Human Resource Development - Coursework Example

Given a systems view of the delivery of output/ services to s/ identify the roles of the HRD practitioner I. Introduction The position and the role of human resources management in enterprises around the world has been considered as crucial. Its importance to the increase of firm’s performance cannot be denied however there are cases that different practices have to be followed in order to achieve specific targets. In this context, Schuler and Rogovsky (1998, 159) found that human resource management across countries has to differentiate in accordance with the following variables: ‘a) the business structure, b) the legislative and employment relationship context, c) the patterns of HRM competence and decision-making and d) the national culture’. Moreover, it has to be noticed that in order to be more effective, HRM has to refer to several organizational issues especially when a particular firm operates in many countries around the world (multinational enterprise). For this reason, HRM tends to present a variety of norms and characteristics that differ in accordance with the country and the organization involved. Sims (2002, 3) noticed that that human resources involve HRM programs aimed at developing HRM strategies for the total organization with an eye toward clarifying an organization’s current and potential problems and developing solutions for them; They are oriented toward action, the individual, the global marketplace, and the future’. Under these terms the role of HRD practitioner is becoming extremely difficult and complex. The existence of several ‘tools’ and ‘techniques’ that have been developed in the HRM area (literature, scientific research) can be very helpful to the completion of the tasks assigned to a HRD practitioner, however the influences of the turbulences occurred in the local and the global marketplace can create additional obstacles to the achievement of the targets set. III. Human resources development – presentation and analysis As stated above, HR can have many forms. In accordance with Lawler et al. (2003, 15) HR ‘has mainly focused on the administrative aspects of human resource management; however, with the growth of information technology, the hold of the corporate staff of HR on this work is weakening significantly however much administration can be accomplished by self-service information technology solutions that are either hosted by the company or outsourced’. Furthermore, in order to achieve the targets set in the corporate strategic plan, HR has to use all the available resources and techniques to the point that they can be applied on the specific organization. In this context, Kesler (1997) noticed that ‘the "tools of the trade" - as used by the HR organizations - can be summarized as: a. strategic staffing and selection b. learning and education, c. performance management, d. rewards and recognition, e. organization design and f. communications’; HR practices are designed into the business model in terms of three processes, co-owned by line managers and HR managers: a. aligning organization, b. developing capabilities , c. managing performance’ (Kesler et al., 1997, 30). A possible solution to the achievement of a successful adaptation of the HR strategies to the organizational environment can be the use of ‘fit’ as a strategic technique. More specifically, Wright (1998, 56) notices that ‘the basic theory behind "fit" is that the effectiveness of any HR practice or set of practices for impacting firm performance depends upon the firms strategy (or conversely, the effectiveness of any strategy depends upon having the right HR practices)’. However, there is no reference to the possible organizational form where the strategy of ‘fit’ would be more appropriate (regarding the application of HR strategies and their relation with the whole corporate plan). Under the above issues, the role of employee to the successful of the HR strategies has been highlighted. Moreover, it has been noticed by Eldson et al. (1991, 41, 45) that HRM should set the following priorities: ‘a) to enable employees to seek greater fulfilment in their work through person-to-person career counseling creates significant value for the organization through enhanced retention; b) a person-to-person career counseling should be offered to the extension that such an activity creates greater workforce flexibility by enabling employees to respond rapidly to a changing environment and customer needs; c) the provision of support to the employees regarding their career development, to the level that such a support could address the different segments of the employee population and track them with appropriate metrics; d) Particular emphasis is also required to support the retention needs of employees with five or fewer years of service - a vulnerable group’. The support offered to a firm’s employees has been proved therefore to be a crucial factor for the success of any given HRM strategy. From a different point of view Lajara et al. (2002) tried to identify the possible relation between the HRM and the market competition and came to the conclusion that ‘an essential requirement for the success of the cooperation scheme is that the participating companies have the internal capacities needed for the performance of the activity that is the object of the agreement while human resource management mainly refers to the following ‘performance areas: 1) leadership and employee motivation and 2) HR practices (recruitment and selection, training performance appraisal and compensation management)’ (Lajara et al., 2002, 34-36). The above findings prove that HRM can have many aspects and for this reason it has to focus on the issues that are really important for the performance of a specific organization trying to avoid any reference to issues of ‘less value’. III. The role of HRD practitioner – description, elements and particular aspects In a general context, Jamrog (2004, 60) noticed that ‘HR professionals need competencies that fall within a three-domain