc Cracken & Wallace (2000) model redefined Strategic Human Resource Development in several aspects. In the model, SHRD is vital in shaping the goals and mission of the organization. This is in contrast with Garavan (1991) model where the goals and mission are integrated. In addition, while Garavan model focuses on support of the top management, the McCracken & Wallace top management is through leadership focus. Moreover, the environmental scanning is in the terms of the HRD and is accomplished by the senior management of the organisation or firm. While the Garavan (1991) model focuses of the plans and policies of the HRD the McCracken & Wallace (2000) model includes strategies into the HRD. Furthermore, the strategic partnership is both with the Human Resource Management (HRM) and line management. The model perceives trainers as consultants of the changes of the organization. The other vital component of the model that differs with that of the Garavan (1991) is the ability to influence the culture of the company or the corporate despite the fact that the evaluation of the organisation being based on cost effectiveness. Interestingly, Maxwel et al (2004) integrated both the characteristics of the Garavan (1991) model with the McCracken (2000) model either by enabling those characteristics or by implementing them. Garavan et al (1995) argues that most organisation incorporate the short term perspectives since the HRD is perceived not only in soft terms but also lacking the coherency that the strategic approach required. Heraty and Morley (2000) highlights the characteristic nature of HRD in Ireland at the organizational level. These characteristics are the identification of the needs for the HRD, the responsibilities of its policies; the delivery, coverage, and evaluation of the HRD; and the nature of the activities for long term development. In addition, the function of HRD is often perceived as an activity that is elusive which lacks real strategy that is focused. However, the perception is evidently changing with time. Mc Cracken & Wallace (2000) illuminates that the survey of companies based in Scotland and several cases studies found evidence of SHRD though in its weak version. Moreover, the evidence illustrates that strongly on the support of top management instead of the leadership as the Mc Cracken & Wallace (2000) model suggests. However, there is weak support in the line management with few or lack thereof of partnership. Besides, as much as there is more focus on evaluation, the cost effectiveness is very minimal. Maxwell, Watson, and Quayle (2004) in reference to the Hilton cases study attempt to marry the characteristics of the SHRD and their presence. For an instant, in the enabling of the integration of the mission and goals of the organisation, the HRD terms are never present. This is also evident in the environmental scanning while on the role of expanded trainer, the presence is not at the level of operation. However, there is presence of the following characteristics in the Hilton case study: enabling of leadership and support of the top management; and recognition of the culture of the organisation. In reference to the implementation, there is the presence of plans and policies of the HRD; activities of the HRD that are complementary; and evaluation emphasis. However, the involvement and commitment of the line manager is not clear. Within organizations, the role of SHRD is quite complex and has influences that are interrelated. Garavan (2007) explains that few companies or organisations practice SHRD due to the its complexity. The perspective nature of the model and lack of the desire or ability for the specialist in HRD to not only measure but also evaluate their contributions in terms of strategies hampers organizations to practice SHRD. Garavan (2007) extrapolates that the evolution of SHRD is best comprehended as a dynamic and multi-level concept. Due to this evolution Garavan (2007) describes SHRD as a coherent, horizontally integrated set of development and learning activities which are vertically aligned in order to achieve strategic goals. This calls for an approach that is holistic with emphasis on both the SHRD strategic and operational dimensions. The Garavan (1991) model enabled early comprehension of the concept of SHRD as a corporate strategy response. On the other hand, Mc Cracken & Wallace (2000) model redefined the model (Garavan’s model) with the aim of promoting a culture for learning. In the model, learning and development strategies are respond to the strategies of the corporate and also shapes and influences the corporate. Conclusion There are numerous theories and literatures that have attempted to examine the role of HRD in organizations. This has been propelled by the increasing interest in both HRD and SHRD with the aim of evaluating the ideal models for the success of organizations. While the component of HRD focuses of the development of career, organisational development, and training and development. The Garavan (1991) provided the early concept of the SHRD which was later redefined in the Mc Cracken & Wallace (2000) model. In the Garavan’s model the integration of the missions and goals of organizations are highly emphasized. In contrast, the other mentioned model focuses on shaping the missions and goals of the organizations. References List: Garavan, T.N. (1991). Strategic human resource development. Journal of European Industrial Training, vol.15, no.1, pp.17-30. Garavan, T.N. (2007). A strategic perspective on human resource development. Advances in Developing Human Resources, vol.9, no.1, pp.11-30. Harrison, R. (2002). Employee Development, 3rd ed, London: CIPD. McCracken, M & Wallace, M. (2000) Exploring strategic maturity in HRD: Rhetoric, aspiration or reality? Journal of European Industrial Training, vol.24, no.8, pp.425-467. Walton, J. (1999).Strategic Human Resource Development, Great Britain: Pearson Education Ltd. Maxwell, G., Watson, S & Quail, S. (2004). Quality service in the international hotel sector: A catalyst for strategic human resource development’, Journal of European Industrial Training, vol.28, no.2/3/4, pp.159-182. Garavan, T.N., Heraty, N. and Barnicle, B. (1999) ‘Human resource development literature: Current issues, priorities and dilemmas’, Journal of European Industrial Training, vol.23, nos.4/5, pp.169-179. Mankin, D.P. (2001). A model for human resource development. Human Resource Development International, vol.4, no.1, pp.65-85. McLean, G.N. and McLean, L. (2001) ‘If we can’t define HRD in one country, how can we define it in an international context?’, Human Resource Development International, vol.4, no.3, pp.313-326. Stewart, J. (2005). The current state and status of HRD research. The Learning Organization, vol.12, no.1, pp.90-95. Swanson, R.A. (2001). Human resource development and its underlying theory. Human Resource Development International, vol.4, no.3, pp.299-312. Read More