framework: 1) knowledge of business (which includes financial, strategic, and technological capability), 2) knowledge of HR practices (which includes staffing, development appraisal, rewards, organizational planning, and communication) and 3) management of change (creating meaning, problem-solving, innovation and transformation, relationship influence, and role influence)’. The above view is in accordance with that of Conner et al. (1996, 38) who stated that ‘to improve its effectiveness and have greater impact, the human resource function must understand how to add value in the organization by helping line managers align HR strategies, processes, and practices with business needs; This will require HR professionals to perform increasingly complex and at times paradoxical roles’. In this context and in order to achieve the required targets ‘HR professionals can apply innovative ways to develop current employees, including: new and stretch job assignments, membership on project teams, action learning in training experiences, leaders running training programs, 360[degrees] feedback, coaching, Web-based best practice and learning mechanisms, and Web-based skill building’ (Ulrich, 2000, 18). A strategy that could help the HRD practitioner to achieve the required tasks is the strategic skills analysis. Indicatively, Summers et al. (1997,18) notice that ‘for those organizations seeking a competitive advantage through innovative human resource activity, strategic skills analysis (SSA) represents a means to link business strategy with human resource strategy’. From another point of view, in the scientific research it has been found that there can be a link between the satisfaction of employees and the organizational performance. More specifically, it has been proved that ‘an organization could increase productivity simply by increasing the happiness and satisfaction of its employees, and both organizations and employees would benefit’ (Landy, 1989, R. Wright, 2000 in Barrick et al., 2003, 30). As for the particular elements of job satisfaction it is stated by Kim (2005, 669) that ‘job satisfaction is positively correlated with motivation, job involvement, organizational citizenship behaviour, organizational commitment, life satisfaction, mental health, and job performance, and negatively related to absenteeism, turnover, and perceived stress’. On the other hand, Katzell (1975, 5, 11-12) examined specifically the following issues: ‘how can productivity and job satisfaction be increased together? Put another way: how can the economic performance of an organization be improved while at the same time increasing the satisfaction (rather than strain) of its workers?’ After an extensive research, he summarized his views as following: ‘policy-makers must face up to a serious dilemma and find some way to resolve it; the dilemma is this: policy-makers would like to achieve two objectives for work organizations, on the one hand to enhance productivity and performance, and on the other to improve the quality of working life and job satisfaction for employers; under certain conditions, improving productivity will enhance worker satisfaction and improvements in job satisfaction will contribute to productivity; what it does mean is that there is no automatic and invariant relationship between the two’. The extensive reference to the job satisfaction is being made because of its importance to the achievement of the targets set by a specific HRM strategy. Therefore, job satisfaction should be among the priorities of a HRD practitioner. The evaluation of job satisfaction has to be therefore one of the key issues for any HRD program. However, this evaluation can be achieved only by using the appropriate ‘techniques’ of measurement. Towards this direction, Ramlall (2003, 60) noticed that ‘it is only through performance measuring that one can really articulate the benefits of HR strategies in achieving the organizations business strategy and in the process enhance the credibility of the HR profession’. Moreover, Neely (2002, 107) made clear that ‘accounting measures of performance have been the traditional mainstay of quantitative approaches to organizational performance measurement; however, over the past two decades, a great deal of attention has been paid to the development and use of non-financial measures of performance, which can be used both to motivate and report on the performance of business (and other) organizations; the impetus for such developments has come from both the bottom and the top of the organization while much performance management at the operational level is carried out using specific indicators of performance, which are usually not measured in financial terms’. However, the achievement of an effective organizational measurement has been proved to be a difficult task. For this reason it has been noticed by Gelade et al. (2003, 383) that ‘few organizations can evaluate their performance accurately by averaging the performance of their employees; in most cases, the performance of an organization is determined by the productivity and efficiency of such higher-level organizational entities as departments, retail outlets, plants, or teams which constitute - in the language of operations research – the so-called "decision-making units" (DMUs)’. From a similar point of view Walker (1998, 9) tried to estimate the cost of such an effort and came to the conclusion that ‘costs of human resource processes and initiatives (investment of money, time, and other resources) are best measured in relation to their outcomes; absolute costs or changes in costs mean less than the productivity of the activity, the value or a result achieved relative to cost, or the business benefit relative to the investment while the unusually high recruiting and training costs may be justified by the resulting business results achieved; however, such recruiting and training costs should also be evaluated in terms of productivity measures and results achieved’. In order to reduce these costs, organizations have proceeded to the creation of special programs which however have to include training and development sections that will allow the employees to be adapted more effectively to the organizational environment. In this context, Brown et al. (1997) stated that ‘organizations are relying quite heavily on in-house T&D services; Sixty-nine percent of T&D is designed and delivered in-house, compared to 31% purchased from outside vendors’. The costs related to the above initiatives and all the details for their application belong to the duties of the HRD practitioner who has to examine carefully the financial strength of his company in order to proceed to any particular plan. At a next level, the application of diversity within the organization also belongs to the duties of the HRD practitioner who is responsible to identify any possible pitfalls in the corporate plan (regarding this issue) and propose the appropriate solutions. In this context, Mathews (1998, 175) states that ‘before diversity strategies are implemented, the organizations cultural environment, management and evaluation systems should be examined to ascertain if existing personnel/human resources processes will support or hinder diversity in the organization; then, appropriate strategies can be designed to develop and manage diversity based on these findings’. However, Noon and Ogbonna (2001, 135) highlighted that in a specific workplace ‘equal opportunities are often confused with the diversity management; the reason for this is that the latter has the responsibility and the power of decisions regarding the recognition and the application of the former but when examining thoroughly, the two terms can present points of differentiation’. The size of the firm seems to be a factor that can influence the diversity strategy applied on the specific firm. For this reason, Ferner, Almond and Colling (2005, 304) who studied ‘the Cross-National Transfer of Employment Policy and the transfer by multinational companies of policies and practices between the different national business systems in which they operate’ came to the conclusion that ‘diversity is an issue that should be examined thoroughly regarding the international transfer of policy’. Under these terms, the application of a diversity strategy can be proved to be a complex task which can be influenced by the cultural and social conditions of the area where an organization operates. The achievement of a high level of job satisfaction, which belongs to the duties of a HRD practitioner as already stated above, can face severe obstacles when the diversity strategies applied within an organization do not correspond to the firm’s actual social and cultural environment but they follow a general framework which is not appropriate for the resolution of particular problems related with the employees in a particular workplace. For this reason, Christensen (1958, 255-56) noticed that ‘individual satisfaction and group morale are among the most difficult concepts to define, let alone measure, in the field of organizational behaviour while there are two extreme points of view within which investigators may choose a framework for the study of satisfaction while the individuals satisfaction or dissatisfaction is determined by his total situation at work and at home, in every aspect of his life; the second point of view, in the extreme, holds that an individuals satisfaction can be separated for purposes of study into major areas, such as his job, the pay he receives, his supervision, the company he works for, and so forth’. In this context, the diversity strategy chosen and applied in an organization to the level that it is depended on the HRD practitioner’s initiatives and decisions, it has to be in accordance with the cultural standards set by the specific geographic area where a firm operates. The role of the HRD practitioners also refers to the choice of the technology that will be used for the training of employees regarding specific organizational aspects. Moreover, Megginson (1972, 75) noticed that ‘while technology can increase productivity and give major emphasis to social and economic development, the other factors are equally important; management exerts strong influence upon the types and extent of utilization of technology as well as the supply of natural, financial, and human resources while productivity involves using knowledge, skills, attitudes, motivations, and methodology of people in an existing culture. The relation between productivity, technology, employee satisfaction and company’s performance is proved to be – given the above views – close and direct. The level at which the employees will participate on specific corporate programs can also be decided by the HRD practitioner who has to choose the appropriate scheme for every employee taking into account the personal strengths, education and experience as well as the organizational needs. Towards this direction, Levine (1995, 83) found that ‘in certain occasions, the employee involvement could lead to significant problems for the company’s profile towards its stakeholders as it has been found that a related set of problems occurs in financial markets, where owners and investors are concerned about whether managers are abusing the funds entrusted to them; owners and investors prefer investments that are easy to observe; although many owners would like more employee involvement, current incentive systems for managers lead to a lower level of involvement than would maximize profits’. The decision on the participation of employees in any organizational program or initiative has to be taken therefore after thorough consideration taking into account the required targets and the costs involved. IV. Conclusion The operation of HRM within the international marketplace is a challenging effort. The above assumption can be supported by the fact that the multinational corporations (where the problems faced by the HRM are more extended) have to operate in accordance with certain rules which enhance the competition but tend to create severe turbulences if not followed strictly. For this reason a firm that operates globally has ‘to base its competitive strategy on the development of entrepreneurial networks that integrate technical and market information for the exploitation of business opportunities; it must accordingly place less emphasis on conventional competitive strategies that focus on operational effectiveness, marginal product differentiation, or expansion to established market niches’ (Mourdoukoutas, 1999, 44). The special reference to the multinational enterprises is being made because of their importance for the financial stability around the world and because it has been proved that the role of HRM and HRD within such environments is really challenging. Of course there are other factors that can influence the effectiveness of a HRM strategy. In this context, Lewis (2000, 128) noticed that ‘human and organizational factors are commonly identified as causes and contributors to failures and difficulties in implementing planned changes’. In order to achieve the targets set a HRM strategy has to ensure that all participants will reach the highest possible degree of performance trying to combine continuous control with flexibility. On the other hand, Casey, Keep and Mayhew (1999, 81) who examined particular the British workplace and the effectiveness of HRM strategies came to the conclusion that ‘in many UK organizations flexibility has become synonymous with deregulation and the opportunity to cut labour costs’. The above finding shows that in many cases the role of the HRD practitioner can be negative regarding the personal development of the employees in a specific organization. However, such an issue will arise only when the intervention of the above practitioner will refer to the reduction of the existed staff while in any other case his participation in the application of a particular HRM strategy will be helpful to the progress of the employees and the increase of the firm’s performance. References Barrick, M., Ryan, A. (2003). Personality and Work: Reconsidering the Role of Personality in Organizations. Jossey-Bass. San Francisco Brown, K.G., Durham, C.C., Kristoff, A.L., Kunder, L., Olian, J.D., Pierce, R.M. (1998). Designing Management Training and Development for Competitive Advantage: Lessons from the Best. Human Resource Planning, 21(1): 20-32 Casey, B., Keep, E., Mayhew, K., (1999) ‘Flexibility, quality and competitiveness’, National Institute Economic Review, 168, 70-84 Christensen, C., Zaleznik, A. (1958). The Motivation, Productivity, and Satisfaction of Workers: A Prediction Study. Harvard Business School Press. Boston Conner, J., Ulrich, D. (1996). Human Resource Roles: Creating Value, Not Rhetoric. Human Resource Planning, 19(3):38-46 Elsdon, R., Iyer, S. (1999). Creating Value and Enhancing Retention through Employee Development: The Sun Microsystems Experience. Human Resource Planning, 22(2):39-47 Ferner, A., Almond, P., Colling, T. (2005). Institutional Theory and the Cross-National Transfer of Employment Policy: The Case of ‘Workforce Diversity’ in US Multinationals. Journal of International Business Studies 36: 304-328 Fogg, J.G., Barlow, E.D. (2005). Building a Strategic Workforce Plan for the Correctional Organization. Corrections Today 66: 110-115 Gelade, G.A., Ivery, M. (2003). The Impact of Human Resource Management and Work Climate on Organizational Performance. Personnel Psychology, 56(2): 383-398 Jamrog, J.J., Overholt, M.H. (2004). Building a Strategic HR Function: Continuing the Evolution. Human Resource Planning, 27(1):51-63 Katzell, A. (1975). Work, Productivity, and Job Satisfaction: An Evaluation of Policy-Related Research. Psychological Corporation. New York Kesler, G.C., Law, J.A. (1997). Implementing Major Change in the HR Organization: The Lessons of Five Companies. Human Resource Planning, 20(4):26-37 Kim, S. (2005). Gender Differences in the Job Satisfaction of Public Employees: A Study of Seoul Metropolitan Government, Korea. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research., 52(9-10): 667-683 Lajara, B.M., Lillo, F.G., Sempere, V.S. (2002) ‘The role of human resource management in the cooperative strategy process’, Human Resource Planning, 25(2): 34-46 Lawler, E.E., Mohrman, S.A. (2003). HR as a Strategic Partner: What Does It Take to Make It Happen? Human Resource Planning, 26(3): 15-31 Levine, D. (1995). Reinventing the Workplace: How Business and Employees Can Both Win. Brookings Institution. Washington, DC Lewis, L.K. (2000) ‘Communicating Change: Four Cases of Quality Programs’, The Journal of Business Communication, 37(2): 128-145 Mathews, A. (1998). Diversity: A Principle of Human Resource Management. Public Personnel Management. 27(2): 175-183 Megginson, L. C. (1972). Personnel: A Behavioral Approach to Administration. Richard D. Irwin. Homewood Mourdoukoutas, P. (1999). The Global Corporation: The Decolonization of International Business. Quorum Books. Westport, CT Neely, A. (2002). Business Performance Measurement: Theory and Practice. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, England Noon, M., Ogbonna, E. (2001). Equality, Diversity and Disadvantage in Employment, Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Ramlall, S.J. 2003. Measuring Human Resource Managements Effectiveness in Improving Performance. Human Resource Planning, 26(1):51-64 Schuller, R., Rogovsky, N. (1998). Understanding compensation practices across firms: the impact of national culture’, Journal of International Business Studies, 29(1): 159-172 Sims, R. R. (2002). Organizational Success through Effective Human Resources Management.Quorum Books. Westport, CT Summers, S.B., Summers, T.P. (1997). Strategic Skills Analysis for Selection and Development. Human Resource Planning, 20(3): 14-19 Ulrich, D. (2000). From eBusiness to eHR. Human Resource Planning, 23(2):12-22 Walker, J.W. (1998). Are We Using the Right Human Resource Measures? Human Resource Planning, 21(2): 7-10 Wright, P.M., (1998). Strategy - HR Fit: Does It Really Matter? Human Resource Planning, 21(4): 56-59 Read